CRS-8

File: 457 KB, 2464x1632, crs-3_dragonmating.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

CRS-8 Anonymous Fri Apr 8 08:33:07 2016 No.7987548 [Reply] [Original]

So, with T-8 hours 20 min away, we might as well start a new launch-tread.
I know that for the next 8 hours it will just be a shit-flinging fest for "Musk-aholic's" and the "Musk BTFO"-club alike, but we can always hope for some civil discussions before the inevitable "Hold!Hold!Hold!" and subsequent spectacular explosion upon landing in about 8 hours time.

So, to start of:
I'm really exited about the whole BEAM-payload. If it endures the testing as well as the two previous ones, we might be a little closer to a new form of habitation modules for future usage. Also, always have the fingers crossed for a successful landing, although some fireworks seem more likely

Pic related from CRS-3

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 10:32:24 2016 No.7987675 >>7987548 Is it bad I'm wishing we get a 3 day hold?. I'm leaving town for the weekend later today and if they launch on schedule I'll miss the shitposting.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 10:47:30 2016 No.7987704 >>7987675 well, its not like there wont be any more shitposting here... though, at 89% go weather-wise, it looks like it will be a "go"

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 10:52:29 2016 No.7987710 Can I have the coordinates of the launch pad? thanks

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 11:27:45 2016 No.7987779 File: 111 KB, 1920x1080, 1433357116258.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Can I have the coordinates of the keep-out zone? thanks

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 11:28:11 2016 No.7987781 >>7987704 someone will be a retard and drive a boat under the flightpath of the rocket despite the fact there are radio warnings blared out for hours before the launch.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 11:46:15 2016 No.7987819 >>7987781 haha yeah, there is always that. i remember when the last CRS from SpaceX had that whole "rapid deconstruction" as Elon called it, and someone here talked about how ULA was out with a laser and shot it down.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 11:49:21 2016 No.7987829 >>7987819 and that laser, despite only needing a small design and construction team supposes thousands of non-jobs, costs too many millions, all for the dubious claims of superior reliability.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 11:55:23 2016 No.7987845 Telemetry webcast https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh8V0COrrzE and hosted webcast https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pUAydjne5M

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 11:58:12 2016 No.7987853 >>7987845 please tell me that the telemetry webcast cuts out all of the loud screaming fuckers who drown out everything else the second something happens

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 12:00:42 2016 No.7987858 >>7987853 yes

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 12:03:07 2016 No.7987864 >>7987858 thank god, ive been avoiding the launches cos I can stand it 'the falcon 9 has passed MaxQ...WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!11!1!!!'

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 12:06:43 2016 No.7987875 >>7987864 i feel you brah although, hearing the reaction from that crowd when the stage made a successful landing...gave me epic goosebumps

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 13:02:36 2016 No.7988028 >>7987779 Are u a boat m8?

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 13:36:57 2016 No.7988134 Are they planning on landing the first stage on land or are they going to land 'on a barge' otherwise known as the ocean.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 13:46:58 2016 No.7988154 >>7988134 Barge. So my money is on a lot of scared fish

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 13:50:42 2016 No.7988163 Didn't the last few times they tried to land on the barge it didn't work? Have they landed on the barge successfully yet?

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 14:03:02 2016 No.7988187 >>7988163 nope. and the irritating thing is that every time they have tried so far, the rocket has come down pretty much right on the mark. Its always been some irritating fucking random detail like a leg not locking in place that has fucked the landing

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 14:11:55 2016 No.7988213 What's the barge's name this time?

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 14:20:35 2016 No.7988241 The last barge landing they were right at their limits so conditions should be better for this attempt.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 14:23:18 2016 No.7988249 >>7988213 Of Course I Still Love You gay name ngl

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 14:43:29 2016 No.7988310 T-1 hour 59 min

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 14:45:13 2016 No.7988316 >>7988249 yeah. not enough gravitas

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 14:52:15 2016 No.7988338 [math]_{_"I said, I've got a big stick"}[/math] test post pls ignore

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 14:57:01 2016 No.7988348 File: 561 KB, 646x1002, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 15:11:22 2016 No.7988378 >>7988348 thanks senpai, was waiting for it

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 15:16:45 2016 No.7988383
File: 23 KB, 448x373, 1445205729499.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>7988241
>>7988213
>>7988187
>>7988163
>>7988134
>Landing on a barge

Why don't they design net-type structure to "catch" the decelerating craft instead of using a hard surface?

The barge is portable after all - surely they could engineer a deformable crashmat type landing craft?

Am I the only person who has thought of this?

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 15:19:54 2016 No.7988391 File: 132 KB, 858x990, 1378819730620.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7988316 >not enough gravitas TOO MUCH gravitas, more like

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 15:22:42 2016 No.7988399 >>7988383 obviously not. probably that idea stoped by the material of the so called "net".

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 15:25:03 2016 No.7988400

>>7988383
Are you retarded? How are you planning to land a 68m tall, 3.66m diameter, 505 ton structure on a soft fucking surface?
It will topple over and break. Even if it doesn't break there will be massive damage to the engines from the moment it touches down.

To whole reason to land it on a hard surface with retractable legs is to not damage the rocket and its engines.

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 15:27:10 2016 No.7988406

>>7987548
>I know that for the next 8 hours it will just be a shit-flinging fest for "Musk-aholic's" and the "Musk BTFO"-club alike, but we can always hope for some civil discussions before the inevitable "Hold!Hold!Hold!" and subsequent spectacular explosion upon landing in about 8 hours time.
Kek, well put.

Although it's the armchair rocket scientists who are the absolute worst kind of posters.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 15:34:48 2016 No.7988419 >>7988406 Im honestly impressed by how little shitposting there has been so far. But the night is young

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 15:35:23 2016 No.7988422

>>7988400
>It will topple over and break.
No that's what currently happens on the hard surface, a deformable solution would absorb the energy of landing without creating too much resistance or damaging the craft.

Does the empty craft really still weigh 505 tons?

Engineers enjoy difficult problems: Based on your response to my original suggestion I'm guessing you aren't an engineer

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 15:43:43 2016 No.7988440 File: 1.16 MB, 2369x1579, SpaceX_CRS-1_launch_cropped.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] One hour left till launch. Hoping for a successful barge landing this time.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 15:43:55 2016 No.7988441 >>7988419 i retract that, it has begun >>7988383

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 15:45:36 2016 No.7988448
File: 540 KB, 1104x1472, 8x93e9ne.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>No that's what currently happens on the hard surface
It will happen on a soft surface as well.
Sure you might be able to prevent that from happen if you make it like really really soft, maybe.

But that still leaves the problem of the engines. You want to land on legs to protect the engines.
Even if you land on a soft surface they'll eventually will be squashed as the weight from the booster comes down.
Can't land on a soft surface with legs like these.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 15:48:01 2016 No.7988454 File: 50 KB, 480x640, 1410307701806.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7988440 >successful >barge landing pic 1 and only 1

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 15:48:57 2016 No.7988457 >>7988454 >i want to believe.jpg

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 15:49:18 2016 No.7988458 why dont they just make the barge bigger

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 15:51:38 2016 No.7988464

>>7988448
Instead of legs they should have a retractable protective roll cage to shield the engines.

Then on returning to Earth rotate the craft upside down and intentionally crash the top of the craft in order to save the engines at the rear from damage.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 15:52:01 2016 No.7988465 File: 39 KB, 500x333, podracer_bg[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7988454 Kickster's right. He'll finish the landing this time.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 15:52:23 2016 No.7988466 >>7988454 Stop goal posting. I was about talking soft vs hard surfaces. >>7988458 Hitting the barge isn't the problem, it's doing it while staying upright.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 15:52:45 2016 No.7988467 >>7988406 >Although it's the armchair rocket scientists who are the absolute worst kind of posters. Well ,you called it. They are here

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 15:52:46 2016 No.7988468 File: 167 KB, 1220x1202, elon_musk_crying.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Just leaving this here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4CGwSqrGq8

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 15:53:01 2016 No.7988469 >>7988466 They missed the barge last time

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 15:54:50 2016 No.7988476 >>7988464 >protective roll cage to shield the engines There is no way you make a roll cage strong enough while maintaining a low weight. >>7988469 Only because they were lacking fuel. They were dead on center all the times before that.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 15:55:29 2016 No.7988478 >>7988476 yeah but they wouldnt have missed if the barge was bigger

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 15:56:53 2016 No.7988484 File: 1.68 MB, 254x275, 1455179503704.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7988468 kek'd

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 15:57:36 2016 No.7988485 >>7988454 the first one after they successful land landing, was successful. until the leg not locking made it tip over and go boom. the last attempt just told Tesla that their calculated height limit, was too high.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 15:58:00 2016 No.7988486 File: 26 KB, 527x409, Yplh18u.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7988478 Same with your bait

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 15:58:32 2016 No.7988491 >>7988485 >>7988476 Why the fuck don't they have a support structure on the barge to assist the landing?

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:01:09 2016 No.7988495 >>7988468 This is some fucking inspiring shit m8 Fuck all the haters. This is scientific experimentation at it's finest

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:01:59 2016 No.7988496

>>7988491
Because the rocket can't hover(its engines are too powerful), it has to do what is known as a hoverslam where it zeros out right as it hits the pad. Putting a guiding tower of some kind there would do nothing but put a large rod to fail on if hit.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:03:50 2016 No.7988499 >>7988495 this desu

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:03:56 2016 No.7988501 >>7988496 Yeah but I keep seeing that webm where it lands on the barge then falls over What if there were arms that sprang up to hold it as soon as it landed?

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:06:19 2016 No.7988507 >>7988495 rip rato tho

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:07:27 2016 No.7988511
File: 43 KB, 460x288, 1357419301801.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>7988491
>support structure on the barge

Now we're talking

They have engineered the shit out of the Falcon 9 but completely overlooked the landing platform, resorting to a simple floating barge with no additional features and a shitty live camera feed which fails in the slightest breeze

Step it up SpaceX: Where is my floating inflatable pillowcase with robotic fishing net drones?

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:07:32 2016 No.7988512 >>7988501 The two times it landed and fell over, it was due to leg failure(one broke, and another didn't lock because of ice), not because it isn't stable. The F9, when empty, is very bottom-heavy(the engines are the majority of its dry mass).

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:07:35 2016 No.7988513 File: 57 KB, 500x750, tumblr_nauy37KFbC1srbx6mo1_500.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7988468 i heareby challenge you to do better

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:10:34 2016 No.7988518

>>7988501
To slow or to imprecise. Pick one.

The landing barge is the size of a football field. The margin on the landing spot is to big, so you can't have something that springs up quickly because you don't know were it will land.

If you're going for precision you'll be to slow.

Also this >>7988512

Also, he plans on landing on Mars. No support structures there.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:11:07 2016 No.7988520 File: 62 KB, 500x446, hasSciGoneTooFar_12.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7988513 I landed on the fucking mun on KSP, I'm pretty sure those niggers couldn't even get in orbit on the game, let alone real life. > 36km > orbit

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:11:35 2016 No.7988524 >>7988468 WE

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:13:03 2016 No.7988531 >>7988524 WUZ

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:14:04 2016 No.7988534 >>7988531 ASTRONAUTS

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:15:15 2016 No.7988536 File: 207 KB, 1067x1600, 1421775021087.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7988513 aaaand here we go

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:15:37 2016 No.7988538 >>7988531 AYYLIENS N SHIT

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:17:46 2016 No.7988546 File: 101 KB, 720x360, afronauts[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7988531 AFRONAUTS ALSO: FIRST FOR BASED SPACEX AMBIENCE

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:18:49 2016 No.7988549 >>7988518 >The margin on the landing spot is to big >>7988476 >They were dead on center all the times before that. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:19:17 2016 No.7988551 File: 233 KB, 653x471, Capture.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Barge ready.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:20:26 2016 No.7988553 File: 67 KB, 555x525, beam-space-module.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Wow, this thread is only comprised of SpaceX shills. Not one mention of Bigelow and their revolutionary inflatable module.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:21:36 2016 No.7988557 >>7988549 >They were dead on center all the times before that. That was hyperbolic. Nevertheless, they always came close to the center. Like I said. A large margin.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:22:29 2016 No.7988558 >>7988557 nice damage control, shill

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:22:54 2016 No.7988559 >>7988557 How much do you want to bet the barge video feed will cut off just before touchdown?

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:23:19 2016 No.7988561 >>7988553 looks like a huge anal plug to me. 0/10 would not insert in ass.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:24:21 2016 No.7988566 >>7988559 Nothing. Because it will shut down. But what what does that have to do with anything?

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:24:24 2016 No.7988567 >>7988559 il bet you one exploded first stage

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:24:40 2016 No.7988568 >>7988553 >shills but no, this habitat is really cool. How quickly could we throw up a station with these?

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:25:08 2016 No.7988569

>>7988553
>revolutionary
>literally just bought the patents from NASA's transhab program in the 90s and called it their own
>run by completely delusional management that treats their employees like shit
>forgetting that the Russians are also working on inflatable modules as well
Bigelow deserves to get crushed by some competition.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:26:01 2016 No.7988571 Oh shit what up Kate

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:26:55 2016 No.7988574 File: 181 KB, 278x396, spacesex.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Look at this piece of ass

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:27:09 2016 No.7988575
File: 229 KB, 630x324, 5066472fc[1].png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

WTF
WHAT HAPPENED TO JUNGLEBUNNY ANNOUNCER
WHO'S THIS PISSHAIRED SNOWNIGGER?

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:28:15 2016 No.7988578 >white woman ummmm elon that's not very diverse???

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:29:11 2016 No.7988581 >>7988574 >>7988575 >not watching technical broadcast plebs

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:29:18 2016 No.7988582 >>7988561 >huge anal plug I've seen bigger :3

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:30:01 2016 No.7988585 File: 118 KB, 764x573, 1976fc_3e7659a1742c492ca474fdb9e692c8ac[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7988581 >not wanting to see based Cocoanaut

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:30:03 2016 No.7988586 >>7988581 I watch hosted until minute or so left

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:30:09 2016 No.7988587 >>7988569 That may be so, but transhab never made it to space and that's the point. I too would welcome Bigelow to be drowned out by stronger competition if they don't perform well. But the tech itself is cool.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:30:23 2016 No.7988590 File: 23 KB, 640x480, 1374614794313.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7988574 >>7988578 >>7988571 >HIGH TEST

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:31:23 2016 No.7988594 File: 101 KB, 400x600, froggu.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] dubs confirms firecrackers singles confirms success

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:31:25 2016 No.7988595 >pink haired ainimu qt slut BASED SPACEX

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:31:37 2016 No.7988596 ANOTHER white women RACISM IN STEM

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:32:01 2016 No.7988597 >>7988581 >>7988586 >not watching both feeds at the same time. plebs

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:32:09 2016 No.7988598 File: 114 KB, 1204x680, 1458948964490.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7988581 >Not having 1440 resolution to double up on this shit

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:32:39 2016 No.7988600 that's a pretty cool logo for dragon

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:32:50 2016 No.7988601 >>7988581 link plz?

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:33:31 2016 No.7988602 >>7988601 Spacex YouTube channel

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:33:42 2016 No.7988603 >>7988601 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh8V0COrrzE

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:33:58 2016 No.7988604 >>7988600 careful, people might think you are shilling

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:34:06 2016 No.7988605 File: 32 KB, 512x512, fcblzsfi[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7988601 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh8V0COrrzE

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:35:18 2016 No.7988608 File: 2.01 MB, 480x270, t.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:35:24 2016 No.7988609 File: 269 KB, 440x406, spacesex2.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] IS THIS LOVE THAT IM FEEEELING IS THIS THE LOVE IVE BEEN SEARCHING FOOOOOR

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:35:43 2016 No.7988610 So, Will it Blow up or The Landing unit crashes to the land, or both

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:35:46 2016 No.7988611 File: 258 KB, 774x609, just-capsule.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >Dragon 2 only American capsule capable of carrying humans What a lie. Orion exists.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:35:54 2016 No.7988612 >>7988608 Kek

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:36:11 2016 No.7988614 File: 35 KB, 615x409, MAIN-Elon-Musk.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Who comfy here? I've got a nice glass of my favourite scotch. Gonna be a gud lunch.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:36:16 2016 No.7988615 >>7988597 This.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:36:47 2016 No.7988617 >>7988609 >pink hair In the trash it goes.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:37:03 2016 No.7988618 >>7988597 this

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:37:06 2016 No.7988619 I FUCKING LOVE TALKING ABOUT SCIENCE

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:37:48 2016 No.7988620 File: 35 KB, 849x459, CcGPgX4UAAIifFS[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7988611 >Orion >ever flying anywhere beyond LEO It will suffer the same fate as SLS once the BFR/MCT are under extensive development.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:37:49 2016 No.7988621 >>7988615 >>7988618 these

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:38:48 2016 No.7988626 WILL IT EXPLODE SCI WILL IT

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:38:58 2016 No.7988627 >>7988614 comfy reporting having a pint of a nice craft beer

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:39:15 2016 No.7988629 What is the pink hair sluts name?

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:39:43 2016 No.7988630 Range go Thank fuck. No cunts in the range this time

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:39:48 2016 No.7988631 >>7988626 Not if they bring back BASED COCOANAUT

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:39:50 2016 No.7988633 >>7988626 of coursh

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:40:01 2016 No.7988634
File: 84 KB, 822x705, _0__019.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>7988614
Sitting here taking notes on what to study tomorrow in advance for some exams; triple windowing Hosted, Technical and Capri Cavanni Horse Ranch Fuck so I can free myself of my hard-on

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:40:22 2016 No.7988635 >>7988629 Jessica jensen

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:40:46 2016 No.7988638 It looked like it was swaying when they did strongback....looked creepy as fuck

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:40:52 2016 No.7988639 go strongback go

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:41:37 2016 No.7988640 Looks like a nice calm day for the barge landing. I bet they pull it off, and this is the first booster they relaunch.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:41:43 2016 No.7988641 sheeit I'm so excited

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:42:23 2016 No.7988646 File: 85 KB, 500x269, Hold_onto_your_butts.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] HOLD ONTO YOUR BUTTS

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:42:46 2016 No.7988648 What's the betting the live feed from the barge will cut out again just as the rocket attempts landing?

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:43:01 2016 No.7988649 NASA has a live video from a different angle, seems a bit ahead of the spacex stream, check their facebook

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:43:19 2016 No.7988650 Godspeed Falcon!

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:43:35 2016 No.7988651 File: 44 KB, 1252x880, reddit.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] reddit isnt what it used to be

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:44:13 2016 No.7988653 HYPE HYPE HYPE HYPE HYPE

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:44:35 2016 No.7988654 MY HEART IS RACING FUCK

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:44:35 2016 No.7988655 Good luck falcon :3

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:44:38 2016 No.7988656 >>7988651 wow das racist.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:44:56 2016 No.7988658 FLY YOU FOOL!!!

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:44:58 2016 No.7988659 >>7988651 samefag alert

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:44:58 2016 No.7988660 >>7987548 FUCK YEAH

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:45:16 2016 No.7988662 GODSPEED FALCON

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:45:38 2016 No.7988663 BOOM BOOM BOOM

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:45:43 2016 No.7988664 mission abort reaction images status nominal

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:46:40 2016 No.7988668 IT'S LIKE A GLORIOUS DONG FUCKING THE SKY, NO, THE HEAVENS THEMSELVES FLY STRAIGHT, SKY DONGER

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:47:41 2016 No.7988670 >>7987548 wew earth looks pretty round flat earthere btfo

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:48:21 2016 No.7988671 File: 824 KB, 320x240, computerecommend.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:49:13 2016 No.7988673 >>7988670 DUDE it's all shopped

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:49:22 2016 No.7988674 >>7988670 fancy computer graphics m8 flat earth is still real

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:49:47 2016 No.7988676 >>7988670 It's a fisheye lense

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:50:02 2016 No.7988677 holy shit i am watching a fucking rocket engine live feed from motherfucking space

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:50:11 2016 No.7988678 what is of course i still love you?

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:50:43 2016 No.7988682 File: 139 KB, 519x329, DSCOVR_blue_marble.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:50:57 2016 No.7988683 >>7988678 The name of the landing barge

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:51:03 2016 No.7988684 >>7988678 that's how the drone barge is called

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:51:21 2016 No.7988685 >>7988677 Fuck yeah mother fucker

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:51:24 2016 No.7988686 >>7987548 did stage 1 landed fine?

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:51:30 2016 No.7988687 >>7988678 landing bage

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:51:39 2016 No.7988690 File: 143 KB, 640x640, 11386494_1452562881712991_551422559_n.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7988678 this

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:51:56 2016 No.7988691 the technical webcast is nice but it's also somewhat fun to hear people cheering too. Makes me want to cheer.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:52:29 2016 No.7988692 WTF

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:52:32 2016 No.7988694 HERE WE GO

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:52:38 2016 No.7988697 OH MY NIGGERS!

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:52:40 2016 No.7988698 THE FUCKING MAD MEN DID IT

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:52:41 2016 No.7988699 >>7988678 The landing barge they're named after ships from the "The Culture" series of books by iain m banks

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:52:41 2016 No.7988700 >>7988686 YES LAND WIN I REPEAT WIN

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:52:47 2016 No.7988701 File: 62 KB, 375x258, Capture.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] WEW LADS

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:52:52 2016 No.7988702 FUCKING YES!

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:52:57 2016 No.7988704 AAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:52:59 2016 No.7988706 FUCKKKKK YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS AMERICA FUCK YEAHHHH

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:53:08 2016 No.7988707 Pretty impressive desu

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:53:11 2016 No.7988708 YEEEEEEEES

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:53:11 2016 No.7988709 hoooly shit it landed

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:53:11 2016 No.7988710 File: 87 KB, 643x546, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] I LOVE YOUUUUUU I LOVE YOUUUUU I Like VÊ YOUUUUUUUUUUUUUURUUEJ IT JUST WERKS

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:53:19 2016 No.7988711 Well, son of a bitch. They finally stuck the landing.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:53:20 2016 No.7988712 HE DID IT WE'RE GETTING OFF THIS ROCK

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:53:29 2016 No.7988713 HE DID IT THE ABSOLUTE MADMAN

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:53:35 2016 No.7988714 >Successful landing >Gets knocked over by a freak wave on the way back

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:53:37 2016 No.7988715 FUCKING GODS

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:53:37 2016 No.7988716 HOLY FUCK THEY DID IT USA USA USA USA USA USA

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:53:45 2016 No.7988717 The moment it came into the frame, wow, that was a scary angle

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:53:56 2016 No.7988718 USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:53:56 2016 No.7988719 inb4 it topples

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:54:00 2016 No.7988720 File: 105 KB, 342x270, Capture.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] THE FALCON HAS LANDED I REPEAT THE FALCON HAS LANDED

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:54:00 2016 No.7988721 USA USA USA USA USA

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:54:01 2016 No.7988722 fuck yeah FUUCK YEAH

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:54:18 2016 No.7988723 It looks awfully unstable

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:54:20 2016 No.7988724 Do Americans really chant USA at everything, or are these guys just autistic?

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:54:33 2016 No.7988726 They actually did it the absolute madmen

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:54:33 2016 No.7988727 >USA USA USA Calm down Also funny how the feed always cuts when it doesn't land, yet now we have a landing we get picture-perfect quality

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:54:34 2016 No.7988728 FUCKING NICE

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:54:34 2016 No.7988729 >>7988711 >mfw it falls off the barge in 5 minutes time

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:54:41 2016 No.7988731 beautiful

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:54:42 2016 No.7988733 That really isn't very well centred.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:54:50 2016 No.7988734 >>7988717 You said it my man

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:55:07 2016 No.7988735 SPACEX HATERS BTFO

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:55:08 2016 No.7988736 File: 9 KB, 256x342, 449967-milhouse.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7987548 usaaSASAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAUSAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:55:22 2016 No.7988738 >>7988729 this USA USA USA

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:55:37 2016 No.7988741 File: 193 KB, 439x288, 1343931325352.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] THE HYPE IS REAL ELON IS GOD

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:55:48 2016 No.7988742 my dick is literally diamonds.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:56:16 2016 No.7988744 >inb4 it topples because of the waves

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:56:38 2016 No.7988745 >>7988727 the last time they did a shot from the barge so not surprising when a rocket crashes next to a camera and the camera breaks.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:56:38 2016 No.7988746 >>7988724 I don't see your country landing rockets on barges out in the middle of the ocean.

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:56:51 2016 No.7988747
File: 99 KB, 867x701, americaFUCKYEAH.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

ARIANESPACE REFUGEE ENGINEERS BTFO
ULA ON SUICIDE WATCH
ROSCOSMOS CALLING FSB FOR GUIDANCE
CNSA SUBPAR ENGINEERS BEING EXECUTED
ISRO ON LOOICIDE WATCH

AMERICA HAS WON AGAIN

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:56:54 2016 No.7988748 FUCKING BEAUTIFUL, what a day guys!

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:57:03 2016 No.7988750 GONNA NEED A WEBBUM OF THAT LANDING

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:57:05 2016 No.7988751 Is it sliding around?

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:57:59 2016 No.7988753 File: 18 KB, 442x132, debnts.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] PAY

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:58:08 2016 No.7988754 File: 371 KB, 850x434, file.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] USA USA USA missed the middle though baka

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:58:11 2016 No.7988755 File: 761 KB, 853x480, THEFALCONHASLANDED.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:58:22 2016 No.7988756 WE DID IT LADS

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:58:31 2016 No.7988757 >>7988751 Nope. It's heavy enough. A nearby tugboat with welders to weld down latches for the legs is on its way.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:58:34 2016 No.7988758 >>7988746 Spoiler: Musk isn't American. Neither are most of his engineers

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:59:05 2016 No.7988760 >>7988755 hnnnggggg

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:59:14 2016 No.7988762 File: 1.98 MB, 158x158, 1373583265964.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7988755 10/10

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:59:33 2016 No.7988765 >>7988755 Beautiful

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:59:42 2016 No.7988766 >>7988750 https://twitter.com/ReutersLive/status/718543233123389440 not webum but

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:59:46 2016 No.7988767 >>7988755 muh dick.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:59:50 2016 No.7988768 File: 33 KB, 374x454, 1456835626477.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7988755

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:59:51 2016 No.7988769 >>7988758 >Musk isn't American. He is now. >Neither are most of his engineers Wrong. ITER requires everyone working on rockets to be citizens or permanent residents with clearance.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 16:59:59 2016 No.7988771 >>7988754 That's a little scary close to the edge

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:00:19 2016 No.7988772 >>7988744 No waves son, it's a clear day, that's the point

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:00:25 2016 No.7988773 >>7988755 based jesus this is beautiful i thought for sure it was going to tip over right at the end there

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:00:34 2016 No.7988774 >>7988758 He's a US citizen. Despite what /pol/tards may tell you, America's strength comes from taking the best of other nations and adopting it as our own.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:00:43 2016 No.7988778 File: 47 KB, 530x92, Screen Shot 2016-04-08 at 4.59.01 PM.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:00:52 2016 No.7988779 >>7988758 Yea but according to wikipedia, Musk is an "American exceptionalist". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elon_Musk#Nationalism

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:00:54 2016 No.7988780 >>7988771 Both the barge and the first stage have good centres of gravity ;)

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:00:57 2016 No.7988781 File: 103 KB, 1234x512, ac9b1871b2[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7988771 It's just the myspace angles.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:01:45 2016 No.7988782 File: 22 KB, 332x305, HOLYFUCK.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7987548 HOPLEE PHUC DID I JUST HEAR SPACE HOTEL!??!??!?!?

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:02:16 2016 No.7988784 what an autistic closing line lmao he always fucks it up good work spacex

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:02:30 2016 No.7988785 When is the module supposed to dock with ISS btw?

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:02:42 2016 No.7988786 >>7988755 that approach angle. had me worried for a second. i love having youtube on my tv. got to watch the technical webcast on a 60 inch tv.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:02:53 2016 No.7988787 In space, on it's way to the international space station :')

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:03:09 2016 No.7988788 >>7988779 >its history and its mission give the United States a superiority over other nations. Jesus christ

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:03:13 2016 No.7988789 File: 518 KB, 600x890, 1451427936491.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7988755 Beautiful

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:03:25 2016 No.7988790 File: 1.87 MB, 331x197, 1436285489789.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7988755

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:03:28 2016 No.7988791 that was the most beautiful thing i have ever witnessed with my own two eyes.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:03:33 2016 No.7988794 >>7988772 Right before the end of the stream it fired RCS when a wave hit. Hope they can get out there and weld it down quick.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:04:25 2016 No.7988796 >>7988769 Von Braum was a citizen too :^)

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:05:19 2016 No.7988801 File: 22 KB, 645x773, 1447679719735.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] i'm a physics student in a 3rd world country and this made me wish i was american lads >tfw your country will never ever have a relevant space program

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:05:35 2016 No.7988802 Why don't they try land it somewhere with calm water?

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:05:36 2016 No.7988803 >>7988755 >It couldn't be done they said.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:05:42 2016 No.7988804 >>7988796 And Hamilton, Carnegie, etc

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:06:16 2016 No.7988806 >>7988785 For an unmanned craft like this, it'll probably be a couple days before they dock. http://www.cbsnews.com/network/news/space/home/spacenews/files/spacex_cots2_timeline.html here is a timeline of a previous dragon launch-to-dock

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:06:31 2016 No.7988807 >>7988754 There going to need a bigger boat. Its hard to believe they are going to be able to do that every time there is so little room for error.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:06:44 2016 No.7988809 >>7988755 The beauty. Musk FTW.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:06:52 2016 No.7988810 File: 70 KB, 620x353, elon_shrug.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] How can one man be so successful?

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:07:19 2016 No.7988812

>>7988802
because that's not the point.

Recovery of the 1st stage is a secondary objective.
They're no going to load it with a ton more fuel so they can navigate it back to land or somewhere nicer.

The idea is that they send out the drone ship to the calculated best return point and then hope to land it there.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:07:28 2016 No.7988813 >>7988801 Brazil? we're togheter in this dude

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:07:36 2016 No.7988814 >>7988755 AND I FUCKING MISSED FUCK

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:07:52 2016 No.7988816 >>7988810 he signed a pact with the satan himself

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:08:22 2016 No.7988821 >>7988785 >>7988806 Sunday around 4am pacific

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:08:24 2016 No.7988822 >>7988786 same brother

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:09:02 2016 No.7988823 >rocket lands on earth YAWN wake me when they land one on the MOON. that'll be something worthwhile.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:09:17 2016 No.7988824 >>7988813 yea, how did you guess?

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:09:29 2016 No.7988825 File: 51 KB, 210x210, 1370961566154.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7988803 >mfw this is the start of space renaissance

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:09:32 2016 No.7988826 All in all, it's been a pretty good week for Elon :^) I live vicariously through him t b h

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:09:41 2016 No.7988827 >>7988794 COM mas pretty low so idk if it's even an issue

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:10:44 2016 No.7988828
File: 2.01 MB, 260x260, 1458105924229.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Holy shit that was amazing.

This isn't anywhere on the news but that was incredible. The shot, the cheers, the chants. I haven't felt this proud to be an American in a long time.

Thank you Musk and SpaceX.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:10:58 2016 No.7988829 >land first stage on a unmanned barge >clap americans everyone

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:11:26 2016 No.7988831 >>7988823 Even better, let's land it on ur mum. It's an even bigger target and her fat rolls are more jiggly than the ocean waves so it will be a real challenge

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:11:47 2016 No.7988832 >>7988823 >possible reusability (and not the shit kind like the shuttle) is boring

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:12:06 2016 No.7988833 I feel like I'm living in the 60s.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:12:25 2016 No.7988834 >>7988823 >Eventually lands on Mars YAWN

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:12:26 2016 No.7988836 File: 95 KB, 680x989, berserk_b8.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7988829

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:12:33 2016 No.7988837 >>7988823 >>7988831 >>7988832 >people falling for this cheap bait

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:13:11 2016 No.7988838 >>7988831 lmao'd

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:13:11 2016 No.7988839 File: 214 KB, 658x595, 1455422548185.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7988831

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:13:45 2016 No.7988840 >tfw we'll still waste tons of resources going to mars instead of just building orbital colonies fuckin musk you're so smart why do you care about this stupid MCT REEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:13:46 2016 No.7988841 >>7988828 >being proud of somebody else's achievements because you happen to live in the same country why do people do this

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:14:47 2016 No.7988844 >>7988831 >people still laugh at your mom jokes christ

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:15:29 2016 No.7988847 >>7988840 It's important to have both.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:15:32 2016 No.7988848 >>7988746 Nah we're a bit busy focusing on what's beyond low earth orbit.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:15:42 2016 No.7988849 File: 135 KB, 714x398, image.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7988781 >myspace >my >space

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:16:27 2016 No.7988850 >>7988823 ATK shill detected.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:17:01 2016 No.7988851 File: 2.25 MB, 438x363, 1450668723214.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7988841 >Why do people do anything (You)

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:17:07 2016 No.7988853 File: 725 KB, 250x188, 1345254007009.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUTTTTURRREEE

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:17:10 2016 No.7988855 >>7988841 MY SPORTS TEAM IS BETTER THAN YOUR SPORTS TEAM SO FUCK OFF

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:17:21 2016 No.7988858 >>7988840 >Not wanting to fucking terraform mars and turn it into a lush scientific utopia You're dreaming TOO SMALL, anon

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:17:43 2016 No.7988860 File: 36 KB, 378x504, friday.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7988829 >Meanwhile at ULA HQ

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:17:49 2016 No.7988861 File: 175 KB, 1324x866, 1453056841417.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7988755 I was planning on offing myself soon, but this just made me want to keep living B R A V O E L O N

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:17:58 2016 No.7988862
File: 96 KB, 500x359, 831274053.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>7988840
> mars
> instead of Jupiter's or Saturn's moons
GETS ME EVERYTIME

Also this livestream was badass, has it ever happened before? (first time I watch a launch, didn't know they could livestream from the rocket itself.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:18:22 2016 No.7988864 >>7988840 Jeff Bezos is the one who wants orbital colonies. Good thing Blue Origin is also working at a decent clip now. Its orbital rocket Very Big Brother is currently under development.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:18:59 2016 No.7988866 Mfw the chinese replicate this in a few months, just so they wont be beaten the merkins

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:19:19 2016 No.7988868 >>7988862 they stream every launch

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:19:32 2016 No.7988869 >>7988862 >Jovian moons Good luck with all of that lethal radiation coming off Jupiter.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:19:43 2016 No.7988870 >>7988829 >>7988831 this is going on reddit lads

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:21:06 2016 No.7988874 >>7988858 >>Not wanting to fucking terraform mars and turn it into a lush scientific utopia >You're dreaming TOO SMALL, anon Unless you move Mars much closer to the sun, good luck with "lush".

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:21:18 2016 No.7988875 File: 202 KB, 688x977, 1460148869756.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] IN MUSK WE TRUST

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:21:25 2016 No.7988876 >>7988866 Chinese space program is still using 1970s Soviet tech.

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:22:06 2016 No.7988879

>>7988862
Occasionally they cut to a camera inside the fuel tank to see and show how the fuel acts in zero gravity inside the tank. These shots are usually only displayed when it is coasting to the next burn or coasting until it releases satellites, etc.

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:22:24 2016 No.7988883

>>7988823
Unironically, this.

This whole reusability thing is just about making flights a bit cheaper for SES, Intelsat, Eutelsat, etc. Boring telecom companies who make billions will be able to make more some more billions. Sooo awesome...

Even the hardcore spacex fans know that we won't see democratic spaceflight prices in our lifetimes.

We gave no fucks about the price tag when we went to the moon. It's not a 30% discount that will change attitudes today or suddenly make Mars possible.

It's just a moneymaking thing.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:24:02 2016 No.7988889 File: 868 KB, 1218x686, 1438886372518.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] how can a man be so based?

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:24:43 2016 No.7988891 >>7988889 >that image kek

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:27:55 2016 No.7988901 >>7988813 So we are 3 :`(

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:28:10 2016 No.7988903 >>7988883 if private space launch can make money, more private space launch companies. the more private space launch companies, the cheaper it gets. your children will see mass market affordable space launch

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:28:39 2016 No.7988906 here's the best part https://a.uguu.se/oikfgq.webm

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:29:01 2016 No.7988908 >>7988883 Ever wondered why there are no manned missions to other astronomical objects? Because they're too expensive, that's why. It's not cold war anymore. Only in cold war it is possible for two superpowers waste billions on dick measuring contest.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:29:13 2016 No.7988910 >>7988553 whats the point of inflatable habitats when you could just launch the whole first stage into space to form a large "wet lab"

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:30:24 2016 No.7988916 >>7988889 Would you let Musk fuck you in the ass for the future of space flight /sci/?

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:32:04 2016 No.7988921

>>7988903
That's assuming we'll launch more and more. Some geostationary sats, some earth observation sats, military sats, some science missions here and there, and that's it. There are hundreds of million of flights per year worldwide, vs a hundreds rocket launches tops. We would need a million times more launches per year worldwide to achieve airline-like prices through mass-production/mass-exploitation.

Unlikely.

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:32:23 2016 No.7988924

>>7988903
>the cheaper it gets
without serious subsidies or massive advancements in technology it will still be prohibitively expensive

this isn't like planes where you just need infrastructure to make a fuck ton of them and then it's basically maintenance and fuel costs

musk estimates that a reused falcon 9 will cut the cost of a launch by about 30%, which sounds like a lot until you realize that takes it from ~60 million to ~40 million.

if it's going to be economies of scale then everyone is going to have to want to go to space for a good reason, AND the technology is going to have to improve, AND the government will have to subsidize it or companies will have to accept a massive per-launch loss and make it up some other way.

believe me anon i too want to see affordable mass market space launches but realistically that will only be possible if there are large industries out in space that lots of people have to go work in so that companies can take some losses on launches

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:32:34 2016 No.7988925 File: 113 KB, 1041x1041, 05 Jupiter.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7988813 CS huezillian student here, it's sad that all of my friends literally don't care about Space Programs, good to see some hues here tho.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:32:56 2016 No.7988928 Elon's boner is reaching Mars right now. Now we just have to make it wet and comfy.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:33:28 2016 No.7988930 So, when is he going to actually launch reused first stage? And where is the first stage that landed last year? I've read somewhere (probably here) that they've performed a fire test and it managed to work for about 2 seconds. Is this accurate info?

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:33:32 2016 No.7988931 >>7988924 >>7988921 space mining

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:34:56 2016 No.7988932 >>7988930 they test fired the rocket from the successful ground landing, and it did work perfectly. they probably took the thing apart down to the rivet. To check over the parts and see if it as actually reusable.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:35:00 2016 No.7988933 >>7988931 Ha, would be nice but no. Space mining becomes profitable when rocket launches become ridiculously cheap. Not the other way around.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:36:11 2016 No.7988940 >>7988921 mining tourism exploration the military/nasa has certian budgets If launches only cost them 50 million vs 500 million or whatever they pay, then they'll launch more.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:37:26 2016 No.7988945 >>7988933 Rare Earth and Platinum group metals. Modern electronics need these metals.

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:37:36 2016 No.7988946

>>7988933

The thing is, everyone knows that space is a fucking goldmine IF launch costs can be brought down to reasonable levels. That starts with things like bringing the cost down 30%. It's going to be a slow process, but there will be a push to bring costs down to a point where space is profitable without government contracts, and eventually that will happen. This is just the beginning.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:38:15 2016 No.7988950 >>7988921 you're really really really underestimating just how fucking profitable space mining is it's a miracle it's not being done already, I bet it's some legislation bullshit

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:39:14 2016 No.7988953 >>7988945 The best part is that you're too fucking stupid for it to even occur to you that there is a known price for platinum, so even though the algebra is trivial you can't do it.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:40:10 2016 No.7988959 >>7988916 without a moment of hesitation

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:40:24 2016 No.7988960

>>7988769
>ITER
It's ITAR and it actually has provisions for non US persons (those who aren't US citizens or Permanent Residents) to get special clearance. Its a huge pain in the ass to deal with though, in both time and money, so its fairly rare and only used to recruit high level staff.

Nonetheless, there are some Canadians, Aussies and Euros working here. The guy I report to is a Brit who is currently waiting on his green card.

>>7988769
>clearance
Almost no one here holds clearances of any type. This will probably change as we start actively handling national security payloads but it still won't affect most of the staff.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:40:35 2016 No.7988962 >>7988945 You are now aware that "rare earth" metals are NOT actually rare on earth. Just need to ramp up mining them a bit more.

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:40:43 2016 No.7988964
File: 203 KB, 1041x1041, 06 saturn 2.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>7988933
> you need lots of energy to get out of earth
> tfw you can't build electric rockets because no propulsion
> tfw fuel is too expensive
Cheap nuclear engines when? I want to travel to Saturn with my qt waifu in my lifetime.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:40:51 2016 No.7988965 THE FREE MARKET WINS AGAIN LIBERALS BLOWN THE FUCK OUT

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:41:47 2016 No.7988966

>>7988883
>Even the hardcore spacex fans know that we won't see democratic spaceflight prices in our lifetimes.
SpaceX is planning to build a fully-reusable rocket and spacecraft that will bring 100 people at a time to Mars with an estimated cost of $500,000 per person. The entire point of both SpaceX and Blue Origin is to lower the costs to the point where millions of people can move to space. Literally, their goals are that. For Blue Origin, it's eventually sending millions of people to orbital colonies. For SpaceX, it's bringing 1 million people to Mars by the time Elon dies.

Will you have airplane-like prices? No. But you will have prices that are POSSIBLE if you're middle class and save for a decade.

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:42:05 2016 No.7988967

>>7988945
If you want to make $5000000 smartphones, maybe. I can see apple making an iPhone "Space Edition" for that price though.

Seriously though, we can barely bring a kg of asteroid material back to earth with a multi-hundred-of-million dollar mission. Mining, as in bringing back enough of the stuff we need so that we can sell it to a profit, is many many decades away.

Rockets are still glorified ICBMs. They may (or may not) get cheaper with reusability, but for that kind of application, you need order of magnitudes more power density. Aka a new technology.

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:42:19 2016 No.7988968

>>7988931
space mining is good for things in space; it's okay for things on earth but it isn't optimal and indeed the costs to go get things from space, bring them to earth, mine them, and bring them back to earth will probably exceed the cost of just getting it on fucking earth. sure you can make the argument that one good sized asteroid rich in rare earth or platinum group metals will be worth trillions, but investing tens of billions in untested, risky technology in a grey area of international law with the hope of twenty plus years down the line making a profit isn't something many companies will do. I know there's a couple currently doing some preliminary work on it but until i see designs or anything firmer than a press release they may as well be the mars one crazies.

Dr. O'Neil (the guy whose name we attach to the O'Neil cylinder colony design) suggested that colonies at Lagrange Points be built to house workers who would A) build more colonies and B) Maintain gargantuan solar arrays which would feed giant converters to beam microwave energy to earth, which could be sold to utility companies as green energy; by his estimates this was the fastest and most plausible way to pay for a giant space colony, and it wouldn't pay off for around 20 years or so, so still similar problems as above except with even more people living in space and more potential for things to go wrong.

I don't want to be a fucking downer, man i'd love to travel to space or to live on a colony in orbit one day, but reality is a bitch anon.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:43:39 2016 No.7988976 >>7988962 Iridium is actually very rare on Earth but very common in space. Your smartphone and tablet have it to make their screens.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:44:15 2016 No.7988979 >>7988874 >Mirrors

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:45:51 2016 No.7988984

>>7988960
>Nonetheless, there are some Canadians, Aussies and Euros working here. The guy I report to is a Brit who is currently waiting on his green card.
No doubt about it. You made the claim though that most of his engineers weren't American. That's what I disagreed with. Also, thanks for correcting the ITAR acronym. I get that screwed up occasionally.

Still, it's a win for America one way or another.

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:46:10 2016 No.7988986

>>7988968
Futurists think that mining in 0-g is trivial and that if an asteroid has trillions of dollars worth of platinum it is actually pure platinum. You will never be able to reason with them, just like how they think we'll be colonizing the moon to mine helium.

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:47:09 2016 No.7988987

>>7988966
>For SpaceX, it's bringing 1 million people to Mars by the time Elon dies.
He's what, 40 yo? Assuming a rich guy like him lives up to 90, that gives us fifty years to bring a million people to Mars.

Ha, no. I'll feel lucky if we have a serious manned mission to Mars by that time.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:47:26 2016 No.7988988 >>7988968 There's a fine line between microwave energy transmission and a giant death beam.

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:47:29 2016 No.7988989

>>7988967
When launches costs a billion dollars, and every ounce of payload is carefully calculated, bringing rocks back is a flagrant waste of money

When its much much cheaper, and the goal is to use the resources on the asteroid to propel it into LEO

They'll be able to bring back far more.

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:47:54 2016 No.7988990

>>7988883
>This whole reusability thing is just about making flights a bit cheaper for SES, Intelsat, Eutelsat, etc.
>a 30% discount
It'll be a 30% discount right away. Like, that's what their prices will be on the first reused boosters. In this generation (using Falcon 9/Heavy), they're talking about going down to about $10-15 million for a satellite launch as reusability gets reliable and they streamline pad operations.

But the main significance is preparing the way for their next generation vehicle, often referred to as the BFR (Big Falcon Rocket), which is intended to be fully and rapidly reusable, with simplified consumables (no helium), and largely automated pad operations. In other words, an orbital airliner, which can take large payloads to orbit and back for little more than the cost of propellant.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:48:22 2016 No.7988992 >>7988986 robots.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:49:08 2016 No.7988993 >>7988861 >someone saved my image yes

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:49:26 2016 No.7988994 >>7988992 a one word answer does not dispel all of the issues surrounding what is an extremely complex process.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:50:29 2016 No.7988996 >>7988930 They did a full burn of the successfully recovered first stage as far as I am aware. Also Elon Musk should just put the thing up in his front yard after they are don't studying it.

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:51:18 2016 No.7988998

>>7988990
The SpaceX people talk a lot about a Mars colony. That's a plausible use of their technology, but I think they mostly just talk about that because it's something that's easy to picture.

It's not easy to predict or imagine what we'll do with orbital launch that's 1000 times cheaper.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:52:43 2016 No.7989002 >>7988998 well if you want to put man on Mars and get them back to Earth. You will need what SpaceX is building.

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:52:44 2016 No.7989003

>>7988987
>He's what, 40 yo? Assuming a rich guy like him lives up to 90, that gives us fifty years to bring a million people to Mars.
I will agree that it's unlikely that he'll have 1 million people on Mars by that time, but I can believe that tens of thousands can be sent there by that time.

>Ha, no. I'll feel lucky if we have a serious manned mission to Mars by that time.
Now that's just unrestrained pessimism. The methalox Raptor engines that will be used on the BFR and MCT are already under development. Once reusability is perfected in both the Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy, SpaceX will be working full-tilt on the BFR/MCT and their satellite constellation.

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:53:23 2016 No.7989005

>>7988989
Still anon, even assuming a 90% cost reduction is achieved in rocket (won't happen in our lifetimes but let's assume it), that costs are too fucking high. You need to deploy an space infrastructure that will commute between the earth and the asteroid, you'll need big fucking heavy machineray there (which will need maintenance), and you'll need to bring industrial quantities of materials back to earth.

I could mine platinum with a Bagger 288 covered with diamonds and plated with gold and it would still be more profitable than space mining with current technology.

We need a new tech (nuclear rockets?), not a half-assed concept like first stage reusability if we want to do that kind of shit.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:54:37 2016 No.7989007 >>7989003 As much fun as sending people to Mars sounds, I'm just happy enough we'll get to see Falcon Heavy in a couple years. Everything else is pure bonus

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:55:12 2016 No.7989009

I don't post here very often but I have a question for you guys.
What is the actual point of a reusable rocket stage? Are the financial benefits of such a concept even viable?
I've always thought the fuel in these rockets are worth more than the fuselage itself, not to mention the cost of actually repairing it after it went into space.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:55:39 2016 No.7989010 Once again SpaceX making me want to become an American Citizen and contribute to their space efforts rather than the European shit ones.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:57:05 2016 No.7989012 >>7989009 What is the benefit of reusing your car every fucking time? What kind of car do you think you'd be driving if you had to throw it away every time?

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:58:06 2016 No.7989019 >>7989009 cost reduction and tech development. Musk wants to make a rocket that can fly to mars, land, take off, and fly back to earth.

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:58:32 2016 No.7989020

>>7989005
>even assuming a 90% cost reduction is achieved in rocket (won't happen in our lifetimes but let's assume it)
>won't happen in our lifetimes but let's assume it
What's with the unnecessary pessimism? Once we have full-reusability, a 90% cost reduction is expected.

>>7989009
>I've always thought the fuel in these rockets are worth more than the fuselage itself,
The fuel is about .2% of the cost of the rocket. 70% of the Falcon 9's cost is in the first stage.

>not to mention the cost of actually repairing it after it went into space.
Once you have reusability, you can then use more expensive yet resilient materials to increase the lifespan and reduce maintenance accordingly.

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:58:39 2016 No.7989021

>>7988984
>You made the claim though that most of his engineers weren't American.
I wasn't the anon that made that claim and I certainly didn't mean to imply that the majority of employees here aren't Americans, just stating that there are certain, albeit rare and expensive, exceptions.

>>7988984
>Still, it's a win for America one way or another.
As someone born in a shitty Eastern Europoor country that is now an American citizen and working here, I support this statement.

>>7988996
>Also Elon Musk should just put the thing up in his front yard after they are don't studying it.
His asshole neighbors in Bel Air would probably throw a fit.

>>7989009
>fuel in these rockets are worth more than the fuselage itself
The fuel costs are a tiny fraction of overall launch costs. RP-1 isn't expensive, probably $200-300k for the F9.

The engines on the other hand are expensive as hell.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:59:01 2016 No.7989022 >>7989009 >I've always thought the fuel in these rockets are worth more than the fuselage itself Not at all, the fuel is only a few hundred thousand dollars, the rocket is 60 million total. The engine is where most of the money goes.

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 17:59:11 2016 No.7989023

>>7989009
The biggest cost is probably in the salaries for the engineers building and designing the rockets. The Falcon 9 rockets costs 10s of millions, while the cost of fuel is only a couple 100s of thousands. So fuel is 2-3 orders of magnitudes less than the cost of the rocket (.1%-1% of the total cost).

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:01:05 2016 No.7989030

>>7989009
the fuel cost is quite low compared with building the incredibly intricate engines, pumps, etc. associated with turning that fuel into thrust. as >>7989012 said, reusing your car is an incredible cost saver. in terms of rockets it won't be as much in the near term, but Musk has given estimates that reusing the Falcon 9 booster stage would shave maybe 30% off of a launch cost. it's still mega expensive, but 30% less mega expensive is the difference between a scientist getting funding to launch an instrument or not launch; or for a company to put up a satellite (or hell maybe putting up two instead of just one)

basically it opens the market for launches ever so slightly, and more launches with more reusable boosters could drive prices down further. it won't make hopping onto a rocket and going to space cheap enough for a normal person any time soon, but it's a step.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:01:21 2016 No.7989032 >>7988976 The first part is correct, but iridium is not used in LCD displays. That's indium, in the form of Indium-Tin Oxide (ITO).

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:02:55 2016 No.7989040 >>7989019 why mars tho

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:03:51 2016 No.7989042
File: 2.24 MB, 500x415, 1343500692598.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>7988960
>The guy I report to is a Brit who is currently waiting on his green card.
What is his job title? How high up is he? Britfag here.

>>7988916
Yes but without the space flight part

>>7988968
>I don't want to be a fucking downer
Well guess what, you are being a fucking downer. Stop being a fucking downer in a SpaceX succesful landing thread

Zieg Heil Musk

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:03:59 2016 No.7989043 Drone ship landing and inflatable space rooms? what a time to be alive. inb4 you'll never get to use said inflatable space rooms.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:04:07 2016 No.7989044 inb4, "sorry guys, rocket tipped over because muh waves"

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:04:23 2016 No.7989045

>>7989020
>What's with the unnecessary pessimism? Once we have full-reusability, a 90% cost reduction is expected.
Market is the driver more than raw tech is. Unless there's somehow a massive jump in satellite launches, that figure is very unlikely.

OneWeb etc seem to be pointing in that direction (even though mass launched isn't that much greater -- they just have many small sats) and even them picked the european soyuz for launching their things.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:05:48 2016 No.7989048 >>7989043 To be fair, the astronauts on the ISS aren't going to be using this inflatable space room, either.

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:05:57 2016 No.7989049

>>7989005
>even assuming a 90% cost reduction is achieved in rocket (won't happen in our lifetimes but let's assume it)
lol, this is the most ridiculous pessimism.

>a half-assed concept like first stage reusability
They're developing first-stage reusability and orbital spacecraft reusability at the same time, with the Falcon 9 booster and Dragon V2.

Why? Because these are the least expensive incremental steps forward from an expendable rocket, and they cover all the essential functionality of a fully-reusable launch vehicle, not because that's where they intend to stop.

Dragon V2 is the prototype for recovery of a reusable upper stage. They're figuring out the heat shield, precision guided re-entry, a highly reusable and cheaply-renewable heat shield, and low-stress, pinpoint propulsive landing.

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:06:22 2016 No.7989051

>>7989012
>>7989023
>>7989022
>>7989021
>>7989020
>>7989030
As I said, I've always thought rockets were just thin metal tubes filled with rocket fuel. I didn't factor in the cost of actually developing these things and making them reliable enough to wihstand flinging them into space. Thanks for clearing this up for me.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:07:15 2016 No.7989053 >>7988406 >Although it's the armchair rocket scientists who are the absolute worst kind of posters. Prophetical post.

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:08:20 2016 No.7989057

>>7989044
The SpaceX employees some nearby boats rush over and bolt the legs down in the event of a successful landing. In a few hours/days the barge will come sailing into port and we'll have majestic images of a 13 story tall rocket on a football sized barge docking.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:08:37 2016 No.7989059 http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/index.html post-launch press conference right now

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:10:41 2016 No.7989076 >>7989057 To be fair, it just 'looks' really unstable. Most of the weight is actually in the engines.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:10:49 2016 No.7989078 File: 68 KB, 921x614, SpaceX_Testing_Merlin_1D_Engine_In_Texas.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7989051 Rocket engines are incredibly complex.

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:11:37 2016 No.7989082
File: 28 KB, 495x259, 0ef4064811[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>7989040
This entire book will give you a great explanation. Pic related
Also, Elon explains it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P79E0-3LeW8&nohtml5=False

>>7989045
Well, admittedly, the market does determine it. Both OneWeb and SpaceX itself are planning LEO constellations for the purpose of providing high-speed internet service. Right now, SpaceX is probably going to keep launch costs as high as they can with reusability($40 million instead of perhaps $30 million) so they can increase their profits and reinvest them into the MCT. The entire point behind both SpaceX and Blue Origin as I stated before is to lower the cost of access to space so that humans can finally colonize it. The companies are not typical corporations only out for profit. That's a big difference that most people don't understand. These companies are private and thus follow whatever goal the CEOs and boards set for them.

Within a few years, Blue Origin will also have its orbital launcher ready and we'll see a price war for <10mT launches. This will definitely spur innovation and cost reduction as it occurs.

>>7989051
Yep. You're welcome, bro. It's always nice to give people more information about this industry.

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:12:06 2016 No.7989084

>>7989023
>salaries for the engineers building and designing the rockets
The technicians are a big cost component as well. All that OT gets expensive.

I know welders/machinists here who clear $130k with all the OT, some make more than the younger engineers.

>>7989042
Mission Assurance Manager. He's fairly high up, his supervisor is a VP who then reports directly to Elon. There are a couple of other non-Americans who are in lower level positions as well, but they are very good at what they do and I'm guessing were mostly hired through referrals.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:13:40 2016 No.7989091 SpaceX anthem of the day >>>/wsg/1023433

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:17:13 2016 No.7989104 File: 1.87 MB, 400x398, Orbital.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7988861 High quality

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:21:34 2016 No.7989119 Space travel will soon be inexpensive because of [expensive thing that physically cannot become significantly less expensive]. To say otherwise is unreasonable pessimism, and is tantamount to heresy against the futurist faith.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:22:11 2016 No.7989120 >>7989059 >Reporter: what's the max pitch of the barge that the rocket can land on? >Musk:... It's a ship. It used to be a barge. Now it has 4 engines, it's a ship.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:23:48 2016 No.7989126 >>7989119 >expensive thing that physically cannot become significantly less expensive Not throwing away said expensive thing after a single use might be a start.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:24:23 2016 No.7989128 >>7989120 You're expecting too much detail from a startup company that has existed for a mere 14 years.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:24:49 2016 No.7989131 >>7988788 Trumps Leadership made this possible

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:25:25 2016 No.7989134 >>7989091 What's the song

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:26:40 2016 No.7989143 >>7989128 well he did answer the question actually, i was mostly amused by him autistically correcting the reporter about the distinction between a barge and a ship

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:29:17 2016 No.7989160 >>7989084 That seems like a fuck ton of money for a welder. What kind of training do they have? How can I become a rocket welder?

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:29:48 2016 No.7989165

>>7989051
>>7989078
They actually can make rockets fairly simple. For instance, with solid rocket motors, or with pressure-fed liquid-fueled engines.

OTRAG, for instance, was a design intended to dramatically lower launch costs without reusability, by making rocket propulsion units that could be easily mass produced:
http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/otrag.htm

These were made from sections of uninsulated stainless steel pipe, from a machine designed to build oil pipelines. The engine was just cast in the bottom from fiberglass, which served as an ablatively-cooled material for the combustion chamber and nozzle. The fuel was ordinary jet fuel and a dense nitric acid blend. The fuel tanks were simply pressurized before flight with compressed nitrogen in about 1/3rd of the tank volume.

So it is possible to make a very low-cost expendable rocket as well.

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:31:50 2016 No.7989172

>>7989119
>Space travel will soon be inexpensive because of [expensive thing that physically cannot become significantly less expensive]. To say otherwise is unreasonable pessimism, and is tantamount to heresy against the futurist faith.
You realize that reusability drops the price greatly, right? I never said it would fall to airline prices, only that it would be possible for a person from the middle class to save up enough in his or her lifetime to go.

Reading comprehension m8

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:35:59 2016 No.7989190 >>7989172 Reusability didn't drop the price of the space shuttle to the point that "middle class" people could make direct use of it. Whether Musk's scheme will is conceivable, but don't act like it's a certainty.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:39:36 2016 No.7989205 >>7989160 https://www.commercialdivingacademy.com/underwater-welding-career-and-salary.cms Become an underwater welder instead.

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:41:50 2016 No.7989215

>>7989190
>Reusability didn't drop the price of the space shuttle to the point that "middle class" people could make direct use of it.
We could go on for hours about the Shuttle and why it was a colossal fuckup but this is very different.

>Whether Musk's scheme will is conceivable, but don't act like it's a certainty.
It's probable, but not certain. The BFR and MCT are going to be developed with 100% reusability in mind from the start, hence why they're using methalox engines instead of hydrogen/lox or RP-1. Hydrogen causes embrittlement over time and RP-1 causes coking which increases maintenance in comparison to methane. This is why Blue Origin is investing in the same methane-based propulsion.

Either way, humanity benefits from the technological advance. Hopefully we can drop the price far enough for extensive colonization to take place, but even if we drop the price to 1/5th, that's still widening the possibilities greatly.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:44:07 2016 No.7989224 >>7988876 Shit, so is ULA.

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:45:19 2016 No.7989227

>>7989160
Experienced TIG welders can make $35-40/hour and have plenty of opportunities for OT. Some of the more experienced ones are making$50/hour which will get you to $100K without needing much OT. Those rates earn 1.5-2x depending on OT.

I know a guy here who has a MechE degree from Cal but works as a weld inspector b/c one, he likes to weld and is good at it, and two, he makes more as an hourly employee with OT than he would as a salaried engineer.

Most have certifications from CC or trade schools. It isn't particularly hard to pick up but it is time consuming.

If you can learn AWS D1.1, D1.2, D17.1, AMS-STD-2219 and Mil-STD-1595A you can make some serious money. There are a few people here who manage the QA/NDT portion of the friction stir weld shop who I'm sure are closing in on $200k.

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:45:31 2016 No.7989228

>>7989190
The space shuttle was a fake cost-saving program where nobody actually cared about saving costs. The expendable drop tank was the same mass and cost of precision aerospace hardware as you'd need to launch the same payload in a purely expendable vehicle. There was never any potential for cost savings.

SpaceX is a real cost-saving program. Falcon 9 is one of the cheapest rockets on the market as an expendable, Falcon Heavy would be a breakthrough in $/lb even as an expendable, but they're also being made reusable.

There's no way for this reusability to be like the shuttle and end up costing more, because they're focused on cost savings and not just doing a sham of reusability for PR purposes.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:50:19 2016 No.7989247 >>7989120 >4 failures >1 success >hurr what is the max pitch? retard reporter

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 18:57:21 2016 No.7989270 >>7989227 Are you the same SpaceX fag who's posted on /sci/ before?

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 19:03:26 2016 No.7989285 >>7989270 I've posted here occasionally before but not on launch days, my schedule is usually full. There could be other SpaceX anons too though.

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 19:04:46 2016 No.7989287

>>7989215
>hence why they're using methalox engines instead of hydrogen/lox or RP-1.

Can't help but think Martian ISRU might be in the back of their minds as well...

Not sure what I'm missing with coking, for jets there are additives that make it much less of a pain and improve engine-on-wing times. Not sure why that's not enough here given that the alternative, methane, is quite unattractive due to its lower density, requiring a bigger rocket.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 19:07:50 2016 No.7989296 >>7989287 Of course, methane is also necessary for ISRU on Mars(unless the astronauts want to go exploring for water ice that may or may not be near their landing site. As for the rest, I'm sure they've weighed the pros and cons of all possibilities.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 19:18:29 2016 No.7989323 >>7989134 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGx6K90TmCI

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 19:19:42 2016 No.7989327

>>7989287
I don't think he has it right when he says it's about coking.

I think the reasoning behind SpaceX's choice of methane has to do with rocket engine engineering details. Musk has said that it was the best way to get high chamber pressure, and the additional gain of specific impulse over kerosene was a bonus, plus methane was the cheapest form of chemical energy suitable for rockets. He has also said that coking wasn't a problem with kerosene, and that they wanted to make the tanks self-pressurizing.

There are some gains of symmetry to consider, as well. The optimal oxygen:methane ratio is nearly 1:1 by volume, so the tanks can be the same size, and the pumps can be the same size. Oxygen and methane are liquid at the same temperature, too.

They're doing full-flow staged combustion, with fluid bearings, so this symmetry is quite pleasing. They can probably use identical turbopumps, just with different preburners.

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 19:36:38 2016 No.7989378

>>7989296
>Of course, methane is also necessary for ISRU on Mars(unless the astronauts want to go exploring for water ice that may or may not be near their landing site.
They'll need to collect water to produce any significant amount of methane. Zubrin's plan of transporting liquid hydrogen to Mars was never very practical, and is certainly not SpaceX's style.

Anyway, there's nothing special about methane for ISRU. The chemical reaction to produce it is simple, which is a bonus, but then it has to be stored when it's gaseous at Mars ambient temperature, which is inconvenient. This means you either need big, high-pressure tanks, or you need active cryostorage that works for years.

It might be better to produce fuel and oxidizer which are solid or liquid at Mars ambient temperature, and it wouldn't be a lot harder.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 19:48:02 2016 No.7989417 >>7989327 >>7989378 Alright. Thanks for the new info. It appears what I heard about coking probably wasn't right, but that there were other reasons as I suspected. Here's to hoping they get to Mars on time!

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 20:09:58 2016 No.7989473

>>7988883
>Even the hardcore spacex fans know that we won't see democratic spaceflight prices in our lifetimes.
Sorta.
One factor you're kinda neglecting here is how fast miniaturization is coming from the other direction to meet launch costs (more than) halfway. Sure, you won't see average people able to afford a ride into orbit, but it might become reasonably affordable to launch your own microsat in the not-too-distant future.

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 22:15:28 2016 No.7989726

>Entire thread of idiots arguing that we'll never have airline price spaceflights and even larger idiots arguing with them that they will

Nobody is trying to get fucking 2,000 dollar spaceflight seats in the next few decades. Musk and everyone else wants them to be around 500,000 - which is easily enough if you plan your retirement or the rest of your life around it. You'll be able to move and live on a mars colony by the time most of us are sixty or seventy - and that's perfect. I don't doubt that a lot of companies will set up and start offering incentives like paying the flight in return for x years of contract work. That's the same way we had it when people moved to the new world.

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 22:31:24 2016 No.7989761

>>7989473
>Sure, you won't see average people able to afford a ride into orbit
I don't see any reason why not. Your orbital energy in LEO is about the same as your weight in gasoline. If you get reusability really efficient, the energy cost of putting a person in orbit at current prices is only around $1000. Long-range airliner tickets are usually about triple the fuel price.

Furthermore, space rockets aren't the only advancing technology. Solar panels have been on an exponential curve of watts/$ for the last few decades, which hasn't been too important because they've never been as cheap as conventional power, but their unsubsidized energy cost is currently in the process of going below the cost of coal-fired electricity, in the best locations. There's no reason for that cost improvement to slow down, in fact, there's a further reason for it to be sustained, if it's the cheapest energy source.

With automation advancing and it being possible to make solar panels from common materials, and the solar panels themselves providing the energy for the transformation, there's no cost floor. At some point, it's just going to be a question of what surfaces we permit to be used for solar power generation, and more energy from sunlight falls on the Earth every day than all the energy released by burning fossil fuels in history.

So on the scale of a couple of decades energy cost should also go down, possibly dramatically.

In fifteen years, you might think of going for a vacation at a space hotel like going for a vacation in Hawaii.

Anonymous Fri Apr 8 23:06:19 2016 No.7989826

>>7989726
>Musk and everyone else wants them to be around 500,000
Musk was talking about the cost of MOVING TO MARS being around $500,000, not just going to LEO.

Moving to Mars is very different from visiting LEO, or even going to the moon.

Let's say you had a reusable booster and four reusable orbital spacecraft (which also serve as upper stages) with short-term accommodations for 1,000 passengers. You can plausibly fly four times per day to a LEO space station, transporting 1,000 passengers up, and 1,000 passengers down, collecting 4,000 return trip fares per day, let's say 250 days per year, and it lasts 5 years. So the cost of producing each such system is amortized over 5 million fares. Let's say it costs $500 million. Only about $100 of each ticket is vehicle cost. The rest of it is paying for maintenance, fuel, overhead, etc. This is like the economics of an airliner.

Now let's say you use a similar system for transporting people to Mars. Let's start by assuming that we can refuel in LEO, so the mass you can throw to orbit is similar. It will take 2-4 additional flights to refuel for each departure. So we're already at 3-5X the LEO cost. But you also need supplies and shielding and stuff for people to spend 3-6 months in deep space in transit to Mars, so instead of carrying 1,000 people, it takes 100, and they're quite crowded in. Now we're at 30-50X the cost of a LEO visit.

But we're not done. This stage/spacecraft might be able to be refuelled on Mars and sent back to Earth, but it's going to be gone for about 3 years, and the launch window for the next trip to Mars won't come for about 4 years and 4 months. Let's say that this vehicle costs $50 million. Divided among 100 tickets, that's $500,000 each. They do recover something by getting it back to use again after 4 1/3 years, but maybe it'll be good for five trips in its life, and there's the time value of money to consider. So maybe $250,000 of each ticket is needed for the vehicle.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 8 23:14:09 2016 No.7989839 >>7988965 sounds like you dont know what a liberal is friend ;^)

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 9 01:55:04 2016 No.7990135 File: 87 KB, 1017x667, 112-Zenith Sur le pas de tir-Zenit On the launch pad-zenith 2 transport.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7988876 And so is musk.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 9 09:40:15 2016 No.7990686 >>7990135 This is also his favorite rocket

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 9 11:56:19 2016 No.7990965 >>7988841 Because when you're a part of/heavily identify with a group, you're proud and happy of any achievements of anyone in that group. You autists really don't get this kind of shit, do you?

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 9 11:59:06 2016 No.7990971 >>7988831 gotteeee

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/sci/ - Science & Math