/sfg/ Space Flight General - stacking edition

[Anonymous No.11399346]

On the last thread of /sfg/ >>1396224

[Anonymous No.11399349]

>>11399346
oh no, last thread >>11396224

[Anonymous No.11399352]

>>11399322
>if Google can't make it work for gaming Windows certainly can't do it at the OS level
Gaming is by far the worst place for them to start if they're trying to get people to adopt desktop as a service. Video games rely so heavily on immediate feedback that any kind of latency just feels like shit—people have no idea how much time and money and effort goes into client-side prediction to make online multiplayer games feel good to play. The client-side prediction to make an OS-as-a-Service is pitifully easy in comparison and if the latency is what Starlink actually promises it may not even be necessary at all.

[Anonymous No.11399366]

anyway, back to space flight:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4VlhFP_-zc

[Anonymous No.11399379]

>>11399366
Stick him in an ion thruster and we'll go to Jupiter.

[Anonymous No.11399390]

>>11399346
How many more starlink satelites are needed for minimal coverage?

[Anonymous No.11399402]

>>11399390
100 to 120. Since Falcon 9 has been throwing them up 60 at a time, two, maximum three more launches.

[Anonymous No.11399405]

Listen to the asshole, he wants to leave LEO scraps to private corporations, anything beyond government only.
Fuck oldspace and fuck reptile politicans.

[Anonymous No.11399407]

>>11399402
sounds to few

[Anonymous No.11399413]

>>11399407
Well, there's 297 of them operational right now, and 400 to 420 has been repeatedly quoted as the "minimum coverage." It's being thrown around that SOMEBODY, not "everybody," is going to be able to start subscribing to Starlink ISP as soon as July/August.

Honestly it's all gotta be beta tests because the first real Starship missions will be hauling up Starlink sats, 400 at a time.

[Anonymous No.11399418]

regarding the hammering on Starship while they're stacking it:
they need to hammer in shims in order to get proper separation for welding

[Anonymous No.11399423]

Quality stream, NASA. Just cut the VP off mid speech.

[Anonymous No.11399427]

>>11399423
this lady staring straight into the camera is really unsettling

[Anonymous No.11399430]

>>11399427
They really should hire a fucking intern that knows the intertubes to run their streams. Jesus fuck, it's bad enough that they stream in 720p in 2020, but this shit is awkward.

[Anonymous No.11399461]

>>11399423
NASA TV bends their schedule for nobody
They'd cut off Mister President himself if he ran long

[Anonymous No.11399466]

>>11399461
Separate stream, man.

[Anonymous No.11399470]

>>11399466
it was probably running on NASA TV simultaneously. They bend their schedule for no man

[Anonymous No.11399496]

>>11399346
It looks so un-American.

[Anonymous No.11399503]

>>11399496
-t.

[Anonymous No.11399508]

>>11399496
it does have a kind of soviet jankiness to it now, but hopefully it will shape up soon

[Anonymous No.11399516]

>>11399496
steel in the white is the MOST American color, anon
we used it on Atlas-Mercury, we used it for the Apollo CSM, we used it for everything this country ever did good in space except for Gemini but we pronounced that wrong so whatever

[Anonymous No.11399519]

>>11399496
Si fly.

[Anonymous No.11399533]

You can use starship tankers as orbital fuel depots!
>launch empty tanker to orbit X
>top it up with other tankers
>finally launch your precious payload and have it refuel from the awaiting tanker!
This changes everything! This means the primary issue with orbital depots - that they are stuck in a single point in a single orbit - is utterly gone! This means you literally have mobile depots following you around! DEPOTS!
DEPOTS!!
ORBITAL DEPOTS!!!
D-E-P-O-T-S

[Anonymous No.11399542]

>>11399533
Son, it's best that you stop the communist propaganda right now. AMERICAN space flight belongs to POWERFUL AMERICAN expendable rockets made by AMERICANS. Not to some company started by a FOREIGN man.

[Anonymous No.11399545]

>>11399533
WRONG
it goes like this:
>launch tanker to orbit X with 150 tons of fuel
>launch more tankers to orbit X with 150 tons of fuel
>put all the fuel in one tanker
>full tanker
>???
>profit
if you're REALLY ballzy you can even launch your payload first and then use THAT as a tanker

[Anonymous No.11399551]

Reminder no d-words outside of /b/. Reported.

[Anonymous No.11399553]

>>11399545
>sharing fuel
Sounds like communism. Which is un-American. You're not a foreign communist are you son?

[Anonymous No.11399556]

>>11399553
>sharing
incorrect, it's more like the fuel pony express, or orbital USPS

[Anonymous No.11399563]

>>11399553
Absolutely not, Senator. I thoroughly support all things American and will do everything my meager position allows to support the breakup and nationalization of *that* foreign and privately traded domestic terrorist company seeking to undermine our American way of Doing Things.

[Anonymous No.11399569]

>>11399346
Space flight is /pol/

[Anonymous No.11399571]

>>11399366
tldr;?
I can't stand 45 minutes of empty bureuspeak.

[Anonymous No.11399575]

>>11399571
nothing important, just ego stroking and then some lady stares into the camera without speaking for a full minute

[Anonymous No.11399576]

>>11399569
incorrect, it's obviously /a/

[Anonymous No.11399580]

>>11399576
There are a couple of good /sfg/ /a/ shows, yes.

[Anonymous No.11399581]

>>11399580
yeah but they're not good unless they're also /m/

[Anonymous No.11399585]

>>11399569
Nah, /pol/ will probably complain about how propellant depots are communism unironically.

[Anonymous No.11399591]

>>11399581
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOUUQUtFD4k

/mu/ meets /m/ meets /m/ meets /a/

LISTEN TO MY FUCKING SONG!

>>11399585
/pol/ unironically believes earth is flat and that because von Braun had that particular bible verse on his gravestone, there's a physical bubble that rockets crash into that we can't break through.

[Anonymous No.11399592]

>>11399585
We had wonderful space elevator threads before faggotry completely took over the entire site. Unironic nazis and ancaps love space the rest are niggers.

[Anonymous No.11399593]

>>11399592
I remember those.

[Anonymous No.11399597]

>>11399591
>/pol/ unironically believes earth is flat and that because von Braun had that particular bible verse on his gravestone
Sounds incredibly stupid.

>>11399592
>We had wonderful space elevator threads before faggotry completely took over the entire site.
You mean on /pol/ or /sci/?

[Anonymous No.11399601]

>>11399597
>Sounds incredibly stupid.
Yeah, that's /pol/. Threads full of people taking biblical verses literally, so if the bible verse had the words "firmament", that means "physical bubble that we can't penetrate".
Hell is other people and why I want to go to space.

[Anonymous No.11399620]

>>11399597
/pol/ had the space elevator threads.

[Anonymous No.11399628]

>>11399597
>>11399601
>>11399591
/pol here. Flat earth shills are a jewish conspiracy to discredit recognition of actual conspiracies.

>Hey have you guys noticed how many bankers and media figures have links to zio-
>THE EARTH IS FLAT, 9/11 WAS CARRIED OUT BY HOLOGRAMS, LIZARD PEOPLE FROM AN ALTERNATE DIMENSION CONTROL EVERYTHING
It's the same reason Alex Jones is given so much public attention.

[Anonymous No.11399630]

>>11399628
f/a/ggot who frequents /pol/ here, can confirm.

[Anonymous No.11399633]

>>11399591
>/pol/ unironically believes earth is flat
That's very not true, /pol/ has a group of flatearth faggot shitposters who plague every space-related thread with the same images they occasionally spam here. Most anons in those threads just ignore them or talk shit at them the way /sfg/ sometimes will.

[Anonymous No.11399636]

>>11399628
This. The basic idea of that subversive tactic is to promote disgust through association with loonies.

[Anonymous No.11399661]

>>11399630
you do not belong on /a/
>>11399633
I'm glad that the moderation team here gives enough of a shit to kick them out

[Anonymous No.11399671]

>>11399633
Here, have this.

Back on topic of space flight, how would amateur space flight be affected if systems like Starship drastically reduce the cost of access to space? Will we see more groups trying to put landers on various bodies? Will there be a surge in amateur rocketry? Will there be new regulations on what a private individual can do in space?

[Anonymous No.11399686]

>>11399661
You have to prod the jannies to get them to kick them out though.

>>11399671
Question is, will amateurs even be allowed outside suborbital/LEO? Will private companies even be allowed to do their own shit outside LEO? Listening to Pence today, I wasn't exactly emboldened. Sounded to me like what he wanted was nothing but LEO for private, everything past LEO was not without government say so, meaning NASA involvement all the way, meaning No Space For You.

[Anonymous No.11399690]

>>11399413
>400 to 420
lefty media and hobbyist astronomers have been salty as fuck with every launch of 60 sats, imagine the buthurt of 400 of them, running a train in the nightsky.
Shit will be in every newspaper around the world.

[Anonymous No.11399691]

>>11399686
yes, there's literally nothing anybody can do to stop them
official regs don't have any roadblocks and plenty of go-aheads

[Anonymous No.11399695]

>>11399686
>Listening to Pence today, I wasn't exactly emboldened.
What did he say exactly?

[Anonymous No.11399700]

>>11399691
On paper there's plenty they can do to stop them. You know that a F9 is classified as a ballistic missile, right? All rockets are. You don't get to launch one without the right paperwork.

>>11399695
He went waxing lyrically about private corporations and low earth orbit and space tourism, not a fucking word about mars or asteroid mining or resource extraction or any of that shit that actually matters, just bullshit.
And that was what got me thinking.

[Anonymous No.11399703]

>>11399591
pretty sure that the flatearth shit is spammed on /pol/, just as the blacked threads.

[Anonymous No.11399705]

>>11399700
It could be that he's not really aware of private actions towards BEO. Sure, there's SpaceX and their Mars goals, but some consider that to be a pipe dream. Hopefully his omission doesn't mean that the US intends on restricting BEO to only approved government projects.

[Anonymous No.11399709]

>>11399700
>>11399705
Well, the only mention of BEO? NASA. Private corporations do not seem to be invited to go ahead on their lonesome. They are not opening up a gold rush if anyone was under that belief.
So I'm very curious as to how Elon plans to pull off not ending up being the owner of the biggest fleet of parked Starships on Earth.
Of course, he can always use them for heavy lifting, but it seems such a fucking waste to use them just for dumping shit into LEO.

[Anonymous No.11399711]

>>11399686
>You have to prod the jannies to get them to kick them out though.
Just accuse them of being the flatties themselves. That gets their attention.

[Anonymous No.11399713]

>>11399711
That's the prod, yes.

[Anonymous No.11399714]

>>11399700
terra nation states can only enforce where they can project power. ie leo and no further.

[Anonymous No.11399721]

>>11399671
The moment starship flies it'll be criminalized and regulated into national security. This will be a global treaty so there will be no escape. Humans living beyond the grasp of earth governments is a fundamental existential threat to earth governments. Nobody wants another USA.

[Anonymous No.11399724]

>>11399721
Musk is going to defect to the DPRK isn't he? The blue balls of getting a starship into orbit and getting stopped at the starting line by the government would be absolutely immense.

[Anonymous No.11399725]

>>11399714
Yeah, sure, you can take your shit and launch from another country.
But then you run into another bunch of fucking problems.
For starters, do you think the US government would just let you pack up and take your toys? Not happening. Secondly, say you want to set up shop in Russia? Well, now you have to deal with the fucking Russians, that means corruption and all sorts of other issues to deal with. Also you'll run into production issues, guaranteed. That might even set you back years due to tooling issues, even banalities like minor voltage differences. Slight variation in the purity of the argon gas you use for welding from the new supplier etc. Millions of things like this.

It's not just packing up your furniture and moving to a new apartment.

[Anonymous No.11399726]

>>11399628
>Flat earth shills are a jewish conspiracy to discredit recognition of actual conspiracies
Or is it? To me it's just a trick to get people actually reading into science. You go to school, "learn" a lot of garbage, but you forget all of it. Then all of sudden, a bunch of people start showing what seems to be evidences that the earth is flat. What do you do? You can either

a) bark at them like a guard dog

b) read into the concepts being presented, about how models are constructed, etc.

What proof was show to you to prove that the Earth is round? A cgi composite? If that's all it takes, you could have been taught that the earth was flat and you'd firmly defend that belief not because it's true, but because you accept arguments of authority. Meanwhile they'll try to make their physical experiments that sometimes give results that contradict what they think, but that sometimes also contradict what people "on the other side" would expect.

Flat earthers have exposed a big hole in modern educational systems, and if you don't think so, you're part of the problem that needs to be eliminated

[Anonymous No.11399731]

>>11399690
>400 of them running a train
Not how it works but I would have loved to see it.

[Anonymous No.11399733]

>>11399726
>What proof was show to you to prove that the Earth is round?
I climbed the fucking mountain I grew up next to as a kid. I also spent time at sea, since I grew up and still live next to the ocean.
Funny how you can see the curvature of the planet once you get up a bit and don't live in a flat fucking desert.

[Anonymous No.11399734]

>>11399709
>Private corporations do not seem to be invited to go ahead on their lonesome. They are not opening up a gold rush if anyone was under that belief.
At least for SpaceX, being able to deliver +50t to anywhere in the solar system (practically speaking) is a pretty powerful thing to have. For just probes, the amount of mass shedding needed to fit on current anemic launchers is astounding. That requirement significantly drives up the cost of the probes as it requires advanced materials and manufacturing. Which then drives up the cost even further because now there's more risk management required to make sure that the highly expensive probe works. Lifting the mass restriction will allow for cheaper and faster built probes that would be just as good as current probes. I think SpaceX has it down if they can get Starship to work.

[Anonymous No.11399737]

>>11399724
He can't do shit without the companies he created and they can always hold his family hostage to prevent him from doing bad things. It's ogre.

[Anonymous No.11399738]

>>11399726
>What proof was show to you to prove that the Earth is round?
I saw a sunset.

[Anonymous No.11399744]

>>11399721
I doubt that because it can't be guaranteed that every country is going to play nicely with space. China has shown to not give a damn about what the international community thinks and they could happily take over space if it meant having an advantage over other great powers. The US shutting down SpaceX and every other attempt to open up access to space means that other countries will just do their own "SpaceX" and leave the US behind. It's better to embrace the future and deal with the consequences, rather than suppress it for security.

[Anonymous No.11399749]

>>11399744
Right now, it seems the US government is stuck on the oldspace route. Unless something drastically changes, we're fucking stuck there doing baby splashes in the heated pond throwing money into the fucking singularity.
So, here's hoping China does something that scares them sufficiently enough to get them to shift things into gear.

Because face it, that fear was what drove the space race.

[Anonymous No.11399753]

>>11399733
>Funny how you can see the curvature of the planet once you get up a bit and don't live in a flat fucking desert.
I can see curvature in my cellphone screen even though it's perfectly square because I have astigmatism

>>11399738
If you were taught that was a proof that the earth was flat, would you believe it was flat?

[Anonymous No.11399757]

>>11399749
China is oldspace. If we were to wait for them to do something significant we'd be waiting just as long as with NASA.
Literally the best thing the US can do for its long term prospects is just not interfere with SpaceX and BO. Not even fund them (beyond actual contracts), just not get in the way.

[Anonymous No.11399762]

Why no oxy-acetylene rocket engines?

Also, how would you push oxy-acetylene into a burn chamber to produce a really high thrust? Turbopump would definitely melt

[Anonymous No.11399764]

Lmao these niggers are going to lose so much money

[Anonymous No.11399766]

>>11399726
>the virgin inferior mirage vs the chad superior mirage

[Anonymous No.11399769]

>>11399753
The easiest way to debunk flat Earth shit is just talk about solar power.


Their models all have the sun as being too small to generate the power that we already create through solar power.

[Anonymous No.11399774]

>>11399753
>If you were taught that was a proof that the earth was flat, would you believe it was flat?
No because I know that sunsets prove that the Earth is round because I actually rationally thought about it. It is clear that the sun is going below the horizon, but time-zones are a thing. So there's another place on Earth that's midday with the sun being overhead. This is physically impossible on a flat Earth.

[Anonymous No.11399776]

>>11399757
>just not interfere with SpaceX and BO
Except it seems Trump and Pence are not going to let them go past LEO on their own. So there.
Space Tourism is never going to make anyone money.

>>11399762
Specific impulse slightly higher than a concentrated fart. That's why.

[Anonymous No.11399777]

>>11399764
>go public trading
>kikes instantly go for your company
Hmmm

[Anonymous No.11399781]

>>11399744
It doesn't need to. What matters is castrating the PRIVATE unknown element that might disturb balance of power. Governments have had good dealings in space for 60 years now.

[Anonymous No.11399783]

>>11399753
>If you were taught that was a proof that the earth was flat, would you believe it was flat?
No, in the same way that I don't believe Columbus discovered America for Europe because there's research suggesting the vikings were there first. I was also taught that flat 7-up would cure a cold and I think that's retarded too because I was also taught that circumstantial evidence isn't enough to "prove" anything. I could "prove" that there's no way a conspiracy of the scope of flat earth could exist just by sharing a secret with a handful of friends and seeing how it takes to get out. The hilariously vast number of people who would—on a daily basis—trip over actual, undeniable proof of flat earth is proof in itself that it's retarded.

[Anonymous No.11399786]

>>11399764
What has Virgin even done to generate this sudden wave of interest? They can barely light a candle without killing a pilot somewhere in the vicinity and their tech would be a dead end even if that weren't the case. Manipulation?

[Anonymous No.11399791]

>>11399516
shut up you gameany

[Anonymous No.11399793]

If you think earth is flat, visit coastal Norway.
There's not a flat surface in sight, not even after the invention of dynamite.

[Anonymous No.11399797]

>>11399776
>Except it seems Trump and Pence are not going to let them go past LEO on their own. So there.
Even if that's the case, Trump is incredibly impressionable. Elon could spend 5 minutes presenting a case and immediately have him on side again.

[Anonymous No.11399798]

>>11399774
>No because I know that sunsets prove that the Earth is round because I actually rationally thought about it
>This is physically impossible on a flat Earth.

But it's possible on a toroidal earth, or a flat earth with curved space

I bet you didn't think of alternate models like real scientists do and just went with your personal intuition

[Anonymous No.11399800]

>>11399786
gone public. SpaceX and BO probably never will.

[Anonymous No.11399801]

>>11399786
Association. A lot of people will be getting an ass quite soon too.

[Anonymous No.11399802]

>>11399764
>>11399786
>>11399777
It's pumped 200% in the last 12 days, so it's absolutely market manipulation

Or just something outright retarded like this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-Z8_Mzmqgk

[Anonymous No.11399803]

>>11399781
You're misunderstanding.
>private US companies aim for space
>US shuts down these companies to not "disturb the balance of power"
>China continues to develop their space tech
>China claims the moon upon landing a man there
>because they don't care about what other countries think so long as it makes China look stronger
I mean, their human rights violations are terrible and yet they don't do anything when complaints are leveled against them. What makes you think that China will care about what others feel about ownership in space?

[Anonymous No.11399804]

>>11399786
Probably related to SpaceX offering Crew Dragon trips.

>>11399797
I dunno. Boeing and the boys have the ears of everyone else in congress and he listens to them more often than he listen to Musk.

[Anonymous No.11399810]

>>11399803
>What makes you think that China will care about what others feel about ownership in space?
because the US and Russia both think they own space. They don't care about China abusing its own people, but edging in on US or Russian space superiority will hit a nerve like nothing else.

[Anonymous No.11399812]

>>11399803
Unlimited funding for boeing and company and the US gets its moon landing next to the chinks as well.

Everybody realizes how stupid and wasteful that is after the first few stunts and a new era of partnership and proper science begins. Cue lunar station ala gateway for 50 years + sls cost effective sls replacement program to build it with.

[Anonymous No.11399819]

Didn't the last holdouts in Boca Chica finally give in last month? Or was it just the ones who gave us the cool pictures?
>https://www.businessinsider.com/spacex-texas-spaceport-boca-chica-village-possible-eminent-domain-challenge-2020-2

[Anonymous No.11399822]

>>11399812
>Unlimited funding for boeing
They already have that.

[Anonymous No.11399825]

>>11399819
I always wondered what's stopping some large company with vested interests to offer fat paycheck to someone and buy a house there, then... refuse to sell the property to spacex. If eminent domain is involved then make noise with media/etc. Win/win.

[Anonymous No.11399826]

>>11399764
>The Virgin Galactic
>The Chad SpaceX

[Anonymous No.11399830]

>>11399810
If that's the case, then how would the US and Russia challenge China in this hypothetical scenario? Once something is in space, the only thing that can stop it is something else in space. The Chinese would be able to send 50t to the moon with the LM-9. That's enough to send some serious base making equipment. Russia has nothing that could send anything substantial. The US has the SLS, but it's payload is about half that of the LM-9 and it's launch rate is pathetic. If the LM-9 can launch even as fast as the SLS, then the Chinese would win access to BEO.

[Anonymous No.11399837]

>>11399776
>Specific impulse slightly higher than a concentrated fart
Yeah, so is methane-oxygen

if you use it in a cutting torch

There's no reason why an acetylene rocket wouldn't work

[Anonymous No.11399845]

>>11399822
Not true. The stream of money is endless but that's just for sustenance. To produce results they need a flood and chinese moon landing can open the floodgates.

[Anonymous No.11399846]

>>11399826
>The Virgin Galactic Hybrid Booster
>The Chad SpaceX Closed Cycle Methalox Liquid Rocket
Hybrid boosters are for sounding rockets like the shit we send up.

>>11399837
Acetylene, no, burns too quickly. Liquid form, aka acetone, not quite there yet. Acetone peroxide, most certainly.

[Anonymous No.11399847]

>>11399830
The Chinese don't anticipate having LM-9 running until well into the 2030s. The Russians are working on two different super heavies - Yinesei, a moon-capable Soyuz derivative that they intend to have in service by 2028, and their existing Angara A5 rocket with a new second stage that can haul 40 tons to the moon.

If all else fails, they seem to still have their mind on big, dumb, reliable and (relatively) cheap since it's worked so well for them since the 60s.

[Anonymous No.11399852]

>>11399837
Total layman understanding here, but acetylene being carbon rich makes it both heavy and dirty in a rocket, surely? Methane works well because it's more volume efficient than hydrogen while being very hydrogen rich for a hydrocarbon.

[Anonymous No.11399857]

>>11399852
Correct. The more carbon, the more it will coke.

[Anonymous No.11399860]

>>11399846
Gas acetone is acetone, liquid acetone is still acetone, not acetylene

[Anonymous No.11399862]

>>11399700
yeah and SpaceX know how to do the paperwork correctly, and the guys who stamp it make sure you've dotted all the 'i' and crossed all the 't' but they don't screw people over

[Anonymous No.11399871]

>>11399860
Not a chemist really, also not my first language. I still wouldn't build a rocket out of an oxy/acetylene torch.
It's good for cutting steel and leaving a very sooty deposit behind if you use too little oxygen. I doubt you can power an engine with it without burning through it.

[Anonymous No.11399886]

>>11399819
all the permanent residents are gone, I think
so now it's a bunch of vacation homes, and a bunch of boomers are going to get eminent domained

[Anonymous No.11399891]

any /sfg/ approved books one should own? What literature can you recommend?

[Anonymous No.11399892]

>>11399837
aside from being unable to run it at an acceptable chamber pressure because acetylene will spontaneously polymerize if you sneeze at it

[Anonymous No.11399900]

>>11399862
there are a lot of legitimate reasons not to allow unfettered space travel outside of the reasonable enforcement of the law, especially if the governing body is literally not yet capable of producing a similarly capable vehicle under its own direct control. You have to trust that Musk isn't a maniac who's going to taxi an asteroid into a collision course with Earth which is a lot of trust to put into someone. This is how the argument is going to be phrased and that paperwork is going to be shelved for years while they argue about it on the floor of congress and Musk twiddles his thumbs launching dumb junk into LEO.

[Anonymous No.11399905]

>>11399900
the mission they're sending out won't have that capability, dumbass, and it's trivially easy to prove that
also, no matter how much media stink there is, the FAA and FCC don't give a flying fuck
also they'll probably send along some US Marshals at some point

[Anonymous No.11399915]

>>11399905
>also they'll probably send along some US Marshals at some point
this is true, I guess as long as most of the astronauts are NASA it's not that big of a deal. Although the rational argument is not always the one that gets through congress.

[Anonymous No.11399918]

>>11399915
congress can't do shit

[Anonymous No.11399920]

>>11399900
lolwut. You cannot just covertly fuck around in a rocket. If it was going off itinerary it would be obvious for anyone to see. The actual personnel and mission control are all planetside so you absolutely do have everything under direct control. This is some weirdo dan brown shit

[Anonymous No.11399922]

>>11399918
>make it illegal for US companies to leave LEO without a government funded science contract
whoops!

[Anonymous No.11399926]

>>11399871
But you'll have a liquid oxygen tank too

[Anonymous No.11399929]

>>11399920
absolutely
anyway, can we go back to roasting the guy asking about how he can use explodium to power his rocket?

[Anonymous No.11399931]

>>11399920
This. You can't really hide in space, and space is so vast that it'll be clear that a spacecraft is going somewhere it's not supposed to. Also, the travel times in space (especially with chemical engines) are so long that any attack is heavily telegraphed.

[Anonymous No.11399935]

>>11399922
You're forgetting about the GSO commsats that are still needed.

[Anonymous No.11399936]

>>11399922
You keep saying this all over the thread but it comes from nowhere. Like you just heard Pence talking shit and suddenly you've decided every member of govt has unanimously decided to fuck private space. There's a lot more behind an undertaking like that than a vice president being a dick

[Anonymous No.11399942]

>>11399936
could it potentially be some sort of bizarre blue psyop

[Anonymous No.11399954]

>>11399926
I highly doubt it's suitable.
Remember, we've gone from gasoline (boom) to 75% ethanol (slightly less boom) to kerosene (not very boom) to get rid of the fucking explosion risk.
And you want to bring in a highly explosive gas into the mix.

[Anonymous No.11399958]

>>11399936
I just think the reality of it hasn't set in on most people and when it does they will be afraid of it and try to stop it, just like they're doing with Starlink. Human intervention around the solar system will be framed as "pollution" no matter how superficial and in the same way the US govt has routinely fucked over the immense potential of nuclear power, the risk exists that they fuck over the immense potential of privately funded interplanetary exploration and colonization simply because the average voter is afraid of it.

[Anonymous No.11399968]

>>11399837
There are easier amateur liquid rocket propellants. Acetylene is usable, but it has downsides. The biggest one is that it's unstable (it tends to decompose) which makes storage tricky. If you're looking for a light hydrocarbon, then pentane may be better as it's stable and liquid at room conditions. Stepping away from hydrocarbons, the alcohols are great as fuels. Ethanol is easily obtainable and can be watered down to regulate the temperature of the rocket engine. Methanol can't be watered down and is harder to get, but it offers much better performance.

[Anonymous No.11399996]

>>11399958
>starlink
Good analogy. Nobody cared until the first batch flew then the end of astronomy started and the skies fell after the celestial dome was torn by the sky streakers. And it's not like musk was hiding what he was doing it was out in the open publicly for years. 100% same thing is going to happen with starship. The reaction from the planetary protection types alone will be spectacular.

[Anonymous No.11399998]

>>11399954
A rocket is just a controlled pipebomb, bro. Plus, liquid hydrogen is a lot more dangerous.

[Anonymous No.11400003]

>>11399998
Yes, I know. But amateurs don't tend to fuck around with cryonic fuels.

[Anonymous No.11400010]

>>11400003
It can't be that difficult, can it? Just an oversized oxy-fuel torch with a graphite nozzle instead of a brass one. Plus with cheap drone controllers control becomes a non-issue. We're not in 2002 anymore.

[Anonymous No.11400015]

>>11400010
>It can't be that difficult, can it?
Yeah, it's not like it's rocket science, right?
Oh wait.

[Anonymous No.11400016]

>>11399996
Thing is ground astronomers and SpaceX have no common ground, which means the astronomers can be as shrill and explosive as they like. The govt is hugely entwined with private space. Neither is eager to get on the other's bad side particularly.

[Anonymous No.11400024]

>>11400010
>It can't be that difficult, can it?
In my experience. Dealing with highly oxidizing substances was a massive headache. They require specialist materials, lubricants, oils, handling procedures, and more. Cryogenic fluids were also a headache to deal with for the same reasons. Dealing with both at the same time was even worse as materials that can both handle oxidation AND extreme cold are both expensive and rare for an amateur to get. For example, just getting ball valves required special ordering from Israel with an 8 week lead time. Picking something like nitrous oxide as the oxidizer will be much easier to handle.

[Anonymous No.11400025]

>>11400016
It's simple then. SpaceX just has to hire more indigenous protestors to BTFO the ground astronomers about how it should be illegal to build a telescope anywhere on earth because every suitable patch of dirt in existence is some tribe's sacred ground.

Then rockets will become mandatory because in space will be the only place it's legal to build a telescope!

[Anonymous No.11400026]

>>11399571
Space is really hard.

[Anonymous No.11400031]

>>11400015
People did it in the 30's with nothing but slide rulers, we're almost 90 years in the future with infinite computing power

[Anonymous No.11400034]

>>11400024
>>11400010
Sorry, I probably sounded like a massive downer. Experiment with cryogenic liquid oxygen if you want to, maybe you'll find some easier way to handle it. Just understand that there's lots of challenges with it.

[Anonymous No.11400036]

>>11400025
What they should do, is get some some orbital telescopes shot up and donated to them just to shut them the fuck up. As a gesture that the age of optical is indeed fucking over.

[Anonymous No.11400039]

>>11400026
Space is hard if you do it the oldspace way.

[Anonymous No.11400041]

>>11400031
Computers aren't why rockets are hard. It's the materials science and manufacturing tolerances demanded by the field, along with the almost nonexistent margin of error, that makes it difficult.

[Anonymous No.11400044]

>>11399810
Daily reminder that China is banned from ISS and other international space projects on request of US.

[Anonymous No.11400047]

>>11400031
Computers are great.
But computers only do what people tell them to. People aren't any smarter now than they were 60 years ago.

[Anonymous No.11400051]

>>11400044
>Chinese on a space station
Imagine the smell

[Anonymous No.11400058]

>>11400051
I would share a bow of rice with a yellow astronaut.

[Anonymous No.11400062]

>>11400058
thats not a typo

[Anonymous No.11400065]

>>11400041
Yes but with computing you can basically ignore aerodynamics. A plank with 2 motors can be controllable with proper pid tuning. Even this shit from pic related is impossible without computers. Can you even imagine how to make it mechanically like the ww2 self-guiding japanese torpedoes? Now you don't need to.

[Anonymous No.11400068]

>“so you western piggus actually thought a little flu would stop us?”

[Anonymous No.11400074]

>>11400065
Computers only keep everything under control as long as it's all operating exactly according to a pre-determined profile, any change and things go tits up in a hurry. So you still need all that mechanical autism backing up the computation

[Anonymous No.11400099]

>>11400068
>“Coronavirus?...what virus?...isn’t that an alcoholic beverage?

[Anonymous No.11400104]

>>11400099

[Anonymous No.11400108]

>>11400104

[Anonymous No.11400110]

>>11399837
Storing acetylene is arguably a bigger pain than hydrogen. Welding cylinders are filled with activated carbon and acetone where the actual acetylene is dissolved at a pressure af about 12 bar. Try to compress it without that - it goes boom. Try to compressit more even with all that - it goes boom. If you're handling a cylinder and feel it's getting warm out of nowhere - crank the valve open and fucking run.

[Anonymous No.11400120]

>>11399503
God I hate this fucking faggot so God damn much and I'm a republican I guess

[Anonymous No.11400137]

>>11400099
>>11400104
>>11400108
Chinese rockets do have a neat aesthetic to them.

[Anonymous No.11400148]

>>11400068
>china: nothing going on here, CHINA STRONG
>western media: it's just the flu, stop being racist.
>WHO: we are fighting a war against fake news, also "corona/wuhan virus" is racist, call it covid19

Also

>every nation in the world taking more drastic measures against the virus everyday.

Hmm, who should i believe...

[Anonymous No.11400150]

>>11400148
>WHO: we are fighting a war against fake news, also "corona/wuhan virus" is racist, call it covid19
Source?

[Anonymous No.11400158]

>>11400074
If it's in one piece, it can fly

[Anonymous No.11400160]

>>11400150
Look up the first time they announced the renaming of coronavirus to covid 19.
They mentioned it in that press statement.

[Anonymous No.11400163]

>>11400148
>19 million American citizens got the regular flu this season
>10.000 people died

>10.000 corona infected
>1000? people died

t.U.S. Department of Health official numbers

[Anonymous No.11400174]

>>11400137
I love how smoothly these launches go.
Its like nobody is stopping or sabotaging their space efforts,its amazing.

[Anonymous No.11400182]

>>11400160
You’re an idiot. “Coronavirus” is a broad clade of viruses whereas COVID-19 refers to a specific strain that started spreading in 2019.

[Anonymous No.11400196]

>>11400016
>Thing is ground astronomers and SpaceX have no common ground, which means the astronomers can be as shrill and explosive as they like

Ground astronomy is a meme now. If they like, they can launch fuckhueg observatory satellites into orbit on Starship or even put them on the far side of the moon.

[Anonymous No.11400200]

>>11400137
What do you want to bet that they're using pic related to control everything

[Anonymous No.11400204]

>>11399996
How is planetary protection real? Do people actually care about rocks?

[Anonymous No.11400206]

>>11400200
>It works like magic.
>Cheap as fuck.
I say other countries should watch and learn from them.
Maybe save a buck or two.

[Anonymous No.11400215]

>>11400163
>10000/19 million = 0.0005 = 0,05% mortality rate
>1000/10000 = 0,1 = 10% mortality rate
Seems pretty clear which one is more lethal

[Anonymous No.11400224]

>>11400215
yeah lucky for everyone thats not how it works

[Anonymous No.11400240]

>>11399690
Oh man, you haven't seen the estimates of what they'll look like after dusk and before dawn in the summer months?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9hQfKd9kfA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGBuk2BTvJE

[Anonymous No.11400241]

>>11400163
There’s like 80,000 cases

[Anonymous No.11400248]

>>11400240
Cool. It’s nice to see the presence of glorious mankind in the heavens. Truly, we will remake the world in our image.

[Anonymous No.11400251]

>>11400241
Do you actually believe the CCP numbers?

[Anonymous No.11400254]

>>11400068
>>11400137
>Chinese rockets do have a neat aesthetic to them.

[Anonymous No.11400261]

>>11400254

[Anonymous No.11400266]

>>11400261

[Anonymous No.11400272]

>>11400248
This.

[Anonymous No.11400283]

>>11400272
>>11400248
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjNssEVlB6M

[Anonymous No.11400304]

>>11400266

[Anonymous No.11400311]

>>11400304

[Anonymous No.11400330]

>>11400200
>>11400206
The ARM core would shit itself under the stress of a launch, assuming it didn't get thrown off the board from insane vibration to being with. Even if it did manage to get into space, the basic radiation outside the atmosphere would ruin it.

[Anonymous No.11400386]

>>11399764
So many people betting money on companies they don‘t know anything about in markets they have no insight into.

[Anonymous No.11400402]

>>11399847
If only all their funding didn‘t get lost to the russian cleptocracy.

[Anonymous No.11400403]

>>11399802
this, when something like this hits the news, it's so chumps buy in and are left holding the bag

[Anonymous No.11400407]

>>11400330
Just put it in a lead box filled with expanding foam.

[Anonymous No.11400416]

>>11399891
Ignition!

[Anonymous No.11400448]

>>11400240
>naked eye view
>100s of stars
KEK!
I can barely see two dozen stars if I scan the entire fucking sky in this lightpolluted hellhole I call home.

[Anonymous No.11400454]

>>11400448
Right? It's almost unfortunate SpaceX is working on lowing their sats' albedo, wtf else am I supposed to see in the sky except the glow of the nearest city

[Anonymous No.11400477]

Anybody who’s interested in the upcoming DARPA launch challenge should save this link, they will be posting updates on this website. As part of the challenge, the recently un-stealthed Astra Space will be attempting to successfully launch two of their SLVs from Kodiak, Alaska in rapid succession; the launch window opens February 25.

https://www.darpalaunchchallenge.org/live.html

[Anonymous No.11400515]

>>11400477
>Rocket name: 1 of 3
Was that supposed to be intentionally vague for security reasons or was it supposed to be pretentious?

[Anonymous No.11400523]

>>11399998
wrong, acetylene will explosively decompose in the gas phase above about two atmospheres absolute
also, the triple point is, you guessed it, about two atmospheres absolute, so you can't even cryogenicly store it, it just goes straight from gas to solid at atmospheric pressure

[Anonymous No.11400527]

>>11400515
I believe the launch vehicle itself is actually called Rocket (innovative and original) and they are sending 3 up to Alaska for the challenge. So you have Rocket 1,2 and 3 or Rocket 1 of 3, 2 of 3 and 3 of 3...

[Anonymous No.11400531]

>>11400527
Who runs that launch service? The Borg?

[Anonymous No.11400533]

>>11400110
cranking the valve won't save you, anon
>>11400515
they're being pretentious fucks about being in "stealth mode" when everybody and their mother already knew they existed because Scott Manley spilled the beans because he used to live near their headquarters

[Anonymous No.11400599]

>>11400531
Edgy aerospace hipsters and DARPA

>>11400533
>they're being pretentious fucks about being in "stealth mode"

Their not in stealth-mode anymore: they’ve got a website, a fancy promo video, Twitter account and are now publicly hiring. They’ve even invited some media+launch photographers to their upcoming launches.

[Anonymous No.11400623]

[Anonymous No.11400680]

>>11400068
>>11400099
no virus, just sleepy

[Anonymous No.11400685]

>>11400515
It's Borg

[Anonymous No.11400687]

>>11399686
My understanding of it wasn't "private should only stay in LEO" but rather "private can do LEO better than NASA now, so NASA should focus on beyond". Especially in the context of his other policy remarks, there's no way he'd be in favor of more obstructions for the private sector.

[Anonymous No.11400788]

>>11400687
>Republicans being opposed to private corporations doing things better than the government

???

[Anonymous No.11400846]

>>11400160
They made it policy after calling a flu virus swine flu made niggers and rural chinks torture pigs to death.

[Anonymous No.11400874]

https://spacenews.com/blue-origin-opens-rocket-engine-factory/

42 engines a year seems kind of disappointing considering they'll be making them for 2 companies.

[Anonymous No.11400891]

>>11400874
meanwhile in Elon
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1192605854270312448

[Anonymous No.11400895]

>>11400874
Well thats enough to fit 6 New Glenns per year.

[Anonymous No.11400903]

>>11400788
Exactly, there's no way he'd tell private business to stay away from BEO like the earlier anon was suggesting.

[Anonymous No.11400916]

>>11400874
>>11400891
>>11400895
If your actually reusing your engines to a significant degree (BE-4s are supposed to be good for 25 flights) 42 should be more than enough. Actually, most that manufacturing capacity should go towards sustaining Vulcan instead of New Glenn, considering the former will be expending 2 BE-4s per-flight until at least 2023.

[Anonymous No.11400919]

>@tobyliiiiiiiiii: Saw that SN1 had some buckling in between the welds, is that fixed now?

>@elonmusk: The Persuader hammer will fix SN1. SN2+ will have better fit & weld quality. Later serial numbers will use bigger stampings, so much less weld length.

They're improving at an exponential pace! The Starship singularity is near!

[Anonymous No.11400942]

>>11400919
>ywn be the mexican that Persuaded the first Starship that ever (hopefully) flew into shape
Legit it's going to be super exciting to watch it continue to improve in successive generations.

[Anonymous No.11400943]

>>11400330
>ARM
NASA made some cubesats built around an android phone and they worked fine
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20140008616.pdf
The helicopter on the new mars rover is using an ARM processor:
https://rotorcraft.arc.nasa.gov/Publications/files/Balaram_AIAA2018_0023.pdf
>> assuming it didn't get thrown off the board from insane vibration to
cellphone electronics are designed to withstand accelerations on the order of thousands of gs, because they experience that when hitting the ground if dropped.

[Anonymous No.11400949]

>>11400874
Vulcan uses 6 engines. So that's 7 launches.

[Anonymous No.11400953]

>>11400949
>Vulcan uses 6 engines
What?

[Anonymous No.11401034]

>>11400599
and they're still being pretentious about it

[Anonymous No.11401045]

>>11399922
>make it illegal for US companies to leave LEO without a government funded science contract
>all US space companies fuck off to some other country without that law
whoops!

[Anonymous No.11401057]

>>11401045
Every thread someone brings up this idea of shipping out private space to some lawless shithole. All that would get you is a hellfire up the ass.

[Anonymous No.11401065]

>>11401057
>Every country that doesn’t impose unnecessary and detrimental restrictions upon private space companies is a lawless hellhole

Stalinist cope

[Anonymous No.11401068]

>>11401057
Not a lawless shithole, an opportunistic middleweight shithole. Something along the lines of a Brazil or an Indonesia or a Nigeria. Not some rogue state looking to lob nukes at the burgers, but looking for a slice of a pie. A pie that, in this hypothetical where the US govt is somehow even further up its' own ass than usual, America has declined to eat.

[Anonymous No.11401100]

>>11401065
>>11401068
The point is not about the lawlessness or shitholeness of the target country, the point is it would be the most flagrant violation of ITAR imaginable. It's pointless to even imagine because no one's dumb enough to try it.

[Anonymous No.11401103]

>>11401065
sorry, but the unnecessary and detrimental restrictions are known as ITAR and they involve putting hellfire up your ass if you try to fuck off with rocket technology or merely look at it wrong

[Anonymous No.11401108]

>>11401057
It (nearly) happened in Russia. Plus, SpaceX's services are making incredible amount of profit for them. They would fight tooth and nail so they can access the untapped potential of BEO payloads.

[Anonymous No.11401131]

Do you nerds have any comfy space games you would recommend?

[Anonymous No.11401133]

>>11401103
>sorry, but the unnecessary and detrimental restrictions are known as ITAR

Abolish it.

[Anonymous No.11401138]

>>11401131
I'm playing KSP right now. Working on both a medium sized recoverable booster and a crewed mission around the Mun. It's pretty comfy.

[Anonymous No.11401182]

>>11400533
>cranking the valve won't save you, anon
At least that's what they tell us in training every year. You're also supposed to carry it outside and pour cold water on it (or snow if it's winter) and only run if it doesn't help. Apparently the heating starts when the filling goes a bit bad so the reaction happens in a small volume enough for the rest of the cylinder to act as a heatsink at first and prevent it from going boom right away. It's essentially a ticking time bomb at this point still.
Luckily we don't deal with that shit in practice, only with supercritical co2 and occasionally some nitrogen for drying lab glassware.

[Anonymous No.11401184]

>>11401133
over Congress' dead bodies

[Anonymous No.11401193]

>>11401138
>medium sized recoverable booster
SSTO with the mainsail for medium payloads
SSTO with whiplash and aerospikes for small (mk2) payloads
the only reason to use the air breathers is because landing spaceplanes is way cooler than landing boosters
>>11401182
I was told that cranking the valve could cause it to destabilize as it boils.

[Anonymous No.11401204]

>>11401193
>SSTO with the mainsail for medium payloads
>SSTO with whiplash and aerospikes for small (mk2) payloads
Thanks, but I haven't unlocked the mainsail yet in this science mode save. And my goal is 32t to LKO, so I'm not sure if a mainsail SSTO will cut it.

[Anonymous No.11401214]

>>11401184
EXPENDABLE LEGISLATORS

[Anonymous No.11401226]

>>11401204
It's been told, in hushed whispers, that it is possible to build an air breathing SSTO with the panther and the terrier
I don't believe it for a second
get those spaceplane parts they're good for making fuck-off huge spaceplanes and they'll pay for themselves in Kerbin science if you're willing to circumnavigate Kerbin a few times

[Anonymous No.11401228]

>>11401204
oh, and never underestimate the powers of LKO refueling with reusable spaceplanes
it takes literally ten hours but it's fun

[Anonymous No.11401229]

>>11401214
I just don't understand this reusable legislator meme.

The amount of money you can save from reusing representatives isn’t enough to justify how much harder it makes it to pass the difficult bills that usually make money in the lawmaker world. I’m sure one day reusability will be more effective, but the truth is that when you have all the challenges that come with political science in general, it’s almost always much more effective to throw away the legislator after it’s done its job than to figure out how to make recovery part of the mission. I know of no major technology on the near term horizon that would change that.

Even if reusable legislators are possible now, but when reliability is THE number one priority (in this case the appropriations bill takes up 2/3rds of the cost and the actual representative only 1/3rd) it makes absolutely no sense. Like, look at this legislator (pic related). This represents some of the most advanced technologies in the constituents world. Do you honestly think that such a complicated machine can be made tough and reliable enough to be reusable? I doubt it. Best example in my opinion is condoms, sure you could reuse them but making sure that they do not suffer a drop in reliability will cost a lot of money and time.

Just because some country made reusing legislators popular, then that doesn't mean that we will have the sci-fi future of millions of laws per year. We'll be lucky to see more than a couple dozen per year. Dial down your expectations, don't buy into the 'reusability for legislators' meme.

[Anonymous No.11401236]

>>11401229

[Anonymous No.11401244]

>>11401229
>much more effective to throw away the legislator after it’s done its job than to figure out how to make recovery part of the mission
Someday this idea will be taught in political science holo-class.

[Anonymous No.11401255]

>>11401226
>>11401228
Thank you. I'll look into that. Right now Im just doing Sea Dragon style recovery since that seemed the most straight forward. But know I'm at the 5th level of the tech tree and can't decide on what to choose. Apart from the engines, fuel tanks, and electronics, there doesn't seem to be alot of useful things compared to that they lead off to.

[Anonymous No.11401257]

>>11401255
post your tech tree

[Anonymous No.11401260]

>>11400949
Vulcan uses 2 engines

[Anonymous No.11401261]

>>11401257
I just finished a Minmus mission so I have lots of science points to spare.

[Anonymous No.11401265]

>>11401261
the second tier of aeroplane stuff is worth it, if only just for doing dumb stunts around KSC
do not, I repeat, do not attempt to circumnavigate Kerbin with the turbofan
when is the third engine unlock?

[Anonymous No.11401269]

>>11401265
>the second tier of aeroplane stuff is worth it, if only just for doing dumb stunts around KSC
Thanks. Might be useful to do some Kerbin science. The starting landing gear sucks.

>do not, I repeat, do not attempt to circumnavigate Kerbin with the turbofan
Understood. lol

>when is the third engine unlock?
You mean the one with the mainsail? That's right after that top node in the pic.

[Anonymous No.11401272]

>>11401269
no I meant the Panther
I'm a plane junkie
>Understood. lol
circumnavigating Kerbin at 20km and mach 4: under an hour
circumnavigating Kerbin at 5km and mach 1.2: kill me
if you're going to try to go supersonic, do it as high as possible, and don't do it with the turbofans

[Anonymous No.11401275]

>>11401272
>no I meant the Panther
The node after the second plane node.

[Anonymous No.11401281]

>>11401275
hmmmm
I don't think any of the plane stuff is worth it until you can get the panther
once you have the panther you can just put the Top Gun soundtrack on loop

[Anonymous No.11401316]

How many self-landing BFRs are gonna crash before they are as reliable as the F9 in reusability?

[Anonymous No.11401324]

>>11401316
About tree fiddy.

[Anonymous No.11401327]

>>11401324
I'll take that bet, first 3 BFRs will crash and burn, 4th will land but fall over.

[Anonymous No.11401335]

>>11401316
I'm predicting they only have one burn up over Texas early on

[Anonymous No.11401346]

>>11401335
First one will Challenger, second one will Columbia.

[Anonymous No.11401347]

>>11401346
I'm predicting zero challengers and one columbia

[Anonymous No.11401352]

My friend gave me his 3d printer after upgrading to a better one, so now I get to learn how to use this shit. Printed a tiny Starship and a BFR from a different file, scaled to roughly match each other. I'll probably pick up some primer and paint to see if they cover the obvious layering, maybe sand a little too. This is fun.

[Anonymous No.11401359]

>>11401352
Bruh use a smaller layer height and nozzle

[Anonymous No.11401363]

>>11401352
nice dildo faggot
>gets 3d printer
>immediately starts making cocks and shoving them up his ass

[Anonymous No.11401366]

>>11401363
Tell me more about this phallic fixation of yours.

[Anonymous No.11401368]

>>11401359
>Bruh use a smaller layer height
Think I can tweak that, still figuring out Cura after having it only a couple days. Nozzle though? Only things I've tweaked so far were infill, speed, temp and support.
>>11401363
Nobody gets stimulation from an inch of insertion, no matter what your gf tells you.

[Anonymous No.11401392]

>>11401193
>cranking the valve could cause it to destabilize as it boils.
I just re-checked our safety manual and it actually says both but doesn't go into much detail. You should limit the flow rate to below 25 l/min during normal operation, but crank it open all the way if it starts heating. My guess too much flow can indeed end up in boiling and loss of acetone (which is what makes the filling go bad and consequent loss of stability) but when the bomb is already ticking the filling's fucked anyways and you should only care about dropping the pressure as fast as possible since it's stable by itself below 2 bar.

[Anonymous No.11401397]

>>11401363
Is there a rocket that doesn't look like a penis?

[Anonymous No.11401404]

>>11401397
If the first thing you think when you see a rocket is "phallus", may I refer you to Dr. Freud as well?

Ceci n'est pas une penis.

[Anonymous No.11401406]

>>11401404
Nah, I was just saying that seeing a penis in one rocket is the same as seeing a penis in all rockets.
Sometimes a rocket is just a rocket.

[Anonymous No.11401420]

>>11401406
>seeing a rocket in one water tower is the same as seeing a rocket in all water towers.
>Sometimes a water tower is just a water tower.

[Anonymous No.11401426]

>>11401368
A smaller nozzle is a physical part you need, see the little brass bit on the end that shoots out the plastic? They come with different sized holes, get some smaller ones desu.

[Anonymous No.11401432]

>>11401426
Okay, that's what I thought but there are so many unfamiliar settings that I wasn't certain. I'll have to ask my friend, he assembled it from a flat pack and would know what parts I can swap and where to get them. It'd probably be a good idea since I'm into miniatures and finer detailing would be nice to have.

[Anonymous No.11401434]

>>11401432
If you're into miniatures, get a resin printer instead.

[Anonymous No.11401445]

>>11401434
Can I print my warhams yet?

[Anonymous No.11401450]

>>11401445
Resin is great. You're gonna have to learn to hollow out models if you don't want to waste a hell of a lot of resin though.

[Anonymous No.11401454]

>>11401450
Surely resin has got to be cheaper than plastic crack anywau. I wonder if there are any big archives with 40k mini scans in them. I guess GW is probably all over that shit getting it taken down ASAP.

[Anonymous No.11401460]

>>11401214
>EXPENDABLE

[Anonymous No.11401531]

Soyuz LAUNCH

https://twitter.com/NASASpaceflight/status/1230418360611020800

[Anonymous No.11401585]

Remember to do your squat exercises. :)

[Anonymous No.11401599]

>>11400254
I guess -- if you're into Mormon grain silos

[Anonymous No.11401612]

>>11401131
Elite Dangerous has good bits and bad bits. After playing for a while I get so pissed off with the bad bits that I delete it and then go back to see what's new after 6-12 months. Supposed to be a major revamp on the way this year I think, which is badly needed. Not enough proper content in it really atm. Too sandboxy.

[Anonymous No.11401615]

>>11401131
Star Citizen, but don't even think about playing it until at least 5 years from the moment this comment was posted has elapsed.

[Anonymous No.11401620]

>>11401615
Scam Citizen won't be finished in 5 years.

[Anonymous No.11401755]

>>11401615
>Star Citizen, but don't even think about playing it until at least 5 years from the moment this comment was posted has elapsed
Deja Vu, I heard this in 2010

[Anonymous No.11401870]

Robloxfag here, I'm gonna update this shit, any suggestions?
Here's what I'm already planning to do:

[Anonymous No.11401872]

>>11401870
>Move crew quarters from bigelow modules to Starship habitable fairing
>Reduce # of bigelow modules
>script the EVAs to work

[Anonymous No.11401879]

how many starships would you have to attach together front-to-back and connect them into a circle before you could create decent artificial gravity? 10?

[Anonymous No.11401893]

>>11401879
stop playing with baby toys, it's rotting your brain

[Anonymous No.11401900]

>>11401893
I was just looking at >>11401870 and thought it probably wouldn't be too hard to roll it up and just make a space station without too much effort.

[Anonymous No.11401901]

>>11401893
you can't stop me

[Anonymous No.11401906]

>>11401879
2

[Anonymous No.11401907]

>>11401879
Just the two, back-to-back, rotation at 3RPM will give you a solid half G in the upper decks, gradually dropping to about .24 G at the decks closest to the center of spin.

[Anonymous No.11401908]

>>11401901
cmere you little shit you're getting spanked

[Anonymous No.11401910]

>>11401907
does that have that problem where your head feels more gravity than your feet and you explode or something?

[Anonymous No.11401920]

>>11401879
Oh I should also note, even in the ISS with newer exercise equipment they say that most of the long lasting negative health effects have been alleviated, all you'd need to do to make sure Starship astronauts are physically healthy is pack some resistance band exercise kits and maybe, 10 and 20kg weights for them to work out with when two ships are connected and tumbling end-over-end.

[Anonymous No.11401927]

>>11401910
That's nonsensical, you'll feel some uncomfortable coriolis effect at the lower end of the Starship which might make you dizzy or ill for the first few days but you'd get used to it, you'd have to pay attention while pouring water because it would noticeably spill out diagonally instead of straight down. Closer to the upper decks it would wall bellow the conscious threshold.

[Anonymous No.11401930]

>>11401910
Whoever is going to vomit at that already vomited his intestines out from the microgravity anyway.

[Anonymous No.11401933]

>>11401920
I guess, but honestly I think simulating gravity would be necessary for keeping all the people sane. They're not going to be trained military.

[Anonymous No.11401939]

>>11401933
Agreed, in general. Luckily Starships are more than tall enough to simulate a full G if they're spinning while connected ASS TO ASS. You could start the spin low at just 2 RPM, slow enough that even people who normally feel motion sickness wouldn't suffer any negative effects, and over the course of about a week ramp it up to 4.2 RPM, at which point you'd have a full G at the nose of the ship and somewhere around .5 or .6G in the "lowest" decks closest to the center of spin. If you slowly increase the spin, people will have time to acclimate between changes in spin and thus basically anyone except for somebody who is already chronically prone to motion sickness wouldn't have any problems.

[Anonymous No.11401941]

>>11401939
what if the second starship is full of cargo that vastly outweighs the passengers?

[Anonymous No.11401945]

>>11401939
>ASS TO ASS

[Anonymous No.11401946]

>>11401941
Then you would manipulate your RCS thrusters accordingly to spin around the two ship's common center of mass. You could spin even slower then and achieve the same effect. Dunno though that might be too awkward for most RCS thrusters to manage so you just might not be able to do it with two completely different Starships.

[Anonymous No.11401947]

>>11401933
Microgravity is really cool. Why would you want normal gravity?

[Anonymous No.11401950]

>>11401947
microgravity is cool until you have to take a shit

[Anonymous No.11401957]

>>11401950
I’ll just shit into a bag like they did in Apollo, and we can collect all the shit to grow plants in when we land on Mars.

[Anonymous No.11401958]

>>11401947
It is easier to maintain health in at least some amount of gravity. It is true that muscle and bone loss can be combated now with resistance exercise however there are other problems as well. The circulation of blood and lymph is hindered in microgee because humans did not evolve their fluid circulating systems in microgee, a lot of our plumbing has grown assuming it's always being pulled down by 1G. Injuries or illness (possible in a long term space mission) would also be exacerbated in microgee, for example bleeding injuries cannot drain properly in microgee and the lungs cannot properly expel fluid in microgee, which would make pneumonias extremely dangerous in it. If any of your astronauts caught the space Kung Flu in microgee they'd be fucking goners, so simulated gee is desirable.

[Anonymous No.11401961]

>>11401958
>Having a circulatory system

There is no certainty in flesh but death.

[Anonymous No.11401967]

>>11401131
High Frontier
http://highfrontier.com/

Space Engine
http://spaceengine.org/

[Anonymous No.11401971]

>>11401961
We're going to have Starships a long time before full body cyberization.

[Anonymous No.11402007]

Mass simulators are funny looking things

[Anonymous No.11402009]

>>11402007
Also, those are some cool T-shirts

[Anonymous No.11402025]

>>11401910
depends on diameter of rotation, you need at least 150m for Martian gravity simulation without making people sick

https://www.artificial-gravity.com/sw/SpinCalc/

[Anonymous No.11402032]

https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/02/ambitious-japanese-mission-to-phobos-moves-into-development-phase/

fucking finally, Phobos getting some love, it is really the nearest potentially wet asteroid, prime real estate for a future colony

[Anonymous No.11402036]

>>11401939
>spinning docked starships
Cool if you want to exploded starship assholes leaking their methane insides all over, otherwise fucking stupid
Starship has no reason for artificial gravity anyway, the weightless stints are not long enough to cause long term concern with up to date countermeasures

[Anonymous No.11402063]

>>11402036
Imagine spending half a year stuck in a space ship with dozens of other people floating around shitting in bags and being forced to do specific exercises every day or else your bones will melt. Nothing can ever be properly cleaned because the grime and skin cells are just floating in the air. Drink out of your sippy cup, shit in a bag and thank god you can't smell anything because the inside would be rancid quickly. It's not like they have science shit to put their mind to every day like the ISS astronauts do. There aren't even any windows.
I think there's a strong case for simulated gravity if it's just a matter of attaching a few starships together that would have made the journey anyway.

[Anonymous No.11402067]

>>11402007
My guy needs to lift more

[Anonymous No.11402074]

>>11402063
Anyone who can't take ISS-level inconvenience, for shorter durations and on a fresher ship, does not belong on a pioneer Mars mission. Their souls are held down by gravity.

[Anonymous No.11402083]

The bigelow inflatable habitats are a truly amazing concept, but how are you going to fit furniture and shit into it?
>>11402032
It's also quite sandy.

[Anonymous No.11402085]

>>11401460
ULA got in trouble for the original diagram with Shelby because they were promoting propellant depots. Expendable launch vehicles strangely disappear at some point in the diagram. ULA wanted to own the market for propellant depots and start developing outer space.

[Anonymous No.11402094]

>>11401870
I don't understand what roblox is or does, but it came up when I was searching for information on numerical integrators and it had some handy tips related to their use in cloth simulation. Since you can do that in roblox, write up FEA and particle hydrodynamics and simulate it woobling around with fluid inside. Although you should really calculate the natural frequency of it properly. Cause for shit that don't have to deal with gravitational loads, that's the most important thing.

[Anonymous No.11402096]

>>11402063
To be fair, windows could be added via gilded portholes with mechanized doors. Just open them only once in a while to minimize UV exposure.
Starship's volume is also much greater than the ISS, so ther could be enough room to install a few stationary filth vents, which would suck up shed skin and hairs. The collected filth could be used to help grow hydroponics.

[Anonymous No.11402099]

>>11402083
Nothing stops you from putting lightweight rigid structure inside the balloon. The only thing wrong with the concept is that the only company seriously pursuing it is headed by a paranoid schizophrenic

>>11402032
>wet
Carbonaceous. Could have water, could not.
Also would like to hear a good reason to put a colony on Mars' moons. It's easier to land on Mars itself due to the atmosphere and you have better resource opportunities.

[Anonymous No.11402106]

>>11402094
Roblox is an old ass game that actually was quite fun back then. While it has a fairly cancerous selection of games as of now, it also has a fairly kick-ass physics engine, so it's actually fun to design models and test them out via Roblox Studio. LUA knowledge is required if you want to make scripts though.
Can't seem to mimic fluids, though. Keep in mind, it's one of those "gravity only goes down into a void" physics.

[Anonymous No.11402108]

>>11402083
Are they amazing? Are they, really? To me they seem like a solution to the problem we've had since the Shuttle era that we're just getting around to solving forever, which is of course maximizing living space for a given expendable rocket's launch mass capacity. You know what we'll be able to do with Starship? Mass produce hundreds of 8 meter wide, ~12 meter long steel-can habitats and dock them together in orbit to do whatever the hell we want. Shortly afterwards we'll be able to launch rolls of steel into space to manufacture truly large single-module stations and deep space ships from.
In light of these rapidly forthcoming capabilities, what is so amazing about a habitat that can inflate to roughly 200% of its packing volume after reaching space? It's a total dead end technology.

[Anonymous No.11402112]

>>11402099
That's why like how Elon musk has assistant engineers, Bigelow has assistants to go "No, Bad bigelow, no daily doses" when he pulls off something really insane.

[Anonymous No.11402121]

>>11402096
lmao just glaze the window with an anti-UV coating lol even consumer sunglasses can block 100% of UV light why would you not include that christ

[Anonymous No.11402122]

>>11402108
It reduces the width needed for a rocket to launch payloads, but I do see how beyond that, they're not really not that revolutionary. They also do have thicker skins to protect against debris, but that's mostly it. That's why I suggested having a splittable starship that could sandwich a bunch of bigelows and have trusses connecting that whole assembly. It'd be become some 2001: A Space Odyssey shit should the concept come true.

[Anonymous No.11402123]

>>11401229
we need legislator depots

[Anonymous No.11402124]

Would people on Mars be unable to build muscle mass to the same size as someone living at 1G? If I get shredded on Earth, can I go to Mars and slay for a few weeks until my muscles atrophy? Or does gravity not matter?

[Anonymous No.11402126]

>>11402124
ps I'm writing a science fiction book and this is critical to the plot

[Anonymous No.11402128]

IT'S HAPPENING
IT'S HAPPENING
IT'S HAPPENING
IT'S HAPPENING
IT'S HAPPENING

[Anonymous No.11402133]

>>11402128
>Pls to no teabag our multi million dollar investment sir

[Anonymous No.11402134]

>>11402124
High resistance low rep regimen on the ISS is able to prevent muscle and bone loss, on Mars I imagine you would have similar results as on Earth. Gains might be slower but you're not going to atrophy away.

[Anonymous No.11402140]

>>11402122
Sounds expensive and complicated. Why not ditch inflatables entirely and just use Starships, which are likely to be cheaper anyway, or mass produced steel cans launched with Starships?

[Anonymous No.11402143]

>>11402134
>Gains might be slower
alright, that's good enough
thanks

[Anonymous No.11402146]

>>11402124
Your muscles would already be significantly atrophied by the time you even got there unless you have some sort of BS warp device or something. But if your book is set in the future then just come up with something bro lmao

[Anonymous No.11402157]

>>11401615
Even then you would probably still need the latest video card to play it.

[Anonymous No.11402163]

>>11402146
No dude. They figured out how to completely halt bone and muscle loss in zero G like a year ago, all they needed to do was exercise with high resistance and low reps (you know, like how you would do in an actual gym)

[Anonymous No.11402164]

>>11402140
because its cool

[Anonymous No.11402167]

>>11402164
Not a good economic reason. Lots of shit is cool and we'll never ever do them for commercial reasons because they aren't cost effective.

[Anonymous No.11402171]

>>11402163
>50 years of zero G research to discover that in order to stress the bones and muscles enough to keep their density you have to actually work out and not just cardio bunny in space
This is what we get when the space program is run by pencil necks

[Anonymous No.11402176]

>>11402171
It's also just hard to gather a lot of data when you've got few people in orbit and rarely ever send new gear. The ISS can't be replaced fast enough

[Anonymous No.11402192]

>>11402176
>send guys on a long duration mission
>hmmm they're losing bone density
>probably due to the lack of forces acting on the bone
>Hey guys, how about we have the astronauts jog in place for literal hours with an effective weight of a few kilograms and see if that helps?
>good idea
>welp, turns out that helped a bit. Should we do anything differently?
>How about spend more time running
>hmm, better, but still far from perfect, solutions
>how about we make guys run for a long time every day, but we do like 100 missions to gather more data
>good idea
>well shit we're getting better at this but the pelvis isn't being stresed enough even after literal decades of research, maybe we need to experiment
>(does one mission where duded lift heavy effective weights)
>Oh look, our problems with bone density loss and muscle wasting are literally ALL solved
w-worth the effort, right guys . . . ?

[Anonymous No.11402197]

Don't mind me

[Anonymous No.11402206]

>>11402197
I won't.

[Anonymous No.11402240]

>>11402197
What's the craft name? I can't find it on the KSP Steam workshop.

[Anonymous No.11402247]

>>11402163
>>11402176
>>11402192
The heads of NASA need a smack on the back of the head every day until they start doing some actual good for space flight.

[Anonymous No.11402252]

>>11402240
Tupolev OOS

[Anonymous No.11402261]

>>11402192
Absolute fucking state.

[Anonymous No.11402266]

>>11402192
>>11402261
>>11402247
Well, sending heavy things up ain't free.
But they should have thought about it.

[Anonymous No.11402272]

>>11402192
Like, what ISS experiment was truly groundbreaking? Even in the very scientific technical sense that won't wow the public. What did that station do or prove that could only be done on the ISS?

[Anonymous No.11402276]

>>11402266
It doesn't matter if it's heavy or not, a cargo launch to the ISS costs the same whether it drops off 1 kg or 1000 kg.
In this case they sent up a machine (it lets you do squats I think) with a bunch of elastics for 'weight' resistance. Literally negligible mass cost and bone and muscle problems are solved now. They could have put this machine on Skylab, there's nothing high tech about it.

[Anonymous No.11402279]

>>11402272
mostly that long-term habitation in a microgravity environment is possible and won't completely destroy the human body

[Anonymous No.11402281]

>>11402163
Where is the proofs please

[Anonymous No.11402282]

>>11402266
It doesn't have to be expensive either. It also doesn't have to send up useless junk to justify the existence of a gutted shell of an agency that can't even make a new rocket out of spare parts without messing it up.

[Anonymous No.11402293]

>>11402272
This discovery that heavy resistance exercises extends zero G (and certainly Mars and Moon gravity) mission lengths up to effectively unlimited time is a big deal, the issue is that it wasn't some medical breakthrough or finely tuned workout regime, it's literally just "uh lift more". Should have been figured out decades ago. Otherwise ISS hasn't done much other than teach us how shitty it is to do work in zero G, especially on EVA, which means we will want space habitats and motherships of the future to be as simple to construct and repair as possible (single big module, vast majority of systems accessible from the inside, etc).

[Anonymous No.11402297]

>>11402281
From NASA astronauts themselves

[Anonymous No.11402325]

>>11402293
>Should have been figured out decades ago.
I don't follow the "NASA is a grant farm" theory, but stuff like that offers strong evidence for it.

[Anonymous No.11402341]

[Anonymous No.11402345]

>>11402297
Yeah but where can I read about this

[Anonymous No.11402364]

Jeff Bezos will do it again, won't he? His New Glenn will reach orbit before Starship and he will tweet "welcome to the club" when Starship is the second orbital methane rocket.

SN1 won't go to orbit, for SN2 it's unknown. Nobody knows what they are doing in that big Blue Origin building, but Bezos probably really wants to be faster than Musk.

[Anonymous No.11402368]

>>11402364
I don't know, but I don't care who's first in that particular race. I want both to succeed because space flight needs as many SpaceXs and Blue Origins as possible.

[Anonymous No.11402376]

>>11402364
if the competitive mindset gets us there faster who cares

[Anonymous No.11402379]

>>11402364
New Glenn doesn't exist and Bezos will inevitable kill himself once Starship becomes the face of the brave new future of space industry and BO is forgotten.

[Anonymous No.11402391]

>>11402379
Go away Elon

[Anonymous No.11402393]

>>11402391
Oh? W-who's this umm Elon Musk fellow? He sounds very umm handsome. haha

[Anonymous No.11402395]

>>11402345
It's discussed in the Garrett Reisman Joe Rogan episode

[Anonymous No.11402400]

>>11402364
> but Bezos probably really wants to be faster than Musk.
Doubt/10.
Going slow is literally BO's company ethic.
I don't want to trash them, competition is good. But they're going to be at least one step behind for quite some time.

[Anonymous No.11402408]

>>11402364
>Jeff Bezos will do it again, won't he? His New Glenn will reach orbit before Starship and he will tweet "welcome to the club" when Starship is the second orbital methane rocket.

Your wrong on all accounts here, considering it’s all but decided now that ULA’s Vulcan will launch before New Glenn does. Furthermore, BE-4 doesn’t actually run on pure methane like Raptor does, it runs on Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) which is a mix of methane and ethane.

[Anonymous No.11402409]

>>11402400
this is the difference between Bezos and Musk: Bezos could build and fold a dozen Blue Origins and still be the richest man on Earth. Musk has only one chance and he needs to make it work.

[Anonymous No.11402411]

>>11402140
Expandables give superior mass-to-volume ratios, so if you build say a 50 ton steel can and a 50 ton expandable hab made of mostly para-aramids, insulation and a thin steel internal skeleton, the expando-hab will grant you substantially more pressurized habitat volume per ton of material used. It is also more durable (note I say durable in terms of it's ability to soak up micrometeor hits and radiation). Expando-habs so far are also massively less expensive compared to the current aluminum/steel can habs used by previous stations and the ISS, and while you can skylab it up by refurbishing a hollow steel shell with the necessary equipment for life support, I don't think that will be very safe or sustainable in the long term, permanent habitats should be purpose built for their functions.

[Anonymous No.11402428]

>>11402134
>gains might be slower
it changes the quality of your rest, but I don't know if it's good or bad

[Anonymous No.11402429]

>>11402411
Not skylabbening Starships would be a massive missed opportunity until we have truly massive dedicated structures in orbit. Dwarfing the ISS in a single launch of an end-of-life Starship for unimaginably cheap is too juicy.

[Anonymous No.11402430]

>>11402393
haha the peasants are confused

[Anonymous No.11402434]

>>11402036
>Cool if you want to exploded starship assholes leaking their methane insides all over

Starship is designed to handle multiple g fully loaded with payload and fuel. And also to hang on a crane from the top apparently. It is strong enough for artificial gravity for sure.

[Anonymous No.11402440]

>>11402276
but anon, they've got to preserve the delicate microgravity environment of the space station
can't be having people actually do shit up there, that might shake the accelerometer and then we'd know that it wasn't microgravity anymore

[Anonymous No.11402441]

>>11402411
Mass is about to become cheap to launch into orbit, and I don't care what anyone says, a literal steel can welded together on an assembly line and outfitted with simple insulation and a life support crate module tossed in to maintain air quality will be cheaper than any inflatable design. Current habitat module prices aren't a good metric because they've all been designed and built as one-off projects, similar to custom deep space probes. Not a good way to do space habitats.

[Anonymous No.11402443]

>>11402434
>Starship is designed to handle...
Yeah, Starship. Not its ass-to-ass connectors. Also, your gravity is going in the wrong direction. Both of those add up to beefing up the vehicle in weird ways that would probably add far too much mass to ever be worth it.

[Anonymous No.11402445]

>>11402099
>Also would like to hear a good reason to put a colony on Mars' moons. It's easier to land on Mars itself due to the atmosphere and you have better resource opportunities.

If Martian 0.38g is too low for kids to grow up in, then colonization of Martian surface may be impossible. Orbital colonies, near moons for easy access to resources, will then be the next best option.

[Anonymous No.11402449]

>>11402408
>BE-4 doesn’t actually run on pure methane like Raptor does, it runs on Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) which is a mix of methane and ethane.

Nope.

https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/1174788727870083072

>Actually, BE4 runs on methane. We sometimes use LNG as a shorthand. But, as you point out, that’s not strictly accurate.

[Anonymous No.11402450]

>>11402445
Building bowl colonies or gravity trains using on situ resources will be far easier than space colonies.

[Anonymous No.11402453]

>>11402293
there's still health effects from microgravity, shit just ain't good for you
but when you come home your bones aren't going to break so that's nice
>>11402393
pic related
>>11402408
wrong, it's high purity natural gas, which is almost entirely just methane, same stuff that Raptor uses
calling it Natural Gas is a marketing thing because normalfags don't know what methane is because they didn't pay attention in high school science class

[Anonymous No.11402460]

>>11402443
use a tether like this, not much additional mass needed, downside is issues with dynamical stability and course corrections

[Anonymous No.11402468]

>>11402429
But why would you skylab a cargo Starship? There is already going to be a crew Starship with what was it, a 50 crewman to Mars capacity and a 100 crew maximum capacity or something along those lines? And if you want to maximize habitable volume, why use a Starship when an expando-hab that fits inside a CargoShip will expand to be significantly larger than the internal volume of the ship itself?

[Anonymous No.11402470]

>>11402450
I doubt it. Maybe if we were on Earth. Colonizing Mars with its requirement for cosmic ray shielding and pressurized habitats is effectively almost as difficult as a space colony already, without huge complications from making it moving in an enviroment with friction. If Mars gravity is too low, then orbital colonies are the only viable alternative.

[Anonymous No.11402473]

>>11402460
I don't believe there are any dynamic stability problems with this, as long as you've properly articulated your hookups

[Anonymous No.11402480]

>>11402468
>But why would you skylab a cargo Starship?
> And if you want to maximize habitable volume, why use a Starship
My answer to both is: why wouldn't you? It doesn't really matter that there are theoretically more optimal things that you could put in orbit, because those things are more expensive, take longer to build, have better things to do (crewed starships), etc. Cargo and tanker SS will inevitably hit end of life and have to do something. Putting them in orbit and utilizing that enormous capacity will get a lot more value out of them than scrapping them for their engines and steel.

[Anonymous No.11402487]

>>11402449
IIRC, the BE-4 can run on both LNG and methane, but the Raptor can only run on methane due to SpaceX wanting to super-chill their propellants.

[Anonymous No.11402488]

>>11402441
It will be cheaper but it will also be substantially more hazardous in ways which it doesn't need to be. In addition expandohabs are already projected to be enormously cheaper than current custom aluminum can habs, the price gap between a steel can hab and an expando hab will be very small compared to the price gap between both of them and a current specialist custom hab for the ISS or any other contemporary space station. Certainly there will be steel and aluminum can habs cheaply produced for rapid deployment, but I doubt they will be the norm.

[Anonymous No.11402490]

>>11402487
no

[Anonymous No.11402494]

Here is an idea: how about utilizing Starship main tanks as additional space during long flight to Mars? They will be empty anyway, with fuel only in header tanks. So vent them and then make a hatch on the wall. You could more than double the habitable volume for just a very minor increase in mass.

[Anonymous No.11402496]

>>11402494
I think those tanks are needed for the return flight.

[Anonymous No.11402499]

>>11402488
Inflatable designs only make sense when you have strict limits on payload mass and volume. In a post-Starship world, they are a dead end.

The future of orbital habitats is mass manufactured tin cans, and then orbital construction later on.

[Anonymous No.11402501]

>>11402499
Starships DO actually have a limit on payload mass Anon, it's 100 tons.

[Anonymous No.11402502]

>>11402496
just clean them during refurbishing

[Anonymous No.11402509]

>>11402502
Fair enough.
>tfw you drew the short straw and have to live in the "brap chamber" for the trip to Mars

[Anonymous No.11402516]

>>11402502
It's not about cleaning, it's about cutting a human sized hole into a flask meant to hold liquid volatiles at extremely high pressures. The tank may no longer function to hold propellant if you put a hatch into it. That ship would probably be unsafe for any further flights as the hatch would create a huge point for potential failure during tank pressurization.

[Anonymous No.11402519]

>>11402516
it's fine if the ship isn't returning from Mars

[Anonymous No.11402529]

>>11402519
why not just cut out the hole when you get there to make it a slightly bigger hab

[Anonymous No.11402534]

>>11402529
oh yeah, a hatch is retarded. If it's a one-way trip, cutting a hole would be the best way and could make it a lot more comfortable.

[Anonymous No.11402541]

>>11402534
imagine all the micro gravity sports you could play in that thing

[Anonymous No.11402542]

>>11402534
A soft material hatch that zips open would probably be a good middle ground, you'd also want to weld or seal the valves leading from the tank to the combustion chambers shut too, since those would also represent potential points of depressurization.

[Anonymous No.11402543]

>>11402516
<10 bar is "extremely high pressure? I dont think so. Human sized access hatches on LNG tanks are common in the industry.

[Anonymous No.11402549]

>>11402541
>playing micro-g soccer
>injury fakers are threatened with being spaced for their drama
Imagine

[Anonymous No.11402552]

>>11402534
just gotta make sure you don't create any sparks :)

[Anonymous No.11402554]

>>11402541
here's the real question: how many decades after the first launch of Starship will it take before I can watch microgravity sports on tv?

[Anonymous No.11402558]

>>11402534
m8 that is still retarded. That would be like cutting up your houses septic tank and then sleeping in it

[Anonymous No.11402565]

>>11402552
Well if you open the tank to vacuum first any trace of liquid should boil off and be vented from the tank, I don't know if superchilled liquid methane leaves any residues but you might also need to clean/burn those off before the tank is livable, but it certainly wouldn't be much of a challenge if you're sure the ship is never going to fly again.

[Anonymous No.11402567]

>>11402558
It is not retarded at all. Pressurized space will be hard to get and very precious on Mars. Fuel tanks are not spetic tanks. They will almost certainly be used for more habitat space if the ship stays on Mars.

[Anonymous No.11402575]

>>11402549
blitzball at the olympics when

[Anonymous No.11402577]

>>11402565
it would not leave any residue
I don't think having 1% methane in your breathing atmosphere will cause any issues, but you never know longterm

[Anonymous No.11402580]

>>11402554
Pretty much as soon as somebody thinks to pack a soccer ball. Use your hands to rebound from the bulkheads, feet only for maneuvering the ball. No headbutting/spears, no kicking, etc. Goals are set up on opposite ends of the compartment and the goalie anchors themselves in place either with a tether or with their fingers and toes.

[Anonymous No.11402589]

[Anonymous No.11402593]

>>11402589
they're missing the all-important heatshield
also Super Heavy

[Anonymous No.11402598]

>>11402567
Yes, but instead of feces residue you'll have rocket fuel residue. Both of which are extremely toxic. Your plan sounds ok in theory but would be retarded in practice.

[Anonymous No.11402602]

>>11402589
3/10, not enough dents.

[Anonymous No.11402606]

>>11402598
neither methane nor oxygen are toxic, and they do not leave residue

[Anonymous No.11402609]

>>11402494
There could be a small valve, called the Brap Valve, that you could use to brap into, refilling the methane as the ship went on its journey

[Anonymous No.11402616]

>>11402606
Maybe he's thinking of the Chinese Starship which will be propelled by UDMH and dinitrogen tetroxide.

[Anonymous No.11402618]

up to date Starship assembly diagram

[Anonymous No.11402628]

>>11402445
If you really have to do that, I'd suggest doing so in orbit around Earth first. Then you could add rockets and transport the station to wherever you wish.

[Anonymous No.11402629]

>>11402618
It almost looks like one of those donation trackers.

[Anonymous No.11402630]

Can someone explain wtf header tanks are for, and if the other tanks boil off why not just make the header tank as big as the normal tank. Then you don’t need two separate tanks.

[Anonymous No.11402631]

>>11402598
>rocket fuel residue
the oxygen tank residue is literally a head start on your breathing air, and the methane tank residue is harmless
it shouldn't be dangerous as long as you start mixing with nitrogen first

[Anonymous No.11402635]

>>11402630
header tanks are so you don't suck a bubble into your rocket engine when you're trying to do this stupid shit

[Anonymous No.11402638]

>>11402630
it is to prevent fuel sloshing and Raptor engine ingesting a bubble

[Anonymous No.11402647]

>>11402635
Jesus Christ I can't stand having to wait to watch this wild shit happen in real life.

[Anonymous No.11402652]

>>11402628
Do it in equatorial LEO first, radiation environment is so benign that you save many tons per square meter of shielding mass. Then cislunar space and retrograde orbits around Martian moons.

[Anonymous No.11402653]

>>11402635
That would be both amazing and terrifying to watch in real life. Can't wait.

[Anonymous No.11402655]

>>11402647
>some spacex control algos guy
>writing code that transitions Starship from bellyflop to landing
>slap a comment in there
HOLD MY BEER

[Anonymous No.11402659]

>>11402652
what are some good values for background radiation in different areas?
Denver, some random east coast sea level town, the basement in an area with high quality natural uranium deposits

[Anonymous No.11402661]

>>11402629
The Turkey Baster of Thanks.

[Anonymous No.11402665]

>>11402655
I can definitely see SpaceX coders putting in little jokes in the comments of their codes. Like "%This is when shit gets real" right before a huge block of dynamics calculations.

[Anonymous No.11402668]

>>11402487
It makes some sense; if they super-chilled, the other fractions might ice out of the methane and cause clogs.
>>11402501
...and volume too; even if it expands much bigger than SS, it still has to fit into the cargo volume with the nosecone as the fairing.
>>11402580
Goalie sticks his toes into the net, with his feet along the net frame.
>>11402631
Methane "residue" isn't so harmless if you're going to be welding or using a cutting torch in there. And you do need oxygen in addition to the nitrogen if you don't want to go sleepy-time.

[Anonymous No.11402671]

>>11402668
at 1% methane? nobody's going to notice
there won't even be a smell, rocket methane doesn't have any of the additives that give consumer natural gas the distinctive smell
I've welded in way nastier environments than that

[Anonymous No.11402674]

>>11402618
Is the outer shell supposed to be a pressure container? It doesn't look like so

[Anonymous No.11402677]

>>11402659
Earth surface is 3 mSv/year average. Some places where people live long term have ~ tens of mSv, with no apparent bad effects. Some places where people do not live but visit (beaches) have 100 mSv.

ISS is 150 - 300 mSv. Mars surface is roughly the same as ISS. Deep space is 300-600 mSv.

[Anonymous No.11402686]

>>11402674
idk. are the tank walls part of the airframe or will a larger structure be built around these?

[Anonymous No.11402688]

>>11402671
Have you done that in outer space where one tiny fuck up will literally kill everyone on board instantaneously?

[Anonymous No.11402694]

>>11402635
>those angles
I doubt it'll be that extreme. All past rockets that went that extreme with the angles on landing crashed.

[Anonymous No.11402695]

>>11402688
yes, I've done it in a confined space
trace methane is not going to kill you, as long as you dilute it with nitrogen and mix it good before introducing any oxygen

[Anonymous No.11402698]

>>11402686
>>11402674
there will be only one layer of stainless steel

[Anonymous No.11402699]

>>11402694
Starship starts at 90 off of vertical doing a bellyflop, anon

[Anonymous No.11402702]

>>11402699
Yeah, but in orbit or 200 feet off the ground?

[Anonymous No.11402703]

>>11402688
>in outer space where one tiny fuck up will literally kill everyone on board instantaneously
Only because pretty much every spacecraft today and in the past had to respect tight mass budgets. If extra mass if available for beefier structures and triple redundancies, then tiny fuck ups would just be inconveniences.

[Anonymous No.11402704]

>>11402702
200 feet off the ground
that's the fucking plan

[Anonymous No.11402709]

>>11402704
This is going to go well.

[Anonymous No.11402714]

>>11402709
now do you understand why we're so excited for these 20km and 100km suborbital test flights

[Anonymous No.11402715]

The normal taco truck has be supplemented

[Anonymous No.11402724]

>>11402715
awwww damn gonna be eatin HOG tonight

[Anonymous No.11402731]

>>11402715
mo rocket, mo meat

[Anonymous No.11402732]

>>11402715
Fuck yeah, I can already taste that shit from 200 miles away.

[Anonymous No.11402743]

>>11402732
>ywn live in texas, weld starships together for a living and eat this for lunch daily

[Anonymous No.11402744]

>>11402714
It just doesn't make any sense when viewing >>11402635 like the perspective is WAY off. Like a large icon representation of a 100k distance.

[Anonymous No.11402748]

>>11402715
>SpaceX switches to Texan food from Mexican
>SpaceX methane production drops

[Anonymous No.11402749]

>>11402744
terminal flight and landing of Starship is going to be fucking wild

[Anonymous No.11402753]

will starship have its own
WHOOP WHOOP PULL UP
TERRAIN TERRAIN
etc
sound effects?

[Anonymous No.11402756]

>>11402753
I feel like this is a reference that I'm not getting.

[Anonymous No.11402759]

>>11402756
Typical trope from various movies.

[Anonymous No.11402760]

>>11402756
/tv/'s favorite TV show

[Anonymous No.11402764]

>>11402753
bellyflop to ass landing transition and raining blood starts playing automatically.

[Anonymous No.11402765]

>>11402756
I doubt Starship will have a Bitchin Betty system as it will be entirely autonomously controlled. That is only installed on airliners because they've got significant periods of manual control.

[Anonymous No.11402770]

>>11402748
>pinto beans become a strategic national security asset
>cattle have to be rigged with methane recovery systems

[Anonymous No.11402773]

>>11402770
>cattle have to be rigged with methane recovery systems
Garden hoses up their butts don't count.

[Anonymous No.11402777]

>>11402756
>anime poster
>retarded
The jokes write themselves

[Anonymous No.11402808]

>>11402743
>ywn build irl sentries on mars
Ffs

[Anonymous No.11402814]

>>11402808
>ywn fend off the Martian Revenue Service from them trying to tax your bee farm
I feel like I was born too early.

[Anonymous No.11402821]

>>11402814

[Anonymous No.11402823]

>>11402777
/tv/ is for niggers. Also Anime site.

[Anonymous No.11402835]

[Anonymous No.11402853]

>>11402743
At least you have a funny accent though

[Anonymous No.11402866]

new >>11402863

[Anonymous No.11402932]

>>11402866
>only on page 6
faggot

[Anonymous No.11402960]

>>11402032
oh no

[Anonymous No.11403125]

>>11402756
Modern planes have vocal warning alarms, often in a pretty strident tone of voice, it is known that a pilot may be more likely to pay attention to their alarm if it sounds like another human voice berating them. In addition, there are a multitude of different electronic sounds a plane can produce when something is wrong, in the heat of the moment a pilot may forget what each one means and what they have to do, a human voice snapping out a simple command or warning in just a few words is effective in reminding them what to do. One of the other Anon's mentions bitchin' Betty, a nickname for the AWS in FA-18s, because it sounds like your plane is snapping at you like a fed up mom. It's relevant to Starship because Starship is pulling a maneuver which would make the EGPWS in a normal aircraft go fucking ballistic.

[Anonymous No.11403139]

>>11402753
A recording of ol' Muskey narrating the flight progression in trans-atlantic accent

>>11402932
SINK RATE WOOP WOOP