/sci/ - Science & Math

Covid19 will halt starship production

>>11556065
Based and stack-pilled.

>>11556071
Ok doomer.

>>11556065
It‘s stakkeni-
I‘ll stop.

STACC

>>11556071
SpaceX supplies the ISS. They're an essential company.

>>11556090
Starship ain't going to ISS

Starship ain't going anywhere

Gonna be fun laughing at you kids in a month.

>>11556065
S T A C C
T
A
C
C

>>11556071
I hope it halts me.

https://youtu.be/cdtQfSkrVUU

Fresh estronaut interview with Peter Beck from rocketlab. Some cool stuff in there, although

>Peter Beck is a Venusfag

>>11556115
He needs to differentiate himself from Musk. "I wanna go to Mars too" doesn't sound too hot. Venus is hot.

>>11556093
andhewasneverseenagain.jpg

>>11556071
Call it the CCP virus chang.

>>11556166
Fuck off migapede, its been corona chan since day one.

>>11556131
Meme-tier: Settling on Mars
Destroyer-of-worlds-tier: Crashing 2020 AV2 into Venus making the surface habitable.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_AV2

>>11556093
But Starship is essential for the growth of the company.

>>11556131
I mean, if you want to be different from Musk but still sound reasonable, then pro-moon would be better.

>>11556090
> Arguing with a Boeing shill
Playing chess with pigeons

>>11556174
Corona virus is a general term for this kind of virus.
Wuhan virus, china virus, etc... is stupid.
The fact is that the world's health institutions had a shitload of safety measures in place that never were used because of on the chinese side retarded CCP communists trying to save face and lying there ass of about how bad this shit really was and on the western side corrupt bought out pieces of shit and "muh racism" lefties.
We are getting fucked hard by a aggressive flu virus that would have never been a problem at all for the world if everybody involved in this kind of thing did his fucking job.

>>11556201
Sorry mate, not going to war with China to enrich defense Jews just because Trump tickled your racism peepee and its OK to say chink now.

>>11556115
>>11556131
>Peter Beck is a Venusfag
If he's so desperate to differentiate himself, he should be talking about Mercury. At the poles you have water and if you go underground there's a whole lot of nice diverse materials to mine in a stable environment. You can do whatever you want there, nobody gives a rat's ass about Mercury.

>>11556214
who is talking about going to war with china?
The west was already pulling out of china before all of this and the trade wars against china was hurting them bad while on the western side you could see a lot of business restarting that were almost extinct because of china flooding the market.
Rare mineral mines restarting all over the world as example.

And you're the one bringing "jews&chinks" terms in to this thread.

SN5 is already well under way.

>>11556242
We all know the end game of the anti Chinese message being pushed, go shill for lockmart elsewhere.

>>11556256
>anti Chinese message
anti CCP/communist message.
The fact that you are trying to spin this as being against chinese instead of against the communist government who fucked up is proof enough that you are the real "shill" in this thread.

Now lets go back to talking about space exploration.

>>11556262
chicoms suck but the ethnic chinese suck too

>>11556185
>2020 AV2
>1 to 3 km diameter
It's fucking nothing

>>11556243
sick

>>11556262
>I have to get the last word

Lmao kill yourself

>>11556262
The distinction is pointless. I don't see people making the distinction between the governments and people of other enemy states, past or present, and yet I always see it with China. In contexts like these, it's understood that bashing China is more directed at the government than civilians.

Too much non-space flight discussion. Not enough comfy space flight pics. Post them.

>>11556281

>>11556283

>>11556285

>>11556281

So they must be right around the joint where the docking port and solar panel are? Who is it?

IIRC Conrad and his deputy had a hell of a time while EVA.

>>11556290
>So they must be right around the joint where the docking port and solar panel are?
Yes.

>Who is it?
Edward Gibson getting out of the airlock.

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/skylab-4-final-mission-launches-to-skylab

>>11556297

Oh, those mutinying bastards. Never mind then.

>>11556194
Already taken

>>11556230
Mercury is shit mate
No atmosphere to aerobrake plus tons of delta v needed

If it was tidally locked to the sun then you could hide from heat but it ain’t so you are screwed

>>11556324
So? Considering how few good viable future possibilities for space flight, one can't really afford to be uber contrarian.

>>11556327
First point, sure. Second point, the poles are fine.
With the available resources, you could send a (relatively) small complement of equipment and bootstrap up to a massive industry, yeeting blocks of refined material to the rest of the solar system with mass drivers.

>>11556347
Ah I see mercury has very little tilt, which makes polar colony viable
That’s not how industry works btw

>>11556285
Since moon has minor gravity, can dragon capsule actually "float" next to people near surface with minimal thrust?

Mars is the future of human exploration, three important reasons:

- It will be use as a gateway to travel outer worlds (Jupiter, Saturn...)

- Low gravity (1/3 of Earth), so easy to escape its gravity (Starship SSTO...)

- Has enough resource to support self-sustaining cities

>>11556363
Mars will be important, but not because it is actually important. It will be important because enough resources and people will be thrown at it for the word "economy" to be accurate.

>>11556363
>- It will be use as a gateway to travel outer worlds (Jupiter, Saturn...)

Not from Earth it won't retard.

>>11556352
>That’s not how industry works btw
Really? Why not?

NASA is looking for small discrete science packages to send to the Moon prior to the Artemis landings. What can you come up with

>>11556359
Look better at the pic, anyway it's just art.
In a real situation it would land on the rear.

>>11556775
I we scale up the Norwegian Nucleus tech, we can maybe send a crate or two of beer to the moon. For science.
Discretely, of course.

>>11556775
my package is neither small nor discrete ;^)

>>11556347
To send materials so far it would need a hell of a mass driver, you don't only need to escape mercury's gravity.
If you need metals asteroids like psyche would seem to be cheaper.

>>11556870
I was googling around for fun and found out that Austin University has a railgun made to launch very small things at up to 11 km/s for micrometeoroid research. Also says they've done studies for one able to move a 10kg payload at 10 km/s, which is hilarious.
https://repositories.lib.utexas.edu/handle/2152/33003

Also, this is fun:
https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/5821802

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alc8aCoDsYo&feature=emb_title

Looks like the skylon meme is becoming a bit less of a meme.
And if that pre cooler does what they claim it can do then it would have a lot of use in other fields too.

>>11556230
There is no Spaceship in existence or planned that could land people or heavy cargo on Mercury.

>>11556243
the mad man is making a production line of space rockets

>>11556104

>>11557088
Darpa's logo is so dated. Exciting stuff anyway.

Loving all the boomers crying about health and safety on the stacc videos. Fuck sake no wonder nothing got done.

>>11557088
isn't skylon already dead?

>>11556268
Not only that, how exactly an asteroidal impact is going to clear venus from all that CO2.

>>11557238
Nope, apparently it's very alive.
The pre cooler breaktrough pretty much saved the program and put it in a higher gear.
From what i have read they are making a sabre engine right now for testing.

And lets say they cant get that engine to work, even then the pre cooler could greatly improve a lot of tech.
Jet engines could get some real gains from this tech.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARjmgZWG7Mk
The alan bond interview start around 12minutes.
The first 12 minutes are kind of cringe but still has some good info on how they probably found the fix for the precooler not becoming a block of ice.

>>11556262
as a complete outsider, all this anti-chink circlejerk clearly looks like the murican (mostly) damage control to me, and it's clearly xenophobic/religious/whatever, no need to invent shitty excuses for yourself and shift the blame to others for making things political, it's you personally who do this

I'm super tired of mutts going bananas with their obligatory two minutes hate ITT every fucking time china is mentioned, it's you who are feeding trolls making fun of you. You're worse than those fucking german normies with their nazi damage control.

>>11557292
the underage is wafting off of this post, zoomer

>>11557256
>From what i have read they are making a sabre engine right now for testing.
I've read that several years ago, I wonder what they did since that. There was some american organization interested in this as well IIRC, what are they doing?

>>11557292
It's funny how you call out racism against china in your post while the post your replying you clearly states hate against the CCP instead of the chinese people and at the same time your using racial slurs like "mutts"
You need to work harder to hide your agenda "chang"

>>11557323
I'm not the poster you've been bickering with
and not even close to an asian, let alone a chang lel
funny how you ignored chinks but stayed buttmad at mutts
chinks and mutts and ruskies and everyone else can suck my dick

just calling things their real names, you associate chinks with communists and fight them in your head while all you do in reality is shitposting on vietnamese cartoon board with your own crusade, annoying everyone

>>11556201
The US entirely fucked up its own shit wrt Corona-chan, had all the fucking warning in the world Go back to your containment board and get the fuck out of this general faggot.

>>11556359
Divide its mass by six. It still "weighs" tons.
It'll float like a Buick doesn't.

>>11556359
maybe on Phobos like in that render, since it has a gravity of 0.0057m/s2 compared to Luna's 0.0253 m/s2

>>11556359
It's not minor, it's ~1/6 of Earth's.
>next to people
Only if those people are not reusable. Look at the Apollo taking off, rocks are flying in every direction.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HQfauGJaTs
Besides, I don't think its engines can be throttled that much to allow it to hover on the Moon.

>>11556093
Okay doomer

>>11556327
Wrong. You can hide in polar craters full of ice. They’re permanently shadowed due to their high latitude and depth.

Or you could just go underground

>>11557371
There's no consistent gravity on Phobos, it's too close to the planet. The gradient is negative from the Mars side and positive from the outer side. Phobos-2 didn't even orbit it directly, it was on a quasi-orbital trajectory. So yeah, technically speaking you can hover above Phobos without any engines, by co-orbiting it. Not very long though.

That art >>11556285 is not very realistic, especially with people on the surface.

>>11557292
>nooooo stop saying bad things about the dystopian communist dictatorship country where people eat dogs nooooo

>>11557406
What’s unrealistic about people bumbling around on Phobos?

>>11557384
the super dracos are extremely throttlable, so they could be used
the draco engines can be pulsed which is basically throttling except loud

I just want COOL looking space ships
is that too much to ask?

>>11556807
>Norwegian Nucleus tech
?

>>11557419

What is your definition of "cool looking" space ships then?

>>11557419
you get a shiny stainless phallus and you're going to like it, anon

>>11557419
Does Starship not look cool?

I do wish they'd stuck with the Fin legs and all but it still looks pretty good. The Space Shuttle is still the king of space aesthetic.

>>11557419
>COOL
Because aesthetics is totally not subjective or anything, right?

>>11557424
Pic related.
Hybrid, they're planning on using it as the only nano sat launcher in Europe. It's pathetic, really. But at least the idea of a booster that you can turn off and restart is kind of cool.

>>11557424
norway's hybrid motor sounding rocket

>>11557436
It's intended use is actually more than just as sounding rocket. They plan to use it deliver small payloads.

>>11557410
Falling onto Phobos is only possible on the far side and walking is impossible anyway. For astronauts it's essentially like being in space. So to roam around, you need a bulky propulsive system, and they don't even seem to have something like SAFER which only provides measly 3m/s

>>11557435
>Because aesthetics is totally not subjective or anything, right?
rockets are made retroactively cool because of what they do, but Starship is ugly. There's no getting around it. Look at these fins—they're like the model you give a 6 year old because none of the pieces are small enough to choke on.

>>11557446
You’re telling me Phobos has even shittier gravity than Gilly? Sounds great.

>>11557460
Dude, I don't give a fuck if it looks like a flying bad dragon dildo if it gets people to Mars.

>>11557460
Starship looks beautiful

>>11557460
it chonk, anon

>>11557460
Hi Jeff, just f*** off.

>>11557435
Pitiful stuff.
We'll be able to haul crates of beer to LEO within the next decade.

>>11557433
for me it is and always will be a full stacc Saturn V

>>11557476
is North Star 1 just them putting Nucleus on top of a chonk first stage?
is North Star 2 just them putting their chonk first stage on top of a chonkier zeroeth stage
is the North Star Launch Vehicle just them putting all of their bits on top of each other in a row

>>11557479
just wait until you see full Stacc Starship sweating condensation in the morning light

>>11557480
Yup. And that's a tiny cubesat, aka a crate of beer on the LAUNCH VEHICLE.
You'd think it was a god damn fucking Saturn stack they were assembling.

>>11557482
too bad nobody is ever going to film Starship on actual film.

>>11557484
maybe they've finally found a delivery system for their weaponized cuisine

>>11557484
People need beer dude

>>11557487
it only takes one person, anon
if you approached Elon with the hardware I'm sure he wouldn't say no

>>11557488
Hey, don't fuck with our food. That's actually edible for the most. Just stay away from the more "adventurous" stuff that most people don't really eat and you're golden.

>>11557490
I know, I'm just not sure there's going to be a huge market in LEO for it.

>>11557494
>I'm just not sure there's going to be a huge market in LEO for it
just hold out hope that distillation/fermentation isn't possible in <1g

starship needs a conning tower. It's trying to look like an aircraft when its clearly a submarine

>>11557419
Look at the Dragon v2 control panel as it was first presented. A cool looking mock-up for the presentation but entirely impractical. Then look at what they got in the end - crude looking but super practical setup. In fact, this is probably the most ergonomic avionics setup I've ever seen. You have a robust handle you can grab while pulling Gs, and either reliably push the buttons at the bottom with your thumb, or tap the touchscreen (the mode change buttons are located conveniently close to the handle). They even have the button protective covers pressing against the frame, not against the case. This was a problem in the Soyuz TMA-3 in 2003 where a cosmonaut crushed such a cap with his leg while loading the cargo, inadvertently firing the RCS thrusters, luckily a ground operator noticed that and turned them off remotely. Probably someone at NASA remembered that accident and told them to do so.

Which design would you choose, the one that lets you actually fly the ship, or the one killing you while looking cool?

>>11557496
If I ever get off this rock, I will be using my expertise in welding rectifiers and fermenting stuff to at least perform that particular science experiment.

>>11557496
They aged whiskey up there. Came out kind of weird apparently

>>11557516
Aging is an entirely different beast than fermenting or distilling. Microgravity is also an entirely different beast from actual gravity even one <1g

>>11557503
aesthetics and practicality aren't mutually exclusive

>>11557462
Sounds like Phobos is in a low enough orbit that the tidal forces from its orbit range (nearest/farthest points) are greater than its inherent gravity, even if not by much. But that would apply to both ends. And if that's perpendicular to the axis of rotation, it could get inconvenient.
Anyhow how would it even stay together, if that was true, it would just fall apart. I guess if it still counteracted enough to almost cancel its gravity, it would still be a pain in the ass without anchors and thruster suits.

>>11557528
But when you design things for aesthetics along with practicality, you might end up looking retarded like pic related. When you see someone in ACES or Sokol, you know these people aren't joking, they mean business. When you see this.. what is this, a fucking startrek cosplay? And those pressure suits are retarded-looking and practical at the same time - nothing sticks out and you don't walk like a potato sack like in ACES, at least.

(but really, why do they need those high boots? where are their life support/telemetry sockets? do they have any survival gear in case they land in the middle of the ocean?)

>>11557555
they look pretty terrible, yeah, but just because it can be done bad doesn't mean it shouldn't be attempted at all

>>11557555
it will be quietly "upgraded" in time i imagine.

>>11557555

>>11557555
life support/telemetry gear is that white patch above the right knee

>>11557545
It’s billions of tons of useable construction materials already in Martian orbit. No launching required.

>>11557572
I wasn't talking about the general usability of Phobos, just the annoyance factor if if has gravity that wonky. So just dig some holes and get comfy.

>>11557561
Now I want a Playmobil modular Starship and space station set.
t.has a bunch of classic Steck castle parts
(holy shit I just found out that someone made 120° hexagonal Steck adaptors, mind blown)

>>11557460
And it doesn't even work

>>11557555
Those suits are going to date like crazy and look absolutely based by 2040. The only look shit because you're not nostalgic for the early days of SpaceX yet.

>>11557583
Low gravity is also useful in many contexts, because you can launch massive payloads using relatively small launch vehicles, but in this context it sounds annoying since you can’t even expect stuff to fall “down”.

>>11557503
>or the one killing you while looking cool?

"sexy, dangerous" -GQ Magazine

Is sifting the martian surface for iron dust to make steel out of viable? what kind of industries could we set up on mars?

>>11557503
>no proper redundancy
One loose wire and both are bricked.

>>11557555
needs a belt and a smaller neck

>>11557586
Then the visual design has failed, because it was clearly designed to advertise today, not to become a meme later.
In fact, pressure suits always looked cool at their time, and sci-fi suits looked silly at all times.

>>11557545
Would Deimos be better if one wanted to orbit (or rather float nearby in the long term) one of Mars' moons?

>>11557610
the way mining works these days is you just dig a huge hole and run all the rock through a system that separates out the heavy metals. This can be done on Mars just as well as it could be done on Earth, but it takes a lot of power and water and manual oversight, so there's a huge amount of overhead required to get it set up.

>NOOOOOOOOOOOOO, NASA YOU CAN'T JUST USE THE LOWEST BIDDER.

>>11557610
Ore deposits are created by asteroid impacts and volcanic activity, and Mars has plenty of remnants of both

>>11557633
is "predatory pricing" illegal in Russia? It's the basis for our entire economy here

>>11557633
I'll say it again, geez it's almost as if government ran/preferred businesses artificially inflate their prices.

If the USA has alien technology, why did the X-33 flop?

>>11557661
because it was deliberately selected as the worst of the entrants into that competition

>>11557619
shuttle was shit though

>>11557638
They're just extremely confused why in the world would someone set their prices so much lower than the competitors even if it's still profitable when they could set them just a tad below and roll in cash

>>11557669
I think it's because the primary gain from launching that SpaceX is after is technical expertise in rapid launch and reuse, so they're trying to drum up a launch cadence by lowering prices

>>11557661
To cover their ass from all the alien technology they've using.

>>11557663
>>11557678
After Roswell they were on a roll with Apollo, the SR-71 and B-2 but then bombed out with their SSTO plane. Maybe aliens haven't figured it out either and saucers are actually two stage. Would explain why we keep finding "crashed" wreckage

>>11557545
>Anyhow how would it even stay together, if that was true, it would just fall apart.
It is falling apart, and you're correct that all of that is due to tidal effects. The current consensus is that it's a bunch of rubble held together by a (somewhat) sturdy crust on the exterior. If that crust wasnt there, then yes, the untethered material on the Martian side would enter an orbit with a lower periaps.

>>11557619
They have the redundancy actually. There are two sets of controls in Crew Dragon, just like in the Shuttle or Soyuz, it's only the left one on that picture.
>Space Shuttle Controls.jpg
In fact, those controls are less reliable than a set of MFDs. In those panels, you have thousands of wires that can fail, and each failure can lead to troubles. And if an indicator fails, you never know if it failed, if the subsystem has failed, or there's just no event to signal. With a screen, you always know it failed - there's no picture/backlight.

Compared to that, MFDs:
- focus the attention on what's important at the time, instead of hundreds of distracting indicators not important for the current situation
- present the information in the best possible way, without needing complex/unreliable mechanical setups like mechanical attitude and ILS indicators do
- always have a redundant display that can be configured to provide the same info at any time

That's why they've been used in Shuttle and are used in avionics since 70s. But classic MFDs with side buttons can't be relied on for some controls because every button represent a different menu option each time. Touchscreens make this obsolete - you just tap what you see, shortening the UI feedback loop.

So yeah, touchscreens are actually superior to traditional controls, they are safer and more reliable. Most avionics made in recent years rely on them as the primary flight displays. Obviously you can't replace force feedback devices (like the stick or rudder) with them, and also the tactile controls like the ejection handle which needs to be pulled without looking.

>>11557691
My dad worked at Darpa and he told me Roswell was a good, quality Saucer but they picked up some amateur shite in the 80s and 90s that led them astray.

>>11557696
so you mean Mars could have a ring

>>11557711
A Martian ring of dust has been predicted for a while but we never found it

>>11557702
>instead of hundreds of distracting indicators not important for the current situation
Fun fact, I've worked with people who work on aircraft cockpits and that issue above is the reason why dark cockpits are becoming a thing. It's where if everything in the aircraft is nominal, then there shouldn't be a single light on.

>>11557633
It's not "Russia", it's Rogozin, the same trampoline man as always. He's probably aiming to surpass Zhirinovsky in being a clown.

>>11557709
The original must have been the sport model.
But seriously I feel that the fact that the USA considering all the other phenomenal things they achieved in aerospace can't do SSTO kind of shows that it's not possible with current technology. I mean it's not like NERVA which had successful tests but got canned, the X-33 project flopped completely.

>>11557711
Chances are it's had one in the past, and it will again in the future when Phobos falls to bits in 30ish million years (assuming no human intervention).
There's actually a theory that Phobos had been a ring and a moon multiple times in the past, breaking up, then re-coalescing into a (much smaller) moon afterwards. Not sure how much credence there is to that though.

>>11557619
>planned to steal space shuttle to escape coronavirus
Gonna have to rethink my plan

>>11557723
You can't deny that the trampoline thing BTFO NASA

>>11557723
>>11557760

>>11556363
>- Low gravity (1/3 of Earth), so easy to escape its gravity (Starship SSTO...)
This is the most relevant feature. It allows pretty much any object in the solar system to be colonized, probably through funding and commissions from Earth based organizations. The advantages of being able to easily do high payload mass fraction reusable orbital flights with normal propulsion technology and materials cannot be overstated. Mars also has two very low gravity moons just begging to be strip mined and used as a source of structural materials that require effectively zero launch delta V to put into Mars orbit.

Mars is almost the ideal planet for jumping from a totally home-planet-bound species to one that lives across all the worlds of a star system; the only improvement to be made would be to increase the percentage of nitrogen and water in the atmosphere. Mars has everything; past geology that concentrated resources like on Earth, but is currently geologically dead and thus very stable, low enough gravity that SSTO is easy, an atmosphere that lets SSTO vehicles land again from Mars orbit almost for free (and at reentry speeds slow enough that bare steel or titanium would be sufficient for TPS), and not one but TWO small moons directly analogous to asteroids, which means no only do we have access to several quadrillion tons of material already in Mars orbit, learning to use that material will DIRECTLY lead to the technology needed to immediately start mining and colonizing all the asteroid-like objects in the solar system (asteroids of course, but also comets, irregular moons of gas giants, Kuiper belt objects, etc).

nasa guy says it could take 48 falcon heavy launches to get 360t to the moon the build moon base, but includes both sls and gateway. launches would start in 2025 and end in 2029.
>isru production of hydrogen and oxygen
>30t habitat
>6 kilopower

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20200001588.pdf
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20200001589.pdf

>>11557760
Just looks sad and pathetic now that they're whining because alternatives are coming on line.

>>11557781
>48 falcon heavy launches to get 360t to the moon the build moon base
And that would probably still be cheaper and faster than a single SLS launch.

>>11556912
Neat, now imagine one 1000x as long, blasting soda can sized slugs of aluminum at targ-sorry, "shipping recipients" out in the solar system

>>11557781
>48 falcon heavy launches over four years
no, not happening
but any development or thought that goes into that could be directly usable with Starship

>>11557789
what's the orbital period of Mercury?
you wouldn't be able to aim such a megastructure, and Mercury isn't tidally locked so you can't just have it pointed prograde all the time forever

>>11557785
Unironically in the ballpark by sticker price, but NASA contracts pay a lot better than that

>>11557793
88 days give or take.

>>11557785
>And that would probably still be cheaper and faster than a single SLS launch.
Not quite. 22 FH for one SLS assuming that the SLS costs $2B per launch. Still a significant amount of TLI mass, about 14 times more than what Block 1B cargo can do.

>>11556775
Has SpaceX released what is different between the prototype models?

>>11557802
You're assuming that the SLS is going to be on time and not end up costing more. Foolish.

>>11557799
What's the Robert Bigelow approach to losing a contract?

>>11557810
https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1248375403019821056

>>11557720
in more recent aircraft, almost everything is simply replaced by screens

>>11557479
Ohh yeah baby, that's the stuff

>>11557779
The problem is Mars itself is the colonisation goal. If you want a stepping stone, use the Moon.

>>11557826
Airbus has the worst cockpit design, holy shit.
It may look good in pictures but it is totally unpractical.
> almost everything is simply replaced by screens
It's called a glass cockpit.

>>11557503
If you don't think the 'after' picture looks cooler, because it's fundamentally the same concept as the 'before' design but actually workable under real life conditions, then you're retarded.

>>11557826
What if you spill coffee on the screen?

>>11557846
you've got like four extra, it's fine

>>11557720
Diversity in flight and removing meritocracy is why that is happening. Basically, they are allowing stupid people to fly now. It is sickening.

>>11557696
>The current consensus is that it's a bunch of rubble held together by a (somewhat) sturdy crust on the exterior
No it isn't, Phobos is still several dozen million years away from dropping low enough due to tidal drag that it gets shredded by the tides, crustiness notwithstanding. If you piled a bunch of talcum powder with the mass of Phobos together at the same distance from Mars, it'd still hold together due to gravity alone.

>>11557826
There's still buttons in the overhead that operate the plane like engine start-up, de-icing, APU, etc.

Also analog cockpits are pretty aesthetic. Hearing every single instrument go "ker clunk" simultaneously upon the power being flipped on followed by the altimeter furiously ticking away was dope.

>>11557883
electromechanical devices are boss, especially for stuff like altimeter and navball
digital navballs just aren't the same

>>11557824
I know how poorly Boeing fared with GLS, but what does that have to do with Bigelow? I thought Bigelow's issue was that it's CEO is a bit of a nutjob?

>>11557840
That's not Airbus, that's Irkut MC-21. But the cockpit design is by Honeywell.
>It may look good in pictures but it is totally unpractical.
I don't see why. This is a worldwide trend and in aerospace nobody's making their designs go through the certification and testing hell just because the screens look cooler. The real reasons are listed here >>11557702 , they provide measurable benefits

>>11557727
See the entirety of the previous thread to read up on why SSTO is neither practical nor useful around Earth. What it boils down to is, you have no choice but to build a vehicle with a 90% propellant mass ratio on the pad fully loaded with cargo (meaning structure and engines can only weight about 5% to 8% of the total mass), using the hardest propellant combination there is in terms of achieving a good mass ratio (hydrolox). The Centaur upper stage for example doesn't need to worry about thrust to weight ratio OR thermal protection system OR landing gear, and it only gets a mass ratio of around 80% propellant, and that's by using balloon tanks.

A 90% propellant-by-mass vehicle capable of launching into orbit from a 1g planet with atmosphere and surviving the later reentry in order to land and be reused is a GIANT meme and will NEVER happen. Two stage to orbit reusable on the other hand is VERY achievable and works with only a 50% reduction in payload mass fraction compared to an expendable rocket, and requires zero fundamentally improved technology compared to what existed in the 60's in terms of propulsion and what existed in the 90's in terms of electronics. Now that we're in the 20's with 20's engine control programs running on 20's computers to control vehicles built with 20's structures and 20's materials, there's no reason why a single commercially funded company could't develop a fully reusable TSTO on their own, and it looks like SpaceX is going to be the one to do it.

>>11557883
Yeah some controls are not replaced, obviously.

>>11557897
that is Boeing's response to being excluded because they:
A. overbid by an order of magnitude or more
B. refused to even entertain the notion of letting people look at their software

>>11557907
>B. refused to even entertain the notion of letting people look at their software
C. They didn't have any software or it was such a pile of buggy shit that they were embarrassed to let anyone see it.

>>11557793
You can't aim the barrel, but no reason why you couldn't attach a big magnetic deflector to the end of the barrel that could shove the projectile onto a new vector and give it a 30 degree cone to aim inside, similar to how the cathode ray tube in an old TV aims electrons.

>>11557907
>refused to even entertain the notion of letting people look at their software
No shit. It was most likely buggy as hell.

>>11557838
Mars is the FIRST colonization goal, and once it's colonized you can colonize everything else with ease.
The true goal is to colonize EVERYTHING, or at least make use of everything, and doing that solely from Earth would be too expensive and really make no sense. You really think Mars won't want their own endemic space program to let them develop Mars orbital infrastructure and expand further? You really think that after 300 years of Earth colonizing the Moon, Mars, Ceres+asteroids, and a couple of the Jovian moons, that all of those colonies are going to just sit around at the bottom of their much more shallow gravity wells, already building and relying on space-rated life support systems and power systems, and NOT decide that they could probably reach out and take Saturn if they wanted to?

>>11557902
but what if aerospike

>>11557846
Screens are generally waterproof, control panels stuffed with physical switches and buttons are not.

Gateway could get huge
>>11557912
it would take exactly as long to accelerate it as it would to deflect it
megastructures are a meme unless the object is tidally locked

>>11557943
doesn't help, basically already assume aerospike with the numbers we used

>>11557952
if starship goes well do you think nasa will make a bigger spacestation than pic related?

>>11557942
really weird to be talking about competing with a competitor that hasn't been made yet while advocating we make the competitor

>>11557940
>>11557911
this was a selection award, nobody has even written any software yet

>>11557959
probably not NASA, but I'm sure somebody will try. USSF will almost certainly have some kind of space station.

>>11557959
Oldspace would probably fight tooth and nail to make that not happen.

>>11557965
Then why they are they claiming they didn't want to show and tell stating "protecting intellectual property"?

>>11557964
well, when there's the potential of becoming the competitor that hasn't been made yet still on the table...

>>11557969
Boeing's bureaucracy is tremendous

>>11557952
>more interior volume than the gateway
>can just land on the moon

starship may die as a water tower but its going to be really embarrassing if it works

>>11557943
Spike engine is a meme. There are plenty of ways to reconfigure the engine during the flight, like the expanding nozzle. Nozzle extensions are usually good enough and are widely used on real engines for decades.

>>11557987
nozzle extensions don't allow you to change it during flight without it getting really inefficient and heavy

>>11557943
Really only useful if the engine were expected to work both in vacuum and in an atmosphere thicker than Earth's. However it can double as a heat-shield ROMBUS style, so it has that going for it.

>>11557943
What does an aerospike get you? A small (roughly 5%) increase in average stage Isp during ascent to orbit. What does it cost? Aside from engineering effort, which we're handwaving here, any aerospike engine is going to have a lot of extra dry mass compared to a traditional bell nozzle. This increased mass is killer, SSTO vehicle designs are always limited to razor thin mas margins to begin with.

Aerospikes are a meme in our atmosphere anyway, because we can get 90% of the performance benefit of an aerospike by just making the bell nozzle of our engine much bigger, and having the outer rim deflect inwards a few degrees to keep the flow attached; see the Space Shuttle main engines for an example of this.

For aerospike engines to make a difference they'd need to offer about double the Isp of a bell nozzle, because that would let you build a vehicle that was 60% propellant by mass that could supply ~9700 m/s of delta V and thus reach low Earth orbit with a decent payload. More specifically, with an Isp of 900 seconds, a 1000 ton vehicle could put 100 tons of payload into orbit, all with a vehicle dry mass of 210 tons. Unfortunately, aerospikes are not miracle technology and don't offer that kind of efficiency.

What CAN offer that efficiency are nuclear thermal engines. NTR using hydrogen gets you ~900 Isp but has shitty thrust to weight ratio, bad for launching. NTR using methane gets you ~600 Isp and decent TWR, better for launching. Add on an oxygen tank for an afterburner and you can get really good TWR at roughly 320 Isp at sea level, good for jumping off the pad. Burning at 320 Isp for 1 minute, 600 Isp for 3min and 900 Isp for 6 min yields an average Isp of 752.

752 Isp lets a 1000 ton vehicle put 100 tons of payload into orbit with a vehicle mass of 165 tons, more tough but possibly doable. Just need to convince people to let you build and fly a nuclear thermal engine with a vastly improved TWR compared to previously built examples.

>>11557900
Ah, I saw a shitty passive side stick design and assumed airbus. That's my fault.
As for what's wrong, well a lot. Are you familiar with what brought down AF447?
On normal airplanes inputs are doubled, that is when you pull the yoke back on your side the other side sees it too. Doesn't happen with these side sticks (though gulfstream is working on this).
Because of this what happens when you have two people pulling back on a sidestick? Well if they're doing roughly the same inputs it will aggregate them. If their inputs differ however, it rejects both and the plane announces "DUAL" and just doesn't do anything.
On yokes, when you're gonna stall the stick has a built in stick shaker. On sidesticks, the plane yells at you "STALL". The tactical advantage of having your stick shake cannot be understated. Most pilots are trained to immediately respond to a stall. And because you have the physical indictation of the shaking stick you don't even have to think about it.

On a single pilot plane, side sticks are fine. The issue is when you have two pilots - PM is slightly detached from what PF is doing. That's what killed the 228 people of AF447. You have one dumb pilot who doesn't know how to handle a stall and the other pilot is completely unaware of his incorrect inputs until it's too late.

>>11557952
>megastructures are a meme unless the object is tidally locked

Build it as a circum-global track on the rotational equator, design it to be able to accelerate projectiles along its entire length and also to be able to release them along its entire length. Now you can aim at at point along the plane in space that the circle inscribes, at any point in time during the rotation of the planet.

>>11557991
Spike engines are heavier and hotter anyway.
And they somehow solved the problems on RD-58MFs

>>11557964
Why does it need to be competition? No reason why Earth couldn't hitch a ride, but plenty of reasons why Earth efforts can't get to other objects in space as easily as Mars efforts.

>>11558027
This, aerospikes are shit unless your atmosphere is significantly more dense than Earth's and/or the gravity is weaker. Aerospike engines will only ever be a thing if we are colonizing worlds with those conditions at some point in the future.

>>11557902
I agree that it's not possible currently but I don't think it can never happen ever. All that is holding back SSTO is materials science and the ban on nuclear.

>>11558022
On MC-21 those are active sidesticks though, with co-pilot motion feedback and stick shaking.

Cancel Starship.

Build Orions.

>>11558043
Cancel Orion.

Build Liberty Ships.

>>11558041
Really? That's exciting.
I was aware that gulfstream was working on it but as far as I know their the only ones with the technology.
My problems with sidesticks is the lack of situational awareness.

>>11557907
>>11557911
I immediately thought of two reasons. The higher-ups probably thought they were using reason B, but the right reason would be C.

>>11558040
>All that is holding back SSTO is materials science and the ban on nuclear.
And those things will hold it back forever. Materials will never be light and strong enough for SSTO to make sense around Earth because of the mass fraction problem; even with effectively zero mass structure, the engines are still going to weigh a shitload and the TPS will weigh a shitload. Reusable TSTO will always be significantly cheaper and easier and faster than SSTO even if SSTO is actually pursued.

SSTO around other worlds in the solar system will be easy because of the reduced gravity, allowing heavier structures due to less delta V required to achieve orbit, and of course the use of relatively easy to design and build chemical engines.

>>11558050
The hippies will never allow it.

>>11558065
While it's always silly to say "x will never happen" you have a point that TSTO will likely always be a better option.

>>11558066
And despite blocking it for the wrong reason, they'd be right to do so, because there's no way that thing would ever be cost competitive with Starship. Reusable TSTO is the king of Earth launch forever and ever and no improvements in engine technology will ever change that; at most, reusable TSTO vehicles would transition to using one of those magic nuclear engines on the upper stage, mostly eliminating the need for refueling tanker missions to LEO except for those vehicles that needed to squeeze every cm/s of delta V because they're going to Jupiter or Saturn.

>>11557824
Thanks anon, I'm enjoying the train-wreck that is Boeing.

>>11558071
The fact that TSTO will always be a better option is why I keep saying that SSTO will never happen, not because it's impossible now and forever, but because it will never be BETTER than TSTO, and we're going to have robust reusable TSTO vehicles in place long before we develop even marginal SSTO vehicles. Survival of the fittest baby, the niche of reusable launch around Earth is about to get filled.

I'm going to do some napkin math and come back to this thread later with a Mars SSTO design based on Starship tech, I may even draw up some diagrams.

>>11558095
Anon please, it's literally just a stock Starship

>>11558090
I think the space tourism industry would find SSTO viable if something like Skylon ever happens but I have the feeling BAE buying it means SABRE will be highly classified military tech for our lifetime.

I can't wait until we start building space ships that don't intend to ever land on Earth.

>>11558107
stfu nigger

>>11558121
Earth launch is the ultimate cuckolding

>>11557824

>>11558126
you're wrong, have fun confining yourself to the orbital cuckshed

>>11558137
implying Earth gravity well isn't just a big cuckshed

>>11558137
You’re both childish.

>>11558147
yeah I hate that dumb shit too but I felt it would be the only language he would understand
I will not respond to him anymore

>>11558095
Starship could work as SSTO on Mars without any modified, just need fuel.

>>11558095
>>11558150
That is part of the design spec.
>SSTO from mars
>refuel on orbit
>return to earth
This has been the mission plan for years at this point.

>>11558157
wrong, it can SSTO and then return to Earth in one go, without refueling

>>11557555
BC Thomas with his SR-71 would have been laughed out of Norway in a suit like this

>>11558162
Source? I though it needed both stages for a return from the surface.

>>11558171
no, Mars surface -> Earth surface is a single stage affair for Starship

>>11558166
I dunno. Those boots look right at home in a sjark.

Is it possible to extract water from Earth in space? That way propellant depots in LEO wouldn't have to rely on launches from Earth to replenish their stocks. Perhaps scooping water from the upper atmosphere after using lasers to put more evaporated water in the air?

>NASA’s Office of Inspector General has some grim news about the Space Launch System
>The report found that the cost of the Space Launch System had exceeded the congressionally mandated baseline by 33 percent by November 2019. The cost will exceed the baseline by 43 percent or more if the launch date of Artemis 1 is pushed back beyond November 2020. Since the launch of the Artemis 1 is now scheduled for some time in 2021, the Space Launch System is becoming a bigger problem than before.
>The NASA OIG report has several recommendations, which start with the space agency going to Congress and begging for mercy.
Just put it out it's fucking misery already. Jesus wept.

>>11558204
>Is it possible to extract water from Earth in space?
Yes, just launch a rocket carrying water into space

>>11558204
you'd be getting so fucking little that it'd be more cost effective to harvest ice from a near earth asteroid

>>11558030
>Why does it need to be competition?

On the timescales we're talking about a martian colony will feel as loyal to a parent planet as we do to parent countries. Not necessarily adversarial but the rest of the solar system would be first come first serve and a civilization with an advantage won't share, they'll trade.

Also me and a britbong can instantly shit on each other on earth internet, but a between a martian and terran it would take several minutes. I expect cultures to diverge.

Is a big Capital Ship style space ship. Actually a spaceship at all or a space station?

Is there a line between powered space station and large space ship?

>>11557789
this is why the Moon is better for that sort of shit, pop something down on the dark side where it can't do anything but fling stuff into deep space, and by the time there's enough stuff out there that it becomes a major threat, you've got a bunch of other things to be worrying about in that department.

>>11558090
Never is a long time

We could get a propulsive system so good that the staging increases time between launches

>>11558255
>Is there a line between powered space station and large space ship?
yes, engines

>>11558255
Large navy ships are basically ocean stations anyway

Would this blow apart at the seams?

Methane is actually a good radiation shield not as good as but comparable to hydrogen

>>11557824
absolutely delicious

>>11558204
there's a guy on NSF constantly advocating for his insane air-scoop idea
he wants to grab atoms from the upper atmosphere and then separate out the oxygen and use the nitrogen in an ion thruster to counteract air-drag

>>11558255
no

>>11558311
yes, bulkheads point out for a reason

>>11557824
AN ABSOLUTE CRIME AGAINST AMERICA INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY IS THE KEY TO BOEING'S INTEGRITY! I SHALL SEE THIS REMEDIED IMMEDIATELY.

>>11558331
That sounds more pointless than tits on a nun to be quite honest.

>>11558397
the big issues I have with it is I'm not sure if t works on non-geologic timescales and doesn't require more in spare part mass than it obtains in oxidizer mass
also the power demands would be enormous, it would spend half of each orbit in the shade, and basically what the everloving fuck dude

>>11558331
I thought this concept was just for a self-propelling satellite

>>11558404
yes and that's a good idea but this guy's completely lost his marbles

>>11558403
Yes, about as pointless as tits on a nun.

>>11557863
Well they certainly allow stupid people to shitpost

>>11557503
Both look great if you ask me.

>>11558419
Found the diversity hire.

>>11557824
>we congratulate NASA on this...milestone
Yeah, it was time someone woke up to Boeing's shit.

>>11557824
Hey, anon! What sound did the jet airliner make when it crashed into the ground?

>>11558212
NASA just wants funding money. They don't care about the projects themselves. Revolving door funding is their payday.

>>11558481

>>11558103
>>11558150
>>11558157
I know, but it isn't optimized. I'm talking about something that people on Mars could build to help themselves access Mars orbit in a very effective manner.

Anyway, I did some math, and I cooked up a vehicle better optimized for placing BIG payloads into Mars orbit.

To start off, the vehicle has a wet mass with payload of 4504.5 tons. In Mars gravity it weighs about 16.666 meganewtons (on Earth it'd weigh over 44 meganewtons). The vehicle is propelled by a ring of eight Vacuum raptors (fired during launch) surrounding a pair of vacuum raptors (fired during launch and later for landing).

The vehicle launches and achieves Mars orbit with a total mass of 1800 tons. The dry mass is 500 tons, which means there is 1300 tons of payload and landing propellant combined. Due to the low landing delta V requirement of no greater than 500 m/s, only 100 tons of landing propellant mass is required, and the deorbit propellant mass is negligible anyway. This means that this fully reusable Mars SSTO can place 1200 tons of payload into Mars orbit and come back for a propulsive landing.

Mars reentry, which takes place at no greater than 3000 m/s, is relatively benign compared to reentry at Earth, which occurs at close to 8000 m/s. Due to the cubic relationship between velocity and heating, a vehicle entering Mars' atmosphere from low Mar orbit will encounter approximately 19x less heating per square meter than the same vehicle undergoing reentry in the same atmospheric density in Earth's atmosphere. What this means for the vehicle is that there will be a minimal need for thermal protection coatings on the structure, if any TPS is needed at all. Since the vehicle concept being considered here is made of the same stainless steel as Starship, it's likely that no heat shielding is required, and thus there is no additional mass burden.

Summary; Big chungus Mars SSTO can refuel a Starship in orbit with a single launch.

>>11558258
It wouldn't matter, you'd still use two stage vehicles even if the first stage could plunk the second stage directly into orbit and return, because the performance advantages (of having a fully fueled vehicle sitting in orbit) are too huge to ignore.

>>11558513
Too huge to ignore, now

Unless you pretend revolutionary propulsion systems can't happen, there's no reason to declare fuel will always be as big of a consideration as it is now. If we could make something that SSTOs from earth and has plenty of fuel to go to mars, that's probably what we would use to go to mars.

>>11558544
>things will change if fuel is magic
What a cogent and relevant point to make.

SSTO is dumb let's talk about real shit please now

>>11558556
>Flight is delayed again
>They had to swap out the Airbus A320's first stage

>>11558568
That's exactly what would happen if airplanes had to carry their own oxidizer, double nigger. Hell, drop tanks are a thing even in non-bizarro world.

>>11558575
>oxidizer

The 21st century called grandpa

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ue2YB_kRmQE

This isnt going to work is it

>>11558583
I don't know what they do in magic fuel land, but a jet in the real world isn't subject to the same tyrannies as rocket engines because they use the atmosphere as their oxidizer for combustion. You can't compare the two in terms of fuel use or delta V unless you have some way to pull combustible material out of the aether.

>>11558506
Couldn't fit it into that post, but that big chungus Mars SSTO requires literally zero new technology to build, it just needs to be built on Mars. As a few other little notes;

It has legs designed to hold it up only when landing on the ground pretty much empty, which means they only need to withstand a mere 1850 kN of weight total, making them appear very spindly to our Earther eyes.
It has a dry mass such that it can land on a single Raptor near full throttle, but is designed to land using two Raptors at low throttle,
This thing has a diameter of about 18 meters, and has a very large payload volume to contain such huge mass payloads.
It does a belly-flop reentry like Starship.
With no payload it has a total delta V of 6922 m/s.
With two launches (one propellant and one payload) it can drop off 900 tons of payload into Phobos orbit and return (no aerobraking except reentry considered).
With three launches (two propellant and one payload) it can drop off 200 tons of payload into Deimos orbit and return (no aerobraking except reentry considered).

>>11558575
wrong, single stage point to point works great
see: V2 to London

>>11558588
No reason why it wouldn't work, anon.

>>11558588
>glowing nozzles
Not going to happen, Raptors are regeneratively cooled, touching the outside of the nozzle while the engine is firing would give you frostbite. Also the engine gimbal angle during the landing was in the opposite direction that it should have been for righting the Starship. Otherwise nice animation.

>>11558506
>>11558604
Zubrin?

>>11558618
he wouldn't have said "big chungus"

>>11558614
the inside of the nozzle is going to be glowing purple from reflected light
you won't be able to see the outside of the nozzles because they'll be obscured by the skirt

>>11558618
no

>>11558626
Dummy, the animation had an engine camera that clearly showed the nozzles a cherry red color. That's what I was pointing out as inaccurate.

>>11558618
Zubrin's fetish seems to skew undersized lander instead of oversized one

>>11558639
ah yes I hadn't watched it yet
all in all it was pretty gay and got some key things very wrong but whatever

>>11558642
LIFT
AND
THROW

>>11557952
>Gateway could get huge
My bet is that gateway will turn in to the new ISS anyway when the current ISS gets too old.
I dont even believe for a second that axiom is anything else then a money laundering scheme.

>>11557987
>Spike engine is a meme
Not really, it's just that the materials to create a aerospike that wont melt the actual spike are hard to make.
It's much

>>11558694
>heavier by design
>requires extra cooling
>solves expansion which is a meme problem to begin with
It's a meme. Even moreso for an SSTO which requires maximum ounce autism.

M A R S E T E R N A L

>>11558790
this is a shitty flag

I'm writing a short report on Starlink for an econ class, anyone know of any good sources for the economic implications? Everything I've found is either conjecture or technical

>>11558790
muh arse eternal

>>11558800
What economic implications? It's supplementary for extremely rural areas and the third world if the third world can actually afford it.
Musk is not running a charity because he's already beholden to a Canadian pension fund who has invested quite a lot of money in it. I don't know if more have invested in it.

>>11558812
Like, I've found some reports such as the ITU "impact of broadband
on the economy" one from 2012 and some numbers from Microsoft suggesting the FCC Broadband Deployment Report values are up to 10X off in some places, but I still can't find any direct research linking VLEO constellations & industry/societal effects.
Perhaps no one has done them yet.

>>11558820
You know, it's not gonna be free, right? He's talking about free as in open and uncensored. Not free as in free beer.

>>11558822
yeah of course, I'm in an Econ & technology class, we're supposed to link the two. The potential customer base is easily determined from contention ratio & overall throughput data, plus the utilization percentage.

>>11558800
The nexus of people who deeply understand economics, wireless communication and low altitude satellites isn't that big. And there's enough that's neva been done befo that no analysis can be free of a lot of conjecture.

>>11558828
true

>>11558826
I don't think the customer base is going to be that big, at least not in the developed world.

keep in mind that he's counting on starship to get off the ground to yeet out much bigger payloads to get this shit going in that triple layer constellation he wants.
Doing that configuration with just f9 is going to take forever and be prohibitively expensive.

Does starlink make internet censorship by governments impossible? Well at least the ones that aren't the host nation of starlink?

>>11558831
If upfront costs aren't insane (antenna is a big question) they will be very much supply limited, people are chomping at the bit for alternatives to oldinternet.

>>11558853
Laser intralinks aren't a thing yet, so no. Even then, you still need that country's permission

>>11558853
Needs a relatively expensive/high tech single source piece of equipment to operate which means easy to regulate. Beyond the fact that like >>11558863 said those countries can just refuse to play ball with the system.

>>11558790
u know nuthin, john carter

>>11558799
>>11558806
>>11558900
We'll need to think of cultural things to invent once we colonise Mars and break off from Earth. I'm thinking free traps for every household

>>11558998
I really hope your talking about death traps...

>>11558998
You've got my vote

>>11558583
You shouldn't be posting ITTs.

>>11558998
Recreational mass drivers.
Western style dusters over suits for sand protection, think of the NCR Ranger from Fallout: New Vegas (of course it'll be a bit bulkier).
Custom sand dune buggies, both pressurised and open, use them for speed records and long-range endurance challenges to far off landmarks and back.
Rocket jumping, both small rocket hopper ships with 1-2 people, and custom personal ones.
Host the best sandcastle competitions in the world

>>11559023
mom said I could

>>11559034
i'm sure we could have cool low-g variations on regular sports like baseball, tennis etc too.
Imagine building an almost 0g squash court on Phobos, endless fun

>>11556065
I'm gonna I'm gonna *stoooooock

The stoocker:
-builds his spaceship out of literal scrap
-when it explodes he reuses the pieces that survive, like a dirty hobo who picks up food from the floor
-*i'm stoooocking*
-new rocket every month
-doesnt even bother to get it right he just wants to stooock

>>11558790
Shit flag.
>>11558998
Shit flags.

>>11558483
Nasa doesn’t even have control over project timelines when it’s all contracted out anyways
And they deliberately drag stuff out being bureaucratic fucktards too

>>11559070

>>11559049
can you jump so high you hurt yourself when you fall in low gravity? or is there a law that you can only jump as high as you cannot hurt yourself?

also, must be trippy to jump of a height that would break your leg on earth and only feel like a 1 meter drop here on earth.

>>11559049
it will also be trippy to see the hugegantic structures engineer will be able to pull off with low gravity and abscence of wind load and earthquakes, the two main limitations of tall buildings.

>>11558998
Chrissen Avasarala's actress is in my permanent mind-folder for fapping. both in current age and younger.

>>11558593
And their velocities are low
And can use air as reaction mass

>>11558853
As we've seen there is no need for the government to censor anything. Big platforms get in bed with each other until they are defacto monopolies and then start censoring as they like.

>>11559049
>shooting hoops
>ball hits the edge of the driveway
>it goes into orbit

>>11559065
coomer face needs an edit to look like elon

>>11559075
Reminder that the Helghast objectively did absolutely nothing wrong

>>11559065
>stacc chad churns out a rocket every month and doesn't give a fuck if they blow up because he made them in a garage out of scrap metal and glued them together with mexican sweat
>cleanroom virgin pours hours over each nut and bolt so daddy will be proud of him but never actually gets anything done

>>11559077
you get out what you put in, conservation of energy. If you jump with the same amount of energy on Earth as on the Moon (disregarding air resistance), you'll impact the ground with the same velocity.

>>11559102
This desu,

Pretty sure after this round of btfo and abject humiliation boing are going to be lobbying like a motherfucker to cancel gateway, its already on shaky ground and a few private yachts and some shares thrown around will probably finish it off desu.

>>11559077
>>11559113
>Jump on Ceres
>Shoot 100 feet straight up
>Shit spacesuit

>>11559102
They did not, until they very moment they decided to wipe out earth.

>>11559113
>had churns out a rocket every month and doesn't give a fuck if they blow up because he made them in a garage out of scrap metal and glued them together with mexican sweat
>>cleanroom virgin pours hours over each nut and bolt so daddy will be proud of him but never actually gets anything done

yeah but is it enough to hurt you? you jump with all your might here, it will accelerate you a certain distance up and then you will fall down, when you impact the floor on earth the acceleration will never be enought o hurt you, but how about on low gravity?

>>11559121
Gateway getting cancelled sure, but the moon missions are set in stone now.

>>11559139
fuck earth, UCN deserves it

>>11559139
Fuck Earth

>>11559151
Based

>>11559151
>>11559161
Jelly baby scum.

>>11559180
UCN seethe

>>11559143
again, energy is conserved. If you jump up with velocity V from the surface, it all goes to potential energy at the peak, then all goes back to velocity when you're back at ground level. You might even get a less powerful jump in low gravity (speaking in terms of energy), because you'll accelerate away from the ground quicker leaving less time to apply force to the surface.

>>11559194
but like youll get higher, right? how about if you grabbed a rope and pulled up as hard as you could and let go. you could end up kililng yourself, right?

>>11559197

>>11559180
Evil is subjective

>>11558998
Marriages to animals and I migrate.

>>11559146
can someone explain the new moon mission to me

They land on the moon and?...

Are they going to put something there?

>>11559515
Put something in there that offends liberals

>>11559515
they're going to leave more poop lying around
do some more geology (important!)
figure out wtf is actually up with moon dust
figure out wtf is actually up with polar crater ice

>>11559515
Try out the urine mooncrete in practice

>>11559523
>Go to the moon and collect samples
>The public got bored of "boots and flags", we won't make that same mistake again
>50 years later
>Go the the moon and collect samples

>>11559525
imagine the smell

>>11559533
yeah but this time with "international cooperation" and surfaces bases and dedicated rover deliveries and such

>>11559515
They'll put some flags down, take some selfies, and leave. Literally Apollo II Electric Boogaloo. Except it's worse than Apollo because no scientific and technical boundaries being pushed. Once the landings are over, there would be a new rise of "we should be solving our problems on Earth before leaving it!", and all of NASA's progress will be reset for another 50 terrible years.

>>11557545
Ah, the Integral Trees. Book had great world-building ruined by a sucky plot. Thanks, Niven.

>>11559535
Just the existence of the gateway means no surface base is written in between the lines, and even the gateway isn't happening now

>>11559197
NO YOU FUCKING RETARD

You go up higher, sure, but you also fall slower, and the effects EXACTLY cancel out no matter what. Want to know what it would feel like to land awkwardly on the Moon after a 15 foot vertical jump? Go outside and jump and land awkwardly, the exact same jolt of force is what you'd feel, no matter if you were jumping in 1 G or 0.1 G or 0.0001 G.

In fact, you'd actually feel a HARDER jolt on Earth, because there's a significant amount of additional velocity you'd gain just from falling your own height, which is NOT true in lower gravity.

>>11559523
>figure out wtf is actually up with polar crater ice
There's currently no plan to do this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9m2QJz6fk8

How do we find the hugo boss of space suits?

>>11559627
The -W I D E B O Y- is perfection

>>11559627
the SpaceX suits don't look TOO bad in motion
although it looks like you won't be doing jack or shit in them when there's a pressure differential across the suit, look at how the guy in the back is rigidly doing the neutral arm floaty position at 1:05 or so in that video

>>11559627
they do have some neck mobility, you can see at 2:00 or so when they're walking out to the Tesla

>>11559636
>the SpaceX suits don't look TOO bad in motion

They literally waddle. The groin seam might as well be down to their knees.

>>11559648
yeah but that's understandable

>>11559632
hey qt

so it turns out that magnetoshell is fake news, only 1% - 20% of particles/energy get captured by the system, the rest continues to the skin of the vehicle like normal

>>11557470
Yeah nah fuck off Reddit cunt

>>11559674
no, anon
you

>>11559675
nah fuck off no one thinks your reddit memes are funny, quite literally go back

>>11559686
I'm sorry anon, but no, you

>>11559689
Never touched reddit so you're already being a bit of a retard, go back to /r/funny and post big chungus there, maybe you will get extra karma, redditor

>>11559694
I don't even know what those words mean

>>11559698
I always thought it must be hard living as a mentally challenged Redditor, go back and maybe you will find consul with your retard peers on /r/bigchungus

>>11559627
Is there supposed to be no audio or is that a problem on my end?

>>11559674
>replying 13 hours later to get your daily dose of posting about reddit

Talk about space flight you piece of shit

>>11559726
some parts don't have audio, itll probably kick in when you read this

>>11559726
big chunks of it have no audio

>>11559627
Man, watching the model x close its doors and adjust its suspension like that is a little uncanny. For just a moment it seems like an animal.

>>11559729
nah fuck reddit desu

>>11559746

>>11559734
Right on the money

>>11559752
>Redditor trying to fit in so hard he posts stale 8 year old memes and doesn't know what word filter is

do yourself a favor and just go back

>>11559758
says the man who got hit with the years old word filter

TALK ABOUT SPACE FLIGHT

>>11559770
>>11559563

I was just thinking about Falcon Heavy and how they don't intend to go through the process of man-rating it because of Starship coming up. There might be a pretty significant gap where Starship isn't yet man-rated/still working out kinks but commercial heavy lift flights with humans on board would be desirable. I could see some public money grumbling about SLS ferrying people while the less capable but still suitable FH sits in the background racking up Space Force satellite launches at a tenth the price. I wonder if the push to get Artemis rolling might include some clearing of NASA man-rating red tape.

What would be really funny is if Elon decides to be a dick, dust off Grey Dragon, and do a lap of the Moon a month before the first Artemis astronauts take off.

>>11559761
yeah you're 500% a redditor fuck off before you and your peers trash this board too far

>>11559780
I've been here for a decade, anon
I was introduced to reddit in 2013 and thought it was trash then too

>>11558806

>>11558826
>contention ratio
I think that's going to vary with the number of satellites visible. Need more capacity, spin up another shell.

>>11559627
Do they really need that much police escort? And what does the "NASA tactical unit" even do?

>>11559070
Correct. I have thrown together some bad ones of lesser quality for your consideration as well.
>Just the UN but Mars
It's just the UN flag, but Mars
>a fucking tricolor
Mars Dirt, Mars Ice, and melted Water, all protecting you against radioactive fuckery. Looks too Dutch.
>Sequel to Burgerland
self-explanatory
>Arrival
Took the idea from the Pathfinder patch, but the symbolism is pretty clear
>Spear of Mars
Okay so bear with me here: The Spear of Mars is the already existing symbol for Mars. And Mars, besides being Rome's god of War, was also a god of Agriculture. Apparently the spear got wrapped in laurel to represent peace, and an animal associated with Mars, the woodpecker, apparently guarded the Peony. So I slapped some plant life on the spear itself and put a (poorly drawn) peony on the shield, and that's that.
>Safety Beneath Ice
I got bored and just did "Ice = Safety/Life = Good" again

>>11559070
>>11560301

>>11559515
>can someone explain the new moon mission to me
"IT'S HER TIME NOW"

>>11559515
>Are they going to put something there?
THE FIRST WOMAN! (and the next man) and they're going to take LOTS OF SELFIES WOOOOO!

>>11559101

>>11559065

>>11559632

>>11559525
You forgot to attach the piss forest meme

>>11560532
Magical realms await!