Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 15:15:39 UTC No. 15987314

>>15987295
Cancel MSR

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 15:18:45 UTC No. 15987316

i miss dis nigga like you wouldn't believe

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 15:22:17 UTC No. 15987319

>>15987295
>>15987314
>>15987316
When are we leaving this planet bros? Here I am another day, stuck on this rock with flat earthers and moon landing deniers... I want to go out and explore the galaxy... Whats taking so long

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 15:27:56 UTC No. 15987322

during yesterday's SLIM stuff I noticed another space autist vTumor
there was also stream today on the neptune color thing and moon's formation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNjWqeh6LQU
seems like decent content if you like such things, she doesn't even do the fake cutesy voice which instantly shoots up the tolerability rating

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 15:28:17 UTC No. 15987323

>>15987319
How about you use your autism to discover anti gravity tech that can reduce spaceflight to a dollar per pound
Way better than bitching about liberals all day

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 15:30:09 UTC No. 15987324

Bros I've done some napkin math and figured out that boring out tunnels only to build offices in them is more economically viable than building office building on the surface. Just think about it. Tunnels last nearly forever and have perfect insulation. They can be build near residential areas and it's not hard to find space for them.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 15:35:37 UTC No. 15987326

>>15987314
I got laid off from MSR, AMA

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 15:38:20 UTC No. 15987329

>>15987326
Did you really work for the Jet Propulsion Laboratory?

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 15:45:17 UTC No. 15987332

>>15987329
Contractor but yes

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 15:45:36 UTC No. 15987333

>>15987324
Not really Spaceflight though is it

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 15:45:54 UTC No. 15987334

>>15987295
digger

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 15:47:01 UTC No. 15987336

>>15987323
>reduce spaceflight to a dollar per pound
Way better than bitching about liberals all day
If he killed all the Liberals it would have the same effect.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 15:51:46 UTC No. 15987338

The most expensive part of spaceflight is literally getting off the planet
Once youre able to do that it costs less than a million to propel a ship with 200 tonnes of cargo to the moon

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 15:55:28 UTC No. 15987342

>>15987326
Now that you can be impartial what is your opinion on the whole program?

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 16:00:22 UTC No. 15987347

>>15987336
>stop dreaming about flying, wilbur. humans will never be able to fly. its science fiction nonsense that will never be a reality

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 16:12:22 UTC No. 15987356

So we europeans are pretty much banned from flying onboard NASA missions but we also can't build our own crewed vehicle, so we must buy private american seats?

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 16:15:48 UTC No. 15987360

>>15987324
>boring out tunnels only to build offices in them is more economically viable than building office building on the surface. Just think about it. Tunnels last nearly forever and have perfect insulation. They can be build near residential areas and it's not hard to find space for them.
Tunnels flood constantly, requiring the operation of large expensive pumps, and need large fans to blow fresh air through them.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 16:16:26 UTC No. 15987361

>>15987356
I thought spaceflight was racist and therefore illegal in the euopistani caliphate.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 16:23:15 UTC No. 15987369

>>15987326
How was the work culture there?
Were there a lot of diversity hires?

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 16:26:01 UTC No. 15987372

Did they ever release any new information on SLIM? If you land something on the moon, the least you can do is to send back a photo.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 16:34:19 UTC No. 15987380

>>15987314
This would actually be so fking based.
Spend all that money on reusable rockets (first stage and upper stages).
Once we have masterd this technology then what can't we do?
Is NASA dumb?

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 16:48:30 UTC No. 15987404

>>15987342
Cool idea destroyed by terrible leadership/culture
>>15987369
Way too many arrogant phd's in one place. The amount of infighting is ridiculous. Tons of people of Iranian descent who are extremely difficult to work with. They just habitually shit on ANY idea that isn't their own and will actively try to sabotage you if you go against them.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 16:48:38 UTC No. 15987405

>>15987380
>Is NASA dumb?
Yes, but more corrupt than incompetent >>15987404

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 17:00:28 UTC No. 15987424

is space exploration just going to be "monke make bigger rockets" forever?

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 17:01:21 UTC No. 15987425

>>15987404
Do you think China or Elon will get samples back before JPL?

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 17:02:00 UTC No. 15987429

>>15987424
Tell us how the last Sea Dragon launch went.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 17:03:32 UTC No. 15987434

New sexy artist on the block

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 17:09:33 UTC No. 15987444

>>15987434
eh

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 17:15:03 UTC No. 15987451

>>15987434
Needs longer hair

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 17:16:49 UTC No. 15987455

>>15987434
Cute!

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 17:20:06 UTC No. 15987462

>>15987380
I still don't understand why MSR requires so muh mass Autism, can't a falcon heavy get like 17T to MTO? Just send two missions back-to-back, one with the lander, one with an orbiter that picks up the lander.
Why would this cost billions of dollars?

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 17:35:47 UTC No. 15987478

>>15987404
but you are saying they are competent in principle (though managment/culture might be bad)?

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 17:37:11 UTC No. 15987480

consider that the rover alone costs like #3 billion. Add to that the ascent vehicle and the fetch drone and the satellite and the planning that's $10 billion

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 17:38:11 UTC No. 15987481

fuck phd fuck college fuck oldspace

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 17:38:32 UTC No. 15987482

What’s the use case for modular starship class space stations?

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 17:38:37 UTC No. 15987483

>>15987481
Do you have anyone to fuck?

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 17:41:44 UTC No. 15987487

>>15987462
You could easily fit an entire MSR mission into one expendable Falcon Heavy's 16,800 kg mass budget. But that would only cost ~$150M, and the point isn't to get samples back from Mars. The point is to spend money on groups that are politically well-connected.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 17:41:49 UTC No. 15987488

>>15987482
they're cool
and
fuck the ISS

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 17:43:28 UTC No. 15987492

>>15987487
Size is also an issue, you have to fit everything into the Falcon fairing

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 17:45:26 UTC No. 15987493

>>15987487
>Look up Mass of MAV
>500kg
>LockMart wants a billion dollars for this
Cancel MSR

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 17:45:44 UTC No. 15987494

>>15987483
wym

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 17:50:02 UTC No. 15987500

Axiom 3 docked with the ISS earlier today.
https://youtu.be/RY4PPUDUG1c

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 17:53:04 UTC No. 15987507

>>15987492
Using the extended payload fairing would get around most of that. It's still a bit too narrow to reuse the aeroshell design from Curiosity or Perseverance, but the Spirit/Opportunity sized ones would fit nicely.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 17:58:22 UTC No. 15987513

>>15987424
No, at some point megastructures will make sense, even if not here on Earth, but they can't be built with infrastructure in space, and rockets are needed to build that infrastructure.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 17:59:55 UTC No. 15987515

>>15987513
without

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 18:02:44 UTC No. 15987520

You think you could load this bad boy up with dozens, if not hundreds of cubesats and send it on its way to mars or somewhere?

I’m trying to think what else besides space stations you could do with the big gravitics shell

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 18:03:47 UTC No. 15987523

It’s been 8 months since this was posted. Do you think Mcgregor is still pushing out R2s or have they moved entirely onto R3s?

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 18:08:50 UTC No. 15987529

>>15987434
>WhoreX

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 18:09:07 UTC No. 15987531

>>15987507
How are they doing with the extended fairing?
I haven't followed the news that closely with the FH.
My understanding is the rocket's 'thin and tall' design is really impeding with the project ie. the length width ratio (can't remember the term for this) is already near the limit.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 18:11:58 UTC No. 15987540

For those that are interested in /sci/'s 4cc team, we play /t/ after [wsg]-/lit/ >>15987443

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 18:17:22 UTC No. 15987547

>>15987523
R1, R2, R3... It's all the same bs. They change the name to create the illusion of advancement. The Blue Origin engine never had to change it's name and it was in development shorter than Raptre engine.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 18:18:38 UTC No. 15987550

>>15987540
who's the /sfg/ rep again?

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 18:19:07 UTC No. 15987552

>>15987540
kek

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 18:19:27 UTC No. 15987553

>>15987531
The Gateway modules (which are the upper limit of what FH can structurally handle) should be the first use of the extended fairing.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 18:19:34 UTC No. 15987554

>>15987507
Stretching the fairing doesn't open F or FH to many more payloads. The width is the main issue

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 18:21:16 UTC No. 15987557

>>15987523
Raptor 3 is still being tested but is close to production

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 18:21:58 UTC No. 15987558

>>15987488
t. ching chong or pajeet

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 18:23:47 UTC No. 15987561

>>15987550
von Braun, he got promoted to Silver when I ran the roster poll 2 weeks ago, he and Elon share a goalhorn

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 18:25:33 UTC No. 15987564

>>15987553
They had to remove the windows from the modules so the weak SpaceX rocket could carry them

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 18:27:00 UTC No. 15987567

>>15987564
>it came to me in a dream

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 18:28:12 UTC No. 15987568

>>15987567
no, a source familiar with me matter entrusted me with that fact.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 18:28:45 UTC No. 15987570

>>15987568
Okay Eric

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 18:31:13 UTC No. 15987573

>>15987547
so trve xister

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 18:32:43 UTC No. 15987576

>>15987568
Bullshit

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 18:38:57 UTC No. 15987584

>>15987552
game is abut to start, /lit/ got BTFO by [wsg]

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 18:39:48 UTC No. 15987586

>all matches today have been blowouts so far

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 18:42:50 UTC No. 15987589

I don't care about videogames, I only care about boring tunnels on the Moon.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 18:45:44 UTC No. 15987593

>>15987589
Play video games WHILE boring tunnels on the moon

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 18:51:02 UTC No. 15987596

>>15987589
>>15987593
turn boring tunnels into a videogame

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 18:52:45 UTC No. 15987602

>>15987434
gooks and their wannabes can't draw

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 18:53:25 UTC No. 15987604

>>15987602
this
only ai can draw

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 18:59:11 UTC No. 15987613

>>15987604
Agree. Artists are finished

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 18:59:41 UTC No. 15987614

>>15987596
>Teleoperating digging machines on the moon in an irl game of Dwarf Fortress

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:08:41 UTC No. 15987623

>Another blowout

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:10:16 UTC No. 15987627

another Raptor blew out. Elon Musk is finished.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:13:34 UTC No. 15987634

https://twitter.com/planet4589/status/1748736907394076732

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:14:36 UTC No. 15987638

>>15987634
https://twitter.com/planet4589/status/1748738419335835733
> Inferred second stage trajectory for the Iranian launch

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:14:44 UTC No. 15987639

>>15987627
Finally! Now we can work on problems here on earth like the soaring costs of sǒy lattes and not being able to give out as much money for my wife to go out and find new flings!

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:15:37 UTC No. 15987640

>>15987638


link it >>15987623 >>15987627

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:16:38 UTC No. 15987643

https://twitter.com/CNSpaceflight/status/1748562171741585791

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:18:11 UTC No. 15987645

>>15987638
inb4 fails in mysterious circumstances

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:18:58 UTC No. 15987646

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crAi5dw64JA
> SpaceX's Announced Starship Upgrades are Ludicrous and Awesome, and SLIM lunar lander doomed?

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:21:18 UTC No. 15987648

>>15987640
I was talking about the 4cc, we're losing 4-0 to >>>/t/

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:22:00 UTC No. 15987650

>>15987648

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:23:25 UTC No. 15987653

>>15987627
Oh no! Anyway

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:23:42 UTC No. 15987654

>>15987648
also faggot mods filtered the link to the stream

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:25:07 UTC No. 15987657

>>15987553
>>15987568
>>15987567
PPE+HALO is the upper limit for FH, it cannot do the theoretical 50+ tons because of the F9 second stage it uses.

https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-22-105212.pdf

>As of February 2022, the co-manifested vehicle is above the Falcon Heavy launch vehicle’s mass limit. If the mass is too high, it could affect the vehicle’s ability to reach the correct lunar orbit. The project is taking steps to reduce mass, including evaluating whether it needs to potentially off-load some components for initial launch

>According to officials, the project office finalized the updated mass allocations for the HALO and the PPE in February 2022, though as of that date, the co-manifested vehicle mass was above the established mission design limits. If the combined mass of the co-manifested vehicle is too high, it could affect its ability to reach the correct lunar orbit. Further, project officials explained that mass affects the overall mission design because the Falcon Heavy has a mass limit

>The project is also tracking risks related to the PPE’s mass that could result in late design changes. As of February 2022, the PPE’s expected mass exceeded its mass allocation for the co-manifested vehicle. If the PPE project has to make late design changes to reduce mass, it could result in cost growth and schedule delays. The project office has mass reduction efforts underway, including assessing the removal of certain capabilities from the PPE to reduce mass. Reducing the PPE capabilities could affect other Gateway elements and the overall mission.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:27:49 UTC No. 15987663

>>15987654
Is the isthisliv link not working?

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:28:45 UTC No. 15987667

>>15987663
oh right I forgot about that one

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:29:32 UTC No. 15987670

>>15987643
We are 12 to 24 months away from seeing China successfully recover a Falcon-style reusable launch vehicle

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:32:56 UTC No. 15987674

>>15987657
Nothing about "removing windows"

Sounds more like the teams making the modules need to work harder on reducing pointless mass. We've seen this time and time again with other payloads

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:33:11 UTC No. 15987675

>>15987667
There's a reason why is use cyrillic н as an n, it gets past the filter.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:33:57 UTC No. 15987676

>>15987670
I look forward to seeing it. This could be the start of something great.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:47:33 UTC No. 15987692

>>15987670
yeah, and there will probably be multiple chinese companies doing that after the first
I wonder if that is going to be a wake up call to old space in the US and especially Europe

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:54:54 UTC No. 15987698

>>15987670
Alon SpaceX is 12 to 24 months away from landing on Mars.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:56:15 UTC No. 15987699

just a clarification, I literally made the thing about removing windows because of SpaceX up. (You) were trolled on hard.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:57:12 UTC No. 15987700

>>15987698
SpaceX fan here, this is not gonna happen kek.

These chink companies have a chance though

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:58:14 UTC No. 15987703

>>15987699
>I was only pretending to be retarded

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:59:01 UTC No. 15987706

>>15987692
>Oldspace
>Ever waking up
very optimistic of you

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:59:35 UTC No. 15987707

>>15987692
If ten years of SpaceX turning themselves into a launch hegemon isn't going to wake them up, nothing China is doing will stir them. The Chinese launch industry got banished to the same shadow realm that Russia's currently in way back in 1996. They might as well be on a different planet for how much effect they have on groups like ULA or Arianespace.

>>15987698
Earliest mars launch window that SpaceX might be ready for is Q4 2026. There's an opening at the end of this year, but SpaceX will probably be working on refueling and starship recovery at that point.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:07:42 UTC No. 15987714

>>15987520
Massive optical telescope so we can see a mars ant's asshole from orbit

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:19:49 UTC No. 15987735

>>15987523
fun fact, you can fit 5 raptors inside 1 F1 engine bell.
F1 engine produced 690 tons of force at sealevel, whereas 5 of these raptors (if they all hit 269) would produce 1345 tons of force.
this means if you were to replace the 5 F1 engines under the saturn 5 with raptors filling the same amount of space under the rocket, the saturn 5's thrust would improve by 91% from 3518 tons to 6725 tons of force.
this is the power of modern rocketry, and that's not even with all the real-estate on the bottom covered, that's just the same amount of space the F1's were taking up.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:20:43 UTC No. 15987737

>>15987646
>reminded me of SLIM failing to contact
im sad now

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:20:53 UTC No. 15987738

When did you realize Starship was a scam?

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:22:13 UTC No. 15987741

>>15987738
how is it a scam? how much did you pay for it?

Many have already been built and are being launched semi regularily. Definitely progress is being made with each launch.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:22:25 UTC No. 15987742

>>15987735
Now imagine an F1 sized methalox engine made by SpaceX

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:22:52 UTC No. 15987744

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSxacSDK4Rc
> Why The World Is Rushing Back To The Moon

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:25:37 UTC No. 15987748

>>15987738
This is you
>>15987699

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:28:22 UTC No. 15987751

>>15987500
where does everyone sleep when it is crowded like this? I know the american side only has 4 beds

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:28:31 UTC No. 15987753

>>15987748
nice try buy it's not. Also since when is /sfg/ anti jokes

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:29:04 UTC No. 15987755

>>15987751
In Soyuz or Dragon

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:29:27 UTC No. 15987756

>>15987751
Space orgy. They share the beds.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:32:02 UTC No. 15987762

>>15987753
The jokes used to be better

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:32:16 UTC No. 15987763

This you?

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:34:02 UTC No. 15987765

>>15987763
yes

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:35:12 UTC No. 15987770

>>15987763
I wish. To see the Earth from that perspective would be incredible.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:35:19 UTC No. 15987771

let's post good /sfg/ memes

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:35:36 UTC No. 15987772

>>15987707
My money is on Q4 2024, a nearly-empty starship with almost no fuel, just enough to get to Mars orbit as a big Fuck You to everyone else
and of course all the normies and media will paint it as a failure because it didn't land or something

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:36:02 UTC No. 15987774

>>15987771

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:36:21 UTC No. 15987777

https://spacenews.com/office-of-space-commerce-starts-commercial-pathfinder-project-for-civil-space-traffic-coordination-system/

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:37:07 UTC No. 15987779

>>15987742
even just 3 of these 269 TF engines would have 117 more tons of thrust than just a single F1 engine.
and they could fit inside 61% the area that a single F1 engine takes up.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:37:07 UTC No. 15987780

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:38:17 UTC No. 15987782

>>15987780
cringe

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:39:04 UTC No. 15987783

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:40:35 UTC No. 15987785

>>15987783
sorry anon, sharp corners are bad for hypersonic reenty

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:40:36 UTC No. 15987786

>>15987780
No. Safety needs to be our #1 concern

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:40:48 UTC No. 15987787

>>15987783
Unfortunately angled pressure vessels tend to burst very easily

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:41:49 UTC No. 15987788

>>15987783
>engines
Ah yes, thanks Anon

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:42:50 UTC No. 15987790

>>15987772
I hope they do something like that, bolt some communication instruments on it so it can work as a satellite

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:42:59 UTC No. 15987791

>>15987783
This would work if it's made out of cybertruck steel

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:43:03 UTC No. 15987793

>>15987779
Reengineing the S-IC is weird because of how square of a footprint the Saturn V had, but you could easily fit just as many Raptors in there as on superheavy.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:44:24 UTC No. 15987796

>>15987783
the ship is a cylinder because pressure vessels are cylindrical

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:45:18 UTC No. 15987797

>>15987796
We will add extra bracing to the corners on the inside.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:47:20 UTC No. 15987804

>>15987797
sounds complicated

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:47:28 UTC No. 15987805

>>15987783
whatever you do ignore these retards
>>15987785
>>15987787
>>15987796

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:48:52 UTC No. 15987809

>>15987783
How many midgets will it fit inside?

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:53:49 UTC No. 15987816

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:55:24 UTC No. 15987819

>>15987523
>>15987735
>>15987779
How do other launch providers not tremble in fear when they see this shit?
Unless there's something fundamentally wrong with the design, they're all fucked aren't they?

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:55:51 UTC No. 15987820

>>15987783

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 20:55:54 UTC No. 15987821

>>15987816
JWST was a farce from a monetary standpoint
could have done 10 missions instead, with starship you can build these without the autistic origami folding shit

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:02:55 UTC No. 15987829

>>15987819
yes they are, I guess they are hoping ramping it up will take take and/or there will be a market that is inaccessible to SpaceX which they can compete in (while they try to develop a fully reusable rocket)
Stoke is trying to make fully reusable rocket from the get-go
Blue Origin will have a reusable booster and is in the process of developing a reusable second stage at some point
Relativity is doing a bigger F9 clone basically and the second stage could be made reusable too (not sure about that though)
Rocketlab is basically fucked, Neutron can hardly compete with F9 right now and its too small to be developed to be fully reusable (though Stoke is pretty small but their design is quite unconventional, I guess others could try to copy them if it works)
ULA is fucked in the long term, basically milking NSSL money and trying to get acquired
Firefly is developing MLV, don't really know much about that
European rocket startups are extremely behind, but Europe will have some type of internal market (inaccessible to SpaceX) that might or might not be large enough for some F9 clone to be developed and then perhaps a fully reusable vehicle sometime
Chinas market is entirely separate from the western market so in some sense they don't compete with western launchers at all, perhaps in prestige or something

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:08:56 UTC No. 15987837

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1748812713046716505

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:09:57 UTC No. 15987840

>>15987837
https://twitter.com/BrendanCarrFCC/status/1748809386779119726

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:10:47 UTC No. 15987843

>>15987819
the best part is that on top of all that, it still has a significantly higher ISP than the F1 as well.
oldspace should be fucking shiverring when they see these eyewatering numbers.
BE-4 beaten nearly as hard in ISP at sealevel, but just 1 raptor has 19 more tons of thrust than a single BE-4, dispite the fact that the Be-4 has a bell diameter of 1.9 meters to the raptor's 1.3. not to mention how much heavier the BE-4 must be (i don't actually know it's mass).

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:12:38 UTC No. 15987845

>>15987843
*BE-4 does not get beaten nearly as hard

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:15:12 UTC No. 15987848

>>15987843
BE-4s thrust to weight ratio is 80:1, im bad at maths

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:16:25 UTC No. 15987852

>>15987843
the raptor is just an objectively better engine than the BE-4 in every single way, and dispite that, it's still cheaper lmao.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:17:34 UTC No. 15987853

>>15987819
They're hoping starship doesn't work, I mean how could they even compete with it considering they are all now just building F9 competition. The infrastructure needed to support starship is ridiculous too, what kind of private company could even build up that much.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:19:54 UTC No. 15987856

>>15987829
Falcon 9 is cheap because the second stage is cheap and everything else is reused. Neutron is betting its viability on having an exceptionally cheap S2. The fact that they don't need another boat to recover their fairings helps too.

Given how the rocket crisis is unfolding in Europe I wouldn't be surprised if some continental group just decides "If we can buy F-16s, then we can buy Falcon 9s," and tries to get themselves set up with 2-3 boosters and a subscription plan for upper stages. It doesn't help things that half of the Ariane 6's planned missions could be handled by an RTLS Falcon flying for Kourou.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:23:19 UTC No. 15987866

>>15987848
249,475 tons of thrust divided by 80 is about 3.11 tons, more than twice as heavy as the raptor that beats it in thrust at only 1.4 tons for raptor 3.
so yeah BE-4 at 80:1 gets fucking annihalated by the raptor at 192:1
how can anyone that's not spacex live with themselves?

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:24:51 UTC No. 15987868

>>15987856
Neutron might be slightly cheaper than Falcon 9, but they really need to be starting to think about the next vehicle as well that is fully reusable if they want to be in the business long term and not just pivot to building satellite buses or whatever (which is going fine for them as far as I know)

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:27:53 UTC No. 15987872

>>15987866
wait so if we replaced the 2 BE-4's powering the vulcan 1st stage with raptor engines, it would just become an objectively better rocket?

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:29:12 UTC No. 15987874

alright then everyone post your rocket idea

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:29:26 UTC No. 15987875

>>15987643
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzTW_Ckkj2U

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:30:09 UTC No. 15987876

>>15987874
rocket women with thruster vaginas

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:31:40 UTC No. 15987877

>>15987872
maybe, but don't current raptors have some leak problems and are somewhat prone to explode
need CO2 purge system and engine shielding, so you can't just swap them 1-1

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:33:03 UTC No. 15987881

>>15987434
Terrible eyes

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:33:55 UTC No. 15987882

they are finally protecting the concrete base of the tower

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:35:01 UTC No. 15987884

>>15987874
Two words, Chlorine Trifluoride.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:40:32 UTC No. 15987888

>>15987874
Detonate nuke and contain the blast to exit out of nozzle

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:42:57 UTC No. 15987892

>>15987874
This, but the payload by is filled with a propellant tank, it has a Merlin Vac in the tail, and you can put it on top of a standard Falcon 9.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:45:15 UTC No. 15987895

>>15987874
nuclear salt liquid fuel rocket + nuclear SRB side boosters

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:45:26 UTC No. 15987896

>>15987877
i doubt that's a problem unless you have a giant close nit engine bay with 33 raptors and very little ventilation like with starship.
i doubt 2 raptor engines under a vulcan would cause the same issue.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 22:00:07 UTC No. 15987910

>>15987874

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 22:01:25 UTC No. 15987913

>>15987895
>the sky has fallen
what a blast from the past lmao

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 22:02:23 UTC No. 15987915

>>15987744
lol
Starship hasn't been shown once yet and I'm halfway through, SLS keeps getting shown though

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 22:05:29 UTC No. 15987919

I'm so angry about them changing the chief flights systems engineer on Dragonfly. The former one was a true expert that knew what the fuck he was talking about.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 22:07:19 UTC No. 15987920

>>15987915
seems like they are avoiding it on purpose

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 22:11:29 UTC No. 15987921

>>15987920
>should we show the actual HLS vehicle
>NO THAT ONE IS OWNED BY EVIL ELON MUSK!!!!!
fucking jesus man, some of these people are genuine toddlers.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 22:20:20 UTC No. 15987924

>>15987892
>building a shuttle with an 18 ton weight constraint

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 22:22:24 UTC No. 15987925

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 22:22:50 UTC No. 15987926

>>15987924
Not really. It's for replacing the Falcon's upper stage with something fully reusable that can carry crew.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 22:24:48 UTC No. 15987927

>>15987925
what will the lunar EVA combat outfit look like?

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 22:45:56 UTC No. 15987952

sometimes I wonder what space travel would be like if one of these ballistic reentry vehicles was chosen for human spaceflight instead of lifting/cone shapes. At the very least all astronauts would need to be certified for extreme gs or something

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 22:50:17 UTC No. 15987956

If a fucking capsule can be described as a LIFTing cone then how come starship with proper wings isn't a spacePLANE??????????

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 23:02:24 UTC No. 15987976

>>15987956
Starship does not have wings and the flaps do not generate lift.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 23:09:41 UTC No. 15987984

>>15987919
Dragonfly is a fucking disaster and ISNT EVEN GOING TO THE FUCKING LAKES CANCEL DRAGONFLY THIS INSTANT

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 23:10:19 UTC No. 15987985

>>15987976
>>15987984
bigots

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 23:41:26 UTC No. 15988034

>>15987895
>nuclear salt liquid fuel rocket
These don't work. They're junk science like plasma magnet.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 23:51:06 UTC No. 15988049

How about urm, liquid fuel hydrolox core with ammonium perchlorate side mounted boosters and hydrolox second and third stages !!???

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 23:57:05 UTC No. 15988056

>>15988049
"SLS except three stages instead of two" isn't a bad idea at all

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 23:59:14 UTC No. 15988061

>>15987874
somewhere between zero and six tubes containing an ammonium perchlorate based solid propellant straddling a tube filled with super chilled natural gas and oxygen. on top of that another tube this one containing refrigerated hydrogen and some more oxygen.

Anonymous at Sat, 20 Jan 2024 23:59:18 UTC No. 15988062

>>15988056
Honestly, I'm surprised they didn't consider it. Might make one shot moon landings possible again and it seems like that's all some people want to do.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 00:02:20 UTC No. 15988068

>>15987874

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 00:05:13 UTC No. 15988073

>>15988062
You get such a large performance boost by dividing the core stage in half it's insane.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 00:11:16 UTC No. 15988081

>>15987874
Starship with twin side mounted reusable boosters that feed into the center for a 1.5 stage design.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 00:15:31 UTC No. 15988084

>>15988034
why?

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 00:16:36 UTC No. 15988086

the osprey but instead of propellers it has two massive solid rocket motors it can pivot.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 00:18:05 UTC No. 15988087

Ching chong China strong

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 00:38:03 UTC No. 15988107

>>15987783
>t. Manufacturing Engineer

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 00:43:30 UTC No. 15988111

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VgdOSwVDEbc
> Why China Wants to Massively Launch from the Sea

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 00:47:57 UTC No. 15988116

>>15988111
>Massively Launch
Whut?

Wasted trips

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 00:56:22 UTC No. 15988119

>>15988111
China technology is amazing

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 00:59:14 UTC No. 15988125

>>15988116
that is the title

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 01:00:26 UTC No. 15988127

>>15988116
Shut up you fat nigger

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 01:01:36 UTC No. 15988129

>>15988084
It's pure handwavium.
>Eject critical uranium salts out the back
>They explode
>A miracle occurs and the blast goes the way you want and doesn't destroy your ship

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 01:10:29 UTC No. 15988133

>>15988111
No mention of the Hainan launch sites in the video, which is weird considering it alleviates all the problems the other launch sites have without the increased cost and complexity of sea launch. There's definitely going to be more sea launches but I don't think it'll be huge

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 01:11:49 UTC No. 15988134

>inject a subcritical mass between some reflectors
>it becomes prompt supercritical
Pol schizos: ARGH NOOO THIS IS IMPOSSIBLE
'nuff said.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 01:25:37 UTC No. 15988138

>>15988129
They explode because they're flowing through an active reactor that pushes the nuclear salts to criticality, superheating the reaction mass and ejecting it.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 01:33:30 UTC No. 15988144

>>15988134
>Pol schizos: not /pol/ schizos
>not greentexting where quote is
gtfo newfag

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 01:36:42 UTC No. 15988146

>>15988134
This. Exactly this. Pol schizos ITT are seething because of it and have no argument against you

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 01:37:43 UTC No. 15988148

>>15988144
Uh oh....seething!

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 01:43:30 UTC No. 15988151

>>15987874
Pure solid fuel to get to orbit, non-reusable rocket. Should be cheap and very powerful.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 01:48:25 UTC No. 15988156

>>15988151
https://cdn.prd.ngc.agencyq.site/-/media/wp-content/uploads/NG-Propulsion-Products-Catalog.pdf
Here's your list of parts. Good luck.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 01:54:20 UTC No. 15988167

>>15988156
>Aluminum housing
I was thinking more of taking a page out of SpaceX and building the rockets out of steel, which is cheaper + more structural integrity which can be used fuels that produce more thrust. The idea is to just be as cheap as possible and as powerful as possible, everything used to actually control the rocket can just be tacked on later.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 01:56:20 UTC No. 15988171

Ingenuity is back.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 01:58:41 UTC No. 15988174

>>15988171
so you guys lied to me?

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 02:02:07 UTC No. 15988177

>>15988174
/sfg/ is one person

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 02:22:54 UTC No. 15988196

>>15987482
You can develop angled docking ports and eventually build a spin hab.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 02:28:40 UTC No. 15988201

>>15987874
subcooled propane and liquid oxygen, full flow dual expander cycle engine, keep the smaller set of propellant inside a cryogenic bag inside the other tank so you only have one tank and no bulkheads
unknowns: what's the actual correct size for a dual expander cycle? how many engines?
correct size for the current market is roughly twenty tons to LEO fully reusable, start with one of the early space shuttle concept's upper stages (the full real TSTO with integral fuel tanks) as an aero and structural concept and iterate from there a few times by redoing it completely
design a normal cylinder upper stage that'll be easier to build for initial testing flights, reuse as many systems as possible from the reusable concept design (RCS, engines, pressurization, avionics, batteries) to make it less of a waste when you upgrade later
put these stages on top of a Falcon 9/Super Heavy clone

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 02:29:41 UTC No. 15988203

>>15987976
wrong, the body also generates significant body lift

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 02:35:45 UTC No. 15988209

>>15988203
The body of Starship does not generate lift either.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 02:40:50 UTC No. 15988212

>>15988156
>>15988151
I fucking love OmegA and it's predecesors Ares 1 and Liberty
>>15988209
wrong, even a cylinder at the 70 degree AoA that Starship will reenter at will generate significant lift
this is actually a passable approximation for Starship lol

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 02:41:58 UTC No. 15988213

>>15988201
here's some concept art using existing assets

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 02:43:19 UTC No. 15988215

>>15988213
the Indians have a similar concept in development except that instead of a functional spaceplane upper stage it has no propulsion and will never go to space and is mocked behind its back or whatever, and the booster is a hobby class SRB

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 02:44:52 UTC No. 15988218

>>15987926
>>15988213
YES
THIS

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 02:45:24 UTC No. 15988219

>>15988218
yeah but subcooled propalox though

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 02:50:28 UTC No. 15988230

>>15987874
Frozone+Metallic H2 solid rocket motor.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 03:01:11 UTC No. 15988243

>>15988213
That is so aerodynamically unstable lol.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 03:02:22 UTC No. 15988245

>>15988243
if you can't fly an aerodynamically unstable rocket you don't have fast enough gimbals

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 03:09:30 UTC No. 15988249

>>15987874
HTOL sled-assist spaceplane with integral RVac based second stage, SRBee/LOX strapon flyback boosters for first stage.
>catalyzed propanos TPS
>Metallic intercooled TPS
>supersonic sled release
>can launch from any Shuttle LZ that has LOX, NOS, LCH4, beeswax, and propane onsite
>completely non toxic ops cycle with zero tiles for fast turnaround
>sled can use airbreathing turbofans on Earth or rockets on O2less worlds

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 03:13:52 UTC No. 15988255

>>15988249
all nitrogen oxides are toxic

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 03:16:10 UTC No. 15988259

>>15988177
why did you lie

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 03:21:35 UTC No. 15988264

>>15987874
Revive and combine the Venturestar with a Mass driver to increase payload capability.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 03:25:12 UTC No. 15988269

>>15987874
Energia 2 style parallel burning flyback upper stage using methalox, boosted by vertical landing kerolox boosters.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 03:26:47 UTC No. 15988270

why are you homos so obsessed with spaceplanes

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 03:26:55 UTC No. 15988271

>>15988264
the technology built in china is astounding

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 03:31:46 UTC No. 15988273

I FORGOT TO MENTION THAT ANON IS A STUPID FROGPOSTER
SUBCOOLED PROPALOX FOREVER

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 03:32:47 UTC No. 15988274

>>15988270
THEY MAKE ME HARD

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 03:43:45 UTC No. 15988281

>>15988270
You get a comfortable ride down, and once you land you can just get up and go. None of that water landing buillshit, or getting carried out of your chairs.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 03:56:52 UTC No. 15988292

>>15988271
I really want to see them try this

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 04:13:26 UTC No. 15988309

https://twitter.com/A_J_Higgins/status/1748699127976698356

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 04:14:51 UTC No. 15988312

>>15988309
https://twitter.com/A_J_Higgins/status/1748875167156125893

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 04:17:46 UTC No. 15988317

>>15988309
https://twitter.com/DrPhiltill/status/1748870126626025653
> I’ll agree NASA’s lunar architecture is super strange but IMO it makes sense in light of historical developments, and THOSE are what make it strange. They are…
> (1) The killer app for space in the 1960s was geopolitics, to beat the Soviets. After Apollo, NASA floundered in finding a new killer app that would resonate. Funding settled at ~0.5% of the federal budget, not enough to repeat Apollo on Mars.
> (2) Aerospace companies had no killer app for space exploration or settlement, either. Other than NASA’s cost-plus contracts they had no commercial motive to do more beyond Low Earth Orbit.
> (3) Visionaries including billionaires and entrepreneurs got frustrated at the lack of progress so they took matters into their own hands. Space 2.0 was born. But the question remained: who are the customers? What is the killer app?
> (4) The billionaires took different approaches. Branson’s focus on suborbital space tourism grew too slowly and seems to have failed. Bezos said his vision is moving industry off Earth to save the Earth but they haven’t quite gone orbital yet. And Musk…
>has gone extremely orbital but is focused on building a city on Mars, not supporting NASA’s more modest goals on the Moon as their internal priority. So they are building a lander to carry 100s of tons at a time to Mars. It is not optimized for the Moon.
>(5) NASA realized they need a new approach to fund exploration of Mars. A primary idea is relying on commercial space that has its own skin in the game, other customers to carry the cost. NASA competed the lunar lander and heavily weighed the business model of the company.
> (6) Kathy Leuders of NASA selected SpaceX to build the first lander based on SpaceX having a business argument for how Starship would support itself with other customers. We don’t know the details that SpaceX told NASA, but this is what gave us the current architecture.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 04:18:58 UTC No. 15988320

>>15988317
> (7) Starship, being optimized for carrying 100 humans and 100s of tons of cargo to Mars each flight, requires lots of refueling even if it is only going to the Moon with a few humans and much less cargo. Well,…
> refueling in orbit should become routine. When it becomes ordinary boring infrastructure supporting many missions, it won’t even be included on architecture pics like this. The architecture will not seem strange.
> (8) We *were* trying to develop on-orbit propellant depots over the past two decades but there were some who opposed it because they didn’t like commercial space and wanted NASA to keep trying the old approach (e.g., Sen. Richard Shelby, NASA Admin Mike Griffin)…
> So work on propellant depots was shut down. Shelby famously threatened NASA that if they didn’t shut down all work on propellant depots and in-orbit propellant transfer then he would punish NASA by stripping its budget. So here we are without that crucial technology, yet.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 04:20:01 UTC No. 15988322

>>15988320
> And that is what makes this architecture look strange. When we have landers that are optimized for the Moon rather than Mars and/or when in-space propellant transfer is routine then the architecture drawing will get a lot simpler.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 04:20:56 UTC No. 15988324

to go to mars takes 20 refuels

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 04:21:51 UTC No. 15988327

https://twitter.com/planet4589/status/1748882882376937656

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 04:23:12 UTC No. 15988333

>>15988171
https://twitter.com/NASAJPL/status/1748883252604236281

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 04:24:28 UTC No. 15988338

https://twitter.com/PdxAdvPhoto/status/1748740002593251616
> It’s so frosty!
>#ax3

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 04:24:56 UTC No. 15988340

>>15988333
This is really fucking bad

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 04:25:31 UTC No. 15988341

https://twitter.com/AstroJaws/status/1748837338510245906

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 04:26:33 UTC No. 15988343

>>15988341

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 04:27:38 UTC No. 15988344

>>15988343

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 04:28:45 UTC No. 15988346

>>15988344

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 04:29:25 UTC No. 15988347

Propalox more like niggerlox

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 04:29:49 UTC No. 15988349

>>15988346

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 04:30:54 UTC No. 15988350

>>15988327
https://twitter.com/WxNB_/status/1748857356698476562

apparently it was detected before burning up

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 04:31:01 UTC No. 15988351

Seeing Earth from space makes me think both how big it is, and how small everything is.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 04:31:55 UTC No. 15988354

>>15988350
https://twitter.com/WxNB_/status/1748869011503186161

a bunch of videos in the thread

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 04:38:04 UTC No. 15988357

>>15988351
Reddit

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 04:42:02 UTC No. 15988362

>>15988347
no u

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 04:45:12 UTC No. 15988366

>>15988362
Shut up fag

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 04:47:55 UTC No. 15988369

Repear after me

NIGGERS!!!

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 04:55:15 UTC No. 15988378

>>15988369
more like dolphin sex

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 05:15:35 UTC No. 15988403

>>15988378
Kill yourself immediatly

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 05:18:38 UTC No. 15988407

>>15988403
we were robbed

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 05:22:17 UTC No. 15988411

/sfg/ - Schizophrenic Fighting General

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 05:23:39 UTC No. 15988412

>>15988411
/spaceplane fucking general/

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 05:24:46 UTC No. 15988413

/sfg/ - Stupid Fuck General

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 05:27:35 UTC No. 15988419

/sfg/ - Starship Fucker General

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 05:29:25 UTC No. 15988420

/sfg/ - Shutthe Fuckup Getcancer

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 05:29:53 UTC No. 15988421

I'm so fucked bros

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 05:34:27 UTC No. 15988423

>>15988421
oh nice, looks like you're passed the death zone for heating
hows your propulsion budget for landing?

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 05:35:47 UTC No. 15988424

>>15988421
the more I look at this the more questions I have
where the fuck is your command pod? is that a fairing on top? DID YOU PUT CORCAS IN A COMMAND CHAIR IN A FAIRING ALL THE WAY TO DUNA

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 05:36:17 UTC No. 15988425

Every time i see red NASA launch towers i can't help but think about double decker cheeseburgers.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 05:37:01 UTC No. 15988426

>>15988423
I forgot to include reaction wheels and there wasn't enough monoprop to right myself. I was more or less careening into the ground at the end with 1000m/s or spare delta v at the end. Doing another mission with wheels/drogues
>>15988424
yeah

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 05:47:07 UTC No. 15988430

>>15988426
you can use your main engine gimbal to right yourself typically, especially if if you have 1000 m/s of spare dv lol
what engine are you using? terrier? that might not be enough

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 05:48:21 UTC No. 15988431

>>15988430
cheetah I'm just better at building autistic fairing pods than flying them lol

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 05:57:40 UTC No. 15988436

Imagine
https://spaceflightnow.com/falcon/050120spacex/
>The first Falcon rocket will be launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif., in March.
>The first Falcon 5 on the manifest goes from Vandenberg in the second quarter of 2006 with a one-third scale test craft for Bigelow Aerospace's Earth-orbiting inflatable space modules.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 05:58:32 UTC No. 15988437

>>15988431
I've never used a cheetah outside of my autistic spaceplanes and one single mission to kerbin escape and back for that sweet sweet high orbit sun science before I had mk2 unlocked, what's the gimbal range on that sucker?
4 degrees... it's no Vector but it should be enough
the Vector and Panther at 10 degrees provide an insane amount of control, but even at only 1 degree the whiplash is noticeable
dunno, you should reload and try again

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 06:07:54 UTC No. 15988442

It's really rather elegant. 0.3t instead of the 0.7t a normal one kerbal command pod weighs, though the inside probably isn't pressurized so you have to keep the helmet on the whole trip

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 06:08:37 UTC No. 15988443

>>15987790
Yes, that and call it the first module of the Mars Orbital Station, Depot, and Gift Shop. It would be a handy way to snatch the title of first space station around mars (before lunar gayway lol) and would make many seethe

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 06:13:42 UTC No. 15988446

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 06:22:31 UTC No. 15988455

>>15987853
If SpaceX actually abandons F9 once they have starship fully operational (wont happen if they any sense), then there could be room for a F9 competitor to come in a dominate the smallsat launch market. SS would be like killing a fly with a sledgehammer for some missions

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 06:30:28 UTC No. 15988461

>>15988068
I see you are man who wonders what could be

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 06:31:42 UTC No. 15988462

>>15988086
Total Marine Death

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 06:33:40 UTC No. 15988465

EARTHERS

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 06:36:35 UTC No. 15988468

>>15988455
SpaceX will keep launching F9 for a while, they are looking at certifying the boosters for 40 flights each
later Starship will destroy the whole launch market, with smallsats you are just going to use spacetugs that might themselves be reusable as well
there will be absolutely no market for anything else, other than perhaps some meme emergency launch capability for the military with smallsat launchers and the launches in markets that SpaceX can't access for one reason or another (restricted from foreign companies like chinese launch market, stuff europe wants to launch itself, stuff like Amazon etc not wanting to use spacex specifically and national security launches for the military where they give contracts to multiple providers to keep redundancy)

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 06:41:10 UTC No. 15988473

>>15988465
How could you call me the nigger word anon

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 06:50:05 UTC No. 15988477

>>15988086
*srbees

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 07:13:41 UTC No. 15988492

>>15988461
Payload capacity: Yes

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 07:21:26 UTC No. 15988501

>>15988492
Fucking redditnigger meme go die in a ditch you filthy subhuman mongrel

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 07:24:07 UTC No. 15988504

NEVER, EVER

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 07:25:57 UTC No. 15988505

>>15988501
No

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 08:11:56 UTC No. 15988543

>>15988504
it was literal vaporware

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 08:13:40 UTC No. 15988544

it's 15hrs to drive to the eclipse + festival, 15hrs back, maybe $300 gas. do i do it?

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 09:01:50 UTC No. 15988562

https://images.nasa.gov/details/jsc2024e006057

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 09:02:36 UTC No. 15988563

>>15988562
Are those... flakes of gold?

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 09:04:21 UTC No. 15988564

>>15988259
why did you lie to yourself?

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 09:16:05 UTC No. 15988572

>>15988354
Good night sar.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 09:16:34 UTC No. 15988573

>>15988564
you're the fuckin liar bro

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 10:11:07 UTC No. 15988621

/sfg/ is dood

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 11:27:23 UTC No. 15988691

>>15987425
I hope china is working on a rover to steal the samples directly from percy, that would be amazing.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 11:44:15 UTC No. 15988709

>>15988543

Why?

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 12:05:07 UTC No. 15988728

>>15988320
>>15988322
>>15988309
What is SpaceX wants to keep couple of orbital depots running 24/7/365 in few of the dif orbits. Like a gas station thats permanently available to use? But also like gas stations, with proper insulations, only need to be topped off every few months or when usage depletes reserves?

Then the "complex" system of refueling will be simplified once the first depot is setup and schedule risk for any mission requiring refuel wont be dependent on instantaenous/short time frame window of dozen refuels, but only 1 refuel at a depot.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 12:10:57 UTC No. 15988733

>>15988728
you should go try it in ksp

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 12:10:59 UTC No. 15988734

>>15988691
China is so based they might actually do it. NASA will shit their pants and cry about it

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 12:18:16 UTC No. 15988736

>>15988504
isnt f12 hilariously low performance by todays standards though? why not buy some raptors isntead?

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 13:50:05 UTC No. 15988836

>>15988736
Because the last time anyone talked even remotely seriously about LRBs for SLS was in 2012, and back then Raptor was still an upper stage hydrolox engine.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 13:51:19 UTC No. 15988838

So
>CSS's capsule successfully connected, mission time: 3 hours
>Japan landed their probe on moon, everything nominal except for their solar panel
Anything else I missed this week?

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 13:53:40 UTC No. 15988842

>>15988838

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 13:57:20 UTC No. 15988845

>>15988842
This sentimentality, even if in jest, over robots is haram. The pace should be so fast that some people die in space.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 14:00:41 UTC No. 15988850

>>15988842
Ran out of electricity?

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 14:01:53 UTC No. 15988851

>>15988845
BE THERE OR BE SQUARE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAEYtaB3R7Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAEYtaB3R7Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAEYtaB3R7Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAEYtaB3R7Y

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 14:02:11 UTC No. 15988852

>>15988842
this is creepy

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 14:04:30 UTC No. 15988860

>>15988842
The robots need to die and the answer to their deaths should be to shrug and roll out the next replacement. This bespoke multi-billion dollar rover paradigm is ridiculous and should not exist.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 14:07:30 UTC No. 15988863

>>15988860
MSR must be cancelled and JPL dissolved

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 14:11:06 UTC No. 15988866

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 14:11:34 UTC No. 15988868

>>15988838
Axiom launch
Iran launch
Axiom showed a bunch of space station hardware

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 14:14:07 UTC No. 15988871

>>15988868
>Axion
Yawn. accomplished nothing except to be an expensive middle man for buying space x seats

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 14:16:22 UTC No. 15988874

>>15988871
Tell SpaceX to sell dragons to spaceline companies like boing sells aircraft to airline companies

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 14:17:29 UTC No. 15988878

>>15988874
elon is a control freak and wants 100% money so not happening

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 14:21:39 UTC No. 15988885

Artemis Rocket vs Starship Rocket

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 14:22:54 UTC No. 15988888

>>15988885
they are in love :)

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 14:50:41 UTC No. 15988915

>>15988885
>>15988888
you should probably kill yourselves

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 14:52:07 UTC No. 15988917

>>15988866
my hairline's getting pretty bad, bros...
i can't take it. it's not fair.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 15:01:03 UTC No. 15988920

>>15988885
I think it’s sweet how they support each-other. after all, starship is landing people for artemis and sls is going to get a 20 billion dollar contract to launch cargo to mars once starship is already doing it every week.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 15:06:13 UTC No. 15988924

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1749030646574412077

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 15:10:41 UTC No. 15988933

>>15988924
https://twitter.com/BrendanCarrFCC/status/1748836045293006888

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 15:11:08 UTC No. 15988934

>>15988920
you're completely delusional

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 15:11:32 UTC No. 15988935

>>15988885
>>15988915
cute

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 15:13:58 UTC No. 15988938

>>15988933
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1749082883891835154

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 15:14:03 UTC No. 15988939

>>15988915
Why are you so angry?

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 15:15:31 UTC No. 15988941

What do you think?

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 15:15:52 UTC No. 15988942

>>15988938
Why doesnt Elon sue the FCC then? Case is air tight according to everyone. SpaceX sued the Air Force to be allowed to compete and won. Why not here?

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 15:16:59 UTC No. 15988944

>>15988941
GWYNNE

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 15:19:00 UTC No. 15988947

>>15988942
maybe its not possible and/or its pointless because it would be decided by biased parties like the first decision
like some administrative court that isn't really impartial like a real court but more an extension of the bureucracy
haven't looked into it too much in this particular case

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 15:19:47 UTC No. 15988948

>>15988863
in hydrochloric acid

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 15:20:10 UTC No. 15988950

>>15988924
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1749085023607636040

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 15:20:27 UTC No. 15988951

>>15988942
BEcause it's not airtight and Elon knows it. he loves to play victim on twitter for sympathy and attention tho, trust him to do that constantly

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 15:22:45 UTC No. 15988956

Can't Elon just sue FCC?

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 15:25:47 UTC No. 15988960

can't the FCC just sue elon?

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 15:27:49 UTC No. 15988962

>>15988942
Never expect the federal government to play fair when you decide to sue the federal government. Most of the time the government will just decide that you don't have any standing to complain. The only reason that SpaceX was able to pull off a win over national security launches because they were able to pit a stronger part of the government against the one that was standing in their way.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 15:28:56 UTC No. 15988963

>>15988956
well I guess, anybody could sue anybody for anything in the US
perhaps this is groundwork for it? changing the public perception first or something
or waiting for an admin change

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 15:29:03 UTC No. 15988964

>>15988956
he can and he wont. he has no case (he's lying to you. and paying off trump fcc chair sympathizer)
>>15988960
Not a bad idea considering he is basically commiting libel and endangering public servants

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 15:29:27 UTC No. 15988966

>>15988964
>he's lying to you
Can you prove it?

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 15:32:19 UTC No. 15988970

https://phys.org/news/2024-01-nasa-regains-contact-mini-helicopter.amp

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 15:33:12 UTC No. 15988973

>>15988964
lying that Starlink won't be able to provide some speeds in rural areas that it already does?
this decision was a farce, they used special rules for starlink that they didn't use for the broadband providers
if the same rules were used, nobody would get a subsidy because the broadband providers are providing 0/0 up and down right now
yet starlink was rejected because the commision arbitrarily thought starlink could not do what was required by the end of 2025 even though they could in fact do it right now (the don't need to provide the speeds everywhere, just in the subsidy areas, which could be done just with priorization a few months ago and apparently according to elon now they can do it without even that)

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 15:35:33 UTC No. 15988975

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 15:36:50 UTC No. 15988977

>>15988975
Are you 12?

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 15:39:06 UTC No. 15988980

>>15988977
no cap? bro really thinks im 12 :skull:

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 15:42:09 UTC No. 15988983

>>15988973
If SpaceX has a case, they will sue. They don't have a case.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 15:42:32 UTC No. 15988984

>>15988942
>>15988951
Its not airtight, thats why politicians can abuse their decision making with biased takes. He's not playing the victim here, the victims are the rural customers who have to pay higher prices.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 15:45:46 UTC No. 15988988

>>15988983
Again, the federal government is notorious for looking at valid cases and saying "You don't have a case."

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 15:47:42 UTC No. 15988991

>>15988988
Total administrative court death. I hope SCOTUS rips Chevron deference in half over the fishermen's case.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 15:52:19 UTC No. 15988994

Based.
https://twitter.com/tony873004/status/1748929398257115277

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 15:54:18 UTC No. 15988997

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_court
> The United States does not have a separate system of administrative courts.[2] Instead, administrative law judges (ALJs) preside over tribunals within executive branch agencies. In American jurisprudence, ALJs are always regarded as part of the executive branch, despite their quasi-judicial adjudicative role, because of the strict separation of powers imposed by the United States Constitution.[3] Decisions of ALJs can be appealed to courts in the judicial branch.

https://www.fcc.gov/administrative-law-judges

seems to me if you wanted to "sue" in this case, it would just go to the FCC again or something in the executive branch (controlled by biden admin ultimately)
then when its denied there it could go to a separate court that is actually in the judicial branch which is in principle not controlled by the biden admin
who knows how long something like that could take? what if all the subsidy money has already been given out when there is some decision 5+ years down the line or something?

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 15:54:31 UTC No. 15988998

>>15987874
Cpn Crunch Oops! All Raptors

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 15:56:11 UTC No. 15989001

>>15987874
Starship, but with racing stripes, tinted windows and a spoiler

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 16:06:34 UTC No. 15989012

>>15987874
Beamed power air breathing thermal propulsion first stage with no onboard propellant or energy storage

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 16:07:58 UTC No. 15989013

>>15987874
Bunker oil VTVL

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 16:08:09 UTC No. 15989014

>>15987888
Very high peak chamber pressures possible. Exciting!

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 16:09:43 UTC No. 15989015

>>15987910
At least he died doing what he loved: suffering from massive blunt force trauma

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 16:13:31 UTC No. 15989022

>>15988086
for what purpose

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 16:14:51 UTC No. 15989024

>>15989013
Holy based. I need to see the piping for that.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 16:19:54 UTC No. 15989030

>>15988411
/sfg/ - so fucking gheterosexual

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 16:24:15 UTC No. 15989039

>>15988851
fuck off, buy an ad

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 16:29:04 UTC No. 15989047

Sunday morning Mars Guy content

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91co_zobvaM

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 16:31:00 UTC No. 15989050

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Flight_Europe-America_500
Really cute story

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 16:31:23 UTC No. 15989051

>>15989047
You're late

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 16:34:42 UTC No. 15989053

>>15989022
it will be fun

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 16:39:23 UTC No. 15989062

Sunday afternoon CSS content

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAEYtaB3R7Y

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 16:41:14 UTC No. 15989064

>>15988997
Seems to me like it's a case of picking your battles. Spacex needs to play nice with the current administration to stop the regulatory obstruction. Sure maybe they could sue and win, but then the FCC might come at them from another angle. Probably try and mess with which frequency bands they can use with starlink, ect. While losing the subsidy will impact Starlinks revenue, it ultimately won't effect its long term operations. Its not like they were waiting with their hat out for gov funds to build it in the first place.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 16:46:19 UTC No. 15989069

>>15988455
Who cares then the sledgehammer only costs $10M per launch vs $20M for a F9 clone
Also I'm gonna say it, when SS goes operational, smallsats will die off, there will be no reason to make even the most basic satellites small and compact when it's cheaper and faster to make them bigger, heavier, and slightly more inefficient. Mass autism be damned.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 16:50:50 UTC No. 15989077

>>15989062
The comment section is full of unhinged retarded leftists.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 16:51:58 UTC No. 15989080

>>15988728
We'll probably see orbital depots in the 2030's that aren't starships, but actual dedicated depots assembled and welded in orbit to bet giant fucking gas stations

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 16:54:36 UTC No. 15989081

I still believe in light sail interstellar probes.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 16:55:16 UTC No. 15989083

>>15989062
Get this drivel off my screen

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 16:58:11 UTC No. 15989087

>>15987670
12-24 months away from the total destruction of oldspace? Splendid.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 16:59:42 UTC No. 15989090

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn8CYHNzdF8
> Upgraded Tank Farm Tested for Next Starship Launch | SpaceX Boca Chica

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 17:00:44 UTC No. 15989092

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lz_lW5_vD3I
> We Are Quickly Approaching IFT-3! - SpaceX Weekly Update #98

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 17:02:29 UTC No. 15989096

>>15988977
Model rockets are fucking based fuck off

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 17:13:42 UTC No. 15989110

>>15989069
Smallsats will be student projects, much like how small launchers are used to bootstrap up to heavy lift.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 17:18:34 UTC No. 15989114

>>15988845
>>15988860
Okay lizard jew

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 17:19:41 UTC No. 15989116

>>15988941
Let’s get to work

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 17:24:03 UTC No. 15989123

>>15988851
>>15989062
>corny shit septic
go kys yourself

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 17:27:01 UTC No. 15989127

>>15989096
That's not the point. It simply looks like shit as he didn't even bother to properly paint it.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 17:30:51 UTC No. 15989132

>>15989127
Oh my fucking god, I just looked at the picture properly and I agree with you completely

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 17:31:17 UTC No. 15989133

>>15988850
>Ran out of electricity?
Just lost communication as it was landing. The theory is that it landed outside of comms area. Percy is going to investigate, eventually.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 17:31:17 UTC No. 15989134

>>15989110
Student projects will now be 200kg satellites made from steel and COTS components

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 17:32:57 UTC No. 15989138

>>15989127
I'm sorry I'll do better next time please don't hurt me

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 17:37:27 UTC No. 15989142

>>15987915
>>15987920
>>15987921
Why are you sharting yourself?

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 17:37:56 UTC No. 15989144

>>15989138
make a starship next time

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 17:45:17 UTC No. 15989153

>>15989138
Use masking tape to paint logos next time

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 17:45:23 UTC No. 15989154

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KILA2QrGp_c
> Elon Musk's Most Important Engineer in SPACEX History

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 17:45:45 UTC No. 15989156

>>15987915
So?
They also didn't show New Glenn which is supposed to launch Blue Moon.
The landers are more important to focus on than their respective launch vehicles, and it makes things less confusing for the average viewer to understand.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 17:46:55 UTC No. 15989158

>>15989156
Starship is the lander too retard
and of course they aren't going to show the blue lander, would be too easy to argue bias in that case
so they show neither and only do some random ass renderings

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 17:49:52 UTC No. 15989164

>>15989158
>>15989156
to add to this, you have a video about going back to the moon and do not show the biggest rocket and lander ever that will help to build the lander
that seems very intentional to me
SLS is shown like 15 times and when they talk about landers they purposefully use some weird renderings that have nothing to do with anything
seems pretty clear to me they don't want to give people the impression that SpaceX/Starship/Musk has anything to do with the moon and especially not show SLS and Starship in context as that would be extremely embarrassing

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 17:51:12 UTC No. 15989167

>>15989153
If I took more time with it I would have printed out waterslide decals for the logos but I wanted to get it done in one night to be ready on time for launch (unlike the real thing)

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 17:52:11 UTC No. 15989171

>>15989154
>woman
opinion discarded

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 17:52:22 UTC No. 15989172

the video would clearly be better if they showed Starship, HLS Starship, New Glenn and the Blue Moon lander as they do talk about the landers and show renderings of moon bases and so on
they even fucking talk about ISRU on the moon but then say that the SLS uses hydrogen and oxygen even though ISRU on the moon would be clearly beneficial to the blue moon lander and Blue Origin has explicit plans about moon ISRU
this isn't some mistake, its intentional

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 17:55:19 UTC No. 15989179

>>15987735
Clustering engines together is basically the 21st century cheat code for rockets
Can't believe no one thought of it until the Falcon 9 came along
I understand why they gave up in the 60s but I mean with modern tech there should've been a 5+ engine rocket flying in the early 2000s.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 18:00:28 UTC No. 15989187

>>15989012
I didn't know that there was existing research into laser thermal switching modes from pulsed to ramjet and then to rocket with onboard propellant.

Is there a single good reason to do SSTO like in this paper?

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 18:04:17 UTC No. 15989190

>be ULA
>don't build the SRBs
>don't build the engines
>put some paint on a tube
>vital for national defense

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 18:07:32 UTC No. 15989194

>>15989187
At the end of the day whether you can make the laser ramjet system run for cheaper than a reusable tsto is an engineering problem. You might of course end up with a smaller and simpler vehicle with less processing between flights.
I'm sure continuous wave megawatt lasers will find other uses in space travel, so they should be developed anyways

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 18:11:17 UTC No. 15989203

>>15989154
Well, he founded the company, so this is technically correct, albeit somewhat misleading.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 18:12:16 UTC No. 15989207

>>15989138
Sorry, but I will have to take it away.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 18:13:37 UTC No. 15989212

>>15989179
Partly that's because there weren't any good engines for clustering in the west. The only models we had in inventory were the RS-25, RS-68, RL10, AJ10, and RS-27. The RL10 and AJ-10 were too small for first stage work, and the RS-25 and RS-68 were too big unless you were talking about something SLS-sized. No one liked the RS-27 because it was just an old gas generator design and everyone was lusting after the staged combustion designs coming out of Russia. Besides, it used RP-1 and everyone still knew that hydrogen was the future, because of efficiency and stuff.

China was more open to the idea, as all of their pre-2015 designs used clusters of YF-20s. Europe thought about clustering HM-60s for the Ariane 5, but dropped the idea because it would have taken too long to develop.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 18:18:10 UTC No. 15989220

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 18:18:42 UTC No. 15989221

THIS SAYS IT ALL

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 18:21:01 UTC No. 15989227

>>15989221
lol
which is which?

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 18:21:46 UTC No. 15989228

>>15989221
I think it's funny when oldspace proponents bring up the parable of the tortoise and the hare to illustrate why their methodology is better actually.
they don't get that they're the hare. early lead but they got complacent and lazy. they were over taken ages ago and they never even noticed it pretending like they make slow but measured progress while they rest on their laurels

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 18:22:55 UTC No. 15989232

>>15989221
this guy needs to get a grip

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 18:42:54 UTC No. 15989246

>>15989220
你才是中国人!
你全家都是中国人!

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 18:48:42 UTC No. 15989254

I'm calling it now: SLIM tipped over on its nose due to fuel slosh on landing.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 18:56:43 UTC No. 15989268

>>15989254
We know

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 18:58:07 UTC No. 15989269

>>15989254
where's water hammer anon when you need him

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 18:59:39 UTC No. 15989273

>>15989254
reasonable guess

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 19:02:23 UTC No. 15989274

lol how many of the moon missions are failing now

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 19:04:09 UTC No. 15989277

>>15988171
So they are foreshadowing their killing of ingenuity, once a mission has no use to them they kill it. That's what JPL is like.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 19:04:36 UTC No. 15989279

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 19:05:12 UTC No. 15989280

>>15989221
What's the symbolism behind a turtle and a rabbit on a start line?

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 19:29:30 UTC No. 15989312

>>15989269
here, I've got a spare that you can borrow

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 19:45:13 UTC No. 15989324

>>15989312
How homosexual

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 19:55:33 UTC No. 15989333

>>15988975
cute

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 19:57:32 UTC No. 15989337

>>15989333
Fag

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 20:09:59 UTC No. 15989346

>>15989337
You’re just looking to steal it for yourself and ram it into your asshole

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 20:12:10 UTC No. 15989349

>>15989337
*rapes you* uwu

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 20:15:22 UTC No. 15989353

>>15989346
Based

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 20:16:19 UTC No. 15989355

>>15989337
This is Space Fag General

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 20:17:36 UTC No. 15989358

>>15988421
I forgot how ugly is stock KSP.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 20:27:37 UTC No. 15989365

>>15989127
>didn't even bother to properly paint it.
90% of model rockets get stuck in trees after the first or second launches, I only ever spraypainted mine bright orange for this reason

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 20:34:54 UTC No. 15989381

>Corcas Kerman

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 20:40:06 UTC No. 15989390

>>15989365
I'm currently scratch building a model rocket for display so I need to give it a good paint job

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 20:48:18 UTC No. 15989410

https://twitter.com/NASASpaceflight/status/1749160055977754740

2 astronauts having a time with hot takes

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 20:53:37 UTC No. 15989422

Who wants to start a Space Muffin company with me?
https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/1749116988239081614

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 20:56:40 UTC No. 15989428

>make muffins on earth
>grind them to powder
>vacuum dry them
>vacuum seal them
>sell them to NASA as space muffins

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 20:57:37 UTC No. 15989430

new martian surface imagery just dropped

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 20:58:51 UTC No. 15989433

>>15989422
carmack has been npcified by working for (((zuckerberg)))

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 21:00:23 UTC No. 15989441

>>15989269
>>15989312
i am here
the japanese govt wants to keep this image a secret, i had to spill the basedbeans.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 21:02:26 UTC No. 15989446

>>15989422
>>15989428
>>15989430
for better marketing you should make the space muffins vaguely asteroid-shaped

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 21:14:32 UTC No. 15989475

>>15989446
We should make a really big asteroid shaped muffin and drop it on Africa. Free of charge.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 21:14:57 UTC No. 15989477

>>15989433
Reminder that carmack once had his pet cat put down because he found it inconvenient. Pic related from Masters of Doom.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 21:22:02 UTC No. 15989495

>>15989477
no he didn't

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 21:26:44 UTC No. 15989503

>>15989430
Confirmed, it's a rock.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 21:29:47 UTC No. 15989511

>>15989477
based, also that quote says he took it to the shelter, not put down directly
if you get a cat, are you now bound by some sacred vow to keep the shithead for the rest of your life?

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 21:42:40 UTC No. 15989533

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1749161830449111085

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 21:43:42 UTC No. 15989540

>>15989477
>She's going down! Down to Chinatown!"

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 21:44:36 UTC No. 15989541

>>15989533
and now they can't even keep an engine lit and we have a billion times the computing power.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 21:47:23 UTC No. 15989551

>>15989511
Yes, when you get a pet it's your responsibility to keep it. People who get rid of pets are shitheads. The only time to put down a pet is when it has a terminal medical condition that will cause it to suffer.

>>15989540
based Romero.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 21:51:34 UTC No. 15989560

>>15989171
just started listening, first question I don't remember but Mueller talked about Helios
but the second question was "did the merlin engine influence the raptor in any way"
so clearly she has prepared somewhat

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 21:53:38 UTC No. 15989565

Mueller still hasn't visited starbase lol

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 21:55:03 UTC No. 15989567

>>15989565
How do you know? Even Kanye has secretly visited

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 21:57:14 UTC No. 15989572

It has been 13 days since Tory Bruno's Vulcan rocket shook a payload to death.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 22:10:58 UTC No. 15989591

>>15989567
he said it in the interview >>15989154

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 22:12:49 UTC No. 15989595

autist here does this mean Mueller and Elon had a fight?

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 22:14:14 UTC No. 15989599

>>15989595
They always have fights. The Falcon 1 development with failures of 3 rockets led to someone under him getting fired and heated exchanges were had.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 22:15:15 UTC No. 15989601

>>15989599
Err not fired, but rather quitting due to pressure/blame for failure.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 22:23:11 UTC No. 15989621

>>15989601
no, Mueller started getting more and more reports (people reporting to him) and this was stressing him out or something and boring being an admin instead of actually developing tech so he was assigned to looking at what is needed to get 100 tonnes to mars at first, they were looking at hydrogen but changed to methane because that was half the cost or something
after that Mueller was looking at ISRU on mars (in another interview or context, I don't remember where exactly, Mueller said he worked on mars ISRU the last 5 years he was at SpaceX), but SpaceX didn't really have the resources to start testing the hardware for that at that point
he also talked about a lot of people being on the verge of burnout constantly or something and that they try to keep the pace a bit more sustainable at Impulse Space

I don't think he was blamed for any failure?
the situation sounds a bit like Andrey Karpathy at Tesla who was one of the main people building the FSD team there, after 5 years he started doing too much admin so he quit to go back to OpenAI where he can focus on more pure research

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 22:28:51 UTC No. 15989633

>>15988733
it works in KSP because you only ever want to really go to one of three different orbits repeatedly:
equitorial low munar orbit, equitorial low kerbin orbit, low kerbin orbit in the minmus orbital plane

if you had real tools you could precalculate transfer planes for interplanetary and set up a depot in that ahead of time but alas

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 22:36:12 UTC No. 15989642

>>15989533
>20 petaflops
>20W
>feeble meat computers (sigh)
elon is a redditor of the highest order and stupidly wrong also

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 22:40:26 UTC No. 15989647

>>15989642
Love the guy but yeah, many such cases!

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 22:41:53 UTC No. 15989648

>>15989642
yep, a classical redditor. modern redditors hate him. such is life

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 22:42:52 UTC No. 15989652

>>15989533
who in all shits likes the Yud

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 22:43:45 UTC No. 15989657

>>15989154
ahh, slampig

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 22:59:16 UTC No. 15989689

I think i'm going to find a new hobby. Space is just unattainable and fantasy. i will focus on land or sea for now

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 23:00:39 UTC No. 15989692

>>15989689
>>>/n/ Don't let the door hit you on the way out and remember to stay behind the yellow line.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 23:01:22 UTC No. 15989694

>>15989642
>its stupid because its not promoting tranny ideology
YIKES

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 23:04:47 UTC No. 15989705

>>15989692
I think you are being needlessly rude here

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 23:06:14 UTC No. 15989713

>>15989269
out looking for moisture mallets and fluid gavels

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 23:16:54 UTC No. 15989742

Is the exhibit done yet

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 23:19:45 UTC No. 15989752

>>15989430
found the color version of this

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 23:21:01 UTC No. 15989754

>>15989752
what rover took this?

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 23:21:08 UTC No. 15989755

If rockets stored their fuel as gasses wouldn't that eliminate a lot of the problems concerning fluid hammers and the like? Assuming that the density of the gas stays relatively constant throughout.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 23:21:50 UTC No. 15989757

>>15989752
Is this conclusive evidence of fungi?

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 23:21:57 UTC No. 15989758

>>15989069
big spacecraft are more expensive than putting a rasberry pi in a cardboard box

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 23:28:52 UTC No. 15989770

>>15989642
he also implied that Artemis was designed using slide rules

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 23:30:19 UTC No. 15989774

>>15989705
If anything he's being needlessly polite to--may Elon forgive me for uttering this word--an earther

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 23:31:31 UTC No. 15989777

>>15989774
You're also an earther.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 23:37:24 UTC No. 15989786

>>15989777
being an earther is a mindset

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 23:38:03 UTC No. 15989787

>>15989786
Wrong

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 23:39:12 UTC No. 15989790

>>15989787
Found the left coast communist

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 23:40:49 UTC No. 15989795

>>15989790
Wrong again

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 23:44:27 UTC No. 15989800

>>15989787
yes it is
its earther, not earthling

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 23:49:15 UTC No. 15989806

>>15989777
You, sir, are not a gentleman.

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 23:50:25 UTC No. 15989808

>>15987670
China has a pretty bright spaceflight future

Anonymous at Sun, 21 Jan 2024 23:58:20 UTC No. 15989816

>>15989533
>Our meat computers are feeble

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 00:02:08 UTC No. 15989821

>>15989755
yeah but gas doesn't have the density to perform as rocket propellant

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 00:03:21 UTC No. 15989823

>>15989808
>China is developing missiles to intercept birds

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 00:03:44 UTC No. 15989825

>>15989757
bro that's a closeup of a muffin

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 00:05:40 UTC No. 15989828

>>15989825
no, its a picture of the surface of mars retard

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 00:12:28 UTC No. 15989837

>>15989757
>This is fungi.
>I can tell from some of the pixels and from seeing quite a few fungi in my time.

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 00:23:18 UTC No. 15989854

>>15989828
specifically it's a closeup of this muffin >>15989422

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 00:24:03 UTC No. 15989857

>>15989854
>>15989825
compare the colors to the colors on the so-called "original" muffin
they're not the same
the truth is out there

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 00:26:09 UTC No. 15989861

>>15989854
meds

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 00:36:57 UTC No. 15989876

>>15989854
>>15989825
wrong

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 00:44:59 UTC No. 15989885

>>15989823
they learned their lesson from the four pests campaign. they aren't losing to the sparrows again

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 00:46:52 UTC No. 15989889

>>15989876
im confused.

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 00:49:06 UTC No. 15989891

>>15989876
pretty sure this bunks it

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 00:52:53 UTC No. 15989900

>>15989854

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 00:54:56 UTC No. 15989908

>>15989900
>NASA provided
Got a source on that?

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 00:55:41 UTC No. 15989910

bruhs
>>15989900
if I wasn't busy typesetting a dungeon meshi fanart I would absolutely reedit your image but alas

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 00:57:31 UTC No. 15989913

>>15989908
NASA

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 00:58:31 UTC No. 15989917

>>15989913
If it's from NASA, give me the NASA link

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 01:06:33 UTC No. 15989934

>>15989917
suck my toes while i jerk iff first.

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 01:08:49 UTC No. 15989936

>>15989900
based gaslighter

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 01:09:47 UTC No. 15989938

How are preparations for IFT-3 going so far?

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 01:11:24 UTC No. 15989941

>>15989938
badly.

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 01:11:41 UTC No. 15989945

>>15989908
bro, are you serious?

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 01:11:46 UTC No. 15989947

>>15989936
it's not gaslighting, it's the truth. you know how crazy you sound when you randomly accuse people of gaslighting?

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 01:12:23 UTC No. 15989949

>>15989941
details?

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 01:13:40 UTC No. 15989954

>>15989938
unfortunately the FWS guys are running ATVs around the marsh looking for ocelots so no work can get done right now

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 01:17:56 UTC No. 15989964

Hes right..

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 01:18:07 UTC No. 15989965

>>15989938
Ever since the latest scandal Elon has been MIA from bica chica

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 01:18:25 UTC No. 15989969

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wywYkmeF3uI

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 01:19:48 UTC No. 15989971

>>15989945
Completely serious, and that screencap is completely fake.

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 01:20:20 UTC No. 15989976

>>15989964
yeah, what company on earth could make refueling flights like that so routine that anyone with an interest is bored by them and the general public doesn't even notice that hundreds of flights have been successful?

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 01:20:58 UTC No. 15989977

>>15989964
He's so smart he should work for spacex. They always have a guy on staff to say "you cant just". then they de-limb them.

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 01:21:38 UTC No. 15989978

>>15989876
this is just a conspiracy theory

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 01:22:49 UTC No. 15989982

>>15989971
yeah, you're right
everyone is just lying about it to trick you

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 01:24:54 UTC No. 15989985

>>15989938
Unfortunately there was a fight in the cafeteria about muffins and several people were killed.

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 01:26:06 UTC No. 15989989

https://twitter.com/CNSpaceflight/status/1749238257592983709

Zhuque-3

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 01:35:13 UTC No. 15989997

>>15989938
they have put up a lot of tanks and just tested them, removed two old tanks, put some extra shielding at the base of the tower
not really clear what the holdup is, perhaps it was to upgrade the tank farm with the new tanks

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 01:35:50 UTC No. 15989998

>>15989969
>another starlink launch
I sleep, let me know if it's a twilight launch

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 01:38:20 UTC No. 15990000

>>15989998
Should be, the launch will be about 30 to 45 minutes after sunset.

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 01:39:35 UTC No. 15990002

>>15990000
that's literally the only thing you need to mention, fuck

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 01:42:44 UTC No. 15990007

>>15990000
dubs then quads
impressive digits

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 01:48:26 UTC No. 15990013

>>15989964
spaceguy5 is kind of twofaced here when you know he also thinks it will only take one tanker to replace any boil off if SpaceX makes no effort to mitigate

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 01:51:40 UTC No. 15990019

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

T-1 hr to live

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 01:52:12 UTC No. 15990020

>>15989754
Mars polar lander

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 01:52:16 UTC No. 15990021

>>15990002
Apparently it's an hour later than I thought. Shit.

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 01:52:35 UTC No. 15990023

>>15990021
damn

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 01:56:10 UTC No. 15990027

Hey guys, hope you're having a great night

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 01:56:38 UTC No. 15990029

>>15989633
I like setting up an ISRU lander and orbiting depot at vall to refuel my jool system stuff, and sometimes I'll get frisky and cheat a comet into Laythe orbit and set up a depot there too

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 02:12:36 UTC No. 15990054

https://gizmodo.com/spacex-texas-parks-wildlife-land-exchange-boca-chica-1851179556

I guess the tabloids found the story
shit like this makes it difficult to do anything, if spacex wants to do anything at all there are going to be people against it just because they dislike Musk

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 02:14:12 UTC No. 15990058

https://tpwd.texas.gov/business/feedback/meetings/2024/0125/agenda/item.phtml?item=9

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 02:14:47 UTC No. 15990059

>>15990054
The Internet is the best argument against democracy.

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 02:15:13 UTC No. 15990062

>>15990054
Is it possible for a militia group to go and kill the remainder of the endangered species so this isnt a problem anymore?

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 02:17:09 UTC No. 15990068

>>15990062
kind of a cool deal where we intentionally redirect a large asteroid to hit Earth so people need to get off their ass and do something or else surface life is smoked

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 02:17:57 UTC No. 15990070

>>15990054
>gizmodo
>run by gawker tabloid people
YIKES

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 02:27:08 UTC No. 15990091

>>15990029
I really need to figure out how much delta v I need to put a mining outpost on Gilly and Ike, I'm focusing on the inner solar system right now before I go out
I probably won't go as ham as I went on Minmus, that thing has five of these things
(I went and checked in on them to see if I could get a picture of them on the surface but the base is in the shadow of Minmus hills right now and I have a maneuver node alarm in 12 seconds, but a couple must have blown up because there's only three on the surface right now) holy mother of run-on sentences, here's a picture of what I'm rolling with in the VAB
it needs to be this big in order to refuel all my jumbo sized craft, I'll post a picture of my Mk3 TSTO if you want

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 02:28:04 UTC No. 15990096

>>15989938
goodly.

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 02:42:24 UTC No. 15990127

>scrubbed again
they're not getting anything off this year

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 03:05:19 UTC No. 15990157

https://twitter.com/DJSnM/status/1749263570930716892

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEUoNOw3oHw&list=PLUA9kG1DciUwY2VSvIGk3WZI_TqJMynxG

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 03:07:37 UTC No. 15990159

Staging

>>15990158
>>15990158
>>15990158
>>15990158

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 03:22:46 UTC No. 15990171

>>15990091
Gilly you can basically fly what ever you want as long as you can capture into its orbit first(which takes a pile dV). I dont think I've ever done one on Ike, but I always thought Ike was boring.

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 03:23:38 UTC No. 15990173

>>15990171
yeah getting there seems like the hard part, flying to Eve is hard

Anonymous at Mon, 22 Jan 2024 03:24:42 UTC No. 15990174

do you think I could land this thing on Laythe?
would it be possible to get it back out???