🧵 /sfg/ - Spaceflight General
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 06:22:23 UTC No. 16218956
Previous: >>16217307
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 06:23:45 UTC No. 16218959
still on page 9 faggot
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 06:23:48 UTC No. 16218960
space sex with big fat starship tits
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 06:26:11 UTC No. 16218965
It's another great day in space! Thanks, Boeing!
>“Today marks a great milestone towards providing additional commercial access to low Earth orbit, sustaining the ISS and enabling NASA’s goal of returning humans to the moon and eventually to Mars.”
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 06:35:37 UTC No. 16218977
>>16218963
Can you imagine the absolute conniption fit some people would have if Trump were President during the Artemis missions?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 06:39:28 UTC No. 16218981
So what's our next best hope for estronaut's immolation/asphyxiation now dearMoon is canned?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 06:50:25 UTC No. 16218990
>>16218981
If starship is 2m/launch we can crowdfund to send him into the sun
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 07:16:41 UTC No. 16219014
Any rumors on IFT-5 possible mission goals?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 07:23:15 UTC No. 16219019
>>16218956
death to chinese pedo cartoons
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 07:36:19 UTC No. 16219031
>>16219014
Objective: Survive
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 07:40:49 UTC No. 16219036
>>16219014
Elon talked about maybe landing the booster on the chopsticks this time.
I think they'll probably save that for when they have a spare tower, but who knows?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 07:41:51 UTC No. 16219037
>>16219014
CATCH on tower
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 07:43:01 UTC No. 16219039
>>16219036
Apparently a second tower is being built at Boca Chica right now. I'm hyped as fuck for all things Starship, but not gonna lie the chopstick tower catch seems incredibly sketchy right now
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 07:49:05 UTC No. 16219043
you made a new thread at page 9 using a cartoon picture. Also no edition. Everyone ignore the newfag
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 07:49:06 UTC No. 16219044
I'm worried about Starliner having to do a re-entry right now
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 07:53:14 UTC No. 16219052
>>16219043
This. Thread exploded on the pad. Fuck that pedo
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 08:13:42 UTC No. 16219072
>>16218965
>oft-docking.jpg
>not "oft-choking.jpg"
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 08:20:46 UTC No. 16219085
How many failed tests has these been?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 08:23:53 UTC No. 16219090
>>16219085
>"failed"
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 08:38:40 UTC No. 16219109
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 08:41:35 UTC No. 16219110
>>16219085
You failed an English test, apparently.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 08:47:51 UTC No. 16219113
>>16219014
Presumably they have proved to the relevant authorities that Starship can make orbit and remain in control, so that will be tested. I doubt the cargo door will reappear until v2. Beyond that who knows, I think they will keep testing the Stage Zero lighting sequence and figure out why the shockwave is still occasionally putting engines out. Maybe they have a solar panel design that needs to be flight proven? I've seen renders of some wacky fan panels.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 08:56:27 UTC No. 16219124
>>16219014
Is it too soon to attempt orbit?, i see it as the logical next step for starship before sending humans.
If sending humans is too soon perhaps they can attempt with animals.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 09:03:26 UTC No. 16219126
>>16219124
What animals should attempt? In my opinion, a monitor lizard.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 09:09:55 UTC No. 16219133
i was wondering if mechazilla was the largest robot in the world
then i found out about autohaul
>2.5 km long
>28,000 t.
mechazilla still has to be the biggest robot with arms though
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 09:11:10 UTC No. 16219134
>>16218956
She is big girl.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 09:12:14 UTC No. 16219136
>>16219133
>Australian engineering
world class
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 09:13:29 UTC No. 16219139
>>16219126
That would be a bad idea: lizards are reptiles and as such they are cold blooded and would need heating inside the payload.
Send a monkey or an orangutan instead, they are very similar to human beings so that they will make the best test subjects.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 09:20:21 UTC No. 16219147
>>16219136
wtf spinlaunch looks like this?!
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 09:27:20 UTC No. 16219153
I don't believe in reusable flaps
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 09:28:50 UTC No. 16219155
um retard question here
couldn't you refuel starship in orbit then do a deorbit burn to basically just fall straight down?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 09:31:12 UTC No. 16219157
>>16219155
That would take a truly ludicrous amount of DV, more than starship could output.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 09:31:49 UTC No. 16219158
>>16219155
How would the refueling starship go back tho?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 09:39:31 UTC No. 16219166
>>16219158
it would just do the classic way its doing right now
the one that does the deorbit burn would be for crewed missions
>>16219157
couldn't it handle it with barely any payload?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 09:42:55 UTC No. 16219173
>>16219155
There's not been a rocket in history that could just negate it's velocity from orbit to go straight down, even a fully fueled and empty starship already in orbit wouldn't be able to do it
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 09:43:03 UTC No. 16219174
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 09:44:04 UTC No. 16219175
>>16219147
Same principle at least.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 09:46:14 UTC No. 16219177
I can't fucking wait for the dream chaser bros, the last test was 6 years ago and it still amazes me.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 09:47:38 UTC No. 16219179
>>16219177
Well, you're gonna have to wait.
And wait.
And wait.
Vard at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 09:48:02 UTC No. 16219180
Hi
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 09:48:13 UTC No. 16219181
>>16219177
I'm still mad they chose scrubliner over it
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 09:59:09 UTC No. 16219192
>>16219173
>even a fully fueled and empty starship already in orbit wouldn't be able to do it
could it not reduce the speed by a large fraction to make reentry easier?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 09:59:58 UTC No. 16219193
>>16218268
>>16219160
skepticism from 2019
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:02:43 UTC No. 16219196
>>16219014
in-orbit burn that was skipped in IFT-3, test new flaps (probably already designed mostly), maybe try tower landing with booster
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:03:00 UTC No. 16219197
>>16219192
sure, but the extra heatshield you need from not doing propulsive breaking always ends up weighing less than the propellant you'd need to do the breaking
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:06:06 UTC No. 16219199
>>16219193
KWABOTC
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:07:15 UTC No. 16219200
>>16219124
they need to demonstrate a de-orbit burn before going orbital
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:07:29 UTC No. 16219201
>>16219193
man Starship really does bring out the worst seethe in people for some reason. It's like a big stainless steel middle finger to old space
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:08:24 UTC No. 16219203
>>16219197
>sure, but the extra heatshield you need from not doing propulsive breaking always ends up weighing less than the propellant you'd need to do the breaking
well this is ignoring the weight and just focusing on safety
if you were a billionaire and could afford it, refueling and then reducing your speed would be safer right?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:13:35 UTC No. 16219212
>>16219203
it's always going to be more cost-effective to get a bigger/tougher heat shield. if you like throwing money away, your idea would work too.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:17:41 UTC No. 16219214
>>16219193
I collected 723 screenshots from mainly 2018-2020. There were some not-BFR-specific ones that are also funny now because they talk about Crew Dragon / starlink / F9, like 'ah yes but they haven't even re-used a F9 over 10 times yet' sorts of things... anyways
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:20:59 UTC No. 16219217
>>16219204
they really couldn't see shit from spadre, huh? i don't feel nearly as bad for not making the trip yet...
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:22:25 UTC No. 16219220
>>16218965
The Starliner mission-salvage must have been a significant development, because I saw a bunch of Russoid / Eurasianist faux-smug seething in video comments.
Or maybe they're always that way, I dunno.
>t. Tourist
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:23:21 UTC No. 16219223
>>16219203
Or, here's an idea, you could skip the going to orbit part at all, you could just launch a rocket straight up, see the pretty sights, and then have it come straight down. You could use a much smaller rocket that way, even, maybe make it even more phallic than usual for a rocket if it's just a billionaire's dick stroking machine.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:25:46 UTC No. 16219227
>>16219223
well this would be for guys who went out to the moon/mars etc for a holiday
>>16219212
you could do both
maybe a ultra safe heavy starship could be possible
its not like you have to launch with the weight, just refuel in orbit
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:26:25 UTC No. 16219228
>>16219034
>>16218956
Hella based
I appreciate the reference to the burned fin.
>>16219019
Picrel: doxxed (You)
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:29:06 UTC No. 16219233
I'm trying to find news pieces about starship's launch on YT, but my god the search function is so fucking broken. It's all garbage clickbait and stuff not actually related to the search query.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:30:46 UTC No. 16219236
guys you can stop posting in this faux thread I'll bake a legitimate one in a second.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:31:45 UTC No. 16219239
>>16219204
Reminds me of ogre Fiona from Shrek
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:32:30 UTC No. 16219241
>>16219236
this is idiotic
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:33:17 UTC No. 16219242
>>16219227
The answer really is that the amount it would cost to fly tanker Starships up to refuel a crew starship so it can take the world's least efficient path to the ground is more than people think it would cost to just figure out the Starship heatshield thing. Maybe that'd be wrong in the future, but even if it were, it'd be more efficient to have an unmanned starship in orbit that's just loaded with Dragon capsules and have people deorbit in those, rather than sending up unmanned starships to refuel a Starship and have it land like a suborbital mission.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:34:29 UTC No. 16219244
>>16219239
NASA has no Fiona but it has tomboy waifus at your monitoring station, who wear the same plaid button down shirt as you.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:38:52 UTC No. 16219251
>>16219193
seems like a lot of anons thought stainless steel was a meme and they'd switch away from it eventually.
heh.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:39:40 UTC No. 16219255
>>16219244
That's not a tomboy, that's a bull dyke. You can tell by the tie. Tomboys don't wear ties.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:41:53 UTC No. 16219263
>>16219136
Most Australian thing I will see today!
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:47:20 UTC No. 16219269
Is the round shape the most optimal for coming down? I just keep thinking like what if the heatshield side was just shaped a bit differently to direct the plasma where they want, like how cars take in account airflow. But maybe that doesn't really matter, if the main issue was just the flaps
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:51:47 UTC No. 16219276
>>16219269
Different considerations at these speeds anon. Airflow doesn't turn the protruding bits of your car that direct it in useful ways into molten metal, because the speed differential is much lower.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:52:04 UTC No. 16219277
>>16219193
this is going to serve as a very good slap in the face for any idiot 10 years from now that tries to say "N-NOBODY EVER S-SAID THAT WE ALL T-THOUGHT IT WOULD MAKE IT!"
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:52:30 UTC No. 16219278
>>16218956
>three generals in 24 hours
>thousands of posts
/sfg/ is ALIVE
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:53:05 UTC No. 16219279
>>16219239
underrated post
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:53:34 UTC No. 16219280
>>16219269
Would you fuck off you stupid tourist? No /sfg/ regular would be asking these obvious questions that have been answered literally half a century ago. And no I wont be spoonfeeding you the answer, go back to whatever shithole you came from and ask them.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:53:55 UTC No. 16219281
>>16219223
The New Shepards' launches are not just rich dick stroking, they are a very valuable way to experiment with the dynamic of the Earth and the hardware of the rocket.
Every New Shepard's launch get us forward to the New Glenn with more security and stability, that's why they are useful.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:53:57 UTC No. 16219282
Here's what the japanese thought of the second stage splashdown:
>>>/wsg/5578108
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:54:35 UTC No. 16219284
>>16219278
/sfg/ is full of tourists that are shitting up the general.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:56:03 UTC No. 16219286
>>16219278
>those peaks on the Starship tests
Also what the hell happened in August?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:56:20 UTC No. 16219288
>>16218977
if trump hears that people cna land on the moon in his second term maybe he will emergency executive order 1 trillion to artemis and get it done
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:57:15 UTC No. 16219290
>>16219288
>$995bil to ULA
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:57:21 UTC No. 16219291
>>16219286
The LK-99 RTSC hoax.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:58:58 UTC No. 16219294
>>16219291
I didn't even notice. That certainly seems like a topic that would get the schizos and academics hollering and screaming at each other for weeks
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:59:13 UTC No. 16219295
>>16219204
what causes this utter PIG phenotype /sfg/?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 10:59:41 UTC No. 16219297
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:00:41 UTC No. 16219299
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:00:44 UTC No. 16219300
>>16219281
I love the optimism anon. Manifest that September launch.
🗑️ Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:05:10 UTC No. 16219309
mfw spacex starship
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:09:10 UTC No. 16219316
>>16219284
>>16219280
I'm not that flap-anon,
But I am a tourist. I'm from /k/
.... do you hate me, anon...? @_@
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:11:58 UTC No. 16219320
>>16219280
Well you're regular old grinch, very rude
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:12:32 UTC No. 16219322
>>16219291
>hoax
https://www.popularmechanics.com/sc
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:15:08 UTC No. 16219325
>>16218963
two unethical manipulators.
Fuck Elon.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:15:35 UTC No. 16219327
>>16219316
is that middle one a hooker? very feminine foot posture if male.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:17:24 UTC No. 16219329
>>16219324
Funding secured
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:17:30 UTC No. 16219330
>>16219323
>>16219324
>blatant bait posts
Why even save these?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:17:35 UTC No. 16219331
Can we talk about the fact that the strongest first stage in human history is basically fully operational now?
I mean even if they abandoned second stage reusability at this point and instead just built big dumb corn silo second stages on a long assembly line we are already guaranteed to have a never before seen capability to yeet untold amounts of raw stuff into orbit.
Crazy too. The Starship program may be 5 years old, but Superheavy was just slapped together maybe 2 years ago and it already manages to go through its entire mission including the propulsive landing that no other company can do.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:18:24 UTC No. 16219332
>>16219327
iirc I may have misnamed the file, because the suited people may include ground crew, not just pilots
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:18:24 UTC No. 16219333
>>16218963
Imagine if Trump gets relected and Moon landing happens on his watch
LMAO. The amount of seething it would generate. Holy moly.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:18:50 UTC No. 16219334
>>16219242
>it'd be more efficient to have an unmanned starship in orbit that's just loaded with Dragon capsules and have people deorbit in those, rather than sending up unmanned starships to refuel a Starship and have it land like a suborbital mission.
why not just have a dragon inside the starship fairing
double safety
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:19:18 UTC No. 16219335
>>16219331
we arent sure if the landing was nominal yet. it didnt seem to hover like they said it would, instead descending at a constant rate for the final few seconds, and we dont know if it landed within tolerable bounds of the targeted location.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:20:32 UTC No. 16219337
>>16219334
because you can't abort during launch from inside the bay
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:21:29 UTC No. 16219338
>>16219337
who says we can't?
its only a few mm of steel
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:21:32 UTC No. 16219339
>>16219242
Dragon production line is shutting down. All that will be made have been made There won’t be many around to use for something like that. They’re all going to be booked for ISS/ISS replacement missions
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:23:39 UTC No. 16219341
is nobody going tlo talk about the gridfins on superheavy? i think they got overshadowed by the spectacualar return of the ship, but those thigns were crazy, vibrating back and forth like they were about to fall off and actuating side to side multiple times a second
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:23:59 UTC No. 16219342
Can we just take a moment to depreciate the image in the OP? The biggest thing in spaceflight in decades just happened and the best image this absolute basement dwelling perma-online neckbeard could come up with is a drawing of a humanoid rocket drowning.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:24:37 UTC No. 16219346
>>16219337
Astra disagrees.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:25:01 UTC No. 16219347
>>16219341
Yeah I noticed the entire ship was slightly oscillating and the gridfins were trying to suppress that? Remember it was oscillating last flight too?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:26:37 UTC No. 16219348
>>16219342
at least its not furry
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:26:38 UTC No. 16219349
>>16219342
>drowning
she is happily floating
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:27:10 UTC No. 16219350
>>16219334
>>16219339
I think the bit where I was saying it'd be more efficient to launch Dragon capsules in a Starship and have crew land in those is somehow being viewed as me seriously thinking that is a good idea, and not a dumb idea somehow less dumb than a propulsive deorbit of Starship.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:27:38 UTC No. 16219351
>>16219342
can we take a moment for you to take your meds?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:28:43 UTC No. 16219353
>>16219350
>less dumb than a propulsive deorbit of Starship.
what is so dumb about it?
the fuel will be waiting in orbit
all you have to do is transfer it and do another burn
not saying do it for every mission but maybe when elon wants to go a trip or someone important
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:29:00 UTC No. 16219354
>>16219347
i thought it was about to lose control because they kept actuating into the oscilations making them worse like on ift3. Their models of the air through the landing regime must not be perfect
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:29:18 UTC No. 16219355
>>16219233
Google has been finding new and creative ways to shovel shit down our troaths so yt, google search, etc... is all even more shit now.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:30:40 UTC No. 16219357
Can we just take a moment to depreciate the sculpture on the bow? The biggest thing in seafaring in decades just happened and the best image this absolute basement dwelling perma-online neckbeard could come up with is a figure of a humanoid fish asphyxiating.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:31:20 UTC No. 16219358
>>16219354
yeah and maybe propellant slosh is playing a role. But I noticed after the engine lit the oscillations stopped.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:32:22 UTC No. 16219361
>>16219233
Yeah absolute state of youtube search. I could design a better search algorithm lol. Google and Boeing are such garbage companies how are they even getting along.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:32:53 UTC No. 16219362
Can we just take a moment to depreciate the painting on the fuselage? The biggest thing in warfare in decades just happened and the best image this absolute basement dwelling perma-online neckbeard could come up with is a figure of a humanoid strumpet come-hithering.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:33:45 UTC No. 16219364
>>16219358
>But I noticed after the engine lit the oscillations stopped
true, and even without the engines it seems to gain control right before splashdown, it straightened out like that on ift3 too
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:34:23 UTC No. 16219365
>>16219362
hit a nerve faggot?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:34:24 UTC No. 16219366
>>16219342
Anon, the moment that one of we perma-termina-giga basementdwelling neckbeards gets our act together, another engineer is born.
Let us not impede the process of inspiration and appreciation
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:34:30 UTC No. 16219367
>>16219341
They have more work to do than F9 gridfins, which aren't exactly static on the way down either.
Because there's no fucking entry burn.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:37:06 UTC No. 16219374
>>16219366
how to get an act together? (asking for a friend)
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:38:00 UTC No. 16219375
>>16219362
Can we take a moment to depreciate the painting on the nose? The biggest thing in melting Charlie just happened and the best image this basement dwelling perma-online neckbeard could come up with is a Marylin-Monroe wannabe going spread-eagle for a gasoline-filled penis.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:39:17 UTC No. 16219377
>>16219333
Then Trump and the Artemis astronauts have a tickertape parade
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:39:38 UTC No. 16219378
>>16219193
>bfr will cost 2 billion dollars in engines alone
whew lad there are some serious gems in here
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:40:14 UTC No. 16219379
spacex vindicated.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:41:39 UTC No. 16219380
>>16219333
he's already been found guilty on one of his several criminal trials. It's over for Trump.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:43:15 UTC No. 16219382
$50 million per engine X 39 engines = 1950 million. And that's a conservative engine price estimate.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:45:08 UTC No. 16219384
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:45:09 UTC No. 16219385
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:46:13 UTC No. 16219389
>>16219374
The best I've been able to manage is:
1) Get a few indulgences. Like some food or drink.
2) Get your math textbook or language workbook or whatever ready at your desk or whatever.
3) Read or watch some discrete packet of whatever your stupid vice addiction is. Or if it's Chans or SocMed, then it could be "one full round of checking the threads. While doing this, binge in your comfort food/drink.
4) While riding that high, just launch into that book involved with whatever you should really be doing with your life. It's painful to pull away from an addiction so step 3 is meant to sort of wash that out.
Gradually the dauntingness of that more virtuous route should fade. As you get into it and get a better handle on what you need to learn and how long it will take.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:49:02 UTC No. 16219394
>>16219385
there's a woman who's seen some depreciation
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:49:25 UTC No. 16219396
>>16219333
B-b-but...muh first woman of color....
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:54:21 UTC No. 16219408
>>16219193
God bless you anon, checked
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:54:36 UTC No. 16219410
>>16219393
I KNEEL
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:55:46 UTC No. 16219415
>>16219393
I KNEEL
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 11:58:28 UTC No. 16219419
>>16219393
I REJECT the bad flap design
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:01:21 UTC No. 16219426
>>16219419
MY CHILD will REJECT FLAP
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:02:38 UTC No. 16219430
>>16219414
20 minutes from entry interface to touchdown compared to 30 for shuttle.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:04:08 UTC No. 16219434
>>16219414
wait it doesn't even pull 2Gs on the way down?
neato
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:05:56 UTC No. 16219439
>>16219393
I was a really big composites-fag and I was hellbent on it being the future. But after yesterday I have seen the error of my ways. I apologise Flap-sama..
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:07:31 UTC No. 16219442
>>16219439
How can one be a compositefag in the year of our Elon 2024? Its many flaws have been known since forever, and ITS was widely criticized for intending to use composites at the time too.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:07:33 UTC No. 16219443
>>16219393
I KNEEL
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:07:55 UTC No. 16219444
>>16219439
i'm not sure i've ever seen elon be so smuggy on twitter as he was over the steel yesterday
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:08:58 UTC No. 16219446
>>16219439
Me too anon, me too.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:09:33 UTC No. 16219447
>>16219444
Solving the riddle of steel gives you the right to be smug
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:09:42 UTC No. 16219448
>>16219443
>sparks flying around, it's over
>landing burn reveals flap is still there and functional
We were watching it at the office and literally cheered.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:11:47 UTC No. 16219452
>>16219446
The ITS looks like a black kinder egg capsule.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:12:13 UTC No. 16219453
>>16219448
Oh say can you see,
That Star-ship flap, it stil waa-aaves
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:13:38 UTC No. 16219456
>>16219448
Yeah, a real kino moment, shit was straight out of a movie or anime.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:16:55 UTC No. 16219463
>>16219456
what made it so cinematic was how there were like 5 moments on the way down where everyone thought that had to be the end. i thought it, you thought it, thunderf00t thought it.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:19:34 UTC No. 16219465
>>16219443
We're all going to make it
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:25:08 UTC No. 16219472
https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/
>With Thursday's success, Boeing became only the second private company to build and fly a human orbital spacecraft, joining an elite club of just three nations: Russia, the United States, and China, alongside SpaceX. For the first time in history, three different crewed vehicles, Starliner, SpaceX's Dragon, and Russia's Soyuz, were all simultaneously docked at the station.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:26:01 UTC No. 16219474
the station is useless and should be abandoned asap.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:26:42 UTC No. 16219476
how many starships are required to land on the moon? ive heard these claims about 20 times refuelling and it sounds way too high, especially if starship is supposed to have at minimum 150 ton mass to orbit
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:27:20 UTC No. 16219477
>>16219476
10-15
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:27:40 UTC No. 16219478
>>16219472
>picrel
Are we all just gonna ignore the day the SpaceX capsule instantly exploded into a cloud of cancerous red smoke?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:27:58 UTC No. 16219479
>>16219380
Nobody cares
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:29:00 UTC No. 16219480
>>16219478
pad testing vs testing in orbit with people inside
pretty fucking different situation
nigger
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:29:34 UTC No. 16219481
>>16219478
Something that happened half a decade ago during testing?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:30:02 UTC No. 16219482
>>16219278
>aug 2023
SAD
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:30:12 UTC No. 16219483
>>16219478
You are the only anon who keeps bringing it up and it's painfully obvious
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:30:20 UTC No. 16219484
>>16219434
note that it doesn't include the acceleration due to gravity, but yeah it's pretty soft
(good values for other spacecrafts here in section 2.5 http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/ge
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:30:54 UTC No. 16219486
>>16219476
Depends how much the final design can carry. This is in turn determined by how much they beef up or slim down the rocket and how high they can push the engine performance. All of this is work in progress right now.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:31:00 UTC No. 16219487
>>16219481
Really it's been a decade already?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:31:28 UTC No. 16219490
https://x.com/Erdayastronaut/status
Reminder, all concerns are modeled, understood to a degree and are either considered completely safe or if its in question, workarounds are already in place for the next stage of development after verifications.
Its a non stop process.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:32:02 UTC No. 16219492
>>16219380
Yes, but biden shit himself on stage.
You want a dude who shits himself in confusion or a dude who fucks pornstars?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:33:11 UTC No. 16219493
>>16219492
I'm not really in the market for plague or cholera.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:33:42 UTC No. 16219495
>>16219487
Retard
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:34:51 UTC No. 16219496
>>16218963
Zion Don is not our ally
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:35:06 UTC No. 16219497
>>16219414
the altitude hold at 68km is quite visible.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:35:12 UTC No. 16219498
>>16219472
do they don't know what is causing the (multiple different) helium leak issues and do not know why 5 of 28 RCS thrusters failed
on top of that, the most difficult part (re-entry) is still ahead of them
maybe they aren't really that big of a deal like Nappi says but I mean its Boeing
>This could happen as soon as June 14 but could also be delayed, Stich said.
>Undocking, initiating a de-orbit burn, and surviving reentry through Earth's atmosphere will be one of the most challenging parts of the Starliner mission. Two sources told Ars on Thursday evening that NASA had a lot of issues to work through before Starliner would be cleared to fly home. Both helium supplies and the reaction-control thrusters are necessary for a successful departure from the station and entry into Earth's atmosphere.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:37:34 UTC No. 16219499
>>16219498
Here is hoping they find a big problem and they cant use starliner anymore and they need a dragon capsule to get them back home.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:37:42 UTC No. 16219500
I just checked the KSP forums, its full of commie trannies crying about Musk today. LMAO
Is the entire fanbase like this?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:38:16 UTC No. 16219503
Ars Technica comment section being very positive, which is somewhat surprising to me
https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:38:37 UTC No. 16219504
>>16219500
I wouldn't know, I just play the game instead of paying attention to forums.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:39:34 UTC No. 16219505
>>16219503
Clark and Berger articles are the only saving grace for that reddit owned site.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:39:44 UTC No. 16219506
>>16219500
"Communities" have been infected by the rot for over a decade. Why are you surprised?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:40:12 UTC No. 16219507
>>16219193
Good job
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:40:35 UTC No. 16219508
>>16219503
>>16219505
And the article writer dictates/prompts the temperature of the comments.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:41:58 UTC No. 16219511
>>16219492
I know that this is not the place to talk about this, but the dude didn't just "fuck a pornstar": he paid her hush money to sign an NDA and then falsified business records in order to hide the payment.
That's why he is a convicted felon, he was convicted on 34 counts of falsifying business records by a jury of peers, if a convicted felon cannot join simple law enforcement agencies such as the FBI or the DEA should he be considered eligible for the office of commander in chief of the armed forces? Should the US give the security clearance to a person that has been indicted for mishandling classified documents (wich is something that will get the s.c. revoked)?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:42:12 UTC No. 16219512
https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/
Small Rockets
>Firefly lands massive launch contract.
>It’s now Sir Peter Beck to you, commoner.
>Account of Astra’s dire fundraising efforts.
>Rocket Lab's back-to-back missions for NASA.
>Air Force ramps up Minuteman cadence.
Medium Rockets
>Starliner roars into space but encounters issues.
>Ariane 6 gets a launch date.
>Chinese firm raises big money.
Heavy Rockets
>Starship launches, survives reentry.
>Japanese billionaire cancels Starship flight.
>Military may seek Starship test in FY 2025.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:44:41 UTC No. 16219514
>>16219385
Why did he choose a literal demon as a girlfriend? Even Musk has a better taste.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:44:52 UTC No. 16219516
>>16219507
its not me, I just reposted it
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:44:55 UTC No. 16219517
>>16219511
>I know that this is not the place to talk about this
and what did you do with this knowledge?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:45:57 UTC No. 16219519
>>16219517
lmao
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:46:15 UTC No. 16219521
>>16219511
>I know that this is not the place to talk about this
Your right, take your own advice.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:46:24 UTC No. 16219522
>>16219511
Lil bro just shit his diaper in /sfg/ baka
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:46:34 UTC No. 16219523
>>16219517
I talk about it, that's what i do, deal with it.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:47:09 UTC No. 16219525
>>16219523
talk about it somewhere else
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:48:55 UTC No. 16219527
>>16219522
Just like his president.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:54:54 UTC No. 16219532
>>16219500
Where?
The spacex thread is talking about the launch like everywhere is
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:56:09 UTC No. 16219533
>>16219532
The one on the leddit, but then again, its leddit, so i'm not surprised one bit.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:56:29 UTC No. 16219536
https://new.reddit.com/r/EnoughMusk
https://new.reddit.com/r/EnoughMusk
https://new.reddit.com/r/EnoughMusk
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:57:14 UTC No. 16219537
>>16219492
bit off topic but Wasn't there rumours Trump was shitting himself on stage constantly. Also neither are good for space
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:02:42 UTC No. 16219543
>>16219536
Most people are just getting btfo by replies in that first link lol
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:02:52 UTC No. 16219544
>>16219537
there is a world of difference between biden and trump with respect to space
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:03:53 UTC No. 16219548
I appreciate the irony of a place called enoughmuskspam that does nothing but obsessively talk about elon musk.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:04:23 UTC No. 16219549
>>16219544
Not just space but everything. One is completely goner and has no idea where he is, what he's doing, what's going on, etc there's so many videos of him like this, its now not just sad and pathetic but also cruel and unusual. The other is a lively one but still acts like a retard from time to time.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:05:40 UTC No. 16219550
astronauts shit themselves
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:06:05 UTC No. 16219551
https://x.com/esherifftv/status/179
Elon with Ellie on catching on tower chance
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:06:30 UTC No. 16219552
spaceflight?.jpg
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:07:07 UTC No. 16219554
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:07:48 UTC No. 16219555
>>16219547
Seems like a case of not paying off the right people like Hollywood does with it's arsenal of fully automatic weapons and explosives that rival small countries in size.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:07:51 UTC No. 16219556
reminder that trump literally smells like shit and its been confirmed by republicans
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:07:56 UTC No. 16219557
>>16219547
we can't place 100% of the blame on the fact that zoomers don't live in reality. i blame video games.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:08:27 UTC No. 16219558
NASA’s Mega Moon Rocket
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:08:41 UTC No. 16219559
>>16219547
Epic video to see for sure. Where's the link?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:09:34 UTC No. 16219561
>>16219556
As long as he stays out of Musks way I don't care at all
Biden is openly hostile and using similar lawfare he is using against Trump against Musk
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:10:10 UTC No. 16219563
>>16219514
Musk's women have been pretty normal. Even Grimes is normal once you hose her down.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:10:13 UTC No. 16219564
>>16219550
I just farted. Can I be astronaut and president now?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:10:25 UTC No. 16219565
>>16219551
hullo and at least one anon were saying they'll want to wait until the second tower is ready before trying a catch, but i don't really see how waiting helps you. the second tower's going to be finished regardless of whether the first one gets destroyed in july (inshallah) or december.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:10:48 UTC No. 16219566
>>16219564
yes actually
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:11:14 UTC No. 16219567
>>16219551
the whole interview should be dropping in 2h 20min assuming 10:30 AM is Texas time
https://x.com/esherifftv/status/179
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:13:52 UTC No. 16219570
>>16219565
Possible strategy.
1) try with tower in ~1-2 months from now
2) in 1-2 months from now, 2nd tower will be half way finished
3a) tower catch fails = speed up 2nd tower
3b) tower catch succeeds = speed up 2nd tower
4) next flight after that is another 1-2 months (so total of 4 months from today)
5) 2nd tower will be finished
6a) if 1st tower was damaged 2 months earlier, it would be either repaired or will be in the process of being repaired
6b) if 1st tower wasn't damaged, it will be usable
7) now there are 2 towers
There's no real loss scenario
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:15:05 UTC No. 16219572
>>16219565
Depends if the new tower is just a tower or tower + OLM
If the new tower is just a catch tower, then you'll have to wait till it's up to do the catch less you blow up your only pad, if they are building an OLM then the old OLM might be able to be sacrificed
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:15:18 UTC No. 16219573
>>16219565
if there is something they wanted to test which they couldn't do on IFT-5 or didn't succeed then a destroyed tower might delay flight 6 due to tower repairs/new tower construction being the long pole
you have four Starship/Super Heavy v1 vehicles waiting already
not to mention there might be some enviromental assessment shit again
is it worth it to not test tower landing if you can squeeze in a launch or two which might be blocked by a damaged tower? maybe
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:15:22 UTC No. 16219574
>>16219570
Also basically there will always be atleast 1 usable tower in the next 4 months.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:17:17 UTC No. 16219578
https://x.com/Dailymirror_SL/status
Starlink now has preliminary approval to operate in Sri Lanka.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:17:52 UTC No. 16219579
>>16219570
what if they are able to spam out launches once a month now?
one launching next month and then getting delayed 3-4 months due to tower repairs would mean they have 3 outdated stacks waiting around that they could have launched and perhaps even used to test or launch some starlinks
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:19:30 UTC No. 16219580
Was looking at IFT-4 videos on bilibili, the users there seem to have a very positive view of the flight and Starship in general. Also lots of Boing shit-talk which is funny to see
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:19:39 UTC No. 16219581
>>16219490
getting concerned about elons shape.
beginning to look like a vogon.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:20:20 UTC No. 16219582
>>16219573
recovering the booster is by far the most important thing they need to test right now. nothing else comes even close as far as being a necessity for ramping up cadences.
>>16219572
it's gonna be tower + OLM because they're gonna need two pads to launch the two ships for the prop transfer demo
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:20:22 UTC No. 16219583
Can someone catch me up on why they are even building a second tower right next to the first one?
It's not like they could prepare a second stack for launch on one pad while they're actively launching from the other.
Is it really just redundancy if one gets damaged or closed for upgrades?
Is the new tower higher since they said they would stretch the tanks?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:21:40 UTC No. 16219584
>>16219579
Its possible, they'll try whatever is the fastest route.
>1 month launch rate
a) tower 1 fails, next wait is ~3-4 months after
b) tower 1 works, next wait is 1 month after
Or they could buffer a bit
>2 month launch rate
a) tower 1 fails, next wait is 2-3 months after
b) tower 2 works, next wait is 2 months after
Either way, they'll hit the launch limit I think this year.
>>16219580
>No account
>only 2 comments seeable
>video limited to 1 min or so
lmao.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:21:51 UTC No. 16219585
>>16219537
>Also neither are good for space
Not true. I don't like Trump, but he did lots of good things for space.
>Appointed Jim Bridenstine (the best Administrator that NASA has had in years).
>The first spaceflight launched from the US since the end of the Space Shuttle occurred during his Administration.
>Established the Space Force
>Had policies specifically around space in his 2020 campaign platform.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:21:52 UTC No. 16219586
>>16219580
maybe, despite all our differences, we are all the same...
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:22:26 UTC No. 16219587
>>16219583
My gu as is it's close to the factory
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:22:45 UTC No. 16219588
i guess we can delete the flaps
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:22:46 UTC No. 16219589
>>16219430
doesn't this pretty much prove that even with the bulkiness of this early prototype, starship has a much better mass/drag ratio?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:22:59 UTC No. 16219590
>>16219570
There is another possibility.
Build barebone 2nd tower asap that basically acts as a dummy catcher tower with reduced risk to integral tower parts, aimed away from the rest of the starbase facilities
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:23:52 UTC No. 16219592
>>16219542
I will shitpost on both 4chan and reddit, my power level can't be contained by just one website alone.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:24:05 UTC No. 16219593
>>16219580
I think china sees NASA as the political foil, and SpaceX as the technical foil - both worth emulating (copying I guess)
Long Lehao had a conference a few years ago at I think the university of hong kong and all the students were wearing SpaceX occupy Mars shirts lol. I think there’s huge respect for SpaceX in China. The same thing exists on Dvach with russia.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:25:13 UTC No. 16219594
>>16219155
you could get yourself down to only a handful of km/s, so about mach 6 or whatever, which might be too hot for just bare steel maybe but yeah
if you did this you could bring an HLS Starship back from orbit
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:25:28 UTC No. 16219595
>>16219588
We can take a megalodon-sized bite out of them to save weight.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:27:14 UTC No. 16219597
>>16219588
the mesosphere sure as hell tried to delete them
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:28:15 UTC No. 16219598
>>16219593
Elon is huge outside of western media propaganda goyslop world, especially in China because they understand hustle culture. They grew up in it and got rich/prosperous as a result. They understand hard work leads to prosperity.
In American and in the west today, the marxists promote the idea that hard work = stupid and that the smartest is to not do any work. How does a society function like this? You need hard work + smart work. Not one or other. We haven't created a society where we have abundance yet, so if we slow down the progress all that would lead is decay and misery.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:28:15 UTC No. 16219599
hey pete
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:28:28 UTC No. 16219600
>>16219570
this is great an all but how is this going to impact unique species to the area like the ocelot, piping clover, or kemps ridley sea turtles? im sure all the boca chica flea beetles are dead now from the deluge water run off. The only plausible outcome is that starbase is moved to florida.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:30:46 UTC No. 16219602
>>16219598
The threat of chinks stealing data is too bit BUT I think an Artemis-ILRS meetup on the Moon would be so, so kino. I have huge for China spaceflight but I see why people view them as the antagonist, especially if we want/need some sort of new space race
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:31:03 UTC No. 16219604
>>16219393
I KNEEL
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:32:40 UTC No. 16219605
>>16219602
China has multiple probes on mars and the moon. They're the 2nd most prolific space power after SpaceX/US.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:32:41 UTC No. 16219606
>>16219592
look at that fat cock
not as big as mine though.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:32:47 UTC No. 16219608
>>16219602
*threat is too BIG
*I have huge RESPECT for
Damn wtf I cannot type this morning
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:37:18 UTC No. 16219609
>>16219608
it's the re-entry juices flowing through your brain
the entire general is in an elevated mental state right now, partially disabling our cognition. we're pretty much all on space cocaine at the moment, prepare for the after effects of it wearing off and an increase in IT'S SO OVER or NOTHING EVER HAPPENS in a few days.
after fortnight we'll likely have re-adjusted to regular dopamine levels and everyone will be back to the usual 2 weeks routine.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:41:38 UTC No. 16219611
>>16219565
Not sure why everyone keeps saying this, but the tower doesn't really matter as much as the OLM. They can throw up a new tower in a few months. A new OLM will probably take 12+ months to construct
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:41:59 UTC No. 16219612
>>16219557
Meanwhile we that watch rocket videos are so much better
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:42:18 UTC No. 16219613
elon is talking about moving the flaps further inward, won't that change the stability and control parameters, may also violate faa license, why not just make them titanium or solid steel instead of the cardboard form they are in right now
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:45:13 UTC No. 16219618
>>16219605
So they're third.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:45:28 UTC No. 16219620
>>16219611
Booster crashing on top of OLM wont make OLM completely disappear. OLM is extremely robust enough that it can hold a completely filled starship + booster stack. 5000+ tons filled vs ~200-250 tons empty.
250/5000 ton = 5% mass. Its like an empty coke can falling on top of a brick
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:46:14 UTC No. 16219621
>>16219609
reminder that I was on actual cocaine for IFT-1 (april 20eth 2023)
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:46:35 UTC No. 16219622
>>16219614
looks a bit optimistic.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:46:45 UTC No. 16219623
>>16219583
redundancy and there is really no way to build it somewhere else quickly
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:47:03 UTC No. 16219624
>>16219614
musk was saying at least 6 flights this year before IFT-3. unless we want to believe that he underestimated how easy things would be for the first time in his life, i'm gonna say 40 days is the absolute minimum turnaround time in 2024.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:47:15 UTC No. 16219625
>>16219613
stainless steel is better for reentry than titanium, and solid steel would be too heavy lol
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:47:32 UTC No. 16219626
>>16219612
i went to ift-1 and saw sts-112. spaceflight is actually real and not just pixels on a screen. you might be surprised at what happens outside your basement.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:49:13 UTC No. 16219629
>>16219626
this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1G
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:49:45 UTC No. 16219631
>>16219625
then increase the motor's power, aren't they powered by a motor, i think its a small price to pay than redesigning the entire thing, then having to test the new flaps once again
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:53:24 UTC No. 16219636
>>16219609
It's like that orgy scene in Dune
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:55:01 UTC No. 16219638
>>16219565
The tower and OLM are extremely overbuilt. The booster is an empty soda can by comparison, it would fold like tin foil on the tower. Minimal damage
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:55:04 UTC No. 16219639
>>16219636
Clearly we didn't watch the same dune movie.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:56:30 UTC No. 16219640
>>16219620
hey you and I posted the same thing lol
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:57:42 UTC No. 16219642
>>16219638
I'm more worried about fire from leftover propellant
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:57:54 UTC No. 16219643
>>16219620
You're right, but it would look worse than it really is. The actual danger is if it lands of the farm or some other equipment that will take time to replace.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 13:58:57 UTC No. 16219645
>>16219642
They run the deluge while it is coming down. It's a solved problem.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:00:07 UTC No. 16219648
>>16219620
The clamps can, sure. But I would be concerned about the booster falling on the ring itself. They've been working on that thing nonstop for the past, what, 3 years?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:01:20 UTC No. 16219650
>>16219648
Continuous improvements/upgrades over time. Not a single one time design that took 3 years.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:01:23 UTC No. 16219651
>>16219614
August or September is likely, depending on the modifications they needs to make
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:04:03 UTC No. 16219656
Let's be honest, that booster landing could have been a bit more "precise". There's no margin for error with the catch arms
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:04:04 UTC No. 16219657
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xe4
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:04:14 UTC No. 16219658
>>16219620
???
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:05:04 UTC No. 16219659
>>16219656
How could you tell how precise it was. It's really hard to tell how high it is from that camera's perspective
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:08:13 UTC No. 16219663
>>16219662
Jeff has not even tried yet.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:08:17 UTC No. 16219664
>>16219659
The booster still oscillates upon landing, cant afford to do that and expect the arms to catch you
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:08:32 UTC No. 16219665
>>16219335
Again - to anon's point - even if the second stage reusability never works, we've now got the most lift capability since Saturn V functional. Forget about launching comm satellites, we're gonna be launching stations in a decade and servicing crews.
I can think of at least a dozen companies that would jump at the opportunity to try and be the first company to maintain its own orbital research platform.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:08:49 UTC No. 16219667
>>16219658
A huge difference in energy between 33 engine flowing downward with dense explosive energy vs near empty tank crashing and exploding. Also before the intense upgrades to the entire structure
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:09:30 UTC No. 16219668
>>16219664
I have devised an alternative way of catching the booster that's way more robust
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:09:49 UTC No. 16219670
>>16219619
very good article that i wish /sfg/ would read. going by their numbers, a drone ship f9 launch is around $1600/kg now. by comparison, the infamous 1971 mathematica paper on shuttle economics dazzled congress with cost estimates that come out to $2700/kg today, adjusting for inflation.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:09:55 UTC No. 16219671
>>16219656
The 3 engines made the booster float on the water for few seconds. Thats enough margin for catchin
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:10:39 UTC No. 16219672
Has the 4'11" malding manlet with f250 driver energy made a comment about starship yet?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:11:38 UTC No. 16219674
>>16219672
Are you talking aboit the guy who always wears a baseball cap
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:11:55 UTC No. 16219675
>>16219665
Starship V1: 40-50 tons to orbit with reuse
>Minus Headers: +30 tons
>Minus Flaps and Tiles: +10 tons
>No booster Recovery: X1.5
The IFT-4/Block 1 stack could probably put 120 tons into orbit pessimistically, and 130 tons when fully expended. And it launches once every 3 months right now. Crazy
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:13:55 UTC No. 16219676
https://x.com/TheInsiderPaper/statu
Another Boeing engine mishap on take off
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:15:08 UTC No. 16219680
>>16218965
>GREAT DAY FOR SPACEX
>Oh... uh, and Boeing is here too, I guess.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:15:39 UTC No. 16219682
>>16219676
Seems like an engine manufacturer or maintenance issue rather than a Boeing problem
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:15:41 UTC No. 16219683
>>16219670
Reminder that NASA blacklisted the brilliant Thomas Gold for challenging shuttle cost estimates
>In the 1970s and 1980s, Gold was a vocal critic of NASA's Space Shuttle program, deriding claims that the agency could fly 50 missions a year or that it could have low budget costs. NASA officials warned Gold that if he testified his concerns before Congress, his research proposals would lose their support from NASA. Gold ignored the warning and testified before a Congressional committee headed by Senator Walter Mondale. In a letter to NASA administrator James C. Fletcher, George Low wrote that "Gold should realize that being funded by the Government and NASA is a privilege, and that it would make little sense for us to fund him as long as his views are what they are now".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoma
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:15:54 UTC No. 16219685
>>16218842
>>16218728
>>16218734
>don't fucking talk about fight club you fucking retard
I knew there was something behind these videos...
spill the beans, faggots
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:17:29 UTC No. 16219689
>>16219675
Christ, that's basically a third-of-an-ISS in one go.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:19:35 UTC No. 16219693
>>16219692
https://www.youtube.com/live/Rn2Ezf
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:20:08 UTC No. 16219694
>>16219688
Bad way to go.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:20:13 UTC No. 16219695
>>16219670
Interesting that Starlink profitability is so dependent on launch costs. I mean, obviously, but if simply adding $10 millions to a Falcon 9 launch cost dooms the whole thing, I can't see how Kuiper will work
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:22:20 UTC No. 16219698
>>16219693
He is a closeted SpaceX enjoyer
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:23:47 UTC No. 16219703
>>16219689
V2 can do 100 tons to LEO, so that number increases to 210 tons per launch fully expended, 140 with Superheavy reuse
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:24:45 UTC No. 16219706
>>16219688
the accident report is fascinating. they were basically blended into chunky soup inside their suits from the shaking. it says they passed out before that but i doubt it. that moment it started to roll beyond the point of no return had to have been surreal.
https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/upl
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:25:34 UTC No. 16219708
>>16219662
Because space... is HARD.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:26:33 UTC No. 16219709
>>16219676
I hate Boing, but they don't make the engines and don't do the maintenance on the ground.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:27:59 UTC No. 16219710
>>16219682
This particular problem was probably maintenance and not a Boeing problem. However I don't see how you can say that in general Boeing can absolve themselves of fuckups done by their suppliers. Boeing is the one who decides which suppliers to pick and which not to pick. They decide which engine options they want to offer to customers. If Boeing outsourced 100% of design and manufacturing, would that mean Boeing would have 0% of the blame if the plane crashes due to manufacturing or design flaws even though they are the ones who decided who the jobs were outsourced to?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:28:03 UTC No. 16219711
>>16219688
rough
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:29:13 UTC No. 16219713
>>16219512
>Ariane 6 launches the 9th july
I'll actually be in french guyana from the 12th so if it could get delayed by a few days by weather or something that would be great
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:29:20 UTC No. 16219714
>>16219693
the 'it has no fuel left to land' cope he and css push is such a self report of novice levels of understanding. Weird how they have been pushing that cope for a year and then get humiliated watching both booster and ship land with the fuel they had.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:29:51 UTC No. 16219717
no one is discussing solutions to the flap problem, its all about boing and bezos, where the fuck did the engineers of sci go to?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:30:06 UTC No. 16219718
have they found the starship remains in the oceans yet?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:31:33 UTC No. 16219719
>>16219703
>V2 can do 100 tons to LEO
Nein, eine Tonne Erde zu Erde
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:31:34 UTC No. 16219720
>>16219717
it's not a flap problem, it's a hinge problem. they're moving the hinges out of the airstream on v2. simple as.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:31:35 UTC No. 16219721
>>16219717
The obvious solution is expendable flaps
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:31:37 UTC No. 16219722
>>16219718
RGV seems to have found the booster, and someone else claims that there was footage of Starship.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:31:43 UTC No. 16219723
>>16219695
The brainrot is so real that merely existing as an alternative is enough to get companies and other people to pay any amount of money for said alternative
Starlink is deemed too irrational, ambitious and unproven. It's how viasat is saying in business, they are the "adults" essentially saying to companies do you want your internet delivered by an overcomplex constellation developed by 25 year olds and a meme lord or do you want the company ran by 60 year old farts with a "proven" system (no matter how slow or expensive it is in comparison)
It's how it's going with out constellations, it's made by companies deemed more rational, no matter if their system is slower or even less reliable
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:31:48 UTC No. 16219725
>>16219448
Someone needs to put it to this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vgr
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:32:31 UTC No. 16219726
>>16219706
>it says they passed out before that but i doubt it
No, that's just one of those white lies of comfort investigators tell families.
>He died on impact
>He died instantly
>He wouldn't have felt any pain
>etc.
Because nobody wants to hear that their spouse/child/parent/sibling/friend/
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:33:08 UTC No. 16219727
>>16219717
armchair engineer here. Basically the solution is to hide the hinge behind the cylider so it's not in the plasma. This has a high mass penalty.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:33:30 UTC No. 16219728
>>16219706
>they were basically blended into chunky soup inside their suits from the shaking
werent they constantly reboosting the flight computers up to the moment it disintegrated?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:33:33 UTC No. 16219729
>>16219718
no, but they found something else...
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:33:47 UTC No. 16219730
>>16219692
this guy is the best troll ever if he makes people seethe this much.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:34:09 UTC No. 16219731
>>16219719
These guys designed Saturn V
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:34:35 UTC No. 16219733
>>16219720
so will they fly any more v1 ships?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:35:10 UTC No. 16219734
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:35:51 UTC No. 16219737
>>16219688
I wonder if it would be possible to make two crafts reenter at the same time and almost the same place so one could observe the other to get in-site data on reentry (+unbelievable video)
>>16219717
moar heatshield
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:36:12 UTC No. 16219738
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:36:14 UTC No. 16219739
>>16219730
pretending to be retarded or actually being retarded is not trolling. it's making a mockery of yourself and then calling the mockery "s-seethe" out of insecurity.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:36:31 UTC No. 16219740
>>16219695
Kuiper will have access to better launch vehicles in the future (e.g. NG). Amazon can afford to lose money for an interim period if that's what's necessary to launch sooner and to secure spectrum rights. Besides, Amazon probably wants Kuiper for synergy reasons, to make their data service offerings more complete, not just to make money by itself.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:37:27 UTC No. 16219743
Let's say starliner works flawlessly from here on out.
I know, I know, but humor me.
Will it ever fly private missions? Crew dragon has done 4 already and has several more scheduled. or will it only do the contractually required NASA missions and immediately retire?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:37:39 UTC No. 16219744
>>16219706
>they were basically blended into chunky soup inside their suits
that's total bullshit too.
the suits neck ring might or might not have broken their necks.
that's all.
muh vibration is a total cope. humans survive eject airplane at supersonic velocity and riding rocket sleds and crashing f1 cars with 200g impact
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:39:20 UTC No. 16219745
>>16219743
Starliner seats cost almost twice as much as dragon, I don't see why anyone would fly on it over dragon especially considering it's constant problems.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:39:52 UTC No. 16219746
>>16219733
This is the most damning question of all
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:39:57 UTC No. 16219747
>>16219743
the fact that they saved old atlas Vs for it (just enough to fill out the cc contract) instead of going through the trouble of qualifying it for vulcan should tell you all you need to know
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:40:25 UTC No. 16219749
>>16219743
Commercial LEO destinations maybe. But I don't see space tourists or thrillseekers buying Starliner seats just to go into space; Dragon is literally the cheaper option.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:40:52 UTC No. 16219751
>>16219727
According to Elon it saves mass lol
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:41:08 UTC No. 16219752
>>16219743
it literally doesn't have the launch systems to spare
they only have atlas V's reserved for their contract missions, and as we all know they're not building any more of those.
so if they want this thing to get slaughtered in the commercial market, they're going to have to go through the whole certification process again for vulcan.
or create the most glansy rocket ever and fly it on falcon.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:41:24 UTC No. 16219753
>>16219747
Any chance boeing is gonna bow out of spaceflight altogether once starliners contract is up?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:42:34 UTC No. 16219755
>>16219743
What will it fly on after Atlas V's immediate retirement? Will they really wait around for years before it can fly on Vulcan/New Glenn? Or will they go to the always available F9?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:42:55 UTC No. 16219756
>>16219749
I don't understand orbital queefs rationale for using dreamchaser or starliner. there is no commercial space station at present because the ride to and from it is too expensive. how do they expect to make one commercially viable with ride at the present oldspace ticket price?
🗑️ Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:43:31 UTC No. 16219758
>>16219670
>$1600/kg
And yet SpaceX charges $6000/kg for rideshares. This is why competition is necessary.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:43:45 UTC No. 16219759
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:43:59 UTC No. 16219760
>>16219743
no, too expensive
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:46:06 UTC No. 16219765
>>16219720
so they will be internal hinges?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:46:45 UTC No. 16219769
>>16219759
Plans can change.
Boeings space division has been hemorrhaging cash for the past few years. Before this it never had an unprofitable year.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:47:17 UTC No. 16219771
>>16219727
can someone sketch this because i am having a hard time imagining how it would move
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:47:52 UTC No. 16219773
yesterday was a dream. imagine not being interested in starship development.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:48:17 UTC No. 16219774
>>16219756
BO will probably eventually build a crew vehicle in-house. It can be cheaper per person if it is big enough to make full use of NG's capablities and thus benefit from scale. And also launch frequently. However it makes sense they don't want their entire space station project to depend on just their own capsule project, because that introduces more risk of costly delays.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:48:37 UTC No. 16219776
Has RGV posted booster pics yet?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:51:19 UTC No. 16219782
>>16219282
FURAPPU IKITERU
FURAPPU IKITERU
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:51:45 UTC No. 16219783
>>16219776
He didn't fly over the ocean you can see it on the track.
It's 65 km out probably didn't want to risk it with a shitty cessna.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:52:21 UTC No. 16219784
>>16219774
BO has been working on a reusable upper stage for New Glenn, i imagine it will be like starship but more risk averse as in it will have a traditional capsule ontop of the starship style propulsion module, which can jettison in an abort scenario. it will have too much dry mass for operation beyond leo but will be a safer leo truck than starship
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:52:56 UTC No. 16219786
>>16219670
>$1600/kg
$28m per launch works out to ~$2400/kg to 500km SSO. And yet SpaceX charges $6000/kg for SSO rideshares. This is why competition is necessary.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:54:24 UTC No. 16219788
>>16219392
China's going to have an interesting domestic launch market in 2025. Between this and the Zhuque-3 they'll have two Falcon 9 clones trying to undercut each other on price. We never got that here in the west because the closest anyone's come to trying to really complete with Falcon is something like Vulcan.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:55:09 UTC No. 16219789
>>16219784
Any news on that? It feels like jarvis has been completely silent lately.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:55:30 UTC No. 16219791
So if a /sfg/ott was inside starship’s payload bay with a spacesuit, they would’ve survived?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:56:14 UTC No. 16219793
>>16219771
i can't find that anyone's made a good render of it so the best i can think of are concordski canards, if you imagine it bellyflopping
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:56:37 UTC No. 16219794
>>16219786
they earned that profit margin. but yeah, I agree it would be better if someone gave them a run for it.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:56:43 UTC No. 16219796
>>16219791
Yes but the payload bay probably crumpled when tipping over.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:56:51 UTC No. 16219797
>>16219393
I KNEEL
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:57:18 UTC No. 16219799
>>16219791
if it was me yeah
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:58:16 UTC No. 16219800
>>16219793
putting them that deep inside leaves a huge vertical hole exposed and the plasma will just be waiting to wreck that?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:58:30 UTC No. 16219801
>>16219744
Page 263
Conclusion L2-3. Lethal injuries resulted from inadequate upper body restraint and protection
during rotational motion
imagine riding a roller coaster with a fish bowl on your head
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:58:31 UTC No. 16219802
>>16219793
That's some derpy ass lookin' shit.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:59:05 UTC No. 16219804
>>16219786
Rideshares are more complex missions more constrained by volume than mass
Mass to cost ratios are only relevant for actual high mass missions of single sats or constellation sats, where the actual limitation is mass to orbit rather than if it fits in the faring
If your mass is under what an RTLS mission costs, you're going to pay a high $ to kg ratio because that mission is going to be fixed cost
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 14:59:32 UTC No. 16219805
>>16219393
I kneel. All glory to The Flap!
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:00:24 UTC No. 16219806
>the hotstage ring floating by like stack separator in KSP
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:00:45 UTC No. 16219807
>>16219789
as with everything BO it's all computer generated with one or two panels laying about in a factory as the only real hardware. Allegedly Bezo is copying Musk and making it out of stainless steel now. Which may slightly complicate mating with New Glenn since they are made out of different metals with different expansion ratios. From the little hardware that exists its safe to say Jarvis will be a starship scaled to Zubrins liking.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:01:49 UTC No. 16219809
>>16219796
>>16219799
What about if you were chilling in the engine bay?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:01:56 UTC No. 16219810
>>16219800
you mean like this?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:02:02 UTC No. 16219811
>>16219730
>troll
Nah he makes a living by being the go to Musk hater
Jealousy, hate and resentment can be turned a profit. Dude knows the game.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:03:50 UTC No. 16219813
>>16219807
That news is like 2 years old. Has seriously nothing notable happened in 2 years?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:04:01 UTC No. 16219814
>>16219809
then the heatshielded rvac nozzles will protect you
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:04:24 UTC No. 16219815
>>16219806
since it was so small i thought it was a part from the lower end of the booster
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:06:57 UTC No. 16219821
>>16218960
*paizuri
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:07:13 UTC No. 16219823
>>16219813
it's BO so no lol
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:08:09 UTC No. 16219825
>>16219813
i'm pretty sure they gave up on it after the one test article
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:08:29 UTC No. 16219826
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:08:30 UTC No. 16219827
>>16219679
Sad that they're only just starting to catch up...
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:09:06 UTC No. 16219829
>>16219824
stright outta KSP
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:10:13 UTC No. 16219830
>>16219804
What do they charge for unitary payloads? I compared with the SSO rideshare cost because they publish that number on their website.
500km SSO figure from NASA's performance website is 11.7t, already cut about 1/3 compared to the commonly cited ideal 17.5t to 28.5° low LEO. If volume is still the constraint on rideshare launches, then why not use fairings that are stretched or otherwise enlarged?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:12:44 UTC No. 16219836
>>16219794
If companies were allowed to just "earn" extra profit margins from pushing technological boundaries, then society wouldn't benefit much from technological progress.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:13:12 UTC No. 16219838
>>16219826
fuck you for making me try to draw something
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:16:16 UTC No. 16219843
>>16219838
won't the plasma eat away at the edge where the flap meets the groove?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:16:34 UTC No. 16219844
>>16219788
>they'll have two Falcon 9 clones
There'll probably be a bunch of others as well e.g. Hyperbola-3, Gravity-2 and Kuaizhou-6, and also lighter launchers like Pallas-1 and Nebula-1
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:17:15 UTC No. 16219845
>>16219823
>>16219825
There actually is some news, renamed it to clipper and they have a test stand for it at LC-36.
https://youtu.be/7rQwN7bCIBM
Probably it's just on the back burner while they rush to get new glenn up and running for their mars mission in september.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:17:45 UTC No. 16219847
https://x.com/YellowstoneTen/status
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:17:55 UTC No. 16219848
>>16219688
This happens every time I try reentering with a spaceplane in KSP, any slight adjustment to the angle of attack just sends me into an uncontrolled spin. I hate spaceplanes.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:18:23 UTC No. 16219849
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:19:16 UTC No. 16219852
>>16219717
Fuck the flap problem. The entire tile heat shield goes against the system's design goals and needs to be replaced by ~something~ else.
Don't ask me what that something's supposed to be though. Apparently thousands of fragile tiles being loosely attached one by one by hand is the peak of human technology in that field.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:19:24 UTC No. 16219854
>>16219849
woah, how'd I fuck that up?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:20:08 UTC No. 16219858
>>16219726
It's the old "passed away peacefully" bullshit we tell one another to try and make dying less scary.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:20:17 UTC No. 16219859
>>16219848
you need better yaw control
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:22:27 UTC No. 16219865
>>16219852
You need to invent a spray on coating that's extremely thermally insulative.
There's not a physics reason why it can't exist just need to adhere it to the steel chemically
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:22:57 UTC No. 16219868
>>16219830
>then why not use fairings that are stretched or otherwise enlarged?
Just hasn't been worth it when the current fairing serves 95% of customers
They have an extended faring for some national security contracts being worked on but with falcon 9 being a heritage rocket it's going to take time
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:25:27 UTC No. 16219873
>>16219852
i remember elon started with the idea of a sweating skin for starship but it never amounted to much, they were going to cool the internal skin with some cryogenic but seems too complicated when you can just stick some tiles on the outside
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:26:05 UTC No. 16219875
>>16219873
it wasnt due to being complicated, it weighed more than the tile system according to their calculations
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:28:42 UTC No. 16219882
>>16219871
hooker in space.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:29:22 UTC No. 16219884
>>16219882
The solar system's oldest profession
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:33:27 UTC No. 16219890
>>16219873
The first thing they said was "we're gonna polish the steel and it'll reflect some of the heat radiation and it'll be otherwise fine because it's steel".
I really don't know why the fuck they said that.
But yes, after that they talked about methane sweating or internal cooling. Then they completely gave up and decided to go with Shuttle 2.0 as what they must've thought was an easy interim solution. Except it's not easy and actually a pain in the ass.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:34:52 UTC No. 16219894
>>16219869
>However, there appears to be rising concern in the ISS program at NASA's Johnson Space Center in Houston. The space agency often uses a 5x5 "risk matrix" to classify the likelihood and consequence of risks to spaceflight activities, and the Russian leaks are now classified as a "5" both in terms of high likelihood and high consequence. Their potential for "catastrophic failure" is discussed in meetings.
oop
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:35:48 UTC No. 16219899
What we need is something flexible and durable enough to withstand reentry. We need a reentry-proof heat blanket you can just wrap around shit.
There MUST be a material with a high enough heat tolerance and dissipative properties that ISN'T fragile terracotta bullshit, we just haven't made it yet.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:37:39 UTC No. 16219901
while we're doing wishlists for not-theoretically-impossible materials i still want lk99 that actually works
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:38:42 UTC No. 16219907
>>16219865
Starlite
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:39:21 UTC No. 16219909
>>16219489
>I'm flap, and that's good.
>I will always ablate, but that's not bad.
>There's no one I'd rather be, than me.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:42:33 UTC No. 16219916
>>16219824
Yeah, the return capsules moron.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:51:19 UTC No. 16219939
>>16219843
Plasma won't envelop the rocket. Flappy's problem was that there's the tiniest of gaps right in the middle of the plasma stream.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:52:07 UTC No. 16219943
>>16219896
>ship was 6km off geographically but was able to maintain control
>I was surprised the flap lasted so long
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:56:56 UTC No. 16219947
>I don't think it will be very difficult to survive on Mars
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:57:16 UTC No. 16219948
>>16219547
Gotta pay your bribes in the US or they smack your nuts
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:58:23 UTC No. 16219951
>>16219899
Just bypass this entire issue with fancy ufo propulsion tech. If those things really can go from 80000 feet to sea level in a second then clearly reentry heating is not an issue for them at all. No need for heat shields if you can prevent the air around your craft from compressing using warp bubbles or whatever.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:58:34 UTC No. 16219952
>>16219869
Of course the russian shit is breaking down. The only surprise is how long is has held to western standards.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:59:23 UTC No. 16219953
>>16219738
>>16219739
seethe some more, retards
>>16219811
well, he's making money. that's all that matters in this shitty society.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 15:59:54 UTC No. 16219954
>>16219952
International Smekalka Station
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:00:43 UTC No. 16219955
>>16219954
made me chuckle
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:01:31 UTC No. 16219956
>>16219953
>NOOOOOO YOU'RE SEETHING STOP CALLING ME RETARDED AFTER I DROPPED THE RUSE THAT'S NOT FAIR
lol
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:01:45 UTC No. 16219957
>>16219770
>Ship damaged on reentry
>still lands fine
STAINLESS STEEL
IT JUST WORKS
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:02:10 UTC No. 16219958
https://youtu.be/tjAWYytTKco
>it landed in a pretty precise location
>6km off technically
Yeah um no we are not gonna catch it on flight 5
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:02:35 UTC No. 16219960
>>16219956
>t.paranoid retard
anon, take a look at a mirror, go touch grass or maybe take your meds.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:02:40 UTC No. 16219961
>>16219956
lmao
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:03:40 UTC No. 16219966
>>16219958
Depends on precise
if they weren't even trying to go for hardcore lawn dart accuracy, and just cared about getting the water landing down at all, it could be fine
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:04:14 UTC No. 16219967
a clockwork orange except forcing prisoners to listen to elon musk interviews
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:04:58 UTC No. 16219971
>>16219890
>"we're gonna polish the steel and it'll reflect some of the heat radiation and it'll be otherwise fine because it's steel".
>I really don't know why the fuck they said that.
>But yes, after that they talked about methane sweating or internal cooling. Then they completely gave up and decided to go with Shuttle 2.0 as what they must've thought was an easy interim solution.
No. They just ran the calculations and found the first one infeasible and the transpiration too heavy.
Reminder that SpaceX likely has the most advanced GPU fluid dynamics and vehicle simulations in the world.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:06:01 UTC No. 16219972
>>16219958
>>6km off technically
oh, I was wondering about this. interesting.
what else would you expect from a half molten flap, though?
also I'm wondering about 1 out of 33 engines not starting. how does that affect trajectory?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:07:36 UTC No. 16219976
>>16219972
Of course it affects trajectory. The booster is coming in really fucking spicy, so shit needs to be ironed out.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:07:53 UTC No. 16219977
>>16219899
The tiles are made of silica fibers that are actually flexible as individuals fibers.
They harden because they are sintered together with glass.
The fibers themselves don't need sintering to be heat tolerant but the porous structure the sintering makes gives them the extreme insulative properties.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:09:32 UTC No. 16219981
>>16219262
Me outside the Chink station looking in for some baddies
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:09:51 UTC No. 16219983
>>16219958
I thought the orbiter landed 6km off, not the booster
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:09:55 UTC No. 16219984
>>16219960
i don't really need to, your seething is enough.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:11:19 UTC No. 16219985
>>16219984
>retard seethes about some other retard
>somehow I'm the one seething
...
anon, this is sad. just admit you are obsessed with some e-celeb because he talks shit about your idols.
btw, this website is for adults of age 18+. you really shouldn't be here
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:13:06 UTC No. 16219992
>>16219729
how
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:13:28 UTC No. 16219995
>>16219899
>>16219977
The trade-off for being super heat tolerant is being super brittle. Could a theoretical lightweight material exist with similar heat tolerance? Maybe. But we know of no such material even hypothetically.
The best bet is to either do either
a) methane sweat cooling
or
b) metallic TPS
But both of these will require a ton of R&D time and money.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:13:28 UTC No. 16219996
>>16219986
Imagine the mating
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:16:07 UTC No. 16220003
>>16219958
booster was on target, ship was 6km off
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:17:14 UTC No. 16220006
>>16219958
>6km off technically
this seems incredibly impressive considering how unsmooth these charts look >>16219414 then add engine loss and melting flap
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:19:09 UTC No. 16220009
>>16219995
>metallic TPS
What? Like metal tiles?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:19:17 UTC No. 16220010
wow i wonder what stream the capcom guy is watching?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:19:28 UTC No. 16220012
raptors are not going full throttle during tests, right?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:22:04 UTC No. 16220014
Question about the Starship tests. Are these tests of Starship or not? Meaning, are they meant a functioning Starship or are they mis-named iterative design process flights? If the latter why is FAA involved in making SpaceX address problems? If the goal of a design testing flight accomplished then what failure is the FAA addressing? When will they reach a full flight cycle test stage, is there a roadmap? I’m super confused.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:22:32 UTC No. 16220015
https://x.com/PatrickEBoyle/status/
didn't know this guy had this bad EDS
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:22:38 UTC No. 16220016
>>16219688
funny when i saw that flap disintegrating the first thing i thought of was Columbia
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:26:04 UTC No. 16220022
Shut the fuck up about Thunderfoot or other retards of the same kind. Whatever they're saying is completely irrelevant. And the meta-discussions about whether they're actually deluded or just profiting from retards is even more useless.
>>16220006
The data for these charts is taken from the webcast, so it's very imprecise and the occasional telemetry dropouts don't help
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:26:55 UTC No. 16220025
>>16220015
>seethe becoming so hysterically delusional it doesn't even make me mad
Wagmi!
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:27:43 UTC No. 16220028
>>16219958
He was talking about Starship, not Super Heavy.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:29:09 UTC No. 16220029
>>16220015
Who?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:34:25 UTC No. 16220031
>>16220029
makes youtube videos
usually very snarky in those but I thought it was just joking
seems like he actually has pretty severe EDS
https://www.youtube.com/@PBoyle/vid
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:35:31 UTC No. 16220036
>>16220034
we just don't know
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:36:12 UTC No. 16220037
>easily replaceable mass produced tiles on the uniform mostly flat belly of starship
>custom shaped glued on tiles on all the parts with the most heating
Could this paradox be solved?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:36:23 UTC No. 16220038
>>16220034
warosu was dead during it
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:36:45 UTC No. 16220040
>>16220015
He's a braindead fintech scaremongerer, but he's bri'ish so of course retards listen to him like he has authority
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:37:27 UTC No. 16220041
>>16220040
wrong screenshot
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:40:10 UTC No. 16220042
>>16220036
>>16220038
i found it on archived.moe
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:40:31 UTC No. 16220044
>>16220037
why can't they just 3d print them in the exact shape needed?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:43:39 UTC No. 16220045
>>16219838
aaargh this means it might take a couple of months till they can rebuild, static test it, etc, i think the faa are going to step in and make more delays but it might not be so because they change their engine designs all the time
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:45:15 UTC No. 16220046
>>16220041
Dude looks like he's eyeing up my liver for whatever red wine he has left.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:46:12 UTC No. 16220051
>>16219204
>Embed
Obviously hoping to birth his twelfth little Musk.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:46:24 UTC No. 16220052
Starship reuse is going to take a while, won't it? Booster reuse I can see happening soon, but not starship
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:47:42 UTC No. 16220053
>>16219295
corn and plastic
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:50:47 UTC No. 16220060
>>16219966
Next time they should partner with Taco Bell to give everyone a free taco if Starship hits the target.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:50:58 UTC No. 16220061
>>16220052
Depends what state it's in after they've moved the flaps.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:51:10 UTC No. 16220062
>>16220052
the one they plan on sending to the moon isn't reusable anyway
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:51:31 UTC No. 16220063
Start packing up Starships with gear and throw them all at Mars now, don't even bother landing just start parking mass amounts of shit in Mars orbit.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:51:45 UTC No. 16220064
>>16220010
forgot pic
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:55:19 UTC No. 16220068
>>16220052
no its not lmao, but why can't they demonstrate refilling in space on ift 5, it would be nice while they build the next design to repair the flap mechanism, launch two starships, then demonstrate flight refill, and that's it, that's the last milestone if you can imagine it, its crazy to think they could be done with all these by the end of the year
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:56:17 UTC No. 16220070
>>16219958
elon is weird. he's way less spergy in the presence of this hot woman compared to for example estronaut.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:56:40 UTC No. 16220071
>>16220063
True, if it's in stable orbit it could always be retrieved later. Not like shit won't keep in the vacuum of space.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:57:06 UTC No. 16220073
>>16220068
Orbit, rendezvous, docking (A2A? Dolphin fucking?), THEN fuel transfer. Otherwise yes, I share your optimism.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:57:43 UTC No. 16220075
>>16220068
Probably don't want to add such a huge variable during the next iteration as that might obscure other variables they're more interested in.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:58:35 UTC No. 16220076
>>16219500
Man what is it with commies and trannies?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:59:11 UTC No. 16220079
>>16219958
That was actually a really good interview with nice questions, this woman clearly knows what she's doing.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:59:35 UTC No. 16220080
>>16219512
>>>Military may seek Starship test in FY 2025.
W H A T
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:01:41 UTC No. 16220086
>>16220080
E2E logistics, I imagine. Logistics is a fucking nightmare.
Imagine being able to drop munitions to the other side of the globe in a couple of hours.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:01:47 UTC No. 16220087
>>16219985
i never even talked myself about thunderfag tho.
i just pointed out that calling the people who mock him "seething" is utmost retardation.
i'm guessing you took personal offense to this because you yourself are also someone who pretends to be retarded and this notion offends you.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:02:48 UTC No. 16220088
>>16220063
Speaking of Mars, the return to Earth is going to be toasty, though in this case they won't care whether the heatshield will be rapidly reusable or not
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:03:04 UTC No. 16220089
>>16219958
The BOOSTER you moron the BOOSTER will be caught, not the ship. They said the ship will take multiple very good simulated landings before they will try to catch it.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:03:07 UTC No. 16220090
>>16219986
i can imagine dinosaur mating noises from jurassic park.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:05:18 UTC No. 16220097
>>16220086
it's just gonna be NSSL certification
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:05:45 UTC No. 16220098
>>16219986
Weird to think that that picture (minus Musk) contains a few million dollars.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:07:45 UTC No. 16220106
>Ellie interview with Elon
>full and rapid reusability
>imagine if you had to reuse airplanes
>multiplanetary species
>etc
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:08:47 UTC No. 16220108
>>16219986
EDA is like "get off my turf!"
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:09:09 UTC No. 16220110
>>16220106
fully and rapidly reusable interviews
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:09:29 UTC No. 16220112
>>16220068
didn't the announcers say during the ift4 stream that docking would happen in 2025?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:09:37 UTC No. 16220113
>>16219967
I was cured, alright!
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:09:51 UTC No. 16220115
>>16220110
kek
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:11:25 UTC No. 16220121
>>16220106
>order of magnitude
>holy grail of rocketry
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:11:40 UTC No. 16220122
>>16220110
literaelly
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:13:46 UTC No. 16220127
>>16220123
No fucking way
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:14:56 UTC No. 16220128
>>16220123
CGI? The lighting on the booster kinda looks like it.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:15:29 UTC No. 16220129
https://twitter.com/Jordan_W_Taylor
Mars will be hard
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:16:35 UTC No. 16220134
>>16220080
>>16220086
https://breakingdefense.com/2024/06
>AFRL’s fiscal 2025 budget plans show that the lab hopes to complete testing of the capability to air-drop cargo pallets down from Starship during FY25, and to launch a demonstration flight to “transport 30 to 100 tons of cargo to an austere site” in late FY25 or early FY26.
And possibly related.
https://www.sierraspace.com/press-r
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:17:37 UTC No. 16220137
>>16220134
Sierra Space x SpaceX lets fucking gooo
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:18:41 UTC No. 16220139
>>16220097
Evidently not.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:22:02 UTC No. 16220147
>>16220128
Some people on twitter are saying it's a render, but it's still a good one
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:23:14 UTC No. 16220150
>>16220145
Based.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:24:09 UTC No. 16220151
>>16220145
>Somewhere in the Amazon a tribe is fighting to the death over the right to goon
Not the cyberpunk dystopia I wanted, but I'll take it.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:27:50 UTC No. 16220163
>>16220088
Could aerocapture over several orbits help spread out all that energy, as opposed to just screaming in from interplanetary velocities?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:28:07 UTC No. 16220164
>>16220145
ah yes, the world needs more scammers
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:28:30 UTC No. 16220165
>>16220145
Entirely imaginary story by the way.
They were degenerates before just like all first generation tribespeople when they get modern amenities handed to them.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:29:27 UTC No. 16220169
>>16220123
>>16220127
>>16220128
>>16220147
Just realized, its 100% CGI, missing all the vapor cloud off the side of the booster
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:32:27 UTC No. 16220171
>>16220123
could be legit. maybe shot with a telescope/DSLR and then cropped. lots of digital zoom noise. we had similar shots of the Saturn V
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:33:28 UTC No. 16220172
>>16220134
So you've unloaded your Starship in bongo bongo land, what happens next? Somehow get tankers full of lng and lox to fly it back or abandon it where it landed?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:46:43 UTC No. 16220182
>>16219725
I'm who you replied to. I'm doing that after work
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:49:11 UTC No. 16220184
>>16220172
With no cargo and a full fuel load Starship should have pretty impressive range as a suborbital vehicle.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:55:18 UTC No. 16220190
Starship Troopers soon bros
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:55:33 UTC No. 16220191
>>16220184
Iirc starship is an SSTO without payload
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:57:29 UTC No. 16220195
>>16220191
So it should be able to get itself home from anywhere in the world
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:57:35 UTC No. 16220196
>>16220184
are they saying its possible to launch, land then relaunch the ship by itself back into sub orbital then land again? that would be most impressivissimus
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:59:37 UTC No. 16220198
>>16220191
I don't think thats true, super heavy was fully fueled during ift4 and it barely had any fuel left to do it's landing burn. Starship had to burn for a while to get to near orbit and it also barely had fuel left for it's landing burn.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:59:58 UTC No. 16220199
>>16220191
it's not
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:11:34 UTC No. 16220214
>>16220184
>newfag hasn't followed starship long enough to understand why orbital fuel tanks in space are a thing
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:13:23 UTC No. 16220217
>>16220063
What's useful, shelf stable at extreme temps, doesn't need a lot of engineering work, and won't get outdated in 10 years?
>Water
>Steel beams, sheet metal
>earth dirt (not sure if this is shelf stable, can dirt "die"?)
>clothes, pillows, sheets, towels, lots of cleaning rags
>rice? flower?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:13:33 UTC No. 16220218
>>16220145
>porn
>social media
Bringing them to our 21st century ways
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:14:20 UTC No. 16220219
>>16219751
I remember some Elon interview maybe with Estrogenaut and Elon said that the hinges are an issue and that they would like to move them more back but that would then be structurally inefficient or something.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:17:14 UTC No. 16220224
>>16220163
Probably, aerocapture has never been tried (Mars landers land directly and Mars orbiters make a capture burn then some use aerobraking, which is reducing your apogee with aerodynamic braking), but if there's any payload advantage, SpaceX will definitely use it
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:17:45 UTC No. 16220226
>>16220217
MREs
big pile of copper wire
clothes
structural material
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:18:36 UTC No. 16220227
>>16219810
more like this
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:20:05 UTC No. 16220233
I forgot Elon was talking about moving the flaps before we knew the gridfins would be fixed.
>>16219727
>This has a high mass penalty.
>it came to me in a dream
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:20:09 UTC No. 16220234
https://www.teslarati.com/former-pr
>'I'm a fan of EVs, I'm a fan of Elon'
>Donald Trump had big things to say about Tesla and Elon Musk
Biden never said anything like that, never even praised SpaceX once...
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:22:13 UTC No. 16220239
>>16219899
Wolfram/tungsten tiles with a thin ceramic coating like they do with jet engine turbine blades?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:25:10 UTC No. 16220247
>>16219826
No, the hinge is still outside the body, it's just at 10 and 2 o'clock instead of 9 and 3.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:25:39 UTC No. 16220249
>>16220233
By the time Starships are going beyond LEO the vehicle is going to look retarded
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:26:32 UTC No. 16220253
>>16219986
Will Estrogenaut confront Musk on fucking over the Japanese guy?
>>16220098
I see $100 million in rocket engines
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:27:25 UTC No. 16220257
YEAH BUT UMM HE MISSED THE DEADLINE OF HUMANS TO MARS 2024 THEREFORE THE WHOLE THING IS A FUCKING FROG AHAHAA KILL MEEEEEEEEEE
anybody got the Boring tunnel article from 2045?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:28:14 UTC No. 16220260
>>16220165
>all first generation tribespeople when they get modern amenities handed to them
citation needed
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:28:23 UTC No. 16220261
Just make the flaps out of tungsten if its gonna be reused anyways
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:29:00 UTC No. 16220264
>>16220253
if the dearmooners on twitter are any indication they're more mad at maezawa for not telling them he had the option of pulling out than they're mad at elon
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:29:22 UTC No. 16220265
>>16220233
explain why they didn't do that in the first place if it's so easy
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:30:21 UTC No. 16220269
>>16220264
That one Irish lady is actually pretty cool. She’s been talking very positive about starship and is pissed that Maezawa didn’t understand how delayed spaceflight normally is
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:30:23 UTC No. 16220270
>>16220052
Starship reuse will probably be achieved before refilling is perfected. Rapid tanker reuse is required for Artemis
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:30:33 UTC No. 16220271
>still obsessing over some retarded e-celeb
hahahaha, retards ITT are completely mind broken
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:30:43 UTC No. 16220274
>>16220264
How does that even work? They have a contract or something, and if Maezawa pulls out he gets money back?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:32:26 UTC No. 16220277
>>16220262
STARSHIP LAUNCH COULDVE GONE WRONG AND IMPACTED STARLINYN88
ERS MISSION
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:34:02 UTC No. 16220281
>>16220262
He probably posts here
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:36:41 UTC No. 16220285
>>16220217
>can dirt "die"?
Certainly, if not protected properly.
>shovels, pickaxes, post diggers, hammers
>wrenches, allen keys, screwdrivers, pliers
>pre-fab DIY pressurized habitat kits
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:40:23 UTC No. 16220290
https://youtu.be/0xOxuii84c8
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:44:19 UTC No. 16220296
>>16220233
this would tilt the centre of mass and make the vehicle more unstable, i don't think it has anything to do with mass, and it would still suffer from the same problem, the internal hinge, i think is the best fix
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:44:57 UTC No. 16220300
And so far no sign that they'll pull the booster and sn29 out of the water
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:45:10 UTC No. 16220301
>>16220269
>That one Irish lady is actually pretty cool
The far left progressive one who rambled about how oppressed palestinians were in her response?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:47:07 UTC No. 16220304
>>16220296
the center of mass can be accounted for by moving things internally
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:48:33 UTC No. 16220308
>>16220301
Palestinians aren't oppressed?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:48:44 UTC No. 16220309
>>16220304
no, that's too much change, install internal hinges, change the flaps to a more durable metal alloy and that's it, you need to think like an engineer on a deadline, the simplest solutions always get priority
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:49:31 UTC No. 16220312
>>16219447
There anons are too young for that
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:49:32 UTC No. 16220313
>>16220308
no, they are not
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:49:47 UTC No. 16220314
>>16220307
Kestrel hybrid rocket startup sound is pure sex.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zrs
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:50:20 UTC No. 16220316
>>16220313
>+5 shekels have been deposited to your account
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:52:23 UTC No. 16220318
>>16220314
is this the one that sounds like a fart
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:54:25 UTC No. 16220319
>>16220274
or he gets some fraction of his money back if dearmoon hadn't flown by the original date, since he almost certainly hadn't paid spacex the full price yet
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:54:56 UTC No. 16220320
>>16220318
More like one of those old bank drive thru tubes
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:55:48 UTC No. 16220322
>>16219703
Does that account for all the landing hardware not being needed? Fully make the rocket substantially lighter.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:56:22 UTC No. 16220323
>>16219353
it is a good idea and ultimately the goal of returning from space will not be slowing down by becoming a meteor but by propulsive change in speed until you reach zero upon landing in a controlled decent through the atmosphere, a hundred years from now this almost melting your ship to slow down will be seen as a primitive way to achieve a surface landing
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:59:46 UTC No. 16220328
>>16220198
Have you ever heard of the rocket equation?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:59:58 UTC No. 16220329
>>16220323
yeah and in a hundred years airplanes are gonna turn around ass-first in the sky and brake to a dead stop before descending for a vertical landing instead of using the atmosphere to bleed off energy like a noob
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:03:21 UTC No. 16220332
>>16220329
VTOL planes exist.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:04:34 UTC No. 16220335
>>16220332
as of yesterday, VTOL orbital rockets exist
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:05:27 UTC No. 16220337
>>16220314
I really love hybrids. It's a real shame that they're an idea whose time has clearly past everywhere that's not Europe
>>16220316
I do this for free
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:13:25 UTC No. 16220343
>>16220262
>>16220281
Thinnest /sfg/ poster
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:13:25 UTC No. 16220344
https://x.com/WalterIsaacson/status
What about 4?
Just run the numbers
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:14:41 UTC No. 16220345
>>16220262
he will get in trouble for this no doubt
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:16:20 UTC No. 16220348
>>16220234
>https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.c
Trump says whatever he thinks will get him praised by his crowd
Now fuck off back to /pol/
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:19:15 UTC No. 16220353
>>16220337
Do you have the full PDF of that article?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:20:46 UTC No. 16220356
>>16219447
Ahhhhhh, the Riddle of Steel.....
Do you know what it is boy?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:20:48 UTC No. 16220357
>>16220322
It’s probably a few tons higher desu. I was trying to be pessimistic
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:21:46 UTC No. 16220359
>>16220348
How about both of you niggers go back together.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:21:49 UTC No. 16220360
>>16219448
was great to see it still intact through all that shit on the lens. ITS STILL WORKS!!!!
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:23:43 UTC No. 16220364
>>16220353
https://www.sciencedirect.com/scien
>The Aquila launch vehicle: A hybrid propulsion space booster
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:25:21 UTC No. 16220369
>>16220234
Based on this alone, I'm voting for Trump
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:25:56 UTC No. 16220370
Hear me out guys: first stage powered entirely by hydrazine
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:25:58 UTC No. 16220371
>>16220262
he is finished
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:27:00 UTC No. 16220373
>>16220319
will we ever know?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:27:07 UTC No. 16220374
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:28:07 UTC No. 16220377
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:29:52 UTC No. 16220382
>>16220370
Spicy
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:29:53 UTC No. 16220383
>>16220234
We have to protect our geniuses
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:30:03 UTC No. 16220384
>>16220373
We might now ever know. I’m sure he got his money back but I bet a fraction of it was some sort of non-refundable deposit. For a long time, before Jared was on the radar, everyone was saying MZ’s money for dear moon was bankrolling a lot of Starship r&d. So either people were just assuming/making that up, or MZ has given SX a lot of money he isn’t going to get back
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:32:41 UTC No. 16220389
>>16220384
would be pretty cringe if he actually shilled out a lot of money and isn't going to get anything. Bet Jared was more cunning when negotiating his contract.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:39:46 UTC No. 16220398
>>16220257
>mars only circumnavigated halfway with a hyperloop tunnel, yet another Musk overpromise
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:41:26 UTC No. 16220399
>>16220301
yeah that one, might have retarded politics overall but she seems to be very excited about Starship and understood a project like this would inevitably get delayed
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:41:28 UTC No. 16220400
>>16220370
they keep the price down by having the same engines on both vehicles so no
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:42:05 UTC No. 16220402
>>16219868
The Falcon payload users guide 2021 mentions an extended fairing as an option that exists.
>SpaceX can also provide an extended fairing as a nonstandard service. The extended fairing has the same diameter as the standard faring (5.2 m, 17.2 ft) and an overall height of 18.7 m (61.25 ft)
(p41)
https://www.spacex.com/media/falcon
Do they already use it on rideshares? If not, why not use the extended fairing on the rideshares if it would let them pack more revenue-generating payloads?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:42:50 UTC No. 16220403
According to the title of this video I didn't watch cybertruck is a failure
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LC9
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:42:52 UTC No. 16220404
>>16220400
Hear me out guys: both stages powered entirely by hydrazine
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:43:52 UTC No. 16220407
>>16219958
9 seconds into the video and he's already glorifying a literal nazi
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:45:29 UTC No. 16220409
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:45:33 UTC No. 16220411
>>16220407
and that's a good thing
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:45:43 UTC No. 16220412
>>16220404
I give it the CCP stamp of approval.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:46:31 UTC No. 16220413
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:47:06 UTC No. 16220415
>>16220403
I've ridden in one, and can attest to it's being a cool truck. Very heavy, very roomy. Nothing super crazy about it, hope they bring some of the features to more affordable models
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:47:33 UTC No. 16220417
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:47:46 UTC No. 16220418
>>16220402
The only payloads that actually need the extended fairing are Gateway and some DoD birds that aren't ready to fly yet. It isn't finished yet but they're not feeling any need to rush it. Rideshares could probably manage with a smaller non-hammerhead payload fairing if SpaceX had one available.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:48:05 UTC No. 16220419
>>16220411
yep.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:48:35 UTC No. 16220421
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:48:47 UTC No. 16220423
>>16219845
Is that twink wearing eye shadow/liner? What the fuck
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:49:45 UTC No. 16220425
>>16220421
>nitrogen fuel
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:50:01 UTC No. 16220426
>>16220409
>at very cold temps the strength of stainless steel increases by 50%
wtf is this true?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:50:25 UTC No. 16220427
>>16220417
which book is this again?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:51:06 UTC No. 16220428
>>16220395
Churchill's predecessors probably deserve more credit than Churchill for winning the Battle of Britain due to building up Britain's aircraft industry and inventory. Churchill became PM one month before the Battle of Britain began.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:51:10 UTC No. 16220429
>>16220427
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elon_
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:53:29 UTC No. 16220430
>>16220418
So rideshares aren't actually volume-constrained then since they apparently don't really need the bigger fairing?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:53:37 UTC No. 16220431
>>16219621
We're you up from the night before, or did you just wake up an decide to get after it?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:53:47 UTC No. 16220433
>>16220425
bless those based workers
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:54:48 UTC No. 16220436
>>16220425
>WATER TOWERS
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:55:18 UTC No. 16220437
>>16220404
how about all three stages made out of nuclear bombs?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:55:56 UTC No. 16220438
>>16220431
so I'm in Europe and it was about midday if I recall. I just decided to snort a line before the launch. I wasn't up the entire night before.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:56:22 UTC No. 16220439
>>16220419
i'd be like that
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:00:25 UTC No. 16220443
>>16219511
>Should the US give the security clearance to a person that has been indicted for mishandling classified documents (wich is something that will get the s.c. revoked)?
I'm going to say something about this without talking about it because I think 50% of the country needs to connect some neurons
I don't think the country would be "secure" if the top polling candidate for the presidential general election was stopped from taking office before a vote was cast. Do not unleash hell on us, thank you
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:03:19 UTC No. 16220448
>>16220425
>liquid oxygen and nitrogen fuel
Isaacson pls
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:06:08 UTC No. 16220451
>>16220443
>I don't think the country would be "secure" if the top polling candidate for the presidential general election was stopped from taking office before a vote was cast.
correct. But there could be a even bigger problem on the horizon. What is he gets convicted and sentenced to prison while president (a real possiblity)?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:10:29 UTC No. 16220457
>>16220015
sad, he's normally funny.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:10:58 UTC No. 16220458
>>16220453
He didnt understand the reusable britons meme
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:12:34 UTC No. 16220460
>>16220451
The constitution allows you to run for president from prison, and it also allows you to BE president while IN prison. If anything, the founders messed up in not codifying that you cannot BE president if convicted of a crime, as that would completely undercut Trump's ability to go any further.
As much as I dislike his personality and mannerisms, it would be democratically catastrophic to deny a statistical majority of the nation, outside the margin of error, to not be able to cast their vote for their preferred candidate. If Trump becoming president ends Democracy, but occurs through the democratic process, then the loss is tragic but just. If democracy is saved by denying the merit of the democratic process, then democracy is already dead and the successor would be no better than Trump.
The only way American democracy survives is if on November everyone casts their vote and Trump loses on the count. In which case, he's done. Even if he refuses to concede or claims its rigged or whatever other nonsense, it won't matter; because the process was followed as designed and the outcome is as ordained.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:12:54 UTC No. 16220462
>>16219511
>believing in commie propaganda
Alert! We have a live NPC here!!
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:13:29 UTC No. 16220463
>>16220015
This launch seems to be a litmus test, outing the most retarded amoungus
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:13:54 UTC No. 16220464
>>16220453
can you imagine if Braun was still alive? all the oldspace shit just for his prophesized Elon to colonize mars
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:14:03 UTC No. 16220466
>>16219249
lmao, I was thinking the same thing
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:15:05 UTC No. 16220468
https://x.com/esherifftv/status/179
Ellie interview with Jared Isaacman on Polaris Dawn
>NET July 12th
1 MONTH!!!
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:15:10 UTC No. 16220469
>>16220460
>personality and mannerisms
fairly irrelevant.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:15:47 UTC No. 16220471
>>16220464
Has anyone asked his children?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:16:15 UTC No. 16220472
>>16220460
>If anything, the founders messed up
They did things that way very specifically because they knew that a corrupt government would just declare anyone it didn't want in power a criminal. Just like what's happening right now, when you think about it
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:17:14 UTC No. 16220474
>>16220460
>If anything, the founders messed up in not codifying that you cannot BE president if convicted of a crime,
Completely wrong, such a restriction would enable tyranny.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:18:37 UTC No. 16220477
>>16220460
>If anything, the founders messed up in not codifying that you cannot BE president if convicted of a crime, as that would completely undercut Trump's ability to go any further.
Wrong. If anything founders understood that presidents cannot be jailed or sent to prison while the public votes for them. They understood that wannabe dictators would jail their opponents in hopes of stifling democracy.
We see the banana republic play out today as a result.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:18:41 UTC No. 16220478
>>16220460
>the founders messed up in not letting an administration jail their competition
are you retarded or just brazilian
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:18:49 UTC No. 16220479
>>16219385
Can we just take a minute to appreciate that Jeff Bezos is 5'7"? Elon Musk is 6'2". Any suggestion of competition between Elon and this "man" is ludicrous.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:19:35 UTC No. 16220480
>>16219592
looks like one of those spherical chickens used in physics story problems
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:21:19 UTC No. 16220483
>>16220460
>the founders messed up in not codifying that you cannot BE president if convicted of a crime
Disagree. This would just bring more politics into the already fucked up judicial process.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:21:40 UTC No. 16220484
>>16220471
I'm afraid to look these people up because it would break my heart to discover they're just dumb boomers who might even disavow their father.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:21:55 UTC No. 16220485
>>16220479
Jeff would be picked first to be an astronaut. Manlets have much less mass
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:22:28 UTC No. 16220487
>>16220472
they had a pretty good handle on human nature. not many other places even construct their laws in terms of protecting inherent rights against the government in the first place.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:22:58 UTC No. 16220488
>>16220469
America has almost never voted for someone based on what their policy positions are, so its relevant to the vote; otherwise Biden would be polling far in excess of Trump. It's very much relevant to the conversation about national electoral vote.
>>16220472
>>16220474
Technically, true. But then the wording on treason and aid of enemy statements are a bit vague as well, and don't offer any clarity on someone like Trump. Which results in a catch-22-esque outcome. At some point, something has to give.
>>16220477
The problem with that logic "presidents cannot be jailed", then makes it such that any elected leader is in essence a short lived king. A veiled monarchy elected by the people is not a democracy. The assumption that the system would keep itself in check was a right call early on, but as the last 10 years have proven, neither side is all that interested in maintaining the balance. In which case, the "president cannot be jailed" means that if an elected refuses to give up power and aligns other branches of government to his/her interests in enshrining control, then the system is compromised.
>>16220478
I'm among you, so both.
>>16220483
Is that before or after SCOTUS went full retard?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:23:41 UTC No. 16220490
oh no, this is turning into /polisci/
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:24:38 UTC No. 16220491
>>16220468
fucking based
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:24:50 UTC No. 16220492
>>16220489
>starship mars sample return
>just bring a huge mining rig and fill her up with roggs
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:25:04 UTC No. 16220493
>>16219692
I can't believe I thought this guy was intelligent
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:25:36 UTC No. 16220494
>>16220488
>It's very much relevant to the conversation about national electoral vote.
well, not to me. im more concerned about their values and the horde of other people (and their values) that they bring with them as part of the administration. anyone who would change from trump to biden because of a mannerism probably shouldn't be voting anyway (and yet they are are, i get it)
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:26:16 UTC No. 16220496
>>16220488
Treason is narrowly defined, so narrowly defined that nobody has been convicted of it for anything done after WW2. Even the Rosenbergs who gave nuclear secrets to the Soviets weren't convicted of treason, being executed for espionage instead.
This is a good thing. Everybody likes to say that their rivals are treasonous for doing things they think are counter to the interests of America. If treason weren't narrowly defined we'd have everybody constantly convicting their political rivals of treason for the "crime" of having the wrong political beliefs.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:26:37 UTC No. 16220497
>>16220493
arrogance oft marred that which intelligence once was
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:27:08 UTC No. 16220498
>>16220485
manlets don't looks as good at the ticker tape parade. you have to think about the pr angle of who you send to space
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:27:43 UTC No. 16220499
>>16220493
I think he had some pretty decent analyses early on, but then he found on that just dumping on popular thing was way more profitable under the algorithm. Now he hasn't really turned his brain on in years
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:27:45 UTC No. 16220500
>>16220494
Personality and mannerisms are as much a basis of values as anything else. How you compose yourself and how you behave with others is defined entirely by the values you hold. Trump's personality and mannerisms do not inspire confidence that his values are anything but a vehicle to enrich his own personal bottom line and anything is up for sale if it comes with more zeroes following some number left of the decimal.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:28:12 UTC No. 16220501
>>16220488
The fact that current political party is trying to jail its opponent in an election year and has created a fraudulent case where the jury isn't told of the crime, where the judge has a clear bias problem, and the supposed crimes is a frivolous one about something unrelated to actual presidency and not even an unethical behavior but rather simply clerical filing order shows you the corruption and the pettiness of the political party. Its the bending of the law to create a political prisoner just so they can win at election
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:28:23 UTC No. 16220502
Somebody have a link to the musk interview by the big booba girl?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:29:38 UTC No. 16220503
>>16220501
Didnt the judge at some point before the trial say he was going to put trump in jail, how the fuck can you call that a neutral judge?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:30:28 UTC No. 16220504
>>16220502
X >>16219896
Youtube >>16219958
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:31:35 UTC No. 16220506
>>16220500
Your perception of Trump's mannerisms is completely based on a derogatory caricature created by people who hate him. Please start using the five brain cells God was generous enough to give you.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:31:51 UTC No. 16220508
>>16220503
Yes, but thats not the point. They're trying to keep Trump out with the death by thousand cuts.
Same lawfare is used against Musk with Biden appointees going after Musk for every little thing.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:32:15 UTC No. 16220510
>>16220504
thx, anon.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:33:03 UTC No. 16220511
https://twitter.com/wapodavenport/s
>List of companies that won contracts from NASA to perform 90-day studies "to examine more affordable and faster methods of bringing samples from Mars’ surface back to Earth as part of the agency’s Mars Sample Return Program."
Some of these look like real winners
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:33:11 UTC No. 16220512
>>16220501
Yes, I know. That's my entire fucking point. That denying a statistically significant portion of the country the right to vote for their preferred candidate is undemocratic, even if the person in question, is the worst possible candidate (in my opinion) for the office, and that even if democracy itself dies as a result of electing this person, it's failure as long as it occurred through the electoral process correctly, would be an unfortunate but just conclusion to the saga. Opposed to the opposite, in which case democracy never existed in the first place.
Everyone got hung up on the ancillary point about the lack of clarity regarding criminality and statues in the constitution due to vagueness of certain wording. In which, some of the criticism is justified, but ultimately not relevant to the original point.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:34:39 UTC No. 16220514
>>16219547
This is exactly what they had in mind when they wrote the "placement of an explosive device on an aircraft" law obviously
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:35:12 UTC No. 16220515
>>16220506
Bullshit. I watched many of his rallies. He's a bloviating idiot. You're literally implying that what he said in front of a mic to huge crowds of people is not what he said. North Korea is the other way, retard.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:37:38 UTC No. 16220519
>>16220492
I want the first mars sample collected by a bulldozer.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:38:31 UTC No. 16220521
>>16220500
i disagree with this, and your assessment of his values. you should take this shit to /pol/ btw
>>16220515
>North Korea is the other way
the NK Trump managed to get talking and to step down hostilities with the south, unlike everyone else? yeah, i liked what he did there.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:39:09 UTC No. 16220522
>>16220512
>worst possible candidate
Aside from media remarks and Trump being bit outspoken/rude about some things, I think Trump isn't that bad at all. Whats the worst policy that he has endorsed/put forward? Stop the war in middle east? Stop the war in Ukraine/Russia? Enforce border immigration? Deport illegal immigrants? Cut the number of laws? I dont see it. Unlike the current president/party which is fueling illegal immigration by not enforcing the borders, by not deporting criminal illegal immigrants, by pushing for escalation of war in Ukraine, etc?
The worst and possibly the strangest thing from Trump was his penchant to make peace with America's enemies like China/North Korea/Russia in order to reduce the chance of escalating into a war. Not sure how effective those were, but atleast he is doing something.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:39:10 UTC No. 16220523
>>16219536
I wish I didnt read this
I was expecting elon spectators who dont know anything about space saying what you know they are going to say. But the comments pretending to know basic lurker knowledge about rockets were too much. I had to stop when a redditor said the rocket needed to be made out of aluminum because its easier to cool
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:39:34 UTC No. 16220525
>>16220489
quantum what now?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:39:51 UTC No. 16220527
>>16219547
As I understand it, it's that this was done on federal land and not on private property and/or was done without a permit to do this. In which case, even though its a "stunt", the actions endangered the person flying the helicopter, any other person on the helicopter, and any number of people in the vehicle itself. In films, this exact activity is done all the time. But it's done with proper permits and approval by the local and/or state government.
So, he deserved it. If you want to do batshit crazy shit, get a sign off from the correct authorities when you involve their land. Otherwise, had something gone catastrophically wrong, it would have pulled a ton of resources away in the form of emergency services to assist the culmination of a Darwin award that would have removed unnecessary genes from the pool.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:40:40 UTC No. 16220531
>>16220515
He's the only high level guy i ever heard talking about how socialism was not for us, and how it was a bad thing. no one else talked like that. he rejected the UN and all its world government agendas. theres no great picks at this time, but he's the clear choice above the democrats and their filthy crap, whether you lik how he comports himself or not. Its not just about him, you ken?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:40:52 UTC No. 16220532
>>16220523
>redditor said the rocket needed to be made out of aluminum because elon musk said otherwise*
Thats the theme of the entire reddit. If elon musk said he loves to breathe in air and eat food, the whole of reddit would commit collective sodoku
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:40:52 UTC No. 16220533
go to /pol/, the shit you talk about has nothing to do with spaceflight at this point
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:41:09 UTC No. 16220534
>>16220521
Then go live there, it's perfect for you.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:41:13 UTC No. 16220535
>>16220515
Artemis II's core is headed to the Cape
>>16220515
If you can't get past the man talking like a late night 1-800 commercial that's your problem, leftie. You're not giving anyone a lot of confidence in your ability to observe the world or form useful opinions. You're like a thunderf00t fan; you hate what your told to hate because you're told to hate it.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:41:59 UTC No. 16220536
>>16220533
yeah, we've all too much taken the bait, me included. no more.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:42:57 UTC No. 16220538
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:43:00 UTC No. 16220539
>>16220535
The same can be said to you. All talk, no substance.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:43:04 UTC No. 16220540
>>16220534
oh no, i disagree with you AND love space flight, whatever shall i do?
Artemis3 at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:43:06 UTC No. 16220541
>>16219014
>Any rumors on IFT-5 possible mission goals?
One, maybe two more checkmarks. Three would make me buy Tesla stock, lol.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:43:59 UTC No. 16220543
https://twitter.com/Orbital_Perigee
>I need to state this again because I don’t think people get this. Falcon 9, in 10 years, makes up 17% of all US launches ever, in a tradition going back to 1958. That is insane
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:44:48 UTC No. 16220545
>>16219620
I'm worried about not structural things taking a hit or a small explosion
Also there would be an FAA investigation even if the tower wasnt damaged. Wit the FAA taking months to study the question of "what will spacex do to prevent this accident in the future" and the answer is nothing more complicated than "dont miss next time"
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:47:04 UTC No. 16220547
>>16220421
Whose version of events is this? It sounds not very credible that Elon just randomly pulled the idea for stainless steel out of his ass like that and then pushed it through based on a hunch.
I mean, it might be true. But it kinda reads like a stylized legend that took some creative license to make him look exceptionally good.
>>16220425
>it worked
I mean, a bunch of the early tanks blew up. Also Star hopper certainly wasn't 4 fucking millimeters thick. That thing was built like a dreadnought.
So it worked, but not as immediately as the text suggests. Again a bit of mythologizing.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:48:19 UTC No. 16220548
https://twitter.com/SheriffGarza/st
>TEMPORARY ROAD DELAY ON STATE HIGHWAY 4: On June 8, 2024, SpaceX will transport a booster vehicle from the production facility to Massey’s between 12:00 a.m. – 3:00 a.m. This 2-hour operation may cause short traffic delays, but the beach and highway will remain open.
Next Starship flight is getting ready
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:49:00 UTC No. 16220550
>>16220479
I'd gain a little respect for Bezos if he gave up his launcher ambitions and focused on making deep space equipment that Starship enables. Put $ into plasma magnet test vehicles, lunar mass drivers etc.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:49:24 UTC No. 16220552
Just wanted to say thanks to the anons who helped me get the spacex stream from yesterday downloaded. i asked for help in the last thread and im at 94% complete on the 1.2gb file from x-downloader.
will be enjoying it this evening with a few beers. all hail flap.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:50:26 UTC No. 16220554
>>16220550
they should hook up. need it or keep it?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:51:37 UTC No. 16220555
>>16220552
Should have gotten yt-dlp and it would have been just fine.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:52:12 UTC No. 16220557
>>16220552
all hail flap
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:53:45 UTC No. 16220559
>>16220489
I really appreciate how SpaceX just keeps submitting Starship for everything and just completely moggs these small scope proposals.
They are really trying to force Nasa to massively scale up their ambitions.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:53:47 UTC No. 16220560
>>16220460
This is why I supported Hitler
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:54:29 UTC No. 16220561
>>16220555
running an old mint version and the repository doesn't have it. that program does seem to be the cure all however.
>>16220557
it is to be praised
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:55:28 UTC No. 16220562
>>16220490
You shoulda seen /sfg/ during 2020, it was a riot
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:58:12 UTC No. 16220565
>>16220348
>Trump says whatever he thinks will get him praised by his crowd
Trump's position on EV's, buy them if you want but don't force them on people, has been cosistant.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:58:33 UTC No. 16220566
>>16220547
Yeah sounds like bullshit. I'm sure the stainless steel thing came around after they were realising how fucked the carbon fibre was going to be so they locked a bunch of autists in a room with some tendies and said "find us the right material"
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:58:39 UTC No. 16220567
>>16220559
I hope in the future, NASA makes the conscious decision to actually award more than one contractor for a sample return, but in the context that all missions are essentially flown on a Starship to Mars for it. Effectively, SpaceX yeets one to Mars, with a couple of automated rovers whose purpose is to go do collection of samples in addition to the Percy samples and bring them back to the Starship area. From which the samples would be launched back towards the Earth. In the interim, the rovers would then return to doing science missions in a circular pattern spiraling away from the Starship, which acts as the main communication hub with Earth until humans arrive. Would be an amazing public/private synergistic expansion of mission scope. Then, if there's any delays, SpaceX yeets two Starships. One with the first set of payloads, and then later, another Starship with the second set of payloads. Nobody gets left behind.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:59:29 UTC No. 16220570
>>16220565
There's even a leaked video about Trump being excited about Tesla long ago and one of the oil execs inserts himself claiming Tesla is failed or some shit.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:00:02 UTC No. 16220572
>>16220566
What? No. NASA used stainless steel back in the day. It's a proven material for aerospace use. If anything, your explanation is more bullshit than reality.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:00:26 UTC No. 16220574
>>16220570
>>16220565
Can you FUCK OFF ALREADY
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:00:41 UTC No. 16220577
>>16220547
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/17991
Walter Isaacson followed Musk for two years from August 2021 and the change from carbon composite to steel happened in 2018, so I guess this is second hand information
who knows if its from Musk himself or some other people Isaacson interviewed
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:01:06 UTC No. 16220578
>>16220490
Literally every day of the year there is 5 vaxx threads up at minimum
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:02:05 UTC No. 16220582
Go away /pol/troons, you're not welcome here.
We've learnt this lesson before: It doesn't really matter which old man's name you put a tick next to in regards to spaceflight.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:02:15 UTC No. 16220584
>>16220572
What does that have to do with anything? Like I said I'm sure it came about as a result of engineers comparing different materials rather than le ebin musk moment
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:02:24 UTC No. 16220585
>>16220548
https://x.com/Ringwatchers/status/1
Booster 12 needs to be static fired, Ship 30 has been static fired already
so I guess it might be a Booster 12 static fire attempt?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:03:45 UTC No. 16220589
>>16220364
Sweet, thanks.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:04:31 UTC No. 16220592
https://twitter.com/ESA_transport/s
>Bye bye Ariane 6 passengers, next time we see you will be in space!
Yesterday, the payloads that are flying first on Europe's new rocket Ariane 6 were enclosed inside their protective fairing – Ariane's nosecone that splits into two after liftoff.
Launching in a month
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:04:56 UTC No. 16220594
>>16220031
I think its ironic that a hedge fund manager is hung up over the definition of a success when most of his job is musical chairs
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:05:27 UTC No. 16220595
>>16220583
>the coolest, largest rocket ever with the most kino test flight profile ever and the promise of fun surprises along the way
versus
>a cuck capsule 10 years too late; with CGI because they can’t even downlink a video stream on launch
HMMM WHY ARE PEOPLE MORE EXCITED ABOUT THE STEEL MEGA ROCKET, THIS MUST BE SOME SORT OF SCAM
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:06:21 UTC No. 16220597
>>16220592
Here's the poor, damned souls that get to go first
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:06:52 UTC No. 16220599
>>16220052
I think the engines are hard to reuse, not so much the vehicles.
Artemis3 at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:10:02 UTC No. 16220601
>>16220559
>completely moggs these small scope proposals
This is why I created this image: >>16220541
SpaceX took $3 billion in tax monies for the HLS and they have two more years to complete everything on that list in order to avoid delaying Artemis III. The date will slide, sure, but until there's significant progress on that checklist, it doesn't seem rational to allocate any further funding for "loftier" goals.
Do-able goals? Absolutely. Even in its current state, their booster is a marvel of engineering. A lot could be done with that beast.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:10:08 UTC No. 16220602
>>16220595
An overbudget capsule that had a catastrophically bad first test flight, followed by a second test flight which faced a multitude of delays due to gas leaks, followed by a launch to orbit where before it could raise its orbit to match the ISS encountered systemic failures causing backups to kick in, followed by failed RCS thruster issues. Which then after recovery, led to an orbital raise to the ISS, only to encounter ADDITIONAL failures with thrusters, leading to the ISS actually denying approach, leading to missing the first docking window; leading to the astronauts flying the capsule in manually, which negated the automated approach capability of the vessel. And finally, upon docking with the station, another set of leaks were detected from the capsule AND Boeing engineers on the ground are completely in the dark with regards to the cause of the thruster issues being encountered on second test flight, which were a known quantity from the first flight, and appear to have not been fixed or not fixed well enough to prevent recurrence.
And people are wondering why that isn't exciting? What is exciting about any of that? What is exciting about being worried about the lives of two astronauts in orbit without EVA suits, stuck in a capsule that gives off 787-Max8 falling out of the sky vibes?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:10:12 UTC No. 16220603
>>16220578
yeah i can imagine.
Anyway, thanks again to the anons who helped with the launch stream download. enjoying the LOS music. tomorrow, the whole show...ah, it is right and salutary to praise the flap
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:11:31 UTC No. 16220606
>>16220602
Only reason I watched Starliner was on the off chance it killed astronauts in true Boeing spirit.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:13:06 UTC No. 16220609
>>16220595
>>16220583
watching people pretend to be interested in Boeing's nonsense purely out of spite for Elon Musk is the strangest thing.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:13:32 UTC No. 16220610
>>16220609
it was interesting due to the trainwreck aspect
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:14:37 UTC No. 16220612
>>16220610
I mean the people pretending to be hype for Boeing, obviously. Not the trainwreck enthusiasts.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:16:39 UTC No. 16220618
>>16220601
Four years since hopper did its hop.
Go watch IFT-3 again, then go back to IFT-4. Two months and change between flights.
As long as bureaucracy doesn't fuck them, it's looking pretty bright.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:16:42 UTC No. 16220619
>>16220609
especially css hyping the docking with iss and reposting it on his X. nigga, spacex has done that a dozen times already
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:17:07 UTC No. 16220622
>>16220609
its weird seeing people actively pretend that Boeing is less evil than Elon Musk lmao
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:17:54 UTC No. 16220624
This Ellie bitch wants to fuck Elon SO bad God damn you can feel it through the screen.
Artemis3 at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:20:13 UTC No. 16220626
>>16220602
It's pretty funny how you carefully catalogued all those Boeing issues, but except for telemetry data saying both the Super Heavy and Starship landed correctly, we're all kind of in the dark as to what was absolutely achieved on that mission. At this point, neither section seems to have any sort of flight control sufficient to guide it into the vicinity of some independent observers who can verify that all the mission objectives were actually achieved.
We saw some water splash, that's it.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:22:06 UTC No. 16220628
>>16220626
>except for telemetry data saying both the Super Heavy and Starship landed correctly
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:25:46 UTC No. 16220640
>>16220626
>We saw some water splash, that's it.
Amazing levels of cope.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:25:48 UTC No. 16220641
>>16220626
hi css
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:26:24 UTC No. 16220642
>>16220626
>I didn't see it so it didn't happen
You need to go back
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:26:41 UTC No. 16220643
>>16220626
bait post
Artemis3 at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:29:09 UTC No. 16220647
>>16220618
>>16220628
We got a ways to go before a Super Heavy chopstick grab and an ensuing Starship tarmac touchdown. Just being realistic.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:29:44 UTC No. 16220648
>>16220647
Oh yes, there's a long way to go but you can't deny the speed has been pretty fucking exponential.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:31:01 UTC No. 16220650
what's the cope going to be after a successful catch and\or orbital refuel?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:31:30 UTC No. 16220651
>>16220601
Artemis III is already delayed out to 2027. There's no way Orion is flying again with craters in its heat shield with a trip around the moon. Until NASA has a solution for that, that doesn't have a massive LOV risk associated with it, there's no launch.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:34:10 UTC No. 16220659
>>16220650
haven't demonstrated moon landing, obviously.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:34:10 UTC No. 16220660
>>16220650
>lol big deal, musk said we'd be on mars by 2024, now its 2025
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:35:43 UTC No. 16220662
>>16220651
Starship is 100% going to be ready before that pile of shit so long as they don't get faa cucked again
Artemis3 at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:36:15 UTC No. 16220663
>>16220648
>IFT-3
Super Heavy crashes, Starship tumbles wildly before burning up on re-entry
>IFT-4
Super Heavy splashes down, Starship survives re-entry (minus at least one wing), splashes down (apparently)
>IFT-5
Super Heavy Mechazilla grab, Starship tarmac landing
That progression would be "exponential". Don't exaggerate. I'd be pleased if either section was fully recovered on the next flight.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:37:44 UTC No. 16220665
>>16220663
>apparently
I saw the splash with my own eyes.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:38:05 UTC No. 16220666
>>16220336
I'm not making a nigger account
post a threadroll
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:38:13 UTC No. 16220667
>>16220663
>starship tarmac landing
you do realize they want to do a tower catch with that also
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:38:39 UTC No. 16220668
>>16220510
i thought they broke up?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:38:45 UTC No. 16220669
>>16220663
>That progression would be "exponential"
Take the time between launches into consideration. You're not being intellectually honest here.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:39:33 UTC No. 16220671
>>16220662
There's no mishap investigation for IFT4. The license specifically stated that there would only be one IF Starship or SuperHeavy experienced something OTHER than: non-engine failure RUD, flight deviation from landing corridor, and for the ship: tile failure or engine failure. SuperHeavy lost an engine on flight, but was not impacted and on landing lost another engine, but did not impact landing either; showing up to 2 engine out capability. For Starship, it suffered tile failure and a compromised flap structure, but landed in the Indian ocean successfully per license agreement of the test flight. Which satisfies all conditions of the mishap exception clause.
IFT5 is safe for next flight to relaunch without needing an updated license. When SpaceX is ready to go, all they have to do is submit the request to FAA and likely within 24-48 hours, they'll have another license to yeet into orbit and back down.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:40:05 UTC No. 16220673
>>16220624
she walled too had. her forehead is like a raisin
Artemis3 at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:40:33 UTC No. 16220674
>>16220651
>There's no way Orion is flying again with craters in its heat shield with a trip around the moon.
D00d, the gaps in the hinges on Starship's wings are burning them off.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:40:57 UTC No. 16220675
>>16220626
lmao
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:41:24 UTC No. 16220676
>>16220574
nah, you can go back home to bunkerchan instead :^)
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:41:45 UTC No. 16220678
First and second stage: Hydrazine
Orbiter and injection stage: Aluminum
Lander: Orion-style nuclear
Return: Aluminium again lol
Reentry and landing at houston: Fission fragment
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:41:55 UTC No. 16220679
>>16220667
they already have legs for starship which were used in the hops, so why risk the tower for the first landing?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:42:05 UTC No. 16220680
>>16220663
It's exponential in the sense that in the time that Artemis has launched once, SpaceX has launched 4 SLS class vehicles.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:42:36 UTC No. 16220681
>>16220669
>You're not being intellectually honest
is it even possible to dislike musk and be intellectually honest about it? Like in theory it should be, he says some dumb stuff on X, he can be kind of an dick. but everyone who dislikes him needs to bend so far backwards to justify it that they stick their head up their own ass and start spewing shit from their mouth
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:43:32 UTC No. 16220682
>>16220674
And it landed with a almost fully compromised flap anyway. Tis but a flesh wound.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:43:34 UTC No. 16220683
>>16220550
I'd gain a little respect for Bezos if he grew a long white beard and wore a pointy red cap.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:43:37 UTC No. 16220684
>>16220666
it was kind of meh honestly, a bunch of examples of thunderfoot being ignorant and retarded but the clip where he is calling spacex employees morons is more interesting
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:44:37 UTC No. 16220685
>>16220674
HLS doesn't need a reusable starship
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:46:34 UTC No. 16220687
>>16220583
>binliner almost fails at doing something dragon does regularly with no fanfare
>starship almost fails at doing something unparalleled in human history
yeah, so weird
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:47:36 UTC No. 16220689
Artemis3 at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:47:36 UTC No. 16220690
>>16220680
>SpaceX has launched 4 SLS class vehicles.
Artemis I did a lengthy polar orbit of the moon and returned a capsule. To the best of my knowledge, IFT-4 was a sub-orbital flight (the best to date) where both sections currently reside at the bottom of the two different seas. How are these comparable?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:48:41 UTC No. 16220691
>>16220622
hey, boeing may be killing workers and customers but they're not platforming transphobes while wacked out on ketamine!
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:49:13 UTC No. 16220692
>>16220314
hybrids are great. They are the most metal of wind instruments, closely followed by the Shuttle's re-entering SRBs
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:50:27 UTC No. 16220694
>>16220554
Need it. I don't know what the fuck Bezos is thinking. If he really cared about space then he'd stop suing and start buying. Cheap mass to LEO is what he needs and someone already did it for him
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:51:59 UTC No. 16220698
>>16219871
did i hear this right? elon musk says making rapid reusable rocket which can go to mars is a harder challenge than living on mars from a technological standpoint? or is just my esl kicking in?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:53:25 UTC No. 16220700
I don't think the hotstaging ring is reusable ore than ten or so times. The amount of metal being cooked off the surface during staging is substantial
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:53:42 UTC No. 16220701
>>16220690
>How are these comparable?
SLS, the rocket, only went to LEO and is also at the bottom of the ocean.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:55:05 UTC No. 16220702
>>16219393
I KNEEL
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:55:42 UTC No. 16220703
>>16220700
who the fuck cares nigger
>oh no, this one part has to be replaced every ten flights or so so the booster is out of commission for a day
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:56:18 UTC No. 16220706
>>16220700
Run the numbers and get back.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:56:49 UTC No. 16220708
>>16220698
yes
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:57:31 UTC No. 16220709
>>16220700
I don't think there's any intention of reusing the hotstaging ring, or even including it in the final design.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:59:06 UTC No. 16220712
>>16220583
They must be huge fans of the vastly more successful crew dragon.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:59:10 UTC No. 16220713
>>16220698
its good for him to be optimistic about the other challenges but obviously elon is ignorant of things he doesnt know well. Even ISRU which is the most straight forward issue is a major task. luckily Casey Handmer with Terraform Industries is tackling that challenge. Living on Mars will be a herculean task. Absolutely herculean. Just look at any historical space stations like Mir for context. For example fungi growing behind panels which eat away at metals and glass (maybe a reason for the ISS leaking?). All the life support systems on a space station will be needed on Mars, and there has never been a closed loop space station.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:00:21 UTC No. 16220715
>>16220698
This has always been true and people have a really hard time with it. There is no problem on Mars not made easier with cheap mass to orbit
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:01:35 UTC No. 16220716
>>16220601
Will they have a second and third SLS and second and third Orion ready in the next two years to start with?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:02:37 UTC No. 16220718
>>16220626
Dont worry bud, NASA is in the loop ;)
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:03:48 UTC No. 16220719
>>16220698
Living on mars is going to be the same as living in a submarine + hydroponics + dusting off solar panels. It's all been done before. Starship hasn't been done before.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:04:52 UTC No. 16220722
>>16220714
literally why
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:06:52 UTC No. 16220723
>>16219393
I KNEEL
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:07:11 UTC No. 16220724
>>16220713
>Terraform Industries
I'm optimistic about this guy. I personally think he's hoping to get SpaceX as a customer well before he's actually price competitive just so Musk can say the methane is carbon neutral.
If he's successful, Starship could technically be solar powered. Kek
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:07:29 UTC No. 16220725
>>16220722
would be a kinda cool carnival ride
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:07:31 UTC No. 16220726
>>16220714
>some psycho cuts youre ballon cables
no refunds
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:07:49 UTC No. 16220727
>>16220719
>+ dusting off solar panels
Making it a nuclear sub would cut this part out.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:08:39 UTC No. 16220728
>>16220713
Nice thing about Mars is it isnt truly closed loop. You dont need to wait for resupply missions, the resources will be available for extraction
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:09:21 UTC No. 16220729
>>16220716
Artemis II's core is on the move (>>16220535) and it's boosters are currently stacking in the VAB. A3's core tanks were bare metal back in February, but I think both A2 and A3's ICPS have been completed.
It's not a fast rocket to build, but producing one a year doesn't seem a real trial at this point. It's the production cycle + all of the launch delays that really kill the program's cadence.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:10:08 UTC No. 16220730
>>16219393
uh yeah Im fuckin kneelin
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:10:27 UTC No. 16220731
>>16219443
this webm cuts out the splash and tip
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:12:07 UTC No. 16220732
>>16220683
there would then be the danger that Rocket Hobbit would try launching him into orbit
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:13:34 UTC No. 16220734
>>16220722
You get to spend a long time up there, chill ride up and down, drinks bar, presumably cheaper than bezos gay ride. Also very scalable. I think it's a pretty cool idea.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:16:50 UTC No. 16220739
>>16220673
I don't think Elon is in much better shape rn desu
>>16220698
All you need in order to survive on Mars is to deliver a metric fuckton of solar panels, the Sabatier process does the rest. Radiation is a meme and you don't even need to make a farm if you don't want because nonperishable food lasts for literal years when stored properly
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:18:12 UTC No. 16220742
>>16220686
>>16220689
now, THAT is interesting. I wonder how they got that info without much ADS-B data...
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:18:52 UTC No. 16220744
>>16220713
I mean a station on a planet doesn't have to be entirely closed loop. There's water and gasses outside. You just need equipment to source them.
That's the beauty of going somewhere that's actually a place instead of building orbital cuck barrels.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:19:25 UTC No. 16220746
>>16219393
I KNEEL
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:19:39 UTC No. 16220747
>>16220714
>passengers are in space
>still have to look down to see the earth
kek, that design is fucking retarded
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:20:10 UTC No. 16220748
>>16220724
True. It seems clear that Handmer really wants to help with Mars and the business vibility on Earth is just a side show to make it happen. If Starship actually gets an MSR contract Musk better fucking hire Handmer fast.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:22:54 UTC No. 16220751
>>16220689
isnt disabling your transponder a federal crime
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:23:25 UTC No. 16220752
>>16220694
now you're talking. quit measuring dicks and get something fucking going. human nature has such issues.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:24:49 UTC No. 16220753
>>16220745
Why is star trek so uniformly shit?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:28:13 UTC No. 16220756
Tower catch recovery for the booster and ship still makes me nervous. I wish they would have gone with the oil rigs as landing spots out in the Gulf and operated a few ferry barges to bring them back via the Brownsville ship channel.
That gives you
a) redundant landing pads in case of a mishap
b) no risk to the GSE needed for launch
Even if the turnaround for one booster to get back to the pad is like 24 hours, you can still reach arbitrarily high cadence with a larger fleet, which they intend to have anyway. The tower catch method cannot maintain cadence in case of failure, while offshore landing with two or more rigs can.
>>16219393
I KNEEL
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:28:34 UTC No. 16220757
>>16220745
colony fiction is always bad. Always watering things down to two monolithic factions. In reality an American colony would be more conservative than the homeland because of the harsh conditions. Chinese colony would be split between shills that love the cccp and anti shills that realize that maybe they don't have to listen to them anymore due to distance.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:28:38 UTC No. 16220758
>>16220182
Godspeed anon.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:29:33 UTC No. 16220760
>>16220747
>>16220714
>balloon company sells tickets "to space" to rich dumb boomers
>puts them in a "space suit" and everything
>boomer thinks "being in space" means he can float
>jumps off
you know it's going to happen
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:29:46 UTC No. 16220762
>>16220714
Dark Sky Station
one day...
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:30:10 UTC No. 16220763
>>16220760
would be hilarious
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:33:07 UTC No. 16220767
>>16219393
I KNEEL
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:34:10 UTC No. 16220770
>>16220760
There's no way they will be able to go outside without a tether, airlock won't cycle until it detects your tether connected or whatever.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:35:05 UTC No. 16220772
>>16220771
The body language...
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:38:50 UTC No. 16220775
>>16220760
At least he'll have some time to think about his mistakes going down.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:39:00 UTC No. 16220777
>>16220772
explain to an autistic person what it tells us?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:40:16 UTC No. 16220779
>>16220771
>>16220772
>>16220777
She's on two inch platform heels and he still is looking down at her. She's also dressed up and dolled up basically to get wined and dined.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:41:01 UTC No. 16220781
>>16220771
Bane?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:43:52 UTC No. 16220785
>>16220777
incels have become obsessed over judging who will and wont fuck
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:43:57 UTC No. 16220787
>>16220777
She wants to have sex with him
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:44:10 UTC No. 16220788
>>16220758
Alright here, I never learned how to make a webm
https://youtu.be/gzIOgOIIhcA
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:44:49 UTC No. 16220789
>>16220771
Kek, why is Musk dressed like Zelensky?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:45:37 UTC No. 16220791
>>16220789
who?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:45:53 UTC No. 16220793
>>16220786
as if this is up for debate lol. What mishap could have even occured apart fromlanding 6km off target in a gigantic ocean?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:46:02 UTC No. 16220794
>>16220789
...rent free?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:46:42 UTC No. 16220796
>>16220786
Fuck them, name the fucking mishap you vipers
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:47:03 UTC No. 16220797
>>16220793
threat to the health and safety of krill
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:47:17 UTC No. 16220798
>>16220791
Some jewish dude who lives in a country where lots of Russian soldiers die fo some reason
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:47:55 UTC No. 16220800
https://x.com/RGVaerialphotos/statu
>The Water-cooled Steel Plate has turned an interesting shade of gold after Flight 4's launch.
>Here's a comparison of the OLM after every launch.
>Watch our Starbase Flyover Update analysis video to learn more about Starbase's condition post launch!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMF
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:49:08 UTC No. 16220805
>>16220798
keep /k/oping lol
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:49:50 UTC No. 16220806
>>16220786
I'm going to REDACTED
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:50:46 UTC No. 16220808
>>16220786
Why dont we send a ship to their federal headquarters? No reason why desu I just think we should
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:51:18 UTC No. 16220809
>>16220805
what do you mean? I don't even follow the 3 day SMO.
>>16220794
>mention zelensky once as a joke about musk's fashion sense
>rent free apparently
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:51:29 UTC No. 16220810
>>16220800
I would be surprised if the water plate lasts more than 10 flights or they have to increase the flow rate from the "shower head" so that it absorbs much more energy from the Raptor scalpel before deflecting it away.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:52:35 UTC No. 16220813
>>16220760
I mean, let's hope the tickets are as cheap as possible so all boomers are able to jump at the same time
in fact, just make it a suicide platform (without telling the customers)
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:53:01 UTC No. 16220814
>>16220770
>boomer spends the rest of the trip hanging from the balloon by his tether
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:54:59 UTC No. 16220818
>>16220800
here's an idea: for water launch platforms, simply have a hole below the launch ring and let the engines fire into the water. if saltwateris a problem they could use a freshwater lake.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:56:19 UTC No. 16220819
>>16220800
>>The Water-cooled Steel Plate has turned an interesting shade of gold after Flight 4's launch.
was it made of copper or some copper alloy?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:57:21 UTC No. 16220820
>>16220818
>if saltwateris a problem they could use a freshwater lake
Never ever going to happen, that would be like throwing a few thousand sticks of dynamite into the lake, total fish death
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:57:51 UTC No. 16220822
>>16220819
>Steel Plate
>was it made of copper?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:58:24 UTC No. 16220824
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 22:59:54 UTC No. 16220825
What are the chances they solve the hinge on the next test? Starship V2 will have the altered flaps, but IFT5 won't be using V2. Hopefully they solve the door and deorbit burn next so they can start yeeting Big Starlink
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:02:00 UTC No. 16220827
>>16219393
i K,NEEL Flapsama Onikuragaishiamasa. Hai!
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:04:15 UTC No. 16220830
>>16220800
it's literally just the angle of sunlight
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:04:35 UTC No. 16220833
>>16220777
she's all flopsy and floosy and such and he's all stiff and wide and resolute. its clear.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:05:22 UTC No. 16220834
>>16220825
No V2 for awhile
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:07:39 UTC No. 16220836
Bros... what if they ACTUALLY attempt a catch next time and its not just Elon bullshitting as usual. I know I know this is impossible but what if?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:08:00 UTC No. 16220838
>>16220834
So next flight we will have more flap-chans toasty adventures.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:08:55 UTC No. 16220839
>>16220834
wat is the point of ship 26
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:09:05 UTC No. 16220840
>>16220827
>>>/wsg/5578108
FURAPU!
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:09:07 UTC No. 16220841
>>16220777
new semen receptacle secured
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:09:23 UTC No. 16220843
reminder to save everything for a flight to mars. earth will be a second Venus soon.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:09:32 UTC No. 16220844
>>16220838
The Glorious Flap has proven its worth. IT shall prevail.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:09:33 UTC No. 16220845
>>16220831
>wasting a post with spam/trash
lol ok
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:09:47 UTC No. 16220847
>>16220777
Musk is know to be a breeder.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:10:07 UTC No. 16220848
>>16220839
nobody knows, people thought it was going to get scrapped previously but they keep testing it
so its some kind of test article but unknown still
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:10:08 UTC No. 16220849
>>16220839
Probably a depot testing prototype
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:10:59 UTC No. 16220850
>>16220262
>watching the NSF stream instead of SpaceX with the actual good views and commentary
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:11:14 UTC No. 16220852
>>16220822
right, I'm retarded. kek
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:13:54 UTC No. 16220856
>>16220847
>>16220841
no way he would breed her. nigga could breed anyone.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:14:25 UTC No. 16220858
>>16220850
i gave up on the other streams with FT3. dont need all their bullshit and stuff, just a few little comments from those close to the action and thats it. everyone else just waffle and bluffs to try making themselves relevant. yawn
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:14:29 UTC No. 16220859
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:15:59 UTC No. 16220863
>>16220856
he seems willing to breed most anything. i think he's preparing to call the family together for a mars shot. it'll be a muskmars, with all comers denied.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:17:00 UTC No. 16220865
>>16220859
damn straight it is. he knows
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:18:32 UTC No. 16220866
>>16220859
THE HAND PLEADS
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:19:36 UTC No. 16220868
>>16219565
The only reason to wait is so they can keep flying Starships without any failure-induced delays. The tower will probably take six months to fully fit out with chopsticks, propellant handling equipment, all the various electrical and data devices, etc. Much like with building a house or an office building, assembling it takes about half the time, and fitting it out takes the other half. Since assembly's been done early, the majority of the time is going to be in completing fit-out and making sure everything works.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:21:19 UTC No. 16220871
>>16220810
I wonder what the erosion rate is for the shower head.
I doubt they would want to replace the whole thing. maybe they could add material back to the plate and legs with something like wire arc spray.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:21:59 UTC No. 16220874
They should start stacking starlinks on the test flights once a relight is successful. If it fails then they just lose some sats which kind of sucks but a success saves at least 3 falcon flights (assuming 45t payload, could be more who knows) which is a lot of money.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:23:02 UTC No. 16220876
>>16220871
Just mill out new top plates and weld on top simple as.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:30:12 UTC No. 16220888
>>16219547
are they going to charge grenade drone operators in ukraine too?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:36:23 UTC No. 16220894
>>16220839
A pathfinder for new internal layout (going from the SN series Starships to what's flying nowadays). Also serves as a way to test the Massey's test site ground equipment and flame trench
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:37:36 UTC No. 16220895
>>16220728
Exactly. You can literally just scoop up dirt to get water (in a very small amount) or dig a deeper to hit permafrost. You can also get oxygen from the atmosphere. In many respects, keeping a free floating station supplied around mars would be more difficult than the surface
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:38:08 UTC No. 16220896
>>16220863
he seems careful about who he goes for. all the women hes been with are conventionally attractive, and he would bever breeda black bitch in 1000 years
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:46:04 UTC No. 16220905
>>16220888
The US attorney for central California has jurisdiction in Ukraine?
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:49:58 UTC No. 16220911
>>16220908
NASA will share the footage, if not immediately, then with a FOIA request.
That Australian flight could get away with keeping it to themselves.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:50:24 UTC No. 16220912
>>16220896
>Grimes
>conventionally attractive
Max jej
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:50:57 UTC No. 16220914
>>16220757
I feel like anyone chosen to be sent to a Chinese colony would have to be a true believer who also has family back home the Party can use as leverage. Where things will get messy for the Party is when the first generation born there starts getting it's own ideas.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:51:41 UTC No. 16220917
>>16220912
I like thin girls with almost no curves.
I don't know what else to say.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:53:12 UTC No. 16220919
>>16220914
Correct, dumbass
that's why its called a colony
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:54:06 UTC No. 16220920
>>16220840
this is fucking chaos
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:55:50 UTC No. 16220922
>>16219836
They are allowed to "just do that" because everyone else is free and clear to copy them after some amount of time, even if the technologies involved are patented. These ones are not: everyone else is just incompetent.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:56:40 UTC No. 16220923
>>16220911
They might pull the bullshit they did with IFT-3 where they classified their footage of hot-staging
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:56:55 UTC No. 16220924
>>16220858
I only watched NASA Shill Flight for the suborbital flights where they didn't stream anything. As soon as spacex actually started streaming stuff they were the only ones worth watching. NSF literally just exists to extract as much money out of idiots as possible while development is ongoing.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:57:09 UTC No. 16220925
>>16220583
it's a little depressing when i realize that my lazy halfassed trolling in /sfg/ comes up with exactly the same material as these ecelebs who make hating spacex their full-time job
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:58:01 UTC No. 16220928
>>16220914
I don't think china has any modern or historical experience with long distance colonies.
Would be really interesting.
Anonymous at Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:59:01 UTC No. 16220929
>>16220925
Have you ever considered going into the business?
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:03:20 UTC No. 16220936
>>16220929
surely the market's saturated at this point
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:08:06 UTC No. 16220938
>>16220908
black
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:10:54 UTC No. 16220941
>>16220928
It sort of does and doesn't depending on how you view geography
the imperial center was typically in the northern plains, while far the south was extremely rugged and as such had an independence streak the palace(s) weren't a fan of
the definition of "Chinese" has always been fluid because of all the raping and conquering over the millennia
south could be conquered peoples, colonies, or both
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:14:31 UTC No. 16220944
>>16220928
Ever heard of Vietnam?
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:16:23 UTC No. 16220946
>>16220919
Historicaly, a lot of colonies have been made up primarily of people who are either rejecting, or being rejected from, their origin country (and slaves). Only the ruling classes had any real loyalty to the colonizing power. A hand picked cadre of Party loyalist whose mission it is to set up China 2 on mars is a totally different dynamic
>>16220928
I think they will struggle mightily if they try to micromanage everything from Beijing. Unless whatever Party commissars they send are given the latitude to exercise their own initiatives and are also willing to use that latitude, they probably won't be able to break out of the initial stages of colonization.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:19:07 UTC No. 16220949
>>16220936
NTA, I was considering going into EDS content but it seems the niches are indeed filled. CSS filled the utter retard niche a while ago. A dide called Mises Economics has been trying to break into themarket but he gets only a few thousand views per video.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:22:14 UTC No. 16220953
>>16220947
Literally my two favorite space ships ever
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:22:38 UTC No. 16220955
An Apollo 8 astronaut died on camera. Someone caught his plane auguring in to the water in Washington.
https://x.com/AZ_Intel_/status/1799
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:26:09 UTC No. 16220961
>>16220955
The guy was 90, had no business trying to pull off a loop in a single seater prop that close to the ground
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:26:20 UTC No. 16220962
>>16220955
>>16220959
Imagine flying all the way out to the moon and back then dying because you misjudged a loop-de-loop over a shitty lake.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:26:51 UTC No. 16220964
>>16220955
less than a year after borman died too. RIP
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:26:52 UTC No. 16220965
>>16220962
It was the Pacific Ocean so it's more like "failed the splashdown this time."
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:28:57 UTC No. 16220971
>>16220955
>condition unknown
To shreds you say?
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:29:03 UTC No. 16220972
>>16220955
bruh
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:32:06 UTC No. 16220977
>>16220719
hydroponics is retarded compared to roaches for quail and quail for eggs
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:32:37 UTC No. 16220978
>>16220955
jesus what a wild way to go out
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:34:01 UTC No. 16220979
>>16220896
no igers
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:34:06 UTC No. 16220980
>>16220955
>>16220978
If i make it to 90 I wouldn't mind going out like this desu. My grandpa died at 90 gasping for breath from congestive heart failure
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:34:51 UTC No. 16220982
>>16220980
Let's be real this guy probably died from the strain partway through the loop and the crash just messed up his corpse.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:35:05 UTC No. 16220983
>>16220924
>NSF
exactly, they have nothing to say really.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:35:35 UTC No. 16220984
>>16220955
How many astronauts died in plane crashes? Him and Gagarin off the top of my head.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:37:11 UTC No. 16220986
>>16220982
At the very least lost consciousness
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:37:48 UTC No. 16220989
>>16220944
Vietnam fought many wars against china.
I hear that they hate the chinese a lot.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:43:32 UTC No. 16220993
>>16220984
a bunch if you count astronauts who hadn't flown yet
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:43:43 UTC No. 16220994
>>16220831
>Following the fourth test flight of Starship on Thursday, SpaceX is preparing to launch its workhorse rocket, the Falcon 9, from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station. The Starlink 10-1 mission is targeting liftoff from pad 40 at 8 p.m. EDT
>SpaceX pushed back the launch time of the Starlink 10-1 mission. The new T-0 liftoff time of the Falcon 9 rocket from pad 40 at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station is now 8:28 p.m. EDT
>SpaceX adjusted the launch time of the Starlink 10-1 mission again. The new T-0 liftoff time of the Falcon 9 rocket from pad 40 at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station is now 9:02 p.m. EDT
>SpaceX pushes back the launch time of the Starlink 10-1 mission once more. The T-0 liftoff time is now 9:32 p.m. EDT
You miss all the rain delays you don't try to launch on
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:44:23 UTC No. 16220995
>>16220980
its grim how everyone gets old and dies.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:46:14 UTC No. 16220996
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:46:50 UTC No. 16220997
>>16220995
People like to ignore this usually.
It's more important than most think to figure out how you'd prefer to die.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:47:17 UTC No. 16220998
>>16220955
WHAT THE FUCK OLD MAN lmao. Went out like a badass though; I respect the hustle
Fly high sky king
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:49:58 UTC No. 16221001
>>16220015
There's a lot of people out there similar to Patrick who's content I enjoy and they tend to be very well-informed and intelligent on specific subjects, yet they turn into screeching braindead idiots whenever any subject to do with Elon comes up. EDS isn't a meme, it's very real; these otherwise smart and aware people seem to be completely blinded by tardrage and snark if you even mention his name.
It's utterly bizarre how incapable of reasoning and objectivity they become in this state. They're so confident in their preconceived idea of reality that they don't seem to realise how much of a loon they look like to others, even to many of their own fans. They spend years building respect only to start wittling away at it like this.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:50:37 UTC No. 16221003
>>16220998
>Fly high sky king
Same state.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:52:11 UTC No. 16221005
>>16220079
She used to be a TV news anchor apparently
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:54:36 UTC No. 16221007
>>16219951
its spinning, that makes you use entire thing
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:57:18 UTC No. 16221009
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:58:08 UTC No. 16221010
>>16220063
you cant park in orbit, you need to park by landing
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:58:54 UTC No. 16221011
>>16221001
True disruptors are like that. Trump is the same way.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 00:59:04 UTC No. 16221012
>>16220995
Time is a dick, and makes wrecks of us all if we linger.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 01:00:46 UTC No. 16221014
>>16221010
You can park your ass in the corner and be quiet
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 01:04:44 UTC No. 16221019
>>16220489
Is Aerojet Rocketdyne gonna use something like this?
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 01:04:47 UTC No. 16221020
>>16220063
It genuinely makes more sense to use starship's YUGE upmass to build a mars gateway in leo and send it to mars orbit like lockheed martin is thinking about doing.
Use that as a base camp to stage early exploration missions using a safer lander and build up landing pads, refueling depots, starter habitats, and other infrastructure. Then you send the starship fleet with thousands of tons of cargo to land on the pre-constructed landing pads.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 01:08:10 UTC No. 16221022
>>16220861
wow, the only things that made it were the high data rate telescope (Hubble), and the grand tour (Voyagers). The Shuttle ate up the budget for everything else.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 01:10:45 UTC No. 16221025
>>16221022
More proof shuttle was a colossal mistake
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 01:10:58 UTC No. 16221026
>>16220955
EARTHER gravity claims another.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 01:14:37 UTC No. 16221031
>>16220650
that its not rapidly reusable
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 01:15:56 UTC No. 16221033
>>16221022
the shuttle didn't eat the budget. the budget got eaten by the OMB and congress. the IPP assumed that nasa was going to maintain apollo-era funding levels in terms of money as a percentage of GDP. shuttle development actually ended up cheaper than the 1969 planning was calling for because they ditched full reusability - from $10-$12 billion down to $7 billion.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 01:24:34 UTC No. 16221040
>>16221022
There never was going to be any budget for a permanent lunar base or Mars expeditions, Shuttle or no Shuttle
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 01:27:04 UTC No. 16221041
>>16220650
We are already at
>there's no market for it!
Meanwhile the market for it is being created as we speak. Multiple commercial space station companies have 9m class modules planned already. Airbus is going all in with their module being 9m exclusive, literally only starship can launch it.
https://youtu.be/7l12cNKvXak?t=621
Important point made by the airbus guy. Spacex has a good track record with falcon 9 and businesses know and trust them to get the system working. Potential customers are watching the progress of starship just as much as we are, and once they are confident enough they will start to design around starships capabilities. Some already are.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 01:27:43 UTC No. 16221042
>>16220825
paizuri from starship chan!
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 01:33:35 UTC No. 16221047
>>16219784
>>16219789
>>16219845
speaking of the devil
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-S
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 01:46:47 UTC No. 16221053
>>16221020
I like that. Starship enables the type of orbital construction that has always been scoffed at before due to cost. Bigger modules and less flights, all for less money. I for one have always been a doomer when it comes to starship landing on an unimproved lunar/martian surface. Using starship's capabilities to put other systems into orbit and then down to the surface to build initial infrastructure like landing pads is how I think things will eventually end up.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 01:51:11 UTC No. 16221056
>>16221009
ufo is a spinning disc, they use entire ship, not one side when aerobreaking
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 01:52:22 UTC No. 16221057
>>16221014
stfu
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 01:55:49 UTC No. 16221060
>>16221053
It really would be ridiculous to try and land starship on Mars Raw. I don't see why people think that is in any way a good idea. Moreover, it's overkill for how many people we are going to be sending. Early missions will send a handful of people. Starship could send a hundred. Without infrastructure, sending a ship that can house 50-100 or so people makes no sense.
Also building up a really good base camp with all of the things you could ever need in orbit around earth and then sending that to mars is infinitely easier than arriving on a barren mars with just a starship and having to build up that base from scratch.
>>16221056
The tic tac ufo from the nimitz incident weren't disc shaped. They also ignored air friction and compression. According to the radar data, It (supposedly) went from near space to sea-level in like a second. Only way to do that without burning up would be to have the whole craft isolated from the atmosphere somehow.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 02:04:14 UTC No. 16221069
>>16221060
>Without infrastructure, sending a ship that can house 50-100 or so people makes no sense.
So you send your handful of people and fill the rest up with construction materials? It has to get to get to the surface anyway and you are just wasting mass (yes it matters when you are only sending a few ships), fuel and making it needlessly more complex. Being on the surface gives you easy access to stuff that is impossible in orbit like water and gasses, not to mention you have zero (0) radiation protection in Mars orbit, the atmosphere does quite a lot of work in that regard.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 02:11:26 UTC No. 16221077
where does spacex archive their videos now that they only stream on twitter?
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 02:11:38 UTC No. 16221078
>>16221050
+1 successful launch
Falcon 9 now has 59 successful launches to the year out of 113 total for the world
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 02:12:30 UTC No. 16221080
300th successful landing!!!!!
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 02:13:09 UTC No. 16221081
>>16220955
>does a barrel roll and calls it a life
fly high moon king
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 02:16:21 UTC No. 16221088
>>16221069
>0 Radiation protection
Just build that into the space station? Are you like just forgetting starship can do 100+ tons to leo or what. The water tanks alone would be ample shielding.
>it has to get to the surface anyway
And it will be much easier AND safer if you had infrastructure there first. Using a more traditional lander staged from an orbital mars gateway for the first few missions is just way safer than trying to land starship on mars direct from Earth with zero (0) support infrastructure.
>being on the surface
Dingus, you send crewed reuseable landers like alpaca etc along with your space station. Those can bring things back and forth from the surface and help establish early surface habitats.
You also didn't address any of the benefits like the fact that building a base station in orbit around earth would allow you to put all manner of amenities like modules for growing food, science labs, etc that you get access to IMMEDIATELY rather than having to set up all of those things on the surface over many months. This is a massive advantage compared to the direct to surface approach.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 02:16:26 UTC No. 16221089
>>16220996
ffs my Starship addled brain immediately thought that timestamp in the thumbnail was an NSF watermark, after seeing loads of silhouetted pictures against an orange sky.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 02:21:00 UTC No. 16221099
>>16221060
>sending a ship that can house 50-100
lucky that ain't starship then. Starship can house about 12 maximum for long term missions. you could pack about 100 people for a point to point trip but probably not for 6 months unless they will eat, shit and sleep in one economy class chair
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 02:23:40 UTC No. 16221102
>>16221077
nowhere. it's over (for historians)
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 02:26:41 UTC No. 16221107
>>16221102
Probably the saddest thing about the whole debacle for me. I can't download the raw 4K VOD from the source, and have to rely on some shitty reupload from Youtube
>t. webm maker
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 02:26:52 UTC No. 16221108
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 02:27:09 UTC No. 16221109
>>16220955
I don't get it, what's so bad about this? as long as he was alone and didn't hurt anyone in his path, I'd say it's a great form of suicide. I've thought about it and while I'm not a pilot, I'd love to kill myself like this.
also, sucks for his family but hey, one less boomer breathing air on this earth...
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 02:43:18 UTC No. 16221133
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 02:44:58 UTC No. 16221136
>>16221109
Didn't look like a suicide, he was def tryna pull up
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 02:51:33 UTC No. 16221145
>>16221109
>born in 1933
>boomer
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 03:10:49 UTC No. 16221166
>>16221020
>>16221053
No reason not to park shitloads of Starships in orbit to await their landing pads while you're constructing them too, each synod should have 100+ vehicles heading out towards Mars.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 03:12:37 UTC No. 16221170
>>16221145
Young people don't know that "boomer" doesn't just mean "old person", but applies to a specific generation.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 04:09:04 UTC No. 16221223
>>16220925
this is why it pisses people off so much, btw
you should really consider stopping
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 04:17:37 UTC No. 16221239
CLEAR IS LIVE
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 04:19:49 UTC No. 16221242
>>16221223
no, you get pissed off too easily and need to grow a thicker skin
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 04:22:04 UTC No. 16221249
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 04:38:43 UTC No. 16221277
>>16220914
>they just join the American colony
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 06:31:57 UTC No. 16221425
>>16220257
>anybody got the Boring tunnel article from 2045?
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 11:03:58 UTC No. 16221720
>>16220984
they lost a couple during Gemini..Elliot something and another one i think. Crashed on landing.
>>16220955
RIP Major General Anders. Went out doing what he loved. Thanks for the original photos of earth rising over the moon.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 11:44:09 UTC No. 16221748
>>16220984
it's not surprising since most of them were test pilots before becoming astronauts
test pilot just means a pilot who's willing to die in a plane crash
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 11:45:58 UTC No. 16221751
>>16221748
it also means a very capable engineer and precise pilot.