Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 10:47:28 UTC No. 16257938

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yngaVQqrw-c

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 11:00:06 UTC No. 16257951

What are the differences in US space policy if we have Trump flavored potato vs Biden flavored potato?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 11:03:58 UTC No. 16257956

>>16257951
Not much I imagine, both will want a moon landing in their second term for prestige reasons so both have reason to accelerate artemis.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 11:05:35 UTC No. 16257959

>>16257956
>accelerate artemis

So they'll both cancel SLS and Orion?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 11:06:44 UTC No. 16257960

>>16257959
Congress won't let them do that.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 11:07:33 UTC No. 16257962

>>16257951
Not much. Trump is more likely to mooch off of spacex success occasionally for photo ops so he might bring more attention to it for better or worse.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 11:08:12 UTC No. 16257963

>>16257960
If it's all up to congress I don't see how a moon landing will happen by 2028.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 11:10:18 UTC No. 16257964

>>16257963
It's not all up to congress.
There are certainly things you can do to accelerate artemis that won't piss of congress.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 11:11:42 UTC No. 16257966

>>16257964
Maybe you could just have SLS/Orion do a mission to scrub shit off the side of ISS or something.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 11:13:50 UTC No. 16257967

>>16257951
We are getting at the point that the US goverment has to crack down hard on boeing and i feel like a trump admin is going to be a lot harder on them then a biden admin who will just sweep it all under the rug.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 11:13:54 UTC No. 16257968

Behold, the last sane Frenchman

>CNES chairman and CEO Philippe Baptiste has responded to Eumetsat's decision to ditch Ariane 6 in favour of Falcon 9, saying, “How far will we, Europeans, go in our naivety.”

https://europeanspaceflight.com/cnes-chief-responds-harshly-to-eumetsats-decision-to-ditch-ariane-6/

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 11:15:04 UTC No. 16257969

>>16257968
Him and Lori Garver should fuck

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 11:21:17 UTC No. 16257974

>>16257968
the leadership of eumetsat?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 11:24:28 UTC No. 16257976

>>16257968
How much longer can europe stick it's head in the sand about their space industry being the most garbage of the big 5?
Will india putting a man in space on their own rocket and capsule before europe be the wakeup call they need?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 11:27:56 UTC No. 16257978

>>16257976
I think it's not reasonable to include organizations with no space industry like russia or europe.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 11:29:38 UTC No. 16257979

>>16257976
I think it'll take nothing less than satelite owners complaining that launching on mandatory Ariane 6 rockets costs 10x as much as it should

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 11:29:50 UTC No. 16257980

>>16257978
Russia has the 3rd biggest space industry right now, what the fuck are you talking about?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 11:48:21 UTC No. 16257999

>>16257931
If it's not Boeing, I'm not going!

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 11:49:59 UTC No. 16258000

>>16257980
NTA but yeah they have no industry. Cope

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 11:50:39 UTC No. 16258001

>>16257999
shidd I fucked up the transparency, not deleting the get though

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 11:51:00 UTC No. 16258002

>>16257976
I'm going to be the contrarian here and defend ESA.
While the entire rocket side of ESA is peak old space coruption bullshit run by the ariana frogs and the vega pastaniggers, and the french having a massive monopoly on it all because of their spaceport on the equator.
ESA still is more efficient at doing more science&research in space per eurodollar then NASA.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 11:53:41 UTC No. 16258004

>>16258000
>supplied americans with engines for decades cause american engines were crap
>got american astronauts to the iss cause the shittle retire with no plan to re-place it
>built half the iss
>continually developing new rockets
>>no industry
stop posting retard-kun

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 11:54:53 UTC No. 16258005

>>16258002
>ESA still is more efficient at doing more science&research in space per eurodollar then NASA.
Faint praise when they do substantially less than america. About par with china.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 11:55:40 UTC No. 16258007

>>16258004
>b-but look at all these thing they did decades ago

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 11:55:57 UTC No. 16258008

>>16258004
So? Rhodesia and South Africa were once nice places. Are they that way now?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 11:56:13 UTC No. 16258009

>>16258005
Please stop talking if you dont know what your talking about.

🗑️ Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 11:57:14 UTC No. 16258010

>>16258004
disingenuous zigger cope holy shit hahahaha

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 11:57:46 UTC No. 16258011

>>16258009
euro malding lel

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 11:58:47 UTC No. 16258012

>>16258008
>Rhodesia and South Africa were once nice places.
No they weren't

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 11:59:47 UTC No. 16258013

>>16258012
Beter then the rest of black africa at least.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 12:02:47 UTC No. 16258016

I like to remind that if it was not for elon musk (a south african) brute forcing spaceX succes.
Americans would still be riding bitch on the soyuz and SLS and starliner would still be in development hell.
You should be gratefull to Elon musk and the good lads at spaceX for granting you the opportunity to be so smug about it all.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 12:03:47 UTC No. 16258017

>>16258000
Not sure what you"re on about. The still manufacture quite a lot of rockets and payloads. That's pretty much the definition of having an industry.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 12:03:49 UTC No. 16258018

>>16258016
Would.
And judging by the amount of kids he has so would Elon.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 12:03:51 UTC No. 16258019

>>16258013
which does not in anyway mean they were nice places

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 12:05:45 UTC No. 16258021

>>16258016
I wonder what south africans think when they look at Elon. Do they wish things had gone differently?
>>16258010
you're baiting, retarded and/or new.
Russia's space program is declining rather quickly and doesn't seem capable of much beyond riding on the coattails of soviet successes, but they're still a major player because of that legacy.

🗑️ Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 12:08:10 UTC No. 16258022

>>16258021
>Do they wish things had gone differently?
im sure most white people there would prefer not to have communist niggers ruining the place.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 12:09:25 UTC No. 16258023

>>16258021
>I wonder what south africans think when they look at Elon. Do they wish things had gone differently?
I think most black south africans hate elon musk by the looks of how bad the boers have it right now over there.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 12:11:25 UTC No. 16258026

>>16258023
I remember seeing of video of this black south african woman saying Musk made her proud of her country.
Does anyone remember that?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 12:30:12 UTC No. 16258045

>>16258016
Lel. Imagine in that timeline the Boeing CFT being treated like the second Moon landing.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 12:35:42 UTC No. 16258047

>>16258007
>decades ago
ULA was using the russian engines until the invasion of ukraine
Americans were stuck flying on soyuz until 2020
Russia put the latest iss segment on in 2021
I know time flies when you get old but all these were very recent, not decades ago. Get with the times gramps.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 12:49:52 UTC No. 16258056

>>16258047
And in 2024?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 12:54:52 UTC No. 16258060

>>16258056
Still making engines
Still making and flying soyuz
Developing the soyuz 7
Developing their new post iss space station
In other words doing the stuff a space industry does.
Remind me, what is europe doing in 2024?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 12:56:49 UTC No. 16258061

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gtBJjvxqOpk
>SpaceX' Second Launch Tower is taking Shape!

no talking, didn't know they made vids like these

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 12:59:01 UTC No. 16258064

Awesome job OP.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 12:59:48 UTC No. 16258066

>>16258061

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 13:00:49 UTC No. 16258067

>>16258060
>but what about europe
europe does nothing, like russia.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 13:05:03 UTC No. 16258075

>>16258060
>Remind me, what is europe doing in 2024?

https://spacenews.com/europe-aims-to-end-space-access-crisis-with-ariane-6s-inaugural-launch/
>"Honestly, I don’t think Starship will be a game-changer or a real competitor."

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 13:07:36 UTC No. 16258076

>>16258001
I'm gonna miss this little bitch after she either kills two astronauts or gets abandoned in space.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 13:09:36 UTC No. 16258079

>>16258076
I can't wait for the art of whichever outcome transpires.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 13:10:26 UTC No. 16258080

I hate you niggers who fall for bait more

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 13:12:38 UTC No. 16258082

https://x.com/SciGuySpace/status/1806672865590428127

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 13:13:40 UTC No. 16258083

>>16258082
https://x.com/SciGuySpace/status/1806673878493889023

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 13:18:01 UTC No. 16258091

>>16258075
At the very least russia is taking reuse seriously.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 13:22:15 UTC No. 16258092

looking this delta v chart, does it really take 27 km/s of delta v to get off venus? Is that all from atmospheric drag?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 13:44:55 UTC No. 16258110

>>16258092
Better deltaV map

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 13:48:38 UTC No. 16258114

>>16258091
I hear they plan to start on a RLV right after Angara enters regular service, some time in the early 2070s.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 13:51:15 UTC No. 16258116

>>16257951
A better economy means more money for space.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 13:58:37 UTC No. 16258124

>>16258116
Interesting. Which candidate would be the economy president?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 14:02:52 UTC No. 16258130

>>16258124
You even have to ask?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 14:06:33 UTC No. 16258133

>>16258124
The business tycoon, not the career politician, I believe. The former wants to mug for the camera when big rockets are launching and for that reason alone I want him back. The current guy sucks and doesn't care about the outer space.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 14:07:26 UTC No. 16258134

>>16258124
Neither.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 14:08:37 UTC No. 16258136

>>16258066
cubeular

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 14:28:12 UTC No. 16258155

>>16257931
yeah

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 14:28:13 UTC No. 16258156

boring monoparty theatre goes in
>>>/pol/

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 14:29:27 UTC No. 16258158

>>16258156
Ok. What kind of rogget do you like best?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 14:31:17 UTC No. 16258162

>>16258158
NTA but the skylab saturn v

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 14:32:04 UTC No. 16258164

>>16258158
Aggregat

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 14:33:16 UTC No. 16258167

>>16258162
Based. I like Titan II for hypergolics and pogo memes.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 14:34:15 UTC No. 16258169

>>16258158
NTA Starship. Its the normie choice but I dont care.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 14:37:40 UTC No. 16258170

>>16258158
paper roggets. I love stupid shit like hybrid propellant engines.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 14:37:51 UTC No. 16258171

>>16258169
The N1 was the best looking rocket ever made.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 14:38:59 UTC No. 16258172

>>16258171
Looks stupid

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 14:39:56 UTC No. 16258173

>>16258172
you look stupid

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 14:39:59 UTC No. 16258174

>>16258171
It really was. Korolev would have had that shit boostin' tight.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 14:40:02 UTC No. 16258175

>>16258172
You look stupid

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 14:43:25 UTC No. 16258177

>>16258173
>>16258175
Tankie group-think

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 14:50:00 UTC No. 16258181

What is the current Basedship status bros?
I am at hardstyle festival cannot keep up

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 14:50:58 UTC No. 16258184

>>16258181
The tower arms are cranking a shaft

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 14:53:25 UTC No. 16258188

>>16258177
the setup is too obvious. come up with a better criticism of N1 or expect low effort replies

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 14:53:30 UTC No. 16258189

>>16258184
Cranking my shaft to this.
The catch is gonna be so good.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 14:58:21 UTC No. 16258193

Wizards of /sfg/, is there an ebook/pdf copy of pic related anywhere on the wild internet? I've found fuckall so far, I had this book years ago and it got destroyed, now I just want a digital replacement.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 14:58:40 UTC No. 16258194

>>16258188
Such a shame glushko had these scrapped

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 15:00:33 UTC No. 16258197

>>16258171
I really like its aesthetics and even variable thrust vector design to steer it. But I think Starships design is 2nd for me.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 15:04:36 UTC No. 16258204

>>16258004
>continually developing new rocket

Quite literally, Angara's development started in the nineties.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 15:04:41 UTC No. 16258205

>>16258133
>The business tycoon,
Anon, Trump's only competency is looting and scooting.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 15:07:05 UTC No. 16258207

>>16258171
Only a complete idiot would count on 30 rocket engines working together.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 15:09:47 UTC No. 16258210

>>16258207
this is true. the hard limit is 27

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 15:16:44 UTC No. 16258215

Good morning everyone! Now that Biden has the presidentcy locked in, who will he appoint for Nasa administration?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 15:19:51 UTC No. 16258220

>>16258194
Why was he such a huge cunt?
What did Korolev even do to this guy?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 15:20:44 UTC No. 16258222

>>16258001
thank u for making us a special one

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 15:20:47 UTC No. 16258223

Any company actually working on a spin station right now?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 15:22:22 UTC No. 16258226

>>16258001
dumb brat needs course correction

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 15:23:29 UTC No. 16258229

>>16258220
He disagreed with him on rocket design.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 15:23:50 UTC No. 16258230

>>16258220
Competed directly against each other. With Korolev out of the way he could wine and dine with the party heads and enjoy lavish lifestyle.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 15:27:57 UTC No. 16258238

>>16258004
If anon isnt a shill (doubtful) denying the decrepit state of Roscosmos doesn't help anything.

Could be using its space and nuclear industry to gain hard currency but nope.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 15:30:19 UTC No. 16258241

>>16258230
scrapping the N1 is personal.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 15:33:24 UTC No. 16258246

>>16258193
No luck for me either.
haven't finished yet though.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 15:34:36 UTC No. 16258249

>>16258162
Yup this and Starship
Chefs kiss, kino, perfection, whatever you want to call it. These are cool ass rockets with strong auras

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 15:36:37 UTC No. 16258252

>>16258246
Damn, well I appreciate you trying no matter the outcome anon, usually I don't have this much difficulty tracking down something like this.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 15:41:15 UTC No. 16258260

>>16256099
>>16256099
>>16256099
Staging the correct thread

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 15:43:19 UTC No. 16258261

Kek this tourist really thought

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 15:48:24 UTC No. 16258263

>>16258260
wow thats crazy

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 15:48:51 UTC No. 16258265

>>16258238
I am not denying the decrepit state of roscosmos. However denying russia has a space industry is ridiculous.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 15:49:51 UTC No. 16258266

>>16258260
Thats insaaaaane

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 15:50:47 UTC No. 16258267

>>16258092
the pressure's so high on the surface that normal rocket engines are basically useless. it's not really 27 km/s if you're smart about how you do things.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 15:55:22 UTC No. 16258270

>>16257073
man you probably shouldn't say that lol

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 15:58:09 UTC No. 16258272

How will this impact the FAA? I recall /sfg/ was looking forward to this decision

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 15:58:36 UTC No. 16258273

>>16258220
korolev called him incompetent for needing to split the combustion chambers on the rd-107/108 and then he later tried to get him fired from the r-9 program because he thought glushko was taking too long on the engine for that. the n1 was a terrible rocket and scrapping it was the correct decision.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:04:23 UTC No. 16258277

>>16258272
just depends on the roulette of which judges land which cases now. it could go really well or really badly.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:05:59 UTC No. 16258278

>>16258272
>>16258277
Elon seems happy about it

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:08:16 UTC No. 16258279

>>16258273
literally all they needed to do for N1 was build better engine testing infrastructure.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:08:47 UTC No. 16258282

>>16258001
>shidd I fucked up
very Boing-spirited

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:10:44 UTC No. 16258283

>>16258272
>who should interpret the law?
>judges?
>bearcats with political agendas?
>random rent-an-expert that you see on every tabloid shit?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:11:11 UTC No. 16258284

>>16258279
and that was going to fix all the other problems like pogo and KORD being a broken piece of shit and the engine sensors giving false readings because the thing was wired like shit?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:11:17 UTC No. 16258286

>>16258279
They already did that, the nk33s were gonna be installed on the 5th N1.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:11:56 UTC No. 16258287

>>16258279
That still only gets them to apollo 4. as much as I love n1, it wasn't as simple as fix the engines get a man on the moon. I don't think there's any reality where the soviet moon program panned out.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:13:27 UTC No. 16258289

>>16258273
Lies.

It just needed one more test flight, bro

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:14:37 UTC No. 16258291

>>16258287
What about the soviets going with chelomei's UR-700 instead of the N1?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:16:26 UTC No. 16258293

>>16258284
forgot about KORD, yes that's the other major hurdle.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:20:13 UTC No. 16258294

>>16258291
chelomei was clueless about spacecraft design and the LK-700 would have never been ready before the late 70s. but i'm biased toward the rd-270 and like to think the rocket itself probably would've worked.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:21:41 UTC No. 16258297

https://www.theinformation.com/articles/behind-the-demise-of-a-quirky-billionaires-spacex-moon-mission

https://new.reddit.com/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/1dqm339/comment/lap4k7z/

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:22:50 UTC No. 16258299

>>16258082
berger is being lied to and he's too naive to realize it

>>16258272
this guts the FAA. its all but a powerless agency now. its good for spaceflight but bad for america. civil war is closer than ever now.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:23:53 UTC No. 16258301

>>16258299
getting rid of the administrative state gets the US closer to civil war? Why the fuck

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:25:28 UTC No. 16258302

>>16258294
>chelomei was clueless about spacecraft design
Dude made the proton, almaz stations and the TKS spacecraft

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:26:35 UTC No. 16258304

>>16258297
Wow that website is cancer

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:26:48 UTC No. 16258305

>>16258297
>Mockups of the design drew on Japanese and Nordic inspirations, with wood paneling throughout the space and bathrooms that resembled a Swedish sauna, according to people close to the project. Because the artists would be recording music and videos throughout their trip, Maezawa asked SpaceX to pay special attention to the acoustics of the space, some of those people said.
>But, as The Information has previously reported, the space agency has grown frustrated with SpaceX’s delays in getting the rocket ready. Earlier this month, SpaceX successfully launched an unmanned version of the rocket into orbit before its first and second stages returned to Earth and crashed into the ocean in the fourth-ever test flight.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:27:00 UTC No. 16258306

>>16258019
>does not in any way
Relatively, they were nice places.
Actually, fuck it. Rhodesia was practically paradise compared to the likes of Libya and Sudan. Definitely nice places in relativity.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:27:00 UTC No. 16258307

>>16258301
Because the state doesn't want to die and will happily sacrifice you and I to avoid it.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:27:27 UTC No. 16258308

>>16258302
he got some experience eventually but TKS took about 10 years longer than chelomei expected. LK-700 would have obviously taken even longer.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:29:53 UTC No. 16258311

>>16258301
There is one side that cheers the admin state while the other is harder into the constitution and codified laws.
It's not even necessarily along party or ideology lines. Just mostly whoever benefits the most from each persuasion.

The majority of people who feel they have or exercise power only have it because of the administrative state, unfortunately this is alot of evil people.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:30:13 UTC No. 16258312

>>16258307
administrative state, not the state altogether
bureaucracies won't disappear due to this ruling it just means that they won't have their own internal quasi-judges so it will limit their power

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:32:04 UTC No. 16258316

>>16258026
I've seen all sorts of shit come outta SA. I think I saw that too.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:33:54 UTC No. 16258317

>>16258291
Korolev's big argument against hypergolics was that if a rocket that big exploded the launch pad would be uninhabitable for years. Chelomei's response was that it just wouldn't explode because Glushko's engines would be so reliable. While Glushko did build some great engines, every Soviet rocket went through a teething process where it lost a lot of early vehicles. The Proton had a success rate of just 40% during it's first five years of operation and the R7 was barely able to break 60% over its first five. If the Soviets had tried building the UR-700 they would have lost at least a few of them and each failure would have been as big a setback for their lunar program as the time the second N1 launch destroyed its launch complex.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:36:47 UTC No. 16258323

>agency power got gutted by the supreme court
does this include nasa? noaa? nsa? will bezos begin dropping dozens of lawsuits on nasa to get contracts ripped out of spacex's hands?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:37:51 UTC No. 16258325

>>16258305
>It was around that time that he started talking to SpaceX. He developed a personal relationship with Tom Ochinero, a Japanese-born sales executive who sold launch services to commercial customers and private astronauts, according to former SpaceX employees. Ochinero was said to have sealed the dearMoon deal after he impressed Maezawa by eating spicy food at his request, said a person who heard the story.
>In January 2020, he posted online that he was looking for a romantic partner to join him on the SpaceX flight. Maezawa said at the time that he had broken up with his actress and singer girlfriend Ayame Goriki because she didn’t want to go to space with him.
>Tensions between Maezawa and SpaceX began to intensify in 2022 as it became increasingly clear the project would be delayed, said the people close to the project.
>The billionaire and SpaceX began haggling over a number of issues, including the wood finishes Maezawa had requested for the interior of the spacecraft, one of the people said. SpaceX had concerns that the bespoke design was too flammable and conflicted with its style for the vehicle, the person said.
>Maezawa also requested an array of colors for spacesuits, leading to jokes among some SpaceX staff members that the crew would resemble the characters in the space-themed videogame “Among Us,” that person said. Ultimately, SpaceX rebuffed that request in favor of an all-white spacesuit, because the pigmentation in colored fabrics creates heat and flammability concerns, the person said.

sounds a bit gay desu

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:39:06 UTC No. 16258327

>>16258193
Oh god, it's a pre-ISBN book. I unfortunately do not think this book is archived online.
I should look into buying a copy to make a PDF.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:40:20 UTC No. 16258329

>>16258325
>By the first half of 2023, around the time SpaceX did its first test launch of Starship, SpaceX told Maezawa dearMoon would launch no earlier than 2026, according to a person involved.
>Some people involved in the project speculated that Maezawa had lost interest in space following his trip on Soyuz, or that his decision was financial—by 2024, his net worth had fallen to $1.4 billion, just half of what it was in 2017, according to Forbes.

TL:DR no real new information, other than that MZ wanted wood paneling and colorful spacesuits but nothing about the reason for cancellation itself

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:41:01 UTC No. 16258330

>>16258297
>reddit link
Kill yourself

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:41:33 UTC No. 16258331

>>16258327
I see a few copies for sale on Amazon and elsewhere but they're a bit pricey, $50-70 by the looks of things.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:41:34 UTC No. 16258332

>>16258299
I know this wasn't your intention, but the idea of the FAA being this load bearing organization that, now that it is powerless it's causing the entire union to collapse... Well it's just fucking hilarious! Thanks for the image, friend.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:41:51 UTC No. 16258333

>>16258329
>wood paneled spaceship
the kino we were denied

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:45:18 UTC No. 16258336

>>16258329
We do know the price of about 650 million dollars. With maezawa's worth down to 1.4 billion he'd be spending half his fortune on this mission. That might be a bit hard to swallow.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:46:07 UTC No. 16258338

>>16258305
>NASA is frustrated with SpaceX delaying Artemis
why is nasa so gay

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:48:12 UTC No. 16258341

>>16258338
>NASA
They're probably referring to Nelson blaming HLS for delays when talking to congress recently. They all know the actual truth but they all have a financial interest in SLS. Just politics. You can disregard

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:56:55 UTC No. 16258346

S-See, chuds! They can SIT in their SEATS! That means the thrusters work now!!

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:58:25 UTC No. 16258347

>>16258341
Or could be referencing that HLS guy admin that wants to cast doubt upon fixed price commercial contracts.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:00:21 UTC No. 16258352

How did the RD-0120 achieve combustion stability without resonance chambers?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:03:48 UTC No. 16258353

It's over.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:04:05 UTC No. 16258355

>>16258327
>I should look into buying a copy to make a PDF.
Maybe you have access to one of these libraries, or can get it from them through an interlibrary loan?
https://search.worldcat.org/title/602193511

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:04:58 UTC No. 16258356

>>16258353
strong "THIS *CLAP* IS *CLAP* WHY *CLAP* WE *CLAP* TEST" vibes

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:07:43 UTC No. 16258357

>>16258330
Not that anon, but it's a Reddit link to a comment chain with the full text of the paywalled article, one which can't even be viewed through archive.is. Kill yourself instead.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:09:15 UTC No. 16258359

>>16258353
How soon should I make a video saying that this is the end of spaceX? This cannot be fixed and it's over

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:12:36 UTC No. 16258361

>>16258359
>tweet is 18 hours old
>his "end of SpaceX" video isn't already out
ngmi

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:14:45 UTC No. 16258364

>>16258353
but /sfg/ told me steel airframes didn't have a service life, how can they sustain damage over time?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:14:55 UTC No. 16258365

>>16258323
NASA isn't one of the three letter agencies that made up law as they saw fit.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:20:49 UTC No. 16258372

>>16258004
It wasn't because American engines were crap, it's because the Clinton Administration urgently wanted to keep Russian rocket scientists gainfully employed during the political and economic tumult that followed the collapse of the USSR, instead of looking to China or Iran or North Korea or Iraq for a paycheck. The engines were good, don't get me wrong, it's just not why they did it.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:23:20 UTC No. 16258373

>>16258356
THIS *SLAP* IS *SLAP* WHY *SLAP* WE *CRACK*

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:28:20 UTC No. 16258376

>>16258372
>It wasn't because American engines were crap
No, it was because the american engines were crap. America still hadn't figured out oxidizer rich engine cycles and until they got their hands on russian engines straight up thought they were impossible. You can see this because boeing went with the RS-68 with delta 4. Why didn't boeing go for an american kerolox engine? Because there were none!
The american government made the ISS to keep russian engineers busy, american companies went with russian engines because the russian engines were vastly better at the time.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:28:56 UTC No. 16258378

>>16258353
Elon already said they have a new shorter arm design that has less momentum when moving.
I wonder if they'll attempt it anyway though. It's not like they'll actually re-use the booster, and it'll be nearly out of fuel when it lands so the potential explosion couldn't be too big.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:31:50 UTC No. 16258382

>>16258376
When Clinton was balancing the budget, they decided they should either build the Superconducting Supercollider or build the International Space Station: his administration decided that one of them had to be cut. They chose to build the ISS to keep the Space Shuttle busy and to keep the Russians gainfully employed, to the point that NASA paid for the initial Russian segments out of pocket. The technical specifications of the launch vehicle engines had literally nothing to do with these politically motivated decisions.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:35:16 UTC No. 16258385

>>16258382
Yeah, thats what I said, the iss was a political decision, NG and LH going with russian engines for their rockets was a performance and cost decision.
Because the russian engines were better than anything that was available on the american market.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:35:32 UTC No. 16258386

Why doesn't Turkey have a space industry? They've a big arms industry

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:37:58 UTC No. 16258391

>>16258385
The US space industry was urged to look at Russian technology and use it to keep them employed. Boeing started outsourcing a lot of work to Russia at this time, and the RD-180 was chosen for the Atlas rocket because it was a good engine and straight upgrade to the RS-56, but the decision to make use of Russian technology was at the urging of politicians to make use of what was available.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:39:20 UTC No. 16258393

>>16258376
American engines at the time were focused on hydrolox, something that is still dark magic for Russia.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:41:26 UTC No. 16258397

>>16257951
Biden has basically left Trump's first term space policies on autopilot. With Trump we'd see better funding of interplanetary missions and less regulatory interference with SpaceX but that's about it.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:44:26 UTC No. 16258400

>>16258397
With Chevron Deference killed off in the courts, it's no longer legal for agencies to invent any authority for themselves and must instead rely on unambiguously written laws, so we should see a lot less regulatory interference now that they're no longer free to regulate on demand.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:44:31 UTC No. 16258401

>>16258391
Keep coping. Russian engines were better and it was a market decision. Zero evidence NG and LH were told to use russian engines by politicians.
>>16258393
Thats not true, the RD-0120 was the RS-25's equal in pretty much every way. The russians made good hydrolox (self-contradiction lol) engines.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:45:08 UTC No. 16258402

>>16258353
Add more stringers

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:46:44 UTC No. 16258403

>>16258402
it's not that easy in rocketry

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:48:07 UTC No. 16258406

>>16258401
>Zero evidence NG and LH were told to use russian engines by politicians.

Zero evidence if you ignore the evidence, speaking of cope.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:48:51 UTC No. 16258407

>>16258401
You're gaslighting pretty hard today. Also, NG and LH? The companies involved at the time were Boeing and Lockheed Martin: Northrop Grumman did not have a space sector at the time. The Antares rocket using Ukrainian tankage and Russian engines was made by Orbital Sciences (later merged with Alliant Techsystems, later bought out by Northrop Grumman) because they were trying to be as cheap as possible without their own in-house manufacturing expertise.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:49:51 UTC No. 16258411

>>16258407
Whoops, meant to say launch sector, rather than space sector.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:50:42 UTC No. 16258412

>>16258353
Flex seal

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:52:29 UTC No. 16258414

You were imagining that you were the one interviewing him, right?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:54:58 UTC No. 16258417

>>16258406
What evidence? The only evidence provided is that the ISS was made to keep russians busy and that companies were told to "look at" russian engines. You never even provided evidence american companies using russian engines were a political mandate.
>>16258407
>The companies involved at the time
At the time? What time? I never specified any time. I just listed the 2 major american rocket manufacturers who used russian rocket engines. And yes I did forget that OS was the original manufacturer of antares.
Neither of these address the main point.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:55:13 UTC No. 16258419

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:55:38 UTC No. 16258421

>>16258355
Oh shit, there's a copy literally a town over.
Now I just need to figure out how to scan in such a PDF...

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:56:47 UTC No. 16258422

so maezawa didnt want a ride to the moon, he wanted a luxury space yacht? and spacex found it too impractical to work on?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 18:00:00 UTC No. 16258424

>>16258417
I think I see what happened now: I didn't have the Orbital Sciences COTS contract in mind when I was debating you, and you are correct that Russian engines were chosen because they were cheap and "good" (aside from the part where the NK-33s were a known risk factor and had to be heavily rebuilt to even be useful, and were abandoned after the LOX pump exploded in flight on ORB-3), and then moved on to the next cheapest option in the form of RD-193s.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 18:01:42 UTC No. 16258428

>>16258421
Damn closest one to me is a whole state over. Making a .pdf from a series of scanned images is trivial so long as you get nice page scans.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 18:03:38 UTC No. 16258430

the fact that axiom hasnt announced a crew for the axiom-4 mission yet suggests that the mission has been delayed, likely because of the recent collaboration between nasa and india (isro)

🗑️ Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 18:04:45 UTC No. 16258434

>>16258376
>Why didn't boeing go for an american kerolox engine? Because there were none!
... I don't this argument.
They wanted to reuse the Rocketdyne F-1 on the SLS but came to the conclusion that because those engines were hand made, it wasn't worth it. It may not be an efficient beast, but it sure as shit was a kerolox engine we built.
There's also the Rocketdyne H-1, RS-27, RS-56(everything here is stuff BOEING HAS BLUEPRINTS FOR,) and SpaceX Falcon rocket engines. These are all American kerolox engines, and most of them were even available during the Delta IV program.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 18:04:59 UTC No. 16258435

>>16258424
To be fair all the NK-33's were built in the early 70's and had just been sitting in a warehouse for 40 years when this was flown.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 18:09:21 UTC No. 16258442

>>16258376
>Why didn't boeing go for an american kerolox engine? Because there were none!
... I don't get this argument in the slightest.
They wanted to reuse the Rocketdyne F-1 on the SLS but came to the conclusion that because those engines were hand made, it wasn't worth it. It may not be an efficient beast, but it sure as shit was a kerolox engine we built.
There's also the Rocketdyne H-1, RS-27, RS-56(everything here is stuff BOEING HAS BLUEPRINTS FOR,) and SpaceX Merlin rocket engines. These are all American kerolox engines, and most of them were even available during the Delta IV program.
I guess you have a point if you're really meaning RG-1 and not RP-1, but that's a fuel refining process, and unless your engine is straddling a very thin line, you don't need to worry that much about the /slightly/ higher energy density of RG-1.

Bleh, I need to proof read more.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 18:09:49 UTC No. 16258445

>>16258435
They were dismantled and rebuilt with all of their seals replaced, gimbals added, and all new electronics were developed and built for the engine computers.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 18:11:28 UTC No. 16258448

SC just overruled chevron deference, how could this help SpaceX? Less obstruction and shit?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 18:14:05 UTC No. 16258452

https://x.com/SpaceX/status/1806444825979543725

New vid

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 18:14:13 UTC No. 16258453

>STARLINER: NO TARGETED DATE FOR LANDING

Lmao

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 18:14:53 UTC No. 16258455

>>16258453
NASA: this is why spacex is holding us back

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 18:15:10 UTC No. 16258456

>>16258448
Before:
>Agency: "We at Agency have decided that you can't do this"
>You: "by what right have you made this authority for yourselves?"
>Agency: "Chevron Deference"
>Courts: "Checks out."

After:
>Agency: "We at Agency have decided that you can't do this"
>You: "by what right have you made this authority for yourselves?"
>Agency: "Well if you read between the lines in the law that authorizes our agency..."
>Court: "Nah, let me take a look at that, first."

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 18:16:07 UTC No. 16258459

>>16258448
Regulatory agencies have less powers and now require congress to pass specific laws. The power over law gets passed back to the congress rather than to agencies.

>>16258452

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 18:20:24 UTC No. 16258464

>>16258382
i'd rather have the ISS than CERN at least. europe wasn't going to build ISS on its own and there's no spacex without it.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 18:21:45 UTC No. 16258466

>>16258452
I don't think thats new, just a repost from them

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 18:25:54 UTC No. 16258472

>Nappi says, regarding the helium leaks and the thruster issues, "we understand these issues for safe return... We don't understand these issues well enough to fix them permanently."
What the actual fuck

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 18:26:41 UTC No. 16258473

>>16258472
The leaks will continue until the end of Starliner program.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 18:26:50 UTC No. 16258474

>orbital fuel depot
any good realistic guess as to when they would start construction? for me it would be 2028 or 2029. i dont think it'll be like the ISS where they plan everything out ahead of time, i think it'll be like starbase where they start out with a minimum viable product and expand from there.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 18:27:39 UTC No. 16258476

>>16258382
>NASA paid for the initial Russian segments out of pocket
We also paid for Spektr and Priroda to be added on to Mir so the Shuttle-Mir program could function as a kind of pre-ISS program.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 18:29:03 UTC No. 16258479

>>16258472
>yeah it'll just leak sometimes
their ceiling birds are chirping too I bet.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 18:29:05 UTC No. 16258480

>>16258474
there's not going to be any "construction" of the first depot, it's just going to be a single starship that they keep in orbit. one starship can hold more than enough propellant for anything artemis is going to need.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 18:29:20 UTC No. 16258481

>sieveliner

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 18:32:25 UTC No. 16258483

>>16258353
Why not just make it so the arms can't close further than the radius of the booster with a stupid doorstop-like mechanism on the tower/arms?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 18:32:43 UTC No. 16258484

>>16258481
pissliner

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 18:48:15 UTC No. 16258505

our chubby jewess is back
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Pi1Zpprq9Y

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 18:49:59 UTC No. 16258512

>>16258442
>They wanted to reuse the Rocketdyne F-1 on the SLS but came to the conclusion that because those engines were hand made
I'm pretty sure it was because the F-1 hadn't been built since apollo.
>Rocketdyne H-1
Gas generator that stopped production in 1975
>RS-27 & RS-56
Both gas generators that were substantially below russian performance. Both had stopped production by the early 2000's
>SpaceX Merlin
Made because musk realized making engines in house was cheaper than buying from manufacturers.
I'll admit I thought the RS-27 & 56 were dead by the 90's but doesn't change the fact that the russian engines were cheaper and better performing that the american kerolox engines.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 18:59:45 UTC No. 16258521

https://x.com/Austen/status/1806755967637528762

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:03:43 UTC No. 16258523

>>16258521
i aint reading that, give us the tl;dr

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:05:00 UTC No. 16258524

Dragon-derived Deorbit vehicle

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:06:03 UTC No. 16258526

https://x.com/SciGuySpace/status/1806762777333076064

deorbit vehicle will be dragon based

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:07:16 UTC No. 16258528

>>16258523
agencies exploited gray areas in laws resulting in lengthy lawsuits and refused to clarify these murky areas of the law but then still used them punitively

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:07:41 UTC No. 16258529

>>16258524
Could they just use a regular cargo dragon and pocket the rest of the "development funding"?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:08:14 UTC No. 16258531

>>16258171
we've been through this before. its not bad but the Saturn V is obviously far better looking and its pointiness is superior. i like rockets that didn't explode on the pad.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:09:08 UTC No. 16258532

>>16258526
so a dragon has enough power to drag the ISS into the ocean?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:09:38 UTC No. 16258534

>>16258532
~50m/s is all you need

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:10:21 UTC No. 16258536

>>16258529
a regular cargo dragon wouldn't be able to deorbit a 450-ton station. you're going to need at least 10 tons of propellant for that.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:11:27 UTC No. 16258539

>>16258133
>The current guy sucks and doesn't know about the outer space.
FTFY

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:11:43 UTC No. 16258540

>>16258529
I'm pretty sure it doesn't have enough TWR to reliably crash it into Pacific graveyard even if had enough fuel.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:12:16 UTC No. 16258541

>>16258540
if you use the superdracos then TWR is no problem

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:12:26 UTC No. 16258542

https://x.com/jeff_foust/status/1806763912668364959

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:13:37 UTC No. 16258545

>>16258526
>modifications to the trunk
So either a big ass pair of tanks, and we're talking 7-8 tons of the stuff. Or it docks asswards through a dummy port in the trunk to expose the preferred thrusters for a velocity change and then the tanks are inside where the pressure vessel should be.
or both?
>>16258532
it definitely doesn't, not the current one by itself

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:14:35 UTC No. 16258547

>>16258541
Does regular cargo dragon have those even?
Not like it needs them for anything.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:17:01 UTC No. 16258551

>>16258547
yeah you're right now that i check.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:17:35 UTC No. 16258554

>>16258521
So this has gotta help SpaceX/space startups/nuclear startups/AI startups somehow

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:20:16 UTC No. 16258558

>>16258554
it will bring more clarity eventually from lawsuit precedents
less arbitrary bullshit from bureucrats

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:21:36 UTC No. 16258559

>>16258558
"eventually" being the key word. it's going to take years and years and many more SCOTUS cases before thing start getting sorted out.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:22:11 UTC No. 16258562

>>16258558
That's good, at least there's nothing to make the upcoming Starship LC-39/SLC-37 EIS harder

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:29:02 UTC No. 16258571

>>16257999
>>16258001
im gonna seggs her after she comes back from orbit!

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:32:49 UTC No. 16258578

>>16258554
>somehow
Regulatory capture is one way that established companies can stifle competition from upstarts. Now that's a little bit harder, since congress critters are a more expensive purchase than regulators.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:34:47 UTC No. 16258586

>>16258571
hopefully you will experience no seggfaults

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:35:00 UTC No. 16258587

>>16258571
I'm afraid there's only a 41% chance of "her" returning to safety.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:41:55 UTC No. 16258596

>>16258542
>>16258526
Dragon heritage does not inherently mean a Dragon capsule but it does mean things like the docking ring, engines, tanks, software etc.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:43:42 UTC No. 16258597

>>16258587
:(

Touch my Borken at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:45:19 UTC No. 16258603

>>16258597
Gud.

Ol sha Sha's got a present for you as well.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:45:25 UTC No. 16258604

>>16258353
The SpaceX yaoi paddle.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:49:53 UTC No. 16258612

https://x.com/OfficialKion/status/1806757059368829119

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:49:55 UTC No. 16258613

>>16258604
*yuri

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:50:05 UTC No. 16258614

https://x.com/balajis/status/1806773841395675218

Even longer thread about the positive outcomes
>Technology is about to accelerate.
>Because Chevron deference is over.
>And regulators can't just make up laws anymore.
>So, countless new startups just became feasible.
>This is often spoken about in the abstract, so let's do three examples and two visuals.

>THREE E

Looks like will be good for space startups

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:52:01 UTC No. 16258615

>>16258614
>In other words: if a regulator can't point to the law that gives them the power, they may not have the power. And you might be able to win in a court of law.

Damn this is actually huge put this way, can foresee lots of positive and negative consequences

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:52:29 UTC No. 16258617

>>16258614
>countless new startups just became feasible.
what's a possible spaceflight startup that could be feasible now that wasnt before?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:54:00 UTC No. 16258619

>>16258617
Space mining? idk, just like AI these industries are too early to have too tight regulations imposed on them, so by that metric at least it doesn't looks like things will become more infeasible over time with regulatory excess the likes of ALARA

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:54:49 UTC No. 16258621

>>16258614
>
2) Nuclear power. Did Congress explicitly give EPA and NRC the authority to implement ALARA? No, it did not. But these agencies came up with this "as low as reasonably achievable" standard, forcing nuclear energy to become as expensive as other energy sources by spending all the cost-savings on "safety." Implicitly, this was under Chevron too.

so nuclear power became easier?
what about nuclrea in space propulsion

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:56:07 UTC No. 16258625

>>16258614
>>16258615
>>16258619
>>16258621
a court is still going to have to rule ALARA unconstitutional before anything chages. courts make stupid decisions all the time and there's no reason to assume this is going to happen out of hand.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:56:14 UTC No. 16258626

>>16258619
>>16258621
>space mining
>nuclear propulsion
enough pop sci, give me something real, something tangible

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:56:50 UTC No. 16258627

>>16258621
Presumably things remain as they are and eventually some regulatory burdens get eased by court challenges I think, so best case scenario no regulatory over-burden, wonder what this means for NTSB and FCC and their efforts to interfere and regulate commercial spaceflight too...

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:57:54 UTC No. 16258628

Did congress sign a law specifically stating NOAA has the authority to issue space/earth observation licenses btw?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:58:26 UTC No. 16258629

>>16258625
now there is going to be a court decision so easier to implement a law that fixes that or overturns it compared to the gray murky area being an unknown random risk
at leas you will know what is allowed and what is not and if something is not, you can start lobbying to change it

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 20:07:58 UTC No. 16258646

>biggest worry was that as SpaceX dominance and commercial spaceflight kept increasing the "regulatory state" would step in too quickly in attempts to seize power like NTSB already is trying and hamper the acceleration
>Supreme Court just made that happening much less likely

Man, this is great actually

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 20:09:28 UTC No. 16258649

>>16258628
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/15/960.1

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 20:09:31 UTC No. 16258650

>>16258646
Basically "stay in your fucking lane" unless Congress says otherwise

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 20:10:32 UTC No. 16258652

>>16258649
Yeah I never checked but that makes sense, since its for national security imperative, and congress sometimes signs other weirder shit like mandating SLS

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 20:11:36 UTC No. 16258654

>>16258649
btw NOAA considers cameras “remote sensors” thus under its authority, for context

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 20:15:04 UTC No. 16258660

Please help us /sfg/... don't let us die out here...

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 20:18:18 UTC No. 16258665

>>16258654
the NOAA considers? so that is something that could be litigated

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 20:19:40 UTC No. 16258666

>>16258665
yeah its already making progress, https://payloadspace.com/noaa-gives-heos-holmes-a-thumbs-up/

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 20:20:47 UTC No. 16258667

>>16258382
Supercollider is a complete waste of money compared to the ISS

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 20:21:39 UTC No. 16258668

>>16258660
JUST STEAL THE DRAGON FOR GOD'S SAKE
SPLASH DOWN SOMEWHERE AND CLAIM ASYLUM
EVEN IF REENTRY DOESN'T KILL YOU THE BOEING WHISTLEBLOWER CONTAINMENT SQUAD WILL

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 20:21:50 UTC No. 16258669

>>16258421
university libraries have copy machines that can scan a whole book into a pdf unless I am dreaming about using one

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 20:24:07 UTC No. 16258672

>>16258660
>Boeing kills two astronauts

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 20:28:11 UTC No. 16258678

>>16258505
i already knew about fallenshadow’s announcement but thx anyways

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 20:30:36 UTC No. 16258684

Are there any tools I can use to simulate plate tectonics or tectonic activity on a 2d map?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 20:33:23 UTC No. 16258686

>>16258542
>NASA is preparing both Dragon Crew-10 and the next Starliner mission in parallel for Feb 2025 crew rotation
Now I am not a betting man but yeah, I’d say the chance of Starliner flying this particular mission is pretty much zero. Embarrassing for a company that was once so great.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 20:34:27 UTC No. 16258687

>>16258684
Be more specific

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 20:40:31 UTC No. 16258696

>>16258684
This could range from something found in a phd thesis to something found on a worldbuilding forum

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 20:45:43 UTC No. 16258705

>>16258205
Pre-COVID economy was pretty great. Better than this shit anyway.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 20:45:52 UTC No. 16258706

>>16258660
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2KzfTbbs3Y

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 20:46:21 UTC No. 16258707

>>16258325
Spacex: That's flammable
Yakuza: Yeah, but really flammable or just *pretty* flammable?
He's a dumbass

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 20:48:50 UTC No. 16258709

>>16258707
kek

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 21:00:09 UTC No. 16258717

>>16258706
I don't remember this scene from Fifth Element

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 21:11:58 UTC No. 16258727

>imagine being mogged by China
at this rate, the jeets might have a moonbase before EU and the US. wtf, can you faggots speed up?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 21:14:23 UTC No. 16258731

>>16258727
we need a babylon 5 style moonbase...all these powers working together in the same area, which often results in military showdowns and gun battles

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 21:21:28 UTC No. 16258734

>>16258727
I'm curious to see how far China goes on their own. The neofascist commie/market hybrid seems to be really good for space development. I'm skeptical about the level of innovation though. They've done well so far with derivatives of old soviet shit but that limits you to missions the world has already seen. Would be incredible if they match Starship though. Can you imagine a space race where both sides can launch 1,000,000 tons to orbit every year? At that point the winner of the space race would be everyone

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 21:22:25 UTC No. 16258735

>>16258731
I can't recall a single episode of B5 that talked about the moon. So I'm not sure what you mean. Like a B station in moon orbit?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 21:25:52 UTC No. 16258737

>>16258735
i meant have the moonbase be a joint project between major powers like the ISS, only more dangerous

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 21:26:08 UTC No. 16258738

>>16258734
Wouldn’t say these “neofascist communist” govts are conductive to accelerating space as much as they are simply interested in it / executing a gameplan.
Even with the US running on turbo backburner mode with expensive/late hardware it is still probably going to land back on the Moon and get some sort of sustainable hardware down there for longer and longer duration stays before China even gets boots on the surface

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 21:28:18 UTC No. 16258740

>>16258738
berger thinks a chinese moon landing is due before the end of the decade

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 21:29:01 UTC No. 16258741

Weeks over, you fags are now stuck with me for the weekend. Now, why does /sfg/ seem to not hate Northropp as much as other oldspace counterparts like Locksneed or Boing? Is it becauee they keep to themselves more so we dont hear about them as much or something else?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 21:31:05 UTC No. 16258745

>>16258741
I rarely think about Northrop and their plane division makes cool stuff so I have more leniency

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 21:32:27 UTC No. 16258748

>>16258412

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 21:32:56 UTC No. 16258750

>>16258741
i just cant bring myself to dislike a company that made this little cutie, no matter how much it has changed.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 21:37:33 UTC No. 16258754

>>16258741
mostly because they are not in the same news cycle as LM and Boeing most of the time. Plus ULA also puts more heat on the aforementioned companies.
Northrop Grumman still has its hand up the pork pigs asshole though, with ludicrous contracts being divvied out left and right

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 21:38:08 UTC No. 16258755

fags

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 21:42:05 UTC No. 16258756

>>16258737
where the most dangerous criminal in the galaxy shows up every week but they can't track him down because he's hiding in the designated slum zone, and even if they catch him he manages to escape with the innovative tactic of punching security guards

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 21:43:50 UTC No. 16258757

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 21:46:55 UTC No. 16258761

>>16258738
The progress here is basically luck (autistic billionaire) rather than policy. China had a real shot at wiping the floor with NASA. Of course now the dynamic is moon landing vs moon base but there's a timeline where it was moon landing vs congress scrambling to turn their jobs program back into an actual factory

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 21:53:36 UTC No. 16258770

>>16258761
Yeah no fuck off mate America is beating china on this even in a best-case-scenario for Chinks and a worst-case-scenario for America every single time, every single faggy little alternate timeline you can conjure up

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 21:56:48 UTC No. 16258774

>>16258741
Northrop doesn't do all that much that /sfg/ cares about outside of solid propellant applications, but inside that space they seem to know what they're doing. Their space division was mostly built by absorbing smaller but competent corporations, and they don't fuck up their huge projects in the dramatic way that Boeing does. When the B-21 Raider went over-budget Northrop owned up to it and the CEO put out a statement about how they needed to make more realistic bids on fixed-price contracts while admitting that they just weren't going to make a profit on the first few production lots. Being pretty good at your job and not blatantly gaming the system goes a long way.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 21:57:19 UTC No. 16258775

>>16258757
By russian standars it's still a new station, they are going to keep it going long past 2030.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:06:19 UTC No. 16258780

America has frontrun China solely thanks to Elon. Once the chinks catch up by IP theft they will start to mog America. They don't have to deal with shit like "oh you can't launch once a day here because of the turtles and residents are suing us". They will just build a fuck off huge facility somewhere and the government will green light as many launches as they want. It's the same as literally every other industry in China mogging the west, cars are the main example right now.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:08:20 UTC No. 16258783

>>16258780
this is either engagement bait or you are mentally retarded

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:10:48 UTC No. 16258787

>>16258783
American industry is so threatened by Chinese cars the government had to basically ban the cars from being sold in America. Chinese government actually understands industrial policy, something America has pretty much forgotten about.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:11:43 UTC No. 16258788

>>16258787
banning foreign car sales is industrial policy, anon

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:14:02 UTC No. 16258792

>>16258780
Chinks also have all the blueprints (from corporate espionage) of most western jet engines like rolls&royce, but at the end of the day they still cant build a reliable jet engine.
The chinese still get most of their militiary jet engines from russia.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:14:05 UTC No. 16258793

>>16258727
>Dongfang Hour

It's always amusing to watch him downplay China dropping first stages full of liquid cancer on villages.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:14:34 UTC No. 16258794

>>16258727
>>16258793
He's a chinaboo

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:14:51 UTC No. 16258795

>>16258788
No it's not, it's impotent seething protectionism as your trade enemy mogs you throughout the rest of the world.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:16:41 UTC No. 16258797

>>16258795
sorry, i missed that you were just throwing around terms you don't understand because you were wanting to make some country console wars posts. i won't bother you again.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:18:41 UTC No. 16258798

>>16258787
Chinese cars do not pass American safety standards and America isn't interested in China's games of heavily subsidizing their industry.

The BYD shilling on /o/ was hilariously blatant.

🗑️ Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:19:08 UTC No. 16258800

>>16258797
I could clarify my points for your low IQ brain but you have china seethe rent free on the brain so I won't bother

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:21:03 UTC No. 16258801

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:21:35 UTC No. 16258803

>>16258798
>BYD
Cant wait to see how the CCP is going to hide the BYD battery fires in western nations.
They have complete control in china and can hide that shit, but how are they going to hide it when a BYD cooks it's passengers alive in the US or europe.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:23:10 UTC No. 16258805

>hey /sfg/ is really active now
>just another chink timeloop
:/

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:23:31 UTC No. 16258807

>>16258798
>Chinese cars do not pass American safety standards

BYD scored 5/5 in Europe and Australasia NCAP. It's very obviously a political move because American shitbox manufacturers would collapse overnight if a 10k suburb-walmart-wage cage machine appeared on the market.

>Noooo china is subsidising EVs

Er, meanwhile at Tesla...

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:29:20 UTC No. 16258814

>>16258805
Euro's are sleeping, americans are occupied with sleepy joe&orange man debat.
The only thing left is the summer fags and wumao's.
And me.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:35:13 UTC No. 16258823

>>16258807
>BYD scored 5/5 in Europe and Australasia NCAP

That doesn't mean much my wumao friend.

>Er, meanwhile at Tesla...

Companies like BYD are heavily subsidized by the Chibese government, Tesla is not recieving subsidies from the US government.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:37:08 UTC No. 16258826

/SinoFaggotryGeneral/

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:37:56 UTC No. 16258830

>>16258801
Funny story: I used to be a hardcore leftist twenty years back, and I kept that same image handy because I fell for all the CHINA STRONK faggotry (in addition to a big bunch of other leftist faggotry). Twenty years of economics later, I now see what a bad joke that was...on China.

China is this big, dumb fucking plowhorse that the G7 uses to build widgets and gizmos for the West. We don't give a shit about anything else they do...we just want their cheap labor. They get a pretend seat at the grown-ups table, but after that Covid and Hong Kong shit, they get invited to a lot less get-togethers. They know they're going to be replaced eventually by India and Mexico in the widget race, and their frustration causes them to make idle threats at Taiwan and buddy up with truly degraded shitholes like Russia, which is the geopolitical equivalent of flipping the Monopoly board over to avoid bankruptcy.

It's pretty funny that this childish propaganda endures. They're catching up to the US space program in 1990s, and this is supposed to be a crisis. What a laugh.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:39:02 UTC No. 16258832

>>16258807
>BYD scored 5/5 in Europe and Australasia NCAP
>suburb-walmart-wage cage machine

oh no it's retarded

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:39:43 UTC No. 16258834

/pol/ said ISS is about to explode. What happened?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:41:28 UTC No. 16258837

>>16258834
/pol/ was retarded happeningfags

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:43:28 UTC No. 16258843

>>16258834
Halley's comet fragments are destroying T-mobile xsats, Russian weather satellites, and the Station!

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:44:26 UTC No. 16258846

>>16258834
SpaceX was awarded a contract to develop and build a deorbit vehicle for the international space station. Otherwise, nothing happened.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:48:38 UTC No. 16258851

>>16258823
European safety standards for cars are very stringent, what the fuck are you talking about?

>Tesla does not receive any subsidies

https://subsidytracker.goodjobsfirst.org/parent/tesla-inc

?????????

Plus a 7.5k tax credit on pretty much every Tesla, which is just a roundabout subsidy.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:48:55 UTC No. 16258852

>>16258834
it's possible that some things posted there are not true.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:49:12 UTC No. 16258854

>>16258834
astronaut corpse reanimated, now has super strength from cosmic rays and is pounding on the hatch to get at the living

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:58:31 UTC No. 16258864

>>16258851
Loans that are paid off in short order are not subsidies.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:58:43 UTC No. 16258865

>China is gonna overtake us guys
CCCP concern-posting needs to end

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:59:50 UTC No. 16258868

>>16258846
>Otherwise, nothing happened.

>https://www.reuters.com/technology/space/russian-satellite-blasts-debris-space-forces-iss-astronauts-shelter-2024-06-27/

My favorite part of this story is how all the astronauts were ordered to shelter in their respective vehicles in case of an emergency evacuation, which completely scuppers the SpaceX fable that the Starliner is unusable and "stranding" it's astronauts.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:00:01 UTC No. 16258869

>>16258851
European safety standards for "suburb-walmart-wage cage machine" are not stringent.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:01:12 UTC No. 16258872

>>16258868
>SpaceX fable

Is the Elon man in the room with you right now?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:01:23 UTC No. 16258873

>>16258512
>hadn't been built since Apollo
Again, they wanted to build more. The main problem was that they were designed to be built by hand, using far more primitive tools. This meant that each one would be INCREDIBLY temperamental with its own different "personality quirks", and many of the engineer notes made over time because each engineer was more directly involved were lost.
Ultimately, it wasn't worth updating the F-1's production up to modern standards, and it's a hand made engine.
>gas generators
You asked for kerolox engines, not powerful ones. Yes, the RD-180 outperforms those ones, I can't deny facts.
>Made because Musk realized making engines in house was cheaper than buying from manufacturers
Yeah. They're cheaper engines, that could be made even cheaper by stripping what's necessary to reuse them. (In hindsight, this was just a bad argument to begin with, since the Merlin didn't in 2002, when the RS-68 was first deployed.)
>I'll admit, I thought the RS-56 was dead by the 90s
That fucking engine first flew in '91 though? And also it was the Atlas 2AS's primary engine, a rocket that flew until 2004? Why did you think this engine got retired before the 2000s?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:02:27 UTC No. 16258875

>>16258612
>A lot of these tiles have different shapes
So we can just talk out of our ass now? Last I checked a gross majority are the exact same with a minor amount of different ones around the nose and flaps. What a raging fag

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:04:08 UTC No. 16258877

Wait why is it not called the orange planet? It isn’t red at all wtf

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:04:42 UTC No. 16258879

>>16258872
Every MuskRat on YT has been screaming about "stranded" astronauts for the last week. Take Elon's cock out of your mouth and have a look around.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:04:50 UTC No. 16258880

>>16258615
>>In other words: if a regulator can't point to the law that gives them the power, they may not have the power. And you might be able to win in a court of law.

So Sue Origin will become powerless?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:05:18 UTC No. 16258881

>>16258879
Why are you so fascinated with cocks? Do you miss yours?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:06:41 UTC No. 16258884

>>16258875
When you have 9999999 tiles on the vehicle, even a small % of unique ones does add up to a lot.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:07:23 UTC No. 16258885

>>16258770
I really really don't have enough faith in SLS/Orion to believe that.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:09:22 UTC No. 16258888

>>16258798
>secret Chinese posting
Sometimes they get me going but then they slip up by including an analogy involving a tiger or something

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:10:35 UTC No. 16258890

>>16258884
>even a small % of unique ones does add up to a lot.
Easily 75% of the tiles are exactly the same. Probably more, I'm being generous.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:12:50 UTC No. 16258892

>>16258868
It's possible to open the door and sit inside a car with no engine, anon. A vehicle is supposed to do quite a bit more. Though I'm 99% sure everything will go fine

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:13:33 UTC No. 16258893

>>16258888
A tiger is a good metaphor for the nation of China. Tigers are beautiful animals that were largely hunted to extinction by the Chinese people so they could be ground up into a power and snorted as an erectile dysfunction cure.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:14:52 UTC No. 16258894

>>16258892
how can you evacuate the area on a car with no engine dummy?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:15:51 UTC No. 16258897

i struggle to come up with good startup ideas for spaceflight, but i enjoy the mental exercise nonetheless

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:16:02 UTC No. 16258898

>>16258894
Did they do that dummy?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:18:00 UTC No. 16258900

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:18:08 UTC No. 16258901

>>16258897
It will never be profitable unfortunately. Your best case is coming up with a palletized product that would be useful for developing Mars so SpaceX buys it from you instead of doing it themselves. They haven't even started yet so there are some opportunities.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:18:20 UTC No. 16258902

>>16258890
Sure, and that's still a whole shitload of uniques. The shuttlfication will continue and you will be happy.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:19:02 UTC No. 16258903

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:23:57 UTC No. 16258909

>>16258614
>https://x.com/balajis/status/1806773841395675218
Woah
Now I get it

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:25:31 UTC No. 16258913

>>16258898
no but the whole point was to be prepared to if they needed to dummy
They were gambling that 50% chance of making it back in the boeing is better than 0% if iss explodes

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:27:07 UTC No. 16258914

Too much terra incognita in our own damn star system, that’s unacceptable

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:27:23 UTC No. 16258915

>>16258798
Why do people repeat this lie?
Where is the testing an evaluation that says BYD or other Chinese EVs don't meet US standards?
If it didn't meet standards, you wouldn't need to use tarrifs to defacto ban it.

🗑️ Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:27:59 UTC No. 16258917

>>16258672
There's no way they can numbers that low

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:28:59 UTC No. 16258919

>>16258672
There's no way they can hit numbers that low

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:30:15 UTC No. 16258921

>>16258897
Mass produce super cheap probes with some basic instrumentation on them, flood the asteroid belt and sell the surveys. With that many asteroids being surveyed there are guaranteed to be ones with crazy rich veins/deposits/whatever of very expensive metals. You might not even have to sell the surveys, investor money will flood in if you show off some of the more crazy surveys. Basic mining operation could be done totally automated, the machine would look like a mosquito, solar wings for power, some legs to clamp onto the asteroid, core drill pulls out cylinders of your very expensive metals and then send them back to urf. If your asteroid has a small dv to get back to urf you could have a coilgun setup to shoot the slugs back, if the dv needed is bad then have small solid boosters you strap to your cylinders which you resupply occasionally so long as there is still metal to be mined.

Seriously, you can't tell me there aren't sick deposits of shit like rhodium or Iridium that sell for many times the price of gold and if you can't make THAT profitable then asteroid mining is never going to be profitable.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:35:03 UTC No. 16258928

>>16258921
This is a shocking amount of words from someone who understands neither automation, market forces, launch costs, development costs, or the actual requirements for a vehicle in space. I hate asteroid mining fags so much. The only people who think it's a good idea don't know anything

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:35:07 UTC No. 16258929

>>16258521
>>16258526
SuperDraco bros it's our time to shine.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:37:18 UTC No. 16258933

>>16258929
hell yeah

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:37:21 UTC No. 16258934

>>16258928
We are going to strip mine the belt and earthers like you can stay malding

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:37:58 UTC No. 16258935

>>16258921
>you can't tell me there aren't sick deposits of shit like rhodium or Iridium that sell for many times the price of gold and if you can't make THAT profitable then asteroid mining is never going to be profitable
Correct, it won't be profitable. Compare the cost of everything you just said to just digging a big hole in the ground.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:38:33 UTC No. 16258936

>>16258928
Okay, anon. Why in the fuck would it not work?

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:39:02 UTC No. 16258937

>>16258934
Yeah, 300 years from now. Anon was talking about actual startups not the premise of an Issac Arthur video

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:42:35 UTC No. 16258939

>>16258935
Oh, so apparently coming back with 3500 metric tons of copper in one go is somehow less profitable than the entire yearly copper production? If we're doing asteroid mining, we're likely going to be doing it on a massive scale where these numbers are to be expected.

>>16258937
We're going to see space megastructures within our lifetime, anon. We also might see 300 years be the average human life expectancy but eh, details, details.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:46:39 UTC No. 16258950

>>16258935
Digging a big hole in the ground is really fucking expensive, having to move literal megatonnes of soil for paltry returns and then processing all that shit costs a lot of money. Plus all the legal, environmental and native land rights bullshit. Ongoing overheads in the form of fuel and electricity as well as maintenance of gigantic fucking equipment is also tremendous.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:47:11 UTC No. 16258951

>>16258939
I’m neither of those anons but the way someone else has explained it to me is that it could [emphasis on could] be profitable by a large margin if you did it en masse
but the cost of getting it there by sheer force just isn’t realistic right now and won’t be for a long time. i.e. ANY amount of money you throw at “space mining” to try and turn a profit will just suck all your money dry before you ever see a fresh dollar.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:49:20 UTC No. 16258957

>>16258950
Despite all that it’s still cheaper to do it on Earth at production rates that aren’t even teetering on running out. Earth has everything we need, it’s kind of hard to believe

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:50:11 UTC No. 16258958

>>16258915
By the same logic where is the testing that shows BYD or other Chinese automakers pass US safety standards.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:50:40 UTC No. 16258960

the asteroid thing is impracticable at the moment, but it made me think of space buoys (pic related). a large asteroid will pass between the earth and the moon tomorrow but we only just noticed it [1]. maybe its time that governments start contracting out the development of space buoys which can be attached to asteroids, acting as navigation beacons, warnings, and scientific instruments. and once its time to start mining asteroids or visiting them or whatever, it'll be easier to find them because they'll already have a beacon pinging their location.

[1] https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/asteroid-2024mk-1.7247336

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:50:59 UTC No. 16258962

>>16258950
The rising cost of refined material will overcome any regulatory red tape well before launching a mining colony to Ceres becomes the cheapest available option, to say nothing of the overhead of running that place. Think of all the upkeep costs you'd have for a comparable operation on Earth and then add in the need to maintain a completely closed life support system.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:53:43 UTC No. 16258965

>>16258962
Why would humans have to get involved with the mining side of things? Refining, I get, but the mining operation could be done entirely autonomously once an asteroid is picked out.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:54:24 UTC No. 16258966

>>16258962
We are talking about autonomously exploiting rich deposits of high value materials at small scales, not sending dudes to Ceres to mine copper with pickaxes.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:55:39 UTC No. 16258967

Clear Update

Clear visited Mitsubishi Electric's Kamakura Works which primarily works on building satellites and satellite components. At the plant Clear interviews several engineers there. Video will go up on the 30th.
https://twitter.com/ME_JP_official/status/1806631238431920545

Go Clear! Can't wait to watch it.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:57:00 UTC No. 16258969

>>16258967
>a vtumor is visiting a real world place
how does that work

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:59:54 UTC No. 16258971

>>16258965
>>16258966
"It'll all be done by fully autonomous robots!" is no different from saying "A wizard will do it with magic!"

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:00:56 UTC No. 16258973

>>16258957
>production rates that aren’t even teetering on running out.

It's actually a becoming a big problem in the mining industry. For a lot of metals the discovery rate of new deposits is going down, the discovered deposits are of smaller scale and increasingly lower quality. Lower quality deposits cost more to extract and that is compounded by the rising cost of energy. Turns out we live in a world of limited resources, it's kind of hard to believe.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:01:35 UTC No. 16258975

>>16258971
Yup /sfg/ always hand waves shit kek.
We could be autonomously mining a planet as we speak, that planet is Earth. Yet we’re not. Curious.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:02:59 UTC No. 16258979

>>16258973
In two months they will find a huge deposit under North American soil and it will be a non-issue.
It keeps happening.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:04:10 UTC No. 16258981

>>16258971
What part about the suggestion is magic? A machine that grabs onto an asteroid and drills out core samples to load into a dispenser mechanism? This isn't exactly some self replicating Von Neumann machine.

>>16258975
Mining operations are getting more and more automated by the day, also go back with your shitty reddit speak.

>>16258979
>It keeps happening

It actually doesn't keep happening, that's the problem.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:04:40 UTC No. 16258983

>>16258958
You can't claim chink EVs don't pass standards when you don't have data to back it up. Burden of proof and all that.

It's the same excuse for the Kei car bans. They claim safety but in reality it's salty truck dealers lobbying the local governments. You otherwise allow motorcycles and ancient shitboxes of the same vintage and relative safety.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:05:09 UTC No. 16258984

>>16258960
looks like nasa is interested in something similar but for the moon, but otherwise a quick google search didnt turn up any similar results
https://science.nasa.gov/science-research/science-enabling-technology/technology-highlights/space-age-buoys-for-long-duration-monitoring-of-the-moon/

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:05:54 UTC No. 16258985

>>16258981
Guess how good we are at off-world drilling right now. Seriously take a guess.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:07:37 UTC No. 16258987

>>16258985
>Guess how good we are at automously landing orbital class reusable rocket boosters right now. Seriously take a guess

Your comment circa 2010

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:08:22 UTC No. 16258988

>>16258971 >>16258975
Part of the issue is that robotics hasn't evolved enough to properly traverse Earth's rough terrain.
It's a lot easier to traverse through space, dipshits. We've been doing that autonomously for years. We even did that for the asteroid return mission.

>>16258985
Well considering our first attempt went well, I'd say we're FANTASTIC at it! Realistically though, we won't know until we put it into larger scale.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:09:16 UTC No. 16258989

>>16258987
Actually a good point but quit reddit spacing everything

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:09:30 UTC No. 16258990

>>16258983
>thing not manufactured to meet American safety standards does not meet American safety standards
>fucking magnets how do they work?

Start by educating yourself what American auto safety standards are.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:11:06 UTC No. 16258993

/sfg/ does not understand business. we have this discussion every week
>>16258936
I'm not even sure where to start. You'd need to invent like four things to even do a survey and your minimum launch cost to get out there would be like $90 million. You want your vehicles to go far and do a lot so weight would be a limiting factor on vehicles per launch. Anon was asking about a startup and you said
>just spend hundreds of millions of dollars to do something with no immediate return for anyone involved
You basically described a NASA mission.
>>16258939
>3500 metric tons of copper in one go is somehow less profitable than the entire yearly copper production
Profit is what's left when you subtract expenditure from revenue. If expenditure is higher than revenue then you lose money. 3500 metric tons of copper is half the cost of a falcon 9 launch lmao
>space megastructures within our lifetime
Don't get me wrong, I sincerely wish your optimism wasn't completely uninformed
>>16258950
>digging a hole is more expensive than asteroid mining
Dummy
>>16258962
Costs would need to rise something like 1000x to 10000x to justify it, in which case digging a deeper hole will be economically feasible first. It's just not happening man
>>16258971
kek

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:11:59 UTC No. 16258994

>>16258990
>>thing not manufactured to meet American safety standards does not meet American safety standards
Where is the data they don't? You can't claim something doesn't meet a standard without evaluating and gathering data.
Why is the data a hard ask?
>what American auto safety standards are.
A low bar

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:12:51 UTC No. 16258996

>>16258993
Hundreds of millions is startup size these days if you can con some VC rubes

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:16:03 UTC No. 16259000

>>16258996
The only way to make money from asteroid mining this century is by tricking investors who know just as much as >>16258921

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:18:25 UTC No. 16259007

>>16259000
The only way to make money from a planet spanning network of tens of thousands of satellites providing high speed internet to every corner of the globe this century is by tricking investors who know just as much as >>16259000

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:18:38 UTC No. 16259008

>>16258993
>You'd need to invent like four things to even do a survey
N-no? NASA already has everything required to do a survey. For god's sake, the Psyche mission launched from a Falcon Heavy, and they apparently knew the metals BEFORE they even launched the vehicle.
We just need to take the sensors and find ways to make it cheaper, which sounds like a dream come true with basically any start up in existence ever. After all, what's the point of a start up if you're not somehow offering something unique that your competitors cannot offer? What's the easiest way to get a leg up?
>You basically described a NASA mission
I also described practically every Silicon Valley tech startup.
>3500 metric tons of copper
Okay my original point was actually gold(which is why I ended up with an oddly specific number that seemingly matched the total tonnage of gold produced year over year,) but I decided copper was more valuable when it came to reducing costs. That's my bad for not adjusting the values accordingly.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:20:57 UTC No. 16259013

>>16259008
you have such a romanticized view of industry and businesses hahah

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:21:17 UTC No. 16259014

>>16259013
Ad hominem

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:22:38 UTC No. 16259018

>>16259013
>every Silicon Valley tech startup is a literal capitol investment scam with the mass majority of them never making more than a couple dollars of profit
>you have such a romanticized view of industry and businesses
I feel like I'm more jaded than anything. It's why I'm being as optimistic as I can be with the megastructures statement.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:24:59 UTC No. 16259024

>>16259018
I should have clarified I was nta heh

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:25:12 UTC No. 16259025

>>16259007
That's a completely separate business you stupid faggot, that's like saying filtering gold from seawater is profitable because undersea cables exist.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:27:37 UTC No. 16259029

>>16259025
No it's a straight comparison in how cheap launch costs turns near impossibilities to the mundane.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:30:09 UTC No. 16259034

>noooooooo potentially profitable thing is hard and needs lots of engineering work done before I can even conceive of it being possible

WHERE DO YOU THINK YOU ARE, FUCKING KILL YOURSELF

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:31:37 UTC No. 16259037

>>16258967
i'm gonna laugh my ass off if it ends up being the anime girl equivalent of estronaut where all she says is EHHHH, MAJI DE?!! SUGOI!

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:35:12 UTC No. 16259045

>>16259008
>Okay my original point was actually gold
Alright, so you need to fly out there somehow, either mine and process on site and send the processed gold to LEO or just move the entire asteroid to LEO, and then safely bring it down to the surface. You need to do that for 3500 metric tons and not spend more than ~$55 billion per ton. That's a fantasy.
>>16259029
>near impossibilities
Communications satellites are among the only things in space that turn a profit, building a bunch of small ones is not enough of a leap to justify the feasibility of asteroid mining.
>>16259034
>potentially profitable
>needs lots of engineering work done
This is economics. It will never be more profitable than just digging a hole in the ground. If the price of the commodity goes up, then digging a deeper hole will still be cheaper than asteroid mining. Starship will make trips up and down from LEO absurdly cheap and it still won't make sense.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:36:36 UTC No. 16259050

>>16259045
$55 million*

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:38:51 UTC No. 16259053

>>16258559
Startups can benefit immediately through a herd defense. Just start building shit with zero regard for federal regulations. If enough people do it the court system will get too backlogged to get to any of these cases for years. The illegal alien issue has shown that courts have no remedy for a backlog other than issuing court dates years out and hoping the problem resolves itself before then. Once a build is completed it can't be retroactively deleted by regulation.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:39:06 UTC No. 16259054

it's not that easy in rocketry

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:41:35 UTC No. 16259058

>>16258994
lets see those studies of Chinese cars passing "strict Euro safety standards" my wumao friend

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:41:57 UTC No. 16259060

>>16258967
I love her body and spirit

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:46:37 UTC No. 16259069

>>16258900
Vibe

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:52:27 UTC No. 16259071

Guys i'm dying, i have 38 degree fever, a sore troath and a massive headache.
If i dont survive this, let it be know that i hate all you fucking summerfags so much.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:52:40 UTC No. 16259072

We don't have a commercially available space mining vehicle. Asteroid Mosquito may someday come about. It's on the drawing board right now. Bagger 288 is real. You've seen it down at Garzweiler. We're building the main structure. We have all the buckets done, ready to be put on the test stand at Rheinmetall... I don't see any hardware for an Asteroid Mosquito, except that he's going to take a core drill, some solar panels and a coilgun and put them together and that becomes the Mosquito. It's not that easy in space mining.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:54:44 UTC No. 16259075

>>16258353
this is a non issue

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:57:56 UTC No. 16259079

>>16259071
Only six degrees above freezing?!

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:59:01 UTC No. 16259082

>>16259071
we use the units of countries that can into spaceflight in this thread

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:59:27 UTC No. 16259083

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 00:59:44 UTC No. 16259085

>>16259079
>>16259082
Nobody tell them.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 01:00:25 UTC No. 16259088

>>16259083
Ngl I’m kind of ready for this rocket to go away it’s getting boring

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 01:02:02 UTC No. 16259091

Don't ask questions, just consume rocket and get excited for next rocket

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 01:03:11 UTC No. 16259093

https://x.com/AdrianDittmann/status/1806656690496086321

Musk's birthday

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 01:04:03 UTC No. 16259094

>>16258171
Why did the Soviet moon landing hinge entirely on getting the N-1 to work? I don't get it, just because the Apollo program planners decided that a single launch on a super-heavy was the way they'd do it why couldn't anybody else who wanted to land a man on the moon in the 60s who didn't have a Saturn 5 equivalent just launch the crew capsule and the lunar lander separately on two (or more if you want) medium lift rockets and rendezvous in orbit and go from there? It doesn't seem to me that a moon landing was ever dependent on a super-heavy lift rocket being developed like the Soviets (and even the US) acted like it was. And if you say because the Soviets couldn't do orbital rendezvous/build in orbit then what about all the space stations they built? How many launches did those take?

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 01:07:11 UTC No. 16259099

>>16259094
They wanted to do everything automatically, so an orbital rendezvous of soyuz was off the table.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 01:08:35 UTC No. 16259103

>>16259093
bro said happy birthday to himself

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 01:09:02 UTC No. 16259104

>>16259094
lmao holy fuck, is this SDXL

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 01:11:03 UTC No. 16259109

>>16259094
Because the space race was an arms race, that's why.

What's the point of going if you can't also have the largest greatest most powerful rocket ever, or at least a direct competitor.
Think of it this way, you don't need a Tsar Bomba sized nuke to level a city, and yet..

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 01:15:44 UTC No. 16259113

>>16259094
You'd need at least seven Soyuz launches to pull off a lunar fly-by. Soviet computer systems in the early 1960s were simply not up to the task of handing that many automated dockings. The goal was also to land on the moon and I haven't ever seen it clearly shown that the Soyuz-ABV could have pulled off more than just a lunar flyby.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 01:18:20 UTC No. 16259117

>>16259075
There's no sugar coating this.....

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 01:19:11 UTC No. 16259118

>>16259094
>>16259113
Wouldn't they run into the same problem that Artemis has where they need to launch multiple rockets within a short time frame before the transfer stage fuel boils off?

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 01:29:48 UTC No. 16259127

>>16259109
DESU I think the Soviets just used the N-1 blowing up as an excuse to not even try, I think they knew that N-1 or not if they tried they probably would have ended up with some dead cosmonaut on the moon and egg all over their faces. Too bad, if they had and succeeded there might have been a "moon base race" and there might have been people living (or at least "personnel stationed") on the moon for the last 50 years now.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 01:31:48 UTC No. 16259129

>>16259127
DESU instead of the t b h I wrote, sometimes this place really makes me shake my head.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 01:32:23 UTC No. 16259131

>>16259129
I just blew shit all over my bed

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 01:33:59 UTC No. 16259133

>>16259118
Please do not compare the SLS to the N-1, we're begging you.
t. NASA

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 01:35:10 UTC No. 16259135

>>16259118
Soyuz probably could have managed a fast enough cadence once it hit its stride in the late 60s, but all of these early 60s designs were pure hypergols so boil off wasn't an issue. Most of the Soviet's work with cryogenic space tugs wouldn't come until a lot later when they were adapting the N-1's Blok-D stage to other jobs.

>>16259113
That said, there was an even earlier plan called Sever that did away with the automated docking and fuel transfer idea from the early Soyuz and had a stripped down Vostock capsule manually docking small booster stages together in LEO. Once five of those had been assembled into a chain a larger spacecraft (5K "Sever") would then get docked to the train and light each of the boosters in sequence to push it onto a translunar trajectory. Sever was a competing design to the 7K Soyuz that hadn't moved all of its non-essential gear into a separate orbital module. Again, it's uncertain if this could do more than just a lunar flyby, but it might have been easier to scale by upgrading the booster segments or just stacking more of them.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 01:51:57 UTC No. 16259144

>>16259135
what in the world is that abomination

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 01:55:06 UTC No. 16259147

>>16259058
Chinese cars are sold in the EU right now, and everyone with a brain knows that the EU has stricter standards than the US

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 01:57:19 UTC No. 16259149

>>16259144
A lunar mission idea from 1961 that would have been built using an Soyuz rocket that could only lift 6500 kg at a time

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 02:02:44 UTC No. 16259150

Who else is really psyched for this mission? I fully expect it to be the best human spaceflight kino since shuttle retired.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 02:13:34 UTC No. 16259157

>>16259150
Much higher than Gemini, so yeah

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 02:19:51 UTC No. 16259160

>>16259045
>Billion
No it's not, that's totally-
>million
Oh okay yeah.
This is of course assuming you're doing EVERYTHING on Earth. In the near future, we're probably going to try to create off-Earth manufacturing centers, and the most important of which is propellant manufacturing. If you can get tons of propellant into an orbital refuel depot for cheap, then it completely offsets the costs. I ran the numbers on a dV map, and going from Cerus to Earth LEO is only 400 m/s more than going from ground to Earth LEO.
Coincidentally, we actually have the PERFECT spot to manufacture more propellant, in the form of Mars. Methane and hydrogen production are completely feasible, and the gravity is much lower, meaning far less dV is required to lift off. Also coincidentally, Mars is really, REALLY close to the asteroid belt. Using Cerus as our example mining platform, we can get away with only having 7290~ dV on the transportation vehicle itself(not accounting for shifting weight and all of that,) saving us over 2000 dV compared to a direct Earth->Cerus transport.
It's totally feasible, though obviously it'll take a lot of time to prepare for all of this. And also, this wasn't the startup's intention anyways, the proposed startup was to have simple probes that could probably be propelled through solar sails if time wasn't a concern, to survey the asteroid belts.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 02:27:34 UTC No. 16259162

https://x.com/astroferg/status/1806537933442134448

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 02:28:53 UTC No. 16259163

>>16259150
I look forward to seeing regular dudes go on EVA, that'll be neat.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 02:29:16 UTC No. 16259164

>>16259162

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 02:32:51 UTC No. 16259170

>>16259160
NTA, but you seem extremely deluded.
There isn't an economic basis for this stuff, local production outcompetes interplanetary trade in all but the most extreme cases.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 02:35:43 UTC No. 16259171

>>16259170
Uh-huh.
Extreme cases. Like megastructures... Or orbital building in general... No matter how you slice it, 9k dV is 9k dV.
Also, I know I only took one economics class so I do have some gaps, but I fail to see how this would be ANY different to the modern global goods transportation. It's just an even larger scaled version of that.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 02:36:26 UTC No. 16259172

>>16259160
I'm who you replied to and I actually expect asteroid mining to be feasible from a fully industrialized Mars. The sort of vehicle you could launch to the belt or the trojans with something like the reusable superheavy first stage would bring costs down to something reasonable. We're talking about centuries from now though. That's so far off that surveying remains in the realm of governments. There's no money in any aspect of it right now.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 02:39:59 UTC No. 16259173

>>16259172
To be fair, an minimally industrialized Mars could probably benefit immensely with it too. It'd be pretty easy to just (precisely) lob hunks of material into a barren side of the planet in such a way that it doesn't cause a century-long sandstorm.

I wonder if you were thinking I was going to try to land the transportation vehicle because I wasn't ever considering that this was a possibility until just this moment. It makes no sense to me to give up the vacuum of space, where your vacuum-optimized engines would be way more efficient than anything required to escape Earth's gravity, just so you can land a bulky transportation vehicle.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 02:44:15 UTC No. 16259175

>>16259173
I'm skeptical. Small asteroids wouldn't be worth the trouble and large asteroids aren't possible to move. We're talking so far in the future it isn't relevant to this general

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 02:45:12 UTC No. 16259177

>>16259171
>megastructures
No one has ever said that asteroid mining wouldn't close its case for building Zeon. The problem is that no one is even thinking about building Zeon for a very, very long time.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 02:50:05 UTC No. 16259180

>x thing won't happen for centuries

Incredible midwittery. Even one century ago most people were still riding around on fucking horses.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 02:50:46 UTC No. 16259182

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0ofmSePqRM
A Falcon 9 is launching an NRO payload out of Vandenberg in ~25 min.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 02:51:13 UTC No. 16259183

>>16259175
>small asteroids wouldn't be worth the trouble
Ahem...
Phobos.
Alright, but seriously. I'll take the hint and just stop. I don't think it'll be centuries like you think though. I think it's closer to decades after the first humans reach Mars.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 02:52:34 UTC No. 16259185

>>16259180
Technically they still are... Anyways, it's only about 20 years before horses get obsoleted(1945) and you'll have to be a bit more specific about it. Or just say that most people couldn't afford air travel, one of the two.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 02:54:27 UTC No. 16259187

>>16259171
By extreme cases I meant those goods with the highest value/mass. That's luxury goods basically. The economic basis for orbital megastructures isn't good without already established interplanetary trade, since they're entirely dependent on resources from elsewhere. You'd be better of establishing colonies on spinning asteroids and trying to set up isru there so they can support themselves to some extent, even that's sketchy.
>>16259180
>>16259183
see picrel, now compare to current cost to orbit which is ~$1500 per kg. Note that landlocked countries trade much less than countries with costs: switzerland specializes in luxury goods because of this. The impact of transport costs is huge: for interplanetary trade you need what you might call 'sci-fi' technology.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 02:55:37 UTC No. 16259188

>>16259164
>>16259162
starship twilight effect is gonna be INSANE

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 02:56:25 UTC No. 16259191

>>16259187
*You'd be better off
*trade much less than countries with coasts:

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 02:58:13 UTC No. 16259193

>>16259180
Any advancements that apply to asteroid mining will also apply to ground mining. There is no path near term that would make asteroid mining feasible. There is no engineering problem here, it's just economics. See >>16259187. Transport costs go up 150,000%.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 02:58:22 UTC No. 16259194

>>16259187
>cost to orbit
If you're reusing the same vessel to transport things and just throw heat shielded cargo pods or something other easy, aero-braked method at Earth that doesn't dispose of your space-faring transport vessel, your cost to orbit goes down dramatically.
Likewise, with an orbital propellant depot at Mars, your cost goes down dramatically, as it is 1/3rd the dV and you need 1/3rd the TWR to get the same propellant to a depot.
I guess you could consider things that have been planned for literal decades at this point "science-fiction" but I disagree.
Anyways, I did promise to end it, so I'll end it here.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 02:59:13 UTC No. 16259196

>>16259182
shut up we're debating science fiction

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:02:58 UTC No. 16259198

>>16259194
>dV
>TWR
You need to stop using metrics besides dollars.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:03:15 UTC No. 16259199

Clear Live for NROL-186 Mission
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLzby57f76U
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLzby57f76U
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLzby57f76U

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:03:25 UTC No. 16259200

>>16259182
https://x.com/i/broadcasts/1vAxRvDPwBrxl
Twitter stream is up

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:03:52 UTC No. 16259201

>>16259187
With solar powered mass drivers, the cost of space transit anywhere in flatspace is essentially 0 outside of the upfront construction cost. Mass drivers are not at all "science fiction". Getting goods down a gravity well with an atmosphere is also super cheap.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:05:50 UTC No. 16259204

>>16259201
then stop shitting up /sfg/ and go for it.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:06:57 UTC No. 16259206

>>16259198
>the cost is very clearly a logistics problem and not a result of any hard limiting factors
>discuss the logistics problem and solutions
>you need to stop using metrics besides dollars

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:07:02 UTC No. 16259208

it's up

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:08:40 UTC No. 16259210

>>16259206
it's a 'friction of transport' problem.
We need to reduce the cost to transport to orbit in the region of x1000 to make interplanetary trade feasible, this is all that matters.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:10:05 UTC No. 16259212

>>16259210
>We need to reduce the cost to transport to orbit in the region of x1000

Just scale the rockets larger. Obviously.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:10:36 UTC No. 16259213

>>16259204
Honestly, I would if I was wealthy enough.
I'm working on the wealth problem but I probably won't be wealthy enough before someone else manages to solve the whole thing.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:12:41 UTC No. 16259215

/sfg/ still doesn't understand economics. fuck you guys I'm watching the spy say launch

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:14:26 UTC No. 16259218

lunch

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:14:31 UTC No. 16259219

>>16259215
why would the spy say that?

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:15:32 UTC No. 16259220

Max-Qute!

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:17:33 UTC No. 16259222

That stage sep looked kind of tilted

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:18:54 UTC No. 16259223

my baka wife clear lost the stream

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:19:24 UTC No. 16259225

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:19:52 UTC No. 16259226

>>16259200
What's with all the debris? I haven't seen that much on earlier streams.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:20:59 UTC No. 16259227

>>16259215
Sad, small soulled E*rther mindset. YWNGTS

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:23:00 UTC No. 16259229

he's done it again
x326

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:24:17 UTC No. 16259231

>>16259227
There isn't anything wrong with his argument, you're just coping.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:24:20 UTC No. 16259232

>>16259129
>DESU instead of the t b h I wrote
How nu r u
?

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:25:13 UTC No. 16259234

felon's company can't keep getting away with it
reusability was supposed to be a science fiction meme

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:27:11 UTC No. 16259237

>>16259222
they usually dog-leg for Vandy launches

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:27:20 UTC No. 16259238

>>16259234
it's ok, we can currently mald about husk getting a billion dollars to blow up ISS!
how could he con nasa into letting him destroy a piece of history?! the man is a menace

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:30:49 UTC No. 16259243

>>16259238
jokes on NASA. His master plan is to boost it into a parking orbit and then claim it as his own. Will then add a centrifuge (maybe the one Japan mothballed) and start doing real long-term Mars occupation studies.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:34:33 UTC No. 16259245

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:36:29 UTC No. 16259248

When is NASA going to announce commercial cargo and commercial crew contracts for Artemis Gateway?

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:42:11 UTC No. 16259253

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:42:18 UTC No. 16259254

>>16259245
first falcon launch from hell

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:42:21 UTC No. 16259255

>>16259248
spacex already got it for dragon xl

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:44:40 UTC No. 16259258

>>16259245
fuck, I thought those were cool shock cones until I squinted hard. Fucking vtumor.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:47:04 UTC No. 16259259

>>16259255
yeah I know spaceX will be #1, but I wanted to see some other companies try to make lunar transit stuff

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:56:20 UTC No. 16259268

made some webms while listening to Clear

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:57:39 UTC No. 16259271

https://images.nasa.gov/details/KSC-20240625-MH-AJN01-0001-GOES_U_Isolated_Launch_and_Landing_Views-M7629.mov

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 03:58:43 UTC No. 16259273

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 04:00:01 UTC No. 16259275

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 04:01:03 UTC No. 16259276

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 04:02:06 UTC No. 16259278

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 04:03:09 UTC No. 16259281

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 04:04:12 UTC No. 16259283

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 04:05:23 UTC No. 16259284

man imagine if this was centered and focused

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 04:06:26 UTC No. 16259285

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 04:07:12 UTC No. 16259286

>>16259243
It would unironically be cheaper to trash the thing and start over

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 04:07:24 UTC No. 16259287

>>16259283
It's too bad SpaceX will never break even on this doomed rocket.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 04:08:09 UTC No. 16259290

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 04:08:15 UTC No. 16259291

>>16259037
It's a scripted japanese event. Of course it'll be the most vapid shit you've ever seen with nothing risky or confrontational.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 04:09:11 UTC No. 16259292

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 04:21:41 UTC No. 16259300

nucelar quadrad incoming

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 04:33:46 UTC No. 16259308

Its been almost 2 weeks since any Vast news. And a month since any hardware news. Im being starved of Vast newe bros... please Max if youre reading this post some more stuff about whats going on over there.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 04:48:43 UTC No. 16259313

>>16259259
RFA is making Argo for "lunar logistics services"
https://www.rfa.space/argo/
And I'm pretty sure JAXA is also developing a lunar version of their HTV cargo vehicle

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 05:12:18 UTC No. 16259319

>>16258741
Northrop stays in their lane and quietly works on black money skunkworks projects for DARPA

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 06:29:41 UTC No. 16259377

Wow that's just insane

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 06:35:07 UTC No. 16259384

>>16259377
that's crazy

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 06:39:03 UTC No. 16259388

We need to replace Biden. Who is the best Democratic alternative for spaceflight?

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 06:39:19 UTC No. 16259390

>>16259377

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 06:40:41 UTC No. 16259392

>>16259388
None of them, they're fucking statists.
We need to elect Jaiver Milei.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 06:43:20 UTC No. 16259395

>>16259388
Why dont we elect Elon musk?

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 07:18:46 UTC No. 16259431

>>16259395
Not born in American

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 08:00:04 UTC No. 16259464

>>16259388
maybe some sort of China basher
realistically, they are all awful

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 08:56:17 UTC No. 16259490

>>16258419
This is gonna be so Epic.
I'm gonna have to prepare spare pants for this one.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 08:56:20 UTC No. 16259491

>>16259392
More like Jewvier Milei

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 08:59:20 UTC No. 16259492

>>16257968
We need to hire the Germans to build us a real reusable rocket. Ariane is too expensive.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 09:00:51 UTC No. 16259493

>>16259492
What about that secret german project in darkest africa that was like 1000 pencil-thin boosters lashed together?

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 09:53:09 UTC No. 16259527

There are virtually no improvements that can be made to the tunnel boring machine. They have essentially reached perfection.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 09:53:17 UTC No. 16259528

>>16259493
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfBcCLSQP-c

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 09:56:17 UTC No. 16259529

>>16259491

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 10:03:29 UTC No. 16259530

>>16259529
Who's this fag? He looks like a Jesuit (catholic jew)

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 10:04:30 UTC No. 16259531

>>16259527
From a future Mars textbook:
>Having evolved geodynamic efficiency, boring machines evolved no further. Boring machines are an evolutionary dead end.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 10:14:53 UTC No. 16259536

>>16259527
there are plenty, some of the low hanging ones that the boring company is going for are
1) Porpoising (start and end above ground so you eliminate the dig a hole) and lower the TBM into it)
2) Zero people in tunnel (ZPT), eliminates the need for safety etc stuff for people in the tunnel and mostly automates the machine except a remote control center (for example in a container next to the starting location)
the boring company is also iterating on the boring machine itself, they just tested iteration 3 but iteration 4 is already mostly done I think and iteration 5 is being built
there is bound to be a bunch of optimizations that rapid iteration will uncover

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 10:45:58 UTC No. 16259546

>>16259530
I find it funny that he literally met with the Pope randomly that one time. Like for what purpose?

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 10:47:53 UTC No. 16259547

>>16259546
Are those the Pope's grandkids on the right?

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 10:48:57 UTC No. 16259548

>>16259546

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 10:49:52 UTC No. 16259549

>>16259547
>the Pope's grandkids
Anon, think about what you just posted.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 10:53:17 UTC No. 16259553

>>16259549
No.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 10:54:31 UTC No. 16259554

>>16259546
>>16259547
Shit those kids look a lot like Elon.
You know what that means right...
I can't believe the Pope fucked Elon's wife

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 11:00:33 UTC No. 16259557

>>16259554
which wife? which concubine?

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 11:00:43 UTC No. 16259558

i can't believe elon fucked the pope

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 11:02:26 UTC No. 16259561

>>16259546
Musk heard “ban the latin mass” and mistakenly thought it had something to do with saving weight on starship

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 11:03:07 UTC No. 16259562

>>16259557
Gwynne Shotwell

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 11:04:02 UTC No. 16259564

>>16257951
>Biden
only funding for meme IFLS bullshit like astronomy
>Trump (or really any other republican desu)
Funding for BMD aka BRILLIANT FUCKING PEBBLES HELL YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH BOYS

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 11:07:05 UTC No. 16259567

>>16259546
why does that one dude have long hair? Is this the one that went troon mode?

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 11:07:22 UTC No. 16259568

>>16259388
Tulsi Gabbard. She's still calling herself a democrat, right?

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 11:11:33 UTC No. 16259571

can you mutts shut the fuck up

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 11:11:47 UTC No. 16259572

>>16259464
>>maybe some sort of China basher
None better in Washington than Nancy Pelosi, but unfortunately she doesn't support BMD.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 11:16:59 UTC No. 16259577

>>16259571
unfortunately mutts are incapable of shutting up about their second most popular religion.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 11:18:11 UTC No. 16259579

>>16259571
In the last 24 hours we got confirmation that the best space president in decades is coming back and the supreme court decided the three letter orgs can't make laws anymore. There will be more money and motivation and less regulation. This is so unbelievably good for space flight I can't believe it.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 11:19:30 UTC No. 16259581

>>16259577
>>16259579
like poetry

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 11:20:11 UTC No. 16259582

>>16259581
kek

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 11:21:10 UTC No. 16259585

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 11:29:37 UTC No. 16259593

>>16259581
It's relevant you retard. What is there to talk about in Europe? Your unelected officials decided not to develop a modern rocket and not let you use any other launch vehicles? No one was calling that off topic the other day

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 11:40:33 UTC No. 16259600

>>16259593
You have a monoparty with a bit of political hat changing theatre for the masses to lap up. Nothing significant is going to change for space regardless of who who gets elected.
Case in point: biden changed almost nothing about artemis when he came in.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 11:42:07 UTC No. 16259601

>>16259571
Anon, its euro hours

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 11:44:43 UTC No. 16259604

>>16259585
uhh I thought rockets could only fly in space. this rocket is clearly at cloud level

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 11:46:07 UTC No. 16259606

>>16259600
Yeah, for Israel or something, sure. You'd need to be completely unfamiliar with recent US space policy to think it applies there though.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 11:48:38 UTC No. 16259608

israel mentioned

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 11:52:41 UTC No. 16259611

>>16259604
it’s a spaceplane sweaty it doesn’t have limits unlike inferior crafts such as starship

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 11:52:46 UTC No. 16259612

>>16259606
Here's what's going to happen
1. Artemis will continue
2. it will be delayed
3. congress will be pulled at by oldspace contractors to cancel and restart with something 'more sensible', and pushed on by NASA to provide more funding for Artemis.
4. SpaceX will continue to rise in profile while Bezos continues to sue.

Who gets to sit in the big chair and put his signature on paper given to him has absolutely 0 impact on any of this.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 11:54:57 UTC No. 16259617

>>16258393
>hydrolox, something that is still dark magic for Russia.
Not sure about their capability to build them currently but they used to have the best hydrolox engines in the world. RD-0120, RD-57, RD-0146, RD-701 etc

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 11:56:10 UTC No. 16259620

>>16259612
the admin being pro-Musk instead of anti-Musk will have an impact

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 11:58:54 UTC No. 16259622

since we're already talking about politics may I draw everyone's attention to what's happening here in the Balkans

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 11:59:37 UTC No. 16259626

>>16259622
What? More balkoids chimping out?

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 11:59:50 UTC No. 16259627

>>16259620
Even if Trump was pro-Musk (he isn't, in fact he has publicly insulted him on truth social) it would have zero impact.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 11:59:52 UTC No. 16259628

>>16259622
is it relevant to spaceflight?

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 12:00:14 UTC No. 16259629

>>16259612
Beyond being a jobs program Artemis is basically an ego project. Trump being in charge will impact that kek. Also the recent supreme court ruling will decrease the impact of sue origin.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 12:01:42 UTC No. 16259630

>>16259627
wrong, Trump is opportunist but sees the benefits of working with Musk
in the very least the lawfare against Musk would stop, in the best case Musk might influence Trump and the republicans in general to prioritize certain legislation, removing hindering legislation and so on
it might have a very large impact in fact

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 12:03:30 UTC No. 16259633

>>16259561
"But I'm not launching the Mexican welders to space yet?"

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 12:04:24 UTC No. 16259635

so what if Trump is convicted even more times? He gonna go to jail?

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 12:10:45 UTC No. 16259640

>>16259630
>Trump is [Wishful thinking caused by parasocial relationship]
It needs to be said again: politics is a major mutt religion that otherwise fails at representative democracy. The fact that you have had an almost corpse president for four years should tell you that this stuff does not matter.
The supreme court will continue what it does regardless of president. The lawfare against Musk will continue.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 12:11:46 UTC No. 16259643

POLITICS NIGGERS OUT
>>>/pol/
>>>/pol/
>>>/pol/

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 12:12:18 UTC No. 16259644

>>16259640
I don't care about Trump but you clearly have TDS
lmao
the lawfare isn't coming from the supreme court you fucking retard

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 12:13:13 UTC No. 16259647

>>16259640
So how come the president of the US can be so senile? Wouldn't it make more sense for the party to suggest someone younger who would then have a greater chance of winning the election?

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 12:14:52 UTC No. 16259650

reminder to only post spaceflight in the new thread which we will make at page 10

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 12:16:42 UTC No. 16259651

>>16259644
Reading comprehension you absolute pillock.

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 12:17:43 UTC No. 16259652

>>16259651
nta but I have good reading comprehension

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 12:18:34 UTC No. 16259653

>>16259549
Who was Cesare Borgia and how many children did he have?