🧵 /sfg/ - Spaceflight General
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 14:20:19 UTC No. 16134598
Phallic Edition
Previous - >>16132343
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 14:22:09 UTC No. 16134604
>>16134598
I see a wee wee and an arm reaching out to tug on it....
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 14:24:54 UTC No. 16134609
>>16134604
coomer, i....
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 14:40:28 UTC No. 16134642
>>16134636
SUSIE and Starship are not space planes. They are not capsules.
They are reusable fairings.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 14:55:18 UTC No. 16134661
>>16134636
reusable spacecraft
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 14:57:51 UTC No. 16134668
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 15:12:32 UTC No. 16134689
>>16134636
No, they are bricks with wings.
Barkon at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 15:13:49 UTC No. 16134692
>>16134689
It's Barkon's time to speak, now let's be quiet
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 15:13:58 UTC No. 16134693
>>16134658
>>16134668
>Patrolling the Mojave Almost Makes You Wish For a Nuclear Winter
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 15:20:52 UTC No. 16134699
we need something exciting to happen today
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 15:22:26 UTC No. 16134701
>>16134699
Starlinks are flying today.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 15:28:31 UTC No. 16134707
>>16134701
exciting
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 15:35:05 UTC No. 16134711
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 15:36:56 UTC No. 16134714
>>16134692
Tuxedo cats are silly little things
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 15:40:40 UTC No. 16134719
>>16134711
sanctions aren't affecting it
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 15:58:40 UTC No. 16134732
female welding colleague invited me to her place so she can show me some TIG welding. What did she mean by this?
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 15:59:58 UTC No. 16134735
>>16134732
sex
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 16:07:42 UTC No. 16134741
>>16134719
idk, considering how scared they are of letting outside institutions get direct hands on economic data, i'd say they're working. they wouldn't have anything to hide if a bunch of sanctions magically had no effect.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 16:11:26 UTC No. 16134747
>>16134732
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ya_
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 16:33:11 UTC No. 16134770
the biden admin is corrupt
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 16:34:10 UTC No. 16134772
>>16134770
Name one admin after JFK that didn’t royally fuck up NASAs potential
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 16:35:56 UTC No. 16134775
>>16134772
Trump
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 16:37:28 UTC No. 16134777
>>16134775
Wrong, ISS was extended and SLS was thrown more funding. This is, metaphorically, dropping two anchors and folding your sails away.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 16:53:36 UTC No. 16134796
>>16134777
So your question was insincere as those are congressional actions and you deliberately omitted Artemis.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 16:59:08 UTC No. 16134800
>>16134796
Ahhh thanks for mentioning! Who controlled the purse in 2016, 2017, and 2019?!
And is SLS not a part of Artemis? Thanks for mentioning that too—they kept Gateway alive. A toll booth grift designed to “chain” Congress to the Moon… and we know how that works out long-term (see: MSR samples being left on Mars. Turns out adding cost and complexity doesn’t save you money)
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 17:07:20 UTC No. 16134808
>>16134732
It's an acronym, Tungsten In 'er Gash
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 17:13:24 UTC No. 16134815
>>16134732
She's embarrassed about your shitty welds making the company look bad and wants to show you how to improve.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 17:16:21 UTC No. 16134818
>>16134800
You shouldn't write longer responses as it gives away your ESL.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 17:17:07 UTC No. 16134821
>>16134772
Obongo gave money to that pay pal guy so there's that
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 17:21:14 UTC No. 16134824
>>16134815
meanwhile my shitty welds:
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 17:23:12 UTC No. 16134825
the niggers at j fiber have discovered advanced fiber cables which are perfect for woman with dark skin tones who put things into tubes and press buttons which use fiber cables. if you're in the business of fiber cables, even if you aren't as smart as a nigger is, these fiber cables will make you cum in your pants
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 17:25:39 UTC No. 16134830
>>16134732
she wants to see your tungsten electrode
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 17:29:23 UTC No. 16134836
>>16134732
Your balls and penis WILL be welded together and you WILL enjoy it
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 18:08:26 UTC No. 16134870
>>16134732
>not friction stir welding
she's going to clamp your nuts
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 18:08:40 UTC No. 16134872
>>16134836
Wherein the propellant is stored
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 18:11:30 UTC No. 16134878
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2nC
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 19:10:49 UTC No. 16134927
>>16134919
footpig.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 19:26:13 UTC No. 16134936
>>16134796
>>16134775
If you remove funding what was accomplished by the administration? HLS and ... em ... Oh, they changed the name to Artemis.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 19:26:19 UTC No. 16134937
>>16134818
>political dogmatist gets told
>pretends anyone other than himself is mad.
wew lad
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 19:28:23 UTC No. 16134939
>>16134818
So you’re wrong, then. And now you have nothing to attack save for my English fluency.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 19:28:25 UTC No. 16134940
>>16134795
why do all pleasure craft look the same?
they all have that gayass horseshoe shaped window.
it's boring and tasteless.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 19:30:28 UTC No. 16134942
>>16134692
Nice cat, not as nice as my cat.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 19:33:04 UTC No. 16134946
>>16134940
>why do all these pleasure craft boats have a almost 360 view window.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 20:22:12 UTC No. 16134986
>>16134940
refinement culture
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 20:23:27 UTC No. 16134988
Of all the words of tongue and pen, the saddest are these: "we've not yet reached TRL 3"
https://techport.nasa.gov/view/1463
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 20:48:35 UTC No. 16135017
>>16135005
Apollo 11 happened and then the general populace and politicians realized they didn’t really give a fuck about space [math]\unicode{x1F937}[/math]
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 20:55:53 UTC No. 16135024
>>16135005
>1500
>still no 1420's style tributary in Africa
What went so unbelievably wrong?
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 21:04:02 UTC No. 16135028
>>16134714
They're the best. They have the thirst for affection of a void and the questionable intelligence and/or goofyness of an orange tabby,
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 21:05:36 UTC No. 16135029
>>16134936
Space Force, duh.
>changed the name
SLS didn't have a program at ALL under obeezy because he kept canceling missions like Mars and crewed NEA flyby. Trump was also visibly more supportive of commercial space (picrel).
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 21:06:00 UTC No. 16135031
>>16135005
The yanks declared a pyrrhic victory, the slavs went on did their own thing because the funding dried up, euro's picked healthcare instead of space exploration.
If the russians landed on the moon first, the US would have been like "fuck you, we are going to mars instead"
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 21:15:29 UTC No. 16135041
>>16135029
>... NASAs potential
>space farce
Hmmm.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 21:17:59 UTC No. 16135044
>>16135031
The one thing Senpai got right was that the US would never tolerate Soviet lunar supremacy because of the high ground effect.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 21:33:56 UTC No. 16135064
>>16135044
I know i'm going to get a lot of shit for this, but russia won ever battle, US won the war in the space race.
And i still dont understand how the US went from going to the moon to riding bitch on the soyuz to the ISS.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 21:36:05 UTC No. 16135066
>>16135064
Simple. Rockwell lied like a used car saleswoman with a law degree about the capabilities and price of their STS bid (which is why they no longer exist) and then NASA had to apportion shuttle contracts so carefully between Congressional districts that fixing the flaws after Challenger was impossible.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 21:45:23 UTC No. 16135081
If Korolev didn't die would the Soviets have landed on the Moon? Assuming that Apollo goes on the same as IRL, and N1 flies in the 70s. Would there still have been enough will on either side to continue?
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 21:56:17 UTC No. 16135096
>>16135081
Who knows, there are some who claim that the N1 was actually becoming a lot more reliable when they pulled the plug on it.
Others say it was a shitshow and that it ever got of the ground is miracle.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 21:58:20 UTC No. 16135098
>>16135064
The United States was sabotaged from within, otherwise there'd have been Apollo-derived Mars and Venus missions by the mid 80s.
>have Saturn V
>retire it
>have to invent new heavy lift vehicle
>can't for any less than $4bn
>+tip
Someone should do an alt-history like SENPAI but without all the gays and lame drama.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 21:59:13 UTC No. 16135101
>>16135081
Soviets cut their losses because it was embarassing having their superheavy rocket explode every time when the American one worked flawlessly. If N1 worked, or even if Saturn V exploded a few times then I think Soviets would have done it.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 22:01:02 UTC No. 16135104
>>16134732
>female welding colleague
stopped reading right there. this never happened.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 22:01:46 UTC No. 16135105
Its been so boring recently.. atleast May will be pumped the fuck up because Shartliner explosion and Starship flight
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 22:04:02 UTC No. 16135110
>>16135098
>The United States was sabotaged from within
By who?
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 22:06:42 UTC No. 16135112
>>16135110
Gremlins.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 22:09:10 UTC No. 16135114
>>16135064
you should get a lot of shit for it because
>russia won ever(y) battle
isn't even remotely close to true. the r7 was head and shoulders above any american launcher from 1957-1964 but the soviets were still failing to get a lot of firsts due to their deficient electronics - especially with how mariner 2 and 4 were the first probes to return any useful info from venus and mars. voskhod was a desperate stunt to try to paper over how gemini was ready years ahead of soyuz. after voskhod 2 americans spent nearly 2000 man-hours in orbit before a soviet flew again... and that flight was soyuz 1.
>>16135081
what would korolev not dying have fixed? the n1 was the rocket he designed, and mishin was his right-hand man who korolev trusted more than any other. what we got irl is pretty much what we would have gotten in an alternate timeline. the n1 would have still been a disaster and korolev would have ended his career in disgrace. dying young was a good move for him, since it let him become a totem for lazy alternate histories rather than a subject for critical historical analysis.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 22:10:13 UTC No. 16135116
>>16135112
we don't tolerate antisemetic ideology here.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 22:12:13 UTC No. 16135125
>>16135116
*Antigremlitic
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 22:12:46 UTC No. 16135126
Is there a fundamental lower bound on rocket nozzle size? Could a future craft have 10000 tiny individual rocket engines, all 3d printed or something?
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 22:15:28 UTC No. 16135129
>>16135126
Yes.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 22:16:11 UTC No. 16135131
>>16135126
as long as it's pressure-fed you can pretty much make it as small as you want. that's what rcs thrusters are.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 22:16:33 UTC No. 16135133
>>16135081
If N1 worked and the Soviets had not quit the space race would have continued and there would be Moon colonies already.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 22:21:11 UTC No. 16135142
>>16135129
aerospikes arethe most holariousl stupid design ever
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 22:21:38 UTC No. 16135144
>>16135114
Korolev was the dominant political force in the Soviet space program. It would have recieved more resources, suffered less infighting and not been cancelled before what might would have been its first successful flight.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 22:23:42 UTC No. 16135150
>>16135142
Sober up before you shitpost.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 22:28:55 UTC No. 16135156
>>16135129
>>16135142
have any aerospike engines been flown yet?
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 22:31:16 UTC No. 16135160
>>16135156
Yes, many, but nobody wants to fund bigger projects.
Not since the whole X-33 shitshow.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 22:31:58 UTC No. 16135162
>>16135131
What about turbopumps? What's the limiting factor for making them fit inside a liter?
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 22:39:51 UTC No. 16135171
>>16135144
i could buy that line of thinking if korolev hadn't been one of the primary sources of infighting himself. was he a dominant political force? no, he couldn't get development of the n1 authorized until 1964 largely because he'd discredited himself with lots of the power players in soviet politics. even after 1964 the project suffered for lack of resources because korolev and chelomei were fighting over control of the manned flyby program.
note that i'm not claiming this is all korolev's fault. but it's a matter of fact. the whole n1-l3 project was never in good shape. it was always years behind apollo. even in a best-case scenario they wouldn't have been ready for a manned landing before 1972 - and that would've just highlighted how much less capable a soviet lunar mission was than a j-class apollo landing.
you can come up with alternate histories where the soviets get their act together years earlier and come up with a rocket design that isn't held together with hopium - it's not impossible that the space race could've continued. but korolev alone isn't your ticket to that, and in fact i'm not sure he helps at all.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 22:47:08 UTC No. 16135183
>>16135173
boooring
i live by the coast and I don't even bother to see them anymore unless it's Falcon Heavy or anything else besides SpaceX
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 23:32:02 UTC No. 16135216
>>16135110
Congress
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 23:33:55 UTC No. 16135219
>>16135160
Some absolute galaxybrains flew a hydrogen peroxide monoprop RDRE aerospike recently as a tech demo.
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-rel
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 23:34:24 UTC No. 16135221
>>16135216
>we don't tolerate antisemetic ideology here.
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 23:38:51 UTC No. 16135222
>>16135219
rainbow dash looking ass
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 23:42:29 UTC No. 16135224
>>16135219
nice, i'm still kind of mad about the whole x-33 situation, the launch pad was ready, the x-33 test version was 90% done.
Congress pulled the plug because of the composite tank bullshit while the alu tanks turned out lighter and more reliable.
The us army wanted to step in and fund to al least see it fly one time and find out of aerospikes actually work so they could claim the entire project.
Congress blocked that too.
So two options, aerospikes actually work and it would destroy oldspace, or it was a massive scam and they killed the project at the last second so nobody could find out.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 00:02:15 UTC No. 16135243
>>16135224
Given how buttmad Tory Bruno still is about cancellation I'm pretty sure it would have worked. Ironically the Venture Star would have been happening right around the same time as Falcon 9 so we could have seen an aerospike shootle with optional flyback kerolox LRBs for heavier payloads or higher orbits.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 00:05:36 UTC No. 16135248
>>16135243
what do you "worked" the vehicle they had would never have made orbit
If there was any weight bloat on the final vehicle which was not under construction then your payload disappears
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 00:05:55 UTC No. 16135249
SLS GEARING UP TO GET CANNED AAAAHHHHHHH
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 00:09:31 UTC No. 16135251
>>16135248
Again, dont post when shitfaced.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 00:21:10 UTC No. 16135263
>>16135249
lol not happening (though I wish it would)
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 00:22:44 UTC No. 16135265
>>16135263
He might be right
https://x.com/sciguyspace/status/17
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 00:24:54 UTC No. 16135270
>>16134732
We need pics
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 00:31:18 UTC No. 16135275
>>16135265
MSR AND SLS GETTING CANNED BACK TO BACK
IM COMING
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 00:39:04 UTC No. 16135282
>>16135265
>errrm artemis launch dates are slipping so we're gonna fire a lotta people
interesting reasoning!
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 00:39:31 UTC No. 16135283
>>16135265
>Pay Boing! hundreds of billions to develop a rocket desperately, and keep the shuttle alive by all means
>They decide to scale back on the project anyways
Artemis 2 2035
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 00:39:56 UTC No. 16135284
>>16135005
Vietnam
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 00:56:28 UTC No. 16135301
>>16135096
The N1 test flights are a lot like Starship test flights, except there's not a lot of definitive proof that the Soviets ever fixed any of the issues the explosions pointed out. Switching to the next generation engines was a good move, and it was in line with the original projections of the rocket being ready for service sometime in the mid-seventies.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 00:57:35 UTC No. 16135302
>>16135301
>not a lot of definitive proof that the Soviets ever fixed any of the issues the explosions pointed out
another similarity there...
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 01:01:19 UTC No. 16135305
https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/
>SpaceX is reportedly working with at least one major US defense contractor, Northrop Grumman, on a constellation of spy satellites for the National Reconnaissance Office.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 01:03:09 UTC No. 16135307
>>16135305
https://archive.is/rwvvp
>Exclusive: Northrop Grumman working with Musk's SpaceX on U.S. spy satellite system
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 01:04:38 UTC No. 16135309
>>16135307
> In March, Reuters reported that the National Reconnaissance Office, or NRO, in 2021 awarded a $1.8 billion contract to SpaceX for the classified project, a planned network of hundreds of satellites. So far, the people familiar with the project said, SpaceX has launched roughly a dozen prototypes and is already providing test imagery to the NRO, an intelligence agency that oversees development of U.S. spy satellites.
>The collection of imagery hasn't been previously reported.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 01:22:03 UTC No. 16135319
>>16135265
ITS OVER
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 01:22:19 UTC No. 16135320
>>16135310
mostly works for the romulans other than when the aliens who could freeze time were living inside one
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 01:28:58 UTC No. 16135326
>>16135320
I mean, the basic idea isn't that far fetched compared to the technology that we have today or could make today. Things like nuclear pumped lasers, that's something we can do.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 01:29:12 UTC No. 16135327
>>16135104
I worked with 3 female welders over 20 years ago. It is a thing.
They were fucking shit to deal with though.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 01:31:26 UTC No. 16135329
>>16135328
When will the world be freed from the nonstop kikery in the blood stained deserts?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 01:35:02 UTC No. 16135336
>>16135329
When will we kick out all variants of Abrahamic religions?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 01:37:55 UTC No. 16135338
>>16135326
"compress 100 metric tons into something one ten-thousandth the size of a proton" isn't an inherently difficult concept to understand but if you think it's not far fetched compared to today's technology then i'd suggest that you work on comprehending orders of magnitude
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 01:39:13 UTC No. 16135340
>>16135265
wasn't apollo's peak workforce in like 1966? You don't need as many engineers once you've designed and tested the thing
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 01:39:22 UTC No. 16135341
>>16135338
*compress 100000 metric tons
i have to work on my orders of magnitude too
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 02:11:31 UTC No. 16135367
https://twitter.com/DrPhiltill/stat
>we are designing and building a TRL-6 robotic excavator
Nasa actually starting to do something non-retarded?
Starship is starting to sink in
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 02:12:55 UTC No. 16135370
>>16135367
once the spiral shovels fill up one (1) time, what do they do with the dirt
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 02:17:11 UTC No. 16135373
>>16133272
post guns so I can judge you
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 02:17:50 UTC No. 16135375
>>16135370
Set it in piles for the ESA+NASA refinery mission to recover 17 years later (cancelled)
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 02:23:39 UTC No. 16135381
>>16135367
it's about time. Seemed like no-one apart from Casket Handjob or whatever that guys name is was doing anything to contribute to making ISRU happen.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 02:44:26 UTC No. 16135399
>>16134936
he appointed big jim, who was based. thats about it.
>>16135110
the senators from utah, alabama, and washington state.
>>16135265
its boiver
>>16135340
SLS isn't finished, they need a different model SLS for artemis 3 and on.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 02:46:58 UTC No. 16135404
>>16135328
>The Iranian Space Agency (ISA) is claiming that Air Defense Batteries were able to Intercept at least 3 Hostile Targets this morning over the Isfahan Province of Central Iran
imagine nasa saying some shit like this
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 02:54:00 UTC No. 16135410
>>16134824
use more filler, you've got undercutting
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 02:56:00 UTC No. 16135411
https://twitter.com/PrivateerSpace/
Dumbest shit I saw today, perhaps the whole week
And that is saying something
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 03:02:24 UTC No. 16135417
>>16135411
So a Didn't Earn It has a single brain cell opinion. What a shocking surprise.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 03:23:45 UTC No. 16135429
>>16135336
based forest shaman
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 03:37:34 UTC No. 16135442
I have payed for my Fumo
I predict it will be arriving before the end of the month
I hope you idiots are prepared for an increase in fumoposts
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 03:56:27 UTC No. 16135455
>>16135371
First it's "musk doesn't do anything he just takes all the credit" now it's "why is he screwing everything up" so I wonder (not really, we all know the answer) what they'll say once starship actually starts delivering payloads to orbit
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 04:30:32 UTC No. 16135470
>>16135411
ok my satellite does coms AND it takes pictures of earth
that good enough?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 04:34:11 UTC No. 16135471
>>16135371
>>16135455
there's been a switcheroo from "falcon 9 is a money-loser/dangerous/nothing new" to "falcon 9 is great but nobody involved in that is still around" too
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 04:35:18 UTC No. 16135473
>>16134795
Looks ugly as fuck compare to a j class
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 04:41:40 UTC No. 16135479
>>16135265
>having to wait on SpaceX to finish hls forcing Boeing to burn cash is some how Boeing's fault
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 04:54:32 UTC No. 16135490
>>16135411
Yeah, I think it's stupid how satellites take a single photo and then immediately stop working.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 05:05:31 UTC No. 16135491
>>16135442
What's a fumo?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 05:07:35 UTC No. 16135492
>>16135473
Almost anything does though. A better insult is that it looks like a Chinese knockoff yacht with junk rigging because that pokes fun at Amazon.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 05:21:50 UTC No. 16135505
>>16135491
fear uv missing out
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 05:24:02 UTC No. 16135507
>>16135491
short for "mofu tomodachi" (soft friend) they're these silly stuffed anime dolls
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 05:49:40 UTC No. 16135525
>>16135507
actuallllllly
it's from moFUMOfu which is a japanese onomatopeia for soft
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 06:50:25 UTC No. 16135571
remind yourself on Perseverance' whereabouts:
https://science.nasa.gov/mission/ma
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 06:57:52 UTC No. 16135575
>>16135571
>barely 10km covered in 4 years
pathetic
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 07:07:42 UTC No. 16135592
>>16135575
That's what happens when you send a robot to do an astronaut's job
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 07:07:43 UTC No. 16135593
>>16135307
I think it is hilarious that the government is so desperate to have a backup for SpaceX they are all but forcing Elon to give up the crown jewels to his competitors
I look forward to their reaction when NG just takes the money and keeps working on expensive expendable rockets
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 07:53:47 UTC No. 16135628
>>16135371
musk just eats poop and shits and pees and gulps cum all day fucking long and it kills me because i could literally do a better job
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 07:55:57 UTC No. 16135630
>>16135442
honestly excited
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 08:34:37 UTC No. 16135662
>>16135473
J class are so beautiful man
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 09:27:37 UTC No. 16135696
>>16134824
>almost all of it on the underplate in a corner weld
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 09:52:36 UTC No. 16135709
>>16135471
>Falcon 9 cannot work, the SpaceX employees are all clueless amateurs who never designed a rocket
>ok, Falcon 9 can get to orbit, but will not be able to land it
>ok, Falcon 9 can land but they cannot reuse it
>ok, Falcon 9 can land and they can reuse it, but they cannot get enough contracts to make it economical at scale
>ok, Falcon 9 can get enough contracts, but they are mostly internal Starlink contracts
>ok, Falcon 9 can get enough contracts from all sorts of customers, but some of them are government owned payloads, so SpaceX is running on corporate welfare and Falcon 9 was a sham
>Also, Musk did not do anything, he just hired perfect experts who knew everything about designing rockets in the first place
>Also, it was obvious this all can be done because it was done before (DC-X), NASA just chose not to do it this way and focus on better things
>Starship cannot work, the SpaceX employees are all clueless amateurs who never designed a rocket
>ok Starship can get to orbit, but it won't survive re-entry
(we are here)
>ok, Starship can survive re-entry, but will not land on launchpad
>ok, Starship can land on launchpad, but it won't be economical to reuse
>ok Starship can be reused economically, but it can't be used as a orbital fuel depot for HLS because of boil-off
>ok Starship can be used as a depot for HLS but HLS won't be able to land on Moon because of high thrust/height
>ok Starship HLS has landed on Moon, but Starship will never be able to aerobrake at Mars
>ok Starship is able to aerobrake at Mars but there will never be a permanent base
>ok, there's a tiny Mars base of 1000 people, but not a city of 1 million, so it was a total failure
>Also, Musk did not do anything, he just hired perfect experts who knew everything about designing rockets in the first place
>Also it was obvious this all can work because it was done before (STS), NASA just chose not to do it this way and focus on better things
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 09:59:04 UTC No. 16135716
>>16135628
there's NOTHING, exceptional, or talented about Musk. The son of a billionaire, became a billionaire, SHOCKING, right? Meanwhile, Boeing, has been working on REAL, reusable lunch vehicles, with their, SMART, recovery.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 10:05:20 UTC No. 16135722
>>16135709
The EDS crowd on yotuube are inspiration that you can make it big with pretty much any level of talent or understanding so long as you catch a niche. There is still undersupply in the EDS theatre so perhaps I will make fake EDS content with even more deranged takes than any of them.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 10:19:33 UTC No. 16135735
>>16135722
Poe's Law applies. The idiots will think it's real and you'll only make yourself more frustrated at the unending depths of human stupidity that can't help but parade themselves in front of our eyes.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 10:27:48 UTC No. 16135739
>>16135735
You would still make money and perhaps you could start dropping in some stuff that is mostly unknown to the EDS crowd
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 10:38:35 UTC No. 16135743
https://twitter.com/fakecarlsagan/s
The absolute state of tory bruno
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 11:02:22 UTC No. 16135754
>>16135371
>actually, NASA designed the falcon9&dragon capsule, and they payed somebody else to build it.
What is this guy smoking?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 11:07:29 UTC No. 16135758
>>16135754
>Common Sinsemilla Smoker
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 11:37:50 UTC No. 16135781
>>16135743
lol
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 11:41:07 UTC No. 16135786
is space based solar possible? find out here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-W
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 11:50:47 UTC No. 16135797
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 11:52:41 UTC No. 16135798
>>16135797
they haven't - yet
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 12:03:45 UTC No. 16135803
>>16135743
refute this
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 12:04:54 UTC No. 16135804
>>16135803
I kneel
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 12:17:02 UTC No. 16135808
>>16135803
>refute this
it's obsolete
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 12:18:12 UTC No. 16135811
>>16135742
It won't be just by his effort alone. Don't forget about Congress.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 12:21:41 UTC No. 16135813
>tory is having a melty
oh no no no
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 12:25:01 UTC No. 16135815
>>16135808
Nuh-uh. It's not obsolete. It's just on track to become obsolete in the near future.
And from a procurement perspective, an inferior design isn't obsolete until there are at least two competing providers of the superior design (and whose designs are operational and proven). Ideally, more than two.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 12:25:13 UTC No. 16135816
>>16135808
As Thunderfoot said, the ONLY reason to have loads of small engines isntead of one big engine is that you dont have the expertise to build a big one.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 12:29:54 UTC No. 16135818
>>16135816
They looked into massive engines before (Sea Dragon) and deemed it too unreliable ie. it might work but has a good chance of blowing up every now and then
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 12:32:09 UTC No. 16135819
>>16135816
There's no need to develop the expertise to build a few big engines, if it's cheaper to develop the expertise to build reliable plumbing for 33 small engines, and cheaper to produce more units of a single type of engine rather than fewer units of two types of engines
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 12:38:14 UTC No. 16135825
>>16135818
>a good chance of blowing up every now and then
we have been cruelly denied kino
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 12:39:50 UTC No. 16135827
the only complaint i have about raptor is it doesn't need to be that complex (FFSC) because of the relatively short burn time ie. like S-IC; yes the specific impulse is better but they could've just gone with a standard staged combustion and simplified it a lot
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 12:40:39 UTC No. 16135828
>>16135827
*relatively short burn time of the Super Heavy because it stages fairly slow and low (same principle as F9) to allow for reuse
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 12:41:28 UTC No. 16135829
>>16135827
Doesn't FFSC help with reusability?
Doesn't it put less strain on the turbopump(s) for the same performance, and alleviates the issue of interpropellant seals?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 12:43:38 UTC No. 16135831
>>16135818
Would that be as much of a problem today? They didn't have the same simulation capabilities back in the 1960s
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 12:44:49 UTC No. 16135832
>>16135827
Yes but counterpoint: by slaving away and making the best rocket engine ever made (which evidently is only going to get even better) they end up mogging others in both thrust AND efficiency—not to mention the cost is lower than any other rocket engine of similar caliber save for maybe BE-4 (I only say that because Blue Origin provides a small engine price, but they could be fudging numbers)
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 12:46:17 UTC No. 16135833
>>16135722
It's likely a venture worth attempting. EDS content is definitely a growth market.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 12:47:12 UTC No. 16135834
>>16135816
This is 10/10 bait or you’re just retarded hahah
>>16135831
You only build giant, extremely unstable engines because you don’t know how to build better smaller engines. Literally useless in 2024 to build something like the F1
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 12:47:57 UTC No. 16135836
>>16135832
It seems to me that engine price might be hard to compare fairly, because no manufacturer has the same economies of scale as SpaceX does
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 12:51:48 UTC No. 16135837
https://spacenews.com/astra-conside
How are they still alive?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 12:53:22 UTC No. 16135838
>>16135310
>the two major theoretical possibilities were [a] antimatter and [b] primordial black holes.
Antimatter is just an extreme version of preexisting energy storage methods. Fuels can already explode and be difficult to create. There's nothing strictly stopping us from using antimatter as fuel already. The only problem is being able to use it at great scales. I'd say figuring out a way to create antimatter more efficiently is much more plausible than figuring out a way to create a black hole.
Though I will admit, having black hole production lines and shipping them around to be used up does sound cool as hell.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 12:53:28 UTC No. 16135839
https://spacenews.com/virgin-galact
And these guys aren't doing too well either
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 13:11:23 UTC No. 16135857
>>16135839
Good, hopefully people have realised this piece of shit doesn't actually go to space.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 13:18:17 UTC No. 16135861
>>16135857
crab in a bucket.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 13:28:11 UTC No. 16135865
>>16135857
Kinda silly that it doesn’t, huh. Was there really no way they could squeeze that last little bit of propellant in there to get another 13km up? Would it be too big for the launcher aircraft at that point?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 13:29:25 UTC No. 16135866
>>16135310
How exactly do you control a black hole?
It's an object a fraction the size of an atom that weighs more than a freighter ship and will eat anything it touches.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 13:37:46 UTC No. 16135868
>>16135866
Do magnets work? I'd use magnets.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 13:47:44 UTC No. 16135875
>>16135836
fairly? lol
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 13:48:44 UTC No. 16135876
>>16135833
there might be growing demand after Starship actually starts working, people need their confirmation bias soothed over why its in fact shit believe me bro and not a revolution
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 13:53:34 UTC No. 16135881
>>16135816
this is quite possibly the goofiest piece of bait I have ever heard in my life. Footfungus should get an award for this take.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 14:04:02 UTC No. 16135885
>>16135370
The drum is spun backwards to deposit the material. I wonder if they will dump it into an enclosed augger, as I don't think you want conveyors to move material.
It will be interesting, maybe they will use a binder and extrude the material to consolidate and keep it together, then process it.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 14:05:36 UTC No. 16135887
>>16135837
scraped through selling the engines they got buy buying another company previously, but even that would be in better state if they didn't fuck with it (like half left/got fired of that department)
chris kemp is probably quite charismatic, but very shit at executing or technically in general
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 14:06:25 UTC No. 16135888
>>16135885
why wouldn't you want conveyors?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 14:12:39 UTC No. 16135891
>>16135875
As in, based purely on the technical nature of the engine design itself
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 14:21:25 UTC No. 16135895
>>16135888
For the same reason they wouldn't use conventional buckets on the excavator. The movement that the conveyor imparts is going to result in a shower of dust. You want to keep the regolith enclosed and using rotation to impart momentum that keeps the material against the enclosing surface is a means to do that.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 14:22:36 UTC No. 16135897
>>16135891
I don't think you can separate them
designing for mass manufacturability affects the performance and cost itself
cost is cost
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 14:27:09 UTC No. 16135898
>>16135897
no, youre an idiot.
Astranon at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 14:31:21 UTC No. 16135903
>>16135887
Kemp was visibly tweaking around the office more than once and used to work at NASA so I think it's a mix of drugs and oldspace rotting his brain. I don't know what the fuck Adam London ever did. A big part of the delay for Rocket 4 is they licensed engine designs rather than just buying off the shelf parts so they tried to force march their engine manufacturing teams to advance about ten years in two, while cutting hardware engineers and almost their entire software department from launch ops to datalake to flight software down to the bone instead of ejecting all the email job foids. This worked about as well as you would expect.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 14:38:58 UTC No. 16135914
>>16135898
so we can't compare the cost of a mass manufactured car with some hand built supercar?
of course we can, don't be ridiculous
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 14:43:22 UTC No. 16135917
>>16135914
>>16135898
to make this point clearer
when you decide to choose a bigger vs smaller engine, one of the factors is how many engines you build
the smaller engines will get greater economies of scale, so that will be a benefit in choosing them for instance
you can't just look at this in vacuum
Astranon at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 14:44:33 UTC No. 16135919
>>16135917
Except for upper stage engines, those need to be looked at in a vacuum.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 14:53:22 UTC No. 16135928
>>16135116
That's right. We don't tolerate it. We encourage and propound it.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 15:06:08 UTC No. 16135939
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zv
>LIVE at SpaceX Starbase Texas watching Vertical Cryo Tank Removal and Demolition
tank stream
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 15:06:48 UTC No. 16135941
>>16135816
I hope he really said that
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 15:09:02 UTC No. 16135942
>>16135903
dude in his estronaut interview my first impression was that the dude was either really high or forcing himself to be sober and having a bad time of it. glad its not just me
🗑️ Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 15:12:41 UTC No. 16135947
>>16135897
If we don't separate them, engine design becomes conflated with industry structure. SpaceX has labor, money and market share that would allow them to benefit from economies of scale even if they had chosen a different engine design
Astranon at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 15:12:54 UTC No. 16135949
>>16135942
Yeah we were all kept well away from estronaut so we couldn't tell him what we really thought.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 15:14:14 UTC No. 16135950
>>16135939
tankwatching? in my 2024? it's more likely than you think
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 15:30:13 UTC No. 16135958
>>16135865
It's going to the cucked US definition of space so I guess they figured that was easier than trying to get higher.
>>16135861
It's Virgin "Galactic" retard, if anything they're reversing progress in space exploration by making people think they're astronauts.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 16:09:03 UTC No. 16135988
>>16135837
because these are the investors
https://twitter.com/Austen/status/1
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 16:23:08 UTC No. 16136001
Is China preparing a SAR megaconstellation?
Ku band, 230kg, stackable flat panel
>Taijing 4-03 satellite is a high-resolution flat-panel SAR imaging satellite developed by Micro-Nano Starry Sky. It is my country's first commercial Ku-band phased array radar imaging satellite. The satellite weighs 230 kilograms, has a resolution of sub-meter level, and has multiple imaging modes such as bunching, striping, and scanning. The observation width in sliding mode can reach more than 10km. In addition, Micro-Nano Star Sky has designed and implemented a flat-panel satellite configuration for the first time. This configuration mode can realize multi-satellite stack launch, laying the foundation for large-scale satellite network launch, and its commercial technology level is at the leading level in the world. The satellite adopts an on-board intelligent processing system that can quickly generate images in orbit. For the field of ocean monitoring, it can quickly detect and identify sea and airport targets.
https://weibo.com/5658451754/OarFpu
What is the global SAR situation today? How would Taijing 4 compare?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 16:24:25 UTC No. 16136002
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 16:25:12 UTC No. 16136004
https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/
>Multiple sources have confirmed that NASA is studying alternatives to the planned Artemis III landing of two astronauts on the Moon, nominally scheduled for September 2026, due to concerns about hardware readiness and mission complexity.
>Under one of the options, astronauts would launch into low-Earth orbit inside an Orion spacecraft and rendezvous there with a Starship vehicle, separately launched by SpaceX. During this mission, similar to Apollo 9, a precursor to the Apollo 11 lunar landing, the crew would validate the ability of Orion and Starship to dock and test habitability inside Starship. The crew would then return to Earth. In another option NASA is considering, a crew would launch in Orion and fly to a small space station near the Moon, the Lunar Gateway, and then return to Earth.
bros...
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 16:27:53 UTC No. 16136008
TL-3 first stage tank delivered to Space Pioneer's final assembly facility in Zhangjiagang. They're supposed to launch in July; how realistic is this?
https://weibo.com/5658451754/OaqHxd
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 16:30:48 UTC No. 16136010
Landspace has now installed friction stir welding equipment in their factory, which will allow them to build propellant tanks on their own. I assume this means their propellant tanks have thus far been manufactured by CASC
Also, the ZQ-2 is being changed to incorporate common bulkheads
https://weibo.com/5658451754/Oas3hh
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 16:32:15 UTC No. 16136012
>>16136004
could orion launch to LEO on vulcan?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 16:32:57 UTC No. 16136013
>>16136004
Why not? If critical components aren't ready, they might as well fly a partial mission. They're not saving much money by having the SLS and Orion people waiting around with nothing to do
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 16:35:33 UTC No. 16136015
>>16136004
LMAO
LMFUCKINGAO
IMAGINE using SLS for this, forcing the lunar landing to 2+ years away instead of finding a way to launch Orion seperately like on Superheavy autonomously, god fucking damn
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 16:37:13 UTC No. 16136018
>>16136004
Artemis IV will be dock to Gateway, HLS dock to Gateway and first lunar landing, and return to Gateway, I knew it
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 16:39:18 UTC No. 16136021
>>16136015
>IMAGINE using SLS for this, forcing the lunar landing to 2+ years away
What if it was going to happen 2+ years away anyway?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 16:44:10 UTC No. 16136025
>>16136004
lmao, an SLS launch just for Orion to dock with Starship
Polaris is already doing that with Dragon and the launches cost like 200mil on those instead of 4bil or whatever the fuck SLS + Orion launches cost
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 16:45:29 UTC No. 16136026
>Now that production of the Delta rockets has ceased, it is not clear whether more of these interim stages could be produced—at least not at a reasonable cost.
at a more reasonable cost than the EUS, sure. if you're really worried that you can't make another IUS before 2028 then the right thing to do would be to cancel artemis 2, since that's a publicity stunt mission that doesn't advance us toward a landing in any meaningful way.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 16:45:48 UTC No. 16136027
>>16136004
Changing the mission this late in the game doesnt speed up timelines or reduce complexity
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 16:46:06 UTC No. 16136028
>>16136012
Surprisingly no, but I know one that could...
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 16:46:10 UTC No. 16136029
>>16136004
>The Starship-Orion mission has another benefit that sets it apart from a Lunar Gateway mission: It can be done without a powerful upper stage on the SLS rocket. For its first three Artemis missions, NASA is using an "interim" upper stage for the Space Launch System rocket based on the Delta rocket and manufactured by United Launch Alliance. Now that production of the Delta rockets has ceased, it is not clear whether more of these interim stages could be produced—at least not at a reasonable cost.
So this alternate Artemis 3 would use an SLS without an upper stage since it is only going to LEO and the 2 remaining ICPS are needed for Artemis 2 and the first landing.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 16:48:09 UTC No. 16136031
Fuck it, remake Ares I. Just hire ESA to produce Ariane 6 cores to put on top of a shuttle SRB. Liberty rocket Mk 2
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 16:48:14 UTC No. 16136032
>>16136025
>>16136015
Give NASA time, they are slowly converging on the Starship-only architecture
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 16:49:04 UTC No. 16136034
>>16136028
Falcon Heavy cannot lift more total mass than a Falcon 9 due to the structural limits of the second stage.
Rather than making Falcon 9 a super heavy lift rocket Falcon Heavy makes it a 'high energy' heavy lift rocket, which is why you don't see it used very often.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 16:50:03 UTC No. 16136036
CREW RATE VULCAN
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 16:53:26 UTC No. 16136037
>>16136004
naw fuck that, launch orion to the moon. we didnt spend $5 billion for them to not do it. either give us the billions back or do the fucking mission.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 16:54:46 UTC No. 16136040
>>16136028
bridenstack almost got Jim fired
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 16:54:54 UTC No. 16136041
>>16136001
>>What is the global SAR situation today?
starshield supposedly has SAR with machine learning, along with other things on it
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 16:55:47 UTC No. 16136044
>>16136037
it doesnt even have functioning life support yet
🗑️ B at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 16:56:10 UTC No. 16136046
Billy and Jean
I'm working :)
Fear is small.
Pain is big.
A thing like a heartbeat would come at collapse and so on.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 17:01:38 UTC No. 16136051
>>16136028
>>16136036
for a LEO mission you could underfuel the service module. my napkin math says it could still have 500 m/s for orbital maneuvering and come in at 19.5 tons. vulcan could handle that even with the escape tower.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 17:02:52 UTC No. 16136052
>>16136051
Lets do it
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 17:06:56 UTC No. 16136060
>>16136057
elon has EDS. everyone knows ISP is a meme.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 17:08:11 UTC No. 16136064
>>16136060
on first stage motors yes. not so on RVACs
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 17:09:32 UTC No. 16136065
>>16136060
it's a meme, which is why they arent focused on it. thrust is the only thing that matters
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 17:12:59 UTC No. 16136069
>>16136057
fucking overoptimization autistism this is why Artemis III is delayed
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 17:16:14 UTC No. 16136074
>>16136069
did you read the berger article? artemis 2 is delayed because orion cant bring astronauts back alive
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 17:16:58 UTC No. 16136076
jewess https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bB
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 17:18:07 UTC No. 16136078
>>16136065
in thrust we thrust
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 17:18:29 UTC No. 16136080
>>16136074
it can, nasa's just throwing a fit because they weren't as good at computer modeling as they thought. heat shield erosion was well within acceptable ranges.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 17:20:03 UTC No. 16136084
>>16136080
the temperatures inside orion [artemis 1] are enough to cook any astronaut. it also flew without life support so it literally couldnt keep astronauts alive if it wanted to
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 17:20:48 UTC No. 16136085
>>16136080
>nasa's just throwing a fit because they weren't as good at computer modeling as they thought. heat shield erosion was well within acceptable ranges.
My thoughts exactly, they're letting their perfectionist autism get in the way of good enough, Apollo never had this problem because they didn't have that kind of modeling back then
Seriously more needs to be said about this model autism, rn in F1 Mercedes are struggling to match real world performance with their precious models too
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 17:21:48 UTC No. 16136088
>>16136084
>the temperatures inside orion [artemis 1] are enough to cook any astronaut
Wrong I can't recall the exact temp they gave but it was not that hot, plus their IVA suits have cooling anyways to handle it
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 17:21:57 UTC No. 16136090
Berger's Falcon 9 book is gonna be unbelievably boring
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 17:23:30 UTC No. 16136093
>>16136032
Why not launch the astronauts up in Starliner? And dock with Starship in orbit. Transfer crew, and head to the Moon?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 17:24:32 UTC No. 16136096
Burger's Falcon 9 book is gonna be unbelievably tasty
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 17:26:03 UTC No. 16136102
>>16136084
>the temperatures inside orion [artemis 1] are enough to cook any astronaut
No anon, thats starship
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 17:26:13 UTC No. 16136103
>>16135722
>>16135709
50% of the American pop has below 98 IQ. I'd reckon 30% of that 50% (15%) are below 85 as well. Thats 50 million people in US alone.
If we consider the world wide avg of ~90, and a good 20-30% are likely below 80 IQ. With 8.1 billion, 30% of that is 2.4 billion people with addressable market.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 17:27:43 UTC No. 16136105
>>16136102
Starship isnt going to Earth though
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 17:29:40 UTC No. 16136109
>>16136094
It has stage fright
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 17:31:01 UTC No. 16136111
>>16136094
She looks embarrassed...but cute!
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 17:31:46 UTC No. 16136113
>>16136094
can't wait for boing! to claim that this is going to take 5 years and $8 billion to pull off
B at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 17:32:23 UTC No. 16136114
>>16136113
I'll let you know
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 17:32:43 UTC No. 16136115
>>16136113
Wouldn't be surprised if its just as delayed
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 17:33:37 UTC No. 16136117
>>16136113
huh just like mars sample return spacex-edition. guess wat your savior is boring 2.0
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 17:35:56 UTC No. 16136120
>the temperature of space is 1000 degrees
>the only reason you freeze is because there's no atmosphere
wtf
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 17:36:01 UTC No. 16136121
https://www.planetary.org/planetary
>Casey Drier and Mike Griffin on Space Policy Edition
>Discuss Real and Acceptable Reasons for Space Exploration
🗑️ B at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 17:36:46 UTC No. 16136123
>>16136120
Awh
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 17:48:38 UTC No. 16136136
>>16136105
Why does it have a heat shield tho?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 17:55:20 UTC No. 16136144
>>16136136
I'll tell you: little retard named Elmo
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 17:58:15 UTC No. 16136147
Didnt we already pay locksneed to build to msr rocket? what happens to that
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 18:00:07 UTC No. 16136150
>>16136085
They're more intrigued that their models are wrong than the fact their models are wrong
If I had to guess, the composition of the atmosphere has changed since they modeled the erosion, but more likely is that someone fucked up on floating point precision on the CFD simulation
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 18:01:34 UTC No. 16136151
>>16136147
We'll get a cute little SRB they can use as a cubesat kick stage for interplanetary sat swarms
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 18:01:38 UTC No. 16136152
>>16136147
they dont need to if they dont want to. thanks for the money though.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 18:02:27 UTC No. 16136155
>>16136057
How can it be harder to hone T/W if the "same" engine is improved with greater thrust? Is the engine being made more than 70% heavier to achieve 70% more thrust, or what?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 18:03:37 UTC No. 16136157
>>16136155
it's not the same engine. increasing engine thrust lately has involved adding mass to the engine. cant say much more
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 18:03:57 UTC No. 16136159
>>16136155
they open the throat to acheive a greater flow rate so the expansion ratio is lower and the isp goes down
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 18:04:24 UTC No. 16136160
>>16136150
Yeah thats the sense I got, they're willing to delay Artemis II just to perfectly align their models, its frustrating
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 18:06:54 UTC No. 16136161
why does hubble orbit nice and snug close to earth whilst jwst has a massively elongated and eccentric orbit like kepler?
i always worry shit gets lost when it orbits that far away
is it because it needs minimal disturbance for it to use the infrared equipment properly?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 18:08:09 UTC No. 16136162
>>16136161
>literally called Ur Anus
God was really having a fun night when he cooked that up
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 18:08:21 UTC No. 16136163
>>16136159
Does that make the engine heavier?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 18:10:25 UTC No. 16136165
>>16136121
Why is Mike Griffin poking out his snake head so much lately? He was a terrible NASA administrator
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 18:13:36 UTC No. 16136169
>>16136162
I thought it was Johann Elert Bode who cooked that one up
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 18:15:27 UTC No. 16136173
>>16136060
speaking of ISP and memes I made on of those ancient dnd alignment charts of different propellants (aka fuels)
anyone know what should go in the empty spaces? a "high" ISP is anything greater than 300s. mid density = about RP-1, 0.80. high density is more than that.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 18:15:31 UTC No. 16136174
>>16136161
JWST is in the L2 Sun-Earth Lagrange point, whatever visual this is from is not accurate
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 18:27:04 UTC No. 16136189
>>16135798
Falcon Heavy can deliver more to every orbit than delta 4 heavy in fully expendable mode and still be 1/3 the price. Tory is just being a bitch and trying to gaslight people into thinking ULA rockets can do things that nothing else can when it's objectively false.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 18:27:55 UTC No. 16136192
>>16136173
If it's propellant, you should change hydrogen and methane etc. to hydrolox, metholox...
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 18:28:20 UTC No. 16136194
>>16135797
SALTY
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 18:30:02 UTC No. 16136197
>>16136192
my mistake, might just change the title to "fuel" then because we all know hydrogen is usually hydrolox etc
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 18:30:21 UTC No. 16136199
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 18:31:03 UTC No. 16136201
>>16136190
unironically "just be yourself"
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 18:31:39 UTC No. 16136203
>>16136173
Probably not in the spirit of things if you're only considering chemical propellants but NSWR could be a good Lawful Evil candidate. Alternatively you could go with pentaborane or one of the fluorine mixes
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 18:43:30 UTC No. 16136218
>>16136172
That means Orion will be replaced with Crew Dragon
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 18:44:29 UTC No. 16136219
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 18:45:04 UTC No. 16136221
>>16136173
flip the vertical axis. it makes no sense that denser things are eviler.
also put fluorine/lithium/hydrogen triprop as lawful good
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 18:51:21 UTC No. 16136233
>>16136218
Saves money on not needing expensive EUS, giving more time to test out heatshields for Orion, and more time for Starship to perfect landings, budget friendly, etc.
Its a "win" move in terms of de-risking a lot of things
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 18:53:21 UTC No. 16136239
>>16136221
denser = evil just because I think of toxic hydrazine and SRBs as the "evil" way of doing it vs the "good" hydrolox, methalox etc. just a personal preference. also light = angelic, heavy = devilish.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 18:56:12 UTC No. 16136247
>>16136239
Helium (cold gas thruster)?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 18:59:21 UTC No. 16136254
>>16136001
Probably closer to Starlink V1s. That said though, if China goes all in on flatpak designs. It's going to seriously change how satellites are made world wide.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 18:59:57 UTC No. 16136255
>>16136221
>>16136239
I reckon a better measure of 'evil' is handling difficulty and toxicity.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 18:59:56 UTC No. 16136256
>>16136201
alright.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 19:00:01 UTC No. 16136257
>>16136173
You could put steam on chaotic good
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 19:02:04 UTC No. 16136261
>>16136239
Hypergolic propellants are indeed evil concoctions.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 19:03:58 UTC No. 16136264
>>16136255
yeah but then kerolox and ethalox would move to the top row
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 19:04:10 UTC No. 16136266
>>16136173
What would this alignment chart look like with the planets in our solar system?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 19:04:51 UTC No. 16136268
>>16136247
>>16136257
>>16136261
aaaand its finished. cold gas Helium does indeed have tiny density and laughable ISP. you could fit a couple in each box but Im limited to one each
>>16136255
it incidentally lines up with that, hydrazine being toxic, SRBs being difficult to handle/likely to blow up (Challenger)
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 19:05:59 UTC No. 16136272
>>16136266
>low isp, high density: earth, mercury
>high isp, low density: gas giants
>high isp, medium density: icy moons
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 19:07:46 UTC No. 16136275
>>16136004
They should go with option 1. It's vastly more useful politically and public sentiment wise to have orion dock with HLS in orbit and give the entire world a live stream of a crew of 7 people living in a spacious space penthouse with futuristic design and minimalist aesthetic with an onboard water and plant deck with huge windows looking out at the Earth below.
What NASA and US aerospace thereby desperately needs is a big PR win that affirms why all the spending and man power has been worth it. You can then use option 1's wins to justify option 2. It's easier to convince the public to build a new space station around the moon if they all get a real view of the possibility of being able to afford a trip on a space hotel in their lifetime. It's infinitely harder to justify a new space station around the moon when you ask for $100Bn, talk 30 year timelines, and make the glamour and glory of space still a pipe dream for everyone but governments and the uber wealthy.
You can still have orion and SLS Block B and Gateway and everything else, but only as long as make sure option 1 happens first. Because the added benefit of option 1 is that the HLS Starship remains parked in low earth orbit pretty much indefinitely and it can be used as a station which Axiom and Polaris and other commercial crew missions can dock onto and use the space as a hab for experiments and manufacturing testing and other missions.
Can go as far as selling HLS in parking orbit in LEO as an Gateway precursor, where everything that would need to integrate with HLS can be tested in low earth orbit. Then the cost of putting up parts and validating integration, fuel transfers, power transfer and system upgrades, all can happen more rapidly and at 1/10th the cost for 2x the return on science and useful manufacturing data--ensuring Gateway to the Moon is the best version of the system it can be.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 19:09:07 UTC No. 16136277
>>16136266
Well if we use the sounds from this video as a basis then I am immediately putting Saturn in Chaotic Evil
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQL
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 19:09:42 UTC No. 16136278
>>16136266
saturn in LE, jupiter in... something Good.
>>16136257
keek
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 19:16:48 UTC No. 16136284
>>16136266
you gotta pick what the axes represent.
>lawful-chaos: slow-fast orbit? radiation/atmosphere? dV to reach from Earth?
>good-evil: size? good is terrestrial or smaller, evil is gas giants. or more habitability = good so Earth Mars and Moon are the good. neutral is semi-colonisable like Venus, Mercury
Lawful good: Earth
Neutal good: Mars (some radiation)
Chaotic good: Moon (high radiation)
Lawful neutral: Venus (no radiation but uninhabitable)
True neutral: Pluto
Chaotic neutral: Mercury (no atmosphere, blasted by solar wind)
Lawful evil: Uranus/Neptune
Neutral evil: Saturn
Chaotic evil: Jupiter (radiation will fuck you up, even on the moons)
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 19:24:08 UTC No. 16136295
been a while since the last F9 launch. is spacex ok?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 19:25:07 UTC No. 16136296
>>16136163
isp decreasing and getting heavier have the same effect on payload. I think isp and weight both get worse with higher thrust, assuming they have to buff the parts to handle the increased flow rate.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 19:26:31 UTC No. 16136298
>>16135005
more?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 19:26:52 UTC No. 16136299
>>16136295
all of the boosters got shot by a ula sniper
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 19:30:06 UTC No. 16136300
>>16136275
Artemis 3 being a moon landing was always a ridiculous goal, an Apollo 8 style missiona round the earth is an obvious good and like you said it gets the ball rolling publically and politically. At the very least if HLS/Orion orbits the earth for several days then some normies will become aware of it through EDS news
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 19:33:56 UTC No. 16136306
>>16136103
mars astronaut selection process is the eugenics we need
martian master race
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 19:40:42 UTC No. 16136318
>>16136306
It would be self selecting, similar to how America was colonized of the past. America is the distilled spirit of exploration and risk taking. Where individuals took the plunge into the darkness, not know what awaits 5-6 months away from now and into the land of the unknown/unforgiving/etc.
Mars will be distilled version of America.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 19:41:34 UTC No. 16136320
>>16136261
How evil though? Like what would happen if I ran up and took a big sniff of some of the fumes coming from the x37b?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 19:48:51 UTC No. 16136330
>>16136320
doesn't x37b use kerosene/htp? you'd probably be fine
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 19:49:12 UTC No. 16136333
mass simulators are fake
they actually have mass
they're not simulating it
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 19:50:13 UTC No. 16136335
>>16136119
[nigger clap] no [nigger clap]
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 19:51:12 UTC No. 16136336
>>16136295
>no launches in almost 24 hours
its over for muskrats and starcels
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 19:51:19 UTC No. 16136337
>>16136333
very nice
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 19:52:50 UTC No. 16136338
>>16136183
bride kidnapping
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 19:53:33 UTC No. 16136340
>>16135491
someday soon you will understand
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 19:57:50 UTC No. 16136347
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 19:58:22 UTC No. 16136349
>>16134642
By the time they get starship to work, it'll be a place plane. Cap this.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 19:58:47 UTC No. 16136350
>>16136333
this is why true chads call them boilerplates
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 20:00:15 UTC No. 16136351
>>16136333
mass simulator that works by accelerating upwards very quickly
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 20:06:44 UTC No. 16136357
>>16136025
Can't launch and dock with Starship unless Starship can make orbit. With a totally empty rocket and all engines working, for once, it still was short of making orbital velocity.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 20:20:47 UTC No. 16136368
>>16136367
Not sure if bait disguised as screeching or screeching disguised as bait.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 20:22:54 UTC No. 16136370
>>16136368
how about you smoke my cock like a cigarette and cum?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 20:23:02 UTC No. 16136371
>>16136367
It's a bad lander when half of the lander is taken up by legs.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 20:23:50 UTC No. 16136372
>>16135696
yeah, that too
he's got good control of the weld he's just doing it fucking wrong
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 20:30:34 UTC No. 16136378
>>16136367
I think the one with 1000 times more payload is better
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 20:33:46 UTC No. 16136381
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 20:34:16 UTC No. 16136382
>>16136381
KEK
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 20:37:32 UTC No. 16136384
>>16136381
It's loss
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 20:37:52 UTC No. 16136385
>>16136381
Didn't the leg break?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 20:39:21 UTC No. 16136386
>>16136378
>1000 times more payload just to carry a nig and a slut
Id rather the small one
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 20:45:02 UTC No. 16136397
>>16136385
I think this was made before we knew that, when they thought it just came down too sideways maybe onto a rock
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 20:56:30 UTC No. 16136402
god bless NASA
https://www.nasa.gov/smallsat-insti
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 21:04:47 UTC No. 16136418
>>16136386
>a nig and a slut
hey now, thats not a very nice way to refer to your parents
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 21:12:07 UTC No. 16136432
>>16135827
ISP and mass fraction are important for the boostback burn, actually
boostback really cranks up the benefits to aiming high on engine performance
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 21:22:24 UTC No. 16136448
>>16135829
yes. FFSC has only marginal benefits over ORSC for performance so it's basically never worth the trouble for an expendable engine.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 21:23:06 UTC No. 16136449
>>16135919
unless of course you're talking about Raptor again
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 21:26:00 UTC No. 16136454
>>16136080
>>16136084
have you considered that the reason the temperatures were high was because the life support wasn't on?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 21:26:15 UTC No. 16136455
>>16136432
GUY.. WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT LOL...
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 21:30:06 UTC No. 16136461
>>16136333
True. They should be called "useful payload simulators"
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 21:31:12 UTC No. 16136464
>>16136454
I completely made the temperature part up but fuck Orion anyway, fat piece of shit
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 21:31:36 UTC No. 16136465
>>16136120
space has like five different "temperatures" my dude, and the 1000 degrees one is literally useless
>>16136239
hydrolox should be lawful evil, HTPB should be chaotic good
rotate the diagram
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 21:33:40 UTC No. 16136467
>>16135827
retard
>>16135829
yes. with ffsc the temperature inside the turbine is lower which is the least reusable part of the engine.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 21:34:03 UTC No. 16136469
>>16136340
soon
>>16136455
shut the fuck up retard and do the math or go away
somebody post the schizo filter
🗑️ Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 21:35:08 UTC No. 16136471
>>16136275
>What NASA and US aerospace thereby desperately needs is a big PR win
Not if Chudlon gets a slice of that PR win. You're forgetting the political angle. It's better to postpone any PR win for Musk to as late as possible
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 21:35:17 UTC No. 16136472
>>16136464
the only problem with Orion is that the faggot Euroids refuse to make the service module bigger
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 21:36:40 UTC No. 16136475
>>16136275
>What NASA and US aerospace thereby desperately needs is a big PR win
Not if Chudlon gets a slice of that PR win. You're forgetting that political angle. It's better to postpone any PR win for Musk to as late as possible
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 21:41:06 UTC No. 16136482
>>16136475
what i still dont get is why elon roman saluted each driver during the handoff event of cybretruck.. awks. :/
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 21:45:25 UTC No. 16136493
>>16136004
China will get their first
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 21:46:20 UTC No. 16136497
>>16136493
Yes china will get theirs first. Only then can we as a species progress to the stars.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 21:51:46 UTC No. 16136501
>>16136497
If we're relying on SLS, it's certainly possible. It could be faster just to have a program that flies crew from LEO to the lunar surface and back on HLS and use Dragon for the first and last leg of crew transport.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:09:30 UTC No. 16136521
The Chinese military is undergoing a major reorganization. The PLA Strategic Support Force, which, among other things, was responsible for space, is being dissolved. Military aerospace will now become a whole force by itself.
There will be 4 军 and 4 部队
* Ground 军
* Aerial 军
* Naval 军
* Rocket 军
* Military aerospace 部队 <----
* Cyberspace 部队
* Information support 部队
* Joint logistics 部队
http://www.mod.gov.cn/gfbw/xwfyr/zt
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:11:54 UTC No. 16136525
>>16135473
This is genuinely incredible. I don't know how it happened, but we lost our knowledge of aesthetics somewhere along the way.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:12:22 UTC No. 16136527
你滿嘴都是屎
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:13:13 UTC No. 16136528
>>16136527
Care to elaborate?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:17:54 UTC No. 16136532
>>16136469
not space flight related. shill.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:17:55 UTC No. 16136533
>>16136521
>No! China isn't preparing for an invasion of Taiw-
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:18:01 UTC No. 16136534
>>16136449
(the joke is that Astra's second stage engine failed because they literally didn't test it in a vacuum chamber and so they didn't anticipate a fuel leak)
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:19:34 UTC No. 16136535
>>16136521
>Military aerospace will now become a whole force by itself.
Chinese Space Force?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:19:41 UTC No. 16136536
>>16136533
It's more like anything America does they feel compelled to copy. We reorganized and created the Space Force, so they had to do it too. It's almost instinctual.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:21:38 UTC No. 16136537
>>16136521
>Military aerospace 部队
>部队 means "force"
space force. they're literally just copying what Drumpf did in 2021
>>16136533
>-an
reorganizations happen literally every 10 or so years. they were due.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:23:15 UTC No. 16136540
>>16136537
Trump was right about everything.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:23:17 UTC No. 16136541
>>16136537
>>16136536
1989 June 4th Tiananmen Square protests and massacre
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:25:07 UTC No. 16136542
充滿了狗屎
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:25:18 UTC No. 16136543
>>16136541
hey look, a schizo
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:26:27 UTC No. 16136544
>>16136541
January 6
Waco
9/11 inside job
weather underground
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:28:07 UTC No. 16136547
>>16136544
July 1969
Nixon
Telephone call
Who was phone
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:28:19 UTC No. 16136548
>>16136544
My guy, I'm not sure why you think any of us aren't on a list by this point.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:29:43 UTC No. 16136550
>>16136548
I'm a chinese
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:31:32 UTC No. 16136553
這傢伙滿口胡言亂語 我知道他有麻煩了
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:33:46 UTC No. 16136555
>>16136536
They're not entirely following America here. China created the "Strategic Support Force" as a separate branch already back in 2015. It was supposed to handle space, cyberspace and intelligence. I think it was a bit similar to the US Space Force, NRO, NSA and military intelligence rolled into one. I think it was thought that there was a lot of synergy, and it kinda makes sense. However they have apparently now decided that the Strategic Support Force will be broken up into three components.
China's Aerospace Force still isn't a perfect analogue to the US Space Force. China doesn't distinguish between a Space Force and Space Command. China only has combatant commands for the 军. At least I think that's the case.
It's probably because space is about to become such a big thing, that it's now considered to deserve its own distinct branch.
🗑️ Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:35:42 UTC No. 16136559
>>16136554
Still no turbopump on that engine. Been doing these tests for a year.
Relativity is dicking around equally.
Only Firefly and Stoke seem to be doing well.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:40:42 UTC No. 16136561
>>16136559
lmao im a retard
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:41:12 UTC No. 16136562
>>16136537
Both 军 and 部队 can be translated as "force", "service", "service branch", etc. The official English translation is a bit weird, hence why I used the Chinese characters. 军事 also means related to military matters in general.
The official translation of 军 is "Service" and the official translation of 部队 is "Arm". However, the official translation of 空军 is Air Force, and the official translation of 军事航天部队 is Aerospace Force.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:42:31 UTC No. 16136563
China not welcome here, git out
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:44:19 UTC No. 16136564
>>16136554
I think rocket lab is kind of fucked on the launch side, maybe their satellite bus business will stay alive though
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:45:08 UTC No. 16136567
>>16136564
tick tock Peter Beck.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:45:49 UTC No. 16136568
>>16136563
it's good to keep an eye on them
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:45:54 UTC No. 16136569
>>16136521
aerospace force doesnt sound like a space force at all. they probably handle alot of satellites, but do they handle space launches? anti satellite weapons? why is aero included in with space? do they do high altitude stuff too like the spy balloons?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:45:58 UTC No. 16136570
>>16136554
Is Rocket Lab falling into the same pit that Blue Origin spent years in?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:49:18 UTC No. 16136571
>>16136544
I'm a big fan of Ruby Ridge personally
can we all pour one out for Bryan Malinowski as well?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:49:21 UTC No. 16136572
>>16136569
for example, russia's aerospace forces include ballistic missile defense alongside their military space units
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russi
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:50:19 UTC No. 16136576
>>16136569
you need to understand that the Chinese air force isn't functional like the USAF
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:52:16 UTC No. 16136581
>>16136535
Sounds more like Air Force that also does space. They don't even have a separate air force so far, or a separate navy. It's all part of the army
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:52:32 UTC No. 16136582
>>16136569
Most of China's spaceports - Xichang, Taiyuan, Wenchang and Jiuquan - are run by the PLASSF, so the new Aerospace Force will likely take over that responsibility.
> why is aero included in with space?
"Aerospace" is a common translation of 航天, however it really means spaceflight, as far as I know. 航空 is aviation.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:58:28 UTC No. 16136594
Reminder about the chinese guy who was posting about the liquid electric pump fed engine he made and hotfired and then suddenly died while he was working on a GG cycle one
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 23:01:07 UTC No. 16136597
>>16136564
I've always said that the small launch companies that will come the closest to prospering are the ones with a very effective side gig. Rocket Lab is probably the best positioned out of all of them.
>>16136570
Building bigger engines, especially staged combustion designs, is hard. It doesn't have to be a painful, decade long process, but you have to take it seriously and budget your resources accordingly.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 23:01:09 UTC No. 16136598
>>16136594
we had a couple of people making engines in 2018 and they all died lol
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 23:01:09 UTC No. 16136599
>>16136581
They most certainly have a separate air force and navy that is distinct from the army
>>16136521
Your confusion might stem from over-interpreting the translation "People's Liberation Army". It could just as well have been translated as "People's Liberation Military", however for historical reasons People's Liberation Army is the official translation. Historically, the PLA only had a ground component, so it didn't make any difference. However, nowadays, because the US and UK use the word "Army" to mean ground forces exclusively, that causes a lot of confusion.
All of these eight forces are part of the People's Liberation Army
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 23:03:05 UTC No. 16136601
>>16136599
Things like "People's Liberation Army Air Force" or "People's Liberation Army Navy" always felt like retarded translation errors made by someone who was being a bit too literal.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 23:09:10 UTC No. 16136609
>>16136599
>>16136601
Strictly speaking, the word army is not exclusive to ground forces. The word "army" comes from French "armée", which in turn comes from Latin "armata", which means an armed force. Ironically, the word "army" has the same etymological origin as the word "armada".
France's Air and Space Force is called Armée de l'air et de l'espace in French
I believe the word "army" has come to refer exclusively to ground forces in English as other forces grew out of the ground force and became distinct enough to deserve their own name
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 23:11:41 UTC No. 16136611
>>16136601
the united states had an army air force before 1947
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 23:14:10 UTC No. 16136614
>>16136601
It's not even being literal. It's about adding accidental meaning during translation that didn't exist in the original word. In the Chinese name 人民解放军, the 军 refers to military in general, with no "ground" connotation. Ground force is 陆军, navy is 海军, air force is 空军.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 23:26:44 UTC No. 16136621
Public service announcement
I must inform you, the china quota of this week has been reached, please wait for next week for further china discussion.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 23:37:45 UTC No. 16136635
we're on page six and someone is already staging. what should we do about this?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 23:38:57 UTC No. 16136638
>>16136635
join the new thread
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 23:41:03 UTC No. 16136640
>>16136635
Slay him
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 23:43:02 UTC No. 16136643
>>16136635
brilliant pebbles the new thread
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 23:43:35 UTC No. 16136645
I heckin love rockets
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 23:44:19 UTC No. 16136646
what the heck is prilliant bebbles?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 23:51:07 UTC No. 16136649
>>16136646
bibble bebbles
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 00:06:53 UTC No. 16136663
>>16136649
is that like some kind of meme elon is into?
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 00:07:48 UTC No. 16136666
>>16136663
No it's fanfiction about the real purpose of Starlink
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 00:09:39 UTC No. 16136668
>arguing about the meaning of Chinese words... in English
攻击力max的一句话,翻译成中文就是“cnm臭不要脸混账司马死全家丑玻
如果说fuck u杀伤力100,那fagggot对homo杀伤力起码10000,对直男
只要被骂这句话,不打不是人。
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 00:14:57 UTC No. 16136675
>>16136668
We should argue about their meaning in Danish. That way we can have a truly inclusive discussion in which everyone can take part.
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 00:20:09 UTC No. 16136681
>>16136666
Implessive digits
Unfortunately, the only way we can know for sure that starlink isn't a bp system is for somebody to launch a nuke at muttland or israel.
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 00:22:31 UTC No. 16136684
>>16136635
report him
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 00:23:57 UTC No. 16136690
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 00:25:57 UTC No. 16136693
>>16136681
oh no.... not a nuke launched at israel.... that would be... awful...
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 00:37:41 UTC No. 16136706
>>16136239
how about rocket candy for chaotic good?
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 00:40:58 UTC No. 16136711
>>16136706
>rocky candy
makes me think of this desu
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 00:41:17 UTC No. 16136712
>>16136534
>Astra's second stage engine failed because they literally didn't test it in a vacuum chamber
please tell me this isn't real
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 00:53:19 UTC No. 16136720
>>16136712
[sad rocket noises]
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 00:53:55 UTC No. 16136721
>>16136004
>Artemis I and II are not enough, we need a third make work landing to test our readiness to be prepared to lay the groundwork for our preparations for early testing of future emergent capabilities
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 01:02:25 UTC No. 16136733
>>16136723
1:160 instead of 1:110 like the Saturn V though. Bummer.
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 01:09:12 UTC No. 16136741
>>16136521
what the fuck is with the chinese and branch autism. it was bad enough to separate logistics into a "support services" branch but now it's completely parceled out into its own discrete branch?
fucking retards. it really is not a serious force for force projection.
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 01:09:38 UTC No. 16136742
>>16136534
how do engines actually get tested in vaccum without going to space? surely you would fill the room with exhaust very quickly?
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 01:14:28 UTC No. 16136747
What have I missed the last 2 days? Or nothing ever happens
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 01:15:22 UTC No. 16136749
>>16136733
I'm not sure how many children (and adults apparently) seethe at their toys being at slightly different scales. I certainly despised this as a kid.
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 01:17:16 UTC No. 16136752
>>16136740
it wouldn't be if Artemis wasn't married to SLS. I'm not even convinced gateway will happen.
it's not surprising that they're shuffling around Artemis. the last time I saw the mission architecture 4 was literally a nothingburger mission. It all required gateway which STILL DOESNT EXIST and requires the fucking UAE to deliver an airlock on time. and the suits aren't ready. oh and they need a new mobile launch tower. oh and SLS is expensive and too slow to build. oh and they need a new version of sls. oh and apparently Orion doesn't work properly. and they've only just started contracts for a rover
absolutely fucked program, but the only way out is through. inshallah it'll end up killing SLS via budget
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 01:18:22 UTC No. 16136754
>>16136747
Artemis II is now Artemis I 2 and Artemis III is now Artemis II and Artemis IIII will be Artemis III
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 01:20:04 UTC No. 16136758
>>16136742
There's a trick to it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=d
I'm pretty sure this is a Castor 30 getting put through its paces in one of those set ups
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 01:23:56 UTC No. 16136764
>>16136740
pretty likely. gateway will have a most of its modules by that point.
china and russia will be working on their lunar base. dont know about the third one
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 01:24:10 UTC No. 16136765
>>16136069
Yeah I'm sure it has absolutely nothing with FAA sitting on their hands or anything of the sort.
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 01:26:30 UTC No. 16136768
>>16136752
>oh and they need a new mobile launch tower
they need a new mobile launch tower so they can fit the bigger second stage that adds the extra capacity that they don't really have a use for
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 01:26:59 UTC No. 16136770
>>16136268
Anything fluorine is more classic chaotic neutral in the sense of exploding and setting fire to everything including the asbestos just for the fuck of it.
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 01:27:43 UTC No. 16136771
>>16136768
oh no the use is that it will be launching gateway. the thing they need to carry out any of the landings.
money please!
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 01:33:12 UTC No. 16136779
>>16136004
wait a second, I just realised something
>astronauts would launch into low-Earth orbit inside an Orion spacecraft and rendezvous there with a Starship vehicle, separately launched by SpaceX.
>the crew would validate the ability of Orion and Starship to dock and test habitability inside Starship.
all the previous mission architectures required that Orion dock with gateway, hls dock with gateway, and then the astronauts use gateway to transfer between vehicles both before landing and after ascent. is this the first mention of this change? this could mean an Artemis which does not require gateway - which only makes gateway more of a massive pointless money sink
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 01:34:09 UTC No. 16136780
>>16136771
Those remaining Gateway parts could be easily launched by Falcon Heavy or Vulcan. New Glenn could probably launch both of them at once. And after that's done there's no more need for EUS stages. Artemis could just keep running on standard Block 1 SLS/ICPS until congress finally runs out of interest.
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 01:47:57 UTC No. 16136790
>>16136779
Gateway only makes sense if it's permanently manned, which only Starship is cheap enough to do.
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 01:50:03 UTC No. 16136792
>>16136790
gateway is an insanely small cuckbox, why would you put people in there permanently
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 01:53:53 UTC No. 16136795
>>16136790
You appear to have no idea what the purpose of Gateway is, especially in the greater Moon to Mars purpose of Artemis.
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 01:54:14 UTC No. 16136796
>>16136792
It's about 25% bigger than Salyut-1. You'd stuff people in there for extended periods of time because that's a vital part of training for doing the same thing to them when you send them to Mars. After all, NASA's more serious Mars programs all have transports that are just an Orion docked to a Cygnus-based habitat module.
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 01:55:52 UTC No. 16136800
>>16136790
gateway only makes sense if the countries that throw a piece of hardware onto it actually have the power to bully congress for money
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 01:56:39 UTC No. 16136801
>>16136800
they do. why do you think foreign aid exists?
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 02:02:55 UTC No. 16136805
>>16136801
>why do you think foreign aid exists
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 02:06:07 UTC No. 16136809
>>16136233
I'm not mad about it at all. I'd rather see human space flight go somewhere other than iss than wait for delay after delay on a lunar mission which could get canceled entirely if some retards in Congress decide to make it a pawn in the culture war. This is good is a good, pragmatic move.
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 02:07:21 UTC No. 16136810
whens the next starship test?
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 02:15:21 UTC No. 16136813
>>16136810
two weeks
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 02:17:24 UTC No. 16136815
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 03:01:13 UTC No. 16136860
>>16136858
>just
November 2022
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 03:02:55 UTC No. 16136864
>>16136554
The fact that Terran R, a better rocket on paper by a company that's never reached orbit, is making better progress than Neutron is inexcusable.
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 03:05:33 UTC No. 16136866
>>16136864
yeah but if terran r gets hit by a sledgehammer during launch it's FUCKED
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 03:06:43 UTC No. 16136867
>>16136858
cosmic blink of the eye
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 03:07:33 UTC No. 16136868
>>16136866
I think that's a risk they're willing to take, lel
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 03:37:41 UTC No. 16136893
>>16136858
>This is a real image
sure it is
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 03:45:19 UTC No. 16136899
>>16136858
Astronomers need to lie to the public to get funding. Why else would they pick that color palette? Fun fact, all that dark blue and green is rocks. The methane "lakes" (puddles) are not visible in this image
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 03:50:26 UTC No. 16136900
>>16136899
its in infrared. so obviously its not going to be true colour.
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 03:50:32 UTC No. 16136901
https://www.youtube.com/live/eDul3u
sexy girl offnom
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 03:53:58 UTC No. 16136903
>>16136900
Obvious to no one but nerds and slithering astronomers. The false colors are chosen diliberately to deceive. Notice zero disclaimers on the image itself.
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 03:56:51 UTC No. 16136904
>>16136899
it's all false color. even your phone or dslr.
titan still looks pretty cool in a more accurate color palette
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 04:01:00 UTC No. 16136908
>>16136899
>Why else would they pick that color palette?
they are mocking us
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 04:06:14 UTC No. 16136913
>>16136904
>>16136908
Kind of a salty-ass bitch about it ain'tcha
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 04:11:39 UTC No. 16136921
>>16136903
fuck off. only a literal retard would think any image from JWST is in "true colour"
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 04:22:16 UTC No. 16136927
titan is the best moon but only if you're hulder-pilled and not some hazercel
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 04:31:33 UTC No. 16136933
>>16136921
>fuck off. only a literal retard would think any image from JWST is in "true colour"
there are a lot of people out there who think space looks like color enhanced science photos
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 04:47:58 UTC No. 16136939
>>16136858
I can see the space oceans and space continents
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 04:49:05 UTC No. 16136940
>>16136858
Wow so Titan looks exactly like Earth? Why aren't we funding this??? Literally trees growing there according to NASA pictures
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 05:06:56 UTC No. 16136954
>>16136952
>>16136952
>>16136952
>>16136952
>>16136952
The new /sfg/ has arrived
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 05:11:11 UTC No. 16136957
For every /sfg/ on the catalog, Elon adds two more weeks.
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 08:46:02 UTC No. 16137079
>>16136019
nice teeth on that rocket
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 10:59:16 UTC No. 16137160
>>16136381
There's no bad landers, just bad software.
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 11:25:32 UTC No. 16137174
>>16137160
Your software can be the best in the world but it will still land on it's head if it gets the wrong information from it's sensors
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 12:44:12 UTC No. 16137225
>>16137174
There's no bad landers, just bad hardware and software?
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 14:25:40 UTC No. 16137279
>>16137079
HULLO
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 14:56:16 UTC No. 16137301
I'm not staging.