š§µ /sfg/ - Spaceflight General
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 14:30:35 UTC No. 16316932
Raptor 3 Static Fire - Edition
Previous >>16315003
šļø Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 14:32:56 UTC No. 16316938
I came
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 14:32:56 UTC No. 16316939
>>16316932
See I was about to make the same OP but with Partially Assembled Edition.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 14:34:13 UTC No. 16316940
>>16316939
I thought about doing "tory cope - edition" with this op pic but decided against it.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 14:37:38 UTC No. 16316942
>>16316940
Good choice. Twitter screenshot threads feel lazy and uninspired, better to just use a regular image related to it and reference it in the edition name. Your OPs are improving keep up the good work.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 14:40:30 UTC No. 16316946
>>16316932
Revoke Chinese launch privileges
Sabotage the chink space industry now
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 14:42:07 UTC No. 16316948
>>16316940
I myself am not an editionfag but as someone who used to make a bunch of /sfg/ threads, the simpler the better. And itās better to keep it topical. No fun in making political, snarky, edgy editions lol. It doesnāt change much but itās just off putting
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 14:42:25 UTC No. 16316949
>>16316932
What is he thinking now?
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 14:45:48 UTC No. 16316955
>>16316949
>"when is that merger with BO going through again?"
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 14:46:12 UTC No. 16316956
>>16316932
I want to have sexual relations with that engine.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 14:48:01 UTC No. 16316958
>>16316949
Dumb cuck
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 14:49:43 UTC No. 16316962
>>16316957
Yes.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 14:49:46 UTC No. 16316963
>>16316957
we wont know until we try
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 14:49:54 UTC No. 16316964
>>16316957
Depends on what you mean by "missing". We're "missing" nearly all of it, but the stuff we're missing that's actually hard is cheap rockets and life support, probably in that order.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 14:50:18 UTC No. 16316965
>>16316957
dealing with radiation. we dont have any guaranteed solution engineered out yet, just ideas. someone mass manufacturing a habitat/building that could be used on earth but also on the moon and mars could make bank.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 14:54:42 UTC No. 16316970
>>16316965
think something like a shipping container-style building that can work as both a surface building and also an underground building. easy to mass manufacture, cheap, and works on earth and colony worlds.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 14:54:59 UTC No. 16316971
>>16316957
Yeah being able to not be self sufficient is kind of a fucking problem mate. No free atmosphere to draw oxygen from, always running energy negative. Better hope we can lob a ton of nuclear fuel rods over there but even then we canāt ISRU nuclear fuel rods from Martian terra firma as far as Iām aware
You could make solar panels on Mars but youre not industrializing the entire planet that way
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 14:56:14 UTC No. 16316972
>>16316957
nothing fundamental I think, its a shitload of engineering though
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 14:56:14 UTC No. 16316973
>>16316970
something like it maybe, but it will have to be a pressure vessel that seals against other modules so probably more rounded with small entries
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 14:57:52 UTC No. 16316978
>>16316971
>we canāt ISRU nuclear fuel rods from Martian terra firma
Why not? Fissile material should be as common on mars as it is on earth and if you go with a candu design you don't even need to process what you dig out of the ground, just shape it into fuel rods.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 14:58:02 UTC No. 16316980
>>16316971
>>16316972
well which is it these are two completely different answers
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 14:58:39 UTC No. 16316981
>>16316980
I'm correct of course
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 14:59:46 UTC No. 16316983
>>16316978
>Fissile material should be as common on mars as it is on earth
A: source?
2: mining and refining fissile material on earth is a massive industrial process, not something you can do with ~50 starship payloads worth of equipment.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 14:59:53 UTC No. 16316984
>>16316977
Why are reddit mods so pathetic?
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:00:01 UTC No. 16316985
>>16316978
I said āas far as Iām awareā because Iām not sure if the same geochemical processes that concentrated nuclear material in the crust here on Earth also took place on Mars, and Iām not sure we have nuclear deposits mapped on Mars other than basic surgical remote sensing data
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:01:01 UTC No. 16316987
>>16316985
*surficial
not surgical
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:01:19 UTC No. 16316988
>>16316977
>>16316984
The same discord tranny horse fucker mod controls that board.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:02:53 UTC No. 16316991
>>16316986
Yeah this stupid squah gets the airlock
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:03:00 UTC No. 16316992
>>16316983
For A https://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/l
This is about a natural reactor on mars like the one in oklo. This wouldn't be possible if fissile material were much rarer on mars than earth.
As for 2, did you just ignore the part about candu reactors needing little to no processing?
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:03:12 UTC No. 16316993
>>16316747
>How can they compete? Is this the end of geostationary orbital satellites?
they cant compete but they can stay alive for awhile longer
>building hybrid terminals for the military that combine signals from spacex and geo satellites
>collabs with other satellite operators like oneweb
>maybe building components for other satellites like starshield
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:04:30 UTC No. 16316997
>>16316985
see https://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/l
Theres good evidence there are dense concentrations of fissile material on mars, just like earth.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:05:47 UTC No. 16317000
>>16316992
Handwaiving reactors that donāt need any fuel. Very common stardust redditor tactic. Whatā¦ are we also going to have UBI and post-scarcity the second we land there, too?
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:07:46 UTC No. 16317002
>>16317000
You do realize candu reactors are real and we have built them right?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CANDU
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:08:24 UTC No. 16317003
>>16316997
Is this that schizo shit that claims a nuclear bomb once went off on the surface of mars? Gb2r
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:08:35 UTC No. 16317004
>>16316957
I want to go on a drive from one end of the canyon to the other.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:09:29 UTC No. 16317005
>>16316986
Yes..? They use Tesla motors on Starship
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:09:46 UTC No. 16317006
>>16316986
Who keeps reelecting this disingenuous corrupt cunt?
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:10:41 UTC No. 16317007
>>16316957
dead nigger storage
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:10:49 UTC No. 16317008
>>16317006
Democracy is by the people, for the people. But the people are retarded.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:11:53 UTC No. 16317010
>>16317007
There are multiple craters and frequent dust storms, this problem solves itself
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:11:57 UTC No. 16317011
>>16317003
Are you the same retard that didn't know candu reactors are real?
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:11:59 UTC No. 16317012
>>16316984
It's government propaganda. Just like how /pol/ is spammed with irrelevant shite and /k/ can't have any productive conversation about manufacturing firearms.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:16:01 UTC No. 16317017
>>16316992
getting large quantities of heavy water on mars sounds difficult, but maybe easier than refining uranium. I still don't think it will be something that gets built in the early years of mars colonization on the short path to self sufficiency.
personally, I believe hydrocarbon fuels will see nearly as much use on mars as they do on earth, with emphasis on ethanol, biodiesel, and wood gas.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:16:04 UTC No. 16317018
>>16316932
Where did all the funky tube on the outside of the raptor go? also I hope this Raptor version is now reliable enough to not fail even once during an average flight.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:17:22 UTC No. 16317020
>>16317018
that engine is only partially assembled.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:18:21 UTC No. 16317022
>>16317020
Your brain was only partially assembled.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:18:47 UTC No. 16317023
>>16316948
agree with your post
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:19:27 UTC No. 16317026
>>16317020
So am I
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:19:48 UTC No. 16317027
Why was the interview to technical bros :(
I was expecting that this would be one of those behvaioral interviews
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:25:48 UTC No. 16317030
>>16316948
Would you consider >>16316939 this OP to be one of those?
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:27:20 UTC No. 16317033
>>16317017
>getting your hydrocarbons from biological sources
I'm pretty sure it would be much more efficient to use solar power by land usage. By like 100x. Also it doesn't need to be pressurized land
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:29:33 UTC No. 16317036
>>16316986
>>16316989
That is the shit that blackpills me on the future of space exploration
šļø Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:34:07 UTC No. 16317041
>>16317030
I mean itās fine. I donāt care. I have autism and Iām the anon who used to do the complicated āthis day in spaceflightā and āin the newsā write ups accompanying my OPs but I havenāt made a new /sfg/ in over a year because Iām depressed and the spark in my eye has long dwindled out so
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:37:06 UTC No. 16317045
>>16317033
you're going to have fucktons of plants for food, animal feed, textile production, etc. some of the scraps will be used to fertilize your dirt and turn regolith into more dirt, but at some point you'll have surplus for fuel. plus it's a much better energy storage than solar with batteries.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:38:58 UTC No. 16317049
Wait wut I thought Neutron was only supposed to do 8T to LEO. Why is it now listed with a 13,000 kg to LEO capability?
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:43:46 UTC No. 16317060
>>16317006
The people.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:48:12 UTC No. 16317067
>>16317045
No I'm talking about solar with no batteries making hydrocarbons. Two startups working on this that I'm aware of, one of them seems serious about it.
Also I don't think you'll have nearly as much food production as you think, at least until you're sufficiently industrialized to the point where biofuels don't make sense. The mass of food for 1000 people is roughly one Starship payload (~100 tons) per year. That's for Americans, with completely un mass optimized diets. Dried or dense foods with supplemental fresh vegetables might get you even further.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:53:23 UTC No. 16317073
>>16317049
I thought it was 15T?
Also they uprated it cause most payloads are around that size.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:54:04 UTC No. 16317076
>>16317006
Weaponization of emotions by appealing to crab mentality.
You can either inspire or drag down others. Both use emotions as powerful agents of change.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:57:08 UTC No. 16317079
/sfg/ is definetly back. That was a cancer few weeks but we are getting more quality posters, high post count and best of all janny killed the split threads
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:58:46 UTC No. 16317080
>>16317079
there has just been a lot of stuff happening
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:58:50 UTC No. 16317081
>>16317079
you know you donāt have to be meta about the general every fucking thread jfc just shut up
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:59:36 UTC No. 16317083
Starlink launch scrubbed. I'm so sad I don't have a launch to not watch now
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 16:00:08 UTC No. 16317085
>>16317083
ITS OVER. Now gotta wait till tomorrow!
šļø Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 16:04:09 UTC No. 16317092
>>16317081
How about you kill yourself you dumb faggot I will post what I want
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 16:18:32 UTC No. 16317116
>>16316965
>le radiation meme
Isn't it not a problem on the surface? I seem to remember someone saying that staples fortified with zinc (like flour on Earth fortified with iron) would bring cancer risk down to the same as Earth.
>>16316970
There would need to be more people arriving on Mars than fit into a Starship before making habs makes sense. Everyone is already showing up in a hab and they get more space once the tanks aren't needed. This is only true for people who stay permanently, but there will be many more cargo ships than human ships, so there with be a surplus of ready made living space on Mars. Pic related, your Martian house.
>>16316971
If all you need to import is fuel rods you're doing good. Also I asked about industrialization not self sufficiency. It's arguable whether or not certain countries are self sufficient. If oxygen for the decade is payed for with only a Starship load of fuel rods I'd consider the place industrialized. Hell, you could import an entire PBR and make it so all your colonists need to do is plug into it. Pic related again, your Martian reactor
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 16:22:41 UTC No. 16317122
>>16317116
>Also I asked about industrialization not self sufficiency
Hmmm. Well there isnāt a very defined line in the sand here is there? At what point do you consider Mars āindustrializedā? Iād argue you canāt just ship machinery from Earth to Mars and say
>yup weāre industrialized now because we have working machinery!
Any colony or settlement, be it some US military base in afghanistan with burger kings and convenience stores, bases on Antarctica, the Moon, Mars, whatever, will have imported supplies and technology. But are these places self-industrialized? Or are they just using industrialized machines from industrialized Earth to try and keep a heartbeat
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 16:26:45 UTC No. 16317129
>>16317116
>There would need to be more people arriving on Mars than fit into a Starship before making habs makes sense.
sorry the point is that you're making them for earth, mars, and possibly the moon. a single building that can work on all 3 worlds. earthers will be your primary source of revenue for a long time. martians and others will be a small portion of your business for awhile.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 16:28:15 UTC No. 16317132
>>16316957
Just about everything. With cheap rockets flights you could get a souped-up McMurdo going.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 16:29:14 UTC No. 16317135
>>16317122
Mars can't retroactively invent industrialization before earth did so they can then claim to be industrialized bro
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 16:32:12 UTC No. 16317139
>>16317129
Why would you make pressure vessels for earth habitation?
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 16:33:38 UTC No. 16317141
>>16317135
When did I imply that?
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 16:35:31 UTC No. 16317145
>>16317139
In case of a fallout event.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 16:37:37 UTC No. 16317152
>>16317083
Oh no, was this the one that was going to rescue those poor astronauts?
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 16:37:51 UTC No. 16317153
>>16317141
Your post
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 16:39:52 UTC No. 16317155
>>16316984
They believe if they control the narrative it can alter the physical world to be what they desire.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 16:43:42 UTC No. 16317163
>>16316932
I saw this same exact OP picrel on Krautchan last night
>it was kc tier and it was on /sci/
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 16:43:52 UTC No. 16317165
>>16316957
We have everything we need, we just need to build it.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 16:44:29 UTC No. 16317169
>>16317152
yeah, they were gonna ride home on a starlink sat a la dr strangelove
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 16:46:18 UTC No. 16317173
>>16317122
industrialized
adjective
(of a country or region) having widely developed industries.
>>16317129
I see what you're saying. There probably won't be a period on Mars where that's necessary. When you've reached the stage of development where you can build buildings cheaper than living in a landed Starship, you could probably get pretty wild with the design. Basically your human forcing function (psychological health) plays a larger role in the economy as various goods get cheaper. Will the people who just spent 10 years living in a spaceship and working in an inflatable factory surrounded by a frozen red desert want to move to a new pod? Pic related, your second Martian home. Mass produced cast stone under an inflatable plastic sky.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 16:48:49 UTC No. 16317179
>>16317163
Fuck off back to where you came from
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 16:50:17 UTC No. 16317182
>>16317132
I don't specifically mean
>is there something that can be palletized and sent today?
I mean
>do we need to invent anything?
What are we missing?
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 16:50:51 UTC No. 16317183
Does it count as spaceflight related if I drew a picture of Fox and Krystal fucking inside a spaceship? You can see stars in the background.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 16:52:06 UTC No. 16317184
>>16317183
You can't draw.
šļø Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 16:53:30 UTC No. 16317188
>>16317183
Nigger
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 16:54:07 UTC No. 16317190
>>16317184
*ahem*
Not with that attitude
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 16:55:45 UTC No. 16317196
>>16317183
Only if you hide it in a spaceflight related pdf
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 16:57:59 UTC No. 16317200
>>16317196
>>16317183
Or post the twitter link but diguise it as one of Elon Musks post
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:03:19 UTC No. 16317208
Guys look at what Elon just posted
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/18219
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:03:50 UTC No. 16317210
yeah
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:04:20 UTC No. 16317212
>>16317183
yes (no)
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:05:05 UTC No. 16317214
>>16317208
disappointed by lack of blue fox tiddies
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:11:36 UTC No. 16317220
>be CCP china
>copies everything spaceX does
>falcon 9 clones blow up
>starlink clones spread a shitload of debries in low earth orbit
How long before the chinks trigger a kessler syndrome
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:11:54 UTC No. 16317222
>>16317214
Me when I saw a woman naked for the first time
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:12:37 UTC No. 16317223
>>16317173
Well that settles it. I doubt Mars is going to have industry (much less diversified industries, plural) any time soon
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:13:13 UTC No. 16317225
>>16317220
2 more years
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:15:27 UTC No. 16317231
>>16317220
kessler syndrome isn't real
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:15:32 UTC No. 16317232
>>16317220
A few years back I would've said Kessler syndrome is no big deal, but now starlink is paying for the Mars colony. So now I think it's a big deal. It's also the best way for China to prevent the advancement of American space flight, as SpaceX is not well treated by the gov in favor of jobs programs. They could seriously impact strategic innovation by disrupting a single company's revenue stream. Our government is so fucking retarded
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:15:59 UTC No. 16317233
>>16316989
A lot of people are completely dismissive of the idea of knowledge loss or any kind of major upheaval of civilization just because it hasn't happened in living memory, but historically there have been so many regressions of progress.
What a horrible shame it would be if our time ends up being the only point in human history that civilization could reach for space, but we squander the chance.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:16:33 UTC No. 16317236
>>16317223
Why?
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:19:36 UTC No. 16317246
>>16317232
The chinks want to make starlink copy with 14.000 satelites, and we already know the chinese dont give a fuck about hitting other stuff up there.
Chinese have already poluted their own nation, and the seas around it, now they want to start fucking up space too.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:22:25 UTC No. 16317253
>>16317139
it doesnt have to only be for habitation but they can share a common standard, just like there will be different variants of starship. some buildings could be for storage, others for habitation.
>>16317173
you might be right. the general idea is to take something needed on by most people on both earth and mars, and make it work for both worlds. this wont be necessary for things like t-shirts or dental floss, but it might be an option for things like habitats or microchips.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:23:03 UTC No. 16317254
>>16317183
Still waiting on this
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:25:35 UTC No. 16317257
>>16317183
depends on if they are traveled at an orbital velocity at some point in the flight plan. Bezos and branson shit doesn't count
šļø Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:31:36 UTC No. 16317262
>>16317254
https://x.com/mercrantos/status/182
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:31:38 UTC No. 16317263
>>16317233
you could easily argue that space exploration regressed significantly in living memory from visiting the moon to simply jumping into LEO, you also see it in the number of launches before SpaceX started launching
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:32:14 UTC No. 16317266
>>16317258
Where has the time gone
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:32:49 UTC No. 16317267
>>16317262
Remove the Cuck MCloud
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:33:39 UTC No. 16317271
>>16317262
>daylight side of planet
>visible stars
for shame
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:34:13 UTC No. 16317272
>>16317267
>canon husband
>cuck
Do you even know what that word means or has porn rotted your brain?
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:34:22 UTC No. 16317273
>>16317253
I get it. I'm currently working on the patents for an idea I had that would work on Earth, but would scale very nicely on Mars. My goal is to have a palletized product before they start launching industry so I can get in on the ground. My guess is that Mars will be subject to absurd deflation early on because every product will be worth its value plus it's weight in launch cost.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:37:04 UTC No. 16317278
>>16317272
You heard me.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:38:53 UTC No. 16317280
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:41:05 UTC No. 16317285
>>16317280
starfactory probably being expanded on top and beyond the private plot of land, apparently these footings are similar starfactory used
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:42:22 UTC No. 16317289
>>16317285
they speculate starhopper might be moved inside the office building that is being built
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:43:24 UTC No. 16317290
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:44:26 UTC No. 16317292
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:45:27 UTC No. 16317293
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:45:57 UTC No. 16317294
>>16317236
The fuck do you mean āwhyā?
Weāve been in LEO for 50 years and thereās no industry besides station upkeep. Weāre not going to land on Mars and immediately have mining, processing, or any other type of large scale industry (I admittedly canāt think of any more examples at the moment so I apologize for a lack of creativity here lol)
Weāll have ISRU machines and nuclear reactors mainly assembled on earth that will be doing nothing but keeping the bare minimal colony alive, heated, and fueled. We are a long ways off from a diverse industry in space. Thatās why.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:46:30 UTC No. 16317295
>>16317293
the flyover is from Aug 2, so you see module 6 still on the ground
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:48:23 UTC No. 16317300
>>16317233
this isnāt Halo bozo, there isnāt some secret advanced ancient human civilization that has since lost all of its tech. We will be fine.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:49:50 UTC No. 16317303
>>16317153
Read it again
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:50:07 UTC No. 16317306
>>16317295
new entrance being built, after the pic they added rebar and poured concrete already
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:53:46 UTC No. 16317313
>>16317300
It took nearly a thousand years before Europe was able to even start approaching lost feats of construction and civil engineering that the Romans achieved during their height.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:54:20 UTC No. 16317314
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9iS
>Raptor 3 Fires Up, New Glenn Tests at Port & Starliner's Latest Update | This Week in Spaceflight
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:56:20 UTC No. 16317315
>>16316986
>this is too complicated for /sfg/
grim
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 17:58:52 UTC No. 16317323
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 18:00:46 UTC No. 16317326
2 weeks?
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 18:00:47 UTC No. 16317327
>>16317313
Or, as someone who isnāt an imbecile might say, it took germanic tribes only a few generations to begin to rebuild convergent engineering that existed at the height of the roman empire
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 18:02:50 UTC No. 16317329
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 18:04:46 UTC No. 16317334
>>16317294
There's no industry in LEO because there's nothing there. On Mars you have every element you'd need to be fully industrialized. It's also 8 months away with two year launch windows, so there are incentives to make things locally. ISRU means aluminum and steel, which is most of the mass of basically any industrial process you can think of, which means you can make heavy machinery while only shipping the motors, bearings, screws, and computers. Machine per ton shipped will go way up as more industry is developed until you're importing luxury goods and computer chips only.
Also, the largest private American company is biting off a larger and larger chunk of the yearly hundred billion dollar telecom industry to pay for it.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 18:17:32 UTC No. 16317355
>>16317353
Who said this?
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 18:20:31 UTC No. 16317360
>>16317353
source: https://youtu.be/aFqjoCbZ4ik?t=3108
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 18:22:21 UTC No. 16317362
>>16317360
thats insane
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 18:22:22 UTC No. 16317363
>>16317334
space sex tourism
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 18:22:38 UTC No. 16317364
>>16317169
they are flat-sats, so more like surfing down as in Dark Star
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 18:30:11 UTC No. 16317369
>>16317353
I really dislike this video. He tries so hard to be Elon's friend.
>acres of volume
>>16317334
reminds me, if you can produce steel cables and atmosphere locally, then one Starship load of ETFE gets you like 50 acres of pressurized volume
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 18:36:49 UTC No. 16317376
>>16317017
Why are the modules cylindrical? Wouldn't that make traversal difficult?
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 18:37:55 UTC No. 16317378
>>16317376
easier to make a cylindrical pressure vessel I would imagine
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 18:39:44 UTC No. 16317380
>>16317173
Martian cities will be in artificially-excavated kilometer-deep slot canyons and they will be more beautiful than any city on Earth has ever been. Residences and most other structures at least partially integrated into the canyon walls or built in alcoves, with the canyon floor dominated by lush public parks.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 18:49:56 UTC No. 16317389
>>16317380
If you're the guy that's always posting the pictures of that I gotta say I love em, but I personally doubt that's how they'll do it. Building down is more expensive than building up, which is more expensive than building out. A high enough ceiling on a pressurized volume like >>16317369 means that radiation isn't a problem at all.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 18:53:53 UTC No. 16317393
https://x.com/blueorigin/status/182
>Coming soon to Rocket City - Our Blue Ring team is expanding manufacturing facilities in Huntsville! Stay tuned as our multi-mission space mobility platform gears up for groundbreaking missions #ForTheBenefitofEarth.
>Thanks to @RepDaleStrong and the local Huntsville community for visiting!
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 18:56:12 UTC No. 16317400
>>16316932
You may not like it, but this is what meritocracy looks like.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 18:56:30 UTC No. 16317401
The astronauts are stranded.
/sfg/ was wrong.
Jannies are trannies.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 18:56:31 UTC No. 16317402
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 18:57:31 UTC No. 16317405
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 18:57:53 UTC No. 16317406
>>16316986
>NOOOO YOU JUST CAN'T USE THINGS DEVELOPED BY YOUR OTHER COMPANIES FOR THIS SPECIFIC COMPANY!
Get fucked, Pocahontas.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 18:58:32 UTC No. 16317408
>>16317405
https://x.com/SpaceAbhi/status/1821
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 19:03:57 UTC No. 16317414
>>16317389
I expect cities like that to be third or fourth-wave in terms of types of settlements constructed. First is obviously living in the vehicles you landed in and some inflatable modules scattered around, second is larger tented structures and tunnel settlements connected to burgeoning industrial operations, third and fourth are whatever becomes possible as a result of that industrial capacity.
I'm not saying that these will be the first cities or even eventually the main kind of large city on Mars, but they are the peak of form and function for the conditions, provided you have the necessary machinery. There is the choice of building up into hostile conditions, or building down into a controlled environment. The former will of course be necessary early on, the latter is ideal when the ability exists.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 19:04:11 UTC No. 16317415
>>16317233
If I ask you to imagine where we'll be in 100 years. Do you imagine soviet style poverty with a few high tech machines sprinkled throughout the agrarian society with ancient industry?
Do you imagine steam engines? Horses and carts? Sticks and stones? Mammals on trees?
Fuck. No.
Literally no one actually believes that.
Progress on average is inevitable. Everyone intuitively knows this. Everyone feels this. The progress may be set back in places and at times. But averaging it out, the trend is clear, the direction certain.
Lest the universe strikes us down all at once. Humanity shall advance. And we will get off of this rock.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 19:04:25 UTC No. 16317417
this sounds like an absolutey nightmare, like at least 3 levels of hierarchy and you have somewhat independent hierarchy trees too
and you have to "read the room" i.e. can't say something that is retarded with how things are being done or you get the boot I guess?
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 19:04:53 UTC No. 16317419
If boeing says it's safe, it's safe.
Nasa should stop bitching and send starliner back with the astronauts already and get this joke over with.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 19:06:55 UTC No. 16317426
How are engine internals insepected? Do they have wire cameras for that?
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 19:07:31 UTC No. 16317427
>>16317417
>this sounds like an absolutey nightmare
It's government bureaucracy. It's not designed to be efficient, it's designed to employ maximum amount of people and have them keep one another busy.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 19:08:36 UTC No. 16317429
>>16317415
progress is not inevitable, technology does not develop by itself but by specific people using their time to do so
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 19:12:15 UTC No. 16317435
>>16317415
>Progress on average is inevitable. Everyone intuitively knows this. Everyone feels this. The progress may be set back in places and at times. But averaging it out, the trend is clear, the direction certain.
midwit take but said with enough confidence to make it pants on head retarded
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 19:12:21 UTC No. 16317436
>>16317414
So very far future. I like your vision. Also much less susceptible to Earther attack than my plastic ceiling
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 19:12:32 UTC No. 16317437
https://x.com/ajtourville/status/18
Starlink in ~1700 schools in Kazakhstan. Nearly all the schools in Kazakhstan
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 19:13:41 UTC No. 16317438
>>16317415
>Progress on average is inevitable.
This is where optimism becomes a hazard. Be as gung-ho about space colonization as you want, I sure am, but always remember that all your work and intentions CAN be swept aside. If you're only ever looking forward without heed of your surroundings, you'll get knifed in the ribs. Industrial collapse CAN fuck us over. Maybe not permanently, but perhaps long enough for an extinction event to finish us off. Even if it's a recoverable, regression is impermissible because of the risk it poses.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 19:15:12 UTC No. 16317441
>problem with the CC-8800-1
it's over
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 19:19:32 UTC No. 16317446
https://x.com/torybruno/status/1821
Tory still coping hard. Holy hell. This man is living in denial.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 19:21:25 UTC No. 16317451
>>16317441
what problem?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhJ
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 19:23:08 UTC No. 16317453
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 19:23:37 UTC No. 16317454
>>16317446
they threw a community note on his original comment lmfao violated
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 19:24:17 UTC No. 16317455
>>16317453
I guess SpaceX solved it
Musk has repeatedly said it was very difficult to make this engine
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 19:24:32 UTC No. 16317456
>>16317451
Rewind to about 1:35pm, something broke earlier when they were standing it up earlier today. SpaceX had to send out their manlift.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 19:25:23 UTC No. 16317457
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgS
NSF livestream discussion "flame trench" in 100min
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 19:26:27 UTC No. 16317459
>>16317456
what if they are just inspecting something?
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 19:27:02 UTC No. 16317461
Where is musk getting this nonsense from?
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/18219
He really should go back to rockets because identity politics are clearly frying his brain
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 19:27:12 UTC No. 16317462
>>16317436
I'm also looking forward to lunar cities. Some degree of subsurface presence will be necessary from the get-go for any serious colonization attempt, if only to take advantage of the thermal stability you can get from using the ground as a heat sink/source.
With even lower gravity and a more gradual thermal gradient, a whole lot of the lunar interior is readily habitable once you've cracked the necessary rocks to make yourself an atmosphere. A global tunnel network linking pockets of civilization, limited only by your ability to dig.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 19:28:09 UTC No. 16317463
>>16317461
https://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 19:29:14 UTC No. 16317465
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 19:29:15 UTC No. 16317466
>>16317415
Dude if earth becomes niggerworld the only hope is the earth isn't too fucked up for white people to evolve again. If everyone on earth had the qualities of someone from somalia we would not have invented rockets
There is nothing stopping an advanced society from not understanding and then destroying the things that made it advanced. Then they run on fumes and don't notice, then they collapse
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 19:30:20 UTC No. 16317467
>>16317461
>where is musk getting this correct etymology from?
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 19:31:41 UTC No. 16317470
>>16317461
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/slav
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 19:43:30 UTC No. 16317485
>>16317479
qrd on the black Tesla
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 19:44:44 UTC No. 16317487
>>16317465
Trolley problem?
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 19:51:30 UTC No. 16317501
>>16317485
I've only ever seen it when there was some sort of delay or technical problem. Last time was when there was bad weather prior to stacking module 4. The person who got out of the car the prior time sort resembled Elon, it was too hard to tell in any case. But they were dressed like him and walked around without a hard hat or vest like they owned the place. Later that day module 4 got stacked.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 19:55:26 UTC No. 16317512
>>16317479
>>16317501
I'm surprised he's not driving Cybertruck
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 19:57:57 UTC No. 16317517
>>16317512
maybe he wants to be inconspicuous
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 19:59:41 UTC No. 16317519
>>16317479
someone's getting fired lol
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 20:02:15 UTC No. 16317522
>>16317512
probably just whatever was on hand, you see a lot of model 3s sitting around the parking lots
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 20:02:57 UTC No. 16317525
>>16317517
If he wanted to be inconspicious then he would be driving a regular truck.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 20:15:14 UTC No. 16317537
>>16317227
RD-170 is 4 engines not 1
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 20:19:25 UTC No. 16317544
>>16317537
On top of that I think raptor is still more powerful when you compare newtons/throat area but I canāt find the graph in my /sfg/ folder atm.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 20:26:40 UTC No. 16317551
>>16317537
It's not. The RD-170 is one set of pumps driving propellant to four separate combustion chambers. It's a trick Glushko pioneered for avoiding combustion instability issues when he was working on the RD-107/108.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 20:33:14 UTC No. 16317562
>>16317537
RD-170 is neither 1 engine or 4
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 20:34:40 UTC No. 16317565
>>16317537
TWR is better anyway who cares. Obviously a Soviet engine will be worse than something produced with modern manufacturing techniques
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 20:37:45 UTC No. 16317570
>>16317551
begs the question: what counts as 1 (one) engine?
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 20:42:14 UTC No. 16317576
>>16317570
One set of turbopumps
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 20:42:18 UTC No. 16317577
>>16317501
might be his brother kendall. he visits elon's companies when there is an issue and bosses people around.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 20:43:19 UTC No. 16317578
>>16317577
>kendall
kimbal*
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 20:43:58 UTC No. 16317579
>>16317576
what if it's pressure fed. or battery pump fed. is a rocket engine a pump for fuel? I'd be tempted to say 1 combustion chamber 1 engine
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 20:48:34 UTC No. 16317586
>>16317578
what the fuck is wrong with the names in this family
elon, kimbal, vivian
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 20:54:10 UTC No. 16317588
>>16317415
Source: My ass
šļø Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 20:54:19 UTC No. 16317589
jannie needs to clean sci
>>>/x/
Space X isn't academic, it piracy
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 21:02:19 UTC No. 16317598
>>16317586
uncommon names are cool
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 21:06:30 UTC No. 16317608
>>16317036
Unlikely to occur though because rocketry and spaceflight are also useful as tools of war. Thereās too much of an incentive to keep the technology alive.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 21:15:17 UTC No. 16317614
>>16317393
what is that like a payload adapter or something?
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 21:18:15 UTC No. 16317621
>>16317579
A rocket engine is something that takes one or more liquid propellants pumps them into a combustion chamber. Centering on the combustion chamber doesn't really work since there have been so many engines designed over the years that have one set of pumps serving multiple chambers; you really need to see the engine as the thing that's moving the propellant rather than just the destination, even though that destination is an integral part of the system.
Battery powered systems are just replacing the preburner with an electric motor while keeping the rest of the architecture the same. Pressure fed systems are a weird outlier since they've simplified the whole thing down to just a pair of valves. Most people would think of the combustion chamber as the engine in those cases because that's the most complex part left, but that's not technically correct since you could have a multi-chamber system driven by one big pressure-fed valve mess. Most people tend not to think too hard about pressure fed systems, but I think that might actually be how a lot of RCS systems are set up.
And then you've got shit like the Chinese YF-21 which is a module built out of four separate YF-20 engines, each with their own independent set of pumps, yet is referred to overall as a single engine.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 21:18:21 UTC No. 16317622
>>16317602
starliner does cargo too?
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 21:21:22 UTC No. 16317627
>>16317620
armored satellites when
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 21:22:09 UTC No. 16317628
>>16317620
>Dragon crew-1 2020
>Starliner crew-1 2026
Embarrassing
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 21:23:55 UTC No. 16317631
>>16317628
Meant for
>>16317602
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 21:24:35 UTC No. 16317632
>>16317614
It's an orbital tug for rideshare payloads
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 21:25:23 UTC No. 16317633
>>16317620
why isn't the Wall Street Journal or Business Insider reporting about the Chinese second stage? what are they waiting for??
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 21:27:09 UTC No. 16317634
>>16317633
An american news agency only reports on american interests.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 21:33:56 UTC No. 16317642
>>16317623
>competing megaconstellations are so far behind
>Starlink on set to take over 80-90% of the market for all commercial, cruise, and large scale oceanic transport markets
The first mover advantage is wild
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 21:50:46 UTC No. 16317657
>>16317648
make this happen elon
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 21:56:02 UTC No. 16317659
>>16317647
I wonder if he's going to talk about how jets are outdated and the military sucks at buying things again
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 21:58:15 UTC No. 16317663
>>16317648
>EDS crowd upset about this little rover's cancellation
>Elon brings it back
>EDSers seethe
>SpaceX proves it can launch to the moon so everyone wonders why NASA has a more expensive rocket (even though that's not how it works it would be funny)
Anyway watch BO buy it and then never do anything with it
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 22:16:57 UTC No. 16317684
>>16317659
Introducing the Tesla Icarus, Mars' first airplane
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 22:21:52 UTC No. 16317690
>>16317263
>1966 saw the largest number of launches
>wasn't surpassed until 2021
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 22:37:55 UTC No. 16317714
Hello fags. State your favorite spaceflight company that is not SpaceX and why. If you cannot name one you are Muskrat vermin.
>note: nothing anti-spacex in this post
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 22:39:40 UTC No. 16317718
>>16317714
SpaceX, they are unimpeachable.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 22:40:34 UTC No. 16317721
>>16317616
>dr. anon, I'm FAA
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 22:40:54 UTC No. 16317723
>>16317714
Vast.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 22:41:13 UTC No. 16317726
>>16317714
Impulse Space, they seem competent and are developing something that will complement SpaceX and not try to compete with them pointlessly without bringing anything novel to the table
Vast and Gravitics are pretty cool too for the same reasons
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 22:42:41 UTC No. 16317728
>>16317714
Firefly
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 22:44:03 UTC No. 16317733
>>16317714
This is Muskrat general, faggot
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 22:48:15 UTC No. 16317739
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/08/07/nas
ONE WEEK, BOEING
SPACEX OR DIE
šļø Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 22:50:44 UTC No. 16317743
>>16316932
>>16316957
so many jewish pedophile glowies in this thread
This is space flight not fucking Disney Star Wars. All of you are Israeli cucks that vomit whatever goyslop you're being fed.
Meanwhile American space efforts are a historic embarrassment because of the incest going on at Boeing and how they abandoned astronauts and their shit is so bad it's destroying the space station it's docked to.
Meanwhile, all you Elon Musk turbo autists think you know shit. Which VSauce level science and mathematics are you doing?
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 22:50:53 UTC No. 16317744
>>16317728
>Firefly
Incomprehensibly false
10 newspace companies are more exciting than Firefly.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 22:52:28 UTC No. 16317748
>>16317743
Okay. Your point?
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 22:53:51 UTC No. 16317754
>>16317744
>>16317744
>10 newspace companies are more exciting than Firefly.
That wasn't the question asked
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 22:54:30 UTC No. 16317755
>>16317684
>Icarus
>on Mars
That name should be reserved for Mercury
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 22:55:51 UTC No. 16317757
>>16317754
Bet you're a space shittle fanboy too.
You're a faggot to the core
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 22:56:23 UTC No. 16317759
>>16317757
Your opinion will never matter
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 22:58:17 UTC No. 16317763
>>16317759
Firefly Aerospace will never matter
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 22:59:25 UTC No. 16317766
>>16317763
seethe if you must
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 23:05:26 UTC No. 16317778
>>16317415
All I can think of is that Peter Theil quote about definite vs indefinite optimism and pessimism. Anon here has fallen deep into the indefinite optimism trap.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 23:07:48 UTC No. 16317780
>>16317714
Gotta come clean, for me it's axiom
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 23:08:14 UTC No. 16317781
temporary space station modules
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 23:17:40 UTC No. 16317792
>>16317743
I've been doing level 10 VSauce science and mathematics before you were even born faggot
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 23:18:30 UTC No. 16317796
>>16317792
concerning
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 23:22:21 UTC No. 16317802
>>16317647
>"You will all soon die for Israel, but that is a sacrifice I'm willing to make"
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 23:23:49 UTC No. 16317806
Which modern rockets could take a 200kg payload into the moon's gravity well?
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 23:27:31 UTC No. 16317813
>>16317714
Armadillo and Bigelow, simple as
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 23:29:28 UTC No. 16317816
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 23:29:43 UTC No. 16317817
>>16317714
NASA
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 23:30:50 UTC No. 16317821
>>16317816
He was so right itās unreal
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 23:31:33 UTC No. 16317824
>>16316932
been awhile since i posted here, but i wanted to ask if anyone had that webm of some guy on a boat with trump flags photo bombing a crew dragon recovery?
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 23:32:19 UTC No. 16317826
>>16317813
Hello time traveler from 2004.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 23:36:31 UTC No. 16317836
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 23:38:15 UTC No. 16317839
>>16317816
You don't need to nuke all of them, just the Shanghai Academy of Spaceflight Technology. The rest of the Chinese space sector manages entertaining rather than intrusive fuck ups.
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 23:43:46 UTC No. 16317850
>>16317806
ask chatGPT
Anonymous at Fri, 9 Aug 2024 23:59:53 UTC No. 16317871
>>16317633
American businessmen don't want to offend China.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 00:06:27 UTC No. 16317883
>>16317836
>50 atomic bombs on china
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 00:11:47 UTC No. 16317896
>>16317633
WSJ is a communist platform now. And BI is commie insider.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 00:44:21 UTC No. 16317949
Reminder, Starship v3 is 400 Ton expendable and 200 Ton reusable
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 00:55:36 UTC No. 16317961
>4 of 7 Long March 6A launches have had their upper stages explode in orbit
>the chinese megaconstellation will likely continue to be launched by LM 6A
and yet there's not a peep of protest by (((astronomers)))
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 01:02:36 UTC No. 16317969
>>16317616
Thought those were bunny ears and a fursuit for a sec
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 01:05:56 UTC No. 16317972
>>16317949
>400 ton expendable
What could that possibly be? JWST was like 70x smaller. Are we going to image exoplanets?
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 01:31:05 UTC No. 16318000
>>16317139
In case of atmosphere loss
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 01:33:31 UTC No. 16318002
>>16317949
45 ton right now chud Husk lied to you.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 01:37:08 UTC No. 16318006
>>16318002
Right now its 0 because its not operational
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 01:38:16 UTC No. 16318008
https://x.com/Starlink/status/18220
> The Starlink team and @TheNRAO
worked together to enable Starlink satellites to avoid transmissions into the line-of-sight of radio telescopes, leveraging our advanced phased array antenna technology to dynamically steer beams away from telescopes http://starlink.com/updates
There is a video
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 01:42:20 UTC No. 16318013
>>16318002
>Falcon 9 can only launch 9 tons and its all expendable Husk is a fraud
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 01:49:02 UTC No. 16318021
>>16317949
Yeah and starship v1 was supposed to be 100 reusable but turns out it cant even get to orbit
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 01:50:08 UTC No. 16318022
https://x.com/SpaceX/status/1822024
Up first on Saturday, August 10 are back-to-back Starlink launches from Florida, set to deliver 45 Starlink satellites to low-Earth orbit
Two Falcon 9 launches in thirteen minutes
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 01:52:48 UTC No. 16318028
>>16317961
Seriously
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 01:59:03 UTC No. 16318036
>>16318008
China will see this and now purposefully target other countries radio telescopes to hinder their research
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 01:59:46 UTC No. 16318039
>>16318022
what's the current record for time between orbital launches?
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 02:12:17 UTC No. 16318047
>>16318039
maybe an hour during Gemini or mercury
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 02:16:11 UTC No. 16318050
>>16318039
The closest record I've been able to find is Vostok-3 and Vostok-4 which launched 22 minutes apart. Gemini 8 launched 101 minutes after the Agena Target Vehicle it planned to dock with.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 02:23:41 UTC No. 16318062
>>16318006
True!!
>>16318013
I detect Muskchud cope, F9 is not Starship
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 02:45:15 UTC No. 16318085
>>16318062
>it's cope
No, it's just an excuse to post old Falcon 9 pictures
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 02:52:12 UTC No. 16318093
>>16318013
>>16318085
The 3x3 engine setup is pretty kino.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 02:54:35 UTC No. 16318094
>>16317208
Wow that is just demented
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 03:28:52 UTC No. 16318139
>>16317208
Thats insane.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 03:32:45 UTC No. 16318140
I just have to come out and say it, iāve understood like 99.99999% of /sfg/ jokes but I canāt stand estronaut and I refuse to watch his starbase tours, even if theyāre insightful, because of the concentrated cringe and I simply donāt get this āwow thatās crazyā āthatās insaneā āyeahā series of jokes
Can someone spoon feed it to me? Are these just funny deadpan Musk responses to Tim or something?
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 03:36:00 UTC No. 16318142
>>16318140
>he wants us to spoonfeed him
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 03:43:40 UTC No. 16318154
>>16318140
concerning
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 03:46:50 UTC No. 16318158
>>16318140
Like, dude. Can you even imagine that? It's unfathomable.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 03:59:07 UTC No. 16318168
>>16318140
No it's Tim reacting to anything and everything he sees at Starbase. As I recall it wasn't such an issue on the last tour.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 04:12:04 UTC No. 16318179
>>16318140
!!!
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 04:29:01 UTC No. 16318197
>>16318140
Take the ego out bask in the glory of spacex
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 04:41:19 UTC No. 16318212
How come its not going to be February before the shartliner crew can be brought home by SpaceX?
Is NASA intentionally delaying it until after the election?
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 05:03:04 UTC No. 16318222
>>16318140
Tim sees literally anything
>Wow that is literally insane
Musk, bored
>Yeah
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 05:04:26 UTC No. 16318223
>>16318212
No matter how it goes Trumo is gonna use it as ammo against Kamala
NASA won't allow that
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 05:06:50 UTC No. 16318226
>>16318212
No the february thing is only if they decide to bring them back on Crew 9 Dragon. They donāt want to waste an entire mission profile sending a dragon up and straight back down. They would send up dragon with a half-crew (2 instead of 4) but make butch and suni wait for Crew 9 to run most or all of its experiments on the station and then come back in February
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 05:16:51 UTC No. 16318232
>>16318231
Whats more, we got to see her career as an independent space journalist launch from starbase. Its crazy. There's quite a few whose career got started by SpaceX or atleast pushed majority by it.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 05:21:34 UTC No. 16318234
>>16318231
Iām not even being mean does she have a developmental disorder? She looks like she rode the short bus to school. Also she says āeric burjerā despite everyone knowing itās obviously āburgerā
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 05:26:04 UTC No. 16318237
>>16316992
> did you just ignore the part about candu reactors needing little to no processing!
We were being polite. We didn't want to draw attention to you insisting one can just shovel dirt into a reactor and it works. Because atoms or possibly the Power of Friendship.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 05:27:56 UTC No. 16318238
>>16318231
what a whore
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 05:29:14 UTC No. 16318241
>>16318238
okay what the fuck this is just gross and whatās worse, this is obv on purpose. Puke tier content
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 05:30:06 UTC No. 16318243
>>16318238
>>16318231
wouldnt be surprised if in a few months shes announced as having one of elons children.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 05:39:15 UTC No. 16318253
>>16318238
>>16318231
I hate women so much it's unreal bros. Elon needs to invest in robo waifus and artificial wombs so we don't export these creatures off world.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 05:46:08 UTC No. 16318257
>>16318234
It's "Bear-jƩ"
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 05:50:54 UTC No. 16318261
>>16318231
>be attractive women
>see no other attractive women in niche male field
>start making basic ass videos
>instant success
Men are niggers for enabling this.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 06:08:17 UTC No. 16318285
>>16318261
its actually the you-know-hews who own and operate yewtube who decide who is and isn't successful
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 06:15:44 UTC No. 16318292
When IFT-5? It's taking so long.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 06:16:33 UTC No. 16318293
>>16318292
elon said mid august but my guess is after polaris dawn
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 06:50:22 UTC No. 16318307
>fat guy on NSF thinks that Bozo is going to try and get their pathfinder to the moon before SpaceX in order to steal the spotlight
I can see it. I can absolutely imagine another "Welcome to the club." Tweet from Jeff.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 06:59:11 UTC No. 16318312
>>16318231
AHAHAHAHA CHECK OUT THE WRITING IN THE BANNER
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 07:07:34 UTC No. 16318320
This EJ dude on NSF looks like he does bumps every time the camera isn't on him, lmao.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 07:37:20 UTC No. 16318345
>>16318312
AI slop banner too lol lmao
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 07:39:09 UTC No. 16318347
>>16318261
Don't forget the other mid-tier whore who used to hang around Starbase constantly, trolling for compliments and spreading her legs for any SpaceX bros with a Tesla. Jessica Kirsh was her name, not sure if she's still trying to get in on the action or not. Good to see these bullshit channels finally fail on their lack of merit, besides the "look at me, I'm a GIRL!" thing, these vapid cunts have nothing to offer the world and should be repurposed.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 07:46:16 UTC No. 16318352
>>16318347
Ellie has done some interesting interviews though she seems to farm views by showing her tits a bit (she used to be a journalist previously)
I don't remember Jessica Kirsh really doing much of anything at all
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 08:59:07 UTC No. 16318390
>>16318292
Up to the feds. Elon's endorsement has probably done damage in this regard
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 09:02:08 UTC No. 16318394
>>16318390
What happens when Trump doesn't win? The biggest way to fuck up the whole starship program is by not letting them launch from specific place more than 10 times per year
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 09:04:01 UTC No. 16318395
>>16318394
Same thing that has been happening in the last few years, their policy won't change once their old puppet is gone.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 09:17:48 UTC No. 16318398
>>16318347
brb
buying Tesla
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 09:33:13 UTC No. 16318403
>>16318398
I hate those tesla fanboys. There's something about stock that makes people mentally insane.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 09:35:16 UTC No. 16318404
>>16318140
you make this same post every year
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 09:35:32 UTC No. 16318405
>>16318403
its a good stock sir
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 09:58:31 UTC No. 16318411
>>16318394
More lawfare with increasing attempts to get Elon to sell his stake
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 10:06:36 UTC No. 16318413
>>16317233
>>16317300
>>16317415
*destroys your population's ability to maintain a complex civilization*
Only solution is eugenics. A mars base would at least offer a separate population, and one with strong incentives to implement eugenics (space habitats need clever people to keep everyone alive).
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 10:11:35 UTC No. 16318415
>>16316978
CANDU is shit though and you should really be looking at a fast breeder to maximize your fuel usage
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 10:14:17 UTC No. 16318416
>>16317327
It took a thousand years. That's the point.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 10:16:37 UTC No. 16318418
>>16317415
this progress may be in the tens of thousands of years scale on average, but we still have periodic collapses due to dysgenics.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 10:22:30 UTC No. 16318419
>>16317642
In a free market, the only kind of monopoly that can form is something similar to spaceX - one where the product is genuinely too good for any competitors to make. In 30 years or so, the monopoly will naturally be destroyed as competitors catch up or the key people at the company retire, die, move on.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 10:25:45 UTC No. 16318425
>>16317620
it's almost like the chinks do it on purpose to sabotage america's space efforts
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 10:26:46 UTC No. 16318426
>>16317633
democrat approval
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 10:45:50 UTC No. 16318440
>>16318425
The only thing this is going to affect is the shell they were planning on putting the satellites in. Imagine announcing you are putting up a megaconstellation and your first launch kesslerizes the specific orbit you were planning to use
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 10:46:29 UTC No. 16318441
>>16318413
>eugenics fag
Good luck with that. The Martian population will be necessarily self selected from the start. It isn't obvious you would even need eugenics. If you take anything from the 20th century it would have to be a really robust asylum system. I imagine if the subway schizophrenics could vent the atmosphere of the entirety of NYC they would still have some solid asylums.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 10:50:38 UTC No. 16318446
>>16318441
keeping people in asylums is expensive, euthanasia or being exiled back to earth is probably more reasonable
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 11:09:12 UTC No. 16318451
>>16318446
Look man I'm talking about real life here. Do you honestly expect NASA/SpaceX will tell the public and international community
>yeah we had to kill him, it would be too expensive otherwise
A lockable door and a launch window's worth of food might literally be like $100,000 depending on where Starship's cost per kg ends up.
>exiled back to earth
Who's going to volunteer to sit in a Starship with the insane man for 8 months?
The first few missions will send people past the age where psychological problems arise, but as soon as they start sending people younger than that they'll need asylums.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 11:14:59 UTC No. 16318453
>>16318451
I'm not talking about NASA/SpaceX, I'm talking about the independent mars colony
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 11:16:28 UTC No. 16318455
>>16318231
looks like a femsoi, so she's estronaut but with boobs
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 11:17:25 UTC No. 16318456
>>16318455
that's insane
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 11:42:32 UTC No. 16318463
>>16318461
wtff why is SpaceX launching a anti-ship ballistic missile?
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 11:50:42 UTC No. 16318469
>>16318463
The final solution to the boatboomer problem.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 11:54:36 UTC No. 16318473
>>16318461
death, taxes, and spacex wiping the floor by an order of magnitude
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 11:58:46 UTC No. 16318475
>>16318469
about fucking time
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 12:17:36 UTC No. 16318483
>The report, by NASA's Office of the Inspector General, has even called for 'financial penalties' for the aerospace giant's 'noncompliance with quality control standards.'
OH NONONONONONONOOOO BOING BROS... NOT LIKE THIS....
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/science
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 12:20:03 UTC No. 16318486
>>16316932
i want to see how they install the rats
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 12:20:12 UTC No. 16318487
>>16318419
>In a free market, the only kind of monopoly that can form is something similar to spaceX - one where the product is genuinely too good for any competitors to make
lol
Maybe in industies with a low barrier to entry.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 12:23:13 UTC No. 16318491
>>16318487
Steam is another example.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 12:24:52 UTC No. 16318493
>>16318483
>Daily Fail article
Barely worth the paper it's printed on.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 12:25:20 UTC No. 16318494
>>16318487
>low barrier to entry
I think you mean high barrier to entry
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 12:26:55 UTC No. 16318497
>>16318494
I didn't mean to imply that I thought the aerospace industry had a low barrier to entry.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 12:28:40 UTC No. 16318502
>>16318493
https://oig.nasa.gov/wp-content/upl
Main article. Get ready to rage.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 12:30:18 UTC No. 16318505
>>16318483
Iāll save you some time, NASA rejected the idea of those penalties
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 12:33:15 UTC No. 16318506
>>16318483
>>16318502
hello outer asteroid belt poster
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 12:47:48 UTC No. 16318517
>>16318507
>people will inevitably say this to starship starlink launches
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 12:50:32 UTC No. 16318523
>>16318453
Not a thing, and when it is a thing they'll be able to afford asylums
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 12:51:30 UTC No. 16318524
>>16318507
will they care about chinese starlink if it keeps dumping hundreds of pieces of junk into orbit?
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 12:52:05 UTC No. 16318525
>>16318497
I alright anon I understood what you meant
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 12:54:08 UTC No. 16318527
>>16318523
why do you think the colony would adopt the liberal western way to do things? I would guess a bunch of people going there were trying to escape it
keeping permanently useless or even dangerous people in the colony doesn't seem very smart
kind of doubt there would be long term prisons either
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 12:57:10 UTC No. 16318528
has elon launched anything to moon?
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 12:58:40 UTC No. 16318532
Aaaaand landed another one
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 13:00:28 UTC No. 16318534
https://x.com/muskontooolll/with_re
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 13:01:41 UTC No. 16318535
>>16318527
>eugenics
>kill the insane
>kill the criminals
You're just a sociopath lmao what the fuck. This has nothing to do with conditions on Mars
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 13:03:52 UTC No. 16318536
>>16318535
its just pragmatic
if you are a permanent threat to others, then you have to be contained (expensive) or be removed permanently
this is not about personal grievances or anything of the sort
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 13:04:07 UTC No. 16318538
>>16318528
No he doesn't care about the moon
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 13:05:08 UTC No. 16318540
>>16318536
>expensive
That's an excuse lol. It's not that expensive. You just want to kill people
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 13:07:32 UTC No. 16318543
>>16318540
keeping someone around for something like 50+ fucking years? yes its extremely expensive
not only do you have to build and upkeep the space for this individual, you need to feed and clothe them and then have one or multiple people keeping watch and there is a pretty good chance the person is going to harm someone during that time
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 13:10:19 UTC No. 16318547
>>16318543
and I'm specifically talking about violent people or people which would sabotage or harm something very important which would in effect be violence as well
for instance if you poison water is that violence? what if you vent a habitat with people inside?
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 13:14:39 UTC No. 16318551
I mean perhaps you could have some kind of work camps or something so the people might be a net benefit or something, but if someone is just too insane to function then idk
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 13:20:21 UTC No. 16318553
>>16318543
it will cost next to nothing to ship starships back to earth. Bad apples wonāt be stuck on Mars. Theyāll be deported as soon as possible.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 13:23:35 UTC No. 16318557
>>16318553
yes that is what I think is more likely than simple execution
Starship is big enough to have a brig and after some time you would have ships going back every cycle and probably have SpaceX or some other employees on them, doing trips back and forth
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 13:29:31 UTC No. 16318562
>>16318557
why are you acting like executions are even on the table here bro, good grief you are sadistic
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 13:32:22 UTC No. 16318563
>>16317579
so, a V8 is actually 8 engines?
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 13:33:44 UTC No. 16318565
>>16318562
why are you acting like they wouldn't be?
right now in the west violent criminals are protected over victims, its absurd
a mars colony could not do this, not for a very long time
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 13:34:40 UTC No. 16318567
>>16318565
I hope you never come close to holding any sort of power or authority
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 13:37:06 UTC No. 16318571
>>16318567
I'm talking about violent criminals getting executed instead of getting lifelong sentences
what is wrong with this exactly? you haven't articulated any counter argument, just some pussyfooted argument from incredulity
the justice system of the mars colony is not going to function like canada or san fransisco, its going to be closer to martial law
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 13:38:28 UTC No. 16318573
>>16318517
Inshallah it will happen with crewed mars launches.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 13:38:39 UTC No. 16318574
>>16318571
youāre just larping as a space martial of justice. We donāt have bad apples being executed in antarctica or military bases. Grow up.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 13:40:07 UTC No. 16318579
>>16318574
yes because its easy to remove them from antarctica or the military base and put them into prison (and some would get executed yes)
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 13:41:23 UTC No. 16318582
>>16318579
itās easy to get people off of the moon and mars retard
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 13:43:45 UTC No. 16318585
>>16318582
really? >>16318451
>Who's going to volunteer to sit in a Starship with the insane man for 8 months?
>The first few missions will send people past the age where psychological problems arise, but as soon as they start sending people younger than that they'll need asylums.
mars isn't going to fucking have asylyms for a very long time
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 13:46:50 UTC No. 16318589
what is so radical about exectuing murderers and very violent repeat offenders?
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 13:51:43 UTC No. 16318594
That anon is trolling. Much of Earth's population is living in countries with death penalty. Only European countries are staunch abolitionist, and their opinion won't matter in space in the near future for obvious reason. Only US and China has realistic plan to setup colonies outside Earth, both carry out death sentence, China regularly. It stands to reason that future space colonies are very likely to have death sentence, inheriting it directly from the founding country.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 13:54:22 UTC No. 16318599
>>16318594
when keeping evil people alive costs you the very air you breath, you'd think that the death penalty would become absolutely necessary
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 13:58:42 UTC No. 16318605
>>16317714
I'm stoked for Stoke, but Rocket Lab is my actual favorite
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 14:00:38 UTC No. 16318607
>>16318605
why? the CEO of Rocketlab seems very unambitious
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 14:04:35 UTC No. 16318610
>>16318607
NTA I think Beck is ambitious. He just doesnāt have unlimited money cheats enabled and wants to push for something other than biggest cheapest rocket.
Roggidlab stands a real chance of being the first company to run a venus mission. Iād say thatās a good ambition.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 14:10:23 UTC No. 16318617
>>16318594
practical
>>16318594
also practical but not ethical. If we practically execute henious criminals on mars colony, thats a practical way to keep order. However if we punish them with prison time but then when you need to take calculus due to lack of air issues of which the immediate solution is to kill criminals, that would only buy few minute/hours of time at max and would have no material impact on the gravity of the situation and thus is done likely not in perfect utilitarian calculus but more of irrationality. In other words, death of criminals cannot be supported by arguments about air rations but can be supported by practical maintenance of order.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 14:20:38 UTC No. 16318625
>>16318599
You are obsessed with the resources used without having any context for their relative costs which means you're using it as an excuse to kill people
>only the enlightened west lets inconvenient people live
Well the west also brought us from cabbage farming to interplanetary travel so I say we keep it
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 14:21:41 UTC No. 16318627
>>16318625
Exactly; I second this
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 14:26:01 UTC No. 16318632
>>16318625
you seem to be obsessed with keeping dangerous and evil people alive at all costs.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 14:38:25 UTC No. 16318639
>>16318528
There were some lunar missions launched but not SpaceX corp missions
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 14:44:43 UTC No. 16318645
>>16318312
>final frotier
so she likes frottage?
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 14:46:56 UTC No. 16318651
>>16318625
>>16318617
I suspect that the death penalty for martian colonists will be like that of the first colonists of the Americas, IE if you break something truly irreplaceable/unfixable you are deemed too much of burden for the colony and killed.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 14:56:39 UTC No. 16318661
>>16318651
Probably not. We have better technology to avoid the worst of the old ethical standards. Keeping a criminal in life or worst case scenario, send them back to earth on the first return trip by creating a Guantanomo Bay for Earth. We will ofcourse have return trips back but we should also have enough to survive till the next launch as well. If it is truly the case that the martian colony cannot survive then killing the criminal would not solve anything as everyone would die anyway.
Questions about whether killing the one person would save the whole colony would need to consider not just the oxygen/food/resources cost but the possibility of rehabilitation that could turn things around with the labor value of the additional hand. With both options to be weights, the calculus cannot be lightly done nor be accurate enough to make a firm decision, atleast not on consequentialist terms. But rather on emotional and appeal to order.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 14:56:48 UTC No. 16318662
>>16318659
Faggot rocket for customers too salty to fly on a Falcon
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 14:59:40 UTC No. 16318666
>>16318663
Earthās workhorse
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:00:40 UTC No. 16318669
>>16318665
Why would pushing the software update potentially brick the entire docking port?
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:01:47 UTC No. 16318671
>>16318659
heterosexual rocket for patrician high energy payload customers.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:04:15 UTC No. 16318673
>>16318671
Toryās whole āprecisionā metric is so fucking lame and is just a cope because he has nothing else to show for
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:06:53 UTC No. 16318676
>>16318320
bumps?
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:07:52 UTC No. 16318677
>>16318661
The idea of a space brig makes a lot of sense but it's going to be hard not to implement procedures that prevent colonists from enacting defacto kangaroo courts that far from any authority center. Much less convincing launch providers to lift a space jail.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:08:01 UTC No. 16318678
>>16318665
The previous starliner docked and undocked just fine autonomously though?
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:08:21 UTC No. 16318679
>>16318662
https://x.com/torybruno/status/1539
>We have sold 70 Vulcans. The first 8 are in flow in the Rocket Factory
That's 38 Kupier launches, 20 launches for NSSL Phase 2, one Dream Chaser test flight and six operational flights, and then maybe five individual contracts for groups like NASA and Intelsat. That's not a great customer base.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:08:33 UTC No. 16318680
>>16318676
https://youtu.be/8QYdIswhbY4?si=kTU
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:10:40 UTC No. 16318681
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:14:15 UTC No. 16318685
>>16318665
Huh? They can't EVA to undock it?
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:18:53 UTC No. 16318688
>>16318685
How would an EVA undock it? All of the parts locking it to the station are inside of the docking adapter.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:18:57 UTC No. 16318689
Does Shitliner have Canadarm attachment point?
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:21:02 UTC No. 16318691
>>16318688
wear EVA suits, unlock the clamps, drift it out and the astronauts return to the ISS
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:22:04 UTC No. 16318692
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/18222
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:23:04 UTC No. 16318693
>>16318691
All of the clamps are inside the adapter and can't be accessed from the outside
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:23:22 UTC No. 16318694
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:23:57 UTC No. 16318696
>>16318692
Inner Cringe is the best let free
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:24:23 UTC No. 16318697
>>16318691
you have no idea how docking works, please donāt pipe up with stupid ideas on topics you donāt know about thanks
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:25:00 UTC No. 16318699
>>16318697
Why would it not work? Why must they stay inside the starliner?
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:25:15 UTC No. 16318700
>>16318692
can't wait til we can shitpost on the moon
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:26:12 UTC No. 16318701
>>16318688
People who think astronaught can command Starliner to undock then EVA back to ISS either have no sense of how bulky the EVA suit is or how crammed Starliner is. I don't think you can even operate the switches wearing gloves of EVA suit without hitting things you shouldn't.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:27:50 UTC No. 16318702
>>16318699
Your ignorance is even more impressive than your stupidity
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:28:38 UTC No. 16318704
>>16318702
So you don't know.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:28:58 UTC No. 16318705
>>16318699
Retard lmao
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:31:41 UTC No. 16318708
>>16318701
I'd say the odds of being able to operate Starliner's control in EVA gloves are better than 50/50. It would be very awkward, but astronauts with EVA experience are good at making very deliberate, planned manipulations. My big concern would be if the astronaut could even fit out the hatch or docking port while wearing the EVA suit after Starliner was detached.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:37:30 UTC No. 16318712
>>16318708
Actually, I had another thought. Dragon had to be certified for operations after depressurization for the upcoming Polaris spacewalk. Do we even know if Starliner will function be able to properly with a depressurized cabin?
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:37:32 UTC No. 16318713
>>16318632
>all costs
Again with this. We're talking about the 1% of people that go irrecoverably bonkers and a murder rate comparable to Iceland. The resource expenditure is low.
>>16318651
>Reasoning by analogy
Mars is going to be a cutting edge factory not a cult's farming village.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:43:02 UTC No. 16318721
>>16318665
I refuse to believe nasa doesn't have the means to get the capsule undocked autonomously, it just may take a while. I don't think the 2nd port being taken out of action while they wait is likely to happen. Just don't use the boeing capsule ever again
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:44:58 UTC No. 16318722
>>16318708
Yeah at worst bring a stick to push the buttons and flip the switches. I don't think the docking port is big enough for EVA suit, but the side hatch should be. No idea if it's possible to close it from the outside while in space wearing the EVA suit though, but at that point it's probably the least of everyone's concern.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:45:04 UTC No. 16318723
>>16318721
>I refuse to believe nasa doesn't have the means to get the capsule undocked autonomously
Well as of right now Boeing doesnāt soā¦
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:45:17 UTC No. 16318724
>>16318712
It can't even function properly right now
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:48:15 UTC No. 16318727
>>16318665
>>16318721
also if the first plan to autonomously undock it fails, there's probably a 2nd and 3rd one.
If these two astronauts are stuck in a capsule that cant deorbit then the only plan is suicide pills.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:49:48 UTC No. 16318731
>>16318712
Surely it has to work while depressurized. Otherwise what's the point of wearing IVA suit if the capsule will fail when exposed to vacuum and you can do nothing but watch your oxygen depleted.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:50:49 UTC No. 16318733
>>16318725
itās long time past rocket lab needing to fuck off with these cutesie mission names
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:51:16 UTC No. 16318736
>>16318731
>Surely it has to work while depressurized. Otherwise what's the point
Easy money from making a substandard product
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:53:17 UTC No. 16318740
>>16318721
https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/
>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 delayāthe need to update Starlinerās 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 Earthās atmosphere.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:53:42 UTC No. 16318741
>>16318731
Yeah it seems like an obvious thing but I donāt put anything past Boeing right now. Of course Iām speculatingābut it would not surprise me if we learned that Starliner had internal components that would simply fail under vacuum/thermal issues
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 15:54:50 UTC No. 16318744
>>16318231
>>16318347
I know things dont look good now but just wait on the compression space suits
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 16:01:51 UTC No. 16318754
>>16317839
Enough communist gobbledygook.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 16:02:13 UTC No. 16318755
Canadarm should just rip the accursed shart off the station
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 16:06:24 UTC No. 16318762
Contrarian here:
NASA has consistently claimed that, despite the current situation and lack of confidence, should there be a serious emergency (i.e. a station destroying event) they would not hesitate to have Butch and Suni return to Earth in Starliner right now. If thatās the case, is there really a problem?
If theyāre confident in being able to use Starliner in a āshit, well we have no other choiceā scenario then itās really just people arguing back and forth about the small details whilst they have the time to do so
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 16:09:34 UTC No. 16318766
>>16318762
If there was a fire in your house blocking the hallway, would you hesitate to jump out of your second story window? Of course not.
Does that mean jumping out of your window is safe? Of course not.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 16:10:43 UTC No. 16318769
>>16318762
Yes, you have better chances aboard Starliner than a destroyed space station. Excellent point. There must really be no problem at all huh
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 16:14:42 UTC No. 16318772
>>16318762
>hey would not hesitate to have Butch and Suni return to Earth in Starliner right now
I think they're full of shit and are just saying that.
I do not believe them.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 16:16:50 UTC No. 16318775
>>16318713
you know what uses less resources? if you blow them out of the airlock to die.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 16:18:25 UTC No. 16318780
>>16318766
>>16318769
Iāll remind you both that NASA has officially listed putting Butch and Suni on the cargo pallet inside Crew 8ās Dragon as an option. So yeah if theyāre willing to do that but also willing to fly them back on Starliner anyways in some sort of emergency then the problem is obviously not that bad
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 16:28:07 UTC No. 16318790
>>16318775
Resources on Mars will not be scarce enough to justify your sociopathic fantasies
>>16318780
It's better than cramming them in the luggage compartment so it can't be that bad
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 16:30:52 UTC No. 16318794
>>16318790
i think that nutcases and murderers should be even more scarce.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 16:31:54 UTC No. 16318796
>>16318607
>the CEO of Rocketlab seems very unambitious
Beck is highly ambitious, RL needs to keep a good face and show off financials so their stock looks good. Their big claim to fame is Electron, but launches only make up about 25% of their income. Their other space-related services like building satellites make up the other 75% of income. There is a lot going on behind the scenes.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 16:33:21 UTC No. 16318798
>>16318796
Yawn wake me when a real company wants to do something important
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 16:33:44 UTC No. 16318799
>>16318762
I think a not insignificant part of NASA okaying Starliner as a lifeboat is that in such scenario ISS is lost therefore the risk of Starliner crashing into is no longer part of the calculation. If Butch or Suni has a medical emergency right now, they will come back with Crew 8.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 16:35:42 UTC No. 16318803
Estronaut is just gonna throw softball questions at Jeff isnāt he
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 16:45:40 UTC No. 16318815
>>16318803
I'm curious how Bozos will react to Estronaut baseding out over everything.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 16:51:47 UTC No. 16318820
>>16318815
by awkwardly laughing very loudly no doubt
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 16:56:16 UTC No. 16318826
>>16318803
>So, when do expect your company to reach orbit?
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 17:04:39 UTC No. 16318836
>>16318669
Maybe there's some chance of it getting stuck there with no way to remove it if the software fails.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 17:07:51 UTC No. 16318839
>>16318836
>canāt fly with astronauts
>canāt fly without astronauts
How did it come to this? Boeings competency is so low right now itās on the fucking abysmal plain of hades
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 17:08:07 UTC No. 16318841
>>16318722
even if they could somehow fit an eva suit through the hatch and teather it to the station nasa would never do something so risky with an astronaut.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 17:16:28 UTC No. 16318853
>>16318841
Yeah anything that involves EVA into Starliner is absolutely not going to happen.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 17:24:16 UTC No. 16318858
>>16318722
Yes I would never do something so risky post-challenger/columbia, the days of the MMU style tests are probably over for them
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 17:25:22 UTC No. 16318861
>>16318858
NASA would* lmao
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 17:28:16 UTC No. 16318865
>>16318858
Yeah I was going to say: maybe if this were the 70s theyād try something ballsy
But then again, if this were the 70s they would have a capsule that actually works and isnāt a dangerous piece of shit
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 18:22:28 UTC No. 16318922
>>16318815
Thats insane
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 18:25:56 UTC No. 16318925
How much does the steel for each Starship cost?
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 18:30:47 UTC No. 16318930
>>16318925
$90K total for entire Starhip/superheavy.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 18:30:52 UTC No. 16318931
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 18:32:28 UTC No. 16318932
>>16318931
lmao
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 18:34:17 UTC No. 16318934
>>16318931
More like between 3 cents and 10 billion dollars
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 18:40:59 UTC No. 16318945
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 18:46:25 UTC No. 16318952
>>16318945
I'm 40 and this is nostalgia
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 19:06:26 UTC No. 16318968
Hello saw a pic with some weird metal thing sticking out of starships bottom where the engines are supposed to be anyone know what I'm talking about.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 19:08:26 UTC No. 16318970
>>16318968
It's okay for Starships to have fetishes.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 19:14:38 UTC No. 16318980
>>16318968
Oh yeah the big prolapse. I have no fucking clue what that was
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 19:15:56 UTC No. 16318983
>>16318968
and of course you can't even repost said image here
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 19:16:28 UTC No. 16318985
>>16318931
what kind of rocket can I get for 3 cents? a plastic tube filled with a mentos and a sip of coke?
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 19:17:21 UTC No. 16318986
>>16318985
Maybe a bottle rocket out of a pack of 100?
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 19:28:05 UTC No. 16319004
>>16318983
Retard nigger your using the wrong image format convert it to png
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 19:31:21 UTC No. 16319009
>>16318983
Can't find it any more. Closed tab before I bothered to save it
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 19:35:13 UTC No. 16319013
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 19:49:46 UTC No. 16319033
are their any estimates how expensive the whole boing disaster is for NASA so far?
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 19:52:00 UTC No. 16319036
>>16319033
pretty cheap because the dumbasses at boeing agreed to a fixed price contract
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 19:54:26 UTC No. 16319040
>>16319036
it fucks with ISS operations and missions though and they probably have quite a few people doing a lot of extra work to unfuck it
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 20:01:50 UTC No. 16319052
>>16318425
It's probably just that the Chinese are an extreme hurry to claim orbits and spectrum before the ITU resolution 35 deadlines. They don't think they have the time to pause launches to debug flaws in new rockets, so they will keep launching the rockets while the debugging is ongoing
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 20:05:59 UTC No. 16319056
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 20:14:01 UTC No. 16319066
I haven't visited musk's X page in 3 weeks. I only see the posts that people post here.
It makes me a healthier person.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 20:17:40 UTC No. 16319071
>>16319066
getting away from socials in general for 3 weeks will make everyone a better person
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 20:18:21 UTC No. 16319073
>>16316957
here
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 20:28:15 UTC No. 16319082
>>16318483
NASA is going out of its way to show the public that Boeing is running the show, with the fact that they refuse to penalize a contractor that has so catastrophically failed at delivering on their fixed price deliverables despite having been paid nearly 2x more than the other solicitor.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 20:30:27 UTC No. 16319084
>>16318721
They don't. The station is over 30 years old and at no point in its design, was it ever anticipated that a contracted supplier would shit the bed so badly, it would turn a lifeboat into a coffin attached to the ISS.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 20:35:43 UTC No. 16319089
cool https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ihi
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 20:41:10 UTC No. 16319096
>>16319082
Its SO obvious Boeing is getting complete legal protection from the current administration, because of political corruption. They also comply with the diversity hires, and gay ass promotion of everything liberal and union. The absolute clown world bullshit is on full display here, and normies don't even care.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 20:45:55 UTC No. 16319102
>>16319096
Is there a point to this post or is it just an awkward attempt at in-group signaling?
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 20:49:07 UTC No. 16319107
>>16319102
boeing bad spacex good upvotes to the left
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 20:54:46 UTC No. 16319113
>>16319096
Boeing is too big to be allowed to fail.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 21:06:23 UTC No. 16319133
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 21:06:34 UTC No. 16319134
>>16317714
I like BO now that they got the oldspace cleaned out.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 21:09:48 UTC No. 16319139
>>16319102
The point is, these policies are absolutely ruining the one thing we are here for. nerding out about great engineering, tech advancements, and possibilities. everything Boeing has done recently is counter to our interests, and we have a right to be pissed about it. its actually quite alarming more people don't notice things.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 21:11:05 UTC No. 16319141
>>16318140
holy cow can you imagine? i've never seen this before in my life! *awkward laugh*
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 21:11:38 UTC No. 16319143
>>16319120
RGV say it's a filter or a sump or something idk they weren't very clear about it I doubt they know either
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 21:20:15 UTC No. 16319157
>>16319143
It's clearly one of those space lasers Elon said he has
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 21:25:29 UTC No. 16319163
>>16319139
>nerding out
>we
>our
Really wish reddit didn't kick you out.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 21:27:10 UTC No. 16319165
>>16319139
>Boeing bad government corrupt Biden corrupt DEI gay ass woke union bad clown world
None of these statements are wrong as facts and as opinions they're very safe ones that the overwhelming majority of /sfg/ holds to some degree. That's not the point. Everyone here already knows and notices and understands all of this, so what value does stating any of this again add to the conversation here? We already all have negative opinions of Boeing and Biden and the government. That post is someone going into an incel general and repeating a pile of negative stereotypes about women. It's begging for headpats and some "Well done, son" affirming (you)s. Stop enthusiastic arguing for a point 100% of everyone here already agrees with.
>we have a right to be pissed
Have you ever considered that being this angry about things you can't change isn't healthy?
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 21:27:28 UTC No. 16319166
>>16318517
That will be a wonderful thing
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 21:27:46 UTC No. 16319167
>>16319143
it is a funnel/sump for the flatter bulkhead in order to ensure fuel flow
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 22:22:13 UTC No. 16319229
>>16318815
He'll respond in kind.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 22:33:00 UTC No. 16319235
>>16319134
what timeline are you from? Cause that certainly hasnāt happened here
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 22:39:22 UTC No. 16319240
>>16319235
Yes it has.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 22:42:40 UTC No. 16319247
>>16319240
Bezos finally got pressured enough to replace bob smith with dave limp yet the oldspace still runs deep. Youāre coping! Nothing will change the fact that Blue Origin runs on SpaceX burnouts and old purged Aerojet Rocketdyne talent who were about to retire but were instead offered huge paychecks.
Blue Origin will never be retroactively cool or newspace. They are nuULA and you are delusional for thinking otherwise.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 22:43:32 UTC No. 16319250
>>16319120
Fucking elon is making everything on starship look like an old 50s sci fi prop
except it's stainless and not chrome
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 22:43:49 UTC No. 16319251
>>16319247
Geez, calm down muskrat
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 22:48:04 UTC No. 16319257
>>16319251
You have your fingers in your ears and need to be corrected
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 22:49:22 UTC No. 16319258
>>16319257
gross pervert
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 22:50:10 UTC No. 16319259
>>16319251
This is the muskrat general until someone else lands a first stage of a rocket that launches a payload to orbit. This is the bar, it's very low.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 22:51:36 UTC No. 16319260
>>16319259
Looks BO will be the first besides spacex to do it.
šļø Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 22:52:00 UTC No. 16319261
>>16319251
learn the truth badly
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 22:58:15 UTC No. 16319266
>>16319129
damn that's a big cylinder
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 22:58:46 UTC No. 16319268
>>16319134
HA!
Very funny joke
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 23:01:06 UTC No. 16319272
>>16319165
>Have you ever considered that being this angry about things you can't change isn't healthy?
The entire point of our system of government is that things like this should be changeable.
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 23:09:47 UTC No. 16319284
>>16319274
fuck those gay ass KBOs I say more ice giant probes
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 23:34:37 UTC No. 16319308
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 23:43:11 UTC No. 16319318
>>16319188
I may try this for IFT-5
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 23:44:51 UTC No. 16319319
>>16319318
iām going to do it for escaPADE except Iāll keep getting close enough to where they have to scrub
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 23:46:06 UTC No. 16319321
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 23:48:02 UTC No. 16319323
>>16319321
Reused? Also
>air recovery
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 23:48:21 UTC No. 16319324
>>16319321
this little experiment doesnāt count, no one worth their salt takes this seriously. Itās investorbait
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 23:53:01 UTC No. 16319325
>>16319318
>>16319319
I wish we wouldn't be in such a nanny safety culture and they'd simply put down a parameter and say "if you're inside, whatever happens to you is not our problem"
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 23:54:21 UTC No. 16319326
>>16319325
I agree lol. Though I imagine half of it is safety for the rocket/payload/crew, i.e. you donāt know the intent of someone approaching too close to a manned launch and you need to recycle or stand down for safety of the rocket
Anonymous at Sat, 10 Aug 2024 23:57:51 UTC No. 16319330
I have nothing against air recovery and I wish any company who pursues that path the best of luck.
That said, it's an insane amount of added logistics and endangers pilots on even the most mundane of missions.
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 00:06:07 UTC No. 16319336
>>16319326
Yeah, it's retarded and I'll sign any waiver. If you get hit by falling debris it's a skill issue. Designated water viewing areas are only marginally closer so not sure I'll bother but I plan to attend one way or another.
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 00:08:16 UTC No. 16319338
>>16319336
the flip side of the chinese being careless and reckless is that they donāt give a fuck if you walk right up to a giant medium lift hypergolic rocket launch and honestly I think thatās based hahah
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 00:09:29 UTC No. 16319339
>>16319323
not in the requirements.
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 00:10:46 UTC No. 16319340
>>16319339
>lands
Nah try again.
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 00:11:20 UTC No. 16319341
Why land a rocket booster when you can sea it
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 00:37:45 UTC No. 16319361
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/18224
3 WEEEKS
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 00:41:27 UTC No. 16319364
>>16319361
2 WEEKS + 1!!!!
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 00:41:47 UTC No. 16319366
>>16319361
It still feels like theyāre gonna chicken out of a tower catch at the last second
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 00:52:16 UTC No. 16319374
>>16319366
at launch or before the landing burn?
because we'd still get a cool shot of it blowing up offshore even if it aborts the landing attempt
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 00:53:25 UTC No. 16319375
>>16319366
There's no point to starship if they don't follow through. Tower B will be ready in a few months if they fuck up.
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 00:54:10 UTC No. 16319376
>>16319374
Oh no I meant like a few days before launch
If they get to launch day and are still intent on doing it then I think itāll happen, for better or for worse lol. Iād hate to see the entire launch pad/tower area get nuked because of a bad landing burn but I think theyād recover from it and rebuild in a month or two
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 00:54:26 UTC No. 16319377
>>16318585
Exile them to Phobos to work in the space mines
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 01:02:07 UTC No. 16319383
>>16319375
NTA but I'm not sure SpaceX would be satisfied with IFT 4s landing burn
While it ultimately worked, it wasn't clean and they are risking launch site damage and miles of red tape.
I guess it depends on how much they trust the new pressure fixes and the state of the vehicle before launch
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 01:08:46 UTC No. 16319386
>>16319272
They are, sometimes, but you're not going to change anything with hollow displays of anger on a Kenyan astrology imageboard.
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 01:17:41 UTC No. 16319389
>>16319274
Because getting to a flyby of a Kuiper Belt object needs a C3 of at least 165 km2/s2. Even very big rockets can only fling very small probes to those trajectories, which means the amount of science they can do is limited, especially if they're only capable of a flyby. On top of that it still takes most of a decade to get there, so you have to build the probe to survive that long and find the funding to keep your science team on ice until it arrives. It's very expensive, very awkward, very difficult, and you don't get much out of it at the end.
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 01:25:25 UTC No. 16319394
>>16319330
>endangers pilots on even the most mundane of missions
It's got that Space Shuttle energy
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 01:26:17 UTC No. 16319395
>>16319383
surely theyāve told the FAA at a certain point it might *look* like a disaster if it hits the tower, but Iām sure they have the legal framework to do it and return to flight in a few months. FAA has been pretty nice considering everything SX is going is uncharted waters and before SX all the faa had to deal with was like 4 flights a year max from legacy oldspace
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 01:27:18 UTC No. 16319397
>>16319394
kek, throw Starliner into that group as well
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 01:31:12 UTC No. 16319400
>>16319366
They are demoing tower 1 either way. It's like when they launched IFT1 with raptor 1s. At some point it's just the cheapest way to dispose of the stuff
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 01:46:27 UTC No. 16319406
>>16319400
I was not aware the plan was to demo the tower. I presume that means they have a ton of upgrades they want to pursue, both for the chopsticks but also the tower structure itself?
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 01:54:21 UTC No. 16319412
>>16319400
>perfect catch
>FTS engage
>blows up the tower
>oh noooooo that sucks how did this happen???
>oh well you faggots were going to investigate us anyway :^)
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 01:58:11 UTC No. 16319413
>>16319336
FUCKING IDORTS
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 02:02:16 UTC No. 16319416
>>16319413
Fucking lmao
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 02:14:34 UTC No. 16319425
>>16319406
Flame trench
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 02:17:19 UTC No. 16319427
>>16319383
I guess state of the vehicle after launch too if it's sort of like droneship landings with the booster translating and committing only if everything looks good. Seems they're confident in SH control at least. Maybe.
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 02:28:20 UTC No. 16319433
>>16319413
Stainless Steel TUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUBES
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 03:18:21 UTC No. 16319457
Very dire that the new horizons team simply cannot find any KBO object to intercept; like thereās simply nothing out there
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 03:24:40 UTC No. 16319461
>>16319457
Itās karma for stripping Ultima Thuleās greek name in favor of some faggot native american name
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 03:30:10 UTC No. 16319467
>>16319361
SpaceX are flying a self-funded super heavy lift rocket more than others are flying their operational rockets lol. No one is even close to competing with them, itās crazy.
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 03:32:50 UTC No. 16319468
>>16319413
>>16319433
TUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUBES IN THE SKY
šļø Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 03:58:31 UTC No. 16319482
>>16319457
lotta space in space. not a hole lot of not space.
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 04:21:13 UTC No. 16319495
so tower catch or not?
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 04:33:07 UTC No. 16319505
>>16319495
youāre going to have to ask musk or shotwell. we donāt know.
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 05:34:44 UTC No. 16319547
>>16319120
Starships screw in like lightbulbs.
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 05:37:28 UTC No. 16319548
I just saw a dream tonight where spacex failed to catch the booster and it landed to the left of the tower (but still did not explode). Dunno about starship tho, the dream ended before they got to it
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 06:00:05 UTC No. 16319556
>>16319495
Its gonna take MONTHS to get FAA approval to do a catch. I could see them doing a "standard" launch just to test the hardware and heatshield.
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 06:27:43 UTC No. 16319574
>>16319556
Good thing it's already been like 6 months since the last launch. Testing starship hardware and re entry is separate from superheavy. I still feel like they will cuck though yeah, but I guess we will see.
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 07:37:56 UTC No. 16319605
https://x.com/peterrhague/status/18
Mice still have bone loss at simulated 1/3 g
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 07:42:37 UTC No. 16319610
>>16319605
Irrelevant since astronaut bone loss is now at 0% using high resistance exercise machines. Need more specific data.
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 07:59:31 UTC No. 16319624
new stage
>>16319623
>>16319623
>>16319623
>>16319623
>>16319623
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 08:08:49 UTC No. 16319633
Anonymous at Sun, 11 Aug 2024 09:26:38 UTC No. 16319689
>>16318780
Incidentally, if someone snuck onboard Dragon as a stowaway would the systems be able to automatically correct for the additional mass and shifted center of mass?