/sfg/ Space Flight General - Martian Real Estate

[Anonymous No.11907017]

How would you live on Mars?
Previous: >>11903657

[Anonymous No.11907023]

in the 4ass pisslockers

[Anonymous No.11907024]

>>11907017
>no piss airlock
No gonna make it.

[Anonymous No.11907037]

I'm probably getting this localized meme wrong, but you can always make martian jarate and throw it at incoming chinese landers

[Anonymous No.11907044]

>>11907037
Just make a very long piss airlock with a dead end and a sign at the entrance that says "American ICBM secrets inside".

[Anonymous No.11907056]

>>11907044
arw you crafty american now you make me smell of pee and i still no have the missire

[Anonymous No.11907060]

I'm gonna say it

I'm gonna say the D word

[Anonymous No.11907064]

>>11907060
nationalize him!

[Anonymous No.11907067]

>>11907017
>>11906881
the cliffs at the bottom of olympus mons and at the caldera at the top would be very interesting to explore i feel like, they're 8 kilometers straight up in many places

[Anonymous No.11907068]

>>11907056
>Chang comes out of the piss trap
>he's angry that he smells like urine without any missile tech for glorious homeland
>he waddles to his rover
>it's on cinder blocks and stripped down to the frame
>faint chuckling and didgeridoos can be heard in the distance

[Anonymous No.11907077]

>>11907060

[Anonymous No.11907083]

>>11907068
wacky races in space with xi as dick dastardly and kim as mutley.

[Anonymous No.11907086]

>>11907077
fucking checked based Elon poster

[Anonymous No.11907098]

>>11907083
NGL I'd watch that. It can be like one of those Top Gear trip specials but in space.

[Anonymous No.11907100]

You, yes YOU! I need you to come up with with a name for a off-Earth settlement!

[Anonymous No.11907105]

>>11907100
new-detroit

[Anonymous No.11907107]

unrelated but what would be safer: a bunker with a roof made out of 50 tons of cotton or 50 tons of poop?

[Anonymous No.11907109]

>>11907107
is it a proonted poo bunker?

[Anonymous No.11907112]

>>11907100
>Elongrad
>Shelby Memorial Propellant Depot
>Lunar Fulfillment Center
>Opportunity Bluff
>Bridenstineville

[Anonymous No.11907114]

>>11907100
Finally Fucking Free Town.
Alternatively F3Town.

[Anonymous No.11907115]

mt results
rhetoric creek

[Anonymous No.11907116]

>>11907100
Von Braun City

[Anonymous No.11907119]

>>11907109
I don't understand this idea of bringing a 3D printer to Mars. Sounds incredibly complicated and mass wasteful. Why not just print the printer on-location? It'll save the trouble of bringing it there.

[Anonymous No.11907120]

>>11907100
Colored not Allowed

[Anonymous No.11907121]

boeing crater

[Anonymous No.11907130]

>>11907100
Risa

[Anonymous No.11907133]

ULAke City.

[Anonymous No.11907134]

>>11907100
Non-Kosher Rome

[Anonymous No.11907136]

>>11907121
Are you naming a town, or labeling a spot where a MAX 8 crashed?

[Anonymous No.11907142]

>>11907109
no, I mean scientifically speaking

[Anonymous No.11907156]

>>11907100
Femboy Haumea

[Anonymous No.11907161]

When are these fucking cunts going to test fire this can. JESUS CHRIST I JUST WANT TO HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOP

[Anonymous No.11907167]

>>11907161
>JESUS CHRIST I JUST WANT TO HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOP

[Anonymous No.11907169]

>>11907161
"rockets are easy" he said, "trivial"

[Anonymous No.11907184]

What sort of weaponry would the Martian military use?

[Anonymous No.11907187]

>The Pentagon has requested a version of SNC Shooting Star for the first military space station
>The Defense Innovation Unit has awarded Sierra Nevada Corporation a contract to build an orbital laboratory that would serve as a kind of unmanned space station, the company announced July 14.
>The unmanned orbital outpost will be placed in low Earth orbit to be used for experiments and demonstrations. The autonomous, free flying vehicle will be able to host payloads and support space assembly and manufacturing, microgravity experimentation, logistics, training, testing and evaluations.
>Under the contract, Sierra Nevada Corporation will repurpose their Shooting Star transport vehicle into a scalable, autonomous space station that can be used for experiments and demonstrations. The Shooting Star vehicle is a 16-foot attachment to the company’s Dream Chaser space plane that was developed for NASA Commercial Resupply Services 2 missions. The vehicle was initially designed to provide extra payload storage and cargo disposal upon re-entry.
https://www.c4isrnet.com/battlefield-tech/space/2020/07/16/defense-innovation-unit-issues-contract-for-unmanned-orbital-outpost/
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/34840/the-pentagon-moves-to-launch-its-own-experimental-mini-space-station

[Anonymous No.11907189]

>>11907116
>Von Braun City
>Braunburg am Cydonia

[Anonymous No.11907209]

>>11907187
>unmanned

[Anonymous No.11907210]

>>11907184
lasers would be much more effective without much of an atmosphere, but would be rendered useless during dust storms. So you'd see more use of lasers then on earth, but still mostly kinetics.

[Anonymous No.11907211]

>>11907100
>You, yes YOU!
Leave me alone, you fucking rat.

[Anonymous No.11907215]

>>11907184
>H&K G11
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_didDgUjn0

[Anonymous No.11907229]

>>11907187
>space station
>unmanned

[Anonymous No.11907235]

>>11907187
>The proposed orbital outpost will be initially established in LEO with guidance, navigation and control for sustained free-flight operations to host payloads and support space assembly, microgravity, experimentation, logistics, manufacturing, training, test and evaluation. Future outposts may be based in a variety of orbits including, medium-Earth orbit, highly elliptical orbit, geosynchronous Earth orbits (GEO) to include GEO transfer orbits, and cislunar orbits.
https://www.sncorp.com/press-releases/dod-selects-snc-to-design-develop-unmanned-orbital-outpost-prototype/

>Future outposts may be based in a variety of orbits including, medium-Earth orbit, highly elliptical orbit, geosynchronous Earth orbits (GEO) to include GEO transfer orbits, and cislunar orbits.
So the military may be dumping small "stations" everywhere? Based.

>>11907209
I don't know how it works. Do they just leave it up there with custom payloads every time? Probably. Or do they send astronauts up via commercial Dragon 2? Maybe but probably not. To me this feels like a variation of the X-37b concept.

[Anonymous No.11907243]

>>11907209
>>11907229
It will actually be manned but that's a secret you didn't hear from me

[Anonymous No.11907254]

>>11907215
>proprietary ammo
just use your EVA suit bi-propellant and bullets cobbled up from asteroid iron

[Anonymous No.11907260]

>>11907184
This except the shells would be more easily re-loadable.

[Anonymous No.11907264]

>>11907017
What about dust getting inside your trapdoor?

[Anonymous No.11907292]

What the fuck, was cost-plus the worst decision NASA has ever made?

[Anonymous No.11907298]

>>11907235
How does society at large, and specifically the Space Force, react when starship starts launching and is even 1/10th as cheap as elon has promised?

[Anonymous No.11907312]

>>11907298
n---
nati---
nnnnnn---
no i can't say it

[Anonymous No.11907319]

>>11907298
Most people remain ignorant

Military pops a wicked boner and starts drooling at old plans for rods from god

[Anonymous No.11907322]

>>11907292
Cost-plus made sense during the Apollo era when nearly every key technology was highly experimental and contractors regularly needed help despite being highly motivated. The trend continued after Apollo as a way to keep the space flight industry alive despite lack of government interest; but since the motivation to progress was gone, bloat started to creep in.

[Anonymous No.11907339]

>>11907100
Armstrong.

[Anonymous No.11907349]

>>11907312
NATIONALIZE THIS ANTI-AMERICAN COMPANY THAT IS ACTUALLY RELEASING CONTROL OVER THE SPECIES FROM A SMALL GROUP OF- I MEAN THREATENING THE STABILITY OF THE USA!
>>11907319
will they be able to remain ignorant when there are hundreds, potentially thousands, of super heavy rocket launches per month and thousands of people going to mars every couple of years (2030s)?

[Anonymous No.11907350]

Apparently the Air Force snatched the money requested to support those six small sat launchers.
>The $116M that DoD had set aside for small launch contracts under the Defense Production Act have been redirected to other priorities, and it is unlikely that those contracts will be awarded any time soon, the U.S. Air Force top procurement official said.
>On July 1 DoD withdrew the contracts that would have been awarded to Aevum, Astra, X-Bow, Rocket Lab, Space Vector and Virgin Orbital to launch two rideshare missions over the next 24 months.
https://spacenews.com/funds-no-longer-available-for-defense-production-act-small-launch-contracts/

The Air Force is at it again. Space Force was created so they could get away from the Air Force stealing money from space, but since the Space Force is still tied to the Air Force, the Air Force continues to strangle space.

[Anonymous No.11907367]

>>11907184
just an AR-15 with a fat trigger guard

[Anonymous No.11907380]

>>11907100
Apollo city
The Trench

[Anonymous No.11907383]

>muh 3d printed habitat

Meanwhile no one prints shit on earth
Send people there to build out of concrete and stone

[Anonymous No.11907395]

>>11907350
Useless small launch companies don’t really need to exist

[Anonymous No.11907396]

>>11907383
Because there are cheap immigrant laborers to exploit on Earth.

[Anonymous No.11907398]

>>11907383
Take the hive-city pill
>Windows
>Radiation protection
>Bunker/fortress
>expandable
>Martian made prefab construction
>Arcology
>Amazing spire architecture

[Anonymous No.11907409]

>>11907398
Windows are pointless and stupid, we would all be better off if the window meme disappeared
Cost too much

[Anonymous No.11907418]

>>11907409
I’m sorry you can’t appreciate a good view and free sunlight

[Anonymous No.11907421]

>>11907398
Plenty of mechs, inflatable habs, and time will be needed for sure.

[Anonymous No.11907432]

>it's another argument about 3d printing/Mars habitats
I hate reruns
Wonder how long it will be until someone starts talking about jello babies again, or that one doomposter starts spamming his fetish about the government arbitrarily deciding to ruin private space companies.

[Anonymous No.11907441]

>>11907100
bogistan

[Anonymous No.11907443]

Ideas for a martian terrarium as a research center and refuge for an ecosystem
Now staffed with actual ecologists
Post em

[Anonymous No.11907444]

>>11907209
>>11907229
Alienned

[Anonymous No.11907457]

>>11907100
东方红市

[Anonymous No.11907458]

TUNNEL GOBLINS FOREVER! 100% radiation shielding. Tunnels. +10 impact resistance. NO SUNLIGHT! TUNNELS. Bombard the surface to cleanse the surface dwellers!

[Anonymous No.11907461]

>>11907187
>"Autonomous Station"
>It's a repurposed fucking cargo can

[Anonymous No.11907466]

>>11907461
Hopefully Sierra Nevada will eventually get a contract to make a crew dreamchaser to bring USAF personnel to space or something

[Anonymous No.11907477]

>>11907432
i just don't understand this reusable discussion meme

[Anonymous No.11907487]

mars colonies BTFO:
http://nautil.us/issue/87/risk/mars-is-a-second_rate-backup-plan

[Anonymous No.11907492]

>>11907458
>*Angry falmer noises*

[Anonymous No.11907497]

>>11907487
>http://nautil.us/issue/87/risk/mars-is-a-second_rate-backup-plan
Who asked?

[Anonymous No.11907516]

>>11907487
Dumb article. It completely ignores the fact that Mars is just a stepping stone for further colonization. It doesn't stop at Mars.
All it says is "Oh but Mars is twice as likely to be hit by asteroids than Earth therefore it's dangerous ergo a bad backup plan", as if we're going to Mars to stay there forever and never fucking ever fuck off from the surface of it, never going to use the lesser gravity well to spread out further.

[Anonymous No.11907517]

>>11907487
>Yeah let's back up humanity on O'Neill cylinders, what could go wrong?

[Anonymous No.11907521]

>>11907487
Yes, let's see other near options
>Moon: a fucking rock
>Venus: literally hell
>Mercury: half baked half frozen microwaved atmospherelet with leaking magnetosphere

[Anonymous No.11907609]

>>11907100
Kessler Run
A Ceres of Tubes
Asteroid Suspenders
Sex Pallas
Three Wolf Moonbase
Havesex Enceladus
The Fresh Principality of No Air

[Anonymous No.11907613]

>>11907458
>Old ass LEGO
Based, if LEGO wasn't busy sucking licenses off, they'd make a combination of Mars Mission and Power Miners because of Starship.

[Anonymous No.11907625]

>>11907521
Balloon habs on venus are top tier
Don’t even need 3d printing on Venus, just 2d plastic balloons

[Anonymous No.11907634]

>>11907121
>boeing crater

[Anonymous No.11907644]

>>11907100
General Habitation Unit #1

[Anonymous No.11907646]

>>11907613
that's a SCRAM machine gun digging machine. It drills by shooting stuff.
https://www.hypersciences.com/hyperbreaker/

[Anonymous No.11907648]

>>11907521
The moon is a perfect spaceport.
>conveniently within range of Earth via three day trips on chemical rockets
>gigawatts of available solar power with no atmosphere
>Earth Moon L2 is a fantastic launch spot and can be reached from the lunar surface with dirt powered rockets (AlOx from regolith)
>regolith also contains He3 for fusion engines once we get those
>building nukeplants or more solar panels would allow building a circular mass driver around the moon that could accelerate a ship at 1g for a few days to 1% of lightspeed and fling it off towards another star, needing only 0.19c delta V for the whole round trip if you have a plasma magnet sail for braking

[Anonymous No.11907649]

>>11907292
>17 billion
That isn't a typo is it? That means the single fucking Orion capsule in existence costs more than 8 (EIGHT AHHHHH) SLS'.
Have my eyes stopped working, am I having a fucking stroke? Whoever signed those checks ought to be fucking drawn and quartered.

[Anonymous No.11907653]

>>11907649
Orion was inherited from Constellation, so he's probably adding what it cost there too. That clunker has been around the block.

[Anonymous No.11907676]

>>11907653
Actually, it's more than $17 billion. It's $18.7 billion nominal dollars from 2006 to 2020, $21.4 billion dollars adjusted for inflation.
That's what the Orion has cost to date.

And it's not even done yet.

[Anonymous No.11907678]

>>11907649
you misinterpret it. 17 billion for the orion program. Including constellation. Not 17 billion per capsule lol. At least I hope not.

[Anonymous No.11907690]

>>11907678
There has only been one capsule delivered. We need a second capsule to differentiate unit price from program price.

[Anonymous No.11907709]

>>11907678
God I hope I've misinterpreted it, I pray to our Lord and savior von Braun that Orion is not a 17-FUCKING billion dollar capsule.

[Anonymous No.11907710]

>>11907649
It’s a program that has an annual budget of a billion plus and it’s been going for almost 20 years
Since the launch vehicle got cancelled and then delayed it has no need to deliver anything

[Anonymous No.11907719]

>>11907690
4 are being built as we speak.

[Anonymous No.11907720]

>>11907100
Depends where it's located:
>Moon: Armstrong, Selene
>Mars: Phlegethon, Acheron
>Somewhere in the Asteroid belt: Keep the name

[Anonymous No.11907726]

>>11907709
Gerstenmaier predicted operating budget of $1.1-$1.3bn per year between 2019-2023 for Orion.
But we all know how that won't hold up since it's fucking cost plus and that project is in no fucking hurry. Double or triple that sum at least and consider that Artemis 1 with the first capsule won't be launched until at least 2023 and you start seeing the cost per craft.

[Anonymous No.11907730]

>>11907709
It’s probably just the cost for the whole program. $38.4 billion (adjusted) was what NASA paid for the CSM program during Apollo, and they only got a few CSM’s.

[Anonymous No.11907732]

>>11907521
titan is based

[Anonymous No.11907737]

>>11907730
You've paid $21.4 so far and got 1. And Orion is pretty much just an upscaled Apollo capsule.

[Anonymous No.11907749]

>>11907720
The ugly fucking truth. It worked a lot better in the 60s because the Russians were trying to beat us to the Moon and JFK came out swinging from the hip and put a hard deadline out. NASA hired all the best companies under cost-plus because pretty much everything needed extra funding to get us to the Moon. Companies worked fast, a missed deadline would not only piss your company off but every other company and NASA off. You didn’t want to be the guy delaying the mission for a year.
But in modern day, there is no real goal. It feels like boeing is taking its time delaying on purpose because they don’t give a fuck about the timeline. They just see it as more money

[Anonymous No.11907750]

>>11907100
Earth Colony 1.0

[Anonymous No.11907760]

>>11907737
I’m not defending it. Orion, of ALL things, should have been the one fucking piece of hardware that made NASA happy and came out under budget. They should have just built them all during Constellation to use as leverage, and keep them in a warehouse while paying off a skeleton crew to keep them online until SLS was ready

[Anonymous No.11907764]

>>11907749
>But in modern day, there is no real goal. It feels like boeing is taking its time delaying on purpose because they don’t give a fuck about the timeline. They just see it as more money
That's exactly it. Cost plus contracting plus fiduciary duty to maximize returns means these companied could actually be sued for delivering too quickly. If I had shares in Boing! or Lockheeb I'd sue them for delivering SLS too quickly to make people realize how ridiculous the situation is.

[Anonymous No.11907767]

>>11907760
Cost plus is patreon for old space. Pay them fuckloads to do nothing.

[Anonymous No.11907768]

>>11907646
Oh shit, yeah I see that. Those barrel tips just reminded me of those 1x1 cylinder pieces.

[Anonymous No.11907769]

>>11907676
That's a steal compared to how much it took to design and make a Dragon 2.

>BuT tHe DrAgOn 2 IsNt MeAnT fOr BEO
Easily fixable for less than it what NASA projects the Orion to cost ($1B).

[Anonymous No.11907772]

SpaceX should just fling a crew dragon around the Moon, put a camera on it or something.

[Anonymous No.11907782]

Anyone know any good studies on how interplanetary trade would work? All of the material I can find either focuses on interstellar trade, or assumes that a universal post-scarcity society will develop the moment the asteroid belt is touched and the concept of trade would be meaningless.

pic unrelated

[Anonymous No.11907783]

>>11907772
How many times do we have to tell you old man

[Anonymous No.11907784]

>>11907769
I think you need to recheck your math if you think it cost more to develop the dragon 2 and the falcon 9 than this hunk of junk.

[Anonymous No.11907786]

>>11907784
I think I messed up my wording. I meant a steal as in a steal of tax dollars. My bad.

[Anonymous No.11907791]

>>11907786
"A steal" is usually used when somebody gets a good deal on something.

[Anonymous No.11907796]

>>11907791
Then Lockheed got a steal when they were awarded the Orion contract.

[Anonymous No.11907799]

>>11907783
Put some extra fucking shielding on one, strap it to a FH, launch it off.
Fuck it, send Shelby along for the ride.

[Anonymous No.11907802]

>>11907782
idk but with a heavy lift blue origin (or even just buying starships at a ludicrous price) Bezos could expand Amazon to other planets for trading with colonists and shipping stuff to and fro. It could rival the Dutch East-Indian Company.
I would love to know the studies too. We probably won’t see large scale trade for a long time, but maybe when we’re older we could all start a trading company and make it public. We’d make a shitload of money if we could buy a fleet of starships and do routine trade missions to every colony

[Anonymous No.11907815]

>>11907772
This, you could easily mock up some human dummies with gopros for heads. Film the whole trip from start to end and stream it live back to Earth.

[Anonymous No.11907822]

>>11907799
>Fuck it, send Shelby along for the ride.
I'm not convinced of this reusable Senator meme. What's next, delivering food and water depots to orbit?

[Anonymous No.11907823]

>>11907815
>Starman and his Starfamily on a Lunar vacation
I'd watch it.

[Anonymous No.11907824]

>>11907802
Bezos is too much of a cvck.
Whoever actually leads us to the stars will have to contend with attacks and articles talking about colonization (and connecting it to historic colonization), privilege, etc.

Bezos isn't willing to do that. You need someone unflappable.

[Anonymous No.11907825]

>>11907799
Look at the upcoming F9 Starlink launch. It keeps getting delayed because Elon is really paranoid about his brand and making sure each launch is 100% successful. A mission to the Moon that blows up would leave a sour taste in everyone’s mouth, so Elon would take a long time preparing it and we would see a launch in like 2021-2022 at LEAST. And why do this when you can demo a Starship landing on the Moon in the same amount of time. Starship is way cooler, and if it blows up you can just shrug it off as a “test”. If Falcon Heavy or Dragon blows up, suddenly everyone is scared because this rocket is already supposed to be safe

[Anonymous No.11907828]

>>11907822
I'm not convinced of this reusable thread meme. Why don't we just make a new thread each time?

[Anonymous No.11907833]

>>11907828
I just don't understand this reusable meme meme. Why just make a new meme instead of reposting an old one?

[Anonymous No.11907836]

>>11907100
New New Jersey

[Anonymous No.11907837]

>>11907824
I’ll do it but I would need start up money. Buying a Starship will be akin to buying a large sailboat to add to your arsenal of shipping boats. We could start by buying 5. We would have to pay for refueling at first but we would be making money by trading (and going public). Then we would expand to maybe buy our own tankers or finance a space depot to make our missions easier. Horizontally and vertically integrate. That’s what the VOC did

[Anonymous No.11907848]

>>11907837
You also need to present yourself as a friend of your nation. You exist to benefit the homeland.
And you must befriend politicians and the common man alike.

[Anonymous No.11907866]

solar lander when?

[Anonymous No.11907867]

https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-announces-new-james-webb-space-telescope-target-launch-date

Delayed to late October 2021.

[Anonymous No.11907872]

>>11907848
Of course. The VOC did things like build dams for the Netherlands because it kept dutch farms from flooding and helped both the country and the company. You could create a trading company for space and promise to “employ people from every US state”. You could send out personal habitats and food to colonists, especially if they work for you or if they are US colonies. You could work with the USSF and do private shipping to space force bases and build/bring logistics and weapons to them that can’t be shipped by small companies. Just speculation, but this is all possible considering we DO get colonies in the next 50 years and trading becomes important

[Anonymous No.11907873]

>>11907802
Early trade will most likely be Earth-centric as that's where most of the usable space industry is, but the next big player would probably be whoever can be the first to gather excess space resources to sell to other parts of the system. The big thing I'm wondering is how would trade be shaped. How would good's be transported? In direct routes for faster delivery? Or would they stop at various junctions for easier distribution? Would trade be split between bulk low priority resources sent on low energy transfer windows, and more urgent deliveries on fast transits with little overlap in terms of infrastructure used? Or would all trade use standardized ships? Stuff like that.

[Anonymous No.11907876]

>>11907866
During nighttime.

[Anonymous No.11907886]

>>11907872
Spot on. All this sounds good to me.
I mean, if I was in charge I'd make mine a non-profit. Whereas the VOC was the first publicly traded company.
But you and I think alike, anon.

Too bad this will never happen. You'd need connections before even starting.

[Anonymous No.11907891]

>>11907833
I don't understand this reusable language meme. Why don't we just make a new method of communication each time we communicate?

[Anonymous No.11907894]

>>11907867
they should just scrap it at this point and build a new telescope

[Anonymous No.11907896]

>>11907100
Side 1
Side 2
Side 3
Side 4
Side 5
Side 6
Side 7

[Anonymous No.11907899]

>>11907867
JWST? Delayed again? Oh my god, I'm so surprised. How could this happen?

[Anonymous No.11907909]

>>11907886
That’s why we would need to be public lmao. Or at least find an investor. $2 million per starship (if we’re lucky) but also $2 million for each tanker launch to fill her up (and it takes like 6 tanker launches). If I had a billion dollars we could start off small and then try to expand. The hardest part wouldn’t be acquiring ships, it would be having to pay for all the fuel launches. If you got that settled you would make so much more than your initial money

[Anonymous No.11907917]

>>11907894
The cost of completing it now is modest in comparison to its capabilities. Sunk cost is a fallacy but so is cancelling it because of the money that's already gone.

[Anonymous No.11907918]

>>11907909
2 million per LAUNCH, not per starship. Each starship will cost a lot more then 2 million to buy.

[Anonymous No.11907923]

>>11907872
you've just figured out SpaceX's plans

[Anonymous No.11907924]

>>11907917
i heard it wont even be that much better then hubble, and it wont even have visible spectrum images, which is gay.

[Anonymous No.11907930]

>>11907867
Just launch single 9m mirror telescope on Starship lol.

[Anonymous No.11907931]

>>11907918
Ah, okay. I was just writing a response about that.

It's times like these that I wish I jumped on bitcoin earlier.
But America is still the land of investment, create a business plan, hire engineers, make connections. It could be done.

[Anonymous No.11907933]

>>11907896
>tfw went to an AIAA conference to see a presentation on lunar base building
>they discussed some neat concepts but everything was very high level
>they didn't even have a design for a lunar lander beyond borrowing a drawing from another company
>decide to look them up
>all they have were pretty much just their slides with no way to even build a cubesat
I don't get why this is acceptable in professional aerospace. At least it's not the worst AIAA presentation I saw.

[Anonymous No.11907934]

>>11907930
ironically such a telescope will likely not be ready by 2021 even if we started yesterday.

[Anonymous No.11907943]

>>11907918
Damn you’re right. Fuck, you really do need money to make money. How tf do you go from broke to billionaire these days?? Computer programmer it seems like

[Anonymous No.11907952]

>>11907943
>ywn be the first selfmade billionaire in space by selling moon water
Why live?

[Anonymous No.11907968]

>>11907952
I would actually wake up happy everyday if I managed a trading company that flew in space. Humble are the poor, for they will never have a fleet of spaceships to make billions off of

[Anonymous No.11907970]

>>11907924
It will be hugely better than HST because it's much more sensitive at longer wavelengths and actually has a non-shit spectrograph. There has been 30 years of visible pictures from HST, we don't need more for the same. There is much more science in the near and mid ir.

[Anonymous No.11907975]

>>11907930
a) 9 meters wouldn't fit. b) NASA can't afford a mission like that until 2035.

[Anonymous No.11908028]

> "The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences" by Eugene Wigner
> it is possible to calculate/approximate a Hohmann transfer and its change in velocity for travel to Mars and Earth. Even if you fumble numbers and make mistakes, you still get an eerily close approximate

Why is spaceflight mathematics so macabrely beautiful? From Kepler's 16th century laws, you get the opportunity to know roughly how much you need to do to get to Mars.

[Anonymous No.11908051]

>>11908028
Kepler was autistic enough to chart everything and realize the beautiful patterns through the lens of geometry and relationships. Some time later Newton was rainman enough to mathematically explain these relationships.

[Anonymous No.11908057]

>>11907625
Have fun in your dead-end gravity well with no usable surface

[Anonymous No.11908074]

Chinese manned mission to Mars and Venus to start a second Sputnik scare when!?

[Anonymous No.11908086]

>>11908074
The Chinese are too smart to do that. They know that they have no chance of winning a second space race unless they quietly surpass the US.

[Anonymous No.11908096]

>>11907648
>1% speed of light
>circular mass driver around moon
>1g

[Anonymous No.11908104]

>>11908074
Their official timelines don't even put them on the Moon until the 2030s. If they did some really ambitious stuff with their planned LEO station or pulled off a near-Earth asteroid capture to test space mining technology, it would really light a fire under Congress' ass and get them to stop fucking around.

[Anonymous No.11908123]

>>11908096
Multiple trips around the loop, fag.

[Anonymous No.11908125]

>>11907100
>Gainz Station 13

[Anonymous No.11908136]

>>11908123
hahahahahahaha, idiot. The centrifugal acceleration would pulp any passengers aboard long before they got anywhere close to %c.

[Anonymous No.11908167]

I'd like to see both sides of the 3d printing structures on mars present more numbers and less memes.

The main printing concept NASA has showed interest in, MARSHA, has said their design can mitigate radiation to safe levels,and it explicitly cites this in reference to being built in one of the lower areas of mars so the atmosphere does more to block SP and CR-to be more specific,it looks like using an area with a thicker atmosphere can cut radiation burden of a minimally shielded person on mars by 30-40%. Assuming a location can be found that averages 11-12 rem per year, that works out to a daily radiation exposure of a little over 300 microsieverts-nothing to sneeze at. So the key thing is,how much shielding do we need to lower that to a safe level? Not zero,mind you,but to a level we have confidence is safe-a good guideline for this is the level we currently permit radiation workers to be exposed to in a year.which is 50 milisieverts. Right now,bare-naked on one of the lower surfaces of mars,we're soaking up somewhere north of double that per year,so we need to knock down our radiation burden by about 60-70 percent to get it down to the levels a bit lower than the max for radiation workers.

How much shielding does that require? I will try to find that out. But so far,the radiation situation looks manageable without needing anything too insane.

[Anonymous No.11908174]

>>11908123
That setup gives you a centripetal acceleration pretty much at the midpoint in magnitude between earth surface gravity and neutron star surface gravity

So uh good luck!

[Anonymous No.11908220]

>Ywn visit the Museum of Martian History in Elongrad with the actual rovers and pioneer tools
Why even live?

[Anonymous No.11908236]

>>11908220
>500 years from now Martian Lives matter destroys statues of Musk

[Anonymous No.11908274]

>>11907187
Surely this is just yet another candidate for instant obsolescence the moment SS/SH starts flying?

[Anonymous No.11908280]

>>11908236
>Implying Martians wouldn't be immune to the bullshit (((Terrans))) peddle

[Anonymous No.11908287]

>>11907100
New Hong Kong.

[Anonymous No.11908293]

>>11908220
To suffer
>>11908274
Idk I think we’re all over estimating the “monopoly” of Elon. Even if SS costs $2 mil and can deliver 150 tons to space, I would imagine the government would be veeeeeeery slow to switch over completely to Elon. The gooberment will probably hand out bonuses and incentives to NASA and USSF for launching on other providers like ULA because they’re retarded and funded by lobbyists

[Anonymous No.11908299]

>>11908074
starship will BTFO the chinks so much that they'll just abandon their space program (not really, they'll rush to make a starship copy)

[Anonymous No.11908304]

>>11908299
elon and co need to guard their secrets zealously. the chinese would probably pay someone a hundred million bucks for detailed schematics and material data on starship.they better have better security than fuckin twitter.

[Anonymous No.11908308]

>>11907625
where do you get your resource? from earth? LOL

[Anonymous No.11908309]

>>11908299
>villagers' face when China's new hypergolic Starship clone, the Ge Long, explodes right above them

[Anonymous No.11908311]

>>11908304
America needs a chinese exclusion act 2.0.

[Anonymous No.11908313]

>>11908293
Well sure, but at a certain point the contrast in price is going to become laughable. And you can bet universities will be clamouring to get their payloads up for cheap. SS will be like a monstrous X37.

[Anonymous No.11908341]

uh-oh.

[Anonymous No.11908351]

>the future of spaceflight is a grain silo with wings that's gonna be cleaned with pressure washers by mexicans
Pretty solid lmao

[Anonymous No.11908427]

>>11907836
Literally the worst suggestion imaginable.

[Anonymous No.11908444]

>>11907100
My 30-kilometer capital ship and orbital colony, the Sisyphus

[Anonymous No.11908461]

>>11908274
They're going to the ISS for resupply missions, so the military is probably getting them for cheap since they'll be in space anyway.

[Anonymous No.11908478]

>>11908351
I just want cheap Earth to LEO to be a solved problem so we can move on to the more exciting parts like interplanetary exploration and trade.

[Anonymous No.11908540]

>Remember Martians; Every work-credit you spend on something you don't need is another work-credit you spend for Terra!

[Anonymous No.11908543]

Are Mars cyclers a good technology?

It seems like with BFR launch costs you could build fucking huge cyclers with 1g gravity on board and a ton of passenger capacity.

[Anonymous No.11908557]

>>11908543
Mars cyclers are based on the assumption that boosting Mars capable habitat modules into Earth orbit is hard. With either mass produced Starships or nuclear rockets available they're worthless.

[Anonymous No.11908586]

>>11908557
Nuclear rockets are never gonna launch from Earth and it's more economical and efficient to use launchers to offload personnel onto a big cycler than try to do some cockeyed hybrid.

[Anonymous No.11908598]

what would a chinese version of starship look like

[Anonymous No.11908608]

>>11908598
Some combination of the following:
>rapidly self disassembled
>on fire
>spewing hypergolics everywhere
>in the middle of downtown Beijing

[Anonymous No.11908653]

>>11908598
Moderately shittier in almost every respect, except one metric where they exceed the original and they never shut up about it. Probably also missing a key capability that they refuse to ever acknowledge or just deny the necessity of.

[Anonymous No.11908677]

>>11908598
Probably cheaper but more dangerous.

[Anonymous No.11908691]

>>11907100
Israel 2

[Anonymous No.11908698]

starlink unboxing
https://old.reddit.com/r/Starlink/comments/hsls20/starlink_packaging/
https://www.reddit.com/gallery/hsnc0c
https://old.reddit.com/r/Starlink/comments/hsngyt/unboxing_of_starlink_package/
https://old.reddit.com/r/Starlink/comments/hsngyt/unboxing_of_starlink_package/

[Anonymous No.11908711]

>>11908698

[Anonymous No.11908712]

>JWST delayed 7 months after comprehensive systems test
The pandemic is brutal

[Anonymous No.11908716]

>giving Musk z-level
Brave

[Anonymous No.11908717]

>>11908711

[Anonymous No.11908718]

>>11908653
Lmao
>Probably also missing a key capability that they refuse to ever acknowledge or just deny the necessity of
This is very persistent of North Korea. Their rockets run on hypergolic acids at a high molarity (100% I think), but either through lack of technology or shits to give they don’t add inhibitors. Most of their rocket failures are due to their propellant being corrosive enough to literally destroy the rocket itself

[Anonymous No.11908733]

>>11908718
you can't spell North Korea without Ork.

[Anonymous No.11908739]

how do I get an /sfg/ gf /sfg/? Are women just not interested in space flight at all? I know that meme gets posted a lot about watching out for boys dreaming of space, but seriously of all my engineering coworkers, 1/4 are women and 0 of them have any remotely nerdy hobbies

[Anonymous No.11908745]

>>11908739
Just become gay, anon.

[Anonymous No.11908748]

>>11908745
I don't have the gene for it

[Anonymous No.11908749]

WHY THE FUCK CAN'T I FIND NEOWISE!?

[Anonymous No.11908750]

>>11908748
There isn't a gay gene, per se, it's epigentical; gene expression.

[Anonymous No.11908757]

>>11908749
because you're not looking in the right place at the right time

[Anonymous No.11908759]

>>11908739
They're apparently really fucking rare. The only one I know is a geologist working with the Curiosity rover.

[Anonymous No.11908770]

What's your favorite exoplanetary system and why? Mine's Kepler-62 because I like ocean planets and this system has two.

[Anonymous No.11908794]

>>11908749

https://www.timeanddate.com/astronomy/night/

Haven't seen it yet myself.

[Anonymous No.11908796]

>>11908739
Nerd hobbies betray a masculine mind. I have never met one female nerd that wasn't a basket case, even compared to the average woman.

[Anonymous No.11908799]

>>11908757
>>11908794
I'm using Stellarium and it says it should be where I'm looking.

[Anonymous No.11908806]

>>11908770
TRAPPIST-1 without a doubt.
I saw somewhere that if you were on one of the planets, under the right conditions, the nearest neighboring planet would be as big or bigger by angular size than the moon is in our sky. There's just something so neat about a whole system that could fit inside Mercury's orbit while having so many potentially habitable planets.

[Anonymous No.11908809]

>>11908799
Just look northwest a couple hours after sunset. It will be slightly above the horizon. Will stand out assuming you don't live in a totally light polluted hellhole or have binoculars/telescope

[Anonymous No.11908810]

>>11908304
Too late bro, chinkoids will already have raptor schematics and be getting constant drip feeds of development information by any chinks that spacex employs.

[Anonymous No.11908819]

>>11908809
I live in the suburbs. So there's light pollution and trees.
I do have an entry level telescope, but there's a giant old oak blocking my northwest view. That explains that.

[Anonymous No.11908833]

>>11907100
Fatphobia

[Anonymous No.11908834]

>>11907161
>>11907167
ah, /sfg/ returning to the roots

[Anonymous No.11908851]

>>11908770
Studying exoplanets is like window shopping for supercars but you're homeless and quadriplegic and also blind. I don't understand the appeal.

[Anonymous No.11908855]

>>11907292
>What the fuck, was cost-plus the worst decision NASA has ever made?
Unironically, yes. Even including the Apollo era. Maybe it was a necessary evil at the time, and it did manage to accomplish most of the planned Moon landings, but afterwards we were left with a family of launch vehicles too expensive to keep using. When NASA decided to scrap the Saturn rockets and Apollo capsule to develop a reusable launch system they had the right spirit, but they continued to use cost-plus and ruined everything.

[Anonymous No.11908860]

>>11907418
>a good view
meh
>free sunlight
ow oof my skin cells

[Anonymous No.11908861]

>>11907100
jelloware

[Anonymous No.11908867]

>>11908851
Unlike a cripple, human technology can actually reach the requirements needed to travel there. Though honestly, the next step would rather be putting human minds in robotic bodies so the delicate requirements of life are no longer a crutch.

[Anonymous No.11908878]

>>11908698
Posts are deleted, I think Jessie Anderson violated her NDA or they gave her approval but found her shitty video bad marketing for Starlink. Hopefully she gets fired, I don't think she is a good host on the webcasts and she is an attention whoring thot.

[Anonymous No.11908882]

>>11908878
Is she the black bitch that hosts them?

[Anonymous No.11908892]

>>11908341
Surely you must be trolling, Mr. Spaceman

[Anonymous No.11908894]

>>11908851
Just curious about what an /sfg/uy considers an interesting star system.

[Anonymous No.11908912]

>>11907866
We need ultra low density tungsten-foam insulation, super emissive radiator coatings, and a torch drive propulsion system capable of slowing down to zero relative local velocity and hovering at the Sun's "surface" against ~28 Gs

[Anonymous No.11908916]

>>11908882
No, she is the other woman and a lead manufacturing engineer at SpaceX. She seems absolutely retarded so I have no idea how she is in that position. My guess is she got the job because she has a vagina but I don't want to constantly cry diversity hire.

[Anonymous No.11908930]

>>11907952
Nobody will want Moon water. Starship-launched propellants will be much cheaper for everything in Earth orbit, and probably competitive even on the Moon itself. Elsewhere in the solar system you need native propellant production no matter what, so your Moon water isn't selling there either.
If you want to become a billionaire on the Moon, start a solar powered iron foundry and sell rolls of plate steel along with prefabricated vessels to construction sites across the Moon.
On that note, if you want to become a trillionaire in the asteroid belt, operate a large scale phosphorous mining company on Ceres and sell to the orbital colonies in the belt. At first you'll be marginal at best, but as things accelerate demand will only ever go up.

[Anonymous No.11908947]

>>11908167
>How much shielding does that require? I will try to find that out.
Good luck, I'm studying radiation protection and when dealing with sources of radiation more complex than gamma or beta (such as neutrons or accelerator beams) the industry standard is to go way overkill on the shielding because it's extremely hard to predict what's going to be coming at you. Cosmic rays are especially shitty to deal with because of how much secondary radiation they produce, and the kinds of secondary radiation, including highly ionized heavy atomic nuclei and neutrons, both of which can be produced pretty much anywhere along the attenuation travel line.

[Anonymous No.11908953]

>>11908930
>operate a large scale phosphorous mining company on Ceres
Since when did Ceres have alot of phosphorus?

[Anonymous No.11908957]

>>11908586
>it's more economical and efficient to use launchers to offload personnel onto a big cycler than try to do some cockeyed hybrid.
Not if your launch vehicle is already so big that it easily acts as a habitat for dozens of people, and is also a reusable vehicle.

[Anonymous No.11908961]

>>11908598
It would shit puffs of red-brown fumes out everywhere, but don't worry that's normal

[Anonymous No.11908962]

>>11908957
>dozens
You're still thinking small

[Anonymous No.11908963]

>>11908916
must be some premature marketing thing or something. no way she broke NDA showing off the consumer package as 1. I doubt they've shipped them out yet, they only just started beta signups, and even if she got it immediately cus employee... 2. she's not even in the test region range, she's in California where iirc coverage still has many holes so there'd be no reason to give her one

[Anonymous No.11908969]

>Moon is mostly silicate
>Mars is mostly iron
>Europa is mostly water
>Titan is mostly methane
Why is the Earth such a differentiated body compared to everywhere else?

[Anonymous No.11908973]

>>11908969
>Titan is mostly methane
I thought it was mostly ice like Europa?

[Anonymous No.11908975]

>>11908749
I saw it the other night. Go out when it's 9:30pm at the earliest, go somewhere fucking dark with a low horizon (ie a field in the country), and look north west. Don't look at your phone or anything, just let your eyes adjust and maybe try scanning little patches back and forth. Both times I've gone the comet was about 4 or 5 fingers at arms length above the horizon, and faint but not so faint as to be tricky to see. Once you find it once you'll be able to find it super easily every time.

[Anonymous No.11908981]

>>11908969
because earth sleeps around. just look at all the bacteria growing on it

[Anonymous No.11908997]

>>11908969
> This is the power of the BiosPhere.

[Anonymous No.11909006]

>>11908953
It's not that Ceres is rich in phosphorous, it's that Ceres alone makes up about 1/3rd of the mass of the asteroid belt and thus will have the most phosphorous of any single object. Since phosphorous doesn't seem to get concentrated much by anything less complex than Earth or maybe Mars geology, it's likely that anywhere in the belt you look you're at most gonna find it in low concentrations. If you're on Ceres you've simply got the biggest stockpile of average rocks to chew through, and maybe if you're lucky a few deposits of the stuff concentrated by underground processes.

[Anonymous No.11909018]

>>11908341
Probably the box is empty after they took the "flight hardware" out of it.

[Anonymous No.11909032]

>>11908969
False. Titan's crust is mostly water ice. Its atmosphere is mostly nitrogen. Most of titan's mass is silicates like earth, and it probably has large deposits of necessary minerals down underneath the subsurface water ocean.

[Anonymous No.11909045]

>>11908962
A fleet of 1000 Starships with 50 people each would require a cycler with a habitable volume of a million cubic meters in order to afford each person 40 cubic meters (including the ship they launched in) as opposed to just the 20/person that Starship has. This highlights the problem with a cycler; it's a huge time and launch investment for no real gain. Want to double the personal space of every traveler? Send half as many per Starship, or connect each manned Starship to an unmanned but habitable one. Nevermind the fact that you can only use a cycler once every two or three launch windows, the mere existence of Starship renders it a useless idea, just like the orbital shipyard for assembling interplanetary vehicles. If you can launch your interplanetary monster rocket from Earth, you don't need to build it in space. If you can afford to launch your large habitat to Mars, then don't bother with a cycler.

Just a reminder, the cycler Aldrin imagined would have had LESS volume than a single Starships' habitat section, and existed in concept to serve an Apollo-style capsule that would have needed to have been launched from Earth on an expendable rocket to catch up to it as it went by on its elliptical solar orbit. It existed in concept to solve the problem of (the biggest thing we can launch to Mars is too small to live in for the entire trip". Starship solves the problem instead by making it so that the spacecraft IS big enough to live in during the trip. Therefore no cycler needed.

[Anonymous No.11909052]

>>11908969
>>Moon is mostly silicate
>>Mars is mostly silicate
------------- distance from the Sun at which exposed water ice sublimates away -----------------
>>Europa is mostly water
>>Titan is mostly water
Fixed that for you.

[Anonymous No.11909056]

This is the Starlink beta test area. If you don't live within the chad zone, get rekt nerd.

https://earth.google.com/web/data=MicKJQojCiExU0lrZ3RsSkdGQjZ2U2hqTlctRklBNXRhd1hybEU5UWg
>>11908963
>must be some premature marketing thing
I don't understand why they would ever try to market it like this, Jessie was well aware that she was giving the first look at the Starlink unboxing and still filmed a video with zero production quality. I don't expect a Apple or Tesla level unveiling around it, but it's retarded to introduce products this way.

[Anonymous No.11909074]

>>11909052
Titan is mostly silicate still. So is Europa. The silicates on titan and europa are just covered by a layer of water.

[Anonymous No.11909083]

>>11908930
Is there a fuck ton of iron on the Moon? This unironically sounds like such a good plan... how confident are you it would work if we had the start up money?

[Anonymous No.11909095]

>>11909083
Iron, aluminum, titanium, plenty of good stuff. Start up money would be like 2-3 billion dollars even with dirt-cheap Starship, but it would work.

[Anonymous No.11909096]

>>11909074
True, but for the sake of argument, 99% of objects in the solar system are mostly oxygen by mol, with the exceptions being the gas giants, the Sun, and any of the very metal rich asteroids.

[Anonymous No.11909102]

>>11909083
"The average composition of the lunar surface by weight is roughly 43 percent oxygen, 20 percent silicon, 19 percent magnesium, 10 percent iron, 3 percent calcium, 3 percent aluminum, 0.42 percent chromium, 0.18 percent titanium and 0.12 percent manganese."

[Anonymous No.11909107]

>>11909095
>>11909102
We were born in a time where we could create our own space empire, but we just don’t have the funds. Feels bad

[Anonymous No.11909112]

>>11907609
>A Ceres of Tubes
>Three Wolf Moonbase
>The Fresh Principality of No Air

You got potential, kid.

[Anonymous No.11909116]

>>11909083
I'm 100% confident that of all the different ventures that try to make it on the Moon, there will be at least one or two that actually succeed, and they'll make many billions. As for confidence in any one effort happening to be one of the few that don't go bankrupt, pretty much zero percent. Too many variables.

[Anonymous No.11909126]

>>11909116
I think it’s a matter of outsmarting the first few real contenders and staying ahead of the curve, once you drive them off you get to live in bliss for the next few decades while you flourish and buy out all the small pussy commercial companies.

I feel like if you succeed, the era of horizontal and vertical integration must make you feel so good. Imagine how Carnegie felt in the 19th century when he was expanding (ironically a Steel company hahah)

[Anonymous No.11909128]

>>11908930
>operate a large scale phosphorous mining company on Ceres
Why phosphorous? I can't see the space fertilizer and steel additive industry becoming that large.

[Anonymous No.11909144]

>>11909128
>Why phosphorous?
Because its necessary to grow food. If your colony don't have a reliable supply of phosphorus then it can't grow simply because it can't grow more food to feed it's population. Even with a steady zero-growth colony, phosphorus imports are needed to account for waste. Phosphorus will be like the salt of space.

[Anonymous No.11909160]

>>11909128
Phosphorous is the rarest of the elements 100% vital to all life on Earth, meaning it will become the limiting factor in terms of total population (and moreover, in total biomass overall).
If you've got colonies in space, you're expanding into an interplanetary civilization. This civilization physically cannot be supported by Earth, we WILL need to have in-situ industries including agriculture located off-Earth. Right now we're limited by technology, not by material resources. However, after the first Moon and Mars colonization efforts have been going on for a while, we will have made steady and significant progress on the technological front, making resources more of a limiting factor.
Taking the process just as far as colonizing the asteroid belt with rotating habitats suddenly explodes the upper limits to the extreme; there's enough material in the asteroid belt alone to produce several million times the Earth's habitable surface area in the form of the interiors of rotating habitats, meaning there'd be enough room to house at least several million times Earth's current population (at the average GLOBAL population density, I'll add. That's about 16 people per square kilometer, not exactly packed like sardines). However, despite getting all that real estate before even considering using planets and moons for more materials, we'd struggle to ever fill it up because there simply won't be enough phosphorous to make the DNA of all those people. THAT'S why phosphorous will one day be the most valuable substance in the solar system. It may in fact get so valuable eventually that you could make money producing it by bombarding silicon in particle accelerators.

[Anonymous No.11909204]

>>11907161
how is it supposed to hop with no legs?

[Anonymous No.11909210]

i can't wait to see the first pictures of europa's surface from the surface when we get the europa lander

[Anonymous No.11909229]

>>11908717
Imagine using one of these as a coffee table.

[Anonymous No.11909234]

>>11909204
Her legs are retracted under the skirt and they'll come out before landing.

[Anonymous No.11909236]

>took raft out on river
>had campfire on shore with beer
>while rowing back to launch, see comet Neowise for first time
>shooting star adjacent while staring at it in awe

[Anonymous No.11909294]

>>11909144
>>11909160
The real limiting factor in terms of total population and the need for phosphorous is how much people actually want to reproduce and if colonists are anything like people on Earth, the population won't be high enough to sustain a trillion dollar phosphorus mining industry. It's also likely that food off world will be grown hydroponically which means a closed loop system for fertilizer with very little waste, further reducing demand for phosphorous. Phosphorous is undoubtedly necessary and they colonists should come up with their own production of it, I just doubt the size of the industry will be that great.

[Anonymous No.11909298]

>>11909294
It could be great if you master something like steel first and build a trading empire. Generating enough money to buy cargo ships is one thing, but getting to the point of also being able to BUILD your own ships makes you king. (this will likely take way too long though.) If you could do this you would generate a shitload of capital and have ships at your disposal. You could create a mining colony all on your own to get whatever you need and sell it/use it

How hard would it be to build something like starship completely on another planet, assuming steel is readily available as well as huge machining equipment

[Anonymous No.11909301]

>>11909234
but if it has legs why does it need an engine to hop

[Anonymous No.11909312]

>>11909298
>clear a flat two hectares and get Moon Mexicans with welders on the job

[Anonymous No.11909324]

>>11909301
SpaceX here, we seem to have made a mistake and produced a rocket engine instead of a giant mechanical set of legs that would leap Starship into space. Is there anyway we can get your technical advice in solving the issue? Your salary will be very competitive and we offer free Froyo to our employees.

[Anonymous No.11909330]

>>11909324
as long as we can rename it 'Spacefrog' then you can count on my expertise

[Anonymous No.11909338]

>>11909301
It has the wrong kind of legs. It needs the genetically modified giant bug leg bundles so that the earth runs away from the starship in fear.

[Anonymous No.11909349]

Europe has betrayed us.

[Anonymous No.11909350]

>>11909298
Electronics manufacturing is monstrously complicated. Full synthesis from raw ores to computers being done off world is centuries away unless we can proont them... but a proonter capable of nanometer scale layouts and at least 1% as fast as traditional lithography is three steps away from a Star Trek replicator.

[Anonymous No.11909355]

>>11909349
The EU sucking off China is absolutely nothing new geopolitically. The only difference is they're doing it in spaceflight now. This will be what kills Gateway - if ESA and Roscosmos decide to go all in on China, Gateway would only be with NASA, Canada, JAXA, and private customers. At that point we can just call it Moonbase Freedom and decorate the thing with eagles.

[Anonymous No.11909373]

The use of Starlink may be limited in cities because of the amount of bandwidth any one passing satellite can handle, but will this always be the case? What is the limiting factor here, the number of phases antenna arrays they can fit onto a satellite?

[Anonymous No.11909385]

>>11909355
>moonbase freedom
based, fuck the iss

[Anonymous No.11909406]

Saw now the news.
>JWST fuck my launch up

Will this meme ever be topped /sfg/?

[Anonymous No.11909410]

>>11909406
Nauka, Oryol.

[Anonymous No.11909413]

>>11909373
wasn't it supposed to be more for rural areas?
something about cities having enough internet infrastructure that starlink wouldn't even be a competition for existing ISPs

[Anonymous No.11909423]

>>11909406
wasn't the 2021 launch always the plan after the 2019 delay?

[Anonymous No.11909427]

>>11909373
Each satellite covers 400km^2 at a time and has 80Gbps throughput, or 200Mbps per km^2 without oversubscription. Even at suburban population densities that's pretty bad. It does, however, mean that /sfg/ building Zephram Cochrane Flight Center in rural Montana would be just fine.

[Anonymous No.11909450]

>>11909427
>200Mbps per km^2 without oversubscription
Wow, that's much worse than I expected. I wonder if they're considering launching larger satellites that can handle a higher throughput. Of course they could always just send more satellites up but I think that is less ideal unless they can darken their satellites enough that idiots stop crying bloody murder.
>>11909413
It's for rural areas only because of the limitations of the technology. Without that, SpaceX could easily be competitive in at least some cities, particularly those in countries plagued by high internet costs.

[Anonymous No.11909455]

>>11909450
The goal is to have heavy overlap eventually, thus allowing load balancing between satellites, but right now that doesn't exist.

[Anonymous No.11909459]

one of the big limiters is that you only have so many frequencies, and you can only focus the beam down so tightly

[Anonymous No.11909462]

HOOOOOOOOOOOOP
https://fcc.report/ELS/Space-Exploration-Technologies-Corp-SpaceX/1041-EX-ST-2020

[Anonymous No.11909471]

>>11909462
This piece of shit better not blow up again:

[Anonymous No.11909473]

>>11909462
Requested Period of Operation
Operation Start Date: 08/18/2020
Operation End Date: 02/18/2021

I hate it.

[Anonymous No.11909476]

>>11909473
Yes i hate american dates too.

[Anonymous No.11909477]

>middle of august 2020 to middle of february 2021
WHY IS IT SO FAR AWAY

[Anonymous No.11909481]

>>11909477
>>11909473
says up to 20 kilometers, so this is probably not for 150 meter hop but for the 3 and 20 klick hops

[Anonymous No.11909483]

>>11909481
I'm trying to figure out if it's worth doing a Karman line (100km+) hop before going for orbit
I don't think it is

[Anonymous No.11909488]

I wonder what the SN10 nosecone will look like, assuming SN10 is a full starship (not full stack)

[Anonymous No.11909494]

>>11909488
When’s it supposed to do something noteworthy next. The only thing they’ve officially live-streamed was starhopper. Will the next “official” thing be the 150m hop?

[Anonymous No.11909495]

>>11909494
the next official thing will probably be the next hop (I think it'll be 150m)

[Anonymous No.11909498]

>>11909494
NSF says that they have sources inside SpaceX that suggest spacex will likely only do one static fire test with SN5 over the weekend, leading to a hop sometime next week. I really feel like this is gonna be the one.

[Anonymous No.11909501]

>>11909498
they're trashing both SN5 and SN6 after SN5 hops due to the success they had with the SN7 test tank

[Anonymous No.11909503]

>>11909495
Lord knows when that will happen. Is the 150m hop supposed to be a “full” Starship (second stage at least) with all aerodynamic fins and nose cone?

[Anonymous No.11909505]

>>11909503
no, 150m is just the propulsion section of Starship without a nosecone (plus a big heavy mass simulator)
the engine is never turned off

[Anonymous No.11909507]

>>11909501
i personally think they will test SN6 to destruction just to see what happens but who knows

[Anonymous No.11909509]

>>11909505
Sweet, what’s the planned schedule thus far? 150m hop then straight to orbital seems a bit crazy but I would love to witness it

[Anonymous No.11909510]

NASA learned its lesson from Hubble. No way they'll send something to space before it's ready.

[Anonymous No.11909512]

>>11909509
150 meter hop sometime next week (its been delayed several times but sources suggest this will finally be it), 3 klick hop sometime in mid august, 20 klick hop probably sometime in september, maybe even late august, then after that unknown

[Anonymous No.11909514]

>>11909509
150m hop, trash both prototypes currently at Boca Chica, build and test another test tank and then build SN8 with nosecone and aerosurfaces and hop it to 20km in september or so
after that it's going for orbit in December maybe, getting Super Heavy built and tested will take a while

[Anonymous No.11909515]

>>11909514
i think they're doing a 3 klick hop

[Anonymous No.11909519]

>>11909515
I hadn't heard about that but I will believe it
3km seems like an awkward middle ground where it's too high to do engine on the whole time and too low to get a proper skydive in, I'm not sure what they'd gain from that

[Anonymous No.11909520]

>>11909514
>>11909515
Regardless, shouldn’t the first stage just be a copy of the upper second stage? I mean it has more engines but once they figure out a material, a weld process, etc. a first stage is just a clone

[Anonymous No.11909523]

>>11909520
the aero and control is Falcon 9, the construction is Starship, yeah

[Anonymous No.11909524]

>>11909520
Yeah I was thinking this too. Plus they can test the first and second stages at the same time. Once they decide to go orbital they can test the first stage along the way. If it crashes then they still have an orbital SS to land and test

[Anonymous No.11909561]

Lmao why do the retarded boomers who refused to sell care about the noise? They have a front row seat to the coolest shit ever

[Anonymous No.11909565]

>>11908947
It sounds like water and hydrogen rich plastics are the way to go if you want to build on the surface then.

[Anonymous No.11909578]

>>11909514
>150m hop
>prototypes get trashed
>sn8,9 and 10 explode during testing
>another 150m hop with sn11
>we hope we will reach space somewhere in december
>orbital flight maybe in den first half of next year
>sn12 and 13 explode
>another test tank is built

[Anonymous No.11909582]

>>11907100
ASS-town
(by 4ASS)

[Anonymous No.11909610]

>>11909561
novelties are only neat for so long

[Anonymous No.11909620]

>>11908749
It's pretty fucking easy to find.
>go out at night
>look into a generaly northern direction
>see that big thing (pic related shot on a cheap ass camera with a 61 year old russian lens)
Not photoshopped, just compressed to upload here.

[Anonymous No.11909633]

>august 150m hop
>prototype crashes
>november, biden wins
>sn8,9 explode during pressure test
>2021
>sn10 150m hop successful
>breaks apart during 20km hop mid 2021
>sn11
>20km hop successful
>biden ends artames program for being "over budget and behind schedule"
>diverts all funds to Starliner and SLS, ends spaceX involvement in space
>spaceX is bared by FAA from doing any more flights or hops
>Starship research ends, spaceX bought by chinese holding company

[Anonymous No.11909634]

>>11908806
is the whole system full of trapps?

[Anonymous No.11909639]

[Anonymous No.11909642]

>>11909349
ESA supports dropping stages on villages?

[Anonymous No.11909646]

>>11909642
the term we're using is "natives"

[Anonymous No.11909652]

>>11909639
>Now, THIS is a flammenwerfer

[Anonymous No.11909659]

>>11909355
>>11909385
inb4 Trump invokes the Monroe Doctrine and flattens French Guiana, depriving ESA of a launch site

[Anonymous No.11909669]

depot

[Anonymous No.11909675]

>>11909427
>>11909450
FUD, more satellites mean more bandwidth per area.

[Anonymous No.11909693]

>>11909610
Then maybe they should shut the fuck up, let Spacex carry on with manifest destiny and enjoy the 10x overvalued payment for their bumfuck nowhere hovel.

[Anonymous No.11909700]

>>11909659
ESA could still build a launch platform on the canary islands.

[Anonymous No.11909707]

>>11907184
Revised fishgun,
bigger cartridge and longer barrel for more V0 as well as higher magnification
built in range finder and ballistic simulator and bipod mandatory for higher range
Tolerances adjusted for mars dust, rather than mud
Mars tan for camouflage
revised poly for broader temprange
stock compatible with full-face helmets and folds for rover friendly handling.

[Anonymous No.11909721]

>>11909707
Why would you need a bigger cartridge when there is almost zero air resistance and substantially less gravity to affect your drop? Surely it would be a smaller cartridge if anything.

[Anonymous No.11909745]

>>11909707
I'd go with a modified smoothbore HK G-11 for martian amd space applications.
Modifications include:
>auxilary sublimation cooling system for rapidfire applications
>high magnification scope/rangefinder/ballistics computer combo
>red-dot sight
>modified trigger, selector and handle for enviroment suit compatibility
>MoS2 wax coated ammunition
>sealed CroMoly sheetmetal body with overpressure valves for slight overressure inside to keep regolith out and stop it fron cold welding

[Anonymous No.11909770]

>>11907867
This fucks with Ariane too. And the NG payload bus won't even work when in orbit, should it ever launch

[Anonymous No.11909782]

>>11909721
bulletspeed.
You said it, .38 grav and like 99% less air resistance means that we could max out our effective weapon range straight up to the horizon. And that in a desert like environment mind you.

If we aren't talking about drones with the required precision for that, we can at least give the soldiers the advantage of speed where you don't have to lead on moving targets which I always found to be difficult. And you know it's not only guys running left to right, but rather people popping up behind rocks and if that's 4000+ meters away, you will have delays where they can come up, shoot and then get back down. going faster than sound is a given, everything past that is deciding over who fucks up who.
>>11909745
I will love seeing you fieldstripping this bad boi with your gloves on when it's clogged^^
I mean you can make it heavier there with cooling (adding complexity mind you) I guess, but I did the idea of super high mobility which is code for being a lazy fuck.

[Anonymous No.11909794]

>>11909782
>fieldstripping this bad boi with your gloves on
That's the trick:
You don't.
You won't do that with any weapon with gloves on.
That's why it is in a sealed, pressurized body with MoS2 wax/grease lubrication, so it is sure to not seize due to good lubrication and keeping regolith out.
You will however clean it between operations by removing the action from the body and cleaning off the excess lubricant.

Keeping regolith out is rather important as it REALY fucks up all kinds of sliding surfaces.

[Anonymous No.11909807]

>>11909794
Not to be rude, but why do you think they don't do that with real weapons here on earth aleady?
>You will however clean it between operations by removing the action from the body and cleaning off the excess lubricant.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutiny#:~:text=Mutiny%20is%20a%20criminal%20conspiracy%20among%20a%20group,a%20lawful%20authority%20to%20which%20they%20are%20subject.

[Anonymous No.11909814]

>>11909355
Is there anything stopping euros from sharing Gateway technology and know-how with China?

[Anonymous No.11909815]

>>11909782
>people popping up behind rocks
Use anti-material rifles and aim for the material rocks. I have it on good authority that doing so with full metal jacket rounds distributes the energy of impact with considerable force... And also the rock explodes.

[Anonymous No.11909822]

>>11909807
I pull the lever to my left, I love All-Star way to much.

[Anonymous No.11909827]

>>11909815
I... uh can't really argue with that logic.

[Anonymous No.11909833]

>>11909807
Regolith is significantly more aggressive than even sand and cold welding is a non-issue on earth, same goes for electrostatic attraction of regolith.
In addition to that quite some weapons used right now date back to WW2 in one way or another.
Best examples are the Browning M2 and the german MG-3 aka MG-42.
Ballistics also work a little different in space as the bullets velocity isn't changing much due to the lack of aerodynamic drag.
Recoil management is also important as the lower gravity makes it harder to controll recoil.

So you want something to prevent cold welding, something to keep regolith out, a lightweight projectile and a high muzzle velocity.

In my case the pressurized body and MoS2 grease coated ammunition take care of the cold welding and regolith.
The smoothbore low caliber archives high velocity at low recoil.
Tumbling of the projectile during flight isn't an issue here as there isn't an athmosphere that makes it change trajectory based on its angle.

[Anonymous No.11909841]

>>11909128
Because it's an essential component of DNA. You can't have Earth life without DNA, and you can't have DNA without phosphorous.
>>11909301
Because it's a BRAAAP-pit.
>>11909373
also sky angle is important, it's a phased array and doesn't need to turn, but it still gets blocked when you have a bunch of tall buildings off to the side, unless you put it on the roof of course
and then there's customer density, you have to share your part of the view angle from the satellite with more people, even after there is a higher density of satellites, and your view angle from the ground is even more important
>>11909476
yes, please use ISO dates, not yuropoor backwards dates
>>11909620
>generaly northern direction
fucking 60yo trees are all over my neighborhood
>>11909833
It's lunar regolith that's so bad, Mars actually has wind to grind down the dust not to have microscopic sharp edges everywhere. It's still dust though.

[Anonymous No.11909846]

>>11909841
>It's lunar regolith that's so bad
I specified it as a general space rifle for a reason.
Moon may or may not be a likely place to use it.
It is generaly preferable for a weapon to be useable in most enviroments, you never know where you may need it.
Cold welding is an issue on Mars and in orbit as well as the lack of an oxygen athmosphere makes it likely to happen.

[Anonymous No.11909847]

>>11909833
I made my point, we'll see who's got the better idea on mars^^

[Anonymous No.11909862]

>>11909841
I expect Starlink to generaly work better in remote areas than densely populated ones as the customer density will be antiproportional to the connection speed.
5G will complement Starlink pretty well as it generaly works better in densely populated areas.

[Anonymous No.11909896]

>>11909520
Plumbing to the engines is the hard part. My guess is they'll use 2 small surge tanks above the engines and connect each engine individually to those tanks. Gonna be one hell of a thrust plate

[Anonymous No.11909929]

>>11909349
Is that chinese Mars lander?

[Anonymous No.11909934]

>>11909814
What Gateway tech is there even beyond some PowerPoints?

[Anonymous No.11909936]

>>11909929
No idea. But I pretty sure there was some european equipment on chinese Moon lander.
ESA don't have chinese exclusion policy.

[Anonymous No.11909940]

>>11909814
China about to launch modular space station. Only thing stoping them from building Gateway equivalent is lack of heavy lift launch vehicle.

[Anonymous No.11909953]

>>11908136
For a circular mass driver, to get a 1g centrifugal acceleration with a speed of 0.01c, you'll need a mass driver with a radius of ~0.01ly. Easy.

[Anonymous No.11910017]

petition for starship hop to launch with a 1/38th scale SLS model for mass simulator

[Anonymous No.11910037]

>>11910017
>implying that SLS is real

[Anonymous No.11910078]

Wet dress rehearsal today!!!

[Anonymous No.11910103]

>>11908745
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2RdSS4o88A

[Anonymous No.11910107]

>>11909634
The gay kind? No.
The literal kind? Yeah probably.

[Anonymous No.11910140]

Reminder, Starlink beta will begin really soon. Those in Washington state and in rural will get to enjoy Starlink for good 80-95% of the day as of right now. This is subject to change as more of their sats gets into orbit and patches the final spots.

[Anonymous No.11910153]

>>11910107
>tfw whenever I try to grow Drosera or Dionaea they always die
At least my pitcher plants survive.

[Anonymous No.11910186]

>>11907100
Tax havens
Money Laundry

[Anonymous No.11910217]

>>11909929
Yeah it launches on the 23rd.

[Anonymous No.11910223]

>>11909349
I wonder how many rocket secrets ESA gave to the Chinese.

[Anonymous No.11910229]

>>11909929
>>11910217
Looks like someone slapped a knockoff Opportunity on top a basic lander like Yutu used.
Is it just all propulsive landing? Seems costly on Mars, no airbags/skycrane/chutes?

[Anonymous No.11910240]

Aug 2nd: Crew Dragon return to earth.

[Anonymous No.11910290]

>>11907516
The moon is a better stepping stone to anywhere

[Anonymous No.11910293]

>>11910290
The moon does not have copious amounts of carbon readily identified and ripe for the picking for full ISRU even though KAGUYA identified a fuckload more carbon emanating from it than previously believed and far more than can be accounted for from solar winds and micrometeorites.
Sorry, but Mars is a better place unless you intend to lug around huge amounts of fuel everywhere you go.

[Anonymous No.11910305]

AAAAHHHHH why the fuck are miami evenings so cloudy!!!!! LET ME SEE THE FUCKING COMET

[Anonymous No.11910313]

>listening to Heinlein's The Rolling Stones audiobook
>"full cast"
>neat hearing different VAs for different roles
>mfw musical stings straight out of fucking loony tunes for scene/chapter transitions
Kind of distracting at first but whatever. Any recommendations for good sci-fi audiobooks? Listened to Moon is a Harsh Mistress before this and Rendezvous with Rama series before that.

[Anonymous No.11910318]

>that model
lads...

https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/1284089898195136512

[Anonymous No.11910321]

>>11910293
Mars don't have any resources ripe for picking. That's a meme perpetuated by delusional Mars-fag who think IRSU is an universal 3D recycler/printer hidden in a box closed with red tape.
Even if you had fictional ocean of pure water under the surface of Mars the Moon would still be a better stepping stone simply because it's closer with lower gravity, building self-sustaining infrastructure there first is basic common sense if you want to colonize anywhere else and protect Earth at the same time.

[Anonymous No.11910324]

>>11910321
>Planning to lug fuel all over the fucking solar system
Never gonna make it. The moon is a fine first step, but it should have been started mid 70s, early 80s at the latest. Tick fucking tock.

[Anonymous No.11910327]

>>11910318
I like Tory but how is Vulcan heavy supposed to compete with Starship? Expending six BE-4s isn't going to be cheap

[Anonymous No.11910328]

>>11910318
Vulcan heavy? Definitely seems interesting, although I wonder how much research has gone into it given that the "regular" Vulcan hasn't flown yet.

[Anonymous No.11910333]

>>11910327
>Expending six BE-4s isn't going to be cheap
But they wont (at least not for future flights).

[Anonymous No.11910343]

Reminder that today, it's 45 years ago since these bastards did the dirty and docked.

[Anonymous No.11910349]

>>11910318
lol just built one in ksp last night go figure

[Anonymous No.11910355]

>>11910349
Hello, Tory.

[Anonymous No.11910371]

Bobendoug departing ISS on August first, splashdown on August second.

[Anonymous No.11910374]

>>11910328
It could have been planned for, BE-4s aren't exactly punchy when it comes to TWR so acceleration forces might be gentle enough to allow three Vulcan cores to fly strapped together. Certainly since the engines are arranged in a smaller diameter than the diameter of the core and they haven't got fins or any significant large protrusions they won't have to reconfigure the booster cores like Falcon Heavy's design team had to.

[Anonymous No.11910377]

>>11910333
That's good. Not so great for BO though

[Anonymous No.11910381]

>>11910371
Noice, if they come down with no troubles then Crew2 will have been proven for every step of a manned mission.

[Anonymous No.11910387]

>>11910381
>inb4
C'mon Dragon don't fail them now

[Anonymous No.11910394]

>>11910387
>SRBs and O-rings
>crumbly orange foam
>crumbly fragile tiles
fuck Shuttle

[Anonymous No.11910401]

>>11910394
if anything is going to be a concern for dragon, it's going to be the chutes

[Anonymous No.11910404]

>>11910394
>can’t land itself
>massive payload potential with the STS but ruined because lol bring orbiter to orbit

[Anonymous No.11910418]

If SpaceX kill bobndug are they finished?

[Anonymous No.11910420]

>>11910418
if spaceX kill bob and doug AND biden gets elected, yes. Private space is donezo.

[Anonymous No.11910441]

>>11910321
>the Moon would still be a better stepping stone simply because it's closer with lower gravity
That is not a clear advantage. And you still have the lunar dust problem.

[Anonymous No.11910475]

>>11910017
>petition for starship hop to launch with a 1/38th scale SLS model for mass simulator
It'd be like the closest SLS would come to reality in the frame of... how many years? what's your guess, 5, 15 ever? I don't mean finished product, but rather surpassing being the dead weight, scale model on a prototype of a competing design.

[Anonymous No.11910485]

>https://newatlas.com/space/james-webb-space-telescope-launch-delay-pandemic/

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

[Anonymous No.11910489]

>>11910485
Sure, the pandemic caused the delay, and it wasn't that the delay was already planned and a whole series of made-up technical issues were lined up for it until the pandemic made for an easier excuse to farm more money.

[Anonymous No.11910505]

>>11910485
I didn't even know they sent up a new one, is it more powerful than Hubble? Can you even say that and what are they planning to do with it?

[Anonymous No.11910506]

>>11907100
Domy Mcdomeface

[Anonymous No.11910518]

>>11910505
comparison with hubble is kinda apples to oranges
jwst is infrared tscope and won't take the kind of pictures hubble can

[Anonymous No.11910521]

>>11910518
JWST wont be able to take the kind of pictures Hubble can because it's being delayed into the 41st millennium.

[Anonymous No.11910525]

>>11910343
Soyuz really is tiny compared to apollo CSM

[Anonymous No.11910529]

>>11910525
Well, it's not lugging around a big ass fucking LH tank.

[Anonymous No.11910531]

>>11910529
The Apollo Service Module was fueled by hypergolics.

[Anonymous No.11910533]

>>11910529
CSM used hypergolics IIRC.
It's interesting that the SM has the delta-v for LOI and then the TEI burn too.
The russian design for their moon landing had Soyuz+lander use an extra stage for LOI. Soyuz would only do the burn to leave lunar orbit.

[Anonymous No.11910539]

>>11908299
>>11908304

They're playing catch-up with their own Falcon Heavy clone as we speak, I'd bet money on it.

Hopefully Russia's having a serious look at their Energia II concept, or else they'll be left behind.

[Anonymous No.11910541]

>>11910533
Ah yeah, never mind me. It was that Aerozine 50 thingie. It was still designed for operating a bit further out than Soyuz and for longer periods, so it had big liquid oxygen tanks and all sorts of shit tucked into it.

[Anonymous No.11910543]

>>11910518
>jwst is infrared tscope and won't take the kind of pictures hubble can
So it's got a different mission profile. What is it? and what can it do, that Hubble can't?

[Anonymous No.11910544]

Alright I have a dumb fucking question. My intuition tells me it obviously won’t work but I can’t tell (from a physics diagram point of view) where the forces cancel out.

Why can’t we make a thruster made from electromagnets? For example, take the pic related. Those rings are repelled to the top of the shaft. What if we pushed the rings to the bottom and secured them. Assuming they were super magnetic and we turned the electromagnet WAY up, there would be a huge repulsion force acting on them. Why can’t we use that repulsion force to “lift” the whole device? Is this just akin to using a crane to lift your own crane like in that episode of whacky races? Where do the forces cancel out; I feel retarded

[Anonymous No.11910546]

Chonky lad had to pack lots of shit for lunar trips.

[Anonymous No.11910549]

>>11910543
Look further.

[Anonymous No.11910551]

>>11910544
So, a gauss cannon?

[Anonymous No.11910552]

>>11910546
Different to the equivalent soviet stack

[Anonymous No.11910556]

>>11910552
Very different design philosophies.

[Anonymous No.11910560]

>>11910544
Pretty much. Unless you're suggesting that the magnets push off something magnetic, like a "ferral" heh like a gauss cannon ship pushing off a metal asteroid, that would be the paddleboat driving upstream, powered by a water turbine. Either that or you just invented a gravsphere

[Anonymous No.11910564]

>>11910551
I’m just wondering if there’s any configuration you could build that would give you a net thrust in one direction. I guess the answer is no because if it were possible NASA would have built it by now. Reactionless thrust is like a holy grail of space travel

It just frustrates me bc I feel like it should be easy. We aren’t breaking any laws of physics. We’re putting energy into the field and all we need is a net thrust from that energy. But I guess every configuration leads to forces cancelling out

[Anonymous No.11910569]

>>11910564
There's not an awful lot of particles floating around in space for you to generate magnetic force off.

[Anonymous No.11910573]

>>11910564
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yamato_1?wprov=sfti1
Maybe magnetohydrodynamics would work? I get what you’re asking though. Why can’t we generate a magnetic field, and then use THAT magnetic field to our advantage for directional thrust. The answer is I don’t know lol

[Anonymous No.11910579]

>>11910573
I gave you the hint here >>11910569

[Anonymous No.11910584]

>>11910569
We don’t have to rely on an external field from particles. What if we MADE the electric field at the bottom of the ship with a giant electromagnet, and used that field for propulsion
>>11910573
Yeah see that thing used the seawater around it for thrust. What about instead of conducting seawater, we just surrounded it with our own superconducting fluid like superfluid Helium-4? That thing looks like a god damn space ship wow

[Anonymous No.11910593]

>>11910584
Your idea is like putting a big fucking brush motor on a space ship and expecting it to do anything.
Well, I wouldn't leave any loose tools or keys in the vicinity and depending on the size, I would be careful with vibrations.

From what I understand, you want to harness magnetism as a pusher force and for that to work, you need external charged particles to work with. That's just how physics work.

[Anonymous No.11910660]

>>11910343
How do we know they didn’t have sex?

[Anonymous No.11910661]

>>11910660
Well, they had several successful hard mates.

[Anonymous No.11910668]

>>11910660
maybe because everybody isn't homosexual like you?

[Anonymous No.11910670]

>>11910394
>Crumbly spaceframe

[Anonymous No.11910690]

>>11909841
I fucking hate xkcd so much

[Anonymous No.11910702]

Uhhh guys.. Are we gonna talk a bit more about Vulcan Superheavy?

[Anonymous No.11910711]

>>11910702
How about they launch a regular one first?
Or is Bezosfeld too busy biding his time to deliver the fucking engines?

[Anonymous No.11910724]

>>11910333
imagine going to this extent to not just fucking land your first stage lmao

[Anonymous No.11910736]

>>11910724
It's kinda justified because the Vulcan is pretty much a modern Atlas where the core has tons of boosters around it and flies very high and fast upon burnout. Something like that isn't very conducive to the Falcon 9 style retropropulsive landings. Also, I'm sure the design came about before the Falcon 9 when "reusable' was a dirty word in rocket design because of the Shuttle, so this half-reusable design was probably the most ULA could get away with.

[Anonymous No.11910740]

>>11910711
>How about they launch a regular one first?
I believe that is next year. Nothing wrong with hyping up your rocket though.

>Or is Bezosfeld too busy biding his time to deliver the fucking engines?
The Huntsville factory is still being built.

[Anonymous No.11910741]

What about our own junkyard heavy lift rocket?
Any designs or proposals?

[Anonymous No.11910743]

>>11910740
There's no point in hyping a paper rocket. The heavy is a paper rocket of a paper rocket.

[Anonymous No.11910747]

>>11910736
then start from scratch and design a new rocket ffs.
yes tory, your stir welding tank plant is very impressive, but reuse that shit you twat.

[Anonymous No.11910751]

>>11910525
Soyuz offered much more space for the crew once in orbit but its service module had like 1/6th the volume for propellant and such. This made Soyuz perfect for puttering around in LEO but it also explains why it was such a bitch for the USSR to try and redesign it into a lunar-capable platform.

Soyuz is much more of a Soviet corollary to the Gemini than it was a proper Apollo-style lunar-capable spacecraft. If the Soviets had decided to go to the moon in the 70s then TKS would have been a far, far better design to base an Apollo competitor around.

That'd actually be a pretty killer alternate history, where the American and Soviet space programs decide to one-up each other's ~1970 achievements and US decides to copy the Salyut/Almaz stations with multiple Skylabs while the Russians land on the moon in 1979 or so using a "space train" of Salyut and TKS/Almaz descendants assembled in LEO with Proton launches and running months-long surface expeditions with 3-4 cosmonauts in a lander/habitat the size of a Mir module while another 2-3 cosmonauts run experiments in the Salyut 6-sized lunar orbiter.

[Anonymous No.11910767]

>>11910747
they wont announce work on a fully reusable rocket til starship's first reuse

[Anonymous No.11910768]

>>11910743
Vulcan is being built, just like Starship

[Anonymous No.11910769]

>>11910768
Yeah, starship is a paper rocket too.

[Anonymous No.11910770]

>>11910741
Been doing some solid propellant testing. Will do a burn test tomorrow if all goes well.

[Anonymous No.11910771]

>>11910743
Vulcan is hardly a paper rocket. I'd say more of an unproven design.

[Anonymous No.11910774]

>>11910770
film the test

[Anonymous No.11910775]

>>11910768
>man affixes horse to cart in new innovative way while people go off to buy model t

[Anonymous No.11910777]

>>11910771
Until it has actually flown into orbit with a payload, it's a paper rocket.

[Anonymous No.11910778]

>>11907100
serbia

[Anonymous No.11910780]

>>11910769
starship will be a paper rocket until they can demonstrate the 150 meter hop

[Anonymous No.11910786]

>>11910780
150m hop is fucking nothing. It will remain a paper rocket until successful orbit with payload.

[Anonymous No.11910787]

>>11910777
No lol. Paper rocket means it only exists on paper. Like sea dragon.

[Anonymous No.11910788]

>>11910786
no faggot, a paper rocket is one that is essentially just a concept

[Anonymous No.11910789]

>>11910787
It's not a fucking rocket until it exists and actually works.

[Anonymous No.11910794]

And here comes the Elon defense force, abandon thread.

[Anonymous No.11910798]

Ok, stop giving this guy (yous) lol. What's the kind of payload capacity a Vulcan superheavy would have?

[Anonymous No.11910801]

>>11910794
"elon defense force"
What? We were defending vulcan too retard. But some people think that because a rocket is in development, it will never actually exist. If they were right about things, we would of never even had a V2

[Anonymous No.11910806]

>>11910798
0 tons because it does not fucking exist.

[Anonymous No.11910809]

>>11910806
>rockets that are in development will never exist jesus christ, you're on the level of the "nothing ever happens" people on pol

[Anonymous No.11910818]

>>11910806
>would have
ESL tard

[Anonymous No.11910820]

Could thermal rockets that use molten silica instead of uranium be a viable heavy lift first stage?

[Anonymous No.11910821]

>>11910806
>IESLB
I cachinnate vociferously.

[Anonymous No.11910827]

>>11910798
Judging from trends from the Delta Heavy and Falcon Heavy, 40t to LEO and 12t to GTO. Assuming that the payload values for a lone Vulcan core with a Centaur upper are correct.

[Anonymous No.11910839]

>>11910820
You mean, having molten silica as the heat source? The engine could work, but probably not for a lifter at all. The molten silica would cool quickly as the propellant steals energy from it, and it wouldn't start out much hotter than what you could do with uranium.

[Anonymous No.11910854]

>>11910839
So it wouldn't have the performance similar to a NTR? Thinking of a way to get similar performance without screeching nimbyfgs or getting fucked in the ass by the DoE

[Anonymous No.11910885]

>>11910788
Yeah, a concept that never left the paper. Like sea dragon. “Faggot”.

[Anonymous No.11910888]

>>11910827
40t? That's 10t more than the expected payload for the Vulcan with SRBs and ACES. SMART doesn't even need excess fuel for propulsive landing. I think payload numbers closer to a falcon heavy are more realistic. And it'll be crew rated for DreamChaser. Could be a real contender for government manned spaceflight.

Remember this is methalox cores with a hydrolox upper stage. Plus ACES and the whole depot thing. And a manned Vulcan Superheavy wouldn't have any SRBs to fuck up. Much better than SLS on cost as well. I'd love to see someone do the numbers.

[Anonymous No.11910898]

>>11910888
Going out and pushing would be better than the SLS.

[Anonymous No.11910901]

>>11910898
Very fair.

[Anonymous No.11910908]

Whatever it works out as the more viable human rated rockets the better.

>dreamchaser

vertically launched spaceplanes are cool.

[Anonymous No.11910922]

>>11909565
If you're trying to minimize layer thickness, sure. However, compared to loosely compacted soil, water will be relatively expensive and require additional systems such as a sunshade to prevent it sublimating away, and plastics are a no-go because synthesizing plastic from carbon dioxide is extremely energy intensive for what it grants you. If you're living on a planet, just use bulk materials in whatever layer thickness is necessary to get what you want.

[Anonymous No.11910924]

>>11909578
Even if you're totally right, which I doubt, the program would still be far less expensive, less time consuming, and produce more value than SLS.

[Anonymous No.11910927]

>>11910924
>>11910898

[Anonymous No.11910936]

>>11910543
Bigger mirror.

[Anonymous No.11910949]

>>11910401
>Chutes fail
>Surprise! We kept developing the propulsive landing capability in secret

[Anonymous No.11910955]

>>11910544
>My intuition tells me it obviously won’t work but I can’t tell (from a physics diagram point of view) where the forces cancel out.

The magnet wants to repel the rings. Both the rings AND the magnet are feeling a repulsive force. The rings are simply free to move up until the repulsive force equals the gravitational force pulling them down. If you flipped the entire apparatus over and held it by the rings it would get pushed up and away from the rings, albeit not by as large a distance because the apparatus has much more gravitational force pulling it down.

If you welded the rings in place, made everything superconductive, and ramped the power up to increase the repulsive force, nothing would happen until the repulsive force got so strong that it overcame the strength of the materials holding the thing together and it ripped itself in half.

[Anonymous No.11910957]

>>11910401
yeah i never really trusted chutes

[Anonymous No.11910961]

It's hard to find informed discussion on space topics. It feels like most of the people don't have anything valuable to say but have the need to spew some shit from their mouths anyway.

[Anonymous No.11910972]

depot

[Anonymous No.11910979]

>>11910854
>So it wouldn't have the performance similar to a NTR?
It would for a moment, and the Isp would immediately decrease to effectively zero as the temperature of the molten silica dropped to that of the propellant flowing over it.

Nuclear thermal rockets work because the nuclear reaction produces heat at the same rate that the propellant removes it, that rate being gigawatts of thermal power.

[Anonymous No.11910994]

>>11910888
>depot

[Anonymous No.11911002]

>>11910961
good job you're posting in sfg then ;)

[Anonymous No.11911005]

>>11910994
>thumbnail
here have a full sized one

[Anonymous No.11911007]

>>11910979
>gigawatts of thermal power

[Anonymous No.11911010]

>>11910961
probably because the most informed people are busy working in the industry and not posting here or anywhere else

[Anonymous No.11911013]

Guys, what's your personal fantasy for a chemistry breakthrough leading to improved rocket engines?
Mine is for someone to discover some way of stabilizing liquid ozone so that it no longer detonates randomly at high concentrations, ideally without additives to the liquid. Ozone is like oxygen's big brother, releasing more specific energy while also being a denser oxidizer and a really neat dark purple color, and all without increasing the molecular weight of the exhaust products. A rocket burning anything with ozone would benefit across the board, in terms of mass fraction, Isp, and chamber pressure. It's too bad that ozone RALLY prefers to decompose into diatomic oxygen in a very sensitive manner.

[Anonymous No.11911016]

>>11910994
>That thumbnail ain't big enough for the two of us, Musky Boy!

[Anonymous No.11911030]

If you had a spare $10 million lying around (or whatever it will cost) and you decided to buy your own Starship for personal use, what would you name it?

[Anonymous No.11911032]

>>11911016
who would win in a fight?
sen. "depots, on my lawn?" shelby
or john motherfucking insprucker

[Anonymous No.11911037]

>read article about the military space station
>says one use for it may be as a fuel depot
>cant tell whether that's what the military said or if it's the author making shit up

[Anonymous No.11911039]

>>11911013
A method for mass production of stable metallic hydrogen is another obvious one. It would still have to be doped with cadmium so it can be magnetically confined during the burn though, it would burn hot enough to melt any conventional solid rocket nozzle.

[Anonymous No.11911043]

>>11911013
It's also hella toxic
>Exposure of 0.1 to 1 μmol/mol produces headaches, burning eyes and irritation to the respiratory passages. Even low concentrations of ozone in air are very destructive to organic materials such as latex, plastics and animal lung tissue.

[Anonymous No.11911051]

>>11911030
Columbus, Magellan, or Drake, some European explorer.

[Anonymous No.11911053]

>>11911039
>doped with cadmium
I thought it was caesium, because of its very low ionization temperature.

[Anonymous No.11911057]

>>11911030
Pillar of Light

[Anonymous No.11911060]

>>11911039
What about a rocket nozzle made of metallic hydrogen?

[Anonymous No.11911062]

>>11911013
Mainly a mix of chemistry and physics but a few things I’m excited for:
•Metallic Hydrogen. Even just producing a small bit that turns out to be completely metastable will be so important
•Cheaper Muon production or Muon stabilization. If we could find a way to stabilize a Muon (the electron’s heavier brother) we would have fusion power. This is the one I most want, although there is absolutely 0 research in this area aside from a few tests at fermilab but those are just particle physics tests

[Anonymous No.11911064]

>>11911030
General Transportation Unit

[Anonymous No.11911068]

>>11911030
Go Fasta Red

[Anonymous No.11911072]

>>11911030
Nathan

[Anonymous No.11911073]

>>11911030
Falling Outside The Normal Moral Constraints
>t. space pirate

[Anonymous No.11911074]

>The initial prediction about the amount of pressure needed was eventually shown to be too low.[4] Since the first work by Wigner and Huntington, the more modern theoretical calculations point towards higher but nonetheless potentially accessible metallization pressures of around 400 GPa (3,900,000 atm; 58,000,000 psi).
yea, nah.

[Anonymous No.11911088]

>>11911030
Dead Nigger Storage

[Anonymous No.11911090]

>>11911060
For what purpose? It'd just detonate. Metallic hydrogen itself is not particularly strong or resistant to heat, and when stored it'd be like any other substance at room temperature. The issue would be once you actually started to decompose it into hydrogen in your engine; that reaction releases a stupid amount of heat per kg and per mol, meaning it's creating hydrogen gas at roughly 7000 Kelvin and extremely high pressure. It's going to erode anything it touched because no materials can conduct heat fast enough for regenerative cooling to be effective against that amount of flux. Therefore you need a magnetic nozzle made from an arrangement of superconducting coils to push on the hydrogen plasma and keep it away from the walls of the nozzle.

[Anonymous No.11911097]

>>11911090
and you'd need to power those coils.

[Anonymous No.11911130]

>>11911090
>It's going to erode anything it touched because no materials can conduct heat fast enough for regenerative cooling to be effective against that amount of flux.
Leidenfrost effect maybe? Although that would almost certainly require either wasting even more propellant or oxidizer, or carrying something else to generate vapor.

[Anonymous No.11911140]

>>11911097
Not if they're superconducting; they have zero electrical resistance, so whatever electric current you inject will just keep going around and around and maintain the magnetic field. A superconducting electromagnet is effectively an adjustable and far stronger permanent magnet.
What you DO need to power is the cryocooler that can keep those coils below their superconducting temperature. This is not an easy problem to solve, but modern breakthroughs in superconducting materials such as YBCO tape have reduced cooling requirements from needing to stay below a few dozen kelvin to being able to operate at liquid nitrogen temperatures and remain superconducting. That's huge because it means we could feasibly use radiators and thermal batteries to maintain those operating temperatures even when undergoing full power burns dozens of minutes in duration, as long as there was sufficient time between burns to radiate the stored waste heat into space.
If we eventually crack a high temperature superconductor, something that can operate at hundreds of kelvin, it would blast open so many technological barriers it's insane. Compact Q>50 fusion reactors, magnetic drag sails for space missions, superpowered electric propulsion systems, supercomputers, ultra long distance lossless power transmission lines, Z-pinch fusion rockets, magnetic bubble shields for blocking solar charged particles and even cosmic rays, the list goes on.

[Anonymous No.11911178]

>>11911130
>Leidenfrost effect maybe?
I think you mean film cooling, and this is actually the most commonly proposed solution.
Basically what you'd have is a deluge of water blasting into the chamber where the metallic hydrogen was being decomposed. This water would absorb the heat of the hydrogen plasma and become super-heated steam, greatly lowering the thermal flux the walls need to deal with. The water would also be doing double-duty before entering the chamber by passing through a regenerative cooling loop, just like the fuel in a normal rocket engine. This solution does fix the thermal issues, at the cost of reducing the Isp of the propulsion system down to more like 1000 Isp rather than the >2000 Isp that pure metallic hydrogen decomposition gets you in theory.
However, the reduction in true Isp is offset by a large increase in thrust due to the increased mass flow rate, and in terms of metallic hydrogen use alone the effective Isp actually goes up significantly. This works just like an air-breathing jet engine, in terms of trading real exhaust velocity for effective exhaust velocity by using a cheap and available reaction mass (in this case water rather than atmospheric gasses) to make better use of the energy available in your fuel. To put it another way, a pure metallic hydrogen rocket would get much more delta V in a single stage than one using water based active cooling, BUT, if the water-cooled vehicle was performing a mission profile that let it refill its water tank over and over, it would in fact get much more delta V out of the same mass of metallic hydrogen fuel than a pure metallic hydrogen rocket. That is to say, a water cooled metallic hydrogen rocket vehicle could go back and forth between Ganymede and Callisto many more times on ten tons of metallic hydrogen than a purely metallic hydrogen driven rocket, despite the latter having about double the real exhaust velocity.

[Anonymous No.11911227]

>>11911032
>Your life status wont be norminal when I'm through with you.

[Anonymous No.11911230]

>>11911030
>10 million
more like 1 billion

[Anonymous No.11911272]

>>11911230
Each Starship will cost no more than $100 million to build from start to finish.

[Anonymous No.11911278]

New thread when?

[Anonymous No.11911284]

Cassini falling into Saturn

[Anonymous No.11911288]

>>11911278
>page 10
new faggots when will you learn !!! sci is a slow board, wait until page 15

[Anonymous No.11911306]

>>11911288
The future is now, you... you... DOUBLE BOEING!