/sfg/ Spaceflight General

[Anonymous No.10892991]

Electron Rocket edition.

Previous thread: >>10886029

[Anonymous No.10892995]

[Anonymous No.10893012]

Can the next thread be Jerry Pournell edition? The man was ahead of his time.

>>10892995
Soon.

[Anonymous No.10893014]

road closures now Aug 21, 22 and 23 from 2pm -12am CDT

[Anonymous No.10893039]

>>10893012

Well, you can make the next thread for all i care. Just make sure that you do it once this thread hits page 9/10.

[Anonymous No.10893055]

FUCK THE FAA
HOP NOW
HOP NOW
HOP NOW
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

[Anonymous No.10893120]

>>10893055
>HOP NOW
>HOP NOW
>HOP NOW
>REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

[Anonymous No.10893130]

>mfw reddit said the hop would be today

[Anonymous No.10893156]

Hop when

[Anonymous No.10893210]

>>10893156
>>10893120
>>10893130

https://twitter.com/SciGuySpace/status/1162412668067729409

[Anonymous No.10893424]

>>10893210
FUCK

[Anonymous No.10893450]

Starship Boca Chica livestream

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqZDeKHDwb4

[Anonymous No.10893526]

Depots? Yeah, it's big brain time

[Anonymous No.10893563]

>>10893450
those streams are like the spaceflight version of watching paint dry

[Anonymous No.10893608]

>>10893450
wait, is that a frikkin superheavy on the right?

[Anonymous No.10893618]

>>10893563
Here you go.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLOPygVcaVE

[Anonymous No.10893620]

>>10893608
That's the lower half of SS that they've been assembling this whole time. They took the nosecone off the upper half (in left part of frame) earlier to sort out the kinks in it which is perhaps what's confusing you.

[Anonymous No.10893621]

>>10893608
I think you underestimate the size of regular Starship.

[Anonymous No.10893679]

Soyuz MS-14 will be launched on August the 22nd. Its a test flight to human-rate the Soyuz 2.1a rocket and 2.1a is slated to replace the Soyuz-FG of which its last launch is scheduled for September the 25th.

Here are 2 video's of the MS-14 being prepared:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IxfVZYLsKQs
+
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HgEuGprtMoI

Its also a memorable launch because it takes place a day after the first succesfull test of the R-7 on August the 21st 1957, marking 63 years of the R-7 lineage.

[Anonymous No.10893685]

Does there currently exist, any hypothetical FTL drive or system that doesn't absolutely fuck everything up because of causality? Will we ever be able to one day, dab across the Galaxy? Is our understanding of physics and the universe even good enough to answer this question?

[Anonymous No.10893689]

>>10893685
sorry anon

[Anonymous No.10893694]

>>10893685
causality has been experimentally violated anyways so it's not like causality is a hard wall
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_eraser_experiment

[Anonymous No.10893697]

>>10893685
First, http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/fasterlight.php..

>Does there currently exist, any hypothetical FTL drive or system that doesn't absolutely fuck everything up because of causality?
Wormholes maybe?

>Will we ever be able to one day, dab across the Galaxy?
Probably, but that's so far into the future that I tend not to think of it much beyond sci-fi stories.

>Is our understanding of physics and the universe even good enough to answer this question?
Our understanding seems good enough, unless the Copernican principle get's thrown out or we find some weird ultra high energy quantum field that has some odd properties.

[Anonymous No.10893738]

What's the most realistic near-future or theoretical propulsion for interplanetary travel?

I've heard of the EM drive but last I heard it was pretty much DOA, any other good technologies on the horizon or are we going to be stuck with standard rockets for the foreseeable future?

[Anonymous No.10893746]

>>10893738
Beamed power to go as fast as you want, problem is you need to setup the other end first.

[Anonymous No.10893747]

>>10893738
Interplanetary? Realistic near-future?

Methalox chemical thrusters. I hear the "Raptor" is quite efficient for it's class.

I know that's not the answer you wanted because it's slow compared to some flashy theoretical tech, but it's what will actually get humans to Mars.

[Anonymous No.10893759]

>>10893738
Z-Pinch baby. Lets get this shit started again!

[Anonymous No.10893767]

>>10893759
If this works the applications on Earth are more exciting than as a thruster desu

[Anonymous No.10893773]

>>10893759
>Direct energy converter

Cool let me just build one of those

[Anonymous No.10893791]

>>10893759
Another candidate would be the direct fusion drive that uses field reverse configuration to get the plasma to fuse. As with both of these designs, both of them can take cold reaction mass if you wanna go really fast while still keeping the efficiency still somewhat in the ballpark of fusion/fission drives.

[Anonymous No.10893857]

Congratulations! You have won the lotery and have decided to make your own aerospace startup company. What would you name it?

Hardmode: No aero, space, rocket, or orbital.

[Anonymous No.10893872]

>>10893857
General Products

[Anonymous No.10893887]

>>10893857
Aero-Rocketspace Orbital (ltd)

[Anonymous No.10893889]

>>10893857
Planned Planethood

[Anonymous No.10893895]

>>10893857
Shelby's Depot & Stuff

[Anonymous No.10893896]

>>10893887

[Anonymous No.10893900]

>>10893857
Tri-Tachyon Corporation

[Anonymous No.10893907]

>>10893857
I'd be tempted to do some scifi reference but I'd probably be sued by Disney or whatever
>Corellian Engineering Corporation
>RociCorp
>Galactica

[Anonymous No.10893912]

>>10893857
Tycho corporation

[Anonymous No.10893931]

>>10893857
British Imperial Galactic

[Anonymous No.10893937]

>>10893857
Niggas in space

[Anonymous No.10893938]

>>10893931
>Why do you want to work at BIG, anon?

[Anonymous No.10893948]

>>10893857
∆v

[Anonymous No.10893951]

Is there any way that Starlink could eventually facilitate high bandwidth communication between Earth and Mars by replacing the Deep Space Network? Obviously you'd need to equip some portion of the sats with outward facing receivers, but maybe the massive number and evenly distributed nature of Starlink could support Martian settlements and other deep space missions in that way.
I'm sure it's actually a very stupid idea for some reason I don't know about but I thought it sounded neat.

[Anonymous No.10893958]

>>10893938
Heh someone noticed

Its pretty depressing being British when it comes to space though desu. Only country to independently develop access to space and then give it up. Fucking double crossing burgers

[Anonymous No.10893959]

>>10893951
You'd maybe want some intermediary relay sats at an orbit halfway between Earth and Mars. They'd be larger and suited to long-term operation, and you'd have maybe 12 of them evenly spaced in that orbit so that they can easily pass the signal around even when the Sun is in the way.

[Anonymous No.10893969]

>>10893958
>BIG buys spare Falcon9
>"This makes my Falcon the BIG Falcon"
Sorry about your spaceplane bongs, it could've been great.

[Anonymous No.10893970]

>>10893857
Spice Eggs

[Anonymous No.10893981]

>>10893969
Kek

But I meant Black Arrow aka the lipstick rocket

[Anonymous No.10894031]

Will we ever have spacecraft that would be capable of performing Brachistochrone trajectories at a constant acceleration of 1g? Or is this just a complete impossibility without some magical spice or crystals powering said ship?

[Anonymous No.10894032]

[Anonymous No.10894034]

>>10893981
You know the best part? The French ended up buying leftover surplus hardware from the black arrow and used it for their Diamat 2-BP4 variant, mostly the fairing itself as a slap in their faces.

[Anonymous No.10894041]

>>10894031
Probably in the future if fusion is ever sorted out. But considering the engineering required for fusion, it'll most likely only be reserved for then a short travel time is absolutely necessary. However, IMO, such technologies are so far into the future that it'll be nearly impossible to predict how or why they'll be used due to changes in culture and perspective.

[Anonymous No.10894090]

>>10894032
NASA's still buff
it's the government not funding them and not using them correctly
making them waste resources on dead ends

[Anonymous No.10894147]

Whats one thing we could do in space with existing technology, or at least near future technology that could dramatically change politics here on Earth? Asteroid mining? Colonization? Big ass space stations for shits and giggles?

[Anonymous No.10894154]

>>10894147
Orbital weapons platforms.
Treaties are for fags.

[Anonymous No.10894167]

>>10894147
>Whats one thing we could do in space with existing technology, or at least near future technology that could dramatically change politics here on Earth?
(1/2)

IMO, spacetime law enforcement. There are a growing number of new players in space and many of them don't share the same views as the "old guard" in space. While China and India are members of the Outer Space Treaty which forbids them from trying to claim parts of space for themselves, there's really nothing that could stop them from pulling out of the treaty as they have developed their space capabilities independently. If China had the ability to send significant equipment to the moon along with crew tomorrow, then they can pretty much claim the moon entirely for China and then seize any non-Chinese equipment on the moon. And this isn't some sci-fi postulation as China is developing capabilities to send people to the moon. Manned capabilities isn't even necessary to disrupt space as India's satellite kill test has shown. India was warned about the potential and severe issues that the test would have by other nations, but they continued anyways.

There's also a rise in private space agencies that while are tied to their home governments, history has shown that companies tend not to strictly follow their homeland's laws when there's no law enforcement around. There's also just carelessness due to a need to stay on schedule for profits which can result in damages for other people's property (like with what India did but with different motivations).

[Anonymous No.10894176]

>>10894147
(2/2) of >>10894167

And in space there are already tons of important equipment out there that are important to various nations. Such as, GPS, weather tracking, secure communications, etc. All of that will be at risk as more and more people have access to space. What's needed is more involvement in space to project these assets through law enforcement. It could be as simple as remote control spacecraft that can grab non-law-abiding spacecraft to move them to a secure orbit for later inspection. Or it could be manned outposts with the equipment needed to enforce law and protect national interests (not necessarily weapons) from others who may not recognize that authority.

This has been a recognized issue since spaceflight has started. The United States and the Soviet Union (which were at the time the largest players in spaceflight) envisioned ways to take down their enemies' spy satellites and potentially placing weapons in space where they'll be practically invulnerable to anything from Earth (which would then require an appropriate weapon in space to deal with). However, at the time, during the height of the Cold War, there were fears that these space endeavors would result in a run-away arms race that would grantee the destruction of humanity. And thus, treaties of mutual understanding were made. Stifling spaceflight in the interest of peace. But, times have changed, the tenseness of the Cold War is gone and the number of new players in space is increasing. And those new players don't have to agree with the old mutual understandings.

A sort of "Spaceflight Renaissance" is coming, and that WILL require more involvement in space to enforce ideals that'll grantee a more peaceful sky for everyone. Once this is realized, then the political landscape of spaceflight will forever change.

[Anonymous No.10894270]

>>10894167
>>10894176
bbrrraaaaaapppp-p-pp-p

[Anonymous No.10894434]

>>10894167
>>10894176
Fuck Taxes

[Anonymous No.10894442]

>>10894434
TANSTAAFL

[Anonymous No.10894452]

>>10893857
Hitler Did Nothing Wrong

[Anonymous No.10894587]

>>10893857
>win the lotto
You don't need to win the lotto, you need to win contracts.

[Anonymous No.10894592]

>>10894452
Except loosing
And not killing every fucking kike while he had the chance

[Anonymous No.10894610]

Starship has a diameter of 9 meters, but do we know the height?

[Anonymous No.10894615]

>>10893951
No. Because it's a multiple minutes speed-of-light distance between them. You can get high "bandwidth", but only in one direction.
You basically need a store-and-forward system like Usenet to batch and push things ahead automatically.

[Anonymous No.10894616]

>>10894610
Considering there are STILL sections to be stacked, who the hell knows

[Anonymous No.10894619]

>>10894616
Do we at least know what the minimum height will be?

[Anonymous No.10894641]

>>10894619
Approximately 55 meters.

[Anonymous No.10894646]

>>10894641
Wouldn't that be about the same size as the first stage then? I assume the Starship is shorter.

[Anonymous No.10894654]

>>10894610
way too fucking big

[Anonymous No.10894655]

>>10894615
Yeah a high bandwidth link or multiple links should be reasonably straightforward. You will be able to transfer large amounts of data very fast, it's just the latency that's the problem.

[Anonymous No.10894664]

>>10894646
no, it's a half-and-half rocket almost
the fairing for starship makes it almost as tall as Super Heavy, which is nothing but fuel tanks

[Anonymous No.10894665]

>>10894592
This

[Anonymous No.10894670]

>>10893424
Better than waiting hopplessly

[Anonymous No.10894705]

>>10894034

[Anonymous No.10894717]

>Hop delayed again

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

STOP KEKING ME ELON

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

[Anonymous No.10894724]

Interplanetary missions are a waste of money and resources until nuclear powered spacecraft are utilized for the role. Change my mind.

[Anonymous No.10894734]

>>10894724
Nuclear powered craft have a worse power to mass ratio than regular chemical rockets and you clearly know nothing, fuck off retard.

[Anonymous No.10894738]

>>10894734
How's that exhaust velocity brah

[Anonymous No.10894739]

>>10894738
just fine for the inner solar system

[Anonymous No.10894756]

>>10894739
>slow and steady
Okay Jeb

[Anonymous No.10894761]

>>10894756
Mars will create a reusable nuclear thermal rocket for the outer solar system once freed from the shackles of earth bureaucracy

[Anonymous No.10894764]

>>10894756
>Go faster
>Except you don't because you need to keep your free return trajectories
>So you just get a larger payload at the same speed for a massively increased cost

Retard

[Anonymous No.10895075]

>>10894034
Ugh yeah.

[Anonymous No.10895102]

>>10893685
There is this:

https://www.physicsguy.com/ftl/html/FTL_part4.html#subsec:specialframe

>So, in the end, if all FTL travelers/etc are required to take on a specific frame of reference when they begin their FTL trip, then there will be no way an unsolvable paradox can be produced. This is because it takes two different FTL trips from two different frames of reference to produce the paradox. Under this provision, if you are sending tachyons, the tachyons must only travel FTL in the special frame of reference. If you are folding space, the folding must be done in the special frame of reference. If you are using the special field itself to allow FTL travel, then you must take on the field's frame of reference. Etc. If these are the cases, then there will be no way to produce an unsolvable paradox using any of the FTL concepts.

[Anonymous No.10895108]

[Anonymous No.10895110]

>>10893738
Methalox for nearby future. Then in a few decades we will transition towards deuterium fusion with methane or water as an afterburner, enabling trade-offs between specific implulse and thrust.

[Anonymous No.10895126]

>>10893685
Yes, all FTL systems will be fine unless you purposely go out of your way to fuck up causality. If you try to do this, you'll run into your own past light cone blue-shifted to infinity and be instantly annihilated.
This is why only the most gifted sons of the Great Houses of Navigators are permitted to pilot FTL ships.

[Anonymous No.10895145]

No hop, weekend ruined

[Anonymous No.10895155]

>>10895108
>jw
Lost

[Anonymous No.10895192]

>>10895108
kek

>>10895155
what's jw mean originally

[Anonymous No.10895193]

17.8.2019 16:02 PM UCT

NEXT GIANT LEAP

>I believe that this board should commit itself to achieving the goal, before SLS is built, of shooting Pepe to the moon and returning him safely to the earth.

Undecided on whether there will be onboard video because I think a camera on this thing will make it unstable. I've waited too long to launch already, but that's another story.

[Anonymous No.10895201]

>>10895193
God speed anon God speed !!!

[Anonymous No.10895205]

>>10895193
>>10895201
Thanks for your well wishes anon.

[Anonymous No.10895214]

>>10895193
>>10895205
Kek am I looking at a homemade shitpost model rocket?

[Anonymous No.10895233]

>>10895214
modeled after the original shitpost rocket, obviously

[Anonymous No.10895241]

>>10895233
Nice, what propulsion are you using?

[Anonymous No.10895249]

>>10895192
Jew

[Anonymous No.10895255]

>>10895241
It will hold anything I guess. I have an E16 but with how lightweight the rocket is, I'm afraid it would be like putting a stick of dynamite in there.

I may lose my nerve and just put in a C6-7 with a centering ring.

[Anonymous No.10895292]

>>10893857
what goes up, goes up
wgugu™

[Anonymous No.10895340]

>>10895108
fml idc #lmao

[Anonymous No.10895347]

>>10893857
DEM Programs

[Anonymous No.10895519]

>>10894734
>Nuclear powered craft have a worse power to mass ratio than regular chemical rockets

but thats wrong

[Anonymous No.10895663]

SpaceX Dragon Crew Emergency Evacuation Rehearsal (NHQ201908150001)
A quick moving storm passes as teams from NASA and SpaceX practice procedures for medical emergency evacuation onboard the GO Searcher ship, Friday, August 15, 2019 in the Atlantic Ocean off the coast of Cape Canaveral, Florida. SpaceX will use the GO Searcher ship during the Demo-2 mission to recover NASA astronauts returning from the International Space Station in their Crew Dragon spacecraft. Photo Credit: (NASA/Bill Ingalls)

[Anonymous No.10895671]

>>10893857
Gateway Sol

[Anonymous No.10895706]

>Why Build Big Rockets at All? It’s Time for Orbital Refueling

https://www.universetoday.com/143178/why-build-big-rockets-at-all-its-time-for-orbital-refueling/

[Anonymous No.10895719]

>>10895706
THE ZEITGEIST IS SHIFTING
GET FUCKED SHELBY

[Anonymous No.10895724]

>>10895706
why not build big rockets and then refuel them

these vessels would be capable of truly independent operations all around the solar system, a sort of "star-ship".

[Anonymous No.10895726]

When and how long will we be trapped by space junk?

[Anonymous No.10895731]

>>10895706
>Why Build Big Rockets at All?
Because big rockets (specifically a particular big rocket) are just happened to be made in places with alot of contractors that need welfare, because the spaceflight industry has became so inefficient and lackluster that any launch provider needs government handouts in some way. Why is it inefficient and lackluster? Because attempts to make the industry better would interfere with the contractors' welfare.

[Anonymous No.10895755]

https://www.humanmars.net/2019/08/speculative-internal-layout-of-spacex.html

[Anonymous No.10895768]

>>10895755
>Configured for thrust gravity
>Starship is several orders of magnitude too inefficient to use thrust gravity
what did they mean by this

[Anonymous No.10895770]

>>10895768
Probably so that it can sit on it's tail on Earth/Moon/Mars and the floor will be down and the ceiling will be up.

[Anonymous No.10895777]

>>10894090
Back in the day, NASA was headed by the Nazi who actually invented liquid fuel rockets. Now it's headed by a guy who's never hung a Jew in his life.

[Anonymous No.10895784]

>>10895777
Liquid propellant rocketry was invented by Worcester-born Robert H. Goddard, you goofus.

[Anonymous No.10895789]

>>10895784
This.

[Anonymous No.10895790]

>>10895784
which is why rockets make a "woosh" noise, because goddard was from worchester

[Anonymous No.10895795]

Word!!!

[Anonymous No.10895844]

>>10893857
Business Solutions Services, Ltd.

[Anonymous No.10895869]

>Starship getting stretched for bigger fuel tanks
>NASA partnering with SpaceX to develop fuel transfer

SpaceX isn't pussyfooting around, Starship will go to Mars.

[Anonymous No.10895893]

>>10895755
This is probably retarded and way off, but it does a nice job at showing that what they‘re really trying to do is launch an entire house on top of a rocket.

[Anonymous No.10895898]

Even if SpaceX can get us to Mars, we will need other companies there as well. SpaceX can't be doing everything. Who are those companies though?

[Anonymous No.10895905]

>>10895898
Paragon is working on Starship life support.

https://www.paragonsdc.com/what-we-do/life-support/

[Anonymous No.10895910]

>>10895893
>launch an entire house on top of a rocket.
And a big house. Volume of 1000 cubic meters is equivalent to a house of 400 square meters.

[Anonymous No.10895920]

>>10895905
Planetside though. What companies are working on goods and services for Mars colonists?

[Anonymous No.10895951]

>>10895898
ironicly both boring/tesla are part of the scheme. Battery tech probably for rovers, boring for tunnel production, like that recent tweet suggested

[Anonymous No.10895987]

>>10893767
Such as...

[Anonymous No.10895990]

>>10895898
>we will need other companies there as well
Bunny Co. will be there.

[Anonymous No.10895998]

>>10895990
Musk should put a little silhouette of a rabbit on the first Starship to touch down anywhere, in honor of the Hopper paving the way.

[Anonymous No.10896005]

>>10895998
There is a silhouette of a creepy man on the Hopper. Anyone knows why it is there? Scale is larger than human.

[Anonymous No.10896010]

>>10895998
You mean like this?

[Anonymous No.10896018]

>>10896005
No, it is about the size of a human, and it is for scale purposes

[Anonymous No.10896019]

>>10896005
Enigmatic.
>>10896010
Only when delivering a load of strippers to space

[Anonymous No.10896027]

>>10895898
The first flights to Mars won't be settlers, just astronauts and scientists performing studies with no permanent presence, kinda like what we see in Antarctica, but in smaller scale

[Anonymous No.10896029]

>>10895108
When they start texting about depots, you need to seek professional help IMMEDIATELY.

[Anonymous No.10896035]

>>10895519
you're spending a LOT of mass on the radiators you need to ensure it doesn't melt down from post-criticality daughter product decay, and the reactor itself is quite heavy if you want any reasonable thrust
>>10895755
why didn't you post the companion image to that, where one of the figures was dressed up a as a rebel pilot from Star Wars?

[Anonymous No.10896046]

>>10895768
so that thrust gravity and storage gravity are in the same direction, duh
>>10896027
nope, the current plan requires ISRU, so the first men are going to be wrench monkeys and engineers
you'll need geologists for surveys, of course

[Anonymous No.10896049]

>>10895193
>>10895205
>>10895233
fucking kino, man, fucking kino

[Anonymous No.10896058]

>>10896010
>SpaceXXX

[Anonymous No.10896061]

>"Let's be very honest again," Bolden said in a 2014 interview. "We don't have a commercially available heavy lift vehicle. Falcon 9 Heavy may someday come about. It's on the drawing board right now. SLS is real. You've seen it down at Michoud. We're building the core stage. We have all the engines done, ready to be put on the test stand at Stennis... I don't see any hardware for a Falcon 9 Heavy, except that he's going to take three Falcon 9s and put them together and that becomes the Heavy. It's not that easy in rocketry."

[Anonymous No.10896068]

>>10896061
he was right, you know
Elon has said that Heavy was a mistake

[Anonymous No.10896071]

>>10896068
How many times has Heavy flown?

How many times has SLS flown?

[Anonymous No.10896074]

>>10896061
>"he's going to take three Falcon 9s and put them together and that becomes the Heavy. It's not that easy in rocketry."
Why?

[Anonymous No.10896075]

>>10896074
Because he was saving face for the congress launch system

[Anonymous No.10896076]

>>10896061
>"Let's be very honest again, we have a commercially available heavy lift vehicle. SLS may someday come about. It's on the drawing board right now. Falcon Heavy is real. You've seen it down at Hawthorne. We're building the core stages. We have all the engines done, ready to be put on the launch pad at Kennedy... I don't see any hardware for an SLS, except that they're going to take Shuttle parts and put them together and that becomes the SLS. It's not that easy in rocketry."

[Anonymous No.10896077]

>"Let's be very honest again," Elon said in a 2019 interview. "We don't have a commercially available heavy lift vehicle. SLS may someday come about. It's on the drawing board right now. Starship is real. You've seen it down at Boca Chica. We're building the core stage. We have all the engines done, ready to be put on the test stand at Macgregor... I don't see any hardware for an SLS except that he's going to take some shuttle bits and put them together and that becomes the SLS. It's not that easy in rocketry."

[Anonymous No.10896078]

>>10896074
I don't know the specifics, but even Musk admitted that strapping three F9s together was easier said than done, the center core had to basically be redesigned

[Anonymous No.10896079]

>>10896077
>"Let's be very honest again," Anon said in a 2090 interview. "We don't have a commercially Falcon 9 He three Falcon 9s and put them together and that becomes the Heavy. It's not that easy in rock

[Anonymous No.10896080]

>>10896077
>>10896076
>>10896061
>Let's be very honest again
Time is short and I'll be brief

[Anonymous No.10896086]

>>10896078
>>10896074
Aerodynamics and various torsional stresses are forces across cores that a single stick never experiences. If you strapped three Falcon 9 1.1s together and tried to launch it like Heavy, they would RUD.

[Anonymous No.10896089]

>>10896074
they significantly strengthened the center core, it's basically a new design and much heavier, and they don't even have propellant crossfeed

[Anonymous No.10896092]

>>10896086
the failure mode would be the core stage crushing like a beer can across the top, right?

[Anonymous No.10896094]

>>10896074
IIRC SpaceX did run into some problems with the Falcon Heavy core design. The Falcon 9 was designed to mostly handle stress along it's length, not it's sides. The Falcon Heavy boosters added stress on the core stage that the Falcon 9 was not originally meant to handle, which represented a not insignificant hurdle to work out. However, the aerospace industry has a habit of over-blowing challenges and it made some people think that SpaceX couldn't make the Falcon Heavy.

[Anonymous No.10896097]

>>10896092
I don't know all the failure modes I can image quite a fucking lot of them. Any twisting moment that got bad enough would be an explosion.

[Anonymous No.10896104]

>>10895755
I wonder: Are they going to make just one base Starship design and move shit in and out of the cargo bay as dictated by mission needs?

[Anonymous No.10896109]

>>10896104
I think the base of Starship will always be nearly identical for all versions, but the top half, the fairing, will contain all the differences
unless the heat shield needs to change for beyond low earth orbit missions
how spicy is reentering from GTO?

[Anonymous No.10896177]

>>10896104
I'm expecting at least a cargo version, and a crew version like >>10895755, the bottoms are the same, they just weld on a different top half.

[Anonymous No.10896349]

>>10895951
What tweet? I cant believe this didn't click in my head before, it seems so obvious now

[Anonymous No.10896354]

>>10896349
literally everything he did beyond PayPal was "let's make Mars real"

[Anonymous No.10896364]

>>10896049
SCRUBBED LOL due to thunderstorms/general apathy.

Next launch date is Aug. 31

[Anonymous No.10896366]

>>10896364
boooooo
will you be videoing it

[Anonymous No.10896380]

>>10895951
Also hyperloop, eventually, for getting between settlements. You think he really expected people to unironically evacuate the air from above-ground tubes on Earth? It wasn't worth the cost to get it working on Earth, so he released it without a patent and let autists do the R&D work for free.

[Anonymous No.10896392]

>>10896366
>will you be videoing it
That's part of the reason why I wasn't too keen on doing it today with a bulky camera.


Having onboard TV seems like a must, but I'll have to order a smaller camera off ebay.

[Anonymous No.10896648]

>>10895193
>>10895205
>>10895233
Looks great! Good luck!

[Anonymous No.10896696]

>>10895898
Didn't SpaceX already reach out to a number of other companies for this reason?

[Anonymous No.10896711]

>>10896696
There were some companies but it was mostly universities and government agencies:
>Colorado School of Mines, University of Colorado, Boulder; NASA HQ, ASI, JPL/Caltech; SpaceX, Lunar and Planetary Laboratory, University of Arizona; ASURE, MIT, Bechtel Corporation; Schlumberger; University of Florida; Freestyle Analytical & Quantitative Services, LLC; Ball Aerospace; Arizona State University; Brown University; NASA Ames; NASA Marshall, NASA KSC, EchoStar; NASA Glenn; JAXA; SpaceX/Tesla; BAERI; ESA; University of Central Florida; University of Western Ontario; Caterpillar Inc; NASA JSC; Aerospace Corporation; Maxar Technologies; MBRSC - UAE; Planetary Science Institute; LASP / University of Colorado, Boulder; and Honeybee Robotics

http://nasawatch.com/archives/2018/08/update-on-that.html

[Anonymous No.10896718]

>>10896711
was it Caterpillar that showed off some of their designs adapted for the lunar surface?

[Anonymous No.10896721]

>>10896718
i never heard anything about that so i dont know

[Anonymous No.10896725]

>>10896721
I was wrong, they have martian designs
https://www.cat.com/en_US/articles/customer-stories/built-for-it/building-on-mars.html

[Anonymous No.10896866]

>>10896027
Nope, science cucks taking a back seat this time. The first few synods need capable tradie types who can build, test and troubleshoot all sorts of systems. Not some limp wristed faggots who sit on their PCs all day speculating about rocks.

[Anonymous No.10896869]

>>10896074
Apparently it was actually very difficult for various reasons, yet it still made it off the pad fucking years ahead of SLS, if it ever even launches that is.

[Anonymous No.10896909]

>>10896866
>SLS, if it ever even launches that is.
It'll launch one day. The political momentum behind it is too great for it not to launch at least once. The real question about SLS is, "Will it ever launch a useful payload?"

[Anonymous No.10896917]

>>10895755
>All that wasted, empty space
>Taking up whole decks with crash couches rather than having crash couches in cabins that can fold into a bed

Designed by a mouth breathing retard. Here's how I would do it

>Top floor gym, it's small and you only have a few excercise machines that a few people will use at a time, you also want to keep this noisy shit as far from cabins as possible
>Second floor washrooms, sinks and cooking facilities, you want to keep these separate from general living space again due to noise
>Third and fourth floor fill with comfy couches, TVs, etc... You want larger floors for this since crew will spend a majority of their time here
>Everything below that stacked wall to wall with cabins, two fold out crash couches per room would be optimal I think, people can out up with a bunk mate but people would go nuts for 6 months with 3-4 people sharing the same confined sleeping room
>Doing rough calculations you have around 190m2 of floor space on those three levels, take away one m2 for a ladder on each floor and you are left with 187m2
>2x2 rooms should be fine for two small beds and some room in the middle for a divider and walkway, that gives you around 46 rooms or 92 people

Looking like 100 people is a pretty accurate estimate for the amount of people you could fit in this thing. You would probably lose some rooms from my calculation due to the shape and how the rooms would fit in a circle, but that being said this drawing assumes those ceilings are 2.4, no need for that when it just needs to accommodate a person sitting in a crash couch or sleeping, so you could conceivably stick another few layers of cabins in there.

[Anonymous No.10896920]

>>10896917
if you're not sleeping in your crash couches you're doing it wrong

[Anonymous No.10896923]

>>10896920
Yeah I thought it was pretty fucking obvious too.

[Anonymous No.10896940]

>>10896079
>"Let's be very honest again," Anon said in a 2090 interview. "We don't have a commercially Falcon 9 He three Falcon 9s and put them together and that becomes the Heavy. It's not that easy in rock
...Are...you okay, anon?...

[Anonymous No.10896995]

>>10896917
Yeah if you shave those three levels of ceilings down to 1.8 that gives you a whole other level while still being tall enough to stand in for most people. I think the limiting factor is going to be air and water and how well you can recycle those for a hundred people in a small space.

[Anonymous No.10897110]

>>10896917
All that empty space would be packed full of supply containers like the ISS.

[Anonymous No.10897127]

>>10896995
> <1.8
manlets unite

[Anonymous No.10897133]

>>10897127
I'd fit in 1.8 high ceilings... if I took my shoes off

[Anonymous No.10897135]

>>10897133
what are you wearing, high heels in space

[Anonymous No.10897138]

>>10897135
I'm 182 cm tall or so

[Anonymous No.10897175]

>>10897138
Sorry, your application for a Martian citizenship has been rejected.

[Anonymous No.10897191]

>>10897175
>>10897138
>>10897133
>>10897127
Average human height is 174cm, you can bend down a little for the sake of another row of cabins cutting your ticket cost substantially.

>>10897110
There's no room for empty space in the crew cabin dickhead. There is a cargo bay for that. This shit tier design would house like 12 people or some shit, it's a joke drawn up by some art student.

[Anonymous No.10897255]

>>10896917
>Couches
>In microgravity

Lol what

[Anonymous No.10897294]

>>10897255
>Go to Mars in ship with habitation facilities
>Reach planet where there's literally no habitation facilities
>Guess we'll abandon our fully furnished starship to rough it in our space-tents and total lack of atmosphere!

"lolwat" indeed.

[Anonymous No.10897297]

>>10897255
I'm pretty sure they are going to tether two BFRs together at a time and spin them slowly for some gravity. Elon has been talking a lot with Zubrin and I think he will take that part of his plan. Besides they will need something on Mars anyway.

[Anonymous No.10897309]

>>10897294
If NASA were running it, then the toilets would be deleted to "save mass".

[Anonymous No.10897318]

>>10897309
>Listen guys we can save 3kgs of mass by packing 10,000 plastic bags for your guys to shit and piss in instead of a toilet.

[Anonymous No.10897322]

>>10895519
nuclear anything has a much higher energy to mass ratio than chemical anything but chemical beats the shit out of nuclear in terms of power to mass ratio. One measure is effectively of how much potential energy is contained in a given mass of fuel, and the other is how quickly you can use up that fuel.

[Anonymous No.10897340]

>>10897318
Actually it would be more like 30 kg, but it's still pretty sad to think that "America's most powerful rocket" needs to have its astronauts poop in bags so that the capsule can be light enough to send to the moon. It was somewhat forgettable in Apollo due to the rushed nature of the mission and the fact that the payload included a bunch of heavy stuff needed for landing on the moon.

[Anonymous No.10897351]

>>10897340
>30kg toilet

Nigger what, even my full porcelain bowl toilet isn't that heavy. Surely a plastic space toilet would be lighter.

[Anonymous No.10897355]

>>10897322
>What is throwing cold reaction mass into the chamber
There, problem solved.

[Anonymous No.10897356]

>>10897351
I'm just basing this on a quick search. A space toilet would probably be heavier than a "normal" toilet due to the extra stuff required to work in microgravity.

[Anonymous No.10897381]

>>10895768
If they connect them by the nose via long tether they can spin them as they coat to Mars and simulate any gravity up to and including 1 G the entire ride. There's more than one way to achieve constant apparent acceleration, one way is to actually accelerate and the other is to just spin and let momentum do the work.

[Anonymous No.10897400]

>>10897355
I was already talking about nuclear thermal rockets, dude. NTR has abysmal power to mass ratio compared to chemical. Why do you think NTR gets a thrust to weight ratio about 20x worse than chemical.

[Anonymous No.10897433]

Had a bad day /sfg/? Listen to this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRywGWdeJvI

[Anonymous No.10897438]

>>10897400
Only itty bitty babies use NTR. Real men use Fusion. Taking a fusion rocket with thrust of 1,000 to 100,000 N with a mass flow rate of something like 0.05kg/s and simply throwing in an extra kilogram or two of Hydrogen or Methane and presto. You got yourself a hot tamale.

[Anonymous No.10897480]

>>10897438
>Fusion rocket

Cool fantasy bro, let me know when you have one.

[Anonymous No.10897484]

>>10897438
Uh huh, that still gets garbage power to mass ratio. Also, it doesn't even exist yet. Fusion in general gets bad power to mass ratio compared to fission, simply because fission is so easy and can be done with a far simpler and lighter setup yet still pump out lots of power. The Pewee reactor that powered the NERVA rocket for example was over 2 gigawatts thermal if I remember right yet the reactor didn't weigh more than a couple of tons. Even an extremely optimistic fusion reactor with Q>1 and a net output over a gigawatt would weigh hundreds of tons.

[Anonymous No.10897510]

>>10897484
YES. The Z-Pinch strikes again!

[Anonymous No.10897512]

>>10897356
88 lbs
racist toilet manufacturer.

[Anonymous No.10897523]

>>10897512
SEIG!!!
>fluuuuuuuuussssssshhhhhhhhhhh
HEIL!!!!

[Anonymous No.10897526]

>>10897510
Nice sci fi fantasy ship faggot

[Anonymous No.10897528]

>>10897523
kek

[Anonymous No.10897547]

>>10897526
I wonder how many times that has been said throughout history at technology and inventions.

[Anonymous No.10897575]

>>10897547
Cool well until someone makes your magic fusion drive you can't compare it to actual existing rocket systems.

[Anonymous No.10897579]

>>10897575
until somebody makes a version of NTR that doesn't suck, let's

[Anonymous No.10897585]

>>10897579
Chemical is better than your magic drive by virtue of actually existing. NTR is superior by actually being theoretically possible and not just a pretty picture.

[Anonymous No.10897613]

https://thespaceshow.com/show/16-aug-2019/broadcast-3357-dr.-garrett-erin-reisman
MUCH MORE IMPORTANTLY:
SPACEX IVA GLOVE IS MUCH MORE DEXTROUS THAN NASA'S EVA SUIT WHEN PRESSURIZED
BONE LOSS IS NO LONGER AN ISSUE ON THE ISS DUE TO THE EXERCISE REGIMENT

[Anonymous No.10897616]

>>10897613
>BONE LOSS IS NO LONGER AN ISSUE ON THE ISS DUE TO THE EXERCISE REGIMENT
so bone loss is now out of the equation for microgravity? people on the moon and mars should be good then.

[Anonymous No.10897657]

>>10897613
Just listening to this now, 5 minute slow ass boomer intro for fucks sake. Will be interested to hear about the bone loss thing. That's huge if true but it's also not the only potential issues with micro/low gravity. Things like organs and fluid flow cannot be countered with excercise but yeah bone loss did seem to be the big problem.

[Anonymous No.10897684]

>>10897613
>LOW REP
>BIG WEIGHT
>MASTER RACE
>CONFIRMED

[Anonymous No.10897687]

[Anonymous No.10897690]

>>10897687
omfg haha

[Anonymous No.10897697]

>>10897687
Wtf am I looking at

[Anonymous No.10897708]

>>10897697
The Starship in Coco, as seen from the FedEx Ground facility nearby.

[Anonymous No.10897709]

>>10897708
I still don't get it, I am not previous poster either

[Anonymous No.10897713]

>>10897708
Oh I get it, it's all the truck driver cunts on smoko watching the starship site kek

[Anonymous No.10897899]

Elon stop tweeting about using nukes to terraform mars in a few decades, stop embarrassing yourself Jesus.

[Anonymous No.10897931]

>>10897687
dropping of nukes

[Anonymous No.10897964]

>>10897899
How else can he sell those t-shirts if he stopped tweeting?

[Anonymous No.10897973]

>>10897708
I can imagine one of the FedEx workers going "that's one giant fucker of a water tower"

[Anonymous No.10898039]

>>10896995
the colonisation of mars:
>"you must be less than 180cm to qualify for elonnaut status"
>manlets sign up en masse and are banished from earth under the pretext of colonising mars
>live a life of hardship and want, die young and their "children" are mutants
>6'0 master-race inherit magnificent earth cleansed to the manlet species

[Anonymous No.10898053]

>>10898039
>Niggers inherit the earth as you drown in hordes of African refugees

Ftfy

[Anonymous No.10898090]

>>10897708
Oh, I thought it was SpaceX getting a buttload of deliveries for something.

[Anonymous No.10898136]

>>10895898
mcdonald

[Anonymous No.10898140]

nice rocket!

[Anonymous No.10898158]

>>10898039
>6'0 master-race inherit magnificent earth cleansed to the manlet species
>magnificent
except for overpopulation, global warming, garbage all over the place

[Anonymous No.10898174]

>>10898158
>garbage all over the place
you mean manlets

[Anonymous No.10898334]

>>10897191
That it brought down by asian countries. In west average height increases every generation.

America is a manlet country where as Europe is averaging in 1,80m aside from ex commies

[Anonymous No.10898346]

>>10897510
>micro g's of acceleration
lol

[Anonymous No.10898416]

>>10893857
Zeniff

[Anonymous No.10898441]

The hop may be delayed but are we still getting the presentation the 24th?

[Anonymous No.10898446]

>>10896061
>WITH A BOX OF SCRAPS

[Anonymous No.10898462]

>>10897697
It's similar to when they delivered the Hope diamond. Only one has the spline reticulator. The rest are decoys.

[Anonymous No.10898506]

How do you deal with the fact that even the nearest starts will take DECADES to travel to no matter how good our technology gets?

[Anonymous No.10898507]

>>10898506
unironically cope

[Anonymous No.10898508]

>>10898506
obviously meant "stars"

[Anonymous No.10898521]

>>10898506
Slow and steady.

[Anonymous No.10898527]

>>10898506
There's plenty to do in just this solar system, the stars can wait.

[Anonymous No.10898550]

leg/canard

[Anonymous No.10898555]

>>10898550
Doesn't look right for either of those. Might be an aileron.

[Anonymous No.10898564]

Threadly reminder to support America's Ride to Space.
Support the proven, traditional, reliable, and sustainable way to venture into the great frontier that is space.

[Anonymous No.10898567]

>>10898550
I have extensive experience with aero control surfaces in kerbal space program and I assure you this is no leg.

[Anonymous No.10898584]

>>10898564
>proven
in what regard

[Anonymous No.10898591]

>>10898584
ULA is the nation’s most experienced space launch company with more than 120 consecutive launches and a 100% mission success rate. ULA brings the utmost precision, passion and purpose to one of the most technically complex, critical American needs: affordable, reliable access to space.

[Anonymous No.10898596]

>>10897687
Fresh dank memes being delivered to Elon

[Anonymous No.10898608]

>>10898591
I'm talking about Vulcan

[Anonymous No.10898610]

>>10898564
>first flight April 2021
Cool, but it's gonna be a minute.

[Anonymous No.10898618]

>>10898441
magical eight ball says yes

[Anonymous No.10898620]

>>10898550
holy shit

[Anonymous No.10898797]

>>10898550
urge to know more

[Anonymous No.10898867]

>>10896104
Doesn't seem like it, all the concepts for the cargo and manned starships show significantly different upper sections, one being a hollow fairing that opens in some way vertically and the other being a sealed upper section filled with multiple proper decks. Barring any issues with structure, it seems like they'd just build the propulsion halves all the same way and then attach either a crew or cargo version of the upper section to those.

[Anonymous No.10898876]

>>10898506
Suspended animation.

[Anonymous No.10898881]

>>10898867
>it seems like they'd just build the propulsion halves all the same way and then attach either a crew or cargo version of the upper section
They wouldn't do it that way, they'd do it like they currently make cargo and passenger version of different aircraft; the air frame is the same, the internals are different. The only real change between a crewed Starship and a cargo-only Starship is the fact that the cargo version needs a big door cut in the side and presumably some reinforcement around the rim. That's something they could do by quite literally cutting a hole in a Starship nose cone after it's been built, if they're making a cargo one, and if not they instead cut out the windows and any hatches etc for the crewed version. What they won't be doing is building the front parts of each vehicle separately and affixing them to a propulsion section, that's how you get the front falling off during a launch.

[Anonymous No.10898884]

>>10898867
That's what I was saying. Build 1 base starship hull (the cargo hull), and from there diversify.
If they're just doing an unpressurized cargo or satellite flight, put a door over the main bay.
If they're doing crew, remove the door on the ground and install the hab module, with the hab module's upper hull taking the place of the door.
Doing a pressurized cargo flight to a station? Put in a pressurized cargo module.
Doing fuel to an already orbiting ship or a depot station? Put a tank module in the bay.

[Anonymous No.10898901]

>>10898884
In addition to this, if so desired, it would allow leaving the modules up in orbit, either by themselves or attached to a host craft/station, so that craft/station's capacity and function is improved while the now empty starship hull returns to Earth/nearest available body for the next mission.

[Anonymous No.10898911]

>>10898876
If we have technology that allows us to slow time, then we should expect to have its anti-corollary as well.

[Anonymous No.10898920]

>>10898506
Few key tech needs to be invented for colonizing our nearest stars.

>Tiny ships powered by lasers that can do 10-20% speed of light.
This is the key transport thats floating around. Requires the tiny ship + a laser with gigawatts of power from earth's power stations.

Money is the main issue with the later. Tiny ship that can handle the gigawatts of laser is however bit of an engineering challenge.

>Self replicating nanobot constructors
We can already make nanobots, but we need a smarter nanobot that can be solar/battery/etc powered and work with swarms. Doable, but takes another 10-20 years of research. These machines will land on planets across the galaxies and do the ground work of building facilities/harvesting materials/growing food and also building satellite dish for communications.

>Growing human from cells/sperm and inside a vat tank
Another key tech that's stopped by ethics.

>Internet between the stars
Could be build-able by the nanobot constructors.

From my mind, these are all within 50 years of being invented/created with enough drive/will. Then its a matter of sending human cells/sperms and creating a culture to grow batches of new humans on new planets across the star systems/galaxies/universe.

[Anonymous No.10899004]

>>10898920
This is a dumb post. We need exactly two fundamental technologies in order to be able to accomplish manned interstellar travel. These are Q>1 fusion, the bigger Q the better, and on-orbit construction. That's it. Once we can do orbital construction we will start building out large orbiting habitats (even if it takes a while to get the ball rolling it's pretty much inevitable). These habitats will include farms and factories and so forth, pretty much all the equipment necessary to maintain themselves and the same equipment needed to survive an interstellar hop and restart mining operations in another virgin star system. Once we can do fusion we can power these habitats at any distance from the Sun, and we can achieve the delta V necessary to get these giant habitats moving fast enough to get to other stars in hundreds of years.

With just those two technologies we can effectively build out a gigantic dyson swarm in the solar system, and in that case it'd only take one in a billion habitats to collectively decide to try out colonizing Alpha Centauri, and they could all depart in a loose flotilla of a hundred thousand vehicle habitats, each one supporting a few thousand people, carrying all their backup resources and equipment and sharing among each other for the trip. You could even have entire habitats break down, and simply absorb that ship's population into the cluster while you take it apart and recycle it into a brand new ship, and do this such that even if none of your technology can hold up to a thousand year flight the group as a whole can renew itself continuously, just like your population would be doing.

[Anonymous No.10899333]

>>10898591

[Anonymous No.10899364]

>>10899333
One of these days I'm gonna make a pro expendable vehicles shitpost.

[Anonymous No.10899393]

>>10899333
>He didn't post the advanced version

[Anonymous No.10899440]

Congrats on this. Seriously

[Anonymous No.10899445]

>>10899440

[Anonymous No.10899446]

>>10899445

[Anonymous No.10899450]

>>10893958

Don't blame us because you decided to piss everything away on a welfare state. Just up the TV license fee.

[Anonymous No.10899471]

>>10899440
>>10899445
>>10899446
Agreed. Great job to everyone involved.

[Anonymous No.10899475]

>>10895671
Decent one desu

[Anonymous No.10899478]

>>10898506
Optimistic considering the next Oumuamua pass will be sooner rather than later

[Anonymous No.10899498]

>>10899478
How do we know it's not doing a slingshot to escape the galaxy?

[Anonymous No.10899516]

>>10899478
giving things stupid fucking unpronounceable names to appease injuns who used to live where a useful telescope now exists is stupid

[Anonymous No.10899556]

>>10899498
Not enough solar wind in intergalactic space

[Anonymous No.10899574]

>>10899450
You have a welfare state too fat cunt. Trillion dollars pissed away on niggers and beamers every year.

[Anonymous No.10899633]

>>10898550
there's more pics on NSF, I think it's part of one of the upper canards

[Anonymous No.10899693]

>>10899574

And yet, we are an empire and you are a former empire.

[Anonymous No.10899704]

>>10899693
>Empire

Lmao I'm not even brit, you are Israel's buttslave, what Empire do you have?

[Anonymous No.10899713]

>>10899633
Yeah looks like a canard to me.

[Anonymous No.10899716]

Does China stream LongMarch launches?

[Anonymous No.10899725]

>>10899716
Yeah, but it's password protected. Fortunately my Chinese friend gave it to me.

nothinghappenedonjuneforth1989

Just promise to keep it a secret, /sfg/.

[Anonymous No.10899727]

>>10899725
hearty kek

[Anonymous No.10899758]

>>10899574
>beamers
And here I was about to buy an Audi. Where do I sign up?

[Anonymous No.10899816]

>>10899333
>Propellant Storage

[Anonymous No.10899817]

>>10892991
Earth is flat

[Anonymous No.10900057]

>>10899333
which one?

[Anonymous No.10900063]

>>10900057
meant to reply to >>10899393
here's the other one

[Anonymous No.10900067]

Expendable launch vehicles have a long and trusted service record from the dawn of rocketry. Decades, arguably centuries of design heritage supports expendable launch systems. They put men on the moon. What have reusable systems done? They aren't safe, for once. Out of 18 spaceflight fatalities in history, a staggering 80% of them have been on reusable vehicles. Consider how few reusable rockets there have been! Absolutely dreadful, terrifying statistics for anyone interested in maintaining the safety of our planet's most precious resource, the good men and women of the American space program.

[Anonymous No.10900069]

>>10898911
it's called methamphetamine

[Anonymous No.10900077]

>>10900067
Nice post gramps, dropped one of your ear hairs though.

[Anonymous No.10900083]

>>10900067
Will Vulcan be the death ULA then since its engines are reusable?

[Anonymous No.10900100]

>>10900067
Absolutely Patriotic.

[Anonymous No.10900121]

>4 launches, National Space Council meeting, ISS spacewalk, Starship presentation
This week will be busy for spaceflight.

[Anonymous No.10900123]

>>10900121
Space Command may officially be established too

[Anonymous No.10900128]

>>10900121
don't forget what appear to be preliminary/suborbital aerosurfaces for the Texas Starship prototype

[Anonymous No.10900300]

>>10900121
Hop isn‘t this week either?
Fuck the Federal Boeing Administration.

[Anonymous No.10900313]

>>10899450
Your military is your welfare state. Enjoy dying in agony because your country cannot organise public healthcare like every single other grown up country in the world

[Anonymous No.10900346]

>>10892991

[Anonymous No.10900352]

[Anonymous No.10900366]

Reminder that Rocket Lab is getting ready to launch soon

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNuauG1Gvr8

[Anonymous No.10900367]

[Anonymous No.10900370]

BUMP

[Anonymous No.10900373]

>>10900366
Fuck Poo Peeland

[Anonymous No.10900399]

>>10899333
ULA got in trouble for the original version of this diagram because it promoted depots. Also the expendable launch vehicles stopped after a certain year implying ULA was just doing depots...

[Anonymous No.10900404]

>>10900367
The mach effect has been looked into quite a bit since the whole EM Drive kerfuffle kicked in, and the physicists have been doing the hard math. The long and short of it is that the mach effect is really, really small.

[Anonymous No.10900407]

>SLS will never fly
>Orion will never fly
>JWST will never fly
>We will not go back to the moon via NASA
>Biden will shut this program next year and start a whole new project because ORANGE TANKS BAD!

[Anonymous No.10900413]

>>10900367
>>10900404
Adding to this, nothing he said there is actually important or special or somehow secret knowledge. It's well known in the Mach Effect circles, with a bit of bullshit thrown in at the end about what government agencies are supposedly doing.

[Anonymous No.10900433]

What do /sci/ aerospace engineers think of Earth to Earth?

[Anonymous No.10900437]

>>10900433
Already done, it's called ICBM and works wonderful.

[Anonymous No.10900441]

>>10900437
i mean carrying people from New York to Hong Kong in 20 minutes..

[Anonymous No.10900443]

>>10900441
Well ICBMs works for that if you can manage a very rough landing.

[Anonymous No.10900448]

>>10900433
While I would like to see it succeed there are so many issues I just can't see it ever being viable. The first one that comes to mind is sonic booms, there is a pic in the environmental report of the Starship re entry modelling and it covers most of central fucking Florida with its sonic boom. You would have to put the pads like 1000 miles offshore from the major city you are going to be going from and to and even then people would still piss and moan about the faint booms they can hear. Especially if it's regular flights. The other thing that comes to mind is g force, 3-5g launch and re entry stands a very real possibility of killing old people, people with medical conditions and overweight people and bars anyone pregnant or young from flying. There is also just the psychological aspect, people are fucking scared of rockets, even if they are made as safe as planes, which I kind of doubt is possible but would be happy to be proven wrong, you still need to overcome that psychological problem. Just look at nuclear energy for your example, the energy generation magic bullet we have had for over half a century and yet despite modern reactors being retardedly safe, most people just go GREEN ROCK BAD.

[Anonymous No.10900480]

>>10900433
As likely as humans on mars by 2040.

[Anonymous No.10900483]

>>10900407
>yfw sls is bipartisan orange dildo and madame president will do jack shit about it besides rebranding the asteroid-redi... artemis program
left right left right

[Anonymous No.10900490]

>>10900067
Thank you! I was looking for material for my expendable vehicles shitpost.

[Anonymous No.10900491]

>>10900448
Sounds like the luddites claiming common spaceflights will kill astronomy sort of like how clouds and airplanes already did. If they get an icbm that can do it there will be interest, maybe not in NOT-IN-MY-BACKYARD dominated regions, but certainly in plenty of places with money and interest in short travel times. The real problem will be the various legal battles that need be fought related to rocket technology exports since such transport naturally involves international destinations and rockets.

[Anonymous No.10900511]

>>10900491
>luddites claiming common spaceflights will kill astronomy
It won't kill astronomy. It could kill Earth-based astronomy though. And then there's that silly argument of "but then isolated primitive peoples would see the night sky be forever altered, potentially negatively impacting their religions. Space should be a preserved space for everyone!".

[Anonymous No.10900513]

>https://www.politico.com/story/2019/08/19/newt-gingrich-michael-jackson-moon-1466853
> A general, Newt Gingrich and Michael Jackson's publicist push cut-rate moon plan
>They're proposing a $2 billion contest to return Americans to the moon — far less than the expected cost of NASA's planned lunar project

$2 billion incentive to the first company to land on mars and build an outpost. Whats your take?

[Anonymous No.10900517]

>>10900513
Seems interesting. It'll probably get shot down because it's a threat to SLS. If it passes unmolested, then I'll be excited for it. But right now, as with any NASA plan that's only in the proposal stage, I'll treat it with indifference until it actually starts getting stuff done.

[Anonymous No.10900589]

>>10900399
>ACES Refueling
>Propellant Storage
even worse...
>Lunar Propellant Mining
holy shit don't let Shelby see this

[Anonymous No.10900667]

>>10900513
>$2B
>Mars
>implying boeing and lockheed can do even the preliminary paper work with that pocket change

[Anonymous No.10900669]

>>10900513
on the moon*

minor fix

[Anonymous No.10900678]

>>10900667
Preliminary paperwork? Just the preliminary paperwork? You fool, you have no idea how expensive and complicated aerospace engineering really is. There's pre-procedures for the pre-procedures. All of this in the interest of safety and reliability. Because of this space is left for the real professionals, rather than some random hick from silicon valley who thinks he can build a scifi future on a meme online pay service. We pride ourselves on focus and most importantly safety. Ask yourself this, is NOT giving us an extra $4B worth it if it means the cost of someone's life?

[Anonymous No.10900687]

>>10900448
>there is a pic in the environmental report of the Starship re entry modelling and it covers most of central fucking Florida with its sonic boom
Now take that pic and shift the landing zone to south Texas. Jose BTFO.
>Just look at nuclear energy for your example, the energy generation magic bullet we have had for over half a century and yet despite modern reactors being retardedly safe, most people just go GREEN ROCK BAD.
...which causes the luddites to block modern reactors from being made, which keeps older designs running way past their intended lifetime, then they break and SEE WE TOLD YOU SO GREEN ROCK BAD

[Anonymous No.10900692]

>>10900513
Not unexpected from Newt, but the Michael Jackson ('s publicist) angle is a bit of a surprise.

[Anonymous No.10900734]

>>10900513
Look, I'm highly critical of spacex, because they're just building a rocket to Mars and don't have anything to start building a colony.
2B$ is fucking laughable, even if Starship is available for moving shit to Mars.

[Anonymous No.10900747]

https://twitter.com/jeff_foust/status/1163472275498307586

At the AIAA Propulsion & Energy Forum this morning, SpaceX’s Hans Koenigsmann says the company is planning an in-flight abort test of Crew Dragon in October or November; “hopefully” do Demo-2 crewed test flight this year.

[Anonymous No.10900754]

>>10900747
Lol, why not do both at the same time?

[Anonymous No.10900784]

>>10900734
Its for the Moon. NASA said "bring it" when Elon said they could land on the Moon before being able to convince NASA to do so. Without an incentive, SpaceX launching a free moon is just not economically viable for the company operating on tight budget constraints. So to put weight behind the NASA's statement, Newt is proposing an incentive for private industry to land and build an outpost on the Moon and the winner would get $2 B.

This sort of incentive is absolutely necessary. SpaceX has always been calling for performance based incentives, not the incentives SLS has been getting for 10 years for delays/cost-overruns.

[Anonymous No.10900785]

>>10900784
He said he could land there.
Not do anything useful on it.

[Anonymous No.10900788]

>>10900784
Just sending Crew to the ISS was like 3Billions incentive for them. And the same for cargo before that.
I'm not even sure 2Billions covers the cost of a single Starphip stack to begin with.

[Anonymous No.10900793]

>>10900784
>before being able to convince NASA to do so. Without an incentive, SpaceX launching a free moon is just not economically viable for the company operating on tight budget constraints. So to put weight behind the NASA's statement, Newt is proposing an incentive for private industry to land and build an outpost on the Moon and the winner would get $2 B.
Which is why its going to get shot down so that SpaceX won't compete against SLS.

[Anonymous No.10900797]

[Anonymous No.10900802]

So, youtube spawned me this shit
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-n9uz_cOjT8&lc=z23xufl4gy2iuvlu0acdp43buu5iqhl3qcrrauh1qrpw03c010c.1566227494198613
I mean, we can't go to Mars, but this guy is just spelling all the wrong reasons why.

[Anonymous No.10900805]

>>10900513
>>10900734
This. It's ridiculous to suggest a reward of 2B for something like this.
A company has to
>develop a rocket system capable of moving enough cargo and land it on the surface of the Moon
>develop outpost hardware that will be making up the... outpost
>operate the rocket enough times to build the lunar base

And the reward for all of this is by the mighty USG with its seemingly endless pockets is to be... two billion dollars? Pretty much the cost of a single sls launch, a rocket that cant even fling 30 tons of concrete at the Moon? 6 months worth of budget for the development of said rocket?

If it weren't Newt i'd think it's one of those fake ass "fair" offers where the requirements are clearly meant to be impossible to achieve just to prove a point or defend a position.

Have companies bid for X$/ton landed intact on the moon. Then pick the best offers and make the best use of it. Naturally, that will be among the proposals nobody will ever consider making...

[Anonymous No.10900810]

>>10900805
Maybe that's what the price is about?
What will you do, if you get a free ride to Mars?
I mean, for a third party, it's not that bad, imagining launch costs are below 2B$?

[Anonymous No.10900825]

Name one downside of a $2B moon competition.
>Best case scenario: Moonbase for pocket change
>Worst case scenario: nobody collects it and you lose nothing

[Anonymous No.10900827]

>>10900825
I say we make it 2 million and write a law that if no company succeeds all space commercialization attempts are to be deemed impractical for the near future. Best case scenario we buy moonbase for 2 million, worst case we can put that whole commercial thing to rest letting us focus our efforts on the safe proven and reliable American way to space.

[Anonymous No.10900828]

>>10900825
Yeah, no.
Most case scenario, somebody dies, because cheap air filters or whatnot.

[Anonymous No.10900831]

>>10900827
>reliable

Your vehicle has to fly to be reliable.

[Anonymous No.10900833]

This is my shit plan for simulating a Mars mission.
>Send a crew in elliptical Earth Orbit.
>Plan for it to encounter moon by <trip duration>
Land there.
>Pretend to do anything productive for 21-return trip from mars-previous time spent.
>Return home after that.
If we can do this, then there's no reason not to go to Mars.

[Anonymous No.10900837]

Am I wrong to think the first major milestone of terraforming Mars would be to get the atmosphere up to 0.07atm in low lying areas (regardless of composition)?

If you could get a 0.07atm CO2 atmosphere at the bottom of the Mariner Valley, you'd be below the Armstrong Limit and could walk around on the surface with essentially the same equipment used on Everest.

[Anonymous No.10900839]

>>10900831
Safety above all else. The safest rocket is the one on the ground.

[Anonymous No.10900841]

>>10900837
Yeah, that won't happen unless we nuke the poles in our lifespans.
Then plants ingest all that CO2.

[Anonymous No.10900842]

>>10900837
No, but memesters get butthurt whenever that idea is mentioned because its not "real" terraforming or whatever the fuck that is aka it's not impossible.
A nice consequence of increased pressure is naturally occurring liquid water.

[Anonymous No.10900846]

>>10900810
>imagining launch costs are below 2B$
[Shelby disliked that]

[Anonymous No.10900847]

>>10900841
>that won't happen unless we nuke the poles
well I think Danzig is quite a nice city but I'm willing to accept some sacrifices
>then plants ingest all the CO2
if you can grow plants outside on the surface of mars you've achieved the next milestone anyways (fixing the perchlorate problem)

[Anonymous No.10900849]

>>10900847
Well, you'd be looking for airbone algae.
And we got plenty of them, believe it or not.

[Anonymous No.10900852]

>>10900827
>all space commercialization attempts are deemed impractical for the near future by the US government
>private companies and USAF will still buy commerical launches because millions per launch every month or so is better than billions per launch every year

[Anonymous No.10900853]

>>10900847
Perchlorate is a minor issue.
If you wash (Iknow) the ground, it's gone.

[Anonymous No.10900856]

>>10900847
Do the math with solar reflectors because the only nukes you could ever see exploding are the last things you'll ever see.

[Anonymous No.10900859]

>>10900856
Look, we got enough over here to wipe out mankind a few times, so we might as well use it as a start.

[Anonymous No.10900861]

>>10900833
The crew would have to stay on the Moon for two years to simulate the time between transfer windows, and landing on Mars is more difficult because of the atmosphere. Not to mention the return velocities on both ends would be greater on a real Mars mission.

And the radiation exposure from ~43 months of orbiting through the Van Allen belts and living on the Moon would be enormous, more than an actual Mars mission.

It would be easier to build an LEO simulation with a partially functioning Mars mission vessel docked to a small simulated Martian environment that uses centrifugal force to simulate Martian g-forces.

[Anonymous No.10900864]

>>10900852
Commercial is fine as long as its Boeing.

[Anonymous No.10900865]

>>10900833
Lunar environment is nothing like Mars.

[Anonymous No.10900867]

>>10900864
If that's the case, then I'll be looking forward to NASAs first manned Mars mission in 40,000 AD.

[Anonymous No.10900872]

>>10900802
Dude, learn to trim your URLs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-n9uz_cOjT8
>>10900861
>~43 months of orbiting through the Van Allen belts
Why would they spend more than a day or three in there? Over 2 years that's hardly worth mentioning... unless you're a filthy scaremonger.

[Anonymous No.10900879]

>>10900867
Good estimate for the current budget levels. However, I assure you, American flag on Mars is in fact a real possibility and entirely doable within our lifetime for the meager price of a trillion or two...

[Anonymous No.10900880]

>>10900853
>just wash the planet bro lmao
shit I was using my planet washer for dishes this whole time

[Anonymous No.10900882]

>>10900837
The first major mars terraforming is to have a major human presence there. Then an artificial magnetic shield that redirects harmful radiation at Lagrange points on mars. Either solar powered or by fusion/fission reactor.

[Anonymous No.10900883]

>>10900861
No, they would be in an elliptical orbit.
You don't need your peri-apsis to travel through the van-hallen belt.
And therefore in zero-G.
Which is shit and can be simply mitigated for.
Then, they'd be in 1/6thG which is haft of Mars Gravity.
Then pretend to go home for a few month.
It's fucking retarded, because I already know we can do this. And we can do this better by proving artificial centrifugal gravity.
It will just fucking work. But I wouldn't want to fly on this mission instead of going to Mars.

[Anonymous No.10900886]

>>10900856
If Elon started assembling nuclear weapons on Mars, could we actually stop him?

[Anonymous No.10900887]

>>10900872
>Trim url
Yeah, I know, wtf?

[Anonymous No.10900888]

>>10900880
Just treat the soil you'll be using (or eating?). Of course rain and flowing water will have interesting effects on the perchlorate concentrations.

[Anonymous No.10900889]

>>10900882
It's a lot easier to just put habitats under a few feet of rock than to try and shield an entire planet. An artificial magnetosphere is "oceans on Mars" tier.

[Anonymous No.10900899]

>>10900886
The United states can seize SpaceX assets on Earth, but if the United states sends something to Mars, then Elon can make enough nukes on Mars to give Kim Jong Un a stiffy. This is a very real possibility (maybe not Elon himself doing it but someone) once access to space opens up, which explains why the US cut off support to China's space program.

[Anonymous No.10900901]

>>10900886
We could nationalize all his Earth-based assets for a start.

[Anonymous No.10900902]

>>10900899
>but UNLESS the United states sends something to Mars
correction

[Anonymous No.10900906]

>>10900883
>it'll just fucking work
I didn't know Bethesda was getting into the Space game.

Seriously though the Moon is a totally different environment than Mars and it has completely different procedures and challenges. I dont see the point in actually going to the Moon to simulate a Mars mission when it could be easily simulated in LEO for the same price.

[Anonymous No.10900907]

>>10900899
>>10900901
It's almost a given that once Mars is self sufficient they'll promptly ignore Earth's laws and go full Molon Labe. But that's a far-future projection bordering on science fiction.

[Anonymous No.10900908]

>>10900899
Yeah, no.
It's a pretty late game industrial process.
I'd be amazed if they can make Iron/Steal on Mars when I bite the bullet.

[Anonymous No.10900912]

>>10900906
How many times does it have to be said:
It's never been tried.
We did amazing work into proving zero-G bad.
Not once did anyone said, let's try spinning 2 ships and see whet happens?

[Anonymous No.10900913]

>>10900908
>I'd be amazed if they could refine iron on Mars, a planet characterized by the massive amounts of iron oxide covering literally every square inch
turning rust back into iron is probably one of the easier oxygen sources on Mars

[Anonymous No.10900914]

>>10900912
Don't give anyone ideas about spinny iss or we're stuck in leo for another 50 years.

[Anonymous No.10900915]

>>10900912
There have been artificial gravity studies on the ISS but it's been limited to mice because humans sized centrifuges are big

[Anonymous No.10900916]

>>10900913
Iron oxide, meaning it's useless to direct processing.
The problem is, releasing that oxygen costs energy.
Look, rust is useless here, and it's useless there.

[Anonymous No.10900921]

>>10900914
Spinny ISS isn't even needed to do an artificial gravity study. You could do it today with off the shelf hardware for less than a cool billion.
>Dragon 2 launches, with a special docking adaptor that's basically a counterweight on a cable
>Vary the length of cable and speed of rotation to change gravity
>Do a 1 week mission (or however much food and oxygen you can cram on a Dragon)

[Anonymous No.10900922]

>>10900915
Yeah, they said differential gravity was bad.
Because, you know, differences in spinning rates are greater at a mice level.
There is actually no science there when it comes to humans, and last time I checked, we're not interested in sending mice there.

[Anonymous No.10900923]

>>10900916
Not useless when its a useful byproduct from making use of the iron oxide which is quite useful for making plenty of useful things... But water is going to be primary source of oxygen. And there will be plenty of oxygen available.

[Anonymous No.10900924]

>>10900915
>humans sized centrifuges are big
Then the space agencies in the ISS have shit rockets and need to go bigger.

[Anonymous No.10900925]

>>10900914
>2001 Space Odyssey has an LEO centrifugal orbital station
>IRL 2019 still no centrifugal ss

What did they mean by this?

[Anonymous No.10900928]

>>10900889
https://phys.org/news/2017-03-nasa-magnetic-shield-mars-atmosphere.html

Artificial magnetosphere would restore part of the ocean, heat up mars by few C, thicken atmosphere, in few years all in one sweep. And the technology to do that requires a small magnetic generator and a vehicle to put that satellite in l1 point. That satellite would need to generate only 2 Tesla worth of Magnetic strength. That's easily doable. Its similar to a magnet strength of an MRI machine. Bonus point is, it could be solar powered and the strength could be controlled.

Sure, it won't make Mars into Earth-like, but it would be a huge step in the right direction. I wouldn't be surprised if Musk wants to put something like that. "2 Tesla strong magnetic shield powered on Mars by Tesla solar panels brought by SpaceX"

[Anonymous No.10900929]

>>10900924
No they are just playing their cards well because they know you shouldn't do your job in a day if you can do it a year.

[Anonymous No.10900930]

>>10900916
Mars is not Earth. On Earth, we have huge infrastructure and can do large scale open pit mining to get good quality ores. On Mars, we have whatever can be sent.

Also, on Mars, oxygen is a VERY valuable byproduct. On Earth, spending a large amount of power to get cheap iron and free oxygen is silly. On Mars, iron would otherwise be imported at great cost and oxygen is valuable.

[Anonymous No.10900934]

>>10900930
Well, hopefully, undergound stuff isn't oxidized, (and it shouldn't).
Can't know until we're there, but that should allow us to mate spaceships on Mars.

[Anonymous No.10900937]

>>10900934
Oh yeah definitely if we go to dig a hab tunnel and find good iron ore the rust mining meme is dead instantly, I agree. I doubt it will be that easy but hey, maybe.

[Anonymous No.10900939]

>this is supposed to fly in just a few months

[Anonymous No.10900940]

>>10900929
Really? Because I see a bunch of lame agencies LARPing as Starfleet while growing flowers in space to "determine if microgravity environments affect the smell" all while living in tiny tin cans that look small by standards decades ago. Pathetic.

[Anonymous No.10900942]

Ok, everybody calms down.
Elon Musk is gonna throw its steel tuna can at Mars and it's gonna fail like the second coming of Jesus.
Rip astronauts.
Then he's gonna try again and they'll die, but more softly.
Then, next time you know it, sending shit to Mars is like buying a stamp.

[Anonymous No.10900944]

>>10900928
According to the study, that sort of magnetic shield would restore Mars atmosphere to 1/2 of Earth's atmosphere plus the initial 4C temp increase could trigger a green house effect in warming up the planet further and increasing the atmosphere. Mar's average temperature is -63 C right now, even a small bit in heating up means it could potentially allow our techs to be more Mars friendly. I would it would ever reach 15C avg temperature of Earth, but -63C to -40C would help a lot.

[Anonymous No.10900949]

>>10900942
>Elon throws tuna can at Moon with Matt Damon, Taylor Swift, M Night Shamalan, and Newt Gingrich
>it explodes on the pad
>someone catches a burning Newt head
>it's clear he was a robot this whole time, his face is melting
>his robo voice stuttering and slurring, he stammers out
>m-m-moon b-base

[Anonymous No.10900953]

>>10900949
I came.

[Anonymous No.10900959]

>>10900928
https://livestream.com/viewnow/vision2050/videos/150701155

~1:36:20 for the NASA study.

[Anonymous No.10900968]

>>10900949
I really hope all the gook artist dies for their own fault. Such as drilling a hole in the wall

[Anonymous No.10900971]

>>10900939
I see no problem there

[Anonymous No.10901006]

>>10900929
They won't do space spinny gravity because they're waiting for the big bux to go to the moon.
Also ISS is a shitty tin can and couldn't handle the torsional stresses of spinning. It was only designed for 0g experiments.

[Anonymous No.10901013]

>>10900928
>That satellite would need to generate only 2 Tesla worth of Magnetic strength.
ezpz, we've already sent up one tesla
But seriously if this could be made from a hacked-up MRI machine and a buttload of solar panels, we should do it.

[Anonymous No.10901014]

>>10900939
those new sections look like they are 1 piece with 1 seam to me, can anyone confirm that?

[Anonymous No.10901017]

>>10900968
But they're gooks, not Ivans.

[Anonymous No.10901026]

>>10901006
>They won't do space spinny gravity because they're waiting for the big bux to go to the moon
Which will never happen because any extra money to do stuff around the moon thats beyond the bare minimum means less money for SLS and that's unacceptable by the current management.

>Also ISS is a shitty tin can and couldn't handle the torsional stresses of spinning. It was only designed for 0g experiments.
Then its a shit space station.

[Anonymous No.10901028]

>>10900886
I fantasize about this all the time, Mars is perfect for nuclear research on account of not being Earth

[Anonymous No.10901029]

>>10900916
rust is not useless at all tho?

[Anonymous No.10901030]

>>10901026
That's the moon as in it will have partial gravity, they're not going to do shot put in space, period. Besides, that only works well for a long term trip, because you can't dock with that shit when there's no docking port at the center of gravity, and you need a wheel for that.
If you used a counterweight and the CoG was anywhere on the spacecraft, everybody would be throwing up.

[Anonymous No.10901031]

>>10900912
>let's try spinning 2 ships and see whet happens?

Gemini 8 would like a word

[Anonymous No.10901037]

>>10901031
LIST OF SHIT THAT WAS DONE IN THE FUCKING GEMINI PROGRAM AND THEN FORGOTTEN ABOUT:
>EOR space construction
>spin gravity
WHAT ELSE AM I FORGETTING

[Anonymous No.10901043]

>>10901037
>paragliding back to Earth
>bolting a mini space station to the capsule for extra volume
>actual drive and ambitions

[Anonymous No.10901044]

>>10901043
I don't think they ever got the paragliding done
I don't think they ever got the mini-space-station done
I'll give you the actual drive and ambitions

[Anonymous No.10901046]

>>10901037
ejector seats

[Anonymous No.10901140]

Kerbal Space Program 2 is coming out

[Anonymous No.10901190]

>>10901140
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_nj6wW6Gsc
cinematic looks great, no gameplay shown yet though

[Anonymous No.10901233]

>>10901140
With new and improved full fledged n-body datamining!

[Anonymous No.10901252]

>>10901013
>>10900928
It needs to generate a field the size of a fucking planet you morons. A "hacked up MRI machine" is not going to cut it.

[Anonymous No.10901262]

>>10901252
It doesn't though, it needs to create a field with a shadow the size of a planet. You know the Moon can block the Sun from the perspective of an Earth based observer, yes?

[Anonymous No.10901269]

>>10901262
Retard

[Anonymous No.10901290]

>>10901252
https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/14352/place-a-satellite-at-sun-mars-l1-to-shield-mars-from-sun-radiation

Someone did a rough estimate a while ago. We'd need roughly a billion ton worth of copper field with ~20 megawatts of power generation.

We could, lets say we found a way to, hijack a metal rich asteroid and place it in mars orbit. How large would it have to be? I did a quick google search and found out Ryugu asteroid is roughly close to 1 km in diameter and weighs roughly 450 million ton. That may not get us 2tesla worth of strength, but it may be enough to get us 0.5-1 Tesla worth of magnetic field strength that covers the entirety of mars.

Asteroid capture is probably a key here.

[Anonymous No.10901299]

>>10901290
Or harvesting resources off Mars and doing it that way.
There's also the fact such a setup would probably use superconducting materials instead of metals simply due to the lighter weight of the coils. The cooling system might be a bitch to do, but power in such a shielding station will not be lacking.

Speaking of power, while day to day operations when the sun isnt throwing a shitfit could easily get done with solar arrays, it's going to need something extra for when the sun goes batshit every 11 years.

[Anonymous No.10901300]

>>10901290
Remember that this fuckhuge field is also having a tremendous force exerted on it pushing it away from the sun. You would need some kind of constant fusion engine to keep this shit in place.

[Anonymous No.10901321]

>>10901300
nah, it's just another element in the lagrange point calcs, you can let gravity do the work for you

[Anonymous No.10901325]

>>10901014
Too early to tell from that pic.
I hope anons noticed those don't belong to the starship prototype and signal that either a third one is being started or the birth of a booster.

[Anonymous No.10901357]

>>10901325
I'm pegging it's a booster desu

[Anonymous No.10901361]

good post shithead

[Anonymous No.10901376]

Hanz looking pretty scruffy at the AIAA forum/conference

[Anonymous No.10901423]

>>10900346
>Alan parsons project
High IQ and taste individual detected

[Anonymous No.10901449]

>>10900687
>which keeps older designs running way past their intended lifetime
Older reactors are kept running way past their lifetime because dismantling them is horrifically expensive and it creates even more waste that nobody knows what to do with.
Don't act like there aren't actual issues with fission power. Whether those issues are acceptable or not is another question.

[Anonymous No.10901463]

https://store.steampowered.com/app/954850/Kerbal_Space_Program_2/

multiple person online interactive activities (MPOIA) confirmed

[Anonymous No.10901482]

>>10900867
>Nasa vows SLS will be able to rendevouz with the cult mechanicus within this millenium

[Anonymous No.10901495]

>>10901190
There's pre-alpha gameplay shown in the story trailer on KSPs channel.
I'm concerned that it's still running on Unity though.

[Anonymous No.10901497]

>>10901495
>still Unity

whyyy

[Anonymous No.10901520]

>>10901497
unity is decent though. the problem is that squad was working with literal spaghetti code that became more complex with the pass of the years. The fact that they weren't game developers hindered them as well.

[Anonymous No.10901543]

>>10900433
literally no fundamental problems and it will be reality within 6 years.

[Anonymous No.10901546]

>>10900511
>isolated primitive people
fuck em

[Anonymous No.10901556]

>>10900513
>$2 billion incentive to the first company to land on mars
I think you mean the Moon. Anyway, SpaceX will land a Starship on the Moon without return propellant loaded with a cargo meant to allow retrofit of the propellant tanks into more habitat space, and they will claim that $2 billion thusly.

[Anonymous No.10901568]

>>10900785
Even if they do nothing but land there with Starship they're effectively just plopped a 1000 cubic meter habitat module onto the Moon which can be used by their commercial lander scheme as a ground base. They could even pack some hardware along the way that would let the first lunar crew to arrive the ability to vent, reseal, and safe the propellant tanks and cut a few holes in the bulkheads to turn the entire vehicle into a ~18 story habitat.

[Anonymous No.10901570]

>>10901556
>make fully reusable spacecraft
>expend it
No

[Anonymous No.10901573]

>>10901556
>and then the $2B gets denied because SpaceX didn't meet a new massive requirement was made up while that Starship was in transit and thus couldn't meet
>but you know what meets this new arbitrary requirement that apparently no one else can meet?
>take a guess
>you probably know what it is
>SLS

[Anonymous No.10901578]

>>10901573
SHHHHHHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEELBYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!

[Anonymous No.10901589]

>>10901570
expendable Starship for the moon wet workshop is actually a great idea because it's basically the same shit they're doing in Texas but with a danger of depressurizing and blowing your air out to space

[Anonymous No.10901596]

>>10900880
Any dirt you are bringing inside to farm with you wash with water, then treat the water to break down the remaining perchlorates into salts (most perchlorates break down spontaneously on contact with liquid water).

As for the planet itself, a water cycle will have existed for hundreds of years before the surface becomes habitable to even the simplest life. That water cycle will be naturally washing perchlorates (along with salts and heavy metals and so forth) downhill into what will become large lakes and reservoirs of water. At some point the soil will become habitable to perchlorate-digesting bacteria, which we can then spray around and further detoxify the soil. By the time we can plant any plants of any kind, the soil will be almost completely free of contamination. By the time people can actually walk around and survive outside with minimal additional oxygen supply or completely freely, the soil will be no more contaminated than Earth's soil is. The first areas to be clean enough that people can eat food from plants grown outdoors will be near the fringes of the drainage basins that will form along with the water cycle; the last places to be washed clean will be near the coasts and near the outflow channels from drainage basins. The actual time required will vary from place to place because of differing amounts of annual rainfall; a desert is obviously going to take longer to wash clean than some place that gets dumped with ten meters of rain annually.

[Anonymous No.10901599]

>>10900882
MAGNETIC
FIELDS
DO
NOT
BLOCK
RADIATION
FROM
SPACE

[Anonymous No.10901614]

>>10900916
Iron ores are a made of iron oxide of varying degrees of purity you fag

to smelt iron you take iron oxide in as high purity as you can get your hands on and you heat it up and you run carbon monoxide through it

the carbon monoxide strips the oxygen away from the hot FeOx and leaves behind iron metal

On Mars you have abundant CO2 and you can make carbon monoxide from it using hot electrolysis. Does it take energy, of course, but you're gonna do it anyway because it's the least complicated ISRU method of making breathable oxygen

Everything you're gonna do requires energy, that's no problem to avoid, because you HAVE to solve it or you can't go to Mars at all.

[Anonymous No.10901620]

>>10900934
>and it shouldn't
Dude, EVERY rock is an oxide. Oxygen is the third most abundant element in the universe, and the most abundant element in every object in the solar system except for the gas giants. The entire bulk of Mars except maybe for its core is made of iron, magnesium, silicon, titanium, aluminum, and other OXIDES.

[Anonymous No.10901626]

>>10900937
Iron ore IS rust dude. Magnetite is Fe3O4. Hematite is Fe2O3. These are the ores we make all of our steel out of. It's literally RUST.

[Anonymous No.10901629]

>>10901037
Gemini was THE fucking space program honestly. Apollo was a great success but it was just the MOON program, and focused totally on doing MOON things. Gemini focused on SPACE things and developing a real understanding of what designs did and did not make sense in SPACE.

[Anonymous No.10901633]

>>10901262
excuse me this may be a big ask of you but could you be just a little bit more retarded please
I know it's going to be hard to beat that statement you just made but I just felt like I'd ask
RETARD

[Anonymous No.10901636]

>>10901629
the Apollo Applications Program was also a SPACE program and not just a MOON program, but it was killed
and it being killed, killed Skylab

[Anonymous No.10901638]

>>10901599
Are you a retard?

[Anonymous No.10901643]

>>10901638
You must love rhetorical questions

[Anonymous No.10901645]

>>10901636
It was probably killed because it preserved the equipment necessary for NASA to return to the moon and thus tempt them to push for another incredibly expensive Apollo-style program, ad that had to go away so that the budget can be used for other things.

Like Vietnam.

[Anonymous No.10901653]

>>10901290
Ignore the idea of using copper, since it's a fucking rare element that we only have in any significant quantity because Earth's geology has done a very nice job of concentrating a huge fraction of its total copper load in the upper crust. No other planet or moon in our solar system will have as much copper wealth as the Earth, it will simply be spread too thin to concentrate, it'd be like mining helium 3 from the Moon. Even gold is easier to find in space than copper, since it's unreactive and doesn't alloy with iron yet does sink to the center of protoplanets that were later demolished by high speed impact, meaning there are in fact gold-rich asteroids out there. No such luck with copper.

Anyway, someone needs to redo these calculations using aluminum wire instead of copper, because while aluminum is not as good a conductor it is VASTLY more common and it will be possible in theory to produce that much of it. Assuming we'd need something like 2 billion tons of aluminum, that'd only require the combined total output of all aluminum production on Earth for the next 34 years.

[Anonymous No.10901655]

new
>>10901654

[Anonymous No.10901656]

>>10901321
It wouldn't be at the Lagrange point, it'd need to be much closer to the Sun, in order for the Sun's gravity to be able to pull on the generator harder than the Sun's solar wind pushes on the magnetic field.

[Anonymous No.10901658]

>>10901140
>>10901190
Looks cool as hell. Hopefully they'll deliver.

[Anonymous No.10901659]

>>10901656
yes, that just moves the libration point much closer to the sun

[Anonymous No.10901662]

>>10901325
Definitely a booster, Elon wants an orbital launch by midway through next year, in fact they may have been holding off on starting the Booster just to make sure they catch any glitches in their methods/design by building those Starships before they get started.

[Anonymous No.10901663]

>>10901658
what's the story behind this Kerbal riding a set of reaction wheels in LKO?

[Anonymous No.10901664]

>>10901663
The usual story, everything was going fine until the rocket exploded.

[Anonymous No.10901665]

>>10901361
whet the fuck is this
definitely not Starship, not shittle either, but looks derived from it

[Anonymous No.10901668]

>>10901376
>if only you knew how bad things really are
in regards to working with government bureaucracy of course

[Anonymous No.10901670]

>>10901665
some retard drew shuttle and claimed that the signs pointed to the Starship design being a big delta wing shuttle style because he's a retard

[Anonymous No.10901675]

>>10901449
>even more waste that nobody knows what to do with
Everyone knows what to do with it, the problem is easy; stick it in dry storage for a few decades until the daughter products decay. Oh did you mean fuel? Reprocess it and burn it up in a fast spectrum breeder.
The issue is not the actual list of issues, it's the perceived issues that the average person does not understand yet forms an extremely strong opinion about regardless.

[Anonymous No.10901677]

>>10901520
Apparently Ksp 2 has been rewritten completely, which even if they weren't adding any new features at all would be a decent improvement. That Daedalus propulsion unit made me wet(male) though ngl

[Anonymous No.10901678]

>>10901675
well I mean what the fuck do you do with a load of steel that's eaten ludicrous amounts of neutron flux and basically entirely transmuted into unstable isotopes of iron?

[Anonymous No.10901682]

>>10901570
>Make fully reusable spacecraft
>Design simplified version that is effectively a bare airframe with fewer engines and no TPS or control surfaces (simplified fixed legs/fins)(literally already in the works as mentioned by a tweet form Elon abot how they're gonna serve the high C3 payload market using SSH)
>spend $2 million and 6 months welding it together in a field using mexicans
>launch it into orbit, use your reusable one to refuel it
>send simplified steel can to land on the Moon
>acquire $2 billion
it's that easy folks

[Anonymous No.10901693]

>>10901677
Now that there would be native multiplayer, there was an idea on /v/ of having a dedicated "combat servers".
>with kerbals dropping from the atmosphere in drop pods trying to take control of the colonies(basically planting and removing flags), SSTOs making bombing runs, dedicated interceptors deterring those SSTOs and battleships fighting other battleships for the control of the LKO...ALL AT THE SAME TIME.
Obviously, not realistic at all, but it opens up the game to new ideas.

[Anonymous No.10901694]

>>10901573
here I've got one for you
>to further increase our ability to leverage mass we land on the Moon, the vehicle must be able to convert 100% of its residual propellant after touch down into water and oxygen for the astronauts to drink and to breathe, thus reducing cost by no longer needing to launch as much of those resources from Earth
therefore Starship disqualified because the products of its propellants are water and EVIL CO2, and they don't even get to take advantage of hydrogen boil-off to gain a surplus of sweet, breathable oxygen.

[Anonymous No.10901701]

>>10901589
You don't even have to make it a wet workshop and you already get a habitable volume as big as the ISS (or maybe bigger at this point if they've stretched the crew section design even a little bit) sitting on the Moon, add in the volume of the prop tanks (which we pretty much know for sure are stretched) and the volume becomes ridiculously large, bigger than the entire Space Shuttle external tank was.

[Anonymous No.10901730]

>>10901599
>What is particle radiation?
>What is the earth's magnetic field DOING PRECISELY FUCKING THAT?

[Anonymous No.10901740]

>>10901694
>the vehicle must be able to convert 100% of its residual propellant after touch down into water and oxygen for the astronauts to drink and to breathe
Nice secret hit against propellant d-

(USER WAS BANNED BY THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS FOR THIS POST)

[Anonymous No.10901753]

>>10901638
No, it's true. The magnetic field on Earth could disappear tomorrow and it would have ZERO effect on our lives beyond screwing with a few things that rely on a compass to work (most guidance systems use GPS now anyway because it's more accurate and doesn't wander by multiple kilometers every year like a dumbass). What ACTUALLY shields us from space is our atmosphere. Proof? Stand at the north or south pole at night and look up to see the aurora, produced by radiation being FUNNELED AND CONCENTRATED to slam down directly above your head with the energy of a billion angry niggers, but fails to penetrate down enough to even get within 90 km of the surface. This is because solar charge particles are great in number but FUCK ALL in electron-volts. They get stopped by even a hint of a whisp of matter. Even on Mars' surface, the charged particles from the Sun FAIL to hit the surface. The atmosphere stops them.

So if the air on Mars is already thick enough to block solar radiation, then why bother thickening the atmosphere? it's because of cosmic rays. Unlike the limp dick virgin charged particles, the CHAD COSMIC RAY can have energies exceeding that of macro-scale objects moving at hundreds of km per hour. Most however are in the million electron-volts range to the billion electron-volts range. What that means is, you need about a ten meter column of water or equivalent mass above your head in order to block those bad bois. Earth's atmosphere is about equivalent to a ten meter column of water, which is why we're effectively shielded on the ground but not shielded that well in an airplane, and it's why on the ISS they get ass blasted by chad rays constantly despite being completely withing the Earth's """protective magnetosphere""".

In fact the only thing an atmosphere doesn't automatically block is UV light, which is also easily the most deadly type of radiation in space but also easiest to block in terms of shielding mass. A planet needs ozone tho.

[Anonymous No.10901758]

>>10901678
you let it sit for a while to cool down radiologically and then reuse it for more reactors because if it's gonna get irradiated again may as well reduce, reuse recycle rather than install more fresh steel.

[Anonymous No.10901778]

>>10901693
I could easily see myself and a few bros staking claims to different planets with a basic base to start with then trying to take over each other's systems, a total war game where you lose if you're genocided into oblivion. That way encourages multiple large bases per object under one's control, plus the development of vehicles with more factors to consider than just maximizing delta V with a couple aerodynamic and TWR constraints. A slower spaceplane drone that can cruise in atmosphere for long enough that it can hit many targets is a better weapon than a fast jet that can only break one base, for example. Again though that depends on how the multiplayer actually functions (like how do you do years of time warp acceleration if the other guy is roving around on his planet at the same time? Need to find out.)

[Anonymous No.10901840]

>>10900937
"Good iron ore" IS rust.

[Anonymous No.10901844]

>>10901778
maybe the combat should be restricted to jool, Kerbin or any other planet that has multiple moons? those binary planets seem interesting enough.

[Anonymous No.10901855]

>>10901730
blocked by atmosphere lol
also doesn't even divert anything remotely high energy

[Anonymous No.10901857]

New: >>10901654

>>10901654

>>10901654

>>10901654

[Anonymous No.10901862]

>>10901675
Hah. i stayed at Holid... er worked on a nucleah submahrine, and ah made sure nobody would evah make a breedah reactor, because of terrorists who ah definitely not the peace loving mid-east Arabs who onlyah want to live peacefully with Israhleis.
Even though it's virtuallah impossible to get sufficient puritah to make a bahm from that witches brew of ahsotopes.

[Anonymous No.10901870]

>>10901753
Earth experiences we experience an average of 2 millirads per day. On mars, the daily average radiation is 10x however due to lack of any magnetic shielding, it can spike up at any given day to 1000x or more.

>why bother thickening the atmosphere
Atmosphere thickening = more heat retention, better human body compatibility, etc. The closer mars is to having thicker atmosphere/pressure, the less risky it becomes for humans to go outside. Right now, if your suit tore on mars, you'd be a a husk due to all the air being sucked out due to the huge pressure difference. Increasing the pressure/atmosphere means reducing the rate at which an accident can kill you.

[Anonymous No.10901875]

>>10901599
t.brainlet who thinks all radiation is nuclear isotopes

>>10901620
As far as I can tell, the tricky element is hydrogen. On Mars, the main source of it is H2O, which is elusive. It's frozen at the poles, but you probably have to drill through dry ice first, it's heavily salted under the surface, and probably not in very large quantities.
Carbon can come from dry ice and atmospheric CO2, and oxygen from CO2 and anything else that's an oxide, especially minerals.

[Anonymous No.10901879]

>>10901844
No limits, only depends on how hard you want to make it for yourself. Noobs get a base on low gravity worlds with easier access to unique resources (they're almost certainly gonna have stuff like fusion fuel for high tech propulsion floating around in Jool's atmosphere for example), veterans get more difficult and resource poor starting worlds, elder gods get the really difficult worlds to start from (imagine trying to fight back an invading force when you're limited to what you can launch from Eve's surface). New planets in other star systems are obviously a wildcard.

Lightening round is where everyone picks a Joolian moon, fast paced but a winner is decided quickly and there's nowhere to run. Eternal war is played across multiple star systems, it's effectively impossible to completely eradicate any enemy, although it may be possible to invade with overwhelming force all at once and attempt hostile takeover of a valuable planet or moon. Lots of game modes and rule sets to imagine. Anyway this is a /v/ topic.

[Anonymous No.10901881]

>>10901862
aren't breeder reactors HARDER to make bombs out of than regular reactors?

[Anonymous No.10901882]

>>10901645
And we all know Vietnam was completely Nixon's fault!

[Anonymous No.10901885]

>>10901862
looks like a fag

[Anonymous No.10901890]

>>10901870
>>why bother thickening the atmosphere
It was a rhetorical question, genius. I was pointing out that my thickening the atmosphere you solve all the problems except requiring oxygen.

[Anonymous No.10901892]

>>10901875
Magnetic field does not block UV and does not block cosmic ray, only diverts solar charged particles which are concentrated at magnetic poles, slam harder into atmosphere and cause aurora as the atmosphere stops them totally

[Anonymous No.10901894]

>>10901881
Apparentlah you can't read Suthaan.

[Anonymous No.10901898]

>>10901894
you nigger loving fuck I didn't ask what you said

[Anonymous No.10901902]

>>10901881
With a breeder you make an easier to separate fissionable isotope that can be used as bomb fuel.

With 'regular' reactors running on U-235, you need to be able to enrich natural uranium anyway, and to go from reactor grade to bomb grade you need only run the equipment for longer. Breeder reactors do not pose any further risk of weapons proliferation over regular reactors, and even then there's no real link between nuclear power and weapons. Case in point, north korea has nukes and no nuke power, south korea has nuke power and no nukes.

[Anonymous No.10901908]

come on boys we can hit 500 on this one

[Anonymous No.10901909]

>>10901898
>loving fuck
Ahm a Democraht, we hate them ahhl.

[Anonymous No.10901913]

>>10901908
why the fuck would we do that

[Anonymous No.10901915]

>>10901890
Right, but it takes a lot of effort to thicken the atmosphere. If we could somehow do an asteroid grabbing project in the next 50 years and another 30 years for building a mega magnet from it, it might solve the magnetic shielding issue, which then helps thicken the atmosphere, thus heating up mars and creating a green house effect and melting the polar ice, etc. 100 years is a long time, but such an endeavour could be doable. I don't know if we can thicken martian atmosphere any other way. Maybe "nuke" but who would do that?

[Anonymous No.10901919]

>>10901902
The problem with breeder fuel is you are using a feedstock that is full as fuck of "bad" isotopes that will kill the kind of reaction you need for a bomb. It's going to be a lot harder than starting with some relatively chemically pure uranium from ore, and certainly no easier.

[Anonymous No.10901925]

>>10901915
Yes, we need to "nuke" Mars, but with asteroids, not radioactive bombs.

[Anonymous No.10901926]

>>10901915
Why does anyone think that adding a magnetic field alone would increase the atmosphere's thickness whatsoever? You know what'd make that atmosphere get more massive? If we slammed a few dozen billion-ton comets into the poles and higher latitude regions to vaporize the CO2 and water permafrost, as well as deliver extra water, CO2, and ammonia (which would be decomposed into nitrogen by the impact).

[Anonymous No.10901936]

>>10901926
It's an indirect effect, you dolt. It stops the cosmic wind that has been slowly blowing away the atmosphere over eons, and will let it naturally start accumulating again. Then you can help it along by adding more.

[Anonymous No.10901945]

>>10901919
The 'bad' isotopes you're talking about are a type of plutonium in the uranium-plutonium cycle that spontaneously produce too many decay neutrons for a gun type bomb to work, and which increases the likelihood of a fissile partial-reaction rather than a full on high yield fission explosion when the bomb is fired, and a type of uranium in the thorium-uranium cycle which is an absolute shitshow to deal with and cannot be easily separated from the U-233 you actually want (with 'easy' being defined as the effort involved with separating U-235 from U-238).

Just to be totally clear, in my original post I wasn't saying breeders are good for making bomb fuel, I said it was possible. We did it, after all, and in fact the reason breeders were designed and built in the first place was to replace U-235 enrichment plants with an alternative that still produced bomb fuel but also produced a large net positive amount of electrical power, rather than drawing huge amounts of power from the grid.

[Anonymous No.10901947]

>>10901926
Mars loses 1.3 kg of atmosphere per second is being washed away by solar wind. Magnetic shield would stop this and let the atmosphere build up, resulting in heating, pressure increases, ocean.
Watch this.
>https://livestream.com/viewnow/vision2050/videos/150701155

1:36:20

>asteroid slamming
Again, if we can already do asteroid capture, then leap from there to magnetic field generator isn't that much as the magnetic field generator serves a multipurpose without destroying the environment.

[Anonymous No.10901978]

>>10901936
>will let it naturally start accumulating again
I'm not waiting millions of years, you may as well say it doesn't do shit to thicken the atmosphere for all that's worth.

[Anonymous No.10901980]

>>10901947
Redirecting a billion ton asteroid with a 3 m/s delta V kick 500 million kilometers away from a high velocity Mars intercept DOES NOT EQUAL delivering a billion ton asteroid to a Mars Lagrange point via a delta V budget of several kilometers per second at minimum.

[Anonymous No.10901982]

>>10901980
hmmmm
solar sails?

[Anonymous No.10901984]

>>10901947
But Mars isn't producing any new atmosphere that's being stripped away at 1.3 kg per second, it's just losing what it's always had at 1.3 kg/s. Also that rate is so laughably slow it's barely worth knowing. Earth's atmosphere weighs 5x10^15 metric tons, are you gonna wait 3.8x10^18 seconds to get an atmosphere equivalent to Earth's in terms of mass? (pro tip even at an equal mass to Earth's atmosphere you'd only have 3/8ths the sea level pressure on Earth because lower gravity)

[Anonymous No.10901987]

>>10901982
>solar sails?
Cumbersome and oh so slow. You can use them for tugging around small rocks, and *maybe* to divert bigger asteroids very small amounts, but to apply thousands of meters per second of delta V you really have no choice except for high power direct nuclear propulsion (fusion torch ideally, orion or medusa nuclear pulse would work with near future tech).

[Anonymous No.10901988]

500 cocks in my ass

[Anonymous No.10902012]

>>10901984
Dry ice on mars polar regions regularly/seasonally enter into the atmosphere. 1.3 kg/s is a conservative observation by Maven but that translates to 41 million kilograms of atmosphere per year. For an already thin atmosphere, everything is worth it. NASA Mars scientists has done the research in the video I've linked.

[Anonymous No.10902035]

>>10902012
>Dry ice on mars polar regions regularly/seasonally enter into the atmosphere
Yes but it's CO2 that froze in that hemisphere the previous winter. It isn't new CO2 from the deep interior of the planet outgassing for the first time.

[Anonymous No.10902107]

>>10902012
and if it starts warming, more will get released from the polar CO2 glaciers, and then glowball warming

[Anonymous No.10902129]

>>10900839

[Anonymous No.10902151]

>>10902035
Think of it as adding extra 41 million kg of atmosphere yearly.

>>10902107
As temp warms up and pressure starts increasing, green house gas effect will start to melt the polar ice and turn it into an ocean.

Literally, just watch the presentation video. All of the shits are covered.