🧵 /sfg/ - Spaceflight General
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 07:51:26 UTC No. 16092265
Static Fire Imminent Edition
Previous - >>16089621
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 07:53:40 UTC No. 16092269
>>16092256
Thats because youre an attentionwhoring namefagging tranny (see that troon pink shark)
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 07:55:41 UTC No. 16092272
>>16092270
Thats a spud not Arrokoth
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 07:56:43 UTC No. 16092274
>>16092271
Atleast this one is white. Still unacceptable only clearDEITIES are allowed on /sfg/.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 07:56:43 UTC No. 16092275
>>16092269
:( no
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 08:02:06 UTC No. 16092278
>>16092271
The spin was unintentional so she needs the Aqua scream face.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 08:04:00 UTC No. 16092279
>>16092278
Read >>16092274
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 08:10:26 UTC No. 16092284
>>16092235
Depends on if you consider the many concepts as "the space shuttle"
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 08:23:08 UTC No. 16092290
Two weeks
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 08:26:02 UTC No. 16092292
>>16092280
Just put him in a real suit instead of that bullshit and make a realistic Mars setting. Is it that hard to stick to the 'spaceflight' part of /sfg/?
>>16092290
5 weeks*
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 08:27:40 UTC No. 16092293
>>16092292
ok wat do you wanna talk about?
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 08:29:57 UTC No. 16092296
>>16092293
Nothing with (You) faggot go away youre icky
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 08:39:44 UTC No. 16092303
>>16092284
>windows to scale
So was this like a 200 ton orbiter design?
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 10:46:51 UTC No. 16092368
https://www.newscientist.com/articl
https://archive.is/X08Nr
>The researchers found that what happened was similar to a type of volcanic eruption in which pressure builds up beneath a plug called a caprock, which eventually explodes. In this case, the caprock was the concrete launch pad. The pressure was caused not only by the hot gas from the rocket engines, but also because the groundwater underlying the pad turned to steam and expanded, blasting the concrete upwards.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 10:51:38 UTC No. 16092370
>>16092350
>muh truss
Typical oldspace cope.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 11:02:56 UTC No. 16092375
>>16092271
It would be more realistic if the Earth bg was also rotating around the center of the screen.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 11:05:30 UTC No. 16092378
Is Buran still for sale, pending the skull of the last Kazakh Khan? Where should I even start looking for this artifact?
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 11:07:20 UTC No. 16092380
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 11:09:43 UTC No. 16092381
https://youtu.be/qk7hs6HayiA
CRS-30 docking
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 11:11:36 UTC No. 16092384
>>16092381
Sciens a maf. This is wat we do to sta smrt. I gt IQ 200 I gud. Evryon rtard but me cus I bettah
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 11:12:11 UTC No. 16092385
>>16092381
go for docking; 5 minutes from now
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 11:13:03 UTC No. 16092386
>>16092380
stage 0 still not reusable
it's joever beyond all jope
>captcha shat my pants
lol
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 11:14:05 UTC No. 16092388
>>16092385
sat handover
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 11:16:04 UTC No. 16092389
>>16092370
The truss was much more important in the original Freedom design. Mir Two and a Half never used it to potential, in part because NASA never had a superheavy lifter for payloads besides the Shuttle orbiter until Falcon Heavy and the Shuttle remained too expensive to fly more often.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 11:22:15 UTC No. 16092396
>>16092381
Jesus they're up to 30 already. NG and Boing btfo
🗑️ Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 11:22:43 UTC No. 16092397
>>16091880
Consider the case of ULA and BO. ULA is dependent on BO for engines. Yet BO is also a competitor in launch. How can ULA know that BO isn't going to rugpull them? They have a carefully designed contract that gives them rights. But BO will have ensured that the contract is also carefully designed so it won't be onerous on BO.
Suppose SpaceX payload division A depends on hall effect thrusters made by SpaceX payload division B. That's hardly an unlikely scenario. Then the company is split up. Why won't division B jack up the prices sky high? They might even jack up the prices to an entirely unaffordable level, because they see division A as a potential future competitor and want them to fail.
Is a judge, who knows nothing about aerospace, going to oversee a commission that will write contracts for (potentially hundreds) of components, that will ensure the viability of all newly independent companies and won't be onerous on any, and then mandate those contracts for these companies? It would be a total mess
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 11:27:39 UTC No. 16092401
>>16091887
Because the US government failed back then, like it's on track to fail again today. At least back then western civilian customers had viable international fall-back options in Ariane 5 and Soyuz, so the damage to the industry was limited.
Or are you insinuating that ULA's monopoly *wasn't* a bad thing?
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 11:29:17 UTC No. 16092403
>>16091880
Consider the case of ULA and BO. ULA is dependent on BO for engines. Yet BO is also a competitor in launch. How can ULA know that BO isn't going to rugpull them? They have a carefully designed contract that gives them rights. But BO will have ensured that the contract is also carefully designed so it won't be onerous on BO.
Suppose SpaceX payload division A depends on thrusters made by SpaceX payload division B, or some other component that is critical. That's hardly an unlikely scenario. Then the company is split up. Why won't division B jack up the prices sky high? They might even jack up the prices to an entirely unaffordable level, because they see division A as a potential future competitor and want them to fail.
Is a judge, who knows nothing about aerospace, going to oversee a commission that will write contracts for (potentially hundreds) of components, that will ensure the viability of all newly independent companies and won't be onerous on any, and then mandate those contracts for these companies? It would be a total mess
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 11:33:18 UTC No. 16092407
Is ball lightning real? >>16092405
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 11:34:06 UTC No. 16092408
>>16092388
So has mission control in houston been operating basically 24/7 since 1999/2000 when ISS got its first crew?
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 11:35:36 UTC No. 16092409
>>16092407
yes energy is stored in the balls
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 11:36:26 UTC No. 16092411
>>16092350
>mine is three times bigger, if you count the non-american parts
>it's also structurally less efficient and uses obsolete solar panel tech
>take that
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 11:37:13 UTC No. 16092412
Ball lighting powered mars colony
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 11:39:16 UTC No. 16092415
>>16092407
I've seen it down in Michoud
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 11:40:53 UTC No. 16092418
>>16092407
I bet you there’s weird will-o'-the-wisp phenomenons on Titan.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 11:41:11 UTC No. 16092419
Someone remind me again why they couldn't make Cybertruck out of bent stainless steel sheet? Was it that stainless steel is too hard to bend and fuck up the press or something like that?
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 11:42:36 UTC No. 16092421
>>16092418
Titan is probably more haunted than Mars
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 11:42:57 UTC No. 16092423
>>16092418
Speaking of Titan here is a Veanus flyby
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 12:05:13 UTC No. 16092438
>>16092423
its so smoooth and round, I wanna slap Venus' ass
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 12:18:12 UTC No. 16092445
>>16092350
but the chinese spacestation is a shitty copy of MIR?
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 12:20:32 UTC No. 16092446
>>16092407
Yes, but apparently nobody ever seems to catch it on camera.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 12:26:19 UTC No. 16092450
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3X6
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfJ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uf7
https://twitter.com/i/broadcasts/1v
Soyuz MS-25 launching in T-10:00
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 12:28:09 UTC No. 16092453
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 12:28:23 UTC No. 16092455
>>16092450
Still the best rocket ever made
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 12:29:27 UTC No. 16092457
>>16092455
ahem
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 12:30:24 UTC No. 16092459
>>16092457
Developing a rocket with the help of NASA and modern computing is less impressive than a bunch of drunken retards using only metal lathes and compasses.
Not hating on SpaceX tho.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 12:32:33 UTC No. 16092461
>>16092459
in that case
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 12:36:49 UTC No. 16092464
DECOLLAGE
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 12:41:17 UTC No. 16092467
the old russian tech gives some nostalgia and comfort
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 12:43:00 UTC No. 16092471
>>16092455
A rocket design from the 1950s that's still carrying the Russian space program today
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 12:43:31 UTC No. 16092472
>>16092469
*tourist
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 12:45:18 UTC No. 16092475
>>16092471
really weird how they never used their own engine
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 12:54:09 UTC No. 16092480
>>16091546
Airbus has 148,000 employees. Microsoft has 221,000 employees. Samsung Electronics has 270,000 employees, and that's just a part of the Samsung empire. Volkswagen has 675,000 employees. BYD has 570,000 employees. WalMart has 2,300,000 employees, though most of their employee activities aren't immediately related to high technology.
Those are quite well-run companies, that perform well even in a highly competitive environment. I don't think it's likely to happen anytime soon that Musk's business empire becomes so large that it risks collapsing from its own weight. Even Tesla only has 140,000 employees at this time.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 12:59:20 UTC No. 16092489
>>16092480
>Tesla is worth more than VW
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 12:59:49 UTC No. 16092490
>>16092487
>saar please notice me saarpai
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 12:59:59 UTC No. 16092491
>>16092487
What magic are they using in there because they're shitting out boosters and ships and raptors like crazy
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 13:00:23 UTC No. 16092493
>>16092475
America spent the post-Apollo years telling ourselves over and over again that oxygen rich staged combustion was a practical impossibility and that the only real option other than a gas generator design was to use fuel rich staged hydrogen like the shuttle did, and if the Soviets said otherwise it was just propaganda. Then after the wall came down and it turned out that the RD-170 was real everyone changed course to saying that it was just economically impossible to build an engine like that so we should just buy cheap engines from Energomash. This was a good move commercially because everything Russian was dirt cheap in the 1990s and the State Department liked it because they were worried about unemployed Russian aerospace engineers getting jobs in Iran. We did have ideas to develop engines like the RS-76 that would have been comparable to the RD-180, but given how Aerojet works that probably would have just turned into an expensive kerolox RS-68.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 13:03:27 UTC No. 16092496
>>16092491
raptors are being built somewhere else I think
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 13:04:03 UTC No. 16092497
>>16092480
>that perform well even in a highly competitive environment
in practice the bigger your marketshare and the closer to a mono-/oligopoly you are the more inefficiencies you can allow, to be competitive you need actually a bunch of competitors your size because you can just buy out the smaller competitors that manage to be more efficient than you despite their smaller size.
(in theory bigger corps are more efficient because they can get better deals with suppliers, and streamline a bunch of burocracy and logistics etc)
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 13:04:43 UTC No. 16092498
>>16092493
https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/upl
proliferation of Soviet ICBM tech was definitely a factor when they decided to enter into that contract
>given how Aerojet works
same problem in the fielding of hypersonic missiles, the US has the know-hows but they can't get the supply chain under control to produce them at cost ($20m for the small air launched glider with a 50kg warhead lol)
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 13:13:26 UTC No. 16092504
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 13:14:28 UTC No. 16092506
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 13:16:08 UTC No. 16092507
>>16092272
t. muffin theorist
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 13:20:25 UTC No. 16092511
>>16092491
Iirc they built way too many raptors so they might still be working through their backlog.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 13:21:41 UTC No. 16092513
The SpaceX story doesn't make sense.
No one was making staged combustion in the US and then suddenly they make Raptors.
Operation Paperclip II must have happened sometime in the 2010s.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 13:22:35 UTC No. 16092514
>>16092270
I love this image, we need more asteroid lookalike potato pics
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 13:25:21 UTC No. 16092517
>>16092513
>The Soviet story doesn't make sense.
>No one was making staged combustion in the world and then suddenly the Soviets were
If something can be created once, it can be created twice.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 13:26:29 UTC No. 16092518
>>16092513
The Raptors aren't flight ready and have been in development since 2010.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 13:28:41 UTC No. 16092519
>>16092513
We're about to see huge technological leaps in material science and engine technology in the next 10 years because of AI.
Forget staged combustion.
We're going all out.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 13:32:31 UTC No. 16092525
>>16092518
Then how did starship reach LEO?
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 13:33:05 UTC No. 16092527
>>16092372
chastity piece, like a genital cage
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 13:34:42 UTC No. 16092529
>>16092525
>He thinks an engine with a 10% failure rate if flight ready
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 13:38:26 UTC No. 16092537
>>16092368
>a vehicle so powerful it causes earthquakes measured on the richter scale that can be detected many kilometers away and also fucking vulcano explosions.
>the first launch was so ridiculous that scientists around the world wrote papers about it because a house sized stream of hypersonic gas hitting the ground is impossible to observe anywhere else.
is there any vehicle that will ever be this based? orion perhaps?
CAPTCHA: N0AAY
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 13:41:24 UTC No. 16092538
>>16092407
i put clamps on my scrotum so yes.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 13:46:54 UTC No. 16092546
>>16092529
>retard is still doing low effort raptor reliability trolling
do you ever go over to your parents for a cup of coffee? you you make connections with people around you?
do you have a job? you're wasting your life away man, you should go do something other than pretend to be retarded on a small general inside of a minor 4ch board.
>inb4 HURR I'M RETARDED
>inb4 HURR I WAS ONLY PRETENDING TO BE RETARDED TROOOOOLED
you are retarded in either case, no intelligent person ever spent 90% of their day pretending to be a fucking idiot to "gotcha" people.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 14:02:09 UTC No. 16092567
>>16092409
it's no use the balls are inert
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 14:14:14 UTC No. 16092576
>>16092153 (You) #
Just send a bunch of lactose intolerant women and feed them milk, and collect their smelly braps to fuel the base (I will have to personally test each sample to make sure it's high enough quality)
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 14:15:23 UTC No. 16092577
>>16092511
not very accurate, SpaceX built a shitload of Raptors because they wanted to iterate Raptor. The ones that worked well are gonna fly, the ones that didn't get tossed, and by the time they're trying to recover and reuse Starship, those up to date Raptors should be easily reusable too.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 14:17:49 UTC No. 16092578
>>16092513
Nobody was doing reusable rockets, then SpaceX made Falcon 9.
There's no magic or conspiracy. SpaceX simply has the motivation to just solve the damn problem.
🗑️ Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 14:22:50 UTC No. 16092585
Why is the YF-215 engine part of the "nine engines in eight years" program if the CZ-9 that uses them is NET 2033? The "eight years" during which the engines are supposed to become ready are 2021-2028. In 2023, it became known that AALPT had performed tests similar to what SpaceX did in 2014. Sure, AALPT already has experience with ORSC and methalox engines, but still, there's no way YF-215 could be ready by 2028, right?
https://spacenews.com/china-makes-p
Also, why does Landspace say they're going to have a 2MN FFSC methalox engine by 2028? That doesn't seem credible. Landspace says they started research in 2021. How could they develop such an engine by 2028, even if they get full tech transfer from AALPT?
https://spacenews.com/landspace-lau
Is is all hogwash, or could China really be that far along in Raptor cloning?
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 14:23:12 UTC No. 16092586
>>16092529
The last 2 Starship launches had zero Raptor failures btw.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 14:25:22 UTC No. 16092588
Why is the YF-215 engine part of the "nine engines in eight years" program if the CZ-9 that uses them is NET 2033? The "eight years" during which the engines are supposed to become ready are 2021-2028. In 2023, it became known that AALPT had performed tests similar to what SpaceX did in 2014. Sure, AALPT already has experience with ORSC and methalox engines, but still, there's no way YF-215 could be ready by 2028, right?
https://spacenews.com/china-makes-p
Also, why does Landspace say they're going to have a 2MN FFSC methalox engine by 2028 for a 10m diameter rocket? That doesn't seem credible. Landspace says they started research in 2021. How could they develop such an engine by 2028, even if they get full tech transfer from AALPT?
https://spacenews.com/landspace-lau
Is is all hogwash, or could China really be that close to a Raptor clone?
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 14:25:56 UTC No. 16092589
>>16092585
China is throwing everything at the wall in order to keep their engineers from moving to greener pastures
🗑️ Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 14:30:36 UTC No. 16092591
>>16092588
Those engines have been in development since at least 2013 after the deal with the Russians for RD-180 didn't go through.
The Chinese RD-180 (YF-130) is now relegated to 技术储备 (technological reserve).
The only difference is CALT's rocket will not be using full flow staged combustion, it will be more like BE-4 but with slightly higher specific impulse and chamber pressure.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 14:34:35 UTC No. 16092592
>>16092588
china could have stolen relevant stuff from SpaceX with industrial espionage as well
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 14:38:20 UTC No. 16092596
>>16092513
RS-25s are staged combustion
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 14:40:47 UTC No. 16092599
>>16092591
>it will be more like BE-4
Isn't that the YF-135? I thought that, since 2023, YF-215 is now the primary option for CZ-9
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 14:44:42 UTC No. 16092602
>>16092513
There was the Integrated Powerhead Demonstrator in the early 2000s
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 14:47:43 UTC No. 16092605
>>16092599
yeah you're right it is that engine (200t)
in the early prototype phase
ran this paper thru chatgpt: https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s?__biz=Mz
So far they've done these tests
>Forced starting of the main turbopump
>Torch ignition of liquid oxygen-methane propellants
>Stable combustion in rich-fuel gas generators
>Efficient combustion and reliable cooling in the thrust chamber
>Reliable sealing and cooling of methane turbopumps
>Control and regulation of low-temperature propellant flow paths
>Development of materials and processes for methane engines
>Pressurization, transport, and recovery of methane propellants
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 14:48:00 UTC No. 16092606
>>16092589
What are the greener pastures? It's not like Chinese engineers can just move to the US and start working on American cutting-edge engines, right? They wouldn't be let anywhere near that tech
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 14:49:04 UTC No. 16092607
>>16092513
If Russians nearly made them work, then it would be childsplay for the dullest American toddler to mass produce them. The only reason we didn't is because of bloat.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 14:55:53 UTC No. 16092616
>>16092606
Probably other sectors of the Chinese economy that pay better. That's a problem Russia's been struggling with for years. Russia graduates plenty of good engineers, but working with conventional aircraft (or working in something other than aerospace) pays a lot better than a job at Roscosmos or Energia.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 14:59:48 UTC No. 16092620
>>16092603
Why are women so evil?
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 15:02:01 UTC No. 16092623
>>16092616
I hear China is thinking about passing a law that will prevent STEM grads from working in quantitative finance. Kind of based desu
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 15:14:01 UTC No. 16092633
>>16092616
Aerospace, and space in particular, is a top national priority in China and is seen as a huge growth sector. It's been repeatedly emphasized by the General Secretary himself. I don't think the sector has a money problem compared to other sectors of the economy.
http://cpc.people.com.cn/n1/2023/04
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 15:16:14 UTC No. 16092634
>>16092633
Biggest problem is poor fundamentals and the godawful pay in the chinese aerospace sector.
It's very hard for a SpaceX to exist over there.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 15:24:07 UTC No. 16092642
>>16092634
>poor fundamentals
What do you mean?
>godawful pay
Is that true today? Or was it just true 5-10 years ago when the whole space sector was just a CASC monopoly? Now there's competition for talent from start-ups, many of which are well funded to a large extent by state VCs.
Example:
https://archive.is/https://www.scmp
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 15:24:54 UTC No. 16092643
>>16092633
I don't think it has Russia's payroll problems, but the core of the Chinese space program is still as oldspace as anything in the west and that doesn't have the greatest appeal to young engineering talent. Working on rockets at Boeing is still working at Boeing. I think that's why there's been such a big push to support companies like Landspace. A new graduate could get to be in charge of interesting projects a lot faster than they would at somewhere like CALT.
🗑️ Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 15:28:19 UTC No. 16092647
>>16092643
>doesn't have the greatest appeal to young engineering talent
Do you know this for a fact? In every case I've heard anything said about Chinese opinions of CASC, it is that they and everyone else worships it
>I think that's why there's been such a big push to support companies like Landspace
Or maybe it's just because the CPC realized back in 2014 that space isn't a natural monopoly industry as was previously widely believed, and should have competition
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 15:30:46 UTC No. 16092649
>>16092643
>doesn't have the greatest appeal to young engineering talent
Do you know this for a fact? In every case I've heard anything said about Chinese opinions of CASC, it is that they all worship it
>I think that's why there's been such a big push to support companies like Landspace
Or maybe it's just because the CPC realized back in 2014 that space isn't a natural monopoly industry as was previously widely believed, and should have competition
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 15:45:10 UTC No. 16092666
>>16092654
>still making fairings in a world of two stage to orbit rockets
grim. at least it's reusable, right...?
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 15:47:15 UTC No. 16092669
>>16092666
that reminds me, no one is re-using fairings besides spacesex either. we always talk about F9 1st stage landing being exclusive to them, but fairings are a big cost saving too.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 15:56:05 UTC No. 16092678
>>16092586
I would say them not relighting is a failure but I guess most of those failures were caused by other factors and not the raptors themselves?
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 15:57:55 UTC No. 16092679
>>16092649
You can have a high opinion of something but still feel that a position somewhere else is better for fulling your personal ambitions. NASA is universally popular here in the states and they're still complaining about SpaceX gobbling up all of the talented graduates. Beijing can mandate that space is a national priority, but they can't decree that people will be excited. Having smaller companies that are seen as living further away from the bureau of red tape and are actively working on exciting projects is probably the best way to get people interested in working in the industry.
>>16092669
Wasn't there some talk about Blue Origin or ULA trying to get started with fairing reuse? I know Blue is getting set up for dorneship recovery with New Glenn but I was certain that someone else at the cape was starting to set up fairing recovery boats.
🗑️ Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 16:05:05 UTC No. 16092684
>>16092679
I've never heard about viewing "newspace" as better or more exciting than "oldspace" being a phenomenon in China. I thought it was mostly an American thing. Is this something you know, or are you just speculating?
I think that on SDF there was a Chinese guy who claimed CASC is usually the first choice of fresh aerospace graduates, although I myself don't know to what extent that's correct.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 16:07:06 UTC No. 16092685
>>16092679
I've never heard about it being a phenomenon in China that "newspace" is viewed as better or more exciting than "oldspace". I thought that was mostly an American thing. Is this something you know, or are you just speculating?
I think that on SDF there was a Chinese guy who said that CASC is usually the first choice of fresh graduates in aerospace, although I myself don't know to what extent that's correct.
rephrased
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 16:08:39 UTC No. 16092686
>>16092654
your moms dildo
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 16:12:06 UTC No. 16092689
>>16092666
Space Pioneer is a company that adheres very closely to SpaceX's trodden path. They will probably attempt SpaceX-style fairing reuse eventually. Though their current priority is just to get launching.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 16:13:05 UTC No. 16092690
>>16092491
>What magic are they using in there because they're shitting out boosters and ships and raptors like crazy
Simple (in relation to what is being built) design and stripping down necessary parts. No autistic clean room or government gibs. A business with their own goal that isn't to simply make money.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 16:34:29 UTC No. 16092708
>>16092678
The ten engine ring relit just fine for the boostbackburn, yes the later ignituon failures were due to vehicle factors, not an engine issue.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 16:41:51 UTC No. 16092713
>>16092709
reusable upper stage, reusable side boosters
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 16:42:03 UTC No. 16092714
>>16092709
Pizza Hut logo
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 16:45:42 UTC No. 16092721
>>16092303
if you turn the external tank into an internal tank that's just how big the shuttle would have needed to be. once nasa dropped the requirement for full reusability in the contractor studies they pretty quickly realized that the optimal amount of onboard hydrolox tankage was 0.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 16:46:20 UTC No. 16092723
>>16092709
widen the core, more advanced engines + more propellent, KVTK hydrolox upper stage, get rid of side boosters
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 16:47:12 UTC No. 16092726
>>16092709
RGB lighting
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 16:49:44 UTC No. 16092730
>>16092714
With the cost of rocket launches, they really should just start finding sponsors.
Make that shit look like nascar.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 16:53:47 UTC No. 16092733
>>16092709
Replace the RD-107A/108A engines with four RD-120Us and and RD-193.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 16:56:50 UTC No. 16092739
>>16092709
strap on solid side boosters to the side boosters
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 16:58:41 UTC No. 16092740
>>16092709
dispose of and replace with Falcon 9
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:04:18 UTC No. 16092743
>>16092438
She's a hottie for sure. Prude and mysterious though, unlike that harlot Mars. She just let's anyone see her surface, and even land on her!
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:07:23 UTC No. 16092748
CGTN interview with Song Zhengyu, CZ-8 chief designer, on occasion of the Queqiao-2 launch
He says that 6 launches are planned in 2024H2, both of the old variants and the new CZ-8G. He confirms that CZ-8 will reach a launch cadence of 50/year, although he conditions this on pad availability (presumably, because this is not his responsibility).
https://news.cgtn.com/news/2024-03-
Increased pad availability is being worked on. Hainan commercial pad 1 is dedicated to CZ-8, and both commercial pad 1 and 2 are supposed to have a launch cadence of 16/year each initially. Both pads are supposed to be operational by July. A new double-door VAB is being built in addition to the existing VAB for Wenchang pad 2
https://m.weibo.cn/detail/499312012
https://twitter.com/raz_liu/status/
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:07:37 UTC No. 16092749
>>16092620
Destroying other women and importing more men are just grugbrain sexual competition. There's a reason successful societies don't put them in charge.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:09:12 UTC No. 16092751
>>16092748
I can't keep up with all of these Chinese rockets blarg
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:09:51 UTC No. 16092752
>if the rocket is no reusable is LE BAD!!
What a faggots, this shit should be called SpaceX general
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:11:51 UTC No. 16092753
>>16092752
if a rocket is not reusable, it is pretty bad. Care to elaborate on your problem with that?
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:12:03 UTC No. 16092754
>>16092739
have you been watching my ksp playthroughs?
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:13:41 UTC No. 16092756
>>16092751
Long March 8 is a smaller version of the Long March 7 with only half the boosters and the second stage pulled out. It's about equivalent to the Soyuz-2 in lifting capacity.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:14:20 UTC No. 16092758
>>16092752
>if the rocket is no reusable is LE BAD!!
Yes.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:18:05 UTC No. 16092765
mars is boring and you can't convince me otherwise. It's all dusty roggs. Why do other planets have to be so 'similar' across their whole surface. Earth is nice and varied.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:18:40 UTC No. 16092767
>>16092765
>Anon thinks pictures of Argentina are mars
Lol
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:18:56 UTC No. 16092768
>>16092752
We usually post streams for other providers like the poos and such but SpaceX quite literally revolutionized the launch industry. Turned it upside down entirely. They are launching, I think, more often than the rest of the world combined and are very open with development and mission profiles.
Why wouldn't this mostly be about them?
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:19:44 UTC No. 16092770
>>16092768
I dunno it sounds like a lot of RHETORIC to me
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:27:33 UTC No. 16092781
>>16092752
Why come to a thread and post in it when you dont like the subject?
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:29:27 UTC No. 16092786
>>16092709
Hypergolic propellant. The more toxic, the better.
t. Glushko
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:31:23 UTC No. 16092792
>>16092765
if it weren't for plant life earth would be 3 tone: ocean, desert, and ice cap. mars does ok having desert and ice cap
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:33:12 UTC No. 16092800
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:33:15 UTC No. 16092801
>>16092792
Mars has a bunch of dust covering up all the different roggs too. Look at all the weird formations of different rogg colors on Earth.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:40:42 UTC No. 16092815
>>16092463
they were so real for this. Goes hard
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:43:17 UTC No. 16092821
>>16092800
wtf that’s a downgrade bro
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:48:47 UTC No. 16092829
>>16091882
Lmfao he’s blaming the UK for yesterday’s attack what is his issue
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 18:00:19 UTC No. 16092844
>>16092752
the beauty of imageboards is if you don't want to interact with that poster - get this: you don't have to!
🗑️ Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 18:02:32 UTC No. 16092852
>>16092748
Atlas 401 for how much? $40-50m a launch?
That's not bad.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 18:05:20 UTC No. 16092858
>>16092855
2 stage light gas gun
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 18:06:31 UTC No. 16092860
>>16092293
who is the orange one
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 18:08:17 UTC No. 16092861
>>16092408
yeah
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 18:08:45 UTC No. 16092863
>>16092403
>How can ULA know that BO isn't going to rugpull them?
Because American law would dickpunch Blue, you would know this if you were making a sincere argument.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 18:10:40 UTC No. 16092869
>>16092513
>No one was making staged combustion in the US
What an absolute retard.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 18:13:00 UTC No. 16092874
>>16092855
SpinLaunch
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 18:15:24 UTC No. 16092877
>>16092491
robots and mexicans
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 18:16:10 UTC No. 16092880
>>16092705
I wish Richard Shelby gets to see a depot named after him before he passes away
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 18:27:35 UTC No. 16092895
>>16092709
>replace old RD-107 with more efficient RD-171 derived engines
>make boosters unified for easier manufacturing
>make it possible to use 0-4 boosters so it can be used as light, medium and heavy as needed
oh wait, that's just Angara...
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 18:28:55 UTC No. 16092896
>>16092874
it's much better to use linear megastructure launchers
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 18:31:40 UTC No. 16092901
>>16092895
Angara still needs a better spaceport, a better upper stage, and better payloads. They don't fly it enough to make reuse economical.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 18:31:44 UTC No. 16092902
>>16092896
I'm convinced it would be viable on the moon. better than a mass driver as it fits in fewer launches and doesn't require kilometers of infrastructure to be built. can't launch humans with it though
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 18:32:42 UTC No. 16092903
>>16092895
It's actually a worse Angara. I saw a proposal that had RD-191 derivatives on all the boosters and it ditched the conical architecture for a cylindrical common core design and it was still only projected to lift about 15 tons to LEO.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 18:34:00 UTC No. 16092906
>>16092902
Mass drivers only make sense for shipping out thousands of large payloads to faraway orbits, like fabricating the large structures of a spin colony in pieces on the lunar surface and yeeting them at lunar L5 for assembly.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 18:40:13 UTC No. 16092916
>>16092874
This shit is even more retarded then sadam's spacegun.
At least the spacegun would have worked if the US didnt kill the engineer.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 18:41:27 UTC No. 16092918
>>16092906
better to align to launch things to L2 imo
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 18:42:30 UTC No. 16092919
>>16092906
it's only sensible to launch to EML1
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 18:43:28 UTC No. 16092921
Do we have any guesses on the cost of an expended Starship stack?
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 18:44:08 UTC No. 16092924
>>16092751
Anon, do you really mean to tell us that you're having trouble keeping track of just
*clears throat*
CASC Long March 2C
CASC Long March 2D
CASC Long March 2F
CASC Long March 3
CASC Long March 3A
CASC Long March 3B
CASC Long March 4B
CASC Long March 4C
CASC Long March 5
CASC Long March 5B
CASC Long March 6
CASC Long March 6A
CASC Long March 6C
CASC Long March 7
CASC Long March 7A
CASC Long March 822
CASC Long March 820
CASC Long March 8G
CASC Long March 9 (2011 design, 2021 design, 2022 design, 2023 design)
CASC Long March 10
CASC Long March 10A
CASC Long March 11
CASC Long March 11H
CASC Long March 12
CASC Jielong-1
CASC Jielong-3
CASC Jielong-4
CASC Unnamed 3.8m diameter reusable rocket NET 2025
CASC Unnamed VTHL TSTO spaceplane
CASC Unnamed air-launched reusable rocket
CASIC Kuaizhou-1A
CASIC Kuaizhou-11
CASIC Kuaizhou-11A (may have been cancelled, no news since 2018?)
CASIC Kuaizhou-21 (may have been cancelled, no news since 2018?)
CASIC Kuaizhou-21A (may have been cancelled, no news since 2018?)
CASIC Unnamed rocket using Mingfeng engines
CASIC Tengyun
Landspace Zhuque-2 initial variant
Landspace Zhuque.2 uprated variant
Landspace Zhuque-3
Landspace Unnamed 10m diameter rocket using 200t FFSC methalox engines NET 2028
Space Pioneer Tianlong-2 YF-102 + TH-11 variant
Space Pioneer Tianlong-2 TH-11 only variant (may have been cancelled)
Space Pioneer Tianlong-3
Space Pioneer Tianlong-3H
Space Pioneer Tianlong-3M
Galactic Energy Ceres-1
Galactic Energy Pallas-1
Galactic Energy Pallas-2
iSpace Hyperbola-1
iSpace Hyperbola-2 (cancelled and used as a suborbital hopper instead)
iSpace Hyperbola-3
iSpace Hyperbola-3B
DBA Nebula-1
DBA Nebula-2
CAS Space Kinetica-1
CAS Space Kinetica-1A (cancelled?)
CAS Space Kinetica-2 (original design, 2023 design)
CAS Space Kinetica-2H
CAS Space Kinetica-3 (original design, 2023 design)
CAS Space Suborbital tourism vehicle
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 18:44:48 UTC No. 16092926
>>16092924
ah that clears it up, I had forgotten there was a Tianlong-3H AND -3M
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 18:45:55 UTC No. 16092927
>>16092924
cont.
Orienspace Gravity-1
Orienspace Gravity-2
Orienspace Gravity-2 with boosters
Orienspace Gravity-3
just to mention some of the more well-funded companies. There's also
AAEngine Xingdi-1
AAEngine Xingdi-11
Space Epoch XYZ-1
Space Circling Huilong-1
Space Circling Huilong-2
Rocket Pi Darwin-1 (may have been cancelled)
Rocket Pi Darwin-2
Nayuta Hunter-1
You shound like you don't know all these by heart, anon. Are you even a real space watcher?
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 18:48:01 UTC No. 16092929
>>16092927
>>16092924
where is this money coming from
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 18:49:04 UTC No. 16092932
>>16092929
Powerpoint presentations are cheap
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 18:50:23 UTC No. 16092934
>>16092924
And the CZ-9 is a 30 year project (2030-2060) so
CZ-9A-Z (26 rockets)
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 18:56:30 UTC No. 16092939
>>16092932
All the mentioned companies either have engines on the test stand already, or are buying engines from a company that does (CASC, Jiuzhou Yunjian, or Yuhang Tuijin)
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 18:59:51 UTC No. 16092943
>>16092929
A lot of it is coming from Chinese venture capital organs and a lot of the rest is coming from cities that want to have prestigious aerospace jobs in their district.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 19:03:50 UTC No. 16092946
>>16092929
Most of these rockets have a great deal of commonality
For example:
* Long March 2-4 are all DF-5 derivatives
* Long March 5-8 are all "dial a rocket" variants of the same base design
* Jielong-3 and Kinetica-1 use the same SP70 rocket motor from CASC
* Many companies that are developing Falcon 9 clones are also developing a tricore variant in the style of Falcon Heavy
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 19:06:40 UTC No. 16092952
>>16092946
5 is the odd one out as it uses a hydrolox first stage
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 19:08:34 UTC No. 16092956
>>16092954
https://twitter.com/jdotarnold/stat
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 19:09:06 UTC No. 16092957
>>16092934
Of course. How could I forget to mention that there are at least three CZ-9 versions planned already
* 2 stage variant
* 3 stage variant
* reusable orbiter stage variant
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 19:09:35 UTC No. 16092959
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 19:11:13 UTC No. 16092962
>>16092956
>rich's guys charity goes to benefit himself
news at 11. almost every person with decent wealth has a "charity" that goes to enriching themselves. its a tax scheme.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 19:11:46 UTC No. 16092963
>>16092952
Yes, but CZ-5 was still designed as part of the same YF-100-based "family", as I understand it, inspired by Zenit/Energia
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 19:12:09 UTC No. 16092964
>>16092924
Ummm based china
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 19:14:34 UTC No. 16092965
>>16092957
meh better to have a plan than no plan imo
>get young grads excited about space first and foremost
>observe how each team/company are performing
>cut funding to underperformers
>slowly consolidate
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 19:14:37 UTC No. 16092966
>>16092962
> Musk doesn’t have a giant charity. He has a giant private foundation, of a very specific sort under US tax law. While the NYT acknowledges this in places, they don’t seem to fully understand the significant differences, or why they exist.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 19:15:44 UTC No. 16092968
>>16092946
LM2 are two stage hypergolics, LM3s have a hydrogen third stage and maybe boosters, LM4s have three hypergol stages. LM6/7/8 are all LM5 LRBs with various boosters and upper stages added on. The smaller independent-commercial solids are (usually?) DF-25/31 missiles with extra stages on top.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 19:19:28 UTC No. 16092972
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 19:20:19 UTC No. 16092974
>>16092705
Does anyone know the potential weight savings and/or payload to LEO of an expendable stage-only starship? With reinforcement to hold additional mass, it still has to break 280 tons at least.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 19:23:48 UTC No. 16092978
>>16092350
I do want to see an African space program
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0h_
>UPENDO gets upended
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 19:28:06 UTC No. 16092985
>>16092978
The Iraqi space program would've been awesome
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 19:29:06 UTC No. 16092988
will spaceX perform catch tests before or after the new towers are finished?
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 19:29:54 UTC No. 16092989
>>16092985
I agree! It wasn't very practical but it was an interesting idea.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 19:32:00 UTC No. 16092991
>>16092988
>catch tests
You mean crash tests
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 19:32:44 UTC No. 16092992
>>16092988
ift-4 yes. ship gets destroyed again, raptors fail to relight, booster will be caught
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 19:38:40 UTC No. 16093001
>>16092988
obviously after, I would guess it won't happen this year
they will keep doing a bunch of water landings and trying to perfect it there
landing on the tower is going to be both more difficult and more damaging if it goes wrong compared to a drone ship or RTLS on a concrete pad away from launch infrastructure
not to mention other bullshit that would no doubt happen, whining about beetles etc
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 19:40:33 UTC No. 16093003
https://www.airandspaceforces.com/s
>Space Force Wants IOC for Tactically Responsive Space in 2025
>The Space Force is expanding the scope of its upcoming mission to launch a satellite on 24 hours’ notice—and hopes to declare initial operational capability for the effort, dubbed “Tactically Responsive Space,” in fiscal 2025.
>Next up is “Victus Haze,” first announced last August. Chief of Space Operations Gen. B. Chance Saltzman has said that mission must go even faster than Victus Nox, which took a satellite from warehouse to orbit in just five days, putting it into orbit just 27 hours after receiving launch orders.
>After Victus Haze, the Space Force wants to “provide initial operational capabilities starting in FY 2025” and keep pressing forward with Victus Sol, with launch slated for the first half of fiscal 2026, according to budget documents.
>Details of the Victus Sol mission are not yet clear, but broadly speaking, the Space Force wants the mission to build on its ability “to launch within 24 hours of notice, match the orbital plane of a previously unknown object, and conduct rendezvous and proximity operations for inspection and characterization on an operationally relevant timeline,” according to budget documents.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 19:54:59 UTC No. 16093025
>>16093003
So basically they want the original 1970s specced milshuttle capabilities with cheap commercial small launch, for everything except crewed work and downmass.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 19:56:26 UTC No. 16093029
They will never catch starship, booster maybe.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 19:57:01 UTC No. 16093031
>>16093003
If dreamchaser can get sub-24 hour readiness (idk if this is possible or not) they could always chuck it on a Falcon 9 at a moment’s notice (very possible)
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 19:58:33 UTC No. 16093034
>>16092860
dragon v2 chan
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 19:58:40 UTC No. 16093036
>>16093029
They will never reuse a Falcon 9 booster, reusable fairings maybe
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 19:59:13 UTC No. 16093038
>>16093034
ah, it's not a very good one
I guess she doesn't have very many identifying characteristics...
🗑️ Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 20:00:59 UTC No. 16093043
>>16092974
How much propellant is in the header tanks?
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 20:05:32 UTC No. 16093053
>>16092863
I think it was a rhetorical question. It was immediately answered in the next sentence...
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 20:09:56 UTC No. 16093062
>>16092687
but nasa told me that ropes don't work in space
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 20:14:29 UTC No. 16093070
>>16093029
its simply an engineering problem, all of the separate parts have been demonstrated already
retropropulsive landing of boosters, re-entry from orbit with heat tiles, the belly flop manuever for the ship
landing on the chopsticks instead of on a pad just means you have to be more accurate, but there is nothing impossible here
its an engineering problem that will be solved with iterative development
even if it takes 20 water landings, they will get it
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 20:23:46 UTC No. 16093085
>>16093070
blah blah blah shut the fuck up fucking idiot.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 20:24:07 UTC No. 16093086
https://twitter.com/rookisaacman/st
>final Polaris suits are done
>may be unveiled in about a month
>SpaceX hopes to eventually mass produce suits
>"early summer" launch
>documentary planned
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 20:25:51 UTC No. 16093088
>>16092972
>the photos show fungi on mars
WRONG
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 20:30:20 UTC No. 16093094
>>16092368
>flying water tower because "well let's just see if it works so we can move on faster"
>seismic-volcanic event because "we could install a flame shield but that'd take awhile so we're just gonna see if the concrete holds lmao"
>all in a field in Texas
Unfathomably based.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 20:30:35 UTC No. 16093095
>>16093070
The more interesting question is if they'll have to put legs on there for redundancy anyways if manned versions ever happen (cargo can do without obviously) or if they're going to say if you can't land on the chopsticks you're not landing anyways.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 20:37:03 UTC No. 16093096
>>16093086
Please don’t look like shit please don’t look like shit pleeeeease don’t look like shiiiiiit
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 20:39:27 UTC No. 16093097
>>16093096
You smell of poo but it's fresh so it ok
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 20:39:52 UTC No. 16093098
>>16093095
you would have to have some weird situation where the tower either gets damage after re-entry has begun, or all towers get blown up while the ship is in orbit
seems pretty farfetched
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 20:40:26 UTC No. 16093099
>>16092487
Is there a higher resolution of this? This is wallpaper worthy.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 20:40:53 UTC No. 16093101
>>16093096
its going to look plain
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 20:45:29 UTC No. 16093105
>>16092768
>picrel
evolutionary speaking...what happened?
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 20:45:36 UTC No. 16093106
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 20:46:16 UTC No. 16093108
>>16092480
Org structure is underrated and bureaucratic parasites are an almost completely undiscussed threat. Large companies begin to struggle for the exact same reasons centrally planned economies are outcompeted by distributed economies, and the phenomenon of companies (like Standard Oil or if it were to happen Amazon) being worth more split up stems from this. Averting this is possible by avoiding central bureaucracy, but bureaucratic parasites operate under rules of natural selection and evolution and inherently subvert organizations.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 20:47:05 UTC No. 16093109
>>16093096
>>16093101
Isaacman said it's going to look just like your favorite marvel/halo slop! excitenent confirmed!
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 20:49:41 UTC No. 16093113
>>16093098
Any sort of immediate abort from orbit or off-trajectory situation
🗑️ Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 20:51:05 UTC No. 16093116
>>16093113
I did profit from you lol. Stop WHINING YOU STUPID FOOLS .
You was farted on
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 20:52:31 UTC No. 16093118
reminder the economy is in the shitter. we need more space jobs.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 20:54:36 UTC No. 16093122
>>16093109
it wont
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 21:06:34 UTC No. 16093150
>>16093113
like after booster separation?
if you just re-entered randoml most of the time you would be over the sea, or over some random wilderness
in neither case would landing legs help much
if re-entry went in a way you didn't burn up and the trajectory would be off so you can't get onto the tower, then maybe you could try to aim for a road? idk it just seems kind of far fetched situation where both things went wrong, but not so wrong you died right away but then in a way where landing legs would be usable
🗑️ Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 21:07:33 UTC No. 16093153
>>16093116
B*rkun detected. Everyone report the 'automated spambot'
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 21:10:25 UTC No. 16093163
>>16093088
I just want you to know that help is available for you
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 21:12:28 UTC No. 16093169
>>16093163
where did you get this photo of my apple pie?
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 21:12:30 UTC No. 16093170
if the spay sex sits look like capeshit then im selling all my spacex shares. they need to look exactly like the apollo suits.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 21:13:56 UTC No. 16093175
>>16093169
from NASA's twitter account
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 21:17:33 UTC No. 16093183
https://youtu.be/mPxmLSt5Pp4
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 21:21:39 UTC No. 16093194
>>16093106
>the be-4's chamber pressure
how embarrassing
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 21:22:53 UTC No. 16093198
>>16093194
its designed for reuse, unlike the raptor which is designed for the DoD
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 21:25:30 UTC No. 16093204
>>16093198
beetle claws typed this post
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 21:25:31 UTC No. 16093205
>>16093106
>"raptor"
which one?
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 21:27:25 UTC No. 16093209
>>16093194
I'm not sure how accurate anything but the most basic thrust numbers are for the BE-4. Getting something as basic as specific impulse out of Blue Origin is like pulling teeth out of a cat
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 21:30:51 UTC No. 16093215
have all rovers on mars been sterilized before going there? don't suppose the fairing is airtight and air inside it sterilized
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 21:31:18 UTC No. 16093216
>>16093209
if you know an engine's ISP and propellants then it's pretty easy to estimate chamber pressure
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 21:31:51 UTC No. 16093218
>>16093216
alright shut the fuck up
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 21:33:56 UTC No. 16093221
>>16093205
not clear. the thrust number doesn't match any of the values on wikipedia.
possibly raptor 2 but years out of date?
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 21:35:22 UTC No. 16093225
>>16093221
>>16093205
raptor 1 but years out of date. chart's from 2019.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 21:40:25 UTC No. 16093234
>>16093215
Yes, to an autistic degree.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 21:59:19 UTC No. 16093261
>>16093163
fake picture. opportunity was out of action already by 2023 so no new pictures.
literally a fake tweet that never happened
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 22:01:09 UTC No. 16093264
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 22:05:09 UTC No. 16093273
>>16093261
wrong. read the oppy docs.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 22:05:29 UTC No. 16093274
>>16093261
you don't remember the time oppy woke up to take a picture of lichen?
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 22:10:00 UTC No. 16093282
>>16093261
welcome berenstein universe poster
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 22:19:44 UTC No. 16093296
>>16093265
Fuck off russhit YWNGTS
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 22:22:18 UTC No. 16093302
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 22:24:23 UTC No. 16093309
>>16093296
that's not true, they've been very successful in puppeteering the corpse of the Soviet Union's space program
kind of a marvel it survived the looting actually
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 22:31:23 UTC No. 16093322
>>16093003
Sound like a job for starship if booster turn around time is under an hour.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 22:38:19 UTC No. 16093330
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFi
Your nightly starlink launch will be lifting off in one hour
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 22:39:12 UTC No. 16093332
>>16093330
ol' reliable
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 22:39:25 UTC No. 16093333
>>16093330
do not care
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 22:39:31 UTC No. 16093334
>>16093330
these need to be hourly
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 22:52:41 UTC No. 16093348
>>16093309
i think it just goes to show how much idiot-proofing they did on the soyuz for its first 10 years
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 22:57:36 UTC No. 16093353
>>16093150
>in neither case would landing legs help much
That's why I'm wondering if they'd do it, in the off-chance it could help, or skip it because it's unlikely to help.
>it just seems kind of far fetched situation
That's what abort scenarios are pretty much.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 22:59:36 UTC No. 16093354
>>16093330
nobody cares shut the fuck up.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 22:59:52 UTC No. 16093355
>>16093221
are they ever going to settle on a thrust notation? t_f is dumb and requires conversion no matter what system you use
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 23:01:49 UTC No. 16093358
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 23:02:10 UTC No. 16093359
>>16093354
>>16093218
>>16093085
is this barkun?
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 23:02:44 UTC No. 16093361
>>16092687
its happening
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 23:08:06 UTC No. 16093365
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPv
Interesting video about failure analysis of systems containing software
It's not directly about spaceflight, but it's focused on Boing and is relevant to Starliner and SpaceX.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 23:10:56 UTC No. 16093368
All neuralink candidates will die from copper leeching into their brains. Musk will go to prison.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 23:12:17 UTC No. 16093372
>>16093369
Surprisingly that was one of the few things that worked as expected. Spacelab was a good little pseudo station.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 23:19:41 UTC No. 16093379
>>16093333
Wasted quads kys
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 23:25:37 UTC No. 16093389
>>16093368
Copper's conductive, good for the brain, very healthy
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 23:25:57 UTC No. 16093390
I want Rook to do the Hubble-dragon mission badly. Imagine the kino
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 23:33:28 UTC No. 16093400
delayed
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 23:41:32 UTC No. 16093407
>>16092829
The Russians have an eternal hate boner for the bongs for some reason
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 23:47:32 UTC No. 16093412
>>16093407
It goes back 170 years
It seems to be mutual
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 23:52:38 UTC No. 16093418
>>16092497
>you can just buy out the smaller competitors
Unless, you know, they just refuse.
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 23:56:38 UTC No. 16093420
>>16092874
If you put one of those in just the right spot on the moon, could you yeet something like picrel directly from the moons surface into the earth's atmosphere without it have to make any maneuvers? It would be a really handy way of getting (very) durable goods back, like titanium ingots or something.
Bonus question: Could you use atmospheric reentry heating to smelt your ore?
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 00:03:14 UTC No. 16093427
>>16092513
>Operation Paperclip II must have happened sometime in the 2010s.
What group were they stealing from, aliens from another dimension?
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 00:04:27 UTC No. 16093433
>>16093368
Copper is not toxic at all in the quantities that would come off tiny filaments of it, especially because excess copper is removed by your liver, excreted into bile and eventually shit out. 1mg/l in drinking water is considered safe.
The only people who would get copper poisoning would already get copper poisoning from environmental copper anyway due genetic disorders.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 00:04:44 UTC No. 16093434
>>16093419
beats pouring fluids in zero gravity
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 00:04:52 UTC No. 16093435
>>16093420
If you aim at where Earth is going to be when the projectile reaches it, sure. Accuracy is going to be awful since you are basically aiming for a direct unguided entry so I can see it only being allowed over the Pacific.
If you paid attention in heat shield design, you do not want to expose your payload to the atmosphere at that stage. Hot plasma would chemically react with whatever you were trying to land.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 00:08:19 UTC No. 16093439
>>16093407
there is literally nothing wrong with hating the british (they are earthers)
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 00:11:04 UTC No. 16093441
>>16093420
yes, but it's better to aim for EML1 and then fall into the earth's atmosphere from there
no, the temperature is too high and not a long enough duration
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 00:12:36 UTC No. 16093442
>>16093435
that's not how orbital mechanics works, anon
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 00:14:52 UTC No. 16093448
>>16093420
Sure, but why would you give the Earthers your titanium?
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 00:15:44 UTC No. 16093449
>>16093441
okay shut the fuck up.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 00:16:05 UTC No. 16093450
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 00:25:49 UTC No. 16093457
>>16093450
listen im not asking im telling you.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 00:29:17 UTC No. 16093461
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 00:33:45 UTC No. 16093465
>it still hasn't launched
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 00:53:51 UTC No. 16093478
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 00:55:16 UTC No. 16093481
>>16093455
If the IVO thruster works as advertised it's about 10% of the way to a high thrust regime in watts to throost efficiency.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 01:02:28 UTC No. 16093488
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 01:07:35 UTC No. 16093491
>>16093400
https://twitter.com/SpaceflightNow/
>Weather is proving challenging once again for the Starlink 6-42 mission. Both KSC and CCSFS are in Phase 2 lightning warnings at the moment. SpaceX continues to target a T-0 liftoff from LC-39A at 11:09 pm ET (0309 UTC).
When you launch every day, you hit every rain delay
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 01:17:58 UTC No. 16093497
>>16093488
they hated him because he spoke the truth
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 01:24:33 UTC No. 16093500
>>16092974
>No reply
Maybe I should post FUD or a lustful woman instead Next time
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 01:28:51 UTC No. 16093502
>>16093500
Unless you're making Starship itself the payload it's almost never going to be worth the cost to expend one for commercial customers. What fits in that fairing 280 > x > 150 tons anyway?
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 01:44:13 UTC No. 16093513
Static fire so soon, I think S28 only had one static fire after IFT-2 launched right? Once this gets checked off whats left to do other than booster static fire, WDR and launch pad prep for SpaceX's end? They skipped doing spin primes last time didnt they or am I wrong
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 02:01:36 UTC No. 16093528
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 02:02:45 UTC No. 16093529
>>16093528
silence
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 02:04:48 UTC No. 16093535
>>16093529
This, only clear is allowed
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 02:06:29 UTC No. 16093536
>>16093514
Muffin
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 02:09:21 UTC No. 16093538
>>16093514
Oh neat, dust
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 02:09:26 UTC No. 16093540
>>16093330
T-60:00, again
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 02:09:39 UTC No. 16093542
>>16093537
Whoever drew this either doesnt know how gravity works or doesnt know how artificial gravity works.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 02:13:55 UTC No. 16093548
>>16093542
magnetic boots
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 02:14:08 UTC No. 16093549
>>16093542
magboots
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 02:19:29 UTC No. 16093559
>>16093549
>>16093548
Thats retarded
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 02:20:16 UTC No. 16093562
>>16093559
welcome to the 60s and 70s
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 02:22:03 UTC No. 16093565
>>16093561
Strap on a rocket to that hulking suit at that point
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 02:34:20 UTC No. 16093577
>>16092453
>>16092450
Tracy Dyson is a mega qt
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 02:38:41 UTC No. 16093580
>>16093566
This is also retarded. Did scientists not know that direct sunlight is very hot in space?
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 02:46:24 UTC No. 16093587
>>16092801
Dust is because no rain. If there was rain it would wash the dust away.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 02:56:06 UTC No. 16093602
>>16092271
paizuri from starship chan!
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 03:01:04 UTC No. 16093606
Clear Live for Starlink Group 6-42!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_H2
SpaceX
https://twitter.com/i/broadcasts/1l
-----------------------------------
Clear fan song
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qb
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 03:02:21 UTC No. 16093608
>>16093606
>falcon 9
fuck off faggot nobody cares
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 03:04:33 UTC No. 16093611
>>16093602
Die nigger
>>16093608
Kill yourself Blorigin tranny
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 03:08:50 UTC No. 16093613
>>16093611
if i was black, i would prefer starship chan to have a big ass, not tits
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 03:09:30 UTC No. 16093614
launch
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 03:10:37 UTC No. 16093617
Max-Qute!
lots of water and clouds
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 03:18:05 UTC No. 16093623
another comfortable landing for the first stage of falcon 9
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 03:21:34 UTC No. 16093627
>>16093625
boring
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 03:23:57 UTC No. 16093631
>>16093627
Kill yourself
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 03:28:29 UTC No. 16093638
>>16093627
Dawg I've seen hundreds of them, my dopamine levels are only able to be refilled by starship now.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 03:28:41 UTC No. 16093639
>>16092985
The Jews unironically took this from you
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 03:29:10 UTC No. 16093640
>>16093631
come back with an actually interesting launch loser
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 03:32:32 UTC No. 16093645
>>16092929
A ton of the early rockets are just repurposed ICBMs that are pretty shit but when you’ve got ‘em might as well launch em
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 03:37:44 UTC No. 16093651
Sorry
>>16093638
Mesant for
>>16093631
🗑️ Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 03:46:07 UTC No. 16093659
>>16093639
Enjoy your vacation, goy.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 04:09:32 UTC No. 16093683
>>16093488
This is the sort of research with real applications that they need to do on the ISS. Space-oven when?
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 04:11:14 UTC No. 16093687
>>16093617
I love when they launch over a storm system and you get a god's eye view of inter-cloud lightning. I wonder if they've ever caught a red or blue sprite in the act?
>>16093627
you're boring
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 04:22:53 UTC No. 16093700
>>16093687
and youre sõying (over f9)
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 04:41:39 UTC No. 16093710
>>16093372
losing the ability to bring down an entire spacelab's worth of experiments is basically the only thing we've missed from losing shuttle
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 04:45:54 UTC No. 16093711
>>16093602
This
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 04:54:13 UTC No. 16093716
>>16093710
Oh wow all 1 cubic meter of volume aaaaahhhh this is like losing damascus steel
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 05:01:52 UTC No. 16093722
>>16093710
Being able to repair or downmass large satellites too.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 05:01:54 UTC No. 16093723
there are so many easy human spaceflight experiments that nasa could have done in the past 22 years of continuous human space presence if they weren't pussies
can humans conceive in micro gravity? don't even have to find out the effects of weightlessness on pregnancy, just bring the woman back 2 days later. or you know, don't and learn significantly more.
send a 12 year old up for 6 months. what happens to their bones during puberty?
leave someone in space for 3 years straight. we're gonna have to do it eventually
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 05:08:11 UTC No. 16093728
>>16093723
muh ethics
(even though you'd have hundreds of thousands of willing applicants for such studies)
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 05:26:26 UTC No. 16093733
>>16093723
When I fly up on Starship in a few years, I will claim the record for first (recorded) ejaculation in space. First for Krystalfags
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 05:47:29 UTC No. 16093755
>>16092603
Could be both. But likely white liberal women suffering from mental illness disease
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 05:49:07 UTC No. 16093757
>>16092956
Media propaganda lies in framing, lie by omission, focus shifting and gaslighting.. This guy covers it nicely
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 06:08:06 UTC No. 16093770
>>16092350
I can't remember what precipitated the ISS ban, which is worrying
It was around the time Congress banned Russian engines, I know that
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 06:09:34 UTC No. 16093771
>>16092271
I want to fuck a girl with exactly this form
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 06:10:18 UTC No. 16093772
>>16093733
YWNGTS you disgusting hawaiian nigger.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 07:03:29 UTC No. 16093812
>>16093772
ummmm based department? tfd now
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 07:14:04 UTC No. 16093820
>>16093513
to make any hardware changes to the booster and ship necessary based on the investigation
could just be a software change, or they might need something more
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 07:38:15 UTC No. 16093843
>>16093812
give me the lore on this hawaiian guy
i remember seeing some post of a guy basedfacing that he was gonna see the reentry of starship on flight 2. is that the same guy?
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 07:39:31 UTC No. 16093844
>>16093771
This
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 08:01:03 UTC No. 16093863
>>16093843
yeah I think so
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 08:06:29 UTC No. 16093868
>>16093843
Yea its him. Hes from Oahu and we caught him lacking with a mention of /sfg/ on his account from a few months ago which as soon anons started bringing up and connecting him as one of the two resident furniggers he instadeleted. The only reason it even came up was because he split threads right before IFT-2 many times with Krystal in one of the OPs. If you see any mention of Krystal without AI art being used its him. The other furnigger uses AI art but hes not disruptive so hes okay in my book. There was also more proof that the specific account was him because he posted an OP of a video of his cat that was on /sfg/ before his actual twitter account which again as soon as it was posted was instadeleted.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 08:12:08 UTC No. 16093876
any updates on what went wrong with the latest launch?
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 08:13:09 UTC No. 16093877
>>16093876
starship/superheavy I mean
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 08:15:55 UTC No. 16093878
>>16093876
nothing official
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 08:16:03 UTC No. 16093879
>>16093876
Propellant sloshing caused some rotation in the ship which sent it out of control into what was basically an uncontrolled reentry. This meant that the side without heat shield tiles was going head on into the plasma blanket which we all kind of know what happens then. On the booster I dont think we know much other than the engines didnt reignite for the most part.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 08:52:21 UTC No. 16093913
>>16093876
>>16093879
The booster is the biggest mystery so far, since it seems the initial failure may have happened during the boostback burn when the engines were shutting down unevenly.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 09:16:27 UTC No. 16093939
>>16093878
>>16093879
>>16093913
thanks anons
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 09:17:14 UTC No. 16093940
>19 flights on a falcon 9 booster
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 10:23:52 UTC No. 16093995
>>16093879
NTA but I’ll piggyback his post and ask another question: did the propellant transfer demo take place?
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 10:33:25 UTC No. 16094007
>>16093940
It just werks
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 11:05:55 UTC No. 16094044
>>16093995
They said it did during the livestream, but we've not heard anything else about it. It probably didn't work or was invalid though because Starship was tumbling around the entire time it was in space.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 11:24:43 UTC No. 16094077
>>16094070
don't be RAMA RAMA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nt0
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 12:27:58 UTC No. 16094135
>>16093625
NO. BODY. CARES.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 12:28:45 UTC No. 16094137
>>16092419
>Was it that stainless steel is too hard to bend and fuck up the press or something like that?
Saying this as someone who used to operate a hydraulic press for a living and has bent more pieces of half-inch 304 stainless than you've had hot meals, what the fuck are you actually on about?
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 12:30:21 UTC No. 16094139
>>16094137
that was literally the reason though. they said the stainless was too hard to be stamped into shapes.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 12:44:08 UTC No. 16094151
>>16094139
They built cybertruck in that weird boxy shape because it satisfies Elon's autism, I think you're getting mixed up with the die-casting presses used for making the chassis frames. Tesla had originally been using 6000 ton presses to make aluminum chassis parts but it was realised these wouldn't be capable of making the chassis parts with the necessary strength specs for the truck, so they ordered the 9000 ton presses. The 9000 ton press also allows them to modify the design of the Model Y, so now the rear chassis has gone from being made out of something like 60 pieces to just being a single part. Big cost saving, as you can imagine.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 12:47:53 UTC No. 16094154
>>16094151
the chassis isnt made out of stainless.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 13:02:39 UTC No. 16094165
>>16094151
This sounds like an easy way to get your car totalled in a minor accident.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 13:06:29 UTC No. 16094170
>>16094165
i wish i could piss in your mouth.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 13:08:24 UTC No. 16094177
>>16094170
Fuck off, faggot
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 13:18:18 UTC No. 16094191
>>16094165
Indeed. I can hear Elon saying "the best accident is no accident".
Wouldn't buy
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 13:31:34 UTC No. 16094204
Why would Martian colonists need to grow food when they can just eat muffins?
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 13:35:28 UTC No. 16094210
>>16094137
Could you explain Elon's comment, then?
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 13:37:43 UTC No. 16094212
>>16094210
The solved that. In the factory walkthrough they show air cushion bending presses.
I guess that way the dies don't wear out.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 13:38:58 UTC No. 16094214
>>16094210
I’m nta but sometimes I think musk pulls facts straight out of the aether and/or just misremembers things his head engineers have told him lol.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 13:43:06 UTC No. 16094216
Our guy was featured in a video about synthetic fuel production, which is only really relevant in in situ resource utilization, which is pretty fucking far away.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nng
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 13:45:24 UTC No. 16094218
>>16092419
>too hard to bend
>>16094137
>bent
>>16094210
>stamp
That's the difference. Bending obviously works stamping doesn't.
Probably you can do it as a one off but it would break the dies too often for mass production.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 13:45:37 UTC No. 16094219
>>16094216
Ummmmm I didn’t know he had an accent, this is breaking my brain
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 13:48:45 UTC No. 16094222
>>16094216
>which is only really relevant in in situ resource utilization
Check solar costs chudbigot. It will be cheaper than fracking.
Ecofag companies have been optimizing for things that aren't cost.
Just pipe your solar dc straight into an electrolyzer optimized for cost not efficiency. You can make it all very cheap.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 13:53:16 UTC No. 16094228
>>16094222
As in relevant to the thread.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 13:57:13 UTC No. 16094232
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 14:06:21 UTC No. 16094251
>>16094216
I'm always been a bit skeptical about this but after watching the video, Handmer is saying they are about to be break even? i.e. total integrated system cost amortized (solar, direct air capture and the reactor to turn those gases into natural gas) is almost profitable
this would also be a solution for seasonal storage for renewables, something that needs to happen for Starship to function as a mars system
I wonder if SpaceX has a version of this in house already
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 14:07:40 UTC No. 16094252
>>16094228
you could ISRU this on earth too, maybe make it cheaper than actually drilling for gas
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 14:26:55 UTC No. 16094277
>>16094252
Synthetic methane should have zero sulfur in it so it might be a win in that way.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 14:29:45 UTC No. 16094282
>>16093296
zigger falseflag, same as last thread.
i guess he's going to make this a routine from now on, god i fucking hate these people.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 14:30:45 UTC No. 16094283
>>16094282
It's just a mentally ill tranny. It posts other bait in here too.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 14:33:32 UTC No. 16094287
>>16093613
but you're not black right, anon?
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 14:39:56 UTC No. 16094297
>>16093728
the children (the ones at risk of becoming thalidomide babies or the next Cyraxx) can't consent, retard
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 14:42:52 UTC No. 16094299
>>16093407
the reason for this goes back a very long way. britain basically beat them hard during the great game, russians want something that they can get back at you with, they can withstand any amount of humiliation as long as they can say "but aha here you lost and we won!"
they can't really do that with russia, there's been basically no large scale confrontations between the two where russia definitively won, and britain basically boxed them in and prevented them from expanding influence in a lot of places for a large part of their history.
that's why they've become a sort of boogeyman, any time anything bad happens to them it's the british, i'm honestly kinda jealous of britain's ability to generate such multigenerational seethe in not just russia but many other countries as well.
>>16092924
i don't really keep track of chink rawkets, how many of these are operational right now?
feels like it's begging for some of them to be culled so they can standardize and focus their resources on the more effective ones.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 14:43:53 UTC No. 16094300
>>16094299
*with england.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 14:48:20 UTC No. 16094303
>>16094218
Thank you, Bender
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 15:28:36 UTC No. 16094354
>>16092368
>but also because the groundwater underlying the pad turned to steam and expanded, blasting the concrete upwards.
Maybe it would work better on a dry planet then.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 15:36:59 UTC No. 16094356
>>16094165
If your car gets into an accident where the internal chassis is damaged, it doesn't matter if its die casted or made up of 60 parts welded together. Its totaled.
What you're thinking of is crush cores for the cars, which exists for Teslas, thats there to absorb smaller fender benders and can be replaced.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 15:40:42 UTC No. 16094361
>>16094360
It's going to look like current IVA suit with minor differences. Don't get your hopes up.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 15:41:58 UTC No. 16094365
https://new.reddit.com/r/SpaceXLoun
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 15:47:36 UTC No. 16094378
>>16094365
Speaking of which is there still a wiki war going on over classifying starship launches as failures or successes?
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 15:50:52 UTC No. 16094384
>>16094365
>reddit
>wokepedia
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 15:56:59 UTC No. 16094387
>>16094135
>t.
🗑️ Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 16:18:14 UTC No. 16094415
>>16094354
so the moon? because mars has lots of ground water
>>16094361
It's going to look like current IVA suit with minor differences
good
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 16:18:20 UTC No. 16094417
>>16094135
I care and stop typing like a faggot.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 16:22:42 UTC No. 16094424
>>16094354
so the moon? because mars has lots of ground water
>>16094361
>It's going to look like current IVA suit with minor differences
good
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 16:29:17 UTC No. 16094432
>>16094417
It's a tranny it can't help it
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 16:49:22 UTC No. 16094464
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bkn
> Whoops!! Stage Zero Damaged During IFT-3 - SpaceX Weekly #107
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 16:53:28 UTC No. 16094470
>>16094464
>expendable launchpad
It's over
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 16:58:54 UTC No. 16094482
>>16094464
next flight in 3 weeks sisters....
NET 8 months official
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 17:02:12 UTC No. 16094486
>>16094470
I think there might actually be something to this "expendable launchpad" idea.
SpaceX put a lot of effort into rebuilding and upgrading after ITF-1, but the environmental impact assessment was that there was no damage to the local biome from being showered in sand and launch pad dust. Instead of installing a deluge system and a big steel plate they could have just pilled the crater in with locally sourced sand and let water table soak in. Then you just need to shovel the grit back into the crater with each launch. It's not ideal for daily reflights, but Starship is a long way from that.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 17:06:12 UTC No. 16094491
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 17:06:41 UTC No. 16094492
>>16094490
The problem is that it need replacing for a thing that's supposedly should survive daily launches.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 17:07:18 UTC No. 16094493
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 17:08:19 UTC No. 16094495
>>16094493
removed on wednesday, new hoses being brought to the site on thursday already
>>16094492
its not a critical problem yet and under iterative development like everything is
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 17:08:34 UTC No. 16094496
>>16094492
I don't think overbuilding stage zero to withstand frequent launches will turn out to be a problem.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 17:22:55 UTC No. 16094520
>>16094492
You don't know what works and what doesn't until you try.
They'll buy a more robust flex pipe or if such a thing doesn't exist improve the protective cover seal.
If you made everything bomb proof from the start you'd never get anything done.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 17:38:47 UTC No. 16094542
>>16094520
cope.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 17:39:39 UTC No. 16094545
>>16094542
Seethe
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 18:10:54 UTC No. 16094584
>>16094545
Dial-8
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 18:22:07 UTC No. 16094604
>>16094216
I HATE NPCS SO FUCKING MUCH
he's literally proposing a solution to the intermittent renewables storage problem and at the same time something that could theoretically be cheaper than mining hydrocarbons out of the ground stopping all net emissions by replacing it with carbon neutral fuels.
yet so many niggers be like
>uuhm so you just burn it again?
>that's problematic
>don't we wanna get rid of hydrocarbons not use more of them?
FUCK YOU
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 18:47:57 UTC No. 16094636
>>16094604
>npcs
gtfo normie nigger go back to teddit
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 18:55:42 UTC No. 16094643
>>16094216
lol what a moron
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 18:57:02 UTC No. 16094648
>>16094636
yup that's tranny seethe
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 18:58:23 UTC No. 16094654
>>16094643
where's your hardware company?
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 19:00:13 UTC No. 16094658
>>16094636
npc is LITERALLY 4chan slang
like what do you people even want?
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 19:02:03 UTC No. 16094661
>>16094216
He's going to become rich beyond measure
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 19:04:04 UTC No. 16094665
>>16094360
It looks like marvel slop, it was designed by wakanda
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 19:08:58 UTC No. 16094669
>>16094654
You know, I was being sarcastic. You're supposed to infer these things, dum dum.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 19:28:22 UTC No. 16094698
>>16094669
>dum dum
Call him a retarded faggot like a normal person.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 19:53:49 UTC No. 16094738
>>16093879
>>16094044
>but we've not heard anything else about it.
read the fucking spacex debrief on ift-3 retard. It states clearly it took place and was a success. No use speculating on half rumors when you can hear it from the horses mouth
also the superheavy did not hit the water but RUD about 450 meters above the surface
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 20:05:02 UTC No. 16094748
>>16092271
of course somebody would make that..
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 20:32:52 UTC No. 16094793
>>16094142
don't knock these guys, they invented the aerospike
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 20:54:23 UTC No. 16094828
The thing I like about Spacex and starship is the seething and tears it produces from old space tripe.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 20:56:45 UTC No. 16094831
>>16094828
is oldspace really seething over it at this point? it definitely used to be like that but now i just feel like they've resigned themselves to their doom
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 21:01:08 UTC No. 16094836
>>16094831
Thats exactly what happened. Tory and Arriane were cocky as fuck just a few years back but Starship is only speeding up and now they just shut their mouths or block anyone that even mentions Starship. F9 was a wakeup call a decade ago and they slept through that alarm 300+ times.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 21:08:41 UTC No. 16094847
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 21:10:33 UTC No. 16094853
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 21:16:16 UTC No. 16094867
>>16094216
he speaks extremely fast, bullish
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 21:28:18 UTC No. 16094880
>>16094738
Why aren't there more people talking about it then if it was a success.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 21:31:26 UTC No. 16094887
>>16093359
barkun is gone I think, but we have a barkon now.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 21:34:55 UTC No. 16094890
>>16094887
Same spambot, I think they just have an autoban in place for whenever a poster uses B*rkun as a namefag so B*rkon is now used by the spambot. Or maybe admins just ban any report that comes up with B*rkun as the name.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 21:39:49 UTC No. 16094897
So why is practically every rocket startup designing their own engines? Is it easy to do? Why don't they just have a few companies make insanely optimized engine designs for the rest of the industry, like in aviation?
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 21:42:48 UTC No. 16094901
>>16094897
Its like making a logo. Its fun and neat.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 21:45:10 UTC No. 16094903
>>16094897
you can buy from aerojet rocketdyne and some people (tory) do.
I think astra gave up on using their own engines for rocket 4 and outsourced them somewhere, not that that rocket will ever fly
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 21:49:56 UTC No. 16094911
Why does every car company design their own engines? Is it easy to do? Why dont they just have a few companies make insanely optimized engine designs for the rest of the industry, like in aviation?
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 21:51:08 UTC No. 16094913
>>16094897
we might see things head in that direction as reusability takes over. right now a better engine matters so much more than better tankage, avionics, etc. that it's hard to come up with a viable business plan that involves using engines that someone else is already flying
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 21:55:42 UTC No. 16094917
>>16094911
like how shelby makes engines for ford?
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 21:58:37 UTC No. 16094927
>>16094911
>Why does every car company design their own engines?
They don't
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 22:03:30 UTC No. 16094941
>>16094897
Aircraft engines come in four basic categories:
>small piston engines to turn prop shafts used in 1-2 engine light aircraft
>small turboprop engines used in 1-4 engine light aircraft
>turbofans of various sizes optimized for fuel economy at high subsonic speeds
>supersonic military turbofans
They all use the same fuel, same oxidizer, and operate in very well defined size+speed+altitude condition ranges. Companies that go outside these, like Hermeus, build their own engines. There's way more variety in rocket engines, and much worse economies of scale.
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 22:07:25 UTC No. 16094954
>>16094880
Starship launches are routine now
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 22:07:43 UTC No. 16094955
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 22:53:50 UTC No. 16095046
get the fuck in here! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Ew
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 22:54:57 UTC No. 16095049
>>16095046
>CSS
Kill yourself. Unironically.
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Mar 2024 00:40:20 UTC No. 16095213
>>16093548
The SpaceX IVA suits look even more retarded than this btw