š§µ /sfg/ - Spaceflight General
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 03:09:50 UTC No. 16333883
working in the industry edition
previous >>16331535
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 03:11:14 UTC No. 16333886
good edition thank you for not staging with some /pol/ image
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 03:12:57 UTC No. 16333892
There are recent on topic spaceflight images to pick man, come on.
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 03:14:05 UTC No. 16333894
>>16333883
HEIL
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 03:14:52 UTC No. 16333896
>>16333869
this confuses and enrages the boeing employee
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 03:16:41 UTC No. 16333897
>>16333892
You are basedjacking right now
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 03:22:27 UTC No. 16333906
>>16333901
more like
>BASEDx is launching BASEDronauts on a BASED mission that includes BASEDwalk attempt
am I right?
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 03:30:29 UTC No. 16333910
>>16333888
nah space is still hard. spacex just makes it look easy. remember raptor 3 is still akin to sorcery for the rest of the industry.
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 03:38:14 UTC No. 16333921
>>16333788
>Does Mars have people? Does Venus have jungles?
They assumed yes to both but didn't let it bother them. Same as Darkest Africa had natives so too did Mars and Venus.
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 03:42:40 UTC No. 16333925
Already a sfg
>>16332789
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 04:21:53 UTC No. 16333956
>>16333910
oldspace is jelly
how many times a year does ula launch?
maybe tony should be concentrating on his own house instead of oozing envy at musk's
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 04:53:26 UTC No. 16333983
>>16333883
I used to work in the industry, but then I decided I was too good for it and decided to do something else.
Wernher von's work and the work of his underlings was extremely valuable, made the job I was working on a lot easier, or even conceivably possible, I kind of doubt what I use to work on would've ever even come to pass without Wernher von and his crew.
AMA me anything about working in the industry if you care to
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 05:14:21 UTC No. 16334004
>>16333863
https://www.globalair.com/articles/
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 05:45:16 UTC No. 16334024
>>16333983
How much did you get gaped?
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 06:49:22 UTC No. 16334074
>>16334004
>modern aviation industry: 1930s aircraft design? we can't improve on that
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 06:53:20 UTC No. 16334081
>>16333925
prefer this one
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 06:57:34 UTC No. 16334086
>>16333886
obsessed
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 06:57:39 UTC No. 16334087
>>16333925
early stage (looks like page 4, so by an absolute newfag) + wrong format (no backlink) + you are a faggot
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 06:59:38 UTC No. 16334090
/sfg/ reading list https://theportal.wiki/wiki/Read
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 07:05:48 UTC No. 16334094
>>16334088
Have they said when a rocket using those might launch?
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 07:05:58 UTC No. 16334095
>>16333886
>REEEEEE the guy who put men on the moon and who produced the first orbit capable rockets is /pol/!!!!
>my enitre outlook on life is solely focused on politics, its the only lens I see anything through
>that why I come to /sci/, to police science threads for content I can mistakenly interpret as political and chimp out over
people who are obsessed with politics don't belong on this board or in this thread, 4chan has a separate board for politics
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 07:22:28 UTC No. 16334116
>>16333983
Arianne still hasn't managed to supersede designs that von Braun developed in the 1930s and 40s, all they can manage is scaling them up somewhat.
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 07:29:18 UTC No. 16334122
>>16333983
I'll bite. What did you do and when? Worked on any interesting or famous projects?
inb4 30 years of janitorial experience sweeping the floors of the accounting department at Aerojew Shekeldyne. I'm hoping for something interesting.
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 07:36:26 UTC No. 16334132
>>16334124
X and youtube links for the Polaris Dawn briefing if you missed them
NET is 26th
https://x.com/PolarisProgram/status
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5L_
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 07:40:29 UTC No. 16334137
>>16334128
it cuts off, but the question at the end
>Q: Anything about Hubble or other robotic science missions you might be interested in?
>Jared: We will come back from this one and see where we go from there. We definitely have a Polaris 2 that is up next.
https://youtu.be/5L_OmzqV7wM?si=N8a
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 08:21:45 UTC No. 16334168
>>16333886
>UAP videos on a gov site = /pol/ shit
Mindbroken
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 08:22:31 UTC No. 16334169
>>16334168
Seething
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 08:23:59 UTC No. 16334172
>>16333886
leave this board
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 08:25:00 UTC No. 16334173
>>16333886
fpbp
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 08:28:37 UTC No. 16334177
>>16333886
>>16334086
>>16334095
>>16334168
>>16334169
>>16334172
>Musk outs himself as an altrighter
>suddenly /sfg/ is too
kek
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 08:33:42 UTC No. 16334181
>>16334177
>he unironically uses the word alt-right to describe people's political leanings
haha lmao that's funny
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 08:38:21 UTC No. 16334185
>>16333886
Based,/pol/ tourists BTFO
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 08:41:24 UTC No. 16334189
>>16334177
Musk is at best a centrist
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 08:43:11 UTC No. 16334190
>>16333886
you made them mad lmao
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 08:44:12 UTC No. 16334192
>>16333886
can we cleanse /sfg/ from rightwingers please?
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 08:44:57 UTC No. 16334193
>>16334192
back to r*ddit tranny
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 08:45:47 UTC No. 16334194
>>16333886
>r*ddit
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 08:48:36 UTC No. 16334199
>>16334177
>Any position to the right of the Socialist Transition Phase to Communism is the Alt Right
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 08:50:05 UTC No. 16334201
>>16333886
Thank you for thanking OP
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 09:00:33 UTC No. 16334217
>>16333886
/pol/ board, sry
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 09:02:11 UTC No. 16334218
>>16333886
The jannies are on our side (anti-Trump)
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 09:04:01 UTC No. 16334219
why do trannies feel the need to infiltrate everything?
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 09:05:57 UTC No. 16334223
>>16334219
The entire sales pitch is that they'll finally be happy if they take on a new identity and have people recognize them for this new self. Since they need attention and acknowledgement to get this actualization, they shove it in everywhere they can to get the attention the sales pitch has made them desperately crave.
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 09:56:02 UTC No. 16334267
https://x.com/slvulture/status/1825
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 10:09:25 UTC No. 16334276
>dude it's the largest volcano in the solar system
>dude it's the largest canyon in the solar system
>send exactly zero (0) landers or rovers to either of them in the span of 50 years
Sometimes the budget cuts are deserved.
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 10:16:10 UTC No. 16334282
>>16334064
https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/
>These two science probes must launch between late September and mid-October to take advantage of a planetary alignment between Earth and Mars that only happens once every 26 months. NASA tapped Blue Origin, Jeff Bezos' space company, to launch the Escape and Plasma Acceleration and Dynamics Explorers (ESCAPADE) mission with a $20 million contract.
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 10:20:02 UTC No. 16334286
>>16334282
>Rocket Lab designed, built, and tested the two ESCAPADE spacecraft in a little more than three years. This is relatively fast for an interplanetary science mission. NASA selected the ESCAPADE mission for development in 2019 as part of a new class of small planetary science missions in which scientists can propose concepts for modest probes to explore the Solar System.
time to take old space behind the shed already
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 11:04:30 UTC No. 16334316
>>16333910
Actually the existence of raptor 3 proves that space ISN'T hard, people have just been sticking to designs from a much more primitive era of spaceflight, which has made their experience of spaceflight much harder (because their shit is primitive & sucks).
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 11:06:06 UTC No. 16334318
>>16333886
based
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 11:08:07 UTC No. 16334323
>>16334094
A little over two weeks
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 11:10:10 UTC No. 16334325
>>16334276
there's nothing to study there retard. Most probes are a massive waste of tax payer money already
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 11:11:59 UTC No. 16334327
>>16334124
>I'm definitely going to have to take at least one shit inside this capsule during the mission, and these people will, too
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 11:15:34 UTC No. 16334330
>>16334327
>not opting for the pre-flight enema
selfish
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 11:17:15 UTC No. 16334331
>>16334325
There's plenty to study in both areas mentioned actually
>most probes are a waste of money
lol, lmao
Anyway, the only really egregious example of upcoming wasted probe targeting is Dragonfly's Titan mission landing about as far away from the hydrocarbon lakes as it physically can.
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 11:19:52 UTC No. 16334332
>>16334330
5 days bro, either you're shitting in space or you're shitting during entry when the G forces suddenly come back. Imagine those two women filling the pants in their suits during descent then having to sit in it and huff the fumes in their suits for hours before finally being able to exit the capsule and undress, the embarrassment making them blush even as the stench makes them gag, how disgusting! who could possibly want that!
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 11:27:40 UTC No. 16334342
>>16334331
you feelings don't matter when it's a fact that these missions hardly advance science at all. The money is likely better spent on medical research
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 11:30:34 UTC No. 16334348
>>16334342
or better yet, given directly to your pets (starts with a N)
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 11:32:38 UTC No. 16334350
>>16334342
Medical research is useless, just have more babies dumbass.
Any probe that collects data about any target is objectively advancing our scientific understanding. Even shitty probes like Insight provide valuable data that can disprove entire planetary models, for example the aforementioned has shown us that Mars actually has a pretty large & molten core when previous thinking had deduced it should have a small, solidified core, or minimal melted contents at best.
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 11:38:16 UTC No. 16334354
>>16334064
why fairing so big
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 11:45:58 UTC No. 16334360
>>16334354
the rocket itself is big as well, the payload is just tiny
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 11:47:02 UTC No. 16334361
>>16334360
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsu
pic related is the actual escapade payload adapter
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 11:58:28 UTC No. 16334374
>>16334064
like a hotdog down a hallway
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 12:04:15 UTC No. 16334380
https://www.thespacereview.com/arti
>There is an elephant in the room: the SpaceX Mars architecture built around Starship/Super Heavy. Despite having partially bought into this approach in the Artemis program for usage as a Moon lander, NASA remains deep in ātrade study hellā[1] when it comes to going to Mars. A significant tug-of-war appears to exist between those who insist a nuclear rocket is required for going to Mars with humans, and others, which include SpaceX, who favor the use of in-space refueling of chemical rockets. A more recent NASA trade study[2] concludes that āā¦the high āV required for fast Mars missions with short stay times drives the need for nuclear propulsion technologyā¦ past studies have shown that non-nuclear options require extremely aggressive technologies and concepts of operations to close a fast Mars mission. An apples-to-apples all-chemical ConOps is not likely to be viable.ā
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 12:07:51 UTC No. 16334384
>>16334380
>What is on the table here is the potential for lowering the overall cost of sending humans to Mars while reducing risk substantially via extensive testing. The main challenge this plan will have to surmount lies in accepting that a significant number of Starships are going to be landing on Mars, with some of them crashing. There has been a good bit of discussion of what might be involved in āsterilizingā a Starship to meet the current super-stringent planetary protection rules. Among the many issues is that hundreds of tons of methane fuel would need to be āsterileā, something which strains credulity. There is going to have to be a major re-think on planetary protection for any humans-to-Mars program, but using Starship to support MSR would pull that debate forward in time.
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 12:11:04 UTC No. 16334385
>>16334064
Like that time SpaceX sent up a smallsat on a Falcon 9
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 12:15:08 UTC No. 16334388
>>16334360
Does stage 2 have a common bulkhead between the lox tank and the lh2 tank? I thought you couldnāt do that.
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 12:29:32 UTC No. 16334400
>>16334384
>Among the many issues is that hundreds of tons of methane fuel would need to be āsterileā, something which strains credulity
What the fuck is this supposed to mean? Do people think -180C liquid methane can be contaminated with life?
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 12:31:24 UTC No. 16334402
>>16334388
The Saturn rockets did it, Centaur upper stages do it. There's really no situation in which you cannot use a common bulkhead with any conventional propellants.
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 12:32:13 UTC No. 16334405
>>16334402
but CSS said thats impossible
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 12:53:47 UTC No. 16334434
>>16334405
CSS is actually EDSS
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 13:10:41 UTC No. 16334453
>>16334443
he is going to fix the shitty software and bulging teflon seals with a plastic wrench?
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 13:19:51 UTC No. 16334466
>>16334443
>plastic wrench
what cockhead thought that was a good thing to print
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 13:32:00 UTC No. 16334480
>>16334453
He's going to hit the Russians over the head with it and then steal their Soyuz, which he will land in White Plains in the US.
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 14:13:54 UTC No. 16334522
>>16334471
Is this the only post ITT related to this morningās falcon launch?
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 14:37:20 UTC No. 16334536
>>16334522
this was also the rare debut of a new first stage, now considered the riskiest launch configuration
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 14:38:25 UTC No. 16334537
>>16333886
is this ironic?
if anything, the op image is more /pol/ than a trump one
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 14:39:43 UTC No. 16334538
>>16334537
is it?
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 14:43:54 UTC No. 16334544
>>16333886
Nazis aren't /pol/?
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 14:47:30 UTC No. 16334548
>>16334536
In a decade it will be considered unnecessarily risky to fly crew on a second stage that isnāt flight proven.
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 15:27:43 UTC No. 16334619
>>16334342
>there's no science there and we know this because we've never been there
seethe retard
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 15:33:11 UTC No. 16334632
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 15:44:00 UTC No. 16334657
>>16334643
Whats dish network?
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 15:48:08 UTC No. 16334668
>>16334657
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dish_
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 16:05:29 UTC No. 16334695
>>16334643
https://www.pcmag.com/news/fcc-clea
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 16:27:37 UTC No. 16334727
How much toxic chemicals remain in boosters that fall into the ocean? I ask because while there are lots of good reasons for launch from the southeastern part of the US and out over the Atlantic, I have to wonder if launching the Shuttle over the Great Lakes could have made SRB reuse easier as they wouldn't have been contaminated with salt water. I assume that would have been a big no-go as the booster likely (maybe?) would have contaminated the fresh water of the lakes? Even diluted by the relative proportions, probably not a good thing to have in your drinking water. And of course there are issues with being over populated areas and available orbits. Still, the salt water issue seems quite unfortunate.
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 16:44:50 UTC No. 16334751
>>16334385
IXPE was the smallest and lightest ever
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 16:46:46 UTC No. 16334756
>>16334727
booster reuse was a meme that never amounted much cost savings
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 17:12:42 UTC No. 16334813
>>16333925
>>16333886
you faggots will get both /sfg/s deleted again
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 17:13:31 UTC No. 16334814
>>16334813
I'm actively posting in both so that would be annoying
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 17:49:50 UTC No. 16334872
>>16334354
they forgor
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 17:51:53 UTC No. 16334876
>>16334834
Hey I thought Starlink didnt work? What does Phil Mason and the lot have to say now?
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 18:03:04 UTC No. 16334903
>>16334876
>What does Phil Mason and the lot have to say now?
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 18:11:30 UTC No. 16334915
>>16334876
>>16334903
They always have Hyperloop to fall back on.
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 18:17:15 UTC No. 16334929
>>16334915
what if the Boring Company actually solves that too?
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 18:48:40 UTC No. 16334974
https://x.com/NASA/status/182596415
https://www.nasa.gov/missions/stati
>Editorās note: This article was updated Aug. 20, 2024, to reflect the latest information from NASAās Office of Communications.
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 18:55:09 UTC No. 16334985
>>16334974
This whole thing reads like governments talking about their treatment of POWs
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 18:55:22 UTC No. 16334986
>>16334657
They broadcast a sort of moving picture propaganda medium directly into the living rooms of boomers.
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 18:55:57 UTC No. 16334988
>>16334981
how vain
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 18:58:03 UTC No. 16334991
>>16334981
Am I correct in thinking elon has no involvement with this and itās just some crypto bros trying to drum up hype for their shitcoin?
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 19:05:08 UTC No. 16334997
>>16334991
no elon has made some shitty massive bust of himself and have random retards driving it around
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 19:16:59 UTC No. 16335011
>>16334981
man this level of parasitic dicksucking makes me wanna go postal.
cryptobros deserve the rope.
spacex should poke a hole in a COPV and launch it at this shitty bust.
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 19:24:47 UTC No. 16335025
>>16335011
you should learn to control your temper and not turn into a seething crybaby every time anyone holds an opinion you disagree with
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 19:38:29 UTC No. 16335051
>>16335025
>opinion
>desperately trying to stand in elon's shadow because you know it's a source of money
what "opinion" is there to be had?
they're worthless niggers, end of story.
>inb4 EDS
you're retarded, i don't dislike elon musk
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 19:44:19 UTC No. 16335065
>>16335051
the n word is racist
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 19:52:02 UTC No. 16335077
>>16335065
and?
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 19:52:35 UTC No. 16335080
>>16335065
Das ricsssSSSSSXHSFS
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 19:54:49 UTC No. 16335085
>>16333883
How come von Braun et al developed rockets from practically nothing to interplanetary capability and there has been pretty much zero progress since he stopped working in the field?
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 20:05:47 UTC No. 16335095
>>16335085
well, i'd say that the US, which was pretty much the only country financially capable of pushing the envelope, stagnated for a coupe decades with the Shuttle, then even shut that down once the obamaites got power. The russians just kept doing waht they had always done, while the chinks have only just managed to get an economy which can feed them all reliably and are playing catchup copying everyone else.
But the several new companies in the US, obviously spacex at the forefront, are doing some real work to advance things. its going to be great.
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 20:28:22 UTC No. 16335128
>>16335065
Now that's a vintage gif
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 20:55:47 UTC No. 16335157
>>16334223
they're never satisfied whenever they get what they want, they always immediately start demanding more and crying like a bitch just like they did before they got what they want.
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 21:00:53 UTC No. 16335164
>>16334316
I'm not sure the third major revision of an engine a decade+ in the making really proves that, it was still very hard to get to this point. Not to mention advanced additive manufacturing processes aren't super easy either I bet. I'm guessing you mean more in the sense of it being possible but it still required an extra amount of effort. Let's not forget that FFSC is the hardest cycle. Actually saying all this if Stoke continues at the pace they have and get to orbit in the next few years with zero to FFSC in a few years that'll be a much better example because it'd be just ridiculous. SpaceX at least has the excuse of infinite investor money at this point, Stoke may as well be a bunch of guys in a garage in comparison.
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 21:15:06 UTC No. 16335177
>>16335085
>pretty much zero progress since he stopped working in the field?
What would you have considered good progress since WvB left NASA to today?
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 21:20:20 UTC No. 16335182
>>16334756
>much
*any, it cost the same to just build new ones. They pretty much only reused the booster casings anyway, ie a steel tube.
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 21:21:40 UTC No. 16335186
>>16335085
There's been enormous progress.
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 21:23:17 UTC No. 16335190
>>16335164
It does actually prove that.
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 21:32:50 UTC No. 16335203
>>16335186
such as?
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 21:37:17 UTC No. 16335211
Is new glenn powerful enough to send orion and the esm to nrho?
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 21:44:15 UTC No. 16335221
>>16335211
not even 50%
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 21:51:23 UTC No. 16335231
>>16335221
huh. itās about the same size as sls. Does reusability kill its payload capacity or is srbs and a hydrolox sustainer actually a really good architecture for performance?
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 21:53:20 UTC No. 16335235
>>16335211
that depends on whether or not they can even get into orbit
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 21:54:52 UTC No. 16335238
>>16335157
Because it doesn't work. The radical transformation of identity didn't make them loved, didn't make them happy, and didn't otherwise get them the thing they thought they wanted, and their only recourse is 20 go to 10: try to make someone acknowledge their identity again, because surely this time it will work.
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 22:15:56 UTC No. 16335269
>>16335235
>its already half a decade behind schedule so its a mortal lock guarantee that the people involved in the project are useless morons
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 22:51:05 UTC No. 16335307
>>16334727
>it's the Duluth Space Port poster
Based, haven't seen you in a while
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 22:53:39 UTC No. 16335310
>>16334282
brb gonna go put my aerospace company into sicko mode and see what happens
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 22:54:31 UTC No. 16335312
>>16335231
The SRBs are actually holding SLS back compared to even a gas generator kerolox LRB option. The RS-25E is still a ridiculous monster of a sustainer engine if you don't care about lighting $165M on fire for each one. 1MN of thrust at 425s vac Isp. New Glenn's upper stage is weaker, lower Isp, AND has to do more of the work because the first stage doesn't drop it off basically in orbit like the SLS core.
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 23:03:32 UTC No. 16335320
>>16334484
Thank you Sbarky, very cool!
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 23:40:27 UTC No. 16335349
>>16335346
Haha where did you fond this picture of me? lol
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 23:46:10 UTC No. 16335354
>>16333909
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 23:48:39 UTC No. 16335356
>>16335354
>>16333909
Where's the Titan 3 pic from?
Anonymous at Tue, 20 Aug 2024 23:53:15 UTC No. 16335358
>>16335320
no that is wheel_stop
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 00:12:39 UTC No. 16335382
>>16335358
I'm dumb
My headcanon is that they're both /here/
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 00:26:38 UTC No. 16335395
Thrust is impossible to achieve in vacuum The entire industry is a grift.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 00:29:02 UTC No. 16335399
>>16335395
Jesus makes it possible.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 00:34:25 UTC No. 16335408
>>16335382
sbarky def browses. and there are some other drawanons that are sfg exclusive, thoughbeit rare
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 00:36:39 UTC No. 16335413
>>16335395
What if 2 rockets go up and there's a big spring in between them that pushes them apart
Wouldn't that be at least a little bit of thrust in vacuum?
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 00:46:54 UTC No. 16335418
>>16334282
>>16335310
Elon's secret is that he's always in sicko mode
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 00:47:11 UTC No. 16335419
>>16335395
balloon-car.gif
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 01:12:43 UTC No. 16335443
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 01:19:41 UTC No. 16335452
>nasa decides to return the crew in a dragon
>starliner gets sent back unmanned
>loses control & burns up on re-entry
I'm hoping this is the timeline we're in
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 01:31:17 UTC No. 16335458
>>16334986
They literally put engineering and scientific miracles in orbit. Unbelievable amounts of resources, money, and gargantuan efforts so that Jews can brainwash Boomers into loving israel.
šļø Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 01:55:30 UTC No. 16335486
>>16335452
that's insane
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 02:24:56 UTC No. 16335516
>>16335452
Yup me too. We need a real āoh shitā moment. If this happens it should ground SLS as well, fuck Artemis 2 this boeing rot would be way more scary and should be more important than go-fever and trying to keep to launch schedules
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 02:41:06 UTC No. 16335532
>>16335452
even better scenario:
>nasa decides to return the crew in starliner
>starliner gets sent back with that witch inside
>loses control & burns up on re-entry
>everyone congratulates boeing on destroying the witch
>musk announces that he was planning to sabotage crew dragon to assure her death if nasa had picked crew dragon to return her in
>witches and all other ugly bitches get burned at the stake in celebration
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 02:53:32 UTC No. 16335542
>>16335203
All of newspace
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 02:54:43 UTC No. 16335543
>>16335542
so you can't name anything specific
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 03:03:09 UTC No. 16335547
>>16335543
Falcon 9
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 03:18:26 UTC No. 16335563
>>16335085
You look at Raptor 3 and tell me there's been no progress
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 03:52:08 UTC No. 16335580
>>16335563
>50 years of "progress"
>best thing it produced is a slightly upgraded engine.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 03:59:14 UTC No. 16335582
wheelstop is the only rocketgirl artist with a confirmed vagina. let that sink in
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 04:00:56 UTC No. 16335583
>>16335085
the progress is cost reduction
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 04:10:08 UTC No. 16335592
>>16335583
that only happened in the last few years. same as the engine improvement.
what were they doing for the previous half century?
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 04:58:13 UTC No. 16335620
>>16335307
Not the Duluth guy but since I live in Michigan, I'd have to support Oscoda instead.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 05:02:17 UTC No. 16335625
>>16335452
>the empty starliner loses control & burns up on re-entry
>everyone laughs and lets out a huge sigh of relief
>the dragon carrying butch and sunni also loses control & burns up
>final destination in space
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 05:10:21 UTC No. 16335634
>>16335592
They spent 30 years stuck in Shuttle+ICBMs stasis.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 05:15:24 UTC No. 16335639
prediction: shartliner will never launch again
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 05:18:17 UTC No. 16335645
>>16335639
or land
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 05:55:32 UTC No. 16335690
>>16335592
cost reduction hasn't happened anywhere except at spacex
oldspace still launches twice a year and spends a billion dollars to put a small cargo in orbit
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 06:15:18 UTC No. 16335699
>>16335580
The advances are in manufacturability and cost reduction. However incredible the Apollo-era rocket hardware was, it was still extremely expensive and basically artisan-crafted.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 06:22:56 UTC No. 16335704
>>16335690
Well yeah, administrative bloat. The objective changed from "put things in space" to "make money while remaining technically capable of putting things in space."
This is because the national political will to strive in spaceflight disappeared, so the idealists were gradually pushed out of spaceflight institutions, and without those idealists driving the boat, the institution defaults to basic self-preservation and profit seeking.
Private spaceflight was necessary to make meaningful advances in the absence of national will, because in private industry the vision of the company founder/leader is the substitute for national will. For however long the person with that vision actively engages in running the company, there is progress. Otherwise, progress is not the goal.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 06:33:53 UTC No. 16335711
>>16335307
I am always watching
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 06:48:19 UTC No. 16335731
Great I gotta choose between the nazi /sfg/ and the schizo /sfg/
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 06:52:11 UTC No. 16335732
I've heard F9 recently had a weird/crooked landing, can anyone sauce me up?
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 06:58:38 UTC No. 16335736
>>16335699
>cost reduction.
doesn't exist outside spacex
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 06:59:40 UTC No. 16335738
>>16335731
>b-b-b-baaaaaawwwwwww
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 07:22:47 UTC No. 16335772
>>16334484
I can't wait to see what he cooks up for the Deorbit Vehicle
I wonder what they'll end up naming it, or if NASA is reserving that for a future name contest.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 07:27:15 UTC No. 16335776
>>16335516
Man I don't know if you've ever seen what a delay does to NASA's master Gantt chart but if something happens to Artemis 2 it's going to make the Challenger standdown look like a fucking joke. It'll be another 30 years before they try leaving Earth orbit again, and China will quit after flags and footprints just like the US did.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 07:28:40 UTC No. 16335778
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZW1
>Spaceflight Thoughts #1 - August 2024
eager space video
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 07:31:14 UTC No. 16335782
>>16335772
They will be gay and leave it unnamed as the US Deorbit Vehicle or someshit. But 100% it will have some affectionate meme name internally within SpaceX
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 07:47:19 UTC No. 16335796
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 08:05:27 UTC No. 16335811
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 08:19:07 UTC No. 16335826
>>16335532
>he thinks you can destroy a space witch with fire
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 08:36:14 UTC No. 16335843
Any Lapsa knows more about rockets than either Elon or Bezos.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 08:38:04 UTC No. 16335846
>>16335843
Anal Sphincter knows even more and gets zero credit
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 08:39:59 UTC No. 16335848
everyone just completely forgot about oft5
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 08:50:13 UTC No. 16335853
>>16335848
2 weeks
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 08:50:25 UTC No. 16335854
>>16335848
you mean IFT-5?
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 09:01:23 UTC No. 16335862
>>16335854
No, he means Orbital Hop Number 5.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 09:07:04 UTC No. 16335866
Do a little dab on Boeing's grave
Do a little whip on Boeing's grave
Do a little nae-nae on Boeing's grave
https://youtube.com/shorts/foaRmNTO
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 09:36:12 UTC No. 16335887
>>16335862
the what now?
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 12:22:00 UTC No. 16335998
>>16335772
I feel like Swan would be a fitting name, as in both "Swan Dive" and "Swan Song." It would also fit SpaceX's bird naming scheme.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 12:23:41 UTC No. 16336000
>>16335731
The choice is obvious
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 12:57:26 UTC No. 16336026
>>16335946
We need a SpaceX for missile weapons
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 12:57:44 UTC No. 16336027
what will be different about the upcoming flight test
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 12:59:30 UTC No. 16336028
>>16335620
We've also got MAMA. or will someday I hope
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 12:59:45 UTC No. 16336029
>>16336026
I'm not sure you can break into that space without being killed
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 13:07:15 UTC No. 16336031
>>16336026
Billions and billions and billions of dollars to be made for a company that can do extreme over the horizon radar and missiles that can be launched from stupid far distances and pinpoint moving airborne targets far away.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 13:08:53 UTC No. 16336033
>>16336029
Easy. Just fend off the hitmen with the missiles you now have.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 13:12:12 UTC No. 16336035
>>16336027
they have upgraded the heat shield on the ship so hopefully the flap doesn't get half burnt up
they are also going to try to to land the booster on the tower
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 13:20:44 UTC No. 16336047
>>16336035
how is the new heat shield different
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 13:26:24 UTC No. 16336051
>>16336047
they added an extra layer of ablative heat shield onto around half the ship (basically the middle "belly section from up to down), the heat shield tiles themselves are supposedly stronger (mechanically is the speculation but this hasn't been confirmed) and they beefed up the flap area with tiles
later with starship v2 the flaps are going to be moved further up and back so they aren't in the plasma stream as much
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 13:27:26 UTC No. 16336052
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 13:28:27 UTC No. 16336055
>>16336052
starting to go up
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 13:29:00 UTC No. 16336056
>>16336051
ok thanks
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 13:54:35 UTC No. 16336090
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 13:56:57 UTC No. 16336092
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 13:57:50 UTC No. 16336095
>>16336051
I seem to remember Musk saying that in principle they'd only need one flap at the front/top, so that there'd be three flaps in total. Am I retarded or did he actually say that during one of those tours? I can't really picture it either, would that be like a shark fin at the back? On the other hand planes only have one flap controlling yaw as well, and the wings handle pitch
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 14:00:01 UTC No. 16336099
>>16336033
If you did it right you have a huge asymmetric advantage in arms prices, and if you don't, you weren't the spacex of missile weapons anyway :^)
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 14:02:31 UTC No. 16336100
>>16336095
he did say it was possible in principle, but not that they would actually do it
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 14:03:11 UTC No. 16336101
>>16336051
I'll point out that the ablative underlayer is essentially a survivability backup heat protection system & won't ablate dyring normal reentry. It's being used to eliminate risk of burn through if a tile were to be lost. If a tile were lost, Starship would reenter as usual, then get that broken tile plus the ablative underneath replaced.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 14:04:15 UTC No. 16336103
>>16336095
That'd look a lot like HOTOL, but I think it'd suck, so they won't build it.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 14:04:24 UTC No. 16336104
>>16336100
I said they should, just because it would look cooler
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 14:04:39 UTC No. 16336105
>>16336051
>ablative heat shield onto around half the ship
any word on how this could effect re-usability and turn around time, or is that not a concern at this point perhaps?
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 14:05:36 UTC No. 16336107
>>16336095
>in principle they'd only need one flap at the front/top, so that there'd be three flaps
Iām not picturing this. Is it a dorsal flap, a ventral flap, or some kind of asymmetric flap on only one side of the ship?
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 14:06:36 UTC No. 16336109
>>16336105
its back-up if a tile falls off or something, not supposed to ablate during normal operations
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 14:15:11 UTC No. 16336115
>>16336109
ah ok, so its beneath the tiles. that makes sense now, thanks
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 14:32:16 UTC No. 16336126
>>16336103
>>16336107
Totally worth it just for the aesthetics
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 14:37:35 UTC No. 16336128
>>16336126
Sorry but I see british hardware in orbit and Iām blowing it out of the sky. British āpeopleā can keep their liberalism and monkeypox back on Urf
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 15:03:57 UTC No. 16336137
>>16335879
lets keep it that way
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 15:04:03 UTC No. 16336139
>>16336136
>9 cosmonauts
>only 1 is happy
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 15:04:05 UTC No. 16336140
>>16336136
>Surgey and Surgey are both back
Hell yeah they were cool, they spent a lot of time in the American section goofing off lol
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 15:14:12 UTC No. 16336147
>>16333886
People are now reproducing my OP spergery while I'm out? Kek this is probably OP samefagging though. Someone tell me which thread we are using right now they equal posts below bump limit
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 15:14:55 UTC No. 16336149
>>16336095
>>16336100
he did confirm that future boosters would only use 3 gridfins tho
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 15:19:44 UTC No. 16336158
>>16336155
I'm not gonna post in that gay thread, simple as
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 15:20:25 UTC No. 16336160
>>16336154
What is it missing now? Obviously the arms, OLM and flame trench but anything else I'm not thinking of?
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 15:21:42 UTC No. 16336162
>>16336147
this one has proper backlink
the other has ufo and memedrive in op
your choice
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 15:22:06 UTC No. 16336164
>>16333906
Or maybe just
>SpaceX is providing launch services to first privately funded spacewalk mission
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 15:22:24 UTC No. 16336166
>>16336147
/sfg/ underwent mitosis. whichever one is better adapted to the environment of sci will survive and reproduce, while all others will be outcompeted on resources and die.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 15:22:41 UTC No. 16336167
>>16336158
Theyre both shit to be honest. Also about 2 months without me making OPs now and this is where we're at.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 15:29:20 UTC No. 16336171
>>16336160
basically everything is missing lol
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 15:29:58 UTC No. 16336173
>>16334965
>>16334990
>>16335043
>>16335959
>>16335989
I want to know more about RTGs they are so interesting. Anyone have any cool resources like videos, papers; anything to say on them yourself?
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 15:30:37 UTC No. 16336174
>>16336171
List what everything is then. Go on since you know so much smart ass.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 15:33:37 UTC No. 16336179
>>16336173
All I know about RTGs is that they give power and heating simultaneously to a spacecraft which makes them imperative in deep space missions. If you want more info you should make a non-/sfg/ thread about it. Yes I know the rest of /sci/ is awful but we arent doing much better right now either
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 15:40:55 UTC No. 16336186
>>16336174
my point is that most of the work is still ahead, stacking these pre-built modules was fast, doing the stuff you listed is not going to be as fast
need to expand the propellant farm, add the connections, probably build blast walls or something,
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 15:41:14 UTC No. 16336188
I like the horizon drive discussion from the other thread and I'd like to continue it here.
>>16332789
>>16336002
>>16336007
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 15:44:14 UTC No. 16336194
>>16336188
Id like it to not continue here thank you. Keep it to actual spaceflight that exists right now or will within 100 years and not science fiction bordering on Star Trek tech.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 15:49:54 UTC No. 16336203
>>16336202
Why have you posted the normalfag only frog.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 15:50:24 UTC No. 16336206
>>16336188
Why are you bringing it here? Go back to your own thread schizo.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 15:52:51 UTC No. 16336211
How many modifications would need to be made to a standard off the shelf ICE car to make it suitable for use on the moon? Letās say we leave it unpressurized.
Would it be enough to feed a normal engine nitros from a tank for it to run?
Is the transmission going to shit itself within a few miles or even possibly as soon as you get it out the airlock?
How many critical moving parts are going to cold weld themselves together and how quickly?
Tires should be fine for a few days right?
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 15:54:17 UTC No. 16336214
>>16336211
Why do this instead of just sending up an electric car that only needs new tires?
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 15:56:05 UTC No. 16336216
>>16336211
ICE cars require external oxygen to work and external air flow to cool. Just fucking use electric if there's no atmosphere.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 15:56:13 UTC No. 16336217
>>16336188
take your scam to twitter, the vcfags are there.
>>16336211
are you seriously asking this? how do you provide the oxygen? why would you waste the oxygen?
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 15:58:42 UTC No. 16336224
>>16336211
youāre asking an interesting question in good faith and getting dogpiled by fags who donāt like fun technical hypotheticals lol
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 16:01:51 UTC No. 16336232
>>16336216
You get the oxygen from an onboard supply, probably nitros oxide because throwing that into gasoline engines is well understood but I guess you could use UDMH or something if you wanted. Radiator would be a little tricker. Maybe stick it in the nitros lines and use the expansion of that to cool it. Idk if that would be enough cooling. Worst comes to the worst you make the radiators huge and shield them from the sun.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 16:02:48 UTC No. 16336233
>>16336211
>>16336214
>>16336216
>>16336217
>>16336224
Is this an ice shelf car? Also lighten up.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 16:08:55 UTC No. 16336243
>>16336211
would need to replace the tires, add a massive radiator, probably replace the plastic seals with something that don't break with the low temperatures, probably add some kind of heater so the oil and gasoline don't freeze, add a pressurized air/oxygen intake system and a pressurized exhaust and this is just from the top of my head, I am not intimately familiar with the engineering of ICE cars
oh yeah and then there is the low gravity, not just low pressure + temperature
the low gravity would probably fuck with the fuel intake system
not sure if the abrasive moon dust would have immediate effects but would obviously affect the long term operations with the above modifications which are very handwavy anyway
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 16:12:16 UTC No. 16336247
>>16336233
that can use the ambient air for combustion and cooling, the pressure is similar to warmer locations so that doesn't affect much either
you probably just need a beefier way to ignite the fuel in that, maybe special fuel that doesn't freeze or get ice crystals
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 16:14:37 UTC No. 16336250
>>16336246
I think youād need to charge the batteries first.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 16:19:55 UTC No. 16336259
>>16336250
What if we replace them with modern batteries? How much of a performance boost would that give them?
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 16:24:08 UTC No. 16336267
>>16336251
TBD
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 16:38:19 UTC No. 16336288
>>16334466
>"but a wrench is a wrench" she thought "Why would it matter what your fastener is made of?"
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 17:13:45 UTC No. 16336329
Discuss the combustion of methane and oxygen
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 17:14:49 UTC No. 16336332
>>16336329
Imagine the smell
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 17:16:14 UTC No. 16336333
>>16336329
/sfg/ - Stove and Furnace General
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 17:16:48 UTC No. 16336335
>>16336329
simple, clean, sexy
>>16336332
only smelly because of intentional additives so you can identify a leak
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 17:21:23 UTC No. 16336344
>>16336251
Which capsule the delayed Crew9 or the original planed one?
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 17:23:18 UTC No. 16336347
>>16336344
what?
They have Crew-9 dragon and Polaris dragon
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 17:24:04 UTC No. 16336349
>>16336344
C-207 Polaris Dawn
C-212 Nass 9
Did if this was what was always planned or switched after the delay.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 17:35:02 UTC No. 16336368
>>16336329
That's a clean burning high impulse rocket propellant I tell ya hwhat
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 17:46:51 UTC No. 16336385
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 17:47:54 UTC No. 16336386
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 17:48:58 UTC No. 16336389
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 17:50:01 UTC No. 16336391
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 17:50:29 UTC No. 16336393
>>16336391
my waifu on the left
šļø Barkon at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 17:52:18 UTC No. 16336394
Gey
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 18:00:41 UTC No. 16336414
Automated namefag spambot get rid of it ASAP tranitor it was in the other thread too.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 18:06:50 UTC No. 16336423
>>16336386
Mr. Rookie said it would look like John Halo
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 18:08:46 UTC No. 16336426
>>16336393
Sarah Gillis is cuter, you people are blind!
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 18:24:11 UTC No. 16336463
>>16335736
No other organization has the same ideological drive.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 18:32:33 UTC No. 16336476
>>16336211
>How many critical moving parts are going to cold weld themselves together and how quickly?
They wouldn't. Every interface between moving metal parts on a car is oiled/greased and that lubrication would prevent cold welding. Now, I'm not sure how vacuum-tolerant most of the standard lubricants on a car would be. Some important ingredients might decide to fuck off into the void, leaving a much less viable lubricant behind.
Cold welding isn't as big a deal as you think, though.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 18:35:53 UTC No. 16336478
>>16336052
>>16336055
>>16336090
>>16336092
>[Top of Tower B]
>Tory: How? How can humans survive on Mars? What could possibly transport enough cargo?
>Musk: If humans land, a colony will develop.
>Tory: Even if you succeed, it would take a number beyond reckoning ā thousands of ships ā to sustain the colony.
>Musk: Tens of thousands.
>Tory: But my Lord, there is no such fleet.
>[They walk to the balcony of tower B and Tory looks in awe at the sheer scale of Starfactory. The rumble of multiple super heavy boosters test firing can be heard in the distance.]
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 18:37:58 UTC No. 16336480
>>16336179
RTG heat is typically not used to keep the spacecraft warm, you may be thinking of radiothermal heaters which are much smaller devices that are essentially a pellet of some high specific decay heat isotope that makes little penetrating radiation which they stick directly onto things that can't be allowed to freeze too much.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 18:37:57 UTC No. 16336481
>>16336463
they have ideological drive, they just have a different ideology.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 18:39:43 UTC No. 16336484
>>16336329
More complex than one may think at first, but also much much simpler than kerosene combustion or even hypergolic propellant reactions.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 18:40:25 UTC No. 16336485
>>16336480
Uhhhh nta but Iām pretty sure he was right about RTGs providing power as well as heat
Iāve never heard someone explicitly describe what you mentioned, though it does sound possible. Iām going to say you are wrong here but Iād be happy to be proven wrong
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 18:41:31 UTC No. 16336486
>>16336478
It's gonna be grand.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 18:41:44 UTC No. 16336487
>>16336485
I'm definitely correct about radiothermal heaters, but I may be wrong about RTG heat being used as well. Either way some probes such as Voyager definitely did NOT use their RTGs as a heat source.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 18:46:29 UTC No. 16336492
>>16336487
I think they did. What you described (strategically placing nuclear pellets around the craft) would be a waste of nuclear material and, again, Iāve never heard of this. You use the heat of the RTG and wherever you need more heat you just re-route the electrical power of the RTG to electrical heaters (electrical heaters are just resistors and they pretty much have a 100% efficiency rate for all intents and purposes)
Off the top of my head, the voyager probes have had to shut down these electric heaters as RTG power has dwindled down so some instruments canāt be run anymore
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 18:53:57 UTC No. 16336504
>>16336492
Here's a helpful link to the NASA page describing radiothermal heaters in detail. They exist, they work exactly as I described, and you should really just google things instead of relying on your own "understanding".
https://science.nasa.gov/planetary-
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 18:56:42 UTC No. 16336506
>>16336492
Here's a short NASA animation showing how one of these radiothermal heaters is constructed
https://youtu.be/fHH_yGtmKZs?si=aSU
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 19:01:59 UTC No. 16336513
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 19:03:02 UTC No. 16336516
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 19:04:05 UTC No. 16336518
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 19:04:11 UTC No. 16336519
>>16336513
what's the small tower on top for
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 19:04:19 UTC No. 16336520
>>16336516
where do the employees live? isn't Brownsville a shithole
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 19:05:20 UTC No. 16336522
>>16336519
that's the crane in the background
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 19:07:13 UTC No. 16336524
>>16336522
oh...
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 19:07:32 UTC No. 16336525
>>16336520
some live on the left here >>16336518
but most probably live in brownsville, but a lot of the employees are from there
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 19:10:52 UTC No. 16336533
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 19:15:52 UTC No. 16336542
>>16336534
>Surely he's not a chanhead
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 19:16:12 UTC No. 16336544
>>16336534
Assuredly I am not.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 19:16:38 UTC No. 16336545
>>16336544
dubs confirm
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 19:16:57 UTC No. 16336546
>>16336544
fix the cybertruck, man.
>it needs some f'n titanium skin
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 19:19:35 UTC No. 16336551
>>16336546
Cybertruck was such a retarded idea. They would be better of making a regular Tesla-styled pickup truck.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 19:19:51 UTC No. 16336552
>>16336534
>Why would a company involved in what's generally seen as risky ventures use the generic symbol for good luck?
Truly a mystery for the ages, anon.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 19:21:16 UTC No. 16336554
>>16336243
>a massive radiator
i wonder if any reasonably size radiator would work in vacuum, even kept in shade the whole time. even the LRV had hot batteries.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 19:23:51 UTC No. 16336556
>>16336250
think they were non rechargeable. but yes, replace them with newer recharging versions and boom, LRV is yours.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 19:24:29 UTC No. 16336557
>>16336534
I think a clover was on the mission patch of the first successful Falcon 1 and they've been doing it ever since. I might be misremembering that.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 19:30:33 UTC No. 16336563
>>16336551
>Cybertruck was such a retarded idea
It is if your idea is to make a truck. If your idea is to use your public company's money to research steel for your private company then it's genius. Think anon, think.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 19:35:32 UTC No. 16336571
>>16336485
>pretty sure he was right about RTGs providing power as well as heat
apparently that was how the more modern version RTG was used on the Curiosity and Perseverance mars landers. I was also thinking that simply operating the various electronic components would also help with keeping them warm.
you guys were both right, just talking at slightly cross purposes.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 19:35:34 UTC No. 16336572
>>16336554
All vehicle "radiators" here on Earth are actually liquid-to-air heat exchangers.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 19:36:45 UTC No. 16336575
>>16336571
We were both right until he started saying that radiothermal heaters don't exist, at which point he became wrong.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 19:38:32 UTC No. 16336579
>>16336551
the cybertruck is the best selling EV truck and they are still selling the foundation series (extra 20k)
it is also the best selling vehicle that costs over 100k right now
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 19:40:23 UTC No. 16336584
>>16336563
there's no way. does the timeline support this?
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 19:42:32 UTC No. 16336588
fag
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 19:42:35 UTC No. 16336589
>>16336572
sure, and anything used on such an imaginary vacuum capable ICE powered vehicle would need an infra red radiator like on the Apollo craft, shuttle, ISS etc.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 19:46:20 UTC No. 16336600
>>16336575
its been a kaleidoscopic story of rights and wrongs and a good time was had by all
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 19:47:00 UTC No. 16336602
>>16336575
>>16336485
Was open to being wrong
>>16336504
yeah maybe
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 19:51:27 UTC No. 16336604
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 19:52:01 UTC No. 16336606
>>16336604
lmao
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 19:53:32 UTC No. 16336608
>Airglow (also called nightglow) is a faint emission of light by a planetary atmosphere. In the case of Earth's atmosphere, this optical phenomenon causes the night sky never to be completely dark, even after the effects of starlight and diffused sunlight from the far side are removed. This phenomenon originates with self-illuminated gases and has no relationship with Earth's magnetism or sunspot activity.
Huh never knew about this
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 20:02:20 UTC No. 16336618
>>16336579
>it's the winner of two very niche categories of vehicle
okay
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 20:04:37 UTC No. 16336622
>>16336618
and it just started selling
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 20:13:02 UTC No. 16336630
>>16336608
yeah its pretty neat. you see it mentioned as the lowest possible Bortle level for star gazing.
t. Content Bortle 2 haver
šļø Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 20:34:19 UTC No. 16336651
>>16336604
didn't this fag say the raptor 3 pics looked like CGI?
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 20:35:15 UTC No. 16336652
>>16336631
sidewalks have been poured
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 20:36:16 UTC No. 16336653
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 20:37:17 UTC No. 16336655
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 20:38:19 UTC No. 16336658
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 20:39:21 UTC No. 16336661
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 20:40:22 UTC No. 16336664
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 20:41:23 UTC No. 16336665
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 20:42:25 UTC No. 16336667
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 20:43:27 UTC No. 16336671
>>16336667
possible sushi restaurant
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 20:44:29 UTC No. 16336674
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 20:45:30 UTC No. 16336675
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 20:46:37 UTC No. 16336678
> NASA has pushed out the Starliner decision until the end of August.
Waiting for that Boeing donation to the Harris campaign.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 20:47:09 UTC No. 16336679
>>16336678
Seriously? Faggots if true
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 20:49:45 UTC No. 16336683
>>16336492
The Voyager RTG is on a boom held away from the central spacecraft body.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 20:56:52 UTC No. 16336697
>>16336679
NASA really wants to murder those two.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 20:58:08 UTC No. 16336700
>>16336692
Hop days are over, now get in the fucking pot you little shit.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 21:05:49 UTC No. 16336709
>>16336708
It's that easy
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 21:06:43 UTC No. 16336711
>>16336692
two weeks
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 21:07:03 UTC No. 16336712
>>16336700
waaat
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 21:11:11 UTC No. 16336714
>>16336708
Whatās the most dragons, crew and cargo, simultaneously in space? 2? 3?
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 21:11:49 UTC No. 16336717
>>16336708
Dragon, she come to town.
Come to SAVE, the stranded liner.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 21:17:03 UTC No. 16336726
>>16336714
Nevermind I just looked it up. It was 3 when inspiration 4, crew 2, and crs 23 were all up together from September 16-18 2021
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 21:19:21 UTC No. 16336727
>>16336717
NASA took her away,
stuck at station all day
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 21:25:49 UTC No. 16336730
>>16336727
But she won't,
when dragon saves the day.
HALLELUJAH!
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 21:41:36 UTC No. 16336745
https://www.thespacereview.com/arti
> āItās because, in the meantime, one operator that launched a lot of smallsats is no longer launching any more: Starlink,ā Deville said.
>Starlink, of course, is still launching satellites, but they are no longer considered small. While earlier generations of the satellites weighed in at 250 to 300 kilograms, the āv2 miniā satellites SpaceX is now launching weigh an estimated 750 kilograms. The full-sized v2 satellites, optimized for Starship, will be even larger. SpaceX, in effect, graduated from smallsats to bigger ones.
>The trend of increasing smallsat mass is not limited to SpaceX. Deville noted that, in 2017, the average mass of smallsats launched that year was 17 kilograms; a time, he said, when āthe cubesat was king.ā By 2023, that average mass grew to 199 kilograms, influenced by the large number of earlier-generation Starlink satellites SpaceX was launching. But even if broadband satellites like Starlink are removed, the average smallsat mass still grew to 44 kilograms, more than double the average mass from 2017.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 21:49:28 UTC No. 16336753
>>16336584
There's literally a senator screeching about SpaceX using Tesla electric motor tech right now.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 21:50:07 UTC No. 16336755
>>16336753
source please
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 21:51:31 UTC No. 16336758
>>16336511
>>16336478
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/18263
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 21:52:22 UTC No. 16336761
>>16336755
Senator Warren
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 21:53:42 UTC No. 16336762
>>16336761
lol, of course
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 21:54:38 UTC No. 16336764
>>16336755
There's literally hundreds.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/com
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 21:55:31 UTC No. 16336767
>>16336764
shit like this is why I think its quite unlikely that Starlink is going to ever IPO
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 21:57:17 UTC No. 16336772
>>16336768
aaaand of course I canāt access the full thing :/
Someone posted this though
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 21:58:37 UTC No. 16336775
>>16336764
>w-what do you mean you're not investigating him
>s-surely you can find SOMETHING
She realizes he's the CEO right?
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 21:59:10 UTC No. 16336777
>>16336768
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 21:59:25 UTC No. 16336778
>>16336768
rip escapade
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:00:11 UTC No. 16336780
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:00:43 UTC No. 16336781
>>16336768
ACK
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:01:00 UTC No. 16336783
>>16336768
man I wish spacex had a viable competitor
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:01:04 UTC No. 16336784
>>16336768
>>16336777
What sort of failures?
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:01:12 UTC No. 16336785
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:02:16 UTC No. 16336787
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:03:17 UTC No. 16336790
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:03:29 UTC No. 16336791
>>16336785
>Bezos, the worldās second-richest person and Amazon founder, has been trying to get Blue Origin to orbit for years.
Gradatim ferociterā¦ the tortoise and the hare, Mr. Musk. Soon, very soonā¦
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:04:19 UTC No. 16336795
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:04:39 UTC No. 16336797
>>16336758
When Trunp and Elon are dead it will be such a relief. Too much cringe
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:05:27 UTC No. 16336803
>>16336480
A large part of the energy budget for rovers is to keep them heated, so it would be really stupid to not use the the free heat generated by the RTG.
Though it's apparently too complex to dedust the solar panels, so what do I know...
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:08:39 UTC No. 16336817
>>16336787
>move first stage into hangar
>implodes
Clown company
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:09:25 UTC No. 16336820
>>16336817
kek
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:10:42 UTC No. 16336823
>>16336784
some kind of tank imploding >>16336772
>>16336780
and more specific info about the incidents in the middle paragraphs here >>16336787
but its for the second and third flights, so in principle these should not affect the escapade launch
and weren't they going to simplify the upper stage by removing some orthogrid from it? perhaps the third flight test tank that exploded was this new version of the upper stage, in that case if the second stage of the first flight has already been tested then that shouldn't affect the first launch
though I don't think its really possible to definitely say if they are talking about first or second stages in these incidents
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:12:25 UTC No. 16336825
>>16336787
>let's put this huge sealed vessel in an air-conditioned room after it's reached equilibrium with the outdoors in Florida
>Oh no!
It was amateurish when Spacex did it while transporting a Falcon 1 by plane. It's mind-numbingly incompetent when Blue does it 24 fucking years into the game.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:13:04 UTC No. 16336827
>>16336544
When flight 5?
>>16336563
I predict the geotechnical engineering knowledge of tunnel boring will prove quite useful on Mars as well.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:13:30 UTC No. 16336829
>>16336823
>but its for the second and third flights, so in principle these should not affect the escapade launch
Still not a good sign for this upcoming flight 1 (escapadeās) upper stage. Granted ULA blew out a Centaur V during extreme stress testing and still got Vulcan-Centaur up. But BO has way less experience doing these sorts of things.
Also yes they plan on changing the design but isnāt that for āblock 2ā which is way down the road?
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:13:42 UTC No. 16336830
>>16336787
>imploding rockets
SpaceX did that back in fucking 2008
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:15:31 UTC No. 16336834
>>16336787
Thereās no way to sugarcoat this
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:17:21 UTC No. 16336837
>>16336768
how unfortunate, not that I was expecting them to actually launch it anytime soon, but now they have an excuse
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:19:08 UTC No. 16336838
>>16336837
It was hardware for later rockets, they can still have the first flight explode 50 feet above the pad this year.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:20:00 UTC No. 16336842
>>16336829
I didn't get the impression they have to do a complete "block 2" i.e. a whole new booster as well, didn't they improve BE-3U performance?
better ISP might allow them to have higher dry mass for the second stage with simpler construction (thicker aluminum-lithium plates with perhaps less or no orthogrid necessary) and still get similar payload
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:21:33 UTC No. 16336844
>>16336830
they learned not to lay their big rocket on its side, maybe beƱoz will figure that out soon
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:24:24 UTC No. 16336848
>>16336830
gradatim ferociter = trial and error the same problems that SpaceX did but 16 years later
it took SpaceX 6 years to find out that its a bad idea to take tanks from hot outside air into a breezy air conditioner hangar
for BO it took 24 years
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:25:28 UTC No. 16336851
>>16336842
true also Bozos said he is āhorse racingā cheaper production cost GS2 vs reusable GS2, so he has two teams working on it concurrently I guess. This could have been an example of a test tank exploding because they were trying something new?
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:26:14 UTC No. 16336853
this might not be as bad as it sounds though if these were both upper stages which are supposed to be mass produced anyway
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:27:17 UTC No. 16336855
>>16336851
if its hardware rich testing then this is actually a good sign
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:28:28 UTC No. 16336856
>>16336848
it's gradatim gradociter
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:31:47 UTC No. 16336862
>>16336855
BO is not hardware rich this was probably one of only three tanks they had lmfao
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:34:37 UTC No. 16336866
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:35:42 UTC No. 16336868
>>16336866
Jared is so based itās unreal
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:37:07 UTC No. 16336871
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:38:09 UTC No. 16336873
>>16336871
https://polarisprogram.com/science-
>Below are logos of our partner institutions. Select the institution to read more about the planned experiment and how it will evolve our knowledge of space exploration or impact life back here on Earth.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:38:34 UTC No. 16336874
>>16336862
>reusable means we don't have to build as many rockets
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:40:05 UTC No. 16336875
>>16336778
ESCAPADE's rocket is fine
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:43:07 UTC No. 16336877
>>16336875
For now
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:47:21 UTC No. 16336881
>>16336622
the only thing EVs are good for is getting fools to inadvertently fund rocket programs.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:48:35 UTC No. 16336884
>>16336780
> in part due to worker error
What was the other part due to?
> No more questions! Remove that person!
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:49:47 UTC No. 16336886
>>16336844
they cant. their factory building is not tall enough and they cant weld together their rocket outdoors (or in half open highbays) in the middle of a swamp like spacex.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:50:45 UTC No. 16336887
>>16336881
he says, posting from his 200x overpriced starlink connection
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:52:49 UTC No. 16336890
>>16336887
That's hardly a contradiction.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:57:43 UTC No. 16336899
>>16336697
They actually really don't want to kill them. They just can't quite bring themselves to do what is required to keep them alive.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 22:59:48 UTC No. 16336902
>>16336899
Theyāre going to keep ādelaying the announcementā right up until a week before Crew-9 launch hahah
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:01:45 UTC No. 16336903
>>16336864
https://x.com/rookisaacman/status/1
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:03:08 UTC No. 16336906
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:03:11 UTC No. 16336907
>>16336745
bigsat > sat > smallsat > cubesat > pile of shit > nanosat > steaming pile of shit > chipsat
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:04:37 UTC No. 16336910
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:04:58 UTC No. 16336911
>>16336902
At this point I'd expect nothing less then them delaying the choice until the last possible second.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:07:07 UTC No. 16336914
>>16336902
They're going to smuggle the two home in a Dragon cargo bay without telling anybody, then a while later when the public is still asking for updates they're going to pull a gaslighting routine and pretend there was never an issue and refuse to talk about it
>Huh? Butch and the space witch? In space? What are you talking about, they're at home with their families. "Trapped in space"? Huhh??? What are you guys talking about? You people are so silly. Why are you guys still talking about an old mission that's already over, so weird for you to be obsessed like this. Let's just talk about our new missions.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:07:13 UTC No. 16336915
>Potential solutions to the heat shield issue for Artemis II include altering the spacecraft's trajectory during reentry or making changes to the heat shield itself. The latter option would require partially disassembling the Orion spacecraft at NASA's Kennedy Space Center, something that would probably delay the launch date from September 2025 until 2027 at the earliest.
> delay the launch date from September 2025 until 2027
Bruh
https://x.com/sciguyspace/status/18
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:09:04 UTC No. 16336917
>>16336915
jesus
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:09:31 UTC No. 16336918
>>16336915
>something that would probably delay the launch date from September 2025 until 2027 at the earliest.
>> delay the launch date from September 2025 until 2027
holy fucking fuck what the fuck WHAT THE FUCK
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:09:41 UTC No. 16336919
>>16336915
>removing a heatshield and replacing it with a custom improved version takes 2 years
Dragon engies could unironically do the same in a few months at worst, how are they this bad?
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:10:16 UTC No. 16336920
>>16336915
https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/
absolute fucking disaster
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:10:32 UTC No. 16336921
Launch Orion on the first New Glenn flight as a rescue mission for Starliner
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:11:34 UTC No. 16336923
>>16336915
Thereās no way to sugarcoat this
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:13:51 UTC No. 16336926
>>16336915
China moonshot bros.... we've won!
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:14:48 UTC No. 16336927
>>16336915
China is actually going to beat the US back lol lmao
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:20:00 UTC No. 16336930
>>16336915
this is embarrassing. can we just give a billion dollar to spacex and tell them to revive the grey dragon within 2 years?
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:21:20 UTC No. 16336931
>>16336930
Absolutely not, he's a republican.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:22:03 UTC No. 16336932
>>16336930
Ridiculous proposal, come on anon letās be realistic here.
They could have it ready in less than 1 year
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:22:04 UTC No. 16336933
>>16336915
thats insane
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:26:02 UTC No. 16336940
>>16336933
I'd call it lunacy, but Artemis won't be going to the Moon after all so...
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:32:31 UTC No. 16336949
>>16336915
> SRB will be 10 years past their pour date on launch day.
Pick the Junior High to name after the astronauts.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:33:16 UTC No. 16336950
>>16336915
>china won
what the fuck
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:34:23 UTC No. 16336953
https://x.com/SpaceX/status/1826401
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:34:32 UTC No. 16336955
>>16336915
Boeing/Lockheed execs should be shot
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:35:31 UTC No. 16336957
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:36:18 UTC No. 16336958
>>16336915
Just take it out back and shoot it at this point
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:37:37 UTC No. 16336960
>>16336953
>>16336957
Are they going to be livestreaming the spacewalks?
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:39:20 UTC No. 16336962
>>16336960
yes
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:40:22 UTC No. 16336963
>>16336960
nope
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:40:45 UTC No. 16336964
>>16336960
maybe
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:40:49 UTC No. 16336965
>>16336960
maybe
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:41:15 UTC No. 16336966
>>16336960
not sure
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:41:23 UTC No. 16336967
>>16336953
naked dragon!
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:42:00 UTC No. 16336970
>>16336960
50/50
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:44:28 UTC No. 16336975
>>16336960
Could you repeat the question
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:45:07 UTC No. 16336976
>>16336953
>>16336957
holy fuck
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:46:26 UTC No. 16336978
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:48:37 UTC No. 16336980
>>16336975
Great now thatās going to be stuck in my head over the next two days lol
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:50:02 UTC No. 16336981
>>16336976
MR ADVERTISER GET DOWN
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:50:49 UTC No. 16336982
The company that neil armstrong snubbed, the company that NASA doubted, the company that JPL tried to kill, is now T-posing on the whole fucking industry and wiping the floor clean. The gap could not be larger.
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:51:02 UTC No. 16336983
>>16336976
I hope one day materials science advances far enough to enable transparent fuselages, fairings, and cladding
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:53:47 UTC No. 16336986
>>16336980
Life is unfair
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:54:27 UTC No. 16336988
>>16336983
Save me Mr. Carmack I must SEEEEEEE
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:57:22 UTC No. 16336991
>>16336391
imagine being stuck for 5 days in a tiny capsule with two spicy latinas
Anonymous at Wed, 21 Aug 2024 23:59:57 UTC No. 16336993
>The amount and energies of neutrons produced when galactic cosmic rays interact with spacecraft, such as the Dragon spacecraft, are not well characterized. Pacific Northwest National Laboratoryās (PNNL) Orbital High-energy Space Neutron Activation Project (OHSNAP) experiment seeks to measure the high-energy neutron environment in the Dragon spacecraft using materials to record neutron interactions
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 00:03:45 UTC No. 16336995
>>16336993
>OHSNAP
>OHSHIT
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 00:31:48 UTC No. 16337012
>>16336991
bean farts?
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 00:33:32 UTC No. 16337014
>>16336745
oof
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 00:36:12 UTC No. 16337016
>>16336795
Bezos really thinks he can keep the 60s tech and make it cheaper. Just skipping 50 years of material science and manufacturing advances. Insane.
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 00:39:22 UTC No. 16337020
>>16337014
Ohnononono
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 00:42:06 UTC No. 16337021
>>16337014
18 launches in a year ain't so bad
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 00:43:09 UTC No. 16337023
>>16337014
But neutron will be successful trust the plan, r-right guys??
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 00:44:43 UTC No. 16337025
>>16336971
Fuck off man the boots aren't optional
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 00:47:21 UTC No. 16337026
>>16337014
"I blame our customers."
That always works.
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 00:48:28 UTC No. 16337029
>>16336745
>people build smallsats because their only chance is catching a ride with a bigger payload
>company makes smallsat launchers assuming smallsats are a result of limited required capabilities
>turns out less people give a shit about tiny smallsats when medium lift rockets get so much cheaper
>schools and universities who only care about cheapness and academic ventures also don't happen to care about hyper specific orbits and transporter is offering a better deal
I guess it's easy to see in hindsight with how reused F9 is
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 00:50:38 UTC No. 16337030
>>16337021
Now do Total Payload Mass.
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 00:52:20 UTC No. 16337033
>>16337014
>Customers, though, have not had any problem showing up for SpaceX rideshare launches.
STOP THE COUNT
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 00:56:03 UTC No. 16337035
>>16337014
if you're doing a smallsat you probably have a small budget, which means spacex is likely your only affordable option. rocket lab needs to find a new business model asap.
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 00:57:31 UTC No. 16337037
>>16337014
>malding at your customers for picking the cheaper option
Let's see how this plays out for them
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 00:57:59 UTC No. 16337038
>>16337035
e.g. canning electron and neutron and pivoting solely to satellite and probe manufacturing ASAP
This is where their attention and resources need to be going
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 00:58:20 UTC No. 16337039
>>16336915
Is SpaceX going to get to Mars before NASA gets to the moon? Hell, is SpaceX going to the moon alone?
>>16336916
:)
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 00:59:37 UTC No. 16337040
>>16337030
ok. what's your point?
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 01:00:24 UTC No. 16337043
>>16337040
kek
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 01:03:32 UTC No. 16337047
>>16337039
>Hell, is SpaceX going to the moon alone
If Starship is flying regularly in a few years, even the congress jews are going to be hard pushed to defend these shitcan projects. Especially if chinks start picking up the pace. We could very well end up with starship only architecture.
>HLS launch, refuel and land on the moon with dudes
>Regular starship launch, refuel and goes to lunar orbit
>HLS launch from moon, rendezvous with regular starship and take them back
It will have to carry NASA astronauts and NASA badges though. Private ventures will not be allowed to happen until at least one or two "NASA" missions have been done.
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 01:05:33 UTC No. 16337048
>>16337038
Sat Lab works as a name too
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 01:08:10 UTC No. 16337051
>>16336768
ITS OVER
at their pace, it may be years before they can recover
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 01:13:26 UTC No. 16337056
>>16337014
In hindsight, a lot of the smallsats are small not because the operator specifically wants a small form factor, but because it's the only option they can afford in terms of mass, volume and monetary budget. Falcon 9 rideshare relaxed the pressure to squeeze everything into a small package. Bulkier, heavier but cheaper designs are now valid for traditional smallsat operators. And no one outside the military is really interested in catching a taxi instead of the bus.
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 01:16:15 UTC No. 16337058
Kek today was a rough day for basically anyone who isnāt SpaceX
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 01:22:21 UTC No. 16337062
>>16337014
she warned you
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 01:26:16 UTC No. 16337065
>>16337062
Mother [math]\unicode{x1F60D}[/math]
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 01:27:39 UTC No. 16337066
>>16336783
You should watch the latest interview with stoke space CEO
https://youtu.be/bYyMTa5a2NU?si=xSt
I think they could actually beat SpaceX to a properly reliable reusable upper stage. In only three and a half years they have gone from nothing to
>ORSC hydrologgs upper stage engine with a unique and difficult design
>FFSC (!) Methane first stage engine
>First stage tank built and verified, ready for integration
>multiple upper stages already being produced ready for customer launches
He thinks they are on track for launch next year and I believe him. It looks like he poached some fucking mad talent from BO and SpaceX to get engines built out so fast. He's also based because he is /sfg/ pilled af and loves starship unlike the other malding space CEOs. I also think he is right that starship is kind of too big for a lot of tasks. If they can start launching in a year or two successfully they will be eating fat with all the payloads that are sitting on the two year Falcon wait list along with constellations like kuiper that are stuck in launch hell. I also think starship tiles are going to be an ongoing nightmare, stoke solution is so elegant and simple. I think the reason SpaceX didn't use it or something similar is because they need to use Methane for Mars and it just doesn't have anywhere near as good heat absorption as hydrogen.
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 01:30:48 UTC No. 16337067
>>16337014
>Customers, though, have not had any problem showing up for SpaceX rideshare launches.
absolutely fucking brutal, Foust, good on ya
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 01:35:46 UTC No. 16337071
>>16337066
I am hopeful for Stoke but they're not even in the "competitor" crowd until they've done an orbital launch.
Even Blue is only like halfway there, with engines on Vulcan and a suborbital hopper.
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 01:38:18 UTC No. 16337076
>>16336988
this looks like a sick joke. i imagine carmack and the boys laughing their asses off at what the grafix artists whipped up over the weekend
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 01:42:10 UTC No. 16337081
>>16337071
Making comparisons with blue origin is bad, look at this thread, company is full of clowns. Remember that there is now aerospace talent everywhere, totally different scenario from even 10 years ago. Especially ex SpaceX employees who have intimate knowledge of how first stage reuse works along with a whole host of general rocket knowledge. Not to mention SpaceX has already done a lot of the hard work in figuring out the best way to do things, you just need to copy them.
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 01:51:00 UTC No. 16337086
>>16336551
cybertruck sucks visually IMO but the electric system rework is worth whatever cringe it brings about (though it's only half completed). soon 48V full ethernet getting rid of miles of shitty wiring for that next gen tesla taxi thing
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 01:51:15 UTC No. 16337087
>>16337081
I think worker incentives take a nose dive when people leave SpaceX and are offered (supposedly) anywhere from 4x-5x salary increases and figure out within their first year of new employment that itās mostly just meetings and group powerpoints, their managers work from home or expect like one or two milestones to be met a month instead of like a thousand things needing to be done in a day, and missing timelines has no repercussions
Iām sure itās anecdotal but itās often said people work at SX more for the vision and less for the money. Once they leave they can get comfortable elsewhere. Not the best for everyone else. But nonetheless this isnāt 100% of ex-SpaceX (SpacEX?) employees and I feel like certain companies such as Stoke, Firefly, Rocket Lab, etc. certainly have the passion. Theyāre just operating with way less money and resources.
But God it goes to show how ahead-of-the-curve Elon was. Falcon 1 STILL mogs all of these current small launchers, and they moved on to test firing, flying, and upgrading Falcon 9 for reuse quickly using common engines that also got upgraded. Elon knew what the fuck he wanted and he still knows
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 01:52:15 UTC No. 16337088
>>16335458
America is a wonderful country, isn't it?
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 01:58:48 UTC No. 16337096
>>16337014
As soon as Starship starts flying, all the nominal "competitors" to SpaceX are going to be blown the fuck out of the water. Only Blue Origin and national programs will continue, the former because Bezos has money to burn and the later for national security / prestige reasons alone.
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 02:00:28 UTC No. 16337097
>>16336551
>>16337086
>best selling EV truck
>bad
Its always people claiming SpaceX, Tesla, Starlink being bad while it being dominant
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 02:01:41 UTC No. 16337098
>>16337066
reminded me of this
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 02:02:13 UTC No. 16337099
>>16337097
>best selling EV truck
>bad
That entire gimmick of a niche is bad.
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 02:02:38 UTC No. 16337100
>>16337097
Not hard to be the best selling EV truck when your competition is.. uh?..
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 02:23:40 UTC No. 16337121
>>16336976
>>16336978
Such a complex machine for what is essentially a glorified goldfish bowl to sustain the fleshy human body in otherwise uninhabitable conditions.
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 02:27:19 UTC No. 16337127
>>16336915
jesus christ what a disaster of a program
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 02:29:47 UTC No. 16337131
>>16337121
it doesnāt have to be complicated. A pressure vessel with pressure fed monopropellant engines / RCS, an oxygen tank, and a simple computerāfor exampleāwould really be all you need.
It just helps to know exactly what and how the vessel is doing at all times, and to have redundancies in many places.
Sensors for your engines, sensors for your thrusters, sensors for your fuel tanks, a life support system suite with oxygen and carbon dioxide monitoring, a launch escape system with plumbing and sensor connects to the rocket, a docking ring with mechanical and electrical hookups. Gotta find real estate to run all this stuff if you desire it lol
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 02:40:27 UTC No. 16337140
>>16337086
Love the look of the cybertruck. I wish more manufacturers would divest from the same old tired designs
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 02:42:52 UTC No. 16337142
>>16337100
Kek I remember for years hearing people laugh about how the Lightning and Rivian hit the market before Cybertruck and were taking away sales. And that the Cybertruck was vaporware. I'm starting to see more Cybertrucks than Rivians where I live now, iconic
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 02:44:19 UTC No. 16337143
>>16337140
They do that because aerodynamics for cars is pretty much solved. I bet cybertruck took a huge efficiency hit to look like a Lego block.
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 02:52:23 UTC No. 16337150
>>16337143
Cybertruck has better aerodynamics than all other EV trucks except for Rivian. Rivian has the cuck design
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 02:52:52 UTC No. 16337151
>>16337096
You understand things. "Right size" is the wrong mindset for launch: the only thing that matters is absolute cost to the customer, regardless of what they want to send into space or what orbit they want to put it in.
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 02:57:16 UTC No. 16337160
>>16337150
Tesla/SpaceX engineers are wizards
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 02:57:28 UTC No. 16337161
tesla kowtow general
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 02:58:27 UTC No. 16337162
>>16337150
really? rivians don't seem like much of a different shape from most normal trucks
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 03:00:01 UTC No. 16337165
>>16337151
Sure, but once you scale up to something monstrous like starship you need to be filling that giant payload bay reliably to get the costs down and even then you are limited by the manifest. Look at Falcon 9, two year waitlist despite launching every three days because they just have so many fucking starlinks to launch and will so indefinitely thanks to lifespansof the satellites. It's going to be quite some time before starship is launching at that frequency and even then the starlinks have been scaled up bigly so it's not going to look much different. There is plenty of time for whoever else can nail second stage reuse to be getting lots of launches and scale a vehicle.
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 03:00:31 UTC No. 16337167
>>16337163
i wanna lick her pubic hair
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 03:01:23 UTC No. 16337168
>>16337165
>Sure, but once you scale up to something monstrous like starship you need to be filling that giant payload bay reliably to get the costs down and even then you are limited by the manifest.
Step back and ask yourself why you think that's the case; if you take this as an axiom, you're probably going to come to the wrong conclusions.
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 03:01:30 UTC No. 16337169
>>16337162
Rivian has 0.30
Cybertruck has 0.34
F-150 Lightning has 0.56
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 03:01:41 UTC No. 16337170
>>16337167
control yourself anonymous
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 03:01:58 UTC No. 16337171
>>16337170
im doing my best
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 03:02:40 UTC No. 16337172
>>16337169
drag coefficient*
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 03:07:37 UTC No. 16337173
The Moon is looking really nice tonight
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 03:09:04 UTC No. 16337178
>>16337168
>Step back and ask yourself why you think that's the case
Because it's a massive vehicle. Even once you get everything dialled in and assuming it's a fairly cheap launch and there is a whole load of work left to do to get there, the operations costs are fucking huge. Look at the amount of people and the scale of absolutely everything down at Boca, now add in regulatory compliance, taxes, continuing land and facilities development, maintennance/refurbishment, third party contractor costs and umpteen million other overheads.
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 03:09:08 UTC No. 16337179
>>16337173
who are you confessing to
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 03:11:59 UTC No. 16337182
My one complaint with spacex and tesla being as successful as they are is that Elon has offloaded everything to a touchscreen which is really fucking gay
Knobs and switches and analog dials conveying real-time data please
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 03:14:00 UTC No. 16337186
>>16337182
luckily there's still orion and starliner
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 03:16:59 UTC No. 16337187
>>16337186
I actually like their interfaces, the capsules just happen to suck
Itās like getting in a new rental car and if I want to so much as change the temp and fan speed I have to navigate through 8 buttons on a dodgy touch screen while driving on the highway. JUST GIVE ME A FUCKING TURN KNOB, ITāS TACTILE AND INTUITIVE AND TAKES ONE BRAIN CELL OF PROCESSING POWER TO USE
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 03:18:36 UTC No. 16337189
>>16337178
The power of Starlink as an internal justification for Starship launches is that it self-justifies the operating costs of the pads, vehicles, and associated systems; Starship has a good reason to exist even without a single external customer to name. This, in turn, creates the knock-on effect that the actual cost for the launch does not need to be significantly higher than the amortized cost of the pad's wear items and the vehicle itself.
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 03:19:52 UTC No. 16337191
>>16337182
Ideally you dont need a button for anything, it just reads your thoughts and just werks
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 03:20:46 UTC No. 16337193
>>16337191
neuralink capsule when?
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 03:22:38 UTC No. 16337195
>>16337191
If Iām on the hardware design team at SpaceX and youāre a chippy young fresh-off-the-boat college hire who suggests we just ditch everything in the cockpit for a neuralink interface, youāre getting a 12 gauge blast to the cranium
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 03:25:44 UTC No. 16337197
>>16337191
>dragon starts rapidly depressurizing, sparks and fire erupting from toilet
>i scream internally "SAVE ME DRAGON PLEASE DO SOMETHING"
>dragon panics, shits pants
>i die
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 03:27:39 UTC No. 16337200
>>16337199
dozens of starships soon (I give it a decade + 2 yrs so letās say 2036)
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 03:33:19 UTC No. 16337209
>>16337199
dragon is so pretty.
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 03:40:42 UTC No. 16337213
>>16337182
Better engineering won out.
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 03:53:14 UTC No. 16337224
>With the "lessons" from Starliner seeping in, you may see an uncrewed Artemis II. Except in this case, it is the taxpayer picking up the ridiculous costs, while Lockheed laughs all the way to the bank. This is what happens when you label projects as national prestige projects. Now Lockheed is in a position where THEY benefit from an uncrewed Artemis II launch, as that probably gets them another Artemis mission down the line.
lockheed is the new boeing
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 03:54:38 UTC No. 16337225
>>16337065
since when could 4chan display emojis?
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 03:55:33 UTC No. 16337227
>>16337225
it's /sci/ voodoo. something about inserting unicode into tex
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 03:59:39 UTC No. 16337230
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 04:01:27 UTC No. 16337234
>>16337225
when you put them in the file name
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 04:02:31 UTC No. 16337236
>>16335879
The seas belong to America already.
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 04:03:36 UTC No. 16337238
>>16336026
Anduril?
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 04:40:31 UTC No. 16337261
>>16337224
>unscrewed Artemis 2
Can we just strap some monkeys in there at least
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 05:07:21 UTC No. 16337279
>>16337236
SeaX when?
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 05:15:12 UTC No. 16337285
>>16337179
TO YOU ANON, TO YOU.
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 07:45:04 UTC No. 16337384
>>16337279
Eh?
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 07:47:52 UTC No. 16337385
>>16336604
https://x.com/CSI_Starbase/status/1
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 07:52:41 UTC No. 16337389
Watching our local hoes interview with Herr Mueller, this shit is so funny bros.
>first thing he does is show her a glass cabinet full of ITAR machinery; chambers, turbomachinery, injectors, etc...
>Doesn't mention anything about ITAR
>camera man is eyefucking it
>Mueller pointing out all sorts of different parts in the cabinet
>had to blur it after the fact
>he spends a solid 10 minutes giga autism unloading about the Orion nebula and star types while she just sits there going uh huh, wow, ohhh, cool
My sides I'm not even halfway in, she barely even talks he is just autism info dumping. Kino.
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 07:57:10 UTC No. 16337392
>>16337389
nigga link it
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 07:58:30 UTC No. 16337395
>>16337392
It's like two months old and I don't condone giving this shameless skank views but Mueller is based and his company is doing really cool stuff.
https://youtu.be/_pBKrwCL6xA?si=LnS
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 08:06:29 UTC No. 16337403
>spacex has 13k employees
>nasa has 17k
how long until spacex overtakes nasa? probably next decade?
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 08:09:45 UTC No. 16337406
>>16337395
lots of cool new space stuff coming the next few years
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 08:10:46 UTC No. 16337407
>>16337403
BO has 10k
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 08:13:34 UTC No. 16337410
>>16337406
For sure dude, things are going to get crazy
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 08:18:48 UTC No. 16337412
>>16337395
Truly shameless
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 09:27:15 UTC No. 16337479
Hear me out, private dragon circumlunar flight
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 09:49:48 UTC No. 16337504
>>16337479
Polaris 1 is about to launch
Polaris 3 will be the first human Starship flight
Jared doesnāt have a plan yet for Polaris 2, itās tbd. Might be worth it to do gray dragon to the Moon. Beef up the heat shield, and replace the regular dragon trunk with either Dragon XLās service module or fast-track the ISS deorbit service module (are they both the same thing? maybe!)
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 09:56:31 UTC No. 16337514
>>16337504
>first human Starship flight
Is the human rating a government thing or can Jared just sign a waiver and send it
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 09:59:09 UTC No. 16337518
>>16337187
the US Navy is āde-glass cockpitingā a bunch of bridges on ships because theyāve had a lot of accidents involving touch screen controls. Theyāre stripping the screens and moving things back to physical buttons and switches. They did a study a while ago and found tactile controls are better, especially under duress or combat as it requires less thinking and is more intuitive.
Dragon is a good balance though it still has a stringer of physical buttons for important commands and the manual flight controls (a la their docking game you can play online) seems fine for a touch screen.
Canāt speak for Teslas, Iāve never driven one
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 10:02:38 UTC No. 16337524
>>16337518
Given the state of the Navy I'm forced to imagine it isn't the touch screens
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 10:03:23 UTC No. 16337527
https://news.mit.edu/2020/life-venu
>phosphine detected on venus
>many are naturally skeptical due to the implications
https://www.space.com/venus-atmosph
>new detector used
>once again phosphine is detected and now ammonia
>not only detected but in the cloud layer that is the most earth like place in the solar system
>neither can be explained by known abiotic chemistry pathways
>not detected sooner because UV light destroys it
>it's being replenished somehow
Time to fund robotic HAVOC. Is NASA still not allowed to do serious investigations into this subject aside for look for evidence of water for the 100th time?
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 10:04:58 UTC No. 16337532
>>16337527
>Time to fund robotic HAVOC. Is NASA still not allowed to do serious investigations into this subject aside for look for evidence of water for the 100th time?
Ask the question again when the current cadre of mission directorate fogies finally get forced into retirement or die off.
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 10:05:44 UTC No. 16337533
>>16337514
āhuman ratingā is just a government/NASA thing. Itās just some self-imposed statistic (Iām making this up but, say, 1-in-250 chance of failure or whatever) they do risk analysis along the whole rocket but obv itās kind of just a guessing game as Apollo 1, columbia, and challenger took peopleās lives. NASA re-ran internal statistics and found that shuttle had a 1-in-9 chance of catastrophic failure during the first nine flights of the program lol, whoopsies
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 10:06:12 UTC No. 16337534
>>16337518
>Canāt speak for Teslas, Iāve never driven one
Abysmal. My mate bought a model 3 performance. Scary af piece of hardware, like a Falcon 9 on wheels, kind of cant believe they sell it to any retard, but the ipad screen is actual pure cancer when you are driving. The worst part is that it's mounted flat to the dash and you need to buy a third party accessory to be able to turn it to face, you know, the fucking driver.
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 10:07:17 UTC No. 16337537
Staging to other thread
>>16332789
>>16332789
>>16332789
>>16332789
>>16332789
>>16332789
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 10:07:17 UTC No. 16337538
>>16337533
>1-in-250 chance of failure or whatever
IIRC they just doubled the Shuttle rate 135 flights x 2 = 1 in 270 chance
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 10:11:41 UTC No. 16337553
>>16337527
HAVOC is cool, do it with Starship for cheap
>>16337534
Yeah I figured. Iāve been in plenty of tesla ubers and it seems like the interior is so cheap lol. Everything squeaks, plastic pieces arenāt fitted flush, and the screen seems gimmicky more than anything. I donāt have EDS or anything I just think people are getting fleeced by becoming obsessed with the company and Elon knows he can cut non-essential corners and everyone will forgive him and it wonāt affect the value of the stock price
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 10:16:00 UTC No. 16337560
>>16337553
Idk about the average Tesla but apart from the gay screen his was pretty nice for the price. Panel fitment was precise, all the interior was well put together, no loose bits or squeaky shit. Maybe he got one assembled by the only white man left in California kek. Thing was scary as fuck though when you put the hammer down, can only imagine what the Model S Plaid is like. We would drive around town taking turns ripping it from red lights, some ricer in his WRX subie tried to drag race us, lol lmao even.
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 10:23:17 UTC No. 16337573
>>16337560
the quality was bad at the beginning, its better now, what I've heard sometimes substantially better
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 10:28:03 UTC No. 16337582
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 10:33:54 UTC No. 16337589
>>16336957
>Delayed
It's over.
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 10:52:49 UTC No. 16337619
>>16336916
SEXOOOOO
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 10:56:36 UTC No. 16337626
>>16336803
Again, deduction from your suppositions is not a replacement for just researching the reality of space probe design. Just post a link to a source that backs up your opinion.
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 11:02:27 UTC No. 16337633
>>16337560
lmfao. And yeah I get what youāre saying, these new teslas are like almost illegally fastāand you have a bunch of teenagers and middle-aged speed demons with a lead foot and unrestricted access to high acceleration and velocity hahah.
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 11:04:27 UTC No. 16337635
>>16337626
Just to keep it less confusing I was the original anon asking/guessing about RTGs and you replied to someone else, so thereās more than one of us just guessing and refusing to google
Sometimes (as in, not all the time but occasionally) I like to just go off the top of my head and risk being corrected in the thread. Makes me commit the facts to memory when Iām proven wrong
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 11:12:14 UTC No. 16337645
>>16336391
Why are girls in spacesuits so cute
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 11:12:50 UTC No. 16337648
>>16337645
Rape
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 13:25:04 UTC No. 16337809
>>16337645
Flightsuits, too.
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 15:39:03 UTC No. 16337993
>>16337403
You're only counting NASA's direct employees. It has a massive army of private sector employees. When SpaceX starts contracting for payloads, mission operations, trajectories and science, then they will be lapping NASA.
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 16:56:04 UTC No. 16338092
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 16:57:26 UTC No. 16338094
>>16338092
We're in here
>>16332789
Anonymous at Thu, 22 Aug 2024 17:32:07 UTC No. 16338184
gay