🧵 /sfg/ - Spaceflight General
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 03:42:27 UTC No. 16309344
We're assembling a team edition
previous >>16306544
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 03:47:34 UTC No. 16309352
Hang journalists from lamp posts like fruit trees
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 03:51:50 UTC No. 16309359
>>16309352
Yay, spaceflight!
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 03:53:15 UTC No. 16309362
>>16306544
>>16309344
>consecutive 44s
this means something
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 03:53:17 UTC No. 16309363
>>16309359
It's relevant because they push misleading and defamatory articles about spaceflight to the public
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 03:54:33 UTC No. 16309364
Bets on starliner manned return this month?
Oh actually found a prediction site with the question
https://manifold.markets/TimothyBan
>40% chance
Seems high desu
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 03:57:27 UTC No. 16309367
>>16309364
>Day 55 of Nasa's 8 day mission!
Damn. They said no sooner than the 18th so it will be at the very least a 70 day mission
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 04:01:38 UTC No. 16309371
>>16309364
>an astronaut
seems rigged
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 04:05:01 UTC No. 16309375
>>16309364
Probably after the arrival of next crew dragon.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 04:08:46 UTC No. 16309380
>>16309375
>Probably
Midwit word desu. Also given how next crew dragon is set to launch on the 18th and they've stated no attempts at a return before the 18th....
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 04:26:58 UTC No. 16309392
>>16309364
Returning in shartliner has already been conclusively ruled out.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 04:41:28 UTC No. 16309405
HOW MANY MORE WEEKS UNTIL IFT-5
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 04:42:10 UTC No. 16309406
>>16309405
I think Elon said two?
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 04:48:44 UTC No. 16309414
>>16309405
late august early september, the long pole is FAA approval for the amended flight plan including booster catch
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 04:51:41 UTC No. 16309419
>>16309362
>>16309364
There’s no such thing as a coincidence
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 04:52:27 UTC No. 16309421
>>16309344
Hey OP, I’d like you to know it’s extremely obvious you don’t actually care about spaceflight because you staged for the 3rd time in a row with a picture of donald trump and completely ignored the raptor 3 news.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 05:02:58 UTC No. 16309426
>>16309380
Yeah probably.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 05:06:15 UTC No. 16309427
>>16309380
NASA needs to have SpaceX bring up SpaceX spec flight suits for the Castaways. Which would be announced sometime before the next Dragon launch.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 05:10:18 UTC No. 16309431
>>16309421
We spent most of the last thread talking about it, and you need to stop malding so hard about Trump
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 05:16:03 UTC No. 16309435
>spacex is making starship able to be transported on its side
remember when people were saying that we can build bases on the moon and mars by just laying starship on its side? people said it wouldnt work because starship isnt structurally sound on its side... well now what?
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 05:21:02 UTC No. 16309436
>>16309435
>spacex is making starship able to be transported on its side
Source?
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 05:23:38 UTC No. 16309437
October 15
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 05:26:43 UTC No. 16309439
>>16309436
it was being discussed on nsf @ an hour and 47 mins in
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZK
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 05:37:14 UTC No. 16309447
https://x.com/mcrs987/status/181996
Rocketlabs new engine might have rudded
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 05:43:53 UTC No. 16309456
>>16308907
https://x.com/gleesonjm/status/1819
shots fired
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 05:45:22 UTC No. 16309459
>>16309447
Major fire/heat signature detected from space (and no doubt by the instruments of every other 1st world nation) yet they remain silent like they're pleading the 5th. The longer it take you to come clean, the worse it gets. So just tweet out your anomaly press release early on Sunday when nobody is paying attention, and reassure your investors that Neutron is "on track"
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 05:50:41 UTC No. 16309466
>>16309445
watch it with the nazi lingo kid, we're on to your tricks
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 05:55:33 UTC No. 16309470
>>16309466
We're back journalists, boeing executives and NASA stooges
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 06:03:46 UTC No. 16309480
>>16309464
Not at all. A rocket landing bottom first? Please.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 06:10:30 UTC No. 16309489
Hey guys, I'm back on /sfg/ after 30 seconds. When are we hoppan?
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 06:15:48 UTC No. 16309491
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 06:40:14 UTC No. 16309505
>>16309489
right now, book your flight to Brownsville
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 06:52:54 UTC No. 16309509
Pee will be a valuable resource on Mars, and not for the reason you think
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 06:54:47 UTC No. 16309511
>>16309509
For cycling the airlocks
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 06:55:47 UTC No. 16309512
>>16309509
Titan has oceans of pee, right? Good driver for interplanetary trade.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 06:58:15 UTC No. 16309514
>>16309512
Where did you read that? Sounds incredulous
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 06:59:03 UTC No. 16309515
>>16309514
Some kind of oceans anyway. I think it's pee
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 07:03:57 UTC No. 16309519
>>16309515
We'll never know since Dragonfly will not be visiting any lakes
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 07:04:36 UTC No. 16309520
>>16309509
For the Sodium?
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 07:11:02 UTC No. 16309524
Starlink launch soon
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 07:14:39 UTC No. 16309525
>>16309464
>that ladder
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 07:15:02 UTC No. 16309526
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 07:16:03 UTC No. 16309527
>>16309464
I like the shadows being so long, implying they landed just after sunrise.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 07:17:54 UTC No. 16309529
>>16309525
>SpaceX copied the rocket
>BO copied the ladder
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 07:19:21 UTC No. 16309530
>>16309464
When will we get dog on the moon?
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 07:23:10 UTC No. 16309531
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 08:06:40 UTC No. 16309552
>>16309447
>>16309459
Designing their own engine was such a dumb choice, I don’t see how any of this shite could pay off. Neutron is a dumb design from top to bottom.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 08:33:08 UTC No. 16309563
>raptor 3 memes are breaching containment
It's over for every other retard
🗑️ Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 08:39:58 UTC No. 16309567
Fuck you OP, please consider never posting again.
If you want to continue to be retarded, there's this thread >>16291209 or you can go back to /pol/
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 09:04:20 UTC No. 16309579
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 09:11:37 UTC No. 16309585
>>16309579
You know that celebrity worship is an honest-to-god sign of mental retardation right?
Anyway, here's an actual /sfg/
>>16309564
>>16309564
>>16309564
>>16309564
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 09:14:22 UTC No. 16309586
>>16309585
Sneed
🗑️ Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 09:30:40 UTC No. 16309594
>>16309585
>Spamming/flooding
Report submitted!
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 09:45:15 UTC No. 16309597
>>16309579
>>16309594
You're weird
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 10:12:18 UTC No. 16309609
>>16309456
Ya know, one of the big problems with ULA's stupid new photos rule is... there actually have to be launches to take photos of.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 10:15:24 UTC No. 16309611
>>16309431
He's got a point though, the op image should have been raptor 3 not some /pol/ bullshit.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 10:19:07 UTC No. 16309613
>>16309611
don't be burdened what has been
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 10:20:25 UTC No. 16309614
>>16309421
That's Elon Musk, idiot.
I realise your combined TDS and EDS may blind you at times
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 10:21:32 UTC No. 16309616
>>16309613
what can be unburdened by what has been?
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 10:31:49 UTC No. 16309619
>>16309616
The answer is what. What can be.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 10:39:02 UTC No. 16309621
>>16309597
You exist in the context of all in which has come before you and what has been
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 10:39:54 UTC No. 16309623
>>16309621
Speak for yourself, chuddie, I fell out of a coconut tree
I am #cocopilled
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 11:08:57 UTC No. 16309634
>>16309623
the wheels on the bus go round and round!
HEHEHEHAHAHA
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 11:12:11 UTC No. 16309635
>>16309634
So just how many Venn diagrams *can* a yellow school bus carry?
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 11:42:28 UTC No. 16309648
https://spacenews.com/indian-astron
>
LOGAN, Utah — Two Indian astronauts will soon start training at NASA’s Johnson Space Center, with one of them flying to the International Space Station on an upcoming private astronaut mission.
>ISRO said that Shukla had been assigned to the Axiom Space Ax-4 mission to the station, while Nair will train as his backup. Both of the astronauts, called Gaganyatris by ISRO, had completed ISRO’s own training program for spaceflight that included time at the Star City training center in Russia.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 11:44:26 UTC No. 16309653
>>16309648
>Both of the astronauts, called Gaganyatris by ISRO
I'm not calling them that :)
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 11:45:11 UTC No. 16309656
>>16309653
More like Spootniki
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 11:58:45 UTC No. 16309659
>>16309653
are they gagging because of the smell?
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 12:05:00 UTC No. 16309661
>>16309659
they make others gaga so they are gaga-nyatris
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 12:46:40 UTC No. 16309680
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZU
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 12:54:11 UTC No. 16309688
>>16309585
Oh nyo poor wittle anon seething
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 13:00:07 UTC No. 16309691
>>16309480
i know. this is science fiction. i'd like to see a dog on the moon though
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 13:08:30 UTC No. 16309698
>>16309466
I wonder what secret meaning is hidden behind the common saying "all journalists must hang"
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 13:14:42 UTC No. 16309703
>>16309648
>LOGAN, Utah — Two Indian astronauts will soon start potty training at NASA’s Johnson Space Center, with one of them flying to the International Space Station on an upcoming private astronaut mission.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 13:15:37 UTC No. 16309705
>>16309698
it is a mystery
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 13:22:54 UTC No. 16309710
>>16309698
No secret meaning. The person who utters this wants to live in a fascist failstate.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 13:44:46 UTC No. 16309720
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJO
>Gateway too heavy for launch and a look ahead at Artemis II stacking
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 13:49:03 UTC No. 16309725
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 13:54:17 UTC No. 16309734
>>16309710
>Corporate media buttress and support Corporate entities working lock step with government committing unjust wars, surveillance, degradation of legal and moral systems and iron triangle corruption between states and companies, ie fascism
>you are an evil nazi for wanting to stop them
Texas secession and mars rush NOW
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 13:57:53 UTC No. 16309738
Blue origin asked for license to launch Blue moon cargo MK1 in march 2025
https://licensing.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/w
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 13:59:25 UTC No. 16309741
>>16309738
> Description: Applicant requests authority to launch and operate the Blue Moon MK1 Pathfinder to conduct a 5 to 7-day mission.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 14:00:39 UTC No. 16309744
>>16309738
Wait is that company that has never been to orbit? They are going to land on the moon in under 18 months?
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 14:03:00 UTC No. 16309747
>>16309641
Any guess?
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 14:05:17 UTC No. 16309750
>>16309747
its a big lightbulb
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 14:13:22 UTC No. 16309758
>>16309435
Yeah I was one of those people. It's literally how they currently deconstruct unwanted models; just tip them over and say goodbye! Although Eager Beaver claims you can already tip them over on the Moon and I simply trust his calculations.
>>16309439
>EJ: Brian, did you see the part where they talk about Starship safing procedures post-landing
>Brian (off-camera): Yeah, the landing of the starship and then breaking it over horizontal
>EJ: The break over procedure!
>Brian : Yeah I was like ‘Ahh, what’s that about?!’
>EJ: Dude, just tell em’ about it; please, please!
>Brian: They’ve been talking about landing stuff on drone ships like they had it in the new EIS proposal they’ve had it in this tiered environmental assessment, they had it in original EIS and everything else, they’ve always talked about landing Starship or SH on a droneship. They’ve always talked about it. But it's always been one of those “well, how?” Landing legs? Well as of right now starship is not going to have landing legs at all, at least not current variants...
And then they start going off on a tangent about mars landing speculation. They never showed their source about this supposed safing/break over procedure. Where can I find it
p.s. I don't watch NSF religiously (or like, ever) so I don't know if I got names wrong in my transcript. Bryan? Ryan?
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 14:18:27 UTC No. 16309760
>>16309758
>After landing and safing, the breakover fixture assembly (controlled supported drop from
vertical to horizontal) of the Starship would commence.
https://www.faa.gov/media/82786
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 14:18:38 UTC No. 16309761
>>16309744
I mean they are making it to mars before spaceX
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 14:38:20 UTC No. 16309782
>>16309761
>"ACKSHUALLY we were the first private company to mars"
insanely petty. reminds me of a non-spaceflight company who kept doing stunts like that only to end up falling into the wastebin of history and only being remembered as a black mark on their industry.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 14:41:59 UTC No. 16309784
>>16309761
ol' Musky's roadster says smell ya later
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 14:43:44 UTC No. 16309789
>>16309765
https://x.com/i/broadcasts/1ZkKzRwm
Twitter's live. The T-20:00 vent just started, so the rocket is fueling
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 14:52:00 UTC No. 16309793
>>16309464
Its realistically entertaining and one of the best comics of all time.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 14:53:00 UTC No. 16309794
>>16309515
Titan has oceans and lakes of Methane aka liquefied cow farts.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 14:53:07 UTC No. 16309795
meanwhile, nobody noticed that SpaceX started their 11-1 Starlink shell early this morning from the other coast.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 14:54:23 UTC No. 16309797
>>16309585
Raptor 1 vs 3 is a perfect metaphor of "you vs the guy she tells you not to worry about" in aerospace.
>>16309648
I do like ISRO's flight suit designs.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 14:57:58 UTC No. 16309799
>>16309790
>legend on the left
Gross
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 15:04:28 UTC No. 16309806
holy crap, that vapor cone today is amazing
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 15:06:09 UTC No. 16309808
Oh no it's got the goblin nozzle
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 15:06:16 UTC No. 16309809
>>16309656
>SpaceX launching Cygnus
>Cygnus
Wait a second
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 15:08:02 UTC No. 16309811
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 15:08:31 UTC No. 16309812
>>16309809
The last Antares 200 launched just over a year ago and the 300 isn't going to be ready until sometime late next year at the earliest.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 15:09:17 UTC No. 16309813
>>16309808
interesting: with the shorter nozzle, you can see a dark mach diamond made out of soot. Usually they are brighter than the rest of the plume.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 15:10:55 UTC No. 16309815
wtf, it used 3 engines on the landing burn.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 15:11:03 UTC No. 16309816
spacex is scifi compared to everyone else
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 15:11:28 UTC No. 16309817
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 15:11:31 UTC No. 16309819
HCKGAWI
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 15:12:41 UTC No. 16309822
>>16309815
seriously WTF
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 15:16:38 UTC No. 16309826
https://x.com/NASASpaceflight/statu
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 15:26:58 UTC No. 16309831
>>16309696
>Starship payload sensitive to dry mass
>remove 16% of dry mass
we are so back
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 15:40:35 UTC No. 16309845
>>16309820
Niiiiice
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 15:51:18 UTC No. 16309856
>>16309822
huh?
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 15:58:52 UTC No. 16309861
>>16309761
are they though?
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 16:03:18 UTC No. 16309863
>>16309822
It's normal. They've been starting the landing burn with three engines for a while now
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 16:06:20 UTC No. 16309864
>>16309831
That would increase Starship V1's theoretical upmass to 52.2 tons. V2's theoretical upmass to 116T and V3's theoretical upmass to 232T. I believe the Starlink V2 (full size) are around 840kg, which means that V1 with R3s integrated can theoretically put up 56 V2s for a pair of 28 stacked. V2 can do 124 for a pair of 62 stacked and V3 can do a staggering 250 satellites for a pair of 125 stacked. A V3 launching at the same flight cadence as Falcon 9 (100/yr) gives it the upmass of 12,500 Starlink V2s annually, which falls in the established shell replacement cycle for the 36k total they're aiming for and would support the life cycle reduction from 5 years to 3 years. Which further increases their competitive advantage and further makes difficult adversarial follow through if the tech stack keeps advancing faster than they can develop capabilities to disrupt.
V3s also launching at 100/yr independent of Starlink gives you 23,200T to orbit. Following say the 80/20 rule for useful payload beyond orbit achieved, that's 4,640T to Moon or Mars annually on the year and thereafter (increasing) once said cadence is established. For context, the entire ISS is about 200T cumulative mass accounting for lifeboats. Which puts the 100/yr V3 launch cadence into the realm of being able to put the mass equivalent of 23.2 International Space Stations towards the Moon or Mars per year aka being able to put up the mass/volume to support habitability of 162.4 people annually into deep space with a technology model from 30 years ago per ISS standards. Could probably 5-10x that accounting for all the advances since in material science, additive manufacturing, hydroponics and aquaponics, and recycling capabilities of dry and wet materials of most types. If we conservatively say 7.5x, that puts SpaceX's Moon/Mars habitable upmass support capability to around 1,218 people's worth to Moon or Mars annually. Over a 10 year period, that gets you to 12,180 people.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 16:13:39 UTC No. 16309871
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 16:14:23 UTC No. 16309872
>>16309864
>4,640T
>4% of a small container ship per year
how the fuck are they going to make a self sustaining city with that?
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 16:21:47 UTC No. 16309879
>>16309875
divine
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 16:38:04 UTC No. 16309892
>>16309875
Breaking through the firmament
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 16:48:06 UTC No. 16309898
>>16309872
Nearly 4.5kT is actually a lot accounting for modern technologies. Also, over the scientific advancements over the next 10 years are going to be quite wild in terms of power, manufacturing, agriculture, drone tech, autonomy, etc. It doesn't seem like a lot, but human beings by and large, even from a luxury perspective, are incredibly inefficient with space and usage of common commodities. Any given household has 50-60% inefficiencies in how they operate and of that number, probably 40-50% of it itself is complete waste. If you were to design a habitation system from the ground up that maximizes efficiency of commodities while maintaining a high level of comfort and then educating those who habit, operate, and consume, on methods of maintaining say a Q+5 level of efficiency conservatively rather than Q+10, all that would go a long way towards accelerating the sustainable development of any new colony anywhere in the world or solar system for that matter. For example, I have a 9ft birch, butcherblock style desk for my home desktop. I love it, built it myself, it's nice. But a Mars colony wouldn't need this for an office space. If you can build a table into the walls that folds out or slides out and is supported by integrated struts that connect with the wall itself, that's a huge gain in space, structural, and utility efficiency. Imagine for second that in a hab space, a wall that normally separates a room isn't just a wall, but a full on hydroponics garden wall used to grow commonly sourced vegetables and then you make just EVERY WALL in the hab that separates a room into a hydroponics wall and suddenly you open up a lot of space for other things that are useful for humans and flora/fauna bought for colonization. Also, its all but guaranteed that any colonization on the Moon or Mars will lead to considerable genetically engineered crops to increase nutrition, improve adaptability, and accelerate growth/yield rates.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 16:49:25 UTC No. 16309900
>>16309892
Kys
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 16:56:10 UTC No. 16309902
>>16309898
>>16309872
An average town home has say 1200sqft vertical total between basement and top floors. They have a lot of open space for convenience and general luxury. Most of this space goes heavily underutilized. If you take an average 10' by 11' room with 9' ceilings, you effectively have: 2-3 sides of a square of wall space that you can integrate structurally something useful into the room like a bed, desk, electronics, agriculture, manufacturing, recycling, computing to name a few. You can do the same with the ceiling (which doubles as the floor for what's above it) and do the same again with the floor even if its at the ground level. The reason why colonization of another world will be a good thing for humanity as a whole, is because it will enforce humanity for the first time in a very long time, to rethink how we build communities from the ground up to be maximally efficient and self-sufficient in the event of a supply chain shock or crisis that massively degrades ingress of parts and perishables. It's something that is considered, but never made hierarchically the root of any community--as most builders assume that any supply chain challenges that may occur is the responsibility of the local and state governments to address and not of the builder/community itself. This paradigm shift is what will allow 4,460T of annual supply to become exponentially more valuable than it otherwise seems. Approach it from first principles. Walk around your own space; apartment, condo, home, hotel, whatever. Just observe and consider how much space you have and how inefficiently structured it is for living. Consider the concept that you can't leave the space you're in for the next month, and you need to rebuild that area to support yourself because going outside for prolonged periods is detrimental to your health. HOW would you maximize your space to support you? When you figure out some basic concepts, consider the mass constraints, add them up, and 4,460T / by that.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 16:58:07 UTC No. 16309907
>>16309898
>>16309902
>food
>communities
food is easy. habitable spaces and keeping people alive is easy at this point. the hard part is that you need, like, 500 different industrial processes for self sustainability. think about the supporting industries required to make a computer chip
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 17:07:04 UTC No. 16309915
>>16309898
What are the psychological impacts of requiring people to live like that?
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 17:13:19 UTC No. 16309918
>>16309907
Yeah, which is why the 80/20 rule applies again on that 4,460T of theoretical mass giving you 892T of perishables and 3,568T being dedicated to commodities and manufacturing equipment. I would also expect a massive massive use of plastics, ceramics, and carbon fiber composites in as many systems as possible, as as two of the three things can be additiively printed quickly and an evolutionary number of variable forms, and the third can be produced in situ with commonly available materials. Chip manufacturing will be something that I can foresee taking place on Mars 10 years after colonization. We know, with that pure sulfur crystals exist on Mars' surface based on Perseverance Rover's unexpectedly delightful discovery. Pure crystaline sulfur on Mars means that every other element listed here: https://www.mindat.org/element/Sulf
And I would reasonably expect that metal structures on Mars would be made more in line with mineral abundance on said planet vs standards on Earth.
>>16309915
For a single room, probably significant, but it stands to reason on Mars, that human habs will be made purposefully large in order to minimize long term psychological duress. The added benefit of the extra volume will lead to more efficient use of space with satellite habs springing up once primary is maximized.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 17:16:35 UTC No. 16309922
>>16309907
to elaborate, i'm concerned about the actual feasibility of creating a supply chain capable of going from dirt to computer chips on only 4.5kt a year.
>>16309915
probably not good, especially when you consider that they work in a factory all day and the outdoors is a frozen red desert. you'd probably actually want to increase luxuries and the waste involved. you're still dealing with human beings at the end of the day.
>>16309918
>material availability
the hard part is turning them into something
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 17:17:36 UTC No. 16309924
>>16309919
Another 2nd stage fuck up??
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 17:18:25 UTC No. 16309926
>>16309924
Cygnus fuck up, not spacex
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 17:20:22 UTC No. 16309927
>>16309926
Misread. I thought he meant the burns that screwed things up were SpaceX not Cygnus, but he's saying the first two burns weren't preformed at all. Oldspace can't stop losing
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 17:21:28 UTC No. 16309928
>>16309927
Yeah, spacex did the separation
https://x.com/SpaceX/status/1820117
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 17:22:35 UTC No. 16309929
>>16309907
>>16309918
>MOXIE's objective was to produce oxygen of at least 98% purity at a rate of 6–10 grams per hour (0.21–0.35 oz/h)
>Oxygen production was first achieved on April 20, 2021, in Jezero Crater, producing 5.37 grams (0.189 oz) of oxygen, equivalent to what an astronaut on Mars would need to breathe for roughly 10 minutes.
>MOXIE had generated a total of 122 g (4.3 oz) of oxygen – about what a small dog breathes in 10 hours. At its most efficient, MOXIE was able to produce 12 grams per hour (0.42 oz/h) of oxygen – twice as much as NASA’s original goals for the instrument – at 98% purity or better. On its 16th and final run, on August 7, 2023, the instrument made 9.8 g (0.35 oz) of oxygen. MOXIE successfully completed all of its technical requirements and was operated at a variety of conditions throughout a full Mars year, allowing the instrument’s developers to learn a great deal about the technology
The super crazy thing about MOXIE is that this is how big the experimental version of the system IS. But if made into a integrated system, it's entirely possible to half the size of this. Which means, that in addition to a hab grade version of it, you can build this into the suit itself. Leading to each suit being able to produce up to 10m of oxygen per hour for any time spent outside. Integrating this capability into the suit itself massively increases redundancy for Mars as a whole, as any failure of the major system can leverage the same parts from the suits through additional engineering to supplant recovery of the major system. Plus, a free oxygen maker from the atmosphere is a really awesome piece of tech to have and advancements of that would have positive knock on effects on Earth deep underground where carbon dioxide concentrations in mines for example can sky rocket when there's a gas pocket burst or mixing of gases inherently a result of mining.
>>16309922
Obviously. But we've never colonized from 0 in over 100y, so difficulty is expected.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 17:22:43 UTC No. 16309931
>>16309927
Yeah that’s how I understand it. After successful delivery by F9 second stage, Cygnus subsequently didn’t perform its first two burns for some reason, and they’re trying to figure it out
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 17:23:03 UTC No. 16309932
>>16309898
>just design a tightly constrained system for humans from the ground up
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 17:23:37 UTC No. 16309933
>>16309902
that is also the best counterargument to the "solve urf problems first" crowd.
we'll get immense resources dedicated to figuring out how to keep humans alive and well in high tech habitats with minimal industrial infrastructure.
it opens up solutions to problems that don't have any incentive to be solved here, because its just easier to order a concrete truck, a container with cheap chinesium tech and "food" from industrial monocultures.
it'll also make people appreciate basic things many take for granted a lot more, like breathable air, clean water and fertile soil.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 17:24:41 UTC No. 16309935
>>16309932
>applying logic meant for a biospehere which provides immediate flexibility to tell someone to fuck off and leave to a biosphere where there is zero margin for error and fucking off and leaving means 100% death
bizarro retardo
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 17:27:26 UTC No. 16309937
>>16309933
I always tell that crowd that it's the only way you incentivize billionaires to invest in and develop completely closed cycle or non consumable systems that could be used on earth. They don't understand market forces or incentives though so they're sort of like
>why don't they just do that without going to space
>>16309935
You didn't read the book
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 17:38:52 UTC No. 16309946
>>16309929
Could you run thousands of MOXIES just sitting on the surface, powered by windmills taking advantage of the thin wind there? If those don't work, then big-ass solar panels.
I wanna pump Mars so full of O2 that you don't NEED to wear a suit outside. The best part is no part.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 17:41:53 UTC No. 16309947
>>16309414
Someone really needs to tell SpaceX you can get a fuckload of approved flight plans ahead of time and cancle the ones you aren't going to use.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 17:44:17 UTC No. 16309950
Last day of the summer cup, /sci/ plays in the second QF >>16309917
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 17:45:38 UTC No. 16309951
>>16309950
CAM ON /sci/
SCORE SOME FAKING GOALS
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 17:52:27 UTC No. 16309959
>>16309950
What are our chances?
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 17:57:27 UTC No. 16309965
>>16309951
Hope in the match day thread, the cup administration looks at it for PoI
>>16309959
We made out of the group stage and the Round of 16 and to the final day with pretty solid tactics, but we're really going up against the really strong teams now.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 17:58:02 UTC No. 16309966
>>16309946
>finally turn all the CO2 on Mars into O2
>step outside
>immediately burst into flames as every reactive element in your body rapidly oxidizes
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 17:59:12 UTC No. 16309967
>>16309421
>projection
you're the one who is obsessed with politics, you should be on /pol/ instead of here
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 17:59:46 UTC No. 16309968
>>16309965
>hope
hop*
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 18:02:50 UTC No. 16309971
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 18:03:06 UTC No. 16309973
https://x.com/sbarky38/status/18201
webm request
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 18:04:27 UTC No. 16309975
>>16309966
You couldn't breath anyway, it's only at 2% of earth's atmosphere. 20% is habitable assuming pure oxygen, though 70%+ is much nicer to breath with 20% oxygen and 50%+ nitrogen
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 18:13:18 UTC No. 16309987
>>16309951
>>16309959
It's starting
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 18:23:22 UTC No. 16310007
>>16310006
https://x.com/mcrs987/status/181958
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 18:25:43 UTC No. 16310017
>>16310006
now do raptor 3
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 18:27:56 UTC No. 16310026
>>16310017
I'm pretty sure that is raptor 3, but just a guess from an artist
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 18:31:32 UTC No. 16310031
>>16310026
Well no.
Death is about individuality/forced optimum health
Life is about identity and team, and their health which isn't always optimum.
Basically I'm saying you have your population.
I don't need to start from scratch either. I'm good enough to get over that and that mind set in this scenario isn't good.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 18:31:43 UTC No. 16310034
>>16310026
read
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 18:37:38 UTC No. 16310046
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 18:38:09 UTC No. 16310047
>16310031
thank you chatgpt, very insightful.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 18:42:18 UTC No. 16310054
>>16310006
>>16310007
I stand in awe of this brilliant engineering. Full flow staged combustion, in all its glory. I know SpaceX will optimize the fuck out of this already fucking ingenious design. If they achieve reusability to the point of maintenance free reflights within hours, this exceeds the original 60s moonshot significance. Just look at the pathetic competition, struggling like a black man in first year of law school to get far simpler and less capable engines working at all.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 18:49:15 UTC No. 16310060
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 18:49:57 UTC No. 16310061
>2024
>Still choosing weapons over a suitable tech to space fare.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 18:51:47 UTC No. 16310065
>>16310059
the plumbing is messier, its bigger and weights more and has worse thrust and I think ISP too?
so literally worse in basically every possible way
also costs like 40x more
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 18:52:20 UTC No. 16310066
Tory Bruno seethe status?
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 18:52:21 UTC No. 16310067
People make jokes about BE-4's plumbing.
People hate BO for the antics of their lawyers and Bezos.
Only shills confuse the two.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 18:56:06 UTC No. 16310075
>>16310059
did blue origin ever release the ISP figures for BE-4?
raptor is much smaller and cheaper, and yet it still outperforms the BE-4 in thrust with this new version.
is BE-4's specific impulse at least better than 350? because if no, then OOOOOF there really is nobody better than spacex.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 18:56:54 UTC No. 16310077
>>16310059
I'm not even convinced BE4 is reusable yet
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 18:58:46 UTC No. 16310081
>>16310077
they have no real urgency to do so as the talk of ejecting and saving the engine section was probably never anything more than cope to make themselves seem more relevant in the face of spacex's absolute mogging with partial re-use.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 18:59:14 UTC No. 16310082
>>16309919
>starliner is fucked
>soyuz is fucked
>cygnus is fucked
wtf is going on
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 19:02:31 UTC No. 16310089
>>16310081
SMART reuse (ejecting and saving the engine) was something ULA has been looking into with Vulcan
BO itself intends to just land New Glenn propulsively like F9
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSf
>New Glenn: The Road to Space
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 19:04:28 UTC No. 16310092
>>16310089
ULA has tested a inflatable heatshield
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mM
>NASA Successfully Tests LOFTID Inflatable Heat Shield
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 19:06:57 UTC No. 16310095
>>16310089
SMART is a cope. Even if it worked they lose all the tankage, fairings, upper stage. Too many bottlenecks to high cadence
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 19:08:33 UTC No. 16310097
>>16310089
>WHAT'S NEXT...
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 19:10:09 UTC No. 16310101
>>16310094
NO NEW CLOTHES 4 U
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 19:12:46 UTC No. 16310104
>>16310101
And I found out what's actually going on is I'm not back yet. But I am coming at a rate i don't know. My guess is it shouldn't be too long, maybe 5 minutes. Be careful.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 19:14:36 UTC No. 16310106
>>16310101
Imagine the smell
🗑️ Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 19:17:49 UTC No. 16310109
>>16310106
Fag
What? You literally are and were
Get aggressive with me now, faggot
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 19:31:01 UTC No. 16310132
>>16310059
Is it just painted black or did they change the metal? It seems odd to paint an engine but it doesn't look like a natural color
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 19:35:23 UTC No. 16310135
>>16310095
SMART isn't a cope, it's just a choice driven by ULA's business model. They need to keep building rockets, but the biggest benefit of reuse is not having to buy more engines. SMART is ULA trying to have their cake and eat it too.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 19:52:11 UTC No. 16310149
>>16310142
Does he not have access to them? Would SpaceX really not sell them?
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 20:03:09 UTC No. 16310155
>>16310149
there is ZERO incentive for SpaceX to sell raptor engines to third parties. think about it for a while, its absolutely NOT on the table for any fucking pricehjk8n
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 20:08:47 UTC No. 16310158
>>16310155
Price point, I assume?
If Kamala wins I can see SpaceX be forced to choose between selling their engines or hit with antitrust lawsuit.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 20:11:49 UTC No. 16310161
>>16310158
that would be retarded, there are many other companeis selling engines such as blue origin
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 20:14:36 UTC No. 16310166
>>16310059
>posts defends BO
>hmmm
>click profile
>pronouns
LMAO
Why is this so predictable?
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 20:15:11 UTC No. 16310168
>>16310155
There's legal incentive because they took air force money during development with optional sales to third party NSSL providers being one of the stipulations.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 20:16:35 UTC No. 16310170
>>16310155
They are basically impossible to replicate, let alone replicate the assembly line. Plus a competitive price would leave them with like $20m profit on something that took them a few hours to make. It's not like ULA is actually a competitor for anything aside from NSSL and SpaceX has already won the biggest chunk the design of the program will allow. It makes perfect sense
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 20:19:54 UTC No. 16310173
>>16310168
first time I'm hearing this
if this is true, why isn't ULA trying to buy Raptors from SpaceX?
cheaper, better performance, should be easier to get due to mass production, way more tested
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 20:21:48 UTC No. 16310175
>>16310173
Probably a lot of stuff going on behind the scenes we aren't privy to.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 20:27:37 UTC No. 16310183
>>16310166
Also every single They. Are. Not. Stranded. post i've seen.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 20:29:09 UTC No. 16310186
>>16310166
the western cartoon pfp doesn't clue you in already?
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 20:36:08 UTC No. 16310192
>>16310082
shitty companies trying to get more for less, we're gonna see more and more of it (and not just in the space industry) until people start dying
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 20:39:10 UTC No. 16310199
>>16310142
>330s sl
315s
they're the size they are for a reason (other than they won't fit otherwise)
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 20:59:44 UTC No. 16310217
>>16310186
I'm so tuned in to digital phrenology that I knew what they would say before I even read it
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 21:03:17 UTC No. 16310220
>>16310173
ULA isn't buying Raptors because it's an incredibly dumb idea. Rocket engines can be swapped out in the same way the foundation of a house can be swapped out. Dropping the BE4 would be going back to the drawing board and completely reworking the rocket from scratch. That would take most of a decade and they've got important government payloads that needed to be in orbit yesterday. They'd have no vehicle and no income until at least 2030, need to spend billions designing a "Vulcan 2," and would have zero chance of getting a government launch contract if they ever managed to complete it.
And that's not even starting on the whole "Air Force will force them to sell" thing. The only real information I've ever seen about it if people snowballing rumors and implications back and forth, and even if it is as stated that sounds like the sort of thing that might be outright unenforceable without a major court case to go over the particulars.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 21:04:57 UTC No. 16310221
>>16310082
The whole world is suffering due to competency crisis. Knowledge is not being passed on to future generations because of companies cutting costs and refusing to train to people. Also inept governments having terrible education system doesn't help too.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 21:13:34 UTC No. 16310227
>>16310138
her mouth open for my dick
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 21:16:14 UTC No. 16310228
>>16309509
>pee and semen retentionists will rule the stars
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 21:17:24 UTC No. 16310229
>>16310220
I thought the design (for the booster) was pretty much finalized back when they were still trying to pick between BE-4 and AR1. Sounds pretty “plug-n-play” to me?
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 21:20:03 UTC No. 16310231
>>16310220
It's a decision between thrust structure designs and whether or not they want to use helium or autogenous repress along with fill ratios and tank dome locations on the main aerostructure. With Raptor 3, they don't even have to change the load specs of the thrust structure.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 21:20:42 UTC No. 16310232
>>16310158
you have no idea how that works, you’re just speculating straight out of your ass
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 21:23:42 UTC No. 16310235
>>16310168
They got air force money for r&d into a methalox upper stage for Falcon. Where is it stipulated they must provide for other vendors, should they require?
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 21:24:38 UTC No. 16310237
>>16309907
all the complex shit will be done on earth and maybe a industrialized moon. Rest of space will be the same as colonial states were to a colonial heartland: turd world to import cheap raws from and then sell expensive final products
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 21:26:37 UTC No. 16310240
>>16310229
It's not and it wasn't. Development for Vulcan started sometime early in 2014, and the decision to use the BE4 was made in September. BE4 and AR1 also use completely different fuel types, so that'd make it pretty hard for a design to be "finalized." Picking propulsion is the first thing you do when designing a rocket. Like I said, it's like the foundation you build the house on top of. What engine you pick has a huge number of downstream effects for the rest of the design.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 21:35:20 UTC No. 16310254
>>16310094
https://blogs.nasa.gov/commercialre
>Shortly after launch, the spacecraft missed its first burn slated for 11:44 a.m. due to a late entry to burn sequencing. Known as the targeted altitude burn, or TB1, it was rescheduled for 12:34 p.m., but aborted the maneuver shortly after the engine ignited due to a slightly low initial pressure state. There is no indication the engine itself has any problem at this time.
>Cygnus is at a safe altitude, and Northrop Grumman engineers are working a new burn and trajectory plan. The team aims to achieve the spacecraft’s original capture time on station, which is currently slated for 3:10 a.m. on Tuesday, Aug. 6.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 21:38:56 UTC No. 16310259
>>16310237
The economics of that do not work out at all. Not even close. Shipping raw materials by rocket when you could just dig a deeper hole? Get real
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 21:40:32 UTC No. 16310261
>>16310259
The ratio of earth moved to material extracted can become unfavorable if you run out of rich concentrations to exploit. This isn't going to be a problem for anything like iron or aluminum, but the more exotic stuff is highly unfavorable for acquiring on Earth, especially the stuff that alloys with iron like platinum groups.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 21:52:40 UTC No. 16310272
>>16310254
how come oldspace can't do anything right?
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 22:01:30 UTC No. 16310283
>>16310059
>*check notes*
Hate this midwit shit so bad bros
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 22:04:47 UTC No. 16310285
>>16310089
>mid-air capture
Absolute lunacy
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 22:06:27 UTC No. 16310289
>>16310261
The Earth's crust has a whole lot of metal in it. I don't think an interplanetary raw materials supply chain stands a chance against digging a deeper hole.
>>16310288
This is the real reason for the extended stay
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 22:12:01 UTC No. 16310293
>>16310289
And anything with lower gravity than Earth and doesn't have a hyper-overabundance of silicates like the two crust's worth that went into the moon has higher concentrations of metals that are much easier to reach.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 22:15:06 UTC No. 16310295
Finding a platinum rich asteroid and slamming it somewhere in australia still makes perfect sense to me
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 22:19:07 UTC No. 16310296
>>16310288
I want to see scissoring, enough of this softcore stuff
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 22:44:10 UTC No. 16310310
>>16310295
Melbourne
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 22:46:38 UTC No. 16310312
>>16310272
No feedback loops punishing them when things go bad and a deep allegiance to ESG.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 22:48:16 UTC No. 16310314
>>16310237
>Rest of space will be the same as colonial states were to a colonial heartland: turd world to import cheap raws from and then sell expensive final products
In the modern age, we call that Canada.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 22:49:22 UTC No. 16310315
>>16310289
>The Earth's crust has a whole lot of metal in it
And? There is absolutely a point where the size of the hole you need to dig (really fucking expensive by the way, you are trivialising it) becomes economically non viable compared to extraction from a super rich source elsewhere, even if transport and up front costs are more expensive. Discoveries for platinum metal group mines are consistently down year on year for decades now and ore quality of discoveries is also getting worse. Turns out that several thousand years of digging for shinies has exhausted the majority of good mines, who would have thought???
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 22:51:30 UTC No. 16310316
>>16310221
You forgot to mention one of the reasons for the competency crisis.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 22:52:27 UTC No. 16310318
>>16310135
Show me the date for the first SMART equipped launch and recovery.
Show me the NEXT Vulcan launch at all!
>Sorry, was too busy watching the 9999th Falcon launch and recovery.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 22:52:38 UTC No. 16310319
>>16310295
Sydney to be precise
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 22:54:25 UTC No. 16310321
>>16310254
>>16310272
any scenarios where people could shift the blame to spacex for this?
bad faring jettison? faulty integration?
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 22:57:33 UTC No. 16310324
>>16310315
Mining costs in space would be hundreds of times more expensive than on Earth, and transport is 100x the cost even with best case scenario Starship. It would need to get like 10,000x more expensive to mine platinum metals on Earth before you start looking elsewhere.
>>16310295
How heavy is it? How are you going to move it? It's not that easy
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 22:57:47 UTC No. 16310326
>>16310321
Journalists being intentionally stupid to make writing clickbate easier.
>"SpaceX launch thing but thing break!"
All they need is a bit of tabloid magic that'll tickle the readership's EDS
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 23:01:00 UTC No. 16310327
>>16310318
I can't do either of those things, and they don't really change what I said. ULA could have it a year ago and they'd still be in an noncompetitive position, and having it another year from now merely makes it worse. As I said, they're trying to have their cake and eat it too.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 23:05:26 UTC No. 16310332
>>16310324
>Mining costs in space would be hundreds of times more expensive than on Earth
>Source: my ass
Moving bajillions of tonnes of earth and processing it is the majority of cost of mining, if we are talking about extracting relatively pure metals without needing to shift all that brown bullshit, that cost goes down tremendously. Also 0g helps a lot since you aren't fighting gravity every seconds of your machinery operating.
>transport is 100x the cost even with best case scenario Starship.
Actually the best case scenario is a mass driver, operating cost: $0
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 23:08:15 UTC No. 16310333
>>16310324
Strap ion thrusters to it and let it take a nice long trip to the outback
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 23:12:40 UTC No. 16310335
>>16310333
might want to think about slowing it down first. a big one could make quite a mess of things
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 23:13:09 UTC No. 16310336
>>16310333
Order of operations as I see it. One sat to find candidates. One sat for close up penetrating radar scan. One sat to install explosives to get rid of the most useless parts. Or maybe drop little digger bots. Then one sat tp strap boosters on and guide it to a landing somewhere isolated. 100xing the yearly supply of say titanium would mean it could get used in a huge new market of products so I think the usual argument against choosing to target rare minerals is dumb
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 23:15:15 UTC No. 16310337
>>16310335
Alternative idea. Land it hard on the darkside of the moon
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 23:17:40 UTC No. 16310338
>>16310288
>leglocking
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 23:29:15 UTC No. 16310346
>>16310332
>mass driver
And you'll do what to actually catch it once it arrives?
>0g mining is cheaper
Tell me what you honestly think the cost of mining and shipping from asteroids to Earth would be. Don't even amortize the initial setup, just assume the infrastructure is there. What do you honestly think your cost/oz of platinum would be.
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 23:30:26 UTC No. 16310347
>>16310337
It's now just as expensive to mine and ship but with different dV
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 23:33:28 UTC No. 16310351
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 23:34:18 UTC No. 16310353
>>16310316
disgusting
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 23:43:03 UTC No. 16310358
>>16310022
black
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 23:48:52 UTC No. 16310360
>>16309987
I can't believe we got brazilled by fucking /u/. Lost to yuri physics...
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Aug 2024 23:50:03 UTC No. 16310362
https://x.com/mcrs987/status/181996
>So, Archimedes might have exploded.
>Quoted post was the last update on the Archimedes engine testing program. In the below post, Peter says about a week to full run. Funny thing is, six days later, a fire was detected at their test stand. No other news has come out since.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 00:08:15 UTC No. 16310372
Good post anon
Youtube readers on suicide watch
>>16308282
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytm
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 00:09:20 UTC No. 16310373
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 00:10:25 UTC No. 16310374
>>16310347
Have a truck/crawler pick up high metal % chunks. Put it on a hyperloop to a moonbase. Shoot the payload at australia
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 00:12:38 UTC No. 16310377
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 00:12:59 UTC No. 16310379
>>16310372
The guy didn't need to take fifty minutes to prove that Buran haters are just as annoying as Buran dickriders. This is just a youtuber ranting about how he's annoyed by other youtubers.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 00:14:29 UTC No. 16310381
>>16310360
/u/ were an incredibly strong team and we were just unlucky with Wernher rolling purple for conditions, our midfield just couldn't hold up. I'm sorry things fell apart they way they did >>16310071
That being said it could have been far, far, worse. Finishing top 8 is /sci/'s best performance on PES16. Spring 2016 and Winter 2019 were miserable failures, we actually made it to knockouts this time and have a berth directly to winter without having to fight out of autumn for once. Cya in January/February.
>>16310372
Cute!
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 00:15:59 UTC No. 16310382
>>16310374
Are you fucking with me
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 00:21:42 UTC No. 16310389
>>16310069
exciting
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 00:22:57 UTC No. 16310392
>>16310381
What can we do differently?
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 00:27:41 UTC No. 16310396
>>16310382
I'm a problem solver
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 00:28:09 UTC No. 16310397
>>16309919
Aliens are interdicting the planet, trying to interfere with all spacecraft currently operating. That or a shady global conspiracy has inbeded agents that have undermined space companies and now that that is not working they are actively sabotaging the rockets or designs.
Or this is multiple coincidences.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 00:29:51 UTC No. 16310399
>>16310392
Winter will be on a different version of PES, so I'll have to come up with different tactics.
But if you want to help out in any capacity, get in contact https://implyingrigged.info/wiki//s
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 01:18:13 UTC No. 16310438
>>16310399
You dont want me, i'm trash. I nominate this anon >>16310396
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 01:19:59 UTC No. 16310442
>>16310069
Praying to the sun, concentrating on the southeastern limb.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 01:25:50 UTC No. 16310449
>>16310374
But there's been a bunch of impacts there already, why would you need to make a new one
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 01:26:40 UTC No. 16310451
>>16310438
You don't have to live manage, there are other things that you can do to contribute if you wish.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 01:43:11 UTC No. 16310462
>>16310288
/u/ lost btw
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 01:58:12 UTC No. 16310468
>>16310462
>/u/ lost btw
if this is losing, i dont want to win
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 02:00:57 UTC No. 16310471
just got out of prison, did the cygnus end up relighting?
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 02:03:12 UTC No. 16310474
>>16310468
>>16310296
There's some degree of /sci/ /u/ overlap, the metall/u/rgy threads over there come to mind.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 02:22:54 UTC No. 16310484
>>16310237
We should carve megastatues of Jesus on the moon and mars
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 02:26:00 UTC No. 16310487
>>16310484
Imagine the height and span possible in a cathedral on the moon
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 02:28:36 UTC No. 16310490
>>16310487
Would be insane if you had the spare time to do it. The lower gravity would offer some very unique (and huge) architecture options
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 02:30:07 UTC No. 16310491
>>16310484
getting the reverse image of the big art deco Moon Jesus statue “holding up” the Earth on the horizon
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 02:35:22 UTC No. 16310492
>>16310491
Kino
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 03:09:59 UTC No. 16310504
>>16310484
Sounds, great. I'll drop some rocks on them.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 03:16:30 UTC No. 16310506
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 03:18:14 UTC No. 16310508
>>16310487
Imagine what kind of cathedrals our ancestors could build with the technology we have today.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 03:36:56 UTC No. 16310526
>>16310321
why not just use outright lying, thats what everyone else does?
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 03:46:15 UTC No. 16310536
>>16310526
If anything the MSM will find a way to link it to Starliner’s problem because “boeing bad” actually sells like hotcakes kek
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 03:49:51 UTC No. 16310541
>>16310536
Waiting for that "Falcon 9 is too reliable" and therefore "spaceflight is boring" article.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 04:42:39 UTC No. 16310577
>>16310067
I hate BO for their shitty plumbing. It's not jokes.
They had an 18-month head start on Spacex and have utterly failed the original vision. Not a gram into orbit. They skipped the energetic startup company tech-development surge and jumped directly to late-stage oldspace waste.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 04:50:56 UTC No. 16310580
>>16310577
That's what happens when your sugar daddy is hands off and doesn't have weapons grade autism. BO takes Jeff's money and tells him to come back once a year to check on things and the bring more cash. Elon gets all up in SpaceX's operations and when he's not around, he has Gwen there holding the whip.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 05:12:00 UTC No. 16310587
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/08/04/elo
it's over
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 05:18:02 UTC No. 16310591
>>16310587
not spaceflight
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 05:19:47 UTC No. 16310593
Israeli Startups Compete to Join NASA's Artemis Program for Moon and Mars Exploration and Settlement. I wonder if they'll win the contracts?
https://www.jnf.org/menu-3/news-med
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 05:27:59 UTC No. 16310598
>>16310587
> legal experts could not point to any state laws that may have been broken by the PAC
>It’s unclear if any laws in Michigan have been broken by the America PAC.
Probable cause be damned, just investigate until you find something?
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 05:40:07 UTC No. 16310607
>>16310587
Elon Musk should have full immunity from law
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 05:46:31 UTC No. 16310613
>>16310593
Fuck No.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 06:06:39 UTC No. 16310620
Picture this, hundreds of meters deep, with dwellings and other structures dug into the walls. Picture networks of these of arbitrary size, with the thin upper opening sealed so the entire system can be pressurized.
Cities on Mars can be more beautiful and enjoyable to live in than any on Earth, while negating basically all radiation concerns.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 06:41:00 UTC No. 16310637
did I miss another f9?
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 06:44:30 UTC No. 16310641
>>16310637
Cygnus-21 was the most recent launch. You can watch a replay of NASA's 4K webcast on youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhF
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 06:55:36 UTC No. 16310646
So when is Elon going to Mars?
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 06:57:27 UTC No. 16310649
>>16310646
When the work is complete and he can die there in peace
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 07:46:46 UTC No. 16310684
>>16310490
building a massive steel monument is a trope in one scifi story about colonizing mars
it acts as a catalyst to increase industrial output massively and then transforms the society itself from just living in small pods to actual cities
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 07:53:43 UTC No. 16310689
>>16310646
most likely early 2040s
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 07:53:48 UTC No. 16310690
>>16310598
that is what they do constantly
lawfare against political opponents and this was done even before Musk was actually actively political
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 07:54:19 UTC No. 16310691
>>16310617
lmao when they get engine cost down to the point that reusability is no longer financially beneficial and all the technology they developed becomes worthless
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 07:56:11 UTC No. 16310693
>>16310689
He'll be dead by then
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 08:03:44 UTC No. 16310697
>>16310693
maybe unhealthy, but he should survive into his 70s. people at that age should still be able to make the journey.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 10:50:48 UTC No. 16310785
>>16310288
spacecraft yaoi when
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 10:56:10 UTC No. 16310790
>>16310765
At least we have Jared Isaacman and other chads hand selected by SpaceX. NASA and other governments aren't sending their best, they are sending risk-adverse pussies, including unqualified women, foreigners, and dumb diversity hires, because I guess that "inspires people" and and is good political PR bullshit for the normies who barely tolerate that we have a space program at all.
Private missions will be the only truly groundbreaking achievements, this US government "1 in 270" probability of crew loss standard is way too strict if we want to actually DO anything.
A real chad team is willing to take a hell of a lot more risk and become the heroes we fucking need. People will die, and others will step up to replace them, without big delays. I say a 1-in-10 risk of death is a go for launch, because there ARE chads who WILL sign up.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 10:59:31 UTC No. 16310794
>>16310790
>other governments are sending foreigners
How dare they?!
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 11:14:25 UTC No. 16310802
>>16310794
I'm fine with foreigners, as long as they are elite talent, and thrill seeking absolute Chads, risking death with dignity to do something amazing.
Maybe we need another country to send these candidates, since American astronauts are frankly pathetic in their constant fear, needing extreme redundancy, contingencies, performance-killing abort systems, and many other ills.
Besides Chad itself (disqualified), what countries still harbor these people?
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 12:10:12 UTC No. 16310833
>>16310802
chad's always sniffing niggeria's diarrhea.
this can't be a coincidence, i mean the shape and location of these countries must've been some sort of elaborate prank by the french and british empire.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 12:14:54 UTC No. 16310837
Nothing ever happens.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 12:18:13 UTC No. 16310840
>>>>/g/101707425
Even normies talking about Raptor 3
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 12:26:01 UTC No. 16310844
>>16310598
Yep. Lawfare. Political powers getting triggered by Musk
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 12:32:06 UTC No. 16310846
>>16310587
This angers me, as it reduces our chances of being a spaceport one day.
We need an industry, dammit.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 12:39:22 UTC No. 16310852
>>16310506
>ai generated image of Martian surface has Mars in the sky
Every time
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 12:51:44 UTC No. 16310860
>>16310852
Its the moon of Mars, created by combining Phobos & Deimos and other material from around the solar system to create an actual proper rounded moon.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 13:09:29 UTC No. 16310864
>>16309937
>why don't they just do that without going to space
Why hasn't anyone though. It's not like billionaires haven't spent tons of money on less useful personal projects before. And developing a system with such efficiency in recycling would certainly be useful.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 13:13:41 UTC No. 16310867
>>16310790
Jared is basically me if I had billions. I’d be personally paying for half of Starships r&d and I’d offer myself for crazy manned missions to help advance spaceflight.
21st century explorers. Leif Erikson, Magellan, Columbus, Cabeza de Vaca, Ponce de León… there’s a reason their names are known!
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 13:26:47 UTC No. 16310878
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 13:42:10 UTC No. 16310883
>>16309710
You can get all of your news directly from primary sources but you choose to have other people's opinions injected into you instead. You are not even human.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 13:44:01 UTC No. 16310884
>>16309744
Talk about gradatim!
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 13:45:02 UTC No. 16310885
>>16309747
Boring company crossover arc
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 13:46:50 UTC No. 16310886
>>16309758
Just put a launch tower on Mars
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 13:49:18 UTC No. 16310888
>>16309794
>lakes of Methane aka liquefied cow farts.
I don't think liquifying cow farts is consistent with currently accepted theories of their formation
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 13:49:35 UTC No. 16310889
>>16310885
ooooh, are we going to get rockets with drill nosecones, just like my classic monster movies?!
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 13:58:20 UTC No. 16310893
>>16309872
lel, they're aiming to eventually do tens of thousands of launches in the space of a few months to create a Martian fleet of more than 1,000 starships
which is to say that as impressive as 100 starships per year is, they are planning to do 5 or 10 times that much in a day
my question then is where is the tower factory?
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 14:08:14 UTC No. 16310901
>>16310885
>>16310889
it all makes sense now: Elon is aiming to realize the Gotengo flying drill submarine!
https://godzilla.fandom.com/wiki/At
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 14:12:47 UTC No. 16310907
>>16309937
>whine that not everyone in the thread has read a book four minutes after it was posted
intelligent and reasonable post, extremely heterosexual
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 14:13:28 UTC No. 16310909
>>16309747
effigy of CSS's prolapsed anus
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 14:17:59 UTC No. 16310912
>>16310135
All that "easy" shit is the only part that ULA does... It's still essentially zero reuse for them.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 14:24:43 UTC No. 16310918
>>16310607
The law should be whatever Elon says it is
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 14:29:40 UTC No. 16310919
>>16310867
I would pay to send uncontacted tribes to Martian biodomes first so that there would be someone to slaughter and steal Mars from
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 14:34:53 UTC No. 16310924
>>16310864
Cost. Take the aluminum industry for example. The major American company was founded by the guy that invented the process 150 years ago. There are some promising advances that might mean aluminum electrolysis with 0 consumables and no CO2. However, the materials cost is higher, the electricity cost is higher, and every established factory would need to be renovated. Why would they spend money developing a way to spend money to spend more money? Obviously they wouldn't, so they don't. In space there are different constraints that would incentivize that development.
>>16310907
The guy dismissed the book in a way that said he didn't know what it was even about. It's an important read for engineering minded people who don't understand why designing systems like what he was describing is a bad idea. I suggested reading it for a reason, and he dismissed its relevance despite it being relevant. I'm not going to argue the finer points of a book someone didn't even look up a summary of. What else should I have said
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 14:56:28 UTC No. 16310939
>>16310919
Imagine what a confusing experience that'd be for the new natives.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 15:30:11 UTC No. 16310965
>see reddit thread about stranded boing astronauts
>check it out
>everyone is saying we should be calling up the russians or chinese for help, literally anyone except spacex because EDS
we live amongst demons
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 15:39:01 UTC No. 16310973
>>16310965
I used to go visit reddit after big events to see what the normie take was but it isn't useful for that anymore. The front page subs moderation teams were purchased and replaced by left leaning or state propaganda outlets. There has been an explosive increase in bot posts as well. Front page reddit is now state doctrine disguised as thousands of people discussing and voting on posts. Obviously that system would not view SpaceX favorably. People on 4chan joke but it's worth never going to reddit ever
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 15:47:41 UTC No. 16310979
>>16310973
It’s not even useful as a historic q&a reference either (arguably its one and only good feature, if you had to give it one) because everyone and their mother is jacked into these privacy scripts that erases their comments after a few weeks. It’s so fucking shitty and the worst part is that it effectively monopolized forums all across the internet and shut them down.
Going online was fun in the early 2000s. Now it sucks!
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 15:58:08 UTC No. 16310989
>>16310979
I miss old forum culture. You could find one for every topic imaginable that had very enthusiastic people share incredible information that you usually couldn't find anywhere else. Now most of the places that are still even online are ghost towns with maybe a handful of old members keeping a couple comfort threads alive. Everyone else left to scroll through cancer clickbait. sad
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 16:00:36 UTC No. 16310992
https://x.com/SciGuySpace/status/18
NASA delaying Crew 9 possibly because of Starliner's continued issues
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 16:01:51 UTC No. 16310993
>>16310992
I can think of a solution for both
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 16:04:27 UTC No. 16310997
insane to me that they launched this thing with the massive scar on it. even if they were sure it didn't impact safety or performance (dubious, if they weren't even sure the thrusters worked) it's a terrible look for boing
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 16:12:15 UTC No. 16311005
>>16310989
NSF forum is still very active
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 16:13:25 UTC No. 16311006
>>16310992
wow they'd rather punish spacex than save the astronauts
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 16:17:00 UTC No. 16311009
>>16310992
Can we assume they are keeping dragon free in case they need it to bring those 2 from ISS?
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 16:18:14 UTC No. 16311011
>>16311009
Its likely they dont know if they can undock safely lol
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 16:20:17 UTC No. 16311015
>>16310918
Elon is the Law
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 16:22:13 UTC No. 16311018
>>16310997
'tis but a flesh wound!
come here, i'll bite your ankles
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 16:31:05 UTC No. 16311024
>>16310997
I think it’s cool. It’s like a dirty F9 booster.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 16:31:45 UTC No. 16311025
>>16310992
Knew it. NASA is playing for time because White House do not want to give Musk a victory this close to election. Nothing will happen before November.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 16:35:59 UTC No. 16311029
>>16311024
boosters shouldn't be dirty either but this is worse
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 16:39:58 UTC No. 16311034
>>16311025
Are you the guy that posted that in this general a few days ago? I didn't believe you but I believe you now
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 16:54:17 UTC No. 16311058
>>16311034
The very same. It's actually the easiest option for NASA, and all the incentives align. ISS is well supplied to house Butch and Suni for another three if not six months. Boeing will have even more time to spent on their futile attempt to diagnosis the problem. White House can delay the inevitable until after election and avoid fresh public humiliation to Kamala. Nothing gets done and everyone is happy. And if the Republicans win NASA may as well extend it to January so it becomes Trump's problem.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 17:05:00 UTC No. 16311071
>>16310992
so they are going to wait on the ISS for like 3 more months? lmao
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 17:20:41 UTC No. 16311093
>Starliner issue
>Cygnus issue
>Russian issue
SpaceX is the hero we need but dont deserve
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 17:23:07 UTC No. 16311095
>The Crew 9 delay is relevant to the Starliner dilemma for a couple of reasons.
>One, it gives NASA more time to determine the flight-worthiness of Starliner.
>However, there is also another surprising reason for the delay—the need to update Starliner’s flight software.
>Three separate, well-placed sources have confirmed to Ars that the current flight software on board Starliner cannot perform an automated undocking from the space station and entry into Earth’s atmosphere.
Untested hardware
Untested software
No automatic capability to undock/re-enter Earth's atmosphere
Jesus christ.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 17:27:16 UTC No. 16311100
>>16311095
How is this possible? There have already been two unmanned flights
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 17:29:01 UTC No. 16311104
>>16311095
Is that the price of giving oldspace fixed price contracts? Why even try if they know they won't get more money
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 17:29:55 UTC No. 16311108
>>16311104
I think it's sunk cost. Investors want to see some return and they get a payout if they fly
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 17:32:29 UTC No. 16311110
>>16311095
>they literally didn't install the software needed to automatically undock before they launched
WHAT THE FUCK
every time i hear something new about this thing it continues to blow my fucking mind.
how was nasa EVER convinced that these guys were supposed to be the safe gradatim ferociter option?
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 17:32:48 UTC No. 16311111
>>16311095
>starliner cant be undocked
there's going to be a movie about this
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 17:37:42 UTC No. 16311116
>>16311095
>Starliner cannot perform an automated undocking from the space station
it's actually going to be up there until the station deorbits isn't it
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 17:38:31 UTC No. 16311117
>>16311095
take boeing out back and put er’ down ol yeller style
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 17:41:35 UTC No. 16311119
>>16311117
https://youtu.be/ks8vZirQr9M?si=b3x
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 17:49:00 UTC No. 16311129
>>16311095
What is weird they had a test for just this reason and after the test the software was removed. I would love to know the reasons why.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 17:50:39 UTC No. 16311130
>>16311129
Yeah it's not like software weighs anything.
Anyone wanna bet it's the same reason the shittle couldn't do a remote landing?
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 17:52:05 UTC No. 16311134
>>16311130
You mean politically or technically?
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 17:56:04 UTC No. 16311137
> There is also another surprising reason for the delay—the need to update Starliner’s flight software. Three separate, well-placed sources have confirmed to Ars that the current flight software on board Starliner cannot perform an automated undocking from the space station and entry into Earth’s atmosphere.
> At first blush, this seems absurd. After all, Boeing’s Orbital Flight Test 2 mission in May 2022 was a fully automated test of the Starliner vehicle. During this mission, the spacecraft flew up to the space station without crew on board and then returned to Earth six days later. Although the 2022 flight test was completed by a different Starliner vehicle, it clearly demonstrated the ability of the program's flight software to autonomously dock and return to Earth. Boeing did not respond to a media query about why this capability was removed for the crew flight test.
> It is not clear what change Boeing officials made to the vehicle or its software in the two years prior to the launch of Wilmore and Williams. It is possible that the crew has to manually press an undock button in the spacecraft, or the purely autonomous software was removed from coding on board Starliner to simplify its software package. Regardless, sources described the process to update the software on Starliner as "non-trivial" and "significant," and that it could take up to four weeks. This is what is driving the delay to launch Crew 9 later next month.
Well, Boeing is great with software.....
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 17:56:05 UTC No. 16311138
>>16311134
Theres no technical reason the shittle couldn't have flown unmanned.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 18:06:58 UTC No. 16311147
>>16311138
You're telling me you think Boeing sent up a craft that either comes down with humans or stays there forever? And they did that despite there being a better US option? What the hell are they planning?
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 18:09:42 UTC No. 16311152
>>16311138
> theres no technical reason the shittle couldn't have flown unmanned.
Practically, there was. AIR to enable limited unmanned operation in certain flight regimes -- reentry I think -- they would have to drape a custom wiring harness around the flight deck like Christmas tree lights.
For true autonomous operation, massive hardware and software changes would have been needed. Pic related.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 18:13:50 UTC No. 16311155
>>16311100
it wasn't part of the flight plan so they didn't put it in
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 18:15:03 UTC No. 16311158
>>16311155
Why would they remove software? It doesn't weigh anything?
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 18:16:01 UTC No. 16311159
>>16310992
We're reaching levels of "totally not stuck" nobody could ever foresee.
Also fix your fucking tapestry weaving website, Hiroshimoot.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 18:17:41 UTC No. 16311163
>>16311158
To reduce complexity/integrated testing time. All bloats weigh something
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 18:17:42 UTC No. 16311164
>>16311152
It was deliberately designed from the outset to not fly without crew.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 18:22:18 UTC No. 16311169
>>16311164
>It was deliberately designed from the outset to not fly without crew.
No. It wasn't. Stop making things up.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 18:23:57 UTC No. 16311174
>>16311167
The lady doth protest too much, methinks
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 18:26:12 UTC No. 16311177
>>16310901
he wouldn't be the first to try https://www.aerospaceprojectsreview
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 18:29:06 UTC No. 16311180
Step up: Boeing flew astronauts with new v 0.9 software that had never been used in flight before.
The 1960s NASA Space Chimps were treated with more care.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 18:32:52 UTC No. 16311183
>>16311180
all they had to do was bump that to 1.0 and it would worked flawlessly
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 18:33:08 UTC No. 16311184
are we getting to the point where jail time for starliner management needs to be considered?
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 18:36:16 UTC No. 16311190
>>16311167
>spacex is lying
What a cool-headed take
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 18:36:20 UTC No. 16311192
>>16311169
Hmmm... might have misread you. Those double negatives.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 18:38:27 UTC No. 16311197
>>16311137
>manually press an undock button
if that's all, couldnt they rig up a little remote controlled button press mechanism? or are they not allowed because it wouldn't be certified?
either way, hilarious
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 18:42:39 UTC No. 16311201
>>16311197
Your modern car can do something like that, because extra ports are designed in to give access to the electronics. Spacecraft not so much. Boeing spacecraft apparently not at all.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 18:50:11 UTC No. 16311209
>>16311179
>stranded astronauts
>spaceship stuck to the station
>cargo mission failed
>world's most hated man is their only hope
there better be a movie about this
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 18:50:26 UTC No. 16311210
>>16311201
yeah, seems like they didn't think that was necessary. but i thought more about them diy one on the ISS. if its a mechanical button, it just needs a little motor that pushes a pin, a little battery, a controller and a frame to hold it. wouldn't alter anything in the capsule systems.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 18:54:43 UTC No. 16311211
>>16311184
They killed like 600 people with no consequences so nothing will happen for this either
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 18:57:49 UTC No. 16311215
>>16311197
>>16311137
my first thought was that maybe they just didn't have the software for undocking maneuvers with limited thruster availability, but berger's language seems pretty unambiguous that it's literally the physical separation of starliner from the ISS
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 19:08:21 UTC No. 16311223
>>16311201
Tesla cars can be opened and driven with smartphone only. So can the dragon. But for other car companies, thats impossible. And apparently for Boeing, its impossible as well
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 19:13:49 UTC No. 16311227
>>16311137
How long have NASA know of this software defect and helped Boeing to hide it from the public?
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 19:16:35 UTC No. 16311230
>>16311223
A belief that I have found a surprising number of people seem to hold is that technology improves intrinsically. that's just what it does.
It doesn't cross their minds that things can stagnate or even regress. elon musk became the world's richest man by innovating in stagnant industries. unfortunately from conversations I've had this just confirms their beliefs. if elon hadn't done it someone else would have come around. nevermind that 20 years on and everyone else struggles, or more likely hasn't bothered to try to match elon's companies.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 19:31:17 UTC No. 16311240
So I ended up watching the Wild wild space documentary
Honestly, it was pretty good, it does have a bit of a "frog in the well" feel to it, especially in the starting part, but I liked it
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 19:48:08 UTC No. 16311245
>>16311240
Did Astra's CEO really eat lead paint on camera?
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 19:48:23 UTC No. 16311246
>>16311095
You could pitch a Pentagon Wars -style movie about shartliner and you wouldn't need to embellish anything.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 19:56:37 UTC No. 16311251
>>16310992
"You're in the space industry? That's so cool! What do you work on?"
"Star-"
"No way, you work on Starship?! Have you met Elon, haha? Are you going to move to Mars?"
"-li-"
"So cool! I have Starlink at home. I love it. I'm going to get one of the mobile units as soon as it's available."
"-ner"
"Huh?"
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 19:58:12 UTC No. 16311253
>>16311252
you think that guy on nsf will apologize for going against berger about starliner?
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 20:03:43 UTC No. 16311260
>>16311253
I don't really follow what they say other than watch the starbase updates (unvoiced and voiced)
the streams are like 80% shilling of t-shirts, gets boring fast
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 20:10:33 UTC No. 16311264
>>16311251
Nice stupid fanfic you made up in your ass retard
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 20:16:59 UTC No. 16311269
boeing engineers on suicide watch
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 20:18:03 UTC No. 16311270
>Starbarnacle
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 20:24:02 UTC No. 16311276
>>16311264
Likewise
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 20:27:13 UTC No. 16311278
>>16311269
there's nothing to be afraid of
>In Hinduism, suicide is spiritually unacceptable. Generally, taking your own life is considered a violation of the code of ahimsa (non-violence) and therefore equally sinful as murdering another. Some scriptures state that to die by suicide (and any type of violent death) results in becoming a ghost, wandering earth until the time one would have otherwise died, had one not died by suicide.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 20:29:57 UTC No. 16311281
How did Boeing go from this to >>16311137 this
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 20:32:01 UTC No. 16311287
>>16311227
An Ars' commentator noted how odd that Starliner had autonomous return capability on the fist and second flights, but apparently doesn't now. They speculate that Boeing found a critical failure in that section of code, and decided to comment it out for this third manned flight.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 20:32:12 UTC No. 16311288
>>16311281
they got acquired by mcdouglas and the managment became MBAs instead of engineers
they even moved the HQ away from engineers/the factories on purpose
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 20:35:09 UTC No. 16311294
>>16311283
Yeah. Ars had that move out already:
> While the space agency has not said anything publicly, sources say NASA should announce the decision this week. Officials are contemplating moving the Crew-9 mission from its current date of August 18 to September 24, a significant slip.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 20:35:57 UTC No. 16311295
>>16311287
Well it’s good to know that boeing got rid of that safety concern.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 20:36:30 UTC No. 16311296
>>16311294
yes, but this is basically an independent confirmation
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 20:46:37 UTC No. 16311309
Boeing is the affirmative action option thats suffering from competency crisis. None of their tests have gone right since the inception of this program. There have been varying failures on all their tests and even now on the current "certification" test.
This is beyond pathetic.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 20:47:49 UTC No. 16311310
>>16311304
Sheetz is being charitable. If the same question is asked three times at two separate occasions, "we will get back to you later" isn't an acceptable answer.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 20:48:01 UTC No. 16311311
>>16311309
This is the true power of diversity, chud
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 20:52:51 UTC No. 16311318
>>16311281
Outsourcing.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 20:55:36 UTC No. 16311319
>>16311253
do you remember what they said specifically?
and when?
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 21:00:58 UTC No. 16311328
>>16311291
Cygnus doomers BTFO
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 21:02:26 UTC No. 16311330
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 21:02:41 UTC No. 16311331
>>16311291
Cygniggers, we are so BACK
>>16311304
Journos malding! We are taking this industry back
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 21:04:03 UTC No. 16311335
>>16311304
>>16311331
Those journos at the press conferences are always so uppity, you can tell NASA has been giving less and less of a shit about their questions, which they are seeking just to get a big headline for their stories
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 21:04:47 UTC No. 16311337
>>16309872
they're planning on doing thousands of starship launches a year for mars colonization eventually by the late 2030s/2040s. 100/year is nothing
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 21:16:35 UTC No. 16311350
>>16311335
I wish journos would more "How did you feel" gay emotional questions when things go obviously wrong. They only do that after positive events, but what if to a NASA official they said "How did you feel when the Starliner was spinning out of control" "What did you think then?"
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 21:19:32 UTC No. 16311354
>>16311245
Yes, he did it twice actually. The other time was in front of an investor, the investor laughed and told his friend next to him
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 21:21:01 UTC No. 16311355
>>16311291
as funny as it is when stuff fails I also kinda like being dominant in spaceflight, and we won't be that if we lose literally everyone who isn't spacex. good for NG for pulling through on this one
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 21:22:09 UTC No. 16311357
>>16311252
map from a proposal in feb 2022, which was changed in the recent proposal
uses more land and the towers are closer to each other
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 21:23:44 UTC No. 16311358
>>16311357
zoom in
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 21:24:46 UTC No. 16311359
>>16311358
the current proposal
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 21:32:22 UTC No. 16311370
>>16311281
Read a book, nigga.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 21:35:56 UTC No. 16311373
>>16311335
>never a straight answer
>"please stop asking us those questions"
If you listened to those conferences, you would know how little useful information you can find there. They can last from 30 to 60 minutes but if you remove bullshit, there's like one or two sentences of relevant stuff. Those people are trained to talk a lot without saying anything.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 21:38:34 UTC No. 16311375
>>16311373
Yeah I know, they're experts at this point of completely side-stepping the question or answering in passive aggressive ways, I've stopped watching them at this point, complete waste of time, twitter sums up the relevant parts anyways
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 21:41:29 UTC No. 16311381
>>16310840
that thread is awful, people there still think reuse is a scam meanwhile the entire industry is pivoting to it. they're all stuck in 2015
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 21:42:35 UTC No. 16311383
>>16310852
why does ai do this
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 21:48:49 UTC No. 16311392
>>16311071
If the crew Dragon doesn't go up, they won't be the only ones staying 3+ months longer than planned.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 21:49:53 UTC No. 16311394
>>16311383
All it knows is that for most of the pictures associated with the word Mars there's a big orange sphere in the sky so it always makes sure to include it
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 21:49:59 UTC No. 16311396
>>16311111
kino
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 21:52:55 UTC No. 16311399
I've just learned that Gateway is going to take a whole year to get from GTO to NRHO. This is ridiculous.
If they had a depot in orbit, they could just use a regular stage with a chemical engine, refill it and burn towards to Moon and get there in less than a month. Even regular Falcon 9 would do.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 21:53:07 UTC No. 16311400
>>16311392
Do we have any reason to believe Crew-8 isn't coming back before Crew-9 is launched?
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 21:59:02 UTC No. 16311407
>>16311108
Milestone based payments and Boing ain't interested in actually paying out of their pocket.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 21:59:16 UTC No. 16311408
They are going to be up there until after the election aren't they? LOL
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 22:00:31 UTC No. 16311410
>>16311399
>gateway is ridiculous
More news at 11
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 22:01:38 UTC No. 16311413
https://x.com/_thomashayden/status/
Raptor tested for boost back burn and landing burn
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 22:02:43 UTC No. 16311417
>>16311130
>>16311287
I bet it was to make it impossible for it to undock itself by accident.
You know, for when they try to turn it off and on again to do the needful sars.
o/` A three hour tour... a three hour tooooooour... o/`
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 22:03:10 UTC No. 16311419
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 22:04:32 UTC No. 16311420
>>16311419
Perhaps to simulate a hold for chopsticks to close?
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 22:05:08 UTC No. 16311421
>>16311420
Yes, those people aren't very bright.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 22:06:06 UTC No. 16311423
So if Crew 9 has to be delayed [because of Starliner], do they move Crew 9 to a different F9/dragon capsule and use the current one to instead do a 2-astronaut rescue mission?
Or does “crew 9” just get split in half (2 astronauts stay on earth, the other 2 go up) and that becomes the rescue mission?
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 22:15:13 UTC No. 16311426
>>16311423
From what I understand, NASA wouldn’t call it a “rescue mission” in the title. If they need to do it, they’ll just do Crew 9 but reduce it to two people.
What I don’t know is if it would be an up-and-down mission, or if they would want C9 experiments to continue pretty much as originally planned meaning butch and suni wait their asses on the station for a long time
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 22:22:04 UTC No. 16311435
>>16311426
>NASA wouldn’t call it a “rescue mission” in the title
They can call it the Special Orbital Operation
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 22:23:19 UTC No. 16311436
>>16311423
where tf would it even dock
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 22:27:07 UTC No. 16311441
>>16311417
SAAR SAAR PLEASE BE LISTENING
YOU MUST BE OF UPDATING THE SPACECRAFT FOR BEST FAST PERFORMANCE
PLEASE HOLD THE POWER BUTTON DOWN SAAR AND RETSTART THE ROCKET SHIP FOR THE AUTOMATING UPDATE SAAR
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 22:29:55 UTC No. 16311444
Imagine how nightmarish ISS operations are going to be if they can't get that piece of shit undocked safely and they lose a docking port permanently.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 22:40:07 UTC No. 16311458
>>16311444
Imagine how much that would fuck up Axiom's plans to get their own station segment started. Imagine how much that would fuck up NASA's plans to park the deorbit vehicle there.
This isn't a state of affairs that NASA is going to allow to go on for very long.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 22:44:17 UTC No. 16311461
>>16311458
>This isn't a state of affairs that NASA is going to allow to go on for very long.
Well it can't autonomously undock and return so, uh, lol? Send a nigga out with a blowtorch??? What a disaster.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 22:44:29 UTC No. 16311462
>>16311444
It's easy to undock Starliner, just grab it with the canadarm and push it away
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 22:46:01 UTC No. 16311464
>>16311451
not a fan of the american mechagodzilla design on the patch. kiryu comes with his chopsticks built-in.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 22:48:39 UTC No. 16311469
>>16311462
huh? rip it off with the canadarm? I'm not sure it has the force
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 22:49:29 UTC No. 16311472
>>16311469
I'm certain the onions arm can't defeat steel clamps anon
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 22:50:30 UTC No. 16311473
>>16311462
Can Starliner be grabbed with the Canadarm to begin with? I read on NSF forum that Starliner doesn't have the grapple for Canadarm to hold onto.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 22:55:23 UTC No. 16311481
https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/els/repo
Boeing applied to extend to their FCC permit for Starliner to March 2025.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 23:03:23 UTC No. 16311490
>>16311473
Yeah it needs a special snowflake grapple point and you just know boing didn't include one
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 23:03:48 UTC No. 16311491
>>16311462
have fun ripping the whole docking port off and destroying the station because starliner won't let go.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 23:11:32 UTC No. 16311501
how long would it take for SpaceX to write the software to undock autonomously?
less than a week? two days?
lol
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 23:12:48 UTC No. 16311504
>>16311495
FAA license to land is the long pole here, still like 6-8 weeks away
a two week delay doesnt matter
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 23:15:34 UTC No. 16311507
Sacrifice the ugly brown woman
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 23:18:33 UTC No. 16311510
>>16311444
NASA and boeing both seem in agreement that the thrusters work. They’re just worried about long-duration firing of the thrusters. So getting it off the station wouldn’t be a problem with a software update. Or, worst case scenario, they
a) manually undock it then rendezvous/dock Starliner-Dragon away from the station and come back to the station on Dragon (SX would have to jerry rig a switch port adapter, already in dev for Starship, and put it in the Dragon trunk)
or b) manually undock it and just find a place to manually and permanently dock it to the Station. It would serve the rest of its life as a permanent storage closet on ISS. This would also require a special docking adapter preferably w/ a canadarm hard point, and you’d obviously want to put it somewhere that wouldn’t be stealing from progress, soyuz, dragon. I believe there’s a PMA (shuttle adaptor) somewhere that isn’t really used
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 23:19:37 UTC No. 16311511
>>16311501
A day kek
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 23:27:34 UTC No. 16311519
>>16311501
That's probably already in the control software
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 23:31:21 UTC No. 16311524
>>16311510
>getting it off the station wouldn’t be a problem
Read Berger's article. That is exactly the problem.
>At issue is the performance of the small reaction control system thrusters in proximity to the space station. If the right combination of them fail before Starliner has moved sufficiently far from the station, Starliner could become uncontrollable and collide with the space station.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 23:31:53 UTC No. 16311525
>>16311501
I vaguely remember spacex doing a dragon update within a day. Correct me if Im wrong here.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 23:31:56 UTC No. 16311526
>>16311519
It is
https://x.com/SpaceAbhi/status/1820
>Autonomous Undocking background
>The Dragon and Starliner had to meet 1000s of requirements to be allowed to carry crew. The two main requirements documents were Space Station Program 50808 and Commercial Crew Program-REQ-1130. The latter is publicly available:
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations
>Here is requirement 3.2.6.3 from 1130. CCP wanted to make sure the vehicle was autonomous of the GROUND not autonomous of the crew. It is explicit in that it doesn't require uncrewed vehicles to be autonomous. But 1130 is only half the story. The ISS Program has its own set of requirements in 50808. That document has lots of prescriptive requirements language to ensure that the ISS is safe and remains fully functional (no dead hangers on). Assuming that @SciGuySpace's sources are correct and Starliner can't autonomously undock, it either a) doesn't meet a design requirement; b) NASA is missing a requirement; or c) some fault occurred post launch resulting in a). At one point I had 50808 memorized so I have a guess.
>SpaceX's Dragon met all of NASA's requirements and is also fully autonomous. There was nothing that prevented the contractor from adding their own requirements to serve their commercial interests. Caveat/Correction: When I say Dragon is fully autonomous I just meant that it can be commanded from the ground OR the crew on board and also has automated sequences. It is not fully autonomous without any human intervention.
>Starliner doesn't meet a design requirement
>and it could be stuck up there for months
It just keeps getting worse / better.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 23:38:14 UTC No. 16311532
https://x.com/eager_space/status/18
New Eager space.
SpaceX's stainless steel costs only $90K per starship
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 23:40:26 UTC No. 16311536
>>16311524
Oh shit that’s bad, thanks. Yeah I haven’t read the article yet haha
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 23:42:06 UTC No. 16311538
Airdropping a superheavy straight into Boeing HQ if this ends up also delay Polaris
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 23:44:40 UTC No. 16311544
>>16311532
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1tB
>Why Starship Loves Stainless Steel...
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 23:44:54 UTC No. 16311545
>>16311524
And berger isnt too deep into rocket orbital mechanics, he has some knowledge, so this analysis probably comes from him talking to oters
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Aug 2024 23:54:14 UTC No. 16311556
>>16311545
Starliner already reached zero redundancy once during docking. I'm sure the nightmare scenario of it actually losing control while undocking is hanging over the head of every NASA officials.
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 00:00:28 UTC No. 16311562
>>16311526
If Suni and Butch come back on a Dragon, Boeing is in rough shit. Do you think they will try to launch a Starliner again, even if successfully landing the one up there now?
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 00:04:38 UTC No. 16311566
>>16311562
I wonder if there is even enough launches left before deorbit for them to make their losses back
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 00:05:09 UTC No. 16311567
good night
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 00:06:09 UTC No. 16311568
>>16311562
I can't see them continuing the program if NASA don't certify Starliner after CFT. And I don't see how NASA could justify certifying it if Starliner returns uncrewed.
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 00:12:44 UTC No. 16311576
What does NASA fear more, losing 2 astronauts or the boeing hitman?
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 00:21:38 UTC No. 16311588
>>16311576
The difficulty of this question is the sole reason for Starliner's continued delay.
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 00:36:00 UTC No. 16311604
>>16311510
> manually undock it and just find a place to manually and permanently dock it to the Station
There are only two Dragon Starliner capable ports. Having a derelict Starliner taking up one, leaves only one port. Zero redundancy on a critical item. No dice.
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 00:46:10 UTC No. 16311612
>>16311576
SpaceX winning by doing nothing
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 00:51:12 UTC No. 16311618
Really, seriously, what's the issue with doing a spacewalk and giving the undocked Starliner a nice firm retrograde push?
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 00:53:17 UTC No. 16311619
>>16311618
You need someone inside it to undock.
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 00:54:36 UTC No. 16311620
>>16311618
It literally can't automatically undock, and enough thrusters are broken that it might be out of control once undocked
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 00:59:18 UTC No. 16311623
>>16311619
Time to draw straws, then.
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 01:03:27 UTC No. 16311624
>>16311619
press the undock button with a long stick
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 01:04:55 UTC No. 16311626
>>16311624
Is the ISS equipped with an aerospace-grade long stick? They should've put one on that cygnus they just launched.
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 01:09:31 UTC No. 16311630
>>16311626
they've awarded boeing a cost plus contract to develop a long stick. it will be going up on crew 9, hence the delay.
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 01:09:38 UTC No. 16311631
>>16311620
The problem isn't so much "out of control" in the sense that Starliner could make like Progress M-34 and crash into the station. The worry is that it would just a short distance away and then lose all maneuvering capability. That'd put it onto an orbit that's almost but not exactly the same as the station's. Those differences would cause it to drift and librate back and forth relative to the ISS's reference frame as both of them progress through their orbit, and some of that uncontrolled motion might cause it to impact the station.
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 01:13:24 UTC No. 16311632
>>16311631
the thrusters on ISS aren't broken are they? just lift it up a few kilometers.
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 01:20:46 UTC No. 16311640
>>16311481
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0m
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 01:25:13 UTC No. 16311643
>>16311507
Gromlek is angry
What do you do next?
> sacrifice ugly brown woman
You sacrifice the ugly brown woman
Gromlek has rejected your sacrifice
Gromlek's rage has increased
Gromlek is furious
What do you do next?
>
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 01:26:21 UTC No. 16311645
>>16311319
suggesting that berger is wrong about the astronauts coming back on dragon, that its all but impossible
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 01:32:57 UTC No. 16311650
>>16311632
It's not enough and the station isn't maneuverable enough. On top of that the ISS needs to reserve most of its delta-v budget for reboost maneuvers and periodic debris dodges.
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 01:33:48 UTC No. 16311651
>>16311650
>periodic debris dodges
it's currently docked with debris
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 01:37:21 UTC No. 16311653
>>16311650
Is releasing Starliner just before regular reboost enough to clear it? They will have more leeway to fire its thrusters once it's drifted sufficiently far away from the station.
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 01:38:58 UTC No. 16311654
>>16311631
Yeah I guess by "out of control" I meant the ship's uncontrolled motion might cause it to impact the station.
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 01:48:00 UTC No. 16311662
spacex gets a $900m contract for a Special Starliner DeOrbit Module
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 01:48:27 UTC No. 16311663
What a basketcase of a vehicle lol. Imagine telling circa 2020 /sfg/ this would be the case, no one would believe you hahah
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 01:53:10 UTC No. 16311667
>>16311510
>NASA and boeing both seem in agreement that the thrusters work.
everything works and everything is just fine now please stop asking questions, stop asking us to undock we will undock when we feel like it. we WANT to stay up there right now
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 01:59:55 UTC No. 16311673
>>16311663
>hey /sfg/ I'm from the future and-
>god dammit the /sci/ schizos are leaking again
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 02:05:02 UTC No. 16311678
>>16311676
homestuck dragon
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 02:07:20 UTC No. 16311679
>>16311630
I demand that they award a second contract to another company for redundancy. We can't be reliant on just one company for long stick technology.
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 02:09:49 UTC No. 16311681
SCIENCE IS REAL
BLACK LIVES MATTER
STARLINER IS NOT STUCK
KINDNESS IS EVERYTHING
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 02:13:41 UTC No. 16311683
>>16310840
goddamnit, so many uninformed retards in that thread, typical of /g/. I also hate how arrogant they are, trying to debunk everything that is common knowledge with their "akshually" diatribes. No anon, you didn't just expose SpaceX/Musk by pointing out that the RD-170 has more thrust than a single Raptor, a fact that means nothing in the discussion, that we all already knew, and you just learnt from wikipedia 2 minutes ago.
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 02:24:57 UTC No. 16311694
>>16311681
Yes to all!
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 02:28:39 UTC No. 16311697
18 sats for the a chinese megaconstellation have launched
>SSST's plan is to launch 108 satellites this year, 648 satellites by the end of 2025, provide a "global network coverage" by 2027, and get to 15,000 satellites deployed before 2030.
https://www.reuters.com/technology/
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 02:40:25 UTC No. 16311702
>>16311697
>trannyuters
Propaganda outlet
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 02:41:04 UTC No. 16311704
>>16311697
How is China so much stronger than the USA? I must move to China!
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 02:42:32 UTC No. 16311706
>>16311544
Nice starship pic
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 02:43:53 UTC No. 16311707
>>16311697
Well... good luck to them...
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 02:45:17 UTC No. 16311709
>>16311702
All news is propaganda
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 02:45:27 UTC No. 16311710
>>16311697
That's... early? The next launch up is an LM-6A, but that's not supposed to go for another few hours.
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 02:48:58 UTC No. 16311713
>>16311710
yeah i know, either it launched early or the press are misreporting. i checked the nsf thread but didnt see any updates either.
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 02:49:23 UTC No. 16311714
>>16311697
not a good time to be a Chinese villager...
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 02:50:16 UTC No. 16311715
>>16311709
Yes.
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 02:51:51 UTC No. 16311717
>>16311713
They probably had the story prewritten and just set the publishing timer wrong
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 03:07:02 UTC No. 16311724
I wonder when the first Starship V2 with all Raptor 3's will launch. Early 2025?
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 03:11:32 UTC No. 16311727
>>16310840
/g/ way is too retarded, even /v/ is smarter than them when it comes to tech.
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 03:22:20 UTC No. 16311731
>>16311730
That's a pretty cool trick. I saw a video of one guy who got his toy rockets to land upright like that. think his name was Jeff Bezos.
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 03:27:21 UTC No. 16311733
>>16311731
holy burn
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 03:31:58 UTC No. 16311737
oh shit its all making sense now
>NASA has quietly ordered that Starliner is to return empty
>Boeing says they can't do that without the software update because they weren't planning on this happening
>Butch and Sunni will stay up there till the software updates and Crew 9 launches or something
idk
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 03:44:30 UTC No. 16311746
If only the media and detractors cared about starliner's debacle as much as they cared about dragon's broken toilet, oh well.
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 03:46:02 UTC No. 16311748
>cargo dragon launches 2 additional Crew Dragon seats and Butch and Sunni's Dragon IVA's
>docks to station
>seats installed to Crew 8 Dragon
>Crew 8 leaves with Butch and Sunni
>Crew 9 launches ASAP afterwards with original 4 crew
There I fixed it, I have no idea why NASA is so reluctant to fly more than 4 on Dragon and wants to play musical chairs with a crew that has trained like 6 months to operate together
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 03:57:15 UTC No. 16311759
>>16311744
We tried to warn them.
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 04:20:23 UTC No. 16311777
Rocket! Rocket! Rocket! Rocketeee, waaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
Ahh, sniff, sniff! Sniff, sniff! Sniff, sniff! Sniff, sniff! It smells nice... sniff sniff
Mmm! I want to sniff the smell of RP-1 rocket fuel! Sniff, sniff! Aaah!!
I was wrong! I want to fluff it! Fluff it! Fluff it! Fluff it! Fluff it up the engine cover! Crunchy fluff... so squishy and squishy!!
The design of the new Raptor engine was cute!! Ahhhh... ahhhh... ahhhhhh!! Aaaaaannnnn!!
I'm glad the launch was a success, Rocket! Aaaaah! So cool! Rocket! So cool! Aaaaah!
I'm happy to see new technology being adopted... noooooooo!!! Meeeeeeeeeee!!! Gyaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!
Aaaaaaaaaaaaah!!! Nuclear-powered rockets aren't real!!! Oh… thinking about the Mars rocket simulations too…
ROCKETS Aren't they real? Nyaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!! Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!
Nooooooooo!! Nooooooooo!! Aaaahhhhh!! To space!!
Damn it! I'm quitting!! Stop with reality...huh!? Are you...seeing? Is the rocket on the pamphlet looking at me?
The rocket in the brochure is looking at me! The rocket is looking at me! The rocket in the exhibition is looking at me!!
The rocket on the TV is talking to me!!! Thank goodness... the world isn't a lost cause yet!
Yayyyyyyy!!! I have a rocket!!! JAXA did it!!! I can do it all by myself!!!
Oh, a model rocketeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!! Nooooooooooooooooo!!!
Ahhhh Elon Musk!!! Propellant!!! Space station!!! Tank!!!
Uuuuuuu!! Send my feelings to the rocket!! Send them to the rocket in space!
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 04:35:03 UTC No. 16311790
>>16311400
If they did the starliner crew would not have a dragon on station to pack into in an emergency. They probably won't say anything but I see it as very unlikely they will get left up there without a dragon on station.
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 04:42:23 UTC No. 16311797
Why’s Elon seem to be shilling for the deep state?
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 04:48:43 UTC No. 16311802
>>16311797
he has to now that kamala is presumptive president. only the jews can protect musk now
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 04:56:56 UTC No. 16311806
>>16311790
They can still take refuge in Starliner, which was exactly what happened when debris came close to the station last month.
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 06:21:22 UTC No. 16311860
>>16311119
>Tell me about the cost-plus contracts, George
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 06:42:31 UTC No. 16311884
>>16311883 S
>>16311883 T
>>16311883 A
>>16311883 G
>>16311883 E
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 07:02:02 UTC No. 16311899
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 07:26:18 UTC No. 16311919
>>16311914
Summer tourists and slow ass board will do that.
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 08:02:00 UTC No. 16311945
>>16311914
one is because someone sperged out about an OP image being tangentially political, and another is because the guy who keeps making threads with a tangentially political OP image was too slow
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 09:18:30 UTC No. 16312004
>>16311945
no, it's mostly the retard making embarrassing trump cronyism threads that nobody wants anything to do with.
nigger, i don't even dislike trump, but newfaggotry like that doesn't fly, this is /sfg/ not /muhfavouriteelectioncandidate/
it's embarrassing and worshipping people like that always looks really pathetic
>inb4 retard comes out of the woodwork and tells me i'm a liberal/tranny
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 10:49:48 UTC No. 16312049
>>16311797
He fucked up and was antisemitic a couple months back so now he's going hard so they don't take away Mars. Anything for Mars
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 12:56:15 UTC No. 16312147
>>16312004
>Trump? Exists? In a picture?!
The picture cannot hurt you, why does it make you angry? I'd be annoyed if the pictures weren't related directly to spaceflight, like OP just posted him at a rally or whatever, but this isn't that.
Fuck's sake have some perspective.
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 13:07:06 UTC No. 16312160
>>16312147
Fascist
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 13:11:48 UTC No. 16312167
>>16312160
meds
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 13:15:36 UTC No. 16312169
>>16312167
Fucking kill yourself fascist shitbrain
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 14:07:25 UTC No. 16312203
>>16310259
If we remain chained by Ciolkowski equation then yes. Butt solar sails and skyhooks.
Anonymous at Tue, 6 Aug 2024 14:54:51 UTC No. 16312268
>>16312169
Grow up