/sci/ - Science & Math

haha rocket shep go vroosh

>>11650430
Remember to exercise so you can be fit enough to blast off to the future. There won’t be any skinny fats going to Mars

>>11650430
Strange. That doesn't look like the SPACE SHUTTLE RS-25, a real AMERICAN engine. Not this FOREIGN engine. The RS-25, which is HAND CRAFTED by true AMERICAN hands, uses clean and POWERFUL hydrogen as a fuel rather than DIRTY methane. Let us be honest again, the next AMERICAN rocket on AMERICAN soil which will carry AMERICAN astronauts will be the SPACE LAUNCH SYSTEM (pbui). Anyone who actually pays attention to these things will now the power disparity between those engines. The AMERICAN SLS (pbui) only needs four powerful RS-25, meanwhile the weak FOREIGN "spaceship" needs over 30 "raptors".

It is clear that SpaceX can not handle what it takes to push space flight beyond its boundaries. I propose that we nationalize this dangerous FOREIGN company before it kills more AMERICANS, or worse more AMERICAN JOBS.

Reposting from prev thread :
Old NAsA video on Apollo skip entry
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTKHqfloB7Q

>>11650468

>>11650430
>American Engine Edition
There is no point in going multi-planetary if you are not multi-cultural. Really good engineering is diverse before anything else.

>>11650529
>A south african with a japanese sword in front of a american flag.
And somehow this guy did more for spaceflight then any one else in the last few decades.

11650541
you tried

>>11650550
Thanks. But that's what that woman said on that spacex presentation. The one where they revealed starship I think.
She actually entered the line to ask a question to musk and asked why they don't go international before going multi planetary.
She could have asked anything to elon fucking musk and decided to ask that.

>>11650549
I always saw this as one of the US biggest strengths. It's much easier to get stuff done over there than in most other places. This is why so many great people move to the US.
That recent populist-nationalist thing is just holding you guys back desu.

>>11650570
>She actually entered the line to ask a question to musk and asked why they don't go international before going multi planetary.
Why would they go international before going multi planetary? What purpose does that serve other than feeling good for a "united Earth"? One of the "breakthroughs" SpaceX brought to space flight is to have a slim and streamlined production line to cut down on costs. Going international and trying to spread production would increase the price of everything SpaceX does.

>>11650586
She meant why they don't hire more diverse people and not why they don't spread production.
Having a larger pool of phds to hire from is obviously good but it is also obvious that she did it to get internet points.
The answer that musk gave is that rockets are considered a "strategic" industry or something and they can't hire foreigners.

>>11650603
>She meant why they don't hire more diverse people and not why they don't spread production

Has she never heard of ITAR?

>>11650603
>The answer that musk gave is that rockets are considered a "strategic" industry or something and they can't hire foreigners.

ITAR. It’s illegal for any foreigners to work in US rocket technology, so SpaceX can not ever ever “go international”.

>>11650603
>The answer that musk gave is that rockets are considered a "strategic" industry or something and they can't hire foreigners.
Yes, and thank God for that. Some idiot HR cat lady would hire Chang Notaspy and then China would "coincidentally" clone Starship a few years after first flight.

Incidentally this is why Chinese immigration should be ended in general.

>>11650625
A lot of people fail to do basic research

>>11650637
>Some idiot HR cat lady would hire Chang Notaspy
ayyyyyyy

>>11650637
>Incidentally this is why Chinese immigration should be ended in general.
I think that being able to hire from a large pool of workers is good but treating a non-democratic country with no respect for intellectual property laws like you treat everyone else is retarded.

Watch out Mr. Musk

>>11650661
SpaceX is finished

>>11650661
Pictured: First chinese module on the moon.

>>11650661
Looks TOASTY

How well steel would scale for a 110m starship?
Do you guys think there would be the need to structural beams or should fuel pressure be enough?

>>11650683
>110m
If that's height it's supposed to be a bit bigger than that as is, if that's diameter then jesus christ, surely >>11650670 is big enough already

>>11650689
>110 meter diameter rocket
I'm pretty sure that's Orion territory.

>>11650689
What?
Yes, 100m is it's height. Diameter would be 18m. The current one is 55m by 9m.

>>11650695
It could just be gigantic tuna can or a donut.

>>11650661
Looks like one of those wrecked tanks that’s been sitting in the Libyan desert since 1943

>>11650430
I recognize that raptor!
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EU0suUeXQAIZgUl.jpg:large

>>11650689
>110meter diameter spacex launch capacity

>>11650731
>only one has that white thingys
Well noticed anon.

>>11650751
dear god. how much would that even lift

>>11650683
>>11650689
>110m diameter Starship
>15kt payload capacity

>>11650683
That shit's definitely a mothership waiting to be built.

>>11650759

>>11650765
someone pls make a shop of it, I can't even visualize that

>>11650661
But it is really efficient to send humans in space? Except for the research on the effects of microgravity on the human body, it seems modern machines can accomplish so much more with less.

>>11650788
>it seems modern machines can accomplish so much more with less
"modern machines" get less done in 18 years than two dudes with a shovel get done in 30 minutes.

>>11650782
Wait, I can speak meme and translate it for you,
You know that blacked meme image with the black guy's hand on the skinny white chick's head near pevlis? Well, see this image here >11650670 and realize the middle ship is 110 meters long. Now rotate it verticle and scale its size until its width is 110 meters wide. Not the enterprise is the white chick and the starship is the black guy.

>>11650661
I wonder how many chinese rural farmers that thing squashed.

>>11650788
>But it is really efficient to send humans in space?

What does that even mean? There is *no point whatsoever* to exploring space unless you intend to colonize it. If all you intend to do is sight-see, we might as well shut down all space programs right now. Fuck off.

> Except for the research on the effects of microgravity on the human body, it seems modern machines can accomplish so much more with less.

Completely wrong. I could cover more ground in a day or two walking than Curiosity covered in over six years, probably more because I could bound around in .38 g, and take samples from underground using the amazingly complex technology of a spade, while the 700 million dollar inSight probe can’t even drill a hole a few inches. If I ever see that thing, I’m going to pick it up and throw it off a cliff.

>>11650751
>>11650763
>>11650765

>shattered eardrums over the entire hemisphere at launch.

>>11650782
About like this. The Burj Khalifa is 828 meters tall. Starship is 55m high at 9m diameter. That gives us 672m high at 110m diameter.

>>11650729

Since *2011 kek

>>11650826
>If all you intend to do is sight-see, we might as well shut down all space programs right now. Fuck off.
Meanwhile on Mount Everest.

>>11650834
Reaching Star Wars sizes. Shit that needs to be built at lagrange points.

>>11650842
That actually makes a profit for the Nepalese government.

>>11650842
>risking life and limb for this

>>11650849
How much would you pay to get a seat on a rocket for a tour of ____ in our solar system?

>>11650834
oof

>>11650857
> How much would you pay to get a seat on a rocket for a tour of ____ in our solar system?

Ten million dollars if I can get a rock sample. I love rocks.

>>11650661
Having watched so many Chinese rekt videos, I have a feeling this shit landed on some random chink and the video of this event exists.

>>11650867
More like 长啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊.

>>11650834
thanks

https://youtu.be/w0Tgo8HS_KM?t=163

>So you can hear the hosts screaming like crazed sports fans. That's always "fun"
Based Scott

>>11650670
>>11650834
How do you people keep forgetting that the 18m diameter scale up would not also mean double the height? The height would only increase proportional to however much additional performance you managed to get out of the engines. You can't just stretch a Starship to double the height and expect the engines to lift double the weight.

>>11650903
>You can't just stretch a Starship to double the height and expect the engines to lift double the weight.
Ha ha methalox go boom.

>>11650782
Here's a rough sketch I made. I should be mostly to scale. Although, to be honest, my rocket maker spreadsheet is abit spaghetti and needs to be cleaned. I ended up spending more time getting it to work they way I wanted than drawing this monster. So don't be surprised if a number or three is off.

>>11650928
Now do it in KSP.

>>11650932
iirc even procedural parts max out at 10m diameter

>>11650941
We clearly need somebody to write a new procedural parts.

>>11650928
Imagine the crater that would leave

>>11650951
sea launch

>>11650867
One of the Chinkonauts fell through the escalator up to the launch tower and got crushed

>>11650942
even then, I doubt you could fit it on the ramp let alone in VAB
the science just isn't there yet
>>11650952
I wonder if anything swimming in 500km radius would survive the launch

>>11650975
I hope KSP2 actually materializes soon and doesn't completely fucking suck.

>>11650952
oh shit, here we go

>>11650430
>>11650468
>RS-25
>uses advanced non-reactive zero outgassing thermally insulating covers specifically manufactured to fit into each pipe opening when the engine is no installed on the rocket

>Raptor
>"Yeah some yellow tape will do"

based

>>11650979
Me too anon, the devs seem to really care about KSP so I hope it isn't shit. I have some optimisation concerns, and I also hope they release it on Linux like KSP otherwise I'll be fucked off.

>>11650980
Well that solves the combustion instability problem of the original design rather handily.

What day of the week usually drops the best news? Monday? Friday?

>>11650994
>I have some optimisation concerns
Well, it's still Unity as far as I can tell, so those are probably well placed concerns.

>>11650932
>Launch Uberrocket from Kerbin
>The planet's orbit shifts a kilometer or so

>>11650979
IMO, the bar for KSP2 is pretty low. As long as the game handles better and has new stuff to do then it'll be good.

>>11650450
I did my best

>>11650661
Congratulations China, for successfully copying SpaceX's original Dragon capsule design.

>>11650450
>>11651024
Needs that new Chinese spacecraft.

>>11650699
You can't double the height. You can scale it as wide as you want, but there's only so many engines you can pack into the base to lift a rocket.

A taller rocket requires more thrust per unit base area. A wider rocket requires exactly the same thrust per base area. This is why rockets generally get wider as they get taller; N1 is the most obvious example of this.

18 meter diameter Starship would be exactly as tall as the current 9m design, it'd just be twice as wide, and would get ~4 times the payload to LEO.

>>11650699
Fully stacced is over 100m height though, with the same construction and materials. I don't know if the 18m is supposed to have a scaled up Superheavy as well or if it would require and entirely different approach.
>accidentally kicked off 100m diameter discussion
kek

>>11651035

>>11650763
9 m radius Starship gets 150 tons to LEO in final form.
Scaling up diameter directly scales up payload in relation to base area.
110 meter diameter Starship has about 150 times the base area.

Therefore, 110 meter wide Starship Super Heavy has;
>4650 first stage Raptor engines
>900 second stage Raptor engines, probably more vacuum optimized ones than sea level optimized
>a payload capacity of 22,500 metric tons to LEO, and with refueling 22,500 tons to the surface of the Moon or Mars

>>11650909
You literally cannot, though. You'd need Raptor to double its chamber pressure and thrust for every doubling in height.

>>11650430
Y-Y-Y-YOU CANT J-JUST MOVE AEROSPACE GRADE HARDWARE LIKE THAT!!!

>>11651064
Wouldn't it be possible to just make a scaled up version of the raptor called the "super raptor"?

>>11651066

>>11651040
>I don't know if the 18m is supposed to have a scaled up Superheavy as well
Yes, you'd widen both stages from 9m to 18m, and you'd leave the length alone.

>>11651068
It could scale up but that wouldn't necessarily do much for thrust per area which is what you're really looking for there.

>>11650751
Is that the point where you get diminishing returns on rockets yet?

>>11651071
the chad chode

>>11650541
no, anon
your engineering needs to be good before anything else
it's your money that needs to be diverse
gotta get as many countries as possible in on the future

>>11651076

>>11651085

>>11651068
It wouldn't change the requirement for more chamber pressure. You'd have more thrust per engine but the same combined average thrust per unit area at the base of the rocket. In fact with a bigger engine you may end up with less efficient packing and less thrust per unit area overall.

To give a real world example, look at the massive F-1 engine on the Saturn V, and compare it to four little Raptors. The F-1 produces much more thrust than a single Raptor, but four Raptors both produce MORE combined thrust in a smaller area when clustered, and do it while weighing less.

As another example, look at New Glenn with its BE-4 engine, which is slightly more powerful than the current Raptor but much bigger due to having lower chamber pressure. If you removed the 7 BE-4 engines from NG and installed 9 Raptors, you' have greater thrust reduced weight and greater efficiency, too.

You can think of any rocket engine as needing to be strong enough to lift a column of propellant and structure above itself, and that column can not be so tall that it weights more than the thrust force of the engine. Scaling up Starship in width and height would increase the height of the column each engine would need to carry, even if you packed in as many engines as you could fit. However, scaling up ONLY the width is effectively like stacking more columns next to one another to get a bigger stage; that process can scale infinitely because each engine isn't being forced to do any extra work.

>>11651085
>>11651087
based

>>11651076
That's not how diminishing returns works in rockets. See pic related for how it actually works.

Basically, diminishing returns in rocketry only show up if you're trying to increase delta V, and even then it's only if you're trying to increase delta V without increasing the size of each stage.
For Earth launch to LEO, the delta V requirement is static. No matter how large the payload, you can launch it to orbit in just two stages. Of course at extreme scales these stages start to look more like pancake propellant tanks with enormous engine clusters at the bottom, but the same delta V is supplied regardless.

If you want to give your rocket more payload, you never run into diminishing returns. If you want to give your rocket more delta V, well now you're fighting the rocket equation, and you need to start adding more and more stages of larger and larger size. Luckily, the largest number of stages we'd ever reasonably need to perform human colonization of the Moon, Mars, and the easier asteroids is just three, so it's not a big deal. Sending serious payload to Jupiter's moons using chemical rockets would be pushing it. Interstellar travel delta V is enough that even if you're willing to accept a 5000 year trajectory your staging requirements are just insane if you aren't using nuclear propulsion.

>>11651101
>Acknowledgments MH is thankful to Elon Musk and Paul Krugman for inspiration.

>>11651085
Those EBFR engines better have some really high chamber pressures in order to lift a rocket of that height. By my reckoning they'd need to be around 800 bar or so. Raptor's turbopump pressures reach 800 bar, but the main combustion chamber is aroudn 200 after the pressure drop through the turbines, so if those engines used a similar cycle (and FFSC is the best for generating high pressures) the turbopumps would need to be running at around 3200 bar.

Anyone want to try to imagine what alloys could withstand 300 degree oxygen rich gas at 3200 bar? I'm thinking some kind of high strength platinum alloy could maybe work. Maybe.

>>11650661
Jesus man that thing is fucking charred, what the fuck kind of filthy burning ablator are they using to get a capsule that dirty?

>>11651099
vertical takeoff horizontal landing winged stages impose a significant mass penalty for reuse, especially when compared against Super Heavy which is required to save just a little bit of fuel for the landing burn (if you're downrange landing) (a little bit more if you're doing boostback) and needs to carry grid fins and associated hardware for control during descent, but still well within the realm of possibility.
Of course, you won't be colonizing Mars or the moon with a winged landing stage, both due to there not being enough atmosphere at either of those places and your payload fraction being smaller (so refueling isn't worth it) but it would have been a great tool for building and supplying Space Station Freedom
>>11651141
gutter oil

>>11650980
The funny thing is that this is from the mars infinite video, a fully reusable sea dragon to mars and back in ksp rss. So it might actually work

>>11651068
The room where you can put the engines, big or small, scales differently than the weight. Essentially as you scale the rocket's height and diameter equally the weight that must be lifted overwhelms your capacity to put engines under it to lift it. This has profound impact on the general shape of the rocket. Small rockets - long and pointy. Big rockets - pyramids or outright saucers. Conveniently air resistance matters less and less the bigger you are so you can fly blocky things no problem.

Repostan' from the previous thread, a supersonic metal deposition printer manufacturing a 20kg combustion chamber and bell in seven hours and change. I think if you increased the size of the chamber and armature holding the part, and added a rotating deck of nozzles with different spray patterns and sizes you could have these machines churning out practical scale rocket engines quite rapidly.
The parts are solid metal pieces of the proper strength and density as a result of the supersonic deposition process, which effectively cold-welds every particle together, no need for processing them afterwards like laser-sintered components.
I think in the near future we'll start to see 3D manufactured rockets with the injector plate, chamber and nozzle all being a single solid piece, perhaps even made up of composites of different metals layered atop one-another.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hze1D_B2ui4&feature=emb_title

>>11651157
>The funny thing is that this is from the mars infinite video
Correct!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F--3aBhAKCY

>>11651068
Only to a point, when rockets start getting seriously big it becomes easier to get wider than to get taller. So each engine doesn't have to support an increasingly large weight alone. The heaviest ground launched spaceships will eventually get so large they'll look more like Minie-Ball bullets with squat bases and relatively round noses.

>>11651188
the only reason that small rockets are so short is because they can't get as tall as their thrust/area ratio would allow due to aerodynamics and structural issues

>>11651179
>He posted the mod list.
Motherfucker, back into Ckan we go.

>>11651126
There's a platinum-gold alloy that's super durable, or what about that gold-titanium one?

>>11651240
Beta-Titanium-Gold is super hard, hard enough that diamond drill bits have difficulty marking it, but I don't hear anything mentioned about it's other properties. I'd worry that as with most any metal or metal alloy, you're working in a world of tradeoffs where to get quadruple the hardness of steel you're going to have quadruple the brittleness, not a good thing for rocket engines because there's also extreme vibration involved which might crack such a super-hard alloy. Not to mention that "just" titanium has a melting point of "only" 3034F, while the insides of rocket engines can reach nearly 6000F, nothing mentioned about how it can perform in hyperoxic environments either. The Titanium-Platinum alloy is similarly dummy strong when it comes to resisting friction wear, and supposedly very heat tolerant as well, but I couldn't find anything with quick searches as to whether it would stand up to the pure mechanical stress involved in rocket turbomachinery, not to mention dear lord the fucking cost of the stuff must be extraordinary, it's 90% by mass platinum. Of course every blade and gear in that setup will have to be made of the stuff too, because of how ridiculously hard it is I'd assume it would chew any weaker metal to shit.

>>11650570
>That recent populist-nationalist thing is just holding you guys back desu
Not wanting millions of non-whites to come in and lower wages isn't holding us back, faggot.

>>11651188
I don't think we'll ever need to launch shit that huge into space, if we can get a substantial space station in orbit in the coming years (and not just a cramped science lab) we can start constructing huge crafts without needing to hurl them from the ground beforehand.

>>11651240
That alloy is only durable to abrasion, and even then only with abrasion against gold-platinum alloy. If means you can make headphone jacks that never wear out, and other such things.

>>11651066
Haha pickup go brrrr

>>11650661
So, the inflatable heat shield worked?

>>11651437
If by "worked" you mean "failed spectacularly", yes.

>>11651439
Well, it came down whole and the internals seems to be alright so far. So I wonder what part has failed?

If the heat shield failed as rumored before, the capsule would have been disintegrated.

>>11651445
before

>>11651445
It wasn't part of the capsule. Two payloads.

>>11651437
the inflatable heat shield did not work
the capsule heat shield did work
these were two separate vehicles and tests on the same rocket

>>11651451
>>11651455
I see. So they built a dedicated inflatable shield RV just to test that shield? That's pretty damn careful, albeit quite a testament that they have that spare carrying capacity on their rocket.

>>11651445
you could not pay me enough to consider descending to earth in that

>>11651463
The Chinese build escalators that swallow people whole. Their first LEO "Heavenly Palace" deorbited rather quickly. I don't think their second one will fare much better.

>>11651473
Their 2nd test station has already deorbited as per schedule. They are now in the process to build their third and final one.

>>11651478
Oh, they're on their third? I don't really pay that much attention to shit that just falls out the sky that fast.

>>11651483
The two first ones were little more than larger capsules to test the concept and never meant to be in the orbit for any longer than a year or so. The third one is a Mir-sized space station with multiple modules.

Pic; first station

>>11651492
And the third one.

>>11651495
what a difference a cubic-six-node does, huh?

>>11651373
Probably true, especially if we use von Braun's method and just inflate giant para-aramid balloons to form the base shape then build the rest of the ship around them. They can be reused for the inner bulkhead walls with some padding sewn onto them with the rigid ship's skeleton outside and the plating overtop that, with the cabling and piping feeding in between those layers.

>>11651478
and that one will sink into the swamp?

>>11651459
>I see. So they built a dedicated inflatable shield RV just to test that shield? That's pretty damn careful, albeit quite a testament that they have that spare carrying capacity on their rocket.

Capsules are usually pretty light weight payloads. The CZ-5 is roughly comparable to Falcon 9 in terms of capability, and Dragon is far from straining the capabilities of Falcon 9.

>>11651524
>box in a box

>>11651500
The most based station connector part, bar none.

>>11651524
Sounds complicated. Just lock/bolt/weld some shit together. Or build something traditionally, from the ground up, where it's easy to reach orbit like the moon/mars, or for the really big stuff a combo of the two.

>>11650657
Why do you pretend Democratic is a good thing
Or intellectual property?

>>11651553
Why do you eat bats drenched in their own piss?

>>11651553
He means non-Republican, in the literal sense not the political party. Everybody forgets that because the words have been used too sloppily.

>>11651560
Government by voting is the worst shit possible

>>11651584
Government by gun and threats is infinitely worse.

>>11651588
Government by brainwashing

>>11651588
China has gone from an agrarian communist hellhole to first world in 3 decades
Meanwhile the west is dying

>>11651584
It the least shit so far as I can tell, Rome as a Representative Republic was one of the longest lived (mostly) unchanged government systems in human history, rapidly brought to ruin by a switch to authoritarianism. The US as a modified Constitutional Representative Republic has grown faster and accumulated greater material and technological success than most any other government in human history. If there's a system which is superior to a Constitutional Representative Republic I don't know about it.
>>11651602
Look Chang, just because the Party has instructed you to deny that China is a hellhole on pain of death doesn't make it any less of a hellhole.

>>11651602
>first world
mao
lmao

>>11651602
>first world
Oh do fuck off. They're an authoritarian hell hole that has given the proletariat a tiny little bit of money so that they don't overthrow them, for now.
They've staved off what was a wave of liberalization in the 80s by producing nothing but party propaganda media for the following generation at the same time.

They're still the same old kleptocrat communist party elite plundering the proles, while threatening to send them off to gulag if they show the tiniest bit of non-conformity to the "glorious socialist revolution".

Some are always more equal than others on the farm.

THE CHINK IS A JANNY DESIGNED TO GENERATE (YOU)s. STOP REPLYING TO IT.

>>11651547
I think the idea with building in space is to do shit that wouldn't hold together under construction down on Earth. Of course after Elon's junkyard model of building spacecraft we may skip that entirely in favor of just building on Earth, the Moon, or Mars.

Easiest (you)’s of my life

>>11651632
Don't spend them all in one place.

>China can't even build a HIAD

>>11651176
Damn son

>>11650788
The point isn't to be efficient. The point is to be cool.

>>11650867
The booster definitely wiped a small village off the map.

ok so im still lingering on what was said in the other thread.

when can i expect to see earth to earth travel by rocket to be cheaper than airplanes?

>>11651700
they launched from the coast

>>11651602
>first world
Honesly i hope your a chill because otherwise i really think your the most retarded fucker i have seen the entire week on 4shit.

>>11651710
Probably never for anything other than long distance major popular runs.

>>11651316
>Not wanting millions of non-whites to come in and lower wages isn't holding us back, faggot

If you can’t compete then that’s your own problem.

>>11651760
how about a combination of rail and rocket?

also, rails could be severely automated.

elon musk said driverless trucks will be cheaper than sending stuff by rail

how much money the salary of the driver affects each transportation method?

>>11651316
>>11651763
not wanting to cum inside hot girls of all nationalities becasue its so pleasurable and if you impregnate them by putting the semen deep inside their vaginas its so hot

>>11651765
Electric trucks will still have drivers, he's stated before he doesn't intend the technology to displace truckers, merely to make their job a lot less stressful and exhausting.

>>11651769
There's a difference between cooming inside hot foreign girls and inviting tens of millions of random foreigners to coom into your country and fuck up it's demographics, economy, government and social programs.

>>11651783
No matter what the intention is, it's inevitable. Once the tech can handle it some company is going to decide that it isn't worth it to keep paying middle men for a job that basically does itself.

>>11651716
Oh wow, a boostback burn to hit the peasants, I've got to appreciate their dedication

>>11651783
no, that's the inmediate next step, the end goal is full automation and that is the kind of vehicle that will bring less money than train

>>11651792
who cares, just fuck and coom inside, if you care about shit like that is because you cant get girls to fuck and coom inside, not my problem

>>11651800
this is true but they better make them capable to defend themselves, millions of well paid people around the world will suddenly find themselves without a job because of something that is easy to sabotage

>>11651783
Tesla Semi v2 or v3 won't even have a cabin. Why in the hell would you pay someone to sit in the vehicle when the day comes that it can drive itself?

>>11651814
>lol if you care about the genetic inheritance of your people you're an incel
What pond did they scrape you out of?

>>11651765
>>11651765
>how about a combination of rail and rocket?
the future is an interconnected network of maglevs or even hyperloops, nothing is more efficient that have a transport that goes with no interruptions over predefined tracks in the exact conditions you want.

This kills airplane industry for good someone just has to build it, once its done it will be clear that building intercontinental bridges will pay themselves compared to the price of air travel.

>>11651765
>how much money the salary of the driver affects each transportation method?
In cars trucks and buses: a shitload, its like 30% of the cost. In airplanes its like 60% with most of the other 40% being fuel. The master god tier of this is space transportation, astronaut salary must be a drop in the ocean of that.

>>11651818
>>lol if you care about the genetic inheritance of your people you're an incel
unironically yes, no chad asks for a genetic study before having children, thats firmly into balding skinnyfat creepy mouthbreather territory

>>11651817
To prevent there from being a surplus of homeless or near-destitute people who will cost every other citizen more to take care of in the long run. To provide human oversight for a machine which can't repair or maintain itself on the fly, to guide the machine manually in an emergency situation where human judgement is desired.

>>11651792
>social programs.

If you want a country that coddles you then move to Canada or Denmark. Neither of those countries has a space program or technology sector worth a damn though.

>>11651834
For something like taxis it’s clearly above half the cost

UPDATE: Public Notice of Cameron County Order to Temporarily Close State Highway 4 and Boca Chica Beach
Primary Date May 8, 2020 9:00 p.m. – 6:00 a.m. Closure Scheduled
Backup Date May 9, 2020 9:00 p.m. – 6:00 a.m. Closure Scheduled
Backup Date May 10, 2020 9:00 p.m. – 6:00 a.m. Closure Scheduled
Primary Date May 11, 2020 9:00 a.m. – 9:00 p.m. Closure Scheduled
Backup Date May 12, 2020 9:00 a.m. – 9:00 p.m. Closure Scheduled
Backup Date May 13, 2020 9:00 a.m. – 9:00 p.m. Closure Scheduled

TL;DR 3 more days for testing added on from today making a total of 6 and instead of the normal 9 hours they have been extended to 12.

>>11651853
America does have them, whether I approve of them or not (in essentially all cases I don't), and foreign migrants contribute to their ever-growing strain on the US economy. If they perform any labor at all (they disproportionately don't) it's not generally the kind that contributes to high technology endeavors, and before anyone says "muh coding" I'd just advise them to take one look at Boing!'s Indian/Chinese coded avionic software.

Sorry Globalistfags, infinite immigration isn't valuable for spaceflight.

>>11651868
Also they are during the day not night, so possible hop?

>>11651800
The self-driving thing is valid, but it's probably going ot take quite a while for regulations to catch up to that tech. People are really weird about it too-the amount of media attention when something goes wrong is massive, even though the data is clear that cars with self-driving are in far less accidents.

>>11651602
It converted to a capitalist state to do that.

>>11651892
by that logic the west which is way more capitalist and for a longer time should be doing great

>>11651899
Much of the west, ironically especially in America has become heavily socialized. There are countries in Europe with radically fewer overall economic regulations than the US at this point, which is fucking embarrassing. Ironically the US's economic structure is more like a pale imitation of Fascist Italy, which the US government fucking loved and wanted to emulate before it became unpopular to do so. Which perfectly explains why it's gotten so sluggish and topheavy, because all socialist economic systems are fucking trash.
To keep this shit even remotely spaceflight related, this is probably the primary reason why US Government spaceflight has been such a travesty, the modern conception of socialized central planning is one of humanity's greatest mistakes and the exact kind of pork farming corruption observable in NASA is stereotypical of centrally planned projects.

>>11651818
The United States is the place to make it big or get shit done. It’s what gives America its main competitive advantage over everyone else. Messing with this formula guarantees that China becomes the next dominant power on this planet.

People like you always want the country to be more like Japan. But Japan hasn’t been relevant since the 80s. It’s as simple as that and it trumps any concerns about invading brown hordes. A single Elon Musk is worth a thousand of you. You’re like a dock yard worker in the 60s bitching about shipping containers taking your job.

>>11651913
china is great
>because they are capitalists!!
united states isn't and it does worse
>thats because the united states is socialist
so youre admiting the us is shit
>yes but if it capitalism worked like it did in my mind america would be the best!

>>11651853
Hey, Canada is the nuclear technology capitol of the world, nigga.

>>11651892
It's pseudo-capitalist. The communist government runs the market.

>>11651927
You aren't capitalists Chang, at the very most you're pinkos who's government LARPs some fascistic "State Capitalism" to keep your pathetically weak currency from utterly imploding and sending you to the stone age. The US was more normal capitalist in the past and it was better, and yes economically it has degraded over time, still vastly surpassing your shitty commie hellhole.
Begone from this thread pinko, I hear there's a hungry escalator with your name on it.

>>11650433
Better Res

>>11651978
pretty sure they reduced the number of seats in dragon to 4

>>11651987
Nasa bureaucracy in action

>>11651987
Maximum crew capacity is different from in-practice crew capacity. Max crew cap is basically just bragging about how good you are at space management, in practice I don't think anybody actually flies their max crew.

im curious, what did /sfg/ think of this?

>>11650661
Boing BTFO by chinks

>>11652053
The science is hard enough to satisfy me, and the story is surprisingly straightforward. However, the movie felt like it was supposed to be bigger than what was shown. Such as Pruitt being introduced, does nothing really, and then disappears relatively early in the story. I recommend it, although expect to be bored for chunks of the film.

>>11651931
Yes, fine, the candu reactor is really nice.
The leafs do punch above their weight in certain instances (including space).
But they’re not that the states.

>>11652086
I'm actually talking about the current development of SMRs, not CANDU, but ok.

>>11652053
mostly boring and incredibly unrealistic

>>11652088
CANDU is also pretty based, for a water reactor.

>>11652053
Very nice, the story and aesthetics are very nice.
The “experiment” that is going on doesn’t make much sense but that’s not the selling point of the movie. You could replace it with an asteroid or moon mining facility that has a bunch of nukes or something.

>>11652053
Neat sets and stuff, but shitty writing and a waste of talent. Pacing was shit. Mumblecore is shit.

>>11652069
>the movie felt like it was supposed to be bigger than what was shown.
That was the only good part about it. It gives us a universe that feels bigger than what we can see. Too bad it didn't do much with it.

>>11652092
I suggest you watch this instead. At least it isn't boring.

>>11652092
What is unrealistic? Besides the experiment thing.

>>11651931
pffft, nigga please,usa has

>nuscale
>terrapower
>oak ridge
we're even working on getting flibe to make fusion easier
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Yww1AwXf_s

>>11652109
US has ten times the population of Canada.

>>11652053
"nooo you cant look for meaning through science or religion just stay at home with your wife who hates you"

What a garbage move. Bad science. Unlikable characters. Stupid message. The only saving graces were the production values and cinematography.

The anime Planetes dealt with similar themes in a similar setting in an infinitely better way.

>>11652106
you are in sfg and you need to ask?

>>11652053
if they cut the shitty narrating, it might be bearable. Great cinematography though, loved the moon pirates part

>>11652112
damn right! You are our HAT maplenigger

>>11652112
Not that guy but I don't think being the "X Capitol of the World" is a per capita deal. If you buy Sealand and launch a rocket off of it it doesn't become the rocketry capitol of the world even though 1:1 launches:population is easily smashing it per capita.

>>11652115
Yes. The experiment thing was unrealistic but the science of it was not important for the movie and could be replaced by something else. What else was “incredibly unrealistic”?

>>11652104
>That was the only good part about it. It gives us a universe that feels bigger than what we can see.
I get that too, and I like that too, but what I meant was that the story felt like it was supposed to have included more elements originally and those elements were removed for some reason. It felt like it was building up to more but only followed through little.

>>11652146
I heard that Disney made some changes to the movie when they bought Fox. Maybe that was it?

>>11652146
I think it was a sci-fi drama. But it didn’t make it very clear so a lot of people watched it expecting a sci-fi plot and ending.
The movie was actually about brad pitt’s daddy issues.

>>11652053
The writing was iffy and the science was pure flaming garbage.
This is a future where humanity clearly has a thriving space presence, with at least one big-ass city on the moon and a sizable Mars colony. If it takes 80 days to get to Neptune orbit from Mars, there wouldn't be a single lonely outpost there, the Kuiper belt would be teeming with comet miners. 80 days to Neptune is a fucking miracle, and the movie treats it like some astounding ordeal.

>>11652157
I kinda liked that the plot itself wasn't dependent on the setting being sci-fi. Plots that only focus on the sci-fi tend to just be a technobabble battle.

>>11652053
>The project was announced in early 2016, with Gray saying he wanted to feature "the most realistic depiction of space travel that's been put in a movie"

>>11652163
The fuck
Why would anyone mine the juicer belt? What do you expect to gain there? very little actual mass out there

>>11652106
It's been a while and I was bored so my memory may be a bit fuzzy, but off the top of my head...

>still using expendable rockets in the future
>impossibly high radio tower
>need to be beyond heliosphere to detect interstellar radio signals
>go to Neptune even though Neptune is well inside the heliosphere
>magic death ray pulse thing from magic ship somehow gets stronger over distance instead of weaker
>government not just sending missiles to blow up the ship
>need to go to Mars to record and transmit a radio message to Neptune for no reason
>need to go to the moon before going to Mars for no reason
>everyone still using rinky dink apollo era moon buggies despite having giant moon bases with chain restaurants
>escorting VIPs across pirate territory on rinky dink buggies instead of just flying there
>rinky dink buggy belonging to the protag is indestructible because plot armor
>casually detours to check out a distress signal, ignoring delta-v limits and orbital mechanics
>scary space monkeys
>climbs on and into a rocket as it's launching
>somehow gets from Mars to Neptune in like 2 weeks
>flings himself off a spinning radar antenna and plows through Neptune's rings on a boogie board to get back to his ship by just eyeballing it
>rides a single nuclear blast back to Earth in a fragile spacecraft that should have been destroyed by such a thing

>>11652189
Kuiper*

Oops

ok i know you guys meme about it but realistically what are the challenges we need to overcome to make the SLS worthwhile? it cant be a completely lost cause, if we have old parts we can reuse and the mission is a reuseable rocket, then i think thats a good goal. what are the problems plaguing the SLS program and how do we realistically overcome them?

>>11652189
if fusion power is a thing, you can grab a few icy rockballs and build your own isolated fiefdom. would be pretty comfy.

>>11652194
Not all of those are valid but you have some points I had forgotten about.

>>11652216
>it cant be a completely lost cause
I came here to laugh at you, but I was too apathetic to even manage that.

>>11652189
Total mass is irrelevant, accessibility is what matters.

Cryo/pressure test window opened 10 minutes ago (and closes in 12 hours).
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VtpXx1luzUg

>>11652235
>accessibility is what matters.
if that were true rockets would be made out of braille signs and ramps

>>11652216
>ok i know you guys meme about it but realistically what are the challenges we need to overcome to make the SLS worthwhile?
Having it launch in the same year as the first Falcon Heavy launch.

>if we have old parts we can reuse and the mission is a reuseable rocket
The RS-25s don't have the throttle capability to do that with the current design of the core stage. A core stage with more engines could work, but that would require a much larger tank and NASA has shown that it is very slow with building the current design of tankage.

>what are the problems plaguing the SLS program and how do we realistically overcome them?
The main issues with the SLS is how the program is organised. Other anons are probably going to tear into the project in more detail, but the short version is that the program is designed with the goal of providing jobs in key areas and to pay key contractors. The rocket itself is ultimately a secondary goal. This can be seen in the OIG reports of SLS where contractors like Boeing were routinely late with completing key milestones yet were given extra money.

SLS technically isn't a bad rocket in of itself during the lull between the Shuttle and today, but the management and structure of the project behind the SLS is what makes the rocket bad. No amount of redesign of the rocket is going to change that. Now it has been delayed so much, that it would be better to just cancel the project and spend the resources in helping along other better projects that have sprung up in the meantime.

>>11652239
Are they planning to do a proper pressure test on SN4 now?

>>11652216
What it has going on for it:
It is hidden behind seven proxies of beurocracy, so hard to cancel;
In practice is has an infinite budget because ‘merica;
It is trump’s, who obviously is getting a second term, pet project.

None of those reasons are great but they are objectively nice to have.

Could anyone tell me if these sounds really come from Pluto, i cant find any NASA source for this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xpR4hyPSlE

>>11652260
no sound has ever been recorded from pluto because no spacecraft has ever landed on it

>>11652239
what if it pops?

>>11652244
They already did one up to 4.9 bar which is enough for flight but pressure tests are good proxy for structural integrity so the threshold for human flight is set higher.
I believe they will be doing another pressure test today but I don’t think musk said anything on twitter specifically.
SN2, I think, passed the 4.9 test too but they pushed it higher and lost the opportunity for a static fire test.

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=accelerate+at+9.8+meters+per+second+squared+to+1800+miles+per+second

fuck me...it takes over 3 DAYS of accelerating at 1 g to get to 1% of lightspeed......we gotta figure out some torchship shit if we want to make space truly easy to explore.

>>11652267
Wonderful picture.
SN5 is basically ready and SN6 is under way.

Stranded Florida man rescued by SpaceX

https://www.wesh.com/article/spacexs-rescues-boater-go-searcher/32420095#

>>11652269
In 3 months you would get to light speed (I know it is impossible thanks). Doesn’t sound so bad.

>>11652269
>>11652278
Oops misread it, ir would take one year.
Yet doesn’t sound so bad.

>>11652189
Eris, Sedna, Makemake, Haumea, Orcus- there are plenty of dwarf planets and associated moons that you could strip mine with near impunity.

>>11652269
Oh yeah, and going fast enough you have time dilation on your side.

>>11652290
1% is great for doing stuff in the solar system, and would make going to mars trivial in terms of time. It's not impossible to do-a fusion rocket should be able to get to 1% c without too much difficulty.

>>11652267
If it dies, it dies.

>>11652216
It's not going to be reusable, which would add substantially more complexity, more costs, more delays to this already burdened program. After they throw the STS surviving engines into the ocean they want to switch to a cheaper RS-25E which won't be reusable, as an example.
Reusability also only makes economic sense if you have a sufficiently high launch cadence. Even in the overoptimistic early projections STS needed to be launching at least every other week to approach being economical. SLS, which is effectively STS without the orbiter, has theoretical max production rate of two per year.
Had it been proposed/built decades ago to compliment and further amortize the STS it might've made sense. Had SLS costs and development time actually benefited from Congress-mandated use of legacy contractors, it might've been salvageable.

>>11652297
Solar sail and and laser highways always sound nicer to me than other means of propulsion. Ofc the first mission needs to take fuel to break and build a highways pointing back.

Any news about blue origin? Bezos was going to make a presentation soon right?

>>11652342
no news is good news (I guess)

>>11652337
>Ofc the first mission needs to take fuel to break and build a highways pointing back.

This isn’t actually true. You could use the same particle beam/laser you used to accelerate to decelerate by deploying a mirror which focuses the beam onto the front of the craft.

>>11652356
inverse square law

>>11652356
Somewhat valid point.

Did they put the engine back on without anyone noticing? The test range has the flare stack lit again.

>>11652361
Yes, it’ll get weaker the further away you are, so it’s very desirable to establish another beam array at your destination so deceleration and acceleration are equally efficient and expedient. I wonder how much delta/v a gravity brake using a chonky planet like Jupiter could cut off.

Think about it guys. We already have the technology to send people to other stars. We already have solar sails and the technology to build mirrors around the sun. The only missing piece is kickstarting space industry by lowering launch costs.
On a similar line of thought, once we start moving to space habitats we will basically have free energy. You can strap as many solar panels to your habitat as you want as long as you strap radiators as well. It will have 100% availability and no storage cost. Raw materials will be quite cheap as well, so once we get enough people on space habitats human kind industrial output will be in turbo drive. We will be set on the path to become kardashev 2.

>>11652376
You probably would have to pass so close that the atmosphere would destroy the ship.

>>11652371
I don’t think so. I think they will be doing a pressure test. As other anon put it, we might see a pop tonight.

>>11652337
laser propulsion is cool, there's a great video about building a sort of laser railway through the solar system,but i think fusion rockets are faster to realize and porbably can get us better speeds. We may use them together, like a laser system to help fusion rockets decelerate in some situations.

>>11652371
>>11652388
Apparently they are going for a full manned pressure test so it will be taken to above 8.5 bar. My guess the stack will help offload the CH4 at the end.

>>11652382
>>11652382
>The only missing piece is industry

nigga thats a big fucking piece, do you think its the same to manufacture 1 square meter of cloth than 1.000.000 of a very special kind in space?

its not a matter of numbers, you need new technologies for a larger industrial base

they couldnt have just "upscaled" production in the middle ages to build modern stuff, same thing happens here, we dont even know if its possible or how to have this many amount of factories working in a coordinated manner, society just doesnt work like that

>>11652047
Soyuz flies their max crew at all times
no, wait, I lied
the Soyuz max crew is two people
they fly three people at all times

>>11652376
Do you know if there's been any more word on the viability of PROCSIMA? The science involved isn't my wheelhouse but it sounded interesting.

>>11652384
Passing in front of a body’s orbital path will eat some of your velocity as long as you’re within its sphere of influence. You can play around with this phenomena using the moons in Kerbal Space Program. If you enter their sphere of influence from behind their orbital path, they can slingshot you into a solar orbit, but if you pass ahead of them, they can slow you down so much that you land back on Kerbin after exiting the moon’s sphere of influence. The same principle would work with a big gas giant orbiting another star but on a much larger scale. It may not be enough to capture but it will certainly help.

>>11652391
I was thinking of a laser as a bunch of cheap mirrors orbiting the sun. If you are thinking of earth based lasers then I agree that fusion is almost always better.

>>11652267
Two more on the way, SN5 nearly finished and SN6 well under way.
At this pace they could pop ten more and still be ahead of SLS and Boing! and fuck if anybody knows how far along Blue is with anything.

>>11652397
> but if you pass ahead of them, they can slow you down so much that you land back on Kerbin after exiting the moon’s sphere of influence.

The Apollo missions exploited this. If something went wrong at the moon or in between earth departure and the moon, they’d have a guaranteed return to Earth

>>11652394
It would be the same factories but inside (possibly rotating) habitats.
And, yes, you can scale by simply duplicating things. It’s not necessarily the most efficient way but if there is supply of energy and demand for goods then it’s good enough.

>>11652395
Based ruskies.

>>11652397
I thought we were talking about relativistic speeds because of the context of the conversation. In which case you would need something much larger than a planet to do any significant breaking.

>>11652396
Not myself. In principle, it’s a great idea and probably the most viable form of beamed propulsion, but time will tell. I’m an optimistic idiot and genuinely believe humans will eventually warp around the universe.

>>11652414
You could brake using the star itself, simultaneously refuel and slow down using a ram scoop, and/or perform a deceleration burn.

>>11652424
>just ram scoop a star's atmosphere
>what's the worst that could happen, bro

How common is extra-terrestrial phosphorus? Would mining space phosphorus be profitable? What processes would make a body rich in non-organic phosphorus?

>>11652434
No, just in the interplanetary void. They apparently cause so much drag that you couldn’t use them to accelerate, but this means you could use them as brakes that simultaneously refuel you.

>>11652437
There’s bizarrely no evidence of any phosphorus existing in the universe outside of Earth.

Was the footage in pic related acquired on Apollo 4, or Apollo 6? I have confusion on this point, I have multiple sources telling me both. Was very similar footage recorded on both missions?

There is also footage IIRC of the S-IVB staging from the S-II, and the S-II falling away. More broadly, I want to parse out all "the famous footage/photographs" from both of the A-missions, ascribing them correctly to each mission.

>>11652437
Somewhat common but not the most common. The profitability question is vague. For growing crops in space in large scale it would likely be profitable. For exporting to earth is hard to give a general answer but it might.

>>11652442
That’s just nature trying to meme us.

>>11652445
>Was the footage in pic related acquired on Apollo 4, or Apollo 6?
I can't confirm right now, but a way to do so is to watch the whole footage. If it shows a successful launch, then it's Apollo 4. If the J-2 engines on the second stage shut down early, then it's Apollo 6.

>There is also footage IIRC of the S-IVB staging from the S-II
You mean the S-IB? If so, then you're right. You can tell because the inter stage constricts near the S-IVB whereas it would be straight on a Saturn V.

>More broadly, I want to parse out all "the famous footage/photographs" from both of the A-missions, ascribing them correctly to each mission.
Maybe you can contact NASA for help?

>>11652442

This is an interesting claim. I don't want to be all [citation needed] but I am wondering if you can expand a bit on that.

IIRC stars have lots of hydrogen and helium, and nitrogen, sulfur, oxygen and carbon are found on planetary bodies. The claim makes me think of the abundance (or dearth) of elements up through the third period or so (#20) throughout the universe.

>>11652455
>This is an interesting claim

I was joking. Mars actually has more phosphorus than earth.

>>11652459
Citation
https://www.nature.com/articles/ngeo1923

>>11652454

ahh, the failure-thing on one of the two? That's useful.

Ahh again, Saturn IB Rocket? I need to review.

Very constructive/helpful post. I have the photo book "Full Moon" before me, and a similar photo is attributed to Apollo 6. But in this other photo, the earth occupies the top half of the frame (with different cloud cover I think), not at bottom, while the rocket and ring remain center top.

>>11652459

Ah, thank you for politely humoring my autism then.

>>11652450
>>11652442
This is incorrect. Schreibersite contains “bio available” phosphorus and is commonly found in meteorites.

>>11652424
Actually you can't slow down relative to any object if you're using that object as your gravity assist. You always leave at the same velocity you arrived at, the difference is the vector you're on may have less energy in a different frame of reference.

>>11652354
LOOOOONDOOOOOONNNNN

Starship de geso

>>11651763
>If you can’t compete then that’s your own problem.
t. corporate manager

>>11652504
Umm same speed not velocity

>>11652391
I think laser propulsion will be the main form of interstellar travel between colonized star systems.

I wonder what would happen if lightning hits SN4

>>11652711
probably not much

>>11651834
Rails are shitty for transport because they don‘t begin in the factories and don‘t end in every single store offering the products.

>>11652732
Rails are good for transport because they're very energy efficient

>>11652732
>they don't begin in the factories
Unless you throw a siding to it.
Both KSC and Baikonour have dedicated raillines.

>>11652260
It‘s not sound. How would that even work Anon. Think, god damn it.
They pick up radiation from these planets, then they feed that waveform into an audio program. I think it‘s also accelerated by a lot and might be pitched up or down or something until it becomes listenable.

>>11652371
>pressure test with methalox
Looking forward to that bang.

>>11652764
didn't happen

>>11651899
>by that logic the west which is way more capitalist and for a longer time should be doing great

Last time I checked, it is the most developed part of the world, so it is doing great.

>>11652660
fuck oooooofff

>>11650430
I bet they stole the design from the russians.

>>11652803
Does that look like an RD to you?

>>11652805
yes, it's very similar in both appearance and working

>>11652806
Well, it's got a bell and combustion chamber in common.

>>11652803
Lol, no. Russia has no FFSC engines.

>>11652371
Flare has nothing to do with the engine. It's burning whenever there's liquid methane in the storage and that doesn't magically disappear when they remove the engine. Also according to Elon it would shut down in a few weeks anyways because they'll start recondensing the methane boiloff back into the tanks using solar power.

>>11652395
Even the third guy has to press buttons though.

I'm super confused about the orbit to go to moon.
Hohmann transfer requires two burns in the prograde direction, right?
But in KSP, the first prograde burn (from LEO) takes me to an elliptical orbit intersecting moon. Near moon, I have to burn retrograde to go to lunar orbit (hyperbolic to elliptical). Not prograde.
What happened to the second prograde I'm supposed to do according to Hohmann transfer?

>>11652898
The Mun is not The Moon.

>>11652904
I'm using real solar system mod, but same question with Kerbin+ Mun

Why doesn't starship land on mars like shuttle on earth? You would need almost no propellant to land

>>11652915
You got a landing strip for it?

>>11652916
You could build one after the first few propelled landings

>>11652919
How are you gonna solve the drogue parachute issue in an extremely thin atmosphere? You know the shuttle used one for landing, right? You're also going to need to redesign the entire fucking thing to become a glider, changing payload capacity etc etc.
Also thinner atmosphere means lesser lift, meaning bigger fucking wings to glide, so fucking forget it.

>>11652924
You can just have a very long runway, lots of real estate on mars.
Alright, ignore the part where we redesign. Just imagine this glider will be dropped to Mars orbit using Starship or something.
I'm curious about how big the wings have to be.

>>11652929
If we're gonna have "gliders" on Mars, we're gonna need superlight blimps or something.

>>11650981
That's kapton-tape, aka the duct-tape equivalent of the aerospace and electronics industry.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kapton

>>11652933
Yeah, but they went out and bought a roll of that and didn't go and get a sub-contractor to make special mufflers for it.

Why don't you Americans write to your senators and ask them to revive the NERVA program?

>>11652216
>what are the problems plaguing the SLS program
1. Design concept
It's basicly stuck in the 1990-2000s in the basic design philiosphy
(expendable hydrolox lower stage with SRBs)
2. Production concept
Instead of beeing build by a single company, it involves a shitload of contractors, each producing administrative costs and wanting its own margins wich drives up prices and slows down development.
3. Sunk cost fallacy
Because absurd amounts of money have been sunk into SLS, people think it must produce results eventualy by dumping even more money into it.
That's a flawed assumption as it doesn't get you back anything of the wasted money, it just raises costs even further for a launch vehicle that when launched probably has higher marginal costs than what the competition offers launches for.
>and how do we realistically overcome them?
We would need to start from scratch again as the entire design and production philiosphy behind it are the main issue.

>>11652941
Because it‘s already happening.

>>11652935
Yea, because that's what every reasonable private company does.

>>11652954
Theres a news article 3 years ago but nothing after that

>>11652930
>blimbs
>in an athmosphere that thin
Nope, not going to reasonably work.
A blimb flies by having a density about as low as the ambient air.
If the athmosphere is thick enough, that's easy, if it's thin it's hard.
I could see blimbs work on Venus though as it has a dense athmosphere consisting mainly of gasses significantly heavier than helium or hydrogen (unlike the gas giants).

>>11652973
muh vacuum blimps

>>11652156
>>11652146
Test audiences didn't like something and they removed it/replaced it.

>>11652231
I recall the movie and they seem more valid than the movie itself.

>>11652184
I guess he thought Apollo 13 didn't count?

>>11652053
>Mars to Neptune: 28.56AU(2,654,820,000 miles)
>80 days travel time
>1,382,718.75MPH average and non-stop (not even figuring in the actual velocity gradients needed for turn around and all that this)
Shit movie.

>>11653050
mars to neptune in 80 days at a constant burn would require an acceleration of 0.0365 g and reach 1236 kilometers per second at max velocity.

>>11653175
2.7million mph for the max? They even used what seems to be ion engines. It wouldn't even have enough fuel to perform that.

>>11652194
Here's these points too.
https://gizmodo.com/what-ad-astra-gets-wrong-about-space-travel-astronomy-1838363861

>>11651316
It is. The number of currency units you receive after X days of work means nothing by itself. It needs to be considered in conjunction with the total number of currency units in circulation and the output of the economy. The output of the economy in turn depends on how much and how well you can produce. You produce the most and the best with the most qualified/cheaper employees for the job. Artificially creating escarcity of work force to force employers to hire from a certain demographics only slows you down.
Besides, you can just study more to get a better job if the foreigners are threatening your employment so much. You are either completely ignorant of economics or a retarded truck driver.

>>11653192
Stop replying to the /pol/tard.

>>11650834
Now do it with the booster.

>>11652986
They would only require materials of absurd strength/weight ratio, wich make a space elevator on earth look reasonable.

>>11653203
The US is a democracy, if we don’t explain that kind of stuff to our mentally challenged friends they fuck everyone over.

>>11652434
Actually it's pretty viable even without getting close to the star considering all the mass they spew out every second. And if you are going interstellar you can survive at least 0.2 AU distance from a ~Sol sized star. You could harvest hydrogen and probably harvest antimatter from the magnetosphere or make it yourself with solar power, though i don't know how viable either of these would be.

Can any anon give me a rundown on the feasibility of nuclear engines? I know they are cool and all but it seems the problems outweigh any potential benefits.

>>11653317
There are no problems and they’re hands down superior.

>>11653317
There is nuclear powered iron thrusters and exploding and atomic bomb on your back. They are only good once you are already outside of earth and you probably would want to build them outside of earth to avoid the risk of them exploding during launch.

>>11653317
Problems like what? Most problems with nuclear engines are political. Don't use it for launch because that's a meme and remember to keep anything you like in your radiation shadow and you're golden.

>>11653345
Ok so as far as i see the big ones are: Weight, with them being far heavier, Low TW/R (not very important in space but oh well, Clustering, you need to shield them from each other to prevent neutron thrust, and of course the limp dick governments not giving more than,what, 20% Enriched Uranium to anyone?
>>11653344
Speaking of nuclear power in space, how effective are radiators anyways? I seriously can't bear using nuclear reactors in KSP Interstellar because of the ridiculous radiator requirements.

>>11653363
>Speaking of nuclear power in space, how effective are radiators anyways?

Effective enough that the Russians used many nuclear reactors in space without issue.

any word on the cryo test?

>>11653192
Your argument isn't even close to being coherent, it's well proven that immigration displaces jobs for the native population, especially blue collar jobs. Telling people to just study more is extremely retarded because it happens with high end jobs as well since employers can abuse the H-1B process and have skilled labor who will work for less. On top of that, affirmative action can mean that whites are less likely to be hired even with the same ability as other applicants, in fact, that's a fairly well know policy to add diversity to companies and governments.
>You produce the most and the best with the most qualified/cheaper employees for the job
Those are usually mutually exclusive. Your cheaper employees are not as qualified but their lower cost makes up for any inefficiency.

Your economic argument is laughable but what you should have said is 'immigration creates more jobs than it takes', that is untrue, but it's more sensible. Also, don't reply to a day old post because you got triggered and instead shut the fuck up and stay on topic.

>>11653363
>weight (including shielding and radiators)
Sure, chemical takes the advantage if you're not actually escaping anything. If you are going somewhere outside your backyard, though, nuclear takes it anyway. Plus that shielding can be put to use against solar wind while in transit and those radiators are a small penalty for your craft making its own energy.

>limp dick governments
Like I said, politics

>>11653410
>Your economic argument is laughable but what you should have said is 'immigration creates more jobs than it takes', that is untrue

No it isn’t. More people in a population creates more service jobs.

>>11653363
I don’t play kerbal but the Stefan-Boltzmann law dictates that the radiated energy per unit of surface area is proportional to the forth power of the temperature in kelvin. So I would say radiators are not bad. You are not by any chance putting the radiator plates facing each other, like in computer coolers, right? Because that only works for convection.

>>11653410
The post I replied to was r

>>11653429
I primarily build them like tail fins on both sides of the reactor,large graphene solar-panel like radiators plus 2 circular graphene radiators shielding the rest of the craft from radiation (though i'm guessing that won't work given how thin graphene is,just a bit of larp). Anyways the weakest reactor in KSP I is a 4.6 megawatt monster, so i guess it needs a lot of cooling, it just sucks you're lucky to get 10% efficiency on a reactor with in-built cooling and generators.

>>11653424
>No it isn’t. More people in a population creates more service jobs.
That still doesn't mean it creates more jobs than it takes relative to population and the argument is still terrible because as you're alluding to, the jobs are not of the same quality and pay. We should all be able to agree that immigration suppresses wages, both for high end jobs and low end. This is what people care about more than the amount of jobs available to them. There are always plenty of jobs if you want to pick fruit for a few dollars an hour.
>>11653436
>The post I replied to was r
Did you get shot while trying to post that? Based commie hating snipers.

>>11653410
>it's well proven that immigration displaces jobs for the native population [...]
Incorrect. Banteringly incorrect: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration#Economic_effects

> On top of that, affirmative action can mean that whites are less likely to be [...]
The "going international" thing was a meme making fun of what an woman said (to get internet points) at a musk presentation.

>Those are usually mutually exclusive. Your cheaper employees are not as qualified but their lower cost makes up for any inefficiency.
"Qualified/cheaper" as in the cheapest person that can do the job well.

>Your economic argument is laughable
The argument is solid, the number of currency units you receive means nothing by itself. You have to consider the value of those units, which depends on the fiscal responsibility of the government, it's ability to enforce laws and total economic output.

>but what you should have said is 'immigration creates more jobs than it takes', that is untrue, but it's more sensible.
Immigration does not displace more jobs than it creates, as shown the in wikipedia article and well known to anyone who has taken economics 101. Qualified immigration most certainly does not. The economy is not a zero-sum game.

>Also, don't reply to a day old post because you got triggered and instead shut the fuck up and stay on topic.
That post was replying to me, so I have the right to reply back.

>>11653450
>Did you get shot while trying to post that? Based commie hating snipers.
Yes, I did kek. I'm a libertarian, not a commie. The closest thing to a commie here is the collectivist fork lift operator (You) that is afraid to lose his job to some pajeet and thinks he has the right fuck his whole country over it.

>>11652711
It comes to life like Johnny 5.

>>11653213
It isn't, it's a Republic. At the local and sometimes state level there is Democracy, but at the national level the US is a Constitutional Representative Republic, not a democracy. Words do actually have meanings.

>>11653450
>We should all be able to agree that immigration suppresses wages, both for high end jobs and low end.

All population growth does. Sterilize yourself if that makes you cry. Me and Pablo will outbreed you.

>>11653515
>It isn't, it's a Republic.

I considered saying this but as a joke, not as unironic retardation. All the word “Republic” means is that there’s no monarchy.

>>11653515
>Democracy
Most democracies aren't really democracies either, but parliamentary representative systems. Not true democracy.

>>11653534
republic implies elections—there are more forms of government without elections than monarchy

>>11653538
Bullshit hair splitting. People vote and those votes have political effects.

>>11653542
>those votes have political effects.
No, they don't.

>>11653544
> No, they don't.

Oh yeah I forgot reptilians control all governments and pre-decide who wins from their UFO inside of the flat hollow earth. Kys

>>11653548
You have a very vivid imagination there. Grow the fuck up.
Nothing changes no matter who you vote in, it's still the same fucking corrupt assholes sitting in the same fucking corrupt apparatus.

>>11653515
Please explain in detail how the US is not a democracy.

just nuke the thread and make a new one please
this one is broken

>>11653549
>Grow up dude
>Lol political nihilism

>>11653559
No really, how many election cycles have you taken part of as an adult? One?
Nothing ever changes. Grow up.

>>11653534
>REPUBLIC
>"a state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives, and which has an elected or nominated president rather than a monarch."
Good try champ, I'll give you a participation sticker for at least getting the last part of the whole description correct.
>>11653538
They ought to be defined that way then, confusion of language is one of the multitude of reasons each generation seems to come out more retarded than the last.
>>11653550
Major decisions of state are not decided by a straight vote from the general population of citizens, individuals vote for representatives who create, debate and then pass or veto legislation which (in theory) they believe will best accomplish the will of their electorate. In a Democracy (the corrupt version of polity) the majority opinion controls all major and minor decisions of state.

>>11653562
>Nothing ever changes.

Yeah I dunno about that. The guy in office is definitely a different guy from the last one. Maybe you have dementia and didn’t notice

>>11653577
>definitely a different guy
Playing the same tired old crony games. "Not a politician" my ass.

>>11653487
>Incorrect. Banteringly incorrect
It's not, most studies on this subject have shown that immigration displaces at least some jobs for the native population, particularly blue collar work and those that require only a high school degree. Linking the Wikipedia article on immigration is not only retarded, it's not the same argument. Immigration can still raise overall economic productivity yet be terrible for certain populations and cause job loss for them. That is part of the reason why I said your economic argument is laughable, it doesn't address the original complaint which is if certain people can be held back because of immigration.
>The "going international" thing was a meme
We're not just talking about SpaceX. Affirmative action is a real thing and as stated, it's now policy in a lot of places that if two applicants have the same ability, you higher the more diverse one to make up for 'systematic disadvantages'.
>as in the cheapest person that can do the job well.
This goes against your claim that people should just go back to school. Immigration depresses wages which means they can hire people with less education or training because the lower pay makes up for the lower job performance.

Out of respect for the thread, I'm going to stop replying to this off-topic shit.

So how about that spaceflight, huh guys?
What's goin' on with that whole thing?

>>11653608
Cancelled.

>>11653624
Well it was frustratingly slow while it lasted, gg humanity.

>>11653575
>Major decisions of state are not decided by a straight vote from the general population of citizens, individuals vote for representatives who create, debate and then pass or veto legislation which (in theory) they believe will best accomplish the will of their electorate.
This is a democracy. It's not a direct democracy but it's a democracy. There are many forms of democracy.

>>11653582
>It's not, most studies on this subject have shown that immigration displaces at least some jobs for the native population [...]
[Citation needed]
The wikipedia article says the polar opposite.

>Affirmative action is a real thing and as stated, it's now policy
You brought this up. No one was talking about this shit.

>This goes against your claim that people should just go back to school. Immigration depresses wages which means they can hire people with less education or training because the lower pay makes up for the lower job performance.
I never disputed that economic protectionism elevates the number of currency units you receive, it most certainly does since you are reducing the supply of labor.
What I said is that it reduces the total output of the economy and that the number of currency units you receive means nothing by itself. Both of which are correct.
Reducing the output of the economy in turn makes the population, on average, worse off.

On the end of the day the economy is just a big machine to make stuff. The more stuff you make the better.

>Out of respect for the thread, I'm going to stop replying to this off-topic shit.
Okay, go back to your fork lift simulator.

>>11653624
dilate

>>11653608
I just want to live on another world.

>>11653633
>Democracy is everything even when it isn't.
No. This is your final (you), don't spend it all at once.

New>>11653638

>>11652898
You're not transferring between two orbits, you're transferring between two objects. When you get to the second one (the Moon) and burn, you're burning locally retrograde to capture at the Moon but globally prograde to match the Moon's velocity around the Earth.

>>11653636
Incorrect.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy#Representative

>>11652504
How about binary systems then? That will give you a stellar mass object to break off of that's not moving at teh same speed as the whole system.

>>11652830
they have no operational FFSC engines
I think the Soviets were working on a few designs

>>11652891
that's because the guy in charge can't reach the buttons he needs to when there's a third guy sitting on the center console

>>11652898
you're burning to increase your energy to escape (not completely, but you know) Kerbin, then burning to decrease your energy to capture at the Mun
don't get caught up in semantics
>>11652915
Atmosphere isn't thick enough unless you're going very fast
>>11653650
Not necessarily true, you can orbit either prograde or retrograde around the Mun from a transfer orbit. It's an energy thing.