🧵 /sfg/ - Spaceflight General
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 06:41:33 UTC No. 15978948
Hot staging - edition
previous >>15976177
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 06:45:05 UTC No. 15978954
https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/
> “The one thing that I really appreciate about SpaceX is they want to move fast at all costs until they get to the crew mission," said Lisa Watson-Morgan, NASA's program manager for the Artemis Human Landing System.
> This means SpaceX is poised to launch Starship a lot. "They have told us maybe up to 10 flight tests this year, only one of which is a milestone on our contract," Watson-Morgan said.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 06:48:16 UTC No. 15978958
>>15978954
> "Folks want to know how many total of these tanker flights are you going to need," Watson-Morgan said. "We’ve got our propellant transfer flight later this year. We certainly have predictions, but we'll know how much fuel is it releasing, how long does this take, are we going to be as successful as the analysis says?
>"We’re going to have to do this a few times," she said. "We’re going to have to do the prop transfer flights more than once or twice or three times in my opinion. We’ve never done this before.”
> "We’re doing an uncrewed demo, and they have to prove out their landing, and they go back up, and we may potentially have a re-landing," Watson-Morgan said. "Before we take a crew on there, they’re going to have to successfully autonomously land this vehicle on the Moon.”
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 06:58:19 UTC No. 15978974
>>15978948
Thanks for taking care of baking the thread for me OP, was at gym when it happened
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 07:07:42 UTC No. 15978982
>>15978974
they have been on point lately
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 07:08:56 UTC No. 15978984
>>15978972
>zoomer too young to remember ai playground
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 07:11:20 UTC No. 15978992
>>15978959
Doge coin needs to be the currency of the solar system, everyone gets a government issue tesla and neuralchip implant. based future coming soon
we will all play videogames together on starlunk and suck virtual cocks
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 07:13:19 UTC No. 15978993
>>15978958
Nitwits are going to keep asking this same tanker flight question at every press conference until 2030 arent they
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 07:13:33 UTC No. 15978994
>>15978992
this but unironically, though I might not partake in the sucking of cocks
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 07:13:58 UTC No. 15978995
>>15978982
I've made most of them for the past month, the few times I dont I believe its this current OP making them for me. I made them before but not nearly as many.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 07:14:52 UTC No. 15978998
>>15978993
well no, if SpaceX demonstrates a uncrewed demo landing with then people should know what the necessary number is
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 07:14:54 UTC No. 15978999
>>15978992
Gott mit uns
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 07:17:54 UTC No. 15979002
>>15978987
Zubrin's brain is well and truly fried
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 07:19:13 UTC No. 15979003
>>15978998
the test landing will probably be minimum number refills with almost no payload, right?
🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 07:20:51 UTC No. 15979005
>>15979003
I mean it would make sense to have mass simulators to actually test the crewed mission
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 07:22:53 UTC No. 15979006
>>15979005
i think the expectation is nasa does not plan to utilize the capacity of starship because muh margin is synonymous with muh safety in their fucked oldspace degrowth brains
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 07:24:38 UTC No. 15979011
>>15979003
I mean it would make sense to have mass simulators to actually test the crewed mission parameters
have mass that is the same as what the crewed landing would have, sit around on the moon for a week to test propellant boiloff etc and then go to an orbit that would rendevouz with gateway or Orion to fully test the mission as it would happen with humans
but idk if that is the plan, makes more sense to me than just landing on the moon
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 07:27:08 UTC No. 15979016
>>15979006
well even in that case you would have *some* mass with the astronauts and their equipment, whether that is neglible compared to just landing an empty ship i don't know
but testing propellant boiloff and showing you can actually lift off after a week requires more than simply landing
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 07:35:37 UTC No. 15979027
>>15978953
Ironically, the only way some of the losers on this board are getting into space is if he gets his way. (he wants to export all the plebs to space so they can mine roggs for their betters).
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 07:43:33 UTC No. 15979034
>>15979032
Soulless.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 07:49:31 UTC No. 15979041
>>15979034
That's why they added decals before scrapping
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 07:51:04 UTC No. 15979045
>>15979032
oops wrong pic
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 07:52:35 UTC No. 15979046
>>15978948
I'm sick of this post pandemic meme technology. I want real practical scientific advancement not this flashy showman shit
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 07:54:12 UTC No. 15979048
>>15978954
https://twitter.com/StephenClark1/s
nobody seemed to notice this, but the NASA woman says SpaceX is planning for 10 Starship flights this year
so spacex thinks extending from 5 is trivial?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 07:55:31 UTC No. 15979050
>>15979046
This! A trillion percent% THIS
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 07:56:19 UTC No. 15979051
>>15979046
this is engineering not science you faggot
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 07:57:32 UTC No. 15979054
>>15979048
starship will be wayy too important to the usa economy and they will be cleared for unlimited launches per year soon
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 07:57:37 UTC No. 15979055
>>15979048
https://twitter.com/culpable_mink/s
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 07:59:46 UTC No. 15979056
>>15979006
It's more that Starship barfing 20 tons of payload on to the lunar surface would make the missions using the other HLS vehicle look pathetic and NASA doesn't want to humiliate oldspace.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:01:52 UTC No. 15979060
>ten (10) orbital refueling flights to fill up 1 starship lunar lander
lmaooooooooooooooo
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:01:57 UTC No. 15979061
>>15979054
When daddy returns we'll get what we want
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:04:04 UTC No. 15979062
>>15979060
this is why elon wants to stretch it so bad I assume, but wont that also decrease payload mass to LEO? idk what the endgame is
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:04:06 UTC No. 15979063
>>15979061
Keep dreaming
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:04:37 UTC No. 15979064
>>15979060
is that actually true?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:05:10 UTC No. 15979065
>>15979060
>starship refueling is bad because it goes against my preconceived notions of what spaceflight refueling should be
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:10:27 UTC No. 15979069
>>15979056
the other vehicle is going to land like 5 years after Starship, I don't think it really matters + they can say it has other beneficial properties that Starship doesn't have like using hydrogen which can be ISRUd on the moon
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:11:29 UTC No. 15979071
>>15979064
that is the current estimate give or take a few
subject to change of course
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:13:17 UTC No. 15979073
>>15979064
10 refueling flights to get the ship from LEO to LUNAR Orbit
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:13:30 UTC No. 15979074
>>15979071
is that with how many tons to the lunar surface?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:16:03 UTC No. 15979077
>>15979071
I sent a fuel tank into orbit around the mun because sometimes i didnt have enough delta V to land and get back to Kerbin. I only had about half a tank by the time i got it in a stable orbit around the mun.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:16:08 UTC No. 15979078
>>15979073
Dumb nigger
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:18:04 UTC No. 15979081
>>15979060
that's so fucking stupid wtf is elon thinking
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:18:41 UTC No. 15979082
>>15979063
it's a political imperitive for the existence and prosperity of our future Martian descendants. we must do our duty at all costs
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:22:00 UTC No. 15979085
>>15979082
No matter what you do, pic related is your future.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:23:19 UTC No. 15979087
>>15979081
who knows he also ignores questions about nuclear propulsion, the some way he ignores questions about LiDAR for autonomous driving.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:24:47 UTC No. 15979090
>>15979085
with FAA prioritizing hiring actual retards some of it seems to be true already
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:24:56 UTC No. 15979092
>>15979087
>he also ignores questions about nuclear propulsion
I also ignore most of the questions asked by ignorant retards
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:26:54 UTC No. 15979093
>>15979092
go to sleep Elon the guy has a valid point, don't that guy building shiny new horse shoes when the car is just around the corner.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:26:56 UTC No. 15979094
>>15979085
Elon is working diligently to brainwash the masses and zoomer youth to join our cause, but it may be too late I admit. in any case we shall be free
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:28:38 UTC No. 15979097
>>15979087
he doesn't ignore lidar for driving, he says its a crutch so it actually hinders reaching full self driving
dont remember him talking about nuclear propulsion but the obvious reason not to pursue that is extremely obstructive red tape
chemical rocketry is practical now and with full reuse you can already drive costs down massively
nuclear might be useful for in-space propulsion, but that still means you would need to have some way to launch stuff into orbit i.e. chemical rockets
nuclear propulsion is not relevant right now, it is a future optimization that might or might not make sense but it would be an distraction right now
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:29:18 UTC No. 15979099
>>15978953
I am #TeamEarth
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:32:50 UTC No. 15979102
>>15979099
You are the ball and chain around the ankles of humanity's aspirations.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:33:17 UTC No. 15979103
>>15979099
kys ea fag
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:34:14 UTC No. 15979105
>>15979087
Nuclear propulsion is cringe unless you're shooting actual bombs at a pressure plate. I dont want to hear about it otherwise
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:36:00 UTC No. 15979107
>>15979099
These people genuinely need to die
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:36:27 UTC No. 15979108
>>15979105
how is it cringe do you really want to be stuck in a tin can for 7-9 months going to the closest habitable planet in the universe??
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:37:36 UTC No. 15979109
>>15979093
Shoo shoo, nuketard. The "car" would cost billions of dollars a piece and be less capable of landing a payload on Mars than a single refueled Starship while also requiring more delta-v
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:37:49 UTC No. 15979110
>>15979048
>so spacex thinks extending from 5 is trivial?
Always has been
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:39:33 UTC No. 15979113
>>15979108
Only have to make the trip once retard.
Also more mass > faster trip, and you can bet your fat ass that's going to be the optimization for the next century at a minimum
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:40:21 UTC No. 15979115
>>15979113
you're actually fucking retarded holy cow
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:42:34 UTC No. 15979116
>>15979108
That'll be 100 billion dollars plus tip, thank you. Your Blue Origin designed nuclear toaster will arrive in 40 years once the government approves the paperwork. Thank you, that will be $10,000/kg to the surface of Mars please, very effective, extremely economical
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:44:17 UTC No. 15979118
>>15979115
what nuclear fission rockets gain in isp they lose in mass fraction. sorry buddy
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:45:32 UTC No. 15979121
two types of spacefags
the more evolved trainautist who just likes shiny objects, big numbers and fast vehicles (based)
people who genuinely think anything gets solved by putting huge resources into going to a barren rock with nothing on it instead of fixing the already existing ecosystem we rely on everyday (coping retards)
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:48:01 UTC No. 15979122
>>15979121
t. Chicom
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:48:52 UTC No. 15979124
>>15979122
we must beat them to space
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:49:02 UTC No. 15979125
>>15979121
Once the US congress / senate breaks open the black government, the information about alien technology will be uncovered and will fix a lot of energy problems.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:49:04 UTC No. 15979126
>>15979121
what do you mean solved? retard
its not about solving problems on earth obviously, that will happen incidentally
getting a backup civ while earth declines into the dark ages seems like a good idea
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:50:05 UTC No. 15979128
>>15979119
The only nuclear fission drive worth a shit (Zubrin's Nuclear Saltwater Rocket) would be illegal to build. I fully expect SpaceX to continue using chemical for decades to come, ultimately leapfrog fission in the 2050s and go direct to fusion as the mass fraction is similar but the specific impulse is even greater AND you get higher thrust. but that's just science fiction at this point
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:51:06 UTC No. 15979130
>>15979126
I don't give a shit about the Earth.
I just think that a Mars base is kinda cool.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:51:24 UTC No. 15979131
>>15979121
based, beyond trivialities, space served minimal purpose in the grand scheme of scientific research, and may be a hurdle for improving mind uploading and AI on earth
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:51:28 UTC No. 15979132
>>15979121
kys heeb
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:51:59 UTC No. 15979134
>>15979126
yes there is absolutely nothing wrong with watching a rocket blow up in low earth atmosphere and then logically connecting it to this >>15979082 outcome. that is not delusional or cope
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:52:41 UTC No. 15979135
>>15979126
based low IQ anon
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:53:53 UTC No. 15979136
>>15979121
Musk promises nothing about solving problems on earth with his Mars program. All he has said is it's about risk diversification.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:55:39 UTC No. 15979137
>>15979136
I do not need more sci fi promises, I just need someone to say "hey here's whats realistic with the technology we have and here's what the engineers think we can do in the future" that's why I respect the first type of spacefags, they know what's real and focus on that .
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:57:15 UTC No. 15979138
>>15979121
Earth should be completely destroyed, that would solve most problems.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 08:58:33 UTC No. 15979141
>>15979123
Kek, surprised I've not seen this one
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 09:04:51 UTC No. 15979149
>>15979134
You are oozing jealousy my friend
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 09:11:03 UTC No. 15979155
VASIMR :)
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 09:12:36 UTC No. 15979158
>>15979155
is a scam
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 09:12:38 UTC No. 15979159
>>15979149
i just I wish i had thought of it first
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 09:18:57 UTC No. 15979169
OK so
/sfg/ HATES chemical propulsion
/sfg/ HATES nuclear fission propulsion
/sfg/ HATES nuclear fusion propulsion
Where do we go from here?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 09:19:47 UTC No. 15979171
>>15979121
You forgot the third category of people who know going to another barren rock does nothing but getting away from the rest of our species and will throw all connections to Earth away to get there.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 09:21:09 UTC No. 15979173
>>15979169
/sfg/ does not hate chemical propulsion because that includes methalox, who is feeding you these falsities and why do you believe think they are the king of /sfg/?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 09:26:02 UTC No. 15979179
>>15979121
I want to get away from that ecosystem and go fuck the moon, retard.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 09:27:37 UTC No. 15979181
>>15979173
i wish we knew what spacex plans are after chemical propulsion, or maybe they'll leave that to someone else. I believe chemical will remain the primary method to LEO for the next century. maybe nuclear cyclers to mars/jupiter for humans only makes sense in the 22nd century. cargo can arrive much slower like a continuous conveyor, on chemical
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 09:29:05 UTC No. 15979183
>>15979121
(You) and 'people' like (You) are the reason I am interested in spaceflight. To get the hell away from ALL of (You), the only place thats possible is on a different fucking planet where none of your arguments hold any weight.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 09:30:40 UTC No. 15979186
>>15979169
beamed-power electric or thermal propulsion
power sails
mag sails
QI drive (trust the plan)
and chemical is the "it just werks" of propulsion
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 09:30:57 UTC No. 15979187
>>15979181
Theyve stated that Starship is going to be their major thing for the next century or so. Its going to be what Ford envisioned the Model T to be, absolute perfection where nothing further is needed for any normal activities. Sure its slower but ultimately good and cheap enough to be mass produced and do whatever you need. If you want anything past Starship, go suck off NASA they will be the only ones to do any of that NTP scam.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 09:37:22 UTC No. 15979191
>>15979171
>>15979179
>>15979183
if you go as the first bunch of people you will obviously be forced to do whatever youre told and interact with tons of people you don't like, it will be extremely strict and you won't be able to get away from people at all. and if you go when it's "earth 2" it's just going to be the exact same scenario, people everywhere. do you think they are just gonna have you walk around outside and think about life all day?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 09:39:26 UTC No. 15979196
>>15979186
beamed power from a giant orbital space laser sounds good for low mass payload (people) but the UN wont let you build one bc the temptation to turn it on them is too great
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 09:41:38 UTC No. 15979198
>>15979196
The UN can tongue my anus. If I'm elected President the first thing I'll do with a space laser is burn those parasites to ash.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 09:42:13 UTC No. 15979200
>>15979187
Cheap is the keyword. If a market develops for faster means to Mars (for people specifically) corners can be cut, cyclers will be built, etc. If it's not economical it wont happen at scale
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 09:44:11 UTC No. 15979202
>>15979198
Sir you have my vote
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 09:47:11 UTC No. 15979205
>>15979196
The contingency plan is to blanket the far side of the moon with PV and build a terawatt scale laser array
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 09:47:55 UTC No. 15979206
>>15979181
Cyclers pushed by plasma magnet sails, if that turns out not to be just another schizo grift.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 09:51:03 UTC No. 15979207
>>15979169
Plasma Magnet
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 09:53:43 UTC No. 15979213
>>15979206
>>15979207
Watch yourself greasy Greason
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 09:54:25 UTC No. 15979215
>>15978963
wtf is the point of the space review? why do people write whole ass research papers for it?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 09:56:14 UTC No. 15979217
>>15979215
i like to think of it as jeff foust's personal blog
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 09:59:00 UTC No. 15979219
>>15979217
yeah but he's not the only one who writes for it
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 10:01:11 UTC No. 15979221
>>15979051
who tf cares
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 10:01:23 UTC No. 15979222
>>15979219
i never said my thoughts made sense
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 10:01:34 UTC No. 15979223
Aren't cyclers just a meme? It likely increases the delta-v required once you include intercept/rendezvous (plus station-keeping), and it's limited to shitty ass transfer windows. The Aldrin cycler is 2.1 years per trip, everything else is like a half a decade or greater.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 10:01:39 UTC No. 15979224
Do we have an idea of the altitude of the starship depot? Surely there's an optimal orbit they've worked out that minimizes drag and dV to rendezvous. They're probably going to aim for a low enough orbit that the 200t of scrap metal from a tanker+depot RUD will deorbit on a reasonable timescale. Hopefully that never happens though because that would ratchet up regulatory obstruction by several orders of magnitude, and likely doom the program to being a LEO truck for strlink at best.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 10:03:23 UTC No. 15979227
>>15979213
Me? Oh no I'm not Jeff Greason
I'm uh Geff Jreason, and I come from some place far away.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 10:04:25 UTC No. 15979229
>>15979223
I means you can pack your passengers in like sardines into Starship, thus reducing fees, because they only need to be there for an hour max until the get to the cycler..
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 10:08:30 UTC No. 15979233
>>15979223
yeah they never made much sense to me either. i can understand a permanently in space vehicle that goes between gravity wells, loitering temporarily for refuel, then is off again. not an actual aldrin cycler
>>15979227
fair enough. we've been having problems with a guy by that name shilling his fantastical propulsion methods. whines about nasa not going all in on a full scale prototype, then fades off into the shadows to work on (pontificate on) beamed energy rockets
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 10:13:58 UTC No. 15979237
this >>15979202 but this >>15979149
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 10:31:06 UTC No. 15979251
>>15979048
they're already at a 5 cadence, just with FAA sitting on them in between times
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 10:38:57 UTC No. 15979259
>>15979223
Cyclers make sense if you compare them to something like the NTP Mars Reference Architecture that throws away 3-12 fission reactors in heliocentric disposal orbit for every round trip. Starship enabling full round trip ship reuse with no orbital transfer of anything except propellant is a strict upgrade over the cycler design.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 10:42:19 UTC No. 15979261
>>15979223
I hope you don't think cyclers are 50% on each half of the trip, because that's now how the orbits work. There's a long side and a short side of each transfer, so you need two cyclers in space for any mission other than "oh look there's Mars, wave at it while we pass it, in another year we'll be back on Urf".
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 10:58:53 UTC No. 15979285
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kY
GET IN HERE!
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 11:10:21 UTC No. 15979300
>>15979285
why is everything a controversy
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 11:10:49 UTC No. 15979301
>>15979277
I see your stage separation and raise you a suicide burn
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 11:13:26 UTC No. 15979307
>>15979301
Nothing will beat SN8
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 11:15:01 UTC No. 15979313
>>15979307
SN8 Higgers
SN9 Cirno
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 11:19:24 UTC No. 15979320
what do we think about graivty-1?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 11:19:30 UTC No. 15979321
>>15979301
why not both?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 11:21:29 UTC No. 15979325
>>15979320
didnt it blow up or something
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 11:27:16 UTC No. 15979337
>>15979321
you meant to tag this anon>>15979307
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 11:27:45 UTC No. 15979338
>>15979301
>suicide burn
the new hawtness is chopstick catch
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 11:30:13 UTC No. 15979344
>>15979338
i have my doubts about that ever working
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 11:33:23 UTC No. 15979349
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 11:34:27 UTC No. 15979351
starlink is what 5g could not
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 11:34:45 UTC No. 15979352
>>15979338
ah yes, the chopsticks pre placed on moon-mars yes those chopstix i see
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 11:36:00 UTC No. 15979354
>>15979344
It's not F9, anon, it will have the ability to throttle down to hover, and they're already stacking with the chopsticks, so it can handle the weight.
>>15979352
Yes, the moon that Booster will land on, it's going to be so kino.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 11:37:48 UTC No. 15979359
>>15979351
6G is gonna kill Starling
>>15979354
u aee retard
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 11:43:07 UTC No. 15979371
>>15979359
ok retard
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 11:49:12 UTC No. 15979385
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 11:50:38 UTC No. 15979387
>>15979371
this u?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 11:55:03 UTC No. 15979395
>>15979325
i can't find anything relevant on the mission
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 11:58:28 UTC No. 15979401
>>15979395
China would tell us if something went horribly wrong, therefore it was a resounding success and Elon is shitting his undies. Congratulations strong China!
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 12:08:17 UTC No. 15979413
>>15979401
rent free
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 12:18:50 UTC No. 15979423
>>15979321
Deserves a better webm
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 12:19:57 UTC No. 15979425
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 12:23:42 UTC No. 15979428
>>15979425
alt
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 12:27:20 UTC No. 15979432
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 12:30:55 UTC No. 15979435
>>15979425
Damn he has a powerful voice.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 12:36:06 UTC No. 15979440
>>15979169
Quantized Inertia and/or Plasma Magnet Sails, obviously. Do try to keep up newfriend.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 12:47:42 UTC No. 15979449
>>15979440
this better not be another scam
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 13:19:52 UTC No. 15979472
>>15979169
/sfg/ only likes the giant steel trash can
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 13:27:04 UTC No. 15979480
>>15979470
what is this?
🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 13:45:03 UTC No. 15979483
>>15979472
this. sfg has been infested by muskbabies.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 13:48:20 UTC No. 15979484
>>15979440
Theoretical magsails that do not require a coil kilometers in diameter e.g. Wind Rider pretty much require powersails (PV covered solar sails) to be developed first, of course for generating the necessary amount of power at a low mass but also attitude control (liquid-crystal panels) and course correction via ion thrusters if solar crosswind capability isn't feasible.
What I'm saying is that Japan should be threatened with a third nuke unless they fund a revised OKEANOS proposal. All the technology involved has already been demonstrated in space and it's likely the future of electric propulsion for all but the most distant planets.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 13:49:27 UTC No. 15979486
>>15979484
Also, whatever happened to JOVE?
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 13:50:09 UTC No. 15979487
>>15979484
kill me, none of this will ever happen
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 13:53:09 UTC No. 15979489
https://youtu.be/dPWbdUUTcBA
Jeff Greason needs to be given 1 billion dollars
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 13:56:06 UTC No. 15979491
>>15979169
I love Starship, so i can't hate chemical propulsion
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 13:57:10 UTC No. 15979492
>>15979491
fucking idiot. starship isnt powered by 'chemical propulsion'. its powered by liquid methane and liquid oxygen.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 13:57:44 UTC No. 15979493
>>15979061
>SN8: 9 December 2020
>SN9: 2 February 2021
>SN10: 3 March 2021
>SN11: 30 March 2021,
>SN15: 5 May 2021
>bureaucratic lawfare gap
>S24/B7: 20 April 2023
>S25/B9: 18 November 2023
Get orange man back if only to speed up testing cadence again
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 13:58:28 UTC No. 15979494
>>15979492
... which is a chemical reaction?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 14:00:56 UTC No. 15979496
>>15979493
>>SN8: 9 December 2020 Trump
>>SN9: 2 February 2021 Biden
>>SN10: 3 March 2021 Biden
>>SN11: 30 March 2021, Biden
>>SN15: 5 May 2021 Biden
>>bureaucratic lawfare gap FAA / EPA
>>S24/B7: 20 April 2023 Biden
>>S25/B9: 18 November 2023 Biden
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 14:01:02 UTC No. 15979497
>>15979492
most intelligent /sfg/ poster
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 14:02:41 UTC No. 15979498
>>15979496
Low IQ poster
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 14:03:08 UTC No. 15979499
>>15979492
>fucking idiot. starship isnt powered by 'chemical propulsion'. its powered by liquid methane and liquid oxygen.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 14:12:45 UTC No. 15979506
>>15979496
Bill Nelson wasnt sworn in till May 3rd 2021. All existing senior staff were remnants of Trump's administration until after that point. HLS Starship was chosen frantically in April DURING Bill Nelson's nomination hearing, by acting administrator Jurczyck and associate administrator of human exploration Kathy Leuders, who was just promoted to the position within the last 6 months of Jim Bridenstine's term. Within the first year of Nelson's term, Leuders was demoted and ultimately left NASA, now works at SpaceX. Jurczyck died two months ago.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 14:14:36 UTC No. 15979507
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 14:15:59 UTC No. 15979508
>>15979496
>>15979506
Forgot to mention, Jurczyck retired from NASA 3 weeks after Bill Nelson became administrator
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 14:16:10 UTC No. 15979509
>>15979507
Jesus what a fucking moron
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 14:55:03 UTC No. 15979536
>>15979499
>>15979497
>>15979494
its a liquid reaction..
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 14:56:53 UTC No. 15979539
>>15979536
methane and oxygen isn't hypergolic
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 14:58:17 UTC No. 15979542
>>15979536
excellent b8
>>15979539
even if it was hypergolic it would still be a chemical reaction because combustion is a chemical reaction
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 14:58:57 UTC No. 15979544
>>15979536
he's right, it's molecule propulsion......
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 15:01:24 UTC No. 15979547
>>15979542
so is fission
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 15:02:16 UTC No. 15979549
IFT-3 will be a total success won't it.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 15:02:44 UTC No. 15979550
>>15979549
I think so
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 15:03:16 UTC No. 15979552
>>15979549
All the way to orbit, and maybe all the way through reentry. That'd be my guess anyway, I hope it does even better than my expectations though.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 15:05:11 UTC No. 15979555
>>15979549
nope, theres always something that goes wrong.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 15:05:12 UTC No. 15979556
>>15979549
Its definetly possible. I hope they worked on heat shield technology though, IFT-1 and IFT-2 had so many tiles fall off both times and I think recent static fires still had same issue.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 15:07:00 UTC No. 15979559
>>15979055
They actually mentioned the forbidden "D" word.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 15:07:26 UTC No. 15979560
>>15979547
fission is a nuclear reaction retard
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 15:07:57 UTC No. 15979562
>>15979559
Depot?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 15:09:01 UTC No. 15979563
Just ignore the Troonsons retard /sfg/ it's very obvious bait you dont hand over (You)s for free.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 15:13:10 UTC No. 15979566
>>15979559
Shelby is retiring
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 15:16:52 UTC No. 15979567
Where is the power coming from :)
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 15:18:24 UTC No. 15979568
>>15979561
>shaken payload syndrome
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 15:26:05 UTC No. 15979576
>>15979496
idk how anyone can look at IFT1 and think that it was delayed by bureaucratic concerns.
Could have launched it with the new pad in summer and it wouldn't have delayed the program.
Even IFT2 was probably only delayed by 3-4 weeks max.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 15:26:19 UTC No. 15979578
>>15979556
Starship is just gonna tank reentry with half the heat shield gone. Will arrive on earth a glowing hot mess and burst into a million shrapnel splinters of steel upon hitting the cold ocean.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 15:27:33 UTC No. 15979579
>>15978987
Never heard of any of her supporter online, except Zubrin. Where are they?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 15:28:32 UTC No. 15979581
>>15978948
When are we leaving this planet bros? Im tired of delays and im getting older. I want to go out and explore the galaxy whats taking so long
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 15:29:16 UTC No. 15979584
>>15979581
FAA announed they'll hire more intellectually disabled for administration jobs. Maybe we can sneak past those?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 15:30:00 UTC No. 15979587
Still dont get why they think demoralization will work when Starship is just speeding up progress.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 15:32:12 UTC No. 15979593
>>15979011
Reasonable
🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 15:35:47 UTC No. 15979596
>>15979054
The nigger lives matter riots proved there is no limit to how much of America the ruling class is willing to destroy.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 15:38:16 UTC No. 15979601
>>15979054
By the same argument shutting down the global economy would be too drastic a measure to simply prevent a few cases of the sniffles but they did it anyway, and for fucking years.
You can't apply logic to politics, especially the current politics of America.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 15:45:20 UTC No. 15979608
>>15979060
What's your plan for getting 200 tons of propellant to orbit? It must be either much simpler and more robust or else much less expensive. Or does it use existing infrastructure?
Surely you wouldn't mock a plan that stands a reasonable chance of succeeding this year and changing the history of spaceflight if you couldn't even imagine a better way to do it, right? You couldn't be that stupid, right?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 15:45:42 UTC No. 15979609
>>15979601
It's really hard when you have no logic of your own.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 15:46:21 UTC No. 15979612
>>15979065
I just don't like propellant
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 15:52:05 UTC No. 15979617
>>15979093
nuclear propulsion is for gay retards until fusion is practical, and even then only with some godlike efficiency and low weight
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 15:53:19 UTC No. 15979618
>>15979099
#TeamTotalEartherDeath
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 15:55:10 UTC No. 15979620
>>15979121
The problem solved by going to Mars is having somewhere to stay while redirecting asteroids towards Earth
🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 16:03:22 UTC No. 15979627
>>15979608
little bitch. suck my toes.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 16:13:06 UTC No. 15979638
>>15979627
Footnigger gtfo
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 16:27:33 UTC No. 15979658
your prophet btfo again.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SeP
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 16:46:56 UTC No. 15979684
>>15979658
Chad engineer vs. virgin scientist.
Handmer worked on Hyperloop one which ended up a failure. He quit the job years ago, now working on his startup trying new things. Family man.
Childless Thunderfoot high fiving himself that his constant broken clock naysaying earned him a point.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 16:47:36 UTC No. 15979685
>>15979670
This, spaceflight general for a reason
🗑️ sage at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 16:53:15 UTC No. 15979692
>>15979685
to suck Elon's cock endlessly?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 16:57:03 UTC No. 15979697
>>15979692
That and Vast/Stoke shilling
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 16:57:10 UTC No. 15979698
>>15979549
To orbit amd the orbital burn, yes most likely
But I'm not 100% confident about the pez dispenser and cryo transfer just because those are probably relatively quivkly thrown together and havent seen much iteration
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 16:57:52 UTC No. 15979700
>>15979692
Why are you so obsessed with cocks?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 16:58:36 UTC No. 15979703
>>15979567
What do you mean?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 16:59:46 UTC No. 15979705
>>15979576
They could have launched some previous iteration of the booster way sooner, the enviromental assessment was just slow rolled on purpose
🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 17:00:06 UTC No. 15979706
>>15979700
youre the one sucking precum from the japseye of one.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 17:00:35 UTC No. 15979707
>>15979706
Kill yourself, faggot
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 17:02:09 UTC No. 15979711
>>15979700
I'm american
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 17:14:58 UTC No. 15979731
https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/1
Ax-3 soon
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 17:40:25 UTC No. 15979767
>>15979712
>old school falcon 9
>atlas V
I miss them both
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 18:05:00 UTC No. 15979797
>>15979486
Nothing because no one will fund it
Also, they claim 30 days to Jupiter but it might actually be more like 100 because the magnetic field fall-off rate might be 2 instead of 1. And there's generally a lot of uncertainties remaining. Desu the more I read really, really in-depth and in the weeds about the plasma magnet and all the unknowns the less hype I get, feasibility is much further off than I thought first. And the Q-drive is a pipe dream at this point.
So what else is there for the actual holy grail of spaceflight (propellantless propulsion)?
E-sails
>EST-Cube 2 is dead because it failed to leave its payload container (ouch)
>ESTCube-LuNa is in the preliminary planning stage, years off
>NASA's HERTS (Heliopause Electrostatic Rapid Transit) e-sail is dead project never got off the ground
Solar sails
>NASA NEA Scout never phoned home
>NASA Solar Cruiser cancelled for bullshit reasons
>NASA AC3S launch on Rocket Lab later this year
And that's about it, bleak as fuck.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 18:35:26 UTC No. 15979828
>>15979797
how can the magnetic field fall of rate be known?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 18:36:45 UTC No. 15979831
>>15979705
No they couldn't unless by way earlier you mean a couple months at best. The launch infrastructure wasn't able to support a launch until the end of 2022. Also >muh lawfare gap, they could've kept launching Starships but decided not to and if they hadn't been retards they'd have started the PEA process way earlier so it'd have been long done once the hardware was ready. But then you can't complain about regulations holding you back so I guess Elon prefers avoidably delaying Starship if it lets him virtue signal to his new friends.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 18:41:32 UTC No. 15979836
>>15979828
It can't without actual in space testing lol, cause the vacuum chamber required to properly test all these plasma dynamics and magnetic interactions would be obscenely expensive might as well just build the spacecraft at that point and launch to get that data
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 18:58:17 UTC No. 15979861
chemical propulsion will never work
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:01:02 UTC No. 15979866
>>15979861
don't worry, we're going to be boiling water
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:08:55 UTC No. 15979874
when will the day of the asteroid be?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:12:49 UTC No. 15979880
>>15979873
>What is the big barber poll thing for on the left?
They look like hinges for the doors for the vehicle integration facility. The markings may be to help indicate when things are moving, but I'm just guessing.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:14:08 UTC No. 15979881
>>15979880
>hinges
Ah yes now I see.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:16:02 UTC No. 15979885
I was watching landing footage from apollo 12 and its kind of awkward. The smiling guy on the right gets bullied for being too enthusiastic, the guy on the left insinuates that he's a woman.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:17:12 UTC No. 15979887
>>15979885
Navy people are weird
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:19:19 UTC No. 15979891
Guys...
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:21:58 UTC No. 15979900
Fellas...
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:22:31 UTC No. 15979901
Chaps...
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:23:41 UTC No. 15979904
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:28:18 UTC No. 15979917
>>15979881
looks like a chode
🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:37:22 UTC No. 15979936
>>15979881
looks like a big dick
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:38:22 UTC No. 15979938
>>15979797
>the magnetic field fall-off rate might be 2 instead of 1.
Is there any paper looking into this?
>100 days to Jupiter
If that's a worst case that is fucking unbelievably fast
🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:38:24 UTC No. 15979939
>>15979881
looks like an erection of a mans penis. too hot.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:39:34 UTC No. 15979940
>>15979881
This is the pinnacle of engineering and /sfg/ is completely silent on it
🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:40:42 UTC No. 15979944
>>15979581
>>15979121
>>15979048
>>15978954
>>15979797
I'm tired of this planet, I'm tired working for a future that is not coming. What's taking so long? I want to leave already.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:42:21 UTC No. 15979947
>>15979944
(((we))) are going to space, not people like you or I.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:42:31 UTC No. 15979948
>>15979938
IDK I just read it on the wiki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magne
>fucking unbelievably fast
I know right.
Wish NASA had a department specifically for non-chemical space propulsion R&D, because what I'm seeing is the most inefficient, bureaucratic, piecemeal structure ever that guarantees nothing happens fast or coordinated and almost everything gets cancelled. Yet in-space propulsion should be the first priority because that determines everything else basically from bus to power to mission design (no more fucking gravity assists), basic first principles approach that NASA is not heeding.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:43:09 UTC No. 15979949
>>15979797
>forgetting about lasers
You said you'd never forget.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:45:17 UTC No. 15979952
>>15979949
You must have the wrong person then, I'm not well read on lasers but I see them as a meme desu, too much complexity, have to build up additional ground infrastructure, harden the spacecraft against the laser beam intensity, etc
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:46:12 UTC No. 15979954
>>15979866
Finally, gypsy steam magic will cut the bonds of gravity that tie mankind to earth
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:47:59 UTC No. 15979955
>>15979952
>>15979949
Also I'm not aware of any actual laser beam propulsion projects anywhere near active development either
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:50:44 UTC No. 15979959
>>15979952
>wants the holy grail
>doesn't want a meme
the holy grail is a meme
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:51:55 UTC No. 15979961
>>15979954
It's simple! The gypsy curse causes the spacecraft to lose weight.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:52:20 UTC No. 15979962
>>15979959
Ok but not as much a meme as the QI drive, which I didn't mention either cause its too big of a meme, if it works though then it will actually be a holy grail I guess
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:53:42 UTC No. 15979965
>>15979962
Speaking of QI meme drive I just checked it and the alt is 512km but I remember it being 509km before, is it just apogee/perigee differences
https://isstracker.pl/en?satId=5833
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:53:48 UTC No. 15979966
>>15979955
Neither are any of those other ones tbqh
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:54:48 UTC No. 15979968
NIGGERS
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:55:48 UTC No. 15979973
>>15979965
515 now probably approaching apogee
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:57:20 UTC No. 15979974
>>15979968
I'm also looking forward to Artemis!
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:58:06 UTC No. 15979976
>>15979973
>>15979965
>>15979962
where is the fella who was tracking it's altitude?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:58:16 UTC No. 15979977
>>15979968
why did you say that
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:58:37 UTC No. 15979978
>>15979952
This is the most offensive post in this entire thread, I sentence you to be blinded by lasers as you foolishly mutter about their technical infeasibility in an argument supporting speculative propulsion that cannot even be tested on Earth.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Zw
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:59:19 UTC No. 15979981
>>15979976
Dunno but its range is 510km and 525km
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 19:59:31 UTC No. 15979982
>>15979978
Not Jeff Greason? Not worth my time
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 20:00:27 UTC No. 15979983
>>15979978
>cannot be tested on earth
just build a laser, it's that simple
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 20:00:38 UTC No. 15979984
>>15979978
>an argument supporting speculative propulsion that cannot even be tested on Earth.
>an argument
>supporting
I'm literally just listing out the various types and their status thats it, I'll watch the vid later though
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 20:01:10 UTC No. 15979986
>>15979983
illegal by UN...
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 20:04:28 UTC No. 15979992
>>15979978
>I sentence you to be blinded by lasers
ULTIMA RATIO REGUM
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 20:07:56 UTC No. 15979998
>>15979986
point the laser at the UN
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 20:09:29 UTC No. 15980002
>>15979797
The best proposal is unironically the recent TFINER nuke sail. If earthers could stop sperging about nukes we could be so much farther along.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 20:10:38 UTC No. 15980004
>>15979978
Now you have my attention
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 20:11:57 UTC No. 15980005
Barry-1
Latitude: 67.725412
Longitude: -173.875209
Height: 525.5 km
Apogee reached, going back down now
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 20:35:53 UTC No. 15980034
>>15980019
Why not just go back up to 12 meters?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 20:41:32 UTC No. 15980040
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 20:56:10 UTC No. 15980059
>>15980049
long boy
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 21:04:09 UTC No. 15980071
>>15980059
Longnys
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 21:05:14 UTC No. 15980073
>>15979940
Because there's no info about it? What are we supposed to discuss when all we know was that a rocket was launched off a ship?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 21:11:50 UTC No. 15980078
the bifurcation of the world into two competing geopolitical blocs is causing space companies alot of lost customers and shrinking the market. the money is drying up so companies will have to be more creative if they want to compete.
🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 21:49:13 UTC No. 15980122
>>455393740
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 21:50:43 UTC No. 15980123
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 21:55:35 UTC No. 15980129
>>15980123
>Asked by a Russian
Shocking nobody.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 21:57:04 UTC No. 15980131
>>15980005
>>15979965
>>15979976
https://celestrak.org/NORAD/element
Falling like a brick.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 21:58:12 UTC No. 15980133
>>15980131
Yeah, yeah not surprised, they were supposed to have switched it on by now
So that's QI debunked at least.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 22:01:32 UTC No. 15980137
>>15979940
> /sfg/ is completely silent on it
there were a lot of posts about it when it launched
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 22:04:47 UTC No. 15980143
>>15980131
Wake me up inside (save me)
Call my name and save me from the dark (wake me up)
Bid my blood to run (I can't wake up)
Before I come undone (save me)
Save me from the nothing I've become
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 22:10:04 UTC No. 15980157
>>15980133
You need more faith. The company behind it is never going to admit it doesn't work so they will: a) claim the data shows it slightly worked but never overcame drag. And say they have lots of data for V2 which will be 100 times more effective or b) claim some hardware failure.
And McCullough will never accept a negative result either. At most he'll just claim the company designed it wrong.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 22:11:57 UTC No. 15980161
So what else is /sfg/ wrong about?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 22:13:00 UTC No. 15980162
>>15980157
The DARPA test will be the true make or break moment
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 22:13:01 UTC No. 15980163
>>15980161
Fucking chud shut the fuck up
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 22:19:26 UTC No. 15980172
>>15980162
What test?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 22:20:33 UTC No. 15980176
>>15980172
McCollough mentioned DARPA being interested in making a drive
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 22:22:22 UTC No. 15980177
>>15980176
Lmao if DARPA makes one, and it works, those results will probably end up classified in a vault
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 22:25:50 UTC No. 15980181
>>15980177
I think another company is also making one idk, lots of interest in this meme drive right now
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 22:30:29 UTC No. 15980186
>>15980176
I doubt there is anything to that. He says a lot of things without ever backing them up. His DARPA grant is ending.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 22:32:45 UTC No. 15980188
>>15980186
His whole grift is ending soon it seems
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 22:35:58 UTC No. 15980191
>>15980030
https://www.pcmag.com/news/starlink
Starlink is now offering enterprise/ISP customers the ability to add community gigabit gateway nodes for $1.25M upfront + 75K per Gb/s per month. Starlink will install a 10 Gbps station
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 22:47:22 UTC No. 15980204
>>15980188
We'll see. But he's begging for monies on patreon like a camwhore now. Apparently not only is his grant ending but his university has sacked him.
Never go full schizo.
https://www.patreon.com/OneSteptoTa
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 23:03:20 UTC No. 15980219
>>15980191
10Gbps is enough for ten customers. This isn't 1995.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 23:13:16 UTC No. 15980234
>>15980219
You think your ISP has capacity for all of the connections it sells to transfer at full rate? Cute. And you probably already know Starlink is only meant for places where fiber or mobile isn't competitive.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 23:17:06 UTC No. 15980242
>>15980204
He's like Elon with the anti-wokeness but not the fuck-you money that lets him get away with it lmao
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 23:21:19 UTC No. 15980250
>>15980248
THE COPE POSTS BEGIN
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 23:26:09 UTC No. 15980253
>>15980219
More like 1000 really
You could offer 50Mbps internet to that many people and still not be as under provisioned than most ISPs.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 23:30:24 UTC No. 15980257
>>15980255
>BO is paying people to work after 3pm
Wow
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 23:30:43 UTC No. 15980258
>>15980255
I think they're gonna be stacking NG for some sort of test. Definitely not launch or anything close to it. It'd explain why they have stage 1 and 2 out by the pad now.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 23:35:16 UTC No. 15980266
>>15980049
Question about solar arrays on spacecrafts: does the shape matter?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 23:37:16 UTC No. 15980270
>>15980266
It's all about maximizing surface area relative to launch volume and launch mass. I prefer roll-out inflatable arrays over either of your pictured options because the origami arrays have a decent risk of failing to deploy, even on high profile NASA missions like Lucy.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 23:43:41 UTC No. 15980278
>>15980219
>10 customers that seed 1Gbps torrent 24/7
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 23:43:56 UTC No. 15980279
>>15979119
>>15979128
The best part of Starship is that you can send <50T payloads to Mars without any multi-year gravity assist trajectories that wastes a lot of time and creates massive lag/lead times between rover design and science on the ground.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 23:44:42 UTC No. 15980280
>>15980278
yes
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 23:50:54 UTC No. 15980284
>>15980219
That's $750k/mo in revenue or $9M annually. There's 32 cruise lines in the world. So that's 288,000,000M in annual revenue under this model. Considering each Starlink launch costs around $40M with reused boosters, fuel, and satellite dev/integration/launch costs, that gets you 7 flights a year paid for. Sounds legit. Moreso than any other launch provider driving value.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jan 2024 23:51:33 UTC No. 15980287
>>15980284
You misunderstand, I'm saying each individual end user will want 1Gbps.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 00:00:43 UTC No. 15980304
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsE
In ten minutes SpaceX will be test firing a Falcon 9 in preparation for tomorrow's Axiom launch
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 00:02:12 UTC No. 15980307
>>15980287
Yes, I know, I was mocking you. Because the internet doesn't work like that. Every faggot on this thread that pays 80 bucks a month for a gigabit connection from their ISP isn't saturating their connection 100%, 24/7.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 00:02:43 UTC No. 15980309
>>15980191
that is pretty cool, I was wondering what a community gateway was when those pictures came up at first
so basically heavy duty starlink dishes but supposed to connect with fiber on the site or community
1.25mil upfront and 75k/month per Gigabit seems a bit steep, why would people not just personal dishes?
maybe this being a dedicated gateway guarantees better service or something
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 00:08:58 UTC No. 15980317
>>15980248
sure sure
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 00:12:41 UTC No. 15980322
>>15980309
In places where there's no gateway and community wants independent gateway system for lower latency
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 00:15:50 UTC No. 15980326
>>15980314
only a hunderd more to go!
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 00:16:50 UTC No. 15980328
>>15980326
several hunderd*
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 00:19:03 UTC No. 15980332
>>15980304
well that was anti-climactic
>tomorrow's Axiom launch
I'd forgotten about those clowns. They send up one of their own guys along with 3 rando paying customers (incl the first t*rk astronaut banked by his countries government) and act like this has anything to do with developing the Axiom modules or station? Whats the point. What could they possibly learn from this?
I think NASA just gave them permission to use the ISS to sweeten the deal, that they could use its prestige to start making money immediately.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 00:20:26 UTC No. 15980333
>>15980332
It makes the ISS a tourist destination, I guess. That's good for something?
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 00:21:11 UTC No. 15980334
>>15980332
They pay NASA, NASA like
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 00:23:08 UTC No. 15980340
>>15980333
>>15980334
I know, its all very semitic isnt it?
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 00:24:00 UTC No. 15980342
>>15980309
This does mean that cruise liners can get one of these gateways to directly mount on the top of their ships rather than having an array of individual satellite dishes somewhere on the vessel for connecting with the antenna.They already have those round mounts, which I think are satellite internet gateways. So just swap 1-2 or all four out and each ship gets 4Gbps bandwidth for a nice $4.5M, paying $300k/mo in traffic to then allow their 6.5-7k customer capacity to subscribe to, paying relatively low fees for high speed access and then using law of large numbers to make up for that difference.
https://www.cruisecritic.com/articl
The prices vary, but average appears to be around $20/day per customer for high speed wifi. 6.5k customers x 20 = $130k x 4 days for the entire cruise = $520,000 in revenue. 42.3% gross margin or $220k in profit on ISP sales PER ship PER cruise.
30 days in a month average, divided by 4 = 7 (7.5 actual) revenue opportunities or $1.54M in profit per month from 1 ship.
https://www.royalcaribbean.com/faq/
Royal Caribbean has 28 ships. So that's multiplying that out, that's $43.12M in profit per month across their fleet and $517.44M in profit per year across their fleet.
https://www.royalcaribbeanblog.com/
Annual operating cost of a Royal Caribbean cruise ship is $208M. So the profit margin of onboarding Starlink gateways across all ships, would pay for essentially the free operation of 8.8% of their fleet or 2.48 ships.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 00:26:37 UTC No. 15980346
>>15980342
I wonder if SpaceX might start hitting limits on the capacity of the satellites + laserlinks if they do this too much
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 00:28:15 UTC No. 15980348
>>15980346
they'll hit a limit on how much the FCC and FAA are willing to put up with if they keep pushing their bullshit
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 00:29:59 UTC No. 15980351
>>15980348
okay but now explain your point it without sounding like you have debilitating EDS
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 00:33:37 UTC No. 15980357
>>15980309
>>15980191
this is basically the first examples of fiber backhaul through starlink to remote places that was speculated before
tweet has good summary, the article itself was pretty shit
https://twitter.com/SawyerMerritt/s
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 00:43:15 UTC No. 15980369
>>15980366
kino
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 00:44:45 UTC No. 15980372
>>15980370
> So here, as best as I can tell, is the real story. Scientists are definitely intrigued by the observations that Webb has made of the exoplanet K2-18 b. However, there is a robust debate ongoing about the telescope's measurements of water, methane, and dimethyl sulfide. They're promising but not conclusive. As Colón said, we need more data and possibly new instruments to make a definitive call.
>So the full story has yet to be told.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 00:50:39 UTC No. 15980379
https://spacenews.com/vulcan-launch
> The GEM 63XL is a stretched version of the GEM 63 booster used on ULA’s Atlas 5. It is the same diameter as the GEM 63 but is nearly two meters longer. The GEM 63XL is the largest monolithic, or non-segmented, solid rocket booster built.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 01:05:29 UTC No. 15980404
Yarvin riffing a bit on SpaceX, BO, and the V2 program
https://youtu.be/Hbf7TBr5jrI&t=3600
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 01:07:37 UTC No. 15980407
>>15980394
It'd have to be a custom variant. Better cooling of both cabin and propellant, better rad shielding, uprated comms laser to be visible close to the sun angle wise.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 01:11:14 UTC No. 15980411
>>15980370
>>15980372
Eric Berger is fucking retard mode here. The rumors ARE NOT ABOUT K2-18B. DR BECKY ALREADY TOLD US ABOUT THAT AND WE'VE WRITTEN IT OFF. THE NEW RUMORS ARE A DIFFERENT UNDISCLOSED PLANET YOU FUCKING IDIOT DO SOME REAL JOURNALISM AND TALK TO DR BECKY
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 01:12:18 UTC No. 15980412
>>15980407
all engineering problems that can be addressed it seems, would love to see a Venus mission in the future.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 01:13:42 UTC No. 15980413
>>15980412
It'd be absolutely doable, plus it'd give Elon a chance to name the mission Venus Weanus just to force that to be in all the history books.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 01:16:16 UTC No. 15980416
>>15980370
>goes to nasa jwst managers
>asks nasa is der ayliums
>they say no
KILL YOURSELF BERGER. GET THE FUCK OFF YOUR ASS AND INTERVIEW THE ATRONOMERS MAKING THE CLAIMS. FIND THE SOURCE OF THE RUMOR. JWST PENCIL PUSHERS AT NASA HQ HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO CLUE WHAT THE TELESCOPE IS LOOKING AT, GOOD JOB GETTING THEIR CANNED ANSWER
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 01:21:58 UTC No. 15980427
>>15980370
OOOH DIMETHYL SULFIDE DIMETHYL SULFIDE
DAE DIMETHYL SULFIDE?? HURR DURRR
WELCOME TO SEPTEMBER 2022 BERGER. THAT PAPER WAS BULLSHIT THEN AND BULLSHIT NOW, AND WAS REPORTED AS SO 4 MONTHS AGO. INVESTIGATE THE NEW RUMORS BERGER, DO IT YOU WONT. K2-18B IS OLD NEWS. THERE IS A SCOOP WAITING, GO PICK IT UP DOG SHITTER
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 01:22:41 UTC No. 15980429
So anyone know what exactly happened with SDA missile tracking sat contracts? I know that they worked to exclude SpaceX a year or so ago when Biden admin took over. Now they've awarded couple billions to the traditional defense contractors.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 01:26:15 UTC No. 15980435
>Boeing has asked Ryanair to send extra engineers to oversee quality checks of its planes "on the ground" following the Alaska Airlines incident.
https://nz.news.yahoo.com/boeing-se
Embarrassing, whats next? Asking Orbex to take a look at Starliner?
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 01:32:22 UTC No. 15980441
>>15980429
SpaceX will just be doing the launching
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 01:33:23 UTC No. 15980442
>>15980416
hes become lazy fr fr
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 01:34:31 UTC No. 15980444
>>15980416
lol
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 01:39:20 UTC No. 15980446
>>15980383
>Idefix
it's Dogmatix
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 01:39:56 UTC No. 15980448
>>15980370
>last paragraph
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 01:40:18 UTC No. 15980451
>>15980429
Hobbitlab got part of Tranche 2.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 01:44:29 UTC No. 15980454
There is also DARPA, who commissioned McCulloch’s study. The agency are no longer working directly with McCulloch but have launched a program called Otter, to demonstrate “ability to maneuver without regret,” according to budget documents.
‘Maneuver without regret’ is a key phrase in spacecraft operations. Because all current engines have a limited delta-v, any maneuver carries the risk of wasting irreplaceable fuel. DARPA are looking for something new; a solicitation document for Otter states that “Specifically excluded is research that primarily results in evolutionary improvements to the existing state of practice” indicating that they are looking for revolutionary technology.
Otter will also culminate with a demonstration in orbit, because again this is seen as the ultimate test, but even then a radical and largely unproven system based on new physics may struggle to win acceptance from the Pentagon.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 01:45:21 UTC No. 15980456
>>15980448
the whole article seems like a shitpost
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 01:46:34 UTC No. 15980458
>>15980448
didnt even get that far, but holy cringe. how can a thought like that actually pop into a sentient being's head?
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 01:49:51 UTC No. 15980464
>>15980411
>>15980416
>>15980427
>Anon discovers that Berger is a hack with a few good sources and only liked because he sucks off newspace
>>15980429
It's a confusing mess of tranches and layers and shit, SpaceX got some of it, others got other parts, SpaceX wasn't excluded.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 01:50:02 UTC No. 15980465
>>15980348
Literally every internet service provider in the world that isn't on a dedicated, privately owned service line is over-provisioned by a factor of ten or so. This is why cable internet always slows down at certain times a day and why ISPs do not guarantee their rated bandwidth limits at all hours.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 01:52:25 UTC No. 15980471
>>15980466
Proof that science is dead
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 01:52:35 UTC No. 15980472
>>15980454
Good odds that Maneuver Without Regret includes high specific impulse engines that can be fired without wearing out their operating lives too much or taking too long.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 01:53:00 UTC No. 15980474
>>15980471
He's at least trying to do experiments rather than string theory.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 01:53:19 UTC No. 15980476
>>15980379
>Disposable rocket boosters
>New
I can't wait for old space to die off completely
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 01:53:36 UTC No. 15980478
>>15980472
That seems likely. Ion grids and most forms of MPD thruster are limited by electrode wear long before anything else.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 01:56:30 UTC No. 15980482
>>15980472
>>15980478
idk its pretty vague but interesting nonetheless given DARPA just concluded their study with McCollough and now they solicit this, separate from DRACO
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 01:56:36 UTC No. 15980483
>>15980474
Trying to milk every last penny out of investors in his sham company before they realize and the jig is up. Mike didnt expect to get this far, literally a nonfunctioning potato in orbit lol. Admirable in a way. I wish I lacked integrity enough to swindle people like that
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 01:57:16 UTC No. 15980485
>>15980483
What investors?
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 01:59:07 UTC No. 15980487
>>15980485
https://ivolimited.us/
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 01:59:45 UTC No. 15980489
>>15980309
sounds like something rural ISP's would jump at
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 02:00:27 UTC No. 15980493
>>15980487
Per the CEO they are not taking investment money right now.
https://twitter.com/RaMansell/statu
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 02:01:35 UTC No. 15980495
>>15980474
Even if the experiment proves quantized inertia wrong, he will still believe in it. Not that different from string theorists. I'm not against him trying something different but he needs to have to courage to try something else when it's shown not to work
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 02:02:18 UTC No. 15980497
>>15980466
neat
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 02:03:21 UTC No. 15980498
>>15980495
Best (funniest) outcome is the experiment works and it works only in space, but its not because of QI, so everyone has to scramble to find out wtf is going on
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 02:03:57 UTC No. 15980499
>>15980493
He's stupider than I thought
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 02:04:54 UTC No. 15980501
>>15980499
I think your stupider than you think
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 02:06:02 UTC No. 15980503
the theory of tape outgassing still holds strong in our post-relativity world
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 02:06:43 UTC No. 15980504
https://celestrak.org/NORAD/element
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 02:20:41 UTC No. 15980513
>>15980019
Yeah that'll land nice and stable on mars and not tip over. Yeah.
God what the hell is wrong with us trusting this whole charade to goofy blood saphire slaver
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 02:25:13 UTC No. 15980524
>>15980487
>ivomited
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 02:31:46 UTC No. 15980529
>>15980513
go ahead and start a rocket company then
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 02:33:10 UTC No. 15980531
>>15980513
CoM
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 02:50:33 UTC No. 15980551
>>15980513
just land perfectly upright on flat ground with no wind?
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 02:54:42 UTC No. 15980559
>>15980551
Fat nigger
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 02:55:11 UTC No. 15980560
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mb0
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 03:01:08 UTC No. 15980567
>work at space company in WA (no, not that one)
>new coworker used to work at Blue Origin
>he's a big fucking space nerd sperg like me
>we start trading stories
>he leans in close
>"So... you know all those ULA memes about "where's my engines, Jeff?""
>yea
>"Wanna know what happened to them?"
>yea
>"We dropped them."
>huh
>"Like on the ground. We dropped them. Our rigging team is retarded"
>wut
>"Yeah that's why Vulcan was so delayed lmao. They dropped them loading them onto a truck and ULA refused to let us rework them so we had to build and qual new ones"
>mfw
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 03:05:36 UTC No. 15980574
>>15980567
Funny if true
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 03:07:20 UTC No. 15980576
>>15980567
I'm pretty sure they didn't drop engines for 5 years so this is probably just that one I remember people saying there was an issue with towards the end, but still lel
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 03:08:47 UTC No. 15980577
>>15980560
>crashing into great barrier reef
I can already imagine all the eco-cucks having a sook online
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 03:12:27 UTC No. 15980583
>>15980577
it's not making it that far
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 03:14:04 UTC No. 15980586
>>15980577
>>15980583
isn't this bitch coming back to the atmosphere at Mach 25?
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 03:56:20 UTC No. 15980626
>>15980133
2 more weeks. Trust the plan
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 04:02:28 UTC No. 15980633
>>15980131
they installed it facing the wrong way
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 04:27:37 UTC No. 15980651
on December I heard some news that Voyager 1 is on the fritz and not returning data, has the issue been resolved yet or is the probe dead
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 04:38:22 UTC No. 15980660
>>15980651
https://blogs.nasa.gov/sunspot/2023
>It could take several weeks for engineers to develop a new plan to remedy the issue.
They can probably pull off a miracle and get it back.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 06:41:48 UTC No. 15980737
/sfg/ is kill
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 06:58:26 UTC No. 15980755
>>15980357
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 07:02:35 UTC No. 15980763
>>15980757
Yeah, the Nunavut government and northern Quebec are already well invested in Starlink, I wouldn't be surprised if they each bought one of those too
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 07:58:40 UTC No. 15980790
>>15980567
I choose to believe this
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 08:02:57 UTC No. 15980792
>>15980757
I don't understand the price /data quantity(or speed?) /month thing. $75k per month wtf
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 08:04:31 UTC No. 15980793
>>15980357
>>15980792 me
yeah got more context from here.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 08:05:00 UTC No. 15980794
>>15980792
its for ISPs so one of these could support thousands of people, how many exactly depends on the speed offered and how oversubscribed it is which can be 10:1, 50:1 or even 100:1
singular customers just get a normal starlink dish
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 08:08:42 UTC No. 15980796
>>15980567
"Gradatim Fer—"
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 08:32:10 UTC No. 15980807
I want to marry Jessie
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 08:36:55 UTC No. 15980810
>>15980807
Thats another Earther to throw out the airlock.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 08:39:55 UTC No. 15980815
>>15980810
What airlock? We're on Earth.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 08:56:03 UTC No. 15980826
I made the mistake of asking some people why they don't think Mars is happening.
>BUT IT'S IMPOSSIBLE
>here are the technologies needed and what is being done to develop them, Elon's current estimate is 2028-2030.
>BUT YOU JUST CAN'T
>why
>YOU JUST CAN'T OK
>why
>ELON WORE A RED COSTUME WITH SPIKES ONCE SO HE'S MOCKING JESUS AND HE WON'T BE ALLOWED TO WIN
>mfw
Apparently the EDS crowd has a schizo faction that thinks their magic sky Jew will physically intervene to stop Elon from colonizing Mars. Don't negotiate with Earthers. Drop rocks on them.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 09:01:03 UTC No. 15980829
>>15980826
he also won't suceed because he's one of those ebil racist trump voters
what can you do, some people are just retarded
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 09:33:15 UTC No. 15980863
>>15980862
Penis shape
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 09:40:19 UTC No. 15980871
>>15980863
My penis is rogget shaped. Pretty neat, huh?
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 09:40:39 UTC No. 15980872
>>15980862
It's a reverse circumcision. Everything but the tip is expended.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 09:56:09 UTC No. 15980887
>>15980503
What if you bend the tape and punch a pencil through both sides? Andromeda galaxy by 2028?
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 10:01:17 UTC No. 15980892
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 10:04:09 UTC No. 15980898
>>15980893
Apparently they also lost the technology for ballistic missiles.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 10:08:15 UTC No. 15980900
>>15980893
The Minuteman is so old that control system software uploads happen on 8" floppies. We are decades overdue.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 10:08:58 UTC No. 15980902
>>15980900
>and as a result no nation can hack it
whats the problem, chief?
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 10:25:03 UTC No. 15980917
>>15980902
Your own engineers don't know how it works.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 10:47:00 UTC No. 15980933
>>15980902
The problem is nobody makes 8" floppies anymore. You can still have unhackable updates with pressed optical media.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 10:51:40 UTC No. 15980936
>>15980902
Hardware rot is a real thing.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 11:33:02 UTC No. 15980969
>>15980796
>"Gradatim Fer—"
oof!
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 12:08:22 UTC No. 15980991
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 12:27:36 UTC No. 15981004
>>15980991
how can deltaii kill noaa n-prime like this? how it work canonically?
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 12:28:38 UTC No. 15981007
>>15981004
It launched on a Delta II.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 12:30:35 UTC No. 15981011
>>15980567
>They dropped them loading them onto a truck and ULA refused to let us rework them so we had to build and qual new ones
I'd be all like "then go use them on your own rocket, Jeffy!"
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 12:34:33 UTC No. 15981013
>>15980513
Retard
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 13:24:59 UTC No. 15981051
>>15981013
Nice argument idiot
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 13:28:54 UTC No. 15981057
>>15980893
I don't understand why america keeps their silo based nukes
I mean I do, it's because of the service funding meme, but it's such an inefficient and vulnerable method
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 13:34:12 UTC No. 15981066
>>15980826
Life gets better when you realize that only about 10-20% of people are actually real, the rest are window dressing.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 13:34:31 UTC No. 15981069
>>15981051
Where do you think most of the weight of that Starship will be?
In the fucking engines retard, near the ground. Fill up a bottle with water 1/4 of the way and try to tip it over.
What fucking wind is gonna knock it over? Oh yeah that famous martian wind!
So yeah, you're a retard
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 13:34:34 UTC No. 15981070
>>15981057
The real answer is because digging holes in Montana is cheaper than floating new SSBNs and there's no serious risk of conventional air strike. I don't think we even have a current production boomer sub class.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 13:36:00 UTC No. 15981072
>>15981069
Not to mention that they will be clamped down anyway
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 13:37:35 UTC No. 15981075
>>15981070
>I don't think we even have a current production boomer sub class.
???
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 13:40:55 UTC No. 15981078
>>15981011
Tory is so fuckin cool it's unreal
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 13:53:39 UTC No. 15981090
>>15980893
>I guess nuking China is more important
You mean having the largest and most powerful military in the world so the communist retards don't try and come at us? We need to be magnitudes more powerful than the rest of the world so we can have a country where SpaceX can do their thing without fear that come chinks or ruskies will try and move in.
Oh no, we don't have the money to send a POC or trans xerson to the moon! Who gives a shit. SpaceX has the end game, not NASA.
🗑️ Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 14:00:58 UTC No. 15981107
>>15980872
Hey this NIGGER is reposting our shit. FUCK OFF DAB I WILL PERSONALLY GUT YOU DONT EVEN GET A HINT OF SFG NEAR THE MASSES YOU FUCKING BOTTOMFEEDER
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 14:02:30 UTC No. 15981109
>>15981078
Turn your thermostat up, Tory.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 14:06:25 UTC No. 15981120
>>15980872
This bottomfeeder is putting /sfg/ in the publics eye, steaking our shit.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 14:06:55 UTC No. 15981121
Impulse reveals Helios kick stage
https://techcrunch.com/2024/01/17/i
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 14:07:17 UTC No. 15981122
>>15980862
Because Boing clearly designed it to go on top of their hydromeme shitter that would never get human rated.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 14:10:59 UTC No. 15981125
>>15981121
nice web trackers, faggot
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 14:21:29 UTC No. 15981136
Chinese CZ-7 supply launch to the space station in ten minutes
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 14:23:12 UTC No. 15981138
>>15981122
>that would never get human rated
I don't see why not
filling the entire launchpad with hydrogen is completely safe procedure
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 14:28:45 UTC No. 15981142
>>15981121
>reusable methalox spacetug
fucking finally someone is planning for cryo depots
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 14:41:34 UTC No. 15981158
>>15981138
Triple digit changes required for the RS-68 alone to even consider human rating.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 14:42:49 UTC No. 15981162
>>15981121
there is absolutely zero excuse for that link
zero
nil
https://techcrunch.com/2024/01/17/i
https://techcrunch.com/2024/01/17/i
https://techcrunch.com/2024/01/17/i
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 15:00:45 UTC No. 15981183
>>15981121
>laughs in Russian
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 15:11:21 UTC No. 15981192
When will Bussard ramjets take their rightful place as humanity’s true space vessel
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 15:14:10 UTC No. 15981196
>Returning to the Moon: Keeping Artemis on Track
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3Z
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 15:14:22 UTC No. 15981198
>>15981192
Stop trying to ram things into your bussy
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 15:16:05 UTC No. 15981202
>>15981196
Those fossils should be put in a retirement house.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 15:17:24 UTC No. 15981203
>>15981057
To waste enemy nukes on some holes in the ground as opposed to something more strategic.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 15:22:45 UTC No. 15981214
>>15981202
The elderly have no place in government, and it is an insult to be represented by anybody over the age of 70. Go home and die old fucks.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 15:23:30 UTC No. 15981215
I’ve started writing on my first full length sci fi book, it’s not meant to be too hardcore in terms of “hard science” but I’m curious to know what theoretical technologies for FTL travel /sfg/ feels are underutilized in genre fiction given their cool factor?
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 15:27:49 UTC No. 15981217
>>15981215
https://projectrho.com/public_html/
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 15:31:02 UTC No. 15981224
>>15981183
TEM is a meme and it will probably never launch. It has already been 15 years of nothing but false promises, toy models, and some truss section mockup they hobbled together. It certainly has no commercial application unless the Russian government decides to set trillions of rubles alight.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 15:33:50 UTC No. 15981231
>>15981215
>>15981217
I don' want to be rude
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 16:03:40 UTC No. 15981268
>>15981196
>Bill Russell (GAO), George Scott (acting NASA IG) and Griffin agree the new schedule for Artemis II is realistic, but not Artemis III, esp bc only 1 yr between II and III. Cathy Koerner (NASA) says the dates for II and III *are* realistic.
I'm sick of NASA and their lies.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 16:15:17 UTC No. 15981276
/sfg/ is dead...
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 16:30:51 UTC No. 15981291
Multi-user propellant depots incoming
Next, comapnies doing ISRU on the moon to compete with propellant sent from the earth to fill these up
Capitalism will do that design by committee and central planning never could, peobably one of the reasons you have leftists seething so much
https://twitter.com/JeffVader10/sta
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 16:34:35 UTC No. 15981298
This fibally kills the high energy meme of Vulcan once and for all
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 16:35:36 UTC No. 15981300
Tom Mueller is a fucking God
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 16:39:06 UTC No. 15981313
https://twitter.com/krgv/status/174
SpaceX may get expansion land at starbase.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 16:43:06 UTC No. 15981320
>>15981162
>>15981121
https://twitter.com/SciGuySpace/sta
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 16:44:50 UTC No. 15981325
>>15981320
https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/
> With a diameter of just under 5 meters, Helios is sized to fit within a Falcon 9 fairing. According to Impulse Space founder and chief executive Tom Mueller, the basic idea is to allow the low-cost Falcon 9 rocket to launch large satellites directly to geostationary space.
>"We're basically adding a third stage to a medium launch vehicle," he said. "It's basically doing most of what a Falcon Heavy will do for much less money, and without throwing away a core."
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 16:46:06 UTC No. 15981330
> At present, for medium and large satellites, there are two ways to reach geostationary orbit directly. A customer can buy a launch on a Falcon Heavy or United Launch Alliance's Vulcan rocket, which is fairly expensive, likely about double the cost of a single Falcon 9 launch. Or a satellite can launch on a medium-lift vehicle and go into a transfer orbit to geostationary space, necessitating a robust on-board propulsion system, up to $5 million in Xenon or other propellant, and six to eight months of lost revenue during the ride up.
nothing perssonnel vulcan
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 16:49:03 UTC No. 15981343
>>15981325
>>15981330
Now we just need the extended FH fairing. I really expected too see it fly before Starship, kind of weird.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 16:50:28 UTC No. 15981348
>>15981330
>four tons to Venus or Mars now doable on an F9 with a reusable first stage
VERITAS/DAVINCI+ just saved like $100M if this works.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 16:52:50 UTC No. 15981356
> Helios will be powered by one of the most robust in-space engines ever built, named Deneb. It is on par with the venerable RL-10 engine manufactured by Aerojet and will have a thrust of 15,000 pounds (67 kN), and be powered by liquid oxygen and liquid methane. The fuel choice is partly a nod to the reusable future of spaceflight that Impulse Space hopes to tap into. "SpaceX needs 1,000 [metric] tons to refuel Starship," he said. "Just give us a sip. We'll take our 14 tons, and we'll be glad to pay for it. And we can continue to reuse these."
reusable methalox space tugs
>>15981142
yes, though pretty cool that Impulse did one of these for Falcon 9/ Falcon Heavy already without waiting for Starship
makes sense though, it might take some years to get Starship into a state where it can take rideshare missions, meanwhile Impulse Space gets experience with tugs and perhaps even refilling them from Starship tankers, developing it in parallel with starship with actual hardware iteration and testing instead of waiting for starship to be ready
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 16:57:03 UTC No. 15981365
>>15981343
There are almost no payloads that need the extended fairing. Gateway is probably going to be the first and it's not launching until Q4 2025 at the earliest.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 16:58:52 UTC No. 15981368
>>15981365
Vulcan has long fairing, though.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 16:59:56 UTC No. 15981370
>>15980893
96bn would get you 400,000 starships...
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:01:40 UTC No. 15981371
>>15981162
> “I always wanted to do a high-energy stage, so it’s been in my mind for a long time,” Impulse CEO Tom Mueller said. “We talked about doing this type of thing at SpaceX, so it’s not exactly new. It’s just a different way to implement it with cryogenic propellants.”
> In many ways, Helios is a bet on where the industry is heading: if the cost of getting to GEO goes down, demand for GEO transportation services will go up. But even if this isn’t the case, Mueller said that there’s already a good market in the around 15-20 launches that go to GEO each year.
>“If we can capture some fraction of those, that’s a great market for us,” he said. “I think that as Starlink and Kuiper and all the other LEO constellations reach their peak and max out LEO, the next move to move data will be back to GEO.”
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:03:40 UTC No. 15981380
>>15981121
>>15981325
>reusable LNG powered tug that can reach GEO in a day
its a start but it doesnt seem like its a strong business model with other tug companies rapidly going out of business
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:05:14 UTC No. 15981384
>>15981380
skill issue and anything that goes through spac deserves to die.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:06:37 UTC No. 15981388
https://www.impulsespace.com/helios
> Quickly and affordably move your payload from LEO (300km) to MEO, GEO, and beyond.
Flights starting 2026.
>The next-generation high-energy kick stage that economically delivers large payloads from LEO to GEO and beyond.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:07:16 UTC No. 15981389
>>15981384
>skill issue
fucking nigger chimp zoomer retard get the fuck out go back to twitter
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:07:41 UTC No. 15981390
>>15981380
Haven't they mostly been going under because they haven't been able to get their tugs to perform satisfactorily? It seems like a reasonable business model if you can dodge the upper stage curse.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:08:59 UTC No. 15981396
>>15981370
You mean 40,000 in the absolute limit of reusability
>>15981384
>anything that goes through spac deserves to die.
TRUUUUUU
>>15981389
dilate
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:10:04 UTC No. 15981397
>>15981394
>>15981388
>>15981342
>>15981330
>>15981325
Posting this to flat earthers and watching them struggle to comprehend reality lmao
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:13:06 UTC No. 15981404
>>15981371
but we can already do direct GEO
it's called not reusing your first stage so you have the staging velocity necessary for your second stage to perform
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:14:15 UTC No. 15981407
>>15981397
>a rendering and news article
>flat earthers
>comprehend reality
that doesn't even make sense.
you sound like you're 12 years old.
also this is spaceflight general not flerfer baiting general.
Return to reddit child.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:14:51 UTC No. 15981409
>>15981405
Source on the press conference
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:15:11 UTC No. 15981411
>>15981215
Your soul exists outside of light rays, who’s to say what the fuck your consciousness generates or what rules it abides by when you supposedly break causality/relativity.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:15:18 UTC No. 15981413
>>15981407
you're so dumb
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:15:57 UTC No. 15981415
>>15981409
>source: spacex
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:16:28 UTC No. 15981416
>>15981404
Well the first stage is expensive tranny.
It's 80% of the rocket with the majority of engines on it.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:16:52 UTC No. 15981417
>>15981313
>477 acres
That sounds like it would be bigger than anything they got there at the moment. It's probably going to be hell trying to get that land though.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:21:36 UTC No. 15981429
You know what I think they're testing on STP-3 and OTV-7?
In orbit space tug that sits in LEO waiting for a spacecraft to tow to higher orbits.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:23:15 UTC No. 15981435
>>15981399
>staged combustion
>torch ignition
>methane
It's a baby RVac
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:23:29 UTC No. 15981436
>>15981429
I love that nobody has been able to find it yet after launch, fuck off CCP, fuck off amateur trackers (often from outside US) that aid CCP in finding it for them
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:24:14 UTC No. 15981441
>>15981215
>send tiny von neuman robotic spacecrafts at near light speed
>tiny robot spacecrafts land on planets and start producing von neuman robots by gathering local resources
>assuming we have mastered molecular engineering (ability to assemble parts at molecular level)
>then robots build some habitable environments
>the robots beam back information of the planet/location back to earth
>earth clones brains schematics via neuralink type device
>those digital schematics are sent at speed of light by lasers/radiowaves/etc
>von neuman robot planet captures the data and uploads that to a robotic/cloned body on that planet
FTL - realistic and "easy" mode, so to speak.
It still takes 4 years to transmit signals between earth/proxima, so FTL isn't completely there, but atleast we can now escape our galaxy.
And functionally, this FTL cloning/robotic brain upload can be sent back/merged with the original body by reversing. So personal identity issues are nominally solved.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:25:06 UTC No. 15981444
>>15981436
it has been pretty accurately estimated already
~181x36000 thereabouts
but yeah its not a big secret
the payloads are tho
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:25:18 UTC No. 15981446
Reusable tugs are the future.
They can have a vastly better mass ratio than Starship due to not being a second stage and a lander.
Can be ultralight carbon composite, non aerodynamic, literally just fuel tank and engine.
Perfectly optimized for all in space transportation.
That efficiency means better fuel mileage means fewer superheavy lift depot refills which is the primary driver for cost.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:26:41 UTC No. 15981452
>>15981444
>performs perigee maneuver
>loses your track
nothing personnel
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:28:41 UTC No. 15981459
>>15981441
Also,
1) with tiny robotic spacecrafts, we can send them by the tens of thousands to seed all the planets
2) with cloning/robotic brain upload, you dont specifically need a 6 foot humanoid form. We could theoretically utilize 1 foot robot form to do what we need for energy efficiency sake. Or even clone into another native life form if we get more samples for study.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:31:12 UTC No. 15981466
>>15979169
mass drivers
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:32:27 UTC No. 15981469
subcooled propalox
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:35:03 UTC No. 15981477
>Mike griffin starts his Artemis alternative proposal by ranting about much chinese
>His proposal is basically the chinese lunar architecture
Curious
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:36:51 UTC No. 15981483
>>15979224
130 km with a decay time on the order of a week
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:36:52 UTC No. 15981484
>>15981477
>gets completely ignored by the committee and the NASA people at the table
kek, this hearing is kino https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3Z
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:39:15 UTC No. 15981489
>>15981477
At work so can't look at the architecture, would it be simpler and faster to do a Chinese style mission to beat them to it? Take some of the wind out of China's sails etc.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:42:17 UTC No. 15981496
>>15979224
As low as the FAA allows.
The depot will obviously have an insane amount of fuel on board so reboosting is not a concern.
You maximize the amount of fuel each tanker can deliver that way.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:45:10 UTC No. 15981501
>>15981496
Put the depot at GEO and run a really, really long hose up to it so you can pump fuel up from the surface.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:46:58 UTC No. 15981503
>$42 Billion for SLS development & formulation past 12 years
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:47:34 UTC No. 15981506
>>15981489
Right now no, because HLS is already well engaged.
If you could go back 5 years in the past... maybe, a SLS Block 1B (uses the additional payload for a kickstage enabling LLO insertion and back) + 1 uprated FH carrying a single use staged lander and crasher stage could do a lunar landing, maybe. Not possible with a SLS Block 1+Current FH without getting below Apollo performances.
*instead of a chinese style reusable lander, their use of the crasher stage gives them enough margin for a single-stage lander-ascent vehicle
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:48:49 UTC No. 15981509
https://twitter.com/culpable_mink/s
> I think it's funny when people criticize Starship for blowing up on the test flights, and the GAO's like "these were key development tests for achieving the planned crewed landing".
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:49:51 UTC No. 15981512
>>15981506
Ideally if you use Falcon heavy you do a Earth Orbit Rendez vous (and get rid of SLS)... but there are doubt the FH can carry all its payload to LEO
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:52:00 UTC No. 15981518
>>15980893
>Nuking China is more important
Why yes, it is
🗑️ Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:52:48 UTC No. 15981521
https://spacenews.com/third-axiom-s
> During a media teleconference Jan. 16, officials from Axiom, NASA and SpaceX said they were proceeding with a planned Jan. 17 launch of the Ax-3 mission to the ISS. A Falcon 9 was scheduled to lift off at 5:11 p.m. Eastern and place a Crew Dragon spacecraft into orbit that will dock with the station about 36 hours later.
4h 20min to Ax-3 launch
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:52:53 UTC No. 15981522
>>15981489
It'd depend on the details. Falcon Heavy can handle a LM-10 style mission but it doesn't have quite as much mass to TLI so you might need to scale things even further down or work on uprating FH somehow. Crew Dragon could probably be brought up to deep space specs and have a proper service module designed and built in a year or two. Designing a lander that's light enough and small enough to fit in a Falcon fairing would be the long pole to worry about, assuming that space suits aren't the impossible task they've been lately.
It's not likely to be faster than the current plan for Artemis at this point in the timeline, but it could have been done faster if the decision had been made a few years ago. Then again, if we'd decided to go with an EELV based lunar mission plan back in the day we'd already be back on the Moon.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:52:58 UTC No. 15981523
>Life support systems have proven to be more difficult and challenging to develop
ORION IS STILL IN DEVELOPMENT THEN
STILL
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 17:55:02 UTC No. 15981525
ttps://spacenews.com/third-axiom-sp
> However, SpaceX announced less than six hours before liftoff that it was postponing the launch a day to provide more time “to complete pre-launch checkouts and data analysis on the vehicle.” The company did not elaborate on what issue or issues required the additional time. Launch is now scheduled for 4:49 p.m. Eastern Jan. 18.
so launch is happening in about 28h
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHY
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 18:03:24 UTC No. 15981531
>>15981522
>>15981506
Thanks anons
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 18:17:52 UTC No. 15981557
>china launched cargo to their space station
>sfg doesnt care
>nobody cares
spaceflight is boring
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 18:18:31 UTC No. 15981559
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 18:18:48 UTC No. 15981560
>>15981557
>chinks sending rice and boiled dog to their space chinks
who gives a shit
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 18:21:57 UTC No. 15981564
>>15981557
>ccp leo station cargo launch
boring, call me when Dreamchaser launches
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 19:14:02 UTC No. 15981657
>>15981477
Griffin's just salty bc all his work was for nothing. All cancelled. He really shouldnt be listened to if you want to run a successful program
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 20:03:01 UTC No. 15981768
>>15980513
>getting blown over by wind in an atmosphere that's nearly a vacuum
Lmao
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 21:07:00 UTC No. 15981907
>>15981388
I'm curious how they plan to use cryogenic fuel and still remain vehicle and pad agnostic. It isn't normal to plumb the payload area with cryogenics, requires extra umbilicals.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 21:49:37 UTC No. 15982005
>>15980307
I saturate my 10 Mbit upload 24/7. Ugh... I wish I had 1 Gbit upload.
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 21:55:19 UTC No. 15982026
>>15980234
>tfw living in a country where ISPs can't sell products "up to xxx speed" but have to deliver stated speed 24/7
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 22:55:24 UTC No. 15982170
>>15981330
>high-energy
>falcon 9
ULA sisters... Our response?
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jan 2024 23:05:33 UTC No. 15982180
>>15982170
You can put it on Vulcan and get even higher energy.