🧵 /sfg/ - Spaceflight General
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 00:54:44 UTC No. 16303971
Dragon to the rescue edition
SpaceX has been issued a contract to start preparing to bring the stranded Shartliner astronauts back
https://govtribe.com/award/federal-
previous >>16301038
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 00:57:33 UTC No. 16303978
Reposting from previous thread:
>>16303965
Best estimates are late August to early September.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 00:57:55 UTC No. 16303980
3 weeks until crew 9
4 weeks until IFT-5
6 weeks until polaris dawn
no ETA on starliner return
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 00:58:19 UTC No. 16303982
FT-5 is scheduled for October 15, this is bad news for cadence but good news for tower, since Tower 2 will be complete and used as a catch tower. The mount will take anothrr 2 years to complete
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 00:59:20 UTC No. 16303983
>>16303978
maybe starship will bring the shartliner test monkeys home
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 00:59:34 UTC No. 16303984
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 00:59:51 UTC No. 16303987
>>16303983
They'll send up Crew-9 with two astronauts instead of four if they're doing a rescue.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 01:02:25 UTC No. 16303989
>>16303979
Then why is NSF patented it and selling T-shirts? SDid you steal their meme?
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 01:07:55 UTC No. 16303996
>>16303980
>4 weeks
>possibly early september
nope
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 01:10:03 UTC No. 16304001
>>16303989
The legal system doesn't care about origin as much as being first to file and nobody disputing the claim.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 01:10:27 UTC No. 16304002
>>16303984
who are you quoting?
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 01:10:52 UTC No. 16304003
>>16303989
>Did you steal their meme?
Your trolling sucks, sit down and shut up
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 01:10:59 UTC No. 16304004
>>16303971
Well...can't wait to hear how they feel about Boeing after this.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 01:11:14 UTC No. 16304005
>>16303982
>FT-5 is scheduled for October 15
No, it's not.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 01:14:34 UTC No. 16304011
>up to 25 starship launches next year
reminder that even if they get half that, its still 1 launch a month
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 01:17:44 UTC No. 16304014
I think we should build a mirror array at Earth-Sun L1 in order to block just a bit of sunlight so that carbon dioxide emmission related warming can be negated, thus allowing us to ramp up atmospheric CO2 to 800 ppm and boost plant growth rates globally.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 01:19:56 UTC No. 16304016
>>16304003
Jesus Christ relax, you know damn well what came first and I don't have to argue with you.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 01:22:17 UTC No. 16304017
>>16304011
I think they will get kicked out of texas if they launch that much. Noise levels and the pubic pressure will be too high
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 01:23:30 UTC No. 16304018
>>16304014
nah, just emmit normal amounts of sulphur dioxide
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 01:24:41 UTC No. 16304020
>>16304015
summarize this is 1 sentence
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 01:25:48 UTC No. 16304021
>>16304005
My model points to yes. I told you guys August 15 before and you said that's too long/pessimistic. so fuck you
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 01:26:02 UTC No. 16304022
>>16304020
>I am an angry aerospace boomer
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 01:26:53 UTC No. 16304023
>>16304020
The commenter expresses frustration and disbelief at the video’s content, accusing it of spreading misinformation and being unscientific.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 01:30:24 UTC No. 16304026
>>16304023
So the commentor has posted misinformation, I rest my case. Refuted.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 01:33:29 UTC No. 16304027
>>16304026
I have no idea what he's even replying to.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 01:33:53 UTC No. 16304028
>>16304020
SpaceX bad. They lie about payload. NASA doesn't like Starship. Other space companies are doing more than SpaceX. SpaceX is just lying to public, the reality is inverted to true space industry experts.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 01:45:43 UTC No. 16304032
>>16304017
It's not in a part of Texas that matters.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 01:50:30 UTC No. 16304035
>>16304028
anon said 1 sentence
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 01:57:00 UTC No. 16304041
https://www.inverelltimes.com.au/st
>SpaceX could use Australia as a rocket launch pad after the nation approved an aerospace deal with the United States estimated to be worth $1 billion over the next decade.
>The Australian Space Agency has confirmed the bilateral agreement has come into effect and allows US space launches and recovery missions in Australia while protecting American technology.
>The move could support as many as 100 spacecraft launches in Australia over the next 10 years, the agency told AAP.
Ausbros our time is now, we can finally work as night security guards and janitors at cuntbase
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 02:02:12 UTC No. 16304048
>>16304035
The seething critic of SpaceX's Starship program delivers a harsh assessment, arguing that Starship's current payload capacity is far below its ambitious targets, dismisses its reusability goals as unrealistic, highlights NASA's growing frustration and possible withdrawal of support, and points out significant issues with mission costs and workforce instability, all while accusing SpaceX of being overly secretive and out of touch with industry realities.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 02:05:53 UTC No. 16304050
>>16304035
EDS
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 02:06:57 UTC No. 16304054
>>16304048
None of the assertions made seem to be backed with any kind of evidence or even supporting logic.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 02:09:01 UTC No. 16304057
>>16304040
Good
S
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 02:19:54 UTC No. 16304071
Jeff Besos for VP
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 02:20:24 UTC No. 16304072
>>16304054
That's what you think "space cadet", but those of us in the industry know better
>>16304063
Honestly he would probably be worse for SpaceX (and therefore space generally) than someone who didn't know anything
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 02:24:20 UTC No. 16304076
>>16304027
That's my screenshot from the previous thread lol. The guy was saying SLS is better than Starship (the usual boomer points) and I replied with like one sentence about how Starship is cheaper despite the refilling so it's better. He decided to use the opportunity to write a dissertation
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 02:25:08 UTC No. 16304078
>>16304063
Hard pass
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 02:26:13 UTC No. 16304079
>>16303980
Requesting art of Polaris dawn crew playing outside in view of the ISS with shitliner crew seething
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 02:31:30 UTC No. 16304084
>>16304063
What are his views on the commercial industry?
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 02:32:54 UTC No. 16304086
>>16303971
>SpaceX has been issued a contract to start preparing to bring the stranded Shartliner astronauts back
That contract doesn't say anything of the sort, you fucking liar.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 02:33:03 UTC No. 16304087
>>16304041
Australia might not be the best choice for the kind of rapid launch operations SpaceX is interested in. Gilmore Space had their first Eris rocket ready to go back in April but they're still waiting on a launch license because the Australian Space Agency doesn't understand how NOTAMs or exclusion zones work.
https://www.spaceconnectonline.com.
>Speaking at the AFR’s Entrepreneur Summit, Adam Gilmour argued the delay from its target launch date in April was “more them than us” and even suggested officials were concerned its Eris launch vehicle could hit a passing ship. “Like, what if a cruise ship comes out of Hawaii and goes in the path of the rocket as it’s going up [from the North Queensland coast]? And how are we not going to hit the International Space Station?” he said.
>The business had been targeting a launch in April but can’t attempt a lift-off without approval from the Australian Space Agency. “We’ve got our main engineers answering all these questions and writing all these papers; instead of designing the next rocket, they’re doing this,” he said.
>>16304063
He's a statist faggot who never met a regulator he wasn't eager to blow. Anyone who is deep enough into the DNC's cloaca to get a VP nod is just going to be more of the last four years of problems.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 02:34:11 UTC No. 16304089
>>16304084
Boeing good
SpaceX bad
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 02:53:01 UTC No. 16304107
>>16304087
Falcon 9 from RAAF Woomera can do a down-range landing on solid ground in basically any direction.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 02:54:48 UTC No. 16304112
>>16304084
ULA stooge
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 02:57:44 UTC No. 16304116
>>16304112
*spooge
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 03:00:48 UTC No. 16304124
>>16304063
Bald and Pig-like
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 03:05:45 UTC No. 16304130
>>16304041
I'm going to put down that I'm abo so they hire me. Let's fucking go.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 03:13:00 UTC No. 16304137
>>16304107
Maybe once or twice a year, if you can convince the ASA there's no danger of crashing into a cruise ship near Alice Springs
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 03:14:19 UTC No. 16304138
>>16304137
A half century of flight operations out of Cape Canaveral ought to be convincing
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 03:26:17 UTC No. 16304152
>>16304130
>anon founded Rama Rama Aerospace and achieved orbit with a gas generator petrol design
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 03:31:00 UTC No. 16304157
>>16304137
Dropping a starship on Alice Springs would be a massive improvement
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 03:31:51 UTC No. 16304159
>>16303971
Trump's hair is really different from how it was in the Apprentice days. Not as round. If you showed someone from 2010 that pic I don't think they'd even recognize that's Donald Trump as President.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 03:33:12 UTC No. 16304162
>>16304086
>The contract is for a "SPECIAL STUDY FOR EMERGENCY RESPONSE" with a completion date of August 15, 2024
HMM I wonder what emergency response they have in mind that has to be done as a super rush job to be ready in two weeks
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 03:53:00 UTC No. 16304170
>>16304162
emergency shelter for wetland beetles with fentanyl addictions
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 04:09:20 UTC No. 16304176
>>16304018
Unironically more expensive than just mass-driver lobbing aluminum flakes from the Moon to Earth-Sun L2 (when taken over a time span of more than a single century)
Earth will be terraformed into paradise, every square kilometer of brown desert and white tundra converted into tropical rainforest and comfortable temperate climate. The vast expanses of oceanic deserts shall be changed into mega-reefs via abyssal towers that upwell the deep waters and provide artificial light all the way to the sea floor. Lifemaxxxed Earth will be the model that all other worlds we colonize work to replicate.
TOTAL ABIOTIC DEATH
A UNIVERSE NOT JUST FULL OF LIFE, BUT COMPOSED OF LIFE
FOREVER
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 04:11:26 UTC No. 16304178
>>16304029
America is exceptional
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 04:12:49 UTC No. 16304179
>>16304040
He'd probably fuck up the blossoming commercial spaceflight revolution honestly, give it another few terms and the president himself may be an astronaut (ideally a private astronaut)
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 04:16:26 UTC No. 16304181
>>16304072
>but those of us in the industry know better
I know you're chain-jerkin' but it's funny how oldspace fags will say that shit genuinely when SpaceX composes more of the actual spaceflight industry than all other actors combined lol
SpaceX employees have more expertise and experience developing new vehicles and hardware than ANY other entity and it isn't even close. They have E&E comparable to what America had at the peak of Apollo development, despite the far smaller labor force.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 05:03:20 UTC No. 16304221
>>16304183
anon, think of the poor tardigrades
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 05:53:00 UTC No. 16304257
>>16304221
Their trace carbon will be incorporated into steel production
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 05:56:10 UTC No. 16304260
>>16304176
U may be onto something
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 06:05:59 UTC No. 16304268
>>16304266
Yeah, but they're inter-satellite data connections.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 06:18:12 UTC No. 16304275
>>16304268
thats_the_joke.jpg
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 06:19:41 UTC No. 16304278
>>16304275
Would have worked better if you said "he really does have space lasers" instead of "does he really have space lasers"
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 06:25:44 UTC No. 16304286
>>16304040
It's better if there isn't anyone who thinks they know better meddling in space affairs.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 06:35:16 UTC No. 16304297
>>16304021
and if you're wrong?
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 06:37:34 UTC No. 16304303
>>16304017
the texan government will beg for them to stay in the state lol
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 06:42:47 UTC No. 16304308
>>16304015
>>16304076
i looked through it and a lot of it was just assertions without any actual evidence, like starship flights always costing 100 million even with reuse, full reuse being impossible with a high flight cadence, falcon 9 reuse cadence is slow so starship would be as well (ignores they are completely different vehicles with completely different architectures), NASA losing patience with SpaceX (lol), its basically all cope with no evidence and goalpost moving essentially by somebody who probably never even assumed starship would reach orbit
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 06:46:21 UTC No. 16304310
>>16304308
he also just assumed itd be impossible for them to raise the tonnage to orbit from early flight tests without even actual proof of that
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 06:50:49 UTC No. 16304320
>>16304310
i will say those this has kinda blackpilled me because i now realize we're gonna have to deal with annoying pro-oldspace pessimists saying spacex is a fraud/scam and starship will never work until the point where they're doing 300-400 launches per year at least, so probably up until like around 2030-2031
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 06:55:05 UTC No. 16304326
>>16304320
why would they do that many launches in a single year? 30,000 new starlink satellites?
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 07:01:20 UTC No. 16304341
>>16304326
it'll be more like 20ish starlinks per starship with v3 starlinks (or v4 by that point)
also spacex wants to do a moon base ontop of mars stuff.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 07:13:49 UTC No. 16304361
>>16304326
nta, but 400 launches of Starship annually would support two fully loaded Starships landing on the Moon every single month. 24 Starships that go to do the moon landings, (pessimistically) 10 Tanker launches each, that still leaves behind 136 Starship launches to cover everything from Starlink to satellite payloads to Depot variant launches. That level of logistics would support a serious Moon base, way beyond some rinky-dink setup of modules that most Moon base concepts baseline.
I think 400 launches of Starship per year by 2030 is a stretch but it's gonna be achieved eventually, hopefully before 2040. Really depends on whether the US govt gets serious about Artemis. NASA is currently spending over $2B a year on SLS (whether it flies or not), so at a modest estimate of $40m/launch Starship could fly 50 times on the current SLS life support budget alone. Consider possibilities such as spending agreements between SpaceX and NASA a la HLS, where SpaceX agrees to match a portion of NASA funding in order to pay for more launches and stimulate lunar development further. Other nations may also agree to pitch in, in return for being allotted space for cargo mass and/or seats for astronauts.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 07:15:43 UTC No. 16304364
>>16304361
400 starships a year will definitely happen before 2040 because of SpaceX's mars ambitions, the question is how much investment spacex puts into lunar operations really.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 07:17:53 UTC No. 16304367
>>16304341
Zubrin pointed out in the 80's that Mars programs are better than Moon programs because a launch vehicle that enables Mars exploration and base building by default also enables Moon exploration and base building, while the reverse is not true. Besides that, if you want a Mars colony you definitely also want a moon colony because you can't just idle your giant fleet of rockets for 2.5 years between launch windows, you want to keep that industry churning and sending up payloads. Hence, Moon base as a destination for your steady stream of launch capability, with priority targeting shifting from Moon to Mars & back as Mars' transfer opportunities come and go.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 07:21:05 UTC No. 16304372
>>16304364
I'm fairly certain that despite Mars being SpaceX's focus by a wide margin, Moon development will proceed faster anyway simply due to its proximity and frequency of deliveries. This'd only change once industries on Mars can start to grow themselves with minimal to zero inputs from Earth, at which point the environmental and resource advantages that Mars has will allow it to grow much faster than Lunar home-grown industries will be able to achieve. That's many decades out though.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 07:21:17 UTC No. 16304373
https://x.com/outpostspace/status/1
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 07:26:30 UTC No. 16304379
>>16304372
yes but spacex will have a shit ton of spare capacity to send to mars during orbital windows and since elon is obsessed with achieving full self sufficiency asap, they will do so. i definitely think they will put a lot into lunar operations too, but i think mars will eclipse that by the mid-late 2030s
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 07:40:28 UTC No. 16304392
>>16304379
That shit ton of "spare capacity" for Mars launch windows will be used between launch windows to put stuff on the Moon. Idling all that equipment between Mars windows is silly & SpaceX will get more value per dollar by continuting to launch them as often as possible all the time, hence lots of stuff going to the Moon except for during preparations for the Mars window opening up.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 08:44:30 UTC No. 16304418
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 08:45:32 UTC No. 16304419
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 08:46:33 UTC No. 16304420
>>16304419
https://www.youtube.com/live/tEkRY8
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 09:03:53 UTC No. 16304424
Can Mars' soil be "unpoisoned"?
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 09:07:58 UTC No. 16304429
>>16304424
Just stop caring.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 09:24:00 UTC No. 16304437
>>16304176
based lifemaxxer
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 09:26:39 UTC No. 16304440
>>16304379
The starships sent to Mars won't be coming back. Requirements to make and store thousands of tonnes of methalox are absurd. It's a one way mission for the majority of starships.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 09:31:21 UTC No. 16304445
>>16304424
Rinse it with water.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 09:41:59 UTC No. 16304452
>>16304176
You need a certain amount of desert to provide minerals for jungle.
No Sahara desert, no Amazon rainforest.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 09:46:00 UTC No. 16304453
>>16304183
What is that creature standing in the middle?
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 10:04:28 UTC No. 16304463
>>16304017
I thought musk was moving all his shit to texas, where the hell will he go if he manages to piss them off?
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 10:10:49 UTC No. 16304467
>>16304463
Venezuela
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 10:12:49 UTC No. 16304471
>>16304463
mars
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 10:13:30 UTC No. 16304472
>>16304463
French Guyana.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 10:14:04 UTC No. 16304473
>>16304463
Duluth, Minnesota
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 10:15:22 UTC No. 16304475
>>16304463
Somalia.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 10:15:52 UTC No. 16304476
>>16304463
Spaceport America
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 10:17:34 UTC No. 16304478
>>16304063
Not Jewish enough. We need someone Jewish to ensure Jewish donor support and increased aid to Israel.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 10:25:43 UTC No. 16304482
>>16303754
Where the hell is this guy getting 30 tons to orbit? SpaceX said the IFT4 version of starship can do 50 tons to orbit. As well if you do the math starship easily gets 200 tons to orbit fully expendable.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 11:05:35 UTC No. 16304496
>>16304482
He mentions the new ablative underlayment adding a couple tons. I think he might've just made up the number. Anyway his whole argument is based around the cost and capabilities of the prototypes, but if I'm not mistaken they aren't focusing on payload at all right now.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 11:06:58 UTC No. 16304498
>>16304452
that's actually bullshit
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 11:07:58 UTC No. 16304500
>>16304463
Argentina
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 11:10:28 UTC No. 16304503
>>16304500
Not actually a bad idea
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 11:12:55 UTC No. 16304505
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSg
>SpaceX Starlink, The New "X" Safety Center & The Boring Company Sites in Bastrop, Texas 30 July 2024
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 11:15:11 UTC No. 16304508
>still about a decade away from landing on mars
we're so close yet so far away
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 11:42:39 UTC No. 16304522
>>16304015
So since it's summer and my job is slow as fuck, I got nothing better to do than to address this drivel point by point. As least shitposting on 4chan at work is something to do.
>30 tons to leo
As the other anon pointed out, even the latest test exceeds this so who knows where he got this number from. I suspect he chose it deliberately to support his next point as we'll see.
>you can only improve tonnage capacity by 2x from prototypes
And here we come to why he chose 30 instead of the actual number. If it's 30 then a 2x starship will lift 60 tons while if it's 50 starship will match it's design goals. That'd be too inconvenient for the slsfag so 30 it must be.
As well it's perhaps not wise to assume a 2x max payload improvement as with a fully reusable rocket theres much more room to optimize dry mass than on the partially expendable falcon 9.
>raptor underperforming
Completely unsourced claim. Don't see how it could be true with what we know about IFT-4.
>100 tons to leo isn't a 100 tons to the moon
Is he just forgetting that starship is supposed to be orbitally refueled here? He can't be totally forgetting because he talks about blue moon being refueled. Regardless he's just wrong here, a fully fueled starship has 8.2 km/s deltav which is more than enough to do a moon landing with a bunch of cargo. I also don't understand why he expects starship to bring back tons of material from the moon? Blue moon can't do that either and I don't see why nasa would want so much moon rocks anyway.
>sls-orion is the only blah blah blah
Lmao, sls-orion can't even get to low lunar orbit, it has to do NRHO because it's so underpowered.
>SLS block 2 will deliver
lmao it won't deliver anything cause it's never gonna happen. With all the delays to sls do you really think they can develop new liquid boosters, which they haven't even designed yet, before SLS is retired for better commercial options? I've never seen people as delusional as SLSfags.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 11:50:15 UTC No. 16304527
>>16304522
I don't know that I've seen an SLS fag who's career isn't dependent on its existence so I have to imagine this guy is non-spacex aerospace. Otherwise why would you choose to be so wrong and upset all the time?
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 12:07:52 UTC No. 16304537
>>16304015
>>16304522
>starship can't satisfy cargo reqs
Again, don't know where he's getting this from or what reqs he's talking about as even if we take his numbers as gospel starship can still do more cargo than blue moon. I also really doubt nasa is currently planning for more than what blue moon can do in terms of cargo as nasa knows congress would never fund more before starship is already on the moon.
>nasa hearsay
I assume he's talking about the same thing smartereveryday was talking about. The number of refueling flights seems to be the main thing spooking nasa people but I really don't see why other than being stuck in the old space mindset of every launch having to work or your plan fails. This is certainly not the case with starship. It's not even the case with falcon 9, when it had a failure recently, did everyone just give up on starlink? No, starlinks fine. They fixed the problem in like a week and are back to launching in 2 weeks.
>spacex secrecy
It's astonishing the number of retards who try to claim that spacex is secretive. For christs sake they are building their next gen rocket in an open field and are letting randos surveil it 24/7. It takes a special kind of brain death to claim spacex is trying to hide something.
>blaming sls delays on spacex
Everyone knows it'll be delayed because of the orion heatshield, spacex makes a convenient scapegoat for these people however.
>BO will land first
Lol based on past performance spacex is gonna be on mars before BO makes it too the moon. I hope limp changes things at BO but I'm not holding my breath.
>100 mils per flight
Another unsourced claim. However this seems plausible to me but does not help this guys point like he thinks it does. 100 mil is also what falcon 9 v1 cost to launch yet starship is a much bigger rocket. 100 mil for a fully expended starship indicates substantial cost reductions at spacex compared to everyone else.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 12:15:46 UTC No. 16304538
>>16304467
kek
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 12:19:21 UTC No. 16304540
>>16304537
theres seemingly no cure for EDS, especially not facts.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 12:19:59 UTC No. 16304541
roscomos facility is burning, possibly due to ukrainian attack
>The blaze engulfed 800 square meters of NPO Avtomatiki, a subsidiary of Russia's Roscosmos space agency, before it was extinguished, Russia's Emergency Situations Ministry said. Local media reported that the roof and walls of the building collapsed.
>The factory is a developer and producer of electronic control systems for missile complexes, and manufactures control systems for Russia's Soyuz-2 launch vehicles, which are designed for low Earth orbit missions.
https://www.newsweek.com/fire-russi
Soyuz-2 is used for ISS logistics, pic related
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 12:35:38 UTC No. 16304550
>>16304541
Thanks for the picture, I forgot how Soyuz looks like.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 12:35:46 UTC No. 16304552
>>16303971
>$65 million to carry a largely inert payload to orbit
>$250,000 to perform an emergency rescue mission of two astronauts
hmmm
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 12:38:35 UTC No. 16304556
>>16304020
poster is big gay
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 12:41:50 UTC No. 16304559
>>16304015
>>16304537
>more made up numbers about cost based on his previous made up numbers about payload
From a falsehood, anything follows.
Regardless, even if a HLS flight costs more than 100 mils, which is plausible, assuming tanker flights cost over 100 mil isn't.
>SLS costs 2 bill
lmao try 4.2 billion. Once again an SLSfag uses outdated numbers to make sls look comparable.
>expected reduction in sls cost
I don't know anyone who expects sls to get cheaper since it's done nothing but get more expensive even after it's first launch.
>Reuse stuff
This is just one long gish gallop. Spacex already does a falcon 9 launch every 2 days. Assuming starship takes as long as falcon 9 to refurb with a methalox cycle isn't reasonable. Assuming theres only gonna be 2 starships launching is unreasonable.
>expendable starship can reach cadence
Completely braindead oldspace idiot
>full reuse not good for BLEO
Lol is this tory bruno? Just watch eager spaces videos on ULA propaganda to debunk this nonsense.
>orbital refueling is hard!
I strongly suspect it isn't and it's cope nasa told themselves as a rationalization for not pissing off shelby.
>you're free not to believe but this is reality :)
Yeah, lets just get our facts from unsourced youtube comments that directly contradict info we do have sources for.
>muh worker conditions!
Spacex is where you wanna work if you want to accomplish things. Boeing and lockheed are rocket engineer retirement homes.
>>16304527
It's certainly possible, could be BO too as he talks them up a lot.
>>16304540
I don't think he has EDS, being an SLSfag is a distinct but equally debilitating condition.
Damn, this didn't take as long as I had hoped. Guess I'll have to find something else to do for the rest of the day, besides collect a paycheck.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 12:43:13 UTC No. 16304562
>>16304063
He's a fag. I hope he chokes on three dicks and dies.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 12:50:25 UTC No. 16304567
>>16304326
Are you retarded? The Martian colony fleets will number in the thousands. Do you think the plan is to go directly from one launch per month to thousands of crewed, cargo and orbital refueling flights per month with nothing in between?
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 13:00:08 UTC No. 16304572
>>16304452
>>16304498
It's based on the claims of a NASA "climate scientist"
https://www.nasa.gov/centers-and-fa
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 13:02:23 UTC No. 16304574
Boeing Starliner Program Manager: "I'm going to repeat the same thing that Steve said, we're not stuck on ISS, the crew is not in any danger, and there's no increased risk when we decide to bring Suni and Butch back to earth."
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 13:04:38 UTC No. 16304575
>>16304557
"Quick, what are three words no one would ever use to describe you?"
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 13:11:48 UTC No. 16304576
>>16304574
we have always been at war with eastasia
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 13:12:19 UTC No. 16304578
>>16304541
That's fine. They can buy trampolines from SpaceX
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 13:14:25 UTC No. 16304579
>>16304372
It all depends on how much money Starlink can generate and how much political/financial weight behind Mars/Moon there is.
If Starlink generates 30B a year, SpaceX will focus heavily on Mars
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 13:15:52 UTC No. 16304583
>>16304557
Transphobic
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 13:17:33 UTC No. 16304584
>>16304557
It means he is a Ron Desantis supporter. Here they are watching a launch together.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 13:18:04 UTC No. 16304586
>>16304559
>being an SLSfag is a distinct but equally debilitating condition.
hmmm interesting prognosis
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 13:18:49 UTC No. 16304587
https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/
>United Launch Alliance delivered a classified US military payload to orbit Tuesday for the last time with an Atlas V rocket, ending the Pentagon's use of Russian rocket engines as national security missions transition to all-American launchers.
>The launch Tuesday morning was the end of an era born in the 1990s when US government policy allowed Lockheed Martin, the original developer of the Atlas V, to use Russian rocket engines during its first stage. There was a widespread sentiment in the first decade after the fall of the Soviet Union that the United States and other Western nations should partner with Russia to keep the country's aerospace workers employed and prevent "rogue states" like Iran or North Korea from hiring them.
>Energomash exported the final batch of RD-180s to the United States in 2021, bringing the total number of deliveries to 122 engines. In the initial bulk order, each RD-180 engine was priced at approximately $10 million per unit. Energomash produced a few more RD-180s for ground testing in Russia, and those were never sent to the United States. Six RD-180 engines flew on Lockheed Martin's Atlas III rocket, which retired in 2005, and the rest have powered Atlas Vs into space.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 13:29:12 UTC No. 16304598
https://www.space.com/astroscale-de
>Astroscale's ADRAS-J orbital inspection mission has taken all-around close ups of its target piece of space debris. The stunning footage of the 36-foot-long (11 meters) rocket stage was taken from mere 164 feet (50 m) and revealed no substantial damage to the object. That means the rocket debris is a go for a ground-breaking removal attempt that Astroscale plans to undertake later this decade.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 13:30:12 UTC No. 16304599
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 13:32:38 UTC No. 16304602
>>16304598
>later this decade
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 13:33:20 UTC No. 16304603
>>16304598
pretty cool, i wonder what the classified stuff can do (GSSAP), apparently got real close to a chinese sat at one point - less than 10 kms
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 13:34:22 UTC No. 16304605
>>16304603
teehee
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 13:37:09 UTC No. 16304608
>>16304598
whos shit is that?
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 13:38:32 UTC No. 16304609
>>16304608
Japan H2A rocket
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 13:39:57 UTC No. 16304610
>>16304608
Japan H-IIA upper stage
It’s basically the delta cryogenic second stage (DCSS) and space launch system’s interim cryogenic propulsion stage (ICPS)
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 13:51:03 UTC No. 16304619
>>16304176
A beautiful future, a bright future, let the Earth be as a bright living jewel and may its influence and love spread across the solar system and the stars.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 13:51:40 UTC No. 16304621
>>16304609
>>16304610
ok thanks. be nice when this kind of thing can be brought down easily
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 14:01:37 UTC No. 16304627
>>16304605
Its weird to think about, spooks playing their game way above our heads
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 14:12:55 UTC No. 16304631
>>16304040
But we already know who the next VP is going to be though? Trump confirmed his running mate more than a week ago
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 14:16:47 UTC No. 16304633
>>16304631
Trump can't win, he's too weird
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 14:25:46 UTC No. 16304637
>>16304619
Every time I imagine an optimistic future, I remember that 90% of the Earth's population are lazy, low IQ browns with unsolvable nigger behavior. This is SUCH an immense disparity, and drag on the evolved individuals, it will cause future war, that is inevitable.
A self sustaining colony on Mars is the ultimate White Flight (history repeats), and its really our only chance at true progress. I sure hope we can pull this off, and elite minds get a "do over", leaving the niggers behind to devolve even further. The human race will fork, and at least one branch of it can thrive.
Sad but its the only way forward, and Musk is compelled by it, or else idiocracy awaits.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 14:26:46 UTC No. 16304640
>>16304637
Every time I think this place could be okay, I remember they stopped tracking unique posters to hide shill antics.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 14:29:55 UTC No. 16304643
>>16304574
If they just keep stalling the problem will solve itself when Barry and Suni pass away from old age
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 14:32:28 UTC No. 16304645
>>16304640
he is right
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 14:36:24 UTC No. 16304648
>Extraterrestrial reliquefaction of cryogenic propellants Final report
>Publication Date December 11, 1965
Boil-off is a meme
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 14:38:50 UTC No. 16304650
https://x.com/SciGuySpace/status/18
https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/
>United Launch Alliance has offered no public comment about the new policy. The company did not respond to questions from Ars Technica about the agreement. And the company's chief executive, Tory Bruno, a frequent tweeter who regularly interacts with fans on the social media site X, has ignored dozens of questions about the policy change. Since the first questions were raised a few days ago, Bruno has not replied to anyone on X.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 14:41:49 UTC No. 16304652
>>16304631
Trump will lose and then SpaceX is incredibly fucked because Elon played politics too much.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 14:44:01 UTC No. 16304654
>>16304522
>With all the delays to SLS do you really think they can develop new liquid boosters
Block 2 is supposed to be stretched SRBs with 1 extra segment and like 0% parts commonality with the current SRBs because the propellant grains are larger, BUT Orbital ATK are definitely still capable of actually making the Block 2 SRBs. What's going to kill Block 2 is literally everything else from the GSE being nonexistent (fat pig is so heavy it needs a brand new crawler transporter AND new launch tower) and already half a billion in debt somehow, to the fucking EUS being in development hell STILL which is currently killing Block 1B timelines as well.
Exploration Upper Stage isn't the only reason the Artemis IV schedule has slipped by years already, but it's one of the biggest ones. The structural testing articles aren't even going to be done until next year, and it's expected that final design qualifications that were supposed to be complete this year are now going to be wrapping up in 2026 - assuming everything goes well (lmao).
You're right about 'Block 2 never', but I think the idea of LRBs was dropped a decade ago when Orbital ATK utilized the Mormon powers of UTAH and won the contract
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 14:44:55 UTC No. 16304655
>>16304598
>plans to undertake later this decade
Are they launching a whole nother mission to bring this down? Is that why it’s going to take so long? Insane that they can’t just grab it and start the deorbit process.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 14:49:40 UTC No. 16304659
>>16304655
Maybe they wanted to prove they could rendezvous and maneuver around the debris first, then send up a bigger more expensive tug to deorbit it.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 14:49:43 UTC No. 16304660
>>16304652
Elon will spend whatever it takes to rig the vote so that doesn't happen. Teslas refusing to drive their owners to vote dem in key areas
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 15:00:40 UTC No. 16304664
>>16304650
>burying the lede
a commercial photographer died due to starliner launch so ULA decided to ban all photographers from now on cuz it became bad press and a legal liability
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 15:02:52 UTC No. 16304667
>>16304664
not true
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 15:04:12 UTC No. 16304669
>>16304667
it literally says that at the end of the article
>It could be that the company's legal department got involved after there was a fatal heart attack during camera setup for the recent launch of Boeing's Starliner spacecraft on an Atlas V rocket.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 15:06:18 UTC No. 16304670
>>16304633
(you) are weird.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 15:14:38 UTC No. 16304671
>>16304669
ULA should prohibit rocket building at their facilities in case an engineer has a hear attack while building a rocket.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 15:15:54 UTC No. 16304672
>>16304669
oh come on that wouldn’t be enough for ULA to outright ban it, I wouldn’t think
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 15:18:21 UTC No. 16304673
>>16304645
kek
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 15:19:06 UTC No. 16304674
>>16304672
it would explain why they're radio silent on the reasoning
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 15:21:36 UTC No. 16304676
>>16304674
Hmm could also be some DoD request?
>hey tory you launch a bunch of classified shit. About time you tell the public to fuck off.
Would explain why tory has just kept his mouth shut. Granted I do not know why they would do this NOW and not like 10 years ago—but I’m just brainstorming
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 15:23:40 UTC No. 16304677
>>16304660
Teslas going out alone at night to hunt down multi generational democrats and non citizen voters
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 15:25:22 UTC No. 16304679
>>16304660
>>16304677
Let's just skip this whole "vote" nonsense and just have a war, Elon can hire a PMC private army, lock down Boca Chica as his own fiefdom and launch whenever the hell he wants.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 15:25:25 UTC No. 16304680
>>16304676
Usually brainstorming is more than one idea, where is the rest huh? You fraid someone's gonna laugh huh?
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 15:25:41 UTC No. 16304681
>>16304676
It's pretty obvious it's about China
Very notoriously using footage of Falcon 9 to copy it and Starship to model it
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 15:27:03 UTC No. 16304682
>>16304679
The only way the Republicans can win the popular vote is by closing all the cemeteries.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 15:28:53 UTC No. 16304683
>>16304680
my other hypotheses included cryptids at the cape, ULA execs being in a bad mood after a long bender, or Tory just being a straight up hater
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 15:30:57 UTC No. 16304684
>>16304681
My thoughts as well
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 15:34:44 UTC No. 16304690
>>16304681
Is ULA even doing anything that China would want to emulate?
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 15:37:06 UTC No. 16304692
>>16304683
>cryptids at the cape
That's chupacabra territorial range
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 15:37:29 UTC No. 16304693
>>16304683
Hahaha, that's pretty good. Me? I am thinking Tory has some candid pictures spray painted on the side of a booster and doesn't want us to see em
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 15:39:53 UTC No. 16304695
>>16304690
considering china has almost 0 internal/domestic designs for infrastructure and technology I would say yes, they want to get their hands on as much information as possible. They would still happily rip F-15 schematics, Atlas V & Delta IV designs, etc. Of course they would want information on Vulcan-Centaur.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 15:42:44 UTC No. 16304697
Too bad us europeons can't vote in the US elections when we're already basically vassal states. Would boost Trumps numbers through the roof.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 15:47:35 UTC No. 16304702
>>16304697
It wouldn't. Your shitty compatriots have a bad case of TDS.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 15:55:05 UTC No. 16304707
>>16304697
>historically antisemitic continent
not really
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 16:01:58 UTC No. 16304714
>>16304702
That's just what the media wants you to think, while Trump has been a laugh occationally, it's a laugh where you laugh with him. Biden on the other hand has been nothing but a laughing stock and a topic of resentment ie. "why are the still abusing that old senile man for their own gains".
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 16:03:28 UTC No. 16304716
>>16304041
>SpaceX could use Australia as a rocket launch pad
SpaceX never said they want to launch from Australia, they want to land a SS off the western coast in Australian waters and use their support to retrieve it.
Why the fuck do people keep talking out of their ass?
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 16:08:18 UTC No. 16304722
it feels like bill nelson just sort of gave up being a public figure. Haven’t seen or heard from him in months
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 16:09:21 UTC No. 16304725
>>16304722
He has dementia so they're keeping him out of the public's view
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 16:09:38 UTC No. 16304726
>>16304697
Euros would never vote for a Jew lol
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 16:17:59 UTC No. 16304728
>>16304695
VC doesn't offer new capabilities anymore. F9/Starship I get though.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 16:28:13 UTC No. 16304735
>>16304728
I don’t think china has any rockets that match VC’s 5.4m diameter.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 16:55:20 UTC No. 16304748
>>16304725
he makes Joe look look like a whippersnapper
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 16:59:21 UTC No. 16304752
>>16304748
Remember when Congress asked him about China landing on the moon?
>that side of the moon is always dark
>we don't know what it looks like
>we don't know why China is doing there
Administrator of NASA, everyone
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 17:04:36 UTC No. 16304757
>>16304752
It’s called knowing your audience. He was being based and fear-mongering those with the purse into giving NASA more money and resources.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 17:06:09 UTC No. 16304759
>>16304756
he chickened out of the fight with zuck tho
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 17:11:40 UTC No. 16304764
>>16304669
I don't think the possibility of someone having a heart attack during camera setup is a reasonable reason to ban cameras.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 17:14:40 UTC No. 16304766
>>16304756
schedule it in south padre as the undercard for IFT-5
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 17:15:49 UTC No. 16304767
>>16304735
The LM-5 has a 5m core stage and the LM-10 is going to be all 5m stages. That's not that big a thing, though. Tanks are the easiest part of the rocket. It's why they're it's the only part that ULA doesn't subcontract out to someone else.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 17:15:50 UTC No. 16304768
>>16303971
can you stop putting politics in the OP you fucking delusional sewer rat
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 17:16:25 UTC No. 16304769
>>16304695
What infrastructure and tech doesn't china have that ULA does? China has their own cyrogenic launch pads and private companies are developing methalox rockets. Hell the only thing american rockets can do that china can't is land but you ain't gonna learn that from Vulcan.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 17:17:01 UTC No. 16304770
>>16304756
When is the state dept gonna assassinate this guy?
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 17:21:02 UTC No. 16304777
>>16304756
Musk couldn't dare to fight nerd manlet Zuckerberg and we expect him to fight this bloodthirsty cartel member (I assume this since he is from latin America)
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 17:21:11 UTC No. 16304778
>>16304769
he means they stole/copied it and/or it's not as good or sth to that effect
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 17:21:36 UTC No. 16304779
>>16304598
https://x.com/astroscale_HQ/status/
gif of the pictures
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 17:22:59 UTC No. 16304780
>>16304777
The idea of guys with important brains smashing each other in the head is too retarded to imagine. I imagine Musk dropped out for the same reason he's never been to space. High risk, 0 reward
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 17:29:08 UTC No. 16304785
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 17:32:25 UTC No. 16304787
>>16304780
too based to imagine, you mean.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 17:34:10 UTC No. 16304788
>>16304785
I wonder if Starship will create a market for space archeology. Imagine Starship launches some Impulse craft, it jets over to something Apollo adjacent, grabs it, and jets back to LEO to be grabbed by a different Starship. Do salvage laws apply? What's up there that someone could grab?
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 17:36:08 UTC No. 16304790
>>16304787
No it is not based, fighting for sport has always been something reserved for the enslaved or impoverished. They destroy their body so a group of viewers has an enjoyable fifteen minutes. That is not an arena fit for the richest and most important man on Earth
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 17:38:32 UTC No. 16304792
>>16304780
he was just shitposting, the guy gives 0 fucks and does whatever the fuck he wants, just living the dream. everyone takes way too literally all he says lol
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 17:43:12 UTC No. 16304794
>>16304790
yeah but this isn't for sport. settling disputes through single combat is reserved for nobility, from the old testament to feudal japan.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 17:43:16 UTC No. 16304795
>>16304790
reminds me of that scene in dune 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAd
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 17:49:47 UTC No. 16304805
Wonder if SpaceX is dusting off the offshore launch platforms plans
It has already been said, but it bears repeating: OP is a fucking retard.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 17:51:25 UTC No. 16304807
>>16304801
but musk is a big chicken
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 17:59:09 UTC No. 16304814
>>16304802
Watch out how tons of EDS retards will start defending and siding with a literal dictator just to own le evil musk lmao
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 18:03:12 UTC No. 16304815
>>16304814
That's probably why he did it, to make Reddit stroke out over their heccin chungus spaceman being an anticommunist Trump supporting chud.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 18:06:10 UTC No. 16304819
>>16304802
same way Tim Dodd got a free ride around the moon.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 18:08:50 UTC No. 16304822
>>16304496
>but if I'm not mistaken they aren't focusing on payload at all right now.
Kinda obvious as the payload door still amounts to a slot still with a door that "works"
>>16304814
>>16304815
Also exposes the hatred from certain types towards actual working people. Musk and Starlink is a threat because it lets evil "right wing" farmers access the internet
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 18:10:25 UTC No. 16304825
https://x.com/USGAO/status/18186729
>Artemis Programs: NASA Should Document and Communicate Plans to Address Gateway's Mass Risk
https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24
https://x.com/SpcPlcyOnline/status/
>Interesting GAO finding: NASA's worried Gateway won't be controllable w/vehicles docked. E.g., the Starship Human Landing System's mass is "18 times greater than the value used to develop the PPE's controllability parameters."
Oops.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 18:11:33 UTC No. 16304826
>>16304801
why do we live in the timeline where everyone keeps randomly challenging the mars king to a fist fight kek
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 18:16:18 UTC No. 16304836
>>16304825
lol
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 18:16:28 UTC No. 16304837
>>16304825
starship is FAT
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 18:16:50 UTC No. 16304839
>>16304716
>SpaceX never said they want to launch from Australia
Read the article again but slower.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 18:17:57 UTC No. 16304842
Are they still stranded? Lmao, that's just funny.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 18:18:02 UTC No. 16304843
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 18:18:57 UTC No. 16304845
>>16304842
It's Dragon or a firey death. Also Dragon means Starliner dies for good and NASA looks retarded for giving them so much money. Which they would hate. But would they hate that more or less than losing two astronauts?
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 18:28:15 UTC No. 16304850
>>16304801
i dont understand why he got his panties twisted in the first place
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 18:43:53 UTC No. 16304860
>>16304843
lmao, Starship looks so out of place. Dump the whole Gateway thing and just dock two Starships together, there you have your 2 km^3 of volume in only two launches.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 18:46:40 UTC No. 16304865
>>16304802
it's all fun and games until a head of state / cartel puts out a hit on you
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 18:59:38 UTC No. 16304874
>>16304850
EDS knows no boarders.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 18:59:47 UTC No. 16304875
>>16304865
I agree, even a billionaire is not wise to taunt a dictator of a country like Venezuela. Especially since there are recently millions of them here illegally, a few of which are more than willing to risk everything and take a pot shit
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 19:10:46 UTC No. 16304885
>>16304567
he probably thinks elon is lying about wanting to colonize mars
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 19:14:44 UTC No. 16304888
>>16304825
If this becomes an issue, pay SpaceX to study taking attitude control over when HLS is docked
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 19:16:14 UTC No. 16304890
>>16304482
i believe you but where did they say 50 tonnes to leo for IFT4 starship?
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 19:20:58 UTC No. 16304892
>>16304850
Starlink makes it much more difficult to censor information
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 19:21:58 UTC No. 16304893
>>16304888
yeet gateway into the sun with starship
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 19:26:45 UTC No. 16304896
>>16304874
ESL knows no borders either.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 19:27:46 UTC No. 16304897
>>16304896
blow me
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 19:28:56 UTC No. 16304901
>>16304843
>>16304825
PPE/HALO are overweight and won't be able to perform their TLI
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 19:36:56 UTC No. 16304906
>>16304843
>>16304860
holy shit, they literally made starship smaller in that image to make gateway and orion seem less pathetic lmfao
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 19:39:42 UTC No. 16304907
https://x.com/joroulette/status/181
>Boeing in its quarterly report says Starliner's "return to Earth was delayed to allow time to perform further testing of propulsion system anomalies" and that those delays have cost the company $125 million so far.
>This brings Boeing's total Starliner costs to just over $1.6 billion since 2016, according to a tally from all its quarterlies. And Boeing's NASA contract - awarded at $4.2 billion in 2014 - has increased by $326 million, according to contract modification data.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 19:43:48 UTC No. 16304909
>>16304907
So they really just skipped testing to save money
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 19:47:01 UTC No. 16304914
>>16304909
They tested individual components reasonably well but left integrated systems testing to the computer models. That's why they missed the fact that the thruster doghouses overheat after extended maneuvering cycles.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 19:53:04 UTC No. 16304917
>>16304779
>>16304785
Planetes soon
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 19:54:16 UTC No. 16304918
>>16304865
The Chinese already want him dead because of >>16304678
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 19:57:04 UTC No. 16304919
>>16304860
Ummm sweetie how are Boing and Lockmart going to get their cost-plus contracts with your plan?
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 19:59:37 UTC No. 16304920
>>16304918
If China has Elon assassinated whose rocket designs are they supposed to copy?
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 20:00:44 UTC No. 16304921
>>16304440
*many of* the Starships sent to Mars will go one-way, yeah. Some will return every sinode, though; two-way transport will be huge for expanding the number of people willing to go and work there.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 20:01:23 UTC No. 16304922
>>16304920
They'd rather overtake America in launch capacity using conventional rockets built faster than America than try to play catch-up to SpaceX's innovating. To them, overtaking America in launch capacity is what matters, for strategic/military reasons.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 20:02:58 UTC No. 16304926
>>16304452
Hey retard, if we are going to the effort of building abyssal oceanic megastructures and solar shade swarms to tune Earth's environments for maximum life, fertilizing the endless jungles manually will be no obstacle.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 20:11:25 UTC No. 16304933
>>16304124
Why am I SO bald?
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 20:17:44 UTC No. 16304937
>>16304922
They'd still have trouble doing that with that without Falcon clones. They've got everyone else beat in number of launches but most of those are in the same weight class as the Delta II or Electron. The LM-5 is the biggest rocket they have and it averages a cadence of just one flight per year because the hydrolox core stage is a huge headache to produce. Vulcan is a bigger rocket than the LM-5 and once Amazon gets its Kupier factor running ULA should be able to make good on Tory's goal of one launch every two weeks. China would still have more total launches but if most of those are asian Minotaurs lifting less than 1000 kg there's not really much prestige or capability to it.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 20:19:35 UTC No. 16304939
>>16304937
>They'd still have trouble doing that with that without Falcon clones
They DID do it, but then SpaceX ramped up Falcon 9 and humiliated China, leaving them in the dust. China hates Elon Musk for this, and have been astroturfing against him online ever since.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 20:20:52 UTC No. 16304942
>>16304933
You masturbate too much.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 20:26:58 UTC No. 16304943
>>16304939
>They DID do it
In launch count by spamming LM-2 with small payloads.
It was the situation American small launch providers were banking on before F9 rideshares drank their milkshake.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 20:26:59 UTC No. 16304944
>>16304896
kek
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 20:30:10 UTC No. 16304946
>>16304943
No, China briefly was launching more tonnage to orbit than anybody else, and still would be if not for SpaceX.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 20:33:38 UTC No. 16304947
Bit of topic but do you guys know there isn't much farming going on in the tropics. They could pretty much grow corn, wheat year round instead of just seasonally like here. Seems like a major advantage yet we see very little agriculture in tropical countries. Instead they import what from Ukraine.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 20:36:33 UTC No. 16304950
>>16304552
Thats just the first contract to work out the job on on paper, figure out a timeline, how much it would cost, etc.
Boeing should be footing the cost for all this, not taxpayers.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 20:36:38 UTC No. 16304952
>>16304947
yeah but they can also grow stuff like fruit which gets you much more $/acre
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 20:36:49 UTC No. 16304953
>>16304948
now post GDP data yankee
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 20:37:09 UTC No. 16304954
>>16304947
Why waste the valuable tropics on corn that grows anywhere? Save it for the harder expensive stuffy like coffee tobacco and cocaine.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 20:38:51 UTC No. 16304956
>>16304953
Real life isn't a sport, there's no GDP handicap, chinkoid.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 20:40:29 UTC No. 16304959
>>16304948
What does this look like without starlink? SpaceX drops down by about two thirds right?
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 20:41:43 UTC No. 16304962
>>16304954
>and cocaine
fucking based and Elon approved
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 20:42:22 UTC No. 16304963
>>16304948
>SpaceX and Musk are a frau-ACK!
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 20:46:48 UTC No. 16304969
>>16304947
european style agriculture doesnt do too well in the tropics. often the topsoil is very thing and erodes fast once the treecover is removed and the soil tilled. you can harvest for a few years, then have to move on. many annual crops wont grow either. you can forget about wheat and rice cant get too hot while germinating. corn works if the soil is good enough and theres enough water.
tree crops are much better suited, but they are mostly done in big monocultures too, which also damages the land. palm oil monocultures being the prime example.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 20:48:02 UTC No. 16304971
>>16304939
From my limited time spent on BiliBili, the Chinese public perception of SpaceX seems to be positive. Maybe not in their ultranationalist crowd but definitely amongst their space autists
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 20:52:50 UTC No. 16304974
>>16304764
More reasonable to ban camera setup by life form with only one heart.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 20:55:31 UTC No. 16304979
>>16304969
>you can harvest for a few years, then have to move on.
can't they just use synthetic fertilizers
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 20:56:17 UTC No. 16304980
>>16304825
Starship: Look at me. I'm the station now.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 20:58:18 UTC No. 16304986
>>16304959
It's about the capability, not the payloads. As long as SpaceX exists, China cannot dream of putting more strategic hardware into space than America, nor can they hope to shoot down American satellites faster than America can put more back up. Not to mention the implications of a certain small stones of the intelligent variety.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 21:03:42 UTC No. 16304994
>>16304971
The party is what matters, not the Chinese public. The Chinese government has been preparing for a major war in the Pacific, they've spent decades planning and paying for a massive naval buildup but being at a HUGE disadvantage in space puts the kibosh on it. SpaceX has upset 20+ years of Chinese strategic planning.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 21:05:14 UTC No. 16304997
>>16304901
HALO is barely over but PPE is half a ton over. It's definitely not over the Falcon Heavy's limit so why not just add more fuel?
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 21:06:23 UTC No. 16304999
>>16304986
Reagan would've had a lot of fun with Starship
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 21:16:58 UTC No. 16305011
>>16304040
>Clinton
wtf is this real
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 21:19:32 UTC No. 16305016
>>16305011
She won't give up until she's in a coffin. It's conjectured Kamala is a Clinton puppet anyway
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 21:27:21 UTC No. 16305020
>>16304814
obsessed
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 21:51:04 UTC No. 16305041
>>16304959
>what does it look like when you take away 60% of spacex revenue generator
U dum.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 22:02:09 UTC No. 16305050
>>16304979
no
it turns into pure clay that dries out immediately when its sunny, then into sticky mud without oxygen when its rainy. any ferts you apply will just wash out again and your crops will either dry out or have their roots rot from waterlogged clay.
you have to model your production systems off the natural ecosystems that grow there. eg. tropical rainforest focused on tree crops with a wide variety of species.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 22:14:22 UTC No. 16305064
>>16304664
>a commercial photographer died due to starliner launch
IT CAN'T KEEP GETTING AWAY WITH THIS
>>16304669
>there was a fatal heart attack
Really?
>during camera setup
WTF?
Sounds like ULA lawyers are complete pussies.
Or that's not the real reason.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 22:17:02 UTC No. 16305066
>>16304770
Who do you think runs their vote cheating operation?
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 22:19:46 UTC No. 16305069
>>16304802
>a free ride to Mars
Is that the Bond Villain equivalent of a helicopter ride?
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 22:20:50 UTC No. 16305071
Didn't get much attention but Deep Blue Aerospace announced that their VTVL test campaign in the next few weeks will go up to 100km, could become the 4th VTVL suborbital rocket after F9-S1, New Shepard and SuperHeavy
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 22:21:27 UTC No. 16305072
>>16304107
Kino
>>16304137
Remember the SpaceX shark issue?
>>16304152
>>16304170
Lmao!
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 22:24:43 UTC No. 16305076
>>16304419
Unbelievable amount of dead space in that chart got damn.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 22:31:20 UTC No. 16305086
>>16305076
I think that means they are actually focusing on making something to launch, rather than just hammering shit together until they get good at it. (because apparently they did get good at it)
Seriously, I'm not used to seeing that few. Last year they had 10 SS and 9 boosters at one point.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 22:38:59 UTC No. 16305091
>>16304953
>China GDP PPP: $35.29 trillion
>China upmass: 29,426 kg
>$1.2 billion in GDP per kilogram of upmass
>USA GDP PPP: $28.78 trillion
>USA upmass: 429,125 kg
>$67 million in GDP per kilogram of upmass
>US space industry ~18x more efficient than China
>China would need a GDP of over half a quadrillion ($510 trillion) in order to match the USA
>China would need 2.5x the GDP per capita of Luxembourg
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 22:40:14 UTC No. 16305093
>>16305069
Strapped to the heatshield in a space suit just before arriving at Mars. Death by re entry.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 22:41:29 UTC No. 16305095
>>16305050
very interesting
thank you
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 22:43:12 UTC No. 16305097
>>16305091
>GDP to upmass ratio
Nigger what, how is that a metric. They are already developing reusable rockets which will bring costs down to parity with US.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 22:45:57 UTC No. 16305100
>>16305097
No one tell this guy about Starship.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 22:51:01 UTC No. 16305106
>>16305105
They made Starship smaller, lol
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 22:51:43 UTC No. 16305107
>>16304843
mogged>>16305105
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 22:59:25 UTC No. 16305117
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 22:59:36 UTC No. 16305118
>>16304948
I quickly calculated the upmass potential from from Q2 2023 to Q1 2024 (not the realized upmass, but the maximum theoretical upmass if all succesful launches were filled to max LEO capacity)
2100 tons for SpaceX (out of 1,406t of real upmass, 67%)
360 tons for all chinese launches (out of 140t of real upmass, 39%)
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 23:09:43 UTC No. 16305123
>>16305091
China's numbers got a boost recently because they launched three 20 ton modules to build out their space station. Without that their launch mass figures look a lot worse. They're still better that any other non-SpaceX entity, but unless they want to be constantly building new Mir-class stations they've got a lot less of a lead on nations like Russia.
https://x.com/RussianSpaceWeb/statu
>After brisk rate of 8 launches in the first 5 months of 2024, there was not a single Russian orbital launch attempt in the past 2 months, putting Roskosmos on track for a record-low space activities this century as war and sanctions choke the economy
...Although Russia doesn't seem to be doing to hot right about now either
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 23:16:26 UTC No. 16305136
>>16305123
Chinese upmass number will get a boost with Qianfan (1st launch next week) and Guowang, even without improving the launch supply much that'd mean a lot more launches to near-max capacity of each launcher. So expect some additional hundreds tons in 2025 or so. And then SpaceX level in few years as multiple F9 copies get operational
Of course by that point SpaceX will be regularly launching Starship, so the China-SpaceX ratio should stay the same at least.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 23:17:40 UTC No. 16305137
>>16305132
>dont have anything more than a sounding rocket
>be pathfinding on a real rocket
>start work on an even bigger crazier rocket
can't they just get to orbit already??
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 23:18:40 UTC No. 16305138
>>16305132
GEEx is the BE-3 test stand
see picrel and https://www.youtube.com/live/Y9ZdKk
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 23:42:08 UTC No. 16305157
>>16305116
> We're not sure this vehicle is safe, but it's not like anyone in our family is inside. So roll the dice.
Anonymous at Wed, 31 Jul 2024 23:57:15 UTC No. 16305175
https://x.com/Nord_Space/status/181
>We are proud and excited to announce a historic $5M investment in our new spaceport, Spaceport Canada! This investment and project is being developed to support NordSpace's Tundra launch vehicle and bring Canada one major step closer to sovereign launch as the nation's first operational spaceport.
>Canada is the only G7 nation without sovereign launch capabilities. In addition to countless benefits for Canada’s national security, environmental protection efforts, and global leadership, such a capability would result in an estimated 650 new highly qualified personnel (HQPs) over the next decade alone and $2.5B in economic development.
https://www.nordspace.com/launchers
>Tundra is a portable orbital launch vehicle, powered by NordSpace’s Hadfield and Garneau engines. Capable of lifting payloads up to 500 kg to low Earth orbit (LEO), this capacity allows for a responsive launch system to be set up anywhere it is required including on land or at sea.
>NordSpace's StarGate architecture allows for the entire Tundra launch system to fit and be transported in only a few standard sea containers. The incredible portability, storability, and rapid launch capability of Tundra means launching from anywhere on Earth to anywhere in space is truly a possibility.
So Canada is paying $5M to build a spaceport for a box rocket that could launch from the parking lot of a Nova Scotia Walmart, in order to gain the sovereign capabilities that come from a launch vehicle with the same payload capacity as a Pegasus.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 00:04:04 UTC No. 16305181
>>16305175
Canada will cease to be a functioning country soon anyway
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 00:09:36 UTC No. 16305186
>>16304768
only us engine rats here, boss
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 00:30:06 UTC No. 16305207
>>16305159
they'll probably be doing all the dragon landings in broad daylight though
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 00:30:30 UTC No. 16305208
>>16304725
>>16304722
Not the first time they have had to hide a NASA chief...
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 00:33:36 UTC No. 16305211
>>16305208
what was the other time?
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 00:36:42 UTC No. 16305216
you know what, maybe they can use this shartliner business to finally build that ISS gravity section which showed up once in concept. Help the astronauts keep some of their bone mass while waiting several years for Boeing to take care of things.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 00:39:22 UTC No. 16305218
>>16304845
>losing astronauts
Getting flashbacks
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 00:50:42 UTC No. 16305231
>>16305086
Ahahah I was referring to the graphic itself not the rockets!
T.engineer turned graphic designer
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 01:01:33 UTC No. 16305241
>>16305211
Per Lori Garver's book, that nig Charile Bolden had a loose tongue frequently embarrassing Obama. So she had to do the public part of the job for him.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 01:02:06 UTC No. 16305242
>>16305231
Yeah, well a lack of data does tend to lead to a surplus of empty space.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 01:08:35 UTC No. 16305246
>>16305242
One billion hours MS paint
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 01:10:33 UTC No. 16305247
>>16304845
They would definitely rather shitcan boing. But since there is some small chance that it will make it back in one piece they are just going to press the fuck it button then send thoughts and prayers. Also nonzero chance that some NASA people received phonecalls alluding to what will happen to then and their family if they cancel it.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 01:10:49 UTC No. 16305248
>>16305246
HAHAhA take 2 why does microsft change simple shit all the time
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 01:43:33 UTC No. 16305284
>>16305247
who would be blamed if they came down well done? and have they asked for an open casket funeral?
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 01:52:47 UTC No. 16305292
>>16305284
>who would be blamed if they came down well done?
It will be the most magnificent exercise in buck passing to ever grace the face of the planet until they eventually pin it on a middle manager fall guy, call it a day and make a call to their hand rubbing media friends to stop reporting on it.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 02:02:18 UTC No. 16305303
>>16305247
>They would definitely rather shitcan boing
The sentiment is there but you're underestimating how much NASA likes redundancy in some parts of its life.
>there is some small chance that it will make it back in one piece
You are vastly overstating the risks. NASA will not risk their reputation like that, since anything bad happening would endanger their jobs and their budgets. What we're seeing is just NASA being very very nervous because Boeing doesn't have the perfect understanding of Starliner's design that they said they did
>Also nonzero chance that some NASA people received phonecalls alluding to what will happen to then and their family if they cancel it.
There's a big difference between offing an unemployed whistleblower who's throwing bad PR at a big government contractor and threatening to do the same to a government employee who is high ranking enough to talk to actual elected officials.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 02:28:43 UTC No. 16305340
>>16305303
>You are vastly overstating the risks
Let's see how this statement ages
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 02:31:30 UTC No. 16305346
>>16305303
>NASA will not risk their reputation
What reputation? The reputation of the organization that relentlessly slaughtered astronauts with the shuttle? What's to risk?
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 02:44:15 UTC No. 16305369
>>16305340
The thruster assemblies have an overheating problem that shows up during high duty cycles. The current reentry maneuvers would fall afoul of this, so NASA needs to design a new maneuver plan. To do that they need to understand how the heat builds up and how much the system can take before actual mission-endangering problems occur. That's where we are right now.
>>16305346
If you're only going to talk in tired memes you're never going to have anything useful to say
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 02:56:53 UTC No. 16305387
>>16305216
Is this from the nautilus design?
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 03:10:55 UTC No. 16305407
>>16305374
Why is the central mohawk shinier than the rest of the nose?
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 03:13:13 UTC No. 16305412
>>16305216
I am still so fucking mad we never not spin grav research done, yet we're still doing another dozen to find out how easy it is to grow cabbage in space.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 03:16:23 UTC No. 16305419
>>16303971
spaceflight is so fucking BORING right now
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 03:29:47 UTC No. 16305438
Imagine the smell on the ISS right now. Two months with one set of clothes.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 03:35:28 UTC No. 16305443
>>16305374
what a dirty girl
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 03:51:52 UTC No. 16305454
Zubrin's musk
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 03:59:57 UTC No. 16305465
>>16305099
chicken farming
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 05:10:43 UTC No. 16305508
>>16304906
By roughly a factor of two, going on the assumption that Dragon XL is standard F9 diameter.
I'm sure that there are all kinds of scale issues with the diagram because an intern probably tossed it together in 20 minutes, but Starship being literally half actual size just screams "this vehicle makes the rest of the program look embarrassing and we don't want to acknowledge that."
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 05:19:20 UTC No. 16305512
>>16305508
Brutal mogging
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 05:19:21 UTC No. 16305513
>>16305508
they cant stop downplaying starship
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 05:49:46 UTC No. 16305536
>>16305508
lmao even
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 05:54:43 UTC No. 16305539
>>16304906
Very embarrasing
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 05:57:06 UTC No. 16305544
>>16304906
We can't nail down the motivation for sure but it does seem weird to downplay the size of Starship in a GAO report specifically about issues that come from how big Starship is.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 06:08:33 UTC No. 16305554
>>16305544
Because they don't want the GAO to look at it and go
>erm, that starship thing is kinda huge why don't we just use that
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 06:09:43 UTC No. 16305556
>lots of women have been to space
>none of them have had big tits
really makes you think
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 06:10:36 UTC No. 16305558
>>16305554
I think this might actually be what they're afraid of. If Congress sees the size of Starship relative to everything else, it's hard not to look at it and say "hey, wait a minute here..."
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 06:24:10 UTC No. 16305568
>>16305369
>If you're only going to talk in tired memes you're never going to have anything useful to say
You're the one who brought up NASA
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 07:01:06 UTC No. 16305600
>>16304015
> 5000 words to say, "I'm not mad -- you are!"
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 07:14:29 UTC No. 16305614
>>16305605
They will be upset we are sending niggers and women. Very low quality sacrifices.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 07:16:20 UTC No. 16305617
>>16305605
>ywn fight your way through legions of moon rabbits deep inna dusty luna environment
why go to space?
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 07:34:08 UTC No. 16305626
>>16305614
The Gods will be beyond offended by this pathetic offering of inferior individuals and obsolete technology, and react with a vengeful (and well deserved) mass extinction event
"They're not sending their best..."
We can do better.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 10:26:24 UTC No. 16305699
>>16304778
Again, what did they steal/copy from ULA? ULA is a dinosaur, it doesn't have anything china doesn't besides the methalox engines and thats BO's.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 10:32:41 UTC No. 16305707
>>16304890
I don't remember where spacex said it but I know it was cited in eager spaces video about why starship is taking so long.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 10:49:55 UTC No. 16305721
>>16305707
Elon said it offhand during the post ift3 presentation that also had a graphic where payload for current Starship was listed as a "-" instead of a number. Obviously the EDSers jumped on that one.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 10:58:50 UTC No. 16305727
>>16305556
Seats charge by the kilogram.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 11:50:28 UTC No. 16305751
Bros my quest to develop some industrial product that would be useful for Mars finally bore fruit. I'm writing a white paper and reaching out to a patent lawyer. Get fucked earthers I'm going to be a CEO on Mars
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 12:37:48 UTC No. 16305778
>>16304885
So, yeah, he is retarded.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 12:40:25 UTC No. 16305781
>>16305759
Destack (and destack) of the tower when
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 12:49:09 UTC No. 16305786
>>16304893
gigabased
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 12:51:10 UTC No. 16305787
>>16304914
Luckily the spacecraft consists of a collection of completely independent components that never interact, so their testing strategy was flawless.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 12:52:10 UTC No. 16305788
>>16304926
I believe Earthers contain phosphorus
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 12:57:20 UTC No. 16305792
>>16304937
>Kupier factor
In 20 years we'll see a single suborbital satellite that you can use as a WiFi base station for around 60 seconds for only a few million dollars per shot if you happen to be in Van Horn, Texas.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 13:02:30 UTC No. 16305795
>>16305374
Imagine how kino starships are gonna look from the mix of patina and coated in ablated material
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 13:07:54 UTC No. 16305799
>>16305097
Thank you for increasing the retards per post metric
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 13:11:02 UTC No. 16305800
>>16305231
Wow, how did you get a job at BO?!
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 13:17:57 UTC No. 16305805
>>16305792
there’s already 2 kuiper sats in orbit thoughbeit.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 13:25:29 UTC No. 16305810
https://x.com/vast/status/181898037
https://www.vastspace.com/updates/v
>NEW VAST ANNOUNCEMENT
Looks like they actually got partnerships, and with Redwire at that. What do you think theyre gonna do with this lab bros? Maybe 3D printing or what? I have yet to dig in to the actual article but it is LONG so will try and post summary
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 13:35:25 UTC No. 16305814
>>16305810
>developing pills, biotech, adv manufacturing and more
>10 locker payload slots size of a microwave for 30kg each, 100W of power & ethernet from starlink and can be returned from space
>redwire is putting their pill lab on haven-1 which has been on the ISS
>yuri is also putting their advanced space microscopy experiment onboard
>yuri says that haven-1 is good due to simplified access to microgravity
>vast is chasing semiconductor, material manufacturer and computing contracts
>vast developing an end user program for anyone that buys out a slot to do whatever they need on board from earth
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 13:38:52 UTC No. 16305816
>>16305814
>adsep by rewire is fully automated for processing and conducting experiments on life and small batch biotech production
>4 sampling/processing cassettes to do this and will mostly work on cellular level/pharmaceuticals
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 13:44:20 UTC No. 16305819
>>16305816
>sciencetaxi by yuri is an incubator w/ full temperature control, automation and real time data collection
>also has a centrifuge to test conditions under different gravities and itself can take 38 experiments
>these experiments are called scienceshells and will allow biologists to send up different experiments to test on their own
>phase contrast microscope and microfluidic system on board for them
basically theyre making their own specific system like vast is but for biologists to rent out for their own experiments in microgravity
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 13:47:52 UTC No. 16305824
>>16305819
>>16305816
>>16305814
>>16305810
Basically, Vast is making a platform for ANYONE that wants to rent out space on Haven-1 for their own experiments with the limit of 30kg, 100W and the size of a microwave with added ethernet with a program included to control the box you rent/buy out however you want
This is actually a really impressive and smart way to monetize Haven-1, you have a constant stream of experiments from all around the world going in and out and all you have to do is accept the money, give them access to the program, and send their payload up, plug it in and connect it youre done.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 14:12:24 UTC No. 16305841
Also page 8 and only 77 posts over bump limit is a travesty. The cancerous posters, you know who you are, did this.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 14:13:37 UTC No. 16305844
>>16305841
It's just inflation, less posts per thread
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 14:30:45 UTC No. 16305863
>>16305824
should make doing experiments much cheaper than with the ISS
remains to be seen how much demand something like this actually has
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 14:33:29 UTC No. 16305869
>>16305844
fewer, and no, the spammers and faggots did this
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 14:38:20 UTC No. 16305882
>>16305824
I hope to see vast succeed.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 14:51:11 UTC No. 16305891
>>16305882
Theyre still slated for their original launch date of August 2025 in this article so it looks like things are still going smoothly for them.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 15:03:55 UTC No. 16305900
>>16305894
>>16305897
How many modules tall is tower 2 gonna be?
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 15:05:38 UTC No. 16305901
>>16305900
9 modules.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 15:11:44 UTC No. 16305905
>>16305824
>>16305882
>>16305863
I hope they succeed too, but is there even one customer for Haven-1 yet?
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 15:17:00 UTC No. 16305909
>>16305905
They literally just listed two right there as the inaugural customers and they have already been in talks with ESA to send up people. Are you just a 0 attentionspan zoomer or maliciously posting this?
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 15:19:41 UTC No. 16305910
>>16305909
Oh are these companies actually sending people up too, I thought they were just making machines to be used in Haven-1?
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 15:20:48 UTC No. 16305911
>>16305909
>already been in talks with ESA to send up people
Plus this is the first I've heard about that.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 15:28:39 UTC No. 16305914
>>16305910
You are just a 0 attentionspan zoomer then. No, these are real customers that are buying space in those little locker things so that they can conduct experiments in space. This is not Vast buying tech to put on the station, this is Vast selling space for them to use and you would know that if you had read the version that I even TLDRd for people like you. Either way, customers of Vast are obviously not going to be only astronauts with this lab space announced so its not a good idea to keep thinking in that mindset.
>>16305911
https://www.vastspace.com/updates/e
In regards to this, here is picrel which even if you dont consider it 'official' talks this is pretty clearly deep talks with ESA with Vast, the solely commercial space station company. Vast also previously said that they are targeting smaller space agencies than NASA in getting contracts to send people up to Haven-1. Pretty obvious that they have been targeting ESA for astronauts like I said.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 15:29:12 UTC No. 16305915
>>16305865
This admin is the worst admin in recent history. Worst than Nixon even.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 15:33:12 UTC No. 16305918
>>16305914
>Memorandum of Understanding
That sounds very European. I'm not sure I can elaborate on that
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 15:44:06 UTC No. 16305925
>>16305918
>A memorandum of understanding, or MOU, is a nonbinding agreement that states each party's intentions to take action, conduct a business transaction, or form a new partnership.
basically something that they might do
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 15:45:52 UTC No. 16305927
>>16305925
Which is like I said they are in talks to have astronauts go up.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 15:47:30 UTC No. 16305929
>>16305928
https://www.dawnaerospace.com/lates
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 15:48:10 UTC No. 16305930
>>16305928
Remember when every armchair engineer was saying in space refueling was a meme dream?
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 15:48:32 UTC No. 16305931
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 15:48:54 UTC No. 16305932
>>16305930
No, I always ignore them.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 15:51:46 UTC No. 16305934
>>16305928
Ok so this is basically the connector port system. The gas nozzle to gas cap for satellites/stations?
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 15:56:37 UTC No. 16305938
>>16305931
What if you want a spacecraft thruster that runs on something other than hobbyist tier fuels? Do they have a design for fulling udmh tanks?
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 16:13:34 UTC No. 16305945
>>16305938
TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT
N
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 16:27:42 UTC No. 16305957
>>16304266
>point every starlink with visual contact in the hemisphere above venezuela at one single point
>lets say the head of maduro
>a, nothing happens
>b, his brain starts cooking
>c, his entire head explodes&melts away
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 16:29:25 UTC No. 16305959
>>16304759
Pretty sure zuck was the one who chicked out when he realised musk wasnt joking.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 16:38:01 UTC No. 16305968
>>16305965
https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/
>The report also finds that the Gateway program is running into some pretty serious technical difficulties. One involves a defective network chip that facilitates communication throughout the lunar space station. Its failure could cause myriad problems onboard the Gateway.
>Another risk involves something called "stack controllability." This essentially means that because SpaceX's Lunar Starship is so much more massive than the Gateway, when it is docked to the space station, the Gateway's power and propulsion element (PPE) will not be able to maintain a proper orientation of the entire stack.
>The report also has some sobering conclusions about the potential utility of the Lunar Gateway for Mars missions. (In the past, NASA officials have spoken about the Gateway as a staging area for spacecraft and propellant for human missions to the surface of Mars.) However, the "stack controllability" issue poses a serious constraint to hosting large Mars transit vehicles. Moreover, the planned 15-year lifetime of the Gateway may not be long enough to sustain Mars missions.
>All in all, the report seems to suggest that the Gateway is way behind schedule and is of limited use to lunar and Mars landings. The report suggests the Gateway will be complex to undertake at the very same time NASA is attempting to establish a lunar surface program. But other than that, everything is going great.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 16:38:18 UTC No. 16305969
>>16305965
Can't they just improve flight computers?
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 16:40:40 UTC No. 16305973
>>16305968
https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24
https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-24-1
>The report includes a helpful cartoon to explain the complicated sequence that needs to happen for Gateway to be involved in the Artemis IV mission:
>Launch of the initial segments of the Gateway, a power and propulsion module, and a habitation module, to a halo orbit around the Moon
>Launch of a SpaceX Dragon XL vehicle to bring supplies to the Gateway
>Launch of multiple SpaceX Starships to fuel a Lunar Starship, which will then fly to and dock with the Gateway
>Launch of a NASA Space Launch System rocket carrying four astronauts inside an Orion spacecraft as well as another Gateway module
>After launch, Orion separates from the rocket and docks with this module, the International Habitat
>Orion tugs the International Habitat to the Gateway and docks; the crew exits onto Gateway
>Two crew members board the Lunar Starship and go down to the Moon for six days
>Starship flies back to the Gateway, and the four astronauts return to Earth inside Orion.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 16:41:19 UTC No. 16305975
>>16305965
just more quality design architecture work by Old Space!
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 16:42:36 UTC No. 16305976
>>16305975
shitshow after shitshow
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 16:43:50 UTC No. 16305977
>>16305931
Having three ways to fit seems suboptimal.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 16:49:22 UTC No. 16305982
>>16305965
Man this administration is really bad at managing NASA
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 16:50:38 UTC No. 16305983
SLS and gateway haters eating good today, love to see it
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 16:51:51 UTC No. 16305985
>>16305931
can I get a port to attach to my spacesuit and and fill it with a mix of N2O and O2? for.... uhhh... science reasons
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 16:54:16 UTC No. 16305988
>>16305982
>blatant political post ignores that nasa has been incompetent non stop since apollo ended
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 16:56:06 UTC No. 16305990
>>16305988
The current administration is just worse than usual.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 16:56:47 UTC No. 16305991
>>16305968
>>16305978
How does one get involved in such underachieving teams if your content with being an underachiever?
I can't imagine you do much in a day
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 16:57:32 UTC No. 16305992
>>16305982
lol this goes much deeper than this specific administration and the problem is not specific to just the democrats
using nasa as a way to shovel money into make work projects in congressmens home districts happens no matter which side of the aisle happens to be in charge
for instance richard shelby was a republican since 1994
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 16:58:17 UTC No. 16305993
>>16305988
it's not political to say nelson is a bad admin. Bridenstein was much better.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 16:58:24 UTC No. 16305994
>>16305988
Nah, Trump admin was an absolute great era for NASA. probably the last one
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 16:59:15 UTC No. 16305995
>>16305990
the current admin has been bad specifically with respect to Musk but seems to me they have largely ignored the usual pork projects in NASA and let them do what they always do
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 17:01:04 UTC No. 16305996
https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/
>Taking into account the financial loss revealed Wednesday, NASA and Boeing have committed at least $6.7 billion to the Starliner program since 2010, including expenses for spacecraft development, testing, and the government's payment for six operational crew flights with Starliner.
>It's instructive to compare these costs with those of SpaceX's Crew Dragon program, which started flying astronauts in 2020. All of NASA's contracts with SpaceX for a similar scope of work on the Crew Dragon program totaled more than $3.1 billion, but any expenses paid by SpaceX are unknown because it is a privately held company.
>SpaceX has completed all six of its original crew flights for NASA, while Boeing is at least a year away from starting operational service with Starliner. In light of Boeing's delays, NASA extended SpaceX's commercial crew contract to cover eight additional round-trip flights to the space station through the end of the 2020s.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 17:01:40 UTC No. 16305998
>>16305995
It's hard to imagine how they could possibly out-pork what already exists without greatly expanding the agency.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 17:04:01 UTC No. 16306001
>>16305995
SpaceX constantly flies government payloads and wins nasa contracts back to back. They literally just got the job to deorbit ISS. The only thing you can really point to is not using starlink for their rural internet plan, and that’s just refusing to give them a subsidy because they’re still letting starlink run free.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 17:10:33 UTC No. 16306005
>>16306001
It's hardly a subsidy if they've managed to spend $43 billion on nothing.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 17:13:54 UTC No. 16306006
>>16305991
These people unironically think that they are achievers when they take extra time and spare no expense on overdesigning their hardware.
When their shit hits the real world and problems/glitches arise they unironically think it's because space is hard, not that their lack of testing to failure is a suboptimal strategy.
I'll reiterate: Egg heads *actually believe* they are the better engineers when they overdesign their shit, because to them good engineering = over-engineering.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 17:14:26 UTC No. 16306007
Holy fuck, NASA is embarassing. I'm supporting SpaceX and China now.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 17:21:13 UTC No. 16306011
>>16306001
>The only thing you can really point to is not using starlink for their rural internet plan, and that’s just refusing to give them a subsidy because they’re still letting starlink run free.
The internet buildout bill passed in 2021 under Biden. Since then they have spend $43 billion and not connected a single person. The government was aware of Starlink at the time of the passing of the bill and did not give any funds to Starlink, which has gone on to service 3 million users.
The people to chose to exclude Starlink and the executives at companies that received a portion of the $43 billion & never delivered should be in jail getting raped up the ass with an aids dick for the rest of their lives imho
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 17:21:26 UTC No. 16306012
>>16306007
welcome to the club
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 17:22:46 UTC No. 16306014
>>16306011
Afaik the "project" is stuck in red tape. Not sure if any companies have gotten a cent yet but that just makes it worse honestly.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 17:37:39 UTC No. 16306024
>>16306014
Few billions have already been spent. But 0 customers.
A single $1 billion would have been able to give 80% discount to users of Starlink (600 - 80% = $120 cost of antenna). That could have helped serve 2 million+ customers right there.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 17:40:41 UTC No. 16306026
>>16305996
The most interesting thing I've learned from this article is that the outgoing CEO of boeing is the former CEO of collins aerospace, the same one that recently pulled out of the spacesuit contract.
Maybe this guy is just a shitty CEO?
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 17:41:41 UTC No. 16306027
>>16306026
Incoming CEO*
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 17:42:09 UTC No. 16306028
>>16306026
Depends on what you're optimizing for. The guy has no skin in the game.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 17:54:29 UTC No. 16306044
I imagine getting violently drunk to the point where the room is spinning would be absolute hell if you were in orbit.
I also wonder if it would be miserable if you had the flu or something and your whole body felt like it got hit by a train. Would it be better to be on earth with gravity and a bed? Or wrapped up in a sleeping bag floating on the wall?
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 18:03:30 UTC No. 16306051
>>16306011
Lol dude if you're aware of NASA shit this should be obvious. The point wasn't to expand rural internet, the point was to send $40b to spectrum lol. I don't know why "inefficiency" is the American word for "corruption" but there you go
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 18:15:31 UTC No. 16306058
>>16306044
like 50% of people get space sickness
vomit everywhere in microgravity
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 18:29:18 UTC No. 16306071
>>16305788
no wasting human bodies on Mars, they will be buried under a tree sapling and fertilize the soil
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 18:29:55 UTC No. 16306073
>>16306058
how do they deal with vomiting? do they have some kind of facemask with a hose and some suction to vacuum it all up before it can get all over the place?
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 18:33:30 UTC No. 16306077
>>16306044
Floating in free fall would absolutely help the headache I get when I have the flu, but the fluid redistribution of zero G may make the sinus issues worse. Overall I think somewhere between Earth and Moon gravity there exists a minimum of flu/drunkenness related suffering.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 18:34:32 UTC No. 16306078
>>16306051
I don't disagree. That's where the statement about the people making those decisions getting raped with aids in prison forever comes from.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 18:38:08 UTC No. 16306081
>>16306077
So, Mars gravity?
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 18:38:46 UTC No. 16306084
>>16306081
Probably closer to Mercury gravity.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 18:48:33 UTC No. 16306092
>>16306071
They won't be buried in one piece. Better to freeze-dry then grind the bodies into granular material which can be mixed with bulk soil or better yet cast across the soil surface to feed insects
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 18:49:33 UTC No. 16306094
>>16306073
Vomit bags.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 18:51:11 UTC No. 16306098
>>16306084
Mars gravity is 0.2% stronger than Mercury's gravity. Not 2%, 0.2%, or two-thousandths.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 18:52:14 UTC No. 16306100
>>16306092
geez you're morbid
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 18:55:51 UTC No. 16306107
>>16306098
Yes, that was the joke.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 19:29:34 UTC No. 16306132
>>16306120
Bucket status?
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 19:30:34 UTC No. 16306134
>>16306120
They need some Alabama river rock
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 19:43:32 UTC No. 16306139
>>16306132
Flat
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 19:52:19 UTC No. 16306147
>>16306144
https://x.com/SciGuySpace/status/18
https://x.com/SciGuySpace/status/18
https://blogs.nasa.gov/commercialcr
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 19:57:34 UTC No. 16306151
Boeing and NASA will extend the stay until November before shoving Butch and Suni into the capsule and roll the dice.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 20:04:39 UTC No. 16306160
>>16306026
Depends on what his job was.
If his task was to funnel taxpayer money in to the pockets of his managment friends and stock owners then he did a very good job.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 20:09:03 UTC No. 16306166
>>16306151
No retard Eric has already reported that NASA is studying how to bring them back with Dragon. Theyre retarded but theyre not that retarded
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 20:21:49 UTC No. 16306187
>>16306151
As much as Boing gets away with it, the longer that thing stays on station the more it degrades, and they've already delayed too long and will just come down in a fresh dragon.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 20:25:18 UTC No. 16306191
>>16306187
Shartliner getting uncerrmoniously flung into the atmosphere by the Canadarm to burn up is an unexpected bit of space humor.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 20:42:56 UTC No. 16306203
>>16306191
it'll the first chance they've had to use the middle finger attachment. exciting times
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 20:47:11 UTC No. 16306209
Just make Gateway the LEO international space station successor.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 21:04:17 UTC No. 16306215
>>16306209
Just use superheavy and put a shitload of 9m tall modules in a lagrange L1 and build a massive spacestation.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 21:32:59 UTC No. 16306249
The sciences, each straining in its own direction, have hitherto harmed us little; but some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the deadly light into the peace and safety of a new dark age.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 21:34:48 UTC No. 16306253
>>16305186
humorous
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 21:37:57 UTC No. 16306256
>>16306215
You need to build down a well or in LEO. The radiation in interplanetary space is too big a problem right now. If there's a lunar maglev mass driver flinging tons of gravel shielding into orbit then it's a different story, but even then there's no reason to choose L1 over anywhere else
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 21:41:48 UTC No. 16306258
>>16306256
Sure, i'm just a oldfag gundam fan who liked the idea of massive o'neill cylinder colonies at all the lagrange points.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 22:23:59 UTC No. 16306284
>>16306258
I like the vision and envy what our descendants will take for granted
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 22:27:43 UTC No. 16306287
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 22:30:28 UTC No. 16306288
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 22:33:14 UTC No. 16306290
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 22:34:15 UTC No. 16306291
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 22:35:19 UTC No. 16306292
>>16306291
module still on the ground and flooded trench construction
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 22:37:13 UTC No. 16306294
>>16306292
Pretty old photo, they stacked module 5 already.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 22:39:00 UTC No. 16306295
Our Boca Chica has been mutilated!
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 22:51:16 UTC No. 16306304
>>16306294
I think its from the 25th, so pretty old yes
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 23:10:05 UTC No. 16306320
THEY'RE *CLAP* NOT *CLAP* FUCKING *CLAP* STRANDED
incel chud alt-right bootlicker ERIC BERGER IS LYING
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 23:11:32 UTC No. 16306322
ITS OVER!!!!!
Starliner crew coming back on Dragon.
-Berger
https://x.com/SciGuySpace/status/18
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 23:13:51 UTC No. 16306330
>>16306322
See chudlings, they arent stranded! they are coming back on Dragon! SpaceX chuds BTFO
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 23:16:26 UTC No. 16306335
>>16306322
https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/
You do have to feel for the NASA people who have to make this call, it is a lose lose situation for them because Boeing a fuck.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 23:17:07 UTC No. 16306338
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 23:18:50 UTC No. 16306340
>>16306335
>It has now been eight weeks since Boeing's Starliner spacecraft launched into orbit on an Atlas V rocket, bound for the International Space Station. At the time NASA officials said the two crew members, Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams, could return to Earth as soon as June 14, just eight days later.
>One informed source said it was greater than a 50-50 chance that the crew would come back on Dragon. Another source said it was significantly more likely than not they would. To be clear, NASA has not made a final decision. This probably will not happen until at least next week. It is likely that Jim Free, NASA's associate administrator, will make the call.
>Asked if it was now more likely than not that Starliner's crew would return on Dragon, NASA spokesperson Josh Finch told Ars on Thursday evening, " NASA is evaluating all options for the return of agency astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams from the International Space Station as safely as possible. No decisions have been made and the agency will continue to provide updates on its planning."
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 23:18:55 UTC No. 16306341
This is why we test folks
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 23:20:13 UTC No. 16306343
>>16306340
>So what will the space agency do? Starliner probably could make it back to Earth safely. But there appears to be some reasonable doubt that Starliner will come back safely. If NASA defers to its fallback plan, flying on Dragon, it may spell the end of the Starliner program. During the development and testing of Starliner, the company has already lost $1.6 billion. Reflying a crew test flight mission, which likely would be necessary should Starliner return autonomously, would cost much more. Boeing might opt to cancel Starliner and leave NASA with just a single provider of crew transportation. That would be painful for both NASA and Boeing.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 23:20:26 UTC No. 16306344
>>16306341
No, it isn't. Testing is done with the intent to correct mistakes and issues as they're discovered. Boeing and Aerojet have consistently failed to address or mitigate the thruster issues found on Starliner.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 23:21:55 UTC No. 16306345
>>16306343
Boeing is a big company.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 23:22:33 UTC No. 16306347
>>16306345
for you
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 23:23:25 UTC No. 16306349
>>16306320
>>16306322
It’s all crumbling down boeingbros
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 23:25:12 UTC No. 16306350
>>16306344
Look jack... space is hard.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 23:32:20 UTC No. 16306355
>>16306341
A little birdie told me Starliner will not be undocked (debirthed); It is far too risky to the ISS so they will leave it until eventual ISS deorbit.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 23:33:07 UTC No. 16306356
>>16306345
NASA is trying to move heaven and earth to make Boeing bring the astronauts home on the Starliner for two core reasons:
1. So that Boeing can save face, because needing a competitor to save their astronauts would be reputationally catastrophic.
2. It will make NASA look ever more incompetent and every future decision they make for any post orbit human activity that isn't exclusively framed around SpaceX capabilities will lead to major public criticism and significantly more scrutiny given the degree of failure they've on their plates by betting more on old space competitors vs new space competitors.
Basically, if SpaceX brings the two astronauts down, it's tantamount to a rescue mission--and most importantly, it puts the Biden and Harris administration (current and potentially future if they win in November), in a position where they will have to owe Musk and SpaceX. Which is a political landmine, seeing as to how both sides hate each other's guts.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 23:38:17 UTC No. 16306362
>>16306350
And other things people say when they consistently fail to learn from the mistakes of their predecessors
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 23:43:21 UTC No. 16306367
>>16306147
welcome to the hotel ISS-ifornia
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 23:52:12 UTC No. 16306373
>>16306356
My thoughts exactly. Nothing will happen before November. NASA cannot risk the not insignificant chance that something goes wrong during departure, but more importantly WH do not want to hand Musk a PR victory.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Aug 2024 23:55:10 UTC No. 16306375
>>16306322
If you were there for the docking this was rather foreseeable.
Since then and now there has been so much gaslighting that many forgot. (mostly by twitter shills, not actual NASA PR)
The thruster issues were obviously extremely critical.
They fully lost control at one point.
If NASA actually cares about rigorous crew safety, which I believe they do, letting them return on it is not an option.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 00:03:29 UTC No. 16306379
>>16306373
We just have to wait for Crew-9, after all it's scheduled for August.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 00:06:32 UTC No. 16306380
>>16306345
>smaller valuation than SpaceX
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 00:11:13 UTC No. 16306385
>>16306380
just realized SpaceX is $210b while Locksneed and Boing are $237b combined. Why were those two fighting over contracts when they could've just built a better rocket?
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 00:11:43 UTC No. 16306386
>>16306373
>WH do not want to hand Musk a PR victory
I'm sure they wouldn't but they're not really involved in this. It's just Boeing having a normal one, NASA freaking out over the situation, and SpaceX standing off to the side as the one competent man in the room
>>16306356
#2 would actually be great. Gateway is turning into a useless and poorly designed waste of billions of dollars, and if that dies under excessive criticism then it could take the EUS and ML-2 with it, while putting the long-term desirability of SLS into question. You kick over one domino and all of the poorly designed cost+ parts of Artemis start falling over.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 00:32:43 UTC No. 16306407
>>16306384
>Taller than Ariane 5
Are you sure about that?
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 00:33:12 UTC No. 16306408
Another indicator that NASA is serious about Dragon rescue plan is silence from Elon.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 00:34:38 UTC No. 16306409
>>16306407
thats the 6. 5 is like 45-50m
>>16306408
i have been thinking this for a month
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 00:36:06 UTC No. 16306410
>>16306408
Good point kek
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 00:39:42 UTC No. 16306415
>>16306355
i want to say this is too stupid for me to believe, but i've said that about 5 times about other starliner rumors that ended up being real. what a piece of shit.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 00:40:51 UTC No. 16306416
Remember when LockMart was throwing around the idea of an Orion Lite capsule?
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 00:43:44 UTC No. 16306418
>>16306416
Yeah the schizo Bigelow capsule lol
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 00:45:41 UTC No. 16306420
>>16305985
sure, hold still while I gas you
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 00:52:14 UTC No. 16306424
>>16306416
I remember when Orion was going to be light enough to use as America's LEO crew transport.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 00:52:39 UTC No. 16306425
>>16306001
you're a liar or an actual retard if you don't think it's obvious that this administration went after Elon
nothing you write is worth reading
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 01:00:05 UTC No. 16306431
>>16306258
O'Neill's original plan called for lunar mass drivers. Gateway should switch the xenon piss drives for QI horizon sails and cruise around the inner system doing brachistochrones to LVO and NEAs.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 01:01:39 UTC No. 16306432
>>16306092
I suppose it's probably better to completely sterilize human tissues before reintroducing them to the food chain, and to go even farther and destroy all the protein to avoid prion diseases. In that case you might as well use alkaline hydrolysis.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 01:03:20 UTC No. 16306433
https://x.com/lifeatstagezero/statu
crabs lmao
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 01:12:51 UTC No. 16306438
>>16306407
Parsonson’s drawing is outdated, I’m basing myself on the last renders from last month and this one
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 01:28:54 UTC No. 16306447
>>16306415
obv nasa wouldnt waste a precious port on a permanent shitbox
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 01:31:07 UTC No. 16306449
Confirm Elon hasn't tweeted about or responded at all to Starliner news?
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 01:41:17 UTC No. 16306453
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 02:11:50 UTC No. 16306460
>>16306356
Money talks, bullshit walks
The military are going to override the Biden admin, which is likely holding them back from getting starshield mass-integrated across the entire armed forces
https://spacenews.com/pentagon-advi
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 02:17:10 UTC No. 16306468
>>16306463
this is the real reason the ISS is being deorbited
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 02:23:38 UTC No. 16306471
>>16306463
truly shartliner
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 02:29:14 UTC No. 16306475
>>16306463
i thought they were getting more clothes with the latest cargo mission?
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 03:55:05 UTC No. 16306531
>I've gotta say, the Schadenboner over this whole thing might turn into an ER-visit priapism situation if they really do have to catch a fucking Space Uber home
Berger article comments always goated. It's like /sfg/ but with less nigger words and glassing earthers
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 03:57:36 UTC No. 16306535
>>16306531
Article writers lead the comment flow. They are like AI prompt engineers for the cattle commenters.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 04:06:13 UTC No. 16306546
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 09:13:14 UTC No. 16306787
>>16306463
>reusable underwear
Not on oldspace watch.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 11:51:12 UTC No. 16306911
>>16306356
>It will make NASA look ever more incompetent
why? Boeing is a contractor to nasa just like spacex. it certainly makes Boeing look incompetent.
Another question comes to mind - how long will they leave the ISS unable to be evacuated, since the dragon counts for 7 seats?
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 12:21:25 UTC No. 16306945
>>16306911
>why? Boeing is a contractor to nasa just like spacex. it certainly makes Boeing look incompetent.
NASA is expected or atleast has had their finger on the pluse of everything it contracts for.
The fact they didn't wring Boeing out over the failures during the first ever Starliner flight when they also had truster issues speaks to a complete lack of any engineering talent or oversight. This should have been fixed before Astronauts ever touched that god forsaken capsule.
NASA has no balls left.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 12:31:39 UTC No. 16306958
>>16306945
yeah i guess they should, but do they even bother with the kind of oversight they exercised during Apollo, where they'd have constant performance meetings, deadlines and so on, along with astros working on sight regularly? Even with all that happening the the CM fire happened and the first LM delivered leaked, funnily enough, from the RCS system like a sieve.
it should definitely have been fixed. i heard on here that they didn't even vacuum chamber test the thing.