🧵 /sfg/ - Spaceflight General
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 04:05:31 UTC No. 16306544
Its over for oldspace edition
Musk's alliance with the incoming president will lead to a total SpaceX takeover of NASA and a rebirth of the American manned spaceflight program.
previous >>16303971
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 04:08:43 UTC No. 16306549
>>16306544
https://x.com/i/broadcasts/1YqGovMj
NSF livestreaming F9 Starlink launch
T-52 mins
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 04:16:16 UTC No. 16306559
>>16306552
Stop being so fucking poor.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 04:18:46 UTC No. 16306563
>>16306544
Glass the Earth, demigod war eventually
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 04:19:58 UTC No. 16306565
>>16306552
There are at least two people in space who wish they could come home to Earth.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 04:23:27 UTC No. 16306570
>>16306549
Isn't it funny how SpaceX launches have become so routine that they only get a lot of attention anymore when they're launching some sort of exciting new experimental gear?
Meanwhile every NASA launch of any type still gets a lot of attention - but only because everyone is expecting some sort of spectacular failure.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 04:26:37 UTC No. 16306573
>>16306460
>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
i dont think any starshield issues are because of biden, but because it involves a ton of contractors, not just spacex. starshield is almost just a satellite bus, and other companies build components for it. its not all done in house by spacex like starlink is.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 04:32:42 UTC No. 16306581
People forget that the original Starliner test crew REFUSED to fly on it and then quit NASA
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 04:50:07 UTC No. 16306598
>>16306581
I wonder how the current crew feels about the fact that their eventual rescue has been delayed for months just because NASA doesn't want to give Musk a publicity victory?
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 05:05:37 UTC No. 16306620
>>16306581
source? I believe you but I just want to read about it
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 05:09:29 UTC No. 16306627
another snoozer landing
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 05:10:50 UTC No. 16306628
https://x.com/i/broadcasts/1mnxeAqo
SpaceX Falcon going live now.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 05:11:59 UTC No. 16306630
>>16306628
anon, I...
🗑️ Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 05:13:38 UTC No. 16306633
Your Trump OPs are starting to get very old again /pol/ import. Your constant and incessant shilling does not help his case
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 05:14:41 UTC No. 16306635
>>16306581
I only know about Chris Ferguson who left for "personal reason" but he participated as Boeing's test pilot and technically not on NASA's side. Who else quit?
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 05:16:49 UTC No. 16306637
>>16306544
Imagine SpaceX's proven technical capability combined with NASA's proven bottomless budget. If Trump is elected we will be on Mars before the end of his term.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 05:26:09 UTC No. 16306643
>>16306590
https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/
It's joever for Starliner
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 05:29:29 UTC No. 16306647
At this rate, how likely is it that Starliner will ever have an actual standard-operations crew mission?
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 05:31:32 UTC No. 16306649
>>16306647
Even though getting rescued would be embarrassing, I think they would try for another test flight int 2025 unless the gov terminated the agreement.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 05:45:58 UTC No. 16306659
>https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/
Thoughts on Blue Origin? I didn't realize the rocket console wars were a thing until I read 8 years worth of Blue Origin New Glenn/BE-4 development forum posts. A lot of cope and seethe if anyone mentions F9 or SpaceX. They kept making comparisons to Raptor to defend BO's choice of ORSC cycle for BE-4 seemingly forgetting that SpaceX designed/tested/flew hundreds of Merlins before attempting FFSC with Raptor.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 05:47:36 UTC No. 16306660
>>16306659
A lot of newspace companies are popping up out of the woodwork and jumping straight to FFSC now that people know that it works, so with the benefit of hindsight, doesn't seem likely that Blue Origin would flub it from a strictly engineering perspective.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 05:51:07 UTC No. 16306661
>>16306659
The less launches and test fires, the slower the program, the less relevant it is. Unless Jeff wants to actually push Blorp to at least half of SpaceX testing cadence its a useless company. Hell starship program has started and reached orbit before Blorp has made a single rocket of thier making reach orbit.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 05:51:58 UTC No. 16306662
>>16306649
Another test flight, sure, but how likely is that one to go well enough that NASA gives the green light to proceed with operational missions? This one has gone badly enough that Starliner clearly has some fundamental problems, and Boeing isn't very agile on redesigns or retrofits. Any "fix" to a particular issue probably won't actually address the core flaw, and will still take a while to implement.
Do they get a third crew demo flight after the next one has similar (or entirely new) difficulties? A fourth? Does the NASA top brass get threatened behind closed doors by senators who want Boeing to pay for another vacation home, and move ahead with full missions immediately?
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 05:55:16 UTC No. 16306663
>>16306662
Technically boing is now run out of contract money and is spending their own money to continue the program. I think the press and humiliation of cancellation is too high and would forever tarnish the company and stock and they must at least get one successful launch and landing, and then they will quietly cancel it and pretend it was a success.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 06:03:05 UTC No. 16306665
>>16306659
New around here, aren't you?
Blorigin is the single greatest argument for Elon actually being a critical part of Spacex's success and not just a grifting hype-man. Blue was founded a year and a half before Spacex and as far as I remember got a guaranteed billion dollars a year straight from Bezos, or something ridiculous like that. He didn't take a direct role in running the company, though. He let it rot in the hands of oldspace veterans.
As a result, Spacex now launches ~90% of global mass to orbit and operates the majority of operational satellites, while Blue has put zero (0) kg into orbit and operates a glorified carnival ride, despite having an 18-month head start.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 06:05:26 UTC No. 16306666
>>16306661
It's a strange approach. There's even a post from 2018 talking about how they're 'hardware rich'. I'm not sure they even knew what that means based on what is known now about how that program went. It's like they don't realize the engineering data from a failure is more valuable than the hardware itself during the development phase.
>>16306663
Once they're certified they can do some of the contracted flights and recoup some of the money but will never come close to break even at this stage. That's IF they can without further issues requiring more test flights.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 06:10:52 UTC No. 16306668
>>16306665
They've won close to 10B so far without ever putting anything in orbit. Its a total sham.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 06:22:55 UTC No. 16306672
>>16306665
Clearly Elon always saw 'it' as being an engineering problem and is interested in what his engineers are doing and has spent a great deal of time with them. I guess being le right wing apartheid twitter hitler man means he's a grifter to some but I never understood it. Bezos/Bob Smith seems to treat it as a business problem that can be solved with money and brought in the bean counters, lawfare and patent trolling and probably never even met the guys in charge of the engineering side. To their credit however, ULA never developed an engine that I'm aware of.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 06:44:22 UTC No. 16306682
>Ariane 6 doomed to obsolescence
>no more relaxing female british commentary
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJa
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 07:13:55 UTC No. 16306693
>>16306628
I thought the FAA grounded falcon 9 after that anomaly
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 07:22:22 UTC No. 16306698
>>16306693
they already returned to flight like 4x
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 07:33:03 UTC No. 16306708
>>16306691
Isn't it September now? This month is supposed to be the launch window for Mars but now they're trying to pretend like Mars was never the destination.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 07:37:26 UTC No. 16306712
>>16306708
nigga
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 07:39:03 UTC No. 16306716
>>16306637
Now now. Unmanned probably. Manned definitely not, theres no magical key for unlocking months of time spent testing what with how far mars is
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 07:47:58 UTC No. 16306720
>>16306717
yes, there's a name for it
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 07:53:54 UTC No. 16306721
>>16306717
The Overview Effect. Some people experience it, but not everyone.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 07:57:48 UTC No. 16306724
>>16306544
Wow, I can't believe Harris likes Elon and spaceflight that much.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 07:59:50 UTC No. 16306725
>>16306722
Columbia crew could have made it if their visors had been down and locked, so this should be fine.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 08:00:18 UTC No. 16306726
>>16306708
Mars is literally the destination of the payload, what are you talking about?
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 08:17:51 UTC No. 16306738
>>16306726
>“NASA didn’t promise us a ride to Mars ..."
>the current launch window ... Aug. 6 through 15 of 2024 ... “is approximate and provisional” and that options for the mission’s trajectory are still being studied.
It won't be if they don't launch soon. Originally they didn't plan on TMI but it looks like they will have to.
🗑️ Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 09:02:07 UTC No. 16306771
>>16306544
Trump is going to lose again
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 09:10:01 UTC No. 16306783
>>16306763
Actually insane chin
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 09:15:34 UTC No. 16306789
>>16306598
>just because NASA doesn't want to give Musk a publicity victory?
Blaming NASA for the shit done by boeing lobyists and US senators is a smoothbrain thing to do.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 09:17:17 UTC No. 16306793
>>16306763
Is this a edit?
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 09:28:25 UTC No. 16306799
>>16306763
being an astronaut is about being the best and brightest. slackers get you killed.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 09:37:50 UTC No. 16306805
>>16306799
No it’s not, this isn’t the 70s anymore. Being an astronaut is about sitting in a chair and letting your autopilot do the work. You just need to know how to work a bunch of hand tools and be trained to fly manually which anyone can be taught. I bet the fucking Insp4 crew could have done this Starliner mission.
They stack these overqualified test pilots on missions like this because it’s hyper-competitive. And no offense to sunni but it isn’t exactly inspiring to the young generation to see “career astronaut who is 60 and who has flown to space a bajillion times”
We need young faces in space. There’s not a lot of inspiration above our heads right now.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 10:01:26 UTC No. 16306816
>>16306805
I remember seeing a post by some EDSer that works at NASA that said something like
>you argue with people online about SpaceX and then you click their profile and they're in middle school
And his point was something about how the industry big dogs know SpaceX will fail and the kids don't know anything, but it made me realize how much kids right now are inspired by SpaceX and not NASA or others. Obviously SpaceX is better at space, but God damn they're even better at outreach and inspiration.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 10:16:47 UTC No. 16306833
>>16306816
Lmao NASA people getting btfo by literal moddle schoolers
Lmaooo
The absolute state of oldspace
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 10:29:57 UTC No. 16306841
>>16306789
As long as Spaceguy lives I will never think NASA does not have some blame
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 10:32:57 UTC No. 16306846
>>16306841
>Spaceguy
spaceguy5? just looked it up and I think that's the guy I was talking about in this post >>16306816
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 10:35:46 UTC No. 16306850
>>16306713
fuck knows, was it next year now or did they get something sooner?
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 11:08:59 UTC No. 16306876
>>16306763
>>16306783
Jay Leno is jealous
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 11:11:45 UTC No. 16306879
can we expect tower segment 6 to stack today?
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 11:13:12 UTC No. 16306880
>>16306649
>I think they would try for another test flight int 2025
I really don't think they would. They wouldn't have enough time left to do all their launches. Final test flight in 2025 would make their first operational flight in 2026, ISS is being deorbited in 2030 so that only leaves them enough time to do 4/6 contracted missions. Thats of course assuming the 2nd test flight goes well, which is not guaranteed. Boeing has a new CEO coming in as well, I say he cancels starliner since theres little to no chance boeing will make any money off it.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 11:37:52 UTC No. 16306901
>>16306633
Lmao mad as fuck he didn't get to make the op seethe faggot bitch
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 11:42:09 UTC No. 16306904
>Boeing will sabotage SpaceX to save face
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 11:51:42 UTC No. 16306913
>>16306904
They'll have to pull the ULA sniper out of retirement
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 12:00:46 UTC No. 16306927
>>16306903
When Mars is fully industrialized there will be a planetary effort towards setting up nitrogen exporting factory on Titan. Until then all resources will be devoted to Mars industrialization sorry
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 12:02:12 UTC No. 16306928
>>16306903
There is nothing on titan, uranus is much more interesting to explore.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 12:07:15 UTC No. 16306936
>>16306883
Japan dreams of a life beyond the stars, embracing the inevitable future.
Meanwhile Hollywood is still stuck in the past. Really makes you think.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 12:25:21 UTC No. 16306947
>>16306883
Cause it looks kinda dumb?
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 12:26:28 UTC No. 16306950
>>16306947
So do you but we still tolerate you
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 12:29:52 UTC No. 16306953
>>16306950
Come on anon we all love starship, but it does look like something a kid would draw.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 12:33:07 UTC No. 16306959
>>16306883
it's pretty rare for spacecraft to be depicted in popular media before they fly. it requires both significant autism on the part of the production team and lucky timing.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 12:34:39 UTC No. 16306963
>>16306953
>but it does look like something a kid would draw.
This is precisely what I love about it.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 12:36:18 UTC No. 16306965
>>16306883
How often is Falcon 9 depicted in media?
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 12:38:47 UTC No. 16306966
>>16306953
So why isnt it all over cartoons in the west? Thats where kids spark of imagination would be wouldn't it? There's bunch of leftist propaganda being spread to kids via cartoons.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 12:44:29 UTC No. 16306971
>>16306966
Go back to /pol/ retard
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 12:46:38 UTC No. 16306975
>>16306972
Horse fucker, probably a tranny worshipper too
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 12:49:32 UTC No. 16306977
>>16306975
>Horse fucker
There are several regulars in this very thread.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 12:49:35 UTC No. 16306978
>>16306966
Maybe wait for it to actually work first, faggot.
Other anon is right quit b8ing.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 12:55:07 UTC No. 16306986
>>16306972
Oh, so spaceguy5 was the source for the isp underperformance comment in the last thread? That makes sense.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 13:00:00 UTC No. 16306989
Its okay that two astronauts need to die, my Beoing stocks are far more important than two goy cattle. I don't give fuck about Boeing reputation, my money is more valuable compared to what slaves think.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 13:01:08 UTC No. 16306991
>>16306972
>spaceguy5
Speaking of, I noticed he retweeted this a couple days ago.
https://x.com/bonzack/status/181825
Yet another L to add to spaceguy5. What a difference 4 days makes.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 13:02:36 UTC No. 16306993
>>16306991
>got a reply from the eager beaver
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 13:04:39 UTC No. 16306995
>>16306544
why exactly are we allowing this monkey to make political OPs?
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 13:06:38 UTC No. 16306998
>>16306965
i only saw falcon heavy in westworld
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 13:18:28 UTC No. 16307011
>>16306965
There was a falcon heavy in mike tyson mysteries.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 13:27:44 UTC No. 16307020
https://x.com/JennyHPhoto/status/18
>SpaceX is scheduled to launch Northrop Grumman's Cygnus NG-21 spacecraft
Cygnus on Falcon 9. Imagine that
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 13:31:01 UTC No. 16307025
>>16307020
Huh, that hasn't happened before has it?
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 13:35:55 UTC No. 16307029
>>16307025
https://spacenews.com/falcon-9-laun
Happened once before in Jan.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 13:39:21 UTC No. 16307032
>>16307029
Oh neat, I must've missed that one.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 13:40:10 UTC No. 16307034
>>16307020
>Imagine that
I don't have to
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 13:50:21 UTC No. 16307043
>>16307035
Nah I actually think SS will replace the Shuttle as the “stereotypical rocket” in like 10-20 yrs honestly. It’s going to be pretty ubiquitous, especially once the public sees a return to the lunar surface via a giant white HLS Moonship
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 13:54:35 UTC No. 16307048
>>16306995
I stopped making OPs since it seemed like /sfg/ didnt need me to make them anymore but looks like some mongrels are returning so I will start making them again.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 13:56:32 UTC No. 16307051
>>16307043
I agree. It's going to be tough to prevent the giant rocket launching three times a day to bring you internet and industrialize Mars from entering the popular culture.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 13:56:41 UTC No. 16307052
>>16307043
>>16307035
That will only happen when the leftists are defeated and people recognize the disease that we are living in today with the captured political propaganda driving up ideology of extinction movement.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 13:59:14 UTC No. 16307056
>>16306816
>someone with EDS was acting pathetic
>>16306841
>spaceguy5 mentioned
>>16306846
>oh yeah that was him
This is so fucking funny man
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 13:59:32 UTC No. 16307057
>>16307052
what lol
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 14:03:16 UTC No. 16307061
>>16307057
>Unions
Reduce efficiency
>Regulation heavy
Limit innovation
>Communism
Limit human spirit
>Identify politics
Stoke social division along abstract classes
All this does is slow down or even destroy innovation, companies, humanity, society, etc. The man going against this is a threat to the current agenda.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 14:17:51 UTC No. 16307070
>>16307061
Not space flight
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 14:28:05 UTC No. 16307085
>>16307070
You're right. These policies are a threat to spaceflight industry.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 14:40:17 UTC No. 16307091
>>16307085
https://x.com/RocketLab/status/1819
>Welcome to launch day for our 51st mission. Electron is on the pad at LC-1, ready to deploy the next satellite in the constellation for Synspective
>Lift-off | 04:39 am NZST | 16:39 UTC | 12:39 EST
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 14:45:43 UTC No. 16307097
>>16307091
Really need to get there cadence up
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 15:00:51 UTC No. 16307105
>>16306936
The Space Shuttle is simply more distinctive looking. Falcon 9 is just a generic tube. The only visually distinctive thing about it is the landing legs. Starship is getting more distinctive with each generation as they make it more capable and closer to an orbital vehicle. As it becomes more distinctive and starts racking up accomplishments, you'll see more of it. Until then, it's just a grain silo with some fins.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 15:07:17 UTC No. 16307115
what the fuck happened to not having political threads? can we get this fat orange bastard off my front page please?
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 15:13:16 UTC No. 16307122
>>16306763
They sent an Indian toilet witch to break the poop curse on the ISS.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 15:17:17 UTC No. 16307130
>>16307057
Ignore the /pol/ retard
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 15:20:29 UTC No. 16307134
>>16307115
spaceflight is inherently political (annoyingly), but yeah I wish the polfags would go back to their containment board. Did someone crosspost there again?
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 15:23:14 UTC No. 16307139
>>16307134
when I get back from my errands today I'm making a new thread that's actually spaceflight related
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 15:26:50 UTC No. 16307145
>>16307097
once a month is not bad, better than most countries. They have room to grow with all those pads. Surprised they aren't launching more out of Wallops.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 15:38:03 UTC No. 16307166
>>16307139
Please don't split again I don't want to go back to the three-four threads era
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 15:39:13 UTC No. 16307173
>>16307134
be faster next time if it bothers you so much
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 15:53:59 UTC No. 16307195
>>16307097
They were supposed to be launching 22 rockets this year. So far they've managed 8. Most of the difference seems to be in their recoverable launches. They were planning to have launched 7-8 by this point but they've only launched one.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 16:05:08 UTC No. 16307221
>Curious about our next mission’s fairing? It was made specifically for the wide body of @synspective's StriX satellite and is one of the many ways we can tailor our dedicated launches for our customers.
That's kinda cool. sounds expensive and would be a lot less necessary if you just used a bigger rocket, but still kinda cool.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 16:05:35 UTC No. 16307223
>>16306544
Based photo of SpaceX Dragon capsule. USA! USA! USA!
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 16:38:58 UTC No. 16307263
Clear live for Electron Owl For One, One For Owl Mission
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfY
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 16:39:00 UTC No. 16307265
>>16307244
Even on the launchpad he knew how much of a shitshow this was going to be
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 16:41:16 UTC No. 16307271
electron is currently flying. idk if yall care or not
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 16:41:22 UTC No. 16307272
Clear Max-Qute!
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 16:42:52 UTC No. 16307275
this vtuber shit is fucking cancerous goddamn zoomer
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 16:46:08 UTC No. 16307279
SSLV 2nd dev launch coming in a few days, but other than that, India has had no launches since February. Why so few launches?
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 16:47:20 UTC No. 16307280
thank you rocketlab for doing your part to keep the electric eels charged with all the batteries you drop in the ocean.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 16:50:01 UTC No. 16307282
why is there a fat indian woman there
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 17:35:53 UTC No. 16307318
>>16307271
Irrelevant rocket
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 17:45:20 UTC No. 16307328
>>16307279
They have a few more launches in the back half of the year, but this is pretty much expected for them. India's capability isn't really blowing up like China's despite what people seem to think. They hit a ceiling a few years ago, and their new dev programs (SCE-200, NGLV) have been making almost no progress.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 17:47:09 UTC No. 16307331
>>16307318
I love rockets, ambitious engineers, innovators and dreamers, but he is right. Rocket Lab is boring to follow, they have serious constraints that limit what they can achieve. That said, its still a fairly reliable, somewhat capable orbital vehicle, which is a valuable niche in its own right and spanked Blue Origin and many others quite decisively by many metrics. Their future is uncertain though, I hope they have the talent and finances to execute beyond expectations and remain a player, we need more companies to step up
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 17:54:27 UTC No. 16307337
Holy Jesus imagine if Shitliner was the USAs only option. Sunni and butch would have been the first americans back to space, thirteen fucking years after shuttle’s retirement. And then they’d be talking about needing to come back on Soyuz right now. Fuck Boeing I am sick of their shit—reminder that Starliner got more $$$ than Dragon for crew launches and was expected to be the safer option
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 17:59:41 UTC No. 16307351
>>16307245
Even if Boeing can identify it (a big if), they probably couldn't fix it while the vessel is in space, nor could they mitigate it via new code or process because irreversible damage has already been done to the hardware.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 18:13:46 UTC No. 16307369
>>16307328
They were supposed to be having a much bigger year though
https://spaceanddefense.io/india-re
>India’s National Space Promotion and Authorization Center (IN-SPACe) has announced the country’s planned space launches for the 12 months to March 31, 2025, with more than two dozen launches penciled over the fiscal year.
https://x.com/ISROSpaceflight/statu
>IN-SPACe has published the launch manifesto for FY2024-25 which shows there'll be 29 launches in this FY!
>7Ă— PSLV - 5Ă— ISRO, 2Ă— NSIL
>4Ă— GSLV
>1Ă— LVM3
>3Ă— SSLV - 1Ă— ISRO, 2Ă— NSIL
>2Ă— SkyrootA Vikram-I
>1Ă— AgnikulCosmos SOrTeD
>2Ă— Agnikul's Agnibaan
>7Ă— Gaganyaan related
So far they've got managed one PSLV-DL and one GSLV mk2, with one SSLV hopefully launching soon. SOrTeD flew it suborbital test flight after several scrubs. Vikram's still absent from the pad. No Gaganyaan tests have flown since TV-D1 in October of last year.
I think it's a combination of having the smallest budget of any major space program and having that get whittled down by the usual oldspace inefficiencies. They're also deeply invested into SCE-200 and that's starting to look like it was a good bet for the industry as it was back in 2009 but isn't so great now, and they're having a lot of trouble changing lanes.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 18:27:03 UTC No. 16307394
Still crazy to me that 90-year-old Bill Anders crashed out his beechcraft
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 18:28:05 UTC No. 16307395
>>16307390
flight suits are so kino
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 18:29:02 UTC No. 16307397
>>16307394
thats was something.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 18:49:26 UTC No. 16307419
>>16307337
Let's try to not think about that horrible version of reality and instead be thankful we have at least one competent space company
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 19:05:19 UTC No. 16307444
Electron has launched 50 times, how does it STILL have these problems? Rocket Lab sucks and I believe Neutron is going to be a disaster for them.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 19:10:31 UTC No. 16307451
>>16307444
what happen
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 19:13:06 UTC No. 16307455
>>16307451
They had a dirty stage sep. It ended up working, but it feels like at least one or two things goes wrong every time they launch.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 19:13:37 UTC No. 16307456
>>16307451
Their piece of shit rocket landed on my shit hole house and blew up. I fucking hate my chud life
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 19:18:44 UTC No. 16307466
>>16307450
cant go higher than the dome, obviously
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 19:18:47 UTC No. 16307467
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 19:27:07 UTC No. 16307482
>>16307467
you people are so mean
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 19:29:11 UTC No. 16307488
https://x.com/RedCollie1/status/181
New magnetic ion propulsion
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 19:29:25 UTC No. 16307489
>>16306763
>boing known they were so fucked they hired baba yaga
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 19:33:41 UTC No. 16307503
>>16307122
This needs to be AI genned
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 19:34:43 UTC No. 16307506
>Spetch says they're sending some items up for Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams, like clothes from their suitcases that were removed for the urine processing pump that flew up with Starliner.
Imagine the smell
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 19:36:34 UTC No. 16307511
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kbk
not spaceflight but 8h neuralink podcast (1.5h first part is with musk)
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 19:41:36 UTC No. 16307519
>>16307369
>I think it's a combination of having the smallest budget of any major space program and having that get whittled down by the usual oldspace inefficiencies.
Election season is over for them. Their space program is sadly a pawn for their political system, much like NASA gets pushed around by congress. Its a pattern for them. The lasts time they were given a massive financial boost and things were looking up was also election time.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 19:42:51 UTC No. 16307524
>>16307488
schizo asmr
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 19:44:14 UTC No. 16307526
>>16307488
>I was actually shown how to build this some days ago in a lucid dream.
Take from that whatever you wish.
How did Tesla make his inventions?
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 19:51:42 UTC No. 16307544
>>16307482
reality is mean. SFG should appreciate this above many.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 20:00:34 UTC No. 16307563
>>16307265
it's hard being a space cowboy sometimes
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 20:05:20 UTC No. 16307569
>>16307451
The second stage engine bell came pretty close to clipping the first stage on separation. There was also a lot more engine wiggle than usual at the beginning of the second stage burn.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 20:05:25 UTC No. 16307570
https://x.com/esherifftv/status/181
Ellie and MarcusHouse on SpaceX Starship's ambition.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 20:12:00 UTC No. 16307579
>>16307511
Here is the official transcript for people who value their time.
https://lexfridman.com/elon-musk-an
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 20:43:46 UTC No. 16307616
>>16307511
>>16307579
Is there any actual new information? Updates on animal or human trials? Technology progress?
I'd put the whole thing on for background listening if it had information beyond what they've already said publicly.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 20:47:02 UTC No. 16307621
>>16307569
For comparison, here's what staging is supposed to look like
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 20:49:16 UTC No. 16307624
>>16307569
Uh ohhhh stinky
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 20:55:52 UTC No. 16307630
>>16307569
>>16307621
And the battery isn't wrapped. Why the fuck isn't the battery wrapped?
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 20:57:40 UTC No. 16307631
>>16307569
DAMN that was close. I must assume the engine wiggle was gimbaling to cancel out the spin imparted by that bungled separation, good thing they actually had the margin to handle it.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 21:22:28 UTC No. 16307665
>>16307579
>Go to general about space flight, (((Lex))) is in it spamming his unrelated crap.
Your fifteen minutes are up. Go shack up with Phil in the Czech Republic if you want some attention.
>>16307245
Boeing might be waiting for NASA to order their astronauts to return on the next Dragon. Boeing will put up fake protests, saying they know for sure Starliner is perfectly safe. NASA will say they don't want to take even a tiny risk. Boeing then will be able to insist to everyone that the capsule was safe and NASA is just overly cautious. Boeing saves face and gets to continue getting government contracts. Starliner is pushed off ISS and allowed to burn up in the atmosphere, eliminating all the evidence.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 21:24:30 UTC No. 16307666
>>16307665
>Starliner is pushed off ISS and allowed to burn up in the atmosphere, eliminating all the evidence.
If it fails to make it back in one piece, that would be evidence of it's failure
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 21:26:48 UTC No. 16307669
https://x.com/WeAreSpaceScout/statu
>india
>poland
>hungary
Axiom - 4 Crew Mission. Rare India/Poland/Hungary makes debut
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 21:31:44 UTC No. 16307676
>>16307569
>>16307621
The wanted to try the yeet staging of OFT1 obviously
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 21:34:36 UTC No. 16307679
>>16307444
I wonder if the issue is related to the small size of electron. Maybe scaling up will somehow negate these problems or at least make them easier to find and permanently correct?
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 21:37:25 UTC No. 16307680
>>16307669
Isn't the ISS toilet broken?
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 21:55:55 UTC No. 16307699
>>16307695
Awarded in 2016 yet this fucker has been in the same measly shape for six years. What the fuck even goes on at Sierra on a day to day basis? They might be slower than Blue Origin
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 22:02:54 UTC No. 16307706
>>16307699
Normally I'd say something about how they're been limping along with self-funding, but at this point I'm just triggered everything I see it "almost ready for flight!" and it's still got fucking panels missing.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 22:08:29 UTC No. 16307713
>>16307695
Cooming*
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 22:12:07 UTC No. 16307720
>>16307666
>We wanted to use the thrusters to bring it back the Earth but NASA was worried about the tiny chance of loss of control.
Boeing isn't going to admit fault if there's any way for them to avoid it. NASA will cover for them as much as possible.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 22:12:39 UTC No. 16307722
>>16307630
they mentioned in the stream that this flight had a bunch of battery improvements
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 22:17:42 UTC No. 16307727
>What's up with ULA not allowing photographers to sell pictures of the launch?
>This is absurd and hostile to the space launch community.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 22:21:15 UTC No. 16307733
>>16307727
ULA purchased them before. You can still sell if you're legacy media "publisher" it seems like.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 22:28:59 UTC No. 16307739
>>16307727
I don’t care, personally.
I’m more upset that ULA can’t figure out live on-board launch cameras with an uplink back to Earth. It’s just shitty 90s CGI. No extended tracking cams either.
Meanwhile Musk is showing us 100% unbroken footage through peak reentry it’s insane. SpaceX sets the bar for everything
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 22:30:12 UTC No. 16307740
>>16307733
Tory saw that NSF fag who always oversaturates his photos and decided enough was enough kek
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 22:31:03 UTC No. 16307741
>>16307740
Completely understandable
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 22:32:51 UTC No. 16307743
>>16307727
If you want to setup cameras inside the perimeter, you can only use your photos for editorial purposes, and you cannot use them on your own social media or sell them.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 22:36:55 UTC No. 16307744
>>16306544
If SpaceX is Trump, then is Blue Origin Jeb?
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 22:45:15 UTC No. 16307749
>>16307616
second human has been implanted and it seems to be going well according to musk, they plan to implant 8 others this year
the rest of the interview musk and lex talked about ayahusca, free speech, xAI and AI in general
nothing SpaceX related (nothing new anyway) other than perhaps Musk suggested to Trump that Musk could contribute to some new office/initiative to make the government function more efficiently, this might have some downstream effects on spaceflight and SpaceX I guess if they actually do it and they accomplish something
the next dude has been talking about his backround in the first 10 minutes
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 22:48:18 UTC No. 16307752
>>16307744
fuck off
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 22:50:46 UTC No. 16307756
>>16307744
I can understand your confusion, but actually spacex is musk and blue is jeff.
hope this clears things up for you :)
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 22:57:20 UTC No. 16307764
slow and steady wins the space race
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 22:57:56 UTC No. 16307765
>>16307744
you're brown
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 23:13:48 UTC No. 16307778
>>16307756
jeff is a mess
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 23:35:31 UTC No. 16307788
>>16307245
Good for them, but NASA disagrees
>>16307744
SpaceX is Trump, BO is sexy AOC
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 23:36:51 UTC No. 16307791
>>16307665
>starliner fucking explodes and burns up in the atmosphere
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 23:38:08 UTC No. 16307792
>>16307749
>some new office/initiative to make the government function more efficiently
Lol
Lmao
Kek
Even
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 23:39:44 UTC No. 16307794
>>16307749
Trump needs Milei, Musk, and Peter Thiel to get the economics or atleast government efficiency going by cutting 80% of the fat
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 23:46:53 UTC No. 16307796
https://x.com/dsshhh114/status/1819
Chink-OTV found
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 23:54:21 UTC No. 16307803
>>16307796
Nice, we do a little spying
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Aug 2024 23:56:21 UTC No. 16307806
>>16307796
Is this alien ship?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 00:48:45 UTC No. 16307833
>>16307796
X-37 and it's clones are cool!
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 00:50:29 UTC No. 16307834
What could NASA & friends have done if all the trillions that went to banker wars since 1990s were given to them instead?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 00:52:12 UTC No. 16307835
>>16307706
They must have really been spooked by Starship + Orion's TPS being off, look at all those missing tiles
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 00:52:35 UTC No. 16307837
https://x.com/SciGuySpace/status/18
Boeing responds to Berger and Berger responds back. Boeing trying to do damage control.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 00:53:37 UTC No. 16307839
>>16307834
launch 2 SLSs by now instead of just 1
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 00:59:43 UTC No. 16307845
https://x.com/BoeingSpace/status/18
IT'S OVER
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 01:02:44 UTC No. 16307848
>>16307845
you know it's bad when boeing is forced to resort to transparency
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 01:03:18 UTC No. 16307849
>>16307837
>>16307845
If we were to place bets, what are the odds Butch and Sunni actually ride shartliner home?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 01:03:23 UTC No. 16307850
>>16307845
Running a bit spicy, isn't it
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 01:05:07 UTC No. 16307852
>>16307849
50%-50%
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 01:05:32 UTC No. 16307853
>>16307849
25%
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 01:06:46 UTC No. 16307854
>>16307849
What are the odds they ride it home and don't die in the process?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 01:08:26 UTC No. 16307858
>>16307854
10%
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 01:09:03 UTC No. 16307860
>>16307849
50/50 either they ride it or they don't
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 01:25:44 UTC No. 16307871
>>16307195
Booked aint launched....
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 01:27:56 UTC No. 16307873
>>16307871
Shut up and invest, don't ask questions
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 01:30:40 UTC No. 16307876
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 01:31:57 UTC No. 16307879
>>16307873
How much did you lose?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 01:33:48 UTC No. 16307882
Where does the Starliner crew sleep on ISS?
Are there spare bunks? Do they hotbunk?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 01:36:15 UTC No. 16307885
>>16307849
60%
I think the chance of Starliner suffering catastrophic failure during and after undock is at around 10%.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 01:41:18 UTC No. 16307888
>>16306963
I think the fact that Starship looks like the old 1940s sci-fi rockets (but with less useless curves) is both funny and awesome.
(pic related is a rocket ship playground thing that has been there at least since the 70s)
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 01:44:32 UTC No. 16307892
>>16306544
>Musk's alliance with the incoming president will lead to a total SpaceX takeover of NASA and a rebirth of the American manned spaceflight program.
lol. lmao, even.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 01:45:15 UTC No. 16307893
>>16307876
still expecting the Space Brothers meme to be fulfilled
(but I still think it will make it, as long as they don't abuse the thrusters)
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 01:46:38 UTC No. 16307894
>>16307882
Yes, they hotbunk. Russia has two sleeping quarters, the US section has four. Without the castaways, all of the four US astronauts would have their own quarters but they're probably rotating with the Boeing crew now. There are three Russians so either they do some hotbunk rotation or one of them is sleeping outside of the quarters.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 01:56:02 UTC No. 16307908
>>16307902
Where's the rat nest?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 01:56:52 UTC No. 16307910
>>16307902
CLEAN
Looks like it could last a year or two on Mars and then restart no problem
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 01:57:24 UTC No. 16307911
>>16307902
SEXO
E
X
O
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 01:57:29 UTC No. 16307912
>>16307902
Damn that is a clean engine.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 01:57:59 UTC No. 16307913
>>16307902
Sexy back.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 01:58:20 UTC No. 16307914
>>16307902
Compared to the picture that was posted here awhile back of the rats nest that was that ULA engine SpaceX is fucking lightyears ahead. Imagine how easy it is for the technicians to work on that.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 01:58:26 UTC No. 16307915
>>16307899
>>16307903
Yowch lol
>>16307902
Beautiful
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 01:59:02 UTC No. 16307916
>>16307893
>as long as they don't abuse the thrusters
That's the real issue. Boeing can't quantify exactly what qualifies as "thruster abuse," so NASA can't design a set of reentry maneuvers that they understand to be safe
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 02:01:10 UTC No. 16307919
>>16307902
>>16307908
yeah, where are the engine rats supposed to live?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 02:01:20 UTC No. 16307920
>>16307902
They'll never get rid of proonting.
The entire thing is 3d proonted
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 02:01:31 UTC No. 16307921
>>16307916
also leaves no contingency, I imagine.
i.e. what the hell do you do if something goes wrong and you need to use extended thrusting?
>>16307902
Does the matrix raptor guy have some sort of divine hyperautism?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 02:02:30 UTC No. 16307924
>>16307921
>what the hell do you do if something goes wrong and you need to use extended thrusting?
You die
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 02:03:35 UTC No. 16307927
>>16306975
not an argument.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 02:03:50 UTC No. 16307928
>>16307902
looks incomplete and unfinished
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 02:05:21 UTC No. 16307929
>>16307920
proonter fags vindicated
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 02:05:57 UTC No. 16307931
>>16307929
R I P P E N
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 02:10:20 UTC No. 16307939
>>16307894
>ywn be the lone kosmonaut keeping ISS on course during the night
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 02:13:16 UTC No. 16307945
>>16307902
quick and dirty edit
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 02:15:58 UTC No. 16307951
>>16307945
95t improvement is crazy. I wonder how much more they can squeeze out of it.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 02:16:05 UTC No. 16307952
>>16307902
Third time is the charm
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 02:16:27 UTC No. 16307953
>>16306544
Trump will make American spaceflight great again
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 02:16:47 UTC No. 16307954
>>16307928
Back when V1s were being pumped out, Musk said 99% of the rats nest was for R&D data gathering and would be removed more and more with each iteration
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 02:16:53 UTC No. 16307955
>>16307945
so what were all the lines doing that made them so important for raptor 1 but unnecessary now?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 02:20:37 UTC No. 16307958
>>16307955
A lot of it is testing instrumentation, other lines were integrated directly into the shell.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 02:20:52 UTC No. 16307959
>>16307945
BE 4 engine for context. Looks like Raptor 1 era engine. Totally unoptimized. 3-5 years behind Raptor
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 02:22:03 UTC No. 16307962
>>16307959
La abominacion del originas
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 02:23:45 UTC No. 16307967
>>16307959
Disgusting pipes protruding, very disrespectful!
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 02:24:16 UTC No. 16307968
>>16307945
Rendered version
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 02:25:27 UTC No. 16307972
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 02:28:14 UTC No. 16307976
>>16307955
They're there to make all things work right the for the first iteration/prototype.
The Musk/SpaceX philosophy is to emulate natural simplicity to the root to reduce complexity, increase reliability, increase performance, reduce cost, better aesthetics, etc.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 02:29:42 UTC No. 16307977
>>16307902
Looks pretty close to what they previewed.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 02:32:47 UTC No. 16307980
>>16307902
Somewhat Gigachad-esque
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 02:35:24 UTC No. 16307982
>>16307902
It's a fucking render lol
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 02:35:50 UTC No. 16307983
>>16307919
We are eliminating the infestation, no more engine failures caused by those bastards chewing on the lox lines.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 02:36:06 UTC No. 16307985
>>16307902
increase ze chamber pressure
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 02:37:52 UTC No. 16307986
>>16307982
this is how you're coping sir peter beck?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 02:42:23 UTC No. 16307990
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 02:54:58 UTC No. 16308006
>>16307992
50/50
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 02:55:28 UTC No. 16308008
>>16307902
>more thrust
>higher ISP
>no need for a heat shield
>significantly few parts
nice
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 02:56:54 UTC No. 16308009
>>16307992
SNIIIIIIIIIIIFFFFFF
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 02:57:16 UTC No. 16308010
>>16307888
Old scifi rockets were based on the V-2.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 02:58:08 UTC No. 16308013
>>16307959
>4x bigger
>30% less thrust
>substantially worse thrust to weight/area
>looks like a rats nest
lmao
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 03:12:23 UTC No. 16308025
>>16307902
Mamasita...
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 03:15:30 UTC No. 16308027
>>16308010
no you've got it backwards. wherner Von braun was inspired by the retrofuturistic rockets of the time when he built the v2
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 03:15:55 UTC No. 16308028
>>16308010
other way around
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 03:17:15 UTC No. 16308030
>>16307894
> He doesn't know about Astronaut Cuddles.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 03:22:33 UTC No. 16308035
>>16306763
If I was you, I wouldn't make fun of her.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 03:24:00 UTC No. 16308037
>>16307902
BE4 on suicide watch
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 03:32:37 UTC No. 16308044
>>16308013
>>16308037
For a first attempt at building a multi-meganewton staged combustion engine the BE4 isn't a bad effort. There's still a lot of room to improve if Raptor 3 is the standard you're measuring from, but it's a lot better than how Europe is getting on. They've been at it for almost a decade and haven't manged to complete a 980 kN gas generator design.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 03:35:20 UTC No. 16308046
>>16307888
>1970s playground equipment
>still safer than shartliner
>still will get to space before new glenn
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 03:37:38 UTC No. 16308048
>>16308027
von braun was inspired by one of musks grandchildren, who travelled back in time and told him he has to start developing rockets at any cost, so humans will reach moon and mars. thats how he knew the mars ruler would be called elon.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 03:37:55 UTC No. 16308051
>>16308044
BE4 will not meaningfully improve. In fact it must stay pretty much exactly the same because Vulcan uses it. ULA will not be uprating that POS rocket. Best case scenario, New Glenn series BE4 diverges from Vulcan series, but that will cost them.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 03:39:38 UTC No. 16308053
>>16307914
Just swap in a new engine.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 03:44:51 UTC No. 16308057
>>16308051
I wouldn't put it past Tory to either push for or try to sneak into some kind of upgrade program. Vulcan's already behind the curve and it's only holding on because of factors outside of its performance. He's been able to leverage that into an actual attempt to get SMART working, and his leash-holders spent almost a decade cold shoulder'ing that idea. Even if ULA doesn't want to upgrade Vulcan, Blue Origin could bifurcate the design and start producing BE-4Bs for New Glenn. You'd need to build a whole second production line but it's not like Bezos is a stranger to throwing money at problems.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 03:45:21 UTC No. 16308058
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 03:47:17 UTC No. 16308059
>>16306936
That was literally taking place in the past, using a NERVA Shuttle that never left the planning stage in reality.
Now our present is superior Gemini clone to get us to the ISS, inferior Apollo clone to get us to the Moon, and Tintin's rocket to (eventually) get us beyond
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 03:50:14 UTC No. 16308061
>>16308059
NERVA never had the TWR for SSTO or air launch so it's more like cheating in KSP.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 04:13:12 UTC No. 16308081
>>16306936
>Japan dreams of a life beyond the stars
They just never get the proper funding for it
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 04:18:15 UTC No. 16308084
>>16306883
Should change once it flies more often.
https://files.catbox.moe/wqjpqx.web
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 04:18:25 UTC No. 16308085
>>16308008
Where is this raptor heat shield people are always talking about?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 04:50:57 UTC No. 16308103
Interstellar Technologies just published the latest version of the Zero Payload User's Guide
https://x.com/natsuroke/status/1819
>ZERO is a space transportation service dedicated to small satellites. If you are looking for a rocket to launch a satellite, please contact us through Book Your Launch. We look forward to hearing from you.
https://www.istellartech.com/7hbym/
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 04:52:45 UTC No. 16308106
>>16308103
>Zero Payload
Not quite the message I'd want to sell my rocket on but hey, you do you.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 04:56:03 UTC No. 16308109
>Those in industry have mixed perceptions of Harris and her work on the space council.
https://spacenews.com/space-industr
harris confirmed for not being great for spaceflight
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 05:10:05 UTC No. 16308119
>>16308106
they're learning from Blue Origin
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 05:20:18 UTC No. 16308125
hello. happy friday. tourist here. are the shartliner astronauts going to die on the iss waiting for 'testing' to complete?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 05:20:34 UTC No. 16308126
>>16308109
meanwhile grumpf went out to personally watch bill & doug launch
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 05:25:59 UTC No. 16308131
>>16308126
*bobendug
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 05:26:25 UTC No. 16308132
>>16308125
No, SpaceX will save them and embarrass Boeing.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 05:34:59 UTC No. 16308140
>>16308132
idk, at this point they be trying to let them burn up on reentry when its decomissioned.
do astronauts get overtime? they've got to be rich if they get overtime
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 05:36:33 UTC No. 16308143
>>16308132
And then NASA will give 2 more billions to Boing to fix the Shartliner
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 05:38:14 UTC No. 16308146
>>16308143
No they won't. It's a firm fixed price contract.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 05:39:31 UTC No. 16308147
>>16308126
should have taken the turkish hairline like Musk
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 05:47:29 UTC No. 16308153
i want starliner to make it, give us the product that taxpayers paid for and dont let us be wholly reliant on spacex, you know, in case dragon gets grounded for some reaon
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 05:49:54 UTC No. 16308154
>>16308153
>give us the product that taxpayers paid for
>boeing
lol, lmao even
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 05:58:04 UTC No. 16308160
give it to me straight
i believe both have burned through half a billion each of VC by now
which should qualify them as a space start up
will they ever produce a rocket close to Electron?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 06:02:57 UTC No. 16308163
>>16308160
Non-Americans can't into space.
Europeans don't dream.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 06:10:02 UTC No. 16308170
>>16308163
the Spanish start up looks like it will
how do you spot the scammers?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 06:10:08 UTC No. 16308171
>>16308153
>in case dragon gets grounded for some reaon
no such reason will ever exist, its already been flown successfully over a dozen times with crew aboard, the design has been proved
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 06:31:29 UTC No. 16308185
>>16307902
PROONTCHADS VINDICATED
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 06:33:54 UTC No. 16308187
>>16308170
Was that designed by high schoolers?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 06:34:08 UTC No. 16308188
>>16307902
>not a singled proonted part
Beautiful
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 06:46:58 UTC No. 16308197
>>16308125
Testing is already 'complete' and Starltiner is 'perfectly safe to fly on' yet they haven't returned home.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 06:49:24 UTC No. 16308198
>>16308187
it's parachute launched
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 06:52:11 UTC No. 16308201
>>16307902
So the plan is just replacing engines if it doesn't work or something goes wrong?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 07:00:24 UTC No. 16308209
>>16307902
god DAMN
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 07:08:00 UTC No. 16308216
I have a 2 part poll.
1.) Butch and Suni need to come home. How will they depart the ISS?
A.) (__%) Dragon
B.) (__%) Starliner
2.) In either case, Starliner will attempt to come back to Earth (either with or without crew aboard). What will the fate of Starliner be?
A.) Slow death. Starliner detaches from ISS but gets stranded in orbit. Defined as crew would die before re-entry.
B.) Fast death. Starliner burns up in reentry or lithobrakes.
C.) Starliner lands nominally.
https://strawpoll.ai/poll/results/M
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 07:13:40 UTC No. 16308220
>>16308216
>"Make the long armed one ride the firey tide."
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 07:15:40 UTC No. 16308223
>>16308216
I think in the event of the Slow Death scenario, SpaceX will scramble to get Isaacman's spacewalk mission to the stricken Starliner before they die. I'm not sure what their endurance is limited by (maybe the '45 day' battery, which, due to this debacle, has already been authorized to do 90 days...) This would be like the Thai diver thing, except SpaceX is probably the only ones in the world who could actually do it. I don't think anyone has rescue missions queued up or the ability to get stuff to orbit quickly, except SpaceX might be able to get Isaacman's mission launched in time. Or I guess one of the ships docked to the ISS could fly to the stricken Starliner, take the crew aboard, then either return to the ISS (if enough delta-v and margin) or just re-enter with Butch and Suni in that ship. This would leave 2 astronauts (or cosmonauts) without a ride home until a replacement capsule could be sent up.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 07:17:31 UTC No. 16308224
>>16307902
This has a twinge of that "sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" feeling. An outwardly-simple appearance that conceals enormously complex internal engineering. A thing that looks unfinished but outperforms everything else. It's an idealized sculpture of an engine that also happens to be unmatched as an actual engine. Form and function freed of the need to compromise to one another. Flying art.
It makes me optimistic that I will one day see machines that border on the divine.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 07:22:35 UTC No. 16308225
>>16306998
what episode?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 07:30:52 UTC No. 16308227
>>16307959
>>16308013
can someone slap together a side-by-side scale comparison, with thrust underneath?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 07:41:59 UTC No. 16308234
>>16307888
Heh, small world. I've been in that thing. That's Scott Carpenter park, built by a grateful public. The local university is quite proud of how many astronauts they turned out.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 07:57:17 UTC No. 16308238
>>16308225
S03E04
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 08:00:43 UTC No. 16308240
>>16308227
Values are off as this is like 5 years old, but size comps should be good.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 08:07:22 UTC No. 16308245
>>16308109
>mixed perceptions of Harris and her work on the space council.
she's doing literally nothing
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 08:09:30 UTC No. 16308246
>>16308245
it basically says she doesnt care about the NSC
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 08:26:35 UTC No. 16308256
>>16307902
This was much quicker than I expected, SN1 should mean this is actually being mass produced now and could be installed on a ship and booster (but maybe block 2 or 3)
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 08:48:55 UTC No. 16308261
>>16308224
Kino
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 09:11:35 UTC No. 16308268
>>16307914
>Imagine how easy it is for the technicians to work on that.
Considering all the components you don't see anymore are now machined into the metal... Not very.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 09:15:27 UTC No. 16308272
>>16308008
Now it needs to not eat itself within three restarts.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 09:19:39 UTC No. 16308275
>>16308256
SpaceX slaps a serial number on absolutely everything. The fucking test tanks were counted as full Starships.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 09:19:54 UTC No. 16308277
>>16308085
its more of a blastshield, its on the booster and ship
no quick screenshot to show what they are, but these have gone through a number of iterations and requires big CO2 tanks to purge them from gases
methane gas collecting in them and insufficient CO2 purging was a reason for burning/explosion on one or some of the test flights, don't remember the exacts anymore, probably IFT-1 and IFT-2
all the extra steel + CO2 purging tanks probably adds something like 20 tonnes, so just the weight removal is going to be a massive thing for reduced dry mass
not to mention that the raptor 3s themselves have more thrust and are lighter
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oed
>How To Prevent Raptors From Destroying SuperHeavy
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 09:22:09 UTC No. 16308278
>>16307902
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/18195
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 09:23:18 UTC No. 16308279
>>16308278
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/18196
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 09:24:19 UTC No. 16308281
>>16308279
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/18196
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 09:25:08 UTC No. 16308282
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytm
buran xisters???????? our response?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 09:25:19 UTC No. 16308283
>>16308281
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/18196
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 09:26:37 UTC No. 16308284
>>16308279
That's insane
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 09:27:43 UTC No. 16308285
>>16308278
>regenerative cooling for exposed components
So are they cooling the outside regeneratively?
Aren't the engines off during reentry?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 09:31:58 UTC No. 16308286
>>16308283
that's crazy
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 09:33:22 UTC No. 16308287
Assuming orbit to ground weapons ever do get implemented and I know they wont, at least not soon, but anyways, would they launch directly down at targets or only perform a de orbit burn and fly at a suborbital trajectory?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 09:35:36 UTC No. 16308289
>>16308240
Thumbnail looks like a mech size comparison
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 09:38:31 UTC No. 16308292
>>16308216
lol I answered 85-15 and the aggregrate score was 83-17
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 09:47:31 UTC No. 16308294
>>16308223
> spacewalk mission to the stricken Starliner before they die.
Impossible. There are no MMU for off structure spacewalks. Another one of those things NASA decided they didn't need.
Plus, station spacesuits are no longer certified for spacewalks, because of that leak issue. That could be wavered, but with risk.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 09:50:03 UTC No. 16308296
>>16308285
the booster experiences compressive heating I'm pretty sure (booster falling down fast and air getting compressed and heated) even if its not from orbital speeds
not sure about starship but you probably want some shield or equivalnt regenative heating for re-entry even if the engines aren't directly in the plasma
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 10:12:02 UTC No. 16308305
>>16308223
>Or I guess one of the ships docked to the ISS could fly to the stricken Starliner, take the crew aboard, then either return to the ISS
The slow death scenario almost certainly includes a tumble of some kind from failing thrusters. If that happens it's ogre, rendezvous not possible.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 10:49:12 UTC No. 16308317
>>16308268
I bet it's way more reliable. Solid continuous channel in the middle of a hunk of inconel vs connectorised hoses and shit? Who cares about repairing parts anyway, just remove the afflicted part and swap it out for a fresh one, it's going to be cheap enough thay it doesn't matter at all.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 10:49:16 UTC No. 16308318
>>16308268
Just disconnect and replace the entire engine, if they're mass produced it doesn't matter. Unironically expendable engines.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 10:51:42 UTC No. 16308320
>>16307569
Someone forgot that this is real life and not ksp.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 11:15:03 UTC No. 16308328
>>16308326
he wanted to wait until they had built 300 of them just to be sure
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 11:18:04 UTC No. 16308331
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 11:19:27 UTC No. 16308332
>>16308330
wait for be-4 block 5
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 11:20:40 UTC No. 16308333
>>16308330
>>16308332
Unironicly yeah, it's not like BE-4 can't be refined like Raptor was
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 11:23:14 UTC No. 16308337
>>16308332
in 2070? lmao
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 11:23:29 UTC No. 16308338
>>16308201
Yeah. They're already making one a day and cost target is like $250k. It would literally be cheaper and quicker to just throw it away and grab the next one off the line
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 11:24:19 UTC No. 16308339
>>16308337
slowly and ferociously
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 11:24:44 UTC No. 16308340
>>16308085
here is an actual picture, you can see them above the engine bell on the middle three raptors
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 11:27:13 UTC No. 16308343
>>16308146
Boeing has already gotten more money for this contract lol. They just asked and got it
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 11:27:41 UTC No. 16308344
>>16308340
https://x.com/Yasin__Shafiei/status
>>16308338
musk did say they would blow torch them apart in the spots where they had flanges before and welds now
refurbishment/repair is just a bit more complicated than before, not impossible, I would imagine the manufacturing costs will be somewhat more expensive to start with at least if you have complicated inner channels for cooling and whatever
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 11:30:41 UTC No. 16308345
>>16308344
>inner channels
Why I'm bearish on reparability being possible at all. The production rate will decide the cost/benefit anyway
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 11:43:26 UTC No. 16308346
>>16307945
WE
ARE
GOING
TO
MAKE
IT!
.
.
.
.
.
>unless Israel drags us into nuclear WW3 first.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 11:47:13 UTC No. 16308348
>>16307959
>lines all over the place
>flanges bulging out disgusting
>absolute disgrace
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 11:50:15 UTC No. 16308350
>>16308279
OH. MY. SCIENCE.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 11:54:31 UTC No. 16308352
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 12:00:58 UTC No. 16308354
WHEN IS IFT-5 AAAAAAGGGGGHHHHHHH
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 12:16:54 UTC No. 16308360
>>16308354
2 more months
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 12:17:14 UTC No. 16308361
>>16308219
>569
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 12:17:37 UTC No. 16308362
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 12:25:41 UTC No. 16308372
>>16308103
wow that art looks straight outta 1967
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 12:31:40 UTC No. 16308377
>>16308234
That one is in Oklahoma, I doubt only one was made.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 12:36:26 UTC No. 16308384
>>16308240
How tall is Bezon? They should have used him as the comparison.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 12:42:29 UTC No. 16308388
>>16308363
Reminder, the foundational tower will likely be complete this month or so.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 12:43:00 UTC No. 16308389
>>16308337
Gradatim Gradociter
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 12:44:45 UTC No. 16308391
>>16308170
>the Spanish
By some measures the employment rate in Spain is about 50%. Which is to say the Spanish have the industriousness of a dead dog on a hot day.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 12:48:19 UTC No. 16308395
>>16308160
I believe in RFA. Isar seems to still have the oldspace mindset of maximizing performance over minimizing costs. I don't think isar will make it.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 12:51:37 UTC No. 16308401
>>16308380
They should take exemple on raptor and remove all these bolts
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 13:08:48 UTC No. 16308422
>>16308417
Please, it's called the Service Module.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 13:08:57 UTC No. 16308423
>>16308219
>>16308361
this flew a bit under the radar, means they made 569 Raptor 1s and 2s I guess? I think they ran on the same serial numbering
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 13:11:29 UTC No. 16308425
I think a huge overlooked aspect of what makes SpaceX so insane is their absolute mastery of welding
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 13:12:16 UTC No. 16308426
>>16308425
Manufacturing
Scaling
Welding
3D printing
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 13:15:53 UTC No. 16308430
>>16308425
not overlooked at all it's literally their philosophy & business model, their only other competitor is too focused on the niche markets to have this kind of scale
>>16308426
toss in material science there
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 13:17:22 UTC No. 16308432
>>16308426
>>16308430
True it’s kind of a mastery of everything hahah
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 13:18:24 UTC No. 16308435
>>16308426
all fields that require excellence to even consider being able to build off-planet too
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 13:32:42 UTC No. 16308441
>>16308425
That's because they took many years to master starship welding
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 13:38:36 UTC No. 16308445
>>16306544
Is it guaranteed that SpaceX will bring them down now?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 13:39:04 UTC No. 16308446
>>16307894
i remember reading that they can arrange up to 11 sleeping quarters, some of those requiring a bit of temporary alteration. 9 should be no problem
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 13:40:34 UTC No. 16308448
>>16308283
looks good. very streamlined and clean looking.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 13:41:21 UTC No. 16308449
https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 13:42:47 UTC No. 16308450
>>16308224
yeah, same
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 13:43:57 UTC No. 16308451
https://spacenews.com/nasa-retainin
>NASA officials said at the time that limited budgets prevented the agency from selecting a second company for a lunar rover demo award. “We maintain competition as far as we can into that,” said Chris Hansen, deputy manager of NASA’s Extravehicular Activity and Human Surface Mobility program, at the Space Symposium shortly after the contract award. He said that NASA’s approach to the LTV program gives the agency “better assurance that we can stay within the budgets that we’re given to accomplish our mission.”
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 14:03:07 UTC No. 16308458
https://x.com/robbystarbuck/status/
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 14:09:06 UTC No. 16308467
>>16308458
>Government efficiency commission
Wow, that's a really good idea.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 14:09:49 UTC No. 16308469
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 14:13:09 UTC No. 16308473
>>16308384
not visible at this scale
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 14:17:02 UTC No. 16308479
>>16308285
>reentry
I feel it's possible the engine components might become slightly warm when they are surrounded by rocket exhaust
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 14:20:58 UTC No. 16308481
>>16308479
interesting theory
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 14:24:11 UTC No. 16308482
>>16308348
You WILL live in the tube
You WILL eat Wakudonarudo with your anime space wife
And you will be happy
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 14:28:27 UTC No. 16308484
>Even NG has to rely on F9
No matter what, that's not a good situation.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 14:28:50 UTC No. 16308485
>>16308482
In the bad ending the US federal government succeeds in destroying Elon and you are forced to eat Wakudonarudo with your 3D wife (male) in the Philippines
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUC
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 14:29:51 UTC No. 16308486
>>16308057
ULA pushing for upgrade program goes against their excel style of designing rockets.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 14:35:46 UTC No. 16308490
>>16308426
>>16308430
>>16308432
so this is the true power of applied metallurgy
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 14:37:28 UTC No. 16308491
>>16308467
depends on how efficient they are
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 14:38:10 UTC No. 16308492
>>16308426
And the cost efficiency.
Dont forget. SpaceX wants to get close to $1000 per ton of thrust.
So the Raptor 3 costs probably close to $300K per engine.
~3 Cybertrucks
~1 Starlink satellite
~1/3 Merlin Engine (it costs <$1M per engine)
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 14:43:38 UTC No. 16308494
>>16308486
A lot of that is because historically there wasn't any stakeholder benefit to improve anything. Keeping the old, less efficient means was actually more profitable back when they were a cozy government-backed monopoly. Tory's wanted to build cooler rockets for years, but he hasn't had the chance to because he's not really the one who signs off on the big decisions and it's his job to be a good CEO before he gets a chance to be a good engineer.
These days Boeing is in bad enough shape that they're looking to cash out and Lockheed might want to follow along with that idea. ULA has no future as a government launcher beyond the end of NSSL-3 in 2929, and it doesn't have a future as a commercial launcher once Kuiper can start flying on other non-Falcon 9 RLVs. Something has to change, and that can be used as leverage to push a lot of ideas that the boardroom would otherwise not accept.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 14:49:17 UTC No. 16308502
>>16308465
https://x.com/SpaceflightNow/status
>The NG-21 mission has scrubbed today. The countdown clock was frozen at T-01:00:43, prior to the start of fueling the Falcon 9 rocket. SpaceX confirms this is due to unfavorable weather. The next launch opportunity on the range is Sunday, Aug. 4, but the 45th Weather Squadron forecast only a 10% chance of favorable conditions then. There are also back up opportunities on Tuesday and Wednesday of this coming week.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 14:57:24 UTC No. 16308520
>>16308502
>10% chance of favorable conditions
Why even bother setting up for a launch attempt? Sounds like a waste of money.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 15:03:37 UTC No. 16308526
>>16308520
have to get that cadence up nigga
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 15:05:02 UTC No. 16308528
>>16308523
looks cool but it was a massive, expensive pos
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 15:06:08 UTC No. 16308529
>>16308523
it was definitely a nice flex to have a fully reuseable space plane that could bring things back to earth with it
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 15:06:42 UTC No. 16308531
>>16308523
>carry large rocket engines
>on the part that doesn't have the fuel
>have to complicatedly pipe in the fuel from the part that carries the fuel
what did they mean by this?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 15:07:09 UTC No. 16308532
>>16308528
how dare you
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 15:09:59 UTC No. 16308536
>>16308502
Not too worry, we can still watch Blue Origin play around with their hollow shell of a fake New Glenn mock-up. Look at that hustle! Surely they won't miss the Mars window...
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 15:20:50 UTC No. 16308545
>>16308057
ULA's doing hyper specialized missions for the military (and Kuiper) with odd requirements, the kind of thing most launch providers don't bother with (esp the GEO stuff). Can't get into it much but they're going to be just fine. They have a bunch of contracts lined up.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 15:28:08 UTC No. 16308550
>>16308531
they wanted to reuse the engines
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 15:29:09 UTC No. 16308554
>>16308536
>SIMULATOR
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 15:32:04 UTC No. 16308562
So like 2 - 3 months before tower is operational?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 15:34:06 UTC No. 16308565
>>16308562
2nd tower prob operational (launching) by oct 15
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 15:44:13 UTC No. 16308576
Some things I love: BE-4, Starliner, SLS, ULA, and solid rocket boosters.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 15:49:17 UTC No. 16308583
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 15:49:49 UTC No. 16308584
>>16308576
I'm trans btw, forgot to mention that
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 16:02:45 UTC No. 16308596
>>16308576
so aesthetically pleasing
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 16:07:33 UTC No. 16308597
>>16308576
Team Space!
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 16:21:13 UTC No. 16308609
>>16308576
You sound like a scat lover.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 16:28:59 UTC No. 16308616
>>16308344
does anyone know what those pallets are made out of to support that much weight?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 16:34:17 UTC No. 16308618
>>16308532
he's right & shuttle sucked.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 16:35:22 UTC No. 16308620
>>16308377
Huh, I learned something today.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 16:36:15 UTC No. 16308621
>>16308617
fuck that's a sexy engine
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 16:37:11 UTC No. 16308623
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 16:37:43 UTC No. 16308625
how is less parts = more thrust?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 16:39:07 UTC No. 16308627
>>16308625
higher pressure = more thrust
the number of parts is irrelevant
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 16:40:50 UTC No. 16308631
I've seen quite a few people claim that it's CGI
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 16:40:54 UTC No. 16308632
>>16308625
Less parts = less breaking points
Less breaking points = less chance of failure
Less chance of failure = engine has more room to work harder before failure
Harder working engine = more thrust
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 16:42:54 UTC No. 16308636
>>16308625
proonting. the same or better functionality by replacing discrete, external parts with internal printed channels.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 16:43:07 UTC No. 16308637
>>16308633
you see the heatshield here pretty well >>16308340
>>16308277
>>16308085
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 16:45:57 UTC No. 16308641
>>16308616
dude, its not even that heavy. its thin walled mild steel, made using amateur welding in-house for cheap. its powder coated for rust proofing. they will move it around using based donkey kong software controlled advanced obots. all of this is incredibly optimized for high volume production.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 16:46:05 UTC No. 16308642
>>16308623
Still haven't reached original thrust specs. Vacuum version too is very unoptimized
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 16:46:09 UTC No. 16308643
>>16308639
still some flanges
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 16:47:13 UTC No. 16308644
>>16308625
It doesnt.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 16:50:27 UTC No. 16308646
>>16308639
Release that test footage already elon
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 16:53:19 UTC No. 16308647
>>16308502
Serious question, why don't they launch anyway? What's the worst that can happen?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 16:53:31 UTC No. 16308648
>>16308642
280tf translates to 2746 kN vs the 3050 kN in your pic
ISP is 350s vs 334s in your pic
so in fact the ISP is better
isn't it possible to trade these off a bit by changing the mixture ratio?
maybe 3050 kN of thrust has a retardedly long optimal Starship length, so they made a tradeoff for more ISP instead?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 16:56:13 UTC No. 16308651
>>16308647
the rocket veers off course and is forced to self destruct or is unable to reach the targeted orbit
or the sea is too rough for drone landing which means they lose a booster and at this point with over 20 re-uses per booster, losing one during early stages is pretty bad
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 16:56:58 UTC No. 16308653
>>16308618
but it was cool and that counts for something. they shouldn't probably have gone with it though.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 16:57:13 UTC No. 16308654
>>16308651
>>16308647
also the cost to spacex even with a recovered booster is tens of millions, SpaceX has money but they didn't get here by wasting it
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 16:58:04 UTC No. 16308655
>>16308617
God DAMN look at that fucking thing. I'm gonna cum
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 16:58:15 UTC No. 16308658
>>16308623
>>16308617
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/18197
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 17:02:15 UTC No. 16308661
>>16308623
very nice. lets see the vacuum specs
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 17:02:23 UTC No. 16308662
>>16308617
I always love when optimization leads to more biological forms
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 17:03:22 UTC No. 16308663
>>16308648
We need to go back to ITS. WE NEED TO
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 17:04:09 UTC No. 16308664
>>16308633
is that raptor 2 or 3 on the canvas/graphic on the wall on the right side wall?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 17:05:37 UTC No. 16308666
>>16308658
So next version will habe higher T/W than Merlin WTF
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 17:07:27 UTC No. 16308667
>>16308658
Many things seems to be converging right now that are now coming to optimal state.
>Tesla FSD 12.x
>Raptor 3.x
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 17:07:36 UTC No. 16308668
>>16308666
he can't keep getting away with it
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 17:10:11 UTC No. 16308670
>>16308667
optimus v3 (not counting the prototype testing platform that they threw together in a few months from off-the shelf parts) is going to be the first production version too
you also have powerwall v3
Musk said that v3 is usually when a product starts to get good
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 17:11:11 UTC No. 16308671
>>16308670
>>16308667
and of course starship v3
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 17:11:16 UTC No. 16308672
>>16308647
The worst thing that could happen is that you lose the payload. Losing a Falcon 9 isn't a big setback since all of that Hardware can be produced at scale. Cygnus is a lot more like a custom built spacecraft whose successful launch to the station is (roughly) a $240M payday for Northrop. On top of that, cargo deliveries to the station at very tightly scheduled with individual payload items planned out years in advance.
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/202
>The S.S. Francis R. “Dick” Scobee will be delivering around 3,843 kg (8,472 lb) of cargo to the orbiting outpost. This cargo includes numerous scientific experiments, such as tests of water recovery technologies, a process to produce blood and immune cells in microgravity, and a demonstration of centripetal force for STEM engagement. In addition to the experiments, food, and supplies, the S.S. Francis R. “Dick” Scobee will carry an iROSA solar array upgrade kit — the eighth such kit needed for the installation of the final set of upgraded arrays. Furthermore, Cygnus will deliver spare water tanks and pump assemblies for Station maintenance.
Losing any of that would be a pretty big deal for the ISS program. This is a payload that you don't want to risk.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 17:11:26 UTC No. 16308673
>>16308423
>>16308219
>>16308361
Possibly all combined.
Raptor 1 production was bit low anyway, so even if it wasnt counted, it wouldnt add much.
Also with $1000/t of thrust, with avg price of each engine being ~$270K due to mass manufacturing, the total raptor engine costs is ~$153M.
To put that in perspective, a single SLS engine costs $146 million.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 17:12:32 UTC No. 16308674
>>16308658
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/18197
>>16308661
a few years
sounds like the vacuum version is going to be substantially different than the sea level one, not just a bigger nozzle if it takes years
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 17:12:49 UTC No. 16308675
>>16308671
>>16308670
Also Grok 3 by end of this year and Boring Company's tunnel boring machine v3 is coming too
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 17:15:28 UTC No. 16308679
>>16308647
Failure in such scenario would mean Falcon is grounded for a long time
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 17:22:22 UTC No. 16308684
>>16308674
he is talking about the goal isp not when it will be ready
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 17:22:57 UTC No. 16308685
>>16308643
Hard to avoid altogether when working with plumbing.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 17:23:59 UTC No. 16308686
>>16308623
>350 isp at sea level
>380 isp at vacuum
Thats reaching the limits of theoretical possible ISP. Theoretical max ISP for lox + ch4 is 386. 380/386 = 98.44559%
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 17:24:04 UTC No. 16308687
>>16308651
>>16308672
>>16308679
I should not have asked what's the worst that can happen, obviously loss of payload. I'm more curious what the chances are. I'm surprised something with the power and speed of a rocket can be affected by weather at all.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 17:25:47 UTC No. 16308689
>>16308673
Does that $146 million figure for the SLS engine include R&D or just fabrication, there's no way they're that inefficient compared to SpaceX
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 17:26:32 UTC No. 16308690
>>16308689
Fabrication. Its and old engine, it doesn't count for any of the old R/D costs
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 17:28:23 UTC No. 16308692
>>16308666
everything about FFSC which makes it better for reusability than a gas generator also makes it better for cranking the TWR up
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 17:30:38 UTC No. 16308694
>>16308689
they are that inefficient
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 17:32:59 UTC No. 16308695
>>16308686
Hydrolox max theoretical is in the lower 500s, but I imagine if you are running that at the pressures Raptor does, those engines wouldnt last very long. SSME was like 450
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 17:45:15 UTC No. 16308703
>>16307279
Falcon 9 ate up the global market, and one web has failed to materialize. If One Web had a flat pac satalite it could have been more compelling.
However according to ISRO they have maxed out there production facilities to the point of delaying Gaagaans test lunch.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 17:46:20 UTC No. 16308706
>>16308617
Amazing that IFT-1 flew with gen 1.
Amazing that ONLY 7 engines failed!
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 17:48:06 UTC No. 16308708
>>16308706
need that data
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 17:49:22 UTC No. 16308709
>>16308687
Crosswinds can be a pain. A vehicle can be built to handle a lot of axial force but have a very difficult time dealing with a lateral force that's orders of magnitude smaller. Falcon doesn't have an exceptional ability to deal with inclement weather because it wasn't thinking about needing daily launches when it was being designed. If the topic ever came up the cost savings that came with having a simpler if slightly less capable design would have been more appealing.
On the other side of the discussion: here's a Soyuz getting ready to launch TMA-22 and three crew to the ISS while sitting in a fucking blizzard. The Soyuz-2 still uses the R7 Semyorka ICBM as its foundation and that rocket needed to be able to start WW3 no matter what the current conditions were, so it it was designed to be capable of disregarding almost all weather-related issues.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 17:49:47 UTC No. 16308710
>>16308706
This was reckless and amazing no one was arrested
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 17:54:05 UTC No. 16308715
>>16308710
this is your brain on oldspace
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 17:59:37 UTC No. 16308720
>>16308687
https://www.patrick.spaceforce.mil/
As for the conditions today, weather forecasting for the Eastern Range is handled by Space Launch Delta 45 at Cape Canaveral. Here's their forecast for today's scrub.
https://www.patrick.spaceforce.mil/
They have an FAQ online that explains what a lot of that means. Mostly it's concerns over crosswinds at various altitudes and the odds that the rocket will encourage the local weather to produce lighting.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 18:09:13 UTC No. 16308728
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/18197
>Indeed. It is not widely understood that SpaceX has the most advanced 3D metal printing technology in the world.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 18:10:18 UTC No. 16308730
>>16308728
relativity space absolutely mogged
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 18:17:27 UTC No. 16308732
>>16308728
How does elon go from shitting on proonting to praising it after only a few months?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 18:18:32 UTC No. 16308733
>>16308728
Has anyone heard from Relativity recently? Someone should check on them
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 18:19:11 UTC No. 16308734
>>16308625
Industrial flight & magic
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 18:21:24 UTC No. 16308736
>>16308732
proonting is something you do only if you absolutely have to but in those cases its great
using it for everything is retarded
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 18:21:46 UTC No. 16308738
>>16308732
Its simply that you dont understand nuanced posts.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 18:24:36 UTC No. 16308740
>>16308732
>wtf you’re only supposed to really love or really hate something
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 18:25:45 UTC No. 16308742
>>16308733
apparently they gave up on pronting
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 18:29:41 UTC No. 16308746
>>16308664
Looks like 2
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 18:44:56 UTC No. 16308754
>>16308510
>BE-4 without testing sensors. Most of the cruft is just sensors.
It's still an incredibly inefficient motor and pretty shitty for its size.
People love to shit on Raptors when one fails in flight, but no one wants to talk about the BE-4 that was DOA when shipped to ULA for Vulcan.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 18:51:38 UTC No. 16308759
/sci/ plays /d/ today for those inclined >>16308739
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 18:52:12 UTC No. 16308760
>>16308689
>R&D
Anon forget R&D, the fucking things are already built. They already flew! The $146m is for refurbishing a single engine that was already developed, built, and flew. Yeah
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 18:55:43 UTC No. 16308763
>>16308664
Lol should SpaceX sell those old Raptors to ULA and speed up Vulcan. Gotta pump up those stock numbers before the sale. Any word on that anyway?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 18:58:41 UTC No. 16308768
>>16308733
They need to be applying their tank-building printers to in-orbit construction. Imagine being able to ship up a spool of wire and a pallet of docking adapters and just build a station on the fly with arbitrary module shapes and sizes.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 18:59:16 UTC No. 16308770
>Switching from Raptor 2 to Raptor 3 on a Super Heavy with 33 engines will save 43.8t of dry mass on the Booster.
>For a 6 engine Ship it will save 6.9t
ITS OVER!!!!
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 19:00:31 UTC No. 16308773
>>16308732
>How does elon go from shitting on proonting to praising it after only a few months?
Elon never said he hated 3D printing, he said its stupid to use it for *everything* like tanks.
I'm not sure the percentages with Raptor 3, but previous Raptor engines were under 50% printed.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 19:02:28 UTC No. 16308775
>>16308733
It is really dumb that they printed the part easy to make with sheet metal. It is not like they printed in an isogrid that may have been faster and less wasteful than machining. It really seems like investor bait. To be honest though, some of my classmates in aerospace engineering didn't know the first thing about manufacturing other than printing their models, so I could see how that leads to them thinking they could do that for a rocket. The oldspace model has such small production rates that printing seems to make sense, and would alow for iteration with less new tools needed.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 19:02:31 UTC No. 16308776
>>16308642
>>16308674
Could consider a nozzle extention to keep variants standardized.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 19:02:51 UTC No. 16308777
>>16308732
It's the brainlet -> midwit -> high IQ meme
>3D printing is great!
>Actually 3D printing is terrible and here's a 45 minute video essay about that
>3D printing is great when you use it to do something only 3D printing can do
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 19:05:20 UTC No. 16308782
>>16308768
Why bother when you can lease a StarShip for six months. Pack it with your manufacturing equipment and land when done? LEO Station meme needs to end.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 19:06:47 UTC No. 16308785
>>16308779
Edited
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 19:07:03 UTC No. 16308786
>>16308775
Maybe Relativity figured it would have lower manufacturing labor cost? Also they suggested in early promo videos to be a 3d printer company that happens to make a rocket....
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 19:07:03 UTC No. 16308787
>>16308775
It's worth baiting investors if you get a 3D printer that can spit out a DC-3 in three separate parts. There're a lot of very interesting applications for a printer that can built an orbital class rocket almost completely on its own. It's just that building rockets isn't really one of them.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 19:08:20 UTC No. 16308791
>>16308768
>printers to in-orbit construction
>module
modulefag brain worms
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 19:11:20 UTC No. 16308794
>>16308770
Source on 43T savings? Better mounts? 555kgx33 is 18,000kg
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 19:19:07 UTC No. 16308802
https://x.com/dominickmatthew/statu
Big fan of this lad
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 19:22:26 UTC No. 16308804
>>16308768
pointless, just bring steel and weld them together in space
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 19:24:51 UTC No. 16308807
>>16308759
Those futa lovers?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 19:25:42 UTC No. 16308808
>>16308779
https://x.com/SpaceX/status/1819795
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 19:26:19 UTC No. 16308809
>>16308794
read >>16308785
It's 1155*33 = 38115kg
So 38T
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 19:26:46 UTC No. 16308810
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 19:29:07 UTC No. 16308812
>>16308770
>>16308809
>>16308785
I wonder if these side commodities only include the heat shields or do they have the CO2 tanks as well?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 19:32:48 UTC No. 16308814
>>16308802
cool and disgusting at the same time
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 19:34:16 UTC No. 16308816
If the raptor 3 CAD file was open sourced, how long would it take for anyone else to fly one?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 19:35:29 UTC No. 16308817
>>16308816
Good luck building the production line for it lmfao
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 19:39:10 UTC No. 16308819
>>16308817
Upsides for open sourcing raptor design:
>I get to look at cool designs
>increasing chance that design survives an apocalypse
Downsides:
>china might build a shitty one in 20 years (actually an upside since it accelerated space race competition)
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 19:40:43 UTC No. 16308820
>>16308810
is that threading on the top? are these screwed-in like lightbulbs?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 19:44:36 UTC No. 16308823
>>16308550
Oh yeah I forgot they used to not land rockets
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 19:45:56 UTC No. 16308824
>>16308759
that shit was gay ten years ago, it's just as gay now
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 19:46:34 UTC No. 16308825
>>16308820
No they use a bayonet connection
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 19:48:17 UTC No. 16308827
>>16308824
but its fun and von braun just scored today
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 19:52:24 UTC No. 16308831
>>16308816
I think Spacex's metallurgy and degree of fine-tuning with all the manufacturing processes involved would make that file only slightly better than useless.
There would probably be a lot of design insights useful to making a similar (but less capable) engine, but I think cloning Raptor 3 would take nearly as long as developing it in the first place. The blueprints for that thing would be like a roadmap with significant parts missing that you have to fill in yourself by extrapolation.
I think Elon's right when he says they're coming up against the limits of physics. Raptor 3 feels very close to the top of the local maximum hill that encompasses the task "make thrust using oxygen and methane."
It reminds me of technology in Dune—the absolute limit of analogue engineering with minimal digital input.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 19:59:52 UTC No. 16308838
To be fair, a lot of shit on raptor 1&2 are for sensor purpose to find out what works and what doesnt.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:01:20 UTC No. 16308840
>>16308639
You could give the blueprints for this engine to china and they could never build a 1:1 copy.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:01:50 UTC No. 16308841
>>16308802
They assigned don pettit as his mentor when he was originally chosen by NASA to enter the astronaut corps. Plus his photography is kino. And he’s young and good at public outreach.
I’d say he has a 100% chance of landing on the Moon.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:05:13 UTC No. 16308843
Tory Bruno in meltdown mode over this engine lel
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:05:36 UTC No. 16308844
>>16308827
Did we get fucked?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:08:48 UTC No. 16308848
>>16308843
>t-there aren't enough parts on it!
Does anyone else hear a snake hissing?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:11:10 UTC No. 16308850
>>16308848
What is /sfg/'s take, are they exaggerating?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:11:24 UTC No. 16308851
>>16308848
lmaooo
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:12:22 UTC No. 16308852
>>16308814
When will the japs finally make it to space?
I await the day of our zero gravity JAV overlords.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:13:24 UTC No. 16308854
>>16308852
>zerogravjav.com
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:13:29 UTC No. 16308856
>>16308848
Tory always seethes
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:17:44 UTC No. 16308860
>>16308856
https://x.com/torybruno/status/1819
>Been asked about our photo policy: This applies to media that we allow inside the fence & onto our pad. We prefer to reserve this very limited & privileged access for educational and editorial purposes, rather than for personal business use.
Seething on multiple fronts
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:18:10 UTC No. 16308862
>>16308848
Lol blocked by Bruno liking the wrong things. Even Aerojet Rockedyne let my ask them about RS-25 prices until they deleted there account.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:18:45 UTC No. 16308863
>>16308860
that isn't answering the why are they doing this
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:18:54 UTC No. 16308865
>>16308860
"Buy our official merch, for educational purposes" - t. Tory
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:19:59 UTC No. 16308867
>>16308861
He had any courage would be asking to buy a few Raptor 3s.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:20:59 UTC No. 16308869
>>16308861
They were half a decade late so getting some kind of minimum viable product out to the pad was seen as important.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:21:45 UTC No. 16308870
>>16308867
Then they'd have to build a new excel spreadsheet to build a completely new rocket.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:23:43 UTC No. 16308872
>>16308850
does this >>16308856 look much more complicated than the first picture?
you have the TVC (thrust vector control) rod there and pipe bundle and it looks very clean anyway
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:26:27 UTC No. 16308874
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:29:42 UTC No. 16308877
>>16308785
Half the mass
Half again the thrust
Tenth of the cost
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:39:55 UTC No. 16308885
>>16308880
Do we know anything about 1337 or is it just Elon meming
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:43:52 UTC No. 16308888
>>16308848
Hahahahah
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:44:26 UTC No. 16308890
>>16308885
a clean sheet design using the lessons learned with raptor, might not be called raptor
assuming they are even pursuing it anymore, but in the estronaut video musk talked about it
https://youtu.be/aFqjoCbZ4ik?si=OZm
quote from timestamp
>the leet engine, I think we will do it at some point but that is a total tear up
>it looks like the leet engine but it is much more expensive because it has 3D printed parts
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:45:11 UTC No. 16308893
>>16308885
Its a different engine they are testing, thats not Raptor. And probably designed for Mars.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:45:51 UTC No. 16308895
where are the sensors Elon, it needs more sensors
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:45:52 UTC No. 16308896
>>16308890
>>16308893
Thank you anons
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:49:07 UTC No. 16308900
>>16308686
>350 isp at sea level
>380 isp at vacuum
350 isp is a sea level R3 in a vacuum, 380 isp is a vacuum nozzle R3 in a vacuum
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:49:25 UTC No. 16308901
>>16308890
>it looks like the leet engine
hes so autistic. what does leet engine mean except lol 1337 funy
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:52:59 UTC No. 16308904
>>16308848
I can't believe that's a real tweet from him.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:53:20 UTC No. 16308905
>>16308860
https://x.com/SciGuySpace/status/18
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:54:21 UTC No. 16308907
>>16308905
https://x.com/torybruno/status/1819
the context
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 20:55:09 UTC No. 16308910
>>16308907
Snake gonna snake.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 21:03:32 UTC No. 16308922
>>16308785
I think I figured out where spaceguy5 got his "raptor underperforms isp by 10%" idea
The theoretical max isp of methalox is 386s. 10% of that is 38.6, take that away from 386 and you get 347.4, which is almost exactly the same as V2's isp.
I find it very easy to believe that retard took the isp of the previous versions sea level engine and thought that meant raptor couldn't get anywhere near 386s of isp.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 21:04:50 UTC No. 16308923
>>16308848
Was arguing with randos online part of his contract with ULA?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 21:06:53 UTC No. 16308924
>>16308923
>destroys literally FREE PR from photographers community
Crashing this ULA rocket with no survivors.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 21:07:02 UTC No. 16308925
>>16308923
Not like he has anything to launch
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 21:11:48 UTC No. 16308927
I remember ULA wanting to sell, what happened with that, did no one want to buy it?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 21:12:01 UTC No. 16308928
>>16308923
He sounds just like the fart-huffing smug fags I always get into arguments with over on /mlp/.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 21:14:15 UTC No. 16308931
>>16308907
>can't type or spell right
>coping and seething
>reply_without_sounding_mad_casual_
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 21:24:09 UTC No. 16308938
>>16308923
He has to know the new policy is morally indefensible right? Better to say Boeing's legal department insist and throw them under the bus; it's part of their salary to be the punching bags anyway.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 21:48:03 UTC No. 16308955
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 21:51:01 UTC No. 16308958
https://x.com/raz_liu/status/181966
>According to the Deep Blue Aerospace's patent. They may plan to replace the gridfins with bloom-able & adjustable interstage-ring. Claimed to be lighter weight & cheaper to make than the classic gridfins.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 21:59:39 UTC No. 16308971
>>16308928
Explains why Dustin the Fed loves him so much
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 22:01:37 UTC No. 16308972
>>16308844
No we won and we're going to the Quarter Finals!
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 22:04:22 UTC No. 16308976
>>16308880
The proonting must be eliminated, at all costs
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 22:08:20 UTC No. 16308981
>>16308958
I like this. it's kinda cool and novel
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 22:08:46 UTC No. 16308982
>>16308844
we creamed them! i hope elon scores at least one goal before this is over
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 22:13:16 UTC No. 16308989
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 22:16:08 UTC No. 16308993
>>16308831
there's no reason you can't have 1000 bar chamber pressure
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 22:17:30 UTC No. 16308994
>>16308732
When he shits on 3D printing it's always to point out when people are using it for stupid reasons. Spacex has always used it when it was the best tool for the job.
Hell, I think Elon made an offer to purchase the company that makes the printers Spacex uses, but they turned it down.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 22:18:41 UTC No. 16308997
>>16308993
I'm sure you could handily exceed 1000 bar chamber pressure in a bomb, yeah
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 22:19:27 UTC No. 16308999
>>16308732
He literally just says whatever sounds nice in his head at any given time. Whether or not it is true or accurate. It's a self defense mechanism of his psyche
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 22:20:15 UTC No. 16309001
>>16308997
just put a bomb in the engine
it is that easy
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 22:25:48 UTC No. 16309006
>>16309001
That's pretty much how you do it
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 22:43:59 UTC No. 16309016
>>16308901
Derived from the word "elite". Elite engine
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 22:54:37 UTC No. 16309019
>>16308689
>no way they're that inefficient
hahahahaha
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 22:55:28 UTC No. 16309021
>>16308901
l33t haxx0rs
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 22:56:28 UTC No. 16309022
>>16309019
that was a good one yeah
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 22:59:57 UTC No. 16309023
>>16308989
it's kind of cheating, but that's still a beautiful weld
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 23:00:46 UTC No. 16309024
>>16308760
>cost to refurbish a completed engine is the same as launching an expendable falcon heavy
This goes beyond inefficiency
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 23:03:40 UTC No. 16309026
>>16309023
>kind of
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 23:08:32 UTC No. 16309028
>>16308886
I can't wait to see Raptor 5
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 23:10:59 UTC No. 16309030
>>16309026
While I understand that some people might have objections to that welding technique you can't argue with the results.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 23:16:32 UTC No. 16309034
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 23:19:24 UTC No. 16309035
>>16308861
Topkek
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 23:21:27 UTC No. 16309037
So is New Glenn actually launching this year?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 23:22:59 UTC No. 16309039
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 23:23:49 UTC No. 16309040
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 23:25:19 UTC No. 16309041
SpaceX should send a boilerplate on a Falcon Heavy to Mars just to fuck with blorgin
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 23:28:55 UTC No. 16309046
>>16309041
I wonder if the old NASA threat still holds now that Shelby's out, or if SpaceX would even care now that NASA is becoming a smaller and smaller percentage of revenue
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 23:31:13 UTC No. 16309049
>>16309046
>old NASA thread
QRD?
They don't want people chucking shit to mars?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 23:32:07 UTC No. 16309051
>>16308848
>>16308905
>>16308907
>>16308923
What an ass. Who allows him to act like this on social media? Doesn't that piss off the company with how he makes them look?
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 23:35:49 UTC No. 16309057
>>16309049
I believe he’s talking about red dragon. JPL felt it was a threat (to their funding and Mars program management) and had that shit ripped off the drawing board ASAP
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 23:37:00 UTC No. 16309059
>>16309051
gotta be the least of their problems at this point
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 23:39:24 UTC No. 16309066
>>16308989
>welding in China.webm
have a side order of corncrete to go with that
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Aug 2024 23:49:00 UTC No. 16309077
>>16309066
is that corn?
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 00:03:53 UTC No. 16309101
https://x.com/ashleevance/status/18
https://afresearchlab.com/technolog
>The Department of the Air Force is exploring rocket cargo transportation capability for DOD logistics. Based on advertised commercial capability and business objectives, the Air Force Research Laboratory is currently assessing emerging rocket capability across the commercial vendor base, and its potential use for quickly transporting DOD materiel to ports across the globe.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 00:04:05 UTC No. 16309102
>>16309077
>>16309066
looks like Martian rocks to me
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 00:05:39 UTC No. 16309103
>>16309101
Ancient news
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 00:05:47 UTC No. 16309105
>>16309066
Laugh all you want, but this technique is applicable even to materials that can't be welded with conventional techniques
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 00:07:04 UTC No. 16309108
>>16309101
the market has already decided that explosives are the only thing worth shipping point to point with rockets.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 00:15:44 UTC No. 16309114
Oh boy I'm glad NASA is working hard despite SpaceX's problems
>>16309057
Yeah that's what I was referring to
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 00:17:17 UTC No. 16309117
>>16309108
kek
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 01:40:19 UTC No. 16309189
>>16309077
its high grade, load bearing corn, dont be racist
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 01:58:00 UTC No. 16309209
>>16309194
They're not stranded. Dragon can bring them back home at anytime.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 01:59:41 UTC No. 16309212
>>16309194
Boeing said they're not stranded
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 02:08:01 UTC No. 16309223
>>16309101
If the DoD wants to give spacex money that's great but I genuinely cannot see a use for point to point. What is so critical that you need at a base in a few hours rather than the 10 hours or so that it would take to scramble a globemaster or similar? The only use I could see would be front line deliveries but that's not what they are talking about here anyway and front line deliveries by ICBM is fucking stupid, aside from the risk of it getting shot down (easy as fuck target that will light up air defence like a Christmas tree) there is the risk of shit going nuclear. Expending a few hundred million dollars of starship to land in buttfuck nowhere and never return is also retarded.
Point to point human travel has a better use case and that's also retarded.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 02:15:13 UTC No. 16309231
>>16309223
autonomous death robots which everyone is surely working on and probably has up to a decent standard but keep under wraps not to scare everyone.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 02:15:50 UTC No. 16309233
>>16309231
just put your autonomous death robots on a cargo plane?
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 02:17:20 UTC No. 16309236
>>16309194
They are not stranded.
Their original transport which took them to the station is currently not considered safe for them to travel in, and with no other transport available they have to stay at the station for several weeks longer than initially planned. If they want to leave, a different transport will need to be arranged.
But no, they are not stranded.
Pic unrelated.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 02:19:03 UTC No. 16309240
>>16309233
The point is to drop them in deep strike behind enemy lines areas. Imagine P2P death bot barrages running rampant behind your front line.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 02:46:06 UTC No. 16309274
>>16308523
Cause she's got a GREAT ASS! and you've got your head all the way up it!
🗑️ Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 02:46:27 UTC No. 16309275
>>16309194
the hard pill to swallow is that /sfg/ is just slower than it used to be. It peaked around the hop campaign; back when mass simulators were used in lieu of a nosecone. 8 post/min average during the US daytime. If people weren’t talking about new starbase info or speculating on Starship/Mars they were bringing up interesting information about different engine cycles, niche spaceflight facts, etc.
At a certain point we reached critical mass. Too many trolls (/n/igger aka collagefag, insane ARCAspam, janny that nuked good threads because /sfg/ called her (male) out)
I think the explosion of “space twitter” also had a damaging effect because once oldfags abandoned /sfg/ full-time, people just started resorting to screenshotting gay fags from twitter for rocket news, historical rocket facts, etc.
tldr /sfg/ isn’t dead but it used to be way cooler
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 03:19:30 UTC No. 16309317
>>16309114
>yo-YOU KNOW... SpaceX is having problems TOO! yaknow...
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 03:41:43 UTC No. 16309341
>>16308576
>michael griffin enters the chat
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 03:43:10 UTC No. 16309346
next stage
>>16309344
>>16309344
>>16309344
>>16309344
>>16309344
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 08:38:09 UTC No. 16309566
Actual stage, because OP is a fucking retard.
>>16309564
>>16309564
>>16309564
>>16309564
>>16309564
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 09:16:11 UTC No. 16309588
>>16309566
>Spaing / flooding
Report submitted! This window will close in 3 seconds