🧵 /sfg/ - Spaceflight General
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 04:07:52 UTC No. 15880707
Life Goes On Edition
Previous - >>15878082
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 04:09:29 UTC No. 15880710
why did some tiles fall off but most stayed on?
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 04:09:41 UTC No. 15880711
hows megabay 2 doing?
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 04:12:01 UTC No. 15880715
>>15880711
They've put in elevator shafts and it looks like they were placing concrete on the ground floor today.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 04:13:18 UTC No. 15880719
>>15880717
fail this is 4th post
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 04:14:40 UTC No. 15880722
anyone got the most up to date ringwatchers charts?
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 04:18:38 UTC No. 15880724
>>15880722
just go in to their 'cord and get it yourself.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 04:19:51 UTC No. 15880725
>>15880724
no. spoonfeed me
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 04:21:09 UTC No. 15880727
>>15880725
kill yourself!
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 04:22:49 UTC No. 15880728
>>15880727
no. kill me yourself
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 04:24:30 UTC No. 15880731
>>15880710
wetbacks
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 04:24:34 UTC No. 15880732
>>15880728
fucking lazy bastard. do you expect me to pay for your mars ticket too??
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 04:26:01 UTC No. 15880737
>>15880730
Imagine how much felongated huskrat seethed when the Progressive and Socialist Koreans beat his shiny dick compensator into outer space. Biden should nationalize T*sla immediately!
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 04:51:03 UTC No. 15880762
>>15880751
wait a sec...
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 04:51:50 UTC No. 15880764
>>15880717
Dolce Gabbana Salvatore, this dude is more interested in tailored suits.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 04:56:27 UTC No. 15880771
>what happened to the game show that was supposed to send someone to the iss on dragon?
>what happened to tom cruise going to the iss?
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 04:58:04 UTC No. 15880774
>>15880771
gosh I am sleepy tonight. headed to bed!
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 04:59:50 UTC No. 15880777
>>15880771
>what happened to tom cruise going to the iss?
Chink flu happened. I will never forgive the Chinese for this.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 05:03:10 UTC No. 15880781
>>15880777
Shitty bugmen need ASAT correction.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 05:25:13 UTC No. 15880825
>>15875709
>>15875736
so like dude, if the internal slushing is like totally not cool with negative g-s why not like build internal bulkheads in teh tanks with one way valves. They like know how much fuel is left in the tanks before separation so the walls can be placed so the fuel flows through the valves with positive g-s but stops it from crashing forward when the booster starts doing acrobatics.
Pic related is my tech drawings. OC, do not steal
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 05:30:16 UTC No. 15880840
>>15880717
You mean Tory Bruno the soon-to-be casualty of the BO buyout?
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 05:48:41 UTC No. 15880867
>>15880717
BASED TONY
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 05:50:59 UTC No. 15880869
>>15880762
The fact that this nigger still doesnt know what that is is probably the most embarrassing thing
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 05:52:43 UTC No. 15880872
>>15880825
They should put a cowboy boot in the tank that steps on a trash can lid and pushes the gas towards the engines!
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 06:10:50 UTC No. 15880892
>>15880825
Thanks for your design input
-X
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 06:15:08 UTC No. 15880902
>no on board views
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 06:18:09 UTC No. 15880908
>>15880771
Tom will jump out of a decorating iss.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 06:26:11 UTC No. 15880921
This photo was posted in the previous thread, Lex Fridman visiting the BO factory with Bozo. Everyone seemed to overlook the fact that they're standing right in front of a section from their Starship lookalike, Project Jarvis. You can see one of the fins, turned at an angle.
Do my eyes deceive me or is the interior frame of Jarvis built entirely out of isowaffles? I thought Jarvis was their attempt to be lean and innovative (and more important, cheap), like Starship? This just looks like expensive oldspace manufacturing processes wearing a Starship skin suit.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 06:27:18 UTC No. 15880924
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 07:00:59 UTC No. 15880952
>>15880924
Isogrid hell. Lmao rip Body Odour.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 07:04:35 UTC No. 15880953
>>15880719
very fitting for ULA CEO
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 07:07:46 UTC No. 15880958
>>15880921
>isowaffles
This word doesn't exist.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 07:08:54 UTC No. 15880960
>>15880958
now it does
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 07:09:48 UTC No. 15880961
>>15880707
Do you think if spacex goes bankrupt another company will be able to buy their IP and salvage what they've created
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 07:17:29 UTC No. 15880973
>>15880961
SpaceX isn't the IP, it's the people. The IP would definitely help avoid the need to start over though.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 07:27:04 UTC No. 15880981
>>15880840
Watch he gets put in charge of the merged companies. Likely better than anyone else at this point.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 07:31:59 UTC No. 15880985
>>15880921
>Do my eyes deceive me or is the interior frame of Jarvis built entirely out of isowaffles? I thought Jarvis was their attempt to be lean and innovative (and more important, cheap), like Starship? This just looks like expensive oldspace manufacturing processes wearing a Starship skin suit.
It makes sense if they are not planning on losing a lot of upper stages so they can have a lot of mass margin. In reality, they're gonna lose a lot of upper stages but Bezos has nothing better to lose money on.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 07:32:35 UTC No. 15880986
>>15880921
youre just making shit up lmao
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 07:34:22 UTC No. 15880989
>>15880981
Right after Bezo's favorite got moved over from the flaming pile that's Amazon devices?
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 07:36:52 UTC No. 15880992
>>15880825
Aren't the downcomers self-contained and supply fuel for boostback/landing? There's no slosh when they are still full
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 07:37:12 UTC No. 15880993
>>15880149
I like that this implies that they did nothing to prevent it from getting evaporated by the Super Heavy launching and were just hoping for the best.
>>15880348
This is actually an interesting thought. BN9 performed pretty much the same way a regular first stage would if it wasn't made by SpaceX. It can already do its main objective, they just need to refine the reuse part.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 07:38:09 UTC No. 15880995
>>15880921
I don't want to believe that those are isomemes because of how catastrophically retarded that would be, so I am electing to believe that they aren't.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 08:27:20 UTC No. 15881027
Raptor 4 or Raptor 5 will make ITS possible
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 08:29:58 UTC No. 15881028
>>15880921
Unless I'm missing something, that looks more likely to be orbital reef mockup/pathfinder stuff
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 08:34:25 UTC No. 15881033
>>15880825
good drawing 10/10 not enough Cirno and/or rabbits
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 08:44:57 UTC No. 15881043
how will starship 3 explode?
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 08:45:41 UTC No. 15881044
>>15881043
lithobraking into the FAA
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 08:50:34 UTC No. 15881047
>>15881044
God I hope, would be so zased
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 09:00:20 UTC No. 15881054
>>15881043
Raptors on S28 shut down prematurely so it collides with Booster.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 09:11:10 UTC No. 15881060
>>15881059
Gonna post your scat again or you gonna wait for janny to ban you?
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 09:13:18 UTC No. 15881062
>>15880992
Not entirely. The only propellant tank with a header is the LOX tank. There's still only one fuel tank, whose line runs through the center of the LOX header. Any event that upset the structural integrity of the propellant feed lines would rapidly turn explosive.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 09:18:15 UTC No. 15881064
>>15880710
Because someone probably bent the steel pegs it fixes to. This sort of thing has cropped up before, and it has always been due to human error.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 09:19:16 UTC No. 15881065
>>15881059
Reality is whatever makes you feel special! We are all the center of the universe ^_^
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 09:19:25 UTC No. 15881066
>>15881059
>new pic after the mental breakdown
good on you anon, bouncing back like that.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 09:24:52 UTC No. 15881071
>>15881059
The firmament was made up by jews
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 09:59:50 UTC No. 15881103
>>15880958
Too late, I like it. Congrats on coining a new term anonymous.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 10:11:58 UTC No. 15881114
>>15880869
so what is it then?
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 10:33:21 UTC No. 15881125
>>15881114
Best guess anyone has right now is a new version of the booster transport stand.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 10:35:44 UTC No. 15881129
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 10:39:05 UTC No. 15881131
>>15880992
It's kind of wild how much bigger Raptor was targeted for in 2016. The nozzles are huge, and they were aiming for 3 MN (305.9 metric tons force) per engine. Raptor 2 is 2.256 Meganewtons, and they're looking at scaling that up to 2.452.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 11:09:34 UTC No. 15881159
why did starship tumble out of control? anyone know yet?
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 11:26:23 UTC No. 15881173
>>15881159
It didn't tumble though? It just failed to reach the speed for its trajectory and exploded(maybe terminated).
We know it produced a trail of something and that oxygen depleted unusually fast after the trails appeared. So it was likely some sort of oxygen leak or engine failure leading to the under performance.
The booster just flew a bad trajectory and the fuel sloshed in the tanks, leading to engines not starting, then engines going out, then engines violently exploding, cracking the main fuel pipe and detonating the entire booster.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 11:35:18 UTC No. 15881181
>>15880921
Oh shit, big if true. We will see whos fully reusable launcher has cheaper turnaround. I guess it doesnt matter too much because starship has a company payload as 90% of its upmass anyway
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 11:53:35 UTC No. 15881195
>>15880710
Because they didn't properly attach the rings of tiles between sections.
They build them onto the sections as in >>15880448, then they did a shit job of filling in the gaps.
It still doesn't even matter yet, having a few tiles that fall off will let them know how important the tiles really are during re-entry, instead of the midwits who breathlessly think that even one missing tile will cause the whole thing to suddenly explode in fiery death, because Shittle was that bad. Starship is not Shittle.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 11:53:43 UTC No. 15881196
>>15881159
the dirty secret is it was being controlled from the ground rather than internally and since they lost telemetry unexpectedly it stopped guidance. Then FTS auto exploded due to the deviated pitch.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 11:54:59 UTC No. 15881197
>>15881195
starship is still made out of metal. if steel could survive reentry on its own then they wouldnt need a heat shield.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 11:56:04 UTC No. 15881198
>>15880825
>meth
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 12:00:25 UTC No. 15881204
>>15880993
>to prevent it from getting evaporated
It's a cat, anon. How much experience do you have in herding cats?
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 12:03:32 UTC No. 15881206
>>15881204
It's easy if you have one and know where it is. You can just pick it up. But I suppose delaying a launch to look for a cat in an open air construction site would be unreasonable.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 12:05:36 UTC No. 15881209
>>15881064
HAL9000 Detected
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 12:07:05 UTC No. 15881210
>>15881198
Gotta make the best use of your time in space and on mars.
You can sleep on the return trip.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 12:09:56 UTC No. 15881213
>>15881197
yes, but if you have just a few holes then the heatload is much smaller overall on the ship and the steel conducts heat, so the spot that is uncovered does not necessarily melt away
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 12:10:07 UTC No. 15881214
>>15881197
Anon, not everything goes directly from happy okayness to fiery death. Only the oldspace-grade aluminum mass autism.
Even one missing tile in Shittle is likely to burn a hole quickly. In steel it might cause a problem that prevents a quick turnaround, but it would still land.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 12:22:19 UTC No. 15881230
>>15881228
what're they made of? looks like styrofoam lel
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 12:22:28 UTC No. 15881231
>>15881214
>>15881213
we will have to see if this is true on ift3 whenever that happens. If it survives reentry then holefags will be vindicated, if it doesnt then burnthroughCHADS win again.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 12:32:07 UTC No. 15881242
>>15881228
>a missing tile or two
>might melt through
Star ship doesn't use up all of its propellant as it's meant to be reusable so on re-entry it has some fuel left for its flip manoeuvre.
What do you think will happen when super-hot re-entry plasma meets super cooled oxygen and methane anon.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 12:34:35 UTC No. 15881244
>>15881242
the kind of cope from these people is unbeleivable. dont even bother reading his reply, you know it will be cope.
>first they make fun of shuttle for having a tiled heatshield and losing tiles
>then they say starship will have a tiled heatshield but its ok because starship wont lose any tiles unlike shittle
>then they say "uhmm.. ackshually, losing tiles is alright"
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 12:37:51 UTC No. 15881247
>>15881244
>make shit up
>pretend you're right
lol lmao
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 12:40:21 UTC No. 15881249
>>15881244
the re-entry profile and thus heating profile for the shuttle vs starship is going to be different, shuttle used aluminium vs starship using steel
there are significant differences and assuming they are going to behave identically is very lazy
besides, didn't the shuttle land with some tile damage anyway? so by that logic starship should be able to land with some tiles missing as well
the question is, how many tiles can they lose and where and what configuration
losing like 50 tiles on one spot is probably fatal, but is 10? is 1? what if you lose a tile on the leading edge of a canard? what if a tile is slightly damaged?
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 12:42:03 UTC No. 15881252
>>15881249
didn't the shuttle survive because there was some convenient steel or copper in the way of the damaged tile?
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 12:47:18 UTC No. 15881261
>>15881247
>make shit up
I'm enough of an oldfag to remember Mars Colonial Transporter and Interplanetary Transport system where it was going to use PICA ablator. Then it switched to active cooling by bleeding methane out the underside. The entire time people were making fun of heat tiles. dont pretend it didnt happen.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 12:48:53 UTC No. 15881265
>>15881249
Shuttle survived one time with a tile missing miraculously, then the other time a tile was missing it lead to loss of vehicle. Shuttle has only lost an entire tile twice. All the other instances were dents and scrapes but not full tile shedding like what we saw over 80- times on starship.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 12:49:28 UTC No. 15881266
>>15881230
literally just magic fibers
https://twitter.com/mcrs987/status/
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 12:51:07 UTC No. 15881268
>>15881265
yes, so it depends on the circumstances like I said
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 12:52:09 UTC No. 15881269
>>15881261
it didn't happen, people were saying bleeding is crazy
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 12:52:47 UTC No. 15881271
>>15881269
youre drunk.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 12:55:08 UTC No. 15881273
>>15881268
like I said, it was miraculous. The area where the tile went missing had steel behind it, but much thicker steel than what starships exterior walls are made of. Remember there is fuel on the other side of those exterior walls on Starship. And Starship will get far hotter than shuttle on entry because it generates less lift and has a lower surface area to mass. Not even acounting for the socrching ehat it will face on interplanetary missions.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 12:59:17 UTC No. 15881279
>>15881273
They'll fix the tiles, they're just seeing how much they can get away with in terms of attaching them (these will ideally be easily replaceable).
It'll turn out just like the 'no flame diverter' thing.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 13:07:02 UTC No. 15881287
>>15881279
speaking of flame diverter, i think they will find acoustic damage to the booster once they recover it and will ultimately build a more substantial launch pad. You can visibly see shockwaves coming from under the vehicle when it lifts off. that aint good for any of the parts, and its probably a reason why the tiles came off. hell, it may even have caused enough damage to be responsible for both RUDs
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 13:10:19 UTC No. 15881289
>>15881287
I'm pretty certain it was the spikes in acceleration that wrecked the plumbing.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 13:12:30 UTC No. 15881292
>>15881289
And Starship?
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 13:21:15 UTC No. 15881304
>>15881279
Literally, perfect tiles don't matter until they start trying to recover Starship.
Having a few missing tiles before then will actually give them data about just how bad a missing tile really is, instead of TILE BREAK GRUG DIE.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 13:21:16 UTC No. 15881305
>>15881292
raptor unreliability, see: https://twitter.com/space_josiah/st
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 13:29:17 UTC No. 15881313
>>15881266
There's no reason we can't make this but flexible. Imagine something like a thinner bulletproof vest material you wrap around odd shapes like tubes.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 13:49:03 UTC No. 15881341
>>15881273
>Remember there is fuel on the other side of those exterior walls on Starship
cryogenic fuel, good heat sink no?
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 13:51:05 UTC No. 15881344
>>15881305
>raptor unreliability
>no change in fuel consumption rate at all, indicating no engines shut down
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 13:59:01 UTC No. 15881350
>>15881341
what happens when you heat up a pressure vessel with something cold inside?
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 14:00:10 UTC No. 15881353
>>15881305
this indicates nothing. Based off this chart FTS just blew up randomly. Starship was not traveling as fast as they would have liked but thats about the only anomaly
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 14:07:42 UTC No. 15881361
>>15881271
source on people laughing at tiles? If it happened, it wasn't widespread
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 14:08:43 UTC No. 15881364
>>15881352
sit in the cuckbox
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 14:10:48 UTC No. 15881367
>>15881352
how is it supposed to land?
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 14:15:12 UTC No. 15881370
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 14:25:47 UTC No. 15881382
>>15881266
Looks fun to breathe in.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 14:27:17 UTC No. 15881384
>>15881313
you make it then if its so easy. oh wait..
Stop BULLSHITTING. you Retard.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 14:40:17 UTC No. 15881401
>>15881361
Not him. It was absolutely widespread.
The way I remember it, we went from: "Polished steel needs no shielding and just reflects heat. SpaceX is literally genius. Shuttle was a joke"
to "ok some critical components might need heat shielding, we'll use fuel sweating for it; genius as it's already on board, fuck the shittle."
to "ok, we'll sweat all over and maybe add some tiles around the flaps and critical parts…"
to "we'll tile the whole belly and flaps and a bit above around the flaps, but the tiles will be much stronger and mechanically attached and without special formfactors and there won't be foam strikes so it's still so much better than the shuttle."
Now we are here where they have a heat shield, sweating doesn't happen, the tiles are crumbling and falling off and there's special shaped tiles all between the sections and around the flaps. And people are claiming it was always obvious.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 14:46:20 UTC No. 15881413
>>15881228
Well if you don't have any tiles on the bottom it will burn up. If you have a lot of tiles on the bottom the vehicle won't burn up. Where the tiles are and what effect they have is really kind of an unknown thing. You could lose a tile, a single tile in a certain area, and I don't think it will do anything to you, my personal opinion is. I've heard people say there's going to be a zipper effect. Well, there really isn't a zipper effect. Each one of those tiles is put on individually and they're designed four to five times the strength they need to be for the dynamic pressure they're going to see. I'm talking about going into orbit. I have to say this one more time. The tiles are designed four to five times the strength they need to be for the dynamic pressure. The maximum dynamic pressure we could see on the first flight is going into orbit is 660 pounds per square foot. The tiles fail at 20-22 pounds per square inch. If you multiply that by 144, you see a 2000-3000-pound capability to handle dynamic pressure, and there's a lot of other analysis that's gone into it, like bending and acoustic noise and vibration, that says that you still have a 1.4 safety factor on those tiles that we can still fly, and that's great. I personally believe those are very conservative analyses, we won't see anything like that kind of dynamic pressure, and I think we've got two to three times the strength we need in those tiles. That's just from an engineering standpoint.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 15:02:13 UTC No. 15881436
>>15880921
I mean, If they're doing it too, I'm all for it.
I think it will be hard for Bezos to get ahead of SpaceX, but more re-usable rockets is better.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 15:10:16 UTC No. 15881445
>>15881409
People say this about anything new.
Look what people were saying about the F35 lightning 10 years ago and now you have people salivating when they see it’s belly.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 15:13:03 UTC No. 15881450
>>15880792
They're using Thinkpads on the Tiangong station?
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 15:14:49 UTC No. 15881452
>>15881449
>chooses the least aesthetic Saturn ever
not an argument
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 15:18:13 UTC No. 15881458
>>15881445
your dad is an f35 lightning on my cock.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 15:18:31 UTC No. 15881459
>>15881304
This.
They can barely get Starship into space yet, tiles are not gonna be the focus at least until IFT-4 or 5.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 15:18:57 UTC No. 15881460
>>15881452
quit yapping anti starship trol, just kys already
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 15:19:14 UTC No. 15881461
>>15881413
pussy.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 15:20:31 UTC No. 15881462
>>15881304
your dad being perfect on my cock bouncing up and down doesnt matter until I ask him out for dinner.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 15:21:12 UTC No. 15881464
>>15880792
>>15881450
Man I'm a retard, I totally forgot Lenovo are a chinese company...
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 15:31:39 UTC No. 15881473
>David Grusch on Roe Jogan
>claims Locksneed has material from ayy crashes
>they still can't fully reverse engineer it
why is oldspace so bad?
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 15:33:01 UTC No. 15881477
>>15880958
>he can't infer meaning of novel compound words
ESL moment
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 15:42:00 UTC No. 15881482
>>15881452
No, the Skylab Saturn V was actually the prettiest.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 15:55:25 UTC No. 15881503
>>15881482
I second this
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 15:56:34 UTC No. 15881506
>>15880707
what are those?
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 15:57:07 UTC No. 15881507
>>15881482
David Grusch on Joe Rogan said Saturn V with Skylab is hideous
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 15:58:21 UTC No. 15881511
>>15881452
Bad take
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 15:58:43 UTC No. 15881514
>>15881506
starlink receivers I think
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 16:01:18 UTC No. 15881516
>>15881482
I turd this
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 16:08:52 UTC No. 15881526
I can't wait.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vbq
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 16:13:14 UTC No. 15881530
Rocket Report: Beyond Gravity to study fairing reuse; North Korea launches satellite
--
https://arstechnica.com/space/2023/
Small Rockets
> North Korea launches spy satellite.
> Firefly raises significant funding.
> Rocket Lab targets November return to flight.
> Ursa Major to target solid rocket motor market
> SaxaVord owes contractors money.
> Spanish startup makes progress on methalox engine.
Medium Rockets
> Ariane 6 hot fire test to be broadcast Thursday.
> Beyond Gravity joins the reusable rocket party.
> Japan sets target for next H3 attempt
> White House concerns on Musk won't halt SpaceX contracts.
Heavy Rockets
> Starship takes flight for the second time.
> Actually, Starship had a remarkably successful flight.
> Vulcan has a clear path to flight.
> New Glenn first flight will carry a Mars mission.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 16:24:41 UTC No. 15881549
Vulcain 2.1 test firing in about 3h 50min
> Coverage will start 20 minutes before engine ignition at 21:10 CET (20:10 GMT, 17:10 local time in Kourou, French Guiana) and continue five minutes after core stage operation, once the engine burns through all its propellant.
https://www.esa.int/Enabling_Suppor
https://www.esa.int/ESA_Multimedia/
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 16:28:55 UTC No. 15881556
Beyond Gravity Unveils Reusable Fairing Concept
-
https://europeanspaceflight.com/bey
> Zurich-based Beyond Gravity has announced a reusable fairing concept that would be recovered along with the first stage of a rocket.
From the Berger Rocket Report
> Beyond Gravity joins the reusable rocket party. On Wednesday, the fairing manufacturer formerly known as Ruag announced it was kicking off a "major research and innovation project" to develop a reusable payload fairing. The concept entails the payload fairing being connected to the first stage, with two halves of the fairing swinging open to release an expendable second stage and a payload. The first stage and payload fairing would then return to Earth. The plan looks similar to Rocket Lab's design for its reusable Neutron rocket.
>The launch paradigm continues to shift ... “This new approach is set to address the evolving market's needs while staying true to Beyond Gravity's commitment to sustainability, innovation, and dedication to a 100 percent mission success," said Paul Horstink, executive VP at Beyond Gravity’s launcher division. "In addition, the cost savings associated with reusable rockets could make the launch systems more accessible to a wider range of companies and organizations, supporting more frequent launches." The company says it will initially target medium-launch vehicles. (submitted by Ken the Bin)
https://www.beyondgravity.com/en/ne
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 16:29:44 UTC No. 15881559
>>15881530
>SaxaVord owes contractors money
I think Europe might be cursed
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 16:32:32 UTC No. 15881563
White House slams Musk ‘antisemitic rhetoric,’ says ‘foolish’ to drop SpaceX contracts
--
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/11/20/whi
text below from Berger again
> White House concerns on Musk won't halt SpaceX contracts. The Biden White House is not moving away from Elon Musk’s SpaceX or Starlink technology despite condemning Musk for pushing antisemitic comments on social media, National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said Monday. Musk’s antisemitic X post last week drew a swift response from the White House. “We condemn this abhorrent promotion of antisemitic and racist hate in the strongest terms, which runs against our core values as Americans,” spokesman Andrew Bates said, according to CNBC.
>Difficult to move away from innovative services ... "There’s innovation out there in the private sector that we’d be foolish to walk away from,” Kirby replied, when a reporter asked if the government was reconsidering its contracts with Musk’s rocket maker and his high-speed satellite Internet provider. “I’m not aware of any specific efforts to address our concerns over his rhetoric through the way that his companies provide support to our national security establishment,” said Kirby. Just because the federal government has no plans to walk away from Musk’s technology, however, “doesn’t mean that we accept or agree with or condone in any way that antisemitic rhetoric that he pushed,” Kirby added.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 16:35:59 UTC No. 15881573
>>15881563
SO nothing is happening
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 16:37:28 UTC No. 15881575
>>15881573
some white house officials made accounts on Threads lol
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 16:38:31 UTC No. 15881577
>just saw that there's a raptor 3 in development
what the fuck 300 tons to orbit?
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 16:40:04 UTC No. 15881579
>>15881563
fuck biden. he gave a whole ass speech about how white people are evil.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 16:40:21 UTC No. 15881580
>>15881577
Raptor 3 has been in development for a while, the comment by Musk yesterday could refer to yet another version
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 16:42:02 UTC No. 15881583
>>15881580
nuclear raptor...
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 16:42:19 UTC No. 15881584
>>15881577
>300 tons to orbit?
They will do well to hit the 150 tonne target. I don't think they can hit it with raptor 2. Dry mass of Starship and Superheavy is wahy above where they would like, which was one of the reasons they abandoned the landing leg fins on both vehicles.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 16:43:33 UTC No. 15881587
>>15881577
So when are they get bottlenecked by the launchpad again?
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 16:43:34 UTC No. 15881588
Members of Congress seek increase in Mars Sample Return funding
---
https://spacenews.com/members-of-co
> WASHINGTON — Members of Congress are asking NASA not to slow down work on the Mars Sample Return (MSR) program now while also lobbying fellow members to provide more money for the effort in 2024.
> In a Nov. 21 letter to NASA Administrator Bill Nelson, six members of California’s congressional delegation expressed their “strongest opposition” to a NASA directive earlier this month to slow down work on MSR because of uncertainty about how much funding will be available to the program in fiscal year 2024.
> The letter was signed by Sens. Alex Padilla (D) and Laphonza Butler (D) and Reps. Adam Schiff (D), Judy Chu (D), Mike Garcia (R) and Young Kim (R). The four House members all represent districts in Southern California, home of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, which is leading the overall MSR effort.
> At a Nov. 13 advisory committee meeting, agency officials said they had recently instructed the centers working on MSR — Goddard Space Flight Center, JPL and Marshall Space Flight Center — to “start ramping back on activities” related to MSR because of the wide gap in spending between a House spending bill, which would provide the full request of $949.3 million for the program, and a Senate version that offers only $300 million.
> “If forced to operate at the unnecessarily low funding level prematurely directed by NASA,” they wrote, JPL “will not be able to meet the 2030 launch window, billions of dollars in contracts supporting American businesses will be subject to cancellation, and hundreds of highly skilled jobs in California will be lost.” The contents of the letter were first reported by Politico.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 16:45:15 UTC No. 15881592
>>15881588
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 16:46:53 UTC No. 15881598
>>15881588
>>15881592
nasa should be focusing on finding landing sites for the colony
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 16:48:37 UTC No. 15881603
>>15881588
When will they finally axe this stupid mission?
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 16:52:34 UTC No. 15881610
>>15881603
they are trying I guess but as you see there is resistance right away, 6 south californian congressmen lobby against it because JPL is in their distric and they would lose 300 jobs or whatever
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 16:54:22 UTC No. 15881615
>>15881563
GOODBYE JEWS
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 16:54:55 UTC No. 15881616
>>15881610
With $10 bil you could create more than 300 jobs.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 16:57:37 UTC No. 15881626
Chilling prediction by eeergo on NSF forums:
"Voted March as a NET with lots of technical and regulatory uncertainties acting on it. Caveat that it can easily slip to the right as per the latest flight's experience - more so based on the first test flights, but I expect the major -and much needed- improvements in infrastructure to play a significant role now. Very unlikely to the left IMO, although institutional (and specifically NASA) pressure has worked its magic once already, and quite publicly so, so now it's not just internal SpaceX interests that drive the program forward, at least short-term.
Source: got a 2/2 track record in prior flight polls, nailed to within very close accuracy, plus repeated correct foresights regardimg Boca Chica tests before full stacks were a thing. Nobody's crystal ball is perfect though, that's for sure.
Not a source: Musk's tweets get less factual on average as a function of calendar time (very much not limited to rockets, but most of us know that already). Willing to bet my car on no further flights in 2023. "
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 16:57:41 UTC No. 15881627
>>15881592
Get fucked, NASA unironically making the right decision here
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 16:59:13 UTC No. 15881630
>>15881563
Imagine considering dropping billion dollar contracts because someone wrote some political stuff on Twitter. Anyway what was his latest antisemitic tweet?
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 17:05:47 UTC No. 15881647
>>15880958
Fine, then. Orthowaffles, for the pedantic.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 17:08:38 UTC No. 15881656
>>15881647
Fuck you.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 17:12:28 UTC No. 15881666
>>15881361
It was bro
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 17:20:07 UTC No. 15881682
>>15881666
I don't remember it so it never happened
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 17:20:33 UTC No. 15881684
https://twitter.com/ESA_transport/s
official ESA gov acct posting memes lmao
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 17:20:53 UTC No. 15881686
>>15881626
>I expect the major -and much needed- improvements in infrastructure to play a significant role now
I don't see how this can be true in the slightest. SpaceX does want to move away from the current tank farm setup but there's no reason to replace the tanks now given that the ones they have came through the last launch without any need for repairs.
>Willing to bet my car on no further flights in 2023
This is a very dumb bet to hold up as some kind of an insight, given that Elon said himself that just getting the flight hardware ready would probably take the rest of the year.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 17:24:36 UTC No. 15881693
>>15881445
Those were Russian shills obviously
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 17:25:53 UTC No. 15881695
China’s Landspace aims to build a stainless steel rocket
--
https://spacenews.com/chinas-landsp
> HELSINKI — Chinese launch startup Landspace has unveiled plans to develop a reusable stainless steel rocket.
> The Zhuque-3 (Vermillion Bird 3) will use stainless propellant tanks and clusters of Tianque methane-liquid oxygen propellant rocket engines, according to a presentation by Landspace CEO Zhang Changwu at the Mingyue Lake Aerospace Information Industry International Ecosystem Event in Chongqing, China, Nov. 21.
> The two-stage launcher will have a payload capacity of 20 metric tons to low Earth orbit (LEO) when expendable. Recovery of the first stage downrange will allow 16.5 tons to LEO, while a landing back at the launch site will offer a capacity of 11 tons to LEO. A render of the rocket shows grid fins and deployable landing legs on the first stage.
> Details such as a tentative test launch date and the dimensions of the rocket were not stated, suggesting the plan is at a very early stage.
> The launcher, once operational, will also face competition domestically. Fellow startup Space Pioneer is planning to launch its Tianlong-3 rocket next year. That rocket will be capable of lifting 17 tons to LEO, or 14 tons to 500-kilometer sun-synchronous orbit.
> Landspace is not the only Chinese launch firm interested in stainless steel rockets. Another, much newer Chinese startup, Space Epoch, performed hot fire tests earlier this year as part of development of a planned reusable stainless-steel launcher.
> The tests used a 4.2-meter-diameter stainless steel propellant tank combined with methalox engines developed by Jiuzhou Yunjian.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 17:27:14 UTC No. 15881700
>>15881693
I really don't think so. I guarantee that most of them weren't getting paid.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 17:32:13 UTC No. 15881713
>>15881700
ALL of them were getting paid you fucking bitch. Now I think youre a russian shill too.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 17:35:12 UTC No. 15881724
>>15881700
Russia shill.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 17:37:29 UTC No. 15881732
>>15881695
watch every medium lift and above rocket get made out of steel in the coming decades
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 17:50:41 UTC No. 15881756
>>15881713
>>15881724
russian shill falseflagging to create a strawman.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 17:51:26 UTC No. 15881757
https://www.youtube.com/live/HGoQhe
You guys arent gonna wanna miss this: Europe dabbing on America
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 17:52:51 UTC No. 15881763
>>15881684
it's no Roscosmos Chaikaposting
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 17:55:41 UTC No. 15881767
>>15881626
"SpaceX insider" doomers have been proven wrong pretty much every single time. For some reason they keep assuming that SpaceX works at the pace of other companies, which simply isn't the case
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 18:02:19 UTC No. 15881775
>>15881626
Now like and subscribe and superchat and join our patreon!
>Willing to bet my car on no further flights in 2023.
I agree only because even without FAA to hold them back, there is a bit more than a month left this year. Even without a wrecked launch platform, it'll still take them longer than that just to get sorted for another launch. My gut feeling is at least 3 months even with early FAA approval.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 18:05:12 UTC No. 15881778
>>15881506
Torpedo ports.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 18:09:03 UTC No. 15881783
>>15881563
>"This is a bad thing... but we won't be doing anything about it."
He's got them by the balls.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 18:11:36 UTC No. 15881787
>>15881783
and they hate it. That’s why they’ll throw money at bezos with his track record. They desperately want a second option but none exists.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 18:28:13 UTC No. 15881811
>>15881810
Epic win for Space-X
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 18:30:27 UTC No. 15881813
>>15881810
My god he looks horrendous
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 18:34:01 UTC No. 15881817
>>15881813
always looks homeless regardless of hobo beard or not
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 18:38:18 UTC No. 15881821
>>15881787
This is only proving him right about needing to go to Mars to escape (((control))).
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 18:39:54 UTC No. 15881823
>>15881767
the fuck are you smoking? it took like 8 months for ift2 and most of that was actually SpaceX not being ready despite the public perception.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 18:42:30 UTC No. 15881826
>>15881756
Russians aren't smart enough to conduct a false flag
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 18:43:26 UTC No. 15881828
>>15881796
unlikely.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 18:44:27 UTC No. 15881831
>>15881761
>jack of all trades master of none.
your dad is a jack off my cock and master of cum.
fuck you.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 18:48:00 UTC No. 15881837
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/science
>Bezos beats Musk to Mars milestone: NASA chooses Blue Origin's rocket to launch a mission to the Red Planet in 2024
Someone explain
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 18:49:57 UTC No. 15881838
>>15881837
explain what?
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 18:50:11 UTC No. 15881839
>>15881823
It took just under seven months in total, and at least one month was completely wasted on waiting for paperwork. Many people, both public and "insiders" claimed there would be no way that Starship would fly again in 2023
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 18:52:08 UTC No. 15881840
>>15881837
>>15881838
today i will remind them.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 18:53:40 UTC No. 15881841
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 19:01:52 UTC No. 15881848
>>15881592
No bucks, no Buck Rogers
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 19:03:56 UTC No. 15881852
>>15881837
NASA decided to use New Glenn to launch a pair of 200 kg probes to Mars. It's important to note that an Atlas V 401 would have massively over-preformed for this mission. It's also important to note that at $20M Blue is launching this at a significant loss.
Blue Origin is hungry for some missions to raise their reputation, and NASA is more than willing to take advantage of another's desperation.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 19:05:33 UTC No. 15881859
>>15881783
They're right to be frightened though. This is the first time a billionaire has had the power, the leverage and the intent to challenge the official narrative. The State Department must be seething. The Chinese have disappeared people for less.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 19:06:38 UTC No. 15881861
>>15881852
Thanks for the explanation bro
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 19:08:32 UTC No. 15881866
>>15881852
Oh, these are the rideshare payloads that were going to be on the Psyche launch but due to delays (of Psyche) couldn't make their launch window. Now things are starting to make sense.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 19:10:55 UTC No. 15881868
>>15881626
eeergo is a fucking retarded brown Italian, you can safely disregard everything he says. He's so retarded that the NSF team stripped him of his moderation powers
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 19:15:49 UTC No. 15881871
>>15881837
>a cubesat on a paper rocket
i'm trembling
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 19:17:22 UTC No. 15881876
>>15881682
Stupid frogposter
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 19:18:26 UTC No. 15881877
>>15881871
The size of the notional payload doesn't really matter when the primary goal is demonstrating a successful launch.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 19:19:42 UTC No. 15881880
>>15881700
Pierre Sprey definitely was
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 19:20:53 UTC No. 15881883
>>15881877
Shame it'll miss the launch window
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 19:26:53 UTC No. 15881898
>>15881877
The primary goal here is launching to fucking Mars, which is significantly more impressive than simply getting to orbit
We'll see if that's still impressive when they finally launch
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 19:29:19 UTC No. 15881903
>>15881898
Elon launched a Tesla to Mars
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 19:30:45 UTC No. 15881905
>>15881903
No he didnt.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 19:32:05 UTC No. 15881909
>>15881905
it got pretty close. closer than anything you’ve sent to mars
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 19:33:48 UTC No. 15881914
>>15881902
That rocket already looks ancient
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 19:35:23 UTC No. 15881918
>>15881909
actually I work on prosperity or whatever the fuck that rovers called.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 19:36:01 UTC No. 15881920
>>15881905
You mad bro?
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 19:40:26 UTC No. 15881932
>>15881914
they really did the bare minimum and even that was delayed and overbudget
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 19:41:27 UTC No. 15881935
>>15881902
20min to ignition, they started talking
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 19:49:45 UTC No. 15881960
>>15881905
A Mars Transfer Orbit around the Sun if you want to be pedantic about it.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 19:51:03 UTC No. 15881963
>>15881960
thats right. dont fucking mess up again little pig.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 19:51:14 UTC No. 15881964
>>15881918
I worked for Propensity
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 19:52:36 UTC No. 15881967
>>15881963
>again
Different Anon than the first guy. Going by you, Bezos should hire better PR people.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 19:53:30 UTC No. 15881969
>>15881630
Something about the ADL pushing anti-white and and anti-Asian racial narratives in the media.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 19:54:45 UTC No. 15881972
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 19:55:38 UTC No. 15881973
>>15881972
The whitest Frenchman
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 19:56:03 UTC No. 15881975
>>15881903
No. He's launched to some asteroids, which is the same or better than launching to Mars. It's all about precision and C3.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 19:58:20 UTC No. 15881981
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 19:59:18 UTC No. 15881982
>red light
>HOOOOOLD
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 19:59:21 UTC No. 15881983
on hold for some reason, I muted it so not sure what is happening
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 19:59:24 UTC No. 15881984
Ariane stream is higher quality than SpaceX, lol
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:01:06 UTC No. 15881989
>>15881983
I couldn't understand him through his accent
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:01:31 UTC No. 15881990
>>15881983
>I muted it
understandable. I don't want to listen to french people talk either.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:05:08 UTC No. 15882001
>>15881983
>so not sure what is happening
Nor does Arianespace know.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:11:12 UTC No. 15882014
>>15881975
New Glenn could be the most precise orbit rocket ever built. That's what it's all about. would you rather ride a gross public bus or take a limo to orbit? Obvious answer, and that's why people fly Rocket Lab instead of F9 rideshare trannyporter
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:12:51 UTC No. 15882019
>>15882014
By that logic the crew stage should be a large spaceplane. No EDL has ever been as classy as a space shuttle landing on a runway.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:14:32 UTC No. 15882023
>>15882019
NDA compliance will be waiting for you Monday, Engineer
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:15:03 UTC No. 15882026
Imagine being a yuropoor right now, so cringe
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:20:22 UTC No. 15882034
>>15882014
Nobody should sleep on NG. especially when ti will totally mog starship for high energy trajectories.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:22:51 UTC No. 15882037
I still can't believe we don't have a functional rocket as Europe
depressing
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:23:37 UTC No. 15882039
>>15882026
>>15882037
All smart people left for America and you should too. There's no hope left for this place.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:24:52 UTC No. 15882043
>>15882039
Airbus seems to be going well and the other ESA stuff too. Rocketry is just doing bad. Maybe we need to leave
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:26:07 UTC No. 15882045
>>15882043
There's no money in it, so no one really tries
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:33:31 UTC No. 15882058
>>15882043
Aerospace and defense companies aren't doing that bad. It's the FAGMAN companies that absolutely dumpster Europe.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:34:48 UTC No. 15882062
>>15881477
Words have to be officially approved to exist
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:36:49 UTC No. 15882066
>>15882037
Europe has excellent engineers but the bureaucratic management is fucked beyond repair
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:36:59 UTC No. 15882068
>>15882034
Expendable Blue Gleen >> Starship
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:38:49 UTC No. 15882071
BROS WE ARE SO BACK
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:39:51 UTC No. 15882072
we're back
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:42:24 UTC No. 15882082
>Yeah, we have to keep this fuel at -250C, it's not a big deal
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:44:00 UTC No. 15882084
I hope it explodes
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:45:28 UTC No. 15882088
gold plated ablative engines when
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:46:01 UTC No. 15882089
Cool I guess
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:46:05 UTC No. 15882091
>no noise
ONE JOB
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:48:31 UTC No. 15882094
Listen to all the cool things this rocket COULD be doing if it didn't cost several times as much as a Falcon 9
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:49:53 UTC No. 15882100
>>15882097
Yeah I wonder too, the static fire looks normal too, so why not launch it
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:50:11 UTC No. 15882101
>>15882100
Fake SRBs and no upper stage
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:50:38 UTC No. 15882103
>>15882097
No, FAA hasn't issued the license yet :(
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:51:04 UTC No. 15882106
>>15882101
makes sense then lmao
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:51:08 UTC No. 15882107
>>15882101
starship would have launched with fake srbs and no upper stage
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:52:14 UTC No. 15882109
Early shutdown, uh-ohhhhh
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:53:36 UTC No. 15882113
I'm so happy -_-
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:54:28 UTC No. 15882114
>>15882109
A-at least it made it further than the Green Run
Though the announcer over the net said it was successful after saying it was aborting, so not entirely sure if it was actually full duration
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:56:09 UTC No. 15882119
>the best we have to watch is fucking arianne
starship era needs to accelerate faster
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:56:53 UTC No. 15882122
>>15882094
It's written into law that it will do "cool things" no matter the cost. Welcome to government contracting.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:57:13 UTC No. 15882123
>>15882109
Burnt to depletion, I guess boil off from the 30 minutes delay?
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:57:35 UTC No. 15882124
>>15882109
470 seconds planned not exactly 8 minutes as the guy said.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:57:40 UTC No. 15882125
>>15882109
>>15882114
They said it depleted it's fuel, seems successful
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 20:57:40 UTC No. 15882126
this was the most boring rocket test I've ever seen
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 21:02:28 UTC No. 15882130
>>15882124
Ah if it was 470, they must throttle down sometime between 405-420 because they cut away to an exterior view at 6:45 and when they return at 7:04 the thrust plume is gone. I don't have access to a thrust profile so I don't know what the plan was
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 21:05:20 UTC No. 15882132
>>15882124
That'd still have been a bit longer, it cut off slightly over 7 minutes, but boiloff as >>15882123 could make sense. Hope it's just that really, as shit as it is I just want it to finally launch at this point.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 21:08:21 UTC No. 15882138
>>15882132
@TechSpatiales calls it a an anomaly simulation
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 21:12:02 UTC No. 15882143
>>15881266
>>15881230
Kaowool and colloidal silica
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 21:13:46 UTC No. 15882147
>>15882138
sounds like cope
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 21:24:03 UTC No. 15882158
>>15881855
I think its reasonably that by end of 2024, we'll see Starlink Gen2 full size deployments via Starship even if the ship is lost during reentry.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 21:26:33 UTC No. 15882163
>>15882158
keep coping muskchud.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 21:27:06 UTC No. 15882164
>>15882163
What's a cope? Can I eat it?
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 21:27:54 UTC No. 15882167
>>15882158
I don’t think even the most pessimistic timeliners think they won’t be launching starlinks by the end of next year. even if they only launch twice next year that’ll be one of the payloads
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 21:30:29 UTC No. 15882171
>>15882167
They still have to make a payload door which seems to be a big challenge.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 21:32:19 UTC No. 15882178
>>15882167
the most pessemistic timelines say they will be launching NEVER. which is most likely considering they are going bankrupt. theyve spent 5 billion dollars ons tarship right now and it costs 2 billion a year to keep the program at this level of operation.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 21:34:10 UTC No. 15882180
Taking conservative estiamtes and looking for the cheapest possible price, Starship currently costs 150 million oer vehicle. thats ignoring all things asociated with launch costs and like i said its extraordinarily conservative. more likely cost per starship is 300 million ish
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 21:39:45 UTC No. 15882189
>>15882171
if you don’t attempt reentry you can use FTS as a payload door.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 21:43:07 UTC No. 15882192
>>15882180
Do you mean optimistic? Conservative cost estimates should have higher numbers.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 21:43:37 UTC No. 15882193
>>15882158
I think you're right, but I don't see it happening earlier than flight 5. They're planning another suborbital flight, then they'll be ready for a genuinely orbital test (and probably one or more of their HLS milestones), and then they'll be good to go with an actual payload.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 21:43:46 UTC No. 15882194
>>15882171
mark my words, the payload bay door will be very narrow and it will fundamentally limit the volume of a single payload starship can deploy at once. Shuttle was designed from the ground up for a payload bay, the payload bay is along a straight edge because thats the only feasible way. Starships payload door will be in the narrow area above the fuel tanks but below where the nose starts to curve.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 21:45:01 UTC No. 15882196
>>15882178
They have a large reserve of cash on hand, happy financiers who are making back their money basically on track with the general estimates once you discount the COVID pause in the economy, and Starlink is no longer cashflow negative despite the ongoing, large scale buildout of the constellation. They'll be fine.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 21:45:32 UTC No. 15882198
>>15882192
i mean conservative in the context of not coming up with an extravigantly high price, but yes you are right
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 21:49:06 UTC No. 15882201
>>15882194
the payload bays become way easier when you accept no reuse. Easy to just blow apart a clamshell a la falcon and limit the scope of full reusability.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 21:51:21 UTC No. 15882202
>>15882201
True but at that point youre better off building a falcon 9 style upper stage if you dont plan on reuse
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 21:52:28 UTC No. 15882204
>>15882180
Getting the booster back would be a huge reduction in cost. The biggest loss of IFT-2 was not being able to test the EDL sequence of the booster and pushing the tower catch test. The booster is just too much material and labor to lose. SpaceX can fly a stripped down upper stage expendable no big deal. Hell, the economics might even workout in the short-term by shedding the 50+ tons of landing gear, landing fuel, and structural payload bay between the combination of cheaper upper stages and fewer launches needed.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 21:53:12 UTC No. 15882205
>>15881969
can someone spoonfeed me the link to this Tweet
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 21:54:05 UTC No. 15882206
>>15882198
Ah, I get how you mean it now, yes. Also I agree that 150 million sounds pretty good, I had some numbers in my head at some point too and I was spitballing around that same range. Don't remember what I was thinking exactly unfortunately, but I do think that the price for a full commercial launch will probably start out around 100 million while they work out reuse (and to recoup dev costs)
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 21:54:46 UTC No. 15882208
>>15882204
Yeah I've been hearing about them flying expendable upper stages for some time.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 21:54:47 UTC No. 15882209
>>15882202
that’s basically my thought. Limit full reuse to starlink, crewed, and maybe payloads that accept a very limited door. everyone else is forced to buy an expendable second stage, no different than it was before. and the commercial payload mass is increased dramatically as a result.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 22:04:35 UTC No. 15882217
wtf I love expendable rockets now
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 22:11:49 UTC No. 15882228
Blue glenn vs vulkan
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 22:13:18 UTC No. 15882229
>>15881209
well, humans objectively suck
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 22:13:52 UTC No. 15882231
They only have a limited number of launch licences and they still aren't building starships fast enough to be throwing them away without learning anything from them. Every expended starship is a missed opportunity to learn how to bring them back just to get extra starlinks up. Not gonna happen, starlink is already massively profitable on Falcon 9.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 22:14:06 UTC No. 15882232
>>15882228
Vulcan is a test vehicle for BE4 and will be obsoleted by New Glenn. ULA have dug their own grave by delaying Vulcan for a decade
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 22:18:00 UTC No. 15882238
>>15882232
ULA is based reddut tory brono though
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 22:31:02 UTC No. 15882254
>>15882238
Kys oldspace reddit shill
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 22:31:24 UTC No. 15882255
>>15882254
why are you being so negative
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 22:38:55 UTC No. 15882261
SpaceX lost and Bezos won
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 22:40:07 UTC No. 15882262
>>15881837
>Someone explain
They were supposed to launch with Psyche but JPL is a trainwreck and the made them miss their lauch window.
BO bid well below cost to scoop up Escapade.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 23:05:58 UTC No. 15882278
>>15882232
But what if BO buys ULA? I wonder if there would be any point though if New Glenn is actually flying in 2024
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 23:12:33 UTC No. 15882283
>>15882278
One of the reasons ULA wants someone to buy them is the fact that NASA has switched toward fixed price contracts, but another is definitely the fact that Vulcans time as a competitive vehicle for certain missions is nearly over and its flown zero missions. Tory is only pursuing Vulcan development at this point so that he doesnt tank investor confidence. The real exist strategy is getting purchased.
I don't know what Blue can gain from buying ULA, but Jeff may do it anyway because hes rich and he may see it as a huge boost to the expertise at Blue.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 23:14:20 UTC No. 15882286
>>15882283
>I don't know what Blue can gain from buying ULA
He can treat Vulcan as a really shitty New Glenn prototype rather than a finished rocket.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 23:19:44 UTC No. 15882289
>>15882271
whats his redpill?
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 23:21:16 UTC No. 15882290
>>15882283
Blue gains the right to launch 60% of NSSL-2 as well as becoming one of the co-heirs apparent to the big Lane 2 part of NSSL-3. Blue is replaying Boeing eating McDonnell Douglas to stay in the EELV business. Once this goes through SpaceX and Blue Origin will be where Lockheed Martin and Boeing were twenty years ago.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 23:25:25 UTC No. 15882291
>>15882289
this was after IFT-1
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 23:30:26 UTC No. 15882297
>>15882291
oh right, thank goodness. I thought the FAA had got mad about IFT2 or something.
Anonymous at Thu, 23 Nov 2023 23:57:00 UTC No. 15882316
Heya, I am an trainee marketing researcher.
I was coming up with some slogans that would best advertise SpaceX grand #DearMoon tour. I was first thinking "We are visiting the Moon!", but 'visiting' feels a bit too formal, so I switched it up to "We are going to the Moon!"
I find that a great idea that SpaceX could use! The shortened form could be something like "We are going!"
What do y'all think?
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 00:00:22 UTC No. 15882319
>>15882316
drop the "are" and make it "we gaan", its cleaner
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 00:15:10 UTC No. 15882329
>>15882316
just pay dim todd to make another video.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 00:18:44 UTC No. 15882334
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 00:20:50 UTC No. 15882335
>>15882329
*dim dood
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 00:21:18 UTC No. 15882336
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 00:24:06 UTC No. 15882340
>>15882316
>trainee marketing researcher
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 02:10:07 UTC No. 15882435
>>15882433
QI thrusters will fire in orbit before RVacs do.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 02:26:02 UTC No. 15882454
https://twitter.com/WIRED/status/17
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 02:28:22 UTC No. 15882458
>>15882454
I'm at a loss for words here
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 02:30:23 UTC No. 15882466
>>15882433
hardware will be ready for IFT-3 in 3 weeks, regulatory approval prob not this year
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 02:31:28 UTC No. 15882467
>>15882458
Would you like to buy a vowel?
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 02:39:04 UTC No. 15882480
>>15882458
Don't be too hard on them. It's just their culture.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 02:41:24 UTC No. 15882483
>>15882466
ok doomer
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 02:43:20 UTC No. 15882484
>>15882483
you're misinterpreting elon's words retard
it took 4 months for the mishap investigation to be finished after IFT-1
unless some politicking happens i dont see that going down to 4 weeks
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 02:43:24 UTC No. 15882485
>>15882467
How about a piece of property
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 02:47:45 UTC No. 15882491
>>15882454
>@BaitMasterOG
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 02:49:01 UTC No. 15882492
>>15882454
>They both work on SLS
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHASHAHAHAHAHAHAH
This is what SpaceX's competition looks like
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 03:18:35 UTC No. 15882517
>>15882278
one point is right now ULA gets priority for BE-4 engine delivery, but if they bought ULA they could get that changed
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 03:27:43 UTC No. 15882522
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 03:55:27 UTC No. 15882545
>>15882433
Where did he say that?
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 04:18:29 UTC No. 15882567
>>15882484
It's not even about politicking, SpaceX is leading the mishap investigation so they'd have to finish it within a month to even have a chance and even for SpaceX that's a tall ask, as you said the IFT-1 investigation took like five months. It should be quicker this time obviously as less stuff went wrong but it still will take a while.
That said, it wouldn't surprise me if Musk lights a fire under the team's ass and they somehow get it done by Christmas so he and 1s can blame the FAA for not approving within a week
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 04:21:39 UTC No. 15882573
>>15882316
kek
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 05:11:56 UTC No. 15882616
>>15882492
Newton's 3rd law is yt pepo shit
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 05:29:10 UTC No. 15882622
Wen schizodrive activation
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 05:29:41 UTC No. 15882623
>>15882622
About another week.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 05:30:29 UTC No. 15882624
>>15882623
0.5 two weeks?!!!
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 05:31:52 UTC No. 15882625
>>15882624
They said it'll take multiple weeks of testing before they announce anything publicly so unless someone sees the satellite some place it shouldn't be through a telescope (probably pretty challenging for a 1U cubesat) we won't know until January when you take the holiday break into account.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 05:48:25 UTC No. 15882638
Is BO really going to launch next year? They are very quiet.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 06:20:59 UTC No. 15882656
>>15882625
they're gonna announce some "new physics" and it's going to end up being some current-carrying wires pushing off the Earth's magnetic field after wasting people's time for half a decade of wild goose chases.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 07:21:07 UTC No. 15882706
>>15882638
They don’t want to talk simple as
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 08:48:50 UTC No. 15882768
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status
> Four more Starships, the last of V1
these should be Starships 28,29,30 and 31 I think? or is one of them 32
then the next version will have slightly different canards/front aerodynamic control surfaces and different shaped head?
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 08:49:52 UTC No. 15882769
>>15882768
https://twitter.com/Ringwatchers/st
referring to this from 5 days ago
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 08:51:09 UTC No. 15882771
>>15882768
>>15882769
>>15882770
I want to know this what is so monumentally different that we're going from V1 to V2
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 08:51:44 UTC No. 15882772
>>15882763
just don't have regrets lol.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 08:56:37 UTC No. 15882774
>>15882484
in some sense, even that is unnecessary red tape
why do they *have to* finish the previous investigation fully if the failures were not a threat to the public? they could launch again and then do investigations in parallel
doing then in series and waiting for FAA approval after every one is still a significant slowing factor even if doing the actual investigation took more time than the finishing touches from FAA
there should be tiers of safety and only some of them should stop all flights of the system
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 08:56:56 UTC No. 15882775
>>15882768
>V2 Starships over the horizon!!!
WOAH
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 08:59:38 UTC No. 15882778
>>15882770
>>15882768
its actually over
starship is going to morph into shuttle
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 09:00:37 UTC No. 15882779
>>15882778
Fuck off demoralizer, SWNBASC
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 09:01:55 UTC No. 15882780
>>15882768
Sexo image
>>15882774
Stop trying to put beauracrats out of a job you racist anti semite
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 09:03:27 UTC No. 15882782
>>15882763
Every public comment Elon makes about Bezos is designed to get Bezos to take a more active role in Blue Origin
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 09:05:04 UTC No. 15882784
>>15882780
On the contrary this would give more bureaucrats jobs, as multiple cases can be studied simulatenously meaning the need for a bigger team and higher pay.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 09:06:43 UTC No. 15882786
>>15882782
Bezos too busy getting his winky schlurped by his goblina and sniffing her hair. Imagine being a giga nigga fuck you gorillionaire and doing this gay shit rather than carving your name into the stars. Maximum cringe.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 09:09:35 UTC No. 15882788
>>15882771
If they redesign the nose the header tank might be moved which is a big deal for usable internal volume. They're also changing the design of the canards. That's all I've seen discussed in the thread so far.
It's also important to remember that these iterations of Starship are fundamentally (at this stage) pathfinders for the HLS design, so any design changes we see are ultimately in service of that goal
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 09:21:48 UTC No. 15882792
>>15882770
Imagine explaining what the fuck you're talking about instead of throwing some snippets out there that everyone can and will freely misinterpret.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 09:23:33 UTC No. 15882794
>>15882771
They're making the nose more pointy xD
Which is arguably slightly worse xDDD
Just like that movie xDDDDD
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 09:24:40 UTC No. 15882796
Elon Musk flying V2s?? Somebody warn London!
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 09:25:09 UTC No. 15882797
>>15882794
I think its going to get more round
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 09:26:57 UTC No. 15882799
Probably not the brightest idea to refer to your rockets as "V1" and "V2", Elon...
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 09:27:13 UTC No. 15882800
>>15882792
You fucking retard THATS ALL WE GOT IT WAS ONE TWEET FROM E. WHAT OTHER FUCKING CONTEXT AM I SUPPOSED TO GIVE, THE ENTIRE STARSHIP WIKIPEDIA ARTICLE??
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 09:29:30 UTC No. 15882803
Versioning numbers are inherently nazism
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 09:29:50 UTC No. 15882804
Elon Musk's V2 rocket launch holocausts 6 billion endangered turtles
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 09:30:08 UTC No. 15882805
so will /sfg/ admit that starship was a failure?
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 09:30:58 UTC No. 15882808
>>15882765
It love the way it's just shrouded in fog for most of the flight. Also the entire surroundings were covered in fog before the launch. One truly foggy boi.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 09:31:33 UTC No. 15882810
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 09:32:52 UTC No. 15882812
>>15882810
if starship was so good why do they need a v2? checkmate
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 09:32:52 UTC No. 15882813
>>15882800
I was criticizing Elon.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 09:33:32 UTC No. 15882815
>>15882810
thanks for the license kind stranger
edit: how do I take this clown makeup off
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 09:36:36 UTC No. 15882819
>>15882770
>what is the V2
aimed directly at DC
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 09:37:47 UTC No. 15882821
>>15882768
Sternenschiff/Überschwer Vergeltungswaffe Zwei
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 09:39:02 UTC No. 15882823
>>15882799
It's literally perfect though?
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 09:40:45 UTC No. 15882826
>>15882819
Based, deploy the vengeance weapons
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 09:45:18 UTC No. 15882830
>>15882034
it won't, actually
it requires a third stage to get good high C3 performance
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 09:50:46 UTC No. 15882836
>>15882799
They had card carrying Nazis designing and flying rockets and you think calling things version 1 and 2 is over the line.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 09:51:11 UTC No. 15882837
>>15882803
and here's why that's a good thing. Slava Ukraini!
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 10:13:23 UTC No. 15882874
>>15882805
Wdym the psyop was a stunning success
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 10:24:03 UTC No. 15882894
>>15882883
when is this dude going to prison?
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 10:27:57 UTC No. 15882897
>>15882883
>STOP BULLYING US
lmfao
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 10:39:03 UTC No. 15882912
>>15882883
Bruh
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 10:42:00 UTC No. 15882918
>>15882883
>Arca space
the water rocket guys are still around? Kek.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 10:44:38 UTC No. 15882922
>>15882770
V2 might actually be able to do something useful in space and not just be a test article for orbit and reentry.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 10:50:40 UTC No. 15882929
>>15881213
Yeah the hole can conduct the heat to the surrounding metal and to the gas/liquid behind it. If I remember correctly the melting point of Stainless Steel is about the same as reentry temperature. so it definitely won't melt.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 10:52:31 UTC No. 15882930
>>15881413
also if there is going to be a zipper effect or not is something that's easy to test in a wind tunnel
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 10:54:51 UTC No. 15882935
>>15882883
Reminder that a Romanian build and flew the first jet engine powered plane
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coand
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 10:55:51 UTC No. 15882937
>>15882883
wait these guys are still going?
where the fuck are they getting the money? patreon?
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 11:01:43 UTC No. 15882944
>>15882768
>>15882770
probably making them ready to insert payloads into orbit
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 11:02:34 UTC No. 15882946
>>15882944
could be stretching them and putting the 3 extra vac raptors in as well
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 11:03:22 UTC No. 15882947
>>15882937
petty theft as is Romanian tradition
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 11:03:50 UTC No. 15882949
>>15882946
>>15882944
if they are completely different length and have more engines then that would be a substantial enough difference to change the version number compared to just slightly changing the shape of the tip and location of the canards
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 11:05:40 UTC No. 15882953
>>15882946
How they gonna fit another 3 rvac under the skirt?....
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 11:07:25 UTC No. 15882959
v2 is obviously 18m
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 11:13:47 UTC No. 15882967
>>15882771
>>15882922
>>15882944
V2 Will be longer, thats for certain because Musk openly spoke about that at the IAC. Other than that idk
Hopefully it will actually have a payload bay etc. They should make a man rated one soon and put ravenous monkeys aboard so they can test how it will be in the dear Troon mission
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 11:26:52 UTC No. 15882982
It took them five tries to bellyflop from 10km with Starship. I seriously hope you aren't expecting full success from OFT-3.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 11:28:01 UTC No. 15882985
>>15882929
And IIRC, it maintains it's structural strength much closer to it's melting point than Al.
>>15882883
Good, I need a cup of tea and all they have done is remake a kettle
>>15882946
I expect this + payload stuff + Probably a electrics/ GNC upgrade to actual spacecraft standards, and not just a few cold gas thrusters welded on for quick testing.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 11:39:31 UTC No. 15882996
>>15882953
I don't know, but that is what they will do
tweet from 2 years ago
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 11:42:02 UTC No. 15883002
>>15882953
maybe just between the 3 raptor vacs now, it will decrease or eliminate gimbaling on the center engines but perhaps that can be replaced with differential thrust
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 11:43:29 UTC No. 15883006
>>15882982
well good that they have 4 Starships ready to go then
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 11:48:39 UTC No. 15883016
>>15882996
why does it need more engines? does that actually end up using less delta v due to less gravity losses? seems like a lot of weight and thrust for burns in space
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 11:51:27 UTC No. 15883021
>>15882883
HAHAHAHA THE FUCKING ACCOUNT WAS HIJACKED
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 11:51:53 UTC No. 15883023
>>15883016
Starship stages relatively low so yes I guess
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 11:52:51 UTC No. 15883024
>>15883021
lmao
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 11:53:20 UTC No. 15883025
>>15882545
elon say 3-4 weeks last week, only on X
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 11:53:28 UTC No. 15883027
>>15883023
>>15883016
or early I should say and with hot staging I think its even earlier
and if you stretch it, it also makes sense to add a bit more thrust if you want to keep the TWR about the same (but adding even more might be good idk)
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 11:54:03 UTC No. 15883028
>>15883021
Someone changed their birth date to today so now balloons pop up when you go to their account.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 11:54:29 UTC No. 15883030
>>15883025
he said the ship and booster should be ready in 3-4 weeks, not that they will launch at that point
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 11:54:31 UTC No. 15883031
>>15883021
oh no no no...
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 11:56:27 UTC No. 15883035
>>15882929
rocket fuel can't melt steel rings
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 12:02:33 UTC No. 15883040
>>15882999
KH-11 is what 70s? I'm sure that we have had some upgrades since then in terms of image sensing? (Not in optics myself). Plus any upgrade to the KH-11 would be very secret surely. SpaceX have specifically said that Starshield will provide a common satellite bus for mounting payloads, including imaging.
>>15882982
Not him but my definition for success for OFT-3 would be soft splashdown of booster and making it to re-entry with starship. Making it through EDL is for OFT-4.
I wouldn't be surprised to see a Starlink V2 on OFT 4/5, after all the ships have the slot on them going forward.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 12:08:04 UTC No. 15883060
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 12:14:23 UTC No. 15883067
>>15883030
I've interpreted the way I have interpreted
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 12:16:46 UTC No. 15883071
>>15882999
>3-5 meter reso
yeah in 1980
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 12:35:33 UTC No. 15883089
>>15883078
the guy is mentally ill or a grifter, simple as
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 12:43:18 UTC No. 15883094
>>15883089
or just broke a world record and is proud of it?
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 12:45:41 UTC No. 15883097
>>15882768
>>15882769
>>15882770
https://twitter.com/CSI_Starbase/st
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 12:49:20 UTC No. 15883104
>>15883097
Fool me once, shame on me.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 13:16:36 UTC No. 15883123
>>15883094
can i see an image of the world record being broken? where is the giant rocket?
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 13:18:54 UTC No. 15883125
>>15883078
No I am the developer of the largest rocket, with a weight of 6969 tonnes, and the same amount of hardware to back up that claim as ARCA.
Source, pulled out of my ass
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 13:21:53 UTC No. 15883130
>>15883125
Pressure fed astronaut thinks arca is more promising than starship. its what convinced me he must be trolling to some degree.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 13:22:12 UTC No. 15883132
>>15883123
Subscribe to their patreon to see
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 13:25:19 UTC No. 15883135
>>15883130
you can't be serious
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 13:29:09 UTC No. 15883140
>>15883135
he said it opn the most recent livestream on his channel about 4 months ago
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 13:37:56 UTC No. 15883147
>>15883140
probably a joke, he seems to hate musk but I don't think he looked like a complete retard and actually knows stuff about rockets as he works for lockheed
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 13:41:16 UTC No. 15883153
Blue Gleen has a nonzero chance of btfo starship but you wont hear that take on /sfg
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 13:43:40 UTC No. 15883154
>>15883153
They first have to btfo F9
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 13:44:28 UTC No. 15883157
A space race on the Korean Peninsula
---
https://www.reuters.com/graphics/NO
> Equipped with new launch vehicles and fuelled by national pride, North and South Korea are chasing ambitious orbital goals.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 13:45:03 UTC No. 15883158
>>15883130
he was probably joking about that
"when pigs fly" sort of figure of speech
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 13:47:28 UTC No. 15883165
>>15883157
> SOUTH KOREA’S LAUNCH VEHICLES
> With a launch mass of about 200 tons, the Nuri is “quite big” relative to North Korean designs, said Markus Schiller, a Europe-based missile expert.
>South Korean officials say the Nuri is designed to put 1.5-tonne payloads into low earth orbit at an altitude of 600 to 800 km (370 to 500 miles).
> South Korea has put several satellites in orbit using foreign launchers. The military paid Elon Musk’s SpaceX to launch its first communications satellite in 2020, for example, and the U.S. company will launch five South Korean spy satellites beginning this year.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 13:48:23 UTC No. 15883166
>>15883154
doesnt even consider that competition
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 13:48:46 UTC No. 15883167
>>15883165
> NORTH KOREA’S LAUNCH VEHICLES
> North Korea began space development with the Taepodong-1, a three-stage, liquid-fuelled booster. During its first launch in 1998, the rocket failed late in flight, Schiller noted, and “instead of giving it another shot, the whole design never appeared again”.
> The next launcher design, the Unha, featured a cluster of engines that analysts say were derived from the Soviet-era Scud missile. Its upper stage appears related to the Iranian Safir rocket, according to Western analysts. When South Korea gathered Unha debris in 2012, it found components from Britain, Switzerland, the United States, China, and the former Soviet Union.
> Despite two relatively successful flights, the Unha appears to have been shelved in favor of the latest system.
>“North Korea seems to be focused on the Chollima-1,” Schiller said. “As was the case with the switch from the Taepodong-1 to the Unha, the designs have nothing in common.”
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 13:49:39 UTC No. 15883168
>>15883157
>a space race
is it though?
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 13:50:40 UTC No. 15883170
>>15883153
in what way? cost? payload? first to orbit?
upper stage performance maybe with direct launches if their upper stage has much better ISP but idk
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 13:51:47 UTC No. 15883171
So it's safe to assume they are not flying anything on V1 starships?
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 13:53:55 UTC No. 15883172
>>15883171
no payload bay door so probably not
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 13:55:15 UTC No. 15883175
>>15883170
not even blue Gleen HLS is doing direct. They will solve hydrogen storage on orbit and refuel
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 13:55:54 UTC No. 15883176
>>15883167
> Ahead of the three Chollima-1 launches, North Korea notified Japan and the International Maritime Organization (IMO) of its plan to launch a satellite in a given timeframe. Tuesday’s launch came hours before that notification window, however.
>After the first launch in May, the IMO adopted its first-ever resolution condemning North Korean tests as a threat to the safety of international navigation, and Pyongyang responded by suggesting it may not give notice ahead of future satellite launches.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 13:56:10 UTC No. 15883177
>>15883175
Do we know how many refuels it will need?
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 13:57:12 UTC No. 15883178
>>15883175
yeah, I'm wondering just how New Glenn might btfo Starship
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 13:59:01 UTC No. 15883182
>>15883171
>>15883172
Anything after S28 has Starlink dispenser.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:00:04 UTC No. 15883185
>>15883178
>>15883170
Practicality
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:03:00 UTC No. 15883189
>>15883177
No idea, trying to find a document. wikipedia says they would refuel in NRHO which sounds super retarded
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:03:36 UTC No. 15883190
>>15883182
Do they? They welded shut last one.
sage at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:05:46 UTC No. 15883193
>>15882454
Tell the children. This is what niggers look like.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:07:48 UTC No. 15883195
>>15883190
That was S24 and S25. S28 has a reinforcement around the dispenser.
sage at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:10:04 UTC No. 15883201
>>15882770
transpiration cooling, ablative journalist heat shields
sage at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:11:40 UTC No. 15883203
>>15882796
On second thought, don't warn London.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:13:23 UTC No. 15883204
>>15883185
what does that mean
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:14:50 UTC No. 15883207
>>15883177
New Moon mk2 may require up to 5 launches, plus zero boiloff technology
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:15:58 UTC No. 15883208
>>15883204
from a size perspective, Blue Glen can acheive faster turnround than starship, and more will be allowed to fly because it's quieter
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:18:47 UTC No. 15883213
>>15883153
>imagination Christmas!
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:20:39 UTC No. 15883216
>>15883208
>it's better because it's worse in literally every aspect
die retard
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:22:15 UTC No. 15883218
>>15883216
That's not true
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:23:06 UTC No. 15883219
>>15883218
that's enough out of you
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:24:08 UTC No. 15883222
>>15883219
It can refuel on the moon because it uses hydrogen. starship methane cannot refuel on the moon
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:24:43 UTC No. 15883223
>>15883208
that is retarded
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:26:47 UTC No. 15883227
>>15883222
that is one benefit which might help at some point in the future but saying New Glenn will btfo Starship because New Glenn's upper stage might be able to refuel on the moon is retarded
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:26:55 UTC No. 15883229
>>15883195
Damn, they had only 3 tents worth of construction space, and still don't have enough work stands for finished ships/boosters. With the size of the factory, they will need several more wide bays.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:27:56 UTC No. 15883235
>>15883227
it could be 1% possibility, but still a possibility
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:31:06 UTC No. 15883246
>>15883229
idk why they dont just store them outside
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:33:40 UTC No. 15883249
>>15883246
idk why they dont just store both of your parents on my cock
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:33:51 UTC No. 15883251
>>15883235
yes, but do you know what btfo means?
New Glenn would have to be substantially better in some important aspects or better in many aspects to "btfo" Starship
having a semi-irrelevant feature based on something that doesn't exist yet does not qualify
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:35:09 UTC No. 15883252
>>15883249
Are you sick in the head?
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:36:33 UTC No. 15883256
>>15883252
he can only think about cock, don't bully him, it's a terminal condition.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:37:55 UTC No. 15883257
>>15883251
to be fair new glenn is launching nasa to mars next year. do you trust nasa?
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:41:00 UTC No. 15883263
MY IFT-2 PATCH IS ARRIVING MOMENTARILY
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:42:36 UTC No. 15883269
>>15882770
>V2
THEY ARE GONNA STRETCH IT. I FUCKING KNOW IT. Elon literally said flat out that they would need to stretch Starship by 10 meters, and it's because all the internal shit taking up way more space than they had originally imagined. It's not like they are exactly wanting for power either. Just STRETCH IT ELON.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:43:13 UTC No. 15883272
>>15883269
Didn't they talk about making it more blunt too?
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:44:09 UTC No. 15883275
>>15883269
theyve been wanting to stretch it, modify the flaps, add 3 rVacs, make it less pointy...for years
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:45:11 UTC No. 15883276
>>15883269
huge cope.
they're stretching the fuel tank not the payload bay.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:47:09 UTC No. 15883281
>>15883276
Yup. also notice how they never mention 1100m^3 volume any more after they stuffed the header tanks in the nose like retards. no more big window either :) no morebnose docking port either :)
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:47:53 UTC No. 15883282
>>15883246
I'm not talking about storing, but about engine install stands, tile install, flaps, etc. finishing touches. Right now they have to install the engines on an outside stand.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:50:21 UTC No. 15883284
>>15883281
Yes nobody cares except you.
Nobody was planning on putting a payload in a tiny cone that's retarded
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:50:26 UTC No. 15883285
>>15883275
They already modified the flaps.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:53:13 UTC No. 15883289
>>15883284
No window :) no docking port :)
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:54:00 UTC No. 15883290
>>15883289
cargo starships don't need windows
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:54:56 UTC No. 15883294
>>15883285
the front flaps? dont think so
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:56:04 UTC No. 15883295
>>15883290
They moved the tanks there for stability reasons, they arent going anywhere. Peopled Starships will not have a nose port or big window
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:59:30 UTC No. 15883303
>>15883295
HLS might. It doesn't need the header tank nor the center of mass.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 14:59:35 UTC No. 15883304
>>15883295
big window? moving goalposts now I see
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:00:57 UTC No. 15883307
>>15883301
9 engines to go
maybe Starship system V2
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:01:24 UTC No. 15883309
>>15883303
Why not
>>15883304
That's correct, no more window
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:01:58 UTC No. 15883312
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0qo
ITS kino when?
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:03:18 UTC No. 15883315
>>15883301
ITS was the sexiest looking and the animation was the best
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:03:55 UTC No. 15883316
>>15883305
>31MN thrust in vacuum
so basically a Saturn V first stage firing in orbit. jesus fuck
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:03:56 UTC No. 15883317
>>15883301
>carbon fibre
What a fucking meme.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:05:32 UTC No. 15883323
>>15883317
Looks better than steel
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:05:38 UTC No. 15883324
>>15883301
>>15883305
they shrank the diameter and number of engines from ITS to Starship
but with the number of changes they are making to starship this is seeming like a mistake. It will take too much effort to up the diameter now, but the ship and booster have gotten longer and longer over the design. Looks like they are destined to have another pencil rocket like falcon 9.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:05:54 UTC No. 15883325
>>15883317
It could have been done with steel if they'd used it from the start. carbon fiber held back the program by years, cayse the initial downscale of the ship size, and only after that did they finally switch to steel. if they used steel from day 1, ITS would be real
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:07:24 UTC No. 15883329
>>15883325
so sad. I need my ITS.
>>15883312
the most kino space animation ever.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:08:01 UTC No. 15883331
>>15883324
musk used to talk about 18m diameter for next gen system, but more recently he said 9m might have been too big, since the payload capacity and size matters less when your rocket is 100% reusable. sounds like a cope to me though
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:10:02 UTC No. 15883334
https://twitter.com/DrChrisCombs/st
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:11:19 UTC No. 15883339
>>15883331
With all the stuff Musk has said about Raptor not being the engine to power Mars colonization etc. I think he's looking to the next big rocket already. We can only hope that he lives long enough and is sucessful enough to make an absolute giant chode of a vehicle which can deliver 100+ people to Mars. Starship is really underpowered for anything more than manned visits sadly. He needs to build on its shoulders.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:11:51 UTC No. 15883340
>>15883334
And subsequently, after that email, SpaceX was avoided bankruptcy and raptor reliability drastically improved. What was his point again?
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:12:31 UTC No. 15883341
>>15883323
It looked better, because reality didn't need to factor into the design of this computer graphic at all.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:13:32 UTC No. 15883343
>>15883325
It's so weird that they just stuck with the vestigial 9 meter radius from the carbon fiber tooling.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:14:38 UTC No. 15883345
>>15883339
These are all questions that someone ANYONE could ask him, but no one will. Instead, they will ask
>le how did you FEEL when the rocket lift off??? XDdd
>le how much did rocket cost???? xxxdddddDDDD
>So what year will you land on Mars???????????? XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:15:26 UTC No. 15883347
>>15883343
unfortunate too, because they stuck with the underpowered vehicle blueprint too so starship will definitely not carry 100 people and will most likely not reach the advertised payload.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:16:40 UTC No. 15883350
>>15883340
didn't musk fire the project lead of raptors/raptor mass manufacturing at that point
looks like it worked and the situation with the raptors was probably genuinely not very good at that point
also fired starlink project lead (that then went to amazon for kuiper) because they were moving too slowly, in retrospect that looks like a very good decision as well
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:17:27 UTC No. 15883352
>>15883347
That's not true, Raptor is inching towards the initial advertized capabilities. by the time it matures, it may well reach 3MN thrust per engine
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:17:53 UTC No. 15883354
>>15883345
> how do toilets work on mars? xdd
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:18:40 UTC No. 15883356
>>15883350
Yes, but Elon is just dumb and I am smart. This is genuinely how these retards think
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:20:10 UTC No. 15883361
>>15883331
A smaller system would definitely stress the ground infrastructure less if nothing else. It's humbling to see the absolute mayhem this thing inflicts upon its surroundings. Even on the second flight, the close up footage looked terrifying with the pulsing shockwaves, dust getting kicked up as high as the launch tower, molten whatever flying arround etc.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:21:17 UTC No. 15883364
>>15883334
Elon derangement syndrome
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:23:08 UTC No. 15883369
>>15883339
What is there beyond a full flow staged combustion besides nukes?
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:23:19 UTC No. 15883370
>>15883361
i have yet to hear a satisfying explanation for the molten lava that shot directly overhead the remote cams. someone should be able to go find a piece of it, but I know I expect too much from retard space photographers
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:25:33 UTC No. 15883376
>>15883369
I think nukes have very shitty thrust to weight. and i dont even wanna think about the regulations. FWS/FAA/EPA aint shit compared to the fucking NRC
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:26:25 UTC No. 15883378
>>15883345
You could ask him on twitter, but sadly he mainly just posts midwit takes about geopolitical topics these days on there.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:28:11 UTC No. 15883381
>>15883364
I know I'm preaching to a choir, but his rocket made it much further than the last one and didn't destroy the launch pad when taking off, so I think he is fairly happy with it.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:28:42 UTC No. 15883383
>>15883370
Maybe this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wly
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:31:08 UTC No. 15883386
>>15883378
if howard hughes had a twitter. eventually elon will go full zubrin
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:32:48 UTC No. 15883388
>>15883383
if the top of the OLM really ablated like that, wouldnt we see that in the flyover pics?
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:34:38 UTC No. 15883391
>>15883361
those shcokwaves definitley fuck the vehicle up if you are trying to reuse it multiple times. theyneed a sound supression system.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:35:18 UTC No. 15883394
>>15883390
coincidentally im listening to ol casey rn
https://youtu.be/P4Y7udcyW3s?si=RRx
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:35:43 UTC No. 15883395
>>15883390
https://twitter.com/terraformedmars
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:36:25 UTC No. 15883396
>>15883391
Just add more steel
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:38:45 UTC No. 15883404
>>15883340
His point was that Musk said that SpaceX would go bankrupt if Starship didn't launch Starlink satellites every other week this year.
Starship only launched twice this year, succeeded only on a few test goals, didn't carry any payload, certainly not a commercial one and SpaceX is still here at the end of the year.
So his point was that whatever the rate of Starship or Raptor development was, clearly didn't factor into the financial state of the company this year. So either Elon was either off on his numbers or lied. And the effect: A few people didn't get days off at that time or something. However you take it, I agree with this man that it wasn't a good show of leadership.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:39:03 UTC No. 15883405
Expendable launchpad for bigger starship
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:43:18 UTC No. 15883409
>>15883386
I find it funny that Elon is now getting mentally sidetracked by an algorithm he owns.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:47:07 UTC No. 15883412
>>15883409
you keep saying shit like this but the fact is Starship has launched twice since Musk bought twitter
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:50:20 UTC No. 15883418
>>15883404
Early on, Elon and Gwynne were very vocal about how Starship makes Starlink possible and otherwise it would be foolish of SpaceX to ramp both projects simultaneously. Now with F9 launching every couple days, and Starlink making truckloads of cash, the situation has changed.
In any case, Combs just doesnt like how the sausage is made. Elon's tantrums, rash decisions, half truths, and lies to underlings have proven to be an immense source of motivation in both Tesla and SpaceX since the beginning. Theyve ensured SpaceX has never stagnated nor grown complacent. Nevermind if he doesnt appear like a good leader, he objectively is one, and it directly stems from his neurotic behavior
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:51:41 UTC No. 15883423
>>15883416
I know those hands anywhere....
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:52:57 UTC No. 15883424
just realized, they never added black paint to square up the tiles for ift2...
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:53:49 UTC No. 15883426
>>15883423
Who do you think this is?
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:55:51 UTC No. 15883430
>>15882937
>where the fuck are they getting the money?
The traditional "romanian" way, copper theft.
Also refurbishing old water heaters isn't that expensive.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:56:21 UTC No. 15883431
>>15883222
Where's the hydrogen on the moon? If you say solar wind you have to kill yourself.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:56:57 UTC No. 15883434
>>15883431
it's in the crators dumby
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:57:55 UTC No. 15883435
Man, those people are so lucky. I wish I was able to see it.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:58:34 UTC No. 15883436
>>15883434
yeah, I realized there was water as soon as I posted
oh well, that's the life of a retard
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:58:51 UTC No. 15883438
Where the fuck is starship 2nd stage video? Did it actually not work or something.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:59:16 UTC No. 15883439
>>15883431
deep craters on the poles work as vapor traps which have water ice
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 15:59:50 UTC No. 15883441
>>15883436
you are far more dumb than i could have ever imagined
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 16:00:17 UTC No. 15883443
>>15883438
it exploded at the end of its burn
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 16:00:42 UTC No. 15883445
>>15883438
they'll post the video after it returns from Mars
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 16:00:56 UTC No. 15883447
>>15883426
Idfk i misread the hands. Dont bully me
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 16:02:04 UTC No. 15883449
>>15883438
It cant work. Too many engines. Ever heard of the N1?
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 16:02:45 UTC No. 15883452
>>15883449
No, I hadn't. Thanks, kind stranger.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 16:05:09 UTC No. 15883456
>>15883452
You bet, champ. Always happy to help educate around here.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 16:06:02 UTC No. 15883457
>>15883438
It was censored by (((Hollywood))) and (((Wall Street)))
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 16:07:06 UTC No. 15883459
ridley scott will direct artemis 3
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 16:10:19 UTC No. 15883467
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 16:16:08 UTC No. 15883479
>>15883438
It was carrying a spysat and false flagged its own RUD to lower suspicion. Its near Jupiter right now.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 16:32:10 UTC No. 15883495
>>15882768
>>15882770
additional comments
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status
> Version 2 of the ship holds more propellant, reduces dry mass and improves reliability
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 16:32:12 UTC No. 15883496
>>15883078
>5435 tonnes of water
"Launch weight" isn't payload capability.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 16:33:31 UTC No. 15883499
>>15883495
so both longer for more propellant but simultaneously less dry mass? lol
are they going to make the steel thinner or something
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 16:36:33 UTC No. 15883507
>>15883364
At least he didn't spend 3 decades modeling it in a computer using underpowered legacy parts 5 decades old.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 16:41:13 UTC No. 15883512
>>15883499
theyre removing all the tools the mexicans forgot to take out the payload bay
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 16:41:36 UTC No. 15883513
>>15883496
>>5435 tonnes of water
>"Launch weight" isn't payload capability
That launch weight would make the rocket larger than Starship Superheavy.
It is utterly delusional
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 16:41:46 UTC No. 15883514
>>15883499
It's made out of paper
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 16:46:11 UTC No. 15883522
>>15883514
he can't keep getting away with it
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 16:55:55 UTC No. 15883542
>>15883499
Pretty much yeah. It's overbuilt af right now. Remember how on the first launch it flew for almost a whole minute after fts blew a hole in it? And this time it looks like the nose section was left largely intact after the explosion. There's plenty of room for improvement.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 16:58:21 UTC No. 15883547
>>15883513
Don't tell me you honestly believe Arca will ever deliver anything at all?
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 16:59:08 UTC No. 15883551
>>15883388
This looked to me like a seam in the shielding poping followed by a fire inside the olm that's seen through the gap created
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 17:06:27 UTC No. 15883561
>>15883499
literally yes, musk has mentioned many times that all these test articles are still hugely overweight and they could shave a lot of mass off.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 17:07:38 UTC No. 15883563
>>15883547
they are literally a romanian investor scam so anyone who unironically treats them as a real player should be mocked relentlessly.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 17:10:39 UTC No. 15883566
>>15883561
>all these test articles are still hugely overweight
and yet when i DARE to state the facts and say that Starship presently cant hit 150 tonnes to LEO people get so mad lol
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 17:20:28 UTC No. 15883576
>>15882883
I will not respect the electric tea kettle
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 17:23:02 UTC No. 15883579
>>15883576
oh shut the fuck up. YOU build a rocket if you are so hot.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 17:25:50 UTC No. 15883585
>>15883551
>seam in the shielding poping
The shielding on top is double walled.
Extraordinary claim.
Where is that gap in both in the postflight pictures you absolute retard?
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 17:39:32 UTC No. 15883604
>>15883361
that was one advantage of launching fuckhuge rockets like Sea Dragon from the ocean, less need to protect infrastructure.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 17:43:29 UTC No. 15883613
>>15883404
they were required to raise money in order to continue working, it was possible that they could not do this in some insane scenario involving Russia having working nukes and a death wish or something
if Starship was launching Starlink v2 every other week they would not have needed to do that
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 17:47:09 UTC No. 15883618
>>15883613
you dont know anything about what your talking about idiot. they werent begging they were asking for donations from the financial communtiy.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 17:48:35 UTC No. 15883619
>>15883551
it looks like rocket exhaust hitting a surface and stagnating, which causes it to heat up and plasmify
like reentry
>>15883579
no
>>15883604
think of the whales
>>15883618
of course they weren't begging, very very rich people with a lot of money to throw around and very valuable time were lining up to throw money at them
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 17:56:39 UTC No. 15883631
>>15883619
>think of the whales
You say that in jest, but it's a valid concern. The Navy's had to shut down sonar tests that were too loud for exactly that reason and a Sea Dragon launch would not be a quiet thing. You might actually have an easier like launching it from somewhere more contained like Lake Victoria.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 17:58:04 UTC No. 15883639
>>15883631
I wasn't joking because I know how badly the whales get fucked by that stuff
yeah, or building an artificial lake in an abandoned quarry somewhere
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 18:03:33 UTC No. 15883652
I will be pissed if they go back to the drawing board.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 18:05:24 UTC No. 15883653
>>15883652
can they? they have to do hls.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 18:05:25 UTC No. 15883654
>>15883652
they will. its fucked. starship program going nowhere. thats something spacex and nasa insiders can agree with. present starship simply does not have the delta v requirement to fly itself to the moon, land on the moon, and ascend from the moon, which is crucial
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 18:10:46 UTC No. 15883663
>>15883654
nuh-uh
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 18:12:51 UTC No. 15883665
>>15883652
They obviously are doing things while starship is not flying
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 18:31:29 UTC No. 15883695
>>15883665
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaU
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 18:48:51 UTC No. 15883708
>>15883566
yeah idk why people get upset about, it's a prototype, not the finished thing, right now starship also cant complete all it's other claims, thats just the nature of iterative testing.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 18:51:16 UTC No. 15883713
>>15883695
can you stop advertizing this retard already.
haha yeah he's so retarded look at this dumb video he posted, we all know already.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 19:30:15 UTC No. 15883780
so technically cant they launch 10 starship stacks per year?
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 19:32:36 UTC No. 15883784
>>15883780
once every 2 weeks
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 19:33:08 UTC No. 15883785
>>15883780
you mean 5 suborbital and 5 orbital?
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 19:34:41 UTC No. 15883790
>>15883785
yeah, so far they launched 2 suborbital
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 19:34:55 UTC No. 15883791
>>15882454
Are those people bots?
This is their entire Twitter going back months
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 19:43:14 UTC No. 15883808
>>15883790
I wonder if suborbital launches are going to be useful at all, seems kind of a waste if they could be able to launch starlinks or something but have to stay suborbital just because, the launches being identical otherwise
but they could test landing procedures anyway, just a waste of launch
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 19:46:33 UTC No. 15883815
>>15883808
They are a very thorough test. Only payload deploy or deorbit burn are not tested on suborbitals.
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 19:52:00 UTC No. 15883827
>>15882271
booster 11 and ship 28 launching on christmas, understood
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 19:54:18 UTC No. 15883833
>>15883790
>>15883780
no. the permittes suborbital launches are without a booster.
this counts as orbital
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 19:54:19 UTC No. 15883834
>>15882271
Does he ever feel embarrassed?
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 19:55:21 UTC No. 15883836
>>15883833
This explains why the FAA calls it an Orbital Flight Test (OFT). And that's why I call it that too. IFT is a fake name for newfags
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 20:03:23 UTC No. 15883857
>>15883815
yeah, but you are just doing a launch when could almost as easily also get some payload into orbit
I would think SpaceX is still going to do the suborbitals just to test out the system and the landings specifically but just seems kind of retarded overall
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 20:12:34 UTC No. 15883876
Anonymous at Fri, 24 Nov 2023 20:13:36 UTC No. 15883878
>>15883791
You can't expect hallway bird people to run their own social media