🧵 /sfg/ Spaceflight General
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:11:23 UTC No. 16545695
SCRUBBED.com edition
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:12:26 UTC No. 16545701
sponge poster, did you enjoy today's launch?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:12:31 UTC No. 16545703
>>16545695
Asshats did that on purpose. They weren't ready
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:12:38 UTC No. 16545704
Isn't this what waterfall development is supposed to avoid, why doesn't the rocket just work
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:12:48 UTC No. 16545705
previous >>16543091
dumbass
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:13:06 UTC No. 16545707
elon sent his agents to screw it up
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:13:18 UTC No. 16545709
>>16545698
she saw it was a BO rocket
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:13:51 UTC No. 16545713
FUCK YOU JEFF
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:14:02 UTC No. 16545715
>>16545704
All development is agile. Some people just lie about it.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:14:10 UTC No. 16545716
>>16545704
>why doesn't the rocket just work
There were non white/asian people involved.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:14:12 UTC No. 16545717
kwab
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:14:16 UTC No. 16545718
>>16543104
>>16543960
>>16543966
>>16544718
>>16544777
>>16544926
>>16545130
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:14:45 UTC No. 16545720
>>16545695
Blue SubOrbital
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:15:04 UTC No. 16545721
Goodnight fellas. Fuck you OP
>>16545695
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:15:09 UTC No. 16545722
I was sad because no Clear stream. Little did I know she was only trying to protect my time from being wasted by the evil Jeff. I will never doubt my wife ever again
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:16:48 UTC No. 16545727
>>16545703
They lied back at September and they lied again today.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:18:29 UTC No. 16545730
What is Bozos thinking right now?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:18:42 UTC No. 16545731
>>16545718
Kek. BOsisters...
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:19:19 UTC No. 16545734
>>16545730
>happy birthday to me
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:19:24 UTC No. 16545735
>>16545730
"FUCK"
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:20:08 UTC No. 16545739
New Glenn is the worst name for a rocket I've ever heard.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:21:32 UTC No. 16545746
>>16545718
>Take notes musky this is how you get into orbit
this one gets me
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:23:41 UTC No. 16545748
I think I'm going to order a Tesla.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:25:41 UTC No. 16545749
>>16545730
That maybe he should have gone with his real name of Jorgensen and people would actually consider him competent.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:26:02 UTC No. 16545750
>>16545703
blue origin so desperately wants to appear competant and cool, yet with their pompous commentary they come across as a completely soulless enterprise
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:27:16 UTC No. 16545752
>>16545730
Mogged by elon yet again
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:27:45 UTC No. 16545754
>>16545748
I like mine
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:28:16 UTC No. 16545757
>>16545748
New model Y looks good NGL
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:28:40 UTC No. 16545758
>>16545703
>They weren't ready
and everyone worth their salt knew this was likely to happen
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:29:21 UTC No. 16545759
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:31:34 UTC No. 16545762
fuck you spongeposter this was all your fault
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:32:11 UTC No. 16545764
>>16545759
there, there
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:32:34 UTC No. 16545765
>>16545759
it's okay spongeposter, it wasn't your fault. You'll get to see it... eventually... maybe
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:32:39 UTC No. 16545766
Truly blue balls
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:33:40 UTC No. 16545767
Did elon sell his soul in some kind of absurd devil bargain?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:34:40 UTC No. 16545769
>>16545765
>>16545764
>>16545759
All the same troon
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:34:44 UTC No. 16545770
Bezos bros....
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:36:32 UTC No. 16545771
/sfg/ - Scrubbed Flights General
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:38:18 UTC No. 16545774
>>16545772
is that kuroba?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:38:55 UTC No. 16545775
>>16545695
Oh for God's sake. Again? Come on Bezos, do better, I actually want there to be some competition for SpaceX.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:41:18 UTC No. 16545776
>>16545772
is the Olga poster still alive?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:42:05 UTC No. 16545777
>>16545774
kurobaex. i hate it now that captcha solving is broken. none of this shit is maintained anymore. i miss dashchan. never got into Chance
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:44:07 UTC No. 16545778
>>16545777
I still use clover but I have a pass
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:46:11 UTC No. 16545781
>>16545777
>captcha solving is broken
Do you mean captcha saving? Solving still works fine for me besides the eye searing pink.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:53:05 UTC No. 16545785
>>16545781
Been broken for me for months. what version are you on? and what solver model?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 08:55:15 UTC No. 16545786
>>16545785
Oh, autosolvers. Nevermind, I don't use those.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 09:11:41 UTC No. 16545794
Lol. Lmao even. Sleepers made the right choice
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 09:12:33 UTC No. 16545796
https://arstechnica.com/space/2025/
>According to sources, the primary problem was likely ice clogging one of the vent lines that carry pressurized gas away from the vehicle. Several attempts were made to melt the ice, but these efforts were not successful, necessitating the scrub. Hopefully Blue Origin will provide more information about the cause of the scrub in the coming days.
>Additionally there appears to have been a problem with at least one of the auxiliary power units that provide power to the rocket after the engines shut off. One of the primary purposes of these APUs is to power the deployment of landing legs needed to make a soft touchdown on the company's droneship, Jacklyn. It was not immediately clear early Monday whether Blue Origin would have pressed ahead with the launch, should they have had to land the first stage in the ocean, rather than attempting a barge landing.
>Because the company got deep into the countdown on Monday morning, it is likely that there will be at least a 48-hour turnaround time.
>Finally, the current launch period for New Glenn closes on January 16.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 09:14:43 UTC No. 16545798
>>16545796
it's not that easy in ventlinery
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 09:14:51 UTC No. 16545799
>>16545794
But you missed the stream of Joe Barnard going crazy with each delay and then shitting on BO for not doing stuff like SpaceX during their Earth Ad.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 09:15:30 UTC No. 16545800
who?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 09:28:39 UTC No. 16545805
>>16545796
Where exactly is he getting this? Could be fanfic for all I know
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 09:29:18 UTC No. 16545807
>>16545805
Are you questioning Berger's sources?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 09:31:46 UTC No. 16545809
So, Bezos is a subtard then. Fascinating.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 09:33:41 UTC No. 16545811
>>16545807
yes
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 09:43:26 UTC No. 16545815
sfg is dead...
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 10:12:14 UTC No. 16545821
>>16545815
its 5am for burgers you twat.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 10:14:19 UTC No. 16545822
Dont tell me GayseX is actually going to launch before Blue…
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 10:19:01 UTC No. 16545825
>didn't wake up so BO scrubbed the launch
Sorry, /sfg/
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 10:19:14 UTC No. 16545826
Space is hard
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 10:29:48 UTC No. 16545830
>>16545811
A smile would be nice.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 10:58:21 UTC No. 16545844
>>16545695
>go to bed
>wake up in the morning
>it was another BONG scrub
>and I got a full night's sleep
Ha ha, even Clear-chan didn't watch the scrub
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 11:53:23 UTC No. 16545867
>>16545817
HE'S LUMP
HE'S LUMP
HE'S LUMP
HE MIGHT BE DEAD
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 11:53:26 UTC No. 16545868
>>16545866
Why does supporting Blorigin make a guy put on makeup?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 12:25:19 UTC No. 16545889
>>16545864
This /pol/tard brings up an interesting point. How much will the extra power of Raptor 3 be offset by extra fuel requirements?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 12:26:23 UTC No. 16545890
>>16545889
thats fucking retarded and not how it works
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 12:34:59 UTC No. 16545896
>>16545889
Don't make me tap the sign
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 12:44:22 UTC No. 16545903
>>16545890
>>16545896
Is Raptor 3's main benefit that it weights less? Or is it also more efficient?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 12:45:23 UTC No. 16545905
>>16545903
>weights
*weighs
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 12:54:46 UTC No. 16545908
>>16545903
there are three main traits: thrust (basically power), ISP (efficiency) and weight
lower weight is good for reducing dry mass yes but high thrust also means you waste less propellant on fighting gravity and you can make the propellant tank bigger
high efficiency matters more for second stages
not sure what the main benefit is, but SpaceX seems to be driving for high thrust, I imagine booster reuse which causes the relatively early staging and thus the need for the second stage to be relatively big to get into orbit is the important point here
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 12:55:47 UTC No. 16545910
>>16545906
but they do?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 12:58:50 UTC No. 16545914
>>16545910
Elon's booster primarily boosts itself back with its rocket engines and uses the same to do a powered landing, wasting fuel when you could use lift to direct the booster back and reduce vertical velocity
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 13:02:15 UTC No. 16545921
>>16545914
it uses lift retard
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 13:04:25 UTC No. 16545925
>>16545864
>>16545889
Who cares what South Greenlanders think about rocket.
Tell them to stick to cookies.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 13:04:43 UTC No. 16545926
>>16545921
So did the apollo capsule, but nobody calls that gliding because the L/D ratio is low and not enough to keep it from crashing into the ground like elon's booster would if it didn't do a powered landing
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 13:04:52 UTC No. 16545928
>>16545771
FLIGHT, not flights. thankfully
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 13:06:40 UTC No. 16545929
>>16545923
same. funny they made the official livestream private so i couldn't go direct to it. had to search for another one instead. id feel pretty shit and tired if id stayed up for it, thats for sure. nice how spacex seem to time their launches more considerately.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 13:15:53 UTC No. 16545933
>>16545923
>stay up
>get cucked
>shitty sleep
>now I have a phone interview in 45 minutes
FUCK YOU BEZOS
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 13:17:50 UTC No. 16545934
>/pol/ poster is back
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 13:18:56 UTC No. 16545935
>blue origin stream is now private
do BOkeks really?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 13:22:22 UTC No. 16545937
>>16545935
yeah, thats what i mean. strange.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 13:24:07 UTC No. 16545938
You should be glad that the B0 stream is private, it was shameless earther propaganda, there was so much bullshit about moving heavy industry off planet just to ship the products back to earth and how solar cannot keep up with growing energy demands yet ignores fission/fusion.
Just put the payload into orbit lil' bro.
Shit show of a stream and a shit show of a launch attempt, this should have been a WDR.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 13:25:22 UTC No. 16545939
>>16545935
is it still on X?
I'll download it real quick if it is
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 13:26:11 UTC No. 16545942
>>16545938
I still don't understand why they advocate for orbital industry. It just doesn't make sense at all
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 13:28:06 UTC No. 16545943
>>16545939
i used this one. seems to have the whole thing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ial
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 13:32:53 UTC No. 16545945
>>16545942
because the low-g environment lets you make things you can't as easily in normal-g
not only microchips and other machines, chemical products like drugs that undergo crystallization are affected positively too
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 13:39:20 UTC No. 16545946
>>16545945
>>16545942
Some sensitive things could easily benefit from 'zero-g' manufacturing but the idea of making metal or chemical products on the moon or in an orbital refinery only to ship it back to earth is braindead.
95% of the output of any space economy will go back into space and will not have any positive impact on the health of the planet like BO were trying to sell.
I honestly believe they blew through all of their little PR clips for the year in this one stream just to make up for dead air
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 13:39:51 UTC No. 16545947
>>16545945
People say shit like this because other people say it, exclusively for that reason and that reason alone. Microchip production is resource intensive as is pretty much every other industrial activity worth doing.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 13:40:36 UTC No. 16545949
>>16545946
dead air is hard job. imagine seeing the countdown constantly at 36 minutes no matter how long you waffle on and on. terrifying
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 14:09:43 UTC No. 16545957
New Glenn isn't relevant until thunderf00t does a debunking of it. I mean surely he will do a video about how NG reusability isn't actually cheaper
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 14:19:29 UTC No. 16545966
>>16545964
Why'd you screencap your post before people instantly told you that "/sfg/" does not think anything of the sort?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 14:32:39 UTC No. 16545973
I can't believe BO thought they could launch a probe to mars for nasa last year when they're still struggling to do the 1st flight now.
any chance that starship gets delayed again? Maybe Musk wants to show up Bezos with a much more interesting launch?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 14:33:31 UTC No. 16545976
>>16545973
of course its possible, the weather could turn shit at any moment
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 14:33:53 UTC No. 16545977
>>16545973
new glenn was supposed to launch years ago
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 14:35:08 UTC No. 16545978
>>16545908
higher thrust to weight/thrust to sq footage means they can stretch the rocket to add more payload
It's also a better than 1 to 1 payload increase for the 2nd stage
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 14:36:04 UTC No. 16545979
How do you make a launch company that has gone 25 years without an orbital launch vehicle?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 14:38:26 UTC No. 16545981
>>16545979
virgin orbit has launched more stuff into space than BO
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 14:43:18 UTC No. 16545983
imagine spending this long and pretending it is an advantage to take your time
Then little shit force stand downs, just like every other vehicle
There will be multiple failures in the launch vehicle forcing a 6 month + stand down too
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 14:43:50 UTC No. 16545984
>>16545942
1. Pollution. Just dump that shit into space.
2. Energy. Solar panels are way more efficient in space. Nuclear power is viable again since you don't have to worry about a meltdown doing massive ecological damage.
3. Resources. Launching from earth sucks. You could have mining drones that launch from your space factories and ferry resources back and forth from asteroids. Since they never need to worry about atmospheric flight, they could use super efficient ion propulsion and just refuel at asteroids.
4. No gravity. That means that simply moving heavy things around could be more efficient. A crane no longer needs to lift heavy things against gravity.
🗑️ Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 14:46:27 UTC No. 16545985
>>16545966
lol Elon won and Trump won
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 14:47:16 UTC No. 16545986
>>16545984
everything in LEO eventually falls to Earth, there is no "just dump it into space"
>You could have mining drones that launch from your space factories and ferry resources back and forth from asteroids.
?? Do you have any idea how much delta-v that takes and how many fucking years some hall thrusters would take to move asteroids around?
Theres a reason there has never been a sample return from an asteroid yet
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 14:47:27 UTC No. 16545987
>>16545946
Once you have automated space factories making up the space economy, shipping stuff to earth is really cheap. It isn't like we are talking about using Starship as a cargo vessel to ferry things back from space. If you are at the point where you have robots mining out asteroids, putting manufacturing goods in a heat shield and using a railgun or ion thrusters to yeet them back to the planet is relatively simple and cheap.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 14:48:52 UTC No. 16545990
>>16545986
>Theres a reason there has never been a sample return from an asteroid yet
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OSIRI
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 14:49:05 UTC No. 16545991
>>16545986
You don't move the asteroids around. You build at the asteroid.
>We will never have an oil economy. All the oil is in Texas. Do you have any idea how impossible it would be to move all that oil to underneath New York
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 14:50:13 UTC No. 16545993
>>16545985
Are you having an aneurysm?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 14:51:41 UTC No. 16545995
>>16545986
>Theres a reason there has never been a sample return from an asteroid yet
might want to check up on that
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 14:52:43 UTC No. 16545996
>>16545990
>>16545995
faked
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 14:53:34 UTC No. 16545998
>>16545986
>Do you have any idea how much delta-v that takes
DV to the asteroid belt is only a few hundred dv difference from Mars. The ion probes we send out there are have so much delta-v to spare that NASA takes retardedly inefficient routes to them just to get there faster because delta-v is a non-issue.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 14:55:32 UTC No. 16545999
>>16545986
gases dumped into earth orbit won't make it back to earth. They get ionized by the sun and then yeeted out of the solar system by our magnetic field.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 14:55:37 UTC No. 16546000
>>16545996
ahhh ok, say no more, say no more, nudge nudge nudge wink wink
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 14:58:17 UTC No. 16546001
>>16545983
yeah probably, overall just being much slower and costlier than the rapid iterative method
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 15:03:03 UTC No. 16546004
>>16545986
there have been 3 asteroid sample return missions silly billy
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 15:15:35 UTC No. 16546011
>>16545695
So glad I didn't stay up for that.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 15:22:54 UTC No. 16546018
>>16546015
>What do you chuds need space for, huh?
Buy an ad.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 15:22:54 UTC No. 16546019
>>16546015
The first word tells you all you need to know
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 15:23:41 UTC No. 16546021
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 15:25:17 UTC No. 16546024
>>16546015
posting an excerpt that starts with that name makes this pretty obvious bait
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 15:27:14 UTC No. 16546025
>>16546024
[spoiler]Yes it's bait I legit didn't notice the name lol[/spoilerdon'tworkonsci]
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 15:27:47 UTC No. 16546026
>>16545796
get-it-perfect-before-testing homos once again completely BTFO
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 15:29:43 UTC No. 16546027
>>16546021
ima throwup
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 15:30:07 UTC No. 16546028
>>16546026
this is why we test
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 15:31:43 UTC No. 16546029
>>16545710
What are the odds Jeff buys ULA and pays to have the ACES technology transferred to BO?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 15:33:14 UTC No. 16546031
>>16546015
>human landing BAD
>stray star disrupting the system beyond repair GOOD
>waiting for the sun to engulf the Earth GOOD
their ideologies never have conclusions that make sense
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 15:51:04 UTC No. 16546047
>>16546015
thank you for the concern Mr Rubenstein, very cool!
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 15:53:29 UTC No. 16546049
>>16546044
*yawn*
sorry, I wasn't yawning because starlink is boring, but because I stayed up too late waiting for new glenn to launch
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 15:53:57 UTC No. 16546051
>>16546047
wonder if mr ruberstein lives in a forest
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 15:54:49 UTC No. 16546053
>>16546029
Low. ACES was cool technology two decades ago, but there's very little there that Blue would have trouble developing in-house for less. ULA just isn't worth what Boeing and Lockheed want for it.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:00:50 UTC No. 16546054
>>16545981
just imagine being mogged by fucking richard branson.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:02:30 UTC No. 16546055
>>16546053
>spend 15-20 million just on the engines
how can that be economical
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:02:44 UTC No. 16546056
>>16545984
>4. No gravity. That means that simply moving heavy things around could be more efficient. A crane no longer needs to lift heavy things against gravity
did you forget about inertia?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:04:05 UTC No. 16546057
>>16546055
The only market you're interested in is price-is-no-object DoD missions and you happen to have a monopoly on government launches anyway
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:05:40 UTC No. 16546060
>>16546055
>how can that be economical
It isn't. As this Anon said, >>16546057
as long as there is a market for it, they can keep charging whatever they want. This is what created the avenue for SpaceX to disrupt the industry, and the fact they pulled it off is why Oldspace hates Elon Musk.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:06:37 UTC No. 16546061
>>16546055
SLS engines are like 150mil a pop lmao
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:07:00 UTC No. 16546062
>>16546056
What does that have to do with what I said? It simply requires a lot less energy per kg to displace something in zero g than it does in a strong gravitational well. Obviously dropping things is cheaper in a graviational well, but you don't get back the energy you used to lift it. Its also just generally easier to move things in other directions as well, since you don't need to overcome friction with the floor.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:07:08 UTC No. 16546063
>>16545796
How hard is it to:
1) Put an overwhelmingly powerful de-icing heater on every valve
2) Invent a reliable "APU" (ie, a battery)
?
>>16545908
Raptor 3 is meant to be an all around improvement, getting higher Isp and thrust in a more reliable engine with lower manufacturing costs. Even if Starship's tanks were not stretched to optimize for the better engines, Raptor 3 would still improve the performance of the vehicle. Obviously, optimizing for a better engine results in even greater improvement.
>>16545984
1. If you are talking about "dumping pollution into space" you are implying perfect pollution capturing technology, in which case just leave the pollution in the box you caught it in. "Pollution" is just atoms going where we'd prefer them not to, pollution isn't some inherently evil and useless substance.
2. We already don't need to worry about meltdowns, TRISO fuel reactors literally cannot melt down no matter what you do to the fuel. That said, space based solar power is probably going to work fine.
3. The Moon is a better source of resources than asteroids.
>but muh gravity well
Launching from the Moon is extremely easy, and the Moon is a 3 day one way trip from Earth, where asteroids take years to get to and return from. The only rare important resource on the Moon is carbon. Industrializing the Moon makes asteroid mining trivial to start up, whereas going for asteroid mining from the start has an extremely steep investment curve prior to being self sustaining.
4. Energy costs of moving stuff around in space is pretty high given delta V requirements. Sure when you're doing industry somewhere with low G it's easier to pick and place, but delivering to Earth will be the expensive bit. Of course, energy is almost free in space, and transportation costs can be very small if you're just firing products at Earth using a non-rocket-based launch system.
Apologies for multi-replying, 900 second post timer gave me no choice
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:08:45 UTC No. 16546064
>>16545996
>capsule enters earth's atmosphere
>does not deploy drogue chute
>past failure point of main chute
>camera feed cuts
>camera returns capsule is drifting slowly under main chute
WOOOOOW SPACEFLIGHT IS MAGICAL AND WHIMSICAL!~
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:08:46 UTC No. 16546065
>>16546055
>how can that be economical
When your benefactor is the US Government, you want the opposite of economical. The Government has unlimited money, and they spend it via a collective vote, so you want to squeeze as much out of them as you can.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:12:18 UTC No. 16546069
>>16545926
YOU are a fucking idiot
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:14:02 UTC No. 16546071
>>16545996
Fuck you and also kill yourself you fucking nigger piece of shit
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:16:31 UTC No. 16546074
>>16546015
I would press a button to kill all people who believe this, and I would feel like a savior doing it.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:17:04 UTC No. 16546075
>>16546063
>1. If you are talking about "dumping pollution into space" you are implying perfect pollution capturing technology, in which case just leave the pollution in the box you caught it in. "Pollution" is just atoms going where we'd prefer them not to, pollution isn't some inherently evil and useless substance.
Are you an actual retard or something? Saying to dump pollution in space is the opposite of a perfect pollution capturing technology. Its making no attempt to capture it at all.
>"Pollution" is just atoms going where we'd prefer them not to, pollution isn't some inherently evil and useless substance.
Yes, by definition it is. Pollution, by definition, causes "adverse change". If it is beneficial, then it isn't pollution.
>3. The Moon is a better source of resources than asteroids.
Different bodies have different resources. Bezos wants lunar mining as well. But for metals...
Only 10,000 metric tons of platinum has been mined in earths history. Those are baby numbers for some of the asteroids out there.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:17:42 UTC No. 16546076
>>16546051
if BO was an israeli startup he'd be all for it
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:19:05 UTC No. 16546079
>>16545984
Newfag scifi nonsense
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:19:35 UTC No. 16546080
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:19:36 UTC No. 16546081
>SpaceX: 395 rocket landings
>Rest of the world combined: 0
kek, that number is not gonna change any time soon isn't it. Watch out how Musk will now surpass 400.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:22:03 UTC No. 16546085
>>16546075
How are you going to put the pollution on Earth into space without capturing it first PIG FUCK
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:22:46 UTC No. 16546086
>>16546079
>Huge swathes of the solar system of is made of rare stuff that is very useful to us
>NOOOO WE SHOULDN'T MAKE USE OF IT! LETS MAKE MORE MARTIAN ROVERS TO TAKE GRAINY PICTURES OF LANDSCAPES THAT LOOK NO DIFFERENT THAN ARIZONA
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:24:07 UTC No. 16546088
>>16546081
That isn't true. Rocketlab has successfully recovered electron like a dozen times.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:24:31 UTC No. 16546089
>>16546086
>can't just dig down below ur feet
>have to travel a light year to find "resources"
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:24:58 UTC No. 16546091
>>16546085
Are you not following the conversation? The conversation is about why Bezos believes it is beneficial to move industry into space. The pollution will be produced in space, not on earth.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:25:05 UTC No. 16546092
>>16546088
that's fishing it out of the ocean
don't think they've ever caught it with the heli
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:25:42 UTC No. 16546093
>>16546086
>LETS MAKE MORE MARTIAN ROVERS TO TAKE GRAINY PICTURES OF LANDSCAPES THAT LOOK NO DIFFERENT THAN ARIZONA
anon, you're hired!
t.NASA administration
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:26:42 UTC No. 16546095
>>16546089
Digging is extremely difficult, bad for the environment, and there is some evidence that deep exploration like fracking can cause earthquakes.
Meanwhile, there are rocks in space where the platinum and gold is literally sitting on the surface.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:27:04 UTC No. 16546098
>>16546088
via powered landing? on a platform?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:27:47 UTC No. 16546100
>>16545987
>Once you have wormholes you can zip around the galaxy!!!
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:30:48 UTC No. 16546104
>>16546086
>Huge swathes of the solar system of is made of rare stuff
he doesn't know all asteroids are made of 99.999% common materials with trace concentrations of valuable shit
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:31:55 UTC No. 16546107
>>16546092
IIRC they caught it once but had to jettison it before bringing it back.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:32:40 UTC No. 16546108
I like how people think asteroid mining is even plausible in our lifetimes
moonbases yes, moon mining yes
unless space gets taken seriously and R&D budgets go up massively asteroid mining isn't happening anytime soon
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:33:21 UTC No. 16546109
>>16546091
Why would I follow the conversation when this is more fun? You assume much
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:34:26 UTC No. 16546110
>>16546107
Speaking of booster reuse, has RocketLab done so already? Can't find anything related to it on the news. I know they reused one single engine, and they were planning to reuse a whole batch of 9 Rutherford engines.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:34:30 UTC No. 16546111
>>16546095
>Digging is extremely difficult
lmao
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:35:00 UTC No. 16546112
>>16546108
If you can mine the moon, you can mine an asteroid. Its the same level of complexity. The delta-v differences are small and barely add any challenge.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:35:29 UTC No. 16546113
>>16546109
average /sfg/ poster
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:37:04 UTC No. 16546115
>>16546108
?
Why would budgets need to go up
If it isn't profitable in and of itself, why would you do it
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:40:07 UTC No. 16546121
>>16546112
it's not a delta v problem
it's a heavy machinery in space problem
on the moon it's serviceable
at an asteroid it's not
machines require maintenance
nobody has even built an autonomous mining setup on earth yet, let alone one to mine asteriods
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:41:12 UTC No. 16546123
>>16546113
Would you be disturbed to learn I've been here since the beginning? Concrete ring in a texas swamp, pisslocks, etc
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:41:13 UTC No. 16546125
>>16546108
>I like how people think asteroid mining is even plausible
You lack vision, will, and testes
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:43:34 UTC No. 16546126
>>16546110
just the one rutherford. after that they gave up on electron reuse to focus more on neutron.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:44:06 UTC No. 16546127
>>16546112
It's not the same level of complexity to run a mine on the other side of a three years transportation loop, compared to running a mine on a six day transportation loop. Some gravity is also easer than no/ultralow gravity.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:44:43 UTC No. 16546128
>>16546086
The entire asteroid belt is 4% the mass of Earth. It's harder to get to and harder to operate in than on the ground. Please reconsider that your opinions are fed by popsci nonsense. It's ok too, we all start there.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:47:51 UTC No. 16546134
Venus tethered flying wing colonies when
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:48:29 UTC No. 16546135
we'll colonize mars and mine minerals there before we ever mine an asteroid
simple as
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:48:37 UTC No. 16546136
>>16546108
>moon mining yes
Moon mining no. Not for Earth use for sure, and depending on starship cost and lunar operation cost, not even for lunar use. It will probably be cheaper to launch 100 tons of water than to ISRU the ice caps we're fighting over.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:48:55 UTC No. 16546137
>>16546128
the mass of earth is irrelevant. mining the asteroid belt is thousands of times easier than mining the mantle, let alone the core.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:49:00 UTC No. 16546138
>>16546029
What ACES technology? Never developed.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:49:05 UTC No. 16546139
>>16546126
Totally rational desu
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:49:55 UTC No. 16546140
>>16546137
dig big hole
???
profit
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:50:24 UTC No. 16546141
>>16546135
Mars' moons are where we're gonna invent the tech and processes for asteroid mining, yes.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:51:45 UTC No. 16546142
>another round of newfags show up
>asteroid mining arguments start again
I HATE ASTEROID MINING I HATE ASTEROID MINING I HATE ASTEROID MINING
Who do we blame for this? NDT?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:53:03 UTC No. 16546144
>>16546140
those three question marks are doing some pretty heavy lifting
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:53:43 UTC No. 16546145
>>16546142
Unironically, blame obama and his push for an asteroid redirect mission
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:53:56 UTC No. 16546146
>>16546137
Yeah this isn't even remotely true
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:55:14 UTC No. 16546150
>>16546121
>nobody has even built an autonomous mining setup on earth yet, let alone one to mine asteriods
Don't make it autonomous then?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:55:51 UTC No. 16546151
Might as well build space elevator then
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:00:56 UTC No. 16546154
why dont we just use nanomachines?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:01:14 UTC No. 16546155
>>16546150
Your choices are autonomous rig or manned rig, and since it's in the asteroid belt, you can't do a manned rig yet, and won't be able to for decades at minimum.
A Moon mining rig can be "manned" remotely from Earth (available right now) or directly inhabited (which we will be able to do by 2028).
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:03:20 UTC No. 16546158
>>16546155
>since it's in the asteroid belt
There are lots of asteroids outside the asteroid belt. Go to the nearest ones first.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:07:09 UTC No. 16546160
>>16546151
Based Elon infuriator
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:08:03 UTC No. 16546162
>>16546158
Even the closest NEOs are years away by modern and near future propulsion.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:12:15 UTC No. 16546164
>>16546162
Thats not even remotely true. Hell just last night a NEO passed so close to earth it was the brightest object in the sky besides the moon.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:16:53 UTC No. 16546167
Capture every asteroid and park them in rings around the Earth
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:17:55 UTC No. 16546168
>>16546164
You're actually retarded.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:26:56 UTC No. 16546179
>>16546168
I accept your concession.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:32:52 UTC No. 16546187
>>16546053
this is the common 5m upper stage, ACES is more advanced and doesn't need to carry the helium bottles, it uses boiloff and an internal combustion engine
it's still cutting edge tech but not going to happen if ULA is owned partly by Boeing
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:34:14 UTC No. 16546188
skywatchers BFTO
Internet satellites are king
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:35:17 UTC No. 16546190
>>16545945
>microchips
We already know how to grow very large silicon and germanium crystals here on the ground, far larger than we want to use. Complex lithography in free fall would be a nightmare. Normal force is helpful if not essential in many process steps and you'd have to replicate that somehow.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:39:06 UTC No. 16546197
>>16546164
>what is dV
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:39:51 UTC No. 16546198
>>16545695
How long can you last on Mars's surface in a spacesuit outside of the base before the radiation or cold kills you?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:41:41 UTC No. 16546200
>>16546198
>radiation
Never
>cold
How fast does heat transfer in 1% atmosphere? You might just cook yourself
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:41:50 UTC No. 16546201
>>16546140
>The Kola Superdeep Borehole SG-3 is the deepest human-made hole on Earth (since 1979), which attained maximum true vertical depth of 12,262 metres (40,230 ft; 7.619 mi) in 1989. The drilling ended in 1995 due to a lack of funding.
>The upper mantle of Earth is a very thick layer of rock inside the planet, which begins just beneath the crust (at about 10 km (6.2 mi) under the oceans and about 35 km (22 mi) under the continents) and ends at the top of the lower mantle at 670 km (420 mi).
OH NO NO NO
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:42:06 UTC No. 16546202
>>16546199
Reading this made me bust a nut so powerful my testicles exploded.
Now I have no testicles.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:43:20 UTC No. 16546204
>>16546198
depends on the space suit. odds are you run out of air or batteries before anything else
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:44:44 UTC No. 16546206
>>16546198
>in a spacesuit outside of the base before the radiation
they reckon that you get a couple months on the surface of the moon before your max exposure is reached, assuming you're outside all the time. But thats not a lethal dose, so mabye twice that length of time or more. Not sure about the numbers for mars. i'll have to look up some studies.
https://www.sciencealert.com/scient
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:46:49 UTC No. 16546209
>>16546200
>How fast does heat transfer in 1% atmosphere? You might just cook yourself
If heat is a problem then why did NASA reveal an all black spacesuit in 2023?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:47:54 UTC No. 16546211
>>16546209
because it looks rad as hell
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:51:25 UTC No. 16546213
>>16546209
it was just for marketing, the actual suit is white
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:51:48 UTC No. 16546214
>>16546209
read about that but cant remember their reason. i guess it can be managed, and remember, the apollo EVA suits were known to run very very cool because of sweat in the eyes issues during Gemini. If you know what your suit will be exposed to you can plan for that amount of heat coming in and design accordingly. Rejecting incoming heat radiation would seem to be the best idea though just for easier system design.
and this >>16546213
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 18:30:35 UTC No. 16546255
Launching tomorrow on the transporter 12
Super fucking nervous
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 18:33:27 UTC No. 16546258
>>16546255
Some context, I've been working on this for 3 years. Some of us for over 5 years. So much has gone into this launch. So many fucking painful moments. We finally shipped it somehow.
Just hope it works.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 18:34:43 UTC No. 16546260
>>16546052
>poor english
>francophilia
please take this to the french spaceflight board
>>>/trash/
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 18:36:00 UTC No. 16546261
>>16546053
>EDS mission
at this point every non-SpaceX flight is an EDS mission
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 18:39:06 UTC No. 16546266
>>16546255
>>16546258
what were you working on anon?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 18:40:27 UTC No. 16546267
Blue Glenn more like BLUE BALLS LOOOOOOOOOLOLLLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLO
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 18:46:29 UTC No. 16546272
>>16546258
>>16546255
https://www.supercluster.com/launch
>Impulse-2 (Impulse Space, Mira tug)
>Bluebon (6U XL, TelePIX, Korea)
>FOSSASat TAT-O (3U, FOSSA Systems, Spain)
>(hosted) Triclops (Starfish Space)
>(hosted) Holmes (HEO Robotics)
Exolaunch
>Acadia-6 (microsat, Capella)
>AlAinSat-1 (3U, , UAE)
>Balkan-1 (16U, Endurosat)
>Connecta IoT (4x 6U, Plan-S, Turkey)
>Forest-3 (8U, OroraTech, Germany) +
>GESat GEN1 (16U, Absolut Sensing) (bus Nanoavionics) +
>SkyBee-1 (HiVE constellation) (Constellr, Germany) (bus Nanoavionics) +
>TROLL (6UXL, TRL Space) (ISISpace bus) +
Veery-0F (1U, Care Weather)
Alba Orbital
>HADES-R (1.5P, HYDRA SPACE SYSTEMS, SPAIN)
>HYDRA-T (1.5P, HYDRA SPACE SYSTEMS, SPAIN)
>HYPE AGH (1P, AGH UNIVERSITY, POLAND)
POQUITO (1P, SNT UNIVERSITY OF LUXEMBOURG)
>SKYLINK-1 & -2 (2x 3P, HELLO SPACE, TÜRKIYE)
>PROMETHEUS-1 (1P, U. DO MINHO & INSTITUTO SUPERIOR TÉCNICO (PORTUGAL), CARNEGIE MELLON (USA)) +
Maverick
>LIME (3U, NOVI)
>MBZSat
>Elevation-1 (6U, XDLINX Space Labs, India) +
>GARAI A (Satlantis, Spain) +
>Kestrel-0A (8U, Hawkeye 360)
>Leader-S (3U, ANSER (Advanced Nanosatellite >Systems for Earth observation Research))
>ANSER Leader-S (3U, ESA)
>Centauri 7/8 (2x 12U, Fleet Space)
>Centauri 9 (Fleet Space)
>Pelican-2 (Planet) +
>Ray (Inversion Space, has reentry capsule)
>SIGI (Reflex Aerospace, Germany) +
>UzmaSAT-1 (Satellogic/Uzma (Malaysia)) +
>Winnebago-2 (Varda)
>SuperDove Flock 4G (36x 3U, Planet) +
>TechEdSat-22 (1U, NASA)
>Lyra Block 1 (2x EchoStar Global)
>PARUS-T1 (3U, TASA, Taiwan)
>SEOPS
>SAT GUS (12U, CrunchLabs)
>D-Orbit ION SCV-014
>D-Orbit ION SCV-016
Which one?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 18:51:53 UTC No. 16546276
>>16546272
>>16546272
>ctrl+f "Rogue"
>not in the list
wtf, its this mission the meme drive is launching on right?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 18:51:56 UTC No. 16546277
>>16546272
>>16546266
Not on that list, that's incomplete.
It's an earth imaging satellite.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 18:55:02 UTC No. 16546283
>>16546276
>>16546277
>all that shit
>still incomplete list
What the shit? Didn't NSF used to list all the rideshare payloads? I don't see it on there for this one.
>It's an earth imaging satellite.
Take pictures of something else for a change
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 18:58:23 UTC No. 16546284
I just love the fact that SpaceX has such massive manifests we can't even properly list them all, this probably makes some autists very upset though
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 19:09:47 UTC No. 16546298
>>16545695
When will be the New Glenn launch? According rocketlaunch.live it will be tomorrow, but I have doubts.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 19:11:35 UTC No. 16546300
>>16546298
doubts are at least partially justified at this point
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 19:32:11 UTC No. 16546321
whats going to happen to ULA once BO starts launching regularly
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 19:44:30 UTC No. 16546334
ITS when
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0qo
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 19:49:37 UTC No. 16546341
>>16546339
still going to reach orbit faster than starshit
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 19:58:00 UTC No. 16546349
>>16546321
New Glenn will compete with Falcon 9 and Heavy to drive down the cost of launches to high-energy trajectories. This won't be good for Vulcan as its already launching with very slim profit margins. They have no room to price themselves any lower.
https://x.com/torybruno/status/1809
>Depends. ULA sells trips to space for a little more than the cost. Some of the profit to our shareholders and the rest for technology development. Others get large outside investment yearly in exchange for promises of future profit. (And are free to charge independent of cost, for now…)
This won't kill them immediately, since they still have a lot of NatSec missions on contract for NSSL-2 as well as 38 Kuiper launches, but past 2026 or 2027 things look unsurvivably grim. Vulcan won't be able to compete for big Lane 1 NSSL missions while Neutron and Nova will price them out of low-energy launches. Launching Kuiper won't help very much since New Glenn is launching those too.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 20:07:17 UTC No. 16546357
>>16546086
Look at it this way: Von Neumann suggested self-replicating machines in 1949 and Dyson fleshed out the idea in 1979. If your ideas aren't a meaningful advancement over ideas that are older than you are, don't expect to be congratulated on your originality.
The only interesting thing to say about these ideas would be details about how to actually do it or news that someone actually did, not "Um, guys, why don't we...?"
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 20:14:18 UTC No. 16546361
>>16546349
maybe ULA will change their mind and eventually sell themselves to someone
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 20:16:22 UTC No. 16546364
>>16546361
nobody wants to buy them for more than the value of their facilities and bolockmart don't want to sell them for that little.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 20:20:35 UTC No. 16546369
>>16546349
>ULA is so desperate they're flying NatSoc missions to resupply the Nazis on the Moon
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 20:20:35 UTC No. 16546370
https://thehill.com/policy/technolo
Bezos ‘very optimistic’ about Trump’s space agenda
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 20:22:26 UTC No. 16546372
>>16545908
>there are three main traits
Four, chamber pressure.
It is the biggest reason Raptor puts out the same thrust as a BE-4 at half the size while having better ISP.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 20:23:42 UTC No. 16546373
whats going on with the repeated delays?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 20:25:05 UTC No. 16546376
>>16546370
trying to build some monopoly in this 4 years would be very shortsighted of Musk
instead putting in the pieces for a robust space economy where SpaceX can compete (and dominate) without government forced monopoly will be much better for SpaceX and industry in space in general
right now its basically just SpaceX doing stuff, but if other companies can come in and start doing stuff, investing etc SpaceX can also sell services to them
in absolute terms their business will probably grow more in a robust space economy even if their market share wasn't as all encompassing
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 20:25:48 UTC No. 16546377
>>16546361
Even with their contracts ULA isn't worth more than a billion and change, and Boeing is firm on wanting more than that
https://x.com/SciGuySpace/status/18
>No one is willing to meet the parents' price. Both Jeff Bezos and Fatih Ozmen, among others, have kicked the tires and apparently not found the value they wanted.
>What’s their approx asking price?
>More than $2 billion, apparently.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 20:26:06 UTC No. 16546378
>>16546376
oh and of course you also have anti-trust issues that would probably come up in some later administration perhaps (though that doesn't seem to be the case for Boeing so maybe not)
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 20:27:59 UTC No. 16546381
>>16546372
I mean I would say chamber pressure is an internal thing that doesn't really matter to the outside
its how they get good thrust and ISP, but if they got those through some other method then it would be all the same
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 20:30:24 UTC No. 16546382
>>16546370
what a shitty article
its one sentence of news and then a ton of fluff
the reuters article they reference is better, though its not exactly a must read
https://www.reuters.com/technology/
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 20:30:27 UTC No. 16546383
>>16546377
Maybe if we pool our pocket money we could buy ourselves the ULA
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 20:32:06 UTC No. 16546385
>>16546377
Boeing has overpriced gun show seller vibes
>I know what I got
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 20:32:40 UTC No. 16546386
https://x.com/astro_Pettit/status/1
>One photo with: Milkyway, Zodical light, @Starlink
satellites as streaks, stars as pin points, atmosphere on edge showing OH emission as burned umber (my favorite Crayon color), soon to rise sun, and cities at night as streaks. Taken two days ago from Dragon Crew 9 vehicle port window.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 20:33:41 UTC No. 16546388
>>16546376
>muh "space economy"
lmao it doesn't exit retard
musk is building a global telecommunications monopoly, there is no other substantial economic use for spaceflight other than surveillance, which a global telecommunications monopoly will also cover.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 20:33:47 UTC No. 16546389
>>16546137
good thing nothing we want is in the mantle. it's all crust babyyy
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 20:34:42 UTC No. 16546390
>>16546382
>reuters
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 20:36:09 UTC No. 16546391
>>16546390
>source: some guy on twitter
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 20:46:16 UTC No. 16546403
>>16546388
>lmao it doesn't exit retard
thats the point, it doesn't exist and SpaceX is the only company then its probably less likely to exist in the future
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 20:49:50 UTC No. 16546408
the fuck is happening? is spaceEgg and blorg competing to see who can delay the most? this is getting ridiculous ffs
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 20:51:21 UTC No. 16546415
>>16546408
its just rough weather in south texas afaik. there's supposed to be another cold front coming in through soon too.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 20:51:25 UTC No. 16546416
https://x.com/InfographicTony/statu
>Starship Flight Test-7 (unofficial) infographic poster. I will be doing a follow-up post-launch version with all the mission stats after the flight test.
>A huge thank you, as always, to @LunarCaveman for helping put this together.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 20:52:38 UTC No. 16546418
>>16546404
>>16546408
It's over, spaceflight has fallen. We had a good few years of progress, now it's back to another 40 years of spinning the wheels
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 20:53:15 UTC No. 16546419
>>16546404
Next Spaceflight already changed it to NET January, maybe that's why.
https://nextspaceflight.com/launche
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 20:55:33 UTC No. 16546420
its over
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:01:34 UTC No. 16546425
How can rockets reach airplane-like cadence if they require perfect weather?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:02:00 UTC No. 16546426
Did Blue Origin announce the new launch date yet?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:02:39 UTC No. 16546429
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:05:48 UTC No. 16546432
>>16546115
something can be profitable once the necessary research, development and marketing have been done, even if it wasn't before
is a personal computer or smart phone "profitable in and of itself"?
if so, why weren't they produced for a profit throughout human history?
if not, why are they produced for a profit now?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:06:50 UTC No. 16546433
>>16546298
War criminal said they need 48 hours to recycle.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:09:47 UTC No. 16546439
>>16546388
>space economy
this is an investor bait term used by companies that aren't SpaceX but the entire spaceflight community has picked it up as if it's a given. Telecom really is all there ever will be
>but what about sending fresh fruits to all the private space stations!!
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:11:19 UTC No. 16546440
>>16546438
>no Jan Itor
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:12:54 UTC No. 16546441
>>16546438
haha I get it! because the show is named "scrubs" after the outfits that medical professionals wear but Jeff Bezo's new rocket was forced to scrub last night!
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:16:15 UTC No. 16546444
>>16546441
thanks chatGPT
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:17:39 UTC No. 16546445
Starship flight closure for the 15th is back.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:21:34 UTC No. 16546449
>>16546445
source?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:23:12 UTC No. 16546451
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:23:36 UTC No. 16546452
it's over
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:25:31 UTC No. 16546454
>>16546439
>We will be on the ground floor of the new space economy, please invest !
>The next spacex!
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:25:41 UTC No. 16546455
>>16546449
https://x.com/FelixSchlang/status/1
>The previously cancelled closure of the 15th is back on the table, together with new closures on Jan 16th and 17th! This means, although unlikely, NET Jan 15 is still on!
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:27:36 UTC No. 16546458
>>16546455
i can hardly stand the suspense these days
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:31:46 UTC No. 16546460
No more launches ever
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:32:30 UTC No. 16546461
>>16546455
Why is it unlikely that it will be on the 15th? What did I miss?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:36:07 UTC No. 16546465
>>16546461
to much windypoos or something
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:38:12 UTC No. 16546466
>>16546439
I completely disagree but the space economy which exists will not be focused on launch. THAT side of the market already contracted and is in denial about it
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:38:53 UTC No. 16546467
>>16546441
>forced to scrub
Born to explode
Forced to scrub
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:41:29 UTC No. 16546469
>>16546468
whats with all the white shit around some tiles
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:43:19 UTC No. 16546470
>>16546469
that's where I jizzed on the rocket, sorry.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:47:31 UTC No. 16546474
>>16546469
hopefully its not coming down with the measles
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:48:26 UTC No. 16546475
>>16546466
what will it be
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:52:08 UTC No. 16546477
>>16546473
https://x.com/BCCarCounters/status/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jm8
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:53:21 UTC No. 16546479
>>16546477
could it be just a wet rehearsal to test those gay freezing holes?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:53:43 UTC No. 16546480
>>16546477
about 12min back on the stream, lower right camera
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:54:20 UTC No. 16546481
>>16546477
I WILL BE sleeping
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:54:50 UTC No. 16546482
>>16546479
probably
the fact that BO didn't do a full wet dress rehearsal is kind of weird (or did they? if they did then I missed or forgot about it)
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:57:32 UTC No. 16546487
>>16546477
starship sisters...
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:58:50 UTC No. 16546489
>>16546482
they did, they just referred to it as a "launch attempt"
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:59:11 UTC No. 16546490
>>16546473
I only started crashing from my caffeine high few hours ago Jeff. You better not fuck me up a second time.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 22:01:53 UTC No. 16546494
>>16546011
Just got caught up with the thread. Man, that was even worse than I thought.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 22:03:42 UTC No. 16546498
>>16546489
FUCKING JEFF BEZOS
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 22:09:52 UTC No. 16546506
why does this thread exist when the last one is still on page 5
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 22:10:11 UTC No. 16546508
>>16546504
i'll believe it when i get up tomorrow morning and watch the replay
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 22:11:04 UTC No. 16546509
>>16546506
image limit reached
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 22:12:42 UTC No. 16546511
>>16546506
we got bored of that thread
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 22:19:32 UTC No. 16546519
Suppose BO try again tonight, should we
make a new scrub thread,
use this as the scrub thread, or
use the last thread as continuation?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 22:20:30 UTC No. 16546521
How long will it be until someone drills a deep well, places a nuke in it, and uses the explosion to launch a rocket into space?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 22:25:23 UTC No. 16546528
>>16546521
Saddam Hussein wanted to do something similar
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 22:28:41 UTC No. 16546532
ariane should buy ula
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 22:31:30 UTC No. 16546537
Musk should buy ULA and pivot the company towards cleaning services (toilets)
all the employees, including Tory Bruno, will start cleaning toilets but with their pay intact
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 22:32:42 UTC No. 16546538
blue origin should buy the iss
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 22:33:07 UTC No. 16546539
>go to bed because bezos is taking too long
>check thread today
>several more hours of -30 mins ballbusting
>then scrubbed
heh
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 22:36:45 UTC No. 16546541
>>16546519
>use the last thread as continuation?
reusable threads
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 22:37:30 UTC No. 16546543
>>16546475
Fully operational starship will mean a much larger lower entry market for payload ie where the actual value is derived. And a middle man market for vehicles that inject a payload into a preferred orbit since rideshares will be bigger, cheaper and more frequent
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 22:38:59 UTC No. 16546547
>>16546544
What's going on in Zimbabwe?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 22:40:26 UTC No. 16546548
>>16546544
why do they make starlink so cheap there? as long as they arent operating at a loss i am fine with it. what i dont want is people getting private internet subsidized
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 22:40:45 UTC No. 16546549
>>16546544
where's elon's motherland
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 22:42:59 UTC No. 16546550
>>16546544
>more third worlders on the internet
t-thanks elon
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 22:43:46 UTC No. 16546551
>>16546548
if you already have it running for the rest of the world then i imagine the marginal cost of offering internet service to a new place where users aren't densely packed is close to 0
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 22:45:06 UTC No. 16546552
>>16546548
reminds me of how pharmaceuticals are priced abroad versus in the north america etc
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 22:47:31 UTC No. 16546556
>>16546551
sub sahara africa has much higher population density than north america. why dont they make it cheaper in north america then?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 22:49:10 UTC No. 16546558
>>16546477
So when is the next launch attempt I guess they would tell us if it's 0600 UTC again.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 22:51:25 UTC No. 16546561
>>16546556
it has a much lower density of starlink users, which is what matters in this calculation. but above all else they don't make it cheaper in north america because it's price discrimination and north americans will pay more for it. SOMEBODY has to pay more for it too, or else you're not gonna be able to afford 100 f9 launches a year.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 22:51:39 UTC No. 16546563
>>16546556
population density != user density
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 22:53:20 UTC No. 16546566
>>16546547
They've got the usual rural problem of being a low population density market combined with bad to non-existent infrastructure. Then you start dealing with the effects of inflation (currently about 60% YoY, which is admittedly not as bad as it used to be) and the fact that the country is trying to recover from being yet another experiment in post-colonial communism.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 22:53:24 UTC No. 16546567
>>16545938
it must be because of their tech tree
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 22:57:11 UTC No. 16546571
>>16545981
But BO did make a couple of engines that throosted a Vulcan to orbit... and then they fell into the sea, not having reached orbit themselves.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 22:57:31 UTC No. 16546572
>>16545942
Unsaid but implied is that he wants most *people* living in orbit as well, with Earth left mostly as a nature preserve. This is one of his dumbest takes because humans had been part of Earth's ecosystems for over 10,000 years before the liberation of steam and coal, and we killed off most of the large animals, so now active management is required.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 22:57:49 UTC No. 16546573
>>16546567
>new glenn before autonomy
new glenn is piloted?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 23:02:00 UTC No. 16546576
>>16546549
Canada?
if you are talking about South Africa then there are some laws about minority ownership, i.e. 30% of the owners of the company have to be N
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 23:02:10 UTC No. 16546577
>>16546573
it gets told what to do from the ground instead of just launching whenever it feels like
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 23:03:18 UTC No. 16546579
>>16546576
He should just drop starships full of C4 on them until they change their minds about that.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 23:12:52 UTC No. 16546585
>>16546549
Not there because Starlink hasn't been officially launched there. It's supposed to be available this year which is good because fuck Telkom for the rip off pricing of their shit DSL service. It was the only ISP in my area in the days before Mweb and Cell C.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 23:14:04 UTC No. 16546586
>>16546567
did any /sfg/ autist make one of these for Starship?
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 23:15:08 UTC No. 16546587
I just want to watch rocket launches bros....
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 23:17:56 UTC No. 16546588
>>16546506
sticky on an old thread reset the page number, and it takes forever to gain altitude on /sci/ before staging
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 23:19:33 UTC No. 16546589
>>16546587
i demand sports in space to pass the time between launches
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 23:22:40 UTC No. 16546590
>>16546589
satellite jousting
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 23:26:45 UTC No. 16546592
>>16546547
Zimbabwe is a failed financial sovereignty that pseudo-recovered from its last crash. It holds the world record for peak inflation ever known in the history of the species. Similar to how when Chernobyl failed and had a last known record of 21,000GW or something ridiculous. Zimbabwe's documented peak inflation basically traveled to the end of the universe in a blink of an eye:
>However, Zimbabwe's peak month of inflation is estimated at 79.6 billion percent month-on-month, 89.7 sextillion (
8.97×10^22) % year-on-year in mid-November 2008
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 23:28:46 UTC No. 16546595
Honestly, we should just call it what Hullo called it when blue kept delaying their stream until they scrubbed it: Blue Origin New Glenn -> BONG. The BONG was scrubbed. The BONG is incapable of orbital trajectory. The BONG is frozen. The BONG can't into APUs.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 23:30:23 UTC No. 16546596
NG-1
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 23:30:23 UTC No. 16546597
>>16546594
nothing on BO X page
not going to wake up early for a WDR
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 23:31:30 UTC No. 16546598
>>16546595
NSF is as good as official,see you tonite chuddy
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 23:33:07 UTC No. 16546601
>>16546594
Ain't gonna watch their bait stream for 12 hours before they scrub it.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 23:34:21 UTC No. 16546602
It's happenning, streams live, this time we will make it.
BlueOrigin team wins again!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUj
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAn
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 23:35:08 UTC No. 16546606
12h of flare stack watching waow
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 23:38:33 UTC No. 16546609
>>16546602
musky aint gonna like this one
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 23:39:54 UTC No. 16546610
>>16546602
Those are scam streams. Blue hasn't announced a new window.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 23:41:18 UTC No. 16546611
>>16546610
>Those are scam streams.
>NASASpaceflight
true
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 23:45:53 UTC No. 16546618
https://x.com/blueorigin/status/187
>New Glenn Launch Update: Our next launch attempt is no earlier than Tuesday, January 14. Our three-hour launch window remains the same, opening at 1 a.m. EST (0600 UTC). Tonight’s poor weather forecast at LC-36 could result in missing this window. This morning’s scrub was due to ice forming in a purge line on an auxiliary power unit that powers some of our hydraulic systems.
we are going
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 23:47:18 UTC No. 16546620
>>16546618
FUCK YOUUUU
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 23:51:07 UTC No. 16546625
>>16546179
Whether or not asteroids pass by Earth doesn't matter, a round trip from one takes years, FAGGOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 23:52:20 UTC No. 16546626
Need aomeone to bake a launch thread
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 23:53:24 UTC No. 16546627
>>16546610
It is real
https://x.com/bccarcounters/status/
https://x.com/JConcilus/status/1878
https://x.com/blueorigin/status/187
LET'S LIGHT THIS CANDLE!
WE ARE GOING!
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 23:55:36 UTC No. 16546630
we are 30% going
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 23:56:23 UTC No. 16546632
>>16546621
>rocket already falling apart into scrap metal mid launch
China does what New Glenn don't
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 23:56:28 UTC No. 16546633
>>16546627
Berger said 48 hours, this is called a dog and pony show.
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 23:57:47 UTC No. 16546634
>>16546391
vs
>source: some guy from reuters
Anonymous at Mon, 13 Jan 2025 23:59:26 UTC No. 16546637
we could've had a space tether by now
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 00:02:07 UTC No. 16546641
>>16546637
It takes more launch infrastructure than humanity can currently support to even start a meme tether
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 00:02:35 UTC No. 16546642
>>16546637
I want to ride the space pulley
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 00:02:53 UTC No. 16546643
space colonies are likely to be more /fa/ than earth
>earth too hot because global warming (90F most days)
>space colonies remain cool (50-60F) all year round
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 00:03:54 UTC No. 16546646
>>16546548
because america gets to pay out the ass to subsidize the whole world
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 00:06:36 UTC No. 16546650
>>16546636
i choose the right one, begrudgingly
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 00:06:56 UTC No. 16546651
no clear, no care
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 00:08:09 UTC No. 16546653
>1AM
No
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 00:08:41 UTC No. 16546654
>>16546543
What's the payload? There's nothing up there
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 00:12:02 UTC No. 16546658
>>16546654
Yeah you're right no one has ever wanted to put anything in orbit and never will, you fucking genius
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 00:13:07 UTC No. 16546660
So anyway while we wait for the stream, Blue Ring surprised me the most. It seems like a better version of Gateway's PPE.
>chem+SEP hybrid propulsion
>ROSAs for power
>over 3km/s dV
It's not ring shaped individually so I suspect blorp will be selling packs of them as GEO/molniya constellation buses to DoD, forming rings around the planet.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 00:14:14 UTC No. 16546661
>>16546636
say what you will about the show, at least they had a SOUND-PROOF BOOTH
Looking at you s-
>*chair screeches*
Looking at you Spa-
>*garbage bin loudly slamming
I said LOOKING AT YOU SPA-
>*loud laughter*
>*chair screech*
>*metalpipenoise.mp3*
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 00:18:35 UTC No. 16546664
>>16546660
because gateway is oldspace design by committee pork
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 00:19:10 UTC No. 16546665
>>16546656
Jeff is extremely brave explorer
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 00:20:19 UTC No. 16546667
Blue Ring smells like AWS for space to me
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 00:24:15 UTC No. 16546670
>>16546627
>>16546602
Holy YES
LETS LIGHT THIS CANDLE, SEND IT
FELOCITAR
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 00:25:14 UTC No. 16546672
>>16546664
I think it's just *old* at this point. It's a rehash of an Obama era design.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 00:27:22 UTC No. 16546673
>>16546665
wasn't it like flight 20?
about as brave as me taking the bus
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 00:28:18 UTC No. 16546675
>>16546673
Flight 1 you nigger retard
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 00:29:33 UTC No. 16546677
should I wake up? I'm not sure I want to go through another 3h delay session leading to a scrub with bad sleep
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 00:30:34 UTC No. 16546679
>>16546675
I don't think so friend
🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 00:31:19 UTC No. 16546681
>they privated last night's stream
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 00:33:00 UTC No. 16546682
Clear status?
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 00:33:35 UTC No. 16546683
>>16546682
unclear
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 00:38:46 UTC No. 16546686
try not to launch your rocket in the fuckass middle of the night challenge (IMPOSSIBLE!)
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 00:41:03 UTC No. 16546688
>>16546686
Does the scrub really happen when no one sees it?
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 00:42:50 UTC No. 16546689
>>16546679
Tongue my anus nigger faggot
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 00:43:11 UTC No. 16546690
>>16546688
By definition yes. Nobody watching means nobody to set the rocket into terminal count.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 00:45:27 UTC No. 16546691
https://x.com/NASAWallops/status/18
HASTE out
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 00:50:20 UTC No. 16546693
>>16546686
cock shame instead of cock confidence
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 00:51:20 UTC No. 16546695
>>16546692
It physically takes minimum 48 hours to recycle,so yeah. If they go live tonight, they knowingly did so with a launch being impossible. This shit is so fucking tiresome
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 00:56:38 UTC No. 16546699
>>16546695
>minimum 48 hours to recycle
Proof?
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 00:57:09 UTC No. 16546700
blorigin speedrunning Artemis 1 launch campaign rn
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 01:01:38 UTC No. 16546702
If they launch tonight Berger will be relegated to being a old space reporter who's only capable of writing on slow and safe SpaceX developments.
He simply cannot comprehend the fast-paced nature of new space like Blue Origin and their ability to perform a sub 24hr recycle on New Glenn's inaugural flight.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 01:06:54 UTC No. 16546704
>>16546695
>It physically takes minimum 48 hours to recycle
They have some advanced space high-tech and they can do it faster.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 01:08:10 UTC No. 16546705
>>16546702
>He simply cannot comprehend the fast-paced nature of new space like Blue Origin and their ability to perform a sub 24hr recycle on New Glenn's inaugural flight.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 01:13:04 UTC No. 16546707
>>16546704
No they do not
>>16546699
I work at BO
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 01:14:06 UTC No. 16546708
>>16546704
When the width around the engines is wider than higher up, does it cause the entire rocket to experience as much drag as the wide base? If so, why not make the rocket uniformly wide?
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 01:14:12 UTC No. 16546709
>>16546702
Berger has never been wrong
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 01:14:24 UTC No. 16546710
>>16546707
Proof?
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 01:17:20 UTC No. 16546712
>>16546709
>Berger has never been wrong
Berger is an old boomer that cannot comprehend the complexities of Blue Origin's advanced space tech.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 01:19:10 UTC No. 16546713
>>16546709
I wasn't sure about this, so I looked at the data. It's true, he's literally never been wrong.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 01:19:28 UTC No. 16546714
>>16546702
Hes literally a spaceXs employee, hes always talking shit about the rest of space companies
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 01:21:38 UTC No. 16546718
>>16546627
>1am
What the fuck are these faggots doing?
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 01:22:20 UTC No. 16546719
>>16546710
>Proof?
pic related, my fucking badge
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 01:24:43 UTC No. 16546722
>>16546714
Berger is literally a true space patriot who is loyal to the cause of spaceflight, and that is why he he always seems to take the side of the most important spaceflight organization on this blue turd of a planet.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 01:25:20 UTC No. 16546723
>>16546720
need correction by exploding in her
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 01:27:34 UTC No. 16546725
Another stream joining
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7o
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 01:27:48 UTC No. 16546726
>>16546720
i just came
to post that pic dammit
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 01:27:57 UTC No. 16546727
>>16546720
Wanna fuck this whore till she's braindead
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 01:28:30 UTC No. 16546728
tfw China simply hands Musk full control of tiktok and he becomes a bajillionaire
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 01:29:04 UTC No. 16546729
>>16546714
he wore a BO hat to a press conference once
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 01:30:22 UTC No. 16546730
sexo with New Glenn (female)
sexo with New Glenn (female)
sexo with New Glenn (female)
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 01:31:40 UTC No. 16546731
>>16546729
He wore it to the first SLS green run attempt. About two months later he wrote his first modern “hit piece” on BO. This was when the SpaceX hop campaign really took off and it became evident SX were innovating whilst Bob Smith and Bozos over at BO were wasting time and resources and Berger just said yeah fuck all this
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 01:32:40 UTC No. 16546732
>>16546730
WTF “she” has pingas
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 01:33:40 UTC No. 16546733
>>16546732
[spoiler]7 pingas[/spoiler]
🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 01:56:38 UTC No. 16546744
>bump limit reached
gonna make the new thread
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 02:01:19 UTC No. 16546748
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hm
59 minutes
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 02:04:54 UTC No. 16546749
wasn't flight 7 supposed to be today?
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 02:08:54 UTC No. 16546751
https://x.com/blueorigin/status/187
go 2 sleep
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 02:11:35 UTC No. 16546753
>>16546744
not how it works, wait until page 10
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 02:12:00 UTC No. 16546755
>>16546751
lmfao berger vindicated
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 02:12:06 UTC No. 16546756
>>16546751
undefeated war criminal
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 02:12:58 UTC No. 16546757
>>16546751
Thank God
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 02:13:57 UTC No. 16546758
>>16546572
There's a valid moral argument for Earth being the only planet in the galaxy without any people on it, but that starts with industrializing Mars, not LEO. None of it is coherent
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 02:14:58 UTC No. 16546760
>>16546751
that's a good day for it. I work from home friday so I can stay up as late as I want watching it scrub
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 02:17:39 UTC No. 16546761
>>16546751
two weeks
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 02:18:50 UTC No. 16546763
Capitalism is a naturally occurring interface maintaining balance between systems of order and chaos in a universe that maximizes entropy via ironically entertaining outcomes.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 02:18:52 UTC No. 16546764
>>16546722
Fuck off, Berger. Your forecasts have been shit lately.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 02:21:00 UTC No. 16546765
>>16546064
https://www.youtube.com/live/Kdwyqc
>45:10, t-10:55, drogue chute deployment command
>no chute
>48:13, t-7:54, camera loses tracking
>freeze frame for 5 seconds
>return picture, capsule with main chute deployed, instantly decelerated hundreds of meters per second to landing speed
WOOOOOOW YOU KNOW ITS REAL BECAUSE OF HOW FAKE IT LOOKS WOOOOOOOW
https://www.space.com/crossed-wires
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 02:22:58 UTC No. 16546766
schizos out
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 02:23:13 UTC No. 16546767
>>16546598
Get fucked BONGtard.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 02:23:50 UTC No. 16546768
>>16546764
Too much rain stop the count
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 02:26:44 UTC No. 16546769
>>16546767
I hate you fags
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 02:34:41 UTC No. 16546772
Northern pole of inaccessibility launch site
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 02:52:57 UTC No. 16546774
this some boring ass industry
>wait two weeks
>nothing ever happens
>repeat
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 02:57:30 UTC No. 16546775
>>16546774
Are you not entertained by starlink launches every other day?
Barge landings are also a recent phenomenon with every launch a chance for crashes and explosions!
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 03:13:57 UTC No. 16546778
>>16546774
Below Orbit lived up to its name; nothing happens.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 03:38:06 UTC No. 16546791
i poop i pee i flush i poop i pee i flush
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 03:38:45 UTC No. 16546792
00:07:32 1st stage landing
00:08:15 2nd stage engine cutoff (SECO-1)
00:50:52 2nd stage engine starts (SES-2)
00:50:56 2nd stage engine cutoff (SECO-2)
00:54:07 GESat GEN1 deploys, manifested by Exolaunch
00:54:12 EDISON-1 deploys, manifested by Exolaunch
00:54:18 BRO-16 deploys, manifested by Exolaunch
00:54:25 OTTER deploys, manifested by SEOPS
00:54:41 BUZZZER-1 deploys, manifested by Exolaunch
00:54:51 HCT-SAT1 deploys, manifested by Exolaunch
00:54:57 Flock 4G 19 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
00:55:02 SCOT - Digantara deploys, manifested by Exolaunch
00:55:08 NOVI Low-Latency Intelligence and Monitoring Experiment (LIME) deploys, manifested by Maverick Space Systems
00:55:19 Balkan-1 deploys, manifested by Exolaunch
00:55:25 TechEdSat-22 via NASA's CubeSat Launch Initiative deploys, manifested by Maverick Space Systems
00:55:37 Flock 4G 31 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
00:55:48 PAUSAT1 deploys, manifested by D-Orbit
00:55:58 Undisclosed deploys, manifested by D-Orbit
00:56:09 InnoCube deploys, manifested by Exolaunch
00:56:14 Flock 4G 25 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
00:56:20 Elevation-1 deploys, manifested by D-Orbit
00:56:30 Flock 4G 9 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
00:56:37 Flock 4G 23 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
00:56:54 Fledgling Veery “Barb” deploys, manifested by Exolaunch
00:57:04 TROLL deploys, manifested by Exolaunch
00:57:10 Flock 4G 21 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
00:57:15 Flock 4G 35 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
00:57:25 PARUS-T1 deploys, manifested by D-Orbit
00:57:43 NCKU-IRIS-F3 deploys, manifested by Exolaunch
00:58:01 Flock 4G 33 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
00:58:11 AE1c deploys, manifested by D-Orbit
00:58:22 ANSER-L-S deploys, manifested by D-Orbit
00:58:29 NewSat45 deploys, manifested by Satellogic
00:58:35 Flock 4G 15 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
00:58:54 Flock 4G 13 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 03:39:46 UTC No. 16546794
00:59:00 NCKU-IRIS-F2 deploys, manifested by Exolaunch
00:59:05 Flock 4G 3 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
00:59:24 Flock 4G 34 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
00:59:46 FOSSASAT (FO018) deploys, manifested by D-Orbit
01:00:06 FOSSASAT (FO019) deploys, manifested by D-Orbit
01:00:25 OroraTech FOREST-3 deploys, manifested by Exolaunch
01:00:32 Flock 4G 16 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
01:00:41 LEO Express-2 deploys, manifested by Impulse Space
01:00:47 GARAI-A deploys, manifested by Exolaunch
01:00:57 Flock 4G 10 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
01:01:03 Flock 4G 36 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
01:01:25 Flock 4G 22 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
01:01:31 AlainSat-1 deploys, manifested by Exolaunch
01:01:37 Flock 4G 24 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
01:01:53 constellr SkyBee 1 deploys, manifested by Exolaunch
01:02:11 FGN-100-d1 deploys, manifested by Fergani Uzay Teknolojileri ("Fergani")
01:02:18 Pelican-2 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
01:02:23 Flock 4G 14 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
01:02:37 JAY-D1 deploys, manifested by UTIAS Space Flight Laboratory
01:03:14 Flock 4G 32 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
01:03:34 Flock 4G 17 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
01:03:58 AE1d deploys, manifested by D-Orbit
01:04:15 Flock 4G 29 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
01:04:24 Flock 4G 20 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
01:04:32 Flock 4G 26 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
01:05:27 FUSION-1 deploys, manifested by D-Orbit
01:05:40 SIGI deploys, manifested by Reflex Aerospace
01:06:15 Flock 4G 30 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
01:06:31 Flock 4G 18 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
01:07:16 Flock 4G 27 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
01:07:32 JAY-C deploys, manifested by UTIAS Space Flight Laboratory
01:07:42 Flock 4G 1 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
01:07:49 JAY-D2 deploys, manifested by UTIAS Space Flight Laboratory
01:08:33 Flock 4G 28 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 03:40:47 UTC No. 16546795
01:08:39 ION SCV Amazing Antonius deploys, manifested by D-Orbit
01:08:53 Lyra-1 deploys, manifested by EchoStar
01:09:30 Flock 4G 11 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
01:09:35 W-2 deploys, manifested by Varda Space Industries, Inc.
01:09:51 Ray deploys, manifested by Inversion Space Company
01:10:25 ION SCV Eminent Emmanuel deploys, manifested by Impulso
01:11:09 Flock 4G 12 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
01:11:32 Flock 4G 5 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
01:13:17 Flock 4G 6 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
01:13:31 Flock 4G 7 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
01:15:18 Flock 4G 8 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
01:15:35 Flock 4G 2 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
01:17:25 Flock 4G 4 deploys, manifested by Planet Labs
01:22:07 MBZ-Sat deploys, manifested by Mohammed Bin Rashid Space Centre
01:41:22 2nd stage engine starts (SES-3)
01:41:23 2nd stage engine cutoff (SECO-3)
02:15:24 2nd stage engine starts (SES-4)
02:15:25 2nd stage engine cutoff (SECO-4)
02:17:22 Plan - S / Connecta IOT-7 deploys, manifested by D-Orbit
02:17:36 LEMUR 2 MYNAMEISJEFF deploys, manifested by Exolaunch
02:17:44 SatGus deploys, manifested by SEOPS
02:17:49 Firefly-3 by Pixxel deploys, manifested by Exolaunch
02:18:01 Fleet Space Technologies’ CENTAURI-8 deploys, manifested by Tyvak International
02:18:06 HEO-01 deploys, manifested by Argotec Srl
02:18:21 LEMUR 2 WILSON deploys, manifested by Exolaunch
02:18:30 Plan - S / Connecta IOT-8 deploys, manifested by D-Orbit
02:18:42 LEMUR 2 STAR-FOX deploys, manifested by D-Orbit
02:18:49 NorSat-4 deploys, manifested by Space Flight Laboratory
02:19:13 LEMUR 2 ROUNDTRIPPER deploys, manifested by Exolaunch
02:19:21 Fleet Space Technologies’ CENTAURI-7 deploys, manifested by Tyvak International
02:19:30 ICEYE 1 deploys, manifested by Exolaunch
02:19:36 ICEYE 2 deploys, manifested by Exolaunch
02:19:43 ICEYE 3 deploys, manifested by Exolaunch
02:19:57 LEMUR 2 ARIANNA deploys, manifested by D-Orbit
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 03:41:48 UTC No. 16546797
02:20:06 ICEYE 4 deploys, manifested by Exolaunch
02:20:19 Firefly-1 by Pixxel deploys, manifested by Exolaunch
02:20:25 Plan - S / Connecta IOT-5 deploys, manifested by D-Orbit
02:20:58 Plan - S / Connecta IOT-6 deploys, manifested by D-Orbit
02:21:05 LEMUR 2 ALISIA deploys, manifested by Exolaunch
02:22:02 Firefly-2 by Pixxel deploys, manifested by Exolaunch
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 03:42:48 UTC No. 16546798
>ctrl+f "Rogue"
>nothing again
meme drives bros I don't feel so good
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 03:42:50 UTC No. 16546799
Sir Peter Beck's Nightmare
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 03:50:18 UTC No. 16546806
calm down negros, this means new glenn and starship are launching on the same day. we are eating good
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 03:53:10 UTC No. 16546811
>>16546806
I want to see starship and new glenn kiss
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 03:55:07 UTC No. 16546813
>>16546811
I want to see them fight
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 03:55:43 UTC No. 16546815
>>16546811
make a commission on skeb
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 03:59:34 UTC No. 16546822
KEEEK why did sfg chuds think B.O. was gonna launch tomorrow?
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 04:12:40 UTC No. 16546829
>>16546798
nvrm just checked, they're on the next launch in Feb not this one
uhh at least Satgus is interesting I guess
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 04:22:37 UTC No. 16546837
sponge anon status?
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 04:37:35 UTC No. 16546845
>>16546029
I don't think the notes on ACES (the engineers who did it have retired) is worth what Boeing is asking for it
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 04:41:15 UTC No. 16546847
>>16546837
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWb
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 04:48:23 UTC No. 16546850
>>16546112
not true, moon mining is just earth mining but in a vacuum and also the ground is made out of abrasive grit
asteroid mining is in zero-g which is totally different
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 05:03:59 UTC No. 16546856
>>16546209
black cools faster in the shade
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 05:13:10 UTC No. 16546860
>>16546572
>>16546758
this is the plot of Mobile Suit Gundam btw
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 05:32:29 UTC No. 16546865
>>16546864
source
https://www.blueorigin.com/news/new
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 05:37:50 UTC No. 16546866
>>16546732
spaceships don't have penis unless they do orbital refueling
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 05:37:54 UTC No. 16546867
>>16546864
>Starship now going orbital before New Glenn
musksisters, we are so back
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 05:38:37 UTC No. 16546868
>>16546867
Flight 7 is suborbital
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 05:40:00 UTC No. 16546869
>>16546868
fuck, never mind then
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 05:49:25 UTC No. 16546874
>>16545695
i just woke up! i am so excited to watch the first new glenn launch today!!
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 06:09:45 UTC No. 16546880
>>16546874
go back to bed
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 06:27:10 UTC No. 16546892
>>16546885
I wish there were more rocketboys
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 06:29:19 UTC No. 16546893
>>16546885
>>16546892
you are gay
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 06:31:40 UTC No. 16546894
If Starship has a payload that's less than its maximum, could it carry extra fuel and transfer it to a depot afterwards?
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 06:35:06 UTC No. 16546895
>>16546894
where would it store the extra fuel? we dont even know how the payload is suppost to get out
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 06:39:18 UTC No. 16546897
>>16546893
huh??
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 06:42:28 UTC No. 16546899
>>16546544
>more third worlders on the internet
Why? What's the actual point in this? Indians getting internet access was already bad enough. Half of Africa getting internet access would make it totally unusable.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 07:09:55 UTC No. 16546902
>>16546720
I wonder what Jeff thinks of rocket girls.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 07:18:33 UTC No. 16546904
>>16546885
Jacklyn is a girl's name, foreigner.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 08:13:05 UTC No. 16546932
>>16546108
Just park it in an orbit and capture it around Mars orbit with assisted capture.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 08:16:15 UTC No. 16546936
>>16546602
>Live in 42 hours
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 08:16:39 UTC No. 16546938
>>16546899
I would swap all of Africa for whatever jeets have internet access in a heartbeat. Adding nigs onto jeets? Goodbye internet, my sweetest friend.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 08:18:05 UTC No. 16546939
>>16546548
Sell somethign expensive but only 100 people buy it
Sell it cheaper but 10000 people buy it. Profit is better at cheaper price. Although ideally you'd want to maximize most profit with 10,000 people, if they cant afford it anyway, then its not worth to keep it expensive. As long there's more profit at bottom end, they're doing greatly.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 08:18:42 UTC No. 16546940
>>16546892
I'm sorry anon but all ships are female
that's a goil
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 08:19:43 UTC No. 16546942
>>16546894
only if the depot is in the same orbit as the payload destination (it will never be in the same orbit as the payload destination)
>>16546895
in the fuel tanks, retard
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 09:24:59 UTC No. 16546975
>>16546942
all the fuel tank is used for getting to orbit. only the header tank remains for landing. fag
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 09:28:09 UTC No. 16546976
>>16546975
>all of the main tank is used for getting to orbit
wrong, there is always residuals and if you're not using the maximum performance of your rocket these can be very significant
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 09:39:21 UTC No. 16546980
>>16546976
itll be like 10% of a full tank max
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 09:42:15 UTC No. 16546982
>>16546980
here's a handy guide for you:
subtract the payload mass from the theoretical maximum payload to whatever orbit you're targetting
the amount of fuel left that you can siphon out of the tanks and use on orbit will be slightly less than that
this is basically only useful when delivering to very busy orbits like SSO and GEO or the lagrange points
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 11:00:00 UTC No. 16547001
>>16546874
seriously though, whens Jeff's rocket going to go up? I got salted popcorn and papa johns pizza for my whole extended family and they are getting impatient.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 11:13:17 UTC No. 16547006
>>16546874
I just woke up so excited to read about the new gleen launch that I didn't stay up to watch! Only 70 new messages on /sfg/? What's with that?
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 11:38:49 UTC No. 16547025
>>16546892
There's literally a whole book about it. A movie too.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 11:55:53 UTC No. 16547034
>>16546719
What pic?
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 12:30:09 UTC No. 16547046
>>16547045
>only 12m diameter
even BO fantasmagoria is DoA
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 12:47:42 UTC No. 16547054
>>16547046
>The machines that build the machines are harder than the machines themselves - Elon Musk
Once you settle on a particular set of tools, its over if you want to change it (Starship @ 9m is something a lot of SpaceXers are regretting)
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 13:02:09 UTC No. 16547059
>>16546980
there was a falcon 9 stream graphic not that long ago that showed that by the time the landing burn had finished, the booster had less than 1% fuel remaining
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 13:06:18 UTC No. 16547060
>10 gas generator engines
>3.66m diameter
>thin and tall boi allowing for ease of manufacturing and transportation
>best rocket design in history
how the hell were they the first to come up with this simple yet elegant solution?
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 13:11:01 UTC No. 16547063
“Blue Engine 4”
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 13:11:17 UTC No. 16547064
>>16547050
>orange and black stripes
dangerously based. they just had to sneak in a "fuck you" to the americanskis
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 13:17:33 UTC No. 16547066
>>16547050
Is it some anniversary of apollo soyuz or something? Also the orthodox church / cross is cool
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 13:19:07 UTC No. 16547067
>>16547025
movie was pretty good
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 13:30:32 UTC No. 16547070
>>16547064
>based
You need to be 18 to post here.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 13:36:52 UTC No. 16547075
>>16547070
>75% of 4chans userbase is underage
I can believe that
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 13:42:49 UTC No. 16547080
>>16547070
You have no idea what under 18s talk like. 2016 was 9 years ago.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 13:43:21 UTC No. 16547082
>>16547075
>userbase
he said based, now I said it
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 13:45:09 UTC No. 16547083
so now its going to be like 8h between BONG and Starship
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 13:46:30 UTC No. 16547084
>>16547083
enough time for a power nap
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 13:50:28 UTC No. 16547088
>>16547084
well the starship launch window is 30mi, but has launched on the dot a few times I think
but the launch itself is going to take like 1.5h
so its more like 5-6h
maybe 5h between SpaceX stream ending and BONG stream starting
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 13:51:18 UTC No. 16547091
>>16547088
that works. ive operated heavy, deadly, equipment on 5hrs sleep.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 14:07:33 UTC No. 16547101
>>16546550
>>16546544
I really need to start exploring other internet options. 120 a month is too much now that it is used to import h1-bs.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 14:38:13 UTC No. 16547124
If they doubled the diameter of Starship would that help reduce the amount of weather related delays?
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 14:42:20 UTC No. 16547127
>>16547124
however they do it i cant wait for the all weather tower catches. will look awesome in the pouring rain, at night.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 14:43:33 UTC No. 16547129
>>16547075
75% of 4chan's userbase pulls numbers out of their ass.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 15:05:26 UTC No. 16547140
>>16547064
what do the orange and black stripes mean, anon?
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 15:15:02 UTC No. 16547148
>>16547075
more like userbased amirite
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 15:20:16 UTC No. 16547150
>>16547140
It lets the rocket pretend that it is a mighty tiger
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 15:21:42 UTC No. 16547152
>>16547140
It's the invasion colors for the Ukraine war. That color pattern on a ribbon is similar to posting "Z".
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 15:21:51 UTC No. 16547153
>>16547124
>keeps increasing the fineness instead
It's over. Chodebros will one day be vindicated
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 15:22:35 UTC No. 16547154
>>16547140
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ribbo
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 15:23:08 UTC No. 16547156
>>16547152
its older than that, like Tsars older
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 15:23:44 UTC No. 16547157
>>16547152
>>16547140
it's technically the ribbon of Saint George and before the Ukraine Conflict was commonly used in the same way we have pink ribbons for breast cancer.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 15:39:26 UTC No. 16547165
>>16547150
based
>>16547152
stfu zigger
>>16547154
>>16547157
thank you anons with the deep lore
kinda remarkable how much of Russian culture is just flag waving over having "won" WW2
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 15:54:52 UTC No. 16547181
>>16547165
It's proof they're still fundamentally Soviet rather than a return to precommie Russians.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 15:59:45 UTC No. 16547186
reminder we were supposed to be on mars by now
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 16:07:18 UTC No. 16547199
>>16547186
reminder that you have AIDS
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 16:08:20 UTC No. 16547200
AIDS on Mars?
MAIDS?
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 16:09:17 UTC No. 16547203
>>16547201
>youtube click bait
buy an ad
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 16:12:17 UTC No. 16547210
>>16547199
>>16547200
If we can put a man on the moon, then we can put a man with AIDS on the moon. And if we can put a man with AIDS on the moon, then someday, we can put EVERYONE with AIDS on the moon.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 16:13:52 UTC No. 16547213
>>16547210
it would be cheaper to put them all in the flame(r) diverter
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 16:15:35 UTC No. 16547216
>>16547200
>MAIDS?
already got that in Canada
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 16:17:44 UTC No. 16547218
>>16547216
true
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 17:04:34 UTC No. 16547266
>>16547249
Which one has a cock?
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 17:14:53 UTC No. 16547273
>>16547266
the rover
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 17:18:10 UTC No. 16547275
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 17:22:06 UTC No. 16547280
https://spacenews.com/rosotics-pivo
>Rosotics plans to work with multiple launch providers to send a fleet of vehicles to Earth-moon Lagrange point 5, a location cited in Gerard K. O’Neill’s 1976 book, “The High Frontier: Human Colonies in Space.”
3d printing company pivots to making space tugs
I guess thats the new meme with Starship (and New Glenn) becoming operational
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 17:23:06 UTC No. 16547283
>>16547280
lol ok they say it explicitly
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 17:25:35 UTC No. 16547288
>>16546792
>>16546794
>>16546795
>>16546797
https://www.spacex.com/launches/mis
lol more than 100 satellites
a bit more than an hour until launch
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 17:37:10 UTC No. 16547300
>>16547201
I saw this video when the thumbnail was a pic of mars with the words 'The Mars Cult'
it's just 50 minutes of SLS seething
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 17:44:40 UTC No. 16547307
>>16547280
I still remember the proonting fad that took place in this general back in 2021-22...
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 18:11:24 UTC No. 16547333
>>16547266
>sees girls
>immediately thinks about cock
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 18:18:32 UTC No. 16547342
>>16547288
131 small lift rockets that died before ever being made
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 18:52:21 UTC No. 16547374
>>16545914
>you could use lift to direct the booster back
Wings waste fuel.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 18:57:27 UTC No. 16547380
>>16546381
No it wouldn't.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 18:57:34 UTC No. 16547381
>>16547342
The reason small lift is a dead market is because each of those slots cost about 4% of a dedicated Electron launch
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 18:58:30 UTC No. 16547383
>>16547381
reeeeee
spacex is not being fair and undercutting rocketlab
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:01:43 UTC No. 16547386
>>16546548
>>16546899
It's to give westerners a taste of how evil these places really are. The kids are going to be more racist than they have ever been.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:06:40 UTC No. 16547389
>>16547387
also vandenburg launches are also kino
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:07:10 UTC No. 16547390
I'm tired of waiting around. I was promised Mars by 2020 as a kid. How can I contribute towards this mission?
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:09:11 UTC No. 16547391
>>16547390
You can do nothing and we'll be to Mars by 2035 anyways.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:10:27 UTC No. 16547393
This is the first day time launch of F9 I have watched.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:12:31 UTC No. 16547396
gotta love those dirty boosters
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:17:06 UTC No. 16547402
lots of vapor on that descent
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:17:10 UTC No. 16547403
That was a great shot they had to show how much the booster glides to the LS.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:17:15 UTC No. 16547404
camera slow on the down pan
wtf
great shots otherwise though
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:17:38 UTC No. 16547405
Wow!
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:19:30 UTC No. 16547409
>>16547380
if you have two systems with the same weight, thrust and ISP, then what does the chamber pressure matter? or any other aspect of the internal system?
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:19:37 UTC No. 16547410
>>16547383
SpaceX is being completely fair, AND they're undercutting the competition :)
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:19:45 UTC No. 16547411
very nice, very nice indeed. they make it look easy
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:21:07 UTC No. 16547412
>>16545695
The booster just landed! [math]\unicode{x1F970}[/math] [math]\unicode{x1F970}[/math] [math]\unicode{x1F970}[/math] It makes me so happy [math]\unicode{x1F604}[/math]
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:21:08 UTC No. 16547413
>>16547409
Yes, they do.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:21:23 UTC No. 16547414
>>16547409
chamber pressure increases thrust and isp.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:22:34 UTC No. 16547418
>>16547412
I’m happy you’re happy.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:24:01 UTC No. 16547420
>>16547409
You cannot achieve the same thrust, Isp, AND weight, without also matching chamber pressure.
Chamber pressure is directly correlated to TWR and Isp. Your hypothetical "weighs the same, Isp is the same, equal thrust, and yet lower chamber pressure" engine, simply cannot exist.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:24:55 UTC No. 16547423
>>16547412
its looks happy too
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:28:27 UTC No. 16547432
>>16547413
>>16547414
>>16547420
what if you didn't have breakfast this morning?
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:30:59 UTC No. 16547437
>>16547432
If you increase the amount of breakfast consumed you nessecarily increase how full you feel. You can’t just have two different mornings with different breakfasts but the same fullness.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:33:42 UTC No. 16547439
>>16547432
I didn't have breakfast this morning, and I can report that I'm NOT hungry.
🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:33:57 UTC No. 16547440
New cringe just dropped
https://youtu.be/iGZ5fg2Vja4
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:35:56 UTC No. 16547446
>>16547432
Thrust, Isp, and weight held as fixed variables, you STILL want high chamber pressure because it's going to mean you have a physically smaller engine, which is desireable, even if the engine weighs the same.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:37:39 UTC No. 16547448
>>16547440
Fuck you, it's already in the thread.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:39:04 UTC No. 16547449
>>16547448
Sorry. But please try to be less hostile.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:39:10 UTC No. 16547450
>>16545695
Why aren't we shooting neutrons at spaceships to accelerate them?
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:41:33 UTC No. 16547452
>>16547409
>if you have two systems with the same weight, thrust and ISP, then what does the chamber pressure matter?
Where are you measuring the Isp?
If you're talking about vacuum Isp, the higher chamber pressure engine will retain more of its vacuum Isp at sea level vs a lower chamber pressure engine.
If you're talking about sea level Isp, then your lower chamber pressure engine of equal mass and thrust can only exist if it's using a dissimilar propellant combination, which means it's not a fair comparison. In the second case, switch the higher chamber pressure engine to that propellant and it'll perform better than the lower chamber pressure engine.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:41:42 UTC No. 16547454
>>16547450
neutrons is hard job
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:43:03 UTC No. 16547456
>>16547449
No.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:52:06 UTC No. 16547468
>>16547201
>every comment is a novel
not watching
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:52:49 UTC No. 16547471
>>16547468
>every comment is a novel
I will now watch your video.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:54:19 UTC No. 16547472
>>16547461
hazy
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:57:52 UTC No. 16547476
>>16547409
The engine that operates at a higher chamber pressure will have better thrust and ISP for a given size/weight.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 19:59:12 UTC No. 16547478
>>16547201
lol another nerd crying, love to see it
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 20:00:00 UTC No. 16547479
>>16547432
>can't comprehend the subject matter
>tries the breakfast question as a deflection
simply amazing
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 20:02:10 UTC No. 16547481
deployments soon
Clear getting excited
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 20:02:44 UTC No. 16547482
that's a lot of sats
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 20:02:57 UTC No. 16547484
CANT SEE IT SEPPING
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 20:03:20 UTC No. 16547485
>>16547342
circularization burn so short... blink and I missed it.
First batch of deployments is now starting
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 20:03:59 UTC No. 16547487
THERE HE GOES
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 20:04:45 UTC No. 16547489
>>16547342
>how's my orbital maneuvering?
kek
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 20:06:27 UTC No. 16547492
smol rockets just cant compete with transporter launces
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 20:09:17 UTC No. 16547496
she's going to have to tag out. saying separation conformed 101 times is insane.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 20:14:19 UTC No. 16547504
Beck wouldn’t be getting his lunch eaten if he simple charged 400k an electron and launched them 300 times a year.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 20:20:45 UTC No. 16547515
idk why small launch always thinks they can succeed when SpaceX figured out it was a non starter 20 years ago
There's a reason Falcon 1 only ever flew two missions, a bigger rocket always made more sense.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 20:22:17 UTC No. 16547516
fuck you
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 20:25:16 UTC No. 16547519
>>16547515
it's probably impossible to find the necessary venture capital to start from a big rocket when you're a startup that hasn't accomplished anything
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 20:30:05 UTC No. 16547523
>>16547515
With what money they would develop bigger rocket, spacex had nasa money and BO has bezos money
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 20:31:28 UTC No. 16547526
>>16547522
>test article
when are they actually building the real station?
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 20:32:59 UTC No. 16547530
>>16547526
They probably already have been but since the test article is the most developed part its what theyre posting online. They hired ALLOT of people yknow
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 20:33:22 UTC No. 16547532
>>16547515
SpaceX came into being at the perfect opportunity to upseat the lazy and greedy oldspace companies with the EELV and ISS resupply/crew contracts.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 20:34:23 UTC No. 16547534
>>16547523
Why did Bezos get interested in space anyways?
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 20:40:41 UTC No. 16547537
>>16547534
Although the source for that first paragraph is an Economist article, which is locked to free users. Wikipedia is amazing
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 20:44:45 UTC No. 16547542
>>16547522
how far away are inflatable habitats anyway? two weeks?
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 20:48:26 UTC No. 16547545
>>16547479
the entire point was that chamber pressure is irrelevant to the operation of the rocket, as would the material the rocket is using if you assume the same weight, ISP and thrust are achieved
in this case it happens to be that chamber pressure does increase thrust and ISP, but that is irrelevant
chamber pressure is not the relevant metric, ISP, thrust and weight are
if there was some way to get better ISP,thrust and weight with lower chamber pressure (maybe something entirely different paradigm or whatever), then you would not give a single shit if the chamber pressure happened to be smaller in that case
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 20:50:01 UTC No. 16547548
>>16547476
yes of course, did you miss the if? a hypothetical situation where you get the same output with a different chamber pressure (lets say detonation engine or something not yet invented)
would you prefer the engine with higher chamber pressure but the other 3, actually relevant traits, being worse? of course not
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 20:51:50 UTC No. 16547550
>>16547437
>If you increase the amount of breakfast consumed you nessecarily increase how full you feel.
not necessarily, the type of food affects satiety, your brain chemistry affects satiety regardless of the amount of food and so on
if you neuralink you to have the same satiety regardless of the amount of food in your stomach then it doesn't matter how much or little you eat
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 20:52:29 UTC No. 16547551
>>16547545
>chamber pressure is irrelevant to the operation of the rocket
He can't stop digging his hole.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 20:58:39 UTC No. 16547556
So how was the new glenn launch?
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 20:59:12 UTC No. 16547557
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 20:59:42 UTC No. 16547558
>>16547556
unbelievable
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 21:00:16 UTC No. 16547559
>>16547342
How do they disconnect these wires?
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 21:00:32 UTC No. 16547560
>>16547537
And apparently he decided to start BO when saw October Sky in '99 with Neal Stephenson. After talking together afterwards about wanting to start a space company Stephenson told him he should do it, and he was one of the first employees there.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 21:01:20 UTC No. 16547561
>>16547557
>>16547558
>delayed again
this is getting ridiculous
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 21:03:56 UTC No. 16547563
>>16547560
I didn't know Bezos and Neal Stephenson were that close. I guess it makes sense now why the kindle project got a codename from Diamond Age.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 21:05:15 UTC No. 16547565
>>16547559
It's attached to the deployment mechanism which will pop open.
The actual satellite is inside the case.
They look like the actual satellite because they are using blue panels which do look like solar panels.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 21:06:29 UTC No. 16547568
>>16547551
if I had some other propulsion method like nuclear bombs, chamber pressure would be irrelevant
what matters are the weight of the thruster, ISP and thrust, not internals specific to the thruster like chamber pressure (which do matter to this specific thruster, but not in general)
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 21:08:25 UTC No. 16547571
>>16547568
>chamber pressure isn't relevant to roggets because... um... orion
what's the pressure inside a detonating nuclear bomb?
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 21:16:48 UTC No. 16547578
>>16547568
Anon, your overgeneralizing.
Your point makes sense when talking about entirely different engines, but when talking about generations of the same engine or similar engines, just talking about weight, ISP and thrust doesn't paint a whole picture of changes.
Raptor 3 increased thrust, but it did it primarily by increasing chamber pressure.
It also reduced weight, but that metric doesn't speak of the reduction of non-engine hardware like shielding that's necessary on Raptor 2 but less necessary on 3.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 21:17:57 UTC No. 16547579
>>16547562
>25 hou-DELAYED
this is the year of delays, I just know it
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 21:22:16 UTC No. 16547584
>>16547556
very calm
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 21:23:07 UTC No. 16547585
>>16547571
no chamber
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 21:23:24 UTC No. 16547587
>>16547568
>chamber pressure would be irrelevant
your really cant separate it from the other metrics though. just stop.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 21:26:12 UTC No. 16547589
>>16547585
The atmosphere is a pressure chamber
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 21:29:12 UTC No. 16547591
lot of debris floating around out there. is that all from the second stage itself?
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 21:32:10 UTC No. 16547592
https://www.youtube.com/live/Q_2AW1
my wife is streaming
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 21:32:49 UTC No. 16547593
id like to see her next launch. know what im saying?
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 21:36:33 UTC No. 16547597
>>16547592
how does she follow without knowing english
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 21:37:28 UTC No. 16547598
>>16547597
She does understand it to some extent
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 21:38:26 UTC No. 16547599
>>16547597
she is well educated
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 21:40:21 UTC No. 16547602
>>16547599
PhD student?
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 21:42:23 UTC No. 16547605
>>16547597
i went to japan recently and alot of them are decent at english
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 21:45:44 UTC No. 16547609
This whole chamber pressure thing reminds me of the first time some anon talked about cubic kilometers in this general. Oh, the memories...
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 21:45:52 UTC No. 16547610
>>16547556
Exciting, but mostly static.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 21:46:41 UTC No. 16547614
>>16547593
sure do
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 21:47:54 UTC No. 16547616
>>16547602
She read wikipedia.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 21:56:25 UTC No. 16547622
>>16547621
what space racing could look like
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 21:58:09 UTC No. 16547624
>>16547621
the ocean is never dry though
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:01:59 UTC No. 16547627
24 hours remain.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:03:02 UTC No. 16547630
you think maintenance is cheap or what
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:03:28 UTC No. 16547631
>>16547628
I didn't even know they had this on display, I found it by accident. I thought they had tried to basically memory whole the whole Buran thing entirely.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:03:47 UTC No. 16547632
STARBASE IS NOW UNDER THREAT FROM FPV DRONES
>Talked to this guy who was just launching, he said he had no idea…
>With DJI disabling geofencing, the security threat to SpaceX and all other restricted airspace just became very real, at a very dangerous time.
>Also, visitors need to respect the no trespassing signs around the launch pad. The past few days I’ve never seen so many people just walk right past the signs and very near the pad with a noticeable and concerning absence of security by SpaceX.
>Those of you that visit regularly and document Starship please be vigilant and help keep our public access.
https://x.com/SpacePadreIsle/status
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:04:32 UTC No. 16547635
>>16547630
they could at least sweep it off and put it under a structurally sound roof...
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:05:40 UTC No. 16547637
>>16547635
I mean for gods sake does nobody in Russia own a broom? Can't somebody at least steal a broom from the government and sweep that mess up?
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:07:02 UTC No. 16547641
>>16547636
Pluto sample return when
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:07:18 UTC No. 16547642
>>16547628
Potemkinism runs deep
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:07:47 UTC No. 16547643
>>16547632
if russia and ukraine cant stop fpv drones then spacex cant either
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:08:48 UTC No. 16547644
>>16547639
>last peak right before and during Apollo landings
things are looking good
>>16547641
right after we get a sample from uranus
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:11:09 UTC No. 16547649
>>16547597
she understands but has trouble speaking it.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:11:42 UTC No. 16547650
>>16547545
>if you assume the same weight, ISP and thrust are achieved
This is like assuming a 155cm tall asian woman can get the same 500m track time as a 205cm tall Kenyan man, then asking what race has to do with winning the 500m race.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:14:16 UTC No. 16547656
>>16547548
Your hypothetical assumes something that is contrary to reality, because higher chamber pressure DOES correlate to higher thrust and higher Isp for a given engine.
Asking "but what if it wasn't" is a STUPID question. Everyone says "we want higher chamber pressure" because it means "we want higher thrust and Isp for a given engine mass", and higher chamber pressure is how you achieve that, you dumb motherfucker.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:15:50 UTC No. 16547660
̶E̶a̶r̶t̶h̶ Terra
̶M̶o̶o̶n̶ Luna
̶S̶u̶n̶ Sol
̶U̶r̶a̶n̶u̶s̶ Caelus
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:16:15 UTC No. 16547661
>>16547568
>if you switch to talking about something completely different you can imagine chamber pressure no longer being correlated to performance
We are talking about rocket engines.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:16:42 UTC No. 16547663
>>16547655
cringe long catch arms
cringe bot stage ring
cringe 4x gridfins
cringe OLM
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:17:56 UTC No. 16547666
>>16547621
Dry ground doesn't imply dry 5km altitude airstream
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:19:46 UTC No. 16547669
>>16547628
The real things are rotten and russians cannot refurb them.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:24:16 UTC No. 16547673
https://x.com/SpaceX/status/1879290
https://x.com/SpaceX/status/1879290
https://x.com/SpaceX/status/1879290
https://x.com/SpaceX/status/1879290
https://x.com/SpaceX/status/1879290
https://x.com/SpaceX/status/1879290
https://x.com/SpaceX/status/1879290
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:25:29 UTC No. 16547676
>>16547660
We need to rename Titan after one of the Titans. That's like naming Jupiter "God".
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:27:07 UTC No. 16547677
>>16547660
We should rename Jupiter to God
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:27:46 UTC No. 16547678
>>16547628
That's the 7M OK-TVA structural test article. It was easy to move over to VDNKh because it was already in the Moscow area, so they didn't need to worry about paying for a Mriya flight or going through the trouble of partially disassembling it so it could be shipped by rail and barge.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:28:01 UTC No. 16547679
>>16547676
>"Titan.. oh, you mean like Thanos' planet? that's so cool yeahh"
kill me
yes, we need to rename it, marvel ruined it for us
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:30:24 UTC No. 16547682
>>16547679
We need to just kill normalfags. Move all spacechuds to Mars and blow the Earth up Star Wars style.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:31:55 UTC No. 16547683
60 MINUTE LAUNCH WINDOW
That's fucking long m8
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:32:37 UTC No. 16547684
>>16547542
Two weeks. Vast isnt going inflatable and they have the best progress so far of any CSS company.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:33:55 UTC No. 16547685
>>16547682
Better yet, shoot some antimatter into urf's core.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6S
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:36:51 UTC No. 16547688
Just... one more... day of work....
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:40:48 UTC No. 16547692
>>16547660
For me? It's HD 189733 b, HAT-P-27, CoRoT-20b, and TrES-5b.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:42:44 UTC No. 16547694
>>16547683
How will they add several 30 minute delays to the countdown with a window that short?
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:43:35 UTC No. 16547696
>>16547201
>The other thing that I wanted to mention is that there was an evening session with an open mic for anyone there to voice their opinions. I had gotten a basic feel for the crowd at that point, and realised that the vast majority of attendees (maybe like 95%) were men, and the majority of those were middle-aged. These were the pre-woke days, but the similar term PC was used (politically correct). I, being a feminist, and concerned with the possibility of a whole new planet being colonised by men, for men, stood up and said that we should do outreach to be more inclusive. Of gender, of disciplines/skills, of age, of nationality, etc. I got booed by about a thousand people. I was honestly shocked. However Zubrin, god love him, bounded up on stage and expressed his support for what I was saying. The crowd shut up pretty quick because they were all in awe of him.
Zubrin does it again.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:49:49 UTC No. 16547705
>>16546015
Oh that's so fucking.. Wait.
>Rubenstein
EST
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:51:02 UTC No. 16547707
>>16547696
Jews are matriarchal, it's part of their problem.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:53:25 UTC No. 16547711
>>16547696
>we should be more inclusive
>but not of those goddamn white males
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:55:14 UTC No. 16547714
why wont they make starship have legs right now
its a rocket to land on mars
it needs legs for mars
reeeee
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:55:17 UTC No. 16547715
wish there was a live map that shows signal strength for starlink and other satellites like there is for gps. i want to see interference and jamming patterns.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:58:07 UTC No. 16547719
>>16547714
just bring a catch tower with you? legs are so old school and drab.
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 22:58:19 UTC No. 16547720
why starship doesnt reflect the launch force back and it during the launch? it would possibly have twice the thrust during lift off
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 23:03:15 UTC No. 16547724
>>16547714
what was that one shuttle that tripped and fell onto its side because it had a leg
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 23:05:56 UTC No. 16547727
>>16547724
sn9
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 23:08:50 UTC No. 16547731
>>16547720
they effectively did do that at launch 1. it wasn't great. besides, the engines have to push the limits of their own material strength so you don't want even higher stress just to save a couple seconds getting into space
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 23:10:44 UTC No. 16547734
>>16547731
best launch of my life desu
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 23:11:14 UTC No. 16547736
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 23:15:12 UTC No. 16547739
>>16547736
baka
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 23:16:58 UTC No. 16547741
>>16547736
its so bendy
Anonymous at Tue, 14 Jan 2025 23:17:18 UTC No. 16547742
>>16547673
Roughly 20 hours from now. Do your time calculations.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 00:02:13 UTC No. 16547761
>>16547621
damn, that looked like one hell of a jog. Pulling G's, or just due to zoom lens foreshortening?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 00:02:41 UTC No. 16547763
>>16547714
we're talking some pretty chunky thighs here anon. think about it
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 00:05:07 UTC No. 16547766
>>16547621
i thought it was toast for a moment there. i dont watch many landings but there it is
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 00:21:19 UTC No. 16547773
any deets about flight 8 chat
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 00:25:13 UTC No. 16547774
>>16547761
Sped up
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 00:27:00 UTC No. 16547775
https://x.com/spacesudoer/status/18
beeg if true
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 00:30:36 UTC No. 16547777
>>16547775
hope we get the 4k video
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 00:33:55 UTC No. 16547780
>>16547660
Holy Terra
Blessed Mars
Sacred Luna
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 00:35:36 UTC No. 16547784
>>16546074
That's very anti-semitic of you.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 00:37:03 UTC No. 16547785
>>16547775
holy shit, get ready for PEAK KINO
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 00:37:57 UTC No. 16547786
>>16547775
Will this be the best flight yet?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 00:39:28 UTC No. 16547789
>>16547681
>Elon waits until after I get off work
Thanks m8
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 00:41:19 UTC No. 16547791
>>16547775
i expect more
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 00:44:55 UTC No. 16547793
>>16547792
ula sniper drones
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 00:45:46 UTC No. 16547794
>>16547773
Polaris 2 (suborbital)
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 00:46:08 UTC No. 16547795
what is it with spergs and the inability to entertain hypothetical situations?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 00:47:04 UTC No. 16547796
what if, hypothetically, you increased the pressure but the Isp and thrust stayed the same.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 00:47:16 UTC No. 16547797
>>16547773
Adjusted reentry location: Beijing Presidential Palace
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 00:47:53 UTC No. 16547799
>>16547792
they really should keep people back all the time. EDS is real and some people will do harm if they can
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 00:48:18 UTC No. 16547800
what if hypothetically you couldn't answer in any question hypothesis hypothetically hypocritically
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 00:49:40 UTC No. 16547801
>>16547775
2 per each simulator or in total?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 00:51:14 UTC No. 16547802
>>16547792
SpaceX also replaced the signs at the property line on the beach with a rope fence
probably gonna increase security presence soon
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 00:51:42 UTC No. 16547803
>>16547792
inb4 Luigi 2.0, you know it will happen
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 00:55:25 UTC No. 16547804
>>16547802
just the beggining, soon they will build walls, ramparts, trenches, another set of outer walls and drum towers, archers, remote sentry guns, anti-air missile batteries, Patriot missile defense systems, 6"coastal defense guns, and maybe some sniper towers
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 00:58:10 UTC No. 16547805
>>16547804
I bet I could make it past their defenses.
I didn't even want to before but now it sounds like a challenge.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 00:58:29 UTC No. 16547806
>>16547792
No idea, or hoping no one would notice?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 00:59:04 UTC No. 16547807
Just shit my pants, I would do the same in yours if we were stuck together for the journey to M*rs.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 01:00:13 UTC No. 16547808
>>16547806
>very next day geofencing is disabled they just happen to come down there with drones to go do something that would've been blocked before
sus
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 01:01:07 UTC No. 16547810
>>16547806
still cracks me up people using dji drones to do dumb shit
they could /diy/ a drone that isn't literally broadcasting remote ID
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 01:05:30 UTC No. 16547811
>>16547807
But we aren't on a journey to Mars?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 01:19:27 UTC No. 16547817
>>16547811
Notice the if. Fucking idot
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 01:22:33 UTC No. 16547819
>>16547817
I don't understand, anon DIDN'T notice the if
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 01:23:55 UTC No. 16547821
>>16547817
But that didnt happen
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 01:25:26 UTC No. 16547823
>>16547821
Notice the would. Nigger
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 01:27:01 UTC No. 16547827
>>16546047
>Mr
Mary-Jane. Imagine the smell.
https://mrubenstein.faculty.wesleya
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 01:29:44 UTC No. 16547831
>>16547820
L U N A R
E C O N O M Y
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 01:30:00 UTC No. 16547832
>>16547774
no, I remember it doing that crazy turn in real time on the stream
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 01:48:56 UTC No. 16547842
>>16547832
yeah. for a moment it seemed broked
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 01:51:29 UTC No. 16547843
>>16547834
love how its coasts for 80km descent. the forces really cant be that much.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 01:52:53 UTC No. 16547844
>>16547838
it does get a little pedantic thought
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 01:54:32 UTC No. 16547845
>>16547838
Im impressed this actually got built
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 01:56:06 UTC No. 16547847
>>16547832
It's sped up, fuckface. I watched it live too.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 01:58:16 UTC No. 16547849
>>16547838
sir, this is the spacex fan general - sfg
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 02:03:53 UTC No. 16547850
>>16547847
no, there was a few moments when it seemed to wheel and jag and spin. it was probably camera angle and stuff, but it didn't look good. i should watch it again to confirm.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 02:11:09 UTC No. 16547853
>>16547847
yeah, you're right. Sped up about 2.5 times.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 02:15:35 UTC No. 16547858
>>16547838
what commercial payloads are on the lander? how is it making money?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 02:18:55 UTC No. 16547861
>>16547858
Firefly's getting paid as a part of CLPS
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 02:20:24 UTC No. 16547863
>>16547807
i putvpoop in the bag shit my ass. im a stinky fart boy. wanna poop on me next?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 02:22:11 UTC No. 16547865
>>16547861
>planetvac
a what now
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 02:23:22 UTC No. 16547867
>>16547861
Is making a gay acronym a government requirement?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 02:25:24 UTC No. 16547869
>>16547805
>Launch Tower Defense
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 02:56:40 UTC No. 16547888
>>16547696
When will these retards recognize the difference between builders and users?
Achieving diversity of users is good because it means your customer pool is very large, which implies you are improving the lives of most people with your product.
Diversity of builders however leads to disfunction and a shitty product.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 02:59:05 UTC No. 16547890
>>16547714
>why wont they make starship have legs right now
They aren't needed for anything Starship is doing right now.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 02:59:22 UTC No. 16547891
Plito is a planet
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 03:00:57 UTC No. 16547894
>>16547720
Stupid idea.
>>16547784
Thanks
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 03:30:43 UTC No. 16547903
>>16547865
designed to suck up regolith so you don't need some complicated scooping mechanism for sample retrieval or aspirationally ISRU.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 03:45:51 UTC No. 16547907
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 03:49:01 UTC No. 16547908
>In late November 2021, Maxim Polyakov received a letter from the US Committee on Foreign Investment (CFIUS) asking Polyakov and his investment firm Noosphere Venture Partners to sell a stake in Firefly (nearly 50%) for national security reasons. Polyakov denied the threat to US national security, but agreed to comply.
>The government did not give reasons beyond Polyakov was Ukrainian and Ukraine and Russia had once worked together on rockets.
>Despite Polyakov's anger, he agreed, and on February 24, 2022, it was announced that Polyakov and his company Noosphere would sell their stake in Firefly to AE Industrial Partners.
do not forget
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 03:59:47 UTC No. 16547911
>>16547907
russia is to blame too
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 04:06:27 UTC No. 16547913
>>16547649
Many such cases.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 04:06:39 UTC No. 16547914
Will Hakuto land on the moon this time?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 04:06:56 UTC No. 16547915
>>16547908
Don't forget that we knew Russia was going to invade Ukraine and that we expected Ukraine to fall in 72 hours?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 04:12:07 UTC No. 16547916
>>16547914
50/50
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 04:16:46 UTC No. 16547918
>>16546548
it's because the demand is different in different markets with different per capita income and different need for internet
if you sold Starlink for the US price in Africa no one would buy it, so you reduce the price in Africa to get additional revenue (and profit because it probably costs very little to provide service in areas that are undersubcribed)
on the other hand if you sold Starlink for the African price in the US, you'd be throwing away money because consumers are willing to pay more and you'd be oversubscribed
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 04:44:26 UTC No. 16547925
>>16547863
I have shared this post with another general.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 04:49:46 UTC No. 16547928
>>16547925
You wouldn't dare
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 05:05:55 UTC No. 16547935
>>16547930
I wish they would have put more stickers on it.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 05:13:47 UTC No. 16547938
Why aren't both landers being acknowledged by the participants?
The NASA broadcast only mentions Blue Ghost and the ispace Xwitter only mentions Hakuto.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 05:16:08 UTC No. 16547939
>>16547938
nasa is too busy working om shabeequa's next climate satellite
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 05:19:44 UTC No. 16547940
>>16547938
cock shame
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 05:32:01 UTC No. 16547943
monetize the moon
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 05:39:27 UTC No. 16547948
NASA stream https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMd
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 05:47:02 UTC No. 16547950
If any of these work, will they be the first private uncrewed lunar landings? And both launched by SpaceX.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 05:49:26 UTC No. 16547953
https://youtu.be/AGIAI380TnY
first humans in mars will not be human
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 05:55:34 UTC No. 16547956
>shilling starship on a nasa stream
lmao
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 05:57:58 UTC No. 16547957
>>16547953
The first Martian will be an Urfer.
Let that sink in
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 05:59:37 UTC No. 16547958
>>16547957
honorary martian
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:00:46 UTC No. 16547959
11 min
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:01:15 UTC No. 16547960
>only 2-3 years away from starship landing on the moon
so far but so close
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:03:26 UTC No. 16547961
>>16547960
and only 4 years for mars manned landings
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:03:37 UTC No. 16547962
>>16547957
we need to gestate babies on gainzstations and then land them on mars in pods. then mars will be safe from original sin, and the first marser wont be from urf
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:05:51 UTC No. 16547963
send seeds to grow on the moon. i bet the produce would be massive. strawberries the size of a basketball.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:07:52 UTC No. 16547964
4 min >>16547948
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:09:46 UTC No. 16547965
>>16547963
forget about that, imagine apple-sized grapes. They are so tasty yet so tiny :(
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:12:22 UTC No. 16547968
we gaan
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:13:35 UTC No. 16547970
ITS GONNA KERSPLODE!!
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:16:51 UTC No. 16547973
uh oh, that doesn't look good
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:18:00 UTC No. 16547974
>>16547973
behead those who doompost
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:20:34 UTC No. 16547976
rip that bird
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:20:55 UTC No. 16547977
another clean landing
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:21:00 UTC No. 16547978
Holy fuck that bird got vaporized. RIP
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:23:03 UTC No. 16547979
Let this be a warning to the plovers.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:23:39 UTC No. 16547980
you people are sick to laugh at that
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:27:12 UTC No. 16547982
>>16547980
feathery fingers typed this post
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:31:26 UTC No. 16547984
>>16547981
wow, looks like it was knocked unconscious just from the sound, even before it was hit by the exhaust plume!
Good thing we have a new administration, or they would make SpaceX start doing audio torture studies on avian wildlife, like they did to the seals.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:33:29 UTC No. 16547987
>>16547792
I was saying, if someone wanted to fuck up Elon's progress, a Ukrainian FPV drone into a fully fueled stack on livestream would do wonders.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:33:32 UTC No. 16547988
4-6 more moon launches scheduled for this year
>JAN - SHERPA-ES
>FEB - IM-2
>MAR - Blue Moon
>OCT - IM-3
>??? - Griffith 1
>??? - Beresheet 2
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:34:52 UTC No. 16547990
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:36:44 UTC No. 16547991
>>16547976
>>16547978
>>16547979
I just rewatched it. when??
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:37:17 UTC No. 16547992
>>16547984
>OH MAH GAWD (allah)
>ERON IS A KILLER
>CANCEL ALL SPACEFLIGHT
>WHAT ELSE HAS ERON DESTROYED
>THIS IS WHY WE NEED BIGGER GOVERNMENT
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:37:35 UTC No. 16547993
>>16547981
NASA already did this years ago, nothing new, musk stealing the credit as always, the engineers did all the work
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTC
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:39:18 UTC No. 16547994
>>16547987
Just shoot it with a single sniper round, retard
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:39:29 UTC No. 16547995
>>16547991
Anon posted it here for posterity >>16547981
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:40:15 UTC No. 16547996
>>16547965
And then grape-sized raisins.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:42:51 UTC No. 16547998
starship sized bananas
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:44:57 UTC No. 16547999
>>16547981
lik dis if u cry evrytim
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:50:22 UTC No. 16548000
>>16547948
lots of promos for the Blue Ghost lander and Artemis, but did they talk about the Resilience rover at all?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:52:05 UTC No. 16548002
>>16547994
Easier and somewhat less traceable to get your hands on a drone and some basic explosives than an AMR. Also easier to execute and gtfo because you can be multiple km away
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:53:50 UTC No. 16548003
starshp and new lgenn withn next 24 hors
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:54:03 UTC No. 16548004
>>16548001
They've put a four leaf clover on every patch since Falcon 1 flight 4, with the exception of CRS-7. After CRS-7 they kept putting them on every patch. For all the rigors of science and engineering, engineers end up being a very superstitious sort.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:55:27 UTC No. 16548005
>>16548001
how did u get flight 7 patch
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 06:55:50 UTC No. 16548006
Good morning. Just have to get through another day and it's finally here.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 07:02:51 UTC No. 16548010
>>16548000
here's an infographic about HAKUTO-R at least
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 07:12:11 UTC No. 16548011
good orbit
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 07:14:33 UTC No. 16548012
>>16548011
Was it high-energy, though?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 07:17:56 UTC No. 16548013
if hakuta matata laumched on SLS it would already been in the moon by now
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 07:18:17 UTC No. 16548014
good sep
godspeed
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 07:19:10 UTC No. 16548015
https://www.youtube.com/live/zQUUz0
GUEST STAR?? WHO IS THISSSSSSS
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 07:21:02 UTC No. 16548016
>>16548015
for a lunar mission, you have to invite a moon rabbit
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 07:21:23 UTC No. 16548017
>>16548015
is that pekora?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 07:25:56 UTC No. 16548023
one of them moon rabbit folk?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 07:37:54 UTC No. 16548026
>>16548012
chart says no
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 07:41:36 UTC No. 16548027
>NASA stream ended
Damn, they actually pretended that Hakuto-R didn't exist.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 07:45:38 UTC No. 16548029
Noice
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 07:46:29 UTC No. 16548030
Those ice particles look like stars in a sci-fi movie
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 07:47:35 UTC No. 16548031
>>16548027
>>16548015
at least Clear stuck it out to the successful HAKUTO-R deployment
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 08:00:36 UTC No. 16548034
>>16548030
I thought the same thing. Very pretty.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 08:12:49 UTC No. 16548038
Clear's laughing at blorigin...
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 09:12:36 UTC No. 16548050
>>16545695
i just woke up! i am so excited to watch the new glenn launch today!!
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 09:18:01 UTC No. 16548053
>>16548052
>ISS 2.0
>stuck in LEO for another 3 decades
it's so joever
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 09:25:54 UTC No. 16548056
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 09:31:17 UTC No. 16548058
>>16548052
>>16548056
sounds like rage-bait for their russian audience who will say "offer a space program?! We already have one and its great!" thus souring russian public opinion on a potential deal before it happens, prolong the war until russia can get more land in ukraine
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 09:35:50 UTC No. 16548059
>>16547918
also Starlink is the money printer for Mars, gotta maximize income
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 09:40:29 UTC No. 16548060
>>16548050
see you this time tomorrow
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 10:04:13 UTC No. 16548072
>>16548050
Have you heard of our lord and savior IFT7?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 10:20:47 UTC No. 16548084
>>16548072
*Starship 7
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 10:21:14 UTC No. 16548086
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 10:23:29 UTC No. 16548087
starshart 7
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 10:23:42 UTC No. 16548088
>>16548001
Testing
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 10:59:36 UTC No. 16548106
>>16548088
That B is upsidedown
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 11:34:08 UTC No. 16548128
damn they're doing it in the middle of the day
I prefer morning launches
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 11:34:50 UTC No. 16548129
>>16548128
you mean midnight?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 11:37:39 UTC No. 16548134
>>16548129
no
starship is 4:00pm CT
So 3pm my time
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 11:48:37 UTC No. 16548138
>>16548136
lol
🗑️ Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 12:02:14 UTC No. 16548150
>>16548136
Hah, it's actually real, what an idiot
https://x.com/SenBillNelson/status/
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 12:39:12 UTC No. 16548170
>>16548134
>So 3pm my time
why are you lying anon? 4:00pm CT is literally midnight my time, I calculated. You think I'm dumb enough to fall for that??
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 12:39:57 UTC No. 16548171
>>16548170
timezones aren't real
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 12:41:14 UTC No. 16548172
>>16547915
did he end up fleeing to Russia during that or did he stay
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 12:45:50 UTC No. 16548175
>>16545695
Reusability bros..... we lost...............................
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 12:56:19 UTC No. 16548181
>>16548170
its all in your mind
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 12:57:26 UTC No. 16548182
>>16547987
we can't do it until there's two vehicles on the pad simultaneously, and we need to hit both about fifteen minutes apart
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 13:08:20 UTC No. 16548186
>>16548088
nice dubs
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 13:23:21 UTC No. 16548194
>>16548190
thank you anon, very cool
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 13:34:55 UTC No. 16548203
>>16548175
I was gonna ask if people still actually care about this website, but then I remembered that cryptobros aren't really people.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 13:35:55 UTC No. 16548204
>>16548136
it's just some dumb intern posting the wrong draft tweet.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 13:37:19 UTC No. 16548205
>>16548182
"Sir, a second drone has hit the launch site"
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 13:55:37 UTC No. 16548214
>There is probably about a 50-50 chance we see some kind of wintry mix, so set your expectations accordingly.
Most confident Berger forecast
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 14:01:21 UTC No. 16548217
Serious question - how confident are we that Starship wont get scrubbed? Hows it looking?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 14:04:55 UTC No. 16548218
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 14:07:33 UTC No. 16548219
>>16548218
hmmm thanks. i'll have to think about this
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 14:08:17 UTC No. 16548220
>>16548217
50/50
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 14:10:12 UTC No. 16548221
>>16548220
everyone knows thats not a useful expression
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 14:14:35 UTC No. 16548224
>>16548221
100% confidence for flight in two weeks
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 14:16:12 UTC No. 16548227
>>16548224
gonna go out on a limb and say 100% for tonight because thats what i want
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 14:17:23 UTC No. 16548229
>>16548217
Weather forecast is less than excellent
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 14:58:52 UTC No. 16548263
>>16548229
weather really shouldnt be an issue these days. how can a bit of side wind scare off such a big rocket?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 15:01:02 UTC No. 16548266
>>16548052
russia will never take this garbage offer
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 15:08:26 UTC No. 16548271
>>16545695
It's...... over.......................
[math]\unicode{x1F614}[/math] [math]\unicode{x1F614}[/math] [math]\unicode{x1F614}[/math] I am a strong person, i won't cry.........
nnoooooooooo NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooo
[math]\unicode{x1F62D}[/math][math]
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 15:08:38 UTC No. 16548272
>>16548052
>peace in ukraine in exchange for the privilege of signing the artemis accords
lol
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 15:10:06 UTC No. 16548277
>>16548217
Delayed
https://x.com/JudgeTrevino/status/1
+TFR gone
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 15:10:11 UTC No. 16548278
I've only been awake for 20 minutes and already Starship has scrubbed. Nooglen will scrub tonight as well. Nothing will ever fly again, the atmosphere won't let us go. Abandon your posts, flee, flee for your lives.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 15:11:17 UTC No. 16548279
>>16545984
>meltdown doing massive ecological damage
redditard
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 15:14:26 UTC No. 16548284
>>16548277
looking good for the next few days though
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 15:17:56 UTC No. 16548288
>>16548284
Yeah thursday has improved a lot, may actually launch then.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 15:19:36 UTC No. 16548290
>>16548277
ugh. what a delayathon this week is has been
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 15:22:43 UTC No. 16548291
>Due to weather, we're now targeting Thursday, January 16 for Starship's seventh flight test
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 15:23:34 UTC No. 16548292
>>16548291
Source: https://x.com/spacex/status/1879549
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 15:24:54 UTC No. 16548295
FUCK
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 15:27:54 UTC No. 16548298
>some rain can stop the biggest rocket ever
Its pathetic how bad weather keeps scrubing launches at this point
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 15:28:35 UTC No. 16548300
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 15:39:08 UTC No. 16548305
>>16548295
this
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 15:41:56 UTC No. 16548307
>>16548298
25 flights for 2025 btw
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 15:44:34 UTC No. 16548309
this is the gayest fucking hobby. I've been on /sfg/ religiously since SN4 and starship hasn't put as much as a single starlink into orbit
I think I need a decade long break from this shit
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 15:45:43 UTC No. 16548311
no no nonononono
this isn't true
stop lying
you're wrong
spaceflightnow still has 15th listed
I can't take this anymore
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 15:46:25 UTC No. 16548312
How are we meant to expect a rocket to land on Mars when they are scared of some clouds
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 15:47:43 UTC No. 16548315
>>16548278
>I've only been awake for 20 minutes and already Starship has scrubbed. Nooglen will scrub tonight as well. Nothing will ever fly again, the atmosphere won't let us go. Abandon your posts, flee, flee for your lives.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 15:47:45 UTC No. 16548316
Remember that Musk wants to lengthen Starship even more, thus increasing its fitness ratio. one single cloud and a launch is no longer possible.
12m-diameter bros, we have to do something...
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 15:51:31 UTC No. 16548322
>>16548315
PREPARE FOR BATTLE
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 15:52:33 UTC No. 16548323
>>16548312
at least they can communicate between a few buildings. this is progress
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 15:56:30 UTC No. 16548328
>>16547981
i bet my cat has killed more birds than all spacex rockets combined. fucker drags birds home weekly
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 15:59:28 UTC No. 16548331
>>16548309
>this is the gayest fucking hobby
You could collect Precious Moments figurines, that'd be gayer.
I was gonna say stamps but then I remembered that fin-anon who had a bunch of cool space ones, so that's not gay.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 16:00:33 UTC No. 16548334
>>16548312
just land on days when mars isn’t cloudy. EZPZ
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 16:05:14 UTC No. 16548343
>>16548309
I want that t-shirt lol
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 16:08:10 UTC No. 16548345
remover la atmósfera
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 16:13:27 UTC No. 16548353
>>16547908
https://maxpolyakov.com/biography/
Allowed to invest in US space companies again.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 16:24:53 UTC No. 16548364
>>16548343
me too, but only after she has finished running a marathon with it
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 16:31:21 UTC No. 16548368
>>16548292
FUCK DAMN SHIT CUNTS GO CLIMB A WALL OF DICKS
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 16:37:39 UTC No. 16548375
w-what about BONG though? Am I dumb for even asking?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 16:38:17 UTC No. 16548376
>>16548309
It could be worse, it could be the days after STS-135.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 16:40:27 UTC No. 16548377
>>16548375
Still on schedule for tonight.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 16:50:37 UTC No. 16548387
>>16548377
why do they INSIST on launching (or trying to launch) at such inconvenient hours?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 16:51:01 UTC No. 16548389
>>16548374
Physical dimensions could be one problem. Fitting two landers and a payload adapter (and custom building the adapter) is a lot more difficult than booking a solo flight. Dual manifest missions only worked out so cleanly for Ariane 4 and 5 because Arianespace specifically designed it as a standardized option.
There's also a lot of variability in TLI trajectories. Nova C's preferred flight path might not match with Griffin's, and Falcon 9 might not be able to hit either if it has to carry both payloads. Falcon 9 is a "low-energy rocket" after all. If that's the case they'd have to launch on a Falcon Heavy and that could wipe out the cost savings of flying tandem.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 16:53:15 UTC No. 16548391
I'M GONNA BLOW MY FUCKING BRAINS OUT
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 16:54:02 UTC No. 16548393
>>16548387
The working theory is that they're practicing for TLI launches. Last night's Falcon 9 lunar mission launched around the same time that New Glenn's launch window has been scheduled to open.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 16:56:15 UTC No. 16548394
>>16548374
I wish I could read
https://nextspaceflight.com/launche
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:04:07 UTC No. 16548397
>>16547918
If it only costs them
incrementally
5 dollars a customer
how can they sell it for 100 dollars in the USA and 10 in africa
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:05:50 UTC No. 16548399
Didnt know Falcon 9 had different second stage configurations.
https://www.elonx.net/falcon-rocket
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:08:22 UTC No. 16548400
>>16548387
Fewer eyeballs to criticize the failure (it WILL crash land into the ship).
Fewer eyeballs to highlight how incredibly late and extremely expensive all of it was (ironic because this equally priced and only marginally better turd-girl is set to help replace orange rocket with exactly the same characteristics).
Also, nobody cares. Everything they do is painfully cringe, its best to keep that on TV after midnight, remember how bad the infomercials used to be when its very late at night, its like that slot of content
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:11:10 UTC No. 16548406
>>16548393
i can accept that but still, Apollo managed nice morning launches apart from that one time. that was very considerate
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:12:09 UTC No. 16548409
>>16548381
Why has elon become so unambitious about starship?
>yeah idk if we'll be able to deploy fake starlinks
>idk if heat shield will work
>we're also doing a manned flyby in 2 years
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:12:43 UTC No. 16548410
>>16548404
Here, I Grok'd it for ya:
The Falcon 9 rocket has a theoretical payload capacity to Trans-Lunar Injection (TLI) of around 3.5 to 4 metric tons (3,500 to 4,000 kg). This capability depends on several factors, such as:
>Payload mass and design: The payload's configuration and its need for additional propulsion or systems can affect the performance.
>Mission profile: The exact trajectory, desired lunar orbit, or landing requirements can modify the injection energy and reduce payload capacity.
>Reuse strategy: Falcon 9 missions using a reusable first stage may have a reduced payload capacity compared to an expendable configuration.
For missions where the first stage is expended (not recovered), the payload capacity to TLI increases, though specific figures are not readily available.
For heavier payloads to TLI, SpaceX offers the Falcon Heavy rocket, which can deliver up to 16,000 kg (35,000 lb) to a translunar trajectory.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:12:52 UTC No. 16548411
>>16548400
it definitely doesnt look confident
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:13:21 UTC No. 16548412
https://www.stokespace.com/stoke-sp
>January 15, 2025 — Stoke Space, the rocket company building the world’s first 100% reusable medium-lift rocket, announced today that it has raised $260 million in new Series C investment to drive continued growth and innovation. This investment more than doubles the company’s total funding, bringing it to $480 million.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:13:55 UTC No. 16548413
>>16548404
if you know the GTO value then you should be able to figure it out
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:15:55 UTC No. 16548416
>>16548409
ketamine withdrawal
I told you all that his recent spergouts were because he increased the dosage. Probably realized that it's no good and is cutting now
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:25:31 UTC No. 16548423
>>16548409
Elon has made these kind of comments on every Starship launch my tourist friend.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:28:41 UTC No. 16548428
>>16548412
>fully reusable medium lift with a memespike
Sounds like dry mass hell
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:28:41 UTC No. 16548429
>>16548409
?
its a test launch
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:33:55 UTC No. 16548433
>>16548428
with LH2 and reuse
might still be a good idea if it were bigger
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:34:30 UTC No. 16548434
>>16548428
Hydrolox upper. The memespike is just a ciruclar array of nozzles powered by two turbopumps, which are submerged inside the heat shield area to lower the center of mass during reentry. The first stage needs to do a high loft throw to get any measurable payload to orbit, so it'll have an interesting time.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:38:39 UTC No. 16548437
chances that BONG gets delayed again so they don't have to launch first?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:40:07 UTC No. 16548442
>>16548437
50% I reckon
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:40:49 UTC No. 16548443
>>16548434
Lets them do ass first reentry
Probably a decent idea
But SpaceX is clearly optimizing for payload with their design, this is more investor bait
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:54:12 UTC No. 16548457
>>16548456
Trees are a problem? They didn't stop Amazonian tribes from getting online, what gives?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:55:22 UTC No. 16548459
>>16548456
a few minutes in a message from a guy saying
>sup elon, you ketamine riddled narc. pew pew
is on the screen for several minutes
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:58:05 UTC No. 16548460
>>16548437
>9000%
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:08:38 UTC No. 16548470
>>16548456
How much do you think he spent on this account?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:10:20 UTC No. 16548472
>>16548471
nice to see a space rat settling into an earthly life
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:10:49 UTC No. 16548473
>>16548456
Wow, elon is pretty good at this game
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:13:55 UTC No. 16548477
I'm excited for the Blue Origin New Glenn Orbital (BONGO) launch
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:14:03 UTC No. 16548478
>>16548473
he bought his account
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:17:22 UTC No. 16548482
>>16548397
Because the infrastructure costs justify the higher price and the fact that they can increase their profits by selling in countries that can't afford the US price justifies the lower price.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:18:15 UTC No. 16548483
>>16548477
um....Bongo?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:18:58 UTC No. 16548485
>>16548471
your rock seems furry
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:19:43 UTC No. 16548486
>>16548485
preposterous, it's a trick of the light
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:22:04 UTC No. 16548488
>>16548478
I don't understand why someone would do that, a game is for having fun with, if you don't want to take the time to play it then you don't have to.
What's the point if you're not having fun? Then it's just work.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:23:28 UTC No. 16548491
>>16548478
Smart of him. Let's him focus more on SpaceX/Tesla than no-life running PoE
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:24:11 UTC No. 16548492
>>16548488
I don't think people play PoE HC for "fun"
And Elon doesn't have the time to dump hundreds of hours grinding
Its fun to play for a bit though, dnno why he pretends to have levelled/geared the chars to get there though
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:25:39 UTC No. 16548494
>>16548478
He relies on Yilongma for that
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:25:44 UTC No. 16548495
>>16548471
I think that might be a muffin. You should take a bite of it to find out.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:26:35 UTC No. 16548496
>>16548478
now I wanna see elons bought runescape account
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:26:41 UTC No. 16548497
>>16548416
ketamine is fucked up
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:28:25 UTC No. 16548503
>>16548429
Mk3 was supposed to go to orbit in 2020
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:28:42 UTC No. 16548505
>>16548477
MARACAS or bust
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:29:54 UTC No. 16548506
>>16548497
it turns into a space simulator if you do enough
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:30:30 UTC No. 16548508
>>16548492
I'm confused at this, where does elon actually "pretend" this? did he say explicitly that he grinded to that level all by himself? or is it just people getting mad that he skipped the grind with money
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:30:35 UTC No. 16548509
>>16548492
He got shit on for his elden ring build. So his autism tells him he must be the very best to look cool to the kids.
His election campaigning might have done this to him also.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:31:01 UTC No. 16548510
>>16548503
the FAA is holding him back
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:32:48 UTC No. 16548512
>>16548510
only for 5 more days, then the reckoning begins
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:32:53 UTC No. 16548513
>>16548508
it's technically against the games TOS
although elon owns an ISP so idk how they would bust him for it
could have his booster level on starlink then use that IP himself on starlink and no one can tell
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:33:35 UTC No. 16548514
you could make a game as successful as poe2 and still not be able to afford a single dragon 2 launch
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:34:59 UTC No. 16548516
>>16548513
If I was the company who owned PoE2, I would personally boost Elon's character as high as he wants, tos be damned. Free advertisement
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:35:24 UTC No. 16548517
how are these commercial lunar landers supposed to be profitable if a single starship can bring more cargo than 10 of them combined, but for a fraction of the cost of 1 of them?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:36:19 UTC No. 16548519
>>16548517
Maybe somebody only wants to land 15 grams on the moon and Starship is too big for that?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:36:26 UTC No. 16548520
>>16548508
RMT and boosting is against the TOS. Also he went on Toe Rogaine and claimed to be a god gamer because he had a bugged build in D4 which also may or may not have been boosted because you don't have time for that level of shit if you run multiple companies.
The only thing people wonder is why the fuck he felt the need to pretend to be a god gamer when the average 10 hour player could see straight through his bullshit.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:36:37 UTC No. 16548521
>>16548505
AAAAA
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:38:03 UTC No. 16548524
>>16548517
Starship can't carry shit
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:39:13 UTC No. 16548525
>>16548520
Diablo is so easy his booster account looked plausible
POE2 it was blatant
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:42:56 UTC No. 16548529
>>16548524
As opposed to?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:43:30 UTC No. 16548530
>>16548529
needs 100 launches to make it to the moon
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:45:40 UTC No. 16548532
>>16548530
1000 launches to TLI. its official
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:45:42 UTC No. 16548533
>>16548525
Diablo might be easy but it's still a fucking slog to play. Also that super duper build used a buffer over/underflow to do retarded damage.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:46:07 UTC No. 16548534
>>16548530
>launch one starship into leo
>a dozen large commercial landers are carried inside
>they fly to the moon for 1/10th of the cost, delivering 12 times the payload
hmmmmmmmmmmm
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:48:50 UTC No. 16548537
>>16547994
Starship might genuinely be able to survive that, judging by how the FTS went on the first flight
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:52:41 UTC No. 16548539
>>16548530
The much less capable Falcon 9 has had multiple lunar missions. How many levels of tourism are you on to think you can't put something on the moon without dragging the entire Starship upper stage there?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 18:56:32 UTC No. 16548542
>>16548539
the falcon 9 doesn't land its stage 2 on the moon then fly it back sir
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 19:06:00 UTC No. 16548552
>>16548542
Just one realization away, and yet so far
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 19:06:25 UTC No. 16548554
>>16548516
Depends on whether the Ceo has EDS or not. It would be pretty funny to come out and ban Elon for cheating on stream. What he's doing is rather petty.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 19:08:29 UTC No. 16548558
>>16548554
Yeah gamers really are the biggest fags on the planet
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 19:20:09 UTC No. 16548565
>>16547861
so is DOGE-1 officially dead now?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 19:35:29 UTC No. 16548571
A 18m diameter Shartship could launch a reconnaissance satellite powerful enough to see what shitpost your are posting on your mobile phone
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 19:36:19 UTC No. 16548572
>>16548571
not if I post indoors.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 19:39:37 UTC No. 16548573
>>16548572
>he doesn't know
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 19:46:49 UTC No. 16548575
>>16548381
pre-coping is always a good strat
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 20:03:39 UTC No. 16548585
>china wants to win the war against america and taiwan
why arent they investing in space battleships if its the ultimate high ground? who's going to stop rods from god?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 20:06:03 UTC No. 16548587
>>16548585
the tungsten rod meme only makes sense if for some reason you can't use nuclear explosions, or if you already have a thriving BELTA economy
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 20:06:55 UTC No. 16548588
My top three planets are:
Mars
Titan
Triton
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 20:09:11 UTC No. 16548589
>>16548588
Mars is not a moon
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 20:10:14 UTC No. 16548590
>>16548588
mid tier takes
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 20:12:22 UTC No. 16548592
https://x.com/ESA_transport/status/
>The second Ariane 6 rocket is now standing tall on the launch pad. This week technicians Guiana Space Center have been busy assembling Europe's newest rocket in the run-up to launch.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 20:12:23 UTC No. 16548593
>>16548588
Mars>venus>ceres
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 20:13:22 UTC No. 16548596
>>16548592
comfy launch site
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 20:16:00 UTC No. 16548599
>>16548592
If ariane 6 launches before SS/NG then this general becomes a french one
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 20:16:05 UTC No. 16548600
>>16548592
>europoors use ramps for aircraft carriers
>now they use ramps for rockets
how fucking poor can we get
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 20:17:11 UTC No. 16548601
WHEN IS SOMETHING GOING TO LAUNCH
IF I WANTED TO SEE AN OVERSIZED ROD THAT DOENT GET ANY ACTION, ID PULL DOWN MY PANTS
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 20:18:31 UTC No. 16548602
I love doomposting /sfg/ so much.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 20:18:57 UTC No. 16548603
>>16548601
>no launches
>no (un)dockings
>no spacewalks
>no space weather
>not even any news
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 20:21:05 UTC No. 16548607
we'll have less than 100 total launches this year and no big rockets will get to space. 2025 will be the great depression for spaceflight.
screencap this
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 20:22:51 UTC No. 16548609
>>16548599
T minus 40 days
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 20:24:13 UTC No. 16548611
>>16548600
>ramps
vents
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 20:28:13 UTC No. 16548615
>>16548607
>>16548602
It's not working. I remember the (((Shuttle))) era
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 20:29:36 UTC No. 16548616
>>16548588
For me, it's Inceladus over Triton
>>16548590
It's a pretty good list, considering how few bodies in the solar system have anything interesting going on
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 20:32:49 UTC No. 16548618
>>16548613
>german writing on the wall
imagine not even building your own spacecraft. what a disgrace of a "company"
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 20:34:25 UTC No. 16548619
>>16548457
line of sight is needed so yes trees are a problem
but with dense enough satellite coverage I guess they can work around with it by getting the signal through in spots that aren't blocked
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 20:35:51 UTC No. 16548621
nominal deorbit burn
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 20:37:33 UTC No. 16548622
>>16548602
you have no power here
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 20:46:06 UTC No. 16548627
https://x.com/Firefly_Space/status/
>The first of many on-orbit shots from Blue Ghost! Stay tuned for more “roadside” attractions on our trip to the Moon with NASA
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 20:46:37 UTC No. 16548628
I wanna do a 3d model of Starship.
It's so cool
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 20:55:54 UTC No. 16548635
only 9h until BONG starts delaying launch every 20 minutes until it gets scrubbed after 3h of delays
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:01:26 UTC No. 16548641
>>16548639
they announced the delay hours and hours ago
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:02:32 UTC No. 16548642
>>16548641
I know but I just got off work, figured others would be in my shoes too
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:02:57 UTC No. 16548643
https://x.com/highfreqhertz/status/
>Listen to what Susan Hassett had to say about rocket reuse during the FAA virtual meeting. Shows how moronic these environmentalists are, they understand nothing of what they criticize.
>"Uh, one speaker said that, it, their, uh, reusable, the only reusable rocket. Well, that's not really true because we've got the, um, space center, that is orbiting, and we go back and forth to that quite a bit, and we can now land back on the United States. But when we, who makes the arbitrary decision that, uh, this particular section of this rocket is no longer good and then we just dump it in the ocean. And when we dump it in the ocean we're dealing with heavy metals, we're dealing with oils, hydrocarbons, oxygens--"
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:03:54 UTC No. 16548645
>>16548635
they clearly dont want anyone staying up to watch it live.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:04:57 UTC No. 16548647
>launch with two lunar landers
>almost nobody in spaceflight community cares
what went wrong? is the moon normalized now?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:08:24 UTC No. 16548649
>>16548647
there were no humans aboard
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:17:05 UTC No. 16548656
>>16548649
Probe Lives Matter
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:19:01 UTC No. 16548658
>>16548647
But I -- I just have to say, pretty bluntly here, we've been there before.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:20:47 UTC No. 16548661
>>16548647
Launches are routine. We'll all tune in excited for the landings
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:22:24 UTC No. 16548663
>>16548647
the launching is pretty much as interesting as any other launch
the landings of the lunar landers are not going to happen for a while
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:23:34 UTC No. 16548665
>>16548647
call me when they land with a person inside
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:25:32 UTC No. 16548666
why haven't we sent rovers to the moon like we did with mars? It's way cheaper, easier and faster to get them there, so why haven't we got a hundred already?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:31:57 UTC No. 16548670
I just got back from work, how much time do I have until the Starship launch?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:33:40 UTC No. 16548671
>>16548670
Scrub. Rocket tipped over
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:34:07 UTC No. 16548672
>>16548670
nwyell...
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:34:14 UTC No. 16548673
>>16548666
>why haven't we sent rovers to the moon like we did with mars?
We have.
>why haven't we got a hundred
No commercial profit in it.
Not much interesting science to do there either.
Not much national prestige in it either, ever since Armstrong/etc went up there in person.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:34:32 UTC No. 16548674
>>16548670
another day at least. same for BONGO
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:34:47 UTC No. 16548675
>>16548670
2 weeks
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:37:12 UTC No. 16548678
We would be tuning into the stream right now...
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:37:20 UTC No. 16548679
>>16548675
>>16548674
>>16548672
>>16548671
This is becoming utterly shambolic.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:40:48 UTC No. 16548681
>go outside
>weather is sunny, 65 degrees and nearly perfect today
>should be great for launch
>check starbase weather
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:41:14 UTC No. 16548683
>>16548666
Lunar nights are >>16548675 long and it's hard to keep the equipment working through multiple deep freezes (unless you use plutonium I guess.)
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:44:55 UTC No. 16548685
>>16548683
Is there a case for solar farm in lunar orbit to power equipment down on the surface?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:45:26 UTC No. 16548686
>>16548679
it seems to be the Week of Suspense.
>>16548683
RTGs should be standard issue
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:45:52 UTC No. 16548687
>>16548683
I don't see why this must be the case. What's the point of failure, batteries freezing? Can't somebody just make a rover that uses just solar power with maybe some dry capacitors?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:47:12 UTC No. 16548691
>>16548685
Might be the ONE (1) case where beaming down microwave power from orbit makes sense. You could even skip the rectenna, just have the rover being constantly microwaved to keep it warm.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:47:18 UTC No. 16548692
>Starbase dishwashers make $20 USD an hour
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:47:57 UTC No. 16548693
>>16548692
Honest pay for honest work.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:48:00 UTC No. 16548694
>>16548692
source?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:52:34 UTC No. 16548698
>>16548692
its a high cadence reusability program with exceptionally high refurbishment standards
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:56:38 UTC No. 16548700
>>16548692
Do you need ITAR clearance to wash dishes at starbase? In case, like, someone happens to draw something secret with sauce on the plate while discussing work stuff over the lunch
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:56:40 UTC No. 16548701
>Spacecraft Cleanliness Technician
space janny
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:57:33 UTC No. 16548702
>>16548647
The last two landers I was excited for fell over.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 22:00:27 UTC No. 16548705
>>16548702
at least this one looks more reasonably proportioned. lets hope they switched the landing system on this time
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 22:06:02 UTC No. 16548706
One technical scrub makes a second one more likely.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 22:06:19 UTC No. 16548708
>>16548647
I’ve seen falcon launch before
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 22:08:07 UTC No. 16548710
Im gonna sleep early tonight. Not worth caring about New Gl*nn
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 22:11:21 UTC No. 16548712
>nsf guy thinks that starship will land on the moon this year
how likely is this? seems unlikely to me.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 22:14:00 UTC No. 16548715
>>16548712
they should just fire one at it and do a seismic test like back in the good old days
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 22:14:46 UTC No. 16548717
>>16548712
Zero chance
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 22:15:40 UTC No. 16548719
>>16548712
100% is gonna happen
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 22:19:57 UTC No. 16548722
>>16548666
>why haven't we sent rovers to the moon like we did with mars?
i think we'll get large rovers in the 2030s. even if we have a moon base, sending people onto the surface is a hassle. better to have remotely operated rovers running around on the surface finding points of interest for humans to visit later. there's alot of moon out there.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 22:20:01 UTC No. 16548723
>>16548719
so long as the weather cooperates
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 22:21:59 UTC No. 16548727
>>16548712
unlikely but not impossible
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 22:31:34 UTC No. 16548731
>>16548712
Oh I believe it
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 22:38:33 UTC No. 16548739
>>16548733
>>16548735
>>16548737
>>16548738
Your mom's new dildo is here.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 22:41:39 UTC No. 16548743
>>16548733
>>16548735
>>16548737
>>16548738
thank you for posting a shitty grain silo. What does this have to do with spaceflight though?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 22:46:15 UTC No. 16548744
>>16548739
>>16548743
Blue origin bros... BEGONE
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 22:49:26 UTC No. 16548747
Starship is so fucking ugly
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 22:52:13 UTC No. 16548748
>>16548747
lke ur mom
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 22:53:22 UTC No. 16548750
Any hopes of switching back to a 12m-diameter configuration in this decade? I know, they would have to make lots of changes for stage zero and the launch site, perhaps taking years, but is it really that hard in upscaling-ry??
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 22:55:24 UTC No. 16548752
just seven more hours until New Glenn scrubs again! I hope it all goes smoothly
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 23:01:44 UTC No. 16548755
>>16548609
What would Ariane employees do if they bilt a few reusable rockets? What then? There would be no more work for the employees!
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 23:01:48 UTC No. 16548756
>>16548754
it kind of feels like a race now
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 23:03:41 UTC No. 16548758
>>16548705
Here's hoping anon, I do like moon landers even if they're mere tech demonstrators.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 23:06:13 UTC No. 16548760
>>16548756
a race to see who can launch last, yes.
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 23:06:33 UTC No. 16548761
>>16548755
>There would be no more work for the employees!
Pretty much. Turns out reusable rockets don't actually make sense when your ambition caps out at just eleven launches per year
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 23:07:00 UTC No. 16548762
>>16548712
They wont even do the refueling demo this year
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 23:07:14 UTC No. 16548763
>>16548754
>Some of you will stay up for this.
me, I'll be the retard that stays up to watch the scrub. I just hope Clear will stream this time...
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 23:08:34 UTC No. 16548764
>>16548762
wiki says its ift-9 and 10
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 23:16:01 UTC No. 16548767
>>16548758
they're great when they dont fall over
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 23:16:55 UTC No. 16548768
>>16548756
begun, the scrub wars have
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 23:18:55 UTC No. 16548770
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 23:32:20 UTC No. 16548773
>>16548768
>order 66
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 23:44:42 UTC No. 16548783
It would be funny if they delayed the launch once again
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 23:45:47 UTC No. 16548784
>>16548783
prepare your sides then
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 23:47:49 UTC No. 16548785
where's the "remove the atmosphere" anon
I'm all ears
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 23:56:15 UTC No. 16548787
>>16548412
>building the world’s first 100% reusable
wat
>medium-lift rocket
makes sense lol
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 23:57:47 UTC No. 16548788
>>16548647
Those that care, care. The ones that only "care" about governments dont care
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 23:58:31 UTC No. 16548789
NEW baker needed?
Anonymous at Wed, 15 Jan 2025 23:59:42 UTC No. 16548791
>>16548712
Somewhat likely. Starship hasnt been a problem. The heatshields are a non issue for moon. The relights of the engines are probably a non issues now, if not now, then in the next one. They'll work out the bugs. But its very likely next year its gonna happen.
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 00:08:53 UTC No. 16548794
https://x.com/vast/status/187967398
>The Haven-1 primary structure qualification article has arrived at our Mojave, CA test site. The team is now conducting lift operations to install the article on the test stand.
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 00:14:26 UTC No. 16548799
>>16548794
Shape-wise, it reminds me of Salyut.
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 00:21:41 UTC No. 16548801
>>16548754
Why can't the bozo get his big cilinder up
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 00:27:49 UTC No. 16548805
>>16548801
its just stage fright. after the first one it'll get better
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 00:33:42 UTC No. 16548807
>>16548785
Stop the core and artificially increase solar activity, inshallah it will be stripped away.
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 00:35:19 UTC No. 16548808
>>16548794
me when I’m a pressure vessel built by a gay company
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 00:36:33 UTC No. 16548809
I wonder if GS2 has a hydrolox limit on retanks. They’ve been trying to launch this thing for a week now
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 00:37:33 UTC No. 16548810
If your space company at all involves the state of california you’re ngmi
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 00:38:40 UTC No. 16548811
>>16548810
spacex...
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 00:42:05 UTC No. 16548812
>>16548794
>milled aluminum
just use steel, mexican welders would have done that in three days in a tent
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 00:48:37 UTC No. 16548818
1138th for zubrin
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 00:56:34 UTC No. 16548826
The CCCP had more faith of the heart than modern Russia; how did it come to this
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 01:08:05 UTC No. 16548832
>>16548643
I think I lost 10 IQ just reading that.
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 01:11:23 UTC No. 16548834
>>16548758
one of the ones on the way is the replacement for the upside-down one. (is the "R" in HAKUTO-R for "Retry"?)
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 01:15:59 UTC No. 16548836
>>16548832
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=glj
The complete fun starts at 24:00
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 01:25:26 UTC No. 16548838
>>16548836
tldw, what's the difference between this and that public hearing that took place some years ago? That was a good day in this general, couldn't stop laughing.
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 01:26:46 UTC No. 16548840
Someone push us to page 10 so I can whine about new thread not being made
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 01:27:34 UTC No. 16548841
>>16548840
why not resetting the page counter instead
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 01:28:23 UTC No. 16548842
>>16548841
It still says page 9 retard
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 01:29:38 UTC No. 16548843
>>16548841
Blue Urine moment
>>16548842
Hi jeff
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 01:30:49 UTC No. 16548844
>>16548838
This one is new, just happened on the Monday
>I am a Hawaiian and I demand a full EIS because all of the pacific is essential to Hawaii
>Boca Chica holds deep personal significance to my family because now my son can't ever go to the beach like his great grandfather did
>but he does still go there every week and now he never sees any fish so SpaceX is bad for the environment
>I live in Port Isabel and I feel that the FAA has allowed SpaceX to do whatever they want so I DEMAND a new EIS
>The last EIS is irrelevant because it was for "very small rockets"
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 01:33:24 UTC No. 16548847
>>16548844
So far there have been three guys and they all sounded fairly positive. Every woman is acting like they just got empaneled for Pete Hegseth's confirmation hearing
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 01:40:02 UTC No. 16548849
>>16548050
you are my favorite poster
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 01:40:17 UTC No. 16548850
After listening to a bunch of these commenters I'm growing more and more convinced that, while Starship is potentially revolutionary as a launch vehicle, it's even more of a game changer when deployed as a county-sized NIMBY-targeting jeetshaker
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 01:46:03 UTC No. 16548852
clear pls bless this launch
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 01:50:39 UTC No. 16548853
HOPP
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 01:51:31 UTC No. 16548855
its time to become spaceflight analysts to make that big paper bros
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 01:52:26 UTC No. 16548856
>>16548852
that bitch is gonna cry again
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 01:52:50 UTC No. 16548857
https://x.com/NerdyKowboy/status/18
>NASA WB-57 is ready to support the Blue Origin launch tonight. Look for live Infrared video streaming from over 350 miles downrange to capture the first stage landing on the barge.
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 01:57:09 UTC No. 16548859
>>16548856
She has mild rocket autism and loves seeing successful launches. pls understand
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 02:01:06 UTC No. 16548861
>>16548586
>visible Saturn rings
>from Titan
lol
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 02:02:27 UTC No. 16548862
Is the launch thread anon going to bake a bo thread?
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 02:04:27 UTC No. 16548863
>>16548861
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artis
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 02:15:32 UTC No. 16548867
>>16548593
Beenus sucks
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 02:16:33 UTC No. 16548868
https://x.com/blueorigin/status/187
>Propellant loading is underway.
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 02:17:34 UTC No. 16548869
>>16548867
Bejit- I mean, Beenus bros....
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 02:20:22 UTC No. 16548871
>>16548863
lol
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 02:21:25 UTC No. 16548874
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yt
is this shit worth watching
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 02:23:31 UTC No. 16548876
>>16548874
one look at the account thumbnail and i can tell you the answer is no
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 02:28:46 UTC No. 16548877
>>16548874
>literal troon
What do you think idiot
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 02:35:19 UTC No. 16548882
>>16548050
I hate you so fucking much spongenigger. I'm going to dry you out then soak you in gasoline and set you on fire.
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 02:37:35 UTC No. 16548886
>>16548877
i think shes just ugly
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 02:40:52 UTC No. 16548893
https://x.com/SpaceflightNow/status
>Blue Origin announced that propellant loading for its New Glenn rocket was underway at 9 pm EST (0200 UTC). The process begins with stage 2 liquid hydrogen at T-4.5 hours, followed by liquid oxygen on the 1st and 2nd stages at T-4 hours.
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 02:44:59 UTC No. 16548898
>>16548877
Listen to her voice and say that again, idiot
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 02:48:10 UTC No. 16548904
Expert tranny identifier here, that is a real woman.
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 02:48:13 UTC No. 16548905
>>16548874
>11 minutes of video
>2 minutes of answering the question in the title
??????????
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 02:52:45 UTC No. 16548912
Why would i open the launch stream when it;s just gonna scrub again? Answer this in as few words as possible
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 02:53:29 UTC No. 16548913
>literally names himself expert transperson identifier
and you say youre not obsessed. chuds are pathetic
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 02:53:44 UTC No. 16548915
>>16548912
cute clear
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 02:54:53 UTC No. 16548918
>>16548915
I see no scheduled nooglin stream on her channel, only starship
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 02:54:58 UTC No. 16548919
>>16548915
Transqt3.14 btw
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 02:55:58 UTC No. 16548920
>>16548918
so not a real launch.
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 02:56:31 UTC No. 16548924
>>16548920
she is like berger, aka a hack fraud
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 02:56:44 UTC No. 16548925
>>16548918
Back to twitter
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 02:57:35 UTC No. 16548927
>>16548925
>twitter
what's that?
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 02:57:56 UTC No. 16548928
>>16548912
you like edging
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 03:00:30 UTC No. 16548931
>>16548918
BONG is launching during business hours in Japan, that's why. Clear is not a NEET
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 03:01:32 UTC No. 16548934
Hello. Im here to collect your (You) dues, please deposit them in the replies.
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 03:02:27 UTC No. 16548936
>>16548915nah mate
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 03:03:28 UTC No. 16548938
>>16548934r penis is small
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 03:04:10 UTC No. 16548939
fuck you
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 03:04:51 UTC No. 16548940
^
don't reply to me or post in my thread ever again
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 03:05:28 UTC No. 16548941
>>16548938
Sir theres no need to insult taxman
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 03:14:17 UTC No. 16548950
>>16548948
>throwing away 1/12th of your entire fleet on the first lunch
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 03:15:45 UTC No. 16548952
>>16548950
they are quoted as saying they have another booster “deep in development”
So yeah kek likely a long time before the second attempt
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 03:22:43 UTC No. 16548960
I’m going to bed hope it blows up
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 03:24:08 UTC No. 16548961
>>16548952
>>16548950
that's numberwang
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 03:24:44 UTC No. 16548963
>>16548948
scrub confirmed
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 03:31:50 UTC No. 16548968
has blorigin set up a new stream yet?
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 03:35:38 UTC No. 16548972
>>16548968
not that I can see. I'll make the next thread have launch thread stuff in the op when we hit page 10
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 03:41:16 UTC No. 16548976
>>16548973
you can almost exactly tell what parts other people first came up with, and what parts were purely “Indian” in concept here
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 03:42:39 UTC No. 16548978
>>16548973
I like the ambition but there is no way in hell this thing is making a 2032 launch date. Indian propulsion engineering is just too inexperienced
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 03:47:55 UTC No. 16548984
>>16548983
>basically 50/50
back to sleep everybody
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 03:49:07 UTC No. 16548985
>>16548973
I honestly have more hope in ISRO than western oldspace companies at this point
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 03:50:25 UTC No. 16548986
>>16548836
I hate Hawaiians so much it's unreal
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 03:51:11 UTC No. 16548988
Bring a whore to the watching area and DICK HER DOWN in front the rocket!
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 03:52:53 UTC No. 16548989
Is it funnier if BONG fails spectacularly or succeeds but stays irrelevant forever?
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 03:53:53 UTC No. 16548991
>>16548988
disrespectful to the rocket
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 03:53:56 UTC No. 16548992
>>16548989
spacex needs competition
and starlink
it drives innovation
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 03:55:47 UTC No. 16548995
>>16548989
I want SpaceX to have compatetion but I also want the oldspace ways to just die already.
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 03:56:40 UTC No. 16548996
>>16548992
The Schumpter's Gale (in explosion form) needs to get Blue Origin off the stage so some real competition can arise
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 03:57:00 UTC No. 16548998
>still no stream
blorg com on
I need it for the next OP
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 03:58:06 UTC No. 16548999
>>16548986
The worst part is we don't even have any good slurs for them. Blacks, Latinos, Jews? We've got great slurs for all the rest, but somehow these degenerate hypocritical Polynesian hillbillies got completely passed over.
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 03:59:32 UTC No. 16549000
>>16548996
Then*
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 03:59:33 UTC No. 16549001
>>16548989
I want BONG to send Bezo's mum to the bottom of the ocean for his audacity to patent droneship landing.
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 03:59:40 UTC No. 16549002
>>16548931
This is more devastating to hear than to learn he was a guy
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:01:13 UTC No. 16549003
>>16548799
Same reason. It has to fit in a rocket fairing. Anything else short of orbital welding assembly looks like either Skylab (wet/dry workshop), Mir (mess of self docking modules),or the ISS (tin cans and trusses assembled by a robot arm).
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:02:29 UTC No. 16549006
>>16548812
It still has to go up on F9 so it's mass constrained. Their future Starship-aligned modules might be made of steel since the constraints become cost and volume.
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:02:46 UTC No. 16549007
>>16548984
>50% chads keep on winning
glad I picked the right team
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:03:49 UTC No. 16549008
>>16548997
which flight
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:04:10 UTC No. 16549009
>>16549002
Itasha rockets when?
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:05:36 UTC No. 16549010
>>16548997
>oh_the_humanity.wav
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:06:04 UTC No. 16549012
https://x.com/TLPN_Official/status/
>NG-1 UPDATE: Hearing Blue Origin is working through cryo checkouts and are currently on track for 1:00am ET (6:00 UTC) New Glenn launch! Adjustments to the countdown timeline have been made to try to resolve ice forming on the purge line of a auxiliary power unit that powers some hydraulic systems; which was the cause of first launch attempt scrub. Blue is still concerned about the weather but if need to, will hold the count and wait for a weather gap!
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:06:50 UTC No. 16549013
>>16548997
that'll buff out
>>16549008
nobody who knows will say, but probably 4 or 5
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:07:35 UTC No. 16549014
https://x.com/ISROSpaceflight/statu
> SPADEX DOCKING IS ACHIEVED
>ISRO has successfully docked 2 spacecrafts in Earth orbit for the first time. This makes India the 4th nation to indigenously develop docking technology & it's also a crucial milestone for ISRO's future missions
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:08:11 UTC No. 16549016
>>16548997
is it supposed to do that?
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:10:42 UTC No. 16549018
>>16548997
how tf did it still manage to do a landing burn?
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:10:43 UTC No. 16549019
>>16549013
not test 3?
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:10:57 UTC No. 16549020
>>16548997
w-what am I looking at?
Apologize at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:14:16 UTC No. 16549021
>>16548997
pretty impressive it still managed to land. They really just need to figure out the shielding, but Starship is looking like a solid design
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:14:35 UTC No. 16549022
>>16549020
starship's fairing during reentry i would assume
Apologize at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:20:41 UTC No. 16549024
Starship could potentially transport up to 1000 Indians, directly from India to the USA, in less than 45 minutes per ship
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:21:10 UTC No. 16549025
>>16549019
flight 3 broke apart and lost communications because of it rolling uncontrollably, this picture shows the most heat concentrated around the flap hinge area which wouldn't be possible with the roll
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:22:29 UTC No. 16549026
97 MINUTES TO GO
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:25:05 UTC No. 16549030
The first recorded meteorite impact with sound happened a few days ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJJ
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:25:19 UTC No. 16549031
blorgin where the fuck is the stream?
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:25:44 UTC No. 16549032
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:26:05 UTC No. 16549033
>>16548874
Mommy..
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:26:17 UTC No. 16549034
>>16549030
Transformers vibes
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:26:37 UTC No. 16549035
>>16549030
weird how rocks just kinda do that sometimes.
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:29:48 UTC No. 16549037
>>16549030
idk why this is funny to me
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:29:50 UTC No. 16549038
>>16549034
how? it looks like a piece of ash hit the ground.
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:30:04 UTC No. 16549039
Can't stay up for another scrub tonight.
See you all at the Starship flight friends.
>>>/wsg/5787009
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:33:29 UTC No. 16549043
>>16548931
not like this...
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:37:04 UTC No. 16549046
is there an official BO stream yet?
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:37:38 UTC No. 16549047
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:37:51 UTC No. 16549048
>>16549038
Well, I can't find them right now, but I swear there is a myriad of scenes in the whole saga with the same exact sound and visual effect. Michael Bay was ahead of his time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHy
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:47:47 UTC No. 16549058
>nsf commenter has a full time job and still works round the clock for nsf
what's /sfg/ doing with their lives?
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:49:20 UTC No. 16549060
>>16549058
stuck in a small town washing fucking cars
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:50:25 UTC No. 16549061
>>16549058
stuck at a nasa contract doing nothing all day
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:51:58 UTC No. 16549063
>>16549021
This survived because the prototypes are massively overbuilt with large structural margin. Look at the massive trusses for the front flaps holding them on.
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:52:11 UTC No. 16549064
>>16549031
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hm
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:52:40 UTC No. 16549066
>>16548508
The biggest chance I've seen is when they talked about it on joe rogan and it would've been a really obvious time to say "btw I didnt' grind this myself" when joe is gushing about how much time it would take to achieve this combined with a normal job, let alone running a company or several companies. It's a willful lie by omission, full stop. I give zero fucks how elon does or doesn't play games, how good or bad he is, but if he feels the need to fool people about that, that only seems like a window into his personality to lie about something so petty and unnecessary. It's not just goals and timetables that feel through anymore. He's "that kid". Authenticity is over, I have to wait for actual evidence for everything he's said now just to feel optimism. Is mars just a lie to stir investor enthusiasm and the only real goal is starlink? Is he actually chief engineer of starship? Did elon buy twitter to save free speech or did he just want to start his own everything app? Are his politics real or did he want to be on the right side of populism and make an easy lay up for political power after seeing metrics from X? Does he take AI threats seriously or did he just want to be the leader? I don't have a reason to think he's lying about any of these. But there's little question he's capable of it.
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:52:42 UTC No. 16549067
>>16549020
>>16549008
autists are saying S29
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:53:25 UTC No. 16549068
>>16549058
your mom, mostly
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:54:10 UTC No. 16549071
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:54:48 UTC No. 16549073
>>16549066
Those are exactly my sentimonies
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:55:37 UTC No. 16549075
wen scrub
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:56:15 UTC No. 16549076
>>16549075
4 hours
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:57:25 UTC No. 16549078
61 MINUTES TO GO !
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:57:55 UTC No. 16549080
>>16549066
Limiting scope to Spacex-
Is there even a single high-ranking former employee who has disputed Elon's importance to their engineering programs? Has anyone who spent significant time working with him
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:58:47 UTC No. 16549082
>>16549080
devil's advocate, they're all sitting on a zillion bucks of spacex stock and they don't want to fuck it up
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 04:59:57 UTC No. 16549083
>>16549080
I fumbled the submit post button before finishing that thought but you get the gist.
I'd think that Berger would have highlighted any such stories if he had heard them while interviewing dozens upon dozens of current and former employees.
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 05:01:14 UTC No. 16549085
>>16549084
I'm assuming they're avoiding a repeat of their embarrassment and not doing a stream until they're sure it's not gonna scrub
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 05:02:34 UTC No. 16549088
NSF is super cringe
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 05:03:47 UTC No. 16549090
I expect more anime puzzles during our 3-hour pre-scrub session
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 05:05:20 UTC No. 16549092
>>16549090
*krystal
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 05:05:29 UTC No. 16549093
>>16549087
Do they actually get paid? I always thought it was a volunteer thing, like what boomers do on a weekend
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 05:07:35 UTC No. 16549096
>>16549093
who do you think all the youtube membership and superchat money goes to?
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 05:07:40 UTC No. 16549097
Are they actually launching this time?
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 05:09:36 UTC No. 16549101
>>16549097
reminder holds and aborts can happen at T-0 and later
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 05:10:02 UTC No. 16549103
>>16549087
This dude's head and neck is far too big for his body. It's hilarious.
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 05:10:20 UTC No. 16549104
Stream up.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXy
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 05:10:25 UTC No. 16549105
official stream starting
T-50
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 05:10:38 UTC No. 16549106
STAGING to thread with the stream etc
>>16549102
>page 9
yeah whatever
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 05:11:26 UTC No. 16549108
SAVE US CLEAR
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 05:11:44 UTC No. 16549111
>>16549104
WE GAAN
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 05:13:24 UTC No. 16549121
>>16549106
it's actually page 10 now, you hotstaged
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 05:13:30 UTC No. 16549123
hey I've heard this music before
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 05:13:36 UTC No. 16549124
>>16549100
I see MTL is still shit with pronoun-less Japanese.
She wasn't thinking about streaming it. It was referring to BO checking weather.
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 05:16:39 UTC No. 16549132
>>16549100
>>16549124
why isn't this whore streaming?
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 05:18:05 UTC No. 16549139
>>16548997
hellish kino lol. I hope someday we get the video, maybe even with audio.
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 05:18:59 UTC No. 16549143
>>16549132
He is an upstanding salaryman >>16548931
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 05:44:28 UTC No. 16549203
>hold
Apologize at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 05:46:42 UTC No. 16549206
anon! you have to choose one of the following options:
> 1. You will fly in a manned Starship Flight 10 mission
vs
> 2. You will fly in a manned New Glenn Flight 1 mission
a 100% safe life support system will be provided.
Which one would you choose?
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 06:02:26 UTC No. 16549235
>Literally no footage or any audio
they dont give any shit anymore
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 06:21:02 UTC No. 16549312
is this groundhog day? I've seen this before.
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 06:26:25 UTC No. 16549356
hello
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 06:39:22 UTC No. 16549472
>>16549132
she is retard
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 06:46:59 UTC No. 16549501
>>16548471
That's a Pallas cat, right?
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 06:53:44 UTC No. 16549529
How many things can go wrong with the BONG? 1) It's their first large rocket. 2) Their first real stage seperation. 3) First time relighting the BE-4 mid-flight 5) First time landing from orbital height 6) First time landing on a moving target.
Any more that I'm missing? I feel like they're gonna fail because this is too many things to try all at once.
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 06:58:33 UTC No. 16549571
>>16548912
IT'S GONNA LAUNCH
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 08:02:31 UTC No. 16550071
>>16549501
no it's a rock
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 10:28:56 UTC No. 16550167
>>16549529
gradatim ferociter
Anonymous at Thu, 16 Jan 2025 13:04:09 UTC No. 16550292
LIVE: Astronauts step out of International Space Station for spacewalk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IoT
>NASA astronauts Nick Hague and Suni Williams carry out a spacewalk to complete upgrades on the International Space Station.