/sfg/ - Spaceflight General

[Anonymous No.16221105]

Plasma Sheathe Edition

Previous - >>16218956

[Anonymous No.16221111]

>>16221105
First for reminder that the hinge problem has been solved for over 40 years.

[Anonymous No.16221112]

Post the Webm version

[Anonymous No.16221116]

Mars base camp is just a better architecture

Sorry not sorry

[Anonymous No.16221118]

Can we just take a moment to depreciate the image in the OP? The biggest thing in spaceflight in decades just happened and the best image this absolute basement dwelling perma-online neckbeard could come up with is a photograph of a ferroid rocket disintegrating.

[Anonymous No.16221120]

>>16221109

[Anonymous No.16221122]

See you space cowboy...

[Anonymous No.16221123]

Cancel MSR

[Anonymous No.16221125]

>>16221123

[Anonymous No.16221126]

>>16221122
90 year old legend still flying is amazing, hope he's alive.

[Anonymous No.16221128]

>>16221125
slightly problematic kek

[Anonymous No.16221130]

>>16221122
What a way to go. Those guys were a different breed.

[Anonymous No.16221134]

>>16221125
Could be worse

[Anonymous No.16221139]

>>16221123
>>16221125
the virgin aluminum shittle vs the chad steel belly flop tank

[Anonymous No.16221157]

Is starliner still leaking? Have the leaks increased?

[Anonymous No.16221160]

>>16221122
https://youtu.be/onY-J1Pvegk
looks like nasa already had a video prepped for when he eventually died

[Anonymous No.16221165]

https://youtu.be/Y-SY9hJtIYY
If BO is really doing an aerospike, I cant decide if they are smart or retarded

[Anonymous No.16221167]

>>16221160
Damn NASA, the body is still warm

[Anonymous No.16221175]

>>16221111
the body flap was the silliest part of the shuttle orbiter. Cute little guy!
Lorefags will remember when Atlantis and Challenger swapped body flaps ;)

[Anonymous No.16221182]

>>16221122
Compared to how my father went, I'd take that.

[Anonymous No.16221186]

Updated my death watch/tonteen chart for the OGs. This particular image probably has a few inaccuracies. Lovell will bury them all I reckon. At last check there's 12-ish guys alive.

It was honestly stupid and selfish of Anders to be flying at that age, even though he'd lived his life. Celebrity pilots flying in some private capacity, even if they're trained, tend to get into trouble: Kobe, James Horner, etc. Even taking into account Anders' background, he should have just been the nice grandpa sitting at home. Going out in an accidental blaze of glory in a flight that you didn't have to do just inconveniences a bunch of emergency workers who have better things to do. People shouldn't be able to operate heavy machinery past 85, the woman who clipped my car through her own inattention two years ago was 84.

[Anonymous No.16221191]

Is there any way to stop the atmosphere producing all these NOx compounds? They look so orange and anaesthetic.

[Anonymous No.16221193]

>>16221191
Quadruple the nitrosphere

[Anonymous No.16221194]

>>16221186
The guy was a cowboy, you think he'd rather've died in a hospital bed?

[Anonymous No.16221195]

We’re going to hit 270 successful Falcon landings in a row very soon. 1 in 270 chance of failure was the guidelines for commercial crew. Does this mean Falcon landings could theoretically be man rated?

[Anonymous No.16221196]

>>16221170
Language changes. Now "boomer" means anyone older than yourself, and "zoomer" means anyone younger.
"Millennial" means "faggot"

[Anonymous No.16221199]

>>16221191
Do we know for a fact those are some sort of NOx compounds? My guess would have been carbon compounds of some description going by the color.

[Anonymous No.16221202]

>>16219725
Here you go anon
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzIOgOIIhcA

[Anonymous No.16221205]

looks like they’re testing a HUD of some sort for Artemis EVAs
reminds me of Halo CE Marines https://youtu.be/vDVDwgCQ6Qo?si=mb-RphJXXfdsCd2l

[Anonymous No.16221206]

>>16221125
Didn't need those tiles anyway

[Anonymous No.16221209]

>according to Kerr, black holes have a relatively peaceful region near the core not unlike the eye of a hurricane
>it's also possible to exit a black hole by using the ring structure that lies on the inner border of the peaceful region
black hole colonies when?

[Anonymous No.16221211]

>>16221209
2weeks

[Anonymous No.16221212]

Awaiting with interest the Starliner decision.
I suppose Butch & Suni could take Dragon back down...?

I would be happy if, when Starliner most likely gets retired early, the Dragon fleet gets upped from 4, to something like 6.

[Anonymous No.16221220]

>>16221125
Someone should draw flap-chan with a missing limb and her intestines hanging out but screaming out in defiance and determination.

[Anonymous No.16221224]

>>16221212
What do you mean, it’s docked and last I checked they considered the leaks a non-issue

[Anonymous No.16221225]

>>16221212
has it actually been floated that they might not take it down or did you make that up?

[Anonymous No.16221227]

>>16221202
Yessss. In a sense it's kind of a shame that we'll probably never see a clean view of that, not only are they unlikely to ever have a flap fail that way again, the thing that made it hard to see is the the same thing that was so impressive to see. But on the other hand, there's a kind of sympathetic pathos to it as it stands, the flap in ruins, the camera straining to capture meaning out of the distortion it sees through a dirtied and broken lens. And then the flap flaring to life, the glow of its effort as it pushes its broken frame against the air shedding the light that finally gives the camera a handhold against the darkness.

[Anonymous No.16221229]

https://mauinow.com/2024/06/06/county-council-opposes-air-force-telescope-project-atop-haleakala/

Maybe telling Maui of all islands that you want to build something there when the local aquarium has an exhibit detailing the 50 years the military used a nearby island as target practice, against near continuous opposition from the locals, is not the greatest plan

[Anonymous No.16221230]

>>16221209
black hole where

[Anonymous No.16221234]

>>16221229
Just slaughter the remainder

[Anonymous No.16221235]

>>16221227
what a great way to put it
>>16221229
I mean honestly, why would we need a telescope on earth? Just wait 5 years and launch a Starship with a lens

[Anonymous No.16221246]

>>16221227
it was almost poetic how the camera survived JUST ENOUGH to show the flap with remaining life, and help verify a successful flip and burn

[Anonymous No.16221245]

good job on not having an autistic spergout about the anime thread
>>16221099
you're retarded, you can fit ~700 for a point to point trip and ~80 for a week

[Anonymous No.16221248]

>>16221227
kino

[Anonymous No.16221255]

>>16221202
It's still insane to me that we all got to watch a flight surface half disintegrate then still perform with like a third missing. Is this real life?

[Anonymous No.16221258]

>>16221224
I off-handedly read that mission control is still considering whether re-entry is safe.

>>16221225
Maybe I should have added an "if" clause. Didn't intend to imply anything either way.
"If Starliner re-entry gets scrubbed, could they..."

[Anonymous No.16221259]

>>16221186
As >>16221194 I'd kill to be instantly annihilated doing what I love and I vow not to die in a h*spital

[Anonymous No.16221260]

>>16221258
I cannot make fun of you because half the shit I say on /sfg/ is from sources I half-pay attention to as I scroll past it lol

[Anonymous No.16221270]

>>16221255
Shows why Elon doesn't care about patenting hardware. The software needed for the rocket to adapt to its new aerodynamic profile in a couple seconds and stick the landing... I can't even imagine. Compare that to the Atlas card from 1996 fucking up and causing a scrub the other day

[Anonymous No.16221272]

>>16221260
kek thanks.

To halfway answer my own question, according to this guy, the next intended crew rotation is in August.
So if Starliner was deemed unfit for re-entry, they would have to plot the tradeoffs of various CoA to cover a ~2 month span.

http://www.spacefacts.de/schedule/e_iss.htm

[Anonymous No.16221279]

>>16221270
even so i bet you could give any other company in the world detailed specs for every single piece of starship, hardware and software both, and they wouldn't be able to replicate IFT-4 inside of 10 years.

[Anonymous No.16221280]

Wait holy shit when dearmoon news broke I [exaggeratingly] said MSR was probably a higher priority for SX than a private Moon flyby. Turns out they really did bid Starship for MSR!

[Anonymous No.16221287]

>>16221280
I'm really enjoying how they bid Starship for everything. It just works. Moon base? Gateway? New ISS? Is there anything in the solar system it can't do?

[Anonymous No.16221288]

>>16221280
They'd be foolish not to. Even if they aren't selected, there's a good chance they make it there before any other awarded contractor. Making NASA look retarded by comparison

[Anonymous No.16221290]

>>16221122
RIP

[Anonymous No.16221294]

>>16221125
This is like something you would expect to see in a sci-fi movie during a climactic moment.

[Anonymous No.16221297]

>>16221280
>>16221287
I mean, of course they did, they get more money for something they're already doing, NASA gets a a vastly more capable system already in development for dirt cheap compared to the competitors, it's a classic win win. It'd be stupid not to at least try.

[Anonymous No.16221303]

>>16221227
Lit up by raptors in the dark of night, adrift in the Indian Ocean

[Anonymous No.16221304]

[Anonymous No.16221308]

So let it be war
From the skies of Terra, to the galactic rim

[Anonymous No.16221318]

>>16221304
The current design has grown on me desu

[Anonymous No.16221319]

>>16221304
You could make a collage of IFTs now

[Anonymous No.16221320]

>>16221304
ITS was so kino

[Anonymous No.16221322]

>>16221304
>ITS
SEXXXXXOOOOOO

[Anonymous No.16221325]

SpaceX beat my IFT-4 launch date prediction by 16 days. Revising my model, I am now predicting August 15 for IFT-5

[Anonymous No.16221326]

>>16221325
thats too long anon, please.

[Anonymous No.16221328]

>>16221308
imagine trying to land that in ksp. this will never work. we need big fat legs.

[Anonymous No.16221330]

>>16221326
If no FAA investigation occurs, and SpaceX doesn't revise the license too much, and fixing the remaining heat shield issues doesn't increase development time, and they don't actually attempt to catch the booster next flight, it could be quicker. a launch in 70 days is still 2 weeks faster than IFT-3 to IFT-4

[Anonymous No.16221332]

>>16221326
when has any /sfg/ prediction about a spacex launch ever been too pessimistic?

[Anonymous No.16221333]

>>16221328

[Anonymous No.16221335]

>>16221328
I've done it before on mega-drilling missions before I started building wide

The key is having RCS on the middle and the center of mass at the bottom, just like HLS.

Slopes greater than 8-10 degrees and you're fucked though, no landing leg is going to have enough friction to keep you upright. I should try it some time with KAS's harpoons

[Anonymous No.16221336]

>Quantum, which describes itself as a space infrastructure company, was founded in 2021 by entrepreneur Kam Ghaffarian, who also founded Intuitive Machines and Axiom Space
wtf why make multiple companies in the same industry?

[Anonymous No.16221338]

>>16221336
Space VCs are like bitcoiners, only their to the moon is literal

[Anonymous No.16221339]

>>16221332
After IFT-1 we all thought it wouldnt be until January this year for another because twittertards told us muh foundations and we believed them like idiots.

[Anonymous No.16221340]

What the fuck nationalities are these bitches?

[Anonymous No.16221341]

>>16221340
Fuck off to your board already tourist scum

[Anonymous No.16221343]

>>16221339
if mexico annexed boca chica, elon would launch in a month.

[Anonymous No.16221344]

>>16221328
I'm hoping they'll use a separate lander module in the final design, landing that thing's fat ass on an even surface seems like a recipe for disaster

[Anonymous No.16221346]

>>16221343
Cartels control Mexico, if anyone was annexing anything it would be them and I dont think they would much care for druglords sniffing around Starbase with guns pal.

[Anonymous No.16221349]

>>16221346
the point is the faa and environmental groups slow spacex down.

[Anonymous No.16221355]

[Anonymous No.16221357]

>>16221344
Youre a retard tourist that has no clue what your talking about. We've already discussed like 5 times at this point that the majority of an empty Starships weight is concentrated at the BOTTOM where the ENGINES AND FUEL ARE. They are not going to fucking tip and there are also adjustable legs, obviously dont know shit so why dont you fuck off back to your board.
>>16221349
FAA has been very good with SpaceX, SpaceX leads investigations to fixing what they were already planning to do, FAA just doublecheck their work and gives them the official okay once they finish everything they already planned to do anyways. Conflating FAA with environmental groups is utter garbage that completely ignores the very close relationship that SpaceX obviously has with the FAA, exemplefied by how close license release and launch day was, with launch day being announced way before then. They dont weigh them down anymore than they have to and saying otherwise is disingenuous.

[Anonymous No.16221361]

>>16221357
>>16221349
Also not even mentioning that PUBLICLY Elon/SpaceX has said that the FAA are trying their best and infact need MORE funding so that they can get licenses out faster as they dont have enough people. They testified about this at a congressional hearing seen here. Clearly FAA are trying their best even in a dismal situation funding wise.

[Anonymous No.16221363]

>>16221361
Oops forgot to link hearing hold on https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2023/10/18/spacex-blue-origin-virgin-galactic-call-for-faa-improvements.html

[Anonymous No.16221367]

>>16221361
faa is antiquated and holding back humanity. government bureaucracy that is out of their league.

[Anonymous No.16221368]

So many tourist newfags that need to gtfo. Spoonfeeding even the most basic info we've discussed to death here that has been consensus and common knowledge for months. /sfg/ is always the worst the few days after a Starship launch.

[Anonymous No.16221369]

>>16221367
Yeah you need to go all the way back to >>>/pol/. Obvious where your type comes from, nobody wants you faggots here or anywhere on this site for that matter.

[Anonymous No.16221373]

>>16221368
then you should take a break for a few days. you seem stressed. starship needs legs. sorry.

[Anonymous No.16221375]

>>16221369
are you seriously defending the faa? what a faggot.

[Anonymous No.16221379]

>>16221368
... And in this frame, we find an exhibit of "autistic rage"...

[Anonymous No.16221383]

>>16221368
>NOOOOOO YOU CAN'T JUST DISCUSS SPACEFLIGHT, YOU NEED TO READ THREADS FROM 3 MONTHS AGO TO FIND OUT IF I DISAGREE WITH YOUR OPINIONS FIRST

[Anonymous No.16221385]

>>16221367
True

[Anonymous No.16221387]

>>16221368
We need to add more to the atmosphere. If we add more atmosphere, the rockets will just float up and we can save shit tons of fuel

[Anonymous No.16221388]

>>16221369
I would love to visit a government building such as FAA headquarters and

[Anonymous No.16221390]

>>16221361
Yeah I'm sure the government beauracrats are working flat out LOL

[Anonymous No.16221397]

>>16221390
im wondering now if this is either excellent trolling or this guy works for the faa this is a personal attack.

[Anonymous No.16221398]

>>16221368
Hey you seem really knowledgeable, can you tell me what a space plane is?

[Anonymous No.16221400]

>>16221398
of course, it's the official manned craft of /sfg/

[Anonymous No.16221402]

>>16221383
more like 3 years ago

[Anonymous No.16221403]

>>16221280
>>16221288
How would starship MSR work? I thought starship can't return from mars without some way to refuel it on mars.

[Anonymous No.16221407]

>>16221403
maybe something like red dragon where it launches the return rocket out of the payload bay

[Anonymous No.16221411]

>>16221403
It wouldn't be as efficient as ISRU, but you could always just fly multiple starships to Mars, one for MSR and the rest as fuel depots, and refuel the MSR starship before it lands on Mars and after it launches on it. You could either leave the fuel depot ship in a high graveyard orbit, or just figure out how many tankers you need to get MSR + all the tankers back to Earth.
The ability to launch enormous ships that can refuel in space changes the paradigm in ways that not many people are thinking about yet. All sorts of things that would have been ludicrously inefficient from an economic perspective become simpler with high mass and volume to orbit for cheap.

[Anonymous No.16221416]

>>16221383
Yes? This is why "lurk moar newfag" is a thing.

[Anonymous No.16221417]

>>16221403
What's the minimum payload you can get for Mars surface & return, with no refuelling? Surely you can do it with like a typical 50kg payload, with traditional mass autism.

[Anonymous No.16221418]

>>16221403
It cant, elon just need more public money for starship, just like he did with HLS, but hey hes going to build a entire city on mars with his money LMAO

[Anonymous No.16221429]

Guys im a space nerd but if you think about, /spaceflight/ makes no sense, whats the point of sending plobes or humans beyond LEO? From what we know until now , the whole universe just sucks except planet earth, literally the flour under your feet are more interesting than any part of the solar system, why you want colonies on mars or the moon when theyre inert deserts because of the radiation and nothing else? And exoplanets? Too far away and intellestelar travel is impossible. There arent aliens either, probably they dont even exist and if they do, theyre too far away to cantact to them. I know were all very passionate about the space, but If you use your logic, were just wasting time and money for nothing valuable

[Anonymous No.16221433]

>>16221429
Ok stay here then with the niggers and pajeets. Bye.

[Anonymous No.16221434]

>>16221160
F, King

[Anonymous No.16221437]

>>16221429
you can't fight pitched space battles on earth, duh

[Anonymous No.16221440]

>>16221429
Just found a picture of this anon.

[Anonymous No.16221441]

>>16221433
>random nonsarcastic pajeet hate
way to out yourself newfag. ISRU is respected here for the work theyve done so far starting from nothing, but you wouldnt know what that even is. also just because youre retarded doesnt mean the other anon isnt b4 you strawman me.

[Anonymous No.16221443]

>>16221440
kek. i have yet to see him actually support spaceflight in any way, even oldspace.

[Anonymous No.16221444]

>>16221441
i can smell you from here stinky

[Anonymous No.16221445]

>>16221441
>ISRU
Anon...

[Anonymous No.16221446]

>>16221445
ISRO im retarded holy shit how did i miss that

[Anonymous No.16221447]

>>16221441
kek. good one

[Anonymous No.16221450]

also just checking in with /sfg/ regulars, you all saw that Vast news right? actually massive that they got that partnership with ESA, furthering my claim that Vast will be the dominant CSS company.

[Anonymous No.16221453]

>>16221441
Install a toilet street shitter

[Anonymous No.16221455]

>>16221446
You need to lurk more

[Anonymous No.16221460]

>>16221429
Spaceflight is just a job program, if you think it like that makes sense why it exists

[Anonymous No.16221464]

>>16221433
Aren they sending nigs to moon with artemis tho? And indians are about to have their own manned space capsule

[Anonymous No.16221466]

>>16221460
So far it has been. But SpaceX has finally gained profit via Starlink and satellites are already imperative to the global system. Though a majority of it is a job program (NASA, good chunk of oldspace, etc) some of it is actually meaningful work to maintain our current high quality of life.

[Anonymous No.16221469]

>>16221464
Shhh dont tell him hes gonna start have another tantrum again because people disagree with him.

[Anonymous No.16221471]

>>16221469
Having*

[Anonymous No.16221473]

>>16221464
Nigs will get naturally selected out and so will poojeets

[Anonymous No.16221479]

>>16221429
They are inert deserts now, they wont be like that forever

[Anonymous No.16221480]

>>16221450
Seem in a good position but I would say its still too early to tell

[Anonymous No.16221483]

>>16221466
SpaceX literally is what it is thanks to NASA , they gave them the money to build falcon, falcon heavy, crew dragon and now starship, theyre part of the job program also. Yeah maybe they can get some real money by starlink, but that shows there is not a real market beyond LEO

[Anonymous No.16221485]

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1799258239453802854
>We plan to move older Starships close to the fence, so people can take pics with them if they want

[Anonymous No.16221486]

>>16221485
Boca Chica rocket garden going to mog the Kennedy one soon

[Anonymous No.16221487]

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1799249103316238665
>Government helps, but technology advances primarily via technology entrepreneurs

[Anonymous No.16221488]

>>16221483
Has NASA given more money to spacex than boeing? Was NASA buying something from either company?

[Anonymous No.16221493]

>>16221485
BASED
I will be going there later this summer this is perfect for me

[Anonymous No.16221494]

>>16221488
Are we talking in total or Dragon vs Shartliner?

[Anonymous No.16221498]

>>16221227
And the rocket's red glare, fragments sparkling in air,
Gave proof through the flight that the flap was still there.

[Anonymous No.16221499]

>>16221483
They didn't "give" SpaceX money, they purchased launch vehicles, which is what they got, at a much lower cost and on a faster time frame than the other retards.

[Anonymous No.16221503]

>>16221498
Reddit behavior

[Anonymous No.16221510]

>>16221122
suicide?

[Anonymous No.16221511]

>>16221429
Inert deserts call to the white man

[Anonymous No.16221512]

>>16221355
based, space is gay

[Anonymous No.16221515]

>>16221511
As they always have.

[Anonymous No.16221532]

>>16221515
We will make Mosesbots erect pyramids on Mars.

[Anonymous No.16221544]

https://spacenews.com/spacex-and-the-categorical-imperative-to-achieve-low-launch-cost/
>In 2024, the reusability model is vastly improved, and many analysts believe that the possibility that the full cost of each Falcon 9 launch —– including workforce for transport, refurbishment, assembly and operations, depreciation and amortization on facilities (launch sites, factories, test benches) and reusable items (fairings and boosters) — is currently positioned below $30 million. While some analysts make implicit assumptions that the full cost of Falcon 9 could be as low as $20 million per launch, Eurospace prefers to stay with the more conservative assumption of $28 million per launch.

posted here yesterday but not really discussed

[Anonymous No.16221548]

>>16221450
>partnership
That's a /biz/ word for "you can use our logo on your page"
MoUs are basically business friend requests. They don't confer any legal obligations and they don't come with any money attached. It's more a recognition that Thales Alenia (which would sell out US IP in a heartbeat to China if Vast was dumb enough to give them any) would sure like to license-build another station if the ESA somehow came up with the money for it. They won't.

[Anonymous No.16221549]

>>16221544
>opinion
>full of horseshit
I'll pasd

[Anonymous No.16221554]

>>16221549
not just opinion, its an analysis that shows Falcon 9 internal costs for SpaceX have to be under 30 mil due to a number of factors (the Eurospace analysts themselves assume its 28 mil)

>The most probable and logical assumption then is that by achieving reusability, fast turnaround and especially the very high cadence (thanks to the huge “demand” created by Starlink), SpaceX has unlocked a new economic model for space launch. This also means that SpaceX clearly has margins to undercut the competition while still making a profit on each launch (including the Transporter and Bandwagon mission and their relatively low fill ratio).

[Anonymous No.16221555]

https://x.com/interstellargw/status/1798904231304511490

[Anonymous No.16221561]

>>16221554
though there are some peculiar arguments at the end

I've seen this guys posts on X previously and has this EDS vibe, but in the very least he was very skeptical about Starlink a few years ago
I guess it makes sense in the context that nothing like it has been achieved, but still

[Anonymous No.16221562]

>>16221554
Yeah, not reading the claptrap posted by someone who puts "demand" in snarky passive aggressive quotes like that. The demand for starlink service is real, people want it and are buying it. Therefore the demand for Falcon 9 launches is real.

[Anonymous No.16221564]

https://x.com/Yrouel86/status/1799357314077425744

[Anonymous No.16221566]

>>16221544
It looks like someone complaining that SpaceX is not making space access as cheap as Elon claims he wants to do, but then goes in a different direction. It heavily implies that because SpaceX never lowered its prices, it is in effect funding its other lines of business on Falcon 9's margins because literally no one else on earth has costs that low. And thus anyone using Falcon 9s are subsidizing SpaceX's R&D (and Starlink deployment) because no one has a competitive alternative. It's literally a repeat of the "accidental monopoly" article with more numbers.

This dude is so green with envy it's insane.

[Anonymous No.16221567]

>>16221561
>I have heard from reliable sources that it is now as low as $15-17 million

[Anonymous No.16221568]

>>16221554
They're spewing horseshit. Just watch enough interviews of Gwynne and Elon and you'd know the marginal cost of a F9 launch is 15 million (plainly stated) and the number of reflights required to recoup manufacturing costs is 3. Enough with this European cope

[Anonymous No.16221569]

>>16221561
>Seething that maybe SpaceX is profiting off of decades of hard work while everyone was telling them they are retarded
>meanwhile mic contractors selling $8000 toilet seats

Calling falcon launches "very expensive" is bullshit when they are cheaper than the competition, they are under no obligation to lower prices just because this EDS retard wants to have a melty.

[Anonymous No.16221570]

>>16221562
People only think they want Starlink because Elon has tricked them as usual. Fibre connection is good enough for anyone.

[Anonymous No.16221572]

>>16221564
Lmao I didnt know he was pulling this shit that long ago

[Anonymous No.16221574]

>>16221564
>the 300th falcon 9 landing video below his shitty EDS tantrum

Thunderfaggot absolutely mogged lmao

[Anonymous No.16221577]

>>16221566
>it is in effect funding its other lines of business on Falcon 9's margins because literally no one else on earth has costs that low. And thus anyone using Falcon 9s are subsidizing SpaceX's R&D (and Starlink deployment) because no one has a competitive alternative.

I mean this is definitely true to an extent. But so what? Using profits from your business to fund the same businesses R&D bad?

[Anonymous No.16221579]

>>16221577
Profits that wouldn't exist if someone else had similar costs and wanted to undercut SpaceX. I think that guy is wildly optimistic about what would happen if SpaceX got a legitimate competitor. They would benefit just as much as SpaceX does if their price was the same.

[Anonymous No.16221584]

>>16220800

[Anonymous No.16221585]

>>16221584
OLM

[Anonymous No.16221588]

>>16221585
chopsticks and QD-arm mostly unharmed

[Anonymous No.16221590]

What caused the flap illumination many kilometers before raptor relight? Maybe a fire flaring up lower on the ship?

[Anonymous No.16221591]

>in one article it's, falcon 9 launches are too cheap and competition can't compete
>in another it's, falcon 9 launches are too expensive

[Anonymous No.16221592]

>>16221588
tank farm is fine, except some horizontal tanks have lost some cladding

[Anonymous No.16221594]

>>16221592

[Anonymous No.16221595]

>>16221592
looks like dust to me?

[Anonymous No.16221596]

>>16221594
tower 2 foundation progress

[Anonymous No.16221598]

>>16221591
10 years of F9 recovery, and no one else has even tried

[Anonymous No.16221600]

>>16221595
its these small ones >>16221594

[Anonymous No.16221601]

>>16221592
are you braindead?

[Anonymous No.16221604]

>>16221596

>>16221601
just paraphrasing the video, can you expound upon your comment?

[Anonymous No.16221605]

>>16221591
>noooo the Falcon 9 is really expensive and Elon is just taking tax money to subsidise his ludicrous vanity projects
>noooo the Falcon 9 is really cheap and Elon is just taking profits to subsidise his ludicrous vanity projects

Just strap them all under the orbital launch mount desu desu senpai

[Anonymous No.16221607]

>>16221604

[Anonymous No.16221609]

>>16221604
>Private land
KWAB

[Anonymous No.16221619]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-SY9hJtIYY

Blue Origin have a patent on an aerospike for New Glenn upper stage, kind of gives Stoke vibes

[Anonymous No.16221620]

We wiwll buiwld a gweat dython thwarm awound ouw staw

[Anonymous No.16221622]

>>16221619

[Anonymous No.16221623]

>>16221619
Stoke is run by ex-BO guys. Bezos should sue them into oblivion

[Anonymous No.16221625]

>>16221619
>32 air lighted engines
Jesus christ how horrifying

[Anonymous No.16221628]

>>16221195
By 'man rated landings' do you mean a reusable flight profile, or literally landing a booster with a crewed pod on top? If the latter, why the fuck would you do that? even 1/1000 crash chance is more risky than splashing at sea in just the reentry pod.

[Anonymous No.16221637]

>>16221598
Falcon is already about the limit for an expendable rocket developed into a reusable one while still transportable on US highways. That means everyone else seeking a technically better rocket is constrained to shipment by sea (Ariane, ULA, Blue Origin, Stoke, China), rail (Russia, China), self transporting spaceplanes (Radian), or build-where-you-launch (Starship, Neutron). All of these options are either diameter/length limiting, slow as shit, murderously capital intensive, or some combination thereof. I think we'll see Neutron, New Glenn, and whatever Stoke's vehicle is called attempt reuse in the next few years, and maybe China will promote from PowerPoint rockets to bending metal.

[Anonymous No.16221645]

>>16221625
Iirc stoke has 30 chambers and only 1 engine. Body Odergin could be a similar setup

[Anonymous No.16221646]

[Anonymous No.16221654]

The Aquila is such a goofy 80s rocket design. It's basically Astra before proonted Inconel regeneratively cooled kerolox engines and modern computer networks were possible.
>LOX/HTPB hybrid first and second stages
>solid third stage
>N2O/HTPB hybrid fourth stage
>hybrid stages use oxidizer based TVC
>third stage uses strontium perchlorate of all things for TVC
>Intel 386 running some bespoke OS for GNC, using RS-422 wiring

[Anonymous No.16221662]

Can't wait for the crying when the moonship test will fall to the side and everyone blames Musk for polluting the Moon.

[Anonymous No.16221664]

>>16221662
May i screencap this post?

[Anonymous No.16221665]

>>16221664
Go ahead friend! It's all yours :)

[Anonymous No.16221666]

>>16221665
Thank you.

[B4RK0N (300 IQ) 'kneel' No.16221668]

>>16221665
It's all Barkon's? What kind of jibbery is this? GET OUT

[Anonymous No.16221670]

>>16221450
ESA is a joke, it's just one of many European grifts where connected people give each other taxpayer money and pat each other on the backs about how important they are. See also: CERN.

[Anonymous No.16221672]

>>16221111
How did they solve it?

[Anonymous No.16221673]

>>16221566
>They're using their profits to fund new development? REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
commies are insane. that's how literally every single business (that isn't in a death spiral) works.

[Anonymous No.16221674]

>>16221450
It always weirds me out when small companies like this get legitimized by big players before they've ever accomplished anything

[Anonymous No.16221677]

>>16221191
>is there any way to stop the atmosphere
There is. You know what it is.

[Anonymous No.16221678]

>>16221672
By cancelling the program

[Anonymous No.16221682]

More hybrid rocket papers. This PDF/video is the Peregrine paraffin/N2O sounding rocket with the meme startup sound.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrswPmPQiy8

[Anonymous No.16221683]

>>16221670
Yeah ESA does jackshit all year with the only exception that some times they send a scientific satellite or smth like that.
And even in those cases they need the assistance of other agencies because they are too lazy to make their own stuff, wich is truly a waste of potential because it's not like they lack the funds or the manpower to get things done.

[Anonymous No.16221685]

This paper is a general overview of hybrids and why N2O might be more performant than LOX in some cases.

[Anonymous No.16221690]

>>16221270
The software just runs an adaptive control loop. It looks at some inputs, multiplies some matrices, gets some outputs and chucks them at the actuators.

The real reason this happened is because starship is a massive stainless steel tube rather than some miligram-optimized bucket of aluminium. The actuator survived in a good enough state to remain within the control authority limits of the controller and the stability limits of the system, i.e. the flap didn't come off, it stayed controllable and it had enough surface area to still work with some adjustment to the control weights.

[Anonymous No.16221696]

Thinking about what in retrospect NASA should have done instead of the space shuttle.

IMO the big problem with the shuttle was trying to do everything with one vehicle: medium/heavy lift, orbital laboratory, crew transport ect.

I think NASA should have focused instead on a large re-usable booster design, that could be used for medium/heavy lift with an expendable second stage a bit like a larger falcon 9, maybe with optional solids for extra large payloads.

To start with this could be paired with a capsule for crew missions, but later they could develop a more reusable orbiter potentially to replace the entire second stage, or just the capsule for smaller payloads or crew missions.
The orbiter would be designed from the get-go to fly unmanned and would use a podded crew module for manned missions, which could be jettisoned for better abort capability.

The booster would likely have to be flyback rather than VTVL, but that would be fine IMO, the bigger challenge would probably be the engine and fuel, ideally methalox, which was proposed even back then, but otherwise Kerolox would be workable.

This way you would have the optional heavy lift capability and the high cadence, lower cost smaller payload and crew capability.
You would probably lose the orbital lab capability of the shuttle, but with a better heavy lift rocket you can instead operate a large station with Skylab like modules for orbital science.

[Anonymous No.16221698]

>>16221690
You talk like the outcome wasn't surprising but I know you're a goddamn liar if you weren't amazed to see that flap still working. Even Elon himself was.

[Anonymous No.16221706]

>>16221235
It's still easier and cheaper to build it on Earth and new technology allows you to overcome atmospheric distortion.

[Anonymous No.16221715]

>>16221619
Get a new fucking microphone, jesus christ.

[Anonymous No.16221727]

>>16221429
>intellestelar travel is impossible
Why would it be? Just go fast for 100 years

[Anonymous No.16221734]

>>16221727
Dont interact with that moron. Interstellar travel is absolutely possible even within known physics. There are pleny of high % light speed concepts out there that could get us to planets 10's of lightyears out in a human lifespan. Even if we didn't have those generation ships are a thing and people will use them if they have no other option.

This isnt even accounting for high technology and exotic physics drives like those seen in uap. If that stuff is even remotely legit then Interstellar travel is easy and we have nothing to worry about.

[Anonymous No.16221737]

>>16221696
>NASA should've built Starship
We got the next Werner von Braun over here

[Anonymous No.16221747]

>>16221734
Yeah I'm not even expecting any ground breaking high energy physics, I bet as soon as we figure out the sweet spot for a closed loop habitat we send one to Epsilon Eridani. Maybe a closer shitty red dwarf if the habitat fags don't care about planet surfaces or solar storms. You just need to design the right religion and the people that are born and die in the middle of the trip will be proud rather than resentful to have exclusively lived in a lonely machine

[Anonymous No.16221752]

>>16221328
I could do it if you gave me a chart of locations that were flat enough

[Anonymous No.16221753]

https://files.catbox.moe/4whckj.mp4

threw together a quick edit of the reentry. im not
normally the creative type but that damn flap inspired me

[Anonymous No.16221755]

>>16221737
It wouldn't be starship, it would be more like new Glenn, with the potential to later be upgraded into a fully re-usable system.

The point is mainly that NASA should have focused on making a re-usable booster instead of a reusable orbiter.

[Anonymous No.16221756]

>>16221734
It's obviously not legit lol, please be less credulous.

[Anonymous No.16221757]

>>16221485
Holy Rocket Mecca

[Anonymous No.16221759]

>>16221737
thank you for capitalizing his name correctly

[Anonymous No.16221760]

>>16221756
I didn't even realize that's what he was referring to.
>If magic is slightly real it would be easy
Good thing we don't need magic, just time. Humans have undertaken centuries long endeavors before, and we'll do it again

[Anonymous No.16221761]

>>16221759
I spelled it wrong
>>16221755
Unfortunately it turns out government space could never do anything good. I still can't believe the reason we haven't had progress in half a century is because essentially a large DMV office has been running the show

[Anonymous No.16221763]

>>16221761
'h' is a fake shill letter, I don't believe in it

[Anonymous No.16221765]

>>16221715
I hope he never does.

[Anonymous No.16221766]

>>16221756
It is good to know that you are all-knowing and are aware of all facets of physics, including things humanity hasn't even discovered yet.

The tech behind uap has at least a theoretical basis (mhd, warp drives, and others), and it's not entirely implausible that some (very) small portion of the phenomenon represents real structured craft. You should be open to this possibility rather than dismiss it out of hand, not very science of you anon.

[Anonymous No.16221770]

>>16221761
It's easier to understand the trajectory of spaceflight if you come to understand Apollo as an aberration, that was only possible because of a coincidental political situation.

You have the combination of intense cold war competition and the political desire to create a big jobs programme for the American south so that the civil rights era Democrats could hold on to southern states.
Wernher Von Braun was just as skilled a political navigator as he was a rocket program manager; somehow he managed to sell his rocket ideas to both the German government and the American government.

[Anonymous No.16221772]

>>16221105
all hail flap

[Anonymous No.16221774]

>>16221770
>somehow he managed to sell his rocket ideas to both the German government and the American government.
this. he was quite a character to have survived the SS, selling them his ideas about winning the war through rocketry, and then make it big in the US doing the same. All he wanted to do in life was put things in space and he made it happen.

[Anonymous No.16221775]

>>16221774
Sad that he died quite young

[Anonymous No.16221776]

>still no flight 5
America is finished.

[Anonymous No.16221778]

>>16221770
That's what I'm saying, as soon as he stopped being a driving force it was a downward trajectory. Moon, LEO, nothing.

[Anonymous No.16221780]

>>16221776
China is so strong.

[Anonymous No.16221782]

>>16221105
thunderf00t said it would crumple flat on reentry. why did he lied to me ;/

[Anonymous No.16221784]

>>16221780
smelling
mmm, hydrazine

[Anonymous No.16221785]

>>16221775
he's love spacex im sure

[Anonymous No.16221786]

>>16221510
He was 90 anon, he probably just fell asleep.

[Anonymous No.16221790]

>>16221785
that nigga would be bouncing ideas off elon all day, but sadly starship would end up as a spaceplane with massive wings and toxic hypergolic fuel as a result

[Anonymous No.16221791]

>>16221790
its totally his idea for direct ascent that they plan for staship to the moon.

[Anonymous No.16221800]

>>16221510
he came way too close to not dying if that was a suicide attempt

[Anonymous No.16221804]

>>16221791
but he was also obsessed with spaceplanes. the first shuttle fanatic

[Anonymous No.16221806]

>>16221544
Europeans crying about SpaceX

[Anonymous No.16221807]

>>16221804
That's because he went to his grave thinking Mars had a 0.1 bar atmosphere.

[Anonymous No.16221809]

>>16221770
Him, Musk and others are a living proof of great man theory.

[Anonymous No.16221810]

>wake up
>clear watching starlink
a good morning

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2A2DBdEij0U

[Anonymous No.16221811]

>>16221804
he hed see cherman autism. it serfed him vell

[Anonymous No.16221814]

>>16221592
Am I wrong in thinking that if they had set up the OLM to the opposite of the tank farms, it would reduce the risk greatly to the tank farms?

Moving it south side of the tower (from the picture) would mean when in failure, there's much greater chance of the debris falling to the south side of the tower where there's no infrastructure

[Anonymous No.16221819]

>>16221814
It would. Starbase construction was a clusterfuck with tons of improvisation.

[Anonymous No.16221828]

>>16221814
If they try IFT-5 catch and OLM is damaged, thats another excuse to switch to a newer robust OLM base and move it southwards.

Similarly, I hope the 2nd tower has the ship pointing towards the empty undeveloped area so there's lot less risk to the rest of the tank farms/infrastructures

[Anonymous No.16221829]

CLEAR IS LIVE

[Anonymous No.16221832]

https://x.com/BoeingSpace/status/1799425601633173539

ISS live withi starliner crew

[Anonymous No.16221838]

>wake up on ISS
>momentarily forget where you are
>get lost floating from section to section
Imagine the panic

[Anonymous No.16221840]

>>16221832
Showing off the vehicle like this is kino

[Anonymous No.16221846]

Is that is? That was only 13 minutes and they barely went anywhere

[Anonymous No.16221848]

>>16221165
Well stoke is also going for it. So it's at least a design that can convince more than just BO.

[Anonymous No.16221852]

I say retire the ISS and make a new one, it wasn't even supposed to stay aroound for all of this time in the first place.

[Anonymous No.16221853]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2bKUUy1ali8
>Virgin Galactic Launches Crewed Galactic 07 Mission

[Anonymous No.16221856]

FRESH COPE DROP: Starship only worked because of AI

[Anonymous No.16221857]

>>16221848
Stoke has a trad capsule design though. no fucking clue what BO is thinking with that thing.

[Anonymous No.16221863]

>>16221856
Expected that one. It's totally not the hard work of the people who wrote scientific papers on propulsive landing and adjustments required or anything, it must have been "AI".

[Anonymous No.16221865]

>>16221856
Anon, who cares? Why do you keep posting what dumb assholes bitch about? Why should any anon itt read those people's statements, why should anybody here care?

[Anonymous No.16221864]

>>16221856
Nobody cares about this random trannt. If it isnt CSS, Lightningl3g, ESGHound or Spacegay5 dont post it

[Anonymous No.16221867]

>>16221429
>just wasting time and money for nothing valuable

[Anonymous No.16221868]

>>16221864
>If it isnt CSS, Lightningl3g, ESGHound or Spacegay5 dont post it
Don't post those fags either, I do not care what they have to say and I would never see their names again if anon stopped posting their twitter noise here.

[Anonymous No.16221870]

>>16221856
>can't even figure out how to use his laptop's webcam but feels qualified to lecture people about complex engineering
I can't stand people like this.

[Anonymous No.16221871]

>>16221856
That AI rant is 100% retarded and should be entirely disregarded

[Anonymous No.16221873]

For fuck's sake literally stop giving this petty good for nothing e-celebs attention, i guarantee you they will disappear along with their frustrated defeatism.

[Anonymous No.16221876]

https://x.com/sara_spangelo/status/1799433709298594190

[Anonymous No.16221877]

>>16221696
it is known

[Anonymous No.16221879]

>>16221856
The world is full of people that cannot be helped.

[Anonymous No.16221885]

>>16221698
I was amazed, yes. But my point is that the hardware is what did it, the software is pretty straightforward. So long as it sees a response from its inputs and can damp any adverse oscillations, an adaptive controller can adapt. The hard part is having a flap that can still be functional enough after burning through to be usable.

[Anonymous No.16221890]

>>16221876
>Starlink slicing off more and more of the yearly $100bil telecom market
They're actually going to self fund a Mars city aren't they

[Anonymous No.16221892]

>>16221105
9/10 OP. Image is a bit low res

[Anonymous No.16221895]

>>16221122
what am I looking at?

[Anonymous No.16221896]

>>16221429
>/spaceflight/ makes no sense
If you get it you get it. If you don't, your descendants will starve under the kessler bomb blockade with the rest of the dirtsniffers. Spaceflight is ontologically necessary.

[Anonymous No.16221898]

>>16221895
Apollo 8 astronaut plowing his plane into the surf, in a failed loop. He was 90 years old, died on impact just yesterday.

[Anonymous No.16221905]

>>16221856
>miseseconomics
Don't take his name in vain

[Anonymous No.16221906]

>>16221590
Best guess is methane venting catching fire.

[Anonymous No.16221910]

>>16221191
it's not nox the raptor engine just burn dirty.

[Anonymous No.16221912]

>>16221590
titanium fire

[Anonymous No.16221914]

>>16221690
sounds like a basic logic controller at its heart. Entry level mechatronics really should become part of the mandatory curriculum by now

[Anonymous No.16221926]

>>16221853
6 minutes for suborbital plane

[Anonymous No.16221927]

>try to talk to 'educated' normie about spacex
>they've objectively achieved something revolutionary
>"reeee Elon Musk reeeee"
>tfw one of the greatest technological achievements in human history is just the Chud Rocket to normies

[Anonymous No.16221928]

>>16221690
you're a bigot if you don't understand how versatile and adaptive even a simple PID controller is

[Anonymous No.16221930]

>>16221926
What's different about their upcoming delta class ship

[Anonymous No.16221933]

>>16221927
My friend is like this. EDS is real.

[Anonymous No.16221934]

>>16221930
idk, bigger I guess?

[Anonymous No.16221935]

https://x.com/MarcusHouse/status/1799424407162835409
>I didn't realise @elonmusk had @Copperfield involved in Flight 4.

[Anonymous No.16221938]

final flight of this design, haven't released much about the new design t:NSF faggots

[Anonymous No.16221939]

>For the first time, we have raised the Intersex Progress Pride Flag at a NASA center to commemorate #PrideMonth
https://x.com/NASAAmes/status/1799194566714920972
lmao

[Anonymous No.16221941]

>>16221939
Cult idol

[Anonymous No.16221949]

[Anonymous No.16221955]

>>16221939
And just wait NASA put BLM, LGBT and Feminist flag with Artemis LMAO

God I hope China gets to the moon first

[Anonymous No.16221961]

>>16221955
So instead of wishing for America to right the ship and abandon the globohomo culture, you just want to throw in the towel and wish for communist chinks to beat us back at our own game?

[Anonymous No.16221964]

>>16221756
that dog looks offended

[Anonymous No.16221966]

>>16221927
>normie
hello, reddit

[Anonymous No.16221973]

>>16221782
because lying is literally his job, he's getting paid to do it

[Anonymous No.16221977]

>>16221782
Why are you listening to a chemist on anything rocket related other than fuel?

[Anonymous No.16221978]

>>16221961
>So instead of wishing for America to right the ship and abandon the globohomo culture

Not happening, americans have the faggotry and degeneracy in their blood

[Anonymous No.16221981]

>>16221804
VTVL simply wasn't feasible with the technology of the day, it's much easier now that we have infinitely restartable engines and extreme precision guidance computers

[Anonymous No.16221990]

IT'S UP
https://x.com/SpaceX/status/1799458854067118450

[Anonymous No.16221991]

https://x.com/SpaceX/status/1799458854067118450

Super heavy landing footage

[Anonymous No.16221993]

>>16221990
>>16221991
KINO

[Anonymous No.16221994]

>>16221804
>>16221791
not really sure either of these are true. frau im mond depicted a direct ascent lunar lander in 1929 so that can safely be chalked up as oberth's idea. von braun was certainly expecting that spaceplanes would be the logical choice for manned spacecraft but he wasn't the first (sanger) or the most ardent (mueller, schriever) advocate for them by any stretch.

[Anonymous No.16221997]

So much better than the shittle it's unreal

[Anonymous No.16222000]

>>16221991
NOICE

[Anonymous No.16222001]

>>16221328
>argument by video game
I'm going to need to you to kill yourself immediately

[Anonymous No.16222002]

>>16221990
>>16221991
holy fuck the kino!

[Anonymous No.16222003]

If it had legs it would have landed, not sure if it slowed down enough for tower

[Anonymous No.16222004]

https://x.com/INiallAnderson/status/1799459119268823133/photo/1
>“If you're not adding things back in at least 10% of the time, you're clearly not deleting enough.” - Elon

[Anonymous No.16222005]

>>16221991

[Anonymous No.16222006]

>>16221991

[Anonymous No.16222007]

>>16221333
I wanna see someone draw Starship-chan as an inkling girl from Sploon, because squids.
Preferably the original agent 3 lmao

[Anonymous No.16222009]

>>16222006
Why did they cut it out right at the end? I wanted to see it tip over.

[Anonymous No.16222011]

>>16222006
wish they would have shown the full landing, all from the boat

[Anonymous No.16222012]

>>16222009
Maybe it shaked that floating thing too much

[Anonymous No.16222013]

https://x.com/MarcusHouse/status/1799420105644003766

[Anonymous No.16222014]

>>16221991

[Anonymous No.16222015]

>>16222004
that's on the trailing edge, why would it matter?

[Anonymous No.16222016]

[Anonymous No.16222017]

>>16222009
we don't want the chinese discovering the secrets of how to tip rockets over on the pad

[Anonymous No.16222018]

This flight was the “FH Demo” of starship. Though I say that a bit preemptively. Future flights will probably be even more crazy

[Anonymous No.16222019]

>>16221403
A modified cargo Starship could just launch a red dragon capsule assembly to deorbit, land on Mars, take the sample, then send the mini-rocket to GTFO and burn back to Earth.

[Anonymous No.16222020]

>>16221990
>>16221991
One of the raptor definitely committed sudoku there

[Anonymous No.16222021]

>>16222020
It was visible on the stream already

[Anonymous No.16222023]

[Anonymous No.16222026]

>>16222020
did not need it. I wouldn't be surprised if they could lose 2 or maybe (probably not) even 3

[Anonymous No.16222028]

>>16222015
I thought it was about the whole section that is black instead of steel (the black perhaps being some ablative heatshield material

[Anonymous No.16222029]

>>16221355
They turned off replies because it was almost entirely negative
https://x.com/nasaames/status/1799194566714920972

[Anonymous No.16222030]

>>16222026
I don't think it can lose middle ones

[Anonymous No.16222032]

>>16222015
That is where the burn through first occurred. If you go back and watch the footage, you can see plasma filtering through the gap it had burned into the flaps. They probably added this back to all of the flaps, but couldn't get a shot of the trailing ones.

[Anonymous No.16222033]

not that anyone here cares about atmospheric flight but virgin galactic is flying right now

[Anonymous No.16222036]

>>16221369
wrong and gay
go get tortured to death in North Korea, government lover

[Anonymous No.16222037]

>>16222033

[Anonymous No.16222040]

>>16222030
It wasn't a middle one. When they do the landing, the outer ring lights up first and then turns off again. That raptor which exploded is one of the outer ring ones. It might have even been the one that shutdown prematurely.

[Anonymous No.16222042]

>>16221991
>Starship Flight 5
>booster comes in over Starbase
>its on fire just like here
>but it gets successfully caught by the tower arms first try
>but its on fire

wat SpaceX do?

[Anonymous No.16222046]

>>16221446
It's because you are a retarded faggot

[Anonymous No.16222051]

how the hell am i supposed to get excited about some baby rollercoaster right now after what i witnessed a few days ago.

fuck, i hate the IFT curse, everything else becomes boring by comparison.

[Anonymous No.16222052]

>>16222042
hose

[Anonymous No.16222053]

>>16222051
for reall

[Anonymous No.16222054]

>>16222042

[Anonymous No.16222055]

>>16222051
well VG launches have always been pretty boring, they don't have a livestream for instance

[Anonymous No.16222056]

>>16222033
Not to be negative, but you're right, I kinda don't. In fact "Virgin Galactic" sort of pisses me off, because that's a GREAT name. It's a real pity that it's been applied to something so prosaic as high-altitude ballistics.

[Anonymous No.16222057]

>>16222042
They have the deluge and water hoses. The deluge actually fires as it comes back in. We saw it do this during the flight if you watched the NSF stream. They timed the tower to work the arms with the landing and fire the deluge.

[Anonymous No.16222058]

>>16222054
>>16222052
thats not anywhere near the tower idiots

[Anonymous No.16222060]

>>16222055
>VG launches have always been pretty boring
there WAS that one time...

[Anonymous No.16222061]

>>16222052
IT GETS THE HOSE AGAIN

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8G9BsuaFtk

[Anonymous No.16222062]

>>16221369
Go back to plebbit, faggot.
>>16221429
Oh, but sportsball and Tee-Vee are good?

[Anonymous No.16222064]

>>16222015
>>16222032
In case you think I am bullshitting you. On Estronauts stream at around 10:17:50 you can suddenly see the plasma blow through the gap.

[Anonymous No.16222065]

>>16222058
and unfortunately that is the only hose spacex has or is capable of building. guess no hosing down the booster for them

[Anonymous No.16222067]

>>16221852
Lunar Gateway will be the new anchor around NASA's neck, don't worry

[Anonymous No.16222068]

>>16221997
I would've loved to see Big Gemini in action, fucking (((Jews)))

[Anonymous No.16222069]

>>16222042

[Anonymous No.16222072]

>>16222064
Estronaut was just recasting the spacex stream dum dum

[Anonymous No.16222073]

>>16222072
Yeah, but I don't know what the time is on that. I remember seeing this during this replay and knew where to scrub to in the timeline.

[Anonymous No.16222074]

Are they actually going to attempt a tower catch on the next flight??

[Anonymous No.16222075]

>>16221483
NASA could have accomplished that if it was five people in a small office tasked with approving payments to SpaceX, while wasting uncounted billions of dollars less in taxpayer money.

[Anonymous No.16222076]

>>16222074
yeah, sure, maybe

[Anonymous No.16222077]

>>16222074
Perhaps. Elon said yes, but he is changeable. They denied the tower going through the motions during the flight.

[Anonymous No.16222078]

>>16222074
seems likely

[Anonymous No.16222080]

>>16222074
I don't see why not, I can't really picture it doing more damage to the launch pad and tower than IFT1

[Anonymous No.16222081]

>>16222077
Demoed*

[Anonymous No.16222083]

>>16222007
all I have is ikamusume

[Anonymous No.16222087]

>>16222080
The real danger isn't landing on the pad or the tower, it's landing on the tank farm. The tower has a backup in progress, landing on the pad might do fuck all for actual damage, the tank farm is another story and it's right next door.

[Anonymous No.16222089]

>>16222080
I don’t want to be a whataboutism fag but I do wonder how much damage it would do if it utterly failed and just smashed into the tower. Not that I doubt that SpaceX could build an entire new launch site in like a month or two if need be

[Anonymous No.16222088]

>>16221856
How do these schizos even come up with this shit haha

[Anonymous No.16222090]

>>16221483
>>16221499
It's a bit of both. SpaceX still fights tooth and nail for subsidy money against Blorigin and Boing!™ when it comes to bigger projects like HLS, but a lot of the revenue just came from launching NASA and JPL payloads into orbit.
Unsurprisingly, a reusable first-stage booster ends up being quite helpful in saving shekels.
>>16222075
This.
>k,b.

[Anonymous No.16222091]

Will human beings ever colonize Europe?

[Anonymous No.16222094]

>>16222089
yeah, acting like you can guarantee the tower won't get heavily damaged when you're dealing with a 200t+ hunk of metal flying around at supersonic speeds is a lack of imagination

[Anonymous No.16222095]

>>16221991
sex

[Anonymous No.16222096]

Just to be clear: Raptors keep dying an hero on these test flights because they are, supposedly, “old engines” not concurrent with more advanced Raptors with better durability, right?

[Anonymous No.16222097]

It's gonna be fucking wild to see

[Anonymous No.16222098]

>>16221566
Natural monopolies are allowed under anti-trust laws. Additionally, it's been 9 years since SpaceX landed their first Falcon booster, and 12 years since SpaceX began grasshopper tests to work towards partial reusability. Nearly a decade is enough of a timeframe that the argument of not offering a competing product in the aerospace market is no longer tenable. The argument being made by this person is that a car can move 100x the freight of a horse and therefore the moving company using cars should be audited and its financials be publicly disclosed.

Which is purely a fox and grapes scenario. Falcon already reduced $/kg from 4 digit thousands to single digit thousands. SpaceX intends to reduce cost from 4 digits to 3 digits, doesn't mean they are required to reduce it to 3 digits without a viable mechanism to ensure their business continuity and long term strategic goals, because someone else somewhere else is unhappy at the lack of all the OTHER PLAYERS refusing to compete in the market.

That's pure fallacy.

[Anonymous No.16222100]

>>16222097
this fotograph is doctored

[Anonymous No.16222101]

>>16222057
Is there a recording of this anywhere? I don't see it in their launch specific stream, 5 minute video of flight 4, or spaceflight update

[Anonymous No.16222102]

>>16222096
Maybe?
No one except spacex knows.

[Anonymous No.16222103]

>>16221990
>>16221991
holy smokes

[Anonymous No.16222105]

>>16222097
If it lines up right I still think the first attempt is just going to sheer off the gridfins and come straight down, the chopsticks will probably be fine but the OLM could be busted up.

[Anonymous No.16222106]

>>16221584
>hanging on by a literal thread
>still has enough motor control to land
what an absolute beast

[Anonymous No.16222107]

>>16221590
Something on the ship was definitely on fire. Honestly a good thing, because it provided enough light for the world to see how utterly the deck was stacked against the Starship and it STILL crowned the king.

[Anonymous No.16222108]

>>16222083
C'mon, this raggedy squissy needs money.

[Anonymous No.16222109]

In theory the super heavy booster should be easier to land since unlike F9 it is capable of hovering, although ideally it will do very little hovering since is very expensive in fuel (pure gravity loss).

[Anonymous No.16222110]

>>16222074
They would like to. Whether it'll actually happen is anyone's guess.

[Anonymous No.16222111]

>>16221622
>>16221619
Stoke is made up of ex-Blue guys, so no surprise there's similarity. Bezos I believe even visited Stoke for a chat at one point.

[Anonymous No.16222113]

>>16222101
It was posted in the sticky for the mission, so I don't have it. Not the SFG thread that was also stickied, but the mod one. Also Marcus showed the tower arms doing their thing at 7:50 of his latest video but neglected the deluge.

[Anonymous No.16222114]

>>16222064
kind of a strange location. i expected it to be billowing out closer to the root of the flap

[Anonymous No.16222115]

So did they have tracking for starship reentry?

[Anonymous No.16222117]

>>16222100
You are correct for once

[Anonymous No.16222118]

>>16221584
Is this a real photo?

[Anonymous No.16222119]

>>16222114
is that even a burnthrough? I thought it was just a weird pocket of glowing plasma that formed in a low-pressure section

[Anonymous No.16222120]

>>16222074
Depends on how expandable the tower is and how much grief is scattering all that water tower over Boca Chica. Maybe the cost of the booster is high enough that you still want to try even if they didn't demonstrate hover and station keeping now.

[Anonymous No.16222124]

>>16222105
It's got chonky connectors that go in the arm, it ain't gonna land on the gridfins.

[Anonymous No.16222125]

>>16222120
would booster without fuel even do that much damage

[Anonymous No.16222127]

>>16222119
>I thought it was just a weird pocket of glowing plasma that formed in a low-pressure section
is that something that can even happen?

[Anonymous No.16222129]

>>16222127
anon, I think there are literally zero people on earth who can answer that question with any degree of certainty

[Anonymous No.16222130]

>>16222101
Someone else got it for me:
https://files.catbox.moe/j8z0sg.mp4

I put it catbox so you can actually hear the deluge, otherwise it is difficultish to see on a smartphone. Someone else can make a webm if they want.

[Anonymous No.16222131]

>>16221890
Starlink aims to capture 2-3% of the global ISP market + private and public sector contracts. Combined, there's a potential to reach $100-150Bn/yr annual revenues. Which would put its market cap in the $2-3Tn range (as that's roughly the revenue of Nvidia/Apple respectively). People don't realize that SpaceX as a company, despite all its accomplished, in terms of its business potential and long term value, is basically only on the second of the four Falcon 1 flights and the $1.2Bn Commercial Resupply Contract (CRS) that NASA gives, the "big money printer", has not yet turned on. By the time SpaceX and/or Starlink reaches this $100-150Bn/yr, I would reasonably expect that there'll be anywhere from 500-1000 people on Mars. It's going to take another 15-20 years for Starlink to fully stretch its legs.

The more interesting thing though, is that SpaceX via Starlink will essentially become the next NASA, in the sense that they'll be uniquely positioned to act as a research cash pool for universities and private sector companies and startups looking for grant funding to build the next thing to assist or accelerate offworld activities in fields of: manufacturing, medicine, physics, engineering, astronomy, agriculture, and the list goes on. I would even expect that SpaceX would maintain their open near-no-patent model through this funding mechanism. Where any discovery that pushes the needle forward would be pulled in under a SpaceX consortium umbrella in terms of primary IP ownership, but would be released for use and application to the public under a GPL-2 or MIT type license agreement or something.

[Anonymous No.16222134]

What would you do if you had a child but it grew up to be an Earther?

[Anonymous No.16222135]

>>16222014
>>16222006
Super oxygen rich landing burn. But incredible footage all around.

[Anonymous No.16222136]

>>16222134
i'd put it in the bone stretcher until it's learned it's lesson.

[Anonymous No.16222138]

>>16222131
starlink will have complete monopoly of aviation and marine internet telecommunicatinos

[Anonymous No.16222139]

https://twitter.com/EmlynSpace/status/1798997042083344734

[Anonymous No.16222140]

>>16222114
>>16222064
definitely looks to me like a tile catching the airstream rather than burnthrough. That location is nowhere near the hinge and is directly on a tile.

[Anonymous No.16222143]

>>16222114
I think what happened here was that one of the edge tiles cracked and a piece of it got sheared off. This led to asymmetric airflow and the hot gases vectored downwards towards the flap hinges instead of up and around the ship's curves. Over time, this led to the metal in the area getting heated until it failed and the rest is as we know.

[Anonymous No.16222145]

>>16222140
jsut giessing but the air probably caught that tile because the nose was pitched more down than was nominal due to the front flaps disintegrating

[Anonymous No.16222146]

>>16222090
>SpaceX still fights tooth and nail for subsidy money against Blorigin and Boing!™ when it comes to bigger projects like HLS

not that anon, but again, it's not a subsidy. NASA is a customer paying spacex to design and build a new vehicle. They bid the lowest and had the most impressive offering.

[Anonymous No.16222147]

Space is only for the rich.

[Anonymous No.16222150]

Here is the deluge going off at the same time the booster was landing. It's hard to see, but like I said, very easy to hear in the catbox.

[Anonymous No.16222151]

>>16222143
Seems plausible, someone ask elon

[Anonymous No.16222154]

>>16222113
>>16222130
Thanks, funny though I don't see the deluge in marcus's video., I don't see the chopsticks moving in the deluge stream, and it doesn't seem to be that synced to landing burn. did they stagger the two tests slightly?

[Anonymous No.16222155]

>>16222114

[Anonymous No.16222157]

>>16222154
I think so.

[Anonymous No.16222159]

I like how we randomly went from nothing ever happening to arguably one of the busiest/most extensive months in spaceflight history

[Anonymous No.16222162]

>>16221966
Fuck off cunt, didn't ask for hour opinion

[Anonymous No.16222163]

>>16222114
>>16222143
>>16222155
Exactly at the edge of the tiles

[Anonymous No.16222164]

>>16222118
no, its a speculative reconstruction based on the video by a fan

[Anonymous No.16222169]

>>16222164
What's the video?

[Anonymous No.16222170]

>>16222097
I can only imagine the cope from Thunderfoot et al
>well they already demoed precise landing on IFT-4 so another precise landing just in another location is nothing special

[Anonymous No.16222172]

>>16221814
They should have been granted more land, its a shame that they had to improvise around some arbitrary border

[Anonymous No.16222175]

>>16222074
I think the answer is no. Based on the SuperHeavy landing burn, more work needs to be done to ensure the burn is clean and engines don't commit suicide. We know from the footage that one of the engines shit the bed on relight, and from the footage further down in the thread from the gulf, the entire plume is bright orange. There's just enough methane in the mix for it to generate thrust, but not enough that the plume is clean. So I would suspect that they'll do another 1-2 flights until they can get the landing burn fuel mix addressed, and in the interim work primarily on Starship to validate: engine relight for controlled reentry as that will unlock another block of NASA HLS milestone payment.

I expect that they will try and catch the booster with IFT6. One of the other issues they have to address is that the booster on return deviated by 6 kilometers. This is what 6km looks like relative to the OLM. So they have to with the next flight have the booster come down within a few hundred meters of the virtual launch mount not 6,000 meters radius of it. I know Elon is very optimistic to try, but I expect that Gwynne and others will talk him down from it and defer at least another 1-2 test flights. Especially as the FAA has given them a blank check for additional launches as the current flight did not appear to violate any of the clause conditions that would trigger a new investigation. Thus, it's in their best interest to do additional flights and data collection that doesn't risk the launch mount until there's more confidence to the approach and catch attempt.

[Anonymous No.16222176]

>>16222131
I'm so excited for the future, bros

[Anonymous No.16222178]

>>16222175
FAA still hasn't said whether or not there will be an investigation.
>But the license
I'm aware, but they also said they haven't determined if there will be one according to... I think Berger maybe?

[Anonymous No.16222179]

>>16222175
Imagine by some freak miscalculation booster slams into Starfactory, straight down the middle

SpaceX would probably have it looking like nothing ever happened there by 3 months or so

[Anonymous No.16222180]

>>16222175
the ship was 6 km off, not the booster

[Anonymous No.16222182]

Meshed video
https://youtu.be/8Vl686hB7M8?si=lZIogB80aUi4pFst

[Anonymous No.16222184]

>>16222175
>the booster on return deviated by 6 kilometers
It was the ship, NOT the booster. That means you are a nigger and your argument is invalid. Next flight is catching the booster, as that is the only part that has not been tested.

[Anonymous No.16222185]

>>16221566
I don't see how anyone crying about markup can be mad at spacex for saving them money, but not mad at everyone else for sitting on their ass. Falcon 9 landed its first booster in 2015 and there is no sign of a partially reusable competitor despite all the time that has passed to make one. It looks like starship will be fully reusable before one exists too.

[Anonymous No.16222188]

>>16222175
dummy

[Anonymous No.16222189]

>>16222138
Nah, there's two test satellites of Kuiper in orbit. By the time Starlink reaches full deployment, there will be 3000 Kuiper satellites, a few hundred OneWeb satellites, whatever swarm that RocketLab is implying they'll follow up on, and whatever equivalent the Chinese are intending to deploy given that they're heavily copying the flatpack design of SpaceX in that department TOO. But excluding them, there's essentially 3 other networks that the make will be closer to how the GPU market is today: 88% SpaceX (Nvidia), ~10% Amazon (Kuiper/AMD), and then 1%/1% between RocketLab & OneWeb. 88% is an insane market position to hold, but if the first reusable booster from a competing aerospace company takes 20 years to make to market and a solid 5-7 years after you're yeeting your Gen3 network via your Gen3 super heavy launch system, it's not your fault you're so god damn good.

Someone else lacking vision isn't your problem.

[Anonymous No.16222190]

>>16222175
IT WAS THE SHIP YOU MORON

[Anonymous No.16222191]

Where exactly is the 2nd launch mount gonna be, red or green cirlce, anyone know?

Because if its green that would be fucking incredible, you'd be able to see the stacc from all the way back at the production site I think

[Anonymous No.16222193]

>>16221122
F

[Anonymous No.16222194]

>>16221355
I am not sure people with anatomical anomalies necessarily identify with the LGBT movement. Also that flag is getting so many things tacked on as to be a caricature of itself. Is it time for a rebrand?

[Anonymous No.16222195]

>>16222189
>By the time Starlink reaches full deployment, there will be 3000 Kuiper satellites, a few hundred OneWeb satellites
lmao, that's not happening

[Anonymous No.16222196]

>>16222191
Right here according to RGV.

[Anonymous No.16222199]

>>16222125
Maybe not to the tower. At least not structurally. Tank farm could cause some havoc.

[Anonymous No.16222200]

>>16222191
piss circle I think

[Anonymous No.16222201]

>>16221590
it lit a cigar

[Anonymous No.16222202]

>>16222191
>Where exactly is the 2nd launch mount gonna be, red or green cirlce, anyone know?

Probably between the two circles, closer to the green though. The pad is placed at the corner, check out the other OLT

[Anonymous No.16222203]

>>16222196
FUCKING KINOO

[Anonymous No.16222206]

>>16222191
if you look at the picture in this post >>16221596
you can clearly see that it will be in the red circle

[Anonymous No.16222207]

>>16222196
wtff when did they build that???

[Anonymous No.16222208]

>>16222207
Yesterday overnight

[Anonymous No.16222209]

/sfg/ GET THE INCOMING SEXTUPLES

[Anonymous No.16222210]

>>16222163
Looking at this picture. I'm honestly impressed to the degree of signal quality we got from Starship throughout the entire plasma wake and ascent and landing given the material that protects and blocks the Starlink antenna. Elon said the tiles are about the size of a dinner plate. 2 tiles = roughly the size of a Starlink antenna. So going by those measurements, the ship is housing probably around 16 antenna and the remainder of the space is taken up by supporting hardware and probably power delivery. I wouldn't be surprised if SpaceX has contracted Tesla to build them a custom 4680 powerpack seeing as to how they already use a Model 3 powerpack and model 3 motors for the SuperHeavy grid fin actuation and all other electrical systems and services.

[Anonymous No.16222211]

>>16222206
I fucked up, >>16222202 is right

[Anonymous No.16222214]

[Anonymous No.16222215]

>>16221930
>What's different about their upcoming delta class ship
Not quite as ridiculously more expensive to fly than what they're charging a few boomers to ride it?

[Anonymous No.16222216]

Remember this nothingburger?

[Anonymous No.16222217]

>>16222209
>sextupples
the only sex ive ever had was with your mom last night.

[Anonymous No.16222220]

>>16222217
Fail wouldve been better if you got the GET with that

[Anonymous No.16222223]

GET

[Anonymous No.16222224]

SpaceX will win

[Anonymous No.16222227]

one job

[Anonymous No.16222228]

>>16222180
Gotcha. Ultimately though, I think the other elements still need to be addressed. A very oxygen rich burn as I understand it runs much hotter than a proper fuel balance, and we sort of know this from Blue Origin's BE-4s which ran very oxygen rich in their formative years and they kept committing suicide because the turbo pumps couldn't handle it. So it's a big risk to bring a booster down and try and make it hover for the tower to catch it, while running a fuel mixture that has an increased risk of engine destruction WHILE hovering over mission critical launch infrastructure

[Anonymous No.16222229]

>>16222224
>>16222223
NOOOOOO WE FAILED AND ITS TO THIS WASTE >>16222222

[Anonymous No.16222230]

>>16222139
how many fucking times are you gonna post this

[Anonymous No.16222231]

>>16222195
You think Kuiper won't have 3,000 satellites in orbit by 2040?

[Anonymous No.16222233]

>>16222207
It's always been there, but cloaked.

[Anonymous No.16222235]

>>16222214
>It had been a wonderful evening, and what I needed now to give it the perfect ending was a bit of the old Werner Von.

[Anonymous No.16222237]

>>16222175
ULA and Boeing and NASA is that way sir

[Anonymous No.16222238]

https://twitter.com/DJSnM/status/1799461568264261743

he's got a point

[Anonymous No.16222240]

>>16222237
Sar, please understood. It was honest mistake sar.

[Anonymous No.16222241]

>>16222228
I have a theory that the lengthier the critical spiel about Starship is, the more unlikely it is to be correct
(didn't read btw)

[Anonymous No.16222245]

>>16222238
That's a buoy.

>>16222241
Can't read if you don't know how. As expected anon. I hope one day the letters make sense to you. I'll pray for you.

[Anonymous No.16222249]

Do Muskrats really think they gonna catch the booster next flight? LMAO, I mean, as a spx hater I wish they do it tho, its gonna be so funny when the whole launch pad explodes. 6 months to fix it + 6 month bc of FAA license lol

[Anonymous No.16222250]

>>16222241
it's too skinny

[Anonymous No.16222251]

>>16222196
There's no way this is real

[Anonymous No.16222252]

>>16221856
this doesnt look like a cope post though, its just speculation

[Anonymous No.16222253]

>>16222231
BO/Amazon don't have expertise in neither large scale manufacturing, nor in anything satellite related. And BO is ran by bureaucrats. They will just figure it makes no sense financially and can the project.

[Anonymous No.16222254]

>>16222202
>>16222211
>>16222196
Nice, so just about where the old suborbital pad B was

[Anonymous No.16222256]

>>16222253
>BO/Amazon don't have expertise in neither large scale manufacturing, nor in anything satellite related
this is cope, they will by the time they have 20 satellites built

[Anonymous No.16222257]

>>16221994
i remember that Von Braun was not a fan of the LOR method in the beginning, but once he was shown the details he switched over to it almost instantly. he knew a good idea when he saw it and didn't seem too proud to change his mind.

[Anonymous No.16222258]

Hell yeah bitches

https://youtu.be/8Vl686hB7M8?si=lZIogB80aUi4pFst

[Anonymous No.16222260]

>>16222256
So... 2040?

[Anonymous No.16222262]

>>16222256
>building 20 sats somehow magically scale to 3000
lmao

[Anonymous No.16222263]

>>16222254
in terms of visibility I mean not position

[Anonymous No.16222267]

>>16222262
yeah. if you're not 100% retarded (90% retarded is not 100% retarded) and you know you want 3k sats, you build a few test articles and then you build a production line. by 20 they should have a production line. maybe it'll get the kinks worked out at sat 2k, but it will exist well before that.

[Anonymous No.16222271]

>>16221990
>>16221991
they switched camera views right before touch down, I wanted to see how stable the virtual tower landing looked

[Anonymous No.16222272]

What do you suspect the mission objectives for IFT-5 will be?

>Starship comes down in one piece this time.
>Booster's engines don't minecraft on relight
>Relight test in orbit.
>Tentative catch with possibility to abort into Gulf if they aren't feeling it

[Anonymous No.16222273]

>>16222272
all

[Anonymous No.16222276]

>>16222029
https://nitter.poast.org/NASAAmes/status/1799194566714920972#m

[Anonymous No.16222277]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnRdIMklPow
Starliner Tour
Starliner Tour

[Anonymous No.16222283]

>>16222253
Are you retarded? Were you dropped on your head as child? Do you not fucking understand how long away 2040 is?

[Anonymous No.16222284]

Flight 5 when
Flight 5 when
Flight 5 when
Flight 5 when
Flight 5 when

[Anonymous No.16222288]

>>16222235

[Anonymous No.16222293]

>>16222277
Why did they send a ghoul to the ISS?

[Anonymous No.16222294]

>>16222272
I have to wonder if they'll keep the hotstaging ring on, not jettison it and then engage the landing burn a bit higher up and then use up all the fuel until it reaches a specific height relative to where the tower is and have it hover. Then let it just fall the rest into the ocean and let the disintegration by impact handle the cleanup.

Given how successful the landing burn was this time around AND the fact that based on the telemtry, there appeared to be enough fuel for another 3-5 seconds of additional burn time left AND the fact that the booster was only around 90-95% topped off at launch. I think they have the fuel margins to not jettison the ring. It may actually be valuable with IFT5 to try and land the booster with the ring still locked to the booster. We do know that the last time it failed because the clamp mechanism failed, and that's because there's only 3 mechanisms on the booster and 3 to the ship. While it may add a bit more mass, it'll be interesting to see if they add a 4th one to keep the ring attached to the booster but keep 3 to maintain the ship's attachment to the ring on ascent + gravity forcing it down anyway.

[Anonymous No.16222297]

>>16222284
3 to 5 weeks

[Anonymous No.16222298]

>>16222064
>>16222114
>>16222155
arent these views of the aft flap, not the forward flap?

[Anonymous No.16222304]

>>16222288
>clockwork
not
>cockwork
one job anon

[Anonymous No.16222306]

>>16222277
>proper buttons and switches
soul. shame there's a boeing capsule around it

[Anonymous No.16222308]

>>16222304
I thought the same thing when he posted it yesterday but didn't say anything, its the obvious pun

[Anonymous No.16222312]

>>16222284
August 15th

[Anonymous No.16222317]

>>16221997
>"Big G"
I wish this existed just for that.

[Anonymous No.16222323]

>>16222258
awful syncing, too stupid to use the vapour cone to sync

[Anonymous No.16222335]

>>16221856
what the hell is wrong with you retards? why are you obsessed with dumb shit like this? how do you faggots not understand that there are legit mentally ill people who can write shit like this and post it to the internet, and then there are trolls who post this shit to bait retards like you and other dumbasses ITT?
have you people ever heard of the nettiquete? there is a rule that says "DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS".

[Anonymous No.16222338]

Why Starliner is NOT SAFE to Return Astronauts from the ISS!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pl-0CP9GwKE

[Anonymous No.16222346]

>>16222338
summarize the video for me in 5 lines of greentext or less

[Anonymous No.16222347]

>>16222312
This + two weeks

[Anonymous No.16222354]

>>16222272
This seems about right. I really hope they go for a full orbit on IFT-6 just to shut up people

[Anonymous No.16222359]

>>16222354
Why stop at 1 orbit? I'd think they'd want to keep it up there for at least a day or two to start characterization of boilloff properties

[Anonymous No.16222362]

>>16222346
>5 lines of greentext or less
>Boeing
>Boeing
>Boeing
>Valves
>Boeing

[Anonymous No.16222369]

>>16221890
IIRC their operating model is selling Direct to Cell access to carriers who turn it on for their customer devices. The ones getting fucked are the dedicated GEO satphone companies like Iridium.

[Anonymous No.16222372]

>Starship booster makes soft landing in water, next landing will be caught by the tower arms

[Anonymous No.16222374]

[Anonymous No.16222375]

>>16222372
>yoink!

[Anonymous No.16222376]

>>16222372
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1799497454812844047

I guess the data was good and the meeting went well

[Anonymous No.16222377]

>>16221856
PID controllers are AI, they have tunable parameters
>t. Engineer

[Anonymous No.16222378]

>>16222359
Not a bad idea, I was just thinking they’d start small

[Anonymous No.16222379]

>>16222169
the spacex stream, the pic was shown in the RGV flyover briefly

[Anonymous No.16222382]

>>16222376
>https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1799497454812844047
holy SHIT

[Anonymous No.16222384]

>>16222376
Looks like I'm going to South Padre for this one

[Anonymous No.16222385]

>>16222372
>>16222376
Ship recovery when?

[Anonymous No.16222389]

>>16222385
December 9th

[Anonymous No.16222392]

>>16222375
they aint closing quick enough. nigga finna waste 500m/s delta v just keeping in the air fr.

[Anonymous No.16222401]

>>16222385
Melon said two successful simulated landings of the ship before an attempted capture. flight 4 was too far off target so presumably IFT-7 at the earliest if IFT5 and 6 go well

[Anonymous No.16222410]

Why don’t they just land the ship with legs?

[Anonymous No.16222413]

>>16221930
delta isn't and will never be real

[Anonymous No.16222416]

>>16222410
Legs heavy

[Anonymous No.16222417]

>>16222410
They'll have to eventually for the moon and Mars, but standard cargo/tanker versions that return to base will be caught to save mass.

[Anonymous No.16222418]

https://youtube.com/shorts/51zJzWKQOj8
Our black hole has already been colonized. Now what?

[Anonymous No.16222422]

>>16222376

[Anonymous No.16222426]

>>16221105
BOOSTER LANDING WEBM

BOOSTER LANDING WEBM

BOOSTER LANDING WEBM

[Anonymous No.16222427]

>>16222293
Expendable.

[Anonymous No.16222428]

>>16222418
>Anton brainlet king

[Anonymous No.16222429]

>>16222422
oh you converted it too lol
didn't see

[Anonymous No.16222430]

>>16222294
in v2 the ring is going to be integrated, so I doubt they are going to keep it on
its too massive, easier to jettison it than modify the landing tanks of the current v1 starships

[Anonymous No.16222434]

>>16222422
>>16222426
welcome to the thread. consider reading it first next time

[Anonymous No.16222435]

>>16222134
Put him in a 500G training centrifuge. If he wants to be an earther, he's gonna have to MOG the earthers.

[Anonymous No.16222437]

>>16222434
the webm wasn't posted before and the twatter post is from 3 hours ago.

[Anonymous No.16222438]

>>16222418
only one thing to do. launch a righteous crusade to subjugate the evil colonizers and place them under the benevolent heel of the rules-based world order.

[Anonymous No.16222440]

>>16222437
see >>16222014
read harder faggot

[Anonymous No.16222461]

https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/06/nasa-is-commissioning-10-studies-on-mars-sample-return-most-are-commercial/
>Missing from the list of contract winners was Boeing, which has pushed the use of NASA's super-expensive Space Launch System to do the Mars Sample Return mission with a single launch. Boeing, of course, builds most of the SLS rocket. Most other sample return concepts require multiple launches.
>Alongside the seven industry contracts, NASA centers, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) and the Applied Physics Laboratory (APL) at Johns Hopkins University will also produce studies on how to complete the Mars Sample Return mission more affordablely.

lmao Boeing suggested the use of SLS

[Anonymous No.16222464]

>>16222134
>t.Earther
why are you Earthers deeply hypocritical?

[Anonymous No.16222466]

[Anonymous No.16222470]

>>16222461
Does anyone know how people within NASA personally feel about old/new space? I'm genuinely surprised they didn't award SLS here. I know Bridenstine was basically lying to congress while pushing money to SpaceX but how does the permanent staff feel?

[Anonymous No.16222472]

>>16222426
>>16222422
>>16222014
>>16222006
Ok fellas, which webm do I download?

[Anonymous No.16222475]

>>16222472
the optimized one

[Anonymous No.16222477]

>>16222472
Whichever has the best quality

[Anonymous No.16222479]

>>16222416
Knees weak

[Anonymous No.16222482]

>>16222376
Holy fuck lets goooo

[Anonymous No.16222483]

>>16222472
all. leave no stone unturned

[Anonymous No.16222484]

>Booster landing was on target, ship landing was several km off due to flap damage, but both were soft landings

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1799510160592834764

[Anonymous No.16222485]

man, there's some guy over on /pol/ absolutely seething in his musk derangement syndrome
>>470555227

[Anonymous No.16222487]

>>16222470
The scientists are cooming. Much more experiments pr. dollar, huge ass telescopes. No mass autism whatsoever

[Anonymous No.16222489]

>>16222479
Elon's spaghetti

[Anonymous No.16222490]

this thread i mean
>>>/pol/470550659

[Anonymous No.16222491]

>>16222385
When its fins aren't melting like wax in fire during reentry.

[Anonymous No.16222492]

>>16222466
based

[Anonymous No.16222493]

Why is no one talking about this?

[Anonymous No.16222494]

>>16222484

[Anonymous No.16222495]

>>16222493
lame.

[Anonymous No.16222496]

>>16222492
starbased

[Anonymous No.16222499]

>>16222494
>booster landing was on target

oh fuck they're really going for it next aren't they

[Anonymous No.16222501]

>>16222487
I have a feeling JPL are kinda split on it. It will kill their glorious robotics eventually.

[Anonymous No.16222503]

[Anonymous No.16222504]

[Anonymous No.16222506]

spacefags in the future: why didn't they catch rockets with tower arms before? it's such an obvious solution. we're our ancestors retards?

[Anonymous No.16222507]

>>16222491
HOW DARE YOU.

ALL HAIL FLAP
ALL HAIL FLAP
ALL HAIL FLAP

[Anonymous No.16222508]

>>16222501
They'll retool and build equipment for manned missions. They'll probably also enjoy the huge freedom from not having such tight mass constraints.

[Anonymous No.16222509]

>>16222506
catch arms are doomed to failure. they need to just go back to transpiration cooling instead.

[Anonymous No.16222511]

>>16222506
close, they will be wondering why we werent thinking of SMART recovery for high energy stages..

[Anonymous No.16222512]

>>16221186
>Celebrity pilots flying in some private capacity, even if they're trained, tend to get into trouble: Kobe, [...]
Kobe Bryant wasn't the one flying the helicopter, though.

[Anonymous No.16222516]

Percy found some cool roggs

[Anonymous No.16222518]

>>16222293
that's obviously a witch

[Anonymous No.16222519]

>>16222516
those are some cool roggs. good job percy!

[Anonymous No.16222520]

>>16222516
is that ice?

[Anonymous No.16222522]

>>16222369
Iridium is low earth orbit, not GEOSat

[Anonymous No.16222525]

>>16222493
Thanks, this is really optimized

[Anonymous No.16222528]

>>16222506
I've seen some powerpoint slide of a chinese design that uses 4 towers with wires between them to catch the rocket. I think that has real promise if anyone ever decides to take it a step beyond paper

[Anonymous No.16222529]

>>16222493
Needs to be in a RealPlayer window for the full effect

[Anonymous No.16222534]

Thoughts on this >>16222310 and >>16221839

[Anonymous No.16222537]

This guy sounds bitter like that Thunderwhatever was about starship yesterday.

>Its the modern N1
lol

>>>/pol/470557391

[Anonymous No.16222538]

>>16222534
fuck off

[Anonymous No.16222541]

Will Starship be ready to make the 2026 launch window?

[Anonymous No.16222543]

>>16221555
removed the faggy watermark

[Anonymous No.16222545]

>>16222541
yes but they won't decide to fly anything as they will be focusing on starlink, comercial, and artemis

[Anonymous No.16222547]

>>16222538
i love those cacti. spent some good times with them for company. they are bros.

[Anonymous No.16222548]

>>16222538
Based Hartmann appreciator

[Anonymous No.16222552]

>everyone forgets the original stainless steel rocket

I wonder if centaur will ever fly on a starship? GSE would be a pain, but it should fit in there once they figure out a cargo door.

[Anonymous No.16222561]

>>16222494
if a crew mission went bad and starship had to ditch in the ocean, what would that be like for the crew? How fast does it fall over?

[Anonymous No.16222564]

>/pol/ is right again
>>470542876
>>470546432
>>470549482
>>470550512
>>470550659
>>470551552
>>470552462

[Anonymous No.16222566]

>>16222493
Well a bit off topic but here goes

your bitrate is shit

[Anonymous No.16222569]

Cool video with good narration about the vacuumorph: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_U0pH03Ygw

[Anonymous No.16222570]

>>16222516
very nice, straight in my rogg folder.

[Anonymous No.16222572]

>>16222552
Starship-Centuar has been prophecied

[Anonymous No.16222574]

>>16222564
look newfag /pol/ tourist. none of us like you. none of us are going to bite at your bait. please just leave now and stop shitting up the thread

[Anonymous No.16222575]

>>16222564
I'm glad you're too incompetent to do cross-board links correctly.

[Anonymous No.16222578]

>>16222552

[Anonymous No.16222579]

>>16222516
They look tasty, is percy gonna send them back on starship when it lands to pick up the samples?

[Anonymous No.16222581]

>>16222578
Horrendous bait, I am entitled to better bait than this.

[Anonymous No.16222582]

I WANT TO GO BACK
TAKE ME BACK, BROS

[Anonymous No.16222584]

>>16222574
>>16222575
Starship is failure, 3 out of 4 launches have resulted in explosions and total loss of the spacecraft. Even the one "success" did not involve the recovery of the first stage boosters, which is supposed to the only thing useful about the program. The orbiter is sitting at the bottom of the Indian Ocean.
During the entire 30 year history of the space shuttle program, including all test flights, including the invention of SRBs, only 2 out of 100+ launches ended in that extent of failure. 98% of all boosters and orbiters were recovered and reused. If you'd get Elon's ball sack out of your mouth for 5 seconds you'd realize that the U.S. space program died in 2011 and that China stepped in to fill the void. Their cooperation with European and Russian space programs has their space station on pace to overtake the size and functionality of the ISS by the end of the decade with so far 0 failed missions. The Mars500 project was leaps and bounds above anything private US corporations are involved in, including that autistic grifter you worship.
And don't even get me started on Ain't Going nearly blowing up the ISS 2 days ago.

[Anonymous No.16222586]

>>16222581
meant for >>16222584
sorry about that, I clicked the wrong post.

[Anonymous No.16222589]

>>16222584
he is right

[Anonymous No.16222592]

>>16222584
I think this might've been written by a commie.
It's tough when private corps inevitably do it better than the government, so sometimes they need to de-stress like this.

[Anonymous No.16222594]

>>16222584
Chink shill spotted, go make some more fake waterfalls

[Anonymous No.16222596]

>>16222569

[Anonymous No.16222600]

>>16222592
>>16222594
>"CHINK SHILL!!!" 60 IQ burger cope
As predicted
How many SRBs and Long Marches combined exploded in the entire history of the US or Chinese nationalized space programs (2). Or how many GNSS constellations OR space stations SpaceX has built (0). Or the recovery rate of "fully reusable" falcon second stage boosters (0.00%).
Musk is a con man passing off run of the mill com satellites as a "Mars colonization program" and collecting billions in tax dollars for it, US space programs have been a joke for over a decade, China is doing all the meaningful space exploration now, and you're a retarded faggots.

[Anonymous No.16222601]

>>16222596
they can't breed

[Anonymous No.16222606]

>16222600
boring bait
check current upmass to orbit by organization.

[Anonymous No.16222619]

>>16222600
trolling tip: don't make repeated posts begging everyone to read your /pol/ thread before assuming the persona

[Anonymous No.16222624]

>>16222584
all 100+ launches ditched in the ocean lmao

[Anonymous No.16222627]

https://x.com/thunderf33t_/status/1799199780008239299

[Anonymous No.16222628]

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1799525711872417864
>Ship it

[Anonymous No.16222629]

[Anonymous No.16222630]

>>16222628
Can we deploy Gigalinks now?

[Anonymous No.16222632]

https://x.com/pronounced_kyle/status/1799525779451387977

[Anonymous No.16222635]

Virgin landed, no one gives a fuck

Speaking of bait, the retarded double thread that stayed one week last time might be useful as a decoy, so that /pol/tards and tourists don't shit up the real one

[Anonymous No.16222643]

https://x.com/JerryPikePhoto/status/1799506736098742684

[Anonymous No.16222648]

https://x.com/FelixSchlang/status/1799525904693305416
>Work has already begun for flight 5 and with the recent booster landing video I’m more confident than ever that we might actually see a catch attempt on the next flight!
>That’s something incredible to look forward to!

[Anonymous No.16222651]

>>16222541
They'll test in orbit refilling on launching a small starlink constellation around Mars, screenshot this

[Anonymous No.16222653]

>>16222601
I WILL breed her and ensure space remains sustainably populated with my progeny.

[Anonymous No.16222659]

>>16222569
If I was born as one of these things I'd immediately decompress whatever ship or station they had me slaving over and then steer it into whatever will cause Kessler syndrome the worst. Which is probably a good reason to never do that

[Anonymous No.16222662]

>>16222630
one more suborbital test flight to confirm engine relight works and then they start doing orbital. may as well do starlinks on the first but it's possible they won't
>>16222635
I watched it happen and only cared enough to mention it once. /sfg/ stopped giving a fuck before they even made their second flight

[Anonymous No.16222668]

>>16222662
they need to have the doors working

[Anonymous No.16222672]

>>16222662
>I watched it happen and only cared enough to mention it once. /sfg/ stopped giving a fuck before they even made their second flight
Yeah, I wasn't criticizing. It's a dead-end anyway

[Anonymous No.16222686]

New Handmer content:

https://caseyhandmer.wordpress.com/2024/06/08/how-to-learn-hardware/

[Anonymous No.16222692]

>>>16222659
What if you were a helpful spess monke?

[Anonymous No.16222698]

>>16222692
Uplift them a little more until they're a wisecracking client race

[Anonymous No.16222700]

>>16222659
Sus

[Anonymous No.16222705]

>>16222698
bad idea

[Anonymous No.16222713]

>>16222596
I don’t know why but I’m very attracted to “Xeno” shit

[Anonymous No.16222715]

>retarded subhuman /pol/mutt spamming his garbage here
Genuinely fuck off

[Anonymous No.16222717]

How may I convert myself from a /sfg/ browsing NEET to a Elon-like billionaire?

[Anonymous No.16222718]

>>16222717
apartheid emerald mine

[Anonymous No.16222719]

>>16222276
Wtf nitter works now??

[Anonymous No.16222720]

>>16222717
get a job hippie

[Anonymous No.16222723]

>>16222719
https://status.d420.de/
Just a few instances using non-guest accounts. It's on life support.

[Anonymous No.16222726]

>>16222717
find something you're really good at and keep starting startups in that field until one of them makes it.

[Anonymous No.16222732]

>>16222726
Did Elon have any failed startups? And how did he know who to hire?

[Anonymous No.16222743]

>>16222231
I don't and that's not a relevant date anyway because Starlink will have already captured the market before then, they don't need the whole constellation. The only way for Kuiper to get non-government customers would be to undercut Starlink but then SpaceX can just lower prices because they have much much better margins.
Kuiper will get government contracts for redundancy and will be useful internally for Amazon but it won't be able to compete with Starlink. (They might be able to force them to cut prices)

[Anonymous No.16222744]

https://x.com/JerryPikePhoto/status/1799538744770417069

[Anonymous No.16222745]

>>16222732
you're putting the cart before the horse. If you don't even have a business idea you're just doing mental masterbation

[Anonymous No.16222751]

>>16222074
Greater than 50% chance. Its now on a list of possible outcomes.

[Anonymous No.16222758]

https://x.com/mcrs987/status/1799497044362424636

[Anonymous No.16222763]

>>16222686
lmao
I know a guy who did one of those "find myself" trips

They work, but you're basically saying poor people are too dumb to self-actualize

[Anonymous No.16222766]

>>16222196
Good positions, lets hope. Also if they can also move the current OLM in the same orientation/direction, it would make my heart a lot less heavier

[Anonymous No.16222769]

>>16222745
spoonfeed me business ideas

[Anonymous No.16222768]

>>16221964
that's not dog, you retard
it's a penis

[Anonymous No.16222772]

>>16222763
Poor people are mostly dumb yes.

[Anonymous No.16222774]

What's the consensus on the clip of the booster landing. To me it looks like it was oscillating the entire time. Plus they didn't show the landing view from the boat which implies the landing wasn't as smooth as it needs to be for an arm catchment.

[Anonymous No.16222775]

>>16222732
solarcity failed but he got tesla to purhase it at a massive loss

[Anonymous No.16222780]

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1799524007424762191

[Anonymous No.16222786]

>>16222780
god he's such a basedboy. i hope scamx fails and the failed con 9 charade comes crashing down.

[Anonymous No.16222789]

>>16222774
The fins on the booster were absolutely shitting when it was coming down, thought they were going to get ripped off, they are going to need to upgrade the motors bigly or maybe make the fins smaller.

[Anonymous No.16222792]

>>16222635
>88.8 km, 55.2 mi altitude

Not spaceflight. Try making a thread on /n/?

[Anonymous No.16222799]

>>16222789
true. I am extremely skeptical that the booster doesnt take aero damage which means it can't be reused. i was around for all the early f9 landing attempts and the gridfins never shook as wildly as that. That was nuts.

[Anonymous No.16222802]

>>16222635
>the retarded double thread that stayed one week last time might be useful as a decoy
okay but how do I tell the difference between the real one and the fake one

[Anonymous No.16222803]

>>16222648
Why do they still have to do so much work on the launch pad after every launch. Shit is worse than SLS

[Anonymous No.16222814]

[Anonymous No.16222816]

[Anonymous No.16222818]

>>16222814
it can fly vertically just like a rocket

[Anonymous No.16222819]

>>16222774
Did you watch the uncropped version? it was filmed from a buoy and the footage wasn't stabilized

[Anonymous No.16222821]

>>16222780
I'm surprised they're so eager to risk bombing their entire launch site. If they had the towers coming online soon at Cape, it'd be one thing, but this is all they have for at least 1 year.

[Anonymous No.16222822]

>>16222819
Yeah but it still looks like it's tilting left to right. It might be some weird video artefact not sure

[Anonymous No.16222823]

>>16222821
no time for caution
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2o9KfyPqQzY

[Anonymous No.16222824]

>>16222470
I heard inside nasa it's very factional based on what project you're assigned to. For example, as you'd expect the SLS folks are very anti-newspace as it's the greatest threat to SLS and thus their jobs. On the other end of the spectrum are the interplanetary probe people who benefit from lower launch costs and higher payload capacity.
Back in the 2000's the oldspace faction was dominant in nasa, thus orien and SLS. Pushing commercial space was mostly a presidential goal. Nowadays newspace has been so successful that the oldspace folks have mostly been marginalized to their SLS ghetto.

[Anonymous No.16222826]

>>16222485
Dumbass >>>/pol/470555227

[Anonymous No.16222828]

In most places, VG is not actually classified as spaceflight because in the US space starts at a lower altitude than the rest of the world.
>>16222774
I think the curvature of whatever plastic was on the buoy combined with the bobbing distorted the booster and made it seem like it was oscillating a lot more than it was.

[Anonymous No.16222830]

>>16222758
Impressive CGI

[Anonymous No.16222831]

meanwhile in china
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNBns6k4-T8
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cp99l9gpzwgo

[Anonymous No.16222832]

>>16222802
If you can't tell, you're the problem

[Anonymous No.16222834]

>>16222816
is the foundation for the second tower done?

To catch the booster they dont need another OLM, they dont need another tank farm, just tower and sticks, not even plumbing or QD arm on the tower.

If this isn't going to take long to stack I wouldn't risk hitting the tank farm or even a mishap investigation even if it damages nothing. They still have plenty to do in orbit, like relight, door, and prop transfer. I don't think the tower catch is a big uncertainty that needs to be proven

[Anonymous No.16222835]

>>16222826
Fuck off and go back

[Anonymous No.16222836]

>>16222780
He really is a 2011 redditor

[Anonymous No.16222837]

>>16222836
and that's a good thing

[Anonymous No.16222840]

>>16222832
I'm bout the get filtered then.

[Anonymous No.16222844]

>>16222836
2011 redditors and infinitely preferable to the current userbase of communist trannies.

[Anonymous No.16222847]

>>16222844
are*

[Anonymous No.16222848]

>>16222834
>I don't think the tower catch is a big uncertainty that needs to be proven
I very much doubt that they have a major motivation other than "it's gonna look cool".

[Anonymous No.16222852]

>>16222803
iterative hardware rich development nigger

[Anonymous No.16222859]

>>16222840
irrelevant politics = bad
spaceflight discussion = good

[Anonymous No.16222860]

I am thrilled about Titan

[Anonymous No.16222864]

>>16222814
this is cool as fuck

[Anonymous No.16222875]

>>16222860
your dad was thrilled..

[Anonymous No.16222878]

>>16222831
well yeah, the great wall/10,000 li wall was almost all built in the 70s, atleast the bits tourists can walk on.
so the whole tourism scene in China is faker than a 3 dollar bill.

[Anonymous No.16222880]

And they just let the fucking thing sink
No one is going to sail over there to check if it's still floating around?

[Anonymous No.16222881]

>>16222769
I was researching whether or not I could make a high altitude airship that would hover over a city and let Starlink work with cities. It turned out to be a bad idea

[Anonymous No.16222889]

>>16222836
Anon he has Asperger's

[Anonymous No.16222892]

>>16222836
13 years apart, the user base ideology is very much different now

[Anonymous No.16222893]

>/sfg/ is cheering for a failure of a rocket "test"
/g/ is laughing at you.

[Anonymous No.16222896]

>>16222893
Weak bait

[Anonymous No.16222903]

>>16222860
keep pretending it's not a massive letdown to how it should have been

[Anonymous No.16222906]

>>16222880
I wonder what depth its at? Someone oughta dive the wreck.

[Anonymous No.16222914]

>>16222893
look newfag /g/ tourist. none of us like you. none of us are going to bite at your bait. please just leave now and stop shitting up the thread

[Anonymous No.16222918]

>>16222903
>Planet* is super hazy as seen from orbit
>durr why is the atmosphere not clear when you're looking up from the surface???? duhhhh
*yes, planet

[Anonymous No.16222920]

>>16222893
SpaceX rockets are Linux powered.

[Anonymous No.16222924]

>>16222803
The launch pad, believe it or not, the launch pad, is ALSO in development just like the big fucking rocket lifting off from it! Imagine that? Turns out making a resilient launch pad for the worlds most powerful rocket ever made with no way to make a flame trench is pretty hard!

[Anonymous No.16222925]

>>16222893
move fast, break things

[Anonymous No.16222929]

>>16222893
I saw the /g/ thread before it was deleted, I wouldn't be publicly humiliating yourself by telling people you are from there. Get a normal masochism fetish

[Anonymous No.16222931]

>>16222896
>>16222914
>>16222920
>>16222925
>seething and coping
HOLY KEK LMAO!!!

[Anonymous No.16222932]

>>16222918
Yes a smog moon where you can't see its primary is sooo much better

[Anonymous No.16222934]

>>16222780
Autism is really strong with him.

[Anonymous No.16222935]

>>16222929
>I saw the /g/ thread before it was deleted
It was the best thread before the reddit janny got mad, truth bombs that you /sci/ fags can't handle at all.

[Anonymous No.16222936]

when do the IFT tourists leave?

[Anonymous No.16222942]

>>16222936
I'm leaving rn, sfg is boring

[Anonymous No.16222943]

>>16222936
Never

Flight 5 soon. Flight 6 soon flight 7 soon. It will be non stop IFT every month

[Anonymous No.16222947]

>>16222943
at some point starship will get as boring as falcon and they won't bother to show up

[Anonymous No.16222956]

>>16222836
Definitely. That was also around the era when The Oatmeal webcomic about Tesla blew up there and he became a reddit meme. Elon then donated 1 million dollars to a fundraiser started by the comic author to save his Wardenclyffe lab.

[Anonymous No.16222959]

this is more insane than landing any rocket

[Anonymous No.16222962]

>>16222893
>software vs hardware
kek we'll see

[Anonymous No.16222963]

>>16222947
That will take years and even then there are several high profile missions during that time. Polaris 3, hls test, hls launch, starlab launch, etc. More big profile launches will pop up soon as customers become more confident with starship and in progress projects start coming out of the woodwork. It wont get boring any time in the next 10 years, maybe more if they actually get to mars.

[Anonymous No.16222981]

>>16222963
it will just get more exciting as time passes

[Anonymous No.16222986]

>>16222935
Lol

[Anonymous No.16222988]

>>16222878
terracotta army getting "discovered" in 1974 too

[Anonymous No.16222992]

>>16222774
>To me it looks like it was oscillating the entire time.

360 cameras like on the buoys do that warping when in motion

[Anonymous No.16222995]

>>16222962
>>16222986
AGI is coming, Nvidia is changing the world while you play with fucking soience rockets.

[Anonymous No.16222997]

https://x.com/devenperez/status/1795272429583081893
>Will S29 withstand the intense re-entry of flight 4 next week?

S29 from the May 28

[Anonymous No.16223002]

>>16222931
you should consider that your unquenchable thirst for negative attention is a result of neglect.
i advise you to seek some psychiatric help.

[Anonymous No.16223004]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZx8MhO4occ
>Virgin Galactic Unity goes suborbital for the last time - Galactic 07 launch highlights

[Anonymous No.16223005]

Glad to see sci is based and shitting on elon deniers. Now will you become gigabased and accept uap reality?

[Anonymous No.16223006]

>>16222995
>AGI is coming
kek

[Anonymous No.16223007]

>>16222819
Is there a stabilized version somewhere?

[Anonymous No.16223009]

>>16223005
elon doesnt so no.

[Anonymous No.16223010]

>>16222995
AI still suffers under the tyranny of the rocket equation.

[Anonymous No.16223011]

So are they actually flying another V1 ship in IFT5 despite the known flap burnthrough?

[Anonymous No.16223013]

>>16221727
just accelerate at 1g (how perfect is that) for 1 year and you'll be at 99% c

[Anonymous No.16223014]

>>16223005
I stand with you anon
>>16223009
Elon is reddit in that respect, sadly

[Anonymous No.16223015]

>>16223005
>uap
The scifi general is over on /lit/, we discuss space flight here

[Anonymous No.16223016]

>>16223011
It's gonna be the last V1 ship, probably gonna try a quick fix to see if something simple works.

[Anonymous No.16223019]

>another thread of seething pajeets

[Anonymous No.16223024]

>>16223014
elizondo and grusch and that whole gang is clearly a military intelligence op and they don't even make that much of an effort to hide it.

[Anonymous No.16223025]

>>16223024
> muh bluebeam
take meds

[Anonymous No.16223029]

Ah yes, the weekend is upon us.

[Anonymous No.16223030]

>>16223015
Shhhhh, it's ok. They only probe abductees. As long as you aren't one of those, you have nothing to worry about.

>>16223014
The most interesting thing that was found by Gary Nolan with his studt on experiencers was that the brains of abductees are literally, physically different. This change also appears to be genetic and a dominant trait which lines up eerily with the work of John Mack and co. Don't have the paper on me at the moment though.

>>16223025
No he's partially right. Those goons are trying to control the narrative or are grifters like Greer, I'm willing to bet that much.

[Anonymous No.16223035]

>>16222860

[Anonymous No.16223043]

>>16222995
KEK

[Anonymous No.16223049]

>>16223025
they all have intel backgrounds and they're all open about it - they seem to think this somehow increases their credibility. if they were exposing a real coverup then senators like rubio and rounds and schumer would be trying to throw them in jail, not boosting them.
if i had to guess what's going on, i think we're trying to gaslight the russians and chinese into believing we've developed some hypermaneuverable aircraft and we're clumsily trying to keep it a secret with a ufo cover story.

[Anonymous No.16223050]

>>16223014
>>16223005

[Anonymous No.16223051]

>>16222995
How do AItards always manage to be the worst bunch of mongoloids around?

[Anonymous No.16223054]

>>16223019
These AI images are a dead giveaway for a /pol/bot

[Anonymous No.16223058]

>>16223043
>>16223051
>>16223054
Still mad pajeets?

[Anonymous No.16223059]

>>16223050
>mick west

[Anonymous No.16223061]

>>16223054
we know and that's why no one was responding to it. you triggered it again dumbass

[Anonymous No.16223068]

>>16223035
Saturn wouldn't look like that though.
You wouldn't be able to see the rings from titan.

[Anonymous No.16223073]

>>16223068
Oh you been there?

[Anonymous No.16223076]

>>16221619
>>16221165
Is Blue Origin the Aperture Science of rocket launch companies?

[Anonymous No.16223078]

EJECT!!
STAGE!!

>>16223077
>>16223077
>>16223077

[Anonymous No.16223079]

>>16221619
>kind of gives Stoke vibes
well of course, that stoke guy is from BO and thought he could execute their reusable upper stage quicker than they could

[Anonymous No.16223206]

>>16222932
Can we remove the smog?

[Anonymous No.16223229]

>>16222493
>optimized for VLC

[Anonymous No.16223270]

>>16222376
>next landing will be caught by the tower arms
horry sheet
I was expecting at least two more splashes before they went for a tower landing. I mean at least F9 RTLS lands on an empty pad, no major loss if it fails.
I mean, a stack of Starlinks next launch maybe, but a tower landing?