Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 09:37:10 UTC No. 16537043

New Glenn gonna collide with Starship mid air

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 09:38:19 UTC No. 16537045

>>16537043
no homo

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 09:39:40 UTC No. 16537047

>>16537041
Falcon 9's up to 18.4 tons demonstrated reusable (23 800kg Starlinks), while Starship's going to start with ~64.8 tons reusable with Starlink V3s (54 1200 kg Starlinks).

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 09:40:57 UTC No. 16537049

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 09:42:33 UTC No. 16537050

🗑️ Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 09:50:42 UTC No. 16537053

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1876174862747930717
elon... what are you doing? wtf

🗑️ Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 09:52:41 UTC No. 16537055

>>16537053
>America annexing the Five Eyes countries
Ahead of schedule. Hopefully under budget.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 09:53:50 UTC No. 16537056

>>16537053
We are going to War. No time for mars

🗑️ Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 09:54:25 UTC No. 16537057

>>16537053
Vox Populi

🗑️ Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 09:55:56 UTC No. 16537058

>>16537053
this man has gone INSANE

🗑️ Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 09:57:40 UTC No. 16537059

>>16537058
>>16537053
You seem upset

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:00:25 UTC No. 16537062

>>16537041
i just woke up! i am so excited to watch the first new glenn launch today!!

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:03:10 UTC No. 16537065

>>16537053
>the UK becoming the 51st state
Based timeline.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:08:15 UTC No. 16537067

>>16537053
this vibes https://youtu.be/ojeaZaw6Rw8?si=OFsW33CQtT_3jNtd&t=33

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:08:46 UTC No. 16537068

>>16537053
What's even going on with UK? The whole country operates like it was under occupation after a lost war.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:10:24 UTC No. 16537069

>>16537058
>If a random person says this: "Lol, they're just having a laugh."
>If Elon Musk says this: "HE MUST BE STOPPED!"

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:11:38 UTC No. 16537071

>>16537053
being absolutely based as usual

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:11:40 UTC No. 16537072

>>16537068
it's a nothingburger

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:16:22 UTC No. 16537075

>>16537053
Why is he obsessed with the UK? Is he ADHD?

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:17:56 UTC No. 16537076

>>16537069
You don't think there is a material difference if some random internet shitter vs. one of the most powerful men on earth goes navy seals copypasta on your ass?

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:18:41 UTC No. 16537077

>>16537053
With Elon Musk going full on schizo for the past week, will SpaceX survive and continue without Musk?

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:18:42 UTC No. 16537078

>>16537069
Random people don't have billions of dollars and the ear of the leader of the most powerful country in the world.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:20:17 UTC No. 16537080

>>16537053
he appears to be shitposting

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:20:20 UTC No. 16537081

>>16537053
soon

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:22:51 UTC No. 16537083

>>16537077
Neither Tesla nor SpaceX really need him anymore. Tesla would arguably be better off without him. For SpaceX, he's a good way to keep attention off of Gwynne so she can get work done while Elon is wanking around in public.
Thing is, Telsa can throw him out easily enough but SpaceX is difficult. There are many estimates about how much of the company he owns, but those seem to be based on shaky data from iffy sources. There's no good way to know just how much outside investment there's been and how much control that outside money has.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:22:57 UTC No. 16537084

>>16537080
UK is under genocidal rape, they need to be liberated

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:24:39 UTC No. 16537086

>>16537083
yes they do

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:26:03 UTC No. 16537087

>>16537083
>Neither Tesla nor SpaceX really need him anymore.
completely wrong
go back

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:29:15 UTC No. 16537089

>>16537084
Don't you think that the British people would do something if they disliked the current situation?

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:29:42 UTC No. 16537090

>>16537083
When Elon is gone, those companies will fall so fast fags like you will be coping about it for decades

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:32:41 UTC No. 16537091

>>16537089
no, they're the descendants of the people who put up with it rather than leave. Americans are almost all descended from people who looked around and said yeah fuck this shit forever. Behavior like that is genetic.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:36:09 UTC No. 16537092

>>16537053
Bongs are going to get one large order of FREEDOM fries

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:37:12 UTC No. 16537093

speaking of the UK, what happened to those smallsat launchers that were going to launch from there?

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:44:02 UTC No. 16537094

>>16537093
richard branson MIA

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:44:36 UTC No. 16537096

>>16537093
Skyrora and Orbex?
>The maiden flight of Orbex's Prime is expected to occur in 2025, subject to the availability of SaxaVord Spaceport and a Civil Aviation Authority launch licence
>Hot-fire tests of the first stage of Skyrora XL are scheduled to take place no earlier than late 2024
two more years, trust the plan

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:46:51 UTC No. 16537097

>>16537096
coincidentally, both of these companies are scottish lmao
england can't into space

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:48:04 UTC No. 16537099

>>16537097
ahem, Virgin Orbit. Retard.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:50:29 UTC No. 16537100

>>16537075
An anon in another thread speculated that all this noise is just to cover the stink of the H-1B visa fiasco, where he greatly pissed off the MAGAs.
Either that or it's pure unbridled autism.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:51:43 UTC No. 16537101

>>16537099
another american company

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:52:50 UTC No. 16537102

>>16537101
richard muffugin brandson SON
launched from UK
dumb fuck

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:53:23 UTC No. 16537103

>>16537089
they go to prison if they talk about it

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:54:42 UTC No. 16537104

>>16537100
it's to distract from the fact boeing is about to announce their ufo tech to the world, completely destroying tesla in the process

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:56:43 UTC No. 16537106

>>16537089
They tried, and the representatives of the Crown punished the victims. People who have taken umbrage with this have been repeatedly sentenced to lengthy prison terms. Without scandal sufficient to incite the potential for revolution, there is no fix for this within the borders of the United Kingdom.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:57:54 UTC No. 16537107

many such cases
so sayeth mr musk

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:58:38 UTC No. 16537108

if new glenn gets delayed to the 10th then we'd have 5 launches on that day (see pic)
would 5 launches in a day be the most ever?

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:59:01 UTC No. 16537109

>>16537106
Why doesnt the CIA just assassinate the current leaders?

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:59:41 UTC No. 16537110

>>16537102
musk, a south african man, founded spacex. that doesn't mean spacex is a south african company.
roscosmos usually launches from kazakhstan. that doesn't mean they are a kazakh agency.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 11:02:01 UTC No. 16537111

>>16537109
It wouldn't solve the problem, it'd destabilize a nominal and important ally, and the UK has nukes. It's a lose/lose/lose proposition.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 11:04:00 UTC No. 16537112

>>16537110
Virgin Group was founded in UK you stupid butt fucker. guess what virgin orbit is a subsidiary of

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 11:06:05 UTC No. 16537113

>>16537111
Ok, provide a win/win scenario that involves a US ground invasion and total annexation of the UK.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 11:06:59 UTC No. 16537114

SPEHS

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 11:07:36 UTC No. 16537115

>>16537113
Not much cause or need to assassinate or invade: you basically just sit down at a table and give a list of terms for annexation and hash out what it takes to make the royal family and parliament quietly and permanently fuck off.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 11:09:56 UTC No. 16537117

>>16537115
The only terms will be terms of unconditional and total surrender

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 11:10:08 UTC No. 16537118

The main reason to annex the UK would be their resources. They aren't rich in minerals or hydrocarbons anymore and have you seen their demographics.
Canada first.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 11:11:36 UTC No. 16537119

>>16537118
The main reason would be their technology and strategic position. There are still a few things the UK knows how to do exceptionally well.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 11:14:19 UTC No. 16537120

>>16537118
if we dont do it, russia will

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 11:15:34 UTC No. 16537121

>>16537120
Russia taking over the UK is a bit extreme even for alterative reality vatnik fanfic authors.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 11:16:18 UTC No. 16537122

>>16537112
i'm very much aware that the virgin group is british. however, virgin orbit, considered a branch or subsidiary or whatever you wanna call it, was a us-based company. headquarters were located in long beach, california.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 11:18:57 UTC No. 16537124

He's doing all this so that New Glenn gets delayed again lmao genius

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 11:27:30 UTC No. 16537127

>>16536998
I've built shuttles in KSP but never attempted Starship. Anyone got any tips? Stock preferably

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 11:32:01 UTC No. 16537128

>>16537083
I feel like I've read this exact post before

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 12:03:52 UTC No. 16537147

>>16537127
Making Starship in stock KSP doesn't make much sense, because you need that big payload bay and your best option is the one from shuttle. You can always download Starship mod, but if you want to make your own version then download Nertea's mods, Near Future and Far Future.
Once you have the payload bay figured out, the biggest issue are flaps and their controls. I did it some time ago, so I don't remember the details, but you apply controls of those hinges as pitch. Sadly, you can't control more than one axis with them.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 12:08:21 UTC No. 16537151

>>16537053
Begging to be assassinated. That's what.
Because I want 5 eyes dead, not US annexing my state.
It has done nothing but kill me, my family and countrymen with it's subversion tactics. Death to America.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 12:10:08 UTC No. 16537152

>>16537151
>Because I want 5 eyes dead, not US annexing my state.
What are you, Irish? If you're in Ireland or Scotland, quite frankly, you can have your states; you guys blatantly don't want to be Americans, and most of those who do, or did, emigrated long ago.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 12:11:11 UTC No. 16537153

>>16537151
lmao, quit blaming America, it's your own fault

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 12:24:21 UTC No. 16537164

>>16537058
Yes.

I have been saying this for six months now.
He's climbing up the fence right now.

Anyways, he's unironically correct this time.
Britain needs a healthy serving of LIBERTY pie, soccer enjoying it's correct name again, license free television, taxation imposed on them without representation in Congress just like Puerto Rico, etc.

>>16537053
They are trying to make the NWO one world government actually real, except it's just America eating everything.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 12:51:35 UTC No. 16537171

>>16537164
>LIBERTY pie, soccer enjoying it's correct name again, license free television
I think I'd rather hang on to my foreskin instead, but thanks for the offer. Cheers.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 12:59:14 UTC No. 16537178

>>16537164
>license free television
lol only out of touch boomers watch tv anymore

🗑️ Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 13:24:35 UTC No. 16537189

To put boots on the Moon—and keep them there—will require bold thinkers ready to tackle the challenges of tomorrow. That’s why NASA’s Office of STEM Engagement at Johnson Space Center in Houston is on a mission to empower the next generation of explorers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM).

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 13:30:37 UTC No. 16537194

Do you guys think New Glenn is actually going to stick the landing?

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 13:32:56 UTC No. 16537196

>>>/wsg/5777367

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 13:35:36 UTC No. 16537198

>>16537194
There is no real reason why they cant, BE-4 is a better engine overall. Unless there's something seriously crappy under the hood, they'll probably stick it.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 13:35:55 UTC No. 16537199

>>16537194
nope. Unlike spacegg, boing has practically no experience doing this. It will definitely get aborted

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 13:37:34 UTC No. 16537201

>>16537194
They need to. They're going "slow and steady" rather than SpaceX's optimize EVERYTHING ALL THE TIME mode for fast/cheap/powerful/efficient/reusable. Plus its a classic landing that they've already done with their smaller suborbital rocket. So lets see

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 13:39:57 UTC No. 16537202

>>16537194
I think theres a decent chances. From what I heard BO is going for a super conservative landing profile by launching a light payload and hovering over the pad. I do think this increases their chances vs going straight for a hoverslam.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 13:47:35 UTC No. 16537204

>>16537202
They're not hoverslam. They havent even with their shepard vehicles. It just hovers for few seconds and them comes down to land. SpaceX is the only one doing precision perfect slams.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 13:49:23 UTC No. 16537205

>>16537204
>sfg has no reading comprehension

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 13:49:59 UTC No. 16537206

>>16537194
There's a chance, and it's a better chance than most groups trying for it. The hardware is untested but New Shepard will have given them a lot of experience with software and procedure.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 14:02:25 UTC No. 16537212

>>16537194
Yes, 100%.
gradatim foreciter

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 14:03:27 UTC No. 16537213

>>16537205
>/sfg/ is one person

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 14:11:12 UTC No. 16537217

>STARSHIP: Episode 1 - "Prologue"
Thought it would be more interesting, like history of Starship, but it's just a few pretty scenes and dudes reacting to launch.
https://youtu.be/7LZbVULx280

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 14:34:37 UTC No. 16537231

>>16537055
possibly a very nice obscure reference

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 14:48:03 UTC No. 16537237

>>16537041
Last night I had a dream of the New Glenn launch. the second stage was launching a few meters into the air and the first stage just felt together and dropped into the flame trench and Blue Origin acted like it was some kind of success.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 15:04:57 UTC No. 16537243

https://x.com/Digantarahq/status/1876282566531289386
>Earlier this morning, from our South American site, we captured a low-elevation pass of SpaDeX-A (SDX01) and SpaDeX-B (SDX02) at 09:30 AM IST. These two spacecraft, currently separated by an estimated 4.5 km, are setting the stage for the groundbreaking docking of the ISRO SpaDeX Mission.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 15:08:39 UTC No. 16537246

https://x.com/astro_Pettit/status/1876154709519806543
>Flying over aurora; intensely green.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 15:26:17 UTC No. 16537252

>>16537237
yeah, I can see this happening

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 15:39:44 UTC No. 16537257

Elon is a retard

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 15:40:22 UTC No. 16537258

>>16537053
Holy based. Long overdue.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 15:40:39 UTC No. 16537259

test

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 15:41:40 UTC No. 16537260

https://x.com/andst7/status/1876186267479904472

1.5 bil military comm contract between Italy and Starlink

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 15:48:15 UTC No. 16537261

>>16537083
you are actually retarded
estimated IQ of 75

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 15:48:19 UTC No. 16537262

>>16537257
Kek you frens later anons

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 15:56:53 UTC No. 16537264

>>16537083
you cant get rid if him hes the definition of filthy rich. hell keep gobbling up money until hes a trillionare and then if theres any pretence of there being a democracy itll be name only with him as a dictator.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 16:02:20 UTC No. 16537268

>>16537194
I give it an extremely low likelihood. I would take 20 to one odds against.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 16:02:55 UTC No. 16537269

>>16537264
God I hope so

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 16:03:48 UTC No. 16537270

>>16537268
so you're telling me... there's a chance

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 16:06:24 UTC No. 16537272

>>16537270
I would only be conservative if I was betting my own money because I don't like gambling.

They haven't even tested reentry. There are so many things that could go wrong and have never been tested that expecting it to succeed is ridiculous.

You can't seriously expect it.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 16:15:15 UTC No. 16537279

>>16537264
gobble up? are you retarded?
the companies he started are providing services and products to people that buy them out of their free will, this gives the companies earnings which then give the companies a theoretical valuation on the stock market
how is he gobbling up money?
fucking retard

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 16:19:03 UTC No. 16537282

>>16537053
https://x.com/jeremykauffman/status/1876280892085457209

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 16:22:55 UTC No. 16537287

>>16537053
He needs to be arrested and executed fucking yesterday

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 16:23:29 UTC No. 16537289

>>16537287
paki rape apologist detected

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 16:24:33 UTC No. 16537290

>>16537151
Why dont you kill your own politicians then?

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 16:25:01 UTC No. 16537291

>>16537053
This is extremely provocative

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 16:25:21 UTC No. 16537293

>>16537282
Thats almost funny with how gratuitous it is

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 16:25:58 UTC No. 16537294

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ud0kVetGcIw
>Coming Up On Starship Flight 7 | SpaceX Starbase

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 16:27:03 UTC No. 16537296

>>16537289
New Delhi shitsmeared cow piss chugging granny scamming jeet detected

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 16:27:51 UTC No. 16537297

>>16537293
I remember a similar story from Sweden I think but with adult women
getting raped repeatedly by random unrelated groups of refugees/muslims

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 16:28:46 UTC No. 16537298

Random question, If starship launches from Florida, will the sonic booms during landing be heard in Orlando?

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 16:30:53 UTC No. 16537301

>>16537298
nah they dont even hear it in brownsville

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 16:33:59 UTC No. 16537302

when bo lunch when SS launch?

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 16:35:22 UTC No. 16537304

How come the Boca Chica area was empty in the first place? Seems like an ideal place to put your shit, any shit, there a long time ago.
>t. non-burger

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 16:39:08 UTC No. 16537308

>>16537304
Butts up against the border, far enough away from brownsville / other densely populated areas so any conveniences or services are away from you, you can’t own the beach itself
Basically the same reason there’s a lot of unused wetland acreage all along the coast from texas all the way up to the mississippi river outlet in Louisiana. Nothings there and it’s costly to be a “first mover” for any type of industrial-focused venture

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 16:40:24 UTC No. 16537309

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 16:42:39 UTC No. 16537312

>LG showcasing fake/digital windows at CES today
so this is what space colonists will have to look forward to...

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 16:43:53 UTC No. 16537313

>>16537304
it's one of worst places to put anything except boomer retirement homes. how fucking stupid are you?

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 16:45:09 UTC No. 16537314

>>16537312
This and flirting with meta AI instagram accounts will surely fix my mental health

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 16:48:16 UTC No. 16537318

>>16537313
why

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 16:49:16 UTC No. 16537321

>>16537312
this is gonna make /x/bros extra paranoid

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 16:56:12 UTC No. 16537329

>>16537312
>>16537321
/x/ told me they've been using this tech for all spacecraft windows since mercury

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 17:04:20 UTC No. 16537332

>>16537053
>CIA will fund coup d'état in Britain

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 17:07:05 UTC No. 16537335

>>16537318
Encircled by protected environment. Almost at the sea level so constant flooding.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 17:09:27 UTC No. 16537340

>>16537109
Because La Cia aren't good guys.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 17:09:29 UTC No. 16537341

>>16537332
Expanding human consciousness off of the Earth first requires the total military conquest of Earth's puny nationstates.
Billions must fly.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 17:09:59 UTC No. 16537342

That's insane!

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 17:11:03 UTC No. 16537344

Modern version of Kursk when?

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 17:13:02 UTC No. 16537346

>>16537342
"Ruotsi" means "Sweden", btw. And Venäjä is Russia, and Viro - Estonia.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 17:13:11 UTC No. 16537347

>>16537344
All great world-historic facts and personages appear, so to speak, twice. The first time as tragedy, the second time as farce

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 17:17:28 UTC No. 16537351

>>16537347
I too believe ww2 was a total farce

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 17:21:22 UTC No. 16537353

>>16537344
What, like an Oscar III?

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 17:23:19 UTC No. 16537357

>>16537108
If they delay this New Gland even more day.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 17:27:30 UTC No. 16537364

>>16537110
Considering that the Kazakhs seized Baikonur it might as well be now

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 17:55:19 UTC No. 16537379

>>16537068
It makes a lot more sense when you realize the UK government views its citizens as property.

>defending yourself? that is damaging government property!

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 17:56:46 UTC No. 16537383

>>16537198
>BE-4 is a better engine overall

Anon you need to be more subtle.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 18:25:14 UTC No. 16537399

what even is elon’s relationship with his padre? Reconciled? Hates his guts?

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 18:27:33 UTC No. 16537402

>>16537383
>you need to be more subtle.
let her show off, she's been working very hard for this

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 18:28:04 UTC No. 16537403

>>16537402
this is so dumb

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 18:30:43 UTC No. 16537404

>>16537346
""Sweden""

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 18:30:48 UTC No. 16537405

>>16537403
you're just jealous you don't have 7 be-4s

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 18:32:25 UTC No. 16537407

>>16537402
I like the smug finger-gun one more.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 18:35:07 UTC No. 16537410

>>16537407
basically all the NG rocketgirls I've seen so far are super smug and overconfident. Kinda makes me want to see her fail miserably...

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 18:50:24 UTC No. 16537418

new berger
https://arstechnica.com/space/2025/01/outgoing-nasa-administrator-urges-incoming-leaders-to-stick-with-artemis-plan/

basically says that starship will never be able to replace sls, otherwise we'll lose space to the chinese
>But do I think that they are going to cancel, as some of the chatter out there suggests, and replace SLS with Starship? The answer is no.
>Do you think that President Trump would rather have a conversation with American astronauts during his tenure rather than listening to the comments of Chinese astronauts on the Moon during his tenure?

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 18:58:34 UTC No. 16537420

>lots of off-topic posting, yet only 1 post was deleted
>lots of well written posts that look like generated by LLMs
was 4chan bought by Musk already?

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 18:58:41 UTC No. 16537421

>Ars: Do you think you have some options that are affordable for the mission(MSR)?
>Bill Nelson: Well, that's why I pulled the plug on it, because it was too costly, and it was going to take all the way to 2040, and that's unacceptable. So I think you will see in the options that we're going to present on Tuesday that our desire to bring it in quicker and cheaper is certainly doable.
no fucking way, mars sample return is actually gonna happen? before I die, even? I thought it was just a funny joke
it's gonna be starship, isn't it

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 18:59:30 UTC No. 16537422

>>16537421
>it's gonna be starship, isn't it
it's gonna be electron

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 19:01:13 UTC No. 16537425

>>16537421
>it's gonna be starship, isn't it
How would you refuel it

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 19:02:04 UTC No. 16537426

>>16537420
also, next Starship flight when?

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 19:05:50 UTC No. 16537429

>I believe that at least for the human program going to the Moon and then eventually to Mars, I think that Elon, with his personal relationship with the president-elect, can make sure that NASA has the money to accomplish that. And for that reason, I am optimistic.
based Nelson is a Elon believer. A beliElon?

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 19:12:47 UTC No. 16537435

>>16537426
2 weeks

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 19:23:45 UTC No. 16537446

https://x.com/SciGuySpace/status/1876346630124818570
>I got a tip that Sierra Space CEO Tom Vice was fired this morning. I asked the company, and they say he retired, effective Dec. 31.

Uncertain future for Dream Chaser

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 19:27:24 UTC No. 16537453

>>16537446
getting out before the disaster?

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 19:41:36 UTC No. 16537460

>>16537453
Maybe, but it doesn't sound like it was a very willing departure

https://x.com/PettitFrontier/status/1876348113604186160
>Right before Dreamchaser’s debut too. Ouch.

https://x.com/SciGuySpace/status/1876348207388918090
>"right before" I'm not sure about that.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 19:44:12 UTC No. 16537462

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8laNo8ZQ7M
Starlink launch from LC-39A in T-60:00

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 19:52:44 UTC No. 16537472

>>16537418
But sfg told me Starship and FH could do all the Artemes missions

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 20:00:24 UTC No. 16537480

>>16537472
Starship and F9 could put astronauts and 100T of cargo on the moon if you refuel the starship in highly elliptical eatrh orbit

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 20:03:27 UTC No. 16537481

>>16537243
What exactly is so special about a docking procedure?

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 20:08:50 UTC No. 16537483

>>16537481
Usually the first time your probe docks with a receptacle is an exciting moment, if you know what I mean.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 20:09:25 UTC No. 16537486

>>16537346
why are your names wrong

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 20:11:01 UTC No. 16537487

>>16537486
These aren't "my" names, I'm not Finnish. I just know this because I finished the Duolingo course on Finnish.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 20:13:18 UTC No. 16537489

>>16537446
>Fatih Ozmen
>Eren Ozmen
Türked.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 20:15:43 UTC No. 16537490

>>16537446
crushed dreams

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 20:19:00 UTC No. 16537492

FAA public in person meetings tomorrow regarding SpaceX environmental impact. Virtual meeting will be on the 13th.

Get your shitposts ready.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 20:20:44 UTC No. 16537495

>>16537489
>>16537490
https://x.com/PettitFrontier/status/1876350904791974318
>Google tells me May 2025. So more likely June/July 2025. Not altogether that far off either way. Think it will push deeper?

https://x.com/SciGuySpace/status/1876353638035267885
>Probably, yeah. Maybe 50-50 they launch this year. We'll see!

You can just smell the company getting broken down and sold off for equity

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 20:26:40 UTC No. 16537500

>>16537068
>The whole country operates like it was under occupation after a lost war.
they are. they lost the cold war hard. and germany is right back to what it always does, destroying europe. it's like pottery.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 20:28:03 UTC No. 16537503

>>16537115
ands they say no. now what?

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 20:31:31 UTC No. 16537507

>>16537503
Gaslight them harder.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 20:37:45 UTC No. 16537512

>another dead thread
what would bring /sfg/ to life besides high profile launches like starship?

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 20:38:58 UTC No. 16537514

>>16537512
low profile launches like vega

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 20:40:00 UTC No. 16537516

>>16537514
doesnt that count as high profile? since its such a out of the norm event.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 20:46:28 UTC No. 16537519

What's the rarest rocket launch?

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 20:47:39 UTC No. 16537520

Looks like one of the oldest internet forums just shut down. Can we get an F in the chat for this forum that's been running for 20 years?
http://www.unmannedspaceflight.com/

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 20:49:10 UTC No. 16537522

>>16537520
>forum closes in favour of d*scord
many such sad cases

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 20:49:11 UTC No. 16537523

How many times has Insprucker fucked?

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 20:52:58 UTC No. 16537528

another happy landing
good job foreign workers, and thank you

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 20:56:17 UTC No. 16537531

>>16537519
Starship

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 20:58:23 UTC No. 16537534

>>16537486
its finnish nigga

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 20:58:29 UTC No. 16537535

>>16537531
passionately disagree

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 20:59:24 UTC No. 16537537

>>16537523
69

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 21:00:03 UTC No. 16537539

>>16537516
really just anything but starlink and long march. which unfortunately together take up about 75% of launches.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 21:01:52 UTC No. 16537542

>>16537535
Starship V2

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 21:02:29 UTC No. 16537544

>>16537535
StRship v2

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 21:03:03 UTC No. 16537545

>>16537535
Starship v2

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 21:03:06 UTC No. 16537546

>>16537537
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1876168991330439314

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 21:03:15 UTC No. 16537547

>>16537213
all me and my proxies

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 21:07:40 UTC No. 16537549

>>16537546
Elon is very controversial these days

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 21:08:00 UTC No. 16537550

>>16537055
I really hope 5 eyes do join together and of course under budget. That would be a power house country if the white liberal women don't ruin it.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 21:09:09 UTC No. 16537551

>>16537058
But is he wrong?

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 21:09:34 UTC No. 16537553

>>16537546
based

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 21:10:48 UTC No. 16537554

>>16537535
Saarship v2

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 21:11:15 UTC No. 16537555

>>16537550
it wouldn’t work for the exact reason you listed

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 21:19:14 UTC No. 16537561

holy shit, this musk guy is something else

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 21:28:16 UTC No. 16537569

>>16537164
>They are trying to make the NWO one world government actually real, except it's just America eating everything.
I have been saying for 6+ years that the glowies are eroding all power structures in the world which aren't irrelevant or subservient to America in preparation for WWIII, in which China will be squashed and then balkanized for postwar convenience. This opens the way for the USA not only running the planet, but being the sole arbiter and gatekeeper of who gets to colonize the solar system.
The American Empire won't be able to HOLD those colonies for long, but it'll be extremely effective at establishing them.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 21:32:24 UTC No. 16537571

>>16537569
>The American Empire won't be able to HOLD those colonies for long
lmao, there are morons who believe that colonies will just magically decide to cut off their main economic and population suppliers
>inb4 but le amelican levolution!!!!!
/sfg/ is truly retarded

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 21:36:54 UTC No. 16537573

>>16537519
Ares 1

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 21:40:06 UTC No. 16537575

Just imagine the sigh of relief at SpaceX when Musk finally gets Luigi'd.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 21:43:27 UTC No. 16537578

>>16537569
bro they couldn't even deal with goatherders im pretty sure there isn't a decades/centuries long master plan/conspiracy

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 21:49:47 UTC No. 16537583

>>16537575
Elon Musk has one (1) shitty take and /sfg/ wants him “dealt with” like a goombah [math]\unicode{x1F62D}[/math]

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 21:50:23 UTC No. 16537584

>>16537151
are you an Islamic terrorist ? lol

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 21:50:49 UTC No. 16537585

>>16537575
>when Musk finally gets Luigi'd.
half of /sfg/ would kill themselves, the other half would take matters into their own hands

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 21:51:35 UTC No. 16537586

>>16537575
>gets Luigi'd.
Nice leftist phraseology

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 21:52:30 UTC No. 16537587

>>16537164
As an American, I don't want the world order or the whole world. There are a lot of cultures and to each their own but I don't want them part of America. That being said, 5 eyes would make sense. Throw in Japan for the anime too.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 21:53:04 UTC No. 16537588

when will they rename Starship to Saarship?

>>16537585
>half of /sfg/ would kill themselves
you mean the muskbots? yeah, I guess they would be "killed", aka shutdown

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 21:56:13 UTC No. 16537590

>>16537586
Left and right don't exist anymore, pal.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 21:58:54 UTC No. 16537591

>>16537588
anon, If Musk dies now, there's no certainty as to what will happen to SpaceX and the Mars dream. We all love Shotwell here too, but she's about to retire, and she doesn't have that craziness that Musk has when taking decisions. Would she have fired the early Starlink team that ended up at BO? Would she have switched to stainless steel after having spent so much on carbon fibre? I really do hope that Musk has some good candidates as his successor if something were to happen to him. The future of our species literally depends on that.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 21:59:51 UTC No. 16537594

>>16537578
The goatherders keep the MIC spry

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 22:00:17 UTC No. 16537596

>>16537591
Maybe but imagine how funny it would be if he got unalived
Haha

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 22:01:24 UTC No. 16537598

>>16537591
Who cares lol
There's nothing in space

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 22:03:28 UTC No. 16537602

love seeing the cope from space talking heads about why noone did Methane before SpaceX

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 22:06:48 UTC No. 16537606

reminder that zhoque-2 was the first methalox rocket to reach orbit.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 22:08:07 UTC No. 16537607

https://x.com/AJ_FI/status/1876374602991259967
>China's first launch of the year, and its servicing satellite heading for GEO! A Long March 3B lifted off from Xichang at 2200 UTC sending the Shijian-25 satellite refuelling spacecraft into geosynchronous transfer orbit. No images of satellite nor indication of target for mission extension

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 22:09:02 UTC No. 16537610

>>16537602
US loved hydrogen
Soviets loved kerosene
Chinese engines derived from Soviets
US purchased Soviet engines
Truth is, no one bothered developing them till quite recently

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 22:09:20 UTC No. 16537611

>>16537606
>gas generator

doesn't even count

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 22:09:27 UTC No. 16537612

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 22:10:37 UTC No. 16537613

Guys should I get a job in ballistic missile defense, one of the newspace firms or a satellite manufacturer like Maxar?

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 22:11:28 UTC No. 16537615

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 22:12:22 UTC No. 16537616

>>16537613
none of the above

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 22:13:11 UTC No. 16537617

>>16537607
Shijian 25 is built by SAST, should be related to this GSO refueling and service extension satellite announced 4 years ago by SAST around the time of the launch of Shijian 21.
If so, should be 2.5t heavy with 1.3t of propellant.

https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202110/02/WS61582a11a310cdd39bc6ce8e.html

It is announced that there will be >10 CZ3B launches in 2025

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 22:13:19 UTC No. 16537618

>>16537610
why is tori replying to an indian

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 22:14:59 UTC No. 16537620

>>16537610
America loved kerolox, hydrolox and SRB.
The Soviets (and thus China) loved hydrazine and kerolox.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 22:16:38 UTC No. 16537622

I love rocketgirls!

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 22:24:05 UTC No. 16537625

>>16537618
*future high-skilled worker

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 22:25:42 UTC No. 16537628

>>16537591
Had that discussion on another board over the past few days where we asked "if you had a choice of Musk disappearing but his companies remaining, or his companies disappearing but Musk remaining" we all agreed it would be better for Musk to be the one to remain. He could rebuild his companies but his companies wouldn't be able to survive without him. Without Musk, all of this ends.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 22:25:43 UTC No. 16537629

>>16537625
based on your studies sirs

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 22:26:47 UTC No. 16537630

>>16537617
>It is announced that there will be >10 CZ3B launches in 2025
The 3B/E had 11 launches in 2018, 2019, and 2021, so this would be at least it's 4th best year overall. It's weird watching China's older hypergolic rockets stubbornly refuse to be replaced when they were supposed to get phased out years ago

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 22:28:16 UTC No. 16537632

>>16537620

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 22:34:31 UTC No. 16537633

>>16537632
I love michael collins so much its unreal

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 22:36:42 UTC No. 16537635

Great day for rocket development and space in general today.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 22:50:14 UTC No. 16537639

will open AI replace mexican welders

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 22:52:52 UTC No. 16537642

when will musk move spacex to india? or maybe repel itar to import indian rocket engineers?

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 22:53:53 UTC No. 16537645

>>16537642
he's already doing that bro. What do you think the UK drama is all about?

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 23:00:44 UTC No. 16537651

Only 4 days! I'm so excited! The future of spaceflight is so bright!

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 23:02:59 UTC No. 16537653

>>16537635
two weeks

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 23:04:16 UTC No. 16537655

>>16537651
oh it will be the brightest BO fuck up yet, that's for sure.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 23:09:25 UTC No. 16537656

Imagine all the cool footage that aliens have (astronomical events, planetary collision, all kind of super novas, etc.) that they don't share because they're greedy bastards

>>16537635
>listening to whatever this professional bullshiter says

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 23:12:30 UTC No. 16537658

Mir, my beloved.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 23:14:44 UTC No. 16537659

>>16537658
>crashes a progress spacecraft into you're station
>nothing personnel kid

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 23:14:55 UTC No. 16537660

>>16537642
There is a theory floating that he is helping China because he fears this admin is going to crack down on China hard.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 23:15:31 UTC No. 16537662

>>16537659
Mirly a flesh wound.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 23:17:34 UTC No. 16537663

>>16537662
first time I’ve ever seen someone attempt to spell it like that if I do say so myself

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 23:22:36 UTC No. 16537666

>>16537663
spell what?

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 23:23:17 UTC No. 16537667

>>16537666
“Merely”

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 23:24:00 UTC No. 16537668

>>16537667
It's a sort of topical pun you see.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 23:24:13 UTC No. 16537669

>>16537667
dumbass

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 23:24:21 UTC No. 16537670

>>16537662
kek

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 23:24:58 UTC No. 16537671

>>16537668
Damn, I see now

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 23:28:28 UTC No. 16537673

>>16537632
why the white and black stripes?

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 23:29:07 UTC No. 16537674

>>16537673
make it easier to tell if the rocket is rolling and how fast iirc

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 23:29:57 UTC No. 16537675

>>16537591
>We all love Shotwell here too, but she's about to retire,
Since when? This is the first time I've heard anything about her retiring soon. Seems like that would be much bigger news.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 23:30:45 UTC No. 16537676

>>16537673
Style.

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 23:32:03 UTC No. 16537678

>>16537673
dazzle camouflage

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 23:48:50 UTC No. 16537684

>>16537673
it enables metrology

Anonymous at Mon, 6 Jan 2025 23:55:34 UTC No. 16537687

>>16537312
>what if we made the washer and dryer super difficult to service
amazing though I bet you aren't even allowed to open them up just like how john deere tractors work. funnily enough this is a huge fire hazard since you don't have any clear idea of if the dryer exhaust duct is functioning properly. maybe that is part of an app they require you to use

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 00:08:40 UTC No. 16537690

Are the journalists afraid?
https://theguardian.com/technology/2025/jan/05/why-elon-musks-starship-rocket-is-beating-nasa-in-the-space-race

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 00:10:18 UTC No. 16537692

>>16537690
Is it part of their style guide to do lowercase acronyms or something?
Nasa? It’s NASA

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 00:10:20 UTC No. 16537693

cryovolcano

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 00:13:52 UTC No. 16537694

>>16537692
Yeah the Grauniad always does that

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 00:18:45 UTC No. 16537698

>>16537673
Camera tracking. Didn't have computers to tell how accurately much roll, pitch or yaw back then.
But some boxes like that makes it easy to analyze.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 00:22:46 UTC No. 16537700

>>16537534
with what?

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 00:26:15 UTC No. 16537701

I can confirm Sierra is a bit of a mess

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 00:28:49 UTC No. 16537704

>>16537635
>spaceflight

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 00:35:26 UTC No. 16537710

>>16537701
Sad. Are they having problems with SNC as a whole, or just sierra space specifically

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 00:43:04 UTC No. 16537714

>>16537692
i read that its a british thing

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 00:45:41 UTC No. 16537717

>>16537710
management, and company operation philosophy. a tale old as time

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 00:55:25 UTC No. 16537723

>>16537418
>20 years of R&D
>1 launch
Is the term "shuttle derived hardware" a death knell for rockets?

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 00:56:04 UTC No. 16537725

>>16537690
This stupid shit NASA vs private industry makes no sense, but i guess normies want to think it that way

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 01:01:01 UTC No. 16537730

>>16537725
And it comes from NASA people who think space is their fiefdom.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 01:07:08 UTC No. 16537732

>>16537730
Private space industry in the US exist because NASA gave them money retard

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 01:11:23 UTC No. 16537737

Indians are geniuses

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 01:12:59 UTC No. 16537738

>>16537732
NASA exists because corporations engineered their hardware

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 01:14:05 UTC No. 16537739

>>16537732
Anon you should think about what you said and how silly it makes you look.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 01:16:31 UTC No. 16537741

>>16537692
It's a britishism, they do it whenever the acronym is pronounced instead of spelled out.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 01:28:50 UTC No. 16537751

Glover is pinning scripture on twitter and you’re blackpilling?

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 01:32:31 UTC No. 16537755

>>16537751
what's twitter?

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 01:33:14 UTC No. 16537756

>>16537673
Looks more rockety

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 01:39:43 UTC No. 16537760

>>16537410
she gets fucked by chad every night

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 01:41:09 UTC No. 16537761

>>16537418
astronauts are overpaid meatheads, they dont know shit

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 01:44:13 UTC No. 16537765

>>16537659
shit happens

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 01:44:20 UTC No. 16537766

>>16537472
Yes, and /sfg/ is correct (again)

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 01:46:49 UTC No. 16537768

>>16537546
he's legit going senile. very smart people like him lose their minds early and quickly as they age. he'll be unrecognizable in 5 years

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 01:57:11 UTC No. 16537773

>>16537690
>The Guardian
ahem
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1875615573008380108

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 01:59:39 UTC No. 16537775

https://x.com/blueorigin/status/1876447110863712751

Launch alert

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 02:01:00 UTC No. 16537776

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 02:01:09 UTC No. 16537778

>>16537775
>NET Jan 10th
As it is written

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 02:01:12 UTC No. 16537779

>>16537775
>1am on the 10th
that's plenty of time to catch a flight from orlando to brownsville for starship later in the afternoon

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 02:02:01 UTC No. 16537780

>>16537776

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 02:02:34 UTC No. 16537781

>>16537779
Unless it's a 10am launch

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 02:02:51 UTC No. 16537782

>they think New Glenn is actually going to launch

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 02:03:44 UTC No. 16537783

I hope it fucking explodes
cheers

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 02:05:44 UTC No. 16537786

>>16537781
if it goes ahead on the 10th, it'll be 4pm. The backup days have been listed as 7am though

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 02:05:52 UTC No. 16537787

>>16537776
why didnt they paint the fins black? very unprofessional

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 02:06:07 UTC No. 16537788

>>16537783
same, my hate for bezos is greater than my love for space

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 02:06:50 UTC No. 16537789

>>16537783
>>16537788
gay and woman pilled

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 02:10:33 UTC No. 16537793

>>16537776
goes hard unfortunately

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 02:13:15 UTC No. 16537794

>>16537789
I hate blue origin so much it’s unreal they are textbook dumbass company and they’re in competition with real idiots like branson’s virgin and astra

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 02:15:07 UTC No. 16537798

>>16537794
No they're fine and spacex needs competition. I'm also looking forward to Neutron

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 02:21:56 UTC No. 16537800

>>16537776
sex

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 02:23:14 UTC No. 16537803

>>16537794
dumbass company who have a SHLV on pad

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 02:40:14 UTC No. 16537812

> Blue Ring Pathfinder integrated. Jacklyn well underway. Launch license received. Here we go!

https://x.com/davill/status/1876447685752107331?s=46&t=ySaWSLoZU6lwZ7u03-FcBQ

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 02:45:48 UTC No. 16537818

>>16537812
>muskrats sweating bullets

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 02:47:42 UTC No. 16537819

>>16537818
2 weeks

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 02:54:47 UTC No. 16537829

Wait so wtf is a cosmic ray?

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 02:55:41 UTC No. 16537830

>>16537829
Proton or heavy ion mainly

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 02:56:45 UTC No. 16537831

>>16537830
I thought it was literally EM radiation but now I’m learning it’s, apparently, matter.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 02:57:51 UTC No. 16537832

https://x.com/DD_Geopolitics/status/1876414695835582513
>On January 6, the DPRK launched its newest hypersonic missile, achieving 12 times the speed of sound and reaching an altitude of 99.8 km. It accurately struck a target 1,500 km away in open waters. Kim Jong-un personally observed the test, as reported by KCNA, which also released photos of the event.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 02:59:13 UTC No. 16537833

🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 03:00:21 UTC No. 16537834

>>16537833
I think his daughter (who is beloved to him) is autistically obsessed with space fyi
t. knower

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 03:02:03 UTC No. 16537836

>>16537830
heavier stuff than alpha and beta radiation, basically "all the other stuff" that isn't just alpha, beta, or EM radiation.
>>16537831
you learn something every day anon

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 03:03:28 UTC No. 16537838

>>16537834
>>16537833
>Future North Korean queen is the next Elon Musk
god, just imagine

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 03:13:12 UTC No. 16537848

>>16537635
The only real output of this is a robot phone that still doesn't work. Sam "Jew*" Altman is an unbelievable scam artist. Didn't he recently ask for like seven trillion dollars?
*actually his original middle name. I didn't believe it either look it up

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 03:20:37 UTC No. 16537856

>>16537832
>99.8 km
off by 200 metres kenobi

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 03:47:20 UTC No. 16537868

>>16537833
Ok that's a cool shot

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 03:51:15 UTC No. 16537872

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 03:51:22 UTC No. 16537873

>>16537868
are we sure this isn't a ksp screenshot?

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 04:07:49 UTC No. 16537883

https://x.com/Blobifie/status/1876475431240823256
>S33's Payload bay door is open!

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 04:49:30 UTC No. 16537901

>>16537260
Smart money. The services is there but the incombents in the US are sitting on their asses due to left leaning gov hating Musk, with EU has a commie streak that hates American and hates capitalists.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 04:58:33 UTC No. 16537903

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 05:12:18 UTC No. 16537908

https://x.com/Truthful_ast/status/1876477761004646542
>Toyota has announced an investment of $44 million into Interstellar Technologies, a Japanese private space rocket company. The company's Chairperson Akio Toyoda stated "We are exploring rockets too, because the future of mobility shouldn't be limited to Earth or just one car company." Toyota is also exploring satellite constellations for their futuristic high sustainability city named 'Woven City' which has finished Phase 1 of development.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 05:34:43 UTC No. 16537913

ULA sniper has got a busy couple of days.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 06:16:09 UTC No. 16537927

>>16537739
Tell me why im wrong

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 06:26:03 UTC No. 16537932

>>16537927
NASA doesn't make rockets, is not the only government entity that procures services from commercial providers and the fact that they procure services from commercial providers does not make space NASA fiefdom

I realize you didn't put much thought into the subject so I won't hold it against you

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 06:30:48 UTC No. 16537935

>>16537127
>>16537147
you could probably reuse the airbrake controls somehow

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 06:47:26 UTC No. 16537938

>>16537836
instead of "heavier" I think it's actually "is higher energy"

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 06:50:17 UTC No. 16537939

>>16537883
quit advertising, faggot

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 08:07:19 UTC No. 16537957

new glenn launch mission control center

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 08:34:16 UTC No. 16537963

spacex raptor 3 ffsc methalox engine

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 08:35:48 UTC No. 16537964

>>16537963
I can't believe Gwynne Shotwell designed that all by herself.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 08:40:26 UTC No. 16537966

>>16537964
i dont think she did thar

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 08:42:35 UTC No. 16537968

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 08:43:08 UTC No. 16537969

>>16537908
Hilux will be the Martian's automobile of choice

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 08:45:03 UTC No. 16537970

>>16537939
What the hell are you talking about
Fucking schizo

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 08:48:16 UTC No. 16537973

>>16537963
I do not understand the preburner meme. You're saying to burn the fuel, and then burn it again?

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 08:49:05 UTC No. 16537974

>>16537973
yeah

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 08:49:31 UTC No. 16537975

>>16537974
thanks

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 08:50:49 UTC No. 16537976

>>16537973
You burn just a little bit to heat up the leftovers

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 08:51:35 UTC No. 16537977

>>16537975
you only burn it a little bit in the preburners to keep the temperatures low enough to extract energy out of the result with turbines (to power your turbopumps) you then combine the two preburner exhausts in the main combustion chamber and burn it all the way

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 08:52:27 UTC No. 16537979

>>16537658

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 08:54:27 UTC No. 16537980

>>16537977
>>16537976
But how do you 'partially' burn something. It is either combusted or it isnt

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 08:55:06 UTC No. 16537981

>>16537980
lol, lmao, that's not true at all
go take a chemistry class

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 09:03:49 UTC No. 16537988

>>16537980
You only provide enough oxygen for a portion of the fuel to combust
The result will be heat, combustion products (water, carbon dioxide + trace others) and mostly unburnt fuel all mixed up

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 09:07:12 UTC No. 16537992

>>16537988
do you really want to try to give a stoichiometry lesson to this faggot

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 09:11:59 UTC No. 16537994

>>16537992
I just did

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 09:21:07 UTC No. 16537997

>>16537994
anyway it mostly turns into carbon monoxide, not carbon dioxide
better for exhaust velocity

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 09:33:10 UTC No. 16538006

>>16537041
i just woke up!! i am so excited to watch the first new glenn launch today!

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 09:55:47 UTC No. 16538018

https://x.com/AshleyKillip/status/1876504828781937085
>Ship 33 with what looks like a bolt on test area for the new catch pins. This will be for the upcoming flight on NET 10th a group of ramped tiles much like the starlink versions but much thicker. To keep plasma from eating the area the where the pin meets the stainless body

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 09:58:07 UTC No. 16538020

>>16538018

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 09:59:21 UTC No. 16538022

https://x.com/13ericralph31/status/1876511560409219550
>There are also some interesting modifications lower down I'd guess they're equivalent to the sloped stringers on boosters, so they'll allow the tower arms to slide over the stringers and hardpoints that protrude from Ship 33's hull.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 10:00:58 UTC No. 16538024

>>16538022

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 10:02:37 UTC No. 16538025

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 10:19:52 UTC No. 16538029

>>16537908
What is Japan allowed to do with rockets? I thought the WWII treaty and/or their post-WWII constitution prohibited them from combining rockets with guidance systems, which is why they came up with things like angle launched rockets. Is that no longer the case?

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 10:24:39 UTC No. 16538031

>>16537768
He's finally realizing his H1B meltdown was a huge negative for him and no amount of doubling down would change that nor would any amount of censoring people disagreeing with him. He's trying to change the subject to something most everyone can agree on, which is that raping children is a bad thing.
Wish he'd go back to commenting just on the output of SpaceX, Tesla, and his other companies instead of trying to dictate government policies at home and around the world. Yes, those can impact the ability to generate desired output of his companies but none of that matters if he makes himself universally hated.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 10:30:06 UTC No. 16538034

>>16537903
We say it every time, but seriously-

IT
LOOKS
SO
CLEAAAAAAAAAAAN

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 10:30:40 UTC No. 16538035

>>16538034
it lacks USA and a flag on the side so it's still improper

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 10:34:08 UTC No. 16538037

>>16537546
>f u retard
kek
https://www.yahoo.com/news/elon-musk-cusses-student-called-171002695.html

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 10:37:40 UTC No. 16538039

https://spaceflightnow.com/launch-schedule/

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 10:37:58 UTC No. 16538040

>>16538031
the next month is going to be quite interesting in muskworld. Maybe he'll shut up.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 10:39:42 UTC No. 16538044

>>16538039
what exactly is the purpose of blue ring
I see zero profit in it

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 10:44:11 UTC No. 16538047

>>16538029
yeah, they've been launching Delta 2 derived vehicles for a while now

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 10:48:28 UTC No. 16538051

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhJRzQsLZGg
loading of the starlink mass simulators is ongoing

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 10:50:30 UTC No. 16538053

weird reddit thing I found today. spacex doesn't have the $ for a door? strange

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 10:55:51 UTC No. 16538055

>>16538039
europoorbros, are we waking up early to see another New Hlen delay?

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 11:03:49 UTC No. 16538058

>>16538039
could you imagine the absolute meltdown that this general will have if blue origin nails the landing while super heavy explodes yet again? lmao

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 11:05:32 UTC No. 16538060

>>16538044
kick stage and space tug and I guess a platform for instruments as well
though not sure about the space tug thing at this stage as that would imply it coming back

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 11:07:23 UTC No. 16538063

>>16538051

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 11:08:24 UTC No. 16538064

>>16538055
I'm going to try but my sleep schedule is fucked now
a few days to fix that though

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 11:09:25 UTC No. 16538065

>>16538053
you will use the curtain and enjoy it

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 11:09:51 UTC No. 16538066

>>16538055
>new glenn launching at 8am
>starship at midnight
east europe bros just can't stop winning

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 11:11:04 UTC No. 16538067

>>16538053
elon found the poop curtain
it's over

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 11:12:46 UTC No. 16538068

>>16538053
spacex sounds like one of those companies that use angled toilets to prevent you from sitting on the shitter too long

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 11:20:22 UTC No. 16538070

>>16538058
I mean, I'm not going to meltdown
I'm sure some trolls are going to spam the fuck out of the thread though

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 11:26:22 UTC No. 16538072

>>16538051

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 11:58:56 UTC No. 16538076

>>16538070
well, I will. And I'll be sure to spam the thread with my seethe

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 11:59:49 UTC No. 16538079

>>16538070
Same I love it’s over posting, no way to sugar coat this, etc

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 12:00:08 UTC No. 16538080

>>16538076
you are the trolls who will be spamming the thread
just know that I despise you, and might simply leave the thread for a while due to how annoying you are
please take your seethe elsewhere

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 12:02:00 UTC No. 16538081

>>16538079
here, have a freebie

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 12:21:17 UTC No. 16538085

berger's american launch company power rankings

>1. SpaceX
>2. United Launch Alliance
>3. Rocket Lab
>4. Blue Origin
>5. Firefly
>6. Northrop Grumman
>7. Stoke Space
>8. Relativity Space
>9. Astra
>10. USC Rocket Propulsion Lab

https://arstechnica.com/space/2025/01/annual-power-ranking-of-us-launch-companies-finds-a-shake-up-at-the-bottom/

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 12:23:59 UTC No. 16538087

>>16538085
Without bothering to read the link, that list looks about right.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 12:26:08 UTC No. 16538089

ellon musk needs to be investigated for rigging crypto securities for profit

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 12:28:24 UTC No. 16538090

>>16538081
kek thanks

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 12:30:02 UTC No. 16538091

>>16538085
rocket lab is a fake company

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 12:38:07 UTC No. 16538092

>>16538091
>he didn't boughted

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 12:51:07 UTC No. 16538093

>>16538085
>Student group reaches space
Honestly, how hard can this be? Can I a man literally build a similar rocket to reach space on my own? With a machine shop you could knock something together. Avionics is just a SBC nowadays with pick and choose modules. Dunno if solids are enough to reach space. Liquid rocketry will be the most difficult. As well as sourcing propellant.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 12:54:46 UTC No. 16538094

>>16538053
Budget silos. I've run into it at companies that were overflowing with cash and weren't even stingy about spending but if I needed something like a larger hard drive, if my department already used up all of its hardware budget for the year, there wasn't anything they could do as reallocating money between budget categories required a bunch of senior level approvals that management didn't want to deal with. Things like that just had to wait until the next fiscal year started.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 13:04:52 UTC No. 16538096

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 13:05:00 UTC No. 16538097

>>16537903
why bother with a door, cant it be open all the time?

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 13:09:22 UTC No. 16538100

>5 launches on jan 10
aint no way this happens

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 13:22:41 UTC No. 16538104

does BO have a second rocket ready to go
as well as a second barge
if something happens?
or is it just another year+ delay

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 13:26:37 UTC No. 16538106

>>16538104
According to berger they have 2 nearly finished NG's ready.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 13:30:57 UTC No. 16538108

>>16538093
Your biggest hurdle is going to be funding the project.
Kip Daugirdas spent about 10 grand a year for the better part of a decade to test and prepare for his 250k foot shot. USCRPL and CSXT had huge pools of funding.

🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 13:49:48 UTC No. 16538113

how do these things work? do they count as multipliers/bonuses?

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 14:09:23 UTC No. 16538124

So, people are already talking about raptor 4, musk has said it'll have 5 more seconds of isp and over 200 twr.
Heres a chart showing the previous versions and what we can tell about raptor 4.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 14:14:31 UTC No. 16538128

>>16537913
Fucking kek

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 14:15:24 UTC No. 16538130

>>16538124
just going to keep making the rocket taller lol

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 14:16:09 UTC No. 16538131

>>16537957
>modern tech design
I thought Bezos said they had already figured everything out in the 70s. Where's my burnt orange and wood?

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 14:24:06 UTC No. 16538135

>>16537963
Still using helium

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 14:25:21 UTC No. 16538136

>>16538135
sad!

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 14:25:34 UTC No. 16538137

>>16538124
he can't keep getting away with it

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 14:32:21 UTC No. 16538141

>>16538113
>cool
>sweet
>fantasy
What rocket, /sfg/?

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 14:33:53 UTC No. 16538142

>>16538141
obvious answer

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 14:37:16 UTC No. 16538145

>>16538141
The full development of Orion Nuclear Pulse Propulsion

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 14:40:57 UTC No. 16538147

>>16537973
You burn part of the fuel to power the turbines that pull fuel into the engine and burn the rest in the chamber

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 14:42:53 UTC No. 16538148

>>16537973
is this how little rockets get made?

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 14:43:07 UTC No. 16538149

>>16537997
Does it stay CO after the fuel rich mixture hits the oxygen rich mixture?

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 14:47:41 UTC No. 16538153

>>16538085
>never launch anything into space
>number 4 top launch provider

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 14:49:57 UTC No. 16538157

>>16538153
the list gets pretty grim after the top 3. the launch industry is in dire straights outside of spacex.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 14:50:46 UTC No. 16538159

>>16538153
anon half of the companies on that list are completely and utterly irrelevant to spaceflight. BO is the only one even thinking of competing with spaceX

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 14:51:25 UTC No. 16538160

>>16538094
lol, lmao
I'm not even a manager and I'm authorized to spend anything less than a few thousand dollars without even asking or notifying anyone. How the fuck are you supposed to do your job?

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 14:56:05 UTC No. 16538165

>>16538159
>>16538157
It should at least be separated into Launch Providers (Actual) and Launch Providers (Aspirational)

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 14:57:54 UTC No. 16538167

Project Iceworm launch sites across Greenland now

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 15:01:34 UTC No. 16538169

spacex did 150 launches
ULA did 5
and rocket lab is a microsat launcher
the rest dont even launch

hmm
SpaceX also fully self-funds through their own constellation

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 15:10:43 UTC No. 16538172

>>16538100
Not even the record

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 15:10:48 UTC No. 16538173

>>16538085
>Please note that this is a subjective list, although hard metrics such as total launches, tonnage to orbit, success rate, and more were all important factors in our decisions. And our focus remains on what each company accomplished in 2024, not on what they might do in the future.
Why is Blue Origin on that list?

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 15:11:11 UTC No. 16538174

>>16538172
whats the record for most launches in a day?

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 15:11:47 UTC No. 16538175

>>16538085
Fourth place is a tie between BO and me personally. We have sent the same amount of payload to orbit. In reality, though, I deserve to be ranked higher as I have done so much more efficiently.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 15:11:57 UTC No. 16538176

>>16538174
5

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 15:13:09 UTC No. 16538178

>>16538173
Best PowerPoint presentation

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 15:13:32 UTC No. 16538179

>>16538174
like 6 or 7

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 15:14:02 UTC No. 16538182

>>16538179
what launches? what date?

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 15:14:28 UTC No. 16538183

>>16538178
Apparently so. It looks like just having engines that fire is worth quite a bit given the guys they're having to choose to pad out the bottom of the list to actually have a top ten. This would be a lot easier if it was an international list, instead of a purely US list.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 15:15:41 UTC No. 16538185

>>16538175
lol

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 15:16:22 UTC No. 16538186

>>16538173
BO identifies as a launch provider. Its pronouns are orbital / not already obsolete

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 15:17:31 UTC No. 16538187

>>16538173
yeah arguably BO should have been after Rocketlab, maybe after some others too
2025 they could be 3 or even 2 if they start spamming New Glenns

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 15:17:38 UTC No. 16538188

>>16537083
>Neither Tesla nor SpaceX really need him anymore.
I'd somewhat agree with tesla.
But I'm like 90% certain if they got rid of elon at spacex, you can scrap all plans of ever going to mars.
Its just not profitable in any way that matters here for shareholders on earth.
If elon died today, I'm almost certain spaceX would probably ditch human spaceflight alltogether and become a sattelite-internet provider and nothing more within like 5 years.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 15:20:07 UTC No. 16538190

>>16538188
Tesla needs him too. People don't want to invest in a car company, they want to invest in Elon

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 15:20:15 UTC No. 16538191

>>16538188
Optimus might very well be scrapped or go forward much slower and subsequently lose to the gorillion robot startups out there
so he is extremely important for Tesla as well, for similar reasons as to with SpaceX
he keeps pushing forward towards goals that don't seem to give immediate monetary rewards, hard

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 15:21:24 UTC No. 16538192

>>16538188
I'm not so sure. A big reason they're able to hire who they hire and push them as hard as they do is the dream of Mars.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 15:24:10 UTC No. 16538198

>>16538190
Tesla's moved up a few places on the Revenue list, and are sitting at about the level of Hyundai for 2024 at ~$72 billion.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 15:28:18 UTC No. 16538204

>>16538198
Correction: this only goes up to the first three quarters of 2024, but Q4 wasn't Tesla's best, falling short of deliveries year on year for the first time.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 15:33:53 UTC No. 16538207

What happens when Trump restarts the Strategic Defense Initiative?

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 15:34:31 UTC No. 16538208

>>16538207
it never died

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 15:35:11 UTC No. 16538209

>>16538207
some more billions to be embezzled

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 15:39:03 UTC No. 16538213

>>16538190
sounds like I should short tesla.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 15:46:55 UTC No. 16538219

>>16538213
>he's betting against musk
uh oh

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 15:54:39 UTC No. 16538227

>>16537968
you got it the wrong way round
reddit sois love spaceX (but hate Elon) and think STS was "too dangerous" or some shit.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 15:55:02 UTC No. 16538228

>Starship flight 7 has delayed until the 11th of January 1pm UTC

O
V
E
R

https://x.com/lewisknaggs42/status/1876658642612613275

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 15:56:25 UTC No. 16538229

>>16538228
NOOOOOOOO

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 15:57:08 UTC No. 16538231

>>16538228
elon fucked around
now he's finding out

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 15:57:28 UTC No. 16538232

>>16538228
That’s ok, new glenn is going to be delayed until the 11th too.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 16:02:26 UTC No. 16538235

>>16537041
New Glenn flight when?
I want my favorite rich guy to win the race against the other rich guy today!

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 16:04:51 UTC No. 16538240

>>16538235
use google, retard

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 16:05:42 UTC No. 16538241

>>16538235
I just want the number of heavy lift rockets to go up, on account of me liking rockets.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 16:06:17 UTC No. 16538242

>>16538228
its over

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 16:06:18 UTC No. 16538243

>>16538228
Elonbros????!!!111

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 16:10:44 UTC No. 16538248

>>16538228
They can't do this to me!!!!

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 16:24:32 UTC No. 16538260

>>16538207
We get low orbit ion cannons and female military advisors with lots of cleavage.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 16:28:17 UTC No. 16538262

>>16538228
2 weeks

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 16:35:42 UTC No. 16538269

>>16538219
You're not betting against him by shorting Tesla. You're betting against Musk believers and their faith is strong.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 16:36:34 UTC No. 16538270

>>16537963
>no oxigen
fake

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 16:42:21 UTC No. 16538271

>>16538269
you are doing both if you try to short Tesla
Tesla is a bit over 1 trillion now in market cap, Musk has said that the robotaxis should take it to around 5T and the Optimus to 25T

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 16:48:04 UTC No. 16538272

Is Starship viable with raptor 2 or is everything riding on raptor 3 working out?

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 16:50:47 UTC No. 16538274

>>16538272
Starship was viable back on raptor 1. hold on a second while I type out another bait post from the opposite perspective.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 16:51:48 UTC No. 16538276

>>16538272
Starship won’t even be viable on raptor 4. thank you for waiting.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 16:52:01 UTC No. 16538278

>>16538272
Starship is viable with Raptor 2 but Raptor 3 is required for the desired payload to LEO with full reuse.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 16:59:18 UTC No. 16538283

>>16538272
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNFdR-UpZS8
Eager space (kinda) did a video about this.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 17:09:29 UTC No. 16538287

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 17:11:01 UTC No. 16538290

>>16537963
japanese spitter thinks it's a big deal

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 17:15:20 UTC No. 16538294

>>16538290
To put it another way: you can't afford the engineering hours needed to build something like Raptor 3 unless you are going to make a ridiculous number of them, because design hours take time, which is an easier cost to absorb across a very long production run than a very short one.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 17:32:18 UTC No. 16538306

so spacex is copying russian engines from the 60s? so advanced...

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 17:39:09 UTC No. 16538311

>>16538306(You)

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 17:44:42 UTC No. 16538314

>>16538198
>>16538204
total revenue (not just auto sales) was 97 bil in 2023 and will be about ~100bil in 2024
so it would be up 7 places on that chart

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 17:46:59 UTC No. 16538315

>>16538306 (You)(You)

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 17:52:14 UTC No. 16538321

Haven't been keeping up to date with Starship dev for a while, QRD on progress of:
>the dry mass
>autogeneous pressurization
>ice in the LOX tank
>50% performance shortfall (about 40-50t to LEO)
>10% isp shortfall on raptor
>cascading failure at low fuel levels on raptor
>heat tiles

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 17:52:47 UTC No. 16538323

>>16538321
its over, Starship is cancelled

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 17:59:46 UTC No. 16538326

>>16538306(you)(you)(you)

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 18:01:25 UTC No. 16538327

Why the fuck did the time change? All the others are at night, including the original date on the 10th, but for the 11th it says 1300.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 18:01:45 UTC No. 16538328

>>16538321
>10% isp shortfall on raptor
I'm pretty sure i know the source of this one. You're taking the isp of the sea level raptors (which is almost exactly 10% less than theoretical optimal) and thinking raptor is bad with realizing that vacuum raptors are pretty close to optimal.
Sea level nozzles have a huge hit to performance.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 18:06:59 UTC No. 16538331

https://www.youtube.com/live/Y6-hE6Sadzs

Briefing of MSR update. No idea if there will be anything worth listening in for.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 18:30:16 UTC No. 16538340

>>16538331
I haven’t been listening was there anything good?

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 18:33:19 UTC No. 16538343

>>16538331
>>16538340
>Skycrane & RTG for $7 billion
>or commercial heavy lift + something for $6-7 billion
>various simplified things (tube cleaning on Mars, redesigned pickup mechanism)
>Jared has to get $300 million this year to make mid '30s possible
>could go to cis-lunar and get it from there but NASA prefers direct return
>decision in 2026

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 18:34:13 UTC No. 16538345

>>16538271
>5T
Absurd. Uber is like $100B, the entire taxi market about double that. Where does $5T come from? The entire global car industry is only $4T!!! Absurd!!!

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 18:38:31 UTC No. 16538347

>>16538343
>decision in 2026
fucking hell no wonder they can’t get the samples back before 2040

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 18:40:56 UTC No. 16538349

Holy fuck every woman who comes on asks the most retarded questions, and none of them seem to have heard the "don't ask two questions" part either.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 18:54:15 UTC No. 16538353

>>16538149
the overall mix is still fuel rich

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 18:55:45 UTC No. 16538354

>>16538345
disrupting transportation in general, not just some taxi rides

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 18:56:12 UTC No. 16538355

>>16538347
I do like that he's basically giving Jared enough time to get up to speed and make the best decision, though. Presumably he could even accelerate it if the studies are far enough for that. It kind of feels like "this is what we came up with, you can go with either of these or find yet another way in a year".

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 18:58:34 UTC No. 16538358

>>16538354
The entire global car industry is less than $5T! Where is he pulling that number from?

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 18:58:39 UTC No. 16538359

https://x.com/elonmusk/live

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 19:00:03 UTC No. 16538362

>>16538359
Is he talking about Starship? Don't waste my time.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 19:00:07 UTC No. 16538363

>>16538358
self driving cars will be much more profitable than just selling "dumb" cars in general
each robocar is basically 5x as valuable due to not being parked most of the time

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 19:01:31 UTC No. 16538365

>>16538362
yeah he said its cancelled, doesn't work

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 19:03:38 UTC No. 16538367

>>16538362
>>16538365
It's not cancelled but he admitted that it won't be fully rapidly reusable because of the heat shield issue.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 19:05:41 UTC No. 16538369

>>16538367
everything is fully rapidly reusable if you're willing to take the risk

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 19:19:36 UTC No. 16538384

Apparently he said on stream that the launch was pushed back 3-4 days? Can anyone confirm? My only source is some Redditor.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 19:20:44 UTC No. 16538386

>>16538384
I started listening at like 25min, he has talked about Tesla and grok and neuralink a bit, but not SpaceX

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 19:21:33 UTC No. 16538387

https://x.com/NASASpaceflight/status/1876707408900206737?t=HQUS5Ywv2zeuIHTAwTWgeA&s=19

>Starship Flight 7 pushed back "about three or four days".

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 19:23:38 UTC No. 16538391

It's over

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 19:25:32 UTC No. 16538394

that’s ok. new glenn is also getting pushed out a couple days so they’ll launch on the same day regardless.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 19:25:34 UTC No. 16538395

So Starship Flight 7 at 13th or 14th
New Glenn on 11th

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 19:27:50 UTC No. 16538398

>Raptor 3 is doing well
>Raptor 3 is in a league of its own, so far above any other rocket engine, it doesn't need a heatshield
>it was one of the design goals I set
>many experienced rocket engineers said it couldn't be done, looks too simple
>its actually not simple, we hide the complexity in the internal structure
>it requires a re-design of the booster and Starship to get rid of the heatshield on the base

>we don't have a final date for flight 7, but some time next week

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 19:34:54 UTC No. 16538406

https://x.com/SciGuySpace/status/1876701255940129230

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 19:37:12 UTC No. 16538407

>NG and Spaceship keep getting pushed so they aren't the one to blow up first

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 19:39:08 UTC No. 16538409

>>16538406
sounds reasonable

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 19:42:56 UTC No. 16538413

>>16538406
Why do we need starship? Why no architecture that fits on 1-2 falcon heavies?

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 19:44:44 UTC No. 16538415

>>16538272
Starship will never be viable even with fairy dust

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 19:50:05 UTC No. 16538417

>>16538406
They didn't specifically say starship, they said heavy lander and mentionned SpaceX's and Blue Origin' option, but said they weren't the only ones.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 19:50:17 UTC No. 16538418

>>16538272
They're very viable. They've done a lot less mass optimization than they could, because SpaceX desperately wants to build the hulls as cheap as they can. When they start making the skin thinner and make up the strength with more complex structural elements, then they're truly desperate for mass savings.

🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 19:54:34 UTC No. 16538420

More than 90% of my market gainz have been from $TSLA this year

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 19:55:36 UTC No. 16538422

>>16538420
over 100% for me

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 19:57:43 UTC No. 16538424

>>16538420
I have 0% market gains because I invest nothing.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 19:58:25 UTC No. 16538425

ELON BLOODY BASTERD I ALREADY REDEEMED MY PTO

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 20:01:43 UTC No. 16538427

>>16538425
>expecting rockets to launch on time
>especially in-development or new ones

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 20:08:30 UTC No. 16538431

>>16538427
Yes

🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 20:09:12 UTC No. 16538433

why does trump keep talking about annexing canada?
>elon's mom has canadian citizenship
>elon is a canadian citizen by birth
>elon would therefore be a natural american citizen upon annexing canada, thereby allowing him to become president of the US
president elon soon

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 20:14:19 UTC No. 16538437

>>16538433
Can't they just annex South Africa instead
Surely South Africa is a decent place to launch rockets from too. Or to uncontrollably crashland them there.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 20:16:07 UTC No. 16538441

>>16538437
Canada awards Citizenship to the descendants of Canadian citizens one generation removed. Mae Musk was born in Canada and has Canadian citizenship by birth, and Elon inherited it in turn.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 20:16:22 UTC No. 16538442

>>16538433
Notice how every time he does it is directed at Trudeau and tariffs?

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 20:19:04 UTC No. 16538445

>>16538433
>>16538441
>canadian understanding of american civics

Elon was born in South Africa, he cannot run for POTUS.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 20:21:56 UTC No. 16538448

>>16538445
there are americans that haven't been born in america that have run for presidents

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 20:22:45 UTC No. 16538449

>>16538108
What like regulatory fees? Or raw materials? Rockets have a high idiot index. Surely you can cobble it together in the afternoons in your garage

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 20:24:17 UTC No. 16538453

>>16538407
>Spaceship
Okay, retard.
Starship is already first to explode because it's the only serious rocket program.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 20:26:38 UTC No. 16538455

>>16538445
There are two ways to award citizenship: by soil, or by blood. The US currently recognizes both.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 20:34:25 UTC No. 16538467

>>16538448
Name 5

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 20:35:12 UTC No. 16538469

>>16538467
Elon Musk

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 20:36:04 UTC No. 16538471

>>16538467

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 20:42:39 UTC No. 16538476

>>16538449
raw materials.
ground support equipment.
telemetry electronics.
ground support equipment for telemetry.
the cost of either running a subscale test campaign of launches or having multiple full scale failures (or more likely both).
the cost of travel blackrock desert, to the only place in america where amateurs can actually get a permit to launch stuff to space, with all of your large hazmat items.
could you do it for less? maybe. probably. but many have tried and very few have pulled it off.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 20:47:07 UTC No. 16538482

>>16538363
But if you can use them more than you need less cars! This doesn't track!

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 20:48:48 UTC No. 16538483

>>16538406
The whole concept is pointless. Unless is a Chang'e clone but for Mars, what could we possibly learn from MSR? This concept is beat as manned LEO.

Its time to move ON!

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 20:51:22 UTC No. 16538485

>>16538483

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 20:57:49 UTC No. 16538492

starship and new glenn delays are expected but its unnerving that we're 8 days into 2025 and have only had two launches

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 21:00:20 UTC No. 16538493

>>16538492
Seven, but we are on a bit of a low pace so far this year. At the current rate, we'd only see 104 launches this year.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 21:03:21 UTC No. 16538496

>>16538492
All the lazy Americans need to recover from all that time off they take for their Christian holidays

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 21:04:09 UTC No. 16538497

>>16538493
no one launches in winter because the rockets get chilly, prease understando :(

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 21:06:07 UTC No. 16538499

>>16538190
>they want to invest in Elon
How long will that last if he keeps spilling spaghetti all over twitter?

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 21:10:55 UTC No. 16538501

>>16538413
Is the goal just repeating another Apollo program where when the annual budget ends you have absolutely nothing to show for it?
Or optimizing the reusable rocket where launch costs are only 2x or 3x the fuel cost?

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 21:23:25 UTC No. 16538508

>>16538501
the goal is getting a dozen cock sized metal tubes back from mars. maybe it shouldn’t be, but given that that’s what it is can we do it for less money faster on more proven systems

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 21:24:24 UTC No. 16538509

>>16538501
The real answer is that by the time NASA reacted to the existence of the falcon family, starship was already hopping. SpaceX develops rockets slightly above the rate at which NASA can make decisions

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 21:25:25 UTC No. 16538511

>>16538508
>can we do it for less money
lol
>faster
LOL
Are you new here?

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 21:26:25 UTC No. 16538513

>>16538448
The point is that he isn't a "natural-born citizen" which, besides the minimum age is the only qualification to being president.
>>16538467
The first few Presidents were born before the United States existed.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 21:32:27 UTC No. 16538518

>>16538513
>The point is that he isn't a "natural-born citizen" which, besides the minimum age is the only qualification to being president.
If the nationality was absorbed into the United States, one would imagine this would be sufficient to qualify. The precise definition of these terms isn't well established by existing precedent, since we've never actually annexed a sovereign nation in such a manner before. Previous cases, such as the Louisiana Purchase, did not involve any transference of citizenship, but Elon Musk is already a citizen.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 21:32:29 UTC No. 16538519

>>16538511
huh? I feel like we’re having two different conversations here. this is all about nasa restructuring msr. to that end they can use proven already operational launch vehicles with well understood specs instead of hypothetically better vehicles that will still be in development for who knows how long and are subject to design changes.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 21:41:59 UTC No. 16538522

>>16538519
if NASA can't design a simple launch vehicle which is the basic building block of any space program

how can they design anything in a sane manner?
Better just to simply end NASA altogether

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 21:45:08 UTC No. 16538527

Dissolve NASA and expand JPL.

They can design spacecraft and plan outer space missions from now on, since they are clearly inept when it comes to rockets.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 21:48:21 UTC No. 16538533

>>16538085
Why isn't BPS.space on this list? Wtf Berger.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 21:55:42 UTC No. 16538540

>>16537963
This diagram contains a subtle but lethal error, deliberately included to troll the chinese. See if you can find it.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 21:57:21 UTC No. 16538542

>>16538522
they might be incompetent compared to some public companies (many go bankrupt), but who would design the scientific probes then?
NASA should buy as much as they can commercially and focus on science missions, especially on cutting edge stuff that is still speculative and put money there
do RnD on stuff that is too far from being commercially viable

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 22:00:57 UTC No. 16538545

>>16538540
I see it but I can’t point it out due to ITAR

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 22:02:38 UTC No. 16538547

>>16538540
i'll fix it later

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 22:13:04 UTC No. 16538555

>>16538533
Who?

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 22:14:25 UTC No. 16538558

>>16538555
Joe Barnard of course.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 22:26:37 UTC No. 16538566

>>16538533
What was his total mass to orbit in 2024?

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 22:28:26 UTC No. 16538567

>>16538566
Equal to Blue Origin's.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 22:51:15 UTC No. 16538590

>>16538413
>>16538406
If you read between the lines, basically a Starship contract means they can ship a lab by Starship directly to the surface of Mars along with two colonists who can spend a week down on it and conduct science directly via sample collection done through next-generation Martian drones based off Ingenuity's telemetry fed into new designs. That way, there isn't a 10-15 year gap between mission and sample return and sample analysis. Instead, a ship with crew is launched, travels to Mars in a 6mo window, and by the end of that very year, you'll have samples collected, analyzed, discoveries made and data transmitted, and then said samples are returned alongside crew back to Earth.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 22:53:35 UTC No. 16538591

>>16538590
No that's terrible. You need to design your programs so that an entire generation of NASA employees can make a single mission into their entire career. If a program ends before 40 years it's a failure.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 22:54:22 UTC No. 16538593

>>16538455
Citizenship alone is not enough to qualify to run for POTUS my non American friend.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 22:56:43 UTC No. 16538596

>>16538591
You're hired!

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 22:58:26 UTC No. 16538597

>>16538593
This is only in respect to the Natural Born Citizenship question. The Organics Act that would have to follow to determine the process of granting Citizenship to Canadian citizens would have to determine the ultimate status of Canadian residents, and that process, which is determined by Congress, is entirely open ended. If Congress so desired, they could in fact make such determinations while crafting the legislation that would grant US citizenship. They could also wait a couple of decades to actually do it, or otherwise grant residency without ever granting citizenship. Other than the "natural born" status, you have to be of a minimum age.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 23:04:16 UTC No. 16538603

>>16538591
NASA's in for a rude awakening this admin.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 23:05:36 UTC No. 16538607

https://arstechnica.com/space/2025/01/nearly-two-years-after-its-radical-pivot-fidelity-slashes-relativitys-valuation/
>In its March 2024 quarterly report for Contrafund, Fidelity noted its holdings from the Series D, E, and F fundraising rounds held by Relativity. For example, Contrafund held 1.67 million shares from the Series D round, worth an estimated $31.8 million. Thus, Fidelity valued the privately held shares at $19 apiece. By the third quarter report last year, Fidelity's valuation of those shares had fallen a little to $16.
>However, in a report ending November 29 of last year, which was only recently published, Fidelity's valuation of Relativity plummeted. Its stake in Relativity, valued at $31.8 million last March, was now thought to be worth just $866,735—a per-share value of 52 cents. Shares in the other fundraising rounds are also valued at less than $1 each.
>In other words, what was once valued as a $4.5 billion company might now be worth something around $100 million, at least according to one of its institutional investors. Moreover, the Fidelity documents indicate that the value of some "common stock" held by employees—worth about $15 a share a year ago—may be worth close to zero.

We're going to lose another one

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 23:06:57 UTC No. 16538611

>>16538607
The consolidation/collapse of small launch was inevitable.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 23:07:41 UTC No. 16538614

>>16538603
I wish. After four years it will be business as usual again.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 23:08:33 UTC No. 16538617

>>16538607
should've pivoted to payloads

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 23:11:59 UTC No. 16538621

>>16538607
Once starship is flying regularly, all the nominal competitors will go kaput. Only those being funded directly by governments or bezos will be able to survive.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 23:12:49 UTC No. 16538622

>>16538591
Seriously, do these people care more about prolonging their careers and securing the bag than being responsible for as many new discoveries in space science as they possibly can? You have to be not human to wholeheartedly prefer the former, in my opinion.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 23:17:05 UTC No. 16538627

>>16538622
Even if many of the individuals in the organization would like to move fast and get shit done, the organization itself doesn't reward that, doesn't allow people to work that way. The organization has a life of its own, it's own priorities and ways of thinking.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 23:36:49 UTC No. 16538646

>>16538327
afternoon launch requires closing the beach during the day which is restricted on a saturday. Launching at 7am means it can be reopened before noon

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 23:38:28 UTC No. 16538647

>>16538622
https://www.youtube.com/live/Jd2oVbt_Z_U?si=NvvAv2ARPmJInKrT
Former NASA guy discusses the management he worked under.
tldr NASA is a government program and thus selects for the lowest common denominator. The best leave for the private sector, the worst literally can't be fired. Our most sacred institution, the one that should strive towards our infinite future among the stars, has been nonmaliciously coopted by boomers punching the clock. Thank God for SpaceX

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 23:42:47 UTC No. 16538651

>>16538178

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 23:45:27 UTC No. 16538654

>>16538228
good, now I won't have to race home from work on Friday afternoon to catch it

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 23:46:04 UTC No. 16538657

>>16538651
IT'S A ROADMAP BUT AS A 'STAR MAP' DO YOU GUYS GET IT? HAHA BECAUSE IT'S SPACE, GET IT?

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 23:47:18 UTC No. 16538659

>>16538621
What's starships payload to GEO?

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 23:48:14 UTC No. 16538661

>>16538659
A cubic kilometer of kilograms.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 23:50:23 UTC No. 16538665

>>16538597
>This is only in respect to the Natural Born Citizenship question.

Correct, and Elon is not a natural born citizen to Canada.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 23:52:32 UTC No. 16538666

>>16538471
>not mentioning that they were born to citizen parents
fuck off

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 23:53:41 UTC No. 16538667

>>16538659
With or without refueling?

With or without a third stage like Helios?

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 23:56:23 UTC No. 16538670

>>16538471
this list forgets Obama.

Anonymous at Tue, 7 Jan 2025 23:58:50 UTC No. 16538673

>>16538666
Musks mother is a canadian citizen

Anonymous at Wed, 8 Jan 2025 00:01:10 UTC No. 16538675

>>16538665
>Correct, and Elon is not a natural born citizen to Canada.
He literally is because he was born to an emigrant citizen parent.

Anonymous at Wed, 8 Jan 2025 00:03:55 UTC No. 16538678

>>16538673
And what was the question? Being Canadian doesn't fucking matter if the question was "can he run for US president".

Anonymous at Wed, 8 Jan 2025 00:04:08 UTC No. 16538679

>>16538673
Elons mother becoming a naturalized Canadian citizen after he was born is not comperable to the people in that list.

Anonymous at Wed, 8 Jan 2025 00:05:12 UTC No. 16538680

>>16538614
That's a big IF, on the basis of Trump giving up power. He's going full hegemon.

Anonymous at Wed, 8 Jan 2025 00:06:15 UTC No. 16538681

>>16538680
I wish I could believe the things libtards say about Trump.

🗑️ Anonymous at Wed, 8 Jan 2025 00:07:58 UTC No. 16538683

>>16538681
A guy who's talking about annexing Panama, Greenland, and Canada isn't going to give up power in 4 years to let some other yahoo fuck up his self-ordained mission or basically go "that last guy was a retard, we were just kidding you guys." Once the path of conquest starts, its not so easily given up. This is game theory 101.

Anonymous at Wed, 8 Jan 2025 00:08:47 UTC No. 16538684

You're a kook.

Anonymous at Wed, 8 Jan 2025 00:09:32 UTC No. 16538685

>>16538683
The guy talks a lot of shit and then does nothing but golf, takes credit for anything that goes well and blame other people for anything that doesn't go well. That's Trump's track record. He's an old man now, don't expect new tricks.

Anonymous at Wed, 8 Jan 2025 00:10:15 UTC No. 16538687

>>16538683
Then why did he give up power four years ago?

Anonymous at Wed, 8 Jan 2025 00:10:39 UTC No. 16538688

>>16538683
Oh no he has terminal TDS.

Anonymous at Wed, 8 Jan 2025 00:11:57 UTC No. 16538689

>>16538670
>ai forgets inconvenient fact
How long have we been at war with Eastasia again?

Anonymous at Wed, 8 Jan 2025 00:12:41 UTC No. 16538690

>>16538678
>And what was the question? Being Canadian doesn't fucking matter if the question was "can he run for US president".
The question was whether or not an American annexation of Canada opens up a path for Elon Musk to be categorized as a natural born citizen of the United States. The actual answer to that question is, it's up to Congress, via an Organic Act, which has traditionally followed acceptance of a territory to the United States.

🗑️ Anonymous at Wed, 8 Jan 2025 00:15:27 UTC No. 16538692

>>16538685
Difference is that in 2016, he came in and basically had no idea how anything worked and most of the people long the way who joined up also had zero clue how anything worked. I'm sure other branches of the government will resist, but there's a clear interest in entrenching power and realigning governing bodies under the executive vs having split branches of government playing tug of war with each other. Time will tell if it will be a repeat of 2016 or different, but present rhetoric along with other players aligning with him, implies that it may be in fact different. If nothing else, Elon's going to throw his weight around to ensure that colonization of Moon/Mars is kicked off in a way that's impossible to stop or hobble by the end of Trump's latest term so that future administrations can't engage in bogus interference.

>>16538687
He tried, failed, and couldn't align enough parties within established institutions to his side. But he tried to hold on in a way that ran counter to democratic principles in the past.

>>16538688
I'd expect nothing less from a retard like you, in failing to understand that neutral observation of statements made by the subject in question, is not TDS.