🧵 /sfg/ - Spaceflight General
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 03:59:52 UTC No. 16226142
Jesus Christ Edition
previous >>16224409
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 04:03:03 UTC No. 16226146
https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/s/z
ift4 g-force mapped
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 04:10:04 UTC No. 16226153
>>16226142
Fuck off
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 04:15:38 UTC No. 16226156
fuck urf
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 04:40:16 UTC No. 16226179
Its a funny, slightly space related OP and its 'spaceflight' so Ill let it slide
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 04:42:29 UTC No. 16226184
Vaya Space is claiming that their HDPE/LOX proonted-grain hybrid engines top out over 350s ISP. If true ([X] doubt) that'd be enough for RTLS.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 04:43:26 UTC No. 16226185
>>16226179
hopefully it will stop this from becoming /emg/
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 04:51:26 UTC No. 16226193
>>16226184
>if true
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 05:09:28 UTC No. 16226199
>>16226185
Based cult rejector
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 05:20:10 UTC No. 16226202
>>16226184
literally who?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 05:26:16 UTC No. 16226206
Anyone got the good questions from the elon Q & A? Only thing I know is new tiles are ablative under the surface
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 05:29:28 UTC No. 16226208
>>16226206
Here's a whole thread
https://x.com/NosVemosEnM4rte/statu
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 05:38:59 UTC No. 16226224
>>16226142
>Spaceflight General
I like rockets
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 05:41:56 UTC No. 16226230
>>16226199
digits observed
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 05:44:59 UTC No. 16226232
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 05:49:01 UTC No. 16226240
>>16226230
Tapering rockets are kino
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 05:51:37 UTC No. 16226247
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 06:02:14 UTC No. 16226264
>>16226232
Good man
>>16226206
>>16226208
>>>/tv/
>>16226157
we don't
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 06:07:44 UTC No. 16226275
>>16226240
>>16226247
Dorsal chuds will never understand
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 06:09:22 UTC No. 16226279
Starship MSR is now officially a contender. JPL in sambles.
https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/
>>16226202
Some small startup. I found them completely by accident when I was searching for more details on vortex flow hybrid rockets.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 06:11:47 UTC No. 16226284
>>16226247
>>16226240
I don't like them, they look like skyscrapers which implies they're about to shake to pieces under thrust.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 06:12:25 UTC No. 16226287
>>16226279
>Musk has famously missed schedule predictions
Why doesn't he highlight the fact that Boeing/Lockheed/etc have all missed deadlines in the past for all their projects?
Whats with the singular gaslight?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 06:13:06 UTC No. 16226289
>>16226287
It's not a Berger piece so it's the usual Farts Technica EDS.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 06:13:47 UTC No. 16226290
>>16226269
a couple reasons
1.) no one but the PLA has real ASAT
2.) black knight is fake and gay
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 06:13:58 UTC No. 16226291
>>16226289
Clark is new and hasnt really pushed anti-Musk in the past. But it seems like some of the language is sneaking in
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 06:18:04 UTC No. 16226299
>>16226289
Ars Technica more like Arse Technica
lmao
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 06:26:47 UTC No. 16226304
>>16226287
>Lockheed missed deadlines for all their projects
Musk worship is a mental illness
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 06:26:48 UTC No. 16226305
>>16226287
its unclear if the article is talking about actual schedule deadlines missed or musk just speculating out loud about futurism. I'm confused because the latter he is famous for, the former not so much
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 06:30:41 UTC No. 16226308
This has to be old news but I recently heard that blue origin claimed spacex is infringing their patents for ISS missions and wanted to suspend operations, can anyone spoonfeed me what the fuck that was about? That's even more insane than claiming a patent on barge landings or halting work on HLS
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 06:31:30 UTC No. 16226309
>>16226305
Speculating out loud has consequences when you get contracts to develop on those speculations. Crew Dragon was 5 years late based on that metric. Standard for a space contract, but not untrue for someone to point out
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 06:32:55 UTC No. 16226310
>>16226303
>I-i-it's not over bros
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 06:36:34 UTC No. 16226312
>>16226309
Yeah but it says missed schedule predictions
Ok take this for example. Elon just said on stream he thinks starship will go to mars in 3 years. Is that a schedule? Is that a deadline? I don't see how it can be, there's no mission, there's no contract. Then everyone does backflips when 2027 rolls around and starship isn't on mars, when no customer or investor was waiting for it.
I get egg on his face for missing contract deadlines. It's a contract. But I think nasa is intelligent enough to realize his candid speculation doesn't mean shit and if they want something by a certain date they put it in writing. Beyond that I dont know what consequences you speak of
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 06:51:04 UTC No. 16226321
>>16226312
Speculation itself is more ambiguous. Sure, with that "Mars by 2027" crap he didn't really set a hard deadline, but it wouldn't be unfair to point out that he's known for exaggerating the company's speed of production either since statements like that can factor into who ends up getting the contract. That's why more well established contractors like Lockheed Martin make conservative/realistic estimates and follow through on them consistently.
Take the Crew Dragon example I provided. SpaceX got that contract in 2014 partially because Musk claimed in 2011 that they'd be ready for crewed flights within 3 years (sound familiar?). Not only was the project then given an initial deadline of 2017, but his first revision also said it would be ready by 2018. It wasn't ready until 2020. This isn't to say that SpaceX shouldn't get the next contract, you just also can't really hold it against someone to point out this pattern
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 06:57:42 UTC No. 16226326
>>16226308
All I know is that bald loser and his chode shaped rockets will never even sniff lunar orbit
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 06:58:55 UTC No. 16226327
>>16226287
>>16226279
It's ironic because Elon's predictions have been pretty accurate for the last two Starship launches.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 07:03:13 UTC No. 16226333
>>16226157
Why do you want to stop them? If I was a mutt id rather to see a chinese flag on the moon over LGBT and BLM ones
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 07:07:05 UTC No. 16226339
>>16226333
fuck off vatnik
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 07:11:26 UTC No. 16226344
>>16226333
fuck off chang
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 07:13:25 UTC No. 16226348
>>16226333
>trips of truth
but also
>>>/pol/
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 07:18:54 UTC No. 16226358
>>16226339
>>16226344
at least change your posts and be a bit more original if you're gonna samefag
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 07:19:05 UTC No. 16226359
>>16226321
>you just also can't really hold it against someone to point out this pattern.
This is a pattern in space and not just elon.
He's singled out for being uniquely famous for it. The way I imagine it works is nasa looks at your cards, they estimate what they think you can execute, then set an unrealistic deadline to make you move quicker. They also do this internally with themselves. The first crew flight was supposed to be 2015 and both spacex and boing were on the hook for that and they told nasa they could do it. I don't know why boing and bezos aren't more "famous" than elon especially because boing got to the finish line just other day years later, there's the whole SLS saga. Bezos rockets are no where to be seen, but at least they delivered those engines years late. And there's hundreds of stories I don't know about because I follow spaceflight with the corner of my eye. Everything artemis is late. It might just be easier to count the miracles that were on time
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 07:23:59 UTC No. 16226367
>>16226359
>>16226321
>This is a pattern in space and not just elon.
Yep. Thats my point about singling out Musk when its basically the standard. The so called "Elon time" is just a meme that seemed to attribute to Elon mainly due to his popularity but its just a standard delay in spaceflight industry that all major space companies suffers from.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 07:25:41 UTC No. 16226369
>>16226358
retard
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 07:29:14 UTC No. 16226371
>>16226367
It's because he does similar things with Tesla so people just assume he's lying.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 07:34:45 UTC No. 16226375
How many tanker flights to the depot does starship need to go to mars?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 07:36:30 UTC No. 16226377
>>16226375
However many it takes to fill up one Starship, so I think four.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 07:42:45 UTC No. 16226383
>>16226377
its 8-15 to fill moonship though. I mean I've heard so many damned numbers I shouldn't be posting them, but I've never heard 4
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 07:44:01 UTC No. 16226385
>>16226375
We dont know the capacity of the mars starship
we dont know the capacity of the tanker starship
we dont know about orbital refueling depots
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 07:45:07 UTC No. 16226387
>>16226385
thats my boy
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 07:49:42 UTC No. 16226389
>>16226383
IIRC Moonship needs more tankers because it can't aerobrake on arrival.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 07:57:34 UTC No. 16226393
>>16226389
It will also have to takeoff from the Moon
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 08:07:09 UTC No. 16226401
>>16226371
like you
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 08:30:32 UTC No. 16226423
>>16226157
pretty sure there's an American (German) flag on the moon for 50 years
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 08:33:44 UTC No. 16226426
>>16226279
>when I was searching for more details on vortex flow hybrid rockets
why are you researching obscure rocket engine types??
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 08:42:17 UTC No. 16226436
>>16226389
what is aerobraking like on mars? Is the really thin atmosphere enough? better than earth?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 08:46:10 UTC No. 16226441
>>16226436
Yes the thin atmosphere is enough but it doesn't brake quite as much as on Earth so the landing burn has to be longer
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 08:47:12 UTC No. 16226443
now that raptor reliability, heatshiled durability, and long term cryogenic fuel storage issues have been all but solves, how many months before they send a Starship for Mars?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 09:02:29 UTC No. 16226456
>>16226443
>long term cryogenic fuel storage
Literally, unironically, and in all other ways a solved problem.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 09:03:53 UTC No. 16226459
>chinese astronauts get stranded on the moon
>president harris bans the newly nationalized spacex from sending a rescue starship
what do?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 09:18:07 UTC No. 16226480
>>16226459
Go back to /pol/, you piece of shit.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 09:19:15 UTC No. 16226484
>>16226459
WE GAAN
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 09:46:10 UTC No. 16226522
>nasa's orion has heatshield problem
>it takes years to fix it
>starship has heatshield problems
>uhh lets just swap it in few days, also do all other modifications which may take a month in total
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 09:47:58 UTC No. 16226525
>/sfg/ is such woke infested thread
Thank you for telling me about this place from that SpaceX thread on /pol/.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 10:04:38 UTC No. 16226533
>>16226459
The Changstronauts will use solar radiation to cook rice into a coffin, pickle themselves for preservation, encase themselves in the rice coffin, then apply ancient accupuncture to their pressurized suits to provide thrust back to erf.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 10:06:19 UTC No. 16226534
>>16226157
>how do we stop them bros?
B00T at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 10:08:06 UTC No. 16226535
>>16226534
Now on to you...
Why you let HIM in?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 10:08:54 UTC No. 16226536
https://x.com/DrPhiltill/status/179
Thread about heatshield tiles
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 10:27:45 UTC No. 16226552
>will replace all the heat tiles with one that is double as strong for the next flight
>ablative protection underneath will act as secondary heatshield layer will be added as well
>next flight in about a month, will attempt tower catch
>Starship florida launch in 2025
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 10:44:22 UTC No. 16226565
>>16226552
That's stupid, how are they going to replace the ablative shield after every flight if it's under the main tiles?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 10:45:31 UTC No. 16226568
>>16226565
Its an extra protection if the heatshield tile falls off
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 10:47:03 UTC No. 16226572
>>16226456
Basically solved for everything except hydrogen.
People say cryogenic propellant has never been stored in orbit but they forget not all cryogenic props are made equal.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 10:47:54 UTC No. 16226573
>>16226329
This was killed by JPL
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?i
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 10:57:28 UTC No. 16226581
>>16226568
i.e. its not supposed to ablate away during normal operations, just a backup
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 10:58:46 UTC No. 16226582
>>16226573
Elon PROMISED Halcon heavy launches to Mars every launch window on his own dime. Btw dude had 44 billion sloshing around and chose to buy a social media platform isntead of reserving 1/200th of it to do a mars mission..
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 11:05:29 UTC No. 16226589
>>16226582
spacex isn't bottlenecked by cash it's bottlenecked by engineering hours
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 11:05:36 UTC No. 16226590
>>16226581
There goes another 10 tons capacity. What are we at now? 30 tons to LEO? 20?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 11:05:46 UTC No. 16226591
>>16226582
It wasn't taking crew so I don't care.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 11:08:34 UTC No. 16226596
>>16226589
buy more engineers then?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 11:11:58 UTC No. 16226604
>>16226596
That would probably make iteration slower
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 11:14:21 UTC No. 16226609
>>16226604
all you have to do is develop propulsive landing which they were already doing, and hire flight controllers to hang around observing the flght for 2 years.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 11:14:46 UTC No. 16226611
>>16226582
Grow up, promises mean nothing.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 11:16:36 UTC No. 16226613
>>16226582
He got overtly threatened by a senator.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 11:22:46 UTC No. 16226616
>>16226613
who?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 11:25:44 UTC No. 16226620
>>16226616
You think that would be public record? Did you even read the link you originally replied to? I have my guesses either way
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 11:25:54 UTC No. 16226621
>>16226616
Shelby if previous incidents are anything to go by.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 11:32:55 UTC No. 16226625
>>16226621
yeah that was my guess actually
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 12:06:01 UTC No. 16226650
What do you think about Perun's video on Starship?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 12:17:18 UTC No. 16226661
>>16226650
Reasonably well researched and fair. Pretty sure he's a space nerd as well as military.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 12:18:09 UTC No. 16226663
>>16226650
his nasal voice is annoying so I haven't watched it yet
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 12:23:51 UTC No. 16226668
>>16226650
It was good. I was so satisfied when he busted out the BryceTech graph.
>"But the potential for geopolitical competition beyond Earth's orbit is very much a topic unto itself. And one we will look at in the next episode of this series."
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 12:26:08 UTC No. 16226671
>>16226573
You got anymore spicy internal nasa politicing rumors?
I'd like to get a sense of the factions at play.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 12:49:14 UTC No. 16226700
>>16226672
Wish we had a pic of the ship just before soft landing. Though it will happen sooner or later.
Given Elon's answer, I guess they don't have one either.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 12:51:25 UTC No. 16226705
>>16226700
Starship was 6 km off on the splashdown so I doubt whoever they sent out to watch the landing could see it.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 12:54:03 UTC No. 16226708
>>16226552
>>16226565
I saw somewhere its a silicone felt. I guess it replaces the white fabric they have under the tiles now?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 13:03:33 UTC No. 16226715
>>16226708
that would make a lot of sense if it was possible
maybe not that bad of a mass penalty then
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 13:06:28 UTC No. 16226719
>>16226663
pretty good though, i dont find the sarcasm as grating as others here
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 13:07:02 UTC No. 16226720
>>16226157
Go to Mars
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 13:08:34 UTC No. 16226725
>>16226650
>>16226661
>>16226668
you will never be a woman and ukraine will never win, Perun.
🗑️ Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 13:14:09 UTC No. 16226734
>>16226525
Don’t let the door hit you on the way out nigger
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 13:18:03 UTC No. 16226743
>>16226725
Is that why /chug/trannies like yourself constantly have to cry “russia is winning” at every oppertunity like some deranged mantra?
Doesn’t really sound like confidence to anyone outside looking in, seems more like you’re trying to convince yourself than anyone else.
Also clap clap for the vatnig bringing up ukraine when the topic was starship.
Go back please
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 13:22:56 UTC No. 16226751
>>16226247
The Saturn V was a thing of beauty. You guys ever see Apollo 11 - the doc made entirely from real footage? They had one of the best launch sequences ive ever seen. great sound track over it too. 'In the Shadow of the Moon" did well too.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 13:23:41 UTC No. 16226752
>>16226725
>2 more weeks to Kiev!
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 13:30:21 UTC No. 16226757
>>16226743
>>16226752
dilate shills.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 13:38:01 UTC No. 16226764
>>16226142
We love luna!
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 13:38:13 UTC No. 16226765
What do you guys think is going to happen to all the 'astronomers' complaining about starlink light pollution when there are 2 or 3 other constellations by china and companies that may or may not be run by unpopular billionaires?
Will they continue to complain about what is now obviously the status quo? give up the fight? keep complaining but only about spacex?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 13:42:15 UTC No. 16226772
>>16226765
terrestrial astronomy for deep space objects will die, all powerful telescopes will have to be in space
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 13:49:07 UTC No. 16226783
>>16226751
I can't find it now but I remember a video that was a single tracking shot of the saturn V launch with radio chatter played in the back.
It captured the stressfullness of being in charge of those men's safety while they sit inside a giant experimental machine in a way that videos with jump cuts just don't. Even knowing the ending it makes you realize that those men talking don't.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 13:56:10 UTC No. 16226795
>>16226783
it was something else man, amazing times. What you're talking about remind of Gene Krantz book.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 14:05:12 UTC No. 16226806
>>16226765
>keep complaining but only about spacex
This one. Activists only care about things when they think they have the power to influence others' behavior.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 14:05:27 UTC No. 16226807
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 14:07:57 UTC No. 16226808
>>16226772
>all powerful telescopes will have to be in space
or suffer the consequences
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 14:08:00 UTC No. 16226809
>>16226725
TZD
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 14:08:05 UTC No. 16226810
>>16226755
Good luck bro, I sure hope you have a few tens of billions of dollars for the spectrum allocation in the US alone
This probably hinges on SpaceX getting OFDM approved by the FCC to muscle in on other spectrum it didn't pay for exclusivity on. That precedent will be huge.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 14:16:51 UTC No. 16226817
>>16226765
I don't think you realize how influential they can be. The Dark Skies initiative has been going on for longer than you've probably been alive. The only problem is, we're looking at a tragedy of the commons situation and nobody has a financial incentive to go dark for science.
Astronomers will have to start taking into account existing constellation tracks while planning observations. It's done right now for wildly different reasons (astronomers track asteroid occultations of stars) they just need to adapt this to use data from an object tracking database. Some stars may become permanently unobservable if they require long exposures, but convolution may help.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 14:17:40 UTC No. 16226819
>>16226810
I think the point is to compete with starlinks laser-to-laser backhaul which spacex is starting to offer as a module to satellite manufacturers, not a direct competitor with starlink in general
though it seems they want to do this through radio instead of lasers so might need spectrum still
perhaps they can put the starlink lasers on these and then use the radio to communicate with legacy satellites that don't have the laserlinks yet and in that way give better communications and coverage to current satellties
basically be a intermediate link between starlink and the customer satellite
>SAN FRANCISCO – Assured Space Access announced a strategic partnership with Phantom Space to establish Phantom Cloud, a data-backhaul service for satellites.
>Under the agreement, Chandler, Arizona-based Assured Space will design and build radio frequency communications payloads for the 66-satellite Phantom Cloud constellation. The partners also will work together to design, develop, launch and operate the new constellation.
>“We want to be complementary to what Starlink is doing,” Cantrell said. “We want to focus more on the machine rather than the human-to-human market. That’s a perfect place for a relatively small constellation of satellites.”
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 14:26:02 UTC No. 16226826
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 14:27:49 UTC No. 16226828
>>16226824
I've seen amateur rockets launch in person
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 14:29:13 UTC No. 16226829
>>16226824
i launched an Estes polystyrene Space Shuttle once. it used to glide back down in a long slow spiral. pretty cool
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 14:32:04 UTC No. 16226832
>>16226824
every 4th of July :^)
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 14:33:45 UTC No. 16226835
>>16226824
I've launched model rockets (don't laugh).
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 14:37:25 UTC No. 16226838
>>16226835
model rockets are no laughing matter
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 14:38:28 UTC No. 16226839
>>16226838
Very true
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 14:47:38 UTC No. 16226842
>>16226765
Simple. We build more space telescopes. A commercial company could fill the demand, and starship will enable cheap high mass space telescopes which could be mass manufactured using cheaper materials to cut costs. You could put up a dozen or so Hubble+ class telescopes and customers rent time on them for observations.
I'm surprised no one has thought about doing this yet. If only I had got an engineering degree instead of wasting time on a cyber security degree I will never use I might have done it myself.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 14:54:29 UTC No. 16226847
>>16226839
that must have been painful, I've seen what those motors do to my launchpad.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 14:55:49 UTC No. 16226849
>>16226842
Bandwidth issues could easily be solved with laser comm, utilizing starlink for data transfer instead of radio and DSN like James Webb. Why haven't I thought about this sooner? Muskman is literally enabling a new era of space telescopes with his autism.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 15:22:08 UTC No. 16226872
>>16226839
that seems foolish
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 15:22:18 UTC No. 16226873
>>16226705
Did they even bother sending anyone out?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 15:24:21 UTC No. 16226876
>>16226873
They did for super heavy, presumably they would for starship too.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 15:27:33 UTC No. 16226877
>>16226873
presumably there was a private plane flying there during reentry, there might be footage
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 15:29:18 UTC No. 16226881
>>16226824
god. remember when it was f9 v1.0 vs antares for iss resupply. imagine if antares had won out.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 15:34:41 UTC No. 16226886
musk has a magnetic effect where after hearing him talk about mars for any length of time I become prepared to kill rape and die for the mission. He is like Hitler in that respect.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 15:37:59 UTC No. 16226891
>>16226819
>Phantom Cloud
Pffffft it just hit me what this is about, at least to my conspiracy minded brain. Starlink is off-limits for military use (except where it isn't) but they are absolutely lusting over the capability.
In comes an intermediary, who in essence are going to be Starlink resellers: oops, how did that military traffic get in there?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 15:39:38 UTC No. 16226894
>>16226426
no reason
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 15:40:08 UTC No. 16226895
>>16226891
there is starshield so something what you describe is kind of pointless
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 15:40:33 UTC No. 16226897
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 15:44:22 UTC No. 16226902
>>16226895
Starshield is US exclusive
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 15:45:24 UTC No. 16226903
>>16226902
I think other countries would just launch their equivalent.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 15:45:59 UTC No. 16226905
>>16226902
you mean some adversial countries would use phantom cloud as some kind of backdoor to use starlink for the military? seems kind of far fetched and easy to stop when its found out
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 15:53:31 UTC No. 16226912
Listen.
Its just not not possible to build a super heavy lift vehicle for 50 million a piece a reusable one at that.
We've all seen the SLS - the pinnacle of rocket technology with the most advance rocket boosters and engines optimized to the very physical limits of expendability.
We know it will cost upward of 2 billion dollars per flight. We know: we have to accept it. That is the price to pay for such power and capability.
And that is for a simple traditional system that focuses on cost effectiveness by utilizing as much as possible readily available parts.
We also know the Space Shuttles, of which only few were built and operated over a period of thirty years
simply because they were so advanced and so expensive the United States of America couldn't afford to build more.
These, despite being reusable, costed upward of 1.5 billion dollars per flight.
Lets be real, lets be honest: space is hard and rockets are not cheap.
Comical statements that "it will cost 50 million" simply have no basis in reality so let us leave them outside of it.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 15:55:09 UTC No. 16226913
>>16226912
(You)
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 15:56:43 UTC No. 16226916
>>16226912
It's been a long time since I've seen this pasta.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 15:57:46 UTC No. 16226920
>>16226881
I'd have a lot more launches to watch though
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 15:59:18 UTC No. 16226925
>>16226922
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BO
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:02:09 UTC No. 16226931
>>16226912
this is what spacefag5 sincerely believes
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:05:20 UTC No. 16226935
>>16226931
A reminder that spaceguy5 works at Marshall and SLS is their baby, Starship is a direct threat to his employment.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:06:23 UTC No. 16226939
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:08:29 UTC No. 16226942
>>16226939
look at that bad ass flap giving absolutely no fucks.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:16:29 UTC No. 16226952
Does the ships having an ablative udnecoating mean a columbia style loss of vehicle is impossible? and how much would that weigh? Musk ahs said previously that ablative was too heavy to use.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:16:30 UTC No. 16226953
Wait so Ship 29 survived reentry with the crappy old heatshield?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:17:57 UTC No. 16226956
>>16226953
yes
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:18:14 UTC No. 16226957
>>16226952
Presumably the ablative coating will be thin as it won't need to survive a full reentry.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:20:36 UTC No. 16226961
If SpaceX can get the chance of loss of crew to 1 in 270 for Starship, does this mean they can fly people on it?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:20:49 UTC No. 16226962
>>16226952
>impossible
no
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:21:55 UTC No. 16226963
>>16226961
Legally yes although I think they'd want to get it way lower than that.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:23:59 UTC No. 16226965
>>16226961
Would you ride a roller coaster where 1 in 270 riders end up dead?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:31:23 UTC No. 16226973
>>16226965
>what is joining the military
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:32:34 UTC No. 16226979
>>16226157
>the chinese will own the moon by the end of the decade
just a hunch, but I believe there's plenty enough room on the moon for multiple countries to host outposts there
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:32:43 UTC No. 16226981
>>16226957
but if the tile comes off during launch then it would need to survive the whole entry
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:33:40 UTC No. 16226984
>>16226965
If the possibility is there that j go to space? Sure
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:33:40 UTC No. 16226985
>>16226824
I saw STS-131 and a Titan 4b go up
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:34:29 UTC No. 16226986
>>16226965
does it do a loop de loop?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:36:43 UTC No. 16226989
>>16226965
the risk-reward calculus is different
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:41:14 UTC No. 16226997
>>16226979
Ya but like all real estate, some bits are highly desirable, while a lot is kinda useless. I sure hope China tries to assert sovereignty over Shackelton crater. The US' spaceflight budget would literally go to the moon.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:41:40 UTC No. 16226999
>>16226943
kinograph
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:42:35 UTC No. 16227001
>>16226997
>The US' spaceflight budget would literally go to the moon.
lol
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:42:39 UTC No. 16227002
>>16226999
birb
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:44:50 UTC No. 16227007
>>16226886
I thought it was just me
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:45:42 UTC No. 16227009
Speaking of space sovereignty, since the outerspace treaty bans country from making territorial claims, would all space colonies be independent? Would be an easy way to get around the outerspace treaty.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:49:23 UTC No. 16227013
>>16227001
Ah but have you considered sacry moon commies?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:49:36 UTC No. 16227014
>>16227009
you can just ignore the treaty
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:49:38 UTC No. 16227015
>>16226824
yes
I can see them from my backyard, although I'm not close enough to hear them
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:51:39 UTC No. 16227018
>>16227009
>outer space treaty
The US and China are going to tear that thing in half and wipe their asses with it. If one or the other is way behind in Moon/Mars bases, they might do some kvetching about it, but that's about it. No one else is in a position to enforce the treaty.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:53:21 UTC No. 16227021
>>16227018
>>16227014
The US if anything has doubled down on it with the artemis accords.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:53:55 UTC No. 16227023
>>16226897
imagine leaving this planet... and then choosing to come back
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:54:28 UTC No. 16227024
>>16227017
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO WHY WOULD YOU DO THAT THAT'S SO MESSED UP
this video is highly amusing and mildly unnerving to me and I do not understand why
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:54:33 UTC No. 16227025
>>16227021
those can and will be changed when it is beneficial or ignored entirely (i.e. USA would just retract from the agreement)
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:55:19 UTC No. 16227027
we should have a capital punishment method that consists of putting someone under a rocket as it launches
i volunteer
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:55:44 UTC No. 16227028
>>16226903
>just build your own globe spanning satellite megaconstellation
>it's only been done once in all of human history, but it can't be that hard
sure, guatemala will get right on that
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:58:30 UTC No. 16227032
>>16226943
did the estronaut post his Elon interview yet? I didn't see it
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:58:54 UTC No. 16227033
>>16227025
After all those countries signed it I think it would be taken as something of a betrayal for the one pushing it to suddenly back out the moment it's convenient.
You'd never get people to work with the US in space again.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:59:12 UTC No. 16227034
>>16227032
no, still waiting for approval from jannies
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:59:55 UTC No. 16227035
>>16227014
I do this every day
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:01:30 UTC No. 16227037
>>16227033
lol, USA would just say the situation has changed, if USA is the dominant leader in space then do other countries even have a choice?
you could also have de-facto territories but no actual de-jure claims, an "international" moon base controlled by the US
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:03:34 UTC No. 16227039
>>16226999
I feel like pitching immediately might not be great for the ground infrastructure.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:07:03 UTC No. 16227043
>>16227037
>do other countries even have a choice?
Yes, they can side with china if they're pissed off enough.
>you could also have de-facto territories but no actual de-jure claims
This is basically what I said before, officially independent colonies that have strong ties to their host nations (I.e being able to vote in their source countries elections etc)
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:11:11 UTC No. 16227049
>>16226824
I saw a couple shuttles, falcon 9, and falcon heavy
Hoping to see florida starship in the next year or 2
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:13:11 UTC No. 16227051
>>16227021
The Artemis Accords declare everyone outside them (i.e. China) to be fair game. The US Constitution still allows the creation of privateers and the US has not joined any anti piracy treaties. We will see American space pirates in a mix of surplus military hardware, eBay special SpaceX ships, and stolen enemy craft raiding everything even vaguely Chimese above the Karman Line.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:13:39 UTC No. 16227052
>>16227009
>space will finally abolish the government
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:15:48 UTC No. 16227055
>>16227051
>The Artemis Accords declare everyone outside them (i.e. China) to be fair game.
lol no they don't
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:19:50 UTC No. 16227058
>>16227043
>Yes, they can side with china if they're pissed off enough.
>just give up 99.99% of your capability
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:21:26 UTC No. 16227060
>>16227058
there is no way spacex will ever dominate china. china could have launch parity with spacex if they were actually building their megaconstellation right now.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:22:25 UTC No. 16227064
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:24:24 UTC No. 16227067
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:24:34 UTC No. 16227068
>>16227058
Presumably in this scenario if USA feels the need to shred the artemis accords then chinese capabilities have grown have grown substantially.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:26:23 UTC No. 16227072
>>16227067
lmao
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:26:56 UTC No. 16227073
>>16227058
It's not a smart move to bet the US will be ahead from now till the end of time. Especially if that bet involves pissing off your allies.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:27:08 UTC No. 16227074
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:33:09 UTC No. 16227083
>>16227059
pontificate the aroma
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:34:36 UTC No. 16227084
>>16227073
>It's not a smart move to bet the US will be ahead from now till the end of time.
This just comes down to: Do you bet against Starship?
If there is Starship, then the US will be the foundation of humanity's presence in space. Everything else will either be at the discretion of SpaceX or so insignificant as to be wholly irrelevant. The Chinese will be the Sentinelese of the 31st century.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:36:08 UTC No. 16227090
>>16227060
>there is no way spacex will ever dominate china.
This anon has been in a coma for the past ten years.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:38:02 UTC No. 16227096
https://x.com/Ringwatchers/status/1
>Raptor Diagram #9 | 10th June, 2024 | "The era of easy raptor tracking is over."
https://ringwatchers.com/diagrams/r
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:39:08 UTC No. 16227101
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:40:12 UTC No. 16227104
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:41:15 UTC No. 16227105
>>16227104
>Updates since last diagram:
> R155 Seen scrapped at Hawthorne
> R269, R319, R368, R390 and R398 Installed on S30
> R378 Installed on S30 and then later removed
> R321, R327, R328, R330, R334, R346 and R352 Spotted at McGr
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:47:09 UTC No. 16227111
>>16226824
i was at ift-1, both the scrub and the launch. a very good time for sure
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:49:53 UTC No. 16227115
Reminder that von Braun was an observant and outspoken Christian, especially when he was doing his best work
>God Touches the Heart of a Scientist through Gideons’ Bible Ministry
https://www.christiantoday.com/arti
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:53:56 UTC No. 16227119
>>16227059
>NASA found the piss module
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:54:34 UTC No. 16227122
Where the fuck is Raptor 3
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:56:10 UTC No. 16227126
>>16227115
current christians don't even think space is real
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:56:34 UTC No. 16227128
>>16227122
probably years away
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:58:55 UTC No. 16227130
>>16227084
Thats complete nonsense logic, you don't have to bet against starship, what you have to do it bet against anyone ever matching or exceeding starship forever.
I wouldn't make such a bet.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 18:03:30 UTC No. 16227134
>>16227088
nice but starlink is launching cell service in few months, so its not "have to wait for starlink" that he's trying to gaslight
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 18:04:23 UTC No. 16227137
Elon Musk is a scam artist
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 18:04:51 UTC No. 16227139
>>16227130
How long will it take them to do that?
Where will SpaceX be by that time?
The answer to the first is "Too long."
The answer to the second is "Too far."
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 18:05:45 UTC No. 16227142
musk says 1 month to next flight so see you in august-september
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 18:06:24 UTC No. 16227143
>>16227139
I am reminded that truman thought the same thing about the soviets getting the bomb.
That bet didn't work out so good.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 18:06:42 UTC No. 16227144
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 18:09:23 UTC No. 16227147
>>16227067
pure bs, russian side also recycles water from urine.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 18:09:51 UTC No. 16227152
>>16227143
That would have been perfectly true if they had done anything.
Thankfully, as we've all seen, SpaceX is not the type to just sit around.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 18:10:38 UTC No. 16227153
>>16227126
That's because in von Braun's day there was still enough wiggle room to genuinely believe; his belief in souls was essentially rooted in conservation laws. Nowadays the Big Bang is about the only cope they have left.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 18:11:54 UTC No. 16227156
>>16227147
how much would a liter of piss cost on mars?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 18:12:16 UTC No. 16227157
>>16227126
>God created the stars and the heavens
Its on the first page of The Bible
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 18:12:47 UTC No. 16227158
>>16227143
Hell you don't even have to make an analogy to someone else. Elon scoffed at BYD back in the 2000s and now they sell more BEVs than tesla and musk is begging the US for tariffs or else tesla will go bankrupt.
Believing your opponent is perpetually incompetent is a sure fire way to get blind sighted.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 18:15:42 UTC No. 16227161
stop responding to off-topic posts
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 18:16:09 UTC No. 16227164
>>16227156
inutile question
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 18:20:34 UTC No. 16227167
>>16226954
Wasn't she in The Fast and the Furious?
🗑️ Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 18:21:02 UTC No. 16227168
>>16226142
how the fuck is this spaceflight you double nigger
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 18:28:37 UTC No. 16227178
why do you guys lie about the quantum leap in technology that is required to make starship work?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 18:31:08 UTC No. 16227183
>>16227017
This is actual footage of god making the Solar System
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 18:35:55 UTC No. 16227189
>>16227126
I called my grandma last Wednesday, and during out weekly talk, she told me about the Chinks doing a lunar regolith sample return. She was a bit worried/confused about that since she thinks that souls of the dead go to the Moon.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 18:39:03 UTC No. 16227193
>>16227111
How loud was to boom?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 18:42:12 UTC No. 16227198
>>16227189
You should try to convince her that they're trying to practice necromancy.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 18:42:13 UTC No. 16227199
>>16227156
>there will be girls on mars
>some will play video games
>They will pee
Martian Chad's will be drinking gamer girl piss
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 18:46:01 UTC No. 16227203
>>16226157
IMPLESSIVE
china cant even build its cities without them turning into dust because of tofu buildings in 2-3 years. The are going to conquer jack and shit as any space module done by them is a complete death trap for everybody that has to use it
>>16226333
fuck off pajeet
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 18:48:01 UTC No. 16227206
>>16226725
is mighty puccia beating the snail yet zizter?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 18:49:23 UTC No. 16227208
>nothing happening today
grim
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 18:59:41 UTC No. 16227218
>>16227024
maybe youre high
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 19:11:59 UTC No. 16227239
>>16227206
moving the goalposts. trannykraine will not win.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 19:21:35 UTC No. 16227253
>>16227239
Why are you so invested in the
Is non-spaceflight related topic?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 19:25:08 UTC No. 16227258
>>16227206
what launch was this?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 19:27:49 UTC No. 16227261
>>16227051
Meds
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 19:28:24 UTC No. 16227262
>>16226842
why would your "degree" matter at all? All engineering disciplines are only concerned with your ability to do the work. You actually believe the pissant experience you'd had gotten with a "degree" compares to the real world ability you can cultivate on your own to DO THE WORK? Dumb.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 19:43:36 UTC No. 16227276
>>16227272
happens after every starship test. sticky didn't help. Not even sure if it's /pol/ just gen-pop /sci/ losers. The kind that make 50 million vax threads.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 19:47:19 UTC No. 16227279
>>16227157
yeah and they think they're lights painted on the firmament. The truth is religious people have rotted just like progressives have.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 19:48:13 UTC No. 16227282
>>16227126
dont let the flat earthers poison the well. i think its part of their campaign of bullshit.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 19:49:01 UTC No. 16227284
>>16227276
I don't like Musk much but the last starship flight was a huge milestone. When you stop basing your personality around loving or hating a billionaire you can just see things for what they are
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 19:49:21 UTC No. 16227286
>>16227269
This could all be right but he directly ignored or missed the point of what elon said. He said the tiles were stronger, not more heat resistant. He said they would be backed with an ablative material. And that's not talked about at all.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 19:51:52 UTC No. 16227292
>>16227289
doesn't it have a relatively low melting point
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 19:51:59 UTC No. 16227293
>>16227272
>muskrats
fuck off to your subreddit
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 19:53:00 UTC No. 16227296
>>16227284
??????? I never said anything bad about starship or elon. Is this a bot?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 19:53:19 UTC No. 16227297
>>16227284
I dont know how people get like this
Like ask me what I think of jeff bezos and I will scoff and roll my eyes every time. But I'm not going to call the man dumb and incompetent, I'm not going to say he "failed upward", and I'm not going to blueball myself that amazon is about to implode any day now. Holy shit the delusion that would take is wild
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 19:53:44 UTC No. 16227298
>>16227286
>backed with an ablative material
Why?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 19:53:47 UTC No. 16227299
>>16227292
ah yes I guess you're right. But if they could make it take only 300 C more it could be viable
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 19:54:50 UTC No. 16227301
>>16227296
>muskrats get out
>It happens after every starship test
are you ok?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 19:54:59 UTC No. 16227303
>>16226156
based
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 19:56:52 UTC No. 16227307
>>16227297
wish Bezos would launch a damn rocket already. I want to be enthusiastic about more than just Spacex
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 19:57:24 UTC No. 16227308
>>16227301
I was clearly talking about /pol/tards dumb fuck. Like >>16227157
God you are seriously pathetic.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 19:57:33 UTC No. 16227309
>>16227298
Probably a very complicated answer that no one knows, but from what I understand from a scott manley video the other day on the topic of capsules that probably shouldn't be applied to this example, ablative materials have superior thermal protection for their weight, the problem is they are ablative. But if you cover an ablative material without a non ablative one, it doesn't ablate. So you get the mass savings. In the event starship loses a few tiles, the ablative heat shield will protect the hull and it's just a small area of underlayment that needs to be replaced.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 19:57:49 UTC No. 16227310
>>16227276
just ctrl + f all their standard phrases and sluts it's obviously /pol/
>>16227293
>>>/twitter/
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 19:59:10 UTC No. 16227311
>>16227289
I don't know the material science too well but I think it's mainly because it would require far more mass (and thus volume) of aerogel to survive reentry than is practical. You can only remove so much heat with so much mass of ablator, and aerogel is far too low density.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:00:07 UTC No. 16227313
>>16227308
There's an anon here who got butthurt and wants to argue about elon, he is from /pol/ and puts anti-/pol/ rhetoric in his posts as camouflage. I can't prove it with certainty but I don't really give a fuck that much either
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:01:55 UTC No. 16227316
>>16227284
>setting heat shielding back by 40 years
>no recovery
>"milestone"
I don't give a fuck about elon and spacex has been an overall success but the starship cope is beyond standard delusion
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:03:16 UTC No. 16227319
>>16226765
>>16226817
>muh science
Astronomy has literally never been useful and never will be. It is by far the least useful scientific field ever devised, on account of it being the study of things which are too far away to ever be commercially relevant.
Do you know how all the famous astronomers used to make money? They worked as ASTROLOGERS. That's all their science has ever been able to produce, selling useless fortunes to idiots.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:05:01 UTC No. 16227322
>>16227206
>>16227308
>>16227313
Not space flight shut the fuck up retards
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:05:07 UTC No. 16227323
>>16227092
they will probably make good stack progress in just over a month, they'll see the tower is almost done and fuck off with a tower catch at stage zero
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:06:00 UTC No. 16227324
>>16227316
>setting heat shielding back by 40 years
What do you mean by this
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:06:25 UTC No. 16227327
>16227316
oh look, he's baiting again
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:06:58 UTC No. 16227328
>>16227323
yeah if it takes like 3 months to build the tower then it would make sense to try land it even if there is risk of damage
but I think 3 months might be a bit optimistic and even then if you have 1 month cadence you would lose launches
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:07:58 UTC No. 16227329
>>16226965
If it goes to space, yes. Are you trying to tell me with a straight face that you would pass up a chance to ride even the Space Shuttle, with it's 1 in 67 fatal accident rate? You would have to be a miserable faggot to pass up that opportunity.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:07:59 UTC No. 16227330
ignore the retard please, don't even pseudo reply
just ignore
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:08:22 UTC No. 16227331
>>16227000
>Where is everybody? Why is it so dark?
>Why are you welding the hatch?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:11:41 UTC No. 16227336
https://youtu.be/LeghC93TW6g
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:12:56 UTC No. 16227338
>>16227198
top kek
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:13:02 UTC No. 16227339
>>16227316
Starship flight 4 achieved all of it's goals. It's not bad because it didn't meet your arbitrary goals.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:14:49 UTC No. 16227343
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:17:13 UTC No. 16227346
>>16227343
for me, it's MOOSE
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:17:38 UTC No. 16227348
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:19:07 UTC No. 16227350
>>16227348
>>16227346
this is a waverider lifeboat, lots of crossrange capability
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:21:31 UTC No. 16227354
>>16227253
i just agree with musk.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:31:51 UTC No. 16227370
>>16226142
John 3:16
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:32:02 UTC No. 16227372
>>16227324
Don't be obtuse
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:35:27 UTC No. 16227376
>>16227372
>not the final design with a cuck can for cargo so there's enough fuel carried internally to reach LEO
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:38:03 UTC No. 16227380
This is the only archetype of spaceplane that isn't retarded
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:38:30 UTC No. 16227381
>>16227374
Elon wants to keep the mars muffins to himself to fuel his torso growth.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:39:31 UTC No. 16227385
Anybody have a cut off all the Starship reveals from elons gaming stream?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:39:48 UTC No. 16227386
>>16227381
there's no muffins on mars, that's just a conspiracy theory
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:41:22 UTC No. 16227389
>>16227385
it was a 5h stream, some of it was at the beginning but then at somewhere like 3-4h there was quite a bit talk again
I haven't seen a cut (a lot of the stuff was the general stuff he talks about every time)
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:43:09 UTC No. 16227392
>>16227354
>>16227370
>not space flight
lamiaceous vegetation
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:43:25 UTC No. 16227394
>>16227389
gotcha thanks
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:45:05 UTC No. 16227399
>>16227392
i am imdian please help me
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:45:58 UTC No. 16227401
>>16227374
>Why was this memory holed?
Elon didn't find it
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:50:31 UTC No. 16227409
>>16227399
The future is bright bro
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:51:05 UTC No. 16227410
>>16227391
Actual jesus analog vs some dickhead
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:53:41 UTC No. 16227412
>>16227394
but the main points
>all tiles getting removed and replaced with tiles that are twice as strong (toughness wise I think, not how well they insulate heat)
>a new extra ablative layer will be added behind the heat shield tiles
>next flight in one month
>50% to succeed in tower catch, if a problem is detected before landing then the booster suicides into the water
>mars in 3 years
>earth-to-earth technically possible after starship landing is demonstrated, probably not commercially viable though
>launch from Florida by the end of next year
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:55:11 UTC No. 16227414
>>16226705
6km is not very far
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:57:36 UTC No. 16227417
>>16227414
fuck off.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 20:59:00 UTC No. 16227418
Earth 2 Earth starship "military anywhere in 30 min" is obviously not reusable, right?
After your orbiter lands in shitholewithoil, Iraqistan, how are you going to get it back to a tower?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:00:19 UTC No. 16227419
>>16227417
Sorry meant to reply to >>16227322
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:00:43 UTC No. 16227421
>>16227418
Who cares in those cases. Uncle Sam pays premium.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:00:48 UTC No. 16227422
>>16227126
True Christians recognise space flight as necessary to spreading God's creation to distant barren lands
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:01:01 UTC No. 16227423
>>16227418
just refuel it with half a million dollars wirth of methane and liquid oxygen (should be easy enough to extort from the locals) and you can hop it back to the nearest aircraft carrier waiting in the mediterranean to be shipped home to the US of A
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:04:39 UTC No. 16227427
>>16227418
you're not going to fly it to the front lines anon. Realistically it will fly from the states to bases in Europe or Guam
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:05:02 UTC No. 16227428
>>16227418
Rocket Cargo is an airdropped pallet from orbit, not Starship landing
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:05:05 UTC No. 16227429
>>16227423
>methane and liquid oxygen (should be easy enough to extort from the locals)
do you really think bongo bongo land has big lox and lng facilities and tankers to supply the hundreds of tons needed?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:06:29 UTC No. 16227430
>>16227429
bongo bongo is just a front. They're keeping the good stuff from us
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:08:13 UTC No. 16227432
>>16227427
I really don't see a use case for this. what do you need taken from mainland US to a base in "less" time than a cargo jet? remember too that it needs to be packed up and loaded, and if it isn't starting right next to one of the few starship launch facilities you're still need to fly it on a cargo jet just to get to starship.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:09:18 UTC No. 16227434
>>16227432
If building supply bases next to KSC and Vandy is necessary to make e2e militarily useful it will be done.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:09:32 UTC No. 16227435
>>16227427
>>16227428
just use a jet plane of you are just restocking something
Manned E2E missiles open up new military operations
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:09:50 UTC No. 16227436
>>16227412
>ASDS being weighted for 100 tons was real in my mind
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:11:41 UTC No. 16227438
>>16227435
Anywhere in 90 minutes while not giving a fuck about your adversaries dense air defense network.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:12:19 UTC No. 16227440
>>16227432
maybe some elite soldiers on short notice. Logistics wise loading the rocket should be no more intensive then loading a plane no?
The army will probably use it at least a bit just because it's cool and they have money to waste. It could also be a form of subsidy for spacex and could make China shit themselves becasue everytime one side gets a new capability there's a lot of cope to go around.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:13:49 UTC No. 16227443
>>16227438
But Starships are easy to hit with air defense.
They slowly drop with terminal velocity at the end.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:13:58 UTC No. 16227444
>>16227438
starship is not immune to air defenses
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:14:55 UTC No. 16227446
>>16227438
Ballistic arc is extremely easy to shoot down what are you saying
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:16:15 UTC No. 16227449
>>16227443
>>16227444
Starship never enters the atmosphere, it drops cargo pods that do.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:16:49 UTC No. 16227450
>>16227449
cargo pods are not immune to air defenses
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:17:40 UTC No. 16227452
>>16227446
orbit is not a ballistic arc
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:18:51 UTC No. 16227453
>>16227452
yes it is
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:21:34 UTC No. 16227455
I repeat, Elon Musk is a scam artist
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:22:11 UTC No. 16227456
>>16227452
the shit landing on the ground is.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:22:30 UTC No. 16227457
>>16227059
good work, binliner
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:31:03 UTC No. 16227466
>>16227096
>>16227101
>>16227104
>>16227105
here's my attempt at making sense of all that. raptor 2 production in its first year was forced - they were cranking them out at max speed without worrying about reliability. after that first year, they slowed down dramatically production started to take the shape of a more normal learning curve. after a couple of years riding the curve they're now churning out about .75 raptors per day.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:40:37 UTC No. 16227474
>>16227466
raptor 398 was seen in hawthorne in October 2023
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:41:10 UTC No. 16227475
>>16227466
>they're now churning out about .75 raptors per day
that's one starship every 52 days if they're fully expended
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:41:37 UTC No. 16227477
>>16227474
ok? if something's in hawthorne then that means there's no reason to believe that it's finished hardware
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:41:38 UTC No. 16227478
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:41:49 UTC No. 16227479
>>16227427
E2E resupply is not militarily useful anon. C5s can carry more than any rocket ever made and air travel is safer and cheaper than re-entry. The only somewhat coherent argument in favor of E2E I've ever heard is AA risk mitigation, but if VC and Taliban SAMs can derail US logistics then Chinese and Russian ASAT can obviously do the same thing
>>16227435
>Manned E2E missiles
>t. duct taping infantry to ICBMs
Finally some high quality bait
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:43:16 UTC No. 16227480
>>16227477
I guess, but assuming that the install date is the manufacturing date going to be pretty misleading IMO
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:46:06 UTC No. 16227484
>>16227479
>duct taping infantry to ICBMs
Where do you think sfg comes from?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:47:14 UTC No. 16227488
>>16227429
enslave them to manufacture the fuels. easy.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:47:33 UTC No. 16227489
>>16227480
assuming that all raptors are manufactured with the intention of eventually being installed on a rocket i'm not sure how it makes a difference. i was just going with the earliest dates they'd been spotted in boca chica or macgregor anyway.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:48:30 UTC No. 16227490
>>16227484
why is that nigger sweaty as fuck?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:52:07 UTC No. 16227495
>>16227479
>C5s can carry more than any rocket ever made
>max cargo weight: 127 tonnes
Lmao
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:53:45 UTC No. 16227499
>>16227490
They probably just fished him out of the ocean. Thats Gordo Cooper isn't it? Mercury flight then
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:54:59 UTC No. 16227501
>>16227452
>orbit is not a ballistic arc
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:57:03 UTC No. 16227502
https://twitter.com/JackKuhr/status
>I do wonder if that was the last we've seen of Virgin Galactic. I would be shocked if the Delta-class spaceship ever flies. The company has $867M of cash but racks up $500M (!) in losses a year. They can no longer tap capital markets to get to Delta b/c the business model fundamentally doesn't work, and it's not even really close. A semi-operational $SPCE pulled in $7M in revenue in 2023. If they do get to Delta, Virgin would also need to work through its 600-ticket backlog of deeply unprofitable/ under-priced tickets before selling its $600K tickets (which will also likely have limited demand). It just sucks b/c a lot of to-the-moon retail investors lost 99% of value on this stock. Also frustrating b/c there are plenty of other solid space investment plays
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 21:58:46 UTC No. 16227504
>>16227484
touche anon kek
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:01:31 UTC No. 16227507
>>16227502
how can you possibly be spending that much money when your assets consist of 1 carrier plane and 1 rocketplane?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:04:07 UTC No. 16227511
>>16226321
>That's why more well established contractors like Lockheed Martin make conservative/realistic estimates and follow through on them consistently.
>In 2014, ULA began development of Vulcan Centaur to replace its entire rocket fleet starting in 2019, but development encountered multiple delays.[33][67][68][69][70][71][72]
>Take the Crew Dragon example I provided. SpaceX got that contract in 2014 partially because Musk claimed in 2011 that they'd be ready for crewed flights within 3 years (sound familiar?). Not only was the project then given an initial deadline of 2017, but his first revision also said it would be ready by 2018. It wasn't ready until 2020.
Wasn't there a "well established contractor" that got a Commercial Crew contract as well? Could you remind us how well they met their deadlines?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:04:17 UTC No. 16227512
>>16227507
refurbishing
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:05:27 UTC No. 16227514
>>16227512
how much damage gets incurred on every flight?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:11:16 UTC No. 16227525
>>16227499
what an idiot. why did the dude go in the ocean?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:12:28 UTC No. 16227528
>>16227507
Their current carrier ship is over twenty years old and apparently had to go through one bitch of a refurbishment process before their recent round of flights because the carbon composite in its airframe was decaying or de-laminating or something. I bet there are a bunch of other horrible design choices like that lurking in the program.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:13:37 UTC No. 16227531
>>16227525
those early astros had a pretty interesting sense of humor
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:15:21 UTC No. 16227536
>>16227501
>>16227452
>>16227453
>/k/ no longer grasps why ballistic missiles are easier to intercept than boost glide hypersonics or FOBS
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:17:43 UTC No. 16227538
Hypothetically speaking, would underground basis on Venus completely sealed off from the surface be cooler and devoid of the crushing pressure issues that everything below the permanent cloud deck faces?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:18:29 UTC No. 16227540
>>16227536
you're in the wrong place. /k/ can only have Elon giga seethe threads
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:18:51 UTC No. 16227541
>>16227432
You fly a starship over the target area and 100 special operations troops jump at 135,000 feet
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:19:30 UTC No. 16227542
>>16227538
yeah but if you're going to live in a tin can why not put the can in space and not bother with Venusian bullshit?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:20:38 UTC No. 16227545
>>16227495
>Implying C5s don't regularly carry oversized loads that put Saturn V and Starship to shame
While you're googling more cope responses try searching "Operation Iraqi Freedom 176 tons"
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:22:14 UTC No. 16227549
>>16227542
I was just thinking, if Venus is basically one big hot sea of CO2 and sulfuric acid below cloud level then maybe something similar to the concept of undersea bases could apply. Since the pressure on the surface (which resembles somewhat of an ocean floor) is comparable to what you might fight deep underwater. Only with the temperature difference.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:24:18 UTC No. 16227553
>>16227549
It's just hundreds of times more effort when you could just build a rotating habitat in space
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:30:42 UTC No. 16227559
>>16227545
A C-5 has never lifted 176 tons.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:30:59 UTC No. 16227560
>>16227059
What a waste, this could have gone to refill the pisslocks.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:33:23 UTC No. 16227562
>>16227553
Yes, but it is still a fun thought experiment. Some writer might find a use for it.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:34:00 UTC No. 16227563
>>16227538
I mean if you dig deep enough, eventually the ground will be room temperature
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:35:33 UTC No. 16227566
>>16227563
really? why does it do that, is the core of venus not hot like earth's?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:36:34 UTC No. 16227570
>>16227559
prove it.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:36:42 UTC No. 16227571
>>16227566
Think about how deep you have to dig on earth to start noticing the core is hot
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:37:20 UTC No. 16227573
>>16227569
>alien warship firing a burst from their plasma cannon in low earth orbit
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:38:07 UTC No. 16227575
>>16227571
earth's crust is the average temperature of earth's surface over the course of a year. how hot is venus's surface on average over the course of a year?
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:38:10 UTC No. 16227576
>>16227566
Unknown, though the most recent resurfacing event (which is always catastrophic on Venus given how the planet fissures open due to the incomplete cracking of the crust from excess heat preventing conventional Earthlike plate tectonics) seems rather recent. We don't know if there will be another one or if the core has cooled down sufficiently. The mantle-crust structure seems also a bit different than on Earth. The rock on Venus seems somewhat brittle at least on the surface.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:39:49 UTC No. 16227578
>>16227559
use two of them
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:41:28 UTC No. 16227582
i've avocated for sending starship to mars as soon as possible. 3 years is fine. spacex needs to get data asap especially since they're likely to win the lander contract for the commercial MSR mission.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:43:28 UTC No. 16227584
>>16227563
>>16227571
>>16227575
Yeah I'm retarded disregard. It would be a gradient between the surface temperature and core temperature.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:45:58 UTC No. 16227589
>>16227582
If they win commercial MSR that is ultimate W, but i'm not certain they will since Starship physically can't fulfill the contract. Doesn't have enough delta v to return from Mars even if fully fuelled on Mars. Not to mention the heat shield would melt from the return temperatures.
That is to say, despite the sucessful IFT4 theyare basically at the same stage of development in their MSR plans as Boeing - all just stuff on paper which could be done one day. And the Boeing proposal requires no creation of a massive fuel plant on Mars.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:46:44 UTC No. 16227590
>>16227538
>>16227563
Business idea for a new Minecraft mod.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:47:02 UTC No. 16227591
>>16227418
E2E Starship makes no sense because there's virtually no cargo that warrants that kind of expense. Nothing that NEEDS to be delivered that fast, for that much money, from such a limited number of origins and destinations. Grunts least of all.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:47:19 UTC No. 16227593
>>16227589
i read that the mission will be split into 3 awards, one for getting the mission there, one for getting the sample, and one for return
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:47:37 UTC No. 16227594
>>16227589
stick a return vehicle in starship. it has the payload capacity to spare. starship doesn't *have* to come back from mars sample return
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:48:36 UTC No. 16227597
>>16227589
With starship's mass capability they could deploy a simple sample return mechanism that wouldn't require the rube goldberg machine developed by JPL, and as other anons said I don't think the contract is for all mission hardware.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:48:53 UTC No. 16227598
>>16227440
>>maybe some elite soldiers on short notice
This is just Halo fanfic. Grunts can take airplanes and helicopters. There are enough of the "super duper elite" guys that they can be stationed around the world within a short flight of anywhere they might be needed.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:49:57 UTC No. 16227599
>>16227593
if you want costs and schedules to get out of control again that sounds like the best possible way to do it
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 22:58:12 UTC No. 16227614
>>16227594
>>16227597
well that's true.
Using the starship to do the landing for the msr rocket would simplify the msr rocket, but that simplicity would be offset by having to get the msr rocket from the starship payload area to the surface, and if you are any of the oldspace companies building the actual msr rocket you would much rather buy vulcan and land under a skycrane
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 23:03:15 UTC No. 16227618
>>16227156
If a Starship launch costs $X million and it takes Y launches to fuel a Mars bound Starship with Z tons of payload capacity then the price of anything non-perishable from Earth on Mars should be around X * Y / Z million USD/ton or 1000 * X * Y / Z USD/kg
With X = 1, Y = 10 and Z = 250, that's $40/kg.
With X = 50, Y = 20 and Z = 50, it's $20,000/kg.
Unless the numbers look a lot like the first set there won't be anyone on Mars at all, so probably $50/kg - $200/kg until the ice mines are functional.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 23:05:51 UTC No. 16227620
>>16227440
oh god he's not kidding
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 23:09:15 UTC No. 16227625
>>16227559
No clue if that's true or not but E2E for military supplies is still retarded
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 23:11:20 UTC No. 16227627
>>16227126
fedoraniggers will stay on earth
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 23:12:12 UTC No. 16227628
>>16227589
>Doesn't have enough delta v to return from Mars even if fully fuelled on Mars
what
why do you guys never talk about this
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 23:13:58 UTC No. 16227630
>>16227593
>ok guys, you have to work together or the tax payer gets fucked
yeah no
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 23:17:31 UTC No. 16227637
>>16227292
>>16227289
they're weak and brittle, too
it makes TPS tiles look like diamond, the hardest metal
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 23:19:09 UTC No. 16227642
>>16227298
>>16227309
the ablative shit is non-reusable, but only expended as an emergency measure
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 23:20:10 UTC No. 16227644
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 23:21:02 UTC No. 16227645
>>16227628
the idea is to create propellant manufacturing infrastructure and a permanent base, not boots on mars
if a return journey is absolutely necessary then you can just send tanker starships, which I guess might make sense at first but you would still have to create semi-permanent habitation
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 23:21:46 UTC No. 16227647
>>16227644
Sure Elon, it's fungus and there are no muffins on mars.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 23:23:01 UTC No. 16227648
>>16227391
>>16227410
I can see the halo and stink lines without trying now
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 23:24:56 UTC No. 16227652
>>16227432
fractional orbital special forces teams
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 23:24:59 UTC No. 16227653
>>16227628
Musk's intention was never to build infrastructure for a boots + flag + leave mission, but to actually put mass and infrastructure on Mars. A combination of vehicles and methods could be used for the former without having to refuel a starship and return to Earth. And honestly at this point we should focus on trial and error of robotic development of a human settlement than the wasted prestige missions of having humans piss in the dirt and leave.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 23:48:40 UTC No. 16227666
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O36
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 23:54:56 UTC No. 16227672
>>16227666
not spaceflight
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 23:56:55 UTC No. 16227675
>>16227672
actually it is under article II section 5 of the /sfg/ constitution
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 23:58:22 UTC No. 16227677
>>16227637
>diamond, the hardest metal
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 00:01:15 UTC No. 16227680
newfags are a diamond dozen in /sfg/
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 00:02:47 UTC No. 16227683
>>16226757
i'll give this vatnig a pity (you)
>>16227239
when are is your favourite shithole going to conquer all of ukraine within a week like they said they'd do?
russia has moved the goalposts so often in this war i've lost count lmao.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 00:03:53 UTC No. 16227684
>>16227582
Soon as demonstrations of refueling/landing is confirmed. And if SpaceX has enough excess capacity/older Starships to throwaway, they should.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 00:07:39 UTC No. 16227688
>>16227680
/sfg/ is a doggy dog thread
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 00:10:55 UTC No. 16227692
>>16227688
i've got zero taller ants for doubles advocates here
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 00:12:56 UTC No. 16227695
>>16227677
Name a harder metal then. Only real drawback of diamond is the weight. It’s like 15 times as dense per gram or something.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 00:15:52 UTC No. 16227698
>>16227677
everything heavier than helium is a metal
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 00:25:37 UTC No. 16227702
>>16227698
wait a second, aint that second one the vehicle that got shilled as the 'this is th vehicle that will land humans on mars' by media publications like 5 years ago?
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 00:30:57 UTC No. 16227709
CARBON IS NOT A METAL, ASTRONOMERS GET OUT
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 00:31:43 UTC No. 16227712
>>16227702
naw. i guess it looks kinda close.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 00:35:27 UTC No. 16227714
Metal is the kind of lattice.
Retards
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 00:37:12 UTC No. 16227717
reminder that 2028 was the original date for artemis 3 and the program is perfectly on schedule
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 00:37:16 UTC No. 16227718
>>16227707
I was confused but then I remembered it.
He will never live that down.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 00:41:22 UTC No. 16227724
>>16227721
There is no reason why this wouldn't've worked.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 00:42:05 UTC No. 16227725
>>16227721
the CIA fears this
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 00:44:40 UTC No. 16227729
>>16227721
Me when I haven’t unlocked the bigger engines and fuel tanks in KSP
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 00:45:10 UTC No. 16227730
>>16227628
Because it's not true. Martian surface to Earth aerocapture and propulsive landing is around 6 km/s delta-V, that's basically exactly what Starship is designed to have with 100t payload.
The bigger issues would be actually doing the fuelling on Mars, reentry at interplanetary speeds etc.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 00:46:45 UTC No. 16227732
>>16227721
Too based for this world.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 00:47:31 UTC No. 16227734
>>16227721
The DOOM of rocketry
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 00:48:17 UTC No. 16227736
I want to be contrarian and love Orion (the capsule) but that $1 billion/unit price tag is insane
That figure doesn’t even include the service module. I don’t think it includes the launch escape system tower, either
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 00:49:19 UTC No. 16227737
>>16227189
Does she read Houseki no Kuni?
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 00:57:38 UTC No. 16227746
>>16227724
PressureFedAstronaut actually has a good video on otrag since he has been a long time otrag shill. Fair play to him, he debunked his own pet project. In shirt the dry mass is too high and the engine performance too low so the rocket would have to be ridiculously big.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 00:58:24 UTC No. 16227747
>>16227744
It never even started
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 01:03:17 UTC No. 16227748
>>16227736
I'm not sure which is more damning, the price tag or the fact that we contracted out the service module to the Europeans.
>>16227744
Delta flights starting in 2026!
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 01:05:17 UTC No. 16227751
>>16227736
I expect the same if not more amount of leaks and delays as shartliner
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 01:05:19 UTC No. 16227752
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 01:10:54 UTC No. 16227761
>>16227528
horrific
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 01:11:04 UTC No. 16227762
>>16227736
For me it’s the 1 year delay to swap a battery out.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 01:14:56 UTC No. 16227764
>>16226999
Literally how does the adjoining ground systems (concrete, the tower foundation, tank farm, electrical / analog hookups, etc.) survive this shit? This is so much energy. Does spraying water (?) really suck a lot of that energy out?
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 01:22:19 UTC No. 16227767
>>16227764
The trick is they don't
None of those things are directly exposed to rocket exhaust. If you look at a photo from the air, the tower is actually a giant deflection surface that parts the exhaust before it hits the tank farm. Everything else is covered in steel plating thick enough to survive for the few seconds they are exposed. The water is to absorb the sound waves, not the heat of the blast
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 01:27:40 UTC No. 16227769
>>16227707
It's awful, but I couldn't resist putting these two together.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 01:34:21 UTC No. 16227771
it's easy to think the present situation is normal because we live in it. But sometimes I remember how incredible it is that some guy who is a genuine Mars sperg has raised from the earth the most powerful rocket company in history. Where there was no reusable rocket he forced one to exist. Where there was no market for said rocket he forced one to exist. Where there was no market for Mars colonization he will force one to exist. The rational economy bent to the sheer will of a man and an idea. All hail Musk.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 01:46:18 UTC No. 16227778
>>16227771
We are GOING
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 01:48:10 UTC No. 16227779
>>16227771
Cult
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 01:51:13 UTC No. 16227780
>>16227779
*nt
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 01:55:13 UTC No. 16227783
>>16227771
It's pretty cool that he plans to get buried on mars.
It's kind of like having a whole planet as a mausoleum/barrow, except you don't need anything inside it since the accomplishment is outside.
Mars is already a tomb in a way, so it's fitting.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 01:57:30 UTC No. 16227786
>>16227779
Religious wars will be fought on mars between the local catholic diocese and the cult of musk.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 02:04:25 UTC No. 16227797
>>16227628
Because it isn't true but even if it was it wouldn't matter. Starship is going to be so numerous and cheap that by the time they're launching people there will be propellent depots going to the surface or orbit or they'll already be there.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 02:08:28 UTC No. 16227804
>>16227746
>so the rocket would have to be ridiculously big.
And? I like ridiculously big rockets.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 02:17:40 UTC No. 16227810
>>16227779
When you really think about it, learning to live on one shitty irradiated rock opens up all of them. Learning what breaks, figuring out the minimum viable product of modern civilization, enabling human life from an utterly hostile environment. Mars is the first bullet point on a cubic function that continues into eternity. Mars, the solar system, other stars, the galaxy, beyond, until the end. An unfathomable number of human lives which will only exist because of that first step. That would make absolutely nothing more important than said first step.
Nothing would be more important.
There's the groundwork for a non faith or state based religion which begets serious fanaticism which would be entirely justified from a rational standpoint.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 02:21:25 UTC No. 16227814
>>16227811
>I still technically live
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 02:22:28 UTC No. 16227816
>>16227814
If any part of the rocket isnt reused the its disposable ergo Astra can get bent
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 02:24:06 UTC No. 16227819
>>16227810
If I was charismatic I'd move to Boca Chica and build a cathedral to preach this
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 02:25:09 UTC No. 16227822
>>16227819
Retard
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 02:38:17 UTC No. 16227837
>>16227752
Where is this from?
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 02:39:26 UTC No. 16227839
>>16227816
Like a hot stage ring?
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 02:41:12 UTC No. 16227842
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 02:57:23 UTC No. 16227852
>>16227851
14 days
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 02:58:58 UTC No. 16227853
>>16227158
BYD isn't for sale in the USA
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 03:03:43 UTC No. 16227859
>>16226961
Human rating has nothing to do with that
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 03:06:50 UTC No. 16227863
Hey guys, I'm posting pt1 of 5 of my new 1hr long Starbase tour video in 3 weeks, follow by pt2 4 weeks after, and so on. You can watch one week early by subscribing to my Patreon
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 03:11:26 UTC No. 16227867
SpaceX should carry Sulfur Dioxide on board so when they decommission them they slowly blot out the sun over the course of decades
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 03:13:30 UTC No. 16227868
Clear interviewing Elon when?
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 03:25:49 UTC No. 16227873
>>16227865
Is that slowed down?
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 03:26:33 UTC No. 16227875
>>16227873
Hi newfag
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 03:31:25 UTC No. 16227884
>>16227865
I miss the webm guy that made high definition webms
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 03:38:59 UTC No. 16227895
https://twitter.com/PDChina/status/
>10 candidates, including 8 space pilots and 2 payload specialists, have been selected for China's 4th batch of astronauts, the China Manned Space Agency (CMSA) announced on Tuesday. Of the two payload specialists, one is from the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and the other is from the Macao Special Administrative Region, said the CMSA, adding this is the first time it has selected payload specialists in Hong Kong and Macao.
https://twitter.com/WLR_2678/status
>Important news from CMSEO is that Group 2, 3 and 4 astronauts are starting to take geology classes (地质课程) and work their way toward field geology training (野外实习). They will also actively participate in the development of lunar landing environment simulators.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 03:40:45 UTC No. 16227897
>>16227771
I genuinely think he's some kind of failsafe dropped in by whoever is managing this show. They don't want to toss miracles around willy-nilly, but they're willing to nudge us away from extinction with a single autist who genuinely loves humanity and has a hypercompetence for project management.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 03:53:27 UTC No. 16227904
>>16227168
lol why was my post deleted
>>16227269
I like Dr. Phil, he's cool, but he has completely missed the point here
>>16227536
FOBS is a type of ballistic arc, it's just hugging the atmosphere and actively deorbiting instead of the absolutely zero maneuvers required traditional ballistic arc
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 04:01:58 UTC No. 16227911
>>16227904
Fuck off /k/ike, go back to your glowing shithole
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 04:03:37 UTC No. 16227916
>>16227418
>>>/k/61833895
Interesting thread up about that
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 04:07:42 UTC No. 16227920
>>16227839
yeah
>>16227916
I was thinking about linking it but I decided that /sfg/ was too full of absolute faggots right now to bother and it would just make it worse
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 04:08:45 UTC No. 16227922
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 04:09:42 UTC No. 16227926
>>16227895
>china is going to land astronauts on the moon before nasa
yeah it doesnt look like it at this rate
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 04:21:18 UTC No. 16227935
>>16227916
/k/ is pozzed, dont link pls
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 04:26:38 UTC No. 16227941
>>16227935
/k/ is based
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 04:30:36 UTC No. 16227945
>>16227941
fuck off tranny commie
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 04:31:26 UTC No. 16227948
>>16227945
YWNBAW, anon
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 04:36:13 UTC No. 16227952
>>16227920
/k/ has been constantly shit up (worse than it was before) by /pol/ tourists like >>16227945 and >>16227911 since the start of Vlad's Big Adventure. I figured it can't get much worse and we might as well have some cross board discussion about spaceflight
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 04:38:47 UTC No. 16227955
>>16227952
I just call them "pidor" or tell them that they will never be women and that seems to shut them up generally
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 04:39:23 UTC No. 16227956
>>16227952
>>16227955
Go back
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 04:40:31 UTC No. 16227957
cross-board tourists ranked:
1. /vt/
2. /jp/
3. /a/
4. wherever it is the furries live
5. /g/
6 (tie). /pol/ and /k/
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 04:43:28 UTC No. 16227959
>>16227957
based
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 04:45:42 UTC No. 16227961
>>16227957
true and real
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 04:46:25 UTC No. 16227963
>>16227957
Accurate
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 04:47:20 UTC No. 16227964
>>16227957
big if true
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 04:48:54 UTC No. 16227966
>>16227957
where does /m/ fit in on this scale
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 05:05:01 UTC No. 16227971
>>16227961
Why is she such a bitch, bros?
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 05:23:23 UTC No. 16227977
>>16227971
Japan and Korea hate each other.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 05:26:35 UTC No. 16227980
>>16227957
Clearbros are based so whatever
jp is stupid
a is also cancer but I acknowledge the oldguard and their ways so the tourists get a pass
swap k and this
why
correct
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 05:28:01 UTC No. 16227981
>>16227980
/jp/ in this scenario refers to the Cirnoposter - t. The Cirnoposter
she's legally not anime
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 05:30:25 UTC No. 16227983
>>16227981
Well then sure but then doesnt that mean that /a/ tourists have no oldfag protectorate? That would drop them to 5 imo, fairly certain these /a/ tourists are the same faggots who did the flap plap thing during IFT-4. Even the other tourists told them to shut up with that I remember
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 05:37:46 UTC No. 16227987
>>16227983
people can have more than one interest, you know
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 05:38:40 UTC No. 16227988
>>16227957
What if you post in all these places, but also have been here since 2018?
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 05:39:27 UTC No. 16227991
>>16227988
you should stop posting on /pol/ and probably also /g/
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 05:40:20 UTC No. 16227993
>>16227988
Not a tourist so tier list is different. Still cancer
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 05:41:59 UTC No. 16227996
>>16227991
Whats wrong with /g/ posters? Are they a containment board or something or is it like cryptotards, Im not caught up I only use /sci/ and /sfg/ specifically.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 05:44:50 UTC No. 16227998
>>16227957
I appreciate you left /that/ board off this list so he doesn't get any attention.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 05:46:27 UTC No. 16228001
>>16227996
they used to be kind of funny but then the joke got out and they got swamped by phoneposters and then cryptobros and AI-fags
>>16227998
do not mention that which shall not be named
is he still over there?
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 05:48:24 UTC No. 16228003
>>16228001
He is. I just checked. Also, the EDS spammer is literally posting on /sci/, /k/, /g/, and /pol/ right now. He's also probably posting /there/ but I didn't click on the thread.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 05:50:13 UTC No. 16228005
>>16228001
I'm so old that I remember a time when moot was so fucking lazy he refused to get new jannies/mods for /g/ and it literally was just spammed with endless cute and funny for a whole fucking year. It had zero threads about technology. This was before he implemented captchas, but still, Jesus.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 05:50:22 UTC No. 16228006
>>16228003
I didn't see him on /k/, it was just a chink shill
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 05:50:28 UTC No. 16228007
>>16227996
/biz/ was created as a containment board to get crypto off of /g/. What killed /g/ was corporate shilling.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 05:51:43 UTC No. 16228009
>>16227637
>brittle
wtf aerogel is like glass?? I always thought it was a soft squishy substance...like gel
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cq
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 05:51:49 UTC No. 16228010
>>16228006
It's the same guy. As soon as he mentions solar rooftops, he outs himself because no one else brings that up.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 05:55:59 UTC No. 16228016
>>16228007
/biz/ was super chill and full of good stuff until the last run. Now it's 90% poojeets shitting everywhere. Thankfully they killed the board with their gay email verification shit
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 05:57:14 UTC No. 16228017
>>16228016
They rescinded that, the board is back to full steam
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 06:06:33 UTC No. 16228024
>>16228023
In red is what I believe to be the livable space demo container they have and in blue is what I believe to be a fag flag shirt...
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 06:08:16 UTC No. 16228025
>>16228024
Fairly certain it is. On the bright side, literally nobody else in the crowd is repping that shit so I think thats just the HR lady.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 06:34:25 UTC No. 16228042
>>16228017
*jeet
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 06:39:57 UTC No. 16228046
>>16227702
no, those are proposals for SSTO Shuttle replacement
left to right you have bids from Locksneed (X-33/Venture Star), McDD (basically larger DC-X) and Northrop (basically shuttle with internal tank)
Congress picked one and then cancelled the project entirely
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 06:45:57 UTC No. 16228055
>>16228024
What was going through his mind?
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 07:15:18 UTC No. 16228077
>>16226824
Multiple. Last flight of Delta IV out of Vandy was a treat, but my heart
belongs to Falcon. Wen FH out of SLC-6?
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 07:15:29 UTC No. 16228078
>>16226824
Yes
I'm the clear at IFT-2 guy
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 07:17:29 UTC No. 16228079
>>16228070
maybe they need to spray some water there too
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 07:19:45 UTC No. 16228081
>>16227088
why does hullo get so mad about spaceX
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 07:26:40 UTC No. 16228082
>>16227589
>the heat shield would melt from the return temperatures.
Just circularize and de-orbit from there, not everything needs to be a direct return
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 07:31:14 UTC No. 16228085
>>16227088
I'm ready to turn on scott manley at the drop of a hat, but I really don't think this was a shade post on starlink. He's probably excited to report on anything space related that can affect the average person and his only point is you can use it now. I can't seriously entertain that he's like GOD FUCKING TMOBILE FUCKING STARLINK FUCKING ELON FUCKING WAITING FUCK. That's just not a realistic read
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 07:53:27 UTC No. 16228100
>>16228096
>“After completing a series of tests and carefully considering our options, we have made the decision that we will transition Hubble to operate using only one of its three remaining gyros,” Mark Clampin, director of NASA’s astrophysics division, said on the call.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 07:54:58 UTC No. 16228102
>>16228100
> That gives NASA confidence that Hubble, launched in 1990, can continue to operate for perhaps another decade. Crouse said there was at least a70% chance that at least one of the remaining two gyros should still be working in the mid-2030s. Other Hubble systems, including its instruments, are also working well. “We do not see Hubble as being on its last legs,” he concluded.
>Switching to the single-gyro mode, though, has drawbacks, primarily because Hubble cannot shift from one target to another as quickly or precisely as before. Crouse said that while Hubble can perform observations an average of 85 orbits per week in normal operations, that will be reduced to 74 orbits a week in single-gyro mode, a 12% loss of observing time.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 07:57:24 UTC No. 16228104
>>16228003
>EDS
many such cases
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 08:09:52 UTC No. 16228113
>>16228104
I was one of the earliest ones to start using the Elon Derangement Syndrome terminology and I'm glad it's caught on.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 08:24:02 UTC No. 16228122
>>16227966
ascended
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 08:26:04 UTC No. 16228123
>>16226443
LOL... at least 5 years.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 08:35:44 UTC No. 16228127
Why does the pacific north west have such a different climate from the atlantic north east. But the latitudes are similar.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 08:41:58 UTC No. 16228131
>>16228127
Prevailing winds and ocean currents.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 08:46:14 UTC No. 16228132
https://x.com/katlinegrey/status/18
Lol
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 09:14:59 UTC No. 16228144
>>16227067
humiliation ritual
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 09:22:00 UTC No. 16228148
>>16227153
Found the soulless automaton
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 09:29:24 UTC No. 16228153
>>16227282
>flat earth
it's just organized shills trying to discredit all the truth being told on /pol/
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 09:59:43 UTC No. 16228178
>>16227504
Why does he look like an Asian dictator?
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 10:01:14 UTC No. 16228183
>>16227126
It wasn't that long ago most Christians accepted modern cosmology other than a few fundamentalists.
now days most have turned a hard 180 and have gone back to an ancient and barbaric view of the cosmos.
I wonder whether or not China have any "flat earth" or "le space is fake" crackpots, I am leaning toward no they do not.
what makes us different from them? perhaps they are behind it all and influencing all the anti science rhetoric in the west.
I know tiktok which is their creation has mostly ruined an entire generation of zoomers.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 10:02:39 UTC No. 16228187
>>16227157
anon btfo
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 10:08:20 UTC No. 16228194
>>16228183
Quite a bit of difference whether you openly distrust the elite and highest leadership in the US vs. China. If you say space is fake or the earth is flat might as well call for the ouster of Xi directly.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 10:09:55 UTC No. 16228196
>>16227981
Cirno has a long history on /sci/ because of math.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 10:23:06 UTC No. 16228205
>China will land people on the moon before SpaceX or NASA
Grim indeed. Congress will not care of course even when China builds bases on the Moon and declares land on the Moon their property.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 10:45:20 UTC No. 16228215
https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/
>The company plans to develop two Delta-class spaceships and begin flying them in 2026. These vehicles are designed to be more easily reusable and carry six instead of four passengers. This timeline seems highly ambitious given that, at this point, the company is only developing tooling for the vehicles and won't begin major parts fabrication until later this year.
>However, by 2027, to support the commercial operations of two Delta ships, Colglazier said the company is planning a "targeted maintenance plan" for Eve to support three spaceflights a week and 125 flights a year.
>Nominally, Virgin Galactic anticipates that this cadence will allow the company to fly 750 astronauts a year at a price of $600,000 per seat, raising $450 million annually. At its current expenditures, this would allow Virgin Galactic to just about break even. (That is, after it flies out its existing manifest of 600 customers who previously bought tickets at price points of $250,000 and $450,000).
they aren't going to make it
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 11:26:47 UTC No. 16228226
>>16228215
What was his plan again? I almost feel like the plan was just to have fun spending money, but he he's had to make it seem more important after those guys died
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 11:38:32 UTC No. 16228232
>>16228215
600k per seat for a suborbital flight!!??
holy moly.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 11:39:59 UTC No. 16228234
>>16228227
where would the voyagers land though?
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 11:50:45 UTC No. 16228246
>>16228234
They changed the name from Mars Voyager to Viking, which sadly would upset homos these days
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:01:59 UTC No. 16228262
>>16228249
ship look like something out of Flash Gordon from that angle. Just needs a long needle nose to skewer Ming the Merciless.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:06:27 UTC No. 16228266
>>16228263
More pics and details
https://www.stokespace.com/stoke-sp
Test was last week, guess they were waiting for a quieter news cycle
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:07:09 UTC No. 16228268
>>16228262
It would look completely ridiculous to someone from the 1990s if you could show them.
Turns out 1950s sci fi was accurate after all.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:10:05 UTC No. 16228273
>>16228266
>KENT, Washington, June 11, 2024 — Today Stoke Space announced that it has successfully completed the first hotfire test for its new full-flow, staged-combustion (FFSC) rocket engine. The engine will power the first stage of Nova, the company’s fully reusable medium lift launch vehicle. Reaching this technical milestone represents a major leap forward for Stoke, as the company is on track to deliver the most robust, fully, and rapidly reusable medium lift rocket in the world.
I wonder why Eager is so skeptical of them? They seem to be progressing quite rapidly
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:11:06 UTC No. 16228275
>>16228273
>Notably, Stoke’s team designed and manufactured this first stage engine in just 18 months. The achievement follows Stoke’s successful vertical takeoff and vertical landing (VTVL) developmental test flight of its reusable second stage in September 2023.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:12:32 UTC No. 16228278
>>16228273
Hes a retard I always say hes annoying here whenever brought up
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:14:00 UTC No. 16228279
>NOVA : our fully reusable rocket.
>Fully reusable stage 2
>Actively (regeneratively) cooled metallic re-entry heat shield with integrated modular LH2/LOX rocket engine is robust, resilient to damage, and operates with passive failure modes. Designed for minimal refurbishment between flights, unlocking rapid turnaround: Refit, Refuel, Refly.
>--Direct access to GTO, TLI, and other high-energy orbits
>--Return from orbit to launch site – precision, powered vertical landing
>--Downmass capability
>Fully reusable stage 1
>--7x LNG/LOX engines
>--Return to launch site (RTLS) or downrange landing
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:16:29 UTC No. 16228281
>>16228270
we went from were so back to its over.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:17:28 UTC No. 16228283
Meanwhile at the Archimedes test stand...
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:20:31 UTC No. 16228286
>>16228268
lol yeah exactly. the whole plan to refuel i orbit, assemble the craft then boost to the moon is what von braun first planned for apollo. now they're going to do it. next they'll make a giant rotating ring station powered zee nooclear reactor on zee top
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:23:11 UTC No. 16228287
>>16228279
The aerospike-heatshield forces their rocket to have SOVL instead of being a straight tube
>>16228273
>>16228263
Those are some cool colors. Fuel-rich?
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:25:49 UTC No. 16228290
>>16228288
>WTF my day is unironically ruined
And I suppose it "ran" just fine before that?
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:35:37 UTC No. 16228301
>>16228294
Do we have an atmosphere -> fuel machine designed and built yet?
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:36:07 UTC No. 16228303
>>16228288
a bunch of retarded high school kids from rural Washington came up with that name and the International Astronomical Union was like "fuck it we'll allow it"
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:38:10 UTC No. 16228304
>>16228301
You dont need one to test land a cargo starship
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:40:38 UTC No. 16228305
>>16228304
You might as well refill it and test mars to earth
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:41:36 UTC No. 16228306
>>16228273
A working FFSC engine is a really good start
Aerospike and fully reusable medium lift is still a reason to be skeptical, this is a recipe for negative mass margins
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:45:17 UTC No. 16228310
>>16228288
It might makes sense for the people that will live there. Like, you live in the epsilon eridani system, but you look up and see the ran. Basking in the ranlight. Actually yeah nevermind that sucks
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:47:11 UTC No. 16228312
>>16228301
Terraform Industries is making progress but it looks like you need calcium which isn't great
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:48:05 UTC No. 16228313
>>16228294
Validating fuel transfer will be very easy considering it doesn't risk Starships and can be done without any time constraints in orbit. The only two things preventing Starship from going to Mars at the time being are:
>being able to precisely land the booster on the tower arms consistently
>being able to land upright on Mars
The heatshield has proven it is much stronger than it looks and they will fix those gaps in the canards for all future flights
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:49:27 UTC No. 16228316
>>16228305
refill it with what?
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:50:16 UTC No. 16228317
>>16228312
>calcium
Tbh idk what these roggs are, but it's white. In my mind it's some sort of calcite or salt deposit
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:50:37 UTC No. 16228318
>>16228306
true, spacex tried fully reusable medium lift and abandoned it. Even BO aint doing that. If thetrailblazing leader skips a technology it may be a sign that it doesnt work
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:51:37 UTC No. 16228321
>>16227677
Due to extensive research done by the University of Pittsburgh, diamond has been confirmed as the hardest metal known to man. The research is as follows:
Pocket-protected scientists built a wall made of iron and crashed a diamond car into it at 400 miles per hour, and the car was unharmed. They then built a wall out of diamond and crashed a car made of iron moving at 400 miles an hour into the wall, and the wall came out fine. They then crashed a diamond car made of 400 miles per hour into a wall, and there were no survivors. They crashed 400 miles per hour into a diamond travelling at iron car. Western New York was powerless for hours. They rammed a wall made of metal into 400 miles an hour made of diamond, and the resulting explosion shifted earths orbit 400 million miles away from the sun, saving the earth from a meteor the size of a small Washington suburb that was hurtling towards mid-western Prussia at 400 billion miles an hour. They shot a diamond made of iron at a car moving at 400 walls per hour, and as a result caused over 10000 wayward planes to lose track of their bearings, and make a fatal crash with over 10000 buildings in downtown New York. They spun 400 miles at diamond into iron per wall. The results were inconclusive. Finally, they placed 400 diamonds per hour in front of a car made of wall travelling at miles per iron, and the result proved with out a doubt that diamonds were the hardest metal of all time, if not just the hardest metal known to man.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:51:38 UTC No. 16228322
How come everyone is suddenly able to make a FFSC engine these days? Wasn't it supposed to be super hard?
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:51:40 UTC No. 16228323
>>16228317
Holy newfag! thats a muffin.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:52:58 UTC No. 16228325
>>16228322
the russians did it decades ago. its not that hard, just no point in doing it when you can do something simpler. It's like how making a fully liquid first stage is not that hard but up until SpaceX it was most common to use solid boosters
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:54:52 UTC No. 16228326
>>16228318
>Even BO aint doing that.
Ain't new glenn a medium rocket in reusable mode?
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:55:10 UTC No. 16228327
>>16228318
They don't have the funding yet to start making a super-heavy class of rockets. It is why so many of these companies are going for micro-rockets. If and when people start hiring Nova flights, they will start working on bigger Novas I am sure
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:56:35 UTC No. 16228329
>>16228326
the second stage is not reusable
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:57:40 UTC No. 16228330
>>16228329
They're making a reusable second stage for it though.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:58:17 UTC No. 16228331
>>16228330
maybe
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:59:22 UTC No. 16228333
>>16228326
It's in falcon heavy territory, and it's certainly a heavy rocket by size.
>>16228327
I see why they do it, but they need a vc miracle to make it through to making a bigger rocket. They will probably be launching individual smallsats with that rocket, it will be a tech demo but almost certainly not a profitable one
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 13:01:26 UTC No. 16228335
>>16228310
I am sure the name will change one day in the distant future zero chance they keep some boring name like "ran" for such a significant star system
a name like "ran" is more fit for some insignificant moon or asteroid that nobody cares about
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 13:03:41 UTC No. 16228339
>>16228322
>Wasn't it supposed to be super hard?
Blanket statements like this don't work in spaceflight because of the small sample size (US, USSR)
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 13:06:26 UTC No. 16228341
>>16228331
Then you shouldn't say that they ain't doing it then.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 13:14:46 UTC No. 16228345
>>16228317
Yeah but that means you can't get home until you have functional ISRU. Too many unconfirmed variables to risk a human life. Depending on how Starship works out though you could just send one packed with fuel to the surface. Or one with calcium. That's probably how they'll do it. One Starship entirely water, one Starship entirely nitrogen, etc
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 13:22:31 UTC No. 16228349
>>16228341
a reusable second stage might or might not happen there are no concrete plans for it
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 13:23:47 UTC No. 16228350
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 13:24:43 UTC No. 16228351
>>16228350
When are any of these flying to orbit?
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 13:25:16 UTC No. 16228352
>>16228351
>>16228350
Proper question is which are real and which are just investor baits/scam?
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 13:25:41 UTC No. 16228353
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 13:25:45 UTC No. 16228354
>>16228349
Patents say otherwise.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 13:29:20 UTC No. 16228359
>>16228354
patents mean nothing
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 13:30:21 UTC No. 16228360
>>16228350
jesus
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 13:32:59 UTC No. 16228362
>>16228359
Real science is done on papers. SpaceX isn't doing anything.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 13:36:09 UTC No. 16228366
>>16228365
https://x.com/AndyLapsa/status/1800
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 13:36:15 UTC No. 16228367
There is no Easter bunny, there is no tooth fairy, and there are no habitable exoplanets. Aliens are not real. Interstellar travel will never be possible. Faster than light travel and teleportation is not possible. Mars will not be colonized. Venus will not be terraformed. The sun cannot be harvested. We will never return to the moon. Resources will be exhausted within the century. You will die on this Earth, which will in turn perish as well.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 13:38:51 UTC No. 16228368
>>16228352
Landscape has actually launched rockets to orbit so they're probably real.
Same with orienspace although they've only done one launch.
Galatic energy were the guys who launched a rocket from a ship outside shanghai recently, they've actually launched a quite a few rockets, probably the most legit on the list.
Space pioneer has made one successful launch so far.
i-Space has launched but half their launches fail, hyperbola 3 might be a scam.
Deep blue hasn't launched anything yet, nebula might be a scam.
CAS space is state owned so take that as you will, only launched the solid lijian 1 so far.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 13:42:22 UTC No. 16228371
>>16228369
I wonder how draggy that skirt overhang is
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 13:45:25 UTC No. 16228373
>>16227884
Not possible when the mp4's posted by sources are compressed to shit.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 13:52:43 UTC No. 16228380
>>16228377
It might not be. Since the lunar starship doesn't reenter they might make it out traditional materials to save on weight.
Or maybe it's just paint.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 13:55:30 UTC No. 16228381
>>16228377
>>16228380
It'll probably be painted white to help with temp control
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 13:59:28 UTC No. 16228385
>>16228377
It's just paint. The pathfinder was painted white too
>>16228381
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 14:02:45 UTC No. 16228389
>>16228273
>>16228275
>>16228279
Peter Beck is btfo so fucking hard.
Hope Rocketlab dies soon
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 14:02:49 UTC No. 16228390
>16228367
Anyway, we will reach Alpha Centurai before 2060, screenshot this
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 14:08:12 UTC No. 16228394
>>16228390
Anon we'd need to go 10% the speed of light and leave tomorrow, there's just no way that happens
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 14:08:20 UTC No. 16228395
>>16228390
With tiny probes, maybe. But humanity needs to first maximize and get the most possible use out of a lunar base and or colony. Going to Mars without first training on Luna is a fool's errand.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 14:13:24 UTC No. 16228402
>>16228394
>10%
Those are rookie numbers
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 14:18:02 UTC No. 16228405
>>16228394
Dare to dream
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 14:24:08 UTC No. 16228410
>>16228405
Holy shit
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 14:24:33 UTC No. 16228411
>>16228394
We could get pictures though within the next few years, I hear they're launching a telescope named after Toliman with the specific task of trying to image the Alpha Centauri system.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 14:25:43 UTC No. 16228412
>>16228411
I'd be happy with a Minecraft texture tier image in my lifetime
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 14:27:11 UTC No. 16228413
>>16228390
>Alpha Centurai
you will never have planets
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 14:30:32 UTC No. 16228417
>>16228412
If we lined up a space telescope around 500-1000 AU away with Sol and Rigil Kentaurus, we could theoretically get images of the planets within their system with a resolution as high as 1K pixels thanks to gravitational lensing.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 14:35:28 UTC No. 16228420
>>16228417
>a resolution as high as 1K pixels thanks to gravitational lensing
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 14:39:01 UTC No. 16228424
>>16228412
Getting a HD image of Alpha Centurai's planets is a lot easier than reaching it. Still requires scientific instruments to get farther than Voyager but still doable within our lifetimes imo
https://youtu.be/NQFqDKRAROI?si=4cs
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 14:41:02 UTC No. 16228425
>>16228420
>Trolling outside /b
God Almighty I hate you """people"""
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 14:43:59 UTC No. 16228428
>>16228425
Gravitational lens imaging is a pipe dream
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 14:44:12 UTC No. 16228429
>>16228279
>No va
Won't go. Should have learned the marketing lesson from Chevy.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 14:48:08 UTC No. 16228432
>>16228413
don't believe the WEF lies, Alpha Centurai has several terrestrial worlds we just haven't spotted them yet.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 14:48:11 UTC No. 16228433
>>16228428
Crush your own skull with a rock
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 14:48:13 UTC No. 16228434
>>16228420
>popsci
This idea was discussed by scientists way back in 1936 and 1979 you monkey fuck. The sentence says "theoretical" for a reason. The most recent mention I can find of it was some years ago in an obscure NASA article.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 14:50:49 UTC No. 16228437
>>16228428
>gravitational lens imaging is a pipe dream
So was fully reusable rockets the price of a pair of F-16s. Fuck off
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 14:52:48 UTC No. 16228438
>>16228428
Haven’t we already done it with galaxies that happen to line up?
Not easy to set up a space telescope designed to do it, but it’s not like it’s a warp drive or something.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 14:54:00 UTC No. 16228441
>>16228433
>>16228434
no one is putting a telescope halfway to the Oort cloud to look at one and only one target. quantum optics combined with a network of very large space telescopes will make the idea quaint
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 14:54:55 UTC No. 16228442
The future of rocket propulsion can be plainly seen
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energ
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 14:57:53 UTC No. 16228444
>>16228442
>antimatter
When did wikipedia editors start allowing fictional substances in these articles?
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 14:58:21 UTC No. 16228445
>>16228438
He's just a contrarian dark skin who saw someone else get good (you)s by posting that previously and thought he could do the same but has no grasp of what's real or plausible so he just shits out the phrase like a young girl who just learned the word "gaslighting"
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 14:59:05 UTC No. 16228448
>>16228273
I'm STOKED for STOKE.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 15:04:12 UTC No. 16228450
>>16228369
starship's fine and all i guess but high-energy launches just hit different, you know?
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 15:06:35 UTC No. 16228452
>>16228441
>one and only one target
We aren't doing science anymore here, we're looking at our next sun. That's worth some dedicated hardware
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 15:09:22 UTC No. 16228454
>>16228451
That's quite shit
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 15:15:30 UTC No. 16228458
>>16228395
You know I used to think that too, but they really are so different when it comes to ISRU/ radiation/ day-night cycle, ect that I think lessons learned on the moon might not be all that useful on mars outside of a few basic things
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 15:15:43 UTC No. 16228459
>>16228381
Is white paint better than mirror finish for reflecting heat?
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 15:24:47 UTC No. 16228471
>>16228371
The skirt is there to cover an even more draggy payload adapter
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 15:26:04 UTC No. 16228473
>>16228470
starship is romanian now?
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 15:35:49 UTC No. 16228482
>>16228470
>>16228472
I didn’t realize *all* the spacecraft were gay. Starliner sure, the signs were always there, but most of these come as a surprise.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 15:40:04 UTC No. 16228488
>>16228459
its a good question. The apollo CSM was shiny bare metal and required a slow rotation for passive thermal control. The LM had to able to sit in direct sunlight without being able to move and was wrapped in reflective foil. The EVA suits were covered in an outer layer of bright white beta cloth which has a reflectance of about 90%.
The shuttle was bright white on the upper surfaces, and the ISS is also almost complete white, much of it betacloth or something similar.
it probably depends a lot on required functionality white material and coating can be used.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 15:44:31 UTC No. 16228491
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 15:46:08 UTC No. 16228494
>>16228470
>>16228472
>the only black ones are the ones that blew up
classic japan
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 15:48:58 UTC No. 16228497
>>16228472
>Discovery
Still the best shuttle
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 15:53:06 UTC No. 16228501
>>16228346
>They are painting it
Why? He said they wouldn't have to cmon
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 15:59:35 UTC No. 16228505
>>16228501
Where did he say that?
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 16:00:20 UTC No. 16228506
>>16228470
ftfy
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 16:01:23 UTC No. 16228508
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 16:02:28 UTC No. 16228510
>>16228446
humanity will pay for it's sins one day
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 16:07:09 UTC No. 16228514
>>16228506
>>16228508
The only ones who are straight are Titan and Redstone. The shuttles are all bi because they've had women inside them.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 16:09:51 UTC No. 16228517
>>16228196
it's true
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 16:23:18 UTC No. 16228526
>>16228505
Elon has gone through the gambit of ideas from having zero coatings on SS (not even tiles) to having tiles, to having tiles plus some other thermal layer and now it's going to be an actual coating under the TPS
The idea was to keep things unpainted because stainless shouldn't need much protection from the elements or even heat
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 16:25:46 UTC No. 16228530
>>16228526
We're talking about the lunar lander, not normal starship.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 16:28:33 UTC No. 16228534
>>16228288
Ran!!!!!
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 16:30:42 UTC No. 16228537
>>16228312
shut up retard, the calcium is necessary to extract carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, which isn't necessary on Mars because you can just stick a compressor outside for that
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 16:32:00 UTC No. 16228540
>>16228405
GAS GAS GAS
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 16:33:59 UTC No. 16228543
>>16228537
you're so mean
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 16:35:35 UTC No. 16228546
>>16228451
this is garbo but I like it
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 16:37:12 UTC No. 16228549
>>16228530
>>16228526
>>16228501
I'm pretty sure it's just a fan render
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 16:37:16 UTC No. 16228550
>>16228470
>>16228472
what do literally any of these pride flags mean
>>16228543
if you had put literally fifteen seconds into understanding the physics and chemistry involved you wouldn't be having such tremendous skill issues
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 16:38:05 UTC No. 16228551
>>16228470
>>16228472
they all love cock btw
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 16:38:19 UTC No. 16228552
>>16228537
>>16228543
Okay, how do we get a shitload of calcium on Mars? The bones of all Asia would be a good start, but stripping and transport will be logistical issues.
>>16228550
The flags mean they are crazy.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 16:43:14 UTC No. 16228558
>>16228550
mental illness
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 16:43:37 UTC No. 16228559
>>16228552
calcium is unnecessary on Mars, but it will be very useful for permanently storing and using carbon dioxide on Venus
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 16:59:05 UTC No. 16228580
Starbase Pad B Construction: Super Crane Logistics! by SpaceX nigga
>Construction of the Second Starship Launch Pad at Starbase is well underway. With the amazing successes of Flight 4 in the books, its time to do some extremely heavy lifting! Due to the increased mass of the Integration Tower sections for Pad B at Starbase, the LR11350 used to construct the Starbase Pad A and KSC Pad 39A towers does not have the capability of performing the job. Specifically, the final 2 or 3 section are too heavy for the crane configuration needed for those heights.
>This time around, an even larger crane will be needed due the pre-installed GSE plumbing , hydraulic equipment and integrated staircases.
>As of June 10th, components for a Sarens CC 8800-1 have begun arriving at the Launch Complex. This crane features a 1600 ton lifting capacity, a significant increase from the 1350 ton capacity of the LR11350.
>Instead of using a split "Powerboom" configuration, this crane uses a single "Boom Booster" which helps provide additional stability while slewing and crawling with extremely heavy suspended loads.
>It will be interesting to see how the presence of this crane will affect launch operations for the rest of the year. Especially after its extended to the configuration needed for the upper sections of the tower. Back in 2021 when Pad A was being constructed, the LR11350 was moved away from the launch site prior to SN15's suborbital test flight. As you can imagine, the contractor/owner of this expensive super cranes probably did not want it on site while there was a risk of a massive Starship exploding on the landing pad.
>As most of you know, SpaceX will likely be attempting the first RTLS Chopstick landing with Superheavy on their next test flight - and every launch thereafter.
1/2
https://x.com/CSI_Starbase/status/1
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 17:00:31 UTC No. 16228583
>>16228580
>If the contractor is willing to accept the risk, the cc 8800 can lay down in the position where the LR11000 is typically stowed for launch operations. By the time flight 5 comes around it should still be in a configuration that allows it to lay in that spot. But if so, that means the LR11000 will have to be relocated instead.
>Once the 8800 is in its extended configuration, its unknown whether there will be enough space to lay it down in a position where it will be protected behind the integration tower. If, not it would have to be partially disassembled and moved to the Sanchez site every 6 to 8 weeks.
>With that said, if SpaceX decides to take a long 4-6 month break after Flight 5 it will probably be for this reason. In my opinion, this company has some of the greatest project managers on the planet. For now we will just have to wait and see how they handle the logistics of this operation.
>This is an extremely exciting time at Starbase! I will continue to provide updates regarding interesting changes to the launch infrastructure along the way!
2/2
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 17:04:12 UTC No. 16228594
>>16228587
gateway to massachusetts. subtle nod to how elon realizes that the only path forward for spacex is adopting the commonwealth fusion tokamak.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 17:05:59 UTC No. 16228597
are we sure children born on mars won't be retarded?
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 17:07:55 UTC No. 16228601
>>16228597
That is a risk we have to take
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 17:07:58 UTC No. 16228602
next stage
>>16228599
>>16228599
>>16228599
>>16228599
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 17:08:19 UTC No. 16228603
>>16228597
you can never be sure but they're taking basic risk-mitigation steps like not allowing you to go over there
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 17:09:04 UTC No. 16228605
>>16228602
Great thread OP!
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 17:09:09 UTC No. 16228606
>After 14 hot fires on stubby engines, a full length Miranda engine is up next! Thanks to the co-located manufacturing and test facilities at our Rocket Ranch, we can test and iterate rapidly to accelerate development for our MLV engines and structures.
https://x.com/Firefly_Space/status/
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 17:09:23 UTC No. 16228607
someone make a thread that isn't a faggot edition
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 17:10:05 UTC No. 16228608
>>16228605
Thank you, no problem :)
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 17:11:05 UTC No. 16228610
>>16228603
why can't I go there?\
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 17:12:14 UTC No. 16228613
NEW THREAD (not gay)
>>16228612
>>16228612
>>16228612
>>16228612
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 17:17:19 UTC No. 16228625
>>16228506
Starship should be an inkling girl.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 17:19:06 UTC No. 16228630
>>16228625
wrong squid de geso
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 17:38:04 UTC No. 16228674
>>16228597
Children born here are retarded and that doesn't stop them
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 17:40:47 UTC No. 16228683
>>16228444
antimatter is not a fictional substance
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 17:58:49 UTC No. 16228725
>>16226824
Yes Artemis 1, was sick AF. Florida people are way to scam happy