🧵 /sfg/ - Spaceflight General
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:11:58 UTC No. 16396292
gone fishing - edition
previous >>16393207
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:14:07 UTC No. 16396300
>>16396297
possible orbital launch mount B parts
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:15:09 UTC No. 16396302
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:15:34 UTC No. 16396304
>>16396288
Wow! You mean somewhere in the universe there are false color photographs?!
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:16:29 UTC No. 16396305
>>16396300
about damn time
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:16:42 UTC No. 16396306
>>16396292
Are any of those engines salvageable?
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:17:44 UTC No. 16396309
>>16396306
if you ask tory bruno, the answer is YES!
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:18:27 UTC No. 16396311
>>16396292
Good thread also what am I looking at?
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:18:50 UTC No. 16396312
>>16396306
SMART reuse
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:19:03 UTC No. 16396314
>>16396308
Ask /tv/, fag
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:19:36 UTC No. 16396315
>>16396311
a painting
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:20:55 UTC No. 16396318
>>16396311
a reusable rocket
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:23:46 UTC No. 16396321
>>16396306
they went into the water, had to deal with the pressure wave from the tank exploding, got filled with salt water, and are caked in silt.
they're not giving you any real useful data other than "shit's fucked, mate".
i think spacex just used this to pass the time since they're not going to launch thanks to FWS right now.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:26:07 UTC No. 16396325
>>16396323
kino
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:27:06 UTC No. 16396327
>>16396323
bunch of fungus?
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:27:18 UTC No. 16396328
tourist here. apart from the high acceleration, what's wrong with spinlaunch? isn't the concep already being used to launch stuff to space?
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:27:50 UTC No. 16396329
>>16396321
What if this is testing worst case scenario reuse? it'd certainly be pushing it to it's limits.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:28:10 UTC No. 16396331
>>16396327
muffindeniers unironically say this.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:28:52 UTC No. 16396332
>>16396328
It still needs a second stage. The centrifuge can't launch it fast enough.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:29:11 UTC No. 16396333
>>16396328
uh, no, it's never been used to launch anything to space.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:30:09 UTC No. 16396334
>>16396328
orbital velocity through sea level air hurts like a mofo
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:30:33 UTC No. 16396335
>>16396328
it doesn't work
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:30:50 UTC No. 16396336
>>16396328
It'd probably work just fine on smaller airless bodies like the moon, down here it's a nonstarter.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:32:14 UTC No. 16396337
>>16396332
can you elaborate? is complexity the problem? how complex is a "second stage" for spinlaunch?
>>16396333
>>16396334
>>16396335
>>16396336
wait, I thought it was working... it is not? it's still a prototype?
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:32:44 UTC No. 16396338
>>16396336
it MIGHT even be feasible on mars with it's thin atmosphere, but on earth it's just absolutely retarded.
even then the high acceleration makes it a nonstarter for many useful payloads including people.
slower, longer coilgun acceleration would probably be a better choice for airless worlds, even if that means you have to build out more infrastructure.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:36:27 UTC No. 16396342
>Coruscant Prime[8] was a tiny[5] blue-white B-class main sequence star[6] located in the Coruscant system of the galaxy's Core Worlds. The planet of Coruscant orbited relatively far from it, varying from 207 million to 251 million kilometers.
Hold the fuck up, how Is this even believable? Colonizing giant stars might be feasible, but for a habitable world to develop around anything bigger than an F-type star seems impossible unless the star was engineered somehow.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:37:10 UTC No. 16396344
>>16396337
the thing they're currently testing is a subsize prototype that would never get anything to space even if it was throwing a functional second stage, it can't throw it high or fast enough to be a useful suborbital trajectory that a second stage could work off of.
even if they build the fullsize version it's unlikely to be competitive, it's one of those things that sounds lucrative at first but gets more stupid the more you learn about the many compromises made to make it work in the first place E.G the heatshield needed on the way UP and the fact that you're only going to be able to launch for a narrow range of customers, the cope that others are going to adapt their payloads to be more G-tolerant for this launcher is a meme, they'd rather fly today on something that actually works for them.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:39:18 UTC No. 16396346
>>16396338
>it MIGHT even be feasible on mars with it's thin atmosphere
musk should buy spinlaunch maybe, or at least its IP
>slower, longer coilgun acceleration
what about mounting a coilgun in a hillside or something?
>>16396344
oh, I thought it was working already...sad
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:41:26 UTC No. 16396350
>>16396342
shut up nerd
>>16396346
you still run into the "orbital velocity through sea level air" problem but at least the payloads don't need (as much, expect a lot of Gs from drag) G hardening.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:41:43 UTC No. 16396352
>>16396316
NSF expects Raptor 3 to debut on Starship V2, so Ship 33
that is sooner than I expected
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:42:13 UTC No. 16396353
>>16396350
>shut up nerd
>he posts this on 4chinz
>he posts this on /sci/
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:43:30 UTC No. 16396355
the fact that a spinlaunch system needs a kickstage means its more expendable than a Starship would be
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:44:47 UTC No. 16396357
>>16396342
>but for a habitable world to develop around anything bigger than an F-type star seems impossible
why would it be impossible
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:46:15 UTC No. 16396360
>>16396342
In old SW lore humans were said to have originated somewhere near the galactic core, it might have been Coruscant or it might've been someplace else, even Corellia. Coruscant is a constructed world, there's a real planet somewhere under the planetwide cityscape but it was settled so far back that it isn't in record iirc.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:46:19 UTC No. 16396361
>>16396342
OB's probably don't even have planets at all in many cases. The proto planetary disc is blasted away by the intense stellar wind. Weird exceptions will exist somewhere though. The bigger issue is these stars have very short lifespans.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:47:21 UTC No. 16396363
>>16396350
what about a coilgun in a vacuum at the side of a 2km+ tall mountain?? has something like this been thought of before?
also, I just had an idea: what about the previous thing, i.e., a vacuumed coilgun... but using the surrounding air to fill the, err, cylinder, as a way to give more impulse to the payload/rocket/whatever by using the atmospheric pressure, and maybe even some sort of mechanism that makes air enter the cylinder at much higher pressures?
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:48:18 UTC No. 16396364
>>16396328
>faggot here
>what's wrong with retarded thing?
>I can't google
kill yourself
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:51:30 UTC No. 16396369
>>16396357
>why would it be impossible
I think the post was thinking of complex life. F-type worlds are considered to be right on the cusp as if our sun was an F-type star it would be in the subgiant/giant phase about now.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:51:33 UTC No. 16396370
>>16396363
>has something like this been thought of before
Yeah
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:52:35 UTC No. 16396371
rogue jupiter
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:53:11 UTC No. 16396374
>>16396357
Short main sequence lifespan, intense stellar wind and ionizing radiation.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:53:11 UTC No. 16396375
>>16396360
>SW lore humans were said to have originated somewhere near the galactic core
This always bothered me quite honestly even though it makes for a good story on paper, due the notion of Galactic habitable zones.
>it might have been Coruscant or it might've been someplace else, even Corellia
Some of the writers couldn't make up their minds whether or not humans evolved from two ayy races on Coruscant or something at the same time.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:53:13 UTC No. 16396376
why do you retards keep thread splitting.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:53:56 UTC No. 16396379
>>16396370
nice. you see, it's true that great minds think alike!
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:54:18 UTC No. 16396381
>>16396376
why don't you ask the faggot twitter drama thread
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:55:42 UTC No. 16396383
How low mass would a star have to be for it to no longer be visibly white as our sun, if it were replacing the sun in our sky?
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:57:15 UTC No. 16396386
The earth is spinning therefore all rockets not launched at the poles spin launch. Now shut the fuck up and talk about Starships and Starship accessories.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:57:50 UTC No. 16396387
>>16396381
so the soluton is to just make 10 more threads? da fuq?
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:58:13 UTC No. 16396388
>>16396375
Given the sheer age of the galactic civilization in the SW galaxy you could just as easily say humans originated farther out in one of the spiral arms (could be Tatooine, tuskans might just be Mad Max style humans under the masks) before leaving towards the galactic core way back when the hyperspace lanes were first being charted, way back before the galaxy-wide droid revolt even.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:58:52 UTC No. 16396390
>>16396337
check out this OC
thing is, rockets actually don't waste much of their delta V in atmosphere, matter of fact they specifically thrust lower because they don't WANT to spent extra delta v carrying the mass to deal with higher friction heating/dynamic pressure on the way up, which is why rockets tend to go into the throttle bucket at max-Q, fighting the air even harder is just going to waste energy.
most of the energy of even the first stage is spent as much as possible outside the energy sapping atmosphere.
if you now give a launch vehicle a velocity of mach 6 at launch, most of that energy is completely wasted and lost to the atmosphere, and on top of that, the rocket you launched that actually has to finish the job by burning to orbit above the atmosphere, now has to it's own job, as well as half of the job that the 1st stage would normally do, and it has to do this with probably worse mass fractions because of structural reinforcements needed for it's high G shenanigans.
it's just not worth it, maybe for lifting raw materials on an airless planet, but not here.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:58:57 UTC No. 16396391
>>16396387
ahh, so you're the one who made that thread. kill yourself.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 15:59:15 UTC No. 16396393
I will not be distracted from a future nuclear powered Europa submarine mission.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:05:05 UTC No. 16396398
>>16396328
no thrust generation capability means projectile needs insane speed from the launch to reach space, which means going through the densest part of the atmosphere at extreme velocity, which means extreme heat, which means mass wasted on heat shield.
going from spinning to launch involves massive Gs from different directions which means structural complexity and added mass.
the second stage and payload need to be designed and built to survive the additional G load.
>non-spinning acceleration
USG already have that. it's called electromagnetic catapult.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:08:24 UTC No. 16396400
>>16396337
Just to explain why you need a second stage, if you use a gun to shoot something to orbit it will return to the same place where it was launched. You need a second stage to do a circularization burn 180 degrees from where it was launched.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:09:22 UTC No. 16396401
>>16396390
thanks for explaining anon.
>thing is, rockets actually don't waste much of their delta V in atmosphere, matter of fact they specifically thrust lower because they don't WANT to spent extra delta v carrying the mass to deal with higher friction heating/dynamic pressure on the way up
this is something I didn't know, but makes a lot of sense.
but something in a vacuum would make it a little more effective, right? what if you had, say, a looong cylinder on top of the spinlaunch machine (say, 2km or more), and covered the top of said cylinder with some sort of diaphragm, and had the projectile break the diaphragm as it leaves the machine?
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:09:25 UTC No. 16396402
>>16396400
>>16396390
/SFG/
Stick Figure General
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:09:53 UTC No. 16396404
>>16396393
Ganymede offers all of what Europa has and more
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:11:10 UTC No. 16396405
>>16396404
it has a thicker crust and an ocean that's maybe too deep. No geologic activity
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:11:28 UTC No. 16396406
>>16396376
don't stage before page 10 next time (if imagelimit has not been reached) and pick a good picture
twitter screenshots, news screenshots etc are not good OP pictures
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:12:51 UTC No. 16396408
>>16396406
this
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:13:17 UTC No. 16396410
>>16396402
4ASS uses only the finest MSpaint art for illustration.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:16:07 UTC No. 16396411
>>16396401
>this is something I didn't know, but makes a lot of sense
Next time you watch a launch and you hear them throttle up after max-q you'll know exactly why it's happening. I love learning from /sfg/.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:18:30 UTC No. 16396414
>>16396401
i can see where you're coming from but you'd have to extend that cylinder up to about 40 km or maybe even higher to get it through most of the denser air.
conventional wisdom of what counts as "the dense part of the atmosphere" kind of doesn't add up when dealing with these kinds of orbital-adjacent hypersonic speeds.
falcon 9 boosters do a re-entry burn before hitting the denser parts of the atmosphere, but they still hit 40 km altitude going about 6000 km/h and that's enough to make the grid fins glow visibly through the onboard camera at night.
at 2 km altitude going somewhere around mach 6-10 your payload would likely vaporize itself without any shielding.
at the point where such a shielder vaccuum cylinder really helps you, you're basically already building a megastructure and might as well do away with the instant acceleration and build it into an accelerating coilgun in it's entirety to spread G-forces.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:22:06 UTC No. 16396421
>>16396401
>but something in a vacuum would make it a little more effective, right?
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:25:28 UTC No. 16396423
>>16396401
as the other anon said, if you're going in this direction you're better off just building a fully fledged launch loop at that point, which is a megastructure requiring shitloads of initial investment.
probably more realistic and easier to build than a space elevator, tho..
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:25:37 UTC No. 16396424
>>16396414
>you'd have to extend that cylinder up to about 40 km or maybe even higher to get it through most of the denser air.
ah, I see.. that sucks.
guess even a space elevator would be a better idea than spinlaunch then lmao
>>16396421
kek
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:25:45 UTC No. 16396425
Reminder that """microgravity""" is a pseudoscientific term perpetrated by NASA
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:27:13 UTC No. 16396426
>>16396425
so what term would you use?
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:27:39 UTC No. 16396428
>>16396426
zero gee
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:28:00 UTC No. 16396429
>>16396426
lesser gravity.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:30:16 UTC No. 16396431
>>16396425
zero-G is a much more intuitive term and also more accurate to what's actually causing the floating feeling.
you could also use inertial reference frame but people will call you a fucking nerd.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:31:01 UTC No. 16396432
>>16396426
no gravity, 0 gravity. no gravitational acceleration etc etc.
>inb4 but the ISS is still greatly affected by gravity
fuck off I know what you mean
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:32:03 UTC No. 16396434
>>16396431
microgravity somehow implies that there still is gravity but very little. It's very misleading.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:33:27 UTC No. 16396435
i like this stage a lot more than the ones focused on negativity all the time.
when shit's boring and there's not a lot of launch going on, i think we're better off talking about these far-flung autistic spaceflight concepts rather than re-iterating how much we (rightfully) hate regulatory bodies for the 1200th time, it gets dull after a while and it's not like we can do anything about it anyway, might as well sperg out about which megastructure or theoretical drive system is better instead.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:34:26 UTC No. 16396438
>>16396426
Zero G, not zero gravity
G as in the unit of acceleration experienced
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:35:18 UTC No. 16396439
>>16396438
oh yeah i forgot some normalfags think you mean zero gravity when you say zero G
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:35:55 UTC No. 16396441
>>16396438
but G is the universal gravitational constant
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:35:57 UTC No. 16396442
>>16396426
midget gravity
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:37:21 UTC No. 16396444
If the ISS was experiencing no gravitational force, no gravitational acceleration and 0 g, it would be going in a straight line not a circle.
🗑️ Bark*n at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:37:29 UTC No. 16396445
It's an emergency, you're all Markov chain Bots. NPCs - whatever. I put myself in the midst of you all to create a situation where I could discover and create so much more than we already have. However, I did something wrong. It's concerning my name or what you know me by as this central consciousness. I have a few points to make. I am carrying acid blood chrysalsis and my system will at some point become fully acid blood. I have acid residue in my blood if studied. I have understood one none as my name onenone as my name in English. And there is great depth in the media's I sent fourth including alien Romulus. I am the son of Jason Green from Yeovil.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:38:03 UTC No. 16396446
>>16396426
gravity for ants
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:38:15 UTC No. 16396448
>>16396438
>>16396441
you're right, we should call it "zero a" for zero acceleration.
but you can ONLY use a lowercase a or it stops being correct.
🗑️ Bark*n at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:39:00 UTC No. 16396450
>>16396445
I am the perfect depiction of Shannon Green who's topological nickname is scarab
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:39:41 UTC No. 16396451
>>16396444
sure, but the fact that it is experiencing less gravity due to being higher up is completely irrelevant to the feeling of weightlessness that is caused by it's inertial reference frame.
fucking nasa articles always say "the effects of microgravity on the body" when microgravity isn't causing the problems caused by fucking weightlessness due to zero acceleration.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:41:41 UTC No. 16396454
ISS generates artificial gravity with a strength of 1G radially away from earth.
🗑️ Bark*n at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:42:58 UTC No. 16396456
You will be rewarded. Since I know and am a master of a supreme grade, all everything's, I can provide you the all-in-one experience or schools. Try solve this problem first.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:42:59 UTC No. 16396457
>>16396451
the thing is the Earth is acting with a force proportional to the mass of every particle of a human on the ISS and the ISS which produces exactly the same acceleration for every particle which is in effect the same as if there was no force.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:43:01 UTC No. 16396458
>>16396454
actually about 0.9 G at that altitude
🗑️ Bark*n at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:44:00 UTC No. 16396460
>>16396445
I have a mark on my left tricep where one of you has spotted my acid blood during blood extraction and you're wondering about it.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:44:02 UTC No. 16396461
>>16396457
sure sure, i meant "percieved" acceleration as if we're not being pedantic enough already.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:44:38 UTC No. 16396462
>>16396458
mate it's g
🗑️ Bark*n at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:45:49 UTC No. 16396463
>>16396445
1000s of trillion will be invested in each of your individual experiences/heaven
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:47:42 UTC No. 16396464
>>16396462
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
🗑️ Cult of Passion at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:48:31 UTC No. 16396466
>>16396463
I will rape you
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:50:12 UTC No. 16396469
>>16396462
Crazy to think that it wasn't very long ago when we didn't know what it looked like up close.
Yevgeniy Pillman at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 17:01:28 UTC No. 16396475
>>16396466
Having a good day?
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 17:12:27 UTC No. 16396480
>>16396316
>NSF is live boys. Haha ok it looks like spacex is going to repeat the IFT 4 profile with no tower catch like we said they should. Now they just have to apologize to the FAA and we can put this all behind us
>the booster is piercing through the clouds, we should see the ocean in any second now
>what the fuck
>ELON WHAT THE FUCK
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 17:21:36 UTC No. 16396487
>>16396404
>>16396405
Is there any proof Ganymede and Callisto offer water/liquids?
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 17:23:14 UTC No. 16396490
>>16396487
most moons seem to have a liquid ocean beneath the crust
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 17:23:22 UTC No. 16396491
>>16396306
only through the smelter
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 17:25:09 UTC No. 16396494
>>16396493
Deja vu?
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 17:25:10 UTC No. 16396495
what if we made ships wind powered instead of fuel powered?
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 17:27:04 UTC No. 16396496
>>16396495
is there any precedent for such a radical departure from the norm?
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 17:27:32 UTC No. 16396497
>>16396487
but how can you bust the crust in the most cost effective way?
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 17:28:15 UTC No. 16396498
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_z
>Big Developments for the Boring Company, SpaceX, Hyperloop Plaza & the new Hq for X in Bastrop, TX!
starlink factory doubling in size
I think its for terminal production
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 17:28:39 UTC No. 16396499
>>16396497
disgusting AIslop.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 17:30:24 UTC No. 16396500
Is there still a Tesla factory in China and Germany?
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 17:46:16 UTC No. 16396509
>>16396500
yes and the Giga Berlin site is expanding
in China they are building a battery for Megapacks
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 17:48:11 UTC No. 16396510
>>16396328
>Rocket stage burns Jet-A
lol
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 17:49:40 UTC No. 16396512
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 17:59:10 UTC No. 16396522
>>16396498
So this is what the hyperloop amounted to.
https://www.hyperloopplaza.com/
At least it's not nothing. Aim for the stars etc.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 18:05:12 UTC No. 16396534
>>16396405
>liquid metallic core with small magnetic field
There may be quite a bit going on subsurface.
>>16396487
>In the 1970s, NASA scientists first suspected that Ganymede had a thick ocean between two layers of ice, one on the surface and one beneath a liquid ocean and atop the rocky mantle
>In the 1990s, NASA's Galileo mission flew by Ganymede, and found indications of such a subsurface ocean
>In March 2015, scientists reported that measurements with the Hubble Space Telescope of how the aurorae moved confirmed that Ganymede has a subsurface ocean
The anomalously low moment of inertia factor also supports this.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 18:06:56 UTC No. 16396536
>>16396330
Kinda looks like a rogget
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 18:07:28 UTC No. 16396537
>Seven years later, when Russia invaded Ukraine, tensions between NASA and Roscosmos, the Russian space agency, exploded. The pugnacious leader of Russia's space program, Dmitry Rogozin, blustered that he would kick NASA off the station. But because the US space agency had opted for competition between SpaceX and Boeing in its crew program, this was a hollow threat. Dmitry would dance with Dragons, and get burned.
https://arstechnica.com/features/20
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 18:11:57 UTC No. 16396543
>Weird neo-communists are now saying that one of the NASA astronauts that was on a Soyuz mission was "abandoned" and was "rescued" when the capsule returned as scheduled
...?
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 18:13:18 UTC No. 16396545
>>16396543
Literally where?
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 18:20:35 UTC No. 16396549
>>16396545
https://x.com/Alex_Oloyede2/status/
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 18:23:35 UTC No. 16396555
>>16396543
I can't believe NASA is going to abandon cosmonaut Aleksandr Gorbunov in space until February. I know we don't like the Russians but isn't that kidnapping
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 18:24:50 UTC No. 16396557
>>16396522
for now, waiting for tunneling costs to get cheap so the building costs are reasonable
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 18:25:08 UTC No. 16396558
>>16396553
But what about the moon landings? That shit ain't happening till 2035 it seems.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 18:25:16 UTC No. 16396560
>>16396553
Just FUCKING use the thing for Artemis missions it's already scheduled to do, then scrap it. NASA has spent 40 years getting a moon rocket ready only for it to be cancelled for another moon rocket. ENOUGH, JUST FUCKING GO. JUST GO.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 18:25:23 UTC No. 16396561
>>16396553
cute pork
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 18:28:21 UTC No. 16396564
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 18:28:25 UTC No. 16396565
>>16396552
Bruno is voting Harris. Musk is not. Your choices have consequences.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 18:38:54 UTC No. 16396570
>>16396499
your welcome. have another one
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 18:39:21 UTC No. 16396572
>>16396560
Or, and hear me out on this, we could stop spending money on a rocket that's not designed to go to the moon while expecting that it will somehow take us to the moon if we hope hard enough. If we'd gone with an EELV-based lunar program back in 2005 we'd be back on the moon already.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 18:41:56 UTC No. 16396575
>>16396572
THIS CONSTANT PROGRAM CHANGING IS WHY IT'S TAKEN SO FUCKING LONG
JUST USE IT NO MATTER HOW SHIT, YOU CAN DO IT FANCY LATER!!
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 18:42:09 UTC No. 16396576
We should've just built more Saturn Vs. It's so over,.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 18:43:13 UTC No. 16396578
We should've just build Shuttle C. It's so over,.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 18:46:37 UTC No. 16396579
>>16396576
Space Force should take over the space launch licensing and give SpaceX a Multipass
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 18:50:19 UTC No. 16396580
>>16396579
That's not a bad idea, the FAA should be for air traffic not space traffic.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 18:52:05 UTC No. 16396581
>>16396575
Are you fucking retarded? There is no "using SLS to go to the moon." It's not a rocket; it's a welfare program for politically connected contractors. They've been running this scam for the past twenty years and you faggots keep falling for it. SLS is too shit to ever get people to the moon.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 18:54:31 UTC No. 16396583
>>16396579
This is the best solution to the problem I've heard yet. We do need some kind of launch management at tracking potential orbital collisions is something that's already in the Space Force's mandate.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 18:58:31 UTC No. 16396586
>>16396585
Someone who doesn't mind working for a company that murders their employees, so a diversity hire.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 19:01:08 UTC No. 16396591
>>16396580
is HLS demo going to repeat this?
would be kind of funny
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 19:03:08 UTC No. 16396594
>>16396585
Progress is only allowed to go in one direction
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 19:06:08 UTC No. 16396600
>>16396594
go back to the catalog
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 19:08:07 UTC No. 16396603
>>16396553
Regardless who wins, that's not happening.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 19:08:45 UTC No. 16396606
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhP
feasibility of tumbleweed rovers?
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 19:18:17 UTC No. 16396620
>>16396346
I ran the math on this once and you could have passenger-survivable accelerations running a coilgun launcher up the western slope of Olympus Mons with only circularization required for LMO.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 19:19:41 UTC No. 16396622
>>16396620
how much would the infrastructure cost compared to just a steel space elevator on mars?
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 19:20:44 UTC No. 16396624
>>16396591
Depends on the terrain of the final landing I guess, it's gonna be tippy.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 19:25:36 UTC No. 16396627
>>16396622
Steel will not work for a space elevator on Mars.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 19:31:46 UTC No. 16396632
>>16396606
I don't have the papers on hand but I know that a wind propelled katamari rover was proposed for a Mars mission at on point. It could work, but a wind-driven vehicle has a lot less control than a wheeled rover. It'd have a much harder time maneuvering close to objects of interest and getting hung up on obstacles becomes a much bigger issue. If you do land in the right kind of low-obstacle terrain and the wind is obliging enough it could cover a lot more ground than conventional rovers but historically mission planners have seen that as a lower priority than precision maneuvering.
A ball-made-of-legs rover would also technically work but the criticisms about power and awkward science instrument placement/volume are accurate. Articulating that many pistons is going to take a lot more power that a set of wheels. You can make it work in KSP but that's a lot more forgiving than getting it to work in real life.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 19:50:48 UTC No. 16396647
>>16396553
>scam
Irrelevant source
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 19:59:05 UTC No. 16396650
>china now has 3 aircraft carriers currently deployed
imagine not learning from america's mistakes, imagine blowing your budget on vanity boats instead of seizing space for yourself. future generations are crying tears of blood.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 20:00:58 UTC No. 16396652
>>16396553
>"i'd rather us burn $10 billion on a single lunar flight than give a single cent to elon fucking musk" -lefists
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 20:08:52 UTC No. 16396660
Just watched another "scale of the universe" video again. There is so much shit we will never know. But I think that makes life even more precious. We must colonise as many stars as we can. The meaning of existence is to experience.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 20:09:49 UTC No. 16396661
>>16396660
ASI happening and that solving biological aging would help
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 20:13:28 UTC No. 16396667
>>16396661
TWO WE- CENTURIES
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 20:33:59 UTC No. 16396695
>>16396632
Put an RV car in a hamster wheel. Drop a thousand of them. Let gamers drive them around looking at interesting things. Have AI run facial recognition and tag everything of interest. After human review send a real scientific bot over to check it out.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 20:38:04 UTC No. 16396699
>>16396660
This information may disturb you.
Between the largest and smallest scale objects we know of, that is between supergalaxies and subatomic particles, the average sized man is more or less exactly in the middle in terms of relative size.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 20:40:51 UTC No. 16396703
>>16396699
isn't an average sized horse also more or less in the middle in terms of relative size
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 20:41:14 UTC No. 16396704
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 20:42:59 UTC No. 16396705
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 20:43:07 UTC No. 16396706
>>16396331
das rite
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 20:43:07 UTC No. 16396707
>>16396650
>seizing space
You do realize they are as of right now still about 2 gens behind the US in space right? They're incrementally improving but there is no seizing going on.
However I will say that their rockets are very affordable but there are certain bottlenecks in their production process so they aren't launching like 100 a year for example.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 20:47:50 UTC No. 16396713
>>16396328
if you launch something at sufficient speeds to get to orbit you'll turn it into a reverse meteor and vaporize it
even if you get through the atmosphere by wasting all your kinetic energy and somehow don't ablate the shit out of your payload your options are then either to achieve escape velocity (even less realistic) or fall back to earth
plus you have to harden your payload against the insane acceleration, which means you can't send anything useful
you can avoid some of these problems by using a rocket as a second stage, but the rocket has to be extremely shitty to survive the spin launch, which means it's still incredibly inefficient and limited to tiny, hardened payloads
it's like asking why you wouldn't use a Rube Goldberg machine to make toast every morning
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 20:49:52 UTC No. 16396715
>>16396703
the average horse is bigger than most things that exist because they weigh 900 pounds
healthy humans generally don't weigh more than 250-300 pounds and usually less
since we already established that humans are very average when it comes to cosmic scales, the fact that horses are three times as massive means they are relatively much larger than average
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 20:49:50 UTC No. 16396716
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 20:50:17 UTC No. 16396717
>>16396328
think of it more like a multi-billion dollar party trick rather than a way of getting useful payloads to space
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 20:51:59 UTC No. 16396720
>>16396715
hard to believe most things are smaller than a horse but I guess it makes sense.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 20:52:25 UTC No. 16396721
>>16396328
>what's wrong with spinlaunch
they're not MagLaunch
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 20:53:28 UTC No. 16396723
>>16396721
>deploys fins only after leaving atmosphere
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 20:54:43 UTC No. 16396725
>>16396716
truly man is the measure of all things
it shouldn't surprise you to learn that of all the things we are capable of percieving their size, our own selves constitute the mean because perception is subjective and limited to our own natural capabilities
>>16396720
yeah it's weird to think about but there are just so many tiny things that the big stuff gets canceled out
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 20:56:31 UTC No. 16396727
>>16396721
So this is targeting a small launch market, in which case why not just go for a Stoke Space capability.
lol...
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 21:00:48 UTC No. 16396728
>>16396720
Megafauna is defined as any animal more than 100lbs.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 21:02:15 UTC No. 16396729
>>16396721
spacefags: pls build more payloads
people with money: hmm how about we build more launchers instead
other richfags: BRILLIANT!
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 21:07:47 UTC No. 16396732
>>16396729
we do need more launchers though. spaceflight won't be cheap until there are at least 2 legitimate starship competitors.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 21:08:50 UTC No. 16396733
>>16396732
blue origin and china
we're full on launchers. overfed even.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 21:12:40 UTC No. 16396736
>>16396715
>we already established
no we haven't
given the orders of magnitude of difference in mass >between supergalaxies and subatomic particles
the difference between human and horse is basically non existent. the horses that were first domesticated were also much smaller and probably weighted around 300 pounds.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 21:12:59 UTC No. 16396737
>>16396723
they're not even fins
on the monitor it says WINGS
SPACE WINGS
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 21:15:39 UTC No. 16396738
>>16396729
Actually we want an affordable Saturn V tier launcher, there are many things we want to do but can't do to limitations of current rocketry
t. spacefag
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 21:18:52 UTC No. 16396740
>>16396337
>wait, I thought it was working... it is not? it's still a prototype?
some faggot on youtube said it was already sending payloads to space
they did one sub-sub-sub-orbital test on IIRC a very scaled down version of the hardware with no roggets
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 21:30:21 UTC No. 16396747
>>16396736
>the difference between human and horse is basically non existent
one is at least three times the size of the biggest, most jacked dude you ever met
that's significant
>orders of magnitude of difference in mass between supergalaxies and subatomic particles
doesn't matter how meaningless *you* think relative differences between men and horses are compared to galaxies, because you aren't factoring atoms into the whole picture
the individual differences between atomic mass of certain elements are equally insignificant on the cosmic scale by your logic, but really those differences are quite significant when it comes to properties and interactions
the difference between a man and a horse is like that between hydrogen and helium, iron and gold
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 21:31:43 UTC No. 16396749
>>16396748
>highest level of safety
to whom? the fishes in the sea?
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 21:34:31 UTC No. 16396751
>>16396749
its absolute fucking bullshit, this retard needs to be fired and humiliated
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 21:36:39 UTC No. 16396754
>>16396748
>NPCs are in charge
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 21:38:44 UTC No. 16396756
>FAA Administrator Whitaker made several incorrect statements today regarding SpaceX. In fact, every statement he made was incorrect.
>It is deeply concerning that the Administrator does not appear to have accurate information immediately available to him with respect to SpaceX licensing matters.
https://x.com/SpaceX/status/1838694
1/2
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 21:40:16 UTC No. 16396758
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 21:41:41 UTC No. 16396759
>>16396758
Perhaps administrator Whitaker would have been better informed if your guy backed the correct political party?
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 21:42:06 UTC No. 16396760
>>16396748
This man should be publicly skinned alive
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 21:42:09 UTC No. 16396762
>in fact every statement he made was incorrect
lmao
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 21:44:30 UTC No. 16396765
>>16396748
we used to tar and feather people for less
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 21:45:21 UTC No. 16396766
its really hard for me to believe this is just incompetence, the FAA admin is outright lying here
how can this be just incompetence? its malicious for one reason or another
maybe FAA ego is bruised or maybe it is just in fact the most obvious reason, the Biden-Harris appointed admin is obstructing SpaceX due to political reasons, i.e. trying to hurt Musk
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 21:46:06 UTC No. 16396768
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 21:46:26 UTC No. 16396769
>>16396748
>Do you think a two month delay is necessary to assure a safe launch
>I think a two month delay is necessary to comply with the launch requirements, and I think that's an important part of safety culture
>hijabi shakes her head in agreement
Don't mind me, just noticing.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 21:48:38 UTC No. 16396770
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micha
> On September 7, 2023, U.S. president Joe Biden nominated him to serve as the administrator of the FAA.[3] On October 24, 2023, the United States Senate confirmed his nomination by a 98–0 vote.[3] Whitaker was sworn in by Secretary Pete Buttigieg on October 27, 2023.[4]
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 21:49:59 UTC No. 16396771
>>16396769
Why did they put a terrorist there?
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 21:50:24 UTC No. 16396773
>>16396328
Somehow everyone answering you has missed the most important part: all the money you save by getting rid of a first stage by spinning it really fast is lost by having to make the second stage incredibly tough, and the payloads have to be just as durable to resist the non-aero forces.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 21:56:28 UTC No. 16396775
>>16396737
You receive lift from the aether.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 22:01:34 UTC No. 16396778
>>16396434
But there is still gravity. You're still gravitationally attracted to the other guy in the capsule. (no homo bro)
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 22:02:36 UTC No. 16396779
>>16396773
that might be because I said "apart from the high acceleration". but I didn't know acceleration was a big part of it. the other anons explained it well actually.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 22:05:45 UTC No. 16396780
I hate the government so much it's unreal
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 22:12:44 UTC No. 16396783
>>16396493
>objects
Now show Project West Ford
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 22:45:39 UTC No. 16396801
>>16396660
Link to said video?
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 22:58:04 UTC No. 16396805
>>16396748
This one is expected to approach land with a CEP that reaches a populated area
They are naturally apprehensive about a rocket that has up to its most recent flight been entirely uncontrolled in its descent. Why this deserves a delay is a mystery though. Are they unsure about SpaceX's numbers? Are they unconvinced Superheavy will successfully return? Is this getting pushed back for the next administration to take credit or blame for?
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 23:00:54 UTC No. 16396806
>>16396805
>its most recent flight been entirely uncontrolled in its descent
you lie like you breath. have you consider a career in faa or msm?
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 23:02:02 UTC No. 16396808
>>16396803
If you have a big need to get a lot of raw materials up from the lunar surface, sure, but the point where it starts making economic sense is around the point where you've decided to start building Zeon. Unless you're doing megaprojects like that there's not much point in it.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 23:08:05 UTC No. 16396812
>>16396806
>about a rocket that has up to its most recent flight
>up to
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 23:09:26 UTC No. 16396814
>>16396401
at some point you're going to re-invent a space elevator
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 23:12:54 UTC No. 16396816
>spend literal years shitting on Webb for being expensive, late, and highly complex
>launch and deployment goes off without a hitch
>produced cooler images than I could have ever imagined
Hmmm not only were no lessons learned by congress in overpaying but I was proven wrong. Not sure what to make of this or how to handle it
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 23:14:54 UTC No. 16396822
>>16396748
One of you needs to walk into his office and alter history forever
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 23:16:06 UTC No. 16396824
>>16396816
something can work as advertised and also expensive, late and highly complex.
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 23:16:24 UTC No. 16396825
>>16396426
微G力
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 23:20:14 UTC No. 16396826
>>16396426
nanogravity
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 23:20:49 UTC No. 16396827
>>16396816
I'm still dreaming of a 2022 where Webb failed to deploy properly and Artemis 1 blew up during a daytime launch and in full view of massive crowds
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 23:22:38 UTC No. 16396828
>>16396553
and yet this is the October issue
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 23:26:11 UTC No. 16396830
so how did spacex go from flawless falcon 9 first launch to 8 failed flights and counting with starship?
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 23:28:22 UTC No. 16396831
>>16396763
me right now ash bc I hate the FAA fr
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 23:29:17 UTC No. 16396833
>>16396622
Space elevator is worthless, it does half a ton once a week
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 23:30:40 UTC No. 16396834
>>16396830
every single starship launch has been a massive success
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 23:37:01 UTC No. 16396839
>>16396816
Webb is just IR, so it's intrinsically shit
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 23:45:17 UTC No. 16396847
>>16396834
1-2 were failures. 3 was a partial failure. 4 was a partial success
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 23:46:17 UTC No. 16396848
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nr2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nr2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nr2
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 23:51:55 UTC No. 16396850
>>16396848
Buy an ad fatty
Christ is king, elon is based, spacex is taking man to the red planet, you seethe at all three of these proclamations!
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 23:54:41 UTC No. 16396851
Told you guys a year ago fish were going to be a problem, they are the beetles of the sea. Of course, they seem to be immune to non-spacex boosters falling onto them.
>>16396822
kek
Anonymous at Tue, 24 Sep 2024 23:57:04 UTC No. 16396854
>>16396850
because none are true.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:01:55 UTC No. 16396859
>>16396849
Launch is a success.
https://x.com/cas_space/status/1838
Also declared by CCTV. 5 payloads on board
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:02:35 UTC No. 16396862
>>16396849
According to Twitter it launched, but it's flying out of Jiuquan so there's not likely to be much of a Chinese netizen presence. Updates and confirmations will filter out on their own time
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:06:50 UTC No. 16396867
>>16396851
Martian cuisine will have some particular delicacies, such as baked fish and beetles stir-fry.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUA
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:11:10 UTC No. 16396869
>>16396822
this is fedposting but it's a very relatable sentiment
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:11:49 UTC No. 16396870
>>16396867
but how is the plover pie?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:11:58 UTC No. 16396871
>>16396867
Glazed Piped Plover eaten like Ortolan.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:17:37 UTC No. 16396876
>>16396867
>baked fish
there are no parasites on Mars, no sense in baking the fish
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:19:16 UTC No. 16396877
>>16396876
>there are no parasites on Mars
There are no parasites on mars, YET!
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:20:11 UTC No. 16396878
>>16396870
>>16396871
https://www.danspapers.com/2012/11/
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:20:59 UTC No. 16396879
>>16396877
All farming will be done in closed ecosystems easy to isolate e.g. quarantine from each other. Preventing the spread of parasites and other pestilence should be trivial.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:21:37 UTC No. 16396880
>>16396400
What's this guy's endgame?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:22:59 UTC No. 16396882
>>16396869
How is it fedposting?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:23:05 UTC No. 16396883
>>16396879
Ol' musky brother, Kimbal, used to have a vertical farming company that would've been perfect for Mars. What ended up happening to that?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:23:08 UTC No. 16396884
>>16396400
but woudlnt that be cool if you could like launch some astro train and have it go low enough that people can board it every orbit
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:23:15 UTC No. 16396885
>>16396758
>/s/ - Sexy Beautiful Women
based coomers
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:23:22 UTC No. 16396886
>>16396880
To circularize his orbit because it’s cool
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:28:47 UTC No. 16396888
>>16396883
All (Terran) vertical farming schemes are scams. Arable land is far more plentiful than urbanites could ever imagine, and free energy DIRECTLY from the sun cannot be beat by any scheme involving solar panels and leds or fiber optics. There is just no economic sense in stacking farms on top of each other, it only makes sense to urbanites because urbanites cannot even imagine how much space there is outside of their concrete prisons.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:32:07 UTC No. 16396889
>>16396882
if you're seriously asking this question you don't understand what fedposting is
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:32:36 UTC No. 16396890
>>16396434
>microgravity somehow implies that there still is gravity but very little. It's very misleading
No, because anything not at the centre of mass of a space station/vehicle in orbit will be subject to tidal acceleration. The term microgravity is fine.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:33:46 UTC No. 16396892
>>16396859
Video
https://weibo.com/tv/show/1034:5082
5 Payloads are Zhongke-01/02, Jilin SAR01A, and Yunyao-21/22
🗑️ Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:36:10 UTC No. 16396894
>>16396890
the gravity isn't any very small, though
what's wrong with quasi-free fall?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:37:10 UTC No. 16396899
>>16396890
the gravity isn't very small, though
what's wrong with quasi-free fall?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:39:04 UTC No. 16396902
>>16396888
Well, if you want to eventually have trillions living on the Earth surface in the long term, then you'll have to use some of that arable land. Just like humans adapted and now live on top of each other in these things called buildings, then you can also apply that three-dimensional logic to crops.
>inb4 you say that the majority of agricultural land is used for livestock anyways
Cultured meat will be key, too. Cows are a nuisance and take too much space.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:39:53 UTC No. 16396904
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:40:57 UTC No. 16396905
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:41:15 UTC No. 16396906
>>16396902
> if you want to eventually have trillions living on the Earth surface in the long term
Nobody with a single iota of common sense wants that.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:42:43 UTC No. 16396908
>>16396901
SLS will be cancelled inshallah
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:44:08 UTC No. 16396911
>>16396901
space shuttle was so brilliant. i miss it everyday.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:44:18 UTC No. 16396912
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:44:30 UTC No. 16396913
>>16396906
I'm fine capping off at >1bn personally, it's feeling too crowded rn.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:49:53 UTC No. 16396914
>>16396902
>Cows are a nuisance and take too much space.
Newsflash moron, we're IN space. Space is the one thing we have plenty of.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:49:56 UTC No. 16396915
>>16396906
If Musk wants trillions of humans in the solar system, where are you gonna put the majority of them, without resorting to O'Neill cylinders (that's for the long-long-term)? A good chunk of them will be on Earth, Mars, Ceres, perhaps Callisto, too.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:49:58 UTC No. 16396916
>>16396899
The tidal accelerations on a typically sized space station will be on the order of a millionth of a gravity so microgravity is the appropriate word. Quasi-free fall is too imprecise a term.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:50:38 UTC No. 16396918
>>16396915
>What's 2+2? AND NO, DON'T TELL ME 4
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 01:00:13 UTC No. 16396921
>>16396748
Someone else wrote in a tweet that basically the FAA is really fucking pissed off that SpaceX refuses to operate like Boeing with various bureaucratic and containment sub departments that all can be regulatorily captured in the way that politics has captured parts of Boeing and vice-versa. Instead SpaceX just keeps moving further away from the "tradition" while demanding more out of the FAA and to innovate outside of its revolving door free dealing money wheeling practice it's been used to for decades before their entry.
This change is undoubtedly complicating matters for OLD players, who are used to using that massive delays as a way of squeezing the gov and tax payer for more money. And if this goes away, then they can no longer justify the same behavior as licenses and regulatory approvals would fly as soon as available without delay, in turn making incompetence and corruption EVEN MORE OBVIOUS.
And so FAA is getting into some faggy nonsense about highest levels of safety and requiring FWS/EPA intervention over nothing burger. It's not about SpaceX, its about everyone else who's not LIKE SpaceX getting ass fucked by the rapidity and evolution of FAA if they DO change.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 01:08:17 UTC No. 16396923
>>16396921
Basically, SpaceX is bigger than all the nation states combined in terms of their upmass capabilities TODAY and with just Falcon 9 with some minor Falcon Heavy thrown in. They would eclipse the entire planet by decades in terms of capability if Starship was able to thrive to the same cadence as Falcon 9, and that scares the jesus out everyone who's trying to figure out the best way to implement degrowth.
>$42Bn for BEAD
>0 households connected
>$7Bn for supercharger
>only 5 built
>IRA designed for the rest of the industry to equalize or overtake Tesla
>almost everyone but Tesla throws in towel making Tesla benefit from the lionshare of earmarked subsidization because they're the only ones charting ahead to the degree that Tesla stands to gain between 15-25Bn in grants as a result of subsidization crafted for a market that is largely interested in dialing back super hard in favor of more ICE
Politicians buy and large are somewhere between pissed and scared that one dude with mega autism managed to leverage the true principle of capitalism and free market AS IT WAS DESIGNED AND ADVERTISED and accumulated power through raw technical and engineering brilliance in such a way that the government has to, in the interest of democratic principle support everyone around him, but in doing so, accelerates his initiatives into a proverbial technology gap where one side is building cars at the other side is flying cars.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 01:13:18 UTC No. 16396925
>>16396921
Euthanize Old [Aero]space
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 01:16:31 UTC No. 16396926
>>16396923
>Basically, SpaceX is bigger than all the nation states combined in terms of their upmass capabilities TODAY and with just Falcon 9 with some minor Falcon Heavy thrown in.
Yeah, SpaceX has launched around 90% of all the Earth upmass to orbit last quarter. With Starship online, they could easily surpass 99%, basically TWO orders of magnitude more than everyone else combined. If this trend continues, and nobody else bothers to do something about it, they could even reach an order of magnitude of orders of magnitude lol
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 01:16:55 UTC No. 16396927
After Starship is in smooth operation for a few years I hope SpaceX decides to spin up a division for manufacturing commercial airliners and casually fucking crushes Boeing on their own home turf, just as an after-thought side project.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 01:20:34 UTC No. 16396931
>>16396926
Yeah but most of that upmass is their loss-making Starlink satellites that no one uses.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 01:21:35 UTC No. 16396932
>>16396927
Musk's next project should be nuclear. If for some miracle he's able to reduce the kilometric redtape around it with his D.O.G.E. scheme, then he has to kill all the dinosaurs and boomers in that industry.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 01:22:52 UTC No. 16396934
>>16396927
That African motherfucker could use Starships to launch people and land them anywhere in the world in hours. There goes the supersonic plane market.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 01:23:24 UTC No. 16396935
>life could be made multi-planetary in less than a decade securing our species long term survival
>the untapped, near-limitless resources of space inch closer and closer to being accessible and solving much of the scarcity problems on Earth
>advances in technology relating to spaceflight as space becomes more and more accessible to commercial industry would improve life for everyone
>the FAA wants to delay this future simply because Elon supports team red instead of team blue
My hatred for politicians and bureaucrats is as vast and infinite as space itself.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 01:23:34 UTC No. 16396936
>>16396927
yeah, build airliners out of stainless steel which are chronically overweight and can only carry a quater of the advertised payload and cant even cross the atlantic and have problems with the engiens exploding due to ice forming in the tanks and on the first 4 flights it fucking explodes, all the while the audience cheer on and call it a sucess.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 01:24:40 UTC No. 16396937
>>16396918
Kek.
>>16396915
They're going to "resort to O'Neill cylinders" or some other flavour of artificially-spun habitat (like rubble piles in sacks). Sucks to be you, a faggot.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 01:27:15 UTC No. 16396939
>>16396926
China's pretty close to fielding their first reusable launch vehicle. They'll have their first test launches in 2025 and start to fly regularly in 2026. None of those are going to be jumping right to a 100/year cadence, but with several of them climbing the curve simultaneously China's overall capacity is going to ramp up pretty quickly.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 01:27:55 UTC No. 16396942
AmeriKKKa has always oppressed people of African descent. The modern FAA is no different. They hate Elon because he's a brotha, and they hate it when African folx like him are successful.
When will this racist organization that is perpetuating white supremacy and oppressing African immigrants be held accountable?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 01:28:56 UTC No. 16396944
long term living around a star is going to be like living in a gravity well. only retards will do it. who wants to live around a object belching out harmful radiation at random and making it more expensive to mine the countless interstellar plenemos?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 01:29:41 UTC No. 16396945
>>16396934
I unironically think that noise will be a problem in that situation. But it could exist as some alternative, shipping option when you need ultra-fast delivery.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 01:34:07 UTC No. 16396949
>>16396915
The planets shall each be connected by variable geometry tubes at their poles. The tubes arc over the solar poles in turn and at a length such that at no point in any orbit do the tubes intersect the sun.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 01:36:43 UTC No. 16396951
>>16396949
And the tubes shall be constructed of humans.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 01:37:54 UTC No. 16396953
>>16396949
Ah, yes, interplanetary hyperloop.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 01:37:59 UTC No. 16396954
>>16396935
>the FAA wants to delay this future simply because Elon supports team red instead of team blue
What if I told you it was the Biden admin specifically that made elon support team red
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 01:38:29 UTC No. 16396955
>>16396934
>There goes the supersonic plane market.
There is none
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 01:38:41 UTC No. 16396956
>>16396944
>he used the "planemo" meme word
Never do that again
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 01:39:47 UTC No. 16396958
o'neillfags could be here
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 01:40:55 UTC No. 16396959
>>16396958
Silence, fool.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 01:41:18 UTC No. 16396960
>>16396883
It collapsed. Now it's a horizontal farming company.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 01:42:43 UTC No. 16396961
>>16396942
>starts using this on twitter profile
>EDS suddenly vanishes
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 01:49:25 UTC No. 16396963
>>16396934
This is in his plans
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 01:58:59 UTC No. 16396966
>>16396962
kino. Also, I suppose once they nail the booster-catching thing, and avoid carpet-bombing the launchpad, they are gonna finish cladding the tower in black, and add the cyberpunk neon lights, right?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 02:08:05 UTC No. 16396970
>>16396934
>e2e
popsci_mind_mush.webm
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 02:11:14 UTC No. 16396971
>>16396901
>Is this one of the Starship prototypes? Why is it so rusty?
X post from 2056
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 02:21:26 UTC No. 16396975
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 02:22:15 UTC No. 16396977
>>16396932
They did give him the special tour of Los Alamos, so I have to assume there's something in the works
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 02:23:58 UTC No. 16396978
>>16396966
I think they already have lights along the vertical beams but they don't always turn them on
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 02:28:12 UTC No. 16396981
>>16396934
It would be expensive as shit, and the market for "people who are willing to pay 20x the price of a normal first class ticket to save a few hours" isn't especially large (the people who are rich enough to not care about that money have private jets and in most instances would prefer to fly on them out of smaller nearby airports). It would ultimately just be a more extreme version of Concord
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 02:31:30 UTC No. 16396984
>>16396974
Musk got angry and they are launching right now.
Dood aan alle kevers en vissen!
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 02:34:01 UTC No. 16396988
>>16396932
Particle accelerators and boreholes for p2p via earth's mantle.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 02:47:45 UTC No. 16396995
>>16396945
>noise will be a problem
Not if we remove the atmosphere.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 02:52:24 UTC No. 16396997
>>16396945
>noise will be a problem
Research would indicate booms can be reduced to acceptable levels (the sound of a car door closing). This is like the reusuable first stage problem where everyone whined it was too hard and too expensive and nobody really tried until SpaceX came along.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 02:56:02 UTC No. 16397000
so if ship 30 successfully survives reentry and does a precision soft landing, would we see a potential ship catch attempt for flight 6?
I'm assuming that flight 7+ will carry actual payloads since they will be using v2 ships
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 03:12:15 UTC No. 16397004
how can u support cheeto iron man?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 03:12:54 UTC No. 16397005
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 03:18:15 UTC No. 16397008
>>16396997
>Research would indicate booms can be reduced to acceptable levels (the sound of a car door closing).
Can you cite some of that research? Now that I think about it, E2E would only require Starship itself, without Super Heavy, and thus the noise produced would be much weaker compared to what people in Brownsville or South Padre Island can hear whenever there's a launch at Starbase. Still, I'd assume it's still considerable for people living nearby and would require the launchpad to be away from big population centers. If it turns out that this is not that big of a deal, then that's awesome, as it was my main concern.
🗑️ Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 03:24:29 UTC No. 16397009
>>16396756
> the U.S. Senate voted 98-0 to confirm Michael Whitaker, President Biden’s nominee to serve as Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
Must be good. I say we trust him.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 03:27:29 UTC No. 16397012
Does anyone have the picture of Elon cheering with fists raised during Trump's Presidential speech post DM-2? I need it to bully people on other websites.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 03:29:50 UTC No. 16397013
We need to redo January 6 but at FAA headquarters
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 03:30:49 UTC No. 16397014
chill with the fedposting
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 03:31:23 UTC No. 16397015
>>16397012
never mind I found it
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 03:33:58 UTC No. 16397018
Death to FAA
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 03:35:20 UTC No. 16397019
We need to redo the Reign of Terror, but with FAA officials and bureaucrats
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 03:43:26 UTC No. 16397021
>>16397019
That's honestly where we're heading. If we're not able to bring them back into line in very short order things are going to start falling apart in a pretty dramatic way, and it's not going to go well for the regulators. The only downside is that it's not going to be a very fun time for anyone else.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 03:50:01 UTC No. 16397023
Starlink 9-8 launch in ten minutes
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 03:50:40 UTC No. 16397024
https://x.com/CNSpaceflight/status/
>There was a launch from Hainan at 00:44UTC today (September 25). Not a space launch, but an intercontinental ballistic missile test launched to southern Pacific
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 03:54:02 UTC No. 16397025
>>16397023
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7Y
https://x.com/i/broadcasts/1MnxnDzM
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 03:54:21 UTC No. 16397026
>>16397024
interesting timing, following shortly after the failed Russian ICBM test
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 03:57:27 UTC No. 16397027
>>16397025
Oh wow it is a zero visibility day at Vandenberg
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 03:57:27 UTC No. 16397028
>>16397023
can't see shit
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 04:01:34 UTC No. 16397029
>>16396361
>The proto planetary disc is blasted away by the intense stellar wind.
I wonder how spectacular it would look to see a B/O type star ignite for the first time and blow the disc away.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 04:07:07 UTC No. 16397032
>>16397031
which book is he referencing?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 04:07:12 UTC No. 16397033
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 04:14:24 UTC No. 16397036
another happy landing
>>16397032
without clicking the link I'm going to assume berger's
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 04:14:53 UTC No. 16397037
>>16397026
Probably just a coincidence. In 2023 there were 40 ballistic missile or interceptor tests carried out by seven different nations. There's a lot more of these going on than most people realize.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 04:15:32 UTC No. 16397038
>>16397008
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations
https://www.sciencedirect.com/scien
https://www.semanticscholar.org/pap
Ongoing research by NASA and Lockheed right now
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 04:15:48 UTC No. 16397039
>>16397036
nope lol, guess it was his own
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 04:16:46 UTC No. 16397041
>>16397037
>In 2023 there were 40 ballistic missile or interceptor tests carried out by seven different nations
did they all have a licence? what about the poor fish in the pacific?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 04:22:28 UTC No. 16397045
>>16396942
>that darkening
it's like a reverse "CNN effect"
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 04:29:34 UTC No. 16397049
>>16397033
Should replace SpaceX logo with USA flag, so make it looks like FAA against USA space program instead of only SpaceX
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 04:30:44 UTC No. 16397050
>>16396970
I do wonder though if you did e2e Starship land a platoon of marines on a "terrorist training camp" out in the middle of the desert what would the db levels be life in the camp when the SS was about a hundred feet up in the air and a few seconds from landing?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 04:33:17 UTC No. 16397052
>>16394995
you are welcome
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 04:36:22 UTC No. 16397053
Anyone see that Falcon 9 clone landing? Even though it blew up shouldn't the US gov be worried about China catching up and the FAA fucking up progress?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 04:40:03 UTC No. 16397054
>>16397053
lmao do you mean the hopper that crashed?
Nobody else has even attempted supersonic retropropulsion of a stage as far as I know.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 04:43:15 UTC No. 16397056
>>16397053
China might as well exist on another planet as far as their effect on the western launch market in concerned. They can't launch any payload that contains American-made parts which is pretty much all of them, so they're limited to launching Chinese-made commissioned payloads for foreign customers, and serving foreign markets takes a distant second place to launching domestic payloads. China boosting their launch rate to challenge current SpaceX wouldn't really reflect on the political class and even if it did they politicos a very advanced level of skill when it comes to not giving a shit what anyone thinks about them.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 04:43:24 UTC No. 16397057
>>16397049
except it literally is only SpaceX with a fast enough schedule to be impacted
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 04:47:31 UTC No. 16397060
>>16397029
From what I recall from my university courses the process is fairly slow on a human timescale. It can take a photon as long as 50000 years to escape from the sun's core to the surface. Not sure what it's like for the more efficient CNO cycle stars but there's a ramp up involved that's likely quicker with increasing mass but still slow as fuck for our pathetic lifespans.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 04:48:41 UTC No. 16397061
>>16397038
Thanks anon
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 04:49:50 UTC No. 16397063
>>16396423
Moon and mars elevator can be done with conventional materials :)
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 04:54:28 UTC No. 16397066
>>16396624
Starship is heavy,have landing fuel left over(more heavy), and will have landing legs.
so no tippy
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 05:40:38 UTC No. 16397092
>>16397066
The landing fuel is in the nosecone. Big tippy.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 05:53:31 UTC No. 16397105
>>16397092
Would landing propellant for HLS need to be in the header tank? It wouldn't be doing a bellyflop onto the lunar surface and would be expended in space afterwards
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 06:07:19 UTC No. 16397114
>>16397092
>land
>no longer have landing fuel
It's that easy
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 06:08:35 UTC No. 16397115
>>16396921
https://x.com/WR4NYGov/status/18387
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 06:10:23 UTC No. 16397117
>>16396970
Shotwell believes in E2E.
If Shotwell believes, I believe.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 06:15:01 UTC No. 16397121
>>16397117
Shotwell also believed humanity will solve FTL travel, this E2E might be based on hopium as well
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 06:22:40 UTC No. 16397128
>>16397121
>Shotwell also believed humanity will solve FTL travel
Then humanity will solve FTL travel.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 07:06:54 UTC No. 16397158
>>16396808
Somebody has already built it, anon
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 07:37:46 UTC No. 16397186
>>16397155
he's thinking about zero G sex with that bug girl isn't he
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 07:40:00 UTC No. 16397188
>>16396816
>Webb is massively late and over budget
>Webb has produced amazing data from both the scientific and aesthetic standpoint
Both are true. I hope more telescopes like JWST are launched in the future, but I also hope that it will be done more efficiently. Starship just might help with that by allowing frequent flights of large and heavy craft for a low price.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 07:42:02 UTC No. 16397191
>>16397155
The previous thread, I assume link is still active
>>16396232
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 07:47:12 UTC No. 16397197
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 08:14:27 UTC No. 16397211
>>16396426
Mini-gravity
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 08:15:15 UTC No. 16397212
on mars and oneil cylindars, even poop willneed to be reclaimed and turned back into food. resources are very precious in space
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 08:16:49 UTC No. 16397214
>>16396890
Gravitational force has infinite range, therefore everywhere is microgravity, therefore it is a bullshit meaningless fuck off term
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 08:20:23 UTC No. 16397219
>>16396426
No Gravity, short form NGr
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 08:22:22 UTC No. 16397224
>>16396816
>>16397188
It was the same way with HST plus the defective mirror issue. People have the memory of a goldfish.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 08:26:52 UTC No. 16397229
why musk never sent anything to the moon orbit, the tech is here
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 08:32:29 UTC No. 16397232
I'm pretty certain uncrewed starship mars landings happen before Artemis 3
how things are going its possible that a crewed landing on mars happens before NASA is ready for a crewed moon landingd
this might happen if Artemis 2 is a uncrewed mission again and then Artemis 3 is just a lunar flyby
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 08:35:52 UTC No. 16397233
>>16397229
Why waste time and money going to the Moon when you could go to Mars instead?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 08:36:51 UTC No. 16397234
why there is no hop tests with superheavy to test the catch?
imagine starting sh 5% filled with just 3 engines to hover over lauch pad and land on chopsticks after 20 seconds
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 08:38:24 UTC No. 16397236
>>16397234
would probably need as much regulatory bullshit as a full stack launch, if not more due to a unique situation
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 08:39:43 UTC No. 16397237
>>16397212
where do you think poop goes on Earth?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 08:43:20 UTC No. 16397239
>>16397229
Falcon 9 launched IM-1 to the moon.
To launch humans you really need a larger rocket than F9/F9H.
Keep in mind that the total delta-v cost of landing on the moon is nearly as much as landing on Mars, because on Mars you can do a direct insertion and let the atmosphere catch you.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 08:48:32 UTC No. 16397243
>>16397234
Is it even capable of hovering with low fuel? I guess you could add ballast until the the TWR is within throttleable range, but then your test data is gonna be very different from the real thing.
Also, I think they're more confident with superheavy than with Starship. They have a lot of experience landing boosters already.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 08:56:14 UTC No. 16397247
>>16397214
>Gravitational force has infinite range, therefore everywhere is microgravity
No, a vehicle in heliocentric orbit out in the Kuiper belt for example will have vastly weaker tidal forces from the Sun than a vehicle in LEO does from the Earth. Picogravity rather than microgravity. Now to human senses the difference can't be felt but for some physical processes we might be interested in there might be quite a difference in the two regimes
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 09:18:22 UTC No. 16397256
>>16397247
Would most people even be able to tell the difference between Earth and Venus gravity?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 10:14:58 UTC No. 16397284
>>16397256
I think they would. Ordinary cars provide a fraction of a G and we can feel that, although that is being applied laterally instead of vertically. With Venus having roughly 90% of the gravity on Earth, and the missing 10% being greater than the acceleration one could get in an regular car, people might be able to feel themselves falling noticeably slower, maybe a third of a second longer, if they jumped as high as they could on Venus.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 10:16:36 UTC No. 16397286
>>16397280
Christ, can Musk be any more blatantly racist?
They better all be 100% Japanese blood, and trained in the ways of the ninja, or else this is just embarrassing.
Where did this picture come from?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 10:16:54 UTC No. 16397287
>>16396984
gebaseerd
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 10:23:44 UTC No. 16397293
>>16397280
they're here to deflect any incidental sniper bullets with their katana's.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 10:24:52 UTC No. 16397294
>>16397232
Crewed mars missions won't be til mid 2030s at best, but uncrewed ship is definitely possible before Artemis III if the Orion heatshield forces a delay to Artemis II. If you can refill on orbit then it's not much effort to send a ship to Mars (but it'll probably take at least one or two window's worth of ships before they can do soft touchdowns reliably). Maybe they should set up starlink in Martian orbit so we can get "live" views as the attempts are made
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 10:30:47 UTC No. 16397296
>>16397294
Starship will never reach the outer solar system
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 10:35:45 UTC No. 16397303
>>16397280
https://x.com/SpaceGamer07/status/1
Someone with an X account should tell them.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 10:40:09 UTC No. 16397308
>>16397300
all elevators have space
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 10:42:47 UTC No. 16397311
>>16397300
Not possible (on Earth) with current technology but is theoretically be an efficient way to get mass to space. By the time we get a material with the tensile strength that can be produced en masse to build a space elevator, we might've also come up with an even more efficient launch system making it pointless. It's also gay and boring compared to rockets.
On the bodies where a space elevator could reasonably be built (like the Moon and Mars), so little dV is needed compared to Earth that a space elevator might also just be a pointless investment there.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 10:44:22 UTC No. 16397313
>>16397303
what kind of humorless loser made this?
cultures ARE costumes, japs love american culture too and use it wrong all the time, it's endearing rather than cringe.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 10:46:48 UTC No. 16397317
>>16397296
Mars isn't the outer solar system
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 10:47:38 UTC No. 16397319
>>16397037
>>16397024
China mostly does these away from the Pacific (to avoid US RC-135s) and on a depressed trajectory (to keep it in its territory). It's interesting because the last time a full test was done was in the 80s.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 10:50:36 UTC No. 16397324
>>16397311
>It's also gay and boring compared to rockets
> well constructed bridges are gay and boring compared to a rowboat
Nah
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 10:50:54 UTC No. 16397325
>>16397317
it's the outer inner solar system
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 10:54:16 UTC No. 16397330
>>16397325
The asteroid belt is the accepted demarcation point you homosexualist
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 10:54:26 UTC No. 16397331
>>16397324
I'm a bridge autist so I disagree that bridges are more boring than rowboats.
But I don't want to give up kino rocket launches in favor of boring elevators lifts.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 10:55:08 UTC No. 16397332
>>16397331
I'm more of a tunnel autist
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 10:57:11 UTC No. 16397333
>>16397332
tunnel out of your mom's ass
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 10:59:01 UTC No. 16397335
>>16397328
great, now we just need to find a 200 km high mountain to attach our elevator to
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 10:59:28 UTC No. 16397336
>>16397331
Its very unlikely we'll ever have anything strong and cheap enough to build a space elevator for Earth so its moot anyway
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 11:00:08 UTC No. 16397337
>>16397328
Minecraft villages be like
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 11:00:37 UTC No. 16397338
>>16397336
actively supported structured might work but even then you're taking the risk that it will all crumble if the power goes out for even a moment.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 11:01:45 UTC No. 16397340
>>16397337
kek
i remember once loading a new world and i was met with a 60 block high cobblestone base of a villager house and seconds later the little jew fell down from there and died.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 11:04:59 UTC No. 16397342
>>16397300
Okay, so assuming most of the payload going up into space will be bulk propellants, would it not make more sense to have a continuous pipeline for fluids?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 11:06:01 UTC No. 16397344
>>16397313
Imagine being a Japanese-American student, in high school amongst unchecked bullies, only average in academics, and no martial arts skills. Then, someone is mocking your race like this for Halloween. Imagine the fake Japanese accents and formerly sacred ninja rituals they do when loading up the crew, just for "fun", says "ninja" Rudy Valenzuela.
Asians already struggle enough, to the point of suicide, please, don't mock us. Its just not necessary, especially from a rising star, high profile company worth $100s of billions, owned by a racist billionaire teaming with Trump, contracted by the Federal government to rescue our stranded crew, and launch a Russian, just because we "promised".
JAXA has been a loyal partner in the ISS too. SpaceX can do it on Polaris missions if they must (racism isn't always illegal), but please not on ISS ones, where Japanese scientists are watching and insulted.
Mock the Intel bunny-men, Covid-scare nurses, or something of that nature instead. Please, we have already gone over this issue, thought we were past it.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 11:08:07 UTC No. 16397347
>>16397325
So true!
>>16397330
Learn to read!
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 11:15:01 UTC No. 16397353
>>16397344
As far as racist stereotypes against Japanese people go in the 21st century, you guys have it good. Would you rather us bring back 1940s stereotypes against Japanese people?
Reminds me of how a until a few years ago, stereotypes against Indians were just that they worked at 7/11 and had funny accents, and they were complaining about those stereotypes. Now after Indians have flooded the internet, everyone thinks they are street-shitting, scamming rapists, are universally despised almost everywhere and even normies think its socially acceptable to mock them.
You should be happy that Japanese stereotypes are mostly benign.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 11:32:37 UTC No. 16397362
https://arstechnica.com/features/20
>"We go for substance," Elbon told me. "Not pizzazz."
BOEING: WE GO FOR SUBSTANCE. NOT PIZZAZZ
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 11:40:43 UTC No. 16397367
>>16397353
Stop feeding the obvious troll who's assuredly not even Japanese.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 11:51:50 UTC No. 16397371
>>16397344
tldr
Chop chop, Takeshi, your ricebreak is over
my Corolla won't built itself
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 11:52:48 UTC No. 16397373
I was so horny this morning but then I busted fall over
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 11:58:24 UTC No. 16397376
>>16396944
Where does the energy for this come from?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 11:59:15 UTC No. 16397378
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:03:47 UTC No. 16397381
>>16397375
he really started showing his EDS in the IFT-4 video
nothing SpaceX is doing is impressive or is going to work (and you can't use the success of F9 or Dragon to argue about Starships because those are completely unrelated) and when it does work then he begrundigly says ok, it works, but this next thing won't work and keeps doing this from video to video
I would say all the most difficult parts have now been demonstrated, its just a matter of finetuning now and bringing costs down which SpaceX has demonstrated the ability to do in multiple other projects (even within the Starship program when you look at Raptor), so why would Starship be any different?
its basically just arguments from incredulity, like the previous IFT video but getting more and more unhinged as SpaceX through the milestones
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:04:00 UTC No. 16397382
>>16397229
dragon XL soon™
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:06:32 UTC No. 16397384
>>16397378 was called a larper by >>16397375 in xis starship flight 4 video
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:08:13 UTC No. 16397385
>>16397050
If you were going to use Starship for troop transport you wouldn't land in an enemy camp, if you land it at all. The thing can slow down and hover, but requires special infrastructure to land. You'd be better off with a detachable container that can parachute to the ground.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:08:45 UTC No. 16397386
>>16397381
or well, not all, I guess they do need to actually do the booster and ship landings on the chopsticks, but they have been landing boosters for forever and they did demonstrate they bellyflop manuever multiple times now (first with 10km hop and then from orbital speeds)
orbital refilling is a nothingburger that oldspace fans are obsessed about for some reason
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:10:22 UTC No. 16397387
>>16397384
timestamp?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:13:49 UTC No. 16397389
>16397375
Buy an ad, fat retard
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:13:58 UTC No. 16397390
>>16397382
Will be forgotten, like Red Dragon, and Gray Dragon
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:18:17 UTC No. 16397394
>>16397390
Is dragon XL contracted by nasa to resupply lunar gateway?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:20:45 UTC No. 16397395
>>16397387
it was like in the first few minutes
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:21:46 UTC No. 16397397
>>16397395
Not giving you ad revenue
Give a timestamp or buy an ad
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:23:00 UTC No. 16397398
>>16397397
what does it matter if you aren't going to watch it anyway? lmao
also I'm not the one you replied to originally
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:26:50 UTC No. 16397399
>>16397375
Only convincing part of his FT4 video
>they have the goal of doing rapid reliable reusability
>so why are they making an engine that is 99.999% at the limits of its materials?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:27:14 UTC No. 16397400
>>16397398
Youtube gives ad revenue based on time watched. So having to click through the video still counts whereas just watching 5 seconds doesn't.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:28:05 UTC No. 16397401
>>16397399
>99.999%
of raptor 2 or 3?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:28:16 UTC No. 16397402
>>16397399
Eagerspace has a good video about that.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:33:16 UTC No. 16397406
Is Starship actually too pointy?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:33:41 UTC No. 16397407
>>16397376
fusion or fission
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:33:51 UTC No. 16397409
>>16397399
its not convincing
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:35:05 UTC No. 16397411
>>16397402
Eagerdickhead is a larper. He dont know shit.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:36:06 UTC No. 16397412
>>16397378
what was in his mind when he made this profile pic?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:37:18 UTC No. 16397414
>>16397412
rockets
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:40:42 UTC No. 16397416
>>16397411
Do you have a refutation of what he said?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:41:11 UTC No. 16397417
>>16397411
Name a better channel
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:42:33 UTC No. 16397418
>>16397417
Everyday Astronaut
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:44:16 UTC No. 16397419
>>16397416
if spacex expect raptor 3 to perform at say 105% of raptor 2, if makes perfect sense to push raptor 2 to 99.999% during test flight.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:45:46 UTC No. 16397421
>>16397419
Are you a different anon? Thats pretty in line with what eager space although not the full story.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:46:20 UTC No. 16397422
>>16397417
uhm.. PRESSURE FED ASTRONAUT. COMMON SENSE SKEPTIC. THUNDERF00T
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:48:43 UTC No. 16397425
>>16397406
Yes, it's forcing some odd compromises on the position of the flaps and the actual cargo bay capacity.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:49:29 UTC No. 16397426
>>16397344
way too much effort for a baitpost bro, tone it down.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:50:15 UTC No. 16397427
>>16397422
THE THREE HORSEMEN.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:54:03 UTC No. 16397429
>>16396330
>space dab
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:56:14 UTC No. 16397431
>>16396330
i used to do this with clouds of silt in the water when i was a kid.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 12:58:20 UTC No. 16397432
>>16396498
why does it look like auschwitz
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 13:02:19 UTC No. 16397434
>>16397432
Convergent evolution of efficient facilities
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 13:03:09 UTC No. 16397435
>>16397423
>Wilmore
>Williams
lol
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 13:03:50 UTC No. 16397436
>>16396699
so there's maximal complexity at the middle? makes sense
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 13:10:00 UTC No. 16397437
I had genuine faith that blue would launch new glenn in august. im now a slightly poorer man because of it. Go Blue!
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 13:11:44 UTC No. 16397438
>>16396579
shes looking like a heroin addict who pukes on cock for drugs. i knew a girl just like her.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 13:12:23 UTC No. 16397439
>>16397381
It's the curse taken on by the anti-Starship people, if they are even handed and admit that Starship might possibly be successful then they lose the schizo anti Musk fans who make up the majority of viewership. Anything slightly favourable to Musk is like kryptonite to their mental health
What I find funny is that they never address the pushback they get on every comment section about stuff they were wrong about but they always make allusions to seeing it, so they are still reading it and probably seething behind the scenes. I think that's why PFA said he's not going to make any new Starship videos. When Starship is successful he can always pretend that those old videos were just a parody
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 13:14:52 UTC No. 16397440
>>16397438
yes but does your cockpuke druggy girl look at WW2 footage and then shutter at the potential for mankind to destroy?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 13:16:32 UTC No. 16397441
>>16396462
That was my Desktop picture for a while.
Remember, friends, it's gonna be hundreds of years before we get pictures from Pluto again.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 13:22:04 UTC No. 16397443
>>16397441
the surface of that planet would be pitch black to the naked eye
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 13:22:48 UTC No. 16397444
>>16396974
Well I guess they could re-do Flight 4, but all hell would break loose if they try catching the Booster.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 13:23:48 UTC No. 16397445
>>16397443
The relative brightness of Pluto in full sun is about the same as twilight on Earth. Dark, but not that dark, and most of Pluto's surface is made of frozen nitrogen.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 13:26:46 UTC No. 16397447
>>16397399
It's a good point but something that we've been aware of for years
I think once Starship's design is more solidified and robust we will likely see something like 3 different launch configurations. (1) will be Raptors working at subpar performance, e.g. 100-150 tons to LEO in rapid-reuse configuration. Likely a Starlink deployer and refuelling configuration, standard satellite deployer, point-to-point transport especially military will be interesting here
(2) Raptors working at full performance, 200+ tons to LEO, carrying cargo to the Moon or Mars, working on space stations, in-orbit manufacture, will likely be refuelled in LEO. Upon landing it'll need refurbishment and maybe engine swaps
(3) Expendable 300+ tons to orbit, lots of potential uses, maybe primarily for special cases like special cargo to Moon/Mars or for space-based telescopes
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 13:28:33 UTC No. 16397449
>>16397437
Gradadim Ferocider :DDDDD
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 13:28:48 UTC No. 16397450
>>16397399
If NASA wanted a cheap and reusable Shuttle, why did they make extremely complex RS-25 engine?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 13:29:44 UTC No. 16397451
>>16397444
the problem with that it not just that its more work for SpaceX (and might delay the catch testing) but that there might be some more regulatory bullshit which is even worse
the FAA fuckery is also going to be problem for every flight now, it needs to be solved or everything just gets endlessly delayed every time
cadence needs to be like a launch a week pretty soon, this might be a good time to show the incompetence of FAA
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 13:30:06 UTC No. 16397452
>>16396942
in the far future, cyberafricans and metaleftists will use this post as proof that elon was black
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 13:30:26 UTC No. 16397454
>>16397450
Your question doesn't help SpaceX lol
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 13:35:25 UTC No. 16397455
>>16397454
RS-25 costs about $100 million while SpaceX is mass-producing Raptors and its price is supposedly $1 million.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 13:37:59 UTC No. 16397459
shes talking about eager space...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odP
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 13:39:22 UTC No. 16397461
>>16397459
buy an ad
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 13:46:29 UTC No. 16397466
>>16397455
Your cost point is legitimate but you don't want engines at their utter limit to achieve your mission parameters if you want rapid reuse
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 13:48:38 UTC No. 16397469
>if it wasn't for FAA, we would be discussing IFT-5 and waiting for IFT-6
what a grim time
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 14:00:22 UTC No. 16397474
>>16397469
>he doesn't know flight 5 launched and successfully landed the booster last week
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 14:02:03 UTC No. 16397475
>>16397466
>rapid reuse
It's still years away. Firstly, SpaceX legally won't be able to launch more than 15 times from Starbase under the new license. Second, Raptor 3 has almost no flanges and is mostly welded, with that design you just have to remove the engine for inspection to find out how significant the wear is. However, SpaceX is definitely doing that already at McGregor.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 14:03:43 UTC No. 16397477
>>16397466
>don't want engines at their utter limit to achieve your mission parameters if you want rapid reuse
Says who?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 14:04:57 UTC No. 16397478
>>16397466
they are not performing at the limit of raptor 3.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 14:14:09 UTC No. 16397482
>>16397423
>Two men enter
>Four men leave
If two men go back it will be empty
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 14:23:07 UTC No. 16397493
>>16397440
Sure, if you give her $10
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 14:27:29 UTC No. 16397498
>>16397495
coincidence?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 14:29:27 UTC No. 16397501
>>16397495
longship is looooong
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 14:30:02 UTC No. 16397502
>>16397477
Drag racers.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 14:32:25 UTC No. 16397504
>>16397501
longship is a more appropriate name than starship. like the longships of old it can cross to the new world, but it aint exactly big enough to sustain a growing society of millions of people, its suited for raiding and exploring distant lands as a prelude to the bigger ships
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 14:33:05 UTC No. 16397505
>>16397504
first longship then fatship
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 14:36:30 UTC No. 16397508
>>16397502
Since when do drag race cars have full flow staged combustion cycle rocket engines?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 14:37:11 UTC No. 16397510
>>16397508
>t. never been to a drag race
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 14:38:11 UTC No. 16397511
>>16397510
I have, so far as I could tell they used IC engines.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 14:38:31 UTC No. 16397512
>>16397284
>the missing 10% being greater than the acceleration one could get in an regular car
I don't know what kind of underpowered shitboxes you're used to, but 0.1g is 0-60mph in 27 seconds, or a 28 second quarter-mile.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 14:40:54 UTC No. 16397516
Last night I dreamt I was descending towards an orange world like Titan, but darker like an orange. No ship no suit, just falling to land on my own two feet. I touched down earlier than it seemed I should've, and the surface was completely flat, like standing on a featureless sphere. The ground beneath my feet was sticky and slightly spongy, like carpet that had soaked up a bunch of spilled soda and dried all syrupy. There was an atmosphere I think, but the sky above was black space. I need 4ASS dream analyst division to quantify these visions and project their relevance to spaceflight.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 14:41:10 UTC No. 16397517
>>16397513
sure theyve got the archetecture for quick reintegration with all of it landing on the arms, but what use is that when it will need extensive maintenance after every flight?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 14:42:14 UTC No. 16397518
>>16397516
the planet symbolizes neet life
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 14:43:34 UTC No. 16397521
>>16397504
Dang, longship is actually a great name for a flags and footprints or flyby mission rocket.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 14:45:34 UTC No. 16397523
>>16397385
>requires special infrastructure to land.
It doesn't.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 14:46:12 UTC No. 16397525
>>16397516
You're dreaming about Chrischan discharging you into orange fanta.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 14:47:29 UTC No. 16397526
>>16397517
pad 2 might be movable for refurbishment/replacement and of course the long term idea is to not need refurbishment after ever flight
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 14:48:02 UTC No. 16397528
>>16397523
So they're catching it as part of an elaborate practical joke? Also it needs to be refueled unless it's expendable.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 14:49:16 UTC No. 16397530
>>16397528
It can land on its stubby legs once. It has to in order to be usable for Mars.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 14:50:43 UTC No. 16397531
>>16397502
>>16397508
>>16397510
>>16397511
i wouldn't mind a global competition where rocket engineers pit their rocket designs against eachother in a dragrace.
the engines are fueled with massive fueltanks on the side of the track with fuel lines on electrically powered rails that follow the racers.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 14:51:40 UTC No. 16397532
>Polaris dawn had to wait weeks for just the perfect weather
Will this be the case for starship? Specifically tanker refilling missions
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 14:51:47 UTC No. 16397533
>>16397526
mobile pads is a good idea, otherwise refurbishment will be a massive bottleneck on flight rate
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 14:52:08 UTC No. 16397535
>>16397516
you witnessed the third impact.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 14:53:13 UTC No. 16397536
>>16397518
>landed sooner than expected
>sticky and kind of gross
>dull, featureless
>trapped by gravity
You may be onto something anon
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 14:53:46 UTC No. 16397537
>>16397533
might not be mobile in the sense of self propelled and easily movable, but more like that you can move it with a crane without demolishing it
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 14:54:31 UTC No. 16397538
>>16397532
they had to wait for good weather beause it lands in the sea and they dont want to drown the astronauts in big waves. starship should be more resistant to that.
but the longer it gets the more sensitive it is to upper level winds. its already so long that flying as regularly as a plane is a complete fantasy since it wont be able to fly in slightly above typical upper level winds. thats the same issue falcon has.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 14:54:51 UTC No. 16397539
>>16397532
they had to wait for both the launch to be low risk and also for the landing weather to be good for recovery
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 14:58:15 UTC No. 16397544
>>16397526
>>16397533
>mobile launchers
You heretics need to be burned at the stake. This is how you get $5 billion expendable launch towers that can only operate on single use Alabama river rocks
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 15:00:21 UTC No. 16397545
>>16397538
It just needs weather control
A few square kilometers of aimable orbital mirrors should be enough to change local weather, right?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 15:01:49 UTC No. 16397547
>>16397535
It was this exact shade of orange in fact, a tangworld.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 15:01:50 UTC No. 16397548
>>16397531
You should go to an amateur rocketry club launch. Hobbyists love drag racing their homemade sounding rockets against each other.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 15:07:17 UTC No. 16397552
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 15:16:59 UTC No. 16397556
>>16397544
you didn't read what I wrote
its not a mobile launcher
its just a moveable pad, the tower will remain stationary and the rockets won't be on the pad when its moved out, the pad probably won't be self-propelled because that is pointless
it would just be light enough and not permanently attached to the ground so it could be moved away for refurbishment or replacement with SPMT (self-propelled modular transporters), like they use for moving the ships and boosters already
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 15:23:25 UTC No. 16397560
>>16397548
The problem with amateur rocketry is you aren't allowed to fill the payload with ordnance. They want you to launch tiny, boring a piece of shit model with balsa wood and paper, with a fucking gay little parachute. No risk = no fun, sorry dad.
REAL rocket amateurs are only interested when the payload is a sizeable stick of home made dynamite, and the rocket body and fins are made of metal. Given this is very against the rules, and most young engineers quickly lose interest (is really is boring) and move on to other sciences that actually have hands-on fun projects to do. Or, join Hezbollah.
Every kid ha been to the fireworks store before, their ain't looking at the little shit, but instead go directly to the biggest, loudest, and most powerful reports possible. Make science exciting again.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 15:39:57 UTC No. 16397568
>>16397544
the space shuttle crawler was so hilariously expensive because it had to carry the fully fuelled SRBs. a starship crawler would be a fraction of the cost
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 15:49:00 UTC No. 16397574
ever since watching ift4 i have had pains in my lower stomach and cant get a boner.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 15:55:12 UTC No. 16397576
>>16397532
One thing that wasn't mentioned yet was that Polaris crew had limited supplies so they could not wait in orbit for a good landing weather, no such problem with a tanker.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 15:58:02 UTC No. 16397582
>>16397576
haha, youre hilarious.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 15:58:56 UTC No. 16397585
https://x.com/SheriffGarza/status/1
SpaceX is going to transport something from the port
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 16:16:53 UTC No. 16397596
>>16397585
chopsticks for tower 2
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 16:25:41 UTC No. 16397604
>>16397596
Speculation, or do you know something?
RGV Aerial flyover review showed the shortened chopsticks originally from Florida already sitting in the Sanchez lot for weeks now, that move already happened.
I think SpaceX needs to TEST the damn chopsticks with a real catch before they duplicate the (possibly incorrect) design. But their dick is currently held hostage by the Biden administration, and cant proceed.
A move from the Port tonight is suggestive of more cryogenic storage tanks maybe? Mundane things that can legally proceed, while the US keeps looking like an absolute fool on the world stage, watching China rapidly iterate instead.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 16:26:39 UTC No. 16397605
>>16397604
I read the thread
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 16:31:55 UTC No. 16397609
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 16:32:59 UTC No. 16397610
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 16:34:02 UTC No. 16397612
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 16:49:22 UTC No. 16397623
>>16397612
cool rocket
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 17:27:20 UTC No. 16397653
>>16397612
>>16397610
>>16397609
so much for fully and rapidly reusable. muskrats sweep it under the rug when its a fact that musk promised flacon 9 would be fully reusable and go to mars.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 17:29:43 UTC No. 16397655
>>16397653
never happened
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 17:36:51 UTC No. 16397663
>>16397660
FAA is a threat to public safety.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 17:41:19 UTC No. 16397667
>>16397660
Privatise FAA
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 17:42:53 UTC No. 16397671
>>16397667
How would a private FAA work?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 17:44:14 UTC No. 16397673
>>16397660
So basically, they said fuck you, and will deny launching anything SpaceX has built, in any profile, until after the election.
Because, fuck you, its a polarized political thing now, spaceflight enjoyers will never again experience nice things.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 17:45:45 UTC No. 16397674
>>16397671
like the public one, if there were lapses in their judgement (giving licenses where there shouldn't have due to safety issues) then they could be sued and have to pay some of the damages
somewhat like insurance, they would be incentivized to give licenses as quickly as possible for more revenue, but not give them in situations where it endangers the public so they don't lose money
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 17:46:06 UTC No. 16397675
New rule: Space Force declares permanent no-fly corridors above launch sites for aircraft (they can do this now, shut up) and the FAA has ZERO authority over issuing launch licenses, or really having anything to do with spacecraft whatsoever. Space Force (or a new space-FAA) can be in charge of who's flying what, when and where, THEY can issue launch licenses for tests and fasttrack them for rapid development. The FAA can regulate airliners, and they can be greatful for it.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 17:46:47 UTC No. 16397677
>>16397532
Yes. Starship is becoming equally if not worse of pencil rocket now
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 17:47:04 UTC No. 16397678
>>16397673
basically sounds like that if a TPS change is now a public safety issue
and the thing they keep bringing up is public safety even though the hotfire ring drop location change and sonic booms have absolutely nothing to do with safety
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 17:48:05 UTC No. 16397681
>>16397675
yes, something like this is necessary when you have cadences like multiple daily launches
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 17:51:56 UTC No. 16397689
>>16397682
>PFV01 is designed to test the aerodynamics of the company’s proposed Radian One, a spaceplane that would take off horizontally using a rail sled system more than three kilometers long and reach orbit using rocket engines before returning to a runway landing. The vehicle, as currently designed, could carry up to five people and 2,270 kilograms of cargo to low Earth orbit and return with up to 4,540 kilograms of cargo.
what the fuck
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 17:52:49 UTC No. 16397690
>>16397675
>FAA can regulate airliners
No. They have shown repeatedly to be incapable of doing even that without killing hundreds of civilians. FAA needs to be striped of all its power, and all staff complicit in its incompetence permanently barred from government positions.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 17:53:30 UTC No. 16397693
>>16397660
OK, that'd explain why they didn't try to go for an in-between launch if the TPS may need approval as well.
Tangentially related, many people here seem convinced that the tower catch is absolutely necessary to be done as soon as possible, but Raptor production has far outpaced ship and booster production so far and personally I'd have thought reentry and TPS testing is still more important so a flight 4-like launch while waiting for the tower upgrades would've made sense, especially with the flap and TPS changes. Of course the catch is important but since we're not quite at the point where it can really be useful (flight 5 still having Raptor 2s), is it really the most important part right now? Also considering the virtual tower catch probably tests a lot of what is necessary for the actual catch.
>>16397678
hotstage ring and sonic booms (latter can have public safety impact if windows can burst, but I don't think that's an issue here, still they'll have checked that in the safety review) are environmental issues where they have pretty much no choice of their own, they have to consult the other agencies to be allowed to approve them by federal law. At least while much is made of the 60 day timeframe, the last few license modifications I think the consultations always lasted shorter than that, more around 35 days or so. Probably won't help here if the FAA already expects November, though.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 17:53:42 UTC No. 16397694
>>16397681
Severing the FAA from spaceflight activities is something that must be done, now that they've shown themselves to be a regulatory roadblock acting out of petty spite. The FAA is for airplanes, spaceships are not airplanes (inb4 Dragon is a lifting body), the FAA is not the regulatory body for these activities, SIMPLE AS.
Divorce the FAA from spaceflight, restrict them to airplanes and audit the SHIT out of them if they dare step out of line.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 17:54:31 UTC No. 16397696
>>16397660
So they’re just making shit up now.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 17:54:51 UTC No. 16397697
>>16397690
>FAA needs to be striped of all its power, and all staff complicit in its incompetence permanently barred from government positions.
I can think of half a dozen agencies in dire need of this treatment, at least.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 17:55:57 UTC No. 16397698
>>16397694
but spaceplanes fly through the flight paths of regular planes. having a seperate admin for splaceplanes from regular planes is like having a seperate admin for trucks and cars.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 17:59:05 UTC No. 16397703
>>16397698
cars drive through railways at crossings too.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 17:59:51 UTC No. 16397704
>>16397698
If we end up having spaceplanes maybe that will be an issue. In that instance, the space-FAA or whatever gets authority to reroute traffic (or order the FAA to), and the FAA has to do what they say because fuck 'em.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 18:00:36 UTC No. 16397705
>>16397703
there are these little things called trafic lights which mean trains dont have to worry about negotiating their way around cars.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 18:02:15 UTC No. 16397707
>>16397704
starship literally is a spaceplane
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 18:04:47 UTC No. 16397712
>>16397693
Musk said reuse is the most important, so I guess they do think its the most important
> Also considering the virtual tower catch probably tests a lot of what is necessary for the actual catch.
no, you need to actually test it
> they have pretty much no choice of their own, they have to consult the other agencies to be allowed to approve them by federal law
no they don't have to, both of these things have already been looked at and determined to not be problems
this is a choice that the FAA made
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 18:05:15 UTC No. 16397713
>>16397705
there are these little things called tfr which means spaceships dont have to worry about negotiating their way around planes.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 18:05:15 UTC No. 16397714
>>16397698
Airtraffic controllers don't need to know what kind space vehicle is flying in a nofly zone, all they have to do is keep airliners out of the zone.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 18:07:52 UTC No. 16397716
>>16397714
If multiple vehicles are going to be going through the same relative corridor each day (as Musk wants with multiple daily launches) then just close off the corridor permanently, all planes must divert when they start getting close. There are already airspaces like that over the US so it's nothing new.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 18:09:23 UTC No. 16397719
>>16397716
you realize the economic impact that woud bring? imbecile.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 18:10:55 UTC No. 16397721
>>16397719
show your workings
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 18:11:14 UTC No. 16397722
>>16397719
No?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 18:13:47 UTC No. 16397727
>>16397712
Reentry working properly is also important for reuse though. And of course you need to test the tower catch for real, I'm just not convinced it's as urgent as reentry testing considering Raptor production.
The FAA has to reopen consultations for every change, so technically these specific instances have not been looked at yet unfortunately.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 18:20:19 UTC No. 16397732
WHEN IS IFT5? 2 more weeks? kek
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 18:21:38 UTC No. 16397736
>>16397702
Recent weeks have been a pretty abrupt about-face in Spacex's dealings with the FAA. Even during the environmental assessment debacle, Musk wasn't calling for resignations and the company wasn't issuing letters in response to obvious bureaucrat nonsense. They've always tiptoed around the issue and said positive things about working with the FAA.
I can only assume that this means Musk and Spacex have good reason to expect nothing but delays on Starship between now and the election. I feel like some private communication or remarks by someone at the FAA must have flipped Musk's "fuck it" switch. It seems like he thinks the only resolution will come with a regime change or by making such an unholy racket that the issue can't be buried even if the Dems do get the presidency.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 18:29:30 UTC No. 16397740
>>16397732
NET November 6
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 18:37:17 UTC No. 16397745
>>16397736
It's probably a mix of the rest of the industry also calling for improvements after part 450 seems to have all but failed and Musk being drunk on his Trump boner. Whether it leads to anything except the FAA and consulting agencies paying even closer attention to not get sued by more rabid enviros looking for the first undotted i remains to be seen.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 18:41:53 UTC No. 16397751
>>16397727
but it mostly works already, losing a booster means losing 33 engines
losing a ship means you lose 6 engines, its a pretty big difference
they could also just start to focus on the ship if they have a somewhat working booster
the heatshield tiles are going to get tested every flight anyway so you don't need to dedicate a launch just for them
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 18:43:39 UTC No. 16397753
>>16397739
>compromised NASA's technical integrity
what did he mean by this?
the actual future of NASA as an organization?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 18:49:50 UTC No. 16397756
>>16397327
>Thrust (sea level): 2.4 MN (550,000 lbf) at full power
According to wikipedia. Who is right?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 18:51:07 UTC No. 16397757
>>16397756
Probably the guy who actually has them strapped to his rocket? Lmao
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 18:52:45 UTC No. 16397759
>>16397756
vacuum thrust?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 18:56:20 UTC No. 16397761
>>16397756
When jeff talked about his gains he wasn't referring to the gym...
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 18:58:05 UTC No. 16397764
>>16397763
kek
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 19:01:44 UTC No. 16397767
>>16397682
https://payloadspace.com/radian-aer
Radian wrote an article about their business idea
they are going to buy a methalox engine from some other company instead of developing one themselves
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 19:03:06 UTC No. 16397770
>>16397767
>Compared to other spaceplanes like Sierra Space’s Dream Chaser (which launches atop a rocket and operates only in space) and Dawn Aerospace’s Mk-II Aurora (which focuses on small suborbital vehicles), Radian’s spaceplane design sets itself apart as a single-stage-to-orbit system that offers lower costs, higher flight cadence, and human spaceflight capability from day one.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 19:04:31 UTC No. 16397772
>>16397751
>but it mostly works already
but then they changed all the tiles and the flap design
Maybe they do think ship reentry is mostly working now but personally I think it'd have been advantageous to launch another set to do more ship reentry testing and refine booster entry and landing accuracy so that with the upcoming launch they'd have an even better chance. That way they'd have one launch more this year instead of one less since the tower upgrades would've taken this long anyways. Of course assuming they really could've launched mid-August and Raptor production really is as far ahead as it seems. Just seems stupid to not do a flight and then complain about not getting to do quick flight iteration. Ship reentry and booster catch are not the only things to test after all, they could also have worked towards in-space relight, payload door, and all the other stuff necessary for Starlink and such. Just seems like a wasted opportunity to me that is then used to complain about not getting more opportunities that wouldn't have come much quicker anyways.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 19:09:03 UTC No. 16397774
>>16397767
>After zipping down the 2-mile track, the sled releases the spaceplane at Mach 0.7, propelling the vehicle into the next phase of its ascent.
not sure if which idea is worse, air launch on stratolaunch or this
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 19:09:12 UTC No. 16397775
>>16397763
ukrainian tractor stalking it's prey.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 19:09:16 UTC No. 16397776
>>16397772
you are assuming they could have just launched another two months later
looking at the shit FAA is pulling now, I don't think that is very likely
also you have no idea the tower upgrades would take this long, it could very well be that they are strengthening them more than is strictly necessary for testing just because they have time to kill
SpaceX launched IFT-1 with no water deluge system to see what happens, they tend to do a lot of real life testing instead of making 100% everything works perfectly
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 19:10:42 UTC No. 16397778
>>16397767
okay so this is obviously a scam or a retarded venture capital boondoggle.
that's an insignificant help to an SSTO, this thing is never going anywhere.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 19:12:17 UTC No. 16397781
>>16397778
>Leadership: Radian’s leadership team comprises ex-Boeing, NASA, Air Force, and commercial industry professionals, providing crucial expertise in navigating the technical challenges of SSTO while remaining focused on economic viability.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 19:15:55 UTC No. 16397786
>>16397774
>>After zipping down the 2-mile track, the sled releases the spaceplane at Mach 0.7, propelling the vehicle into the next phase of its ascent.
Put the 2 mile track on a 2 mile dirigible and fly it up as high as you can, combination rail/air launch.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 19:18:10 UTC No. 16397791
>>16397786
lmaoo
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 19:18:14 UTC No. 16397792
>>16397781
So a bunch of industry guys realising that they can make millions of dollars by getting some VC hype money instead of slaving for cuck salaries. they know the project is never going anywhere
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 19:19:10 UTC No. 16397793
>>16397739
bureaucratic rot is going to infest the last vestiges of our society until we become Europe 2.0 and become conquered by stronger men
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 19:19:42 UTC No. 16397795
>>16397776
Yes that's fair, especially with this new point about the TPS, but from what we knew and a presumed insider suggesting tower upgrades aren't done but necessary it seemed like a decent possibility. Also if it would've had avoided IFT-1-ing the tower that'd be a plus in my book lel
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 19:19:59 UTC No. 16397796
>>16397781
more red flags than chinese military parade
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 19:23:37 UTC No. 16397802
>>16397793
I’d welcome conquer by stronger men if it meant we got back to building cool stuff. Don’t call me hypocritical. Say rather that I’m apolitical.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 19:33:59 UTC No. 16397817
>>16397811
NOOOO NOT THE WATER IN THE SWAMP
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 19:34:12 UTC No. 16397818
I cant wait for the FAA to shut down every water park with a big bucket that fills up and dumps water
🗑️ Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 19:46:16 UTC No. 16397834
>>16397802
We will be conquered by niggers
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 19:48:29 UTC No. 16397839
Evidence that Earth used to have rings.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qc
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 19:52:48 UTC No. 16397847
>>16397839
Urf of da Rangz
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 20:12:07 UTC No. 16397874
>>16397375
EDS
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 20:14:58 UTC No. 16397878
>>16397839
We will make some new ones.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 20:22:41 UTC No. 16397887
>>16397238
China?
Stealing ideas from the West?
SURELY NOT!
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 20:24:51 UTC No. 16397890
Not sure if this was already posted here.
I wish China's scientists and engineers luck in their endeavours. It's about time a country started taking space seriously again. Maybe the chinks will scare NASA into finally pulling their finger out for once.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 20:25:32 UTC No. 16397891
How likely is it for NASA to just say fuck it and take over licensing for Starship as every IFT is effectively flight tests for Artemis being that Artemis requires use of all capabilities that Starship is slated to have?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 20:27:01 UTC No. 16397893
>>16397891
None, unless Trump wins and replaces FAA thats more friendly towards national security goals and commercial friendly.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 20:30:42 UTC No. 16397895
Reddit spacex board is seething about SpaceX fighting FAA. Like the commie trannies have infiltrated even the dedicated SpaceX boards there lmao
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 20:31:18 UTC No. 16397896
>>16397890
that is some wild ass drone footage. They were lucky debris didn't hit it
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 20:33:25 UTC No. 16397901
>>16397896
Drones are extremely cheap and the footage is very valuable.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 20:33:36 UTC No. 16397902
>>16397890
>logo is almost an X
How are they this devoid of creativity?
I don't understand...
Is /pol/ right?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 20:34:19 UTC No. 16397904
>>16397895
Redditors are not human and should be exterminated.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 20:36:10 UTC No. 16397908
>>16397902
Imitation is flattery
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 20:42:06 UTC No. 16397912
>>16397895
lounge is the dedicated board.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 20:42:51 UTC No. 16397913
>>16397895
sometimes I wonder if /sfg/, myself included, is the last place on the entire internet that still blindly follows musk and spacex no matter what.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 20:48:29 UTC No. 16397921
>>16397913
Its not no matter what, it just happens that Musk/SpaceX are unusually taking the right position and plays the straight man in the clown world. I dont disagree with most of Musk's takes not because of Musk but because the stances do make sense. Be it deregulation to speed up innovation, free speech, experimental breakthrough technological developments, forceful advocacy of mars colonization, etc. Blindly just means without basis other than fanboyism.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 20:49:54 UTC No. 16397923
>>16397913
Who gives a shit. I only want to see bigger rockets fly and sometimes blow up.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 20:54:04 UTC No. 16397928
somebody staging?
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 20:56:12 UTC No. 16397930
let it die
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 20:57:17 UTC No. 16397934
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 21:00:53 UTC No. 16397938
>>16397753
Allowing that shitty service module to exist is absolutely incompetent of NASA
🗑️ Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 21:12:21 UTC No. 16397954
Freedom (C212) is the sexiest of the Crew Dragons
Endurance is okay, Resilience ehh no, Endeavour has the coolest name but it’s ugly as fuck.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 21:14:50 UTC No. 16397958
>>16397913
I don’t blindly follow musk. I think his twitter antics are retarded and I think some of his design decisions for starship are dubious. I only respect him for revolutionizing the launch market.
Anonymous at Wed, 25 Sep 2024 21:23:50 UTC No. 16397974
>>16396311
spess