/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11946572
The future of spaceflight is earth science missions in low earth orbit, we need to focus more money into fixing problems like racism, starvation, Climate change, and poverty, before we worry about letting Trump use the moon as a political advertisement

Dragon needs more than two flights a year

>>11946615
It'll get more than two flights a year when it starts flying tourists

>>11946615
Well, if Russia continues to be butthurt, it'll get a whole lot more since there'll be no cooperation anymore.

>>11946615
TWO flights per year? Why would you need a flight pear year? A flight every two years would leave very little missions left for the AMERICAN Starliner. The best we can do is a flight every three years, because a four year cycle is the only way to have a sustainable space flight industry.

>>11946615
Cancel SpaceX. We don't need to fund a rich billionaire's hobby.

>>11946633
Based, we need to direct all of their money into welfare programs to save the world from racism

>>11946637

Reposting from the last thread my idea for an actual space shuttle replacement:

>fully reusable spaceplane with top-mounted turntable swing wings with 90 degrees of motion
>"cape" fairing protects turntables from the elements
>no exotic shapes, basic "Hershey bar" chord profile
>since no fuel is stored in the wings, they can be reinforced as strongly as you fucking want
>can be fitted with conventional slotted flaps, slats and spoilers for extremely nimble landing performance that allows it to land absolutely fucking anywhere there's a runway and possibly even on public highways in an emergency
>during launch, wings are folded over the top of the fuselage perfectly, and during re entry are protected from heat by the fuselage itself and thus need no heat shielding
>for even better performance, use a "triple fin" tail setup where the outer two fins unfold down during glide descent along with the wings and become the horizontal stabilizers
>to make it truly usable anywhere, use "jetlox" fuel (jet fuel and liquid oxygen)
>use aerospike engines for both subsonic and supersonic earth-to earth-repositioning flights with only jet fuel in an airbreathing cycle (probably with venturi inlets that are sealed off during space launches)
>strap-on abort motors lift the entire vehicle away from the booster stage, and are jettisoned before final insertion burn

Y/N ?

In some future /sfg/ thread I'm going to post a shitty mspaint outline of my concept.

>>11946572
>SpaceShipTwo interior reveal
Gotta stay relevant to investors somehow

Sorry, but we can't trust a billionaire's hobby for future of human spaceflight, period.

>>11946684
I know this is bait, but SpaceX is the second most developed of any of his companies after Tesla. When will this "hobby" meme among normies stop? SpaceX literally built the USA's new workhorse manned spaceflight vehicle. If that isn't serious about spaceflight, nothing is.

Don't talk to us, or our sons ever again.

>referring to Virgin Galactic as a "spaceliner"
E2E flights confirmed

>>11946695
To be fair, SpaceX's origins are from a hobby or interest of Elon's. It's just that luck hit him and his company like a freight train, and SpaceX is now among the most dominant space flight companies in the world.

Virgin Galactic announcement off to a poor start
>used Stephen Hawking, or at least his voice, for his promo
>announcer has openly only been with the company for a week
>Branson called spaceshiptwo safe
>those godawful spacesuits

>from space, the borders that divide us are arbitrary lines
based colonizer mindset

>what it has always meant to be Virgin
lmao

https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/07/virgin-galactic-reveals-the-sleek-interior-design-of-its-spaceship/
interior images
now go enjoy the rest of your day

>>11946643
Overly complex and heavy. This wouldn't even work in KSP.

>>11946727
>it's all CGI
JUST

>>11946727
>just a render
what a waste of everyone's time

>>11946715
Luck is the word failures use to describe successful people

>>11946684
It is rather state project that find the way avoid beurocracy in dressing up as this man's project.

Still wont catch up with Russian in real things for a long time.

>>11946716
Branson's too proud to admit that the only way his paste-eating retard of a commercial spaceflight startup would ever be anything even remotely relevant was if he'd started flying tourists a decade ago.

Also, SSTwo should have been built around quick-swappable motors that could be built/rebuilt for under $50k so that it could handle a faster launch cadence, such as 3-4 flights a day, while keeping the ticket under $50k. Sub-orbital space tourism is worthless until you can get the price point down to "Guided ascent of Everest" territory so it drops out of millionaire territory and becomes something that dentists do for their 50th birthday and moderately successful Twitch streamers do to chase those precious upcummies.

>>11946716
Did that first accident really mess up the company that much? It feels like they've been in stasis after the first one.

>>11946735
Fair, but luck did play a big factor in SpaceX's early period when they were just a smallsat launch company with a rocket that hasn't flown successfully yet.

>>11946695
>When will this "hobby" meme among normies stop? SpaceX literally built the USA's new workhorse manned spaceflight vehicle. If that isn't serious about spaceflight, nothing is.
Never. The people who say that either are leftists who purposely lie to force an agenda, ULA/Boeing shills, people who know nothing about the space industry and think we regularly send men to the moon and that the shuttle is still a thing, or people looking for (you)s

lol

>>11946757
Kek, was just about to post the same.

Don't need to watch the presentation to see it's a flop.

>>11946729
Sitting back here, you can almost see the lever that disintegrates the craft when you pull it.

NASA and space force want stuff in space. And only because of political corruption have we tunneled tax payer funding away from government bodies to private for-profit companies. And musk is giving back to that corruption by donating millions and millions to GOP senators that gave him that funding and contracts. The goverwnt sold you out as a tax payer to make daddy musk rich off public money, and then they are directly getting kickbacks from it via donations.

There is zero other reason NASA can't afford to develope a new vehicle other than decades of underfunding and misappropriation to make it so. Then the GOP offers privitazation as a solution. They can't afford it by design.

Stop being a Tesla sheep. Musk sucks and you should hate him if you're a tax payer.

>>11946727
silly bitch isn't even looking out the window
>this is really lovely lining

>>11946751
That first accident probably led to major investor pullouts while permanently staining the image of SpaceShipTwo as a Challenger-tier deathtrap, leaving Virgin Galactic in position where they now need to obsessively safety a permanently tarnished airframe on a reduced budget, at a time when Virgin Atlantic has also been getting its clock cleaned by the discount carriers like Nowegian and Icelandair against the backdrop of an ongoing cool-off in transatlantic tourism thanks to the London/Paris terrorism of the 2010s scaring off Americans as well as a massive distaste for Trump-era America on the part of european tourists.

memeable

>>11946727
Oh my god. They only get to 80km. Shittier than BO.

>>11946773
Branson should have founded Virgin Pacific to focus on Europe <-> Asia routes and transpacific travel.

>>11946765
trolling? I cant even tell anymore

>>11946780

>>11946780
dude doesn't even look like he wants to be there

>>11946765
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20170008895.pdf

>The most significant improvement, beyond even the improvements of 2-3Xtimes reviewed to here, was in the development of the Falcon 9 launch system, with an estimated improvement at least 4X to perhaps 10X times over traditional cost-plus contracting estimates, about $400 million vs. $4 billion.
Sound good to me as a taxpayer.

>>11946773
At this point, I'm amazed that it's still around. If I were Branson, I would've killed the company and started a new one with different goals based on lesions from the failed company. Then again, I'm not a businessman so maybe there's some value to VG that I'm unaware of.

>>11946781
>The product of a development program that spans nearly two decades, VSS Unity has flown about a dozen glide flights and used its powered mode to reach "space" twice, flying to 82.7km in December 2018 and to 89.9km in February 2019.
>"space"
based berger
virgin galactic is a scam

>>11946780
Great can't wait for the inevitable frog edits

Virgin has been pushing hard to get space redefined as 80km

>>11946796
>paid 50k and i didn't even get into space
no wonder

Imagine not trying to make orbit capable rockets incplace of this deathtrap wannabe x15 piece of shit

SpaceX is literally a government scam to promote "capitalism meme".

>>11946701
>Don't talk to us or our son's science project ever again.

>>11946711
It's a fucking vomit comet.

>>11946737
It also needs to go high enough that they are actually spending like a half hour in space
Which naturally does not involve air launching from a fucking plane which by itself costs more than 50k a passenger to operate

>>11946822
>Govornment scam
>Currently the cheapest rocket to send people into space
I thought scams weren't supposed to present results, like Starliner or SLS

>>11946803

>>11946822
Begone chapocel

>>11946837
lol

>>11946837
It should've been "4ASS attacks Galactic Virgin".

>>11946800
>ntrs.nasa.gov
>NTR
Nuclear upper stages WHEN? They would be very large, very security-sensitive payloads with a high risk of irradiating the first stage, so they might actually be perfect for SLS.

Worst Korea to use solid fuel rockets for spaceflight
>South Korea said Tuesday it has won U.S. consent to use solid fuel for space launch vehicles, a move that is expected to enable Seoul to launch its first surveillance satellites and acquire technology to build more powerful missiles.
>Solid fuel offers greater mobility for missiles and rockets, and reduces launch preparation time. But Washington had imposed strict restrictions on Seoul’s use of solid propellant for space launch rockets out of concern that it could be used to produce bigger missiles and cause a regional arms race.
>On Tuesday, the South Korean government said that Seoul and Washington have agreed to revise related bilateral missile guidelines to lift such restrictions.
https://www.defensenews.com/global/asia-pacific/2020/07/28/south-korea-to-have-solid-fuel-rockets-in-major-deal-with-us/

The South is an embarrassment to spaceflight. One of the richest and most advanced countries but their space industry is almost non-existent.

>>11946848
Even gook nukem in Best Korea has launched a couple of satellites.

Starship test delayed a bit until rain passes over. Might begin tonight after the rain.

>>11946770
Doesn't it also have windows on top?

is a Zojirushi worth it

>>11946837
Okay I take it back this is based

>>11946572
Virgin Galactic’s first mistake is using such a complicated fuel for their vehicle. They should’ve just used regular liquid propellant like Kerolox or something. It’s easy to use and refurbishment is as simple as loading up the tank again. But no, they use some weird rubber shit that is non-reusable and explodes on the test stand a lot.

I feel like Virgin would be better if the cost of their ticket was $50,000. Still a lot of money, but an middle class person can save up over a few years if it’s their dream. Goddamn who though pricing flights at $250,000 was a good idea?

>>11946981
>$250,000
>80km

>>11946981
Wait, $250k PER TICKET for sub orbital? Starship will have cheaper orbital capacity than that.

I swear virgin have been 3 years from space tourism for like two decades now

>>11947022
Its not an anomaly. SpaceX is the anomaly.

>>11946801
>lesions
based auto-correct
>>11946821
15 years ago it probably seemed like a good idea
>>11946837
needs to be Michigan J Frog
>>11947003
That's why I'm WTF that they've taken this long to apparently do nothing.

>>11946981
>I feel like Virgin would be better if the cost of their ticket was $50,000.
Even at 50k per seat I doubt they'll have many customers, this like an amusement park ride where you are in space for ten minutes. Virgin will be quickly replaced by spaceflight tourism companies that can reach orbit and send people to real destinations in space, real tourism.

>>11947040
Yeah. New Shepard has perpetually been ready to fly passengers by the end of the year, but that never pans out.

oc

any way to salvage virgin galactic's business model?

maybe repurpose spaceshiptwo for something else? can it be used for something else? cargo transport? research?

>>11947074
Kek. Still though RIP but that was a retarded move.

Here’s a Video from 2004 on Virgin’s second spaceflight. At 1:14 in the launch something goes wrong and the announcer goes “OH NO!”

But seriously they already built a suborbital spaceship in 2004, why did they have to say “Nah let’s build a new one :).”

Video of Launch: https://youtu.be/LXNkUNP75-Q

>>11947074
Has anyone figured out why he did it?

>>11947090
New name, new style, and a new vehicle. I think that this point the Virgin Galactic image has been tarnished too much. Space flight fans are too aware of its issues, and they fly so infrequently that the general public is unaware of them.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/iter-assembly-begins-nuclear-fusion-sun/
Will it work?

>>11947114
No but they’ll say that they’re super close but maybe they’ll crack it in 10 more years.

>>11947115
Assuming ITER wont work, when will fusion first work?

>>11947090
any way to salvage virgin galactic's business model?
I doubt it. They're marketing that they're eventually going to try to do point-to-point air travel but it would be multiple times more expensive per seat than the Concorde was.

The only way Virgin Galactic can survive is if build a craft that can reach orbit, they fell for the suborbital meme.

>>11947124
NASA still wants some sub orbital vehicles for testing purposes. Nothing big but bits of money here/there for commercial space companies.

>>11947118
I suspect it'll be sheared-flow stabilized Z-pinch fusion like UW and Zap Energy are working on in Seattle, so whenever they hit Q=1.

>>11947114
in 30 years ;)

>>11947124
I don’t know why Virgin couldn’t just use SpaceShipOne for their flights. They already tested it why did they say “Hey let’s build a new vehicle”

>>11946844
sorry but now that it's the 21st century, you have to set up the test stand for your NTP engine to capture every molecule of exhaust because it might be RADIOACTIVE

also you can only use low-enriched uranium because of "nonproliferation", so get ready for it to be way too fucking heavy

source:
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20170011172.pdf

the program is getting set up to fail

>>11947149
Reeeeeeeee. I guess we're waiting for either fusion or reactionless, then.

>>11947090
Their fate was sealed when they went public and spun off Virgin Orbit. Once other private companies venture beyond LEO and the most Virgin Galactic can do are sub-suborbital flights and brokering actual rides to space from those companies, the investors will see through their facade and the company will fold. Perhaps a niche will exist for SpaceShipTwo that could justify its existence as an asset of Virgin Orbit or another company, but it is absolutely a dead end as the crux of a publicly-traded company.

>>11947136
when will that work

Bob’s wife is going up next. She’ll be sitting in the same seat Bob sat in

>>11947174
>the US has spacer clans and is building a moon base

>>11946643
the switchblade wings only work for boosters and low speed reentry, dude

>>11946643
Just like last thread where your idea was already answered, it's excessively complex even for a spaceplane and SSTO spaceplanes are a meme for a slew of reasons.

>>11946765
you've confused SpaceX for Boeing, anon

Tory Bruno looking like a dork next to Perseverance on the pad.

>>11947208
Mustaches are no go.

>>11947208
My man... I don’t think Bruno sleeps, he responds to everyone on Twitter no matter the hour of day or night

>>11947208
Obligatory "see you space cowboy"

>7 minutes of terror
More like 7 months

>>11947197
it's not SSTO, he said "booster"
I don't know if he meant "subsonic carrier plane" in which case you should just use a black ice style design or supersonic in which case you should still just use black ice but now you also need to build a heavy lift supersonic carrier aircraft or conventional rocket in which case just do Starship or dolphin sex, in which case just do something closer to the original NASA dolphin sex designs

Why do tourist space craft even need windows? Can't then just have screens with exterior cameras?

>>11947256
If you aren't able to directly see with your own eyes there's no point in going.

>>11947256
literally soul vs no soul

>“Seeing positions that are historically held by men now being held by women is extremely empowering and inspiring, pushing me to be a better version of myself,” said Staff Sgt. Kelly Malone, 2nd SOPS satellite systems operator and crew chief. “I’m doing this for my little sister. She probably looks up to me more than anyone in the family, and I have a chance to show her she doesn’t have to do typical ‘women jobs,’ or follow ‘women roles,’ and that it’s OK to break the norms.”

>>11947208
Bruno is the best thing to happen to ULA he’s a great guy. Before homecoming in high school I asked my gf out with a poster that has ULA stuff in it. I posted it on Reddit and Tory replied and sent a gift box with some ULA stuff to my house he’s a great guy.

>>11947213
He's trying to emulate Elon but he's severely restricted in his response. Either due to himself or company.

>>11947268
>“We have a lot of females in the squadron, and given the crew scheduling, we had the opportunity to establish an all-female crew,” said 1st Lt. Alexis Thuli, 2nd SOPS operations assistant flight commander. “We decided to have this female team on crew during the SCA, creating a more historic event for the squadron.”

>“We have a lot of females in the squadron, and given the crew scheduling, we had the opportunity to establish an all-female crew,”
>So basically they're selecting people for their crew based on gender. Good thing I took that equal opportunity training. Imagine building a team and be like "boyz only" and see how well that'd go. If someone really wanted to raise hell that worked there it wouldnt be hard to file an MEO complaint.
>Also the title makes it sound like they did something special and got selected, but really all that happened was they saw the amount of women available was ≥ the amount of people needed for a crew and put them together.

>>11947270
>Either due to himself or company.
Probably his company. Tory trying to change ULA corporate culture is like trying to steer an asteroid with an ion drive.

>>11947276
>>11947268
Who cares

What's stopping an amateur from sniffing the key out of the transmission header and just ssh'ing into the Perseverance platform

>>11947280
KPOOS

Keep Politics Out Of Space

KPOOS

Elon's unbridled counterculture is what drives government contracts into ULA's open arms

>>11947280
>Who cares
Until affirmative action is repealed, government agencies including the military are legally required to make this sort of kabuki bullshit pandering presentation. If you want this bullshit to stop, end it.

>>11947279
Agreed. If given the freedom of a private company I think Bruno and Big Jim would be healthy competitors to Elon. Too bad NASA is controlled by liberal Congress and ULA is controlled by Boeing and liberal congress

>>11947292
ULA would not survive without government contracts. Their lack of innovation is their downfall.

Remember when Berger was having a hissyfit about that black female astronaut getting cut from the ISS flight but kept silent when other astronauts got cut?

>>11947293
Its about as annoying as VG's "inspirational" stock film montage about human flight. Everything done to get normies to care about spaceflight or space tech is always going to be hard to watch.

>>11947293
And? As long as they can do the job, I don't care how they got there.

>>11947302
>As long as they can do the job
If they could do the job properly they wouldn't need affirmative action to get hired.

>>11947292
yeah, elon's tendency to shitpost on twitter is a landmine waiting for the right weight to step on it

he's been lucky so far, but he gotta learn to keep it down low

>>11947304
Could you point to a specific bill, or mandate that says they are allowing unqualified workers into positions for "affirmative action"?

>>11947144
It was so Burt Rutan can stuff it in a museum.

>>11947269
How did you fit the ULA stuff onto the poster?

>>11947304
Mmmm I don't think these people are affirmative action hires. I mean look at NASA... the Shuttle allowed NASA to select people beyond "white GI Joe test pilots". Most of the shuttle flights and beyond had really diverse astronauts because they are some of the smartest people on Earth. I think organizations like NASA and Space Force just pushes the "diversity" part to keep liberal public interest up so they don't get their funding cut

>>11947288
what are you going to use to connect to Mars

>>11947319
I just printed out a bunch of pictures of like Vulcan and Atlas V and Delta IV and Centaur

Shouldn't Poccnr have sent up more than one female cosmonaut by now. That number seems a little light.

>>11947308
>they are not allowing unqualified worker
>just less qualified ones
Fuck off.

>>11947332
they did it to get in the record books and then they never did it again

>>11947308
The government is required to give preference to minority and woman owned businesses even when other businesses can do the job better.

https://www.governing.com/columns/col-problem-with-preferential-bids.html

>>11947322
>Mmmm I don't think these people are affirmative action hires. I mean look at NASA... the Shuttle
Yes, look at the shuttle. It was garbage. NASA is objectively less capable of putting large payloads into orbit than it was in 1972. The shuttle astronauts were explicitly affirmative action hires, with politicians running a train of "first $niche_demographic" in space" virtue signaling points for decades.
>I think organizations like NASA and Space Force just pushes the "diversity" part to keep liberal public interest up so they don't get their funding cut
That would represent a government mandate.

>>11947326
Transmitter time on orbit

>>11947304
yeah they're not affirmative action hires, they just corralled all the females into one schedule for propaganda purposes

>>11947332
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_female_spacefarers
Two Soviet and two Russian women have been to space.

>>11947339
>Opinion piece
I don't care. Can you point to a specific bill or mandate where it says they are allowed to accept under-qualified candidates based on race or sex?

>>11947308
The Hospital Steward's Manual: "age 18-35 able-bodied, free of disease, honest and upright".

These were the people the armies of the United States of America, and rendered authoritative by order of the Surgeon-General, to treat soldiers from the Civil war up until the 1930s. Nowhere are there any qualifications for medical training, nor experience. These staff administered drugs like arsenic and opium as well as assisted in surgeries. Soldiers took up this position because it paid well, they got their own tents and more firewood. This is no different than today having soldiers taking up highly complicated jobs with no experience and learning through the job rather than get hired for qualifications, and they do it for the pay increase.

>>11947302
I've never encountered any hint of sexism or racism in 15+ years in tech. Nobody gives a fuck about that if your skills are good enough and you're not a dick - in fact, possession of a vagina generally equals getting put on all the right tasks to enable a promotion. What's pathetic is this attitude that some women have that they're fucking Joan of Arc or Emmeline Pankhurst simply because they go to fucking work everyday and can pull a gay 'stronk and determined!' face, as if that's what professionalism equates to. This is where (some) women just don't get it.

>>11947364
>I've never encountered any hint of sexism or racism in 15+ years in tech.
I've had the same experience.

>What's pathetic is this attitude that some women have that they're fucking Joan of Arc or Emmeline Pankhurst simply because they go to fucking work everyday and can pull a gay 'stronk and determined!' face, as if that's what professionalism equates to.
Yeah but like, who cares? If it inspires more women to join who otherwise wouldn't, I don't really care if it's dumb and cringy. I learned to tune this shit out in college, it's not like it has effected me in any way.

>>11947332
Fucking bootleg cyrillic wtf. Just download a keyboard if you want to LARP

>>11947373
Lmao google translate or wikipedia at the very least

>>11947373
Who's LARPing, 2022 is far too late in the game to have only 2 women representing a top 5 contributor to the ISS.

>>11947378
I had no idea what it meant at first until I saw cosmonaut.

>>11947390
2022. What?

Besides the mass simulator commuting seppuku, what was wrong with Ares I? I feel like it would be a (relatively) cheap way to get an Orion capsule into LEO... give me some trivia on this thing

>>11947390
Okay.

>>11947398
Wasn't the issue the abort would have put them right in the exhaust plume?

>>11947398
Parachutes getting shredded by SRB propellant burning during any explosive launch abort. Also it was really fucking expensive.
Scott manley made a vid on this I think.

>>11947295
ULA should split back into Lockheed and Boeing so that Lockheed and Bruno can get us the "Atlas VI" with SpaceX-style first stage recovery and bigger SRBs going all the way up to a flyback booster'd upgrade of the Atlas V Heavy concept. It'd be absolute oldspace kino.

>>11947398
Ares I was a cool design but it had a lot of issues. First off the damn thing shook so much that any astronauts onboard would be turned to jelly. NASA fixed this by proposing a giant spring that would sit on the interstage which was super heavy.

Second is that it’s payload to LEO was always too small. It suffered from performance issues (lel) because there’s really only so much you can do to increase the payload of a vehicle whose design is pretty much set in stone. Realize that Orion weighed 23 tons (at the time) and that it has a bad habit of getting fatter (it’s 26 tons now). Ares I maxed out at like 21 tons and they were having trouble getting it to lift a fully fueled Orion to the ISS so they lowered the fuel amount for ISS missions of Orion.

Third is that an Abort in the first minute and a half of flight would have seen the solid first stage being destroyed, which would rain chunks of flaming metal down on any aborting capsule’s parachutes, killing the crew. This is what really killed Ares I

>>11947398
From what i’ve heard it was wildly expensive (ha ha who would have thought).
Although that being said, it at least used an SRB at sea level and reserved its hydrolox for space. It was a dumb design, as all SRB rockets are, but it was better than SLS

>>11947398
$40 billion to develop is not Cheap. Costing more than $1B per launch/flight is expensive as fuck.

>>11947101
>Has anyone figured out why he did it?
I only watched the ACI/Mayday episode on it. In it they speculate that one of the few failures he ever had when simulator training was when he forgot to pull the leaver in time so they aborted that training session. So when he finally got in the real craft he really didn’t want to fuck up and so he probably wanted to get that out of the way early. Because investigators also found out that NOBODY EVER TOLD HIM that that lever can disintegrate the craft at the wrong speed. All they had was a card that said "pull at Mach 1.8". But it said nothing about what happens if you do it earlier. And it‘s not like this was common knowledge among the engineers either. There was maybe two emails that ever talked about this issue in the entire development program.

>>11947411
I think SRBs make reuse really hard because they put the first stage too high up. Falcon 9 first stage cuts out pretty early compared to Atlas, which has to get the low thrust centaur on a high trajectory so it has enough time to circularize.

>>11947420
Northrup Grumman demands an apology for these insensitive remarks.

>>11947424
:(

>>11947411
Agreed. Lockheed martin are always so ambitious with their space tech but NASA never selects them to do their own thing. And ULA is a cool company at heart but they are restricted. A pure Bruno-LockMart company would probably make some really cool rockets and landers

>>11947369
>Yeah but like, who cares? If it inspires more women to join who otherwise wouldn't, I don't really care if it's dumb and cringy. I learned to tune this shit out in college, it's not like it has effected me in any way.
I don't care - I find it amusing in fact. On occasion I've had to stop myself laughing at women in their 'strong and empowered!' mode because it just doesn't work unless backed up by physical presence, which women obviously don't possess. Short blokes can't get away with it either unless they're solid, and I've noticed that short blokes will employ a different style of communication.

So they're aiming for Perseverance going up on Thursday. Tick tock, motherfuckers.

>>11947279
Doubt that's the case. Tory most likely has freedom to do what he wants, but the corporate would want him to take responsibility for it. That's something he doesn't want. Elon goes in and takes responsibility for it since its his company. Tory can't.

>>11947444
They might need to get their act together soon

>>11947114
It will be a pretty outdated, but very big plasma vessel that can do plasma containment experiments in 5 years and limited amounts of fusion experiments in 15 years. It won‘t harness energy and a successor would need a lot of design improvements that may just make it much more compact, opening up the question if all this effort wasn‘t overkill.
Oh well. It will probably generate decent science and unless one of the startups comes up with something very soon it‘ll at least contribute useful findings to the field of fusion research.
Probably irrelevant for spaceflight though as Tokamaks are too fucking heavy as an engine.

>>11947447
Sheet, I wonder if this affects Dragon's mid sun return

>>11947444
Storm targeting florida on Friday.

>>11947447
The 15th is the absolute last chance for the 2020 window.

>>11947153
>reactionless
Anon...

>>11947429
That's why it'd be an iterative upgrade of Atlas similar to the Atlas III->V transition, likely with tweaks to the staging in the name of reusability, maybe with crazy shit like a larger cryogenic upper stage for an F9-style launch profile with a shorter 1st stage burn and a prolonged 2nd stage burn.

Perhaps it might involve ditching the solids altogether and returning from the RD-180 to a three-engined 1st stage like the old Atlas's, maybe with three RD-181s, with the center engine modified so it could be throttled more precisely and restarted in order to perform the re-entry and landing burns. That thing, with a big cryogenic 2nd stage, would be absolute oldspace kino.

>>11947438
Maybe we'd see something truly nuts like them digging into the Martin Marietta blueprint vault for a return of the air-started hypergolic sustainer stage from the later Titan iterations, but this time, instead of being launched by solids boosters, it's launched by flyback kerolox boosters, maybe those "Atlas VI"s that I described here: >>11947466


The Titan IV mogged the shit out of even the Shuttle in terms of payload to orbit. Imagine what this "Titan V" might be able to pull off. We'd likely see New Glenn-tier payloads from it.

>>11947495
Titan IV was a beautiful vehicle but it was super damn expensive and had some issues with reliability

SN5 delayed again. Darn it. You guys didn't pray.

>>11947466
I'd love to see what Lockheed's plans are. Bought some of their stock just for the funsies of telling myself I own part of Atlas. Full first stage reuse is too radical a change for ULA. Their whole schtick is defense payloads, and those aren't big on cost.

Russian engines are a no-go though. Especially with a dem admin potentially on the horizon.

I see SMART happening in 2025, and then reuse sometime around 2030. Wonder what BO will be up to by then... Passengers on New Shepard maybe.

Thanks to whichever anon posted this photo, one of my favorites.

>>11947322
> I think organizations like NASA and Space Force just pushes the "diversity" part to keep liberal public interest up so they don't get their funding cut
no, they do it because of congress. your average american doesn't care shit for diversity quotas.

>>11947501
Prayed Fajr and Dhuhr. Thanks for reminding me. Asr time is here. Also wtf is happening

>>11947495
If ULA or Lockheed ever goes for a flyback design, they should designate it in the Titan class

>>11947499
The only reliability issue it had was those damned solids. The hypergolic core stage was about as reliable of a design as oldspace has ever cranked out. All of the old non-man rated boosters had a nasty habit of randomly blowing up, and it's really only been the advent of the Delta IV and Atlas V families (with their computer-driven designs) where we've stopped seeing RUDs. Hell, even Ariane 5 had a nasty habit of blowing up early on.

>>11947511
>forgot it was on autopost
Why the fuck is elon being so careful now. Waiting like two months for a damn static fire.

>>11947268
Why do women threaten incels so much?

>>11947420
>It was a dumb design, as all SRB rockets are
SRBs make a lot of sense for ICBMs.

>>11947517
Only if it involves hypergolics. I really, really, really want to see someone build a hypergolic flyback booster.

>>11947511
>>11947501
rain

>>11947527
Russians should build a flyback hypergolic based on the Proton M

>>11947501
source?

>>11947364
>>11947369
Are you a non white woman to accurately say this?

>>11947523
>incels
the term is dead from overuse and incorrect use, come up with something else

>>11947536
>>11947539
>>11947523
Don't start please.

>>11947543
That's a perfectly valid question since they bring up the issue

>>11947524
But hypergolic ICBMs and SLBMs are even better: https://youtu.be/yBPg_crn1Rw

>>11947533
They're saving that design to operate off of Ukrainian soil once they finally pull off the Reconquista.

>>11947543
i'll stop talking about politics, but reddit fags have to stop bringing their insane buzzwords in to conversations if they want people to not call them out

Reminder that Lockheed Martin actually gives a fuck about spaceflight but NASA always sees them as "too ambitious"

>>11947573
lockheed also wanted to make miniaturized nuclear fusion reactors, don't know if they're still pursuing that

>>11947570
Why did you bring politics in the thread first by crying at women being hired?

The intersectionality of spaceflight and female STEM underrepresentation has been glaringly apparent for too long. What an industrial eyesore.

>>11947579
i didn't retard, and i agree that he shouldn't of brought up politics in a spaceflight thread, but still that "empowerment" shit is retarded

We ought to get together and cobble superheavy rockets together and go on a WAAAGGGHH!!! across the sol System

>>11947585
why the fuck do you care

>>11947573
"aeiou"

>>11947576
By all accounts they're still working on that one, but like the US Navy's experiments with Bussard Polywells at China Lake, things got real quiet real fast.

I'd bet solid money that at least one of military-related dual-confiment fusion projects actually got somewhere.

Reminder that misogyny actively hampers spaceflight progress. Going to the Moon wouldn't have been possible without female mathematicians and engineers and going to Mars won't be possible without them either. It's not the Middle Ages anymore, if you discount the abilities of half the population which is just as smart and often smarter than men then you are anti-science.

>>11947573
Their shuttle proposal was two stage to orbit, completely reusable. NASA thought it "too ambitious". They've been fucked over for decades and had to result to forming ULA with (((boeing))) which is quite unfortunate

holy crap, why dont reddit fags just stay on reddit

>>11946643
look, we already have a SSTO concept that seems like it might actually be viable-Skylon.

your idea is just masturbation.

Ace Hardware giving procurement a hard time over fuel spin valves. Never had this problem in Hawthorne.

>11947600
can you just shill somewhere else now?

>>11947600
>>11947585
>No one joined in my rage posting about women so now I'm going to false flag and troll

>>11947579
to be fair
that original post is neutral
it just a verbatim quote from an article
people here are free to cheer or jeer however they want
one anon immediately thought diversity hire, you thought incel

Ok guys. To try to give you some sense of direction.

How do we make sure we don't get kesslered? We've already had one on orbit collision, and considering starship and new glenn are coming online, it probably won't be our last.

>>11947626
It's transparent /pol/ flame bait though

>>11947632
start up an orbital clean up service

>>11947632
Easy

Musk and Bezos should really start gatekeeping and talk about how if you're launching a rocket that deploys space junk other than trackable sattelites, you're an asshole and shouldn't be launching shit in the first place

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wscB1ckO_Ew

>>11947632
>We've already had one on orbit collision
we did?
when?

>>11947637
Yeah, that's the obvious direction. I'm thinking something along the lines of maritime salvage. Where if a nation/company can't deorbit their sats within 25 years organically, they pay a fee to deorbit. I wonder if 300+ starlink launched by SpaceX could use those starlink sats to deorbit satellites. Since the krypton thrusters have such low thrust, a grabber arm couldn't be that hard to manufacture, just wonder if they would have the deltaV. Ideally you wouldn't want too many starlink sats per satellite to keep it economical.

>>11947655
>>11947664
The 2009 satellite collision. A dead russian satellite crashed into an American one and fucking eviscerated it out of existence, creating thousands of pieces of space junk in the process

>>11947635
ahahaha... fuck off
>>11947632
make armored starships that carry like 10-20 tons into leo, then deploy some sort of system to clean up the debris?

>>11947632
Making access to space cheap is the solution to kessler syndrome, along with new legal requirements to clean space up.

We should have a bounty system to pay people for going up and knocking space junk into orbits that make it burn up.

>>11947664
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_satellite_collision

>>11947681
Based. Exactly my (>>11947672) line of thinking

>>11947681
>We should have a bounty system to pay people for going up and knocking space junk into orbits that make it burn up.
of course there would have to be some regulation. wouldn't want some small corporation accidentally knocking a piece of space debris large enough to survive reentry onto land or something

>>11947672
Good luck with that. We'll end up with an exact repeat of what happens with pollution on the surface. The western nations + Japan will play nice while China and India leave thousands of tons of junk up there without thinking twice.

https://qz.com/296941/interactive-graphic-every-active-satellite-orbiting-earth/

Cool graphic.

Outlaw any geosynchronous orbit. The altitude makes timely orbital decay unreasonable.

>>11947691
I think the only things large enough to survive reentry are modules of space stations and stuff. It's all easily trackable and usually stuff that big is already deorbited on purpose. The problem comes when you have space junk the size of coins, where they can't really be tracked but they can do a helluva lot of damage

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/29074/skunk-works-exotic-fusion-reactor-program-moves-forward-with-larger-more-powerful-design
So we were talking about lockheed's nuclear fusion plans earlier, found this.

>>11947702
Thing is stuff like that is almost impossible to actually deorbit artificially. In my opinion it's better to focus on the largest satellites in the most crowded orbits.

>>11947706
They were working on the T5 by last year.

>>11947706
Y'all remember this commercial?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcNkCGNL4tA

what is he looking at bros?

>>11947715
nope

Crane is coming down. Looks like personnel are clearing the pad. Stakes are pretty high.

>>11947723

>>11947723

>>11947723

>>11947723

>>11947677
The American one was an Iridium, wasn't it? And the Russian one was in a polar orbit
so it hit at a right angle for maximum lulz.

>>11947723
should i do an /x/ catalog one too

>>11947723

>>11947723

>>11947723

>>11947723

>>11947723

>>11947793

>>11947800
Lmao

>>11947600
Ugh give it a fucking rest. KPOOS

>>11947803
dont give him (you)s

>>11947723
we should email some of these to him and see how he reacts, if anybody knows how to contact that guy

>>11947814
bonus points if there is another version of him in the second window that you can just barely make out

>>11946584
Everything on your list is easily solved by genocide.

>>11947822
>What if I'm the gremlin on the wing...
Sending the script to that hack Jordan Peele right now, thanks for the idea.

Obligatory

>>11947632
Just build a laser broom.

>Ground based laser pulse slightly ablates one side of debris giving it some directional momentum
>Slowly de-orbits

There's no need to go Planetes on this. You can't make money retrieving junk and you need a low-cost sustained effort rather than sending up space jannies every couple of years.

>>11947828
kek

>>11947691
>join orbital clean up crew
>have eva suit that helps show the possible trajectory of descent of what ever I'm de-orbiting
>find old spysat from Israel
>makes sure it crashes on Tel-aviv
>label it return to sender
Did I do that?

>>11947858
you have to attach a rocket engine to it and strap yourself to it

>>11947860
My body is ready.

>>11947723

>>11947878
Nice, very nice

>>11947828

>>11947847
how would you deorbit a large satellite?

>>11947860
L E W D

>>11947896
Ask the proonters, they seem to think that their little polymer injectors can do everything

>>11947672
Instead of deorbiting satellites and wasting on-orbit mass, we should be accumulating it in a MEO "junkyard."
Would end up being a small artificial rubble pile asteroid/moon, full of pre-refined materials and salvageable parts.

>>11947357
>Can you point to a specific bill or mandate where it says they are allowed to accept under-qualified candidates based on race or sex?
Look at how the army "passed" women through ranger school. They don't make it a formal policy, but they grant all kinds of bullshit exceptions to training requirements.
https://www.military.com/daily-news/2018/04/09/10-female-soldiers-have-now-graduated-army-ranger-school.html

>>11947902
OST means the Launching nation has perpetual control of the satellite. MEO junkyard wouldn't really work, the 'rubble pile' would be more like a ring of debris. Combined with the fact MEO is a pretty out of the way place. Orbital workshops make much more sense in LEO

>>11947599
>I'd bet solid money that at least one of military-related dual-confiment fusion projects actually got somewhere.
Probably. I'd bet at least $100 that the Salvatore Cesar Pais naval patents for room temperature superconducters, etc. are soft disclosure.
>Salvatore Cesar Pais
>Savior of King and Country
Obvious pseudonym is obvious.

>>11947923
I was thinking of it as a less-demanding location for the transport tugs, given that you might be boosting something up from LEO or down from higher orbits. And obviously, the original owner would need to sign over the craft to whatever salvage company operated the junk-moon.
>the 'rubble pile' would be more like a ring of debris
Why?

>>11947723

>>11947950
it'd be funny if a virgin galactic flight coincided with a starship translunar injection and the people were able to look up and just see a starship burning to the moon

>>11947960
There's a good chance SN8 might go orbit this year, if they get good results with SN's static fire/hop. That's a big IF tho. 3 order of magnitude assumptions.

>>11947960
>Alright passengers, if you look out the port-side windows you'll see a Spacex Starship craft on close approach, and... *sigh* they appear to be pointing and laughing at us
>Just like last time

>>11947976
>SN8 might go into orbit this year.
No. SN8 will do the 20 klick hop, but it'll never do orbital.

>almost 1 year since pic related
It's not happening bros.

>>11948001
give elon a chance with sn5, there has been a lot of storms recently

>>11947983
Call me a faggot, call me a doomer, but imo the first SS to fly will be SN9. The fact that they've been so cautious with SN5 makes me worried. Will probably go boom. I have no faith in SN6 either. SN8 will probably go boom because of the new alloy.

>>11948001
the development of the facility over the last year is much more impressive than the actual flight hardware
having a fast and cheap assembly line churning SN's out like fucking teslas is going to be the true accomplishment in Boca Chica, not being able to do a hop or two on some prototypes

More rocket selfies from Big Jim.

>>11948020
Exactly. Handful of few prototype destructions aren't the issue. The issue is how to scale up so much that those prototype destructions become statistical anomaly.

>>11947927
I've heard rumors of a few experimental weapons systems that would, uhh, "probably benefit significantly" from room-temperature superconductors.

>>11948022
>tiny Atlas V
>humongous Falcon 9
What did Jim mean by this?

>>11948054
Only reusable manned rockets get closeups.

>>11948022
>>11948054
I like Jim,I hope if Biden wins in Nov he keeps him.

>>11948058
He won't win.

>>11948061
How certain are you?

>>11948022
>>11948054
Exploitables when?

>>11947983
Also, that 20km "hop" is 3 weeks from now, if everything goes well.

FCC filing
>https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/els/reports/STA_Print.cfm?mode=current&application_seq=101294

>>11948037
There's also the Plasma Magnet Sail, which becomes ludicrously cost effective if mass produced room temperature superconductors exist. A kilometer of wire, some solar panels, a pressure vessel, and a couple of rocket engines gets you a ship that can do fast travel to Mars and back.

<politics>
>>11948065
100%. Democrats got humiliated today during Barr's testimony, Biden is going to pick Susan Rice or Kamala Harris as his running mate and lose the ENTIRE black male vote, and even Portland's mayor is quietly talking to DHS about a "cease fire."
</politics>

>>11947983
Why does everyone and their mother keep saying “klick” on this general

>>11948133
I thought "klick" meant speed in kph, not distance in km.

>>11948204
wrong

>>11948133

It's a cool kids lingo shorthand for kilometers.

>>11946727
>>11946781
>>11946802

Isnt this technicaly fraud/scamming by selling tickets to space while it doesnt? Space is defined to start at 100 kilometers/62 miles.

>>11948108
>Also, that 20km "hop" is 3 weeks from now, if everything goes well.
I think a hop might actually happen this week. But there is no way there will be a 20 klick hop in three weeks. SN8 has to be assembled, roll out, do cryo testing, then have rams removed and raptor installed, ontop of a bunch of modifications to the launch pad. 5-6 weeks is more likely.

>>11948209
America defines space as starting at 80 kilometers. The 100 kilometer definition is the international definition.

>>11948210
>5 to 6 weeks
Kek, more like 5-6 months, and even that's optimistic

>>11948215
>Kek, more like 5-6 months
>and even that's optimistic
I'd say that things are going to pick up a lot after the 150 meter hop. Remember that this is something that they absolutely want to make sure nothing goes wrong on, while they will probably be a lot more liberal with the 20 klick hop. Plus, spacex only started diverting most of its attention to starship in june.

>>11948022
GOOD LORD HES BIGGER THEN THE ROCKET

>>11948215
I think if SN5 hops the 20 klick hop will be immediately after. So maybe two months from August

>>11946727

Which will happen? Virgin Galactic taking people to space or SpaceX meeting the 2022 Mars schedule?

>>11948224
SpaceX meeting the 2022 mars schedule. 2 years is a long time, especially when starship is the primary focus of SpaceX. The real question is will the starships they send land. I also believe that virgin galactic may be able to send its first passengers by 2025, around the time SpaceX does the #dearmoon mission.

>>11948214
why is 80km space for the airforce and NASA. Karman line has a reason behind it.

>>11948236
idk ask them

>>11948224
man I'd really love for them to make the 2022 Mars schedule but I feel the first cargo missions will be in 2024 with crewed in 2026, which is still fantastic.

The neat thing about 2024 being the first Mars mission is there's a higher chance we'd see a bunch of Starships all launch from orbit at the same time

>>11948236
its 50 miles thats close enough bro

>>11948215
Optimistic is following official time tables. That's set 3 weeks from now.

5-6M is probably more realistic.

>>11948259
>5-6M is probably more realistic.
I didn't mean to use the word "realistic." Since there is nothing to compare this type of testing to form a "base" line realism.

I meant to say 5-6m is probably more likely.

>tfw there's a change we'll be able to afford, or even get paid to go to the moon/mars by 2040
Feels good to be born in the 90's

>>11948208
It's still incredibly gay and larp-y.

>>11948259
Why 5 to 6 months though, especially when SpaceX is mostly focusing on starship now.

>>11948286
People are just used to slipping timelines. After SN5 hops things will go fast. Whether successful or not they’re moving on to the 20 km hop, and from there probably a Karman line hop, then after that orbit.

>>11948286
They're being more cautious due to preliminary failures.

>>11948286
they're being cautious, so BFR isn't a deathtrap

>>11948318
>>11948305
They're being cautious yes, but I think they just really want the 150 meter hop to succeed. After that, I think that they'll return to their faster speeds. Anyways, I still don't see the 20 klick hop slipping past september.

*explodes on the launch pad*

>>11948323
Will Superheavy development take as long as Starship? Once the 20km hop happens it seems like Starship will be pretty much ready for orbital flights.

>>11948344
probably not, but the engine plumbing and thrust structure will be hard to engineer

>>11948344
>Will Superheavy development take as long as Starship
No. Starship dev is mainly finding right materials/limits of steel. Once they have that figured out, Superheavy will mostly be done.

With interest in nuclear for space. Are they atleast going with MSRs? Fuck high pressure, for space high pressure designs is the dumbest thing you can do.
Please for the love of god someone just make an MSR that is economical, we need it. The world needs it

>>11948233
>2 years is a long time
see >>11948001
Starship in orbit will be an accomplishment in itself, and I think that'll take about a year. To perfect orbital refueling and rapid reuse will take at least that long, and even if that were doable in a year (it won't be), the Starship they'd send to Mars would probably only be an EDL demonstrator.

>>1194839
>see >>11948001
how many times do we have to tell you people that doesn't count because spacex only started focusing on starship in june before you get it? 1? 2? 3? 5? 10? 50? 100?

>>11948398
The Boca operation hasn't significantly ramped up since then. More talent has supposedly been shuffled to the Starship program behind the scenes, but I'll believe it when I see it.

>>11948407
>The Boca operation hasn't significantly ramped up since then.
It has, but more with facility development then the test articles themselves.

>>11948360
Unfortunately not, the two designs I've seen which are new are the BWXT dense solid core nuclear rocket which is supposedly going to be a lot like NERVA or Timberwind but with updated material science and design. The other is Kilopower, which is really just a glorified RTG heating a set of stirling engines to generate a relatively small amount of electricity.

Liquid core reactors would be far superior for all space use, being lighter, more mechanically simple, and inherently self-regulating.

Im so retarded. Everyone keeps posting that upcoming florida hurricane on twitter and I just realized it has to do with Mars 2020’s launch. What are the odds this thing misses its launch window?

>>11948457
Thursday is well before any impacts should be felt at the cape.

>>11948457
Its going to be hilarious if the toy car ends up sharing a launch window with 300+ tonnes of colony prep materials.

>>11948554
You know nasa is gonna have to suck it up and just work with spacex if that happens. No fucking way the public will let nasa do that

>>11948342
Then they pull a Contact
>First rule of government contracting
>Why build one when you can have two at twice the price?

>>11947723
Uh oh.

>>11948554
Kek I could see SpaceX just giving a Cybertruck an Oxygen tank and a remote control and just driving that shit around mars for a few hours.

How would NASA react?

>>11948700
NASA would dig it, congress on the other hand...

>>11948479
If it gets delayed, it could be a problem though.

>>11948700
NOOOOO YOU CAN'T DO THAT!! YOU NEED TO SPEND 10 BILLION DOLLARS FOR A MARS VEHICLE!!!

>>11948689
you forgot pic

>TSTO space shuttle, with a detachable methalox booster that glides down after use and lands, and a shuttle that uses a linear aerospike, fueled by methalox with enough deltaV to launch to mars after being refueled in orbit
Starship need a competitor from ESA or China lmao

>>11948802
ESA is a meme of retardation, and China could only dream of stealing someone else’s tech but making it more shitty. If we’re getting a competitor it’s going to be Blue Origin. But I pray to God that Lockheed Martin decides to pursue reusable landers because they could come up with some dank shit

bros I can't wait to see starlink launches off of Starship

>>11948869
Me too. It would certainly speed up the process.

>>11947268
I want to Amazon Pressed by her

>>11948554
could be worse. you could be the esa and sending this in 2022 lmao.

>>11948700
>"After ruining the night sky and littering LEO, Elon Musk now takes a big microbial shit on Mars with his dirty scrap truck."

Fuck boing and fuck urf

>>11948236
the reasons for 100km are exactly as valid at 80 km as they are at 100 km, the thermopause isn't static

>>11948802
you can't have all of TSTO, a reusable booster, a reusable upper stage, and enough [math]\Delta[/math]v for trans mars injection

>>11949126
>"Refueled in orbit"

>>11949104
>Muh planetary protection

Goddamn I hate people

>>11949136
ah right of course
you just want to see dolphin sex memes happen, huh
face it, the future is penis rockets, no dolphin sex for you

>>11947768
why is he so t h i n

>>11948700
>How would NASA react?
Big Jim would go to Houston mission control, call the Texas congressional delegation, the governor, and the President and congratulate everyone on Texas made trucks and rockets being the best on an entire planet. Elon would be doing this silently in the background.

>>11948554
Has NASA said anything about elons Mars ambitions? What do think about it?

>>11949213
>Has NASA said anything about elons Mars ambitions?
Trump, Pence, and Bridenstine all want American flags and footprints on Mars this decade.

>>11947598
underrated

>>11947691
>the origins of space cowboys
>ranching space junk back to their pens

Do (or can) other planets (such as Mars) have crust as heavily differentiated as on Earth, or do you need a mechanism like plate tectonics to create huge differences? I’m thinking specifically of things like basins and plateaus and uplifts/highlands

>>11949221
Mars has the deepest canyon and highest mountain in the solar system.

>>11949230
Unfortunately the vertical differences are spread over absurd lengths so there are no kino multi kilometer high cliffs and valleys.

dragon is gonna explode on reentry, screencap this post

t. insider knowledge

>>11949288
t. Shelby

Wednesday
>Proton communications sat launch, 21:27 UTC
Thursday
>Atlas V Perseverance launch to Mars, 11:50-13:50 UTC
Friday
>Starlink launch, 07:21 UTC
>Ariane 5 communications sat launch, 21:30-22:16 UTC
Saturday
>Dragon 2 crew return

>>11949288
Hi ULA sniper, could you please provide contact details? I will double your payments to shoot starliners instead.

>>11949313
>perserverance
>launch
uh, bro.....

>>11949333
Not gonna take jobs on Starliners. Impossible to hit with the all the thrusters firing in random directions

>>11949220
wrong anime

>>11949281
the canyons are pretty steep, I thought
it was just the mountain that was more like the world's largest slight hill

>>11948457
It's not just Mars 2020, but Dragon 2 return too.

>>11949313
>Proton communications sat launch, 21:27 UTC
livestream: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-l-e95nST4

>>11949378
wrong anime

anybody who says that Starship looks like shit with the visible welds:
look at this Atlas
they all looked like that
it will never not look like that

expendable ssto hydroloz seaplanes

>>11949499
Ok, china
>>11949489
Just tape it to a minuteman 2 and we’ve got our own lift rocket

>>11949505
attaching solid rocket motors to something automatically makes that thing a bad idea
every time

>>11949509
What’s the worst that could happen?

>>11949433
wrong anime

>>11949489
Just paint it

>>11949523
Cost plus could happen.

>>11949525
wrong anime

>>11949547
Why waste weight on paint? Just spray it down with WD-40 like you're supposed to; that's literally what it's for.

Someone needs to offer a regular shuttle service to the Moon or elsewhere. Like Starlink launches where the mission is going with or without you, and if you want on then you buy a ticket.

>>11949617
Well that’s the aim with Starship so you’re in luck.

>>11947645
based Planetes poster

How would you outfit a starlink sat to deorbit space junk?

Great report about Space industrial today

http://aerospace.csis.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/State-of-the-Space-Industrial-Base-2020-Report_July-2020_FINAL.pdf

Thread of companies complaining about Starlink https://twitter.com/Megaconstellati/status/1283888615660105728

Everyone is on the offense now that SpaceX is winning.

>>11949946
I expect lawsuits to start pouring in. Remember the old adage "if you can't innovate, litigate."

>>11949952
will spacex win these i wonder

>>11949946
Yeah we saw that. Amazon/ATT/DirectTV/bunch of others claiming they need the bandwidth for 5G is hilarious. OneWeb saying Starlink is dangerous is just the frosting on the cake.

>>11949793
Starlink sats kinda suck. Apparently they’re pretty stupid brain-wise compared to say a GEO satellite or a space probe. They probably can’t rendezvous with a piece of space debris without heavy upgrades, which ultimately means they’ll be more expensive, carry more fuel, need RCS for close maneuvering, etc. at that point it’s a whole new satellite.

>>11949946
All of these companies are or will be competitors to Starlink. Seems more likely that they're trying to shut down a competitor without actually making a worthwhile product.

>>11949957
I think the only angle that would work is anti-monopoly, otherwise this mess will only just slow Starlink down abit.

>>11949946
because they know if spaceX can breathe, it'll shit down their neck

>>11949288
dragon gonna splashdown just fuckin fine
t. froyoposter

>>11949979
What's today's flavor? Just curious. haha

SN5 static rain test seems to be a success

new >>11950077