/sfg/ - Spaceflight General

[Anonymous No.15827727]

upskirt - edition
old >>15824246

[Anonymous No.15827729]

[Anonymous No.15827731]

[Anonymous No.15827733]

[Anonymous No.15827734]

[Anonymous No.15827736]

Cancel MSR

[Anonymous No.15827737]

[Anonymous No.15827742]

[Anonymous No.15827747]

[Anonymous No.15827753]

[Anonymous No.15827757]

*moan* omfg so hot bb keep them cooming

[Anonymous No.15827766]

[Anonymous No.15827773]

[Anonymous No.15827776]

>is it actually possible to place the entirety of mars in the magnetotail of an artificial satellite at L1
What kind of satellite would actually be required for this?
Give me a cost analysis, including the launches and rapid on-demand replacement satellites so your budding mars colony doesn't fucking die when your sat has a fucky wucky.

[Anonymous No.15827783]

[Anonymous No.15827788]

[Anonymous No.15827791]

>>15827776
>fucky wucky

No one on this website has ever said that. Go back.

[Anonymous No.15827793]

>>15827791
lurk moar, newfag

[Anonymous No.15827798]

>>15827793
Kill yourself

[Anonymous No.15827806]

>>15827793
Newfag pretending to be oldfag btw. Go back.

[Anonymous No.15827809]

>>15827776
Failed GET and youre reposting this shit nobody cares about from last thread? Go back and also picrel, this is /sfg/ not >>>/lit/sffg/

[Anonymous No.15827817]

>>15827727
>that time someone posted Starship upskirts on r/SpaceX
>they actually called them "upskirt" photos
>the ensuing meltdown caused 100+ bannings, and 1 moderator resigned
A similar incident happened on the nasaspaceflight forum. /sfg/ is my only home

[Anonymous No.15827846]

>>15827817
Oh yeah that shit was topkek. Imagine getting buttblasted by a cheeky little joke.

[Anonymous No.15827848]

>Launch the damn Starship!

[Anonymous No.15827851]

>>15827817
What the fuck?

[Anonymous No.15827863]

>>15827851
It is easy to forget how prissy and faggoty normies and redditors are in the current year.

[Anonymous No.15827866]

>>15827817
Youre still a fag for calling it that.

[Anonymous No.15827868]

>>15827863
>prissy and faggoty
Apt description of /sfg/
Only the trigger-words differ

[Anonymous No.15827869]

>>15827863
>faggoty
>not faggy
Hello twimmigrant.

[Anonymous No.15827881]

>>15827817
>>15827846
>admitting youre from reddit
Go back

[Anonymous No.15827885]

>>15827866
But it literally is a picture up the skirt at the bottom of the rocket

[Anonymous No.15827902]

>>15827727
Thoughts?: https://files.catbox.moe/k3p7k4.mp4

[Anonymous No.15827912]

>>15827902
it's over

[Anonymous No.15827916]

>>15827902
The chinese just won. Based strong china

[Anonymous No.15827917]

>>15827902
Couldn't they at least find one KSP player for a production like this?
I mean I'm not asking for actual expertise, just a kid who plays enough video games to tell them what's wrong...

[Anonymous No.15827918]

>>15827902
What's the point of the bombing maneuver again? And what's with the cleanup? Why, and for that matter how, do they send those dudes to make things happen before sending down that lander?

[Anonymous No.15827919]

>>15827917
Has any KSP player ever landed a rover on the "darkside" of the moon?

[Anonymous No.15827920]

>>15827917
Ok point out whats wrong with this video then genius. Im sure some random FAGGOT on 4cuck knows SOOOO much better than the CNSA

[Anonymous No.15827922]

>>15827912
>>15827916
>>15827917
>>15827918
They're going to build a the moonbase underground so It can be more easily shielded from radiation, and all of this will be done by rovers and drones before any human even lands

[Anonymous No.15827923]

>>15827902
the most amazing part of this video is the missile launching tangentially (correctly)

[Anonymous No.15827925]

>>15827917
>Retard thinks he know ANYTHING AT ALL because he played KSP
The absolute state of /sfg/

[Anonymous No.15827926]

>>15827920
You realize the video isn't an accurate depiction of any CNSA plans, right?

[Anonymous No.15827928]

>>15827922

[Anonymous No.15827931]

>>15827928
Why is everything so overengineered? stop giving nerds the right to design shit. just get some tubes and shovel shirt on top of them

[Anonymous No.15827936]

>>15827926
>>15827917
>>15827920
Why are they so worried about radiation that they have to build the moonbase underground? The US sent astronauts there back in the 1960's and not a single one of the got cancer or anything

[Anonymous No.15827937]

>>15827928

[Anonymous No.15827938]

it's over

[Anonymous No.15827940]

>>15827902
Implessive.

China doesn't even have any normal bunker-buster munitions, but that doesn't stop them from having Quantum Vacuum Precision Excavation Missiles.

[Anonymous No.15827942]

>>15827940

[Anonymous No.15827944]

>>15827942
Well that certainly doesn't look like a Quantum Precision Excavation Missile.

Also holy shit an actual chink shill

DEPLOY THE BUGSPRAY
动态网自由门 天安門 天安门 法輪功 李洪志 Free Tibet 六四天安門事件 The Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 天安門大屠殺 The Tiananmen Square Massacre 反右派鬥爭 The Anti-Rightist Struggle 大躍進政策 The Great Leap Forward 文化大革命 The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution 人權 Human Rights 民運 Democratization 自由 Freedom 獨立 Independence 多黨制 Multi-party system 台灣 臺灣 Taiwan Formosa 中華民國 Republic of China 西藏 土伯特 唐古特 Tibet 達賴喇嘛 Dalai Lama 法輪功 Falun Dafa 新疆維吾爾自治區 The Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region 諾貝爾和平獎 Nobel Peace Prize 劉暁波 Liu Xiaobo 民主 言論 思想 反共 反革命 抗議 運動 騷亂 暴亂 騷擾 擾亂 抗暴 平反 維權 示威游行 李洪志 法輪大法 大法弟子 強制斷種 強制堕胎 民族淨化 人體實驗 肅清 胡耀邦 趙紫陽 魏京生 王丹 還政於民 和平演變 激流中國 北京之春 大紀元時報 九評論共産黨 獨裁 專制 壓制 統一 監視 鎮壓 迫害 侵略 掠奪 破壞 拷問 屠殺 活摘器官 誘拐 買賣人口 遊進 走私 毒品 賣淫 春畫 賭博 六合彩 天安門 天安门 法輪功 李洪志 Winnie the Pooh 劉曉波动态网自由门

[Anonymous No.15827945]

>>15827938
unfortunately the US is all coy about corruption and you have to do a big song and dance to actually get anywhere. Would be much better if casual bribery were a thing, just like in china.

[Anonymous No.15827947]

>>15827936
they spent there like a week there and were graciously spared from lethal solar burst only because they prayed all the way there and back

[Anonymous No.15827953]

Launch in 2 minutes

https://twitter.com/i/broadcasts/1eaKbgkbVjkGX

[Anonymous No.15827954]

>>15827944
>Well that certainly doesn't look like a Quantum Precision Excavation Missile.
no shit
there's nothing special about bunker busting missiles

I swear, /sfg/'s hot takes on /k/ topics are even worse than /k/'s takes on spaceflight

[Anonymous No.15827955]

>>15827954
China('s military) having anything that works would be special, thougheverbeit.

[Anonymous No.15827958]

While we're posting /k/ shit, I chuckled when this Lockmart video appeared on my feed. Like why am I getting an advertisement for weapons?

[Anonymous No.15827959]

>>15827955
it's literally just a bomb with thick steel case and delayed fuse
what the fuck are trying to prove here?

[Anonymous No.15827965]

>>15827959
You're right.
Maybe it's not a Quantum Excavation Missile.
Maybe chinks just happened to find Quantum Caves on the moon? And then Quantum Teleported a bunch of excavation equipment inside, well before their landers touched down.

Implessive.

[Anonymous No.15827969]

>>15827965
>Quantum Caves on the moon
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_lava_tube

[Anonymous No.15827979]

>>15827965
the plan is to have a QuantumX delivered to the surface by MoonSpace, the chinese Lunar lander company, where they will harvest the chinesium crystals discovered by China, a new element on the dark side

[Anonymous No.15827980]

>Changesite–(Y), named for the mythological Chinese goddess of the moon, Chang'e, is a phosphate mineral and columnar crystal. It was found in lunar basalt particles being examined in laboratories in China.
China just leapfrogged all of modern technology

[Anonymous No.15827981]

>>15827969
Please tell me you keep missing the point on purpose.
China hasn't mapped any caves on the moon, they can't blast precision entrances into previously unknown & inaccessible ones, nor can they teleport rovers inside.

That video is nothing but vely implessive fanfiction.

The current state of ILRS is this: Luna-25 failed, and that's as far as they've gotten. Failure at step two of their preliminary recon phase, because Russia's absolute state is one where they can't build a goddamn accelerometer on their own.

[Anonymous No.15827984]

>>15827981
Russia is extremely strong. Take that back

[Anonymous No.15827985]

https://youtu.be/6OKTkm7wCuI
the fermi paradox

[Anonymous No.15827986]

>>15827985
inb4 "fermi paradoxi isn't real"

[Anonymous No.15827987]

>>15827985
fermi paradoxi isn't real

[Anonymous No.15827988]

>>15827986
it's real, based on the video

[Anonymous No.15827989]

>>15827987
you misunderstand what fermi was really getting at

[Anonymous No.15827990]

>>15827986
fermi paradox unironically isn't real
conjured up by a madman who saw the invention of the radio and usage of primitive radio waves and thought everyone everywhere would use those for all time
in less than 50 years, the only radio communications still used on earth will be highly directed and such low energy they would be indistinguishable from background noise by the time you get to the orbit of saturn

and the reason why we don't see other technosignatures is simply that habited planets are so goddamn tiny against the vastness of space

[Anonymous No.15827993]

>>15827987
I've seen it down at Roswell.

[Anonymous No.15827995]

>>15827993
You have never been at Roswell.

[Anonymous No.15827996]

>>15827985
>You don't understand X
but I always do whenever there's a video like this

[Anonymous No.15827997]

>>15827996
maybe not this time

[Anonymous No.15828004]

>>15827922
>sticking the rocket in the hole
That seems incredibly risky to attempt.

[Anonymous No.15828006]

why does bezos use hydrologgz if it makes things harder to manage and refurbish?

[Anonymous No.15828010]

>>15827990
>muh radio broadcasts
ok but where are all the megastructures and von neumann probes

[Anonymous No.15828012]

>>15828006
he's a lunarchud

[Anonymous No.15828015]

>>15828006
They've already invested too much in hydrogen

[Anonymous No.15828018]

>>15828010
Aliens stick to their home planet like sensible people. WTF is the point of colonizing?

[Anonymous No.15828019]

>>15828012
oh fair, I guess its the only cryogenic fuel you can make there.

[Anonymous No.15828022]

>>15828018
this does not exclude megastructures and von neumann probes

partial dyson spheres so you can power your stuff while you stay at home
von neumann probes so you can explore the galaxy while you stay at home

[Anonymous No.15828026]

With New Glenn and Starship having a similar payload capacity it will be interesting to see the fight play out as they both struggle for market share. People will reply with deluded anger because I dare say starship isnt unquestionably number 1 in every scenario, but you just watch: New Glenn will be very competitive in GTO and beyond. Especially for highly specific orbital insertions, because Starship performance falls off due to hauling heat shield, fins and sea level engines everywhere. for Starship to carry out some of the missions New Glenn can do in one flight it would need half a dozen tanker flights to an orbital tanker pre parked on an orbit with the correct inclination, then it would need to launch the payload, rendevouz with the tanker, refill (unknown how this will occur), then finally boost to the insertion. Starship archietecture is not even fully reusable. How do you recover the engines on a tanker starship?

[Anonymous No.15828027]

>>15828012
But thats dumb. The regolith on moon already has carbon on it. Once you heat it up, you get natural methane, along with water.

[Anonymous No.15828031]

>>15828018
If they stuck to their own planet, then they wouldn't be aliens to begin with! Illegal aliens not allowed on Earth!!

[Anonymous No.15828033]

>>15827981
all I said was that the concept of "blasting holes into ground from a distance" is not arcane aryan quantum magic those "insectoid chingchongs" are incapable of comprehending

this is some Chinese equivalent of Zubrin proposing a mission nobody will fund in near future (most likely)

[Anonymous No.15828044]

>>15827928
>>15827937
>solar panels are the last thing they set up after building in the hole
good power planing, chang

[Anonymous No.15828046]

>>15827990
>the only radio communications still used on earth will be highly directed
don't forget the laser comms

[Anonymous No.15828055]

Is intergalactic travel possible? Interstellar travel obviously is, it can take only take a few decades. But intergalactic travel is on the order of millions of years even with traveling at significant fractions of the speed of light.

[Anonymous No.15828058]

>>15828055
>Interstellar travel obviously is
gonna need you to prove that buddy.

How do you propose we accelerate meaningful mass to a significant fraction the speed of light, and then, how do you propose we slow down enough to capture in the new solar system. Magic warp drive?

And how do you deal with extremely high velocity objects traveling in every direction in interstellar space which will destroy your spacecraft if they impact it?

[Anonymous No.15828060]

>>15828058
We quite literally already have the technology.
Quit being new or baiting, whichever it is.

[Anonymous No.15828069]

>>15828060
what technology?
stop getting personally offended and throwing around the bait card because i disagree with you being wrong.

[Anonymous No.15828087]

Another day not leaving this planet. Bros..

[Anonymous No.15828090]

>>15827727
Daily reminder that the next most habitable place in the solar system is CALLISTO, not Mars.

[Anonymous No.15828097]

>>15828090
It's not that far off.

[Anonymous No.15828103]

Shuttle program held back American Space for decades.
This time, we are GOING.

[Anonymous No.15828105]

>>15828097
It also has much more water and a better view

[Anonymous No.15828109]

>>15828010
>megastructures
Kind of a meme.
>von neumann probes
Considering all the UFO shit, it seems they are here already.

[Anonymous No.15828138]

Would the night exist on a planet orbiting a star in densely-packed a star cluster or would it be like a cloudy day?

[Anonymous No.15828152]

>>15828103
Are you low IQ. Something can look awesome and have awesome characteristics whilst still being a programatic drain. You dodnt have to think in binary about everything.

[Anonymous No.15828154]

>>15828105
And its fucking freezing with no atmosphere.

[Anonymous No.15828161]

>>15828154
I think I'd take the view over the pea soup that
Mars calls an atmosphere.

[Anonymous No.15828165]

>>15828154
A vacuum is a decent insulator. Mars itself is practically a vacuum!

[Anonymous No.15828170]

>>15828161
Yes! And on callisto, you actually get the view, as there is no need to live in a lava tube.

[Anonymous No.15828181]

BRILLIANT PEBBLES

[Anonymous No.15828186]

>>15828026
New Glenn is a better competitor against Starship than anything else currently is for the Falcon 9.

[Anonymous No.15828189]

Domes on planets without an atmosphere would use a light diffusing glass to give the feel of being on Earth

[Anonymous No.15828191]

>>15828186
New Glenn will literally never fly. Blue Origin is in the "spend bezos's money" business, not in the "put things into space" business.

[Anonymous No.15828193]

>>15828189
These could be a very beautiful relief from the black sky

[Anonymous No.15828198]

>>15828193
Domes could be built out of smart glass, so you could go back and forth from emphasizing daylight or a view of Jupiter.

[Anonymous No.15828202]

>>15828191
Just watch.

[Anonymous No.15828205]

>>15828202
Been watching for more than 20 years, they've never put a single thing into orbit.

[Anonymous No.15828208]

>>15828205
You're wrong, they put my sides into orbit every time they show a new mockup.

[Anonymous No.15828216]

Not even counting these threads, I've had four or five people this week tell me things like
>SpaceX is okay but Blue Origin is much more exciting
>SpaceX is walking but Blue Origin is running
>SpaceX showed the way forward but now it's time for new companies like Blue Origin to take over

Where the hell is this coming from? The people who've told me these things have been surprised when I tell them that Blue Origin was founded before SpaceX, they know NOTHING about Blue Origin but they're hyping it up as the great rocket company to bury SpaceX. Is this a narrative being pushed by EDS sufferers on reddit or something? What the hell is going on?

[Anonymous No.15828222]

>>15827846
i only go there to scan for Twitter links and simply reply by thanking them for the X link. The amount of downvoting and butthurtness for such a simple comment is always amusing. A few times they straight up remove the comments.

[Anonymous No.15828221]

>>15827885
And you're literally a homosexual

[Anonymous No.15828224]

>>15828216
>SpaceX is being slow walked by the FAA/FWS while Blue Origin has finally started jogging despite being miles behind.
Part of it is that everyone is so used to Blue Origin being an empty factory that does nothing that when they actually do anything its more exciting than it normally would be.

[Anonymous No.15828226]

>>15828216
blue has done nothing in terms of public testing, but New Glenn will be ready before Starship lands on the Moon, and since the two have a similar LEO capacity and NG has higher single launch GTO capacity, things will be interesting. If Biden wins again somehow then Starship will get cucked out of loads of contracts by NG because of Bidens bias against SpaceX

[Anonymous No.15828228]

I <3 Isaac Arthur

[Anonymous No.15828231]

>>15828170
There isn't a need for that on mars either faggot

[Anonymous No.15828234]

When did /sfg/ turn this schizo?

[Anonymous No.15828236]

Don't see how new glenn could outcompete starship. I am almost certain that starship will massively outcompete. Remember that BO has a serious engine production problem on their hands due to commitments to both vulcan and new glenn, and that's not getting fixed soon, since they insist on being a hardware poor company.

[Anonymous No.15828238]

>>15827944
You can't even post on 4chan from China without a pass or a VPN. Anyone posting on 4chan from China is very likely to be using a VPN because the great firewall breaks a lot of sites.

tl;dr that shit won't work

[Anonymous No.15828239]

>>15828189
>Domes
>would use
>glass
entirely wrong

[Anonymous No.15828241]

>>15828239
You could still use a light diffusing tethered plastic sheet

[Anonymous No.15828243]

>>15828238
It wouldn't work in the first place because TLS is a thing
It's a joke you chinkjewslavniggerfaggot

[Anonymous No.15828246]

>>15828216
probably bait because nothing is happening, people are bored

[Anonymous No.15828249]

>>15827866
fuck you

[Anonymous No.15828250]

>>15828234
always has been
>>15828216
It's either people trolling, or Musk haters that have seen one too many normieslop news reports about muh Musk, Bezos, Branson billionaires in space, but don't realize that BO can't even get it up.

[Anonymous No.15828256]

>>15828006
a comparison with elon is illustrative
elon is a winner. he makes companies that succeed in changing global markets. he's done it multiple times

jeff was lucky and launched an online bookstore at the right time. when being the biggest is a significant advantage, being the biggest by a significant margin means you're likely to stay there.

so jeff thinks he's a genius. in reality someone was going to end up as the biggest online retailer in the US and he got lucky.

good luck getting someone like that to recognize his own mistakes. as soon as he has an idea it's gold and there's no need for second guessing. even after a few decades of fuck all progress and burning billions, nothing could possibly be wrong because it was jeff's idea

so why hydrolox? why not? it seemed like a good idea to jeff at the time

[Anonymous No.15828259]

>>15828239
Feels like that is vulnerable to micrometeorites. Not that it's a bad idea but I've only really seen balloon architecture on Venus, and if you wanted multilayer stuff like Bigelow you might as well use glass

[Anonymous No.15828260]

>>15827902
>just bomb the moon and stick a rocket in the hole
hell yeah based chinks

[Anonymous No.15828261]

>>15828202
Watch what? They're not even running the carnival ride anymore

[Anonymous No.15828264]

[Anonymous No.15828268]

>>15828216
>SpaceX walked so BO could run
Hey I was in that /k/ thread too, what an absolute shitshow it was

[Anonymous No.15828269]

>>15828256
could be that he just doesn't guve too much of a shit about BO and its mainly about recognition for him instead of actually accomplishing stuff (with or without recognition)
could also be an ego thing as I think Musk and Bezos had a meeting somewhere around the 2010s and Musk said the things BO were about to do did not make sense
so partly this might be about proving Musk wrong or something, idk
probably main reason is just that Bezos doesn't give a shit

[Anonymous No.15828270]

Hey there are like 41 posters here, we could all fit pretty comfortably into a starship

[Anonymous No.15828272]

>>15828026
>Similar payload capacity
NG has a Leo capacity of 45 tons
Starship is 150
What the fuck are you smoking

[Anonymous No.15828274]

>>15828216
It's always EDS.

[Anonymous No.15828276]

>>15828270
We could also fit comfortably in 6 shuttles with one seat to spare

[Anonymous No.15828279]

ban all /k/tards

[Anonymous No.15828281]

>>15828268
>/k/ope tranny
you need to go back

[Anonymous No.15828282]

>>15828276
We'll probably lose seven people that way

[Anonymous No.15828284]

>>15828243
good point

[Anonymous No.15828285]

>>15828264
Please don't post garbage here

[Anonymous No.15828287]

>>15828264
This is just interaction bait at this point. Is he just trying to make a living being an “anti elon everything” guy?

[Anonymous No.15828288]

>>15828270
We could fit millions of Earthers in the ashtray

[Anonymous No.15828291]

>>15828281
>/pol/ tranny
go back

[Anonymous No.15828293]

>>15828015
New Armstong bros...

[Anonymous No.15828295]

>>15828264
CSS IS FUCKING BASED. CANT WAIT TO WATCH THE NEXT VIDEO ON MY BREAK.

[Anonymous No.15828296]

I don't really visit either board except when they're (rarely) linked here, but the starship threads on /k/ are infinitely more tolerable than the ones on /pol/.

[Anonymous No.15828300]

>>15828272
Starship does not have a capacity of 150 tonnes.
Where do you people even pull this bullshit from?

[Anonymous No.15828301]

>>15828296
You're comparing a nuclear shitheap to a regular one

[Anonymous No.15828308]

FUCK YOU NASA I'M GOING TO JUPITER

[Anonymous No.15828309]

>>15828287
maybe, I would think thunderfoot makes some money with youtube

[Anonymous No.15828312]

>>15828300
yes it does and that is fully reusable

[Anonymous No.15828313]

>>15828300
Are you retarded
Do you have severe brain damage
https://www.spacex.com/vehicles/starship/

[Anonymous No.15828314]

Sometimes I think it would be cool to be a saint so people would take my relics and dried up body parts with them when they spread across the universe

[Anonymous No.15828315]

>>15828312
Source? Sensible people say 80 tonnes.

[Anonymous No.15828316]

>>15828308
The nerve of these fucking cunts.

[Anonymous No.15828319]

>>15828315
https://www.spacex.com/vehicles/starship/
official website

[Anonymous No.15828320]

>>15828315
sensible like pressure fed astronaut?
lmao

[Anonymous No.15828334]

>>15828319
>100-150
so you admit the 150 figure is optimistic even by spacex own website?

[Anonymous No.15828340]

>>15828026
>With New Glenn and Starship having a similar payload capacity it will be interesting to see the fight play out as they both struggle for market share

I think BO needs to actually put something in orbit first, let alone building a functional NG that can leave the ground under the power of BE-4s.
I'm not replying that you didn't call Starship #1, it still has a ways to go before it is functional. But BO? They need to actually do *something* besides mockups and file lawsuits. BE-4 engines have still yet to leave the ground, NG test articles are just fancy looking cylinders, and the best they can do is throw some humans to about 100km into the air. For as long as they have been around, they have almost nothing to show for it.
Didn't BO also say that they plan on launching NG once every month or two? I don't think anyone needs to worry about 6-12 launches in a year.

[Anonymous No.15828347]

>>15828226
>Starship will get cucked out of loads of contracts by NG because of Bidens bias against SpaceX

>Implying NG will be finished before Biden dies

[Anonymous No.15828350]

>>15828334
Instead of wasting time arguing with you, I'm just going to tell you to kill yourself and move on with my life.

[Anonymous No.15828352]

>>15828268
lmao yes that's where I saw that particular claim

[Anonymous No.15828354]

>>15828340
>the best they can do is throw some humans to about 100km into the air
which they haven't done for over a year

[Anonymous No.15828355]

>>15828224
>Blue Origin has finally started jogging
>when they actually do anything
Did I miss something?

[Anonymous No.15828359]

>>15828268
Link?

[Anonymous No.15828364]

>>15828334
nope, ever heard about different orbits?

[Anonymous No.15828367]

>>15828359
He already admitted his mistake without arm twisting so don't go to this thread and hassle him for it:
>>>/k/59986139
>[SpaceX] kickstarted an entire job and development sector and made NASA get off it's ass and try to do cool space shit again. SpaceX walked so companies like Blue Origin or Relativity Space could run, and it's still outpacing the new guys.

He was obviously just parroting a sentiment he heard expressed somewhere else. Probably from malicious misinformation cunts like css: >>15828264

[Anonymous No.15828369]

>>15828340
It gets even worse for BO when you look at the market share argument, considering SpaceX already finished a new Starlink factory.

[Anonymous No.15828370]

I worry that people are hyping up starship too much, like shuttle before it flew.
take for example orbital refueling (and reoxidizering), that's 6 wasted flights per deep space flight. internal costs have to be ridiculously low to warrant that. 80 million per flight would revolutionize space, but that's still an off putting 480 + 80 million to send one full payload past LEO.
and as for crew capacity? sure it has the volume for 100+ people, but nobody is going to let you fly those people without a launch escape system not even if you have 500+ successful back to back flights. and have fun designing a LES that big.

inb4
>low effort concern trolling

[Anonymous No.15828374]

>>15828367
>Musk is a weasel
yup, tranny board

[Anonymous No.15828375]

>>15828370
>6 wasted flights per deep space flight
Considering that the alternative is 0 wasted flights on 0 deep space flights I'm alright with the current refueling regime.
>nobody is going to let you fly
>let you
>let
Death to regulatory agencies and their goons

[Anonymous No.15828377]

>>15827343
>We should make a balloon that goes to space

[Anonymous No.15828378]

>>15828370
>nobody is going to let you fly those people
Who is going to stop me?

[Anonymous No.15828380]

>>15828377
Cool

[Anonymous No.15828382]

[Anonymous No.15828383]

>>15828378
the fish and also the wildlife

[Anonymous No.15828384]

>>15828377
blimp chads rise up

[Anonymous No.15828387]

>>15827866
moralnigger

[Anonymous No.15828388]

>>15828374
yeah, muskrats are a kind of rodent, not mustelids.

[Anonymous No.15828389]

>>15827919
yeah
I have a whole satellite constellation for comms on the far side

[Anonymous No.15828392]

>>15828370
why would it be 80 mil per flight? are you retarded?
its just fucking fuel, depreciating the ground equipment etc and crew costs
you should use F9 as a baseline and that is like 15 mil mainly due to expended second stage

[Anonymous No.15828395]

>>15828355
They finally got a government contract that required New Glenn be functional and their empty factory started filling up with actual hardware. Also, the BE-4 seems to be ready to fly and for once it isn't the thing holding Vulcan up. We haven't heard anything specific recently but the assembly line in Huntsville looks like its starting mass production, so Vulcan's engine requirements won't hold up New Glenn significantly. With the BE-4's long build up finally over they can stop being stretched quite so thin and start moving manpower over to their other more neglected programs.

[Anonymous No.15828396]

>>15828388
>muskrat is a rodent
>starship will kill all ocelots
it finally makes sense

[Anonymous No.15828398]

>>15828384
BlimpCHUDS always fall down

[Anonymous No.15828400]

>>15828398
I agree that hydrogen is fucking gay and we should collectively abandon it as a propellent.
Evacuated airship lifters when

[Anonymous No.15828403]

>>15828369
>It gets even worse for BO when you look at the market share argument, considering SpaceX already finished a new Starlink factory.
Starlink is parallel to Project Kuiper.
I'm just waiting for the rage and seething when they can't meet their launch requirements to keep the orbit and frequency bands granted to them.
Unless they are willing to go with Falcon 9, they MUST complete NG to get all of the sats launched. There simply aren't enough rockets in such a short amount of time to get all ~1800 sats in orbit within a couple years.

[Anonymous No.15828405]

>>15828026
Unless you're going to send >21 tons to GTO, you can do it with Starship fully reusably. You can also just use an expendable version of Starship without fins, heatshielding or landing gear, which I believe will be an option considering SpaceX currently offers Falcon 9 expendable booster options without grid fins and landing legs. SpaceX or another company could also always develop a high performance, low weight kickstage for a reusable Starship configuration, if that turned out to be cheaper than expendability, or orbital refueling in the interim. This goes for all high energy earth orbits. For an interplanetary payload, or a lunar payload, any non orbitally refueled rocket CANNOT achieve the 6.9 km/s of delta v with 100 tons of payload that a Starship can. The majority of costs for these kinds of missions is designing for a tight mass budget, so 9-13 flights of Starship for 2-10 million dollars per tanker launch for a >100 tons of payload will be preferable to a possibly cheaper single-launch of a 10-20 ton payload in the majority of cases. In the cases that don't, use the afformentioned expendable Starship version. Of course, Starship completely beats put New Glenn for any LEO operations because of massive cost savings from full reusability.

[Anonymous No.15828407]

>>15828392
>its just fucking fuel, depreciating the ground equipment etc and crew costs
yep, this is exactly the kind of pre-shuttle hype I was talking about
>it's just building a new tank, refilling the srbs, and crew costs
we already know starship has TPS issues. we don't know how hard it's going to be to refurbish between flights. maybe it's literally free. probably they'll have to replace an engine every once in a while. how many flights does each booster get to amortize over? keep in mind no f9 has flown more than 17 times so far. and they're only certified for 20.

[Anonymous No.15828408]

>>15828400
Well what the fuck else are you supposed to use, helium is running out and too expensive either way. You need to let out helium to descend dont you, how do you get that money back? YOU DONT.
https://youtu.be/ZjBgEkbnX2I?si=VupRQyQdWE4jJmXa
Easy to understand video on how blimps work and why some things are chosen over others. *key jingle* Look its made by Veritasium! You like that dont you?

[Anonymous No.15828412]

>>15828408
>helium is running out
The sun is right over there

[Anonymous No.15828413]

>>15828216
>I've had four or five people this week tell me things like
It means you're in the wrong crowd LMAO

[Anonymous No.15828418]

>>15828413
I try to keep a mixed crowd. If I only associated with people I perceive to be intelligent and informed, then I would only be associating with people who agree with me. This would be self-sabotage, because I'm probably wrong about at least some of the things I believe.

[Anonymous No.15828420]

>>15828395
>the BE-4 seems to be ready to fly
Hopefully it is. Considering a BE-4 has never lifted itself or any rocket off the ground, we can only speculate. They also just had a BE-4 blow up during qualification testing back at the end of June. Less than 4 months ago. They also had a BE-4 fail that was sent to ULA for Vulcan a while back and had to repair it.
Its not looking good to be honest.

[Anonymous No.15828422]

>>15828403
The launch requirements aren't even the biggest problem, lmao. Hundreds of satellites don't just produce themselves. SpaceX had its own troubles with ramping up Starlink production. I can't really see BO making even 500 of their sats in the next 5 years. It's just not that easy in satellitery.

[Anonymous No.15828424]

>>15828408
>helium is running out
Just like fossil fuels and global heating, right?
Weren't we running out of oxygen just 2-3 years ago too? I guess we found more.

[Anonymous No.15828425]

>>15828418
For any human or AI to arrive at a legitimate conclusions, you need a weighted sets of arguments. Weight data is what makes AI/humans work. If you are undiscriminatory towards your data, you get meaningless garbo

[Anonymous No.15828426]

>>15828412
End sun worship -- worship the Aten instead!

[Anonymous No.15828427]

>>15827958
I would buy an automated AA flak cannon if I had the money

[Anonymous No.15828428]

>>15828424
>>15828412
Even if it is just another exaggeration linked with the climate change narrative its still expensive as fuck and not a viable method to run massive airships on so whats your point in going after that.

[Anonymous No.15828429]

>>15828367
>NASA get off it's ass and try to do cool space shit again
NASA doesnt do anything but allocate funding provided to them by congress. They arent doers, theyre barely managers. SpaceX spends a lot of energy convincing NASA how dumb their ideas are

[Anonymous No.15828432]

>>15828287
He's just severally mentally ill. Being able to profit on being a schizo is just a bonus.

[Anonymous No.15828435]

>>15828428
>not a viable method
I disagree. Just because one person finds it impractical doesn't mean it will be.

[Anonymous No.15828436]

>>15828239
>rebar and shrink wrap
we are going!

[Anonymous No.15828439]

>>15828264
Goalposts = Moved :)

[Anonymous No.15828442]

>>15828425
I weigh the arguments I hear and read against what I know and what I intuit. My intuition, my sense for what is true or not, is informed by real life observations, logic, and instincts tuned by evolution. LLMs don't have access to such "ground truth", they rely on consensus and weights given to them by humans who are exercise their own best judgement on behalf of the machine.

Hearing out an idiot doesn't mean that my own thoughts become garbage because I can weigh his arguments myself. When you choose not to hear out an idiot in the first place, you're doing the same thing, weighing his arguments yourself, except you're making a snap judgement with less information. You're less likely to find errors in your own reasoning if you dismiss counter opinions with less consideration.

[Anonymous No.15828443]

>>15828308
JPL hands typed that xeet

[Anonymous No.15828445]

Hot staging ring status?

[Anonymous No.15828448]

>>15828442
Thats neat, but if you are constantly wondering why you hear shitters with EDS/reddit opinion then you should realize that its all garbage data coming in, hence you ignore it outright.

[Anonymous No.15828457]

>>15828445
over

[Anonymous No.15828458]

>>15828448
I was wondering specifically where the Blue Origin narrative was coming from, because I didn't believe that was a narrative idiots were coming up on their own. Some ideas are organic, spontaneously developed by people given the evident facts and circumstance, but other ideas are 'memes' created by one or a few people and then spread person-to-person. The Blue Origin narrative is obviously the latter; an idea people are receiving from others and then parroting.

I consider my question answered by >>15828264

[Anonymous No.15828461]

>>15827714
>Venus flyby too, either one would be cool to see.
Venus flybys actually make more sense since you can't land anyway. For Mars just land.

[Anonymous No.15828465]

>>15827727
>lust-provoking image

[Anonymous No.15828467]

The KSP 2 science/career mode update should be bretty good if it doesn't introduce a lot of new bugs. The performance is already markedly better than it was at launch. I get ~45 FPS on 4K Ultra quality with a 6700 XT flying around KSC in a 62 part plane. They have Blackrack, the developer of the Scatterer mod working for them now so the game is looking better too.

[Anonymous No.15828470]

>>15828467
Does the game work now? I haven't bothered to try after the launch weekend, every streamer I saw playing seemed to be battling the game itself just to do basic shit. If it works I may go pirate it tonight.

[Anonymous No.15828471]

>>15828467
Have they introduced advanced propulsion/interstellar travel?

[Anonymous No.15828473]

>>15828445
Attached but its over

[Anonymous No.15828478]

>>15828470
Wait for the update in December for sure, there are still a number of bugs and no real content but it's becoming rather playable.
>>15828471
No and they haven't released a date for that yet but it won't be this year. The most advanced propulsion in the game right now is just a buffed nuclear thermal engine with 1450 Isp

[Anonymous No.15828479]

>>15828467
i'll try it again in 3 years

[Anonymous No.15828484]

>>15828473
Oh dear... SpaceX is getting bored and starting to polish and name every bolt on the vehicle.

[Anonymous No.15828494]

>>15828473
this is bad

[Anonymous No.15828496]

Have you guys ever read The Three-Body Diagram? In this Chinese science fiction novel, an alien race embark to invade Earth, but know that by the time they arrive Earth's technology will have advanced to a stage that will doom the invasion force.

To deal with this threat, they hatch a plan to use psychological operations to arrest Earth's scientific and technological development. They do this through a variety of means, including using sympathetic humans to promote environmentalist narratives against science and development in mass media. This is a very popular novel, promoted by chinese state media (Tencent, etc). The premise of such a psychological strategy is well known and appreciated by Chinese people, including those with party influence.

I believe that the Chinese are employing such a psyops campaign against SpaceX to stall Starship developmnent. Chinese astroturfers are attempting to manufacture a consensus against Elon Musk, particularly using environmentalist arguments. Delaying America's development of LEO launch capability is a major strategic goal of the CCP, part of their strategy for the 21st century to end American global hegemony and become the global hegemon themselves. What do you guys think?

[Anonymous No.15828498]

>>15828496
Well yeah, duh.

[Anonymous No.15828500]

If SpaceX has to scrub IFT2 for anything other than weather I’m going to be pretty mad. They could be running WDRs twice a week continuously until they get their license.

[Anonymous No.15828501]

>>15828496
Obviously. Nuking China and Israel is part of any sane path to the future.

[Anonymous No.15828504]

>>15828496
*Three-Body Problem

dammit, you know what I meant

[Anonymous No.15828505]

>>15828496
central planning seems to be the downfall of the chinese

[Anonymous No.15828506]

>>15828282
they'll all be the spesspleen fags, so no major loss

[Anonymous No.15828508]

>>15828408
>You need to let out helium to descend dont you
No you can just compress a bit of it into high pressure tanks

[Anonymous No.15828510]

[Anonymous No.15828511]

>>15828407
>keep in mind no f9 has flown more than 17 times so far. and they're only certified for 20.
Certification is arbitrary.
F9 also wasn't designed to be reused.

Starship was designed to eliminate the pain points with F9.
Every launch is an RTLS, engines don't need much cleaning and always lands softly.

There really is nothing stopping a starship from launching and merely being refueled with zero human interaction on the vehicle itself. Only question is the reliability of the whole system and it'll be a while before the booster/ship will be up to snuff and SpaceX be confident enough to do that.

[Anonymous No.15828515]

>>15828259
Micrometeorites make holes in glass just as well as plastic. Guaranteeing glass doesn't propagate cracks is harder than guaranteeing plastic doesn't rip.
Additionally plastic is easier to patch and weld.
On mars there's way less impacts than on the moon or in orbit.
You either want a transparent whipple shield for both or you decide it's not worth it over finding and patching the holes.

[Anonymous No.15828517]

I will permanently live inside Martian Tunnels.

[Anonymous No.15828527]

they found aliens in the amazon

[Anonymous No.15828528]

>>15828496
Most obvious ChatGPT offtopic prompt ever

[Anonymous No.15828529]

>>15828473
its got to be costing spacex millions every single day to keep starbase going

[Anonymous No.15828531]

>>15828508
And tell me what exactly do you expect to compress enough helium on a massive fuck off airship

[Anonymous No.15828533]

>>15828484
They are going to begin praying to the machine spirits, or start covering the booster in runes and wards just out of boredom next.

[Anonymous No.15828534]

>>15828370
you are right, but here people will just get mad. They are the same people who in the boomer generation thought shuttle would be the gateway to millions of people working in space.

[Anonymous No.15828536]

>>15828528
I wrote that comment myself, adapted from a similar comment I left on /k/ about the same topic. Even if you believe the true intent of Starship is to colonize Mars, it nevertheless remains a dual-use technology with obvious strategic defense implications. China obviously feels threatened by this and it would be in their strategic interest to stop this project.

[Anonymous No.15828537]

>>15828533
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3n7eNFj_9Vk

[Anonymous No.15828539]

Which one was the superior design?

[Anonymous No.15828541]

>>15828539
Which survived

[Anonymous No.15828548]

>>15828539
wah

[Anonymous No.15828563]

>>15828539
If the coke one was just angled up instead of to the side it would be perfect.

[Anonymous No.15828566]

>>15828539
the worm logo

[Anonymous No.15828567]

>>15828539
pepsi, obviously.
what's the point of a cylinder if it has a shitty nozzle pointing out the side? Ruins the whole shape. The dangling cap thing doesn't help either.

[Anonymous No.15828576]

>>15828533
FISH FONDLIN'

[Anonymous No.15828580]

Why is Musk antagonizing the FWS? He should be getting on his knees for them and Biden

[Anonymous No.15828588]

Wacky bug trying to figure out how to make vision work

[Anonymous No.15828590]

>>15828580
>He should be getting on his knees for them and Biden
Do you really think that would help? The obstruction is the product of government workers being personally radicalized against Elon Musk by propaganda on reddit/twitter/etc. Nothing Elon Musk can say now will convince them that he's actually a good person who they should support. In their view he is an evil billionaire nazi, no amount of genuflection will change their minds. To them, he is completely beyond redemption.

Probably, his best short-term plan of action now is to double down on the antagonistic behavior to provoke the obstructionists in the government into overplaying their hand, so he can sue them in court, or in the greater court of public opinion. If he can make the government obstruction become so blatant and egregious that it becomes a problem for the present administration during the next election, that's a path towards victory.

[Anonymous No.15828596]

>>15828588
Spaceflight? But keep it up, Anon.

[Anonymous No.15828601]

>>15828496
No shit, Sherlock. Next you'll realize they're running the treaty port and opium war playbooks against us as well.

[Anonymous No.15828603]

>>15828596
What was that message it got deleted

[Anonymous No.15828609]

>>15828590
Or he just needs to start banning democrats/leftoids/nonwhites as aggressively as oldtwitter banned conservatives.

[Anonymous No.15828623]

>>15828496
Buddy, that has already happened in Europe. The whole continent was subversed by communists.

[Anonymous No.15828627]

>>15828580
The FWS is going to get itself deleted if they don't get their shit together
an administration that is symphatetic to Musk might come at some point

[Anonymous No.15828629]

>>15828609
This won't de-radicalize the obstructionists presently sitting in positions of power in government regulatory agencies.

[Anonymous No.15828635]

I would like to buy a license for my fish

[Anonymous No.15828667]

thanks youtube I'm very interested in this content for sure

[Anonymous No.15828681]

>>15828667
Do they know it was multiple films over several years?

[Anonymous No.15828692]

>>15828412
>helium is running out
They keep making more of it all the time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_particle

[Anonymous No.15828696]

>>15828408
>helium is running out and too expensive either way
old stupid meme
US is giving their strategic reserve and infra away because it's nearly worthless to keep around

[Anonymous No.15828707]

>>15828090
>>15828097
>>15828105
Issue with Callisto is lack of heavy metals and silicates. Now you could get that from Io, but you'd have to drain the radiation belts to do so feasibly, which would take quite a bit of time to set up the infrastructure to do that.

[Anonymous No.15828710]

>>15828707
thanks isaac

[Anonymous No.15828712]

I've been out of /sfg/ for a few weeks
Did I miss something? Is there anything interesting before the year ends?

[Anonymous No.15828719]

>>15828315
The fact that you have no better way to get attention and nothing more productive to do with your time than constantly shit up this thread demonstrates clearly and convincingly that you should kill yourself immediately.

[Anonymous No.15828722]

>15828534
except starship is literally nothing like shuttle and doesn't require humans to pilot it so it can be actively iterated on. you people don't know a single fucking thing about what you're talking about and just make these posts as a form of bait

[Anonymous No.15828732]

>>15828710
No, fuck that faggot. Everything he talks about is meme megastructures that would take hundreds of years to be built. Draining the radiation belts wouldn't be easy but its not megastructure tier

[Anonymous No.15828733]

>>15828712
No, the only thing happening is EDS sufferers and bored faggots trying to shill Blue Origin and tell sfg their fantasies about how Starship is just like the Shuttle

[Anonymous No.15828737]

>>15828712
The usual two more weeks. No Starship launches in 2023 guys pack it up FWS says no more Starship

[Anonymous No.15828738]

>>15828712
Blue Origin is the awakened giant tortoise, as SpaceX fallen over their heels trying to move too fast (the hare). Now Blue Origin marches their way promptly to the finish line, with new fresh management. Current predictions are New Glenn and Blue Moon will launch before Starship makes it out of LEO (if the govt doesnt stop Musk before then)

[Anonymous No.15828740]

You retards really need to stop feeding (You)s to these obvious bait posts. They infected this thread because you reacted.

[Anonymous No.15828741]

How is the gypsy doing? In prison yet?

[Anonymous No.15828746]

>>15828732
sorry man it just sounds like a video he's made lol. i wonder if you could use the belts as a power source, like wind turbines

[Anonymous No.15828747]

>>15828314
Jojo part 7, but in space, would be cool.

[Anonymous No.15828752]

>>15828741
No ARCA shilling so he mustve killed himself

[Anonymous No.15828753]

>>15828746
maybe. i have no clue. but i do know that fully draining belts is probably something you could do in years if there was a dedicated colonization effort, not decades or centuries

[Anonymous No.15828759]

im going to invest in arca

[Anonymous No.15828768]

[Anonymous No.15828773]

>>15828768
no, i'm actually going to. you cant stop me from doing so by depicting me as a soijak

[Anonymous No.15828774]

Has there ever been a better time to invest in Astra than right now?

[Anonymous No.15828781]

>>15828774
>>15828773
>>15828759
>>15828738
Why are these posters all Trolling outside of /b/?

[Anonymous No.15828794]

>>15828781
guess you're going to miss out on the AMiE pump.
everyone else, prepare to get rich.

[Anonymous No.15828796]

>>15828781
This is what /sfg/ has become. SpaceX stans who get their feefees hurt when you post nitter links and suggest maybe musk isnt the smartest cookie in the jar

[Anonymous No.15828799]

>>15828781
i'm not allowed to say i'm going to invest in arca? its my money faggot. maybe i want to go bankrupt. ever considered that?

[Anonymous No.15828809]

>>15828712
Define “a few weeks,” because /sfg/ has taken an absolute nose dive in terms of quality/traffic the last few months. This place is pretty much a shell of its former self and the falloff was really, really rapid
You want an update? /sfg/ is dead

[Anonymous No.15828817]

>>15828809
You literally just acknowledged yourself jumping from few weeks to few months stop trying to insert your bitching wherever you can.

[Anonymous No.15828832]

Why do doomers keep posting low quality posts on /sfg/?

[Anonymous No.15828836]

>>15828817
“few weeks”, “few months”, and “two weeks”have significant overlap

[Anonymous No.15828840]

>>15828836
Thats fair, I retract my statement

[Anonymous No.15828843]

>>15828832
boredom.

[Anonymous No.15828849]

>>15828635
What did he mean by this

[Anonymous No.15828899]

>>15828849
It's monty python. The pinnacle of boomer humor

[Anonymous No.15828922]

>>15828382

[Anonymous No.15828939]

Reminder that its IFT not OFT, and IFT sounds better anyways.

[Anonymous No.15828950]

>>15828603
somebody's roguelike that they're making

[Anonymous No.15828952]

>>15828939
We didn't need the reminder.

[Anonymous No.15828987]

>>15828629
it will help stop them from poisoning more people's minds

[Anonymous No.15828992]

Green line is hydroelectric production each year, red line is installed hydroelectric capacity.

[Anonymous No.15829001]

>>15828832
Why was the Firefly explosion more kino than Starship?

[Anonymous No.15829005]

>>15829001
because Starship didn't really explode. All the fuel spilled out.

[Anonymous No.15829021]

ULA will go it alone, claims Boeing/Lockheed holding back innovation.

[Anonymous No.15829031]

>>15829021
>read: mostly Boing!'s fault

[Anonymous No.15829044]

>>15829021
Why would Tory sell the company? He told me refuelled Centaur 5's would revolutionize space

[Anonymous No.15829047]

>>15828370
>inb4
>>low effort concern trolling
it's right after the low effort concern trolling

[Anonymous No.15829048]

>>15828987
That's true, but it's not a complete solution.

[Anonymous No.15829049]

>>15829021
They have to okay literally everything ULA does

Hell it took an act of fucking congress to get the Atlas V to stop using RD-180s when literally anyone at any point in the preceding 10 years could have told the owners it was a bad idea

[Anonymous No.15829053]

>>15829044
Cislunar economy bros...

[Anonymous No.15829054]

>>15828531
compressor

[Anonymous No.15829056]

when can we expect 6 week travel times to Mars?

[Anonymous No.15829058]

>>15829054
Retard kys

[Anonymous No.15829059]

>>15828527
old news
those aliens have already crossed into texas

[Anonymous No.15829060]

>>15829044
Not Centaur V
ACES

[Anonymous No.15829061]

>>15829058
Explain why he's wrong. Why can't you compress the hydrogen to reduce it's volume?

[Anonymous No.15829063]

>>15829060
Who was going to make that engine by the way? Nobody's crazy enough to make an ICE that runs on H2 gas

[Anonymous No.15829070]

>>15829056
1.2 Ms

[Anonymous No.15829073]

>>15829063
>Nobody's crazy enough to make an ICE that runs on H2 gas
Any ICE can run on H2

[Anonymous No.15829078]

>>15829070
kek

[Anonymous No.15829086]

>>15829060
The RL10 hasn't been an "advanced rocket engine" since the 1980s, but a BE-3U Centaur is an interesting idea.

>XCOR Aerospace was an American private spaceflight and rocket engine development company based at the Mojave Air and Space Port in Mojave, California. XCOR was formed in 1999 by former members of the Rotary Rocket rocket engine development team, and ceased operations in 2017.
Just how old is this infographic?

[Anonymous No.15829089]

>>15828308

[Anonymous No.15829094]

>>15828939
it is anything that Musk decides it to be at any second, a bit like the naming the Starship system itself or what version of Falcon 9 is happening at any point
how many different naming conventions were there for Falcon 9s again?

[Anonymous No.15829100]

>>15829063
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_internal_combustion_engine_vehicle#History

[Anonymous No.15829103]

>>15829056
You need 4,270m/s in delta V to get from Low Earth Orbit to Mars Intercept on a 3 months aka 12 weeks ballistic trajectory. But then to get from Mars intercept to its surface, you need an additional 5,240m/s of dV. So in total, you need: 9,510m/s in dV. To get to 6 week travel times to Mars, you'd need to double that. So 19,020m/s.


Starship on a full tank with 100T of cargo has a dV of 6900m/s. You'd have to extend the ship to account for the missing 12,120m/s in dV by basically 3x its current height--which is silly an impractical. So you'd need the equivalent of a super heavy kick stage in orbit or you need some alternative fuel and thrust mechanism (like fusion or fission) which can give you the sustained thrust amount and duration to reduce the total time to Mars by 50%. Considering that we're still easily 15-20 years away from practical fusion and arguably another 10 years after that to getting fusion torches onto ships, the earliest we can see 6 week travel time to Mars is 25 years from now aka 2048. Latest by 2050.

[Anonymous No.15829105]

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1718739670220288405

[Anonymous No.15829106]

>>15829105
Damn, Factorio 2 looks great!

[Anonymous No.15829110]

>>15829105
habbening

[Anonymous No.15829111]

>>15829105
Schizo moment, bear with me:
1. Starship is purely for military use
2. Falcon 9's 'destroyed' Zuma payload tested its ability to carry warheads

[Anonymous No.15829115]

>>15828308
There's actually a nice window for a Jovian flyby mission that opens up on Jan 19th, 2030. It's got a 6.5km/s departure burn and a 705 day coast before a flyby between the orbits of Ganymede and Callisto on Dec 24th, 2031. Then you've got a 638 day flight back to Earth. The whole mission would take about 44 months. If you can't design a crewed Starship variant for that mission you shouldn't be in this business.

[Anonymous No.15829119]

Would be pretty funny if Mars turns out to be a meme and nations are really going after Outer Solar System's moons.

[Anonymous No.15829120]

[Anonymous No.15829130]

>>15829119
>Outer Solar System's moons
useless balls of ice

[Anonymous No.15829131]

>>15829103
you can cut out everything post mars intercept by not being a little bitch and aerobraking all that speed away

[Anonymous No.15829136]

>>15829111
Starship has military application insofar as it has tremendous capability as a LEO bus and can make the 'starwars' program real through thousands of tonnes of upmass. I beleive thats a big part of why NASA chose it for HLS despite it being a ridiculous proposal.
Falcon and Starship have basically zero use as missiles though, there is nowhere on the world you can't hit with an SRB.

[Anonymous No.15829157]

>>15829120
The solar moth is such a cool idea, cruising the inner system with nothing but LH2 and party balloons for an engine.

[Anonymous No.15829159]

>>15829157
>LH2
haram

[Anonymous No.15829164]

>>15829159
Molar mass really, really matters for thermal engines. You go from ~900s to ~600s just switching to LCH4. It's not like hydrolox vs. methalox where you can cheese the difference by subcooling propellant and using clever tank design to increase mass ratio.

[Anonymous No.15829166]

>>15828809
I honestly don't know how many weeks. I've been busy with college bullshit and I have barely any notion of time at this point.
I've checked nextspaceflight and it seems there is no interesting launch for the rest of this year unless Starship gets the fucking license. I might come back when some interesting probes flybys happen but I think I'll give some time before I return to this general

[Anonymous No.15829168]

>>15829157
This but with laser propulsion instead

[Anonymous No.15829172]

>>15829168
Laser propulsion is good for fixed infrastructure but solar moths have the same appeal as private yachts - leave the sunless depths to the nuke boys but otherwise you can go anywhere you want.

[Anonymous No.15829181]

Just got done watching this guy debunk Musk again
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QBt19hZyYI

[Anonymous No.15829187]

>>15829164
you need zero boil-off, embrittlement proof tanks for this idea to work and they don't and won't exist

[Anonymous No.15829191]

>>15829181
when was his account created and how much money has he lost on TSLA puts since, I wonder.

[Anonymous No.15829193]

>>15829172
"you can go anywhere you want" is such a powerful phrase in spaceflight, beam power would dominate if not for the human drive toward self-determination which gives us such autistic designs as orions and solar magnetosphere surfing

[Anonymous No.15829205]

>>15829187
Build them out of PVC instead of metal and they can't be embrittled since they're already full of hydrogen.

[Anonymous No.15829208]

https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/1718782856564981768

Starlink live!!

[Anonymous No.15829211]

>>15829208
HOLD

[Anonymous No.15829212]

abort
countdown hold

[Anonymous No.15829213]

>>15828055
>>15828058
>>15828060
>>15828069
Once we have orbital habs, interstellar and intergalactic travel is as easy as living on Earth, since the point of orbitals is to have 1:1 Earthlike conditions that are maintainable indefinitely.

[Anonymous No.15829215]

>>15829208
Abort!!!!!!

[Anonymous No.15829217]

scrub

[Anonymous No.15829218]

Embarrassing
>FAA NOT GO FAST ENOUGH
>SHITS SELF ON THE PAD
who isnt telling the whole truth here?

[Anonymous No.15829219]

Scrub due to stage separation pressure valve reading

[Anonymous No.15829238]

>>15829219
It should know better than to be reading while it's on the job

[Anonymous No.15829245]

>>15828746
>elmer fudd starts narrating
dwaining thwa wadiation bewlts couwld be feawsibow

[Anonymous No.15829247]

>>15829213
dude I want this so fucking bad

[Anonymous No.15829251]

knower here
do not expect a launch license till january

[Anonymous No.15829255]

>>15829245
jupitouwr

[Anonymous No.15829262]

Pressure Fed Astronaut is the best channel with regards to Starship for anyone interested.

[Anonymous No.15829264]

>>15829218
the embarrassing truth is that Starship is a bomb and is way too dangerous for human transport.

[Anonymous No.15829268]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bq6U5QhOxfs

[Anonymous No.15829269]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIo2EV_wv-0

[Anonymous No.15829274]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lp_PRZxbsS8

[Anonymous No.15829276]

>>15829268

[Anonymous No.15829277]

>>15829276

[Anonymous No.15829280]

>>15829277

[Anonymous No.15829281]

>>15829268
>>15829269
kind of strange how these are flight articles and yet they are outdoors exposed to the elements for several months. I can't imagine the shuttle would be in flying state after being left on the pad for that amount of time.

[Anonymous No.15829283]

>>15829280

[Anonymous No.15829286]

>>15829283

[Anonymous No.15829289]

>>15829286

[Anonymous No.15829290]

it must cost a fucking fortune to keep all the staff at starbase paid, pet alone the opportunity cost of missing out on almost an entire year of Starship launches. How does Musk cope?

[Anonymous No.15829291]

>>15829281
they're made to be used and abused. Probably experiencing similar conditions to Falcon boosters which have flown after being out at sea on a boat in a storm, or being transported on trucks in harsh weather

[Anonymous No.15829296]

>>15829269

[Anonymous No.15829298]

>>15829296

>>15829290
what else can you do? FWS and FAA can delay it, but they can't stop it alltogether without getting sued by SpaceX

[Anonymous No.15829301]

>>15829298

[Anonymous No.15829302]

>>15829301

[Anonymous No.15829304]

>>15829281
Starship stronk

[Anonymous No.15829313]

>>15828334
100 tonnes to polar orbit
150 tonnes to (orbit that matches launch site inclination)

[Anonymous No.15829319]

[Anonymous No.15829325]

>>15829319

[Anonymous No.15829331]

>>15829103
Aerobrake capability at Mars (which is being built into Starship) means the entire propulsive delta V requirement post-Earth-escape-burn is less than 800 m/s (it's just the landing burn). Starship refuels on Mars and can aerobrake at Earth upon return, too. 3 months to Mars is 100% doable with Starship.

[Anonymous No.15829332]

>>15829115
>25,760 m/s Earth return entry velocity
spicy

[Anonymous No.15829336]

>>15829164
I dunno I feel like the mass fraction gains of CH4 over H2 could actually give methane NTR superior stage delta V performance over hydrogen NTR.

[Anonymous No.15829337]

>>15829325

[Anonymous No.15829341]

>>15829332
>lunar reentry velocity was 10km/s
I wonder what could actually be done for these kind of reentries, I don't know if skip reentries can do it even with multiple skips. Would probably need a separate entry module.

[Anonymous No.15829347]

>>15829281
Pretty sure Shuttle sat on the pad for months at some point idk

[Anonymous No.15829354]

>>15829336
Not with a 300 second haircut to Isp since you still need the heavy equipment to keep a cryogenic propellant cold in strong sunlight. The optimum non-LH2 option for solar moths is actually water propellant. You can get half the LH2 Isp (~450s) but 14x denser propellant, which lets you save enough dry mass budget for some more solar panels, more batteries, and an electric pump, so you're not massflow/pressure capped by the expander cycle. Doing this for NTP is a bit trickier since 2500K water steam will eat almost anything it touches so you can't put the propellant in direct contact with fuel rods. Something like pulsed NTP that relies on neutron heating or nuclear lightbulbs with giant quartz walls between the gaseous reactor core and propellant might work better but those are much harder technically.

[Anonymous No.15829355]

>>15829341
>I wonder what could actually be done for these kind of reentries
Play "Balls to the Wall" on the speaker system while reentering

[Anonymous No.15829377]

>>15829354
>Not with a 300 second haircut to Isp
Don't underestimate a 5x increase in density
>since you still need the heavy equipment to keep a cryogenic propellant cold in strong sunlight.
Maintaining liquid methane under strong sunlight is dozens of times easier than maintaining liquid hydrogen in the same conditions because of how keeping things really cold gets exponentially harder the colder you are trying to get.
>since 2500K water steam will eat almost anything it touches
Build with oxides and oxide-forming superalloys (not handwaving just saying it's not magic)

[Anonymous No.15829388]

>>15829377
Solar moths are still mass flow capped by the expander cycle so you don't get the full benefit of denser propellant.

[Anonymous No.15829397]

>>15829388
You don't get as high a TWR bump and that's it. Given that the TWR would still be orders of magnitude higher than that of SEP, which is the only reason to use solarmoth over SEP, I'd say it's kinda irrelevant.
Btw a 650 Isp vehicle that is 80% propellant by mass (probable with Methane NTP) gets better performance than a 1150 Isp vehicle that's 60% propellant by mass (likely mass fraction for hydrogen propellant)
Anyway we've kinda got this three prong conversation where I'm saying methane is better for nuclear thermal than hydrogen, and you're moreso talking about solar moth, and I don't like it because we're talking past each other

[Anonymous No.15829407]

>>15829341
When you're dealing with speeds like 25km/s I think you're only real option is to use a lot of propulsive deceleration before you get close. Bleeding off that much speed in one pass isn't going to be healthy for the crew and I don't think you could shed enough to get a capture by using a more gentle trajectory.

My thought would be to pull the surface raptors and replace them with some kind of nuclear electric engine, then have a reactor sent up on a second flight that you can mount on a long boom of the nose. Going out past Mars is going to make running a crewed mission on solar awkward as hell anyway.

[Anonymous No.15829412]

>>15829407
That's where aerogravity assists come in. Spiral around for multiple full orbital passes inside the atmosphere to bleed off speed until you fall below orbital velocity and glide back to land. This requires borderline magical TPS but it's probably less dead weight than a 15km/s deceleration stage that sits idle for the entire mission.

[Anonymous No.15829413]

>>15829115
Interesting! Sounds like a good time to go. It’d be neat to explore some other good windows for different missions. What software are you using for those orbital mechanic calcs? Do you recommend it?

[Anonymous No.15829444]

>>15829021
fucking isogrid expendable tank bullshit
I hate vulcan

[Anonymous No.15829445]

>>15829413
NASA's online trajectory browser:
https://trajbrowser.arc.nasa.gov/
It's nice for an web-based option, but it can't handle timelines longer than 21 years or mission with more than 20km/s total dV. I also don't think it can deal with more than one gravity assist, or at least I've never seen it output a flight plan with one, so it can't be used to simulate the super scenic routes that NASA likes. But it's not bad if you're only looking at a fairly simple trajectory to any planet or object in the JPL small body database.

>>15829412
I'm just worried that any aerocapture that can actually capture is going to collapse everyone's spines before they get to come around for another pass. You'd probably need to shed something like 15km/s of the total 25 and I don't know how long you'd have to do that in.

[Anonymous No.15829457]

>>15829445
just came back from dinner, glad someone kept this conversation going in the meantime.
Yes, you'd need to get the velocity below 10 km/s. That's why I'm thinking a small separate capsule with some really powerful propulsion module, and ditch the starship into a heliocentric orbit for later retrieval. That would have to be a really big propulsion module, though. Greater than orbital velocity, for a stripped crew dragon it's need something like the better half of a falcon 9.

[Anonymous No.15829463]

>>15829445
at 1g that's only 25.5 minutes of acceleration time to complete the burn, which is pretty much instantaneous for a maneuver like this.

[Anonymous No.15829465]

>>15829110
is that the pic that was direct linked to e621 during the height of krystal posting?

[Anonymous No.15829483]

>>15829281
The longest shuttle wait time on the pad that ai can find was STS-35, during which the shuttle Columbia spent almost 6 months sitting out in the weather, and a total of over 7 1/2 months delay including multiple rollbacks to the VAB.

STS-35 first rolled out to pad 39A on April 22, 1990

On June 12 it rolled back to the VAB after multiple hydrogen leaks scrubbed 3 separate launch attempts

After 2 months going between the VAB, orbiter processing facility, and back to the VAB, it again rolled out to pad 39A on August 9

After more problems delaying the launch, on October 8th it was moved from pad 39A to 39B to make way for STS-38 (yea, STS-35 was so delayed it flew AFTER 36, 37, and 38)... and then one day later on Oct. 9 they moved it back to the VAB anyways due to an incoming hurricane (Tropical Storm Klaus)

At last, on October 14th, 1990, the Space Shuttle Columbia carrying the ASTRO-1 UV/X-Ray telescope rolled out to launch pad 39B where it would SCRUB FOR TWO MORE FUCKING MONTHS, before FINALLY launching on December 2nd - but only after a final 21 minute weather hold just to really rub it in.

>What a shit-show.

[Anonymous No.15829487]

>>15829463
the issue isn't burn length, it's that to shed the velocity in an aerobrake maneuver it would all need to happen in a far shorter time, and the energy to decelerate with propulsive methods only is prohibitive. Maybe do the first 3-5 km's in one aerobrake bass and you only need 12-10 km/s of propulsion to capture into a (very eccentric) earth orbit

[Anonymous No.15829490]

>>15829483
>that ai can find
that *I* can find; I missed the shift key. effortposting from a phone is pain, but I refuse to be a phoneposter.

[Anonymous No.15829493]

What is the story about this land patch?
https://youtu.be/Lp_PRZxbsS8?feature=shared&t=563
The guy in the video didn't explain shit.
How can you be sued for not selling your land?

[Anonymous No.15829495]

oh boy

[Anonymous No.15829497]

culture future or warhammer 40k future?

[Anonymous No.15829499]

>>15829495
God I just dont care. This belongs on /pol/ but janitards leave anything that is the slightest but on topic here because theyre faggots but ban anyone who tries to keep /sfg/ free of tourists. Just fuck off already

[Anonymous No.15829500]

>>15829497
>>>/lit/sffg

[Anonymous No.15829501]

>>15829495
>al jazeera
can we get a real source

[Anonymous No.15829503]

which way?

[Anonymous No.15829507]

>>15829493
>How can you be sued for not selling your land?
There's probably some law somewhere that says you need to either occupy the land or be actively using it in some capacity or else someone can petition to purchase it for whatever the appraised value is. That land has been unused for a very long time so SpaceX can probably sue the owners into selling it for a reasonable price since it sounds like they're trying to scalp it.

[Anonymous No.15829511]

>>15829503
Nuclear-electric powering a cluster of microwave electrothermal thrusters. ~1000s isp and the only fuel you need is a water tank. All of those others are some mix of high-energy memetech and fucking around with hydrogen fuel. VASMIR's probably the best of the bunch but it's also quite complex, and that's just begging for Lockheed and JPL to wreck the project in slow motion.

[Anonymous No.15829523]

>>15829465
Yes that was me. It was funny that they predicted Starship like 10 years ago.

[Anonymous No.15829526]

>>15829523
>predicted Starship
Peak schizo

[Anonymous No.15829531]

>>15829501
Everything that matters was said here.
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1718376814769258956
>We are not so naive.

>Per my post, no Starlink terminal has attempted to connect from Gaza.

>If one does, we will take extraordinary measures to confirm that it is used *only* for purely humanitarian reasons.

>Moreover, we will do a security check with both the US and Israeli governments before turning on even a single terminal.

[Anonymous No.15829537]

>>15829291
they're also exposed to cryogenic fluid

[Anonymous No.15829540]

>>15829497
Space anime future with quantized inertial characteristics.

[Anonymous No.15829585]

nicki minaj predicted starship

[Anonymous No.15829597]

>>15829585
Plan 9 predicted starship

[Anonymous No.15829606]

>>15829531
can't blame the guy for not wanting to die via nerve agent

[Anonymous No.15829631]

>>15829495
Drop a nuke on all of them

[Anonymous No.15829639]

Glass Urf

[Anonymous No.15829647]

the fermi paradox

[Anonymous No.15829651]

[Anonymous No.15829658]

>>15829647
Complex alien life doesnt exist, simple as.

[Anonymous No.15829669]

>>15829597
Unix predicted Plan 9

[Anonymous No.15829760]

>>15829540
that's just UC Gundam

[Anonymous No.15829764]

>>15829760
Different weird physics. QI doesn't prevent long range laser sniping the way Gundam plot particles do.

[Anonymous No.15829781]

>>15829764
the only thing preventing long range laser sniping in UC is nobody has a good laser cannon, all the beamu weapons are star wars style particle beams

[Anonymous No.15829834]

>>15829319
>>15829325
>>15829337
What book? Looks like a fun read

[Anonymous No.15829863]

>>15829834
War in 2080 : the future of military technology by David Langford. idk if I recommend it as it was written in 1980 and therefore dated, I just liked those passages

[Anonymous No.15829943]

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/10/30/fact-sheet-president-biden-issues-executive-order-on-safe-secure-and-trustworthy-artificial-intelligence/
>In accordance with the Defense Production Act, the Order will require that companies developing any foundation model that poses a serious risk to national security, national economic security, or national public health and safety must notify the federal government when training the model

biden using the defense product act to cuck us out of ai
he is going to use this against spacex too btw

[Anonymous No.15829945]

>>15829943
It's a bigger threat to Tesla than SpaceX. Tesla needs powerful AI for their self driving modes, but the in flight computation for spaceflight doesn't really need it and Starship is at the "throw flight hardware at it" stage of development.

[Anonymous No.15829947]

>>15829945
nothing to do with ai
he will make another executive order to stop bad billionaires like musky from "ruining" space

[Anonymous No.15829962]

>>15829947
Joe has been catastrophic for SpaceX. I dont understand why? Obamna was positive for them.

[Anonymous No.15829971]

>>15829943
This is just the result of (((Open)))AI lobbying.

[Anonymous No.15829973]

>>15829962
Elon's companies are crushing traditional Democrat donor bases like Boing! and auto worker unions. They weren't back then.

[Anonymous No.15829975]

>>15829973
bastions of rot and decline

[Anonymous No.15829977]

>>15829975
yes that's why they support Democrats

[Anonymous No.15830011]

>>15829021
>selling right as the company is finally poised to become absolutely worthless
Well, it is a depreciating asset.

[Anonymous No.15830014]

ULA is fine where it is right now, as an expensive government launch provider. So long as the US government is in the business of producing ultra expensive spacecrafts they will get those contracts.
They made some questionable choices like not going through with the AR-1 and the 50-50 thing with Boeing/Lockheed is cumbersome.
It will be cool if they made a "Skunk Works" type of division separate from the parent company that focuses solely on projects like ACES

[Anonymous No.15830016]

>>15829281
>built to handle thousands of reentries
>designed to be blasted by a deluge system thousands of times
>weak against raindrops and mild temperature variations
delightfully counterintuitive

[Anonymous No.15830017]

>>15830014
>skunk works
>do no work
>just a skunk
Isn't this already their business model?

[Anonymous No.15830021]

>monday
can we expect anything today?

[Anonymous No.15830022]

>>15829651
Imagine the smell

[Anonymous No.15830033]

>>15829585
Starship entertainment predicted starship

[Anonymous No.15830040]

>>15830014
But will they keep that position if for example BO flies their rocket and it's cheaper? It would mean ULA is not even a 2nd option anymore.

[Anonymous No.15830041]

>>15830040
BO will buy ULA so they have nothing to worry about.

[Anonymous No.15830042]

>>15830041
Wouldn't New Glenn make Vulcan redundant?

[Anonymous No.15830044]

>>15829507
>you need to either occupy the land or be actively using it in some capacity or else someone can petition to purchase it
That sounds too commie to be real.
Land is land. You buy it, then it is yours.

[Anonymous No.15830045]

>>15829531
>Shlomo

[Anonymous No.15830047]

>>15830044
Commie would be government taking your land without compensation

[Anonymous No.15830049]

Who do I convince to just strap me in a rocket and fling me into interstellar space? I'll work I promise.

[Anonymous No.15830050]

>>15830044
> John Locke was a commie

[Anonymous No.15830051]

>>15830049

[Anonymous No.15830058]

Let’s face facts, it’s not going to happen.

[Anonymous No.15830059]

[Anonymous No.15830062]

>>15830042
Yes. Vulcan is just a test article for BE4, Vulcan SMART recovery allows Blue to recover and refly their engines so that reuse of engines is a solved issue once New Glenn is out, and at the same time ULA gets a free high performance engine. I think ULA promised Vulcan would be flying half a decade ago, so Blue expected engine reuse to be solved well in time for NG

[Anonymous No.15830066]

Can some anons explain this to me?:
>Stainless steel is not used for cars because it's too hard to work with and too heavy
>Stainless steel is used on Starship because it's easy to work with and not too heavy

How does that work?

[Anonymous No.15830068]

>>15830066
You ever look at a rocket? 80% cylinders. Cars are pressed parts welded into place (although I wouldn't be surprised if some parts are cast).

[Anonymous No.15830069]

>>15830066
steel is used in cars and in Starship case the "not too heavy" comes from a much wider range of temperatures, from cryogenic to very how in re-entry

[Anonymous No.15830075]

>>15830066
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AcE7hBhpYU

[Anonymous No.15830076]

https://wisconsinmetaltech.com/why-dont-we-see-more-stainless-steel-cars/

apparently stainless is too hard for stamping, but bending and welding is not stamping

> But here’s the first reason as to why we don’t see more stainless steel cars on the road. A retired Allegheny Ludlum employee revealed that when the cars were originally produced the dies were ruined by stamping out the stainless steel parts from the harder material.
> So, to produce cars from stainless steel, carmakers must spend additional money. Making dies that could withstand stamping out stainless steel parts day in, day out. The Tesla Cybertruck uses cold-rolled stainless steel. And that’s even harder than regular stainless steel, and this makes the problem even worse.

[Anonymous No.15830077]

>>15829531
https://twitter.com/DrEliDavid/status/1718728538113683536
>@elonmusk called head of Israel Security Agency (Shin Bet) and assured him that:
>1. He fully supports Israel in its war against terrorism
>2. No Starlink will be given to Gaza without Israel security approval

You think he gets off from being able to be a power figure in international politics? I would.

[Anonymous No.15830078]

>>15829487
I was talking about an aerobrake, too. The G forces are not extreme.

[Anonymous No.15830079]

>>15830066
With cars it's hard to use compared to aluminium, with rockets it's easy to use compared to carbon fiber
It's heavy but also strong, which allows it to be very thin in rockets. The thermal strength is not relevant for cars because they don't go through reentry

[Anonymous No.15830084]

>>15829511
At 90% water by mass the vehicle would have over 22000 m/s of delta V, which is nice, but I think the real reason it's the best is because water is hyperabundant on Jupiter's moons, so ISRU to refill for the return trip is very feasible. Doesn't even require months of high volume electrolysis and hydrogen liquification, just collect water ice gravel and melt and filter it.

[Anonymous No.15830086]

>>15830066
Starship is fucking huge and has a lot of extremely powerful engines. Steel would otherwise be too heavy for something like a Falcon or a Shuttle space plane. But it works fine in a “giant mega super lifter 9000” format because you have so much mass margin to spare

[Anonymous No.15830090]

>>15830066
The fact is that all cars could be made of stainless steel but making them from mild carbon structural steel is cheaper and the frames last decades with maintenance anyway and nobody cares enough to yell at car companies for not using stainless so they have no reason to switch to it.
Basically the reason is both industry inertia and economics. Inertia because working with Stainless is different & tooling costs big money. Economics because if truck A and truck B perform identically but truck A costs $20k more and truck B will rust out in 40 years, people will buy truck B more often cuz they aren't thinking about 40 years from now.

[Anonymous No.15830093]

>>15830077
He basically runs a phone company in addition to building rockets. If he isn't looking for someone to offload that work to he is now.

[Anonymous No.15830094]

[Anonymous No.15830126]

>>15830066
in the thermal ranges Starship will experience, cars don't have to deal with cryogenic liquids and reentry heat

[Anonymous No.15830134]

>>15830022
SULPHER DOESNT ACTUALLY SME—
OH wait yeah it stinky

[Anonymous No.15830141]

NASA safety panel warns about ISS transition risks,
---
https://spacenews.com/nasa-safety-panel-warns-about-iss-transition-risks/
> WASHINGTON — A NASA safety panel expressed concerns about NASA’s plans to shift from the International Space Station to commercial successors, including funding for an ISS deorbit vehicle.
> At its Oct. 26 public meeting, NASA’s the Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel issued a recommendation calling on NASA to provide a “comprehensive understanding” of the requirements needed to transition from the ISS to commercial space stations, called commercial low Earth orbit (LEO) destinations, or CLDs, by the agency.
> That plan, he added, should include “explicit defensible assumptions” as well as specific metrics and deadlines for judging the progress by companies in developing a commercial business case for their stations “and is sufficient to support the development, production and operation of one or more commercial platforms to replace the ISS.”
> “NASA’s current plan for transitioning from ISS to one or more commercial destinations features a high-level framework and a timeline that is very tight,” West said. The panel is concerned there is not a “clear, robust business case” for commercial stations, he said, “creating programmatic and safety risks with the entire plan for NASA LEO.”
> NASA is currently funding design work by two teams on commercial space stations, one led by Blue Origin and Sierra Space and the other by Voyager Space. A third company, Northrop Grumman, announced Oct. 4 it was terminating its NASA agreement and would join forces with Voyager Space on its project. NASA is separately supporting work by Axiom Space to develop commercial modules that will be installed on the ISS and later separate to form a commercial station.

[Anonymous No.15830144]

Spanish propulsion startup raises seed round, Space Force to begin procurement of missile-tracking satellites for medium Earth orbit constellation
---
https://spacenews.com/spanish-propulsion-startup-raises-seed-round/
> WASHINGTON — A Spanish company developing green propulsion systems for spacecraft has raised $3 million in seed funding.
> The funding will allow Arkadia Space to expand its facilities and workforce in Castellón, Spain, and accelerate development of a hypergolic bipropellant spacecraft thruster. The company is completing work on a small monopropellant thruster, producing five newtons of thrust, it expects to start marketing in 2024 with a demonstration flight planned for late next year.
> The company was founded in 2020 by four former members of the propulsion team at PLD Space, the Spanish launch vehicle startup. It is emphasizing its use of non-toxic “green” propellants, such as hydrogen peroxide and a proprietary fuel, as alternatives to hydrazine. That propellant has long been used on spacecraft because of its performance but is difficult to handle and faces increasing restrictions on its use.
---
https://spacenews.com/space-force-to-begin-procurement-of-missile-tracking-satellites-for-medium-earth-orbit-constellation/
> The MEO satellite program will follow the Space Development Agency’s multi-vendor approach
> WASHINGTON — The U.S. Space Force is moving forward with plans to procure 27 missile-defense satellites for a medium Earth orbit constellation — using an acquisition process that mirrors the model adopted by the Space Development Agency for the military’s low Earth orbit architecture.
The first nine satellites of a medium Earth orbit (MEO) missile-warning and missile-tracking constellation, called Epoch 1, are projected to launch in 2027. A second procurement of 18 satellites, called Epoch 2, will follow two to three years later, Bogstie said Oct. 19 at the MilSat Symposium in Mountain View, California.

[Anonymous No.15830149]

>>15830141
Wasnt the Shuttle supposed to be commerical? wasnt the ISS suppsoed to be commerical?

[Anonymous No.15830151]

>>15830144
> “We are building a multi-layered sensor satellite network in both higher and lower MEO orbits, designed to sense a variety of missile threats, including the very fast, very dim hypersonic glide vehicles,” she said.
> The strategy of buying MEO satellites through fixed-price contracts from multiple vendors emulates the Space Development Agency’s playbook.
> SDA is ordering satellites from several manufacturers and requires them to make their spacecraft interoperable via optical links that adhere to common standards.
> The deployment of missile-tracking sensors in low and medium orbits has become a top priority for the Pentagon amid concerns over adversaries’ advances in hypersonic and ballistic missiles.
> “We’re pivoting from the legacy missile warning architecture, which is a few larger satellites in geosynchronous and highly elliptical orbits, to a significantly more proliferated resilient architecture that even adds new capabilities to actually track missiles,” Calvelli said Oct. 19 at a Professional Services Council event.
> The Space Force needs to take “available technologies off the shelf and use them,” said Calvellli. “When we create our own technology, we end up down this path of cost-plus contracts because it’s too high of a risk, and we end up down these paths of seven to 10-year development cycles.”

[Anonymous No.15830157]

>>15830149
these stations aren't going to be commercial, kind of doubt the BO station is going to get built at all
is this incompetence or corruption? who knows
meanwhile players like vast, gravitics and axiom don't have these NASA contracts but are going to create stations anyway?

[Anonymous No.15830159]

>>15830157
not to mention SpaceX with Starship
why the fuck did BO get the contract in the first place? they haven't shown pretty much anything in their whole existence but still keep getting these NASA contracts

[Anonymous No.15830164]

>Lockheed Martin said in a statement that the in-space flight demonstration of a nuclear thermal rocket engine vehicle will take place “no later than 2027.”
NTR bros, is it finally happening?

[Anonymous No.15830168]

>>15830164
its going to be disappointing

[Anonymous No.15830173]

>>15830168
Nah, getting thrust from a working NTR in space is a big deal

[Anonymous No.15830177]

>>15830173
Two more decades

[Anonymous No.15830187]

>>15830164
Begs the question why NASA isnt doing this and hasnt despite having NTR tech since the early 70's.

[Anonymous No.15830191]

>>15830066
>>Stainless steel is not used for cars because it's too hard to work with and too heavy
You forgot "too expensive", and "too heavy" doesn't enter into it. The vast majority of cars are made out of steel, which is just as heavy as stainless.

[Anonymous No.15830195]

>>15829834
Where did all that hydrogen come from?
If you say solar wind, I'm sending you to Gaza

[Anonymous No.15830198]

B9 HSR has been reinstalled by the way.

[Anonymous No.15830199]

>>15830195
Take some off the sun when it isn't looking

[Anonymous No.15830209]

>>15830141
They don't want a repeat of MSR: they need a clearly defined goal, specific requirements and a timeline they can plan around. It'd fairly bizarre that this is coming from their safety guys but I imagine the astronauts are getting close to full doomer status regarding future opportunities to stay in space. I expect a full astronaut class will train, fly a desk, and retire before the ISS replacement is ready

[Anonymous No.15830210]

>>15830198
>HSR
After rockets and cars, Elon finally gets into trains

[Anonymous No.15830212]

>>15830159
Just because there's nothing public doesn't mean nothing's been flown or tested.

[Anonymous No.15830218]

>>15830086
Steel works the same for rockets of all sizes. Atlas rockets were made of steel. IDK why people keep thinking steel = heavy. The correct way to think about it is, "at cryogenic temperatures, stainless steel is on par with other aerospace materials in terms of strength to weight ratio, and steel can also handle exposure to much higher temperatures in comparison, so less thermal protection coating is required".

[Anonymous No.15830219]

>>15829834
>terraformed moon
And how do you account for the average molecular velocity of your atmospheric gases being well in excess of the moon's escape velocity at earthlike temperatures?

[Anonymous No.15830220]

>>15830218
I left out cryogenic temps and balloon tanks but yeah. You aren’t going to have a balloon tank Space Shuttle though, was my point really. You can afford to have thick (relatively speaking) steel tanks on something like Starship because she is huge and powerful

[Anonymous No.15830221]

>>15830195
europa. it wasn't using it

[Anonymous No.15830223]

>>15830220
Atlas was only a balloon tank because it was a 1.5 stage to orbit booster, which is half as hard and half as stupid as SSTO.
Shuttle could have been built out of stainless steel and have nearly the same mass. The steel would simply be thinner than the almuninum, and the reduced TPS mass would lower the difference moreso.
Starship does not have thick tanks. It has 4mm thick tank walls, which are thinner than Falcon 9 tanks, at much greater internal pressures compared to F9.
Finally, being big and powerful does not mean you ignore the rocket equation. Mass fraction still matters for Starship. Yes a 500kg reduction off of 150,000kg of max payload aint a big deal but that has nothing to do with thr choice of Steel. SpaceX pivoted to steel because it's both the lightest and cheapest option for their vehicle.

[Anonymous No.15830226]

>>15830219
that pic could be paraterraformed, you wouldn't see the membrane from that range

[Anonymous No.15830228]

>>15830219
Global tent held up by air pressure from beneath and held secure by 70km long tethers?

[Anonymous No.15830230]

imagine how big trees could get on the moon

[Anonymous No.15830231]

>>15830226
I think they'd be standing on Dione to get a view like that, possibly Rhea. Either way they're walking in less than 0.027g lol

[Anonymous No.15830234]

>>15830230
6x taller assuming coast redwood maximum height on Earth is solely determined by the effects of gravity.
If the above is true, Moon trees could eventually reach 700 meters in height. Of course that would take thousands of years of ideal growth conditions to achieve.

[Anonymous No.15830235]

>>15830234
what I was a kid I used to draw shit pictures about lunar caves with huge trees and japanese buildings in them. Probably influenced by Baxter's Manifold Space somewhat

[Anonymous No.15830236]

Why exactly was Carpenter banned? He took some of the best pics in the mercury program, and was able to manually correct the retrograde attitude which was showing wrong in the indicator. So what if he used RCS fuel, spent fuel is useful fuel.

[Anonymous No.15830239]

>>15830149
no and no

[Anonymous No.15830240]

>>15830223
>Atlas was only a balloon tank because it was a 1.5 stage to orbit booster, which is half as hard and half as stupid as SSTO
They went that way because murican engines had 50% reliability, so lightning them up in flight was too risky.

[Anonymous No.15830242]

>>15830151
>>15830144
the axis are going to have a hard time dealing with so many satellites

[Anonymous No.15830243]

>>15830164
the future is nuclear, enjoy watching the heretics cope

[Anonymous No.15830244]

>>15830144
>hypergolic
>green
It is good old hydrogen peroxide. It is not nearly as good as aerozyne or UMDH + N2O4 energy-wise.

There is a bubble of meme space companies.

[Anonymous No.15830245]

>>15830187
because the Shittle

[Anonymous No.15830246]

>>15830236
Wasn't following rules at a time when that was unacceptable

[Anonymous No.15830247]

>>15830234
>thousands of years
It takes a few centuries on Earth and I don't see why it would take any longer than on Earth assuming we give it grow lights and necessary nutrients

[Anonymous No.15830248]

>>15830164
by bye elon musk. after this, nasa is back on top

[Anonymous No.15830249]

>>15830236
Rumor has it that much like the Skylab strike never happened Carpenter never prematurely abandoned his capsule and caused it to sink. The shadow of that non-event followed him for the rest of his career IIRC

[Anonymous No.15830250]

>>15830246
Which rules did he break?

[Anonymous No.15830251]

>>15830159
Why do you think?

[Anonymous No.15830252]

>>15830198
Thanks, youre 3 days late

[Anonymous No.15830255]

>>15830240
I'm aware, yeah. The reliability issue made them choose to get all engines lit on the pad. They picked a balloon tank to avoid needing strap on booster stages: they just had strap on engines instead. However, it's notable that they didn't choose an aluminum balloon tank.

[Anonymous No.15830257]

>>15830159
basically because bezos is threatening to tie the artemis program up in lawsuits otherwise. he's already done it successfully once

[Anonymous No.15830261]

>>15830245
Surely you can transport an NTR in the payload bay?

[Anonymous No.15830263]

>>15830257
Ha, SpaceX used that trick too

[Anonymous No.15830265]

>>15830247
It took between 600 and 800 years for the tallest tree on Earth to reach 116 meters. Growing to 700 meters will take much longer even if you imagine the tree putting more energy into vertical growth rather than thickening its trunk to support its own weight.

[Anonymous No.15830268]

space colonies will have artificial trees

[Anonymous No.15830271]

>>15830249
Those capsules took water the moment they splashed down. In a previous mission a recovery chopper almost grinded its engine while trying to lift the overweight capsule with all the water inside. It sank in 2 minutes. Carpenter splashed 200 km downrange from the carrier, it took 40 minutes just to spot him. I don't remember his capsule sinking, but if it did it was not his fault.

[Anonymous No.15830272]

>>15830249
Are you confusing Carpenter for Gus Grissom?
>>15830250
The rule he broke was "do things mission control tells you to do". If they tell you stop wasting propellant, and you don't, you have broken a rule.

[Anonymous No.15830280]

/sfg/ crticized spacex a lot
spacex fanbase has reddit completely locked down tho

[Anonymous No.15830281]

>>15830272
Oh you're right, Carpenter was the retros thing

[Anonymous No.15830287]

Friendly reminder that NTP kinda sucks actually and in pretty much any application you can imagine, chemical propulsion performs on-par in real terms, because despite having higher Isp, NTP would have abysmal stage density and bad wet dry mass ratio.
Also the radiation dose rates both while burning and for several days after a burn are very high & a real problem to solve, unlike cosmic ray dose rates.

[Anonymous No.15830288]

>>15830272
>If they tell you stop wasting propellant, and you don't, you have broken a rule.
He was a romantic spaceflyer. The pics well deserved the spent propellant.
It was a fair price for risking his life inside such a precarious machine that still exhibited the same problems as in previous flights.
Mission control was a meme back then, there was no need to take them seriously.

[Anonymous No.15830290]

>>15830265
why wouldn't it grow 6 times faster? it's doing 1/6 the work to go up

[Anonymous No.15830291]

>>15830288
uh huh. They were right to ban him regardless.

[Anonymous No.15830294]

>>15830290
Because its growth rate is not limited by the work necessary to go up, at all. The growth rate is limited by photosynthesis. The plant can only add tissue mass as fast as it can build sugars, and this rate is unchanged no matter the strength of gravity.

[Anonymous No.15830296]

>>15830280
Shut the fuck up about reddit negroid.

[Anonymous No.15830297]

>>15830263
unironically it's ok when Musk does it

[Anonymous No.15830299]

https://www.reddit.com/r/BeAmazed/s/NAiviOutgs
This might be the best timed shot in television history

[Anonymous No.15830300]

vgh

[Anonymous No.15830304]

>15830299
bait post plz ignore

[Anonymous No.15830308]

>>15830304
Yep, just use the little arrow next to the post number of if youre on mobile the three little dots on the left side of the post, report or hide.

[Anonymous No.15830315]

>>15830304
>>15830308
NTA but why the fuck is that bait? Everyone on /sfg/ seems to call everything bait like people on /pol/ call everything glowies. Its time to take your meds

[Anonymous No.15830319]

>>15830300
lol is that a transtage on the back

[Anonymous No.15830321]

>>15830315
Shut the fuck up retard. Another anon LITERALLY >>15830296 just said to shut up about r*ddit and then this fag posts an off topic r*ddit link, its the same order of events that happenee yesterday with that (probably samefag) ARCA 'investing' posts right after someone mentioned ARCAtard being annoying. Its the SAME FAGGOT thats constantly baiting in here, and maybe instead of my meds its time for YOUR AIRLOCK

[Anonymous No.15830322]

>>15830319
yeah dyna soar had very little orbital maneuvering capability on its own

[Anonymous No.15830324]

>>15830321
Delusional, I posted that arca bait and had nothing to to with the redditposting.
Also, Arcaposting is cool and I miss it.

[Anonymous No.15830326]

>>15830299
/sfg/ doesnt like space-related posts. You will be made example of

[Anonymous No.15830330]

>>15830321
I'm a different guy lol, a second redditor

[Anonymous No.15830331]

[Anonymous No.15830333]

>>15830331
sexy panties

[Anonymous No.15830334]

>>15830319
Nothing wrong with that; just use a cheapo engine for your orbital maneuvers and jettison it when you're done

[Anonymous No.15830359]

>>15830287
the larger the spacecraft the more the higher ISP favors NTP

[Anonymous No.15830370]

>>15830287
Tensile ship design solves that by putting the engines up front on a >1km tether.

[Anonymous No.15830371]

[Anonymous No.15830372]

>>15830287
No wonder NASA picked this useless technology to develop with DARPA or whatever oldspace contractor is was

[Anonymous No.15830376]

>>15830372
blue origin is designing it

[Anonymous No.15830378]

It’s over

https://arstechnica.com/space/2023/10/russian-space-chief-explains-why-country-can-only-build-40-satellites-a-year/

[Anonymous No.15830380]

Reminder that nuclear powered ion engines are the way

[Anonymous No.15830381]

>>15830219
If you can use gay space magic to add an atmosphere, you can use gay space magic to significantly increase the density of the moon, too

[Anonymous No.15830382]

>>15830378
I guess someone asked the question, "Why can't we have our own starlink?".

[Anonymous No.15830383]

>>15830322
It’s smol. I figured
>>15830334
Oh I’m not knocking it. I just think the transtage is goofy. But shit, a space plane with dual AJ-10 maneuvering? It was obviously a good idea because that’s what the space shuttle literally ended up using lol

[Anonymous No.15830384]

>>15830251
relentless lobbying

[Anonymous No.15830385]

>>15830263
suing so you can compete vs suing after you lost the competition is very different

[Anonymous No.15830391]

>>15830330
There's enough rope for everyone

[Anonymous No.15830425]

>>15830385
Rationale aside the method was still the same, they threatened to delay some critical big-ticket mission with legal action unless they were paid to go away

[Anonymous No.15830468]

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1719076410428473509

[Anonymous No.15830469]

>>15830425
wrong

[Anonymous No.15830471]

>>15830468
YO.

[Anonymous No.15830472]

>>15830468
you did not need to post this
How does this influence spaceflight?

[Anonymous No.15830473]

>>15830468
what did he mean by this?

[Anonymous No.15830481]

>>15830473
Jews being holocausted

[Anonymous No.15830483]

average 1

[Anonymous No.15830484]

>>15830378
> Now we have some sense of why this is. In an interview with a state-owned Russian-language news channel, the chief of Russian space operations, Yuri Borisov, explained that the country can only build a few dozen satellites a year. (This is about one-fiftieth of the total that a privately owned company, SpaceX, will launch this year.) Borisov said building a single satellite in Russia takes about 18 months, and because of this, it is not possible to develop a megaconstellation.
> According to Borisov, the combined efforts of the US industry and government can build about 3,000 satellites a year, and China has production facilities capable of manufacturing 1,200 to 1,500 satellites a year. The sprawling Russian space corporation he runs, Roscosmos, cannot come close to matching these totals.
>"It turned out we weren't ready for this," he said in the interview, which was translated for Ars by Rob Mitchell. "Today all satellite manufacturing companies of the industry are capable of building about 40 satellites per year."
> Essentially, Borisov said that the way Russia currently builds its satellites is by hand, through intricate and time-consuming processes. To become more competitive and have a constellation of its own, he said, Roscosmos will need to move toward an assembly line-like means of mass production.

[Anonymous No.15830492]

>>15830481
I'm not sure if that's what he meant. After all the woke were always a bit more pro-Palestine. Elon's tweets are rocketry - relevant

[Anonymous No.15830502]

Jessica Kirsh

[Anonymous No.15830511]

https://twitter.com/Free_Space/status/1719088397405356334

Boeing withdrew their LEO constellation application with FCC.

[Anonymous No.15830517]

>>15830511
If it's Boeing it ain't going.

[Anonymous No.15830523]

MECO!

[Anonymous No.15830524]

Staging!
>>15830521
>>15830521

>>15830521
>>15830521

>>15830521
>>15830521

[Anonymous No.15830582]

>>15830359
Only by grace of mass fraction issues being easier to squish when all your stuff is bigger overall. However this advantage also applies to every other propulsion system, so nah NTP still sucks. NTP needs to be more than just 2x the Isp improvement over chemical propellants, which is why IMO if we're going to try nuclear thermal we should be developing that pulsed version that uses neutron heating to achieve insane propellant temperatures without needing the fuel to be any hotter than normal.

[Anonymous No.15830592]

>>15830380
They are a way, and a good way if you want to take people on big ships to the outer planets, but they aren't THE way. It would be extremely stupid to take anything electrically propelled on a Mars trip, for example, since in that application it would be far slower than just using chemical.
Electric propulsion is for when your mission delta V requirements exceed what chemical can provide, and nuclear electric propulsion is for when the above condition is satisfied AND you're going out very far from the Sun.

[Anonymous No.15830594]

>>15830425
Incorrect.

[Anonymous No.15830619]

>>15830378
Its amazing this motherfucker is so daft to be able to ask this question despite running a criminal enterprise whose modus operandi is that 50% of the total operational budget goes to Putin himself, the other 48% goes to the person in charge, and the last 2% is left over for whatever the mission is. How exactly anything functions in Russia at any level of operational capability is nothing short of a miracle made by the Angel of Pity.

[Anonymous No.15830623]

>>15830619
Yeah Russia is run line a fucking gang. He straight up kills people for disobedience

[Anonymous No.15830625]

>>15830468
I suspect its the FWS finally showing up and doing their fucking job after SpaceX publicly criticized the FWS and FAA in a senate hearing and the senators started making calls asking what the fuck is up. They literally showed up less than 24 hours after the hearing and in full force and keep showing up day after day to evaluate the environment around Starbase. Anyone can see the obvious at that point.

[Anonymous No.15830629]

>>15830066
blame compression vs tension strength
compression strength is a direct function of thickness, steel is heavy when it's thick
basically it doesn't matter how strong your wonder-material is, if it only needs to be as thick as a sheet of paper it won't be strong in compression

[Anonymous No.15830630]

>>15830077
Elon is going to be Comstar

[Anonymous No.15830639]

>>15830629
>compression strength is a direct function of thickness
and tensile strength isn't?

[Anonymous No.15830641]

>>15830639
sorry I just woke up
it's more than direct

[Anonymous No.15830652]

>>15830641
I don't get it.

[Anonymous No.15830657]

>>15830652
two pieces of paper side-by-side is more than twice as strong in compression to a single sheet of paper

this becomes even more dramatic when it's a piece of paper twice as thick

[Anonymous No.15830660]

>>15830657
Maybe you're thinking of bending? Compressile and tensile strength will vary with are basically

[Anonymous No.15830663]

>>15830660
yeah it's basically crumpling resistance