Image not available



🧵 /sfg/ - Spaceflight General

Anonymous No. 16228612

Holy matrimony edition

Previous: >>16226142

Anonymous No. 16228618


Anonymous No. 16228620

would rather see her legs if im honest

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228622

Best I can do

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228626


Anonymous No. 16228628
latest berger is mostly fluff but a couple of key lines you can read between:
>Officially, NASA maintains that the agency will fly a crewed lunar landing, the Artemis III mission, in September 2026. But almost no one in the space community regards that launch date as more than aspirational. Some of my best sources have put the most likely range of dates for such a mission from 2028 to 2032.
>If SpaceX completes this test during the first quarter of 2025, NASA will at least theoretically have a path forward to a crewed lunar landing in 2026.
translation: nobody in nasa expects the prop transfer demo to be finished by q1 2025
you stole my pic literally seconds before i was gonna post it...

Anonymous No. 16228631

spam thread
the other one was started first

Anonymous No. 16228636

if you weren't a baiting retard people wouldn't do this you know

Anonymous No. 16228637

Is he trying to look up her skirt?
Look at the timestamps, this one was first

Anonymous No. 16228638

>>16228599 is the real /sfg/

you lost by over 4 minutes

Anonymous No. 16228639

i thought the propellant transfer demo failed

🗑️ Anonymous No. 16228640

Why are you trolling outside of /b/

Anonymous No. 16228643

spacex and nasa fudging their criteria of success so they can move on kek

Anonymous No. 16228644


Anonymous No. 16228653

no he's doing maintenance on her skirt it is extremely wholesome

Anonymous No. 16228655

Dumbass spam thread

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228656


Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228666

dw I got it, took me a while lul >>16228603

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228667

good job

Anonymous No. 16228671

Artemis timeline has been impossible from the very beginning and it's NASA's fault for all delays.
Another stupid thing is attempting a landing on Artemis III, which is too early for brand new rocket and lander.

Anonymous No. 16228675


Anonymous No. 16228678

fuck off

Anonymous No. 16228681

nasa cannot even be sure the capsule coming back on Artemis I was a fluke or not
the heat shield got way more damaged than nasa predicted

🗑️ Anonymous No. 16228685

janny is going to delete this thread soon, don't know why you fags are wasting your time posting in it

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228687

>Artemis timeline has been impossible from the very beginning and it's NASA's fault for all delays.
it was impossible but bridenstine used the fake 2024 deadline to force commercial HLS much in the same way congress used a fake 2016 deadline to get SLS mandated in the first place. it's a dirty business.

Anonymous No. 16228691

It failed, they didnt show any numbers and didnt test it again last flight

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228697


Anonymous No. 16228702

> it's a dirty business
Lets also not forget the bullshit lawsuit BO tried that delayed HLS and that the original 2024 target was setup to be a legacy item for the end of Trumps' second term and even that was before COVID fucked everything for 2yrs

Anonymous No. 16228703

I am fine with letting the yellow man beta test the moon for us

Anonymous No. 16228704
>Ars Live: How Profitable Is Starlink?

live, discussion starts in 10 min
Eric Berger with dude from Quilty Space that did the analysis of starlink profitability and concluded that starlink should be profitable this year

Anonymous No. 16228706

you lost by making the edition and picture non-relevant

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228715

why would you name your company after a fictional pedophile

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228728
>Vast, a pioneer in space habitation technologies, and The Exploration Company, builder and operator of the Nyx reusable space capsule, signed a cargo services agreement for a 2028 mission to Vast’s second Haven space station. Walther Pelzer, Director General of the German Space Agency at DLR (Deutsches Zentrum für Luft-und Raumfahrt) and Bale Dalton, NASA Chief of Staff, attended the signing event along with Max Haot, Chief Executive Officer of Vast, and Helene Huby, Chief Executive Officer and Founder of the The Exploration Company.

🗑️ Anonymous No. 16228729

wtf are you talking about nigger
its an irish surname

Anonymous No. 16228730

Its better than a nig and a whore waving LGBT and BLM my amerimutt friend

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228731


Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228737

seem to have a lot of these things now
did this with ESA a few days ago

Anonymous No. 16228739

Does berger have a glass eye?

Anonymous No. 16228741

I don't think so, but I guess its possible

Anonymous No. 16228743

His right eye looks weird.

Anonymous No. 16228745


Anonymous No. 16228746

just a lazy one maybe

Anonymous No. 16228747

Have they found any medicine or materials that are economical to produce in zero G yet?

Anonymous No. 16228749

Artemis II is gonna be delayed to 2026 anyways due to Orion issues

Anonymous No. 16228757

true the thought of the first person returning and stepping on the moon after such a long time being some type of DEI hire would kill the moment for such a historic event.
don't know much about taikonauts but would rather it be some seasoned Chinese space man, they seem pretty based.

🗑️ Anonymous No. 16228764

>During her remarks, Koerner was also asked what SpaceX's next major milestone is and when it would need to be completed for NASA to remain on track for a lunar landing in 2026. "Their next big milestone test, from a contract perspective, is the cryogenic transfer test," she said. "That is going to be early next year."
>The test will entail a lot of technology, including docking mechanisms, navigation sensors, quick disconnects, and more. If SpaceX completes this test during the first quarter of 2025, NASA will at least theoretically have a path forward to a crewed lunar landing in 2026.

Anonymous No. 16228777

every time i watch these videos i am distracted by judys BARE FEET. Very disrespectful.

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228781

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228792

I thought this was a bit weird since Europe currently has as much station-building experience as nations like Russia and China and they've had plans for an ATV-based station for years. Now Europe is going to contract an American company to lead their post-ISS station plans? Something seems off.

Image not available


empire of the sun....jpg

Anonymous No. 16228793

>Bill Anders is my favorite astronaut because he tried out the Apollo shitting device at home before Apollo 8, decided it wasn’t for him, asked to be put on a “low residue” diet, and then just didn’t shit for the entire six day mission.

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228794

First of the dozen or so planned Chinese F9 copies is going to its S1 test stand, launch planned in September (fall launch actually isn't impossible based on their test schedule for their previous launcher)

Anonymous No. 16228795

>Europe currently has as much station-building experience as nations like Russia and China
In what world?

Anonymous No. 16228796

Based on what?

Anonymous No. 16228802

What's the shitting device used in Orion?

Anonymous No. 16228806

>Europe currently has as much station-building experience
Thales-Alenia has a lot of it, Airbus has lesser amount
Thales-Alenia is building the Axiom modules
Airbus is participating in Voyager Space and effectively replacing lockheed in it

That's the private companies, ESA just wants to fly astronauts there, and more importantly, they realise its minor member states (aka everybody no France Germany and Italy) have a desire for flying astronaut more often than once in 20 years and so ESA tries to get a step ahead in cooperating those who offers the service (american companies) instead of losing control of its minor state's crewed spaceflight activites had they sent their astronaut bilaterally without ESA

Anonymous No. 16228810

They built most of the western side of the ISS and if you count Cygnus as temporary station modules, then Italy has been churning out two per year since 2013. They're also the primary contractors for HALO/I-HAB for the Lunar Gateway.

Anonymous No. 16228811

Definitely not China (who's the only single country currently capable of making and launching independent complete modular station by themselves), but definitely above Russia, bulk of Nauka is a quarter century old and while there is *some* hardware for ROSS it's going very slowly.

Anonymous No. 16228814

I am elated that this balding faggot is NOT going to the moon

Anonymous No. 16228818

>all modules they have built have effectively just been empty tin cans, life support systems, propulsion and the like have to be relied on by the US or Russia
>has never had the capability to build their own space station, always had to rely on the Shuttle
I'm also a yuro but you're retarded. Building a few modules for an already built station is not the experience you make it out to be.
I don't think you know what "experience" is. The nation that has built and launched the most space stations are somehow not the ones with the most experience? Capability is a better word perhaps.

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228820


Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228821


Anonymous No. 16228823

Thales Alenia is also making module(s?) for Axiom station.

Anonymous No. 16228846

They're contracted for AxH1 and AxH2. I can't find anything clear about the other modules.

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228848

Anonymous No. 16228849

You were just envious.
Who wouldn't have jumped at the chance.

Anonymous No. 16228852

>Only one way to go from there
Yeah, fire 9 instead of 4 engines

Anonymous No. 16228854

estrogenaut is still not going

Anonymous No. 16228858

should wrote made FAGGOT in capital letters too

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228859


Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228866

>for an already built station
What? NASA didn't consider their core part of the ISS complete until harmony was attached
>life support systems...have to be relied on by the US or Russia
So tranquillity just doesn't exist then.
>Empty tin cans
t.cupola hater

Anonymous No. 16228871

>Progress is accelerating
this is the fundamental mistake that makes him predict wrong timelines way too optimistically.
progress is more constant than accelerating.

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228872

Also some of the ISS construction photos are pure kino

Anonymous No. 16228877


Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228878

>Artemis timeline has been impossible from the very beginning and it's NASA's fault for all delays.
Just focus on your end of the job and everything will turn out peachy.

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228880

Anonymous No. 16228884

Have they stated why or has it just been guesses so far

Anonymous No. 16228885

>What? NASA didn't consider their core part of the ISS complete until harmony was attached
I didn't say "for an already arbitrarily decided to be complete station". I said an already built station. ISS functioned before Harmony (who btw is mostly based on the MPLM and is the exact thing when I mentioned it being empty tin cans)
>So tranquillity just doesn't exist then
The lift support system was developed in the US.

It's just plain retarded to say Europe has the same experience as the two nations that has built modular space stations entirely on their own (well, if you ignore China blatantly using Soviet module designs). Europe has experience building empty tin cans in comparison to that.

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228886


Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228887


Image not available



🗑️ Anonymous No. 16228889

>digit status

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228890


Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228892
>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.
Everyone is building their own engines these days. Aerojet on suicide watch

Anonymous No. 16228893

never reply to me ever again

Anonymous No. 16228894

Wouldn't it be faster just to shake them off?

Anonymous No. 16228896

they are going to put an ablative backup layer beneath them and replace the tiles with upgraded tiles that are two times as strong (strong meaning what exactly is not known)
musk said this yesterday during a 5h diablo 4 stream

Anonymous No. 16228897

no, setting up for a static fire takes all day and only ever shakes one or two off

Image not available



🗑️ Anonymous No. 16228901


Anonymous No. 16228902

Just keep pumping in more fuel to keep the raptors fed continuously for a long burn

Anonymous No. 16228906

Are they also getting rid of that insulating blanket then

Anonymous No. 16228908

>musk said this yesterday during a 5h diablo 4 stream
I love that this is how we're getting major spaceflight news in this timeline

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228910
>Catch tower....What..?
>New EIS for 39A...Wow

Anonymous No. 16228911

>Starship vertical landing
Shouldn't this be checked off

Anonymous No. 16228913

I think the point is to replace that with an ablative layer but that might be speculation, I haven't listened to the whole 5h thing
the info was spread out here and then with long periods of just playing or talking about AI or talking about diablo 4 builds with the people he was playing with

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228914

If there's any drawfriend with time to waste:
>captain of a secret agent organization with plenty of military experience
>literally a squid girl
>canonically shy
>scarred tentacles
She's perfect enough to be ika musume's substitute if need be.

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228915


12 page pdf for LC-39A EIS

Image not available


Space Station sky....jpg

Anonymous No. 16228916

gay little modules are a waste of time and money

Anonymous No. 16228921

Met the guy on the right here. He came to our school. Pretty neat.

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228922
>Starlink is available in Sierra Leone!

Anonymous No. 16228923


Anonymous No. 16228924

We need to be assembling 100 ton chunks

Anonymous No. 16228925

Could have done that if the US just bought Energia launches from Russia in the 90's

Anonymous No. 16228927

Next one will also cost >100 billion but we will actually get our money’s worth.

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228928


Anonymous No. 16228929

Starship hardware seems to slow. Their door didn't work, and it wasn't ready to retry for the next flight. And that's the money maker. It should take a long time to make propellant transfer docking stuff and I don't think anyone sleuths have photographed pathfinders for them

Anonymous No. 16228931

he probably means a landing with a recovery

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228937

God this is so ugly

Image not available



Artemis3 No. 16228938

Okay, removing that one off the checklist...the HLS never returns (of course) and the consensus seems to be that the tanker will be expendable. Any vertical landing is part of the re-usable variant and not critical to Artemis III.

Anonymous No. 16228940

Wrong. Starship docking system has been built, NASA tweeted about it recently.
Just need to add a fluid interface and whatever method of settling and transferring prop they've decided on.

Anonymous No. 16228941

What vehicle are these engines for?

Anonymous No. 16228943

Not gonna happen. Ship to booster ratio needs to stay approximately the same or you're not making it to orbit.

Anonymous No. 16228945

>consensus seems to be that the tanker will be expendable
it won't. they're not gonna expend 10 ships when landing has literally already worked that'd be stupid.

Anonymous No. 16228948

MLV and Antares 3

Anonymous No. 16228949

>35 engines on superheavy
based throoostmaxxer

Anonymous No. 16228951

I believe it would be more accurate to say that reusability is not on the mission critical path, although if the capability exists it will be used
I find it likely that with the current trajectory the capability will exist

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228954

not space flight

Anonymous No. 16228955

>catch tower
I don't understand this catch tower meme.
Now the booster is not needs to be put on an SPMT and all this extra complexity.
They can practice catches at Boca are they expecting this many crashes?

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228958

>35 engines on booster
>9 engines on Starship

Anonymous No. 16228959

>changing the checklist rather than checking off items that were completed in older versions of your checklist
doesn't the fact that you have to keep changing your list of mission-critical milestones indicate that you have no idea what's mission-critical and what isn't and nobody should pay attention to your infographics?

Anonymous No. 16228960

It might just be some regulatory requirement to make Starahip launches out of the cape happen

Image not available


xdownloader G5QE5....webm

Anonymous No. 16228963


Anonymous No. 16228964


Anonymous No. 16228966

>that quick flash of green
It's a beautiful thing to see anons

Anonymous No. 16228968

Booster will revert to carbon fiber structure when design is really nailed down.
Nobody can pass on free mass efficiency and it doesn't get nearly as hot as Ship.

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228970
>Checking in on Launch Complex 39A at 35cm/pixel with @umbraspace
>Captured just about 10hrs ago.

original pic is over 4mb

Anonymous No. 16228972

you need to save 10kg of dry mass on the booster to gain 1kg of payload in orbit. it's almost certainly not worth the trouble.

Anonymous No. 16228973


Anonymous No. 16228975

shut up fag

Anonymous No. 16228976

Yes I love gutter oil, concentration camps, building collapses and a low trust society. China is so much better

Anonymous No. 16228977

So minor damage then.

Anonymous No. 16228979

European private companies are HIGHLY capable, when permitted to operate. But any European quasi-government endeavor is destined to be an absolute boondoggle.

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228982

Anonymous No. 16228984

jump scare

Anonymous No. 16228986

> As Starship slows down during its
landing approach, a sonic boom would be generated.

Anonymous No. 16228988

yeah? shuttle did the same thing

Anonymous No. 16228989

Building collapses are pretty funny so long as I'm not in one.

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228990


Anonymous No. 16228991

This has to be the most tedious job in the program.

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228993


Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228994

muh turtles oh no

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228995

Anonymous No. 16228996


Image not available



Anonymous No. 16228998

Anonymous No. 16229001

>ahh finally I've got the last tile affixed, a job well done
>wait a minute, boss is calling

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229002

Per the EIS
>Super Heavy is expected to hold up to 4,100
metric tons of propellant and Starship up to 2,600 metric tons of propellant.
Maximum lift-off thrust of the launch vehicle is anticipated at 103 meganewtons1
(MN). Starship would have a maximum lift-off thrust of approximately 28 MN.
Those numbers are close to the original ITS estimates, glad to see that there's some thought behind the final design.

Anonymous No. 16229006

>Valeri Polyakov
Imagine spending 15 consecutive months stuck in MIR yikes

Anonymous No. 16229009

I'll do it if they let me go up alone for that long. Also I will screen calls from the ground.

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229010
>Amid Flight 5 preps SpaceX readies Second Tower Construction | SpaceX Boca Chica

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229012

does it have anything about the environmental injustice of a rocket that's ugly because it's so skinny and the disproportionate cognitive burden placed on autists who have to look at it?

Anonymous No. 16229016

The faster you grow up and accept that high fineness ratio rockets are more aesthetic the sooner you’ll be happy

Anonymous No. 16229017

>no apparent damage
it's charred black

Anonymous No. 16229018

Please stop bro I just got over the nightmares from Event Horizon

Anonymous No. 16229019

painted black

Anonymous No. 16229020

Obviously the solution to this is to strap two more Starships onto the side as b**sters.

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229023

Starship 1 had a liftoff thrust of 7130 tons and a max thrust of 7590 tons (33X230t). So max thrust is 6.5% higher than liftoff.
Starship 2 has a liftoff thrust of 8240 tons, so we can assume its max thrust is probably 8775 tons. With 33 Raptor 3 engines, each engine probably produces 266 tons of thrust at maximum (266X33)
Starship 3 has a liftoff thrust of 10,000 tons, and a max thrust of probably about 10,650 tons. With 35 Raptor 3 engines, the thrust per engine at maximum is 304 tons each (304X33).

Anonymous No. 16229025

surface char is not damage

Anonymous No. 16229026

The catch tower is probably specifically for ship, it has a completely different method of being held than booster and would allow both ship and booster to land in a short period.

Anonymous No. 16229027


Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229030

it can't be good for the turtle hatchlings to have to look at this pencilneck trash either. they'll grow up with no sense of proportions.

Anonymous No. 16229033

the sooner they scrap this trash and invent the 18m variant the better.

Anonymous No. 16229037

Do you post here just to fuck with me?

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229042

I hate the elongated Starship

Anonymous No. 16229043

I don't know what that guy's deal is, obviously the correct diameter is 12 meters

Anonymous No. 16229047

Please don't post juggalos in this thread.

Anonymous No. 16229049

>Based on data released directly by SpaceX, an ASDS landing comes with a performance penalty of 30 to 35% while a land-based recovery (RTLS) requires approximately half the rocket's performance. Preliminary performance data for Falcon Heavy indicates a penalty of approximately 55% when recovering the vehicle's cores.
I really don't understand why SpaceX sold the oil rigs. They could have repurposed them as catching vessels.

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229050

If you're concerned about the implications of skinny starship for the future of spaceflight, NOW is the time to contact the FAA. Tell them that you believe the FAA should include a mitigation requirement that SpaceX develop wider-diameter tooling for any Starship launch license.

Anonymous No. 16229054

the oil rigs weren't suitable for conversion into a catching tower for various reasons, but it wasn't a total loss because ripping all of the rigging out of them was cheaper than buying that stuff elsewhere

Anonymous No. 16229057

New whiteness map just dropped.

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229060

How much volume did ITS have? Starship has 1000 m3 I think

Anonymous No. 16229062

>I don't think you know what "experience" is. The nation that has built and launched the most space stations are somehow not the ones with the most experience?
Experience gets lost over time as people age out of the industry or otherwise get dropped due to budget cuts; happened after Apollo

Anonymous No. 16229069

with a 17m diameter and a roughly similar geometry to starship it's probably around 3500

Anonymous No. 16229076


Its probably just a second launch tower. Might as well add a launch mount too.

Anonymous No. 16229081

So we're using this thread right? Damn /sfg/ doesnt even need my OP spergery to know when to split threads anymore

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229087

I love this little guy like you wouldn't believe

Anonymous No. 16229088

You will take your cheaply constructed, rugged launch hardware and you will like it.

Anonymous No. 16229091

Wonder how much of Antares first stage Northrup Grumman is developing, or if Firefly is just doing the engines.

Anonymous No. 16229094

Thanks king

Anonymous No. 16229104


Anonymous No. 16229106


Anonymous No. 16229113

What were the benefits of this system again?

Image not available


space capsule res....jpg

Anonymous No. 16229119

you aren't a sharks lunch

Anonymous No. 16229131

Pulls fewer Gs on reentry. Nicer on fragile cargo.

Anonymous No. 16229134

ugly ugly ugly ugly ugly ugly ugly ugly

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229136


Image not available


OIP (1).jpg

Anonymous No. 16229141


🗑️ Anonymous No. 16229151

Anonymous No. 16229156

next OP img

Anonymous No. 16229159

>first reply is a bitcoin scam
Fix your website elon

Anonymous No. 16229161

Maybe I am strawmanning here but I just KNOW the niggers within NASA will be quick to say
>ummm we are ready for Artemis III but SpaceX are holding us back
knowing full well the serpentine half-truth that this is

🗑️ Anonymous No. 16229167

shut up nigger

Anonymous No. 16229171

KEK. This is how 18m chads will win.

Image not available


iss columbus logo....png

Anonymous No. 16229175

it's funny to me that most of the graphic design found on and within the International Space Station is sort of soft-locked in the late 90s/early 00s ('y2k aesthetic' as the kids are calling it, these days) because that's when a majority of the hardware was built and sent up

Anonymous No. 16229178

what the fuck is Richard Branson's master plan here

Anonymous No. 16229180

The correct diameter is whatever can fit an NT engine with enough ISP to reach Titan

Anonymous No. 16229181

None or all, depending on how far along Northrop's inevitable acquisition of firefly is.

Anonymous No. 16229182

Nuclear thermal is gay gay gay gay gay gay gay gay GAAAAAAAY, and I am a tried and true nuclearfag

Anonymous No. 16229184

>Elon can blow up 20 trillion rockets testing them but when someone else does it it's bad

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229185

the only correct choice is nuclear pulsed

Anonymous No. 16229186

he already cashed out

Anonymous No. 16229187

>triple the isp with caveman technology
the only gay one is you

Anonymous No. 16229188

if you've got 12m+ diameters to work with it's a lot less impractical

Anonymous No. 16229190

Dreamchaser would be based if it were even remotely close to on schedule.

Anonymous No. 16229191

Glowing rock bad. Trust in burning stick!

Anonymous No. 16229193

I know you know the answer, and are just posting this because you equally enjoy cock down your throat and (you)s... but I am too autistic to let it slide without correcting you: the point of each dream chaser test (including the upcoming maiden flight) was/is to be a complete success, without failure.
The point of the SpaceX Starship campaign (including the hop tests through the most recent starship test and future tests) was/is to "do as good as possible, try not to blow up, if it blows up it is because we are learning as we go"

Anonymous No. 16229194

It's bad when any destruction of hardware sets your program back years. Wrecking a spacecraft should only delay you by a few months at the most and should be easily absorbed as a development expense. Anything else is poorly planned and even more poorly designed

Anonymous No. 16229198

Not really. The mass of your reactor is going to have to increase. The math is always trying to play catch-up. And yes, normally the utter advantages of NT would outweight the costs regardless... but Raptor has [arguably] already gotten good enough to make NT useless. Raptor is an insanely good chemical engine that will, more likely than not, only further increase in benefit (not even mentioning the extreme decrease in cost compared to a fucking NUCLEAR REACTOR; yeah how is that $/kg of shipment going for you?)
If you have the theoretical green light to use nuclear, and handwaiving any costs (i.e. "the government pays whatever I ask so who cares about making this thing cheap?") then the better alternative is pulsed fission fragment, or R&D into electric fission-fusion

Anonymous No. 16229199

looks cool
gentler g-forces for cargo
more crossrange capability
capable of evading point defense and strategic SAM fire during terminal phase

Anonymous No. 16229203

diameter doesn't matter once you're bigger than about a meter

Anonymous No. 16229204

If they took the flaps and fins off of the booster and starship, no heat tiles, zero cargo, full fuel, fully expendable I wonder if it could land in the moon
Just as a fuck you to SLS

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229209

Burning stick good, make plane go far!

Anonymous No. 16229214

>If you have the theoretical green light to use nuclear, and handwaiving any costs (i.e. "the government pays whatever I ask so who cares about making this thing cheap?") then the better alternative is pulsed fission fragment, or R&D into electric fission-fusion
it isn't because it doesn't exist. NTP is good because it's already been built. No chemical engine will get close to NTP. Faster travel times are needed for practical Mars travel

Anonymous No. 16229215

Who gives a fuck bro, would you fly your human mission to Mars on ion engines just because that 3,00 sec isp?

Anonymous No. 16229218

No because the thrust is too low. If it wasn't I would. I don't get your point

Image not available


1959 Time magazin....jpg

Anonymous No. 16229219

You get 900 Isp, double that of hydrolox, and for that you have to put up with hydrogen storage bullshit and all the other headaches from the reactor.

Image not available


Earliest rocket l....jpg

Anonymous No. 16229221

>Hold my grog

Anonymous No. 16229223

Who's the judge of what major damage is?
Sounds like sugar coating to me

Anonymous No. 16229224

You can use other fuels

Anonymous No. 16229228

And then deal with an isp that's a lot lower than ~900s.

Anonymous No. 16229230

That was exactly my point. The thrust-to-weight of NT engines is awful. There are practical realities that can make good designs on paper bad in reality.
Hydrolox is similarly championed for high isp but look at the tradeoffs. Low volume fuel requires massive tanks, blah blah blah... in the end, methalox becomes a way better alternative because a variety of factors end up changing the game. Same thing with NT. It has a lot of advantages; it has a lot of DISadvantages that make it suck ass. And chemical engines are almost rendering them completely useless as they catch up in other categories (cost, thrust, higher and higher isp obv not as high as NT but still getting better nontheless, reusability and ease of maintenance, readily available fuel sources such as CH3 and O2 that are probably going to get spammed into space for the next 100+ years around Earth + Moon + Mars + Asteroid Belt, etc.)

Anonymous No. 16229234

ummm he is literally the chief engineer sweaty

Anonymous No. 16229235

>(strong meaning what exactly is not known)
He immediately said 'half as likely to crack' afterwards so strong in the structural sense.

Image not available


ntr isp co2 ch4 etc.jpg

Anonymous No. 16229236

Yeah but then your Isp drops to the chemical range or just above. If your reactor is tolerant of lots of propellant types its a different story because then ISRU could tip the balance in its favor. Boosting to Ceres with hydrogen and coming back with water as reaction mass for example.

Anonymous No. 16229239

Taking from the Starlab playbook

Anonymous No. 16229240

>You get 900 Isp, double that of hydrolox, and for that you have to put up with hydrogen storage bullshit already have to deal with hydrogen storage with hydrolox, because hydrolox uses hydrogen as fuel. ??

Anonymous No. 16229241

"Standard pad maintenance" as seen after flights:
>paint, QD refurb, launch clamps, prop hose change
"Minor" damage:
Raptor powered unplanned pad excavation
"major" damage:
It's gone, FUBAR

Anonymous No. 16229244

i just don't see what the downside of methane NTRs is if they still beat out hydrolox by 150s+

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229245

rocketlab posting cope

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229247

>The thrust-to-weight of NT engines is awful

stop basing NTP mass on NERVA

Anonymous No. 16229249

People are scared of nuclear. It's disgusting.

Anonymous No. 16229250

Blue Origin is designing your next engine :)

Anonymous No. 16229251

This is actually hilarious because it shows how far along spacex is

Anonymous No. 16229254

>Stoke posts FFSC hot firing
>Firefly posts an engine with many hot fires
>Hobbits post their bootleg BE-4 that hasn't fired once

Anonymous No. 16229255

German is a funny language. Side note, are they allowed to like von Braun or do they pretend he doesn't exist?

Anonymous No. 16229256

Day late and soon to be a dollar short

Anonymous No. 16229258

BWxT and Blue might both start with the same letter but are not the same company.

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229259
>IFT-4 and the Future of Starship: All You Need to Know (with @scottmanley and @MarcusHouse )

Anonymous No. 16229261

*Spacex, for the Pentagon

Anonymous No. 16229267

more like half as likely to smoke crack hehehehe FREE MY NIGGA H

Anonymous No. 16229269

who is the non balde dude?

Anonymous No. 16229271

Kino. Imagine seeing this when you look up.

Anonymous No. 16229275

Begone pedo

Anonymous No. 16229276

Doesn't really matter anyway. Any chemical engine also needs to deal with boiloff. Difference is it needs to not boil off for 9 months instead of 3 on a trip to Mars. That adds a lot of mass

Image not available


LOX-Augmented Nuc....jpg

Anonymous No. 16229278

Hydrogen storage for missions where you have to keep tanks full for months until you make the insertion burn at Mars/Callisto/wherever is a huge challenge. Its not like doing TLI a few hours after launch like Apollo did.

Anonymous No. 16229281

the tail looks like a guy with a missing tooth when an engine is out

Anonymous No. 16229282

Thrust to weight is not bad enough to make the spacecraft impractical for human spaceflight. The whole trip would be much shorter so I'm not sure what point you're making.

Anonymous No. 16229283

Starship can do chemical three month Mars transfers

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229284

What the ball do?

Anonymous No. 16229285

No it can't. What do you gain from just making things up?

Anonymous No. 16229286

just shut the fuck up troll.

Anonymous No. 16229287

just don't do insertion burns, easy

Anonymous No. 16229289

Starship can do one week transfer

Anonymous No. 16229291

7 km/s is plenty to do short transfers, anon, especially if you aerobrake instead of doing an insertion burn

Anonymous No. 16229292

especially especially if you set off from NRHO instead of LEO

Anonymous No. 16229294

starship has enough delta v to do a standard honman transfer and land and that's it. That will take about 8.6 months. So what are you smoking

Anonymous No. 16229295

do not do this it makes mustard gas

Anonymous No. 16229296

the cost looks a lot worse due to inflation.

Image not available


Nuclear Powered I....jpg

Anonymous No. 16229298

Downside is not being able to go near the engine once its been used because the decay products are too gamma spicy

Anonymous No. 16229299

youre baiting and also gay.

Anonymous No. 16229300

>single use paint
What an innovation

Anonymous No. 16229304

why doesn't elon use the diamonds from his mines to make an unbreakable launch mount?

Anonymous No. 16229307

diamond is the strongest metal, but doesn't have the highest heat tolerance.

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229308

standard Hohmann transfer to Mars is like 3.6 km/s, anon
Starship has 7 km/s of delta V
please stop lying

Anonymous No. 16229310

it needs to land though dickhead

Anonymous No. 16229312

Radiation is the biggest scam in history.

Anonymous No. 16229314

you need what, 700 m/s for that?

Anonymous No. 16229315

>makes claims about delta v
>posts porkchop c3 chart as if that proves anything
just as expected from an ignorant muskrat shill

Anonymous No. 16229317

It can, are you retarded?

Anonymous No. 16229320

where's the lie? You literally just agreed with me

Image not available


shattered diamond.jpg

Anonymous No. 16229321

Yep, they can shatter easily from thermal abuse. Also it was an emerald mine, not diamond mine, that Musk's father had an investment in.

Anonymous No. 16229322

measures wind speed

Anonymous No. 16229323

>Musk is going to get there 2x faster and do a 24km/s areobrake into a precision landing at the land site
I simply don't believe this

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229325

C3 is directly convertible to delta v from LEO if you're not a brainlet
I'm currently trying to figure that equation out but uh

Anonymous No. 16229326

this chartmakes no fucking sense. you postd one for the moon not for mars.

Anonymous No. 16229327

yeah GG ez no re
it says "earth mars ballistic transfer trajectories 2031" right there up top, anon

Anonymous No. 16229328


Anonymous No. 16229329

it's pretty easy to do when you have an 18m diameter

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229330

>Elon simply can't
Gee whiz, never heard that one before

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229332

Anonymous No. 16229334

That interstage would crunch in on itself from the sheer thrust

Anonymous No. 16229335


Anonymous No. 16229337

I'm not a bling musk hater but just assuming incredible capabilities without actually seeing testing is retarded sorry. The current iteration of starship will get there in 8 months like everyone else

Anonymous No. 16229338

what the fuck is that?!

Anonymous No. 16229339

probable frogposter

Anonymous No. 16229340

It's basic physics buddy boy

Anonymous No. 16229341

some kind of broccoli

Anonymous No. 16229343

Hey afros are cute

Anonymous No. 16229347

Standard transfer take around 3.6m/s so I'm not sure what physics you practiced. Even if you burn 100% of starships fuel that's still over 4 months of travel

Anonymous No. 16229351

>Teledyne Brown Engineering, the prime contractor on the project, along with several small business partners, has worked to design and build the Launch Vehicle Stage Adapter (LVSA), a highly engineered and weight optimized piece of spaceflight hardware. LVSA provides the fundamental structural strength required to withstand the launch loads and the maximum dynamic pressure (max q). It also provides the critical separation system used to separate the core stage of the rocket from the second stage, which includes the astronauts in the Orion crew vehicle. The cone-shaped adapter is roughly thirty feet in diameter by thirty feet tall and consists of sixteen aluminum-lithium 2195 alloy panels.
If SpaceX can't build something better than these clowns, human spaceflight is doomed

The sad thing is this rocket would still cost something like $1.5B

Anonymous No. 16229356


Anonymous No. 16229358

its not that easy in space. please understand.

Anonymous No. 16229359

Who cares? They can chill out for eight months.

Anonymous No. 16229360

>Standard transfer
Uh oh, stinky!

Anonymous No. 16229361

your dad, my pussy, NOW.

Anonymous No. 16229365

don't quote me on this but [math]\Delta v = \sqrt{2 \frac{\mu}{r} + C_3} - \sqrt{\frac{\mu}{r}}[/math], assuming you're starting from a circular earth orbit with an altitude of 0.

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229369

i don't want to hear any bellyaching about how NTRs don't have enough thrust after artemis I did TLI on a single rl-10

Anonymous No. 16229370

How come the Chinese video sites have more relevant content than the US ones on Starship? Like what the fuck? Youtube is full of bot channels when you search Starship and lot of negative takes. The chinese one seems to be following pretty closely to the development and lot of cheers on that.

Anonymous No. 16229375

/sfg/s thoughts on Stoke, Vast, Firefly and Gravitics?

Anonymous No. 16229376

yeah because they're trying to steal their technology

Anonymous No. 16229377

1) Not real company until they start flying.
2) Interested in Stoke/Vast, other 2 are meh

Anonymous No. 16229378

deserves to make it but who knows, definitely gonna make it, gonna make it but they're gonna turn to shit in the process, not gonna make it

Anonymous No. 16229381

cool but I don't see the business case
small sat meme
same as vast but based that they want to launch on starship

Anonymous No. 16229382

when musk says its a strech goal to reach uranus is he trolling?

Anonymous No. 16229385

Its a stretched goal, aka long term stuff.

Anonymous No. 16229386

i'm pretty sure what elon means is that it's gonna take some real stretching to hit the tight entry corridor for uranus

Anonymous No. 16229387

Firefly has been doomed to irrelevance as soon as they decided to partner with Northrup instead of doing their own thing, Polyakov and Markusic were just the nail in the coffin.
Stoke is exciting and real and given what they've done they can credibly get the investment needed to make Nova fully and rapidly reusable.
Vast and Gravitics are cool but I fear profitability is a long way out for orbital destinations, maybe too long for a startup to survive.

Anonymous No. 16229388

Hey retard Vast is launching on Starship too. Just their later Havens

Anonymous No. 16229389

vast has somehow managed to pull in some actual contracts with actual customers. gravitics hasn't.

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229391

Speaking of
>Vast signs with The Exploration Company for second Haven space station cargo services

Anonymous No. 16229392

I think it's a half-truth (i.e. "hopefully the long-term future of 18m+ Starship is going to every planet from Mercury to Pluto and even beyond") but in this instance he was more just making a joke about le funny butt planet XD

Anonymous No. 16229393

>The Exploration Company
>SpaceX: Space Exploration company

Anonymous No. 16229397

Stoke is proving that propulsion is a lot easier than previous generations were led to believe, and that's a very good thing. They're also the only group designing a launch vehicle for an industry defined by Starship instead of one defined by Falcon 9.

Vast is doing good work taking back market share from Thales Alenia and is likely to claim the first commercial space station prize that everyone was expecting to go to Axiom. If they can mass produce small-module stations that be launched cheap on Falcon they have a lot of possibilities they can follow.

Firefly is doing good work keeping Northrop Grumman just relevant enough to still exist in the industry, but doesn't seem to have much ambition beyond serving specific government needs. They'll never prosper, especially with Alpha being out lifted by Stoke's Nova, but you can survive on intermittent high-price DoD contracts.

Gravitics has great ambition but they're going to run into problems relying on a launch vehicle that hasn't quite figured out how it wants to handle its payload doors.

Image not available


Screenshot 2024-0....png

Anonymous No. 16229403

Well, Musk?

Anonymous No. 16229404

>Engine install & leak checks complete
>Test stand infrastructure checks complete, incl. LNG/LOX system flow tests
>Engine and stand operations validated
>Next up: Engine firing dry runs
So fuck all basically and you just posted this because Stoke had a hot fire and people were noticing Archimedes is a strictly worse, less complex engine that's been in development for longer.
Holy fuck public companies suck and Peter Beck is at the very heart of this faggotry.
Trying his hardest to emulate oldspace then wondering why they're getting undercut LMAOO

Anonymous No. 16229410

you do not need any bell nozzle walls if you have infinite combustion chambers

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229411


Anonymous No. 16229413

Would an annular aerospike be better or worse?

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229417

What do we think of this? Waste of money? Who's even funding it?

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229418


Anonymous No. 16229419

Rocket lab used to be pretty much universally liked on /sfg/, from what I recall. It's so interesting to note the rapid decline in popularity. I always rooted for them as the underdog but around the third redesign of Neutron it became apparent that things were stagnating

Anonymous No. 16229422

If they're not living at 2 bar at least then it's totally worthless

Image not available


starship v4.png

Anonymous No. 16229426


Anonymous No. 16229427

Ultimately the people who sign up for these things are major LARPers but I certainly do not blame them. I would absolutely participate in one, but they usually require masters/PhD degrees just to be considered.
I think they are useful though. You can't really waste time putting your real astronaut corps in long-duration missions like these. And spending money on good candidates who can accurately simulate months/years in a confined base teaches you little tricks and tips that will be needed on actual hardware you are designing for use with real astronauts

Anonymous No. 16229428

You sacrifice modularity, increasing cost of maintenance. Increases costs of time/installation. Increase costs of manufacturing since you cant produce deformed bells as easily as you can a proper bell shaped with a machine and slows down manufacturing.

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229429

Propellant is stored in the balls.

Anonymous No. 16229432

the love of the crowd is forever a fickle thing and once he started complaining about spacex undercutting electron with rideshares he stopped being the loveable hobbit larping as a mini-elon

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229436


Anonymous No. 16229438

Now hold on a moment, let Elon cook.
Erectship only looks dumb in cargo variation because it's featureless and bizarre.
But could Erectship serve as the Space Shartle orbiter's proper successor?

Anonymous No. 16229439

Nah it was when he SPACed and the whole company turned ever more conservative such that number doesnt go down.

Anonymous No. 16229440

It can land at any nearby runway. Plus, it's like the space shuttle that was supposed to be, rather than the massive and chunky pile of disaster that still managed to perform quite well.

Anonymous No. 16229441

NTA but
>You sacrifice modularity
What do you even mean by this, can you provide an example?
>increasing cost of maintenance
>Increases costs of time/installation
Whaaaat, you are just speculating. Who cares if it takes two more hours to install these wacky engines... for a reusable booster that's NEGLIGIBLE when it's awaiting flight and/or flying most if its life span
>Increase costs of manufacturing since you cant produce deformed bells as easily as you can a proper bell shaped with a machine and slows down manufacturing
I am not sure how Raptors are manufactured, but there are some rocket engine bell manufacturing techniques where it would be negligible. Such as autoclave forming from individual pipes.
I am not saying its a good idea I guess I am just playing devil's advocate but in some stupid alternate universe where this engine was a good idea, it is not impossible to imagine a company like SpaceX being able to do it, and do it at a low cost at that

Anonymous No. 16229442

Turn on part-clipping in editor to achieve this

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229443


Anonymous No. 16229446

Just make it 40 engines and take the differential thrustpill

Anonymous No. 16229448

I'll praise them when they accomplish something notable

Anonymous No. 16229449

So no engine bells? except the outer engines?

Anonymous No. 16229451

>But could Erectship serve as the Space Shartle orbiter's proper successor?
no? shuttle was like 6:1 length:diameter and that was pretty consistent across all concepts studied. they understood the looks-good-flies-good principle as well as anyone. without proper wings you're going to want to go a little squatter, but v3 is already up to 7.8:1. i'm not going to let elon throw away his life's work over something this irritating to look at. 5.5:1 or fight.

Anonymous No. 16229452

The opposite

Anonymous No. 16229453

Wouldnt mind doing a Mars breeding experiment with her

Anonymous No. 16229457

I meant spiritual successor to shartle in the sense that all crewed starships can carry cargo.

Anonymous No. 16229461

opposite of what

Anonymous No. 16229463

SUSIE hands typed this

Anonymous No. 16229467

Yeah, I know how difficult it would be to change EVERYTHING about ss/sh in an upgrade to a wider dimeter, but its the obvious course of action.

Anonymous No. 16229472

Jerad Fogle

Anonymous No. 16229474

It's not happening because the longer rocket is not actually an issue.
Landers can stay reasonably short still until they have pads on moon and Mars.

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229475

10 more years?

Anonymous No. 16229478

felon husk. completely unironically.

Anonymous No. 16229481

frog x cirno

Anonymous No. 16229483

>10 more years
he literally said so

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229499
>These two angles of ESA and JAXA's EarthCare are our first images of the satellite moments after it successfully deployed its solar panel in orbit. Identification means mission success

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229500

looks like when spacex finlly make a reusable launch pad it will have a flame diverter

Anonymous No. 16229504

source my vague screenshot no context

Anonymous No. 16229506

block III ship has 6 rvacs

Anonymous No. 16229508

hi there. was the moon landing an hoax?

Anonymous No. 16229512

I find that most of the evidence “against” it can be dismissed by even just moderate digging. That is to say; it’s more likely it actually happened than not. You would have to subscribe to the fact that even the Soviets were in kahoots to lie about everything ‘beyond the firmament,’ and that’s just too retarded to accept, sorry

Anonymous No. 16229513

>mars colony
what is it with normies calling everything interstellar or "intergalactic"?

Anonymous No. 16229516

I believe she's saying it looks like the movie interstellar for the sake of the youtube algorythm

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229519
>Since the images showing the proposed layout for 39A Starship are such low resolution I decided to put together this Soar Earth Draw project, allowing you to interact with the map in high resolution over recent satellite imagery

Anonymous No. 16229522

kinda funny how the american space program practically halted after the operation paperclip scientists left NASA
and isn't it curious how we don't have the full documentation from Apollo?

Image not available


Pierre Mion Space....jpg

Anonymous No. 16229526

The fact that the first space plane/lifting body to reenter from LEO weighed 78 tons rather than 5 tons is insane

Anonymous No. 16229527


Anonymous No. 16229531

>>16229522 which documents are missing?

Anonymous No. 16229533

Impossible to late

Anonymous No. 16229534

NTP isn't particularly fast

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229536
>More detail pics of Tianlong-3 first stage.
>Will Arrive at hot fire test site at 0613.
>Hot fire test at end of June
>Need to go back to assembly factory to test with second stage at early July
>Ready to be shipped to Wenchang at end of July

Anonymous No. 16229537

>they have a urinal
i was jus thtonking, surely on the moon youwould get DIABOLICAL splashback? there would be PISS EVERYWHERE whenever you urinate in the toilet

Anonymous No. 16229538

the voices in my head told me we can't actually make more F-1 engines, not having the notes or the brains of the engineers who worked on them

Anonymous No. 16229539

>vast has lots of jobs available
>see gorillions of jobs listed

Anonymous No. 16229542

science fiction has brainedwashed into thinking space travel is infinitely easier than it is. even if we end up having a small colony on mars that's all it will ever be, it won't be self sustaining. and even if by miracle it managed to be that would be the maximum extent of our space travel. anything else is completely out of reach. we will sooner live in virtual reality

Anonymous No. 16229543

>it wont be because i said so
Show math

Anonymous No. 16229546

surely they would have a vacuum system to make things go the right way, not unlike the iss

Image not available


rocketdyne M1 eng....jpg

Anonymous No. 16229549

air-breathing superheavy when?

Anonymous No. 16229554

it does kinda upset me to think that now that everyone knows you can cluster 30+ raptors and it'll be fine that we're probably never gonna see F-1/RD-170-sized engines again

Anonymous No. 16229555

blind hope cope

Anonymous No. 16229561

this is way too many real jobs and not enough jobs that i could conceivably qualify for

Anonymous No. 16229563

any serious colonist would consider applying for one of these missions

Image not available


download (4).jpg

🗑️ Anonymous No. 16229567

shes mean to frogs :(

Image not available


rocketdyne M1 eng....jpg

Anonymous No. 16229570

Anonymous No. 16229571

>IT Support Specialist L1: $26.98-$32.97/hour

Anonymous No. 16229574

The seether recoils at progress, and gets angry at those with more ambition that he possesses.
Many such cases!

Anonymous No. 16229579

SSME got similar numbers to the advanced engine other than being way smaller. is the advanced air cycle just skylon or what?

Anonymous No. 16229581

is this what delusion sounds like? I think it might be

Anonymous No. 16229604

i think we are doomed bros
no way we make it off this rock before society collapses, have you seen the absolute state of children? 1 in 9 have adhd now lmao

Anonymous No. 16229607

plastics will be banned on mars, use of which will always be punished by immediate death

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229609

SN15 Starship + IFT 4 booster

Anonymous No. 16229618

launches will be banned to save the climate. no way soacex could get away with multiple superheavy launches a week.

Anonymous No. 16229624

>launches will be banned to save the climate
this is unironically going to happen

sage No. 16229625

I have a suspicion that they'll use carbon neutral methane despite a higher price specifically so this doesn't happen. There's a startup that made real progress towards that

unsage No. 16229629

Whoops forgot to change my name
No way man, they swapped to methane for a reason. By 2035 Starship will technically be solar powered

Anonymous No. 16229642

all plastic will be either imported from earth or manufactured whole cloth from methane
synplastic like this is a pain in the ass but once you've started it there's basically no reason not to do biodegradable plastics
that or the weird corn bioplastics that are biodegradable
either way it'll only be used for very specific high performance applications where plastic is required, like firearms
okay, but what about:
satellite reentries depositing aluminum and silicon in the upper atmosphere
Starship reentries creating mixed oxides of nitrogen in the upper atmosphere (a potent ozone depleteant)
uhhhhhhhhhh methane in the upper atmosphere? the exhaust is fuel rich and not all of it combusts and methane is a potent greenhouse gas

Anonymous No. 16229644

the public won't care
rocket bad
pollution bad
(it actually is bad since its above the atmosphere)

Anonymous No. 16229646

>biodegradable plastics
not actually a thing btw
fun fact, most things labeled as biodegradable are not UNLESS you bury them(being inside your body does not count either)

Anonymous No. 16229648

climate is a moot point now, solar is cheaper than any other energy source everywhere except Northern Europe with costs still going down rapidly, EVs are as good as ICE cars and the world population will start to decline in a few decades. Emissions per capita are already declining/flat and total emissions will start going down fairly soon

Anonymous No. 16229649

I guess we'll just need to engineer a plastic-eating microbe that eats nothing but plastic and unleash it upon the world

Anonymous No. 16229654

Manufacturing ability pretty much stops the day you stop manufacturing
If Maytag stops making a dishwasher model, in 2 years it would be impossible to remake the same dishwasher as fast. And that's something that has a full CAD
F1 has a bunch of hand crafted stuff. You can't even put that on paper if you try.

You would know this if you ever had any professional experience in any technical domain for like, 2 days

Anonymous No. 16229666

Do NOT let the public think anything beyond "carbon neutral".

Anonymous No. 16229668

Nature did it already with wood, I'm guessing we can speed up the process this time

Anonymous No. 16229670

yeah not by car standards. You're not thinking about it right

Anonymous No. 16229672

>we'll figure out how to send stuff to mars and then we'll just stop for no reason

Anonymous No. 16229681

i am sure that won't end in a disaster :)
not like we use plastic for basically everything in the medical industry or the food industry to keep thing sterile

Anonymous No. 16229686

in space no one can hear you jak

Image not available



🗑️ Anonymous No. 16229691

an essential piece of equipment for all survivors
working on my gyrocopter pilot outfit now
obviously I need to wear the survivor goggles and a bandana and wield a composite crossbow

Image not available



🗑️ Anonymous No. 16229698

fuck, I'm missing the helmet portion of the firefighter outfit
I also have the firefighter PCB but I'm wearing it because it's good

Anonymous No. 16229701

Wrong general, it would seem

Anonymous No. 16229703


Image not available


xdownloader Dr3xk....webm

Anonymous No. 16229709

Anonymous No. 16229711

It's hard to understate how true this is

Anonymous No. 16229715

Hope it ruds on the pad.

Anonymous No. 16229717

based loadout. fight the ayys.

Anonymous No. 16229718

>this is literally happening
wtf memes are real?

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229723

Image not available


xdownloader AGkIL....webm

Anonymous No. 16229727


Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229743


Anonymous No. 16229751

Wait, he told the truth???? He was RIGHT?>????

Anonymous No. 16229752

are you really gonna pretend we'll get to mars in the next 10 years?

Anonymous No. 16229755

there's a high chance

Anonymous No. 16229756

so worst case 2031 and anything beyond that proves elon perjured himself?

Anonymous No. 16229757

i haven't paid attention to spaceflight since ift1, what have i missed?

Anonymous No. 16229758

are u gonna pretend we wont

Anonymous No. 16229759

some absolute kino live reentries.

Anonymous No. 16229760

ift2, ift3, ift4

Anonymous No. 16229761

everyone thinks 2033 is the date for humans, but they'll likely send unmanned ships by 2029

Anonymous No. 16229762

Are you really going to pretend headlines are reality?

Anonymous No. 16229763

you poor souls. I envy your naivety

Anonymous No. 16229764

this isnt a nasa mission, there's a very high chance of death. you go into it knowing this.

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229765

funny, futures markets indicate only 18% of everybody thinks 2033 is the date for humans

Anonymous No. 16229766



Anonymous No. 16229768

The only reason this isnt crazy is because the HLS architecture overlaps so much with it. The delta V to the moon is higher, the only thing harder about mars is the long trip there and back, which isn't a problem when you have big mass. Really the biggest problem with the 10 year timeline is the orbits dictate the window. You could be ready in 10 years but the window could be 2 years away so EDS retards explode

Anonymous No. 16229770

if spacex had the hardware to go to mars there would be a nasa mission

Anonymous No. 16229775

i think so too but it'll have it's own requirements separate from the rest of the colony

Anonymous No. 16229779

NASA is run by congress and congress only understands SLS and jobs numbers
they'll setup a companion program to artemis around artemis 3

Anonymous No. 16229780

Based on rate of progress between IFTs, you seem extremely pessimistic about starship. Pretty sure they'll be able to handle cargo doors if they can handle orbital reentry and landing with half a flap buddy.

Anonymous No. 16229781

>mouth on top
>eyes on the bottom
what the fuck is that thing?!

Anonymous No. 16229784

"There are 33 lights"

Anonymous No. 16229787

gul elon tortures captain philip mason

Anonymous No. 16229789

>only built one shitty megaconstellation that changed terrestrial communication forever
>only built one shitty rocket that changed spaceflight forever
what an asshole!

Anonymous No. 16229792

a man who is upside down

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229794

>You will live to see Kino you can hardly imagine

Anonymous No. 16229795

A byproduct of information overload, in great excess of what evolution prepared people for.

Anonymous No. 16229797

this is false
otherwise it would be more common
children in the 1900s learned far more at school too

Image not available


gyro captain.jpg

Anonymous No. 16229798

Learn to speak snake

Anonymous No. 16229800

yeah, im caught up on the starship stuff mostly, but everything else im not
i have to say, the progression from starship is better then i expected. i didnt expect any successful soft touchdown of starship, damaged or otherwise, until 2025

Anonymous No. 16229802

First cargo flights in 2029, second round of cargo flights in 2031, and manned landing in 2033.
very reasonable timeline. people forget that 9 years ago spacex hadnt even landed falcon 9 once successfully, or launched a single crew into orbit. or even really started on starship development. 9 years is a very long time for spacex.

Anonymous No. 16229804

a significant portion (>35%) of those people probably dont even know starship exists, so its probably pretty biased

Image not available


starship fleet2.jpg

Anonymous No. 16229806

Realistically you could throw cargo at Mars right now and probably be alright putting it into orbit for later use. Yes, using Starship as-is.

Anonymous No. 16229807

>nasa goes to mars
ok but which would be the second american government agency to go? noaa? space force? usgs?

Anonymous No. 16229810

and if there's one thing /sfg/ has been consistent about over the years it's unbiased and reliable predictions about spacex's timetables

Anonymous No. 16229813

Starlink dish prices drop 50%($300) for limited time deal for those in certain states. If any of you fucks are on the fence and want a spare starlink dish.

Anonymous No. 16229816

either the IRS or BATFE
gotta stop those machine gun conversion devices on mars

Anonymous No. 16229818

sfg is just as known for people who make predictions about how starship will never do xyz. i remember when people were saying the whole program was doomed after sn1 failed during cryo testing and that they would never even static fire

Anonymous No. 16229819

you could, but i think spacex will mostly be focusing on artemis and starlink stuff until artemis III. i suppose its possible they'll send one starship to mars in the 2026 window to test Mars EDL and maybe land some extra cargo ahead of the 2029 window, but its not necessarily going to happen.

Anonymous No. 16229820

Do you really perceive this place as having as many pessimists about starship as optimists?

Anonymous No. 16229823

ive been here for over 4 years.
yes. most threads ive been in, say one optimistic thing about starship and you get 2-3 replies telling you you're wrong. if you say something pessimistic, people will probably agree with you.

Anonymous No. 16229826

those people are trolling and/or tourists

Anonymous No. 16229830

I'm incredulous but I'll try to pay attention next time anon

Anonymous No. 16229832

Next flight the engine relight test and door test are going to work, and starship will re-enter with no serious damage. I don't know when the tower catch will happen because the booster if the booster doesn't like something it suicides in the ocean, but if the booster decides to go for it, it will work because it can land on the grid fins.

Anonymous No. 16229842

pulling up a random /sfg/ with some future predictions from july 2020:
>I can see an unmanned flyby in 2022, I can't imagine a manned landing until 2024 though.
>I think we're not going to see reliable orbit and recovery before 2023-2024, but that Artemis and Dear Moon will likely happen in 2024-2025... Realistically, it's probably going to be cargo Starships on one-way trips prepositioning materials in 2026 followed by a manned launch in 2028, likely with intentions to stay.
>I'd be shocked if we see anything more than an unmanned flyby/landing in 2024... I doubt we'll see a truly reliably recoverable LEO starship before 2022, and it probably won't make a manned flight before 2023.
>We'll be lucky if starship gets to orbit by 2022, let alone to mars.
>We'd be lucky if starship got to orbit in early 2021. It'll probably get to orbit in mid or late 2021
of the anons making concrete predictions, 80% were wildly too optimistic. 0% were too pessimistic. that basically comports with my memory of the time.

Anonymous No. 16229857

Anybody who knows a little bit of spaceflight knows you have to be pessimistic to be realistic, thats why I laugh at muskrats that talks about starship to mars or shit like that, they seem too inocent. Now were in mid 2024 and starship didnt get to orbit yet, but we dont have to be mean to muskrats, they start watching spaceflight in 2018

Anonymous No. 16229864

So he tries to keep his sanity
With the help of his robot friends

Anonymous No. 16229881

There was a 2 year delay due to EIS

Anonymous No. 16229890

and fortunately this is the last time ever that an unforeseen delay will push everything back by years

Anonymous No. 16229891

>5th helium leak detected on star liner
Lol, what a POS

Anonymous No. 16229895

Pointless to add that into predictions, its unkowable

Anonymous No. 16229900

USGS is not a bad prediction. They make maps of everything, even the Moon and Mars.

Anonymous No. 16229916

>you don't get it, the predictions are SUPPOSED to have a wildly overoptimistic bias

Anonymous No. 16229919

Yes. Those predictions should be mandates too.

Anonymous No. 16229920

not that wild

Anonymous No. 16229922

I mean you could put all kinds of retarded shit in there
what if there is ww3? What if a asteroid induced tsunami wipes out the whole east coast?
What if SpaceX gets nationalized and the project gets cancelled?
of course things could happen but then you just adjust the timelines for these unforseen things

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229931
>All of our users are on the commercial Starlink constellation,” Hopper explained. DoD has “unique service plans that contain privileged capabilities and features that are not available commercially.”
>She noted the flat-panel user terminals that CSCO purchases from SpaceX are designed to be compatible with commercial Starlink and government-owned Starshield satellites. “The terminal is capable of roaming on the Starlink and the Starshield constellation,” Hopper said.

Anonymous No. 16229940

Total Muskrat Domination

Anonymous No. 16229945

don't forget covid fucked up the world way more than anyone realized back then

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229947
>WASHINGTON — NASA confirmed that Boeing’s CST-100 Starliner spacecraft has suffered a fifth, although minor, helium leak in its propulsion system as engineers work to prepare the vehicle for its return to Earth next week.

Anonymous No. 16229961

NASA should unironically cancel the program. If Boeing can't get their shit together, they are just flying a literal death trap. I understand why they want dual launchers, but for the love of Christ, try someone else. They had no qualms allowing SpaceX fly alone for four years. What's another four?

Anonymous No. 16229970

reminder that bobendoug's mission went so well that it got extended to 63 days

Anonymous No. 16229976

The hell are they going to accomplish with just 100 sats? Will they be connected to the greater network?

Anonymous No. 16229978


Image not available



Anonymous No. 16229982

>engineers work to prepare the vehicle for its return to Earth next week
i got a bad feeling about this

Anonymous No. 16229986

hate to be the doomer but:
raptor doesn't work reliably
the heat shield doesn't work properly
they couldn't manage to make a door work

We're on schedule for a 2030 moon landing

Anonymous No. 16229991

Starship HLS doesn't need heat tiles

Anonymous No. 16229995

except we beta tested the moon for them 50 years ago.

Anonymous No. 16229998

Are they going to make ten expendable tankers?

Anonymous No. 16229999

But it requires reliable engines, it also requires multiple flight to fuel up. But really the engines are the biggest issue for Starship right now.

Anonymous No. 16230000

they probably will if nasa want to land on the moon asap

Anonymous No. 16230004

Like I have been saying, hypergolic HLS would have been superior

Anonymous No. 16230005

well yes.

Anonymous No. 16230008
















Anonymous No. 16230015

>you should build the wrong thing instead of the right thing
>engines are the biggest issue
no actually it's the heat shield as could be seen on the flight and was confirmed by elon to be the most important remaining issue

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16230016

Anonymous No. 16230022

For me, it's not the fineness ratio that bothers me, but the ratio between the stages. I feel like the booster should be longer compared to Starship. Aesthetically speaking

Anonymous No. 16230024

They can do the Artemis missions without the heatshiled, but not without the engines. Also they need to develop new engines just for the lunar landing.

Anonymous No. 16230027

You either build a fully reusable rocket or you don't.
That is the primary objective and that is how they're prioritizing it.
Next flight will Booster catch and Starship relight in orbit.
They have no intentions of flying HLS tankers expendably.

Anonymous No. 16230034

As far as we know, the tanker itself is expendable because it won't have flaps.

Anonymous No. 16230037

that sounds kind of unrealistic
the depot will be "expendable" i.e. not coming back to earth but why would the tanker be expendable? For Mars missions the tanker is going to be the ship that is flown most often

Anonymous No. 16230042

I shall submit my alternative method of catching/landing the booster and ship on Earth that's more reliable than the arm thing.

Anonymous No. 16230056

Sorry, I meant depot. My brain is fried from cooming.

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16230058

Anonymous No. 16230064

"Tis but a scratch" sounds like a cringy Electron mission name.

Anonymous No. 16230065

Header tanks as soda can is clever.

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16230067

Surely it's literally faster to just scrap it, and build a new one.

Anonymous No. 16230068

Do you think that well ever see a fairing version of Starship? How exactly does Vast plan on getting their shit into space on Starship given how big the modules are?

Anonymous No. 16230070

So does that mean raptors firing = starship-chan peeing??

Anonymous No. 16230072


Anonymous No. 16230076

Booster Raptor = braaaptor

Anonymous No. 16230082

she is drinking a liquid, the excreted fluid must be pee

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16230094

>Liquid => Combustion => Gas

Anonymous No. 16230112

new Artemis lunar spacesuit just dropped

Anonymous No. 16230118

https://archive ph/QQxPE

WSJ with the deets about Elon fucking female SpaceX employees

Anonymous No. 16230119


Image not available



Anonymous No. 16230121

WTF Starlink confirmed for UFO tech?

Anonymous No. 16230124

Fraudulent cancel culture trying to create fake shit.

Anonymous No. 16230125

Imagine looking up and seeing this coming directly for you

Anonymous No. 16230127

>elon was fucking prime teen pussy intern and put her on executive staff at spacex after she graduated as a reward

Anonymous No. 16230136

fradulent hitpiece as usual, even the woman herself disputes much of the bullshit and they say it here
she is the one that asked Musk to get dinner

Anonymous No. 16230138

>Former employees said that while she was a talented engineer, they found it odd that someone so junior was given such a high-profile role so close to the boss.
>After she arrived in California, Musk invited her for drinks and came on to her, touching her breast, friends said she told them at the time. One of them said the woman recalled Musk saying, “Oh, I’m so bad. I shouldn’t be doing this.”
>She told friends that she was unhappy at SpaceX, had no authority and had trouble getting executives to take her ideas seriously.

>She visited Musk at his home multiple times, as she struggled at work to establish herself, according to people familiar with the matter and friends she confided in.
>“He would text her, like a lot,” said one of the friends. When she didn’t respond to a nighttime invitation to come over to his house, Musk texted her name repeatedly, the friend recalled.
>When she still hadn’t responded, he wrote, “Probably best if we don’t see each other.”
>“Well I mean I think he broke up with me this morning. If I interpreted that last text ,” she wrote.
>“Why are so many of the men in my life so weiiiiirrddddd,” she wrote.

>She said in one of the affidavits that she and Musk texted frequently as she supported him through difficulties, including issues at Tesla and his divorce from actress Talulah Riley.
>He was married to Riley when the teen and Musk were in a romantic relationship years earlier. They divorced in 2016.

>On the few occasions that she went to Musk’s house, the woman said in one of the affidavits, they watched TV and talked. In the email, she said they watched anime and talked about the Tesla Model 3 production ramp up and the “technical future of humanity.”

Anonymous No. 16230139

Whats musks favorite anime?

Anonymous No. 16230142

>even the woman herself disputes much of the bullshit

Anonymous No. 16230143

If I was Elon I would

So much for SpaceX being a meritocracy.

Anonymous No. 16230144

the start of the article

Anonymous No. 16230147

Mass production series

Anonymous No. 16230150

probably some harem groomer show

Anonymous No. 16230152

They created thw whole russiagate and the pissgate with zero evidence. They created the whole covid lies about origin, efficacy, and funding. They created the whole cover up and lies about Hunter Biden laptop story.

Zerotrust in anything media says

Anonymous No. 16230157

>In the summer of 2013, a woman who reported directly to Musk left the company and later returned with a lawyer. She alleged that Musk had asked her on multiple occasions to have his babies, according to people familiar with the allegations.
>Musk, who has at least 10 children, has said that the world faces an underpopulation crisis and that people with high IQs should procreate. He has encouraged some of his employees to have children.
>But the woman at SpaceX declined Musk’s offer. She had continued working for Musk after he asked her to have his children, but their relationship deteriorated. Besides the baby allegations, Musk had denied the woman a raise and complained about her performance, according to people familiar with the matter.
>The woman received an exit package of cash and stock valued at more than $1 million, according to a person familiar with the agreement.

Image not available


elon sls lol.jpg

Anonymous No. 16230160


Image not available


elon preggos.jpg

Anonymous No. 16230165

Anonymous No. 16230166

>gwynne was triggered that a female spacex employee was alone with her husband so she tried to get HR to fire her immediately but elon wanted to keep her on

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16230167

damn what a creep. Reminds me a bit of Epstein's breeding ranch.

Anonymous No. 16230168

I believe all women

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16230172

Step aside Musk.

Anonymous No. 16230174

Fuck off, this juvenile gossip isn't spaceflight.

Anonymous No. 16230175

hitpieces have really ramped up
the vote for musks compensation package ratification ends today
kind of convenient timing don't you think?

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16230177

He might still get his $50B?

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16230178

What the fuck is that

Anonymous No. 16230180

If he gets $50bil, SpaceX gets $50bil. I hope he gets it

Anonymous No. 16230181

Rocket Lab or Locksneed could probably churn out a decent vehicle if funded

Anonymous No. 16230182

>elon fucked her too
but of course he did

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16230183

Imagine showing your rocket factory to THIS guy

Anonymous No. 16230184

why is his bitch such a mess? he could have got anyone.

Anonymous No. 16230185

it's the magical smiling negro of safety.

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16230186

We can only speculate.

Anonymous No. 16230187

Why do that when crewed dream chaser is pretty already finished?

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16230189

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16230190


Anonymous No. 16230192

Why are his engineers such a mess? He could've hired anyone.

Anonymous No. 16230197

well not right away, it will still continue in the courts

Anonymous No. 16230213

I wonder, out of passing curiosity and nothing else, if anyone ever compiled a list of compromised journos who write obnoxious propaganda like that?
>inb4 "you'd just list all journalists"
I know, I mean specifically in relation to anti-Musk/SpaceX hitpieces since those are on-topic.
Imagine certain writers getting "community notes" under every single one of their articles laying out their pattern of propaganda and who pays them.

Anonymous No. 16230216

Too many to list. Many are leftists, some are jist opportunists looking for one time payday, others bought into the EDS.

The bar for libel and defamation is high in the US so Musk cant do much about it

Anonymous No. 16230221

Institutional rot is there so its not just random gossipers, but also the editors. Media has no trust and no one trusts them anymore for this reason.

Anonymous No. 16230222


In case you're proposing some sort of Jewish conspiracy against elon

Anonymous No. 16230224

What the fuck is an /X/?

Anonymous No. 16230227

It's Elon's new board on 4chins

Anonymous No. 16230229

I never mentioned a specific group, but you did.

Anonymous No. 16230233

fuck that got me

Anonymous No. 16230236

Maybe he has a bimbo fetish.

Anonymous No. 16230239

>putin signed the ILRS agreement into law today
>construction is expected to be completed by 2036

Anonymous No. 16230242

I would be very disappointed if it takes china and russia that long.

Anonymous No. 16230259

Four more broken thrusters,
Three coding errors,
Two dead astronauts,
and another Boeing catastrophe!

Anonymous No. 16230264

I will be very surprised if they ever have hardware to look at, much less launch

Image not available


elon sign.jpg

Anonymous No. 16230265


Image not available


to think there is....webm

Anonymous No. 16230267

Realistically, assuming that Starliner does actually kill two astronauts, is it over for Boeing? Unironically, how can they recover?

Anonymous No. 16230269

How many passengers has Boeing killed over the years?

Anonymous No. 16230270

Can't they just land the capsule without astronauts in it.

Anonymous No. 16230274

at least 346

Anonymous No. 16230278

But then you've got two astronauts stuck in space

Anonymous No. 16230280

lmao thought this was the dragon failure picture.

Anonymous No. 16230281

I'd be surprised if they don't. China is the only other market right now where both companies and the government are seriously pursuing reusability.

Anonymous No. 16230282

That's exactly what happened with going to the moon.

Anonymous No. 16230284

Who will come back on dragon?

Anonymous No. 16230289

A non-issue. It's not like they are going to starve. Send up a Dragon with only two Astronauts. Send it back down with 4.

Anonymous No. 16230290

he's just like me!

Anonymous No. 16230294

Why can't the dragon be empty?

Anonymous No. 16230297

It'll take longer it's supposed to start construction in 26', which is even more unlikely than Artemis 3 by September 2026

Anonymous No. 16230307

That's probably true but I expect the new space race to pick up by 2030 and both artemis and the chinese moon missions will be in swing by then. After 2030 I expect accelerated timelines on both sides.

Anonymous No. 16230310

>by 2030
Why is Space so fucking slow. Wasn't spaceX supposed to be sending Starship around the moon by now.

Anonymous No. 16230314

>Why is Space so fucking slow
Nearly all global resources are not allocated towards spaceflight, but instead towards controlled wars for profit.

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16230324

Anonymous No. 16230326

Lack of competition, spacex is still the only company to manage propulsive landings of orbital class boosters.
It took the rest of the world an embarrassingly long time to figure out this is the future and it'll take a while before the rest catch up.
I expect china to actually have better prices than spacex due to this, theres a ton of chinese companies pursuing reusability and they can learn from spacexs mistakes by using methalox to bring down refurb costs farther than falcon 9 could manage.
Sorta like how china managed to make EVs cheaper than tesla thanks to high competition and learning from tesla.

Anonymous No. 16230329

COVID, BO and Starliner failures delayed Artemis by 2.3yrs. Not to mention how much time was wasted by the Obama and Trump administrations following the death of Constellation and Asteroid Redirect.

Anonymous No. 16230336

Been shitting on Boeing hard this entire thread bros.

Anonymous No. 16230338

It's not an emergency, Dragon has a capacity of 4. A two person team allows them to rotate out two additional crew members off the ISS, and NASA still gets part of a ride.

Anonymous No. 16230341

>Tesla has a product that would solve females fucking everything up
>doesn't develop it

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16230342

Anonymous No. 16230344

When are they planning to 10x raptor production

Anonymous No. 16230345

First they need to make it reliable then reduce the cost from $50 million per engine.

Anonymous No. 16230346

No one, literally not a soul, is going to launch on China that isn't China. Russian payloads will stay with Ruscosmos. European ones stay with Ariane and America, and America stays American and Ariane. Same goes with India. You might see a token payload from African countries, but no one is fucking launching on Chinese rockets that also isn't Chinese.

Anonymous No. 16230351

when raptor production rate is about to become the launch cadence limiting factor, it isn't one now as far as I know
they stopped mass producing raptors a while back
if I had to guess they probably have enough raptors stockpiled for the 4 remaining Starship v1/block 1 to launch
right now the limiting factor is engineering and labour to make modifications for the next launch and iterating/fixing stage 0
even if everything goes very well then they might not launch a v2 until next year

Anonymous No. 16230353

>No one, literally not a soul, is going to launch on China that isn't China
Brazil developed a bunch of satellites with china and they went up on long marches.
France put the apstar satellites on long marches.
Argentina put their nusats on long marches.
Egypt put their earth obs satellite on a long march.
Skysight satellites went up a long march and skysight is from the US.
They also sent up the einstein probe from esa.
Finally they put up paksat for pakistan.
But sure, besides all those unimportant places no one besides china uses chinese rockets.
This is only from the last 4 years btw and only on long marches.

Anonymous No. 16230355

>enough raptors stockpiled for the 4 remaining Starship v1/block 1 to launch
And that's a bad thing because this batch clearly doesn't work well.

Anonymous No. 16230361

>“Thought the Action is located approximately six miles from the closest nesting beach, the height of these towers has the potential to be seen by nesting sea turtles during the sea turtle nesting season.”

Abolish NEPA and kill all the turtles

Anonymous No. 16230362

they are still developing raptor and this batch works fine enough for the rest of the system to get tested and iterated upon

Anonymous No. 16230364

turtles getting mentally scarred by seeing pencilship

Anonymous No. 16230369

Anonymous No. 16230372

The last two flights had no engine outs on ascent on the booster, so that is encouraging. They can lose around 3 on liftoff and still get the upper stage to orbit. The other engines out are probably due to fuel slosh and other stresses caused by forces from the booster flip and descent

Anonymous No. 16230383

I also want to add to your post that to be fair to the first stage during IFT-4, it only lost one engine via RUD. We just know that the computers turned off that outer engine during initial ascent and that's all. Could it have exploded had it been allowed to burn? Maybe, but the margin for redundancy caused the computer to shut it down. If Starship didn't have that redundancy, the computer wouldn't have shut down the engine and it would have continued to burn until something happened, or didn't. What's interesting is that we know at least one engine exploded during descent during IFT-3 as well. The six that didn't relight during the flip were caused by debris, which has been solved. Or so it seems. But still, something caused an engine to explode on the way down twice now.

Anonymous No. 16230384

Last flight had a booster engine out on ascent and it literally did not matter. They probably could have lost one or two more without issue.

Anonymous No. 16230390

To clarify, I meant flights 2 and 3 had none out on ascent. The amount of engines they could lose is still only a handful at most though

Anonymous No. 16230408

I wouldn't want to fly on a starship until it's expected that all engines are working

Anonymous No. 16230410

The O2 mass flow of one raptor 2 is ~500 kg/s for a total of 16,500 kg O2/s for the booster. Air is slightly less than 1/4 O2, so we need 66,000 kg air/s. At sea level air is about 1 kg/m^3, so we need ~65,000 m^3/s of air flow. If the whole 9m cross sectional area of the booster was an inlet the air would have to be entering it at 1 km/s to achieve that.

Anonymous No. 16230415

nobody needede your gay math dickhead. just make it work.

Anonymous No. 16230423

And then bioengineer it to be incapable of mutating to take advantage of the abundant alternative energy sources around it everywhere, greatly improving its own reproductive fitness, right? R-r-right?

Anonymous No. 16230435





Anyways the towers are already built so they can fuck off

Anonymous No. 16230437

fiery but peaceful reentry in the near future

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16230442
>Polaris Dawn crew will FINALLY test long-awaited spacesuits in a month!

30min Jared Isaacman interview, the one which had the 12th July date clip earlier

Anonymous No. 16230444

engine would have to be compatible with wide range of velocities and air densities.

Anonymous No. 16230446

>shuts off random thrusters
>leaks helium everywhere
>refuses to elaborate

Anonymous No. 16230452

>is unable to leave because thrusters don't work

Anonymous No. 16230471

>“Elon is SpaceX, and SpaceX is Elon,”
Elon is spaceflight, and spaceflight is Elon
I envy the security crew whose job is to catch bullets meant for Elon

Anonymous No. 16230476



Image not available



Anonymous No. 16230478



Anonymous No. 16230482

>so many [...] men in my life
it seems she clearly understands her role in the world and what she's good for
why should anyone else treat her with more respect?

Anonymous No. 16230496

She's obliviously flirty lol, and likely slow. known many girls in tech exactly like this, they are cute little cocksleeves, to be sure

Image not available



Anonymous No. 16230545

we aim to please

Anonymous No. 16230551

Just wait until the Tahni attack, then we'll see some prioritization on space.

Anonymous No. 16230559

>She's obliviously flirty lol
do we have imagery of her?

Anonymous No. 16230661

It wasn't no reason. The reason was the ussr couldn't compete and the government hates spend money on things that aren't guns and isreal