Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 10:48:19 UTC No. 15942850

NEXT BOOSTER STATIC FIRE WHEEEEENNNN

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 10:52:24 UTC No. 15942857

>3rd simultaneous thread
delete this

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 10:56:09 UTC No. 15942862

>>15942857
Last one was at page 10. The other fraudulent /sfg/ has been left up for a week now and as thus is not considered a true /sfg/ if jannies are unwilling to delete it. We have already had like 4-5 other threads that follow this exact same pattern, its not new and will probably continue until the fake /sfg/ hits bump limit and finally dies. Also last thread stage has proof I did it at page 10 here it is again.

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 11:10:20 UTC No. 15942872

>>15942850
never
not after the last accident

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 11:38:18 UTC No. 15942893

ScamX lost (B1058 KEEEEEEEEK)

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 12:23:19 UTC No. 15942911

>>15942847
the fuck is going on in that picture?
Is it another chink booster that crashed on a rural chinese village?

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 12:28:25 UTC No. 15942914

>>15942911
Ahyup thats exactly what happened. Gotta love chinks and their 'rocketry'

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 12:34:40 UTC No. 15942918

>>15942862
ok, schizo

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 12:45:24 UTC No. 15942921

>>15942911
Based free market chinks, refusing to infringe on the people's right to live in an active testing range.

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 12:53:29 UTC No. 15942930

>>15942921
Ill squash you under my boot wumao chinksect

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 13:03:31 UTC No. 15942937

>>15942914
>>15942921
>Be rural chinese farmer
>dont have much, but you have a roof over your head and the local corrupt CCP party member aka your overlord let's you use a plot of his land to farm on (he owns everything here, but i can farm if i give 90% of my produce to him)
>one day a massive cylinder slams in to town and kills half the town, those that survive breath in the hypergolic propellant fumes and die a slow death.
>you and the others object against this injustice
>the local CCP party member hires goons to intimidate you.
>you still push forward, your social credit score goes in the negative and you get arrested and send for "reducation" to one of the many prison camps
>some rich CCP party member needs a new kidney, and you are a match.
>they execute you for a bunch of fake charges and harvest your organs.
Such is life in china.
China will grow larger!!!

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 13:07:04 UTC No. 15942942

>>15942937
hydrazine isn't that dangerous

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 13:08:00 UTC No. 15942945

>>15942937
this is honestly a good thing
FUCK peasants
they aren't needed anymore

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 13:40:41 UTC No. 15942963

>>15942942
It's a carcinogen, a nerve agent, causes chemical burns on contact with the skin or other tissues. It's fast acting, and has an oral LD50 of 60 mg/kg.

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 14:13:27 UTC No. 15942996

> genuinely feel more sad about B1058 than any children in gaza
have I gone completely schizo ?

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 14:39:39 UTC No. 15943020

>>15942996
rocket hardware is worth more than 2 sandnigger states fighting it out in the desert.

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 15:38:23 UTC No. 15943056

>>15942996
Why would you care about Palestinians? Their rocketry skills are terrible.

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 15:45:15 UTC No. 15943070

>>15942996
I didnt care that much but then found out it was BobnDug's booster :(

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 15:49:55 UTC No. 15943082

>>15942996
I recommend an hydrazine shower to clear your thoughts.

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 15:50:39 UTC No. 15943085

>>15942996
>> genuinely feel more sad about B1058 than any children in gaza
>have I gone completely schizo ?

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 15:51:51 UTC No. 15943088

>>15942996
israel gave us the first kinetic action in space

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 16:34:28 UTC No. 15943130

>>15942996
B1058 has actually directly impacted your life(it has launched SO much shit)
children in gaza will impact nothing

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 16:37:05 UTC No. 15943136

>>15943130
>>15942996
>(it has launched SO much shit)
reminder that it launched transporter 1 AND 3

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 16:46:36 UTC No. 15943143

looked out at the moon while taking a piss tonight, it saddens me that a human has never stepped foot on it while i have been alive

i hope artemis 3 doesn't get delayed much more

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 17:13:03 UTC No. 15943164

>>15943130
except the ground lol
>splat

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 17:39:23 UTC No. 15943183

>>15943143
Jew

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 17:40:48 UTC No. 15943185

https://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/html/20231227/k10014301921000.html
Mark your calendars: H3 test flight No. 2 is scheduled for February 15th.

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 17:44:20 UTC No. 15943187

>>15943183
wrong
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUVYjzvZzjs

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 17:48:56 UTC No. 15943192

Real thread:

>>15934505
>>15934505
>>15934505

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 17:50:40 UTC No. 15943194

>>15943192
No. And you know its not true. Just keep your thread to yourselves, we're not rejoining even after a week of it being up. We've had like 5 threads in our chain by now yours hasnt even passed 125 posts. Keep to yourself.

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 17:51:53 UTC No. 15943196

>15943192
>no a new ip
You're upset but that doesn't mean you have to keep posting in this thread.

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 17:57:36 UTC No. 15943203

i blame the mods for not doing their fucking job.

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 18:01:11 UTC No. 15943208

>>15943203
Janny has been on but just refuses to delete either thread for whatever reason. He hasnt been doing his job nearly as much of well as of late.

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 18:09:00 UTC No. 15943219

https://twitter.com/SpaceOffshore/status/1740071294765285653

Coming this Thursday. Tower 2 arriving at local port.

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 18:38:14 UTC No. 15943250

Good wumao hate thread, we need more of these along with zigger spaceflight hate threads

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 18:51:27 UTC No. 15943262

>>15943250
the fact we aren't using starships to reusably bomb moscow is a crime

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 18:55:56 UTC No. 15943265

>>15942996
Because you've invested years into this shithole and not that shithole. You're emotionally attached to here not there. It all comes down to how you've spent your time.

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 19:21:34 UTC No. 15943282

Emotions are gay

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 19:32:58 UTC No. 15943292

once you reach the peak of your spaceflight you'll have done nothing but add another fleet to my collection - foolish humans.

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 19:51:44 UTC No. 15943312

>>15943208
Dock his pay

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 20:05:25 UTC No. 15943329

Who will land an orbital rocket next? China? BO?

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 20:07:41 UTC No. 15943334

>>15943329
>BO
KEEEEEEEEEEEEK

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 20:17:30 UTC No. 15943345

>>15943334
New Glenn is real. You've seen it down at Kennedy. We're building the first stage. We have all the engines done, ready to be put on the test stand in West Texas.

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 20:18:41 UTC No. 15943346

>>15943329
>6 (six) companies with Falcon/FH clones
what the fuck is china doing man

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 20:20:46 UTC No. 15943351

>>15943346
More than six. I know Landspace is working on a F9 clone Zhuque 3. There's probably more but I can't keep any of the others straight.

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 20:24:35 UTC No. 15943358

>>15943192
haha you're such a pathetic loser, still advertizing when nobody cares about your gay ass split thread.

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 20:26:46 UTC No. 15943361

India also apparently started working on a falcon 9 clone

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 20:30:37 UTC No. 15943367

>>15943361
Everyone is making F9 clones and its already severly outdated tech lmao

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 20:33:35 UTC No. 15943370

https://twitter.com/DrWhitmanCobb/status/1739712522750431520

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 20:33:41 UTC No. 15943371

>>15943346
China is doing what china does best, steal everything they can get their hands on.

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 20:37:49 UTC No. 15943379

>>15943371
I knew China stole shit I'm just a bit surprised as to the extent of the stealing and lack of creativity they have.
truly bug people its fascinating

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 20:38:27 UTC No. 15943380

>>15943361
Japan's Interstellar Technology is working on Zero, but that's a Falcon 9 with Neutron characteristics that's sized to be a smallsat launcher. Europe's Maiaspace (a subdivision of Arianespace) is working on Maia, but that's also a small launcher and it's not going to even try to be done before 2026. Then there's Russia that put out a powerpoint of their Amur which isn't going to even pretend to be ready before 2028.

>>15943346
China's independent companies are what Beijing uses to keep enthusiasm up with the new generation of hires while testing new technology in a way that doesn't risk the prestige of the gerontocratic core of their space program.

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 20:59:21 UTC No. 15943414

Japan to land the SLIM on the moon, what a glorious moment.
I wish that my country could send lunar probes too instead of fucking up with the economy, sure sending a lunar probe would still fuck up with our economy but at least it would be cool.

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 21:01:31 UTC No. 15943420

https://spaceflightnow.com/launch-schedule/

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 21:02:19 UTC No. 15943421

>>15943370
Am I retarded or did they just discover that knowing about commercial space exploration correlates with support for commercial space exploration? Truly this is groundbreaking work.

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 21:05:51 UTC No. 15943426

>>15943421
no, the point is that the public knows little to nothing about spaceflight

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 21:09:23 UTC No. 15943432

>>15943426
Goyim News Network and all the other mainstream media havent cared since the shuttle, the only recent articles that the public sees are those of Felongated Huskrat fails again because they need to trash on everything he does as much as possible since he disagrees with them. Its all just petty squables that prevent humanity from actually going interplanetary. We couldve done it decades ago if the fucking media actually gave a shit and told the goycattle to actually care about something this significant.

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 21:16:47 UTC No. 15943440

>>15943432
>We couldve done it decades ago if the fucking media actually gave a shit
anon you know why they dont give a shit

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 21:19:15 UTC No. 15943444

after there is a clear profit incentive, people will start to care more
that might take a while, but a parallel market will probably be created in space/mars

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 21:21:22 UTC No. 15943450

>>15943444
The only group that needs to care are companies and investors, normalfags can fuck off. Think, who cares about ships or planes aside from a bunch of spotting autists? Yet, they're vital for our economy.

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 21:27:49 UTC No. 15943460

When will Blue Origin ever launch its first orbital mission? Surely not in 2024 since the new glenn hasn't even been built yet and there is no way they are going to assemble, test and send a rocket on the orbit of mars in the span of a single year; especially for the fact that BO never reached earth orbit before.
So much potential wasted, sad.

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 21:46:57 UTC No. 15943491

>>15943460
Bezos said 2024 definitely but he wasn't sure it was gonna carry ESCAPADE

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 22:18:43 UTC No. 15943512

What celestial object will be the first to have a transwoman on it

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 22:18:44 UTC No. 15943513

https://twitter.com/VickiCocks15/status/1740127851540512809

Falcon Heavy raised on the pad once more.

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 22:21:29 UTC No. 15943515

>>15943312
__ ____ __ ___ ____

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 22:24:10 UTC No. 15943520

>>15943460
launching in 2024 maybe
but I doubt they will reach orbit next year (without even talking about landing a booster)

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 22:33:16 UTC No. 15943531

>>15943512
earth, I hope it stays that way

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 22:34:17 UTC No. 15943533

>>15943520
what if its perfect?

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 22:37:52 UTC No. 15943538

>>15943460
>there is no way they are going to assemble, test and send a rocket on the orbit of mars in the span of a single year; especially for the fact that BO never reached earth orbit before.
But you don't understand, Blue Origin has spent YEARS in cad programs testing the rocket. Everything will simply go absolutely perfect on the first launch. Only the incompetent engineers over at SpaceX have to blow rockets up to understand how they blow up; everyone else just designs them correctly the first time around.

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 22:47:48 UTC No. 15943553

>>15943533
I'll be happy to apologize here

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 23:10:01 UTC No. 15943582

>>15943346
>>15943346
It's actually more like 11
He forgot Landspace, CASC, Expace, Rocket Pi, Space Epoch. There's probably a few more

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 23:12:32 UTC No. 15943586

>another B10 scrub/closure
How are they still struggling with this rocket? They have done a few successful full 33 static fires with it already, just do it again

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 23:18:26 UTC No. 15943592

>>15943582
AAEngine also

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 23:36:17 UTC No. 15943620

>>15943370
>normgroids remain ignorant
imagine my surprise!

Anonymous at Wed, 27 Dec 2023 23:58:46 UTC No. 15943637

>>15943192

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 00:14:07 UTC No. 15943664

>>15943637
Damn, you're ugly

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 00:17:44 UTC No. 15943669

we broke the charts

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 00:40:24 UTC No. 15943705

>>15943669
how close to 100 is spacex actually?
google is so dogshit i can't find any resource that just says how much spacex has launched

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 00:45:53 UTC No. 15943711

>>15943705
They had launched 96 rockets by Christmas.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 00:46:12 UTC No. 15943712

>>15943705
I believe they're at 89 Falcon 9s, 3 Falcon Heavies, and 2 Starship flights.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 00:48:54 UTC No. 15943713

>>15943705
93 by my count, with another three possible: a Falcon Heavy and two Starlinks

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 00:54:30 UTC No. 15943719

>>15943329
SpaceX. That's it.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 01:20:16 UTC No. 15943747

>>15943705
https://www.spacexstats.xyz/#launchhistory-per-year

97 so far, there's 3 more planned.

>Falcon Heavy
USSF-52
Florida time
LC-39A
DEC 28 8:07 PM (backup date is day after at DEC 29 8:06 PM)
>Falcon 9
Starlink
Florida
LC-40
DEC 28 11:01 PM (Backup DEC 29 2:59AM, 4 hours later)
>Falcon 9
Starlink
California time
SLC-4E
DEC 30 7:17PM

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 01:29:59 UTC No. 15943759

>>15943370
Should we send influencers to the moon to raise normie interest in space exploration? I think a few selfies like picrel by the right folks could make millions of otherwise ignorant rubes look up from their tiktoks and into the sky.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 01:34:54 UTC No. 15943761

>>15943759
For a while I was hoping that Artemis would fall so far behind that dearMoon 2 could land first, just so someone like Mr. Beast could shame the hell out of whatever diversity hire they're going to put on Artemis III.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 01:51:06 UTC No. 15943774

>>15943759
there was this one regular youtuber who went on bezo's magic dildo ride and it got millions of views

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 02:05:18 UTC No. 15943794

>>15943774
35 million views from some literal who
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXXlSG-du7c

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 02:28:57 UTC No. 15943816

>>15943794
you can buy 10,000 views for a dollar

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 02:36:19 UTC No. 15943821

>>15943816
The jews did do this though hes right.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 02:37:38 UTC No. 15943822

SLIM photo album
https://www.flickr.com/photos/nvslive/albums/72177720313618826/

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 02:39:17 UTC No. 15943826

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zwHJPlqNuPQ
SpaceX - The King Returns 12-26-23

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 02:39:49 UTC No. 15943828

>>15943816

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 02:45:07 UTC No. 15943831

>>15943816
>>15943828
What kind of tourist are you and what's supposed to be funny about this?

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 02:46:32 UTC No. 15943834

>>15943831
The joke is 'Felon Huskrat bad but Christmas'

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 02:48:25 UTC No. 15943837

>>15943834
It's definitely not comedy. This is the same kind of viewpoint-affirming non-joke that The Late Show used to push out.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 02:50:49 UTC No. 15943842

>>15943837
That's what zoomers think comedy is now. Have you been to a standup performance lately? People don't laugh because there are no jokes, they clap instead.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 02:51:50 UTC No. 15943844

>>15943842
>Have you been to a standup performance lately?
I haven't, but it sounds like I'm not missing much.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 02:53:40 UTC No. 15943847

>>15943842
Yeah no fucking shit its horrible humor but this is what my Gen X parents watch this is not zoomer humor. Go search zoomer humor on youtube I assure you its different. Again, this absolute horseshit is millenial or Gen X humor.
>>15943842
Thats millenial humor you fucking nitwit go kill yourself YWNGTS

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 02:55:41 UTC No. 15943851

>>15943847
>YWNGTS
this cuts deep

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 03:05:07 UTC No. 15943858

>>15943842
>they clap instead
MICRO AGGRESSION

Point of privledge, Use Jazz Hands please.

https://twitter.com/growing_daniel/status/1739842682917142655

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 03:06:45 UTC No. 15943860

>>15943759
Mr Beast needs to ride a starship. I've talked to pretty tech knowledgeable normies that have never heard of SpaceX and have no fucking idea that there's starlinks getting flown to space every week.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 03:12:22 UTC No. 15943863

>>15943858
these people need to be in mental institutions

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 03:16:44 UTC No. 15943865

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 03:21:21 UTC No. 15943872

>>15943865
planned 60 flights per year?

oof! 30 years... 135 flights...

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 03:26:09 UTC No. 15943874

>>15943816
>>15943828
Anti-Musk cultists are so weirdly obsessive

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 03:28:11 UTC No. 15943876

>>15943816
It's funny

That some nigger actually came up with this deluded shit

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 03:29:58 UTC No. 15943877

https://global.jaxa.jp/press/2023/12/20231228-1_e.html
H3 launch NET February 15 with a dummy payload plus smallsats (not a $250M payload this time)

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 03:32:49 UTC No. 15943880

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 03:37:16 UTC No. 15943883

>>15943828
Change santa to Starship and its pretty accurate

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 03:37:24 UTC No. 15943884

>>15943880
fucked up. don't post this shit man. be respectful.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 03:39:02 UTC No. 15943887

>>15943880
I forgot for a couple seconds that the CG is that low on the rocket and got confused

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 03:49:06 UTC No. 15943899

>>15943883
YWNBAW

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 03:49:30 UTC No. 15943900

https://spacelaunchnow.me/vehicle/launcher/71/

How did B1061 move from Florida to California in 2022?

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 03:51:11 UTC No. 15943902

>>15943900
By road presumably

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 03:51:35 UTC No. 15943903

>>15943900
By road, the same way it got from Hawthorne to the cape

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 04:14:18 UTC No. 15943912

I'm calling it. No 3rd test launch in 2023.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 04:16:02 UTC No. 15943914

>>15943912
too early to say, retard

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 04:35:07 UTC No. 15943923

>>15943914
TWO DAYS

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 04:42:51 UTC No. 15943930

>>15943923
launch on new year eve confirmed

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 04:43:39 UTC No. 15943932

>>15942942
We used to get 1ml glass ampules of methyl hydrazine, the MSDS is wild. Hazard diamond was 4-4-4. Basically max in every hazard class except radiation.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 04:58:43 UTC No. 15943950

>>15943828
Should I make this the next OP with it being 'Felongated Huskyrat BTFO Edition'?

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 05:02:49 UTC No. 15943955

>>15943950
You should cut off one of your fingers

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 05:13:42 UTC No. 15943970

>>15943955
Youre one to talk about cutting off appendages troon. Go dilate your rotten stinking neovagina

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 05:20:13 UTC No. 15943978

>>15943370
I wonder if they realize that they could write the exact same trhing about commercial exploration of sources of drinking water.
Or oil wells.
Or rare earth metals.
Or PCBs.
Or, if you want to get really basic, iron ore.

I assume that the writers at least know enough to understand this.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 05:53:27 UTC No. 15944002

>>15943978
but those things aren't really novel or cutting edge like space exploration so I don't think you can say they are directly analogous
I still think its mainly that people don't think its going to directly affect them in any way whatsoever and aren't interested in advances in tech generally so there is simply nothing they are personally interested in
if it would be possible for them to personally go to a spacestation or the moon or whatever then a lot more people would pay attention

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 06:20:38 UTC No. 15944024

Ziggers be like
>sabotage iss twice with leaks
>failed two week operation
>cant even go back to the moon with what they did 50 years ago
>launch vodka rocket

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 06:33:53 UTC No. 15944031

>>15944024
I am Joe Baseball from New York oblast and I say no, comrade, it was crazy American lesbian astronaut relationship drama that made the hole be drilled

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 06:36:02 UTC No. 15944034

>>15943370
If you remove SpaceX from the equation, there IS NO commercial space industry. They make up 80% of the industry by themselves. The difference between is staggering; and the news orgs are too busy trying to destroy Musk's empire, paying lip service to vested interests threatened by the disruption in aerospace, auto, and now information brokering. So it stands to reason then that the public at large remains unaware. If the president or the government bodies cared, they'd promote SpaceX, instead of trying to get in their way.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 06:42:13 UTC No. 15944038

>>15944034
this. without spacex (and rocket lab I guess) private space would be... ULA which is being sold off and has a dumb rocket years behind schedule with exploding 2nd stage and missing 1st stage engines, NO manned spaceflight capability, and a smattering of shitty small launch vehicle startups.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 06:55:38 UTC No. 15944051

>>15944038
I still don't understand why ULA is being sold off. What kind of dire circumstances are they under that its better than continuing on alone.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 06:58:18 UTC No. 15944053

>>15944051
keep in mind their business model is 'the government has to prop us up to have redundant launch capability'

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 07:04:48 UTC No. 15944060

>>15943860
That's wild to me. I stay up to date on space news and read up on space history, but I've never seen a Mr. Beast video so I guess we just live in a different world over here on /sfg/. As I understand though, the guy has a huge following and could probably change the outlook of a generation if he made a single "So I went to Space" video. From what I've head he could probably afford a crew dragon flight to make a video to boot

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 07:20:14 UTC No. 15944074

>>15944051
ULA built themselves around "high energy" NSSL launches, which is a niche market in which they face stiff competition.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 07:46:36 UTC No. 15944093

>>15944051
Their rockets have no long term business case and they have no money to create one that does.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 08:14:21 UTC No. 15944111

>>15943860
>I've talked to pretty tech knowledgeable normies
wtf? Every person that I know that is slightly into tech knows what SpaceX is
thats interesting/weird that your tech normies dont know

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 08:20:08 UTC No. 15944119

>>15943860
One of my tech coworkers says that the only thing SpaceX is good at is wasting money which I thought was hilarious, but there was no convincing him that SpaceX is the most successful space company ever. Also started complaining that they got government funding as if no other company has ever gotten government funding before. SpaceX has probably spent by far the most private money out of any space company.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 08:21:20 UTC No. 15944121

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/27/science/secret-asteroid-mission-astroforge.html
>For generations, Western space missions have largely occurred out in the open. We knew where they were going, why they were going there and what they planned to do. But the world is on the verge of a new era in which private interests override such openness, with big money potentially on the line. Sometime in the coming year, a spacecraft from AstroForge, an American asteroid-mining firm, may be launched on a mission to a rocky object near Earth's orbit. If successful, it will be the first wholly commercial deep-space mission beyond the moon. AstroForge, however, is keeping its target asteroid secret.
>The secret space-rock mission is the latest in an emerging trend that astronomers and other experts do not welcome: commercial space missions conducted covertly. Such missions highlight gaps in the regulation of spaceflight as well as concerns about whether exploring the cosmos will continue to benefit all humankind. "I'm very much not in favor of having stuff swirling around the inner solar system without anyone knowing where it is," said Jonathan McDowell, an astronomer at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Massachusetts. "It seems like a bad precedent to set." But for AstroForge, the calculation is simple: If it reveals the destination, a competitor may grab the asteroid's valuable metals for itself. "Announcing which asteroid we are targeting opens up risk that another entity could seize that asteroid," said Matt Gialich, AstroForge's chief executive.
IT BEGINS

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 08:22:14 UTC No. 15944122

>>15944121
https://archive.is/BM0Pm

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 08:24:43 UTC No. 15944125

>>15944122
Thanks bro

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 09:29:37 UTC No. 15944169

>>15944119
>SpaceX is the most successful space company ever.
This is true by the narrow metric of payload mass launched and cadence. But there's a lot more to being a space company than that.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 09:41:59 UTC No. 15944174

>>15944169
Well, lets see, they're also:
>The one with the largest growth potential
>Highest launch services revenue
>On track to exceed Hughesnet's best quarter ever for broadband internet services revenue and still growing rapidly
>Highly advanced engine technology
>Tightly integrated R&D and manufacturing supply chain
>Rapidly advancing technology
>On track to becoming enormously profitable within the next five years
If there's more to being a successful space company, it doesn't sound like there are any successful space companies at all.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 10:02:53 UTC No. 15944181

>>15942847
Implessive...

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 10:05:25 UTC No. 15944183

Guys he's right! How do we get more social scientists at Boca?
https://spacenews.com/spaceports-need-social-scientists-heres-why/

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 10:07:19 UTC No. 15944185

>>15944183
The author doesn't even articulate a function they perform except to inject bureaucratic slowdowns.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 10:35:38 UTC No. 15944202

>>15944121
>a competitor may grab the asteroid
no? isnt there laws for this. its not like somebody can come and start mining your mine too.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 10:36:57 UTC No. 15944204

>>15944183
social science has been a plague for biology

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 10:41:17 UTC No. 15944209

>>15944051
They were created because between Boing and Locksneed (?), there was not enough competition to keep both companies interested. The gummint wanted to have enough redundancy, so ULA was created to launch rockets when nobody else would.
Then SpaceX happened, and now we also have a few other newspace companies that have launched rockets to orbit (BO not related), so ULA's reason to exist is gone.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 10:43:43 UTC No. 15944212

>>15944183
Disgusting how transparent they are in leeching off actually useful science.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 10:46:50 UTC No. 15944215

>>15944169
please name a single metric by which they aren't the best. I'm not being petty or snide, I mean it. /sfg/ is a spacex echocgamber and having some real objective discussion of things they are unequivocally NOT successful at would counterbalance the blind loyalty and dicksucking going on in these threads.

That said, the REASON /sfg/ is so full of SpaceX cocksuckers is because they absolutely ARE the best at literally everything spaceflight, at least as far as I'm aware. I try to keep an open mind so I would really value any kind of counterpoint at all; but (having no knowledge of any such counterpoint to speak of), you coming in here and claiming they aren't the best, without any supporting argument, comes off as mere trolling.

>>15944024
>>15944031
you're just as bad as them, bringing this shit up unprompted. keep it out of the thread; it doesn't fucking matter which side you're on

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 10:47:26 UTC No. 15944216

>>15944202
RIght now the laws of physics are the biggest block to someone else beating them to the asteroid. There's not much capability to get there, and even then, there's probably no way to get there faster. Why go to an asteroid that someone else is already mining, there are plenty of them out there, and if you go later, the transfer is probably longer anyhow.
I think the only ones that would even try are the chinkoids.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 10:48:40 UTC No. 15944218

>>15944209
>They were created because between Boing and Locksneed (?), there was not enough competition to keep both companies interested. The gummint wanted to have enough redundancy, so ULA was created to launch rockets when nobody else would.

Boeing and Lockheed were supposed to keep their efforts separate. Boeing cheated big time on a contract bid that legally should have barred them from bidding for decades to come. But they didn't actually want Boeing to stop bidding on things, so they merged the two companies together to make the problem go away. The resulting company was ULA, and produced the high cost US launch monopoly that SpaceX broke once the Falcon 9 became operational.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 10:58:47 UTC No. 15944223

>>15944218
Yeah, thanks, I didn't remember the details, other than ULA was created because B and L couldn't play nice together, and it was endangering having reliable launches to orbit.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 11:16:55 UTC No. 15944233

>>15944202
Those laws are property rights.
Someone else can't come onto your land and exploit it, but nobody is allowed to own the moon, mars, or any other than body so currently that sort of thing is a massive grey area

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 11:20:55 UTC No. 15944237

>>15944233
The Artemis Accords exist to get rid of the grayness and allow commercial exploitation and recognition of property rights on celestial bodies.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 11:38:51 UTC No. 15944247

>>15944024
anyone who brings up the other side first in the thread deserves to get laughed at. this is a spaceflight thread.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 11:49:19 UTC No. 15944259

>>15944237
half of the world is on the chinese side. we'll be at war over asteroids at this rate.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 11:51:34 UTC No. 15944263

>>15944259
Since China has shown they have every intention of pursuing space as a strategic asset in future conflicts, we'd better position ourselves to win.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 12:42:35 UTC No. 15944297

>>15944259
>half of the world
the irrelevant side yes.
boy i sure do hope we get uzbekistan and whateverthefuckelse stan on the artemis accords.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 13:16:31 UTC No. 15944311

>>15944297
In the future, the only relevant players in space will be the US and China
Other countries signing onto space accords only matters to provide legitimacy, and for that purpose all that matters is # of countries and # of population in those countries

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 13:25:08 UTC No. 15944320

>>15944311
in that case my point stands firm.
i'm not denying that china is a serious threat to contend with. it's just that china only ever gets the most isolated and despotic shitholes to side with them (on most things) with few exceptions.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 13:31:47 UTC No. 15944327

>>15944051
Vulcan has 70 launches on order, of which 26 are NSSL and 38 are Kuiper, I think. When that's done in a few years, it'll be hard to compete and continue to run an entire rocket company that's entirely centered around Vulcan, in a world where SS, NG, Neutron, etc, exist. It'll be hard to continue justifying continued NSSL contracts, and they certainly won't get more Kuiper contracts.

Vulcan could maybe have some value for BO as a low-end complement to NG for the launches where NG is overkill. So it might make sense to merge the companies, gradually transferring most ULA resources to NG and keeping some on Vulcan. Both ULA and BO have main facilities near each other in Decatur/Huntsville, and both rockets use BO's BE-4 main engine and the same propellants, so it might be relatively easy to merge the two companies.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 13:32:49 UTC No. 15944328

>>15944320
Just because you don't care about those countries, doesn't mean no one else does. China isn't lobbying them to sign on for no reason

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 13:39:13 UTC No. 15944339

>>15944328
Specifically, to sign on to ILRS. I mean, what does for example Azerbaijan actually contribute, except to give the project more legitimacy as a multi-national effort. Azerbaijan doesn't even meaningfully contribute in terms of ground stations locations, because Russia is just next door

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 13:48:31 UTC No. 15944353

The factory to produce satellites for China's G60 constellation was officially opened, and delivered the first satellite. Note that the G60 constellation is distinct from the Guowang constellation

Production target is 300 units per year

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 13:49:47 UTC No. 15944355

>>15944353
Source
http://stdaily.com/index/kejixinwen/202312/51756f9ed0f74046af5f8facbb92f518.shtml

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 13:50:51 UTC No. 15944356

>>15944202
In space, no one can hear you sue

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 14:06:32 UTC No. 15944371

>>15944181
CASC still hasn't committed to it. The initial CZ-9 is still supposed to have expendable upper stages, and the the reusable upper stage is planned as a far later addition. Maybe they'll revise those plans if Starship works well. The Chinese are probably still skeptical because of the Space Shuttle

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 14:10:07 UTC No. 15944374

>>15944339
i think china is wanting to get enough international support through ILRS so that the artemis accords dont become de facto international law for space

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 14:21:23 UTC No. 15944378

>>15944209
ULA is joint venture between Boing and Locksneed
Northrop Grumman had Antares and almost finished OmegA that was meant as a competition for government payloads and hypothetically competing in Soyuz weight class for commercial payloads
>>15944051
It's the Boeing's share that's for sale (from what I understand).
Boeing is bleeding cash (5 billion a year, since 2019) and selling off something as hopelessly outmatched as ULA would be probably a good idea.

Civilian airliner sales are so bad that Airbus had to build another factory in US because French can't build the planes fast enough to keep up with demand.
Military jet sales are maybe even worse - Lockheed snatched the new fighter with F-35 over X-32. And if you're poor, the budget option is Lockheed's F-16.
Boeing is only making a handful of FA-18s (and they are going to end the production next year) and handful F-15s (to keep the lights on more than anything).

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 14:38:09 UTC No. 15944386

>>15944121
Literally no one else is attempting asteroid mining (and in fact even these guys aren't--IIRC this barely even a tech demonstrator without even a hypothetical use case for the material produced), and if they did they would have a different target dictated by different timing, objectives and technology.

These assholes are using "it's a valuable secret" to get attention and funding. It makes perfect sense that gay asstroonomers would be stupid enough to play into their hands.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 14:41:09 UTC No. 15944388

>>15944174
You forgot first private human spaceflight, first reusable orbital rockets and (soon) first humans on Mars

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 14:42:18 UTC No. 15944389

>>15944215
>please name a single metric by which they aren't the best. I'm not being petty or snide, I mean it
SpaceX orbital precision is perhaps a little lackluster

Honestly doesn't have much to do with how SpaceX flies its rocket but just what happens with a higher TWR in the upper stage compared to slower accelerating HLOX stages.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 14:44:25 UTC No. 15944392

John Kraus is such a seething cuck about people posting his images LMAOOOO

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 14:46:27 UTC No. 15944394

>>15944311
>In the future, the only relevant players in space will be Elon and Musk
FTFY

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 14:46:55 UTC No. 15944395

>>15944389
>SpaceX orbital precision is perhaps a little lackluster
you don't know that. just cause tory bruno insinuates it doesnt mean its true

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 14:53:01 UTC No. 15944403

>>15944395
You wanted something
It does makes sense to me that a slower accelerating stage would be more accurate.
Does it matter? Clearly not for 99.9% of shit going to orbit but that good initial insertion does allow things like James webb to operate longer.

Of course, needing things to be so accurate is just a continued symptom of old space mentality.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 14:57:58 UTC No. 15944406

>>15944378
boing is a damn case study in how disconnected higherups can completely crush a company's foundation.
that merger with Mickey Douglas was a deal with the devil.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 15:03:01 UTC No. 15944410

>>15944392
Remember to crop out his watermarks and add watermarks from other photographers before reposting

Herbs at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 15:06:33 UTC No. 15944414

>>15944410
Fuck off

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 15:09:51 UTC No. 15944417

>>15944410
wasnt going to bother at first but after >>15944414
i now will

🗑️ Herbs at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 15:22:45 UTC No. 15944434

>>15944417
Shut up incel

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 15:23:05 UTC No. 15944436

>>15943816
It's funny how musk never called out the jews in anyway but whenever musk calls out the globalists who oposse him the media and jews scream antisemitism.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 15:24:05 UTC No. 15944438

>>15943880
Pitty it didnt crash and burn but just tipped over, no eternal afterlife in valhalla for this booster.

🗑️ Barkun at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 15:26:13 UTC No. 15944441

>space thread

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 15:40:29 UTC No. 15944470

Namefags go back.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 15:46:43 UTC No. 15944481

>>15944414
>>15944434
KEEEEK

🗑️ Barkun at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 15:50:07 UTC No. 15944484

>>15944481
I don't care if the jannie bans me for what I post. This board needs cleaning...

Right... Stop posting this gey space flight thread it makes no sense to go-to mars with a few seeds and a tent. It's not going to work faggots and it's wasting muh taxes

Barkun at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 15:54:58 UTC No. 15944491

>>15944481
You go-to mars
You have soil connected to his arm in arm sized dome with plants growing.
You expand this dome when you reach mars as a priority objective.

You take the ecosystem with you

Barkun at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 15:56:04 UTC No. 15944495

>>15944491
You'll need about 50 starships making journeys to and from Mars with resources.

Barkun at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 15:57:09 UTC No. 15944497

>>15944495
Seems pointless since mars is barren. Pluto is a more reasonable objective.

Barkun at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 16:11:04 UTC No. 15944513

>>15944491
>>15944495
>>15944497
samefag

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 16:24:13 UTC No. 15944527

>>15944389
>SpaceX orbital precision is perhaps a little lackluster
>Source? I made it up. (ULA marketing)

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 16:26:54 UTC No. 15944531

It's going to crash, isn't it?

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 16:32:05 UTC No. 15944535

>>15944531
Centaur RUD on ascent.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 16:33:52 UTC No. 15944539

>>15944535
loss of contact with second stage ~12 minutes into flight

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 16:36:19 UTC No. 15944541

>>15944539
Rangefinder returning all zeros or NAN during the final 30 seconds of descent.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 16:39:00 UTC No. 15944542

>>15944541
mission clock set to India time

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 16:40:54 UTC No. 15944544

>>15944531
Centaur failing would ruin ULA plans to sell

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 17:10:32 UTC No. 15944561

>>15944544
If anything another fumble would make it easier for ULA to get bought out.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 17:14:33 UTC No. 15944567

>>15944535
>>15944539
>>15944544
It's going to be a full success and stupid fucking general will seethe.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 17:14:45 UTC No. 15944568

>>15944403
That reply wasn't me (the original question asker). It's a good point but - like you said - it's not relevant to the vast majority of spaceflight. On top of that, aside from one partial failure, I'm not aware of any launches that a Falcon 9 managed to miss the target orbit for. Every mission profile is designed with some amount of margin of error for the orbit and F9 is capable of meeting those accuracy demands, so the argument really only does apply for cases like JWST where being more on-target means a longer spacecraft lifetime.
JWST is rare in that it's in an unstable orbit that requires significant dV for stationkeeping, whereas nigh on all sats use the majority of their fuel for finalizing the orbit in one burn, sometimes also shifting to a graveyard orbit later on.

I guess with starlink being >50% of all sats and actually needing to make up for atmospheric drag with their thrusters, I technically can't claim that 'most' satellites don't need fuel for stationkeeping, BUT on the other hand starlinks don't exactly need ultra precise orbit insertion considering they come off the stage in a giant stack and then have to make their own way to the dispersed orbits. High precision delivery wouldn't significantly extend the lifespan of a starlink anyways, and on top of that they're internet devices which absolutely require upgrading on at least a decadal interval to keep up with network speed advancements.

Really if anything that thought highlights another strength of Falcon 9, that it enables massive constellations of cheap sats in the first place. James Webb and missions like it are partly a symptom of high launch costs preventing groups from just spamming tons of robust cheap satellites insead of one budget devouring all-consuming engineering nightmare that *has* to get everything absolutely perfect. Overengineering and mass autism are the biggest impediments after cost, and reducing the $/kg to LEO is the most expedient solution to two of those.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 17:17:43 UTC No. 15944571

>>15944561
I doubt ULA wants to sell themselves for scraps
>>15944567
It probably will

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 17:17:59 UTC No. 15944572

>>15944567
That'd be great, I think anons are all just burnt out on watching moon landers fail over the past few years.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 17:24:21 UTC No. 15944585

>>15944567
Tell that to the junkyard of failed lunar landers and rovers.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 17:39:14 UTC No. 15944601

>>15944535
>>15944539
>>15944541
>>15944544

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 17:59:09 UTC No. 15944618

>>15944327
This way blue also gets the Centaur upper stage which gives them more in-house hydrolox knowledge. I'm not sure if they're still working on the hydrolox upper stage they proposed for New Glenn at some point (it was a long time ago) but they're definitely using hydrogen for their Blue Moon lander. It isn't using an RL-10, and BO already has their own in-house hydrolox engine from New Shepard that they're adapting to vacuum use for the lander, but BO doesn't have any experience at all with handling hydrolox in orbit (because they don't have experience handling ANYTHING in orbit lol) but achieving long term storage, zero boiloff, and multiple engine restarts in vacuum would be a lot easier with some of ULA's Centaur experience.

Buying ULA makes it much easier for Blue to win govt. contracts as well, and I have to wonder how much of ULA going up for sale has to do with Bezos/BO putting pressure on them and playing backroom political games. Putting on my tinfoil hat for some schizo time, maybe BE-4 isn't in such an absolutely dire state as we've been led to believe, and BO failing to deliver on time was a tactic to put even more economic pressure on Bruno/ULA, or even if there was some sort of collusion between BO and Bruno or the ULA executive board to consolidate, and BE-4 delays are a smokescreen for a deal that was reached years ago. You've got to keep in mind that ULA was literally born from that exact sort of corruption and that Bezos is no stranger to buying out competition and schmoozing it up with politicians to skirt regulations.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 18:07:21 UTC No. 15944627

Nyx Earth
The Franco-German Dragon

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 18:08:22 UTC No. 15944628

>>15944627

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 18:24:51 UTC No. 15944643

>>15944378
Isn't the order for 140 F15EX's going to be all new airframes? I could have sworn the differences made it unfeasible to upgrade the existing fleet to the EX specification. Then again, with the rate boing has been building them it might be just barely keeping the lights on.

It's genuinely god damn mind boggling just how many completely different things boing has managed to massively fuck up in the last several years. The 737 MAX-8 crashing twice was an enormous international boondoggle pissing off commercial airline customers, congress, and the FAA; the F15EX delivery delays pissed off the Air Force, their entire commercial airliner program being nothing but production issues and missed deliveries; losing the joint strike fighter contract to locksneed; probably some of ULA's issues are resultant of boeing executives' unparalleled retardation; the Starliner capsule being a constant deathtrap with hydrazine leaks, faulty guidance software, the fire hazard wiring harness, and parachute issues; and them the horrifying abomination of SLS to cap things off.

Feels like boeing hasn't managed a single W for at least a decade now

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 18:38:02 UTC No. 15944656

>>15944643
Makes me wish to be in a corporate structure just to see how disconnected and a shitfest everything is for things to go this downhill.
Work at a big company now and have 10 managers above me

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 18:38:47 UTC No. 15944657

>>15944643
Yes the F-15EX are completely new build, a big part of the justification for them is replacing old F-15C at the end of their airframe lives.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 18:42:56 UTC No. 15944661

>>15944643
Yeah, but SLS is cost+, so that's actually a win for Boeing. It's just an L for everyone else involved.

And you missed the fact that they've lost over two billion dollars upgrading a pair of 747s to Air Force One specs and that project is still running behind schedule.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 18:43:25 UTC No. 15944662

>>15944378
>It's the Boeing's share that's for sale (from what I understand).

That came from the idea that Lockheed was buying out Boeing's share rather than how it turned out (BO vs. Cerberus vs. Textron).

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 18:50:11 UTC No. 15944668

>>15944627
Very round

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 18:50:14 UTC No. 15944669

So why were the feds okay with being unable to send American astronauts to the International (American) Space Station without paying Russia to send them?

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 18:51:59 UTC No. 15944670

>>15944669
They weren't. They had no alternatives to the Shuttle, and this actually helped SpaceX get the CRS contract because they could demonstrate to congress what a waste of money it was paying the Russians to do it

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 18:54:03 UTC No. 15944675

>>15944669
>feds
you mean american aerospace companies?

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 19:01:33 UTC No. 15944687

>>15943759
This is what Steve Jobs thought would benefit the internet, then we got the iphone.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 19:03:19 UTC No. 15944690

>>15944661
I also forgot to mention that Boeing decided to give up and pull out of the competition for the Air Force's new E-4B Nightwatch 'doomsday' planes, which realistically can only be fulfilled by Boeing in the first place since they require a large airliner, domestically manufactured, with 4 engines, modified into a mobile nuclear command center. Literally a contract that could only go to Boeing and they fucking pulled out.

Apparently part of the reason they gave up is that it's a fixed price contract. I fervently hope boeing manages to implode so spectacularly that even the government stepping in to protect them during bankruptcy isn't enough to prevent their total collapse.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 19:03:38 UTC No. 15944692

another tank deliverd and crew is busy on some pipes now

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 19:05:00 UTC No. 15944693

>>15943860
What would the title of the video be?

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 19:18:52 UTC No. 15944702

>>15944669
America is in decline.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 19:24:07 UTC No. 15944708

>>15944693
>I survived SPACE for 48 hours

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 19:41:35 UTC No. 15944731

>>15944669
Reminder that Atlas V existed and still exists and still is powered by RD-180
Reminder that Pre-RS68 upgrade DIVH couldn't meet the highest DoD requirement (NSSL GEO, 13,500 lbs treshold) without the foreign-made RL-10 nozzle extension (which brought it to 13,800 lbs)

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 19:47:14 UTC No. 15944739

>>15944690
Also the HLS bid that was so bad it didn't even go into further consideration, had NASA tell them to never bid anything this terrible again, and led to the firing of a NASA official who tried to tell them just how much they were fucking up.
Does Boeing have a single recent W other than SLS profit? Is the 787 doing better now or is it still muh batteries muh composites fuckery?

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 19:50:56 UTC No. 15944743

>>15944669
That was never the plan, but then Obama canceled the Ares I.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 20:12:40 UTC No. 15944759

StarXisters... They lied... I thought it was suppsoed to lift 150 tonnes?

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 20:13:40 UTC No. 15944760

>>15944531
>first commercial robotic launch to the Moon's surface
first successful one maybe, only retards work at NASA nowadays it seems

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 20:16:37 UTC No. 15944764

>>15944759
in theory i can fit both my fists up my ass and screech like a banshee

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 20:18:12 UTC No. 15944767

>>15944760
for me it's vast and axiom and gravitics and bo/snc all making the "first commercial space station" because none of them are up yet and also they pretend bigelow didn't launch those modules

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 20:23:54 UTC No. 15944770

how much faster would star ship have been developed if they didn't decide to go all in on fucking boca chica?

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 20:28:34 UTC No. 15944776

>>15944770
FAA

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 20:28:42 UTC No. 15944777

>>15944702
everyone is

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 20:28:56 UTC No. 15944778

>>15944643
Don't forget the KC-46 tanker

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 20:30:33 UTC No. 15944781

>>15944759
in theory this guy is supposed to have a penis but in practice he's a tranny who probably lost it a long time ago.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 20:31:35 UTC No. 15944783

>>15944770
it would have been developed slower because regulatory hurdles would have been even worse in another area.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 20:35:52 UTC No. 15944784

>>15944770
Them going all in on boca chica meant that it was the best place to build starship.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 20:37:03 UTC No. 15944787

>>15943759
People would be extremely enthused by it. And then they'd forget it within a week when the influencers move on to the next thing

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 20:37:04 UTC No. 15944788

>>15944784
its a good location for a privately run LAUNCH SITE

the factory itself, and testing facilities are insanely cramped there

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 20:38:48 UTC No. 15944790

>>15944788
Sure, but transporting starship longer distances would be a huge pain.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 20:40:03 UTC No. 15944791

>>15944788
have fun transporting your 9 meter diameter 70 meter long tube back and forth hundreds of kilometers through a bunch of different counties because they need inspection, modification or repairs after testing.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 20:40:38 UTC No. 15944792

>>15944790
>>15944791
build it at a port, stick it on a barge

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 20:41:08 UTC No. 15944794

>>15944791
P.S keep in mind you wont be able to transport them vertically like they're doing now.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 20:41:29 UTC No. 15944795

>>15944790
>>15944791
?
You barge it down the river to the coastal water ways over to brownsville or a privately constructed dock on the beach if they had permission for that

There is still years of single use launches before reuse starts

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 20:49:44 UTC No. 15944802

>>15944795
You're a retard.
See how often they roll back the prototypes?
>There is still years of single use launches before reuse starts
Incorrect. Otherwise they wouldnt have been trying to do a boostback and water landing on the first flight.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 20:50:23 UTC No. 15944804

>>15944795
irrelevant when you can already see how much moving between the launch and build site they have to do right now.
at the moment they can vroom it between in a few hours. imagine if every inspection and engine installation and modification they did between testing was a multi-day trip instead.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 20:57:20 UTC No. 15944809

>>15944389
SpaceX also lacks a high-energy upper stage, which is why Atlas was still used for solar system exploration missions.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 20:57:51 UTC No. 15944810

>>15944802
>>15944804

>See how often they roll back the prototypes?

From the TESTING stand
Once its been TESTED
And HOPPED
It's good to go, send it to the launch site to destructively test

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 20:59:23 UTC No. 15944812

>>15944810
>and hopped
nigger are you fucking dense?

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 21:03:03 UTC No. 15944816

>>15944812
It's supposed to be reusable, if it can't even be hopped then what is the goddamn point of shooting for orbit?

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 21:12:49 UTC No. 15944824

>>15944759
>spaceguy5

anon I have some bad news

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 21:13:32 UTC No. 15944826

>>15944816
i mean, maybe i've just been paying more attention than most, but have you not been looking at the last half year of testing?
most of the issues or simple installation jobs that required returns to the factory were before any static fires had even occured.
you can pretty much add another year of delay onto this testing campaign if you want them to move the factory to a place somewhere else that requires a week-long retour by boat.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 21:14:12 UTC No. 15944827

>>15944809
Europa Clipper

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 21:16:02 UTC No. 15944831

>>15944181
Why is china so much more advanced than the USA? in 2024 they will have 10 falcon heavy class vehicles and long march 11 is coming right after

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 21:16:49 UTC No. 15944832

>>15944826
>inb4 why the hell would they move the factory now
thats not what i meant btw, phrased that weirdly. if the factory was built in a different area to begin with, every little hickup that require rollbacks would require multiple days wasted in transporting it back and forth.
i think people also underestimate NIMBYism.
yes if they built it outside of a nature reserve, NIMBY's wouldn't be able to use that angle anymore, but there would have been equally similar regulatory hurdles building the factory all the same. most of the problems were with the launch site itself affecting its surroundings and that would not have been an easier process anywhere else along the coast.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 21:21:07 UTC No. 15944840

>>15944809
Psyche mission

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 21:23:35 UTC No. 15944842

>>15944831
>in 2024 they well have 10 falcon heavy class vehicles
no they won't lol.
>dey don't have a commerciarry avairabre heavy-rift vehicre. The Starchship may some day come about. It's on the dlawing board light naow. Infinispace LongDong Sharting Dragon 9-15 are real!

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 21:24:55 UTC No. 15944844

>>15944826
>>15944832
?
Maybe you miss the point
Static fires, dress rehersals, hops, etc
can be done ANYWHERE, and do not need to be done at boca chica

The only thing that needs to happen at boca chica, or florida, is orbital launches
The full complete development of the vehicle can happen before orbital launches, which is how it works for most rockets

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 21:28:03 UTC No. 15944846

>>15944831
The only designs they have that qualify for that are the Long March 9 & 10, and neither of those are rolling out to the pad in 2024. They haven't even started building the pads for them yet and that's going to take more than 12 months by itself.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 21:29:49 UTC No. 15944848

>>15944739
>787
>manufacturing the wings in FUCKING JAPAN and have to ship them all the way to South Caroline because ?????
I used to be a big Boeing simp, but the fuckery with the 787 supply chain being all over the place FOR NO REASON blackpilled me.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 21:30:50 UTC No. 15944851

>>15944824
what's the bad news?

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 21:32:49 UTC No. 15944853

>>15944844
Wait.

Are you the guy who kept saying that SpaceX should be building and testing Starship in fucking Arkansas?

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 21:32:53 UTC No. 15944854

>>15944844
>can be done ANYWHERE, and do not need to be done at boca chica
At that point why even launch from boca chica then? You would need to build up infrastructure to support the rocket at 2 different places.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 21:33:52 UTC No. 15944857

>>15944844
youre a retard
>do it my way which is objectively worse
no lol

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 21:52:16 UTC No. 15944870

>>15944844
>static fires
>dress rehearsals
>hops
>can be done ANYWHERE
...
i dont even know what to say.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 21:53:11 UTC No. 15944871

>>15944870
Do you misunderstand something?

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 22:19:30 UTC No. 15944891

>>15944854
Boca has basically been bought out.
I doubt there was many places that could be gentrified to the degree SpaceX wanted and be a OK place for launches

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 22:22:27 UTC No. 15944894

>>15944891
Chicago?

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 22:28:39 UTC No. 15944905

>>15944894
>launching over land

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 22:29:21 UTC No. 15944908

>>15944871
i misunderstood how stupid you were, yes.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 22:30:48 UTC No. 15944912

>>15944905
launching over land is literally fine if you aren't flying directly over towns, and don't have large hypergolic stages

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 22:31:20 UTC No. 15944913

What happened to the scat posting flerfer

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 22:31:55 UTC No. 15944916

>>15944905
seems to work for the other two space powers

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 22:34:58 UTC No. 15944920

>>15944905
not launching over land is a meme requirement born of the luxury of having coastlines everywhere but straight north. launching overland is fine.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 22:59:19 UTC No. 15944949

https://twitter.com/DanaEn803/status/1740416641467367934

Reminder, 1 starship production per week is the long stretched goal of SpaceX. 50+ per year.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 23:00:36 UTC No. 15944950

is FH going to launch tonight finally

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 23:00:41 UTC No. 15944951

He should set up the starship factory in arkansas

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 23:01:59 UTC No. 15944955

>>15944950
2 hours till launch

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 23:03:14 UTC No. 15944958

>>15944955
yayyyy

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 23:06:42 UTC No. 15944959

How much (lengthwise) clearance you need to launch a rocket? Could Europe launch rockets over mediterranean sea?

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 23:07:59 UTC No. 15944962

>not launching over land is a meme
>all new Russian and Chinese spaceports are on their east coasts

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 23:08:22 UTC No. 15944963

>>15944949
>long stretched goal
Don't believe it, 100 per year is one order of magnitude too low, 1,000 per year is closer to peak boeing airliner production rate, and that's a minimum for Elon

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 23:23:12 UTC No. 15944977

>>15944959
Not easily They've thought about it but there's just too many boats floating around

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 23:25:42 UTC No. 15944982

>>15944977
shut the fuck up.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 23:25:59 UTC No. 15944983

>>15944959
You can't imagine how autistically these government regulators are
They would rather set their whole launch organization in another continent at whatever billions extra cost than launch eastward from spain

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 23:30:07 UTC No. 15944985

>>15944983
Kourou has some significant advantages as a launch site which have nothing to do with launching over water.

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 23:35:40 UTC No. 15944994

>>15944982
Seething tranny

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 23:37:44 UTC No. 15944995

>>15944950
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wnfddhDuWDE
And a Starlink launch, too
T-90:00

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 23:38:06 UTC No. 15944996

>>15944994
and you?

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 23:39:05 UTC No. 15944998

>>15944995
damn
they're still not cracking 100 thought right

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 23:46:40 UTC No. 15945007

>>15944995
https://www.spacex.com/launches/mission/?missionId=ussf-52

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

~1 hr from now

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 23:48:01 UTC No. 15945010

>>15944998
They've got an X-37b and two more starlinks. I think that's 96, plus two Starship tests?

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 23:50:53 UTC No. 15945014

>>15944998
blame December's cape weather

Anonymous at Thu, 28 Dec 2023 23:54:49 UTC No. 15945021

>>15944998
you know what the headlines are going to be come monday
>hack fraud elon musk can't meet own goals for rocket company; falls short on launches

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 00:04:51 UTC No. 15945037

will x-37b actually launch this time or not

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 00:05:32 UTC No. 15945038

>>15945037
yeah

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 00:06:35 UTC No. 15945039

>>15945037
Weather is at 80%, so things are looking pretty good

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 00:07:47 UTC No. 15945041

>>15944995
T-60:00 for FH
T-4:00:00 for F9

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 00:16:08 UTC No. 15945054

>>15945037
I've always liked this little guy. In Seveneves, notHillary Clinton rides one into orbit and proceeds to ruin everything. The first half of that book is awesome and I haven't found anything that has a similar tone.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 00:16:36 UTC No. 15945056

>>15942847
Asking about QI again. Someone said last thread that it has been tested in the lab with results suggesting it works. Anyone got proofs and is capable of explaining the mechanics for why the results show it working and not just a fluke?

Another person claimed the “bullet cluster” is evidence of dark matter, but another person retorted with a claim said cluster can also be explained by QI. Can someone explain both sides of these theories.

Thirdly, if one of the basic reasons for a QI drive being unlikely to work that I heard about is: If an engine outputs constant thrust at constant power, eventually an accelerating craft will gain kinetic energy at a greater rate than energy expended via it’s engine.
This reasoning sounds sensible to me, but how does this work to thrusters using photons? E.g a flashlight left on in space for a very long time outputs constant energy and thrust encounters the same problem.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 00:19:04 UTC No. 15945058

>>15945056
QI is a bit played by people on this board. noone seriously thinks it works.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 00:21:00 UTC No. 15945060

>>15945037
They are saying yes, but its top secret and wont be releasing any more details.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 00:26:27 UTC No. 15945063

>>15945056
the drive works but not because qi is true. it has beneficial interactions with earth's magnetic field

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 00:27:12 UTC No. 15945064

>>15945056
QI is a meme. If people were serious about it, it would be as transparent as SpaceX with their launches and failures. The secrecy and hush hush over an experiment launched on a public mission to orbit just goes to show that its a fucking farce.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 00:29:53 UTC No. 15945067

Weren't LZ 1 and 2 supposed to go to some new rocket company?

https://x.com/SpaceX/status/1740526043554001092?s=20

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 00:31:26 UTC No. 15945069

>>15945067
yeah I recall reading that too

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 00:31:36 UTC No. 15945070

>400+ lunar missions forecasted for the next 10 years
how likely is this

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 00:33:03 UTC No. 15945072

>>15945064
>If people were serious about it, it would be as transparent as SpaceX with their launches and failures.
What's secretive about their launch? The guy talks about it constantly on twitter. We only don't know the results because they haven't gotten their time slot yet. They're leasing time at the end of the list so they have to wait for everyone else to finish their experiments.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 00:38:36 UTC No. 15945080

>>15945007
10 minutes

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 00:45:44 UTC No. 15945088

>>15944389
ULA BTFO

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 00:45:45 UTC No. 15945089

FH are comfy. I'm glad I'm watching with all of you. dual RTLS!

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 00:47:57 UTC No. 15945091

>>15945067
https://spacenews.com/space-force-allocates-three-historic-cape-canaveral-launch-pads-to-four-companies/
Two companies, in fact: Phantom Space (Daytona: booking launches for 2023!) and Vaya Space (The Green Rocket Launch Company), both optimistic small launch providers.

I'm not very optimistic about either of them.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 00:49:11 UTC No. 15945093

MUSIC https://twitter.com/i/broadcasts/1ynKOyeDmrwJR

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 00:51:14 UTC No. 15945095

Good morning /sfg/, I hate Twitter

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 00:51:18 UTC No. 15945096

nighttime FH
Hope we get some good shots

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 00:51:41 UTC No. 15945098

>jessie

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 00:52:14 UTC No. 15945101

A reusable super heavy lift rocket with a reusable spaceplane payload just flew over my house!

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 00:52:42 UTC No. 15945103

https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/1740535676519821537

Live with Jessie

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 00:53:29 UTC No. 15945105

it's launched inverted like shuttle? interesting.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 00:54:13 UTC No. 15945106

Clear Live!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e50SII7LIT0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e50SII7LIT0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e50SII7LIT0

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 00:54:39 UTC No. 15945107

i love this pierced titty slut

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 00:56:23 UTC No. 15945109

10 bings

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 00:58:18 UTC No. 15945110

>>15945106
Finally a real stream

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 00:58:55 UTC No. 15945111

Women make me so horny bros

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 00:59:26 UTC No. 15945113

>>15945111
I know right

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:00:10 UTC No. 15945114

>adversary, singular
hmm

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:01:41 UTC No. 15945115

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:02:17 UTC No. 15945116

>maintain our superiority
damn right

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:02:39 UTC No. 15945117

so we still don't know what orbit it's going into do we?

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:02:53 UTC No. 15945118

>>15945114
It's referring to Satan

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:02:55 UTC No. 15945119

space
starts
here

strong we gaan energy

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:03:25 UTC No. 15945120

>>15945115
cute festive outfit!

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:03:54 UTC No. 15945121

Can't have a US military video without a bunch of useless naggers

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:04:26 UTC No. 15945122

The moon shot on the top left looks nice

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:05:56 UTC No. 15945124

Spaceplane bros we can’t stop winning

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:06:13 UTC No. 15945125

Why did they develop a spaceplane when a capsule would have been easier, and do the same thing?

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:06:20 UTC No. 15945126

>>15945106
why can't she speak american instead of anime

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:06:30 UTC No. 15945127

GO

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:06:34 UTC No. 15945128

>>15945125
because our government is run by fucking retards

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:07:08 UTC No. 15945131

>>15945125
Landing on a runway > splashdown

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:07:11 UTC No. 15945132

>>15945126
Anime girls are developmentally challenged

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:07:17 UTC No. 15945133

>>15945125
capsules are GAY planes are BADASS!

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:07:29 UTC No. 15945134

>>15945125
So it can land exactly where they want it to

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:07:31 UTC No. 15945135

LAUNCH

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:07:51 UTC No. 15945136

the chinese will probably play catch up and send their own spaceplane on a heavy lift rocket next

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:08:04 UTC No. 15945137

we gaan

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:08:04 UTC No. 15945138

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:08:18 UTC No. 15945139

>>15945134
so can a capsule..

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:08:26 UTC No. 15945140

>>15945136
nobody tell him

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:08:45 UTC No. 15945141

Max-Qute!

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:09:15 UTC No. 15945143

>scroll X
>falcon heavy stream comes by right as the countdown reaches t-0
perfectly timed, thanks X

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:09:19 UTC No. 15945144

>>15945139
landing on land in a capsule with sensitive spooky cargo isn't easy

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:09:26 UTC No. 15945145

N O M I N A L

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:09:43 UTC No. 15945148

beco

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:10:54 UTC No. 15945150

>>15945126
gatekeeping is based

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:11:06 UTC No. 15945151

MECO!

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:11:52 UTC No. 15945153

No telemetry for u

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:12:09 UTC No. 15945156

dougboat

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:12:17 UTC No. 15945157

>Spooky Spaceplane

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:12:19 UTC No. 15945158

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:12:34 UTC No. 15945159

>>15945133
Facts

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:12:50 UTC No. 15945160

>>15945158
>delivering your mom's new dildo

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:13:56 UTC No. 15945163

>>15945158
Oh damn I never realized just how huge mvac engines are

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:14:12 UTC No. 15945164

>spaceplane: yawn
>spacecopter: real shit

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:14:59 UTC No. 15945165

they should put windshield wipers on the booster cams or something. too blurry

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:15:01 UTC No. 15945167

>city lights in the background
KINOOOO

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:15:45 UTC No. 15945170

it's that easy

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:16:01 UTC No. 15945171

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:16:02 UTC No. 15945172

>he can't keep getting away with it

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:16:05 UTC No. 15945174

Bullseye. Man, that never gets old.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:16:10 UTC No. 15945175

Perfect landing. Yes, we can!

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:16:34 UTC No. 15945176

>>15945164
>The Rotary Rocket did fly three test flights and a composite propellant tank survived a full test program, however these tests revealed problems. For instance, the ATV demonstrated that landing the Rotary Rocket was tricky, even dangerous. Test pilots have a rating system, the Cooper-Harper rating scale, for vehicles between 1 and 10 that relates to difficulty to pilot. The Roton ATV scored a 10 — the vehicle simulator was found to be almost unflyable by anyone except the Rotary test pilots, and even then there were short periods where the vehicle was out of control.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:16:50 UTC No. 15945177

>96th and final mission
its over 100 launch bros

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:17:21 UTC No. 15945178

>I got one more in me!

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:17:30 UTC No. 15945180

>>15945164

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:17:57 UTC No. 15945181

>>15945177
Fish & Wildlife Services cucked us

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:18:21 UTC No. 15945183

>Most advanced and experimental and secret and cool space vehicle is now in space and heading to a new orbit

USSF is so cool

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:18:39 UTC No. 15945184

>>15945163
now you know why spacex keeps making the the cuck mvac

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:18:42 UTC No. 15945185

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:19:08 UTC No. 15945186

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:19:47 UTC No. 15945188

So what orbit is it going to?

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:20:01 UTC No. 15945189

>>15945188
Lunar

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:20:21 UTC No. 15945190

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:20:33 UTC No. 15945191

>only 96 launches in a year.
>can't even land the center booster
I knew it. Elon is a fucking fraud.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:20:55 UTC No. 15945193

>>15945188
the giganerd sat tracking mailing list will have it soon enough http://www.satobs.org/seesat/Dec-2023/index.html

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:21:31 UTC No. 15945194

>>15945183
Fuck off pajeet

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:22:06 UTC No. 15945196

formation flying of spaceplanes when?

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:23:06 UTC No. 15945197

>>15945183
I always assumed the X-37 was simply just a front, a facade, a ‘potemkin village‘ set up to look scary but in reality it’s just running simple (albeit interesting, I’m sure) experiments

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:23:08 UTC No. 15945198

>>15945191
https://twitter.com/i/broadcasts/1OwxWYyalmWGQ

Starlink in ~2 and half hours.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:24:56 UTC No. 15945201

>>15945176
someone find the quote of the test pilot saying it was like flying a dishwasher or something to that effect

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:28:08 UTC No. 15945204

>>15944567
lol

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:29:01 UTC No. 15945207

>launching important payload on the maiden flight of a new rocket
why.wav

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:29:11 UTC No. 15945208

>>15944844
This is only true in the barest technical sense. The only sensible choice is to do it close to the launch and manufacturing site to reduce transportation times. Once SpaceX has established their manufacturing and verification process techniques, eliminating cryo and static fire testing is probably going to be a long term goal.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:30:49 UTC No. 15945210

>>15945207
remember when soichi publicly shat on JAXA for putting a payload on the doomed H3 flight (that resulted in Clear crying on stream)

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:32:07 UTC No. 15945213

>>15944853
Hahahahaha

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:32:26 UTC No. 15945214

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:33:33 UTC No. 15945218

>>15945214
I'm dubious of the $ value put to a re use but that's a nice table nonetheless

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:33:45 UTC No. 15945219

>>15945210
Will Clear cry if Vulcan fails?

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:34:38 UTC No. 15945221

Does anyone know if there will be another round of CLPS contracts? Maybe for 2026 and beyond

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:35:34 UTC No. 15945222

>>15945214
based on this chart we should see the first starship landings in a few years then the first relaunches a couple of years after that

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:37:34 UTC No. 15945224

>>15945222
starship landings are going to happen much sooner because landing is designed upfront instead of added on later on the f9

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:37:54 UTC No. 15945225

>>15945221
There will be CLPS and CLMS and CLVS and CL-53 USS San Diego

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:38:55 UTC No. 15945228

Got to see x37b launch in person
Seeing a rocket fly in front of the full moon was cool
Shit landing was cool

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:39:36 UTC No. 15945229

>>15945228
very nice FLanon

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:39:47 UTC No. 15945230

>>15945228
God.. just imagine Starship at night

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:44:29 UTC No. 15945235

>>15945218
Doesnt take into account the benefit of paying people to build more stuff vs make stuff to be destroyed

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:45:38 UTC No. 15945236

>>15945230
Its going to disrupt so many vulnerable animal species sleep patterns. It needs to be stopped

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:49:04 UTC No. 15945241

>>15945235
Most accountants view that as a workforce value negative because less stuff to be built tends to mean less need for stuff which means higher unit costs and it becomes harder to justify keeping everyone employed. Falcon 9 ameliorates that with all second stages being new builds, while Starlink upsets that line of thinking completely.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:49:31 UTC No. 15945242

>>15945230
If launch starship at night it looks like morning came early

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:49:55 UTC No. 15945243

Starship has launched
Billions of baby turtles must wander inland

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:50:51 UTC No. 15945245

>>15945243
We don't have the resources to support that many baby turtles, that's why I'm pro turtle-choice

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:52:30 UTC No. 15945247

>>15945242
The engines will look like a blue star, and the exhaust will be a translucent blue, purple, and orange plume.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:53:12 UTC No. 15945250

This bitch is in orbit right now over you're head and basically your fucking stupid find out now!

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:53:29 UTC No. 15945251

Has it ever been the case where two launches happened damn near simultaneously by the same agency/company?

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:54:12 UTC No. 15945253

>>15945251
NASA

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:55:46 UTC No. 15945254

>>15945251
gemini 6a/7

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:56:05 UTC No. 15945255

>>15945251
Yeah, spacex launched two falcon in 4 hours a couple months ago

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:56:48 UTC No. 15945257

>>15945250
what's he doing up there

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:58:42 UTC No. 15945260

>>15945257
Stealing chinaman’s lunch money

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:59:21 UTC No. 15945265

>>15945257
spying on government employees who forget to label stuff CUI

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 01:59:47 UTC No. 15945267

Pls no more tank farm bullshit
https://twitter.com/BocaChicaGal/status/1740552113347014838?t=RdPlfXwjs6KeuZD-UvvxXw&s=19

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 02:00:48 UTC No. 15945271

>>15945267
how has she not been bought out yet

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 02:01:38 UTC No. 15945272

>>15945254
Those lauched 9 days apart

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 02:02:02 UTC No. 15945273

>>15944531
>crash
Vulcan will RUD on accent. BE-4s will be to blame

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 02:02:41 UTC No. 15945274

>>15945271
Was offered to have the house bought, but she refused

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 02:02:44 UTC No. 15945275

>>15945251
Two USAF Thor launcher (a Thor-Agena and a Thor-Ablestar) launched within 90 seconds of each other on August 18 1960.

The Thor Agena carried the first succesfuly recovered american spysat to fly over the USSR, the Thord Ablestar carried the first active repeater communication satellite, sadly the later failed during ascent, the satellite would be launched on another thor 2 months later

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 02:05:56 UTC No. 15945276

>>15945267
Orbit before Vulcan?

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 02:07:45 UTC No. 15945278

>>15945276
Vulcan's launching in ten days. ULA would probably need to delay again for SpaceX to have a real shot.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 02:08:03 UTC No. 15945279

>>15945275
(The Thor Agena was from Vandenberg and Thor Ablestar from Cape)

Two launches within one hour is also not unheard of for R7s too, it at least happened in 1978 iirc, some plesetsk kosmos launch just after a Crewed soyuz launch

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 02:08:43 UTC No. 15945280

looking at the huge number of soviet launches in the 70s, what the fuck were they putting up there

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 02:08:58 UTC No. 15945281

>>15945278
ten days? so they only need to delay another 4 days and they'll launch on the same day as starship

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 02:10:13 UTC No. 15945282

>>15945281
It took me a minute to get this
Fuck you
>>15945278
last launch we got what, 8 days notice?

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 02:10:41 UTC No. 15945283

https://twitter.com/BocaChicaGal/status/1740552113347014838
https://twitter.com/BocaChicaGal/status/1740552113347014838
https://twitter.com/BocaChicaGal/status/1740552113347014838
https://twitter.com/BocaChicaGal/status/1740552113347014838
https://twitter.com/BocaChicaGal/status/1740552113347014838

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 02:10:51 UTC No. 15945284

>>15945219
She'll certainly be sad. Tory is like the only space CEO that interacts with Ria.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 02:10:56 UTC No. 15945285

>>15945280
they had to frequently launch spysats because they used outdated film tech for a lot longer than americans did

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 02:11:44 UTC No. 15945287

>>15945207
>its a fucking lunar lander not just a big LEO sat

AAAAAAAAAAAAAA

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 02:17:00 UTC No. 15945290

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 02:17:39 UTC No. 15945292

>>15945274
Such things can be sorted discreetly

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 02:18:51 UTC No. 15945293

>>15945290
what the fuck is that flightpath

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 02:19:43 UTC No. 15945295

>>15945293
Flat Earthers nightmare

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 02:20:30 UTC No. 15945296

>>15945290
>they put in on FH so they'd have enough delta V to turn it the fuck around and go backwards
sure, why not

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 02:20:41 UTC No. 15945297

>>15945293
I hate projections

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 02:24:52 UTC No. 15945302

>>15945293
It's weird, but it's not that much weirder than the tail end of an average ground track to geostationary. It's just in a highly-inclined, highly-elliptical orbit.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 02:28:38 UTC No. 15945305

>>15945283

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 02:31:14 UTC No. 15945310

>>15945125
>easier
It's a subtle psychological flex. Showing the world that America can pull off spaceplanes despite the difficulty, simply because they can.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 02:34:18 UTC No. 15945313

>ISRO fanboys boasting about Chandrayaan-3

>Meanwhile CLPS in 2024 alone

lel

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 02:38:40 UTC No. 15945321

>>15945297
I cannot forgive Mercator and his many lies

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 02:38:45 UTC No. 15945322

>>15945313
>At the request of our customer we will only be showing an accidental two second clip of payload deployment

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 02:39:02 UTC No. 15945323

>>15945313

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 02:41:13 UTC No. 15945325

Post weird ground tracks

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 02:41:56 UTC No. 15945326

>>15945322
>At the request of another customer

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 02:58:46 UTC No. 15945351

Fireflybros I'm thinking we're BACK
>Partial success incoming.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 03:02:17 UTC No. 15945354

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-FFOLKTlMQ
Stream's up. T-60:00

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 03:02:59 UTC No. 15945355

>>15945354
is it jessi again?

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 03:08:34 UTC No. 15945361

>>15945355
that isn't the spacex stream

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 03:13:50 UTC No. 15945368

BOOSTER STATIC FIRE TOMORROW

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 03:15:24 UTC No. 15945370

>>15945368
posting from mars? how's the weather this time of year?

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 03:17:53 UTC No. 15945374

>>15945198
40 minutes to live for Starlink launch

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 03:27:20 UTC No. 15945386

wow

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 03:28:49 UTC No. 15945392

>>15945313
Honestly it'll probably just be the first two, plus maybe Blue Ghost if we're lucky. Have we seen any hardware for future Astrobotic and IM landers? Where is VIPER? And at least one of them will probably fail and trigger lengthy investigation and fixing.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 03:31:06 UTC No. 15945395

>>15945386

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 03:31:27 UTC No. 15945396

just spent the last 8 hours on the toilet. diarrhea day

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 03:33:19 UTC No. 15945399

>>15945370
Awful we got a bad planet wide dust storm recently

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 03:34:24 UTC No. 15945401

>>15945396
You should probably get that checked out tbħ

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 03:46:39 UTC No. 15945419

10 minutes https://twitter.com/i/broadcasts/1OwxWYyalmWGQ

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 03:54:11 UTC No. 15945428

When will we get the first live band performance from space, aka:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hANbfPkwJm8

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 03:56:16 UTC No. 15945432

>>15945386
>>>/wsg/5394926

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 03:57:22 UTC No. 15945434

https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/1740582471803207788

LIVE LIVE LIVE!!!

T-4:30

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 03:58:23 UTC No. 15945436

How many back to back same day (within 24 hrs of each other) launches have there been for 2023?

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 03:59:14 UTC No. 15945437

>>15945434
These niggas really going all out.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 04:00:41 UTC No. 15945439

1 minute

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 04:01:23 UTC No. 15945440

>no jessie
wtf

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 04:02:14 UTC No. 15945441

lunch

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 04:02:33 UTC No. 15945443

This is the new launch tower right?

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 04:03:23 UTC No. 15945445

>>15945443
yes

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 04:03:41 UTC No. 15945446

Clear (delayed) Live!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xsYRO7jE9yg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xsYRO7jE9yg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xsYRO7jE9yg

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 04:03:49 UTC No. 15945447

>>15945445
First launch from here or was there another one previous with the full launch tower?

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 04:04:56 UTC No. 15945448

>>15945443
Crew tower at SLC-40?

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 04:07:02 UTC No. 15945453

>>15945448
Yeah, they installed a backup a few months ago. NASA was getting jittery about semi-experimental starship launches and landings taking place within shrapnel distance of SpaceX's one crew launch facility.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 04:07:45 UTC No. 15945454

>only 97 launches in a year.
>can't even land the center booster
I knew it. Elon is a fucking fraud.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 04:09:04 UTC No. 15945457

>>15945454
Falcon Heavy will be retired before they reuse a centre core

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 04:10:34 UTC No. 15945458

LANDED

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 04:10:41 UTC No. 15945459

>he gets away with it twice in one day

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 04:12:04 UTC No. 15945462

>>15945459
3x really
3.125 if you include the fairings as a 16th of a getting away with it each

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 04:13:07 UTC No. 15945465

He won't reach 100 launches.
He. simply. won't.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 04:19:14 UTC No. 15945470

>threw away TWO perfectly good 2nd stages IN ONE DAY
pathetic, what a grifter

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 04:24:18 UTC No. 15945474

Whats the deal /sfg/ has been way more active than usual even for a FH launch. You autists been out for Christmas or something?

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 04:28:34 UTC No. 15945478

>>15945474
School's out for the kiddos

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 04:44:14 UTC No. 15945494

>>15945186

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 04:53:10 UTC No. 15945501

>U.S. intelligence officials have determined that the Chinese spy balloon that flew across the U.S. this year used an American internet service provider to communicate
>NBC News is not naming the provider to protect the identity of its sources.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/investigations/us-intelligence-officials-determined-chinese-spy-balloon-used-us-inter-rcna131150

starlink?

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 04:56:27 UTC No. 15945503

>>15945494

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 04:56:52 UTC No. 15945504

>>15945501
i ask starlink because it's likely to be a satellite internet provider that can provide communications across the world, or at least east asia and north america

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 05:05:54 UTC No. 15945515

>>15945504
nvm it looks like viasat betrayed us

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 05:14:21 UTC No. 15945525

>>15945503
Different angle than the usual moon transit photos. I dig it.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 05:16:05 UTC No. 15945526

>>15945503
The Moon is so beautiful bros

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 05:18:01 UTC No. 15945527

https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/1740602637299646970

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 05:37:36 UTC No. 15945538

>>15945527
This picture absolutely dunks on the entire aerospace industry when you factor in that all three boosters in the picture are the same core and are all pre-flown cores too.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 05:45:23 UTC No. 15945548

>>15945515
is that from el dos?

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 05:45:58 UTC No. 15945549

>>15945527
well there you have it. 96. I wonder why it’s so hard to count

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 05:56:07 UTC No. 15945562

>>15945527

How much does the rest of the world hav?

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 05:58:31 UTC No. 15945565

>>15945548
no its some comment on the technology reddit. the only useful comment out of hundreds.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 06:01:25 UTC No. 15945568

>>15945432
you know it doesnt actually look like that right?

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 06:18:25 UTC No. 15945577

>>15945565
Kill yourself reddit nigger YWNBAW

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 06:18:33 UTC No. 15945579

>>15945118
Do my eyes deceive me? Someone else has seen this movie?

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 06:25:36 UTC No. 15945583

>>15945527
Honestly this is a pretty big flex.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 06:33:03 UTC No. 15945588

>>15945565
r/tech is quite the bizarre place. It's like self-hating luddites. For a community discussing technology they sure loath most technology.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 06:36:00 UTC No. 15945589

>>15945178
Man she's so old now

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 06:36:01 UTC No. 15945590

can we please consolidate to ONE sfg going forward? we've had like two in the catalog for the past week. used to be the mods would delete duplicates. idk

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 06:42:50 UTC No. 15945594

>>15945590
Nice try faggot we're not going to your thread. Mods have and continue to leave up the ones that stage, your thread may not be deleted but it is not a real /sfg/. We will continue to stage as normal and ignore your thread, I suggest you do the same with ours and stop bugging us. Go do your own shit and leave us be.
>>15945588
Slit your wrists redditard

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 06:44:59 UTC No. 15945597

the /pol/tard is back. yikes.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 06:49:40 UTC No. 15945599

>>15945597
>fuck someone called me out for trying to subvert /sfg/ again
>uhhhh call him a /pol/tard to discredit him
Go back to your thread, havent used anything other than /sfg/ for 2 years now. Also if youre referring to the reddit comment then youre actually a tranny and need to 41% yourself.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 06:51:24 UTC No. 15945600

report and ignore. /sfg/ isn't like your pol. We don't use that sort of slang. It's not our culture.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 06:54:39 UTC No. 15945604

>we
>our

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 06:55:09 UTC No. 15945605

>>15945604
yep.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 06:56:25 UTC No. 15945606

https://warosu.org/sci/image/UfagZOV-30E8P_SDp3l2MA
https://archive.4plebs.org/_/search/filename/1374032485697.jpg/image/UfagZOV-30E8P_SDp3l2MA/
fascinating

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 06:58:55 UTC No. 15945609

>>15945606
yep, /pol/. Obvious as fuck. it's also fascinating how 'ywnbaw' spammers somehow think they're accepted anywhere on this site outside of their containment board. and how they get all defensive and petulant when their pathetic posts are called out.

he won't leave /sfg/ which is the sad part. he genuinely thinks he's on the 'right side' of it all.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 06:59:24 UTC No. 15945611

>>15945590
Janny is still on Christmas break

>>15945606
>Ufag
lol

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 07:01:14 UTC No. 15945615

>>15945606
a /ptg/ poster? I smell mental illness.
dude should really fuck off from /sfg/ for all eternity.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 07:01:15 UTC No. 15945616

>>15945606
NTA (Im >>15945599) but the last time that got posted was 2020 from your images. Not sure what this is supposed to prove other than he hasnt been part of those boards for 3 years.
>>15945611
Janny has been online Ive seen posts deleted and bans handed out, just refuses to delete either thread we discussed this I think last thread. Either way we have staged 5 times by now I think since the split and janny has done stuff in between so it looks like this will continue as normal.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 07:03:18 UTC No. 15945617

>>15945615
Kek true /ptg/gers are actual lobotomites, arent most of those threads made by glownigger bots?

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 07:05:58 UTC No. 15945618

>>15945617
don't attribute to glowies what can be more easily attributed to a combination of edgy 14 year olds, idiots, and schizos

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 07:09:45 UTC No. 15945621

Anyways we wont be using your shitty thread, continuing on as usual until janny does something or the other one dies. Ive sent in reports days ago on that thread and he hasnt done shit so separate threads it is. Send in reports if you want but nothing will get done Ive tried. God this board is such a shithole.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 07:14:14 UTC No. 15945624

goodnight /sfg/

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 07:15:47 UTC No. 15945625

>>15945624
Night night, dont let the ULA snipers bite.

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 08:27:10 UTC No. 15945676

I bought KSP 2...

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 08:30:40 UTC No. 15945681

>>15945676
I pirated it and it now actually runs on 3060

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 08:32:43 UTC No. 15945684

Kill all KSPggers

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 09:01:51 UTC No. 15945722

Staging

>>15945720
>>15945720
>>15945720
>>15945720
>>15945720

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 11:21:18 UTC No. 15945799

>>15945676
I knew my /sfg/ KSP 2 marketing campaign would pay off, I'm rich

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 12:19:19 UTC No. 15945843

>>15945056
As I understand it, the theory is this:
For an object travelling at relativistic speeds, the universe closes in on it, creating two parallel event horizon planes
These planes turn the open system of space-time in the direction of travel into a finite space, with two impassable boundaries. That allows you to do some quantum physics witchcraft, and thrust can be generated without a reaction mass, presumably as an interaction with the event horizon(s). It would only violate conservation of energy if the energy isn't used up, which it is during the acceleration of the electrons or whatever, and presumably having some energy disappear is how it generates thrust at all

The other point about the violation of relativity sounds dumb
The thrust can't be constant because the kinetic energy of a craft literally makes it heavier.
Essentially the QI drive is a capacitor failing to hold a charge. The discharges in such a capacitor are relativistically accelerated electrons, and those generate thrust in the opposite direction. It's not impossible for it to work, it's just extremely unlikely. They allege to have tested it thoroughly on earth, and they must believe it to work if they've paid for a rideshare to take the thing to space.

>>15945064
They're not being secretive, they're waiting for everyone else on the rideshare to be finished before they try to alter the orbit

Anonymous at Fri, 29 Dec 2023 12:57:56 UTC No. 15945877

>>15945579
I haven't see this movie, just the RLM review. :'(