🧵 /sfg/ - Spaceflight General
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 13:47:28 UTC No. 16130085
20 reuses edition
previous >>16127678
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 13:50:46 UTC No. 16130095
CommonSneed doesnt understand that the atmopshere gets thicker as you go down. in his latest video he says the starship cant aerobrake because in OFT3 it broke up before slowing down
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 13:51:44 UTC No. 16130097
>>16130095
he is so completely clueless he isn't even wrong
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 15:15:10 UTC No. 16130172
>Immediate discussion of EDSers
>Furnigger
Thread immediatly ruined.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 15:48:55 UTC No. 16130203
>>16130201
Oxidizer should be considered fuel
Debate me
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 15:51:04 UTC No. 16130206
>>16130203
why would I debate you when I agree with you?
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 15:56:19 UTC No. 16130211
>>16130203
Theres nothing to debate. Its the truth.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 16:10:01 UTC No. 16130227
>>16130224
long way to go meaning they have a powerpoint?
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 16:10:34 UTC No. 16130228
>>16130224
Elon should immediately start applying for minority owned business status as an African immigrant.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 16:11:26 UTC No. 16130229
>>16130224
Their Falcon heavy clone is called Big Hussle 33, and their Falcon 9 clone is called Nipsey Sky
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 16:14:51 UTC No. 16130232
>>16130224
damn, how are they supposed to afford a rocket when they can only afford a ps2 for the render?
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 16:19:57 UTC No. 16130237
>>16130224
>website literally asking for gibs
this is actually a VC scam. not even like
>oh we have a long way to go but we will make a rocket
like literally just a straight pop up immediatly asking for gibs and another page dedicated to investors.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 16:30:13 UTC No. 16130242
>10 polygon rocket render
>immediatly buys the $1k/month twitter check
>run by a nigger
>why them section literally only talks about BLM alignment
>based in utah somehow trying to help continental africans
>rocket is literally called "the big hustle"
>website immediatly asks for gibs
>pinned tweet is all about "le black owned businesses" and whitey bad
holy shit WE HAVE A NEW ARCA EVERYONE THIS IS NOT A DRILL I REPEAT THIS IS NOT A DRILL
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 16:32:38 UTC No. 16130249
>>16130224
Which one of you paid for this kek
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 16:40:05 UTC No. 16130255
>>16130242
forgot to mention
>immediatly talking about mars
>bought likes and retweets on pin
>no talk about actual plan with company and rockets/target market
>no numbers given AT ALL on page
>both rockets pages has literally one sentence to explain it
>rockets likely from fiverr
>things misspelled or incorrectly capitalized throughout the entire website
>likely only in english because native africans dont have money to scam
>DOESNT EVEN SAY WHERE THE LAUNCH PAD IS OR WHERE THEY ARE WORKING FROM
>I CANNOT STRESS THIS ENOUGH, 10 POLYGON FUCKING ROCKETS THESE ARE NOT AERODYNAMIC AT ALL
KEEEEEEEK LOOK AT THE FOURTH REPLY ON THIS TWEET
https://x.com/tss_space/status/1778
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 16:42:13 UTC No. 16130257
it's going to get billions in funding isn't it? why aren't we scamming investors?
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 16:44:21 UTC No. 16130262
Thats it the next /sfg/ edition is TSS Edition. Im going to take >>16130255 this image, shoop the Big Hustle on to his dick and that will be OP.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 16:46:22 UTC No. 16130266
>>16130257
Even I could make a website look way more fucking legitimate than this for a spaceflight startup. How can you not include ANY details at fucking all in your website if youre going to scam? Atleast give the VCs the tiniest sliver of hope that you might actually have a rocket. If anyone gives this nigger gibs then they deserve to be scammed.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 16:50:29 UTC No. 16130271
>>16130224
really hope we get to see some mock ups
https://www.udio.com/songs/8E5TqMC4
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 16:56:47 UTC No. 16130277
>>16130270
You laugh but he’s doing more than you for spaceflight, buddy
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 16:59:12 UTC No. 16130278
>>16130277
By bankrupting retarded VCs? Id be inclined to agree
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:01:21 UTC No. 16130280
>>16130224
Mmmm, can i have some more of them polygons?
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:04:11 UTC No. 16130284
>>16130224
Wait I just noticed this was an ad lmao.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:07:31 UTC No. 16130288
Bill's on
https://www.nasa.gov/nasatv/
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:10:12 UTC No. 16130296
>msr has a 2040 return date
holy shit. it was that bad??? we would probably already be on mars for a few years at the point with the pace that spacex is currently ramping at.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:10:43 UTC No. 16130297
>>16130288
>There are so many other programs that are important... Dragonfly... Uh... That's just one
Lmao
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:12:09 UTC No. 16130301
>>16130297
Dragonfly isnt even important, Bill. ITS NOT GOING TO THE FUCKING LAKES. CANCEL MSR, CANCEL DRAGONFLY, MAKE A REAL TITAN PROBE OR DONT MAKE ONE AT ALL. GET BACK TO MAKING ICE GIANT PROBES YOU STUPID FUCKS
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:14:11 UTC No. 16130306
Is Universe Sandbox worth the full asking price? Always kind of skeptical about early access stuff (especially those running on Unity) but it seems like a potentially useful tool for simulations at an indie level since it's been around for a while.
Mostly just salty about the fact they bumped up the price from $25 to like $35-$40 in PLN on top of the fact I narrowly missed the last discount during March.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:15:29 UTC No. 16130308
>>16130289
>current mission design
They actually have a design and not just some vague ideas about how all this was gonna work?
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:16:54 UTC No. 16130313
>>16130289
Holy shit how embarrassing. Turns out grifting and tanking the economy are bad! Who knew??? (not politicians, obviously)
I hope China accelerates their own Mars sample return, even if it’s 1 measly gram of regolith. Light a fire under Congress’s ass.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:18:06 UTC No. 16130316
>>16130306
Look on key sites, CDkeys has it for about 40% cheaper than Steam.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:18:12 UTC No. 16130317
>>16130306
is it still in early acess? I got that game like 8 years ago
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:18:15 UTC No. 16130318
>>16130296
Nelson even said as much
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:18:16 UTC No. 16130319
>>16130308
I think I saw a video of a prototype rocket flinger for the return ascent vehicle. not sure why they needed to fling it but it was a nifty piece of added complexity
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:19:24 UTC No. 16130322
>More traditional, tried and true architectures
More oldspace bullshit, perhaps?
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:19:48 UTC No. 16130325
god this conference is so fucking cringe
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:20:01 UTC No. 16130326
>>16130317
Still in early access. Graphics aren't as important to me here as just being able to get some decent or approximate simulations (to have fun with making fictional star systems) but it still seems to look the same as it did then.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:20:33 UTC No. 16130327
how do they expect to do this mission for $5billion when SLS costs $4billion?
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:21:50 UTC No. 16130333
>>16130322
This is code for “cost-plus contracting”—and anyone who thinks we need $+ just to retrieve a few tubes of soil should be charged with treason, embezzlement, and racketeering.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:22:03 UTC No. 16130335
>>16130313
>even if it’s 1 measly gram of regolith
This is the thing nasa has never understood about this, they wanted the the samples for science so they want a wide spread or whatever, whereas if they'd just grabbed a random pebble and returned it to earth everyone would have gone nuts.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:22:29 UTC No. 16130336
>>16130316
I remember Eneba and G2A having keys for like $20. Regardless of how legitimate those sellers are.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:26:00 UTC No. 16130340
>>16130336
I've not bought anything from G2A for awhile but CDKeys has been good to me recently.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:27:20 UTC No. 16130343
>hi I'm british have you considered adding more international partners to the program
lol
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:27:52 UTC No. 16130344
>>16130327
If you shift numbers around and ignore a bunch of stuff, SLS is only $2 bil per launch. Yes it’s sleazy but my point is that NASA can do whatever it wants. Cost really isn’t the issue (you just need to get congress to give you the greenlight—their checkbook is infinitely deep for all intents and purposes)
The real bottleneck is time and capability. MSR could be allotted $10 bil and it still wouldn’t change the fact that NASA needs to develop some kind of retrieval system. At this point their best bet would be to just give SpaceX a flat, fixed-cost contract and say “get it done pls!!” but they know this isn’t realistic. Congress wants to see huge checks shelled out to Lockheed Martin, to Honeywell, to zip ties & more in the middle of bumfuck nowhere Illinois, etc.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:28:54 UTC No. 16130346
>>16130309
>goy swag
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:30:15 UTC No. 16130348
Oh fuck off we need LESS international cooperation on this thing. The fuck are you going to do, bong?
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:31:03 UTC No. 16130349
Fox lady very keen to avoid that Starship question hmm
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:32:31 UTC No. 16130352
JPL SEETHINGG
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:33:16 UTC No. 16130353
>Giving parts of MSR to someone other than JPL
Hallelujah
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:33:34 UTC No. 16130355
>>16130348
SpaceX just needs to make an offer they cant refuse. Simply pay for the flight to Mars and a little extra paycheck at around $1b and our astronauts will grab all the samples you want. As a bonus, we can bring back Ingenuity for study/preservation!
Keep in mind the $1b price is like the 14 refuel flights plus the trip out there.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:34:13 UTC No. 16130356
>>16130344
Literally just get one of the test Mars Starships to pick up percy and bring it home, it's just that easy.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:35:42 UTC No. 16130357
>>16130355
you underestimate nasa's ability to refuse offers. they'll turn down everything spacex offers until the rocks are on starship on their way home. and only then will they pay to save face and say they got the rocks back first.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:35:44 UTC No. 16130358
>If flagships are always over budget, why wasn't this taken into account at the beginning?
>Nuh-uh! Parker Solar Probe!!! Next question
Absolutely embarrassing
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:37:05 UTC No. 16130359
5lbsackbros…
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:37:17 UTC No. 16130360
>>16130358
that Fox lady is a bit of a bitch imo
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:38:06 UTC No. 16130362
>>16130355
that’s not realistic politically
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:38:18 UTC No. 16130363
NELSON IS SO FUCKING COUNTRY SOUTHERN STEREOTYPE LMAO
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:39:48 UTC No. 16130365
she is so done answering reporters questions
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:40:01 UTC No. 16130366
Has Eric/Foust asked a question yet? I hope they deliver the upper cut and ask outright why the program is so SHITTY
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:40:55 UTC No. 16130367
>>16130366
Foust did yeah
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:41:12 UTC No. 16130368
>if jpl has the answer jpl will be sitting pretty, but were opening this up to everyone
thank you bill. very cool
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:41:58 UTC No. 16130370
>we’re not retrieving all the samples
BWAHAHAHHAHAHAHHHAHAHAHAHAHHHAH
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:42:08 UTC No. 16130371
The whole thing was riding on the fact that "they already gave us shitloads of money, they surely will give us more". Now that there's no such money the whole thing collapsed.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:42:13 UTC No. 16130372
>>16130366
clark asked a question for ars
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:43:32 UTC No. 16130375
>>16130366
the reporters from Discovery network always ask the hardest questions and you can tell they always make Bill mad hahah
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:44:59 UTC No. 16130379
>>16130340
>G2A listings going for around $18-$21
>PaySafeCard also now listed as a payment method
I might just opt for G2A this time around, though I've never bought anything from there before.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:46:53 UTC No. 16130382
>We were put in this situation because of congress! Not our shitty architecture!
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:48:17 UTC No. 16130386
>>16130382
>We thought we would have figured it out by now...
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:49:13 UTC No. 16130388
If landing humans on Mars is the ultimate goal of this “Moon to Mars architecture” then WHY PRIORITIZE A PROHIBITIVELY EXPENSIVE VANITY PROJECT TO GET A FEW GRAMS OF SOIL IF YOURE SENDING HUMANS THERE ANYWAYS?!?!?!?!?!?!
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:49:42 UTC No. 16130389
>>16130388
Embezzlement is easier that way
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:49:57 UTC No. 16130390
Conspiracy theorists believe in a powerful, deceitful, invincible NASA because the real truth of just how impotent, politically irrelevant and constrained NASA is in the 21st century is too difficult to accept
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:50:42 UTC No. 16130392
>>16130355
>SpaceX
>Mars
>astronauts
>bring back
>>16130356
>test Mars Starships
>bring it home
you're literally delusional. none of the first starships will return. it requires gigawatts of power for two years, ice mining and a propellant farm to fill one up.
a starship MSR architecture would contain a return rocket in the payload bay.
depending on some large scale Mars colonization effort with dubious financial backing for MSR would push it back beyond 2040 instead of accelerating it and would certainly cost more than 5 billion
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:50:48 UTC No. 16130393
>>16130388
They probably don't believe themselves that they will get humans there in this century
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:51:47 UTC No. 16130394
interesting how MSR fell apart after they tried going the ISS/artemis route of making it too big and too international to cancel. maybe a new meta's about to drop.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:52:41 UTC No. 16130396
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:52:42 UTC No. 16130397
>>16130394
Theres probably only room for 1-2 programs like that max given the limited size of the budget, JPL just lost out this time
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:52:49 UTC No. 16130398
>>16130393
they figure that it's not going to happen before they and all their friends retire so they aren't going to bother trying
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:55:29 UTC No. 16130401
>>16130398
Damn that’s probably the truth. MSR has been on the NASA drawing board as a serious idea since at least the 90s. Everyone is probably convinced that it “has” to happen, and they’ll be damned if they retire after 30 yrs without their “last big one” going through.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:56:58 UTC No. 16130403
Elon should just stop work at SpaceX and Tesla now.
Since he believes AI will be smarter than a human in 1 year and smarter than all of humans in 5 why would you bother with any of this.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:59:53 UTC No. 16130406
>>16130403
Fuck off we’re raising pitchforks against MSR right now, not (you) farming
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:59:59 UTC No. 16130407
>>16130403
it's more fun than AI
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:08:21 UTC No. 16130418
>>16130403
Mars will be the birthplace of the real Butlerian Jihad
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:08:58 UTC No. 16130419
>>16130403
that doesn't take into account the cost of running the AI in one year, if you need a powerplant and so on it might still be cheaper to have engineers
5 years is also quite a bit of time away and in not in any way guaranteed to happen
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:08:59 UTC No. 16130420
if the main hard part of nuclear fusion power is containment, does that mean a fusion engine would be easier than a fusion reactor?
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:10:09 UTC No. 16130422
>>16130289
10 bil too much and 2040 too long
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:11:10 UTC No. 16130424
>>16130422
https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/stat
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:12:35 UTC No. 16130425
>>16130422
>2040
They could just hitch a ride on a starship heading back.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:14:07 UTC No. 16130427
>>16130419
AI as intelligent as a human will take another decade.
Llms are language first so it's deceiving even though they are literally stupider than a chicken.
Refer to Elons self driving car predictions for how massively retarded he is about the hardness of AI problems.
Reminder that a car is as good as a human when it crashes once every 100,000 miles fully unsupervised.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:18:10 UTC No. 16130431
>>16130427
>AI as intelligent as a human will take another decade.
>Everyone dumber than current AI isn't human.
pretty racist
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:19:02 UTC No. 16130433
>>16130289
Looks like SpaceX will complete MSR after all
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:20:04 UTC No. 16130435
>>16130431
Nobody is dumber than current AI. Not the most retarded nigger in the world.
The same way no human is dumber than the smartest dog.
You're just confused by the veil of language proficiency.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:22:27 UTC No. 16130438
>>16130422
>>16130424
>>16130289
I wish this was about the SLS. MSR is kind of meh, in my opinion.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:22:35 UTC No. 16130439
>>16130326
they've been focusing a lot more on the planetary side of the simulation
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:26:11 UTC No. 16130444
>In a followup MSR town hall meeting, NASA's Sandra Connelly outlines the revised architecture that would allow a 2040 sample return: Earth return orbiter launch in 2030, sample retrieval lander (now with an RTG) launching in 2035. The Perseverance rover would return to Jezero Crater in 2028 and go into "quiescent" mode to await the lander.
lmao
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:26:15 UTC No. 16130445
>In a followup MSR town hall meeting, NASA's Sandra Connelly outlines the revised architecture that would allow a 2040 sample return: Earth return orbiter launch in 2030, sample retrieval lander (now with an RTG) launching in 2035. The Perseverance rover would return to Jezero Crater in 2028 and go into "quiescent" mode to await the lander.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:28:12 UTC No. 16130449
>>16130444
>>16130445
This is when NASA HQ went yeah fuck this shit and opened it up to everyone not just JPL
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:38:30 UTC No. 16130463
>>16130444
If you could, show us your personal contribution to this matter or how you would improve things.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:38:39 UTC No. 16130464
>>16130301
they said dunes first then maybe lakes iirc
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:39:40 UTC No. 16130467
>>16130463
just Starship brah, its simple
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:41:28 UTC No. 16130470
>>16130438
The absolute seething.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:44:15 UTC No. 16130476
/
プレスリリース
＼
小型人工衛星の物流サービスを手がけるイタリアのベンチャー企業D-Orb
衛星の「ラストワンマイル」事業に取り組むD-Orbit社と、ロケット打
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:45:18 UTC No. 16130477
>>16130444
I am the most pro nuclear fag on this general but this thing does NOT need an RTG. Added cost for nothing. Waste of resources.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:45:47 UTC No. 16130478
>>16130476
/
press release
\
We have signed a comprehensive agreement to provide rocket launch services with D-Orbit S.p.A., an Italian venture company that provides logistics services for small satellites!
D-Orbit, which works on the "last mile" satellite business, and IST, which provides rocket launch services, will collaborate to provide low-cost and flexible space transportation services in Asia, where the space industry is expected to grow significantly. We will continue to contribute to the supply.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:46:15 UTC No. 16130480
>>16130477
what the fuck were they smoking
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:46:58 UTC No. 16130482
Fuck now Im torn, do I do >>16130262 this or do I make it MSR is Over Edition?
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:47:30 UTC No. 16130484
Can someone explain to me why there isn't a national focus by the world hegemon to install a giant SETI radio telescope on the far side of the moon? Having such a powerful telescope in a stable place to feed large amounts of data in great resolution seems like a stupidly useful tool to have. Imagine if you just dedicated a whole portion of the moon to astronomical facilities with giant ground-based radio, infrared, optical, and x-ray telescopes.
Someone I just wish 95% of man-made shit and whatnot could just be deleted and then rebuilt to be as efficient and clean as possible, followed by homogenizing every nation to stop wars, followed by a calm, clean, organized national and international focus on productive space programs with each nation specializing in a specific task.
NASA as we see it right now often feels like the prime example of how much of a clusterfuck of Earth-level schemes and jewing is holding back the scientific advancement of humanity.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:48:52 UTC No. 16130486
>>16130484
Because the “ETI” part of SETI doesn’t even exist
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:49:18 UTC No. 16130487
>>16130484
>Can someone explain to me why there isn't a national focus by the world hegemon to install a giant SETI radio telescope on the far side of the moon?
We actually take this whole representative government thing seriously and so Congress needs to be treated like spoiled children and tricked into eating their vegetables (supporting science).
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:49:46 UTC No. 16130488
>>16130484
>homogenizing every nation
kek retarded shill
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:51:10 UTC No. 16130492
>>16130463
nta but just going from some numbers i found in 2 minutes on ntrs:
-a pressure-fed hypergolic rocket designed to take a 20kg payload from the martian surface into orbit would have a propellant mass fraction of ~.83 and a wet mass of 313 kg.
-if we assume 2500 m/s for a return burn from orbit and the same propellant mass fraction of .83 for the additional propellant, and a 320s ISP, then that bumps the initial mass on the surface up to ~760kg.
i think my numbers are conservative. since percy was over 1 ton a skycrane could easily place this thing on the surface and it could do direct ascent back to earth, with no need for any orbital rendezvous or a second return vehicle. that leaves the problem of loading the samples into the rocket, but i'm pretty sure you don't need a heavy rover for that. sojourner was 11.5kg and that was with 25-year-old tech.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:54:19 UTC No. 16130498
>>16130340
>>16130379
CDkeys usually goes for cheaper than G2A from what I've seen, but if you're intent on using prepaid vouchers you're SOL. Though it's about a $3 difference between the two as far as the sellers for Universe Sandbox are concerned.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:55:47 UTC No. 16130499
>>16130488
If you enact population transfers, repatriation and resettlement programs just like at the end of WW2 but for every nation on this planet you eliminate 99% of wars. This is crucial for any local or worldwide space effort. How exactly is this a shilling effort?
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:55:58 UTC No. 16130500
JPL MSR is dead, long live commercial MSR
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:00:19 UTC No. 16130505
>>16130486
>Because the “ETI” part of SETI doesn’t even exist
Who cares, it's just a brand name. Besides who doesn't want a giant fuckoff series of telescopes powerful enough to see what's out there better than anything that could be built on Earth?
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:00:43 UTC No. 16130506
>>16130203
the word you're looking for is "propellant".
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:02:16 UTC No. 16130509
>>16130505
>350m dish drawn as being 350km
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:05:12 UTC No. 16130512
>>16130499
science is done by a very small percentage of the world population relatively speaking and that percentage is falling rapidly
if you do that what you say, it doesn't really matter if there are wars, no space effort is going to happen regardless
every country would be like south africa
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:07:14 UTC No. 16130515
>>16130506
Is stored in the balls
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:08:25 UTC No. 16130517
>>16130512
>if you do that what you say, it doesn't really matter if there are wars, no space effort is going to happen regardless
BUT THINK OF THE BENEFIT FOR HUMANITY!
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:10:55 UTC No. 16130521
I'm excited for the future, my friends
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:11:12 UTC No. 16130522
>>16130517
what is the benefit? and no, wars would not stop either, all you would accomplish is basically delete europeans
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:12:44 UTC No. 16130526
>>16130316
>>16130336
>>16130340
Success, managed to get it off G2A for around $21 from Vikingsbrothers w/ PSC. Can't wait to install and try to simulate some fictional star systems. Been waiting so long to get this along with Elite Dangerous. Nice that the storage requirements are also pretty modest.
Also just to be clear, the whole Universe Sandbox ^2 thing is just an update for the existing game? Everything seems to link to the existing game on Steam.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:14:48 UTC No. 16130528
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status
> As Sagan said, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." In turn, Mars Sample Return requires innovation.
>In response to September's independent review board, we're rising to the challenge of an updated mission design to attempt to get samples back sooner, cheaper, and more simply: https://go.nasa.gov/49EX6HU
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:14:51 UTC No. 16130529
>>16130306
Yes, I personally know a PhD who uses it for visualizations of his theories. It used to be a lot rougher than it is now, but it seems like the devs are really putting in work.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:15:01 UTC No. 16130530
>>16130526
>terraria
>counter strike
Based
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:17:09 UTC No. 16130532
>>16130528
THEY'RE GOING FOR ITTT
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:17:18 UTC No. 16130533
>>16130522
>by preserving Europeans all you would accomplish is basically deleting Europeans
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:18:09 UTC No. 16130535
>>16130528
SAGAN NEVER SAID THAT
ITS A COMMON MISSATRIBUTION
NASA LIES, LIKE ALWAYS
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:18:44 UTC No. 16130537
>>16130528
>To achieve the ambitious goal of returning the key samples to Earth earlier and at a lower cost, the agency is asking the NASA community to work together to develop a revised plan that leverages innovation and proven technology. Additionally, NASA soon will solicit architecture proposals from industry that could return samples in the 2030s, and lowers cost, risk, and mission complexity.
based
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:19:52 UTC No. 16130538
>>16130533
homogenizing every nation? what the fuck do you mean by that
if you homogenize earth, that means you delete europeans
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:21:56 UTC No. 16130540
>>16130335
Grab two rocks.
>one for destructive sambling
>one for the President's desk
instant funding faucet
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:22:16 UTC No. 16130542
>>16130533
>European as a unified concept
lol
lmao even
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:23:01 UTC No. 16130543
>>16130530
I don't really play Counter-Strike anymore, I discovered Unreal Tournament and Quake and am a much happier man now. These games at least indirectly also fuel my thirst for space exploration. Don't know enough about Na Pali to simulate it though.
Will probably immediately try to simulate the plausibility of the Cybertron's system (Hadean) and Krypton's system (Rao) as soon as I boot up the game based off memory and the notes I've collected before moving on to other fictional star systems.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:27:12 UTC No. 16130548
>>16130528
haha get em Elon
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:28:57 UTC No. 16130551
>>16130538
>>16130542
Homogenizing every nation = every nation has a homogenous population. Ethno-states would be a human and constitutional right for everyone on the planet. This would eliminate the primary driving factor between wars, tribes competing over shared living space and resources as well as things like irredentism and centuries old hatred between different groups. This is to prevent habitat destruction and encroachment. When you have children that are behaving badly, you need to separate them in order for the adults to get work done.
Without the prospect of ETI or any answer to the Fermi Paradox being in sight any time soon as far as we know, it is counter-productive for resources, time, and manpower to be wasted on forever wars driven by these classical factors and those looking to manipulate them. Everyone needs to go home so that people can actually focus on doing the important work (forwarding the cause of science and space programs and securing the necessary resources and funding). It will be infinitely easier to do this when people are not being pitted against each other over geologically trivial matters that exhaust unnecessary amounts of resources.
Congress pulling funding for the Chandra X-ray Observatory (despite costing less than an F-16 with comparably less expensive upkeep for a one of a kind piece of technology) is just another brick in the wall of this wastefulness humanity is being drowned in, and it's latest example of stagnation.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:29:40 UTC No. 16130552
>>16130548
Seething at strawmen scenarios
absolute masterclass in delusion from spacefag5 as always
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:30:18 UTC No. 16130553
>>16130548
You have to go back
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:31:08 UTC No. 16130555
>>16130548
haha yeah this is totally going to happen. just like they did with dragon and then crew dragon
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:31:57 UTC No. 16130556
>>16130528
is red dragon back on the menu?
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:32:00 UTC No. 16130557
my prediction fpr the winning bid is a price tag between $1.5 and $2 billion and a return date of 2033. hopefully this is JPL's waterloo.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:33:11 UTC No. 16130558
>>16130533
delightfully counter-intuitive
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:36:38 UTC No. 16130561
>>16130548
man this dude is permanently assdamage lmaoo
🗑️ Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:39:48 UTC No. 16130562
>>16130561
I think I know why
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:44:04 UTC No. 16130567
>>16130326
I havent loaded it up since playing it loads in my late teens, back then systems would break down if you increased time warp too much so it was impossible to actually simulate anything over deep time, thats why i stopped playing, I dont know if thats been changed.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:51:47 UTC No. 16130572
>>16130561
Ill give you some permanent ass damage
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 19:57:24 UTC No. 16130575
>>16130572
gey
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 20:01:29 UTC No. 16130578
>>16130548
sussy username ඞ
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 20:03:23 UTC No. 16130581
>>16130526
universe sandbox 2 was a sequel to the first simulation but they later rebranded it to "universe sandbox"
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 20:05:34 UTC No. 16130585
Crazy how fast ksp2 came and went. Does it even have a fanbase?
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 20:11:17 UTC No. 16130589
>>16130585
player numbers were around 300 after launch but they rose to around 500 or so after the science update
I would imagine that the Colonies update will bring back even more people since it will introduce new content that the first game didn't have
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 20:11:46 UTC No. 16130590
>>16130585
I played it. I enjoyed it for what it was. I ran out of stuff to do.
the campaign is pretty short and there's not as much to do for self imposed challenges and I don't really like the changes they made to streamline science. I hope the devs* don't abandon it. I'll probably put in another 20 hours when colonies come out
*producers
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 20:16:09 UTC No. 16130592
>>16130588
its happening
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 20:24:33 UTC No. 16130597
>>16130589
>300
grim
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 20:28:02 UTC No. 16130599
im gobsmacked by the performance of spacex. terrible.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 20:30:40 UTC No. 16130602
> Proposals go out soon to all NASA centers and the private aerospace sector for “a revised plan that utilizes innovation and proven technology to lower risks, to lower costs and to lower mission complexity so we can return these really precious samples to Earth in the 2030s,” said Nicky Fox, associate administrator, Science Mission Directorate. The due date for proposals is next month, and those selected for further study will get NASA grants this summer. This essentially puts JPL in a position of having to compete for its own project.
So, sounds like they're junking what's been done, so that's billions and a decade lost, and starting over.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 20:32:56 UTC No. 16130608
>>16130602
In before Red Dragon is revived to rub salt in the wound.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 20:35:20 UTC No. 16130613
>>16130589
>>16130590
Is the performance fixed? My pc meets the minimum specs but I have no desire to play on low settings and 40 fps.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 20:37:49 UTC No. 16130616
>>16130613
better than it was on launch, but it's still got noticeably lower framerates than ksp1 for comparable crafts.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 20:38:25 UTC No. 16130617
> The agency also has released NASA’s response to a Mars Sample Return Independent Review Board report from September 2023. This includes: an updated mission design with reduced complexity; improved resiliency; risk posture; stronger accountability and coordination; and an overall budget likely in the $8 billion to $11 billion range. The mission design will return samples in 2040.
That's the baseline NASA wants to better. Good luck space cowboy.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 20:40:04 UTC No. 16130619
>>16130617
Elon will probably just do it and they can worry about paying him later
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 20:45:28 UTC No. 16130626
>>16130617
i'm trying to think of an unmanned mars mission that could even come close to justifying a $10 billion price tag. maybe if you had a fleet of helicopters that could hop around and do a comprehensive surface survey.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 20:45:50 UTC No. 16130627
>>16130619
it'd be funny if he got roggs back on his own dime and refused to hand them over. imagine the seething
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 20:50:30 UTC No. 16130635
>>16130567
Right now I'm more concerned about why the habitable zone in Universe Sandbox changes depending on whether you select the parent star or when you are trying to add a planet such as Earth. I legitimately cannot tell if this is a bug or if this is genuinely just taking into account where the HZ would be for a specific planet that you are selecting as opposed to just a general baseline for the star.
At the same time, if selecting an HZ for an Earth-like planet versus straight up Earth isn't the same then what's the point?
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 20:51:51 UTC No. 16130641
>>16130626
Maybe proof of life existing could justify that money.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 20:54:17 UTC No. 16130642
>>16130641
more likely it'd just justify more activism to halt further exploration in order to preserve what was found
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 20:56:48 UTC No. 16130645
>>16130528
This nigga cant even get starship to orbit and made 0 progress on HLS and already want another contract for his mars fantazy LMAO
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 20:59:51 UTC No. 16130649
If I won the lottery I would charter a starship to mars, have some dinky little rover retrieve the Perseverance samples, and just send them to orbit and chuck them into the black abyss. Just out of spite and principal.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 21:01:11 UTC No. 16130653
>>16130645
Versus Boeing who can’t even get a capsule to orbit with humans, or lockheed martin who have fallen off so hard in the civilian launch market that they don’t even want their stake in ULA anymore
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 21:04:46 UTC No. 16130658
Red dragon wouldn’t be a bad idea, honestly. Yeah it doesn’t move Starship / HLS along but it gets the job done if you want to commit to retrieving these retarded tubes without spending a bajillion dollars
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 21:06:56 UTC No. 16130663
>>16130656
Ian miles chung is a smart guy! i love hearing his takes all the time. i wonder who he is voting for president? Interesting man, thanks for introducing me Elon
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 21:07:08 UTC No. 16130664
>>16130656
SpaceX getting the sample return contract is obviously the best thing that could happen, but at the same time present starship is a shitshow with vehicles too unreliable to complete a single flight and less than 1/3rd the specificed performance. It kind of makes sense why the NASA number and internal spacex number is 15 flights to refuel for lunar landing
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 21:08:11 UTC No. 16130666
>>16130663
i'm blocked by big chungus but for some reason I can see the posts in musks replies tab
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 21:09:13 UTC No. 16130667
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YD
he blocked me after I asked him why did he get a dog flashbanged
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 21:14:44 UTC No. 16130672
>>16130659
big wings mean you reduce the mass/surface area ratio so it gets more deceleration in the upper atmosphere and reduce your peak heating. venturestar's metallic TPS was designed to work on the same principle, and that was supposed to handle temps up to 1000C. stainless steel could match that.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 21:18:50 UTC No. 16130677
>>16130659
probably go back to sweating
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 21:24:22 UTC No. 16130684
>>16130672
making starship a flatter shape would also be helpful, tube is not so good.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 21:27:16 UTC No. 16130690
>>16130672
>>16130684
everything becomes a space shuttle sooner or later
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 21:33:31 UTC No. 16130705
>>16130664
As if any other part of MSR is ahead of starship development
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 21:33:57 UTC No. 16130706
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 21:36:18 UTC No. 16130711
!!!
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 21:38:46 UTC No. 16130715
>>16130705
MSR is real. you've it down at jezero. we have all the rocks picked up.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 21:39:22 UTC No. 16130716
>>16130703
he actually hired a bunch of cute girls...i bet he fuckin all of em >:(
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 21:41:04 UTC No. 16130717
>>16130224
They should ask Elon if he's got any spare polygons left over from the Cybertruck design.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 21:41:18 UTC No. 16130718
>>16130716
Jobless
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 21:42:44 UTC No. 16130720
>>16130717
Wow so fuckin original bro!
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 21:43:38 UTC No. 16130721
>>16130690
shuttle was a good idea, it failed in the minutiae. Yeah it had terrible performance beyond leo, but any reusable upper stage would, so they decided to just own it an have a retarded spaceplane. Loads of things went wrong which we all know about, but they were trying to do exactly what starship is trying to do: low cost high frequency launch to leo to facilitate doing everything in space including stuff beyond leo. Even with the crap shuttle we ended up with, you could assemble a moon landing setup in 3 flights. The shuttle was capable of assembling heavy duty missions to the outer solar system.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 21:44:28 UTC No. 16130723
>>16130224
the first black-owned rocket company in minecraft
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 21:45:29 UTC No. 16130726
>>16130703
>"casey" from "mirma"
God are you people illiterate? if you going to make a fake pic atleast edit it properly you 'tard.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 21:57:12 UTC No. 16130734
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 22:05:02 UTC No. 16130741
>>16130715
And there they will stay for the next 20 years if NASA keeps running the show.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 22:07:24 UTC No. 16130746
>>16130741
20 years is an optimistic timeline.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 22:12:29 UTC No. 16130753
>>16130746
some fifth generation martian colonist is going to uncover them by accident in 2175
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 22:18:53 UTC No. 16130764
I'm going to Mars :)
No apologies :)
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 22:22:41 UTC No. 16130768
>>16130526
Yeah, they switched rendering engines I believe. You can fiddle with the installed version in the steam properties beta drop-down.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 22:39:42 UTC No. 16130780
>>16130526
>w/ PSC
You MUST be 18 or older to post
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 22:47:45 UTC No. 16130784
>>16130780
>t. eyetoddler
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 22:49:37 UTC No. 16130785
you now remember that starship v3 stack is 150m tall
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 23:00:58 UTC No. 16130790
>>16130785
it also looks fuck all like the fan renderings
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 23:03:46 UTC No. 16130793
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 23:10:31 UTC No. 16130794
>>16130793
did your mom drop you on the head
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 23:11:19 UTC No. 16130795
>>16130794
yes
how is that related
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 23:11:33 UTC No. 16130796
>>16130794
did your dad drop you on the bed (to fuck)?
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 23:12:16 UTC No. 16130798
>>16130790
what renderings and why does that matter?
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 23:32:25 UTC No. 16130803
>>16130800
This official render???!! OHNONONONONO AAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHA
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 23:38:42 UTC No. 16130807
>>16130803
Yes it's very official as you can see
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 23:55:33 UTC No. 16130816
>>16130800
They better use the Spaceballs opening music as elevator muzak during its inaugural launch.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 00:00:34 UTC No. 16130825
NASA should use their MSP money to help jumpstart other countries spaceflight industries. It'll pay off in the long term.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 00:02:45 UTC No. 16130826
>>16130825
jumpstart deez nuts
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 00:13:49 UTC No. 16130829
>>16130800
i <3 uranus
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 00:14:04 UTC No. 16130830
>>16130734
whats the bait? youre edit wasnt funny
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 00:23:41 UTC No. 16130841
>>16130829
we know, Tom
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 00:29:38 UTC No. 16130848
>>16130397
>>16130394
Could this be the beginning of the end of the endless JPL grift?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 00:32:18 UTC No. 16130850
>>16130548
This guy probably has the worst EDS of them all. Bro is literally living the dream of any aerospace engineer and he’s STILL constantly seething about musk
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 00:36:22 UTC No. 16130855
>>16130850
There's lots of Elon seethers at JPL in particular and NASA in general
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 00:38:09 UTC No. 16130858
>>16130856
kill sls. obviously. that was easy.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 00:39:55 UTC No. 16130861
>>16130856
first one, Artemis is expensive but actually somewhat useful, MSR is just full on retarded
or if you can just kill SLS but keep Artemis running as a programme then I would choose number 2 (but cancel MSR too because its retarded) and then tell JPL to start doing non-retarded shit please
make probes and that will exploit the capabilities of starship
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 00:40:08 UTC No. 16130862
>>16130856
JPL actually does cool shit like the helicopter.
I wouldn't kill them even if their funding went nowhere else
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 00:40:08 UTC No. 16130863
>>16130856
Kill JPL. JPL is the great shaitan. They are the final boss of oldspace. SLS would die off after the ten years but if we don’t kill JPL it’ll live forever, destroying the future of spaceflight with mass autism roverfaggotry
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 00:41:08 UTC No. 16130866
>>16130856
kill jay pee ell
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 00:45:38 UTC No. 16130874
>>16130863
Did you just say rover?
Like Mark Rober (who was LITERALLY a JPL rocket scientist (working on, you guessed it, THE MARS FUCKING ROVER (which is like unbelievably cool)))?
Whose name also sounds like Mars rover?
What are the odds of that?
🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 00:48:40 UTC No. 16130878
>>16130856
Intellignet catposter
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 00:50:26 UTC No. 16130880
>>16130856
Intelligent catposter (I am not)
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 00:51:14 UTC No. 16130881
>>16130874
On
Another
Friggin
Planet
like whuuuuut
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 00:51:53 UTC No. 16130883
>>16130881
>>16130874
IFLS!!
(I Freaking Love Science!!)
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 00:56:33 UTC No. 16130888
>>16130856
JPL. I want to see SLS Block 2 hurling fission reactors into deep space.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 00:57:53 UTC No. 16130890
https://twitter.com/BoeingSpace/sta
>#Starliner is now loaded onto the transporter that will roll it out of our factory tomorrow, April 16. It will head to @ulalaunch's Vertical Integration Facility to be integrated with the #AtlasV rocket for the Crew Flight Test launch on May 6.
https://starlinerupdates.com/starli
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 00:59:21 UTC No. 16130891
>>16130403
Neuralink to bridge the gap. Tesla bot to create infinite labor for infinite growth.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 01:00:27 UTC No. 16130894
>>16130888
I agree with this. SLS is a mess, but it's so bad that we can't salvage something useful out of it. JPL has been a lost cause for longer than SLS has been in development
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 01:04:03 UTC No. 16130897
>>16130856
big rockets are cool
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 01:10:16 UTC No. 16130905
>>16130888
you will not live long enough to see it
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 01:11:57 UTC No. 16130906
>>16130905
t. old man
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 01:19:19 UTC No. 16130913
>>16130894
What are you smoking? SLS is useless and expensive, JPL still delivers tech that’s never been done like skycranes with curiosity and helicopter drones oboard Mars 2020
MSR might be an expensive misfire that needs to be reworked / maybe even taken away from JPL, but they’re still an insanely smart and talented organization. They’re going to have a hard time adjusting to lower $/kg though; they’re kinda mass-conscious to their own detriment right now bc all they’ve ever known is shitty Delta IIs, Atlas Vs, etc
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 01:21:13 UTC No. 16130914
>>16130913
JPL has nothing good in the pipeline because of MSR. Let other science centers build DAVINCI+ and VERITAS and refocus outer system exploration on robust, nuclear fission powered orbiters, landers, and rovers.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 01:24:11 UTC No. 16130918
>>16130913
Anybody can get JPL's results when you give then tens of billions of dollars and decade-long timelines. Optimizing SLS into something that's worth the sticker price is going to be a very ugly process but most of the pieces are already in place.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 01:26:18 UTC No. 16130921
>>16130585
>>16130589
i bought this heap of shit on launch, played for maybe half an hour and gave up because the game bugged out and wouldn't let me launch anything without restarting
people played it and pretty quickly realised it's the same exact shit with a small coat of paint
new ui is just plain bad, stylised to the point of unreadability. The gameplay loop is the same or worse because it's barely even at feature parity over a year after launch, no mods, terrible performance. Colonies, interstellar travel and multiplayer are the only reason to even consider playing and even the first of those updates (colonies) isn't expected until the end of this year or the start of next.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 01:26:37 UTC No. 16130922
>>16130913
The ESA builds better and more ambitious scientific payloads. JPL just does a river grift these days. The little chopper was the exception I’ll admit, but it was so astonishing because JPL is so stodgy, conservative, unambitious and dull
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 01:27:06 UTC No. 16130923
>>16130890
How time flies...
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 01:29:49 UTC No. 16130927
>>16130913
yeah, 20 years ago spending a billion dollars on a mars rover loaded with plutonium and delicate scientific instrumentation wasn't a bad deal. but wanting $10 billion to pick up some rocks was a bridge too far. if they want to take advantage of the revolution in launch capabilities then mercury and the outer planets are still there.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 01:45:32 UTC No. 16130934
>>16130224
>bug hustle 33
My fucking SIDES dude
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 01:52:29 UTC No. 16130940
Skibidi rizz gyatt
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 01:53:33 UTC No. 16130942
>>16130914
I agree about MSR Being a bottleneck. It should be canceled and arguably the problem started with perseverance, a direct repeat of curiosity, not in every way, but in many way nonetheless Mars 2020 including MSR cache tubes *even without MSR being planned yet* basically planted the metaphorical JPL flag on Mars. Leaving no resources or budget for other destinations like Venus, Titan, Europa, Neptune, etc.
>>16130918
>government
>optimizing for price
>16130922
Who is ESA, are they like JAXA or ISRO? They sound pretty irrelevant!
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 01:55:26 UTC No. 16130943
>>16130923
Remember how much shit he got for this
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 01:57:55 UTC No. 16130944
>>16130932
Now I'm imagining a space dep*t with 100 refueling docks, and the biggest bathrooms in orbit.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 01:58:33 UTC No. 16130945
Reminder that as MSR has effectively been cancelled this general must shift to Cancel Dragonfly
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 01:58:44 UTC No. 16130946
>>16130942
I said that I'd be ugly, but that doesn't mean it's impossible. Fixing JLP would require such a complete destruction of its internal culture and funding incentives that there'd be nothing left but the name when the time came rebuild.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 02:00:19 UTC No. 16130947
>>16130946
Good.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 02:01:52 UTC No. 16130948
>>16130942
JPL does not give a fuck about science anymore. They just care about job security and consistent (high) funding streams. They were probably very happy that MSR would take so long, because that means 20 more years of money and jobs. And because politically it means no one else is likely to be approved to go to mars in that timeframe. If they cared about science or had any sort of ability to think creatively or fluidly, they would shift to making rovers and probs for venus, asteroids and the outer planets.
But hey, at least we will get to see the death of MSR and therefore the death of the JPL monopoly on mars
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 02:03:50 UTC No. 16130949
>>16130890
Slow and steady wins the race (of course they already won because they were paid more for this than SeX)
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 02:09:19 UTC No. 16130953
>>16130932
rebbit
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 02:10:23 UTC No. 16130954
>>16130949
They actually probably lost money on this contract lol
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 02:27:17 UTC No. 16130965
>>16130224
I'm personally 100% black
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 02:41:51 UTC No. 16130982
>>16130945
what's wrong with dragonfly :( i thought it looked fun
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 02:42:28 UTC No. 16130984
>>16130982
It's a Titan lander that isn't trying to sample the lakes.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 02:45:26 UTC No. 16130991
>>16130982
Go to the only place outside Earth with lakes. Don't explore the lakes.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 02:48:16 UTC No. 16130994
>>16130989
The R-7 family had Sputnik and Vostok.
Atlas had Mercury 7.
Titan had Cassini.
Shuttle was ridiculously cool every single launch, but probably Hubble repair was the signature demonstration of its ability.
Falcon Heavy aside from the meme roadster will probably be Gateway PPE+HALO or Europa Clipper.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 02:51:18 UTC No. 16130997
>>16130991
>>16130984
THIS.
CANCEL DRAGONFLY.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 02:55:18 UTC No. 16131000
>>16130991
>>16130984
Yep. Needs a massive overhaul
The reason it isn’t going to explore the lakes is just so they can grift a second mission to explore the lakes. But with the timescales involved in an outer systems mission, doing it that way means the second rover/probe/vehicle would probably arrive 30 years after dragonfly, which is probably just shy of 20 years from landing
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 03:03:58 UTC No. 16131004
>>16131001
someone tell smarter every day to copyright the video for plagiarism of thumbnails.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 03:07:32 UTC No. 16131008
>>16131000
we're going to need one mission to bottle up lake samples, another mission to take the bottles and drive them over to the sample return launchpad. from there the Titan Automated Launch Safety Officer can scrub the launch and wait for the 2150 window.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 03:09:44 UTC No. 16131012
>>16130316
>>16130526
I see I'm too late, but if you're considering key sites, piracy might legitimately be better. Especially G2A has been in the news over and over again for selling ill-gotten keys, which can actually end up costing the game's dev money depending on how it was acquired. There's a decent chance you're just enriching grifters when you use these sites unfortunately.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 03:12:26 UTC No. 16131016
>>16131015
but you actually can't make electron or falcon 1 fuel on mars
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 03:13:43 UTC No. 16131019
>>16131008
All via SLS btw
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 03:14:33 UTC No. 16131021
>>16131016
you could make kerosene on mars. it'd be a little bit of work but you could do it.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 03:17:49 UTC No. 16131026
>>16131016
You bring it fully fueled. An ascent vehicle.
Anything else requires a full scale colonization effort to setup refueling
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 03:22:15 UTC No. 16131031
>>16131015
could a fully fueled starship land and then take off from mars? just put a depot in martian orbit, send expendable tankers to fill it. It'd still probably be 20x cheaper than MSR
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 03:50:46 UTC No. 16131051
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okq
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 03:57:21 UTC No. 16131052
>>16131051
EDSer
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 03:59:53 UTC No. 16131054
>>16131016
I mean you just send it over fully fueled, have a crane drop it down from starship, and have a rover load it up, if you need a launchpad send a second starship with a mobile launchpad
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 04:14:28 UTC No. 16131069
>>16131019
this is about Boeing's centennial, not anything to do with flying SLS for 100 years
t. knower
>THAT'S THE JOKE
stfu noob
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 04:20:57 UTC No. 16131076
>>16131069
Kys
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 04:22:12 UTC No. 16131077
>>16131052
Wut
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 04:53:21 UTC No. 16131089
Why is the Discord so dead?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 05:02:22 UTC No. 16131093
>>16131089
Thats a myth there is no discord.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 05:51:03 UTC No. 16131107
>>16130850
he’s constantly seething about musk precisely because he's living the dream
it's like being a famous horse breeder (the analogy works on multiple levels) and then some guy shows up with a car
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 06:02:17 UTC No. 16131110
>>16131107
Except in this case the horse breeder is paid by the government to help Henry Ford make cars lol
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 06:13:37 UTC No. 16131115
>>16131110
says a lot about government's ability to choose the right people for the job
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 06:18:07 UTC No. 16131116
>>16130991
(protip: they don't want to lose it in a lake)
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 07:16:26 UTC No. 16131155
>>16131116
So have it stop a meter from shore and use a cryogenic bendy straw to take samples.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 08:07:40 UTC No. 16131194
>>16131089
you're probably in the wrong discords
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 08:50:58 UTC No. 16131228
>>16131089
Join the Concord duh.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 09:26:54 UTC No. 16131248
>>16131239
It's only showing the first two paragraphs. Does anyone have an archive or something?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 09:28:53 UTC No. 16131249
>>16131239
lmao git gud scrubs
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 09:32:16 UTC No. 16131252
>>16131239
https://twitter.com/SpaceAbhi/statu
>Sigh. I think highly of Beck but this is misguided thinking. The way to compete against SpaceX is to focus on YOU. SpaceX spent hardly a thought on anyone during their rise. Winners only compete against themselves and never become complacent or enamored by their local maximum.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 09:34:17 UTC No. 16131254
Rocketlab wants to give SpaceX malaria and kill them
Kind of a weird analogy especially as Musk almost died of malaria
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 09:39:57 UTC No. 16131258
>>16131248
https://archive.is/5reLe
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 09:46:49 UTC No. 16131269
>The way to compete against SpaceX, Beck said, “is to outsmart them and outwork them. You have to be the mosquito, that is for sure. And you have to be very agile. … The crazy thing about a mosquito is that it’s kind of annoying, but there’s a nonzero chance that you might get bit, get malaria and die,” he said.
Most retarded shit I have ever read. Reddit ass looking faggot beck is just coping and seething. Also funny how people are starting to call SpaceX a monopoly now after years and years of shitting on them saying they will fail. They aren't a monopoly, everyone else is just fucking shit.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 10:14:46 UTC No. 16131303
>>16131258
Thanks Anon.
>>16131298
lol. lmao. Honestly, it probably chafes horribly to be outpaced by SpaceX, but it's not going to stop as long as Elon Musk and SpaceX are both looking further ahead and more eager to get there than the rest of the industry.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 10:46:34 UTC No. 16131324
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okq
>Polaris Dawn - Your Very Own Human Space Program
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 10:52:25 UTC No. 16131331
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 11:10:08 UTC No. 16131354
>>16131001
>I'm a scientist!!!111
>just send a roover!!111
Yeah OK.
>everything that hasn't been done is impossible forever!!1111
Peoplpe llike him were telling everyone how airplanes were impossible, or steel ships were impossible, or hot air balloons were impossible.
Is NASA's Artemis setup stupid? Well, yes it is. But they were saddled wit hSLS, so it was always doomed to be over budget and boondoggle central
Is Starship a good Moon Lander? Nope. But at least it doesn't include negative mass in the proposal llike the competition did.
The rest ofo the video is Elon bashing, pop-sci tier misrepresentation of Starship program progress and argaubly a copyright strike in the making for pretty muhc copying Smart Every Day's video.
Who is that guy, and why is he so upset?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 11:21:26 UTC No. 16131370
>>16131354
Hes right tho
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 11:30:07 UTC No. 16131385
>>16131354
starship is a general purpose cargo transportation vehicle into LEO, the moon and Mars and works as a lander way better than the competing proposals did
perhaps in the future there will better (meaning cheaper) purpose built moon landers
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 12:58:50 UTC No. 16131473
>>16131385
NTA but starship is a shit lunar lander if the plan is to have it shuttle from lunar orbit to lunar surface and not return to earth. Proof is that HLS has to be substantially different from the original vehicle because the original one is simply too awful a lunar lander to be practical. HLS renders still have the surface level engines, I can only assume they will at least delete those if its never intended to return to earth. Otherwise its pure retardation. The HLS vehicle is differnt to an extent but still saddled with all the issues which come with it actually being a reusable upper stage not a lunar lander. The real reasson HLS got the contract is because America is interested in the LEO bus potential.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 13:01:15 UTC No. 16131475
>>16131473
>all the issues which come with it actually being a reusable upper stage not a lunar lander
such as?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 13:06:36 UTC No. 16131482
>>16131089
You will never be a woman.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 13:08:29 UTC No. 16131486
>In a report, Morgan Stanley estimated that SpaceX’s revenue for fiscal year 2024 should reach $13 billion, a 54 percent increase over last year.
>By 2035, as SpaceX’s Starlink internet satellite constellation grows, revenue could reach $100 billion, the firm reported.
B-BASED
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 13:16:50 UTC No. 16131495
>>16131475
a reusable upper stage obviously has a much worse dry mass than a purpose built spacecraft. If the Apollo LEM was structural to the Saturn V then it would have been much heavier empty. Not to mention that Starships engines are dramatically overpowered and overweight for lunar gravity, thats whe whole reason why they need to make as of yet totally undeveloped side thrusters for actually landing.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 13:21:14 UTC No. 16131499
>>16131495
>much worse dry mass than a purpose built spacecraft
wrong. launch vehicles are extremely optimized for dry mass the LEM has terrible mass fraction.
>engines are dramatically overpowered
the more thrust the less gravity loss
>and overweight
the engines don't weigh shit
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 13:24:25 UTC No. 16131506
>>16131495
>need to make as of yet totally undeveloped side thrusters
they've been static firing those thrusters for a year now newfag
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 13:27:33 UTC No. 16131510
>>16131495
Dont say that! Let musk fags believe starshits gonna be on mars on 4 years
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 13:29:00 UTC No. 16131515
>launch vehicles are extremely optimized for dry mass
So why dont satelites take the faring (the structural part) with them into orbit?
>the LEM has terrible mass fraction
I guarantee it would have been worse if the LEM was structural.
>the more thrust the less gravity loss
the problem is they have so much thrust its impossible to hover even on a single engine, thats clearly too much. Apollo LEM burnt for like 5 minutes on the way down and most of that was hovering sideways toward the landing zone like a helicopter. You take 1/6th the gravity losses on the moon and the primary objective is landing safely rather than lighting all 6 raptors an inch above the surface
>the engines don't weigh shit
They make up a small fraction when the vehicle is fully fuelled but so does the payload.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 13:29:48 UTC No. 16131516
So how is SpaceX or anyone else gonna retrieve those Mars sample tubes for NASA anytime soon?
>hard mode: no Starship
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 13:30:17 UTC No. 16131518
>>16131516
>impossible mode: no Starship
ftfy
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 13:30:53 UTC No. 16131520
>>16131515
>So why dont satelites take the faring (the structural part) with them into orbit?
Satellites don't carry humans. You need the fairing to carry pressurized humans you absolute retard.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 13:34:07 UTC No. 16131524
>>16131520
you need a pressure chamber which can hold 1 bar, not a sturcutre which can survive the aerodynamic pressure and stresses of launch. Before you mention crew capsules, those actually land on earth, a LEM does not.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 13:37:52 UTC No. 16131533
>>16131518
Is Red Dragon still a thing? Maybe land one Red Dragon to deploy a relatively simple military robot that can drive around and gather the sample tubes.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 13:42:32 UTC No. 16131541
>>16131516
Starship should land next to Percy, grab the whole thing and bring it home
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 13:42:53 UTC No. 16131544
>>16131516
>>16131533
Do the exact JPL MSR architectue but contract Impulse Space to do it for $500 million dollars.
There's nothing inherently about it that justifies 10 billion.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 13:59:13 UTC No. 16131570
>>16131473
proof is? the renders mean nothing
and still what matters is cost, not your aesthetic considerations or whatever the fuck
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:00:19 UTC No. 16131572
>>16131495
so what it has a worse dry mass? what matters is cost
mass autism thinking is outdated, you need to start thinking about cost
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:01:19 UTC No. 16131578
>>16131515
the absolute state of mass autists
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:01:36 UTC No. 16131579
>>16131570
>the renders mean nothing
okay, well in that case I guess nobody knows whats going on. Musk repeatedly says since ITS the renders are what spacex use internally.
>and still what matters is cost, not your aesthetic considerations or whatever the fuck
yes, it will cost more if you dont fix the issues
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:02:10 UTC No. 16131581
>>16131572
>so what it has a worse dry mass
It doesn't. Starship holds a fuckton of propellant and uses all of it on a moon mission.
I pretty much guarantee it has better mass ratio than all other proposed lander simply due it being huge.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:04:00 UTC No. 16131585
>>16131578
>>16131572
You are retarded. Mass autism on payload and mass autism on vehcile are two different things. If you dont have mass autism on vehicle then you need mass autism on payload because your payload is crap. Shuttle was almost a superheavy lift rocket including the orbiter, but its dry mass was so bad that it was in practice a medium lift rocket. Are you a shuttle shill now?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:23:31 UTC No. 16131613
>>16131585
no retard, what matters is cost
you don't need mass autism on either the vehicle or the payload if your vehicle is massive and the cost is low
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:24:39 UTC No. 16131614
>>16131613
>>16131585
if the shuttle was actually cheap and rapidly reusable, it being a medium lift rocket instaed of a superheavy would have been irrelevant
but it wasn't cheap or rapidly reusable and all that mass was a detriment compared to a simpler non-reusable system
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:25:17 UTC No. 16131616
>>16131613
Okay, well let me just quickly inform you that Starship missions will be more expensive if they require more flights, not hard to grasp.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:27:34 UTC No. 16131620
let me make this simple for you
if it costs me 10k to ship a peanut with a panamax cargo ship and 15k to ship it with a sailboat, it still makes more sense to use the panamax cargo ship
what matters is cost, not efficiency
efficiency might help with cost ultimately, but that is just a intermediate metric
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:28:35 UTC No. 16131621
>>16131616
yes, but if they cost 1/100 to launch it doesn't matter if you need to launch 10 or even 50 of them
you just don't simply seem to grasp the concept that cost is what matters
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:31:08 UTC No. 16131623
>>16131620
its cheap to use the cargo ship because it can deliver massive amounts of cargo. Present iteration of starship has a worse paylod to leo than falcon heavy, and an evern worse payload to TLI (being zero without refuelling). If a panamax required 15 other panamaxes to refuel it before it could complete the journey, and could deliver less than a non reusable wooden sailing boat, then I think the sailing boat would be cheaper.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:33:51 UTC No. 16131627
>>16131623
so you are just incapable of grasping the concept of cost
I already gave you the exact scenario, 10k vs 15k
what happens in the background is irrelevant
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:33:57 UTC No. 16131628
>>16131269
>They aren't a monopoly, everyone else is just fucking shit.
That does not contradict monopoly status. Technological superiority and economies of scale are recognized sources of monopoly that you will find in virtually any economics textbook (although some may include them under the broader summary category "barriers to entry")
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:34:47 UTC No. 16131630
>>16131621
Starship reusability is pribably worse than falcon, because the engines are more complex and with raptor 3 they cant be repaired due to everything being integral. That's fine, spacex are going all in on engine mass manufacture as the way to save costs, but it means you have a fixed price per launch which is at least the cost of replacing the necessary engines and other hardware plus the man hours. If they can refly within a day then maybe that price will just be a few hundred thousand per flight, but the fastest falcon reflight is over 20 days and thats a simpler booster than superheavy.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:38:04 UTC No. 16131638
>>16131627
Im explaining to you that your scenario doesnt reflect actual starship
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:42:04 UTC No. 16131651
>>16130484
Our reptilian overlords are already in direct communication with demonic entities. What do they need a radio for?
It's space flight related thanks to Jack Parsons
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:43:07 UTC No. 16131660
>>16131638
>present iteration
lmao please and you don't even know that, the comment about 40T was specifically for flight 3, not v1 in general
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:45:01 UTC No. 16131663
>>16131630
the point is that they don't need to be repaired or refurbished between flights
they will have some lifetime which will be much longer than one flight and then replaced
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:59:14 UTC No. 16131686
>>16131623
>Present iteration of starship has a worse paylod to leo than falcon heavy
not really though. That fh number is derived by extrapolating its payload to high energy trajectories. You can’t actually stick a 40 ton object in its fairing and expect it to survive max-q
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:59:38 UTC No. 16131687
>>16130663
wholesome big cheongus
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 15:00:07 UTC No. 16131688
>>16131660
Flight 3 was V1, technically it delivered no payload unless you count the air. how does flight 3 not represent v1? I know it was underfuelled, but it was underfuelled specifically to simulate a payload.
>>16131663
It's certainly not a bad idea. Shuttle was too bespoke and starships mass production approach insulates it from insane cost even if it cant be reused as much as they would like.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 15:01:52 UTC No. 16131697
>>16131686
yeah but that's just an autistic nitpick because you could easily make a payload adapter that could handle 60 tons if anyone ever came up with a 60-ton LEO payload for it
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 15:09:01 UTC No. 16131705
>Russian space chief brags that new Amur rocket reusable 'up to 100 times.' But there's a catch. It doesn't actually exist.
https://x.com/SciGuySpace/status/17
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 15:23:26 UTC No. 16131720
>>16131688
now when I think about it, talking about v1 at all doesn't really make sense as there have been so many changes from test flight to test flight
v2 is probably something they will actually use to launch payload and then v3 a planned big upgrade that requires new towers, but they can use v2 for a HLS starship for instance
so in a sense v2 is actually the first actual usable ship and there have been like 5-10 versions before that
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 15:28:34 UTC No. 16131726
>>16131705
Wasn’t New Glenn originally 200, then 100, then 50, now 25 lol
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 15:29:25 UTC No. 16131727
>>16131254
it's an elaborate African joke
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 15:31:29 UTC No. 16131731
>>16131720
>v3 a planned big upgrade that requires new towers
why would it. the qd is at the bottom and there's already evidence they're moving the chopstick lift points down to the pez door.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 15:32:13 UTC No. 16131732
>MSR is kill
I-is Bill 'Ballast' Nelson actually based?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 15:34:08 UTC No. 16131735
>>16131731
hmm perhaps you are right
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 15:40:23 UTC No. 16131739
>>16131732
no, MSR is just THAT overpriced
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 15:48:12 UTC No. 16131746
>>16131486
Starlink is going to pay for elon's private palace on top of olympus mons.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 15:48:56 UTC No. 16131748
>>16131739
Also it involves zero astronauts. Senator Administrator Astronaut Ballast is basically a manned spaceflight fanboy (as seen by his shuttle ride) which is why he supports all the Artemis components including HLS.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 15:52:12 UTC No. 16131751
>>16131746
he is using ketamine and qualuudes, not crack
but otherwise it seems about right
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07e
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 15:56:52 UTC No. 16131754
>>16131739
Isn't it something like 11+ billion dollars? Another JWST and 20+ years of development?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 16:00:49 UTC No. 16131756
switzerland joined artemis accords
https://spacenews.com/switzerland-s
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 16:20:28 UTC No. 16131772
>>16131746
>impregnating celebrities
he's not doing well on that axis as of late.
has he become too chud to get pussy?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 16:22:44 UTC No. 16131775
>>16131746
Liberals are capable of coming up with funny ideas; but they know not brevity and it always ends up being mucho texto. Kinda ruins the whole joke.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 16:50:07 UTC No. 16131795
>>16131785
That would imply it's flying in the first place.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 16:51:31 UTC No. 16131796
>>16131795
They will attempt to. They will not fly.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 17:06:41 UTC No. 16131807
>>16131785
And somehow they are going to blame elon&spaceX for it.
>elon created a hostile space industry where people are forced to skip steps to compete
Or some shit like that, it wont make sense at all to anybody with half a brain, but they will say it anyway.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 17:25:39 UTC No. 16131824
>>16131751
wtf are qualuuudes
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 17:26:45 UTC No. 16131826
https://spacetechpriorities.org/
This is cool, NASA wants (You)r input
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 17:30:22 UTC No. 16131829
>>16131816
Every single newspace company is making their own valves. These are not even for cryogens. How long until the valve market catches up?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 17:31:24 UTC No. 16131830
>>16131826
When NASA says (You), a member of the public, they are actually talking to the space industry and more specifically SpaceX
Like J Random American is going to know that cold welding is still a huge fucking problem or space nukes are predicated on the existence of extremely hard to get isotopes (maybe use different ones, geniuses) or propulsive landing needs to be improved
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 17:32:27 UTC No. 16131831
>>16131830
>Whether you’re part of the space technology community or an interested member of the public, your input is invaluable. By registering and providing your feedback, you’ll help inform an integrated list of national space technology priorities. NASA will make the prioritized list available to stakeholders and the public.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 17:38:37 UTC No. 16131836
>>16131826
>NASA is refining its strategy for prioritizing technology investments, to evolve into a stronger and more resilient national tech base for civil space.
basedbasedbased
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 17:40:57 UTC No. 16131841
>>16131824
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metha
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 17:41:42 UTC No. 16131844
https://www.quantamagazine.org/geom
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 17:42:06 UTC No. 16131845
>>16131841
literally never heard of this before today lmao
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 17:44:16 UTC No. 16131847
>>16131620
Ideally cost/efficiency go together and for some functions, cost is irrelevant, time is the sole factor.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 17:44:59 UTC No. 16131848
>>16131836
Maybe they should fucking start with Solidworks, because it's made by Dassault lmao
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 17:46:01 UTC No. 16131849
>>16131846
>Excavation
Space backhoe bro you are so in
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 17:46:30 UTC No. 16131851
>>16131846
Need to feed this to Google Gemini Pro and generate a nice chart.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 17:48:14 UTC No. 16131852
>>16131846
>>16131850
>NASA produces a list
>industry/centers/universities now know that to prioritize and can get to work on it
fucking finally
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 17:49:16 UTC No. 16131853
>>16131852
what to*
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 17:51:05 UTC No. 16131857
>>16131847
you can give time a cost too in opportunity cost in the stock market or in other ways
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 18:01:54 UTC No. 16131864
>>16131846
193 pages, lol
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 18:02:30 UTC No. 16131865
>>16130551
>primary driving factor between wars
>ethno state A claims ethno state B is not real and has no right to exist
>proceeds to attempt and exterminate them
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 18:09:11 UTC No. 16131869
>>16131845
>he didn't watch wolf of wallstreet
you're missing out
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 18:10:52 UTC No. 16131870
>>16131869
I'M NOT FUCKING WATCHIINGG
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 18:15:24 UTC No. 16131875
>boston dynamics is retiring atlas
hydraulictrannies absolutely BTFO.
all robot must be ELECTRIC
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 18:16:19 UTC No. 16131876
>>16131875
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 18:26:36 UTC No. 16131883
>>16131826
despite paying attention to spaceflight, i have no idea what to tell nasa
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 18:32:01 UTC No. 16131886
>>16131883
mostly they ask you to score them all or some shit, minimal input
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 18:41:52 UTC No. 16131893
remember the mexican space agency? the turkish one? the australian? yeah...
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 18:43:20 UTC No. 16131896
So I have this right?
>in order to launch a starship back from Mars, you need a tank of fuel on Mars
>in order to have a tank of fuel on Mars, you need to send 10 launches from LEO
>in order to do 10 launches from LEO, you need to fill a fuel tank in LEO 10 times
>In Order to fill a fuel tank in LEO, you need to launch 10 starships from earth
>In order to round trip Mars, you need to do over 100 starship launches
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 18:44:11 UTC No. 16131897
>>16131896
Yep, it's over Starship will never work and SpaceX are finished
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 18:46:16 UTC No. 16131901
>>16131896
No, since ISRU is a thing and the plan for refueling starship on Mars. You just need to get an empty one there with the machinery to manufacture methalox from Martian resources
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 18:46:19 UTC No. 16131902
>>16131897
It works if you have 100% reliable 100% rapid (24 hours) reusable starship, and infinite fuel on earth
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 18:48:45 UTC No. 16131906
>>16131896
>So I have this right?
No
Refueling only happens in LEO.
In order to come back you need a Sabatier plant on Mars.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 18:51:04 UTC No. 16131908
>>16131896
Everybody knows that mars starship will only work if they manage to produce rocketfuel on mars.
There already is a testplatform at mars right now that has produced a limited amount of rocketfuel, but i fail to find the name of it right now.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 18:52:05 UTC No. 16131909
>>16131896
Starship is a horrible architecture for Mars and not seriously considered by NASA. They kind of have to say nice things about SpaceX currently because they're dependent on thier services but seriously, pls drop the martian Starship fantasy. It's not happening.
NASA and some other entities are currently in the preliminary stages of designing new propulsion, life support and other systems for Mars but it's not happening till 2045+ at this rate (did you watch yesterday's (depressing) MSR update?)
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 18:52:29 UTC No. 16131910
>>16131908
its called your dad and he sucked my cock last night for $5 bucks.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 18:52:35 UTC No. 16131911
>>16131908
>rocketfuel
>testplatform
>rocketfuel
stop posting until europe has a working falcon 9 clone.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 18:52:45 UTC No. 16131912
>>16131906
well they might send some emergency fuel for the first humans so they can get back if the sabatier plant breaks down or something
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 18:53:12 UTC No. 16131913
Propulsion (Nuclear) 709 Nuclear Electric Propulsion for Human Exploration
149 Propulsion (Nuclear) 702 Nuclear Thermal Propulsion for Human Exploration
150 Propulsion (Nuclear) 705 Low Power Nuclear Electric Propulsion
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 18:53:48 UTC No. 16131914
>>16131909
You're delusional. Starship is the only architecture that can bring 100 tons to the surface at reasonable cost.
Your EDS is showing
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 18:53:57 UTC No. 16131916
>>16131909
I know youre trolling and trying to riff off the HLS anon earlier because Starship is a way better Mars lander than a Moon lander
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 18:54:01 UTC No. 16131917
>>16131909
MSR has nothing to do with SpaceXs mars plans
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 18:55:26 UTC No. 16131918
>>16131911
You forgot to call me a esl faggot, i know you guys get a kick out of that one.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 18:56:01 UTC No. 16131919
So if russia has a 100x reusable rocket , doesnt that leave spacex in the dust?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 18:57:24 UTC No. 16131920
>>16131919
They would need modernized N-1 at this point since they're not doing China's 1000 Falcon 9s plan.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 18:59:29 UTC No. 16131923
>>16131912
it would make more sense to send an empty launcher/tanker a launch cycle early with the ability to refuel itself
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 18:59:29 UTC No. 16131924
>>16131912
It'll be worse than that I imagine.
Setting up the gigawatts of power and infrastructure to mine thousands of tons ice will be infeasibly hard to do without people on the surface in the time frame Elon wants.
They will send the first people without an assured return.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 18:59:40 UTC No. 16131925
>>16131920
>>16131919
they just need to update the software on soyuz and have all the components return to the launch mounts.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 19:01:29 UTC No. 16131927
Missions longer than 1-2 days typically transition from short term body worn and handheld
collection devices to a toilet to manage urine, feces, menses, and odor in a more hygienic
manner and reduce overall mass. The ISS US Orbital Segment (USOS) primarily uses a
Russian toilet system requiring high up-mass. Urine is precision dosed with hazardous liquid
chemicals at toilet collection prior to delivery to water recovery system. Less hazardous
chemicals and more reliable/lower mass hardware is beneficial to exploration. No resources
are recovered from feces (~75% water). Feces biological activity generates noxious gases that
must be contained or adsorbed. Odor control is only partially effective. US developed toilet
is being evolved with additional pretreat dosing, fecal odor containment, and acoustic
improvements to become operational. Future long duration micro-g missions would
significantly benefit from reduced fecal consumables mass and improved long duration
sustaining of rotary phase separation hardware. Surface missions need very low mass
compact and hygienic commodes for initially small habitat volumes. Water recovery from
feces is an enhancement that may be beneficial for long duration missions. Improved system
performance, improved reliability, and system enhancements to allow lower-level
maintenance are beneficial to a reduction of departure mass and improved crew safety on
long endurance missions where resupply is not feasible. System improvements and
diagnostics assistance that reduces crew time are also beneficial.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 19:03:11 UTC No. 16131929
>>16131925
It really is that easy in spaceflight.
Just run the launch code but start it at the end and decrement IP.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 19:16:18 UTC No. 16131946
>>16131924
why would they? just send the fuel
its just a few more cargo ships, they need to send thousands anyway so it isn't really that much in the grand scheme of things
and it will probably increase the morale of the initial groups substantially
if someone gets cancer or something they will be able to get back and so on
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 19:16:38 UTC No. 16131948
>>16131927
>Surface missions need very low mass
>compact and hygienic commodes for initially small habitat volumes
NASA HAS FALLEN
BILLIONS OF TONS MUST BE LANDED
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 19:17:46 UTC No. 16131950
>>16131946
Yeah you're right.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 19:20:59 UTC No. 16131954
>>16131924
>without an assured return
Is this actually deadly? Would it be feasible to just keep one-way shipping supplies every 2 years?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 19:24:24 UTC No. 16131957
>Prior systems studies have demonstrated, that, due to the tenuous atmosphere at
Mars, only SRP (Supersonic Retro-Propulsion) will meet the requirements for supersonic
descent.
HMMMM
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 19:27:01 UTC No. 16131960
>>16131957
>she only finds out now
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 19:28:25 UTC No. 16131965
>>16131960
Did thou just assume my pronoows
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 19:40:48 UTC No. 16131978
>>16131846
Now we're talking
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 19:41:50 UTC No. 16131979
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 19:42:51 UTC No. 16131981
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 19:43:43 UTC No. 16131984
>>16131979
>ISRU methane production
definitely should be a focus for nasa as it would greatly benefit both earth and spaceflight
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 19:44:55 UTC No. 16131987
>>16131984
>>16131978
Imagine the spin-off tech from all this shit
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 19:45:12 UTC No. 16131988
>>16131919
How do you multiply reusability by 100?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 20:00:59 UTC No. 16132014
Did y'all know about this?
https://techport.nasa.gov/view/1167
>Cryogenic (H2/O2) Smart Propulsion Flight Demonstration (SmartProp)
>Project Description
>Demonstrate a smart propulsion cryogenic system, using liquid oxygen and hydrogen, on a Vulcan Centaur upper stage. Test precise tank pressure control, tank to tank propellant transfer, and multi-week propellant storage (i.e., passive thermal control).
ACES bros we are fucking back!
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 20:08:36 UTC No. 16132027
>>16132008
>we got the Air Force's table scraps for five years why are we not matching projections for if we'd had Cold War MIC-bucks since 1960
BAKA BAKA
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 20:23:14 UTC No. 16132045
>>16132027
stupid fairyposter
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 20:28:58 UTC No. 16132050
>>16131988
>send one rocket up
>100 rockets land
ez for a first world country like russia.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 20:32:19 UTC No. 16132055
>>16131919
SpaceX probably already has a rocket that can be reused 100 times. They just haven't been at it long enough to refly a booster that many times
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 20:39:25 UTC No. 16132062
Any girls on /sfg/?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 20:39:51 UTC No. 16132063
>>16132027
it's not like the air force didn't have all sorts of cool ambitions in the '60s that got killed by beancounters themselves
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 20:51:48 UTC No. 16132084
>>16132062
Nope. Engineering is a sausage fest, especially aerospace engineering.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 20:56:08 UTC No. 16132089
>>16132062
Haiii! I’m a grill :3
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 21:01:08 UTC No. 16132102
>>16132089
I'm looking for love right now, are you available?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 21:02:26 UTC No. 16132105
>>16132045
stupid frogposter
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 21:06:21 UTC No. 16132117
>>16132105
stupid fairyposter
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 21:07:47 UTC No. 16132119
>>16132117
stupid frogposter
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 21:10:32 UTC No. 16132126
wtf is going on with the ULA buyout
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 21:11:21 UTC No. 16132127
>>16132126
gradatim ferociter
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 21:11:50 UTC No. 16132129
>>16132126
negotiating custody
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 21:43:42 UTC No. 16132159
>>16132129
reminds me of when my parents split up.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 21:47:51 UTC No. 16132164
>>16130945
Nope. Dragonfly shall live—by the mandate of Heaven and God. Even if it isn’t exploring the lakes.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 21:49:16 UTC No. 16132166
>>16132129
what does that mean
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 21:54:07 UTC No. 16132173
>>16131824
qualuudes are 1960s/1970s drugs, zoomie
lel it's not even in my spelling correction dictionary
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 21:54:13 UTC No. 16132174
>>16132171
spacex should sue them for using the name dragon
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 21:56:28 UTC No. 16132179
>>16132171
Fucking hell CANCEL DRAGONFLY JUST LIKE MSR
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 21:57:43 UTC No. 16132182
>>16132171
>targeted to arrive at Titan in 2034
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 21:57:58 UTC No. 16132183
>>16132050
>Russia
>send one rocket up
>100 rocket pieces land
ftfy
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 22:00:14 UTC No. 16132187
>>16132127
gradatim gradociter
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 22:08:38 UTC No. 16132199
>>16131628
All the big players had decades longer than SpaceX to do literally any kind of innovation. I don't want to hear it.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 22:08:56 UTC No. 16132200
>>16132182
>doesn't visit any lakes
>on the only other body in the solar system with surface liquids
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 22:13:13 UTC No. 16132204
>>16132200
Does Martian polar cap ice become a liquid at some point or does it only sublimate with the low pressure?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 22:13:14 UTC No. 16132205
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 22:18:51 UTC No. 16132210
>>16132204
No, there's nowhere with enough pressure on Mars for triple point to occur
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 22:25:45 UTC No. 16132219
>>16132204
The polar caps are mostly CO2, and liquid CO2 is very rare because it needs a lot of pressure.
But yeah the pressure is so low that H2O probably sublimates too. The most that people expect ever happens is that very salty water could creep along in the soil.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 22:26:36 UTC No. 16132220
>>16132219
as opposed to Congress where very salty boomers creep along the floor to vote down offworld colonies
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 22:35:34 UTC No. 16132225
>>16132210
there is... but it's kilometers underground.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 22:36:51 UTC No. 16132227
>>16132225
Mmmmmm.... tube colonies....
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 22:38:24 UTC No. 16132230
sage at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 22:40:30 UTC No. 16132233
>>16132171
>Titan is the only moon known to have an atmosphere denser than the Earth's, and is the only known object in space other than Earth on which clear evidence of stable bodies of surface liquid has been found.
that's crazy
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 22:55:05 UTC No. 16132245
>>16132171
Where are the solar panels
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 22:55:55 UTC No. 16132246
>>16132233
Hello newfren, are you interested in space enough to make working in it your career?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 22:59:29 UTC No. 16132254
>>16132245
Titan gets fuck-all sunlight. Dragonfly is nuclear powered.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 23:05:46 UTC No. 16132261
>>16132182
>Im gonna be 32 yo when this happens
Young bros i dont feel good...
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 23:06:50 UTC No. 16132264
>>16131816
>>16131829
Pure vertical integration means that the $10,000 hammer industry dies. It means old space and old primes get fucked outside of government protectionism activities. That's TRUE free and FAIR market at work. Which is a good thing.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 23:07:56 UTC No. 16132267
https://twitter.com/SERobinsonJr/st
> - People using Starlink Roam in South Africa for extended periods will have their service terminated this month. Starlink has been unable to obtain a license to operate from the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (ICASA). ICASA has said that any applicant needs to be 30% owned by historically disadvantaged groups to be considered for an operating license.
lol
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 23:09:01 UTC No. 16132270
>>16132171
People are gonna be pissed when they find out it's being dropped hundreds of miles away from anywhere interesting!
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 23:10:50 UTC No. 16132274
>>16132267
gibsmedat mufugga
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 23:10:54 UTC No. 16132275
>>16132267
>tourists cant use starlink in south africa because they arent cutting a check to grifters
lol lmao even. countries are poor because of bad policies.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 23:12:48 UTC No. 16132280
>>16132277
https://twitter.com/TrevorMahlmann/
>NASA’s newest ride to orbit —@BoeingSpace
CST-100 Starliner—outside of the processing facility at Kennedy Space Center this morning
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 23:13:11 UTC No. 16132281
>>16132267
same thing?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 23:13:51 UTC No. 16132283
>>16132280
https://twitter.com/_mgde_/status/1
>Only at the space port that never sleeps.
>Earlier this morning, @Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft was rolled out of the Commercial Crew and Cargo Processing Facility at the Kennedy Space Center to begin its journey to SLC-41.
>CFT astronauts Suni Williams and Barry Wilmore were on site to witness their spacecraft in motion just weeks before their scheduled flight to the @Space_Station
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 23:16:27 UTC No. 16132288
>>16132281
maybe
I think I saw something similar from another african country too, spacex cracking down on the usage
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 23:16:54 UTC No. 16132290
>>16132277
The circumcision skirt sucks, but Starliner itself is pretty. Thermal blankets add texture and sovl.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 23:17:30 UTC No. 16132292
>>16132283
https://twitter.com/Commercial_Crew
> STACKED: @BoeingSpace's #Starliner spacecraft has been placed atop @ULALaunch's Atlas V rocket for the agency's Crew Flight Test mission!
>Set to lift off May 6, Starliner will spend about a week docked to
starliner stacked
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 23:18:19 UTC No. 16132294
>>16132292
cant wait for spaceflight in america to get shut down for 18 months after the crew dies on this deathtrap
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 23:18:35 UTC No. 16132296
>>16132292
Good grief, was it originally designed for Delta or something? It barely fucking fits hahah
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 23:19:32 UTC No. 16132298
>>16132292
they haven't pushed back the launch date in more than a month so i'm assuming it's legit for once
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 23:21:30 UTC No. 16132302
>>16132292
benis rogget :DDDDD
>>16132296
Delta was Boing!s design so probably.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 23:23:35 UTC No. 16132304
>>16132301
That chin is disgusting
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 23:24:39 UTC No. 16132306
Was the fingolian conscripted?
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 23:25:02 UTC No. 16132310
starship v3 is a mistake, right? instead build a space dock and build real spaceships.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 23:27:32 UTC No. 16132313
>>16132290
they add about 100 million $
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 23:27:41 UTC No. 16132314
>>16132310
starship v3 maybe the minimum required to launch the supply to build and operate a space dock
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 23:28:01 UTC No. 16132316
>>16132310
V3 isn't real.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 23:28:25 UTC No. 16132317
>>16132296
the original design got drawn up back in the constellation days when they realized orion would be completely overbuilt for ISS missions. it was basically an orion-lite (there was some specific nickname for the concept but i forget) that didn't need to launch on ares I/DIVH/atlas heavy.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 23:33:21 UTC No. 16132324
>>16132254
Does it have to land and charge batteries or does it have enough nuclear energy to fly continuously
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 23:34:11 UTC No. 16132327
>>16132324
I have to assume continuous because it's sitting in the mother of all cryogenic baths where batteries won't work.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 23:39:56 UTC No. 16132333
>>16132309
I spy an expendable launch pad
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 23:51:39 UTC No. 16132344
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 23:51:58 UTC No. 16132345
>>16132324
It has to land.
>>16132327
You're delusional. It has a warm box just like any other probe.
Also you have no concept of how much power it takes to make a 400 kg object fly vs how much an rtg provides
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Apr 2024 00:38:18 UTC No. 16132417
>>16131107
>a famous horse breeder (the analogy works on multiple levels)
kek
Anonymous at Wed, 17 Apr 2024 03:01:39 UTC No. 16132532
>>16130645
Starship made it to orbit..