/sfg/ - Space Flight General

[Anonymous No.12349001]

previous >>12344625

*siiiiiiip*

[Anonymous No.12349006]

>>12349001
Goodnight SpaceX bros

[Anonymous No.12349009]

>>12349001
Current livestream
https://youtu.be/eVB02SSeqgQ

>Crew scheduled to sleep in 2 hours
>Crew scheduled to wake up in 10 hours
>Boost burn
>Adjustment burns
>Docking around 8 PM EST

[Anonymous No.12349010]

>>12349001
i schleep

[Anonymous No.12349014]

I DON'T WANT HIM GONE
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

[Anonymous No.12349022]

>>12349014
I’d like to think that using a smoke machine for the picture was Jim’s idea.

[Anonymous No.12349026]

>>12349014
Im gonna miss him bros

[Anonymous No.12349032]

>>12349014
enjoy your diversity led climate agency bro

[Anonymous No.12349037]

Had a long shift at work, couldn't even see the launch. Can anyone give me a summary on the problems that happened post-launch?

[Anonymous No.12349044]

>>12349037
Same problem that caused the test capsule to explode, they're gonna deorbit later tonight

[Anonymous No.12349053]

>>12349037
>Fuel line heaters sent alarms
>Turns out it was just alarm tolerance issue
>Heaters reset and alarms resolved
>Docking proceeding tomorrow

>>12349044
All false and inaccurate

[Anonymous No.12349067]

>>12349037
>>12349053 This.

>>12349044
You are a checked nigger now.

[Anonymous No.12349072]

>>12349014
>you don't even know how good things could have been

[Anonymous No.12349077]

I wonder what makes people post drivel like this >12349044, do they really think it's funny? Or are they just permanently seething tesla shorters with a grudge on Elon for losing money (even though the only real reason is them being idiots)?

[Anonymous No.12349080]

>>12349001
when does the shiny chrome dildo do its test flight anyone have an idea of the date or at least time period

[Anonymous No.12349090]

>>12349080
Give 'em a few days to shovel the spilled guts back into raptor and we're back to business

[Anonymous No.12349099]

>>12349077
>do they really think it's funny?
Probably. I certainly did.

[Anonymous No.12349108]

You stupid fascists ready for Biden and Kamari to ban your neo-colonialist space bullshit LOL

[Anonymous No.12349110]

>>12349044
how very homosexual of you to lie in such manner

[Anonymous No.12349111]

>>12349001
serious question, how can be press the mods of this site to give us a space general.

[Anonymous No.12349112]

>>12349111
can we*

[Anonymous No.12349116]

>>12349037
Someone farted

[Anonymous No.12349123]

>>12349111
Fuck generals. They always spawn "thread celebs" and attract other undedirables.

[Anonymous No.12349132]

>>12349123
We need generals to command armies dumb ass

[Anonymous No.12349134]

>>12349077
lighten up, chuck

[Anonymous No.12349151]

well well well, spacex stans. looks like we have yet another raptor swap. dont you ever get tired of being wrong? raptor is a disaster

[Anonymous No.12349158]

>>12349151
do share a superior alternative

[Anonymous No.12349162]

>>12349151
Cool

[Anonymous No.12349165]

>>12349158
All American SSME

[Anonymous No.12349166]

this was sweet of them

[Anonymous No.12349173]

>>12349158
BE-4

[Anonymous No.12349178]

>>12349173
too big to work for starship, I think. Also not powerful or efficient enough.

[Anonymous No.12349179]

>>12349165
incredibly expensive, not good for mass production
>>12349173
we need engines that are more than just for visuals

[Anonymous No.12349182]

>>12349151
Oh thanks for the update anon. It's vital for SpaceX to test the capabilities of these beta test raptors engines in order to have a finished functional product.

[Anonymous No.12349187]

>>12349099
>>12349134
Were you not here during the DM2? Because it was way overused and not funny even back then already and is just stupid doomposting (or is it doomtrolling?) at this point

[Anonymous No.12349190]

>>12349166
Sarcasm. Boeing know they will do fuckall in six months.

[Anonymous No.12349205]

>>12349182
>they strapped bob down to keep him from eating the recovery personnel
Good thinking.

[Anonymous No.12349214]

>>12349182
no problem, i'm all about educating the ignorant

[Anonymous No.12349222]

Anyone care to explain why v shaped airships to orbit isn't workable? Seems perfectly practical to me

[Anonymous No.12349235]

>>12349222
Nothing we do in space for the foreseeable future justifies 2 mile long anything. If you're gonna sink that much money on it you might as well use SLS

[Anonymous No.12349255]

>>12349151
Raptor is ambitious but I think they'll achieve it

[Anonymous No.12349280]

>>12349222
because TSTO reusable just werks, is way more flexibile, cheaper to develop and not meaningfully less efficient

[Anonymous No.12349305]

>>12349166
It was just a rogue intern who was promptly taken out back and died of covid

[Anonymous No.12349306]

>>12349037
It's a bad luck to bring a woman aboard.

[Anonymous No.12349335]

>>12349222
Hasn't done anything yet. Someone with actual funding needs to be convinced that it's a cost-effective alternative to rockets and get behind the project.

[Anonymous No.12349374]

>>12349009
Sleeping in a ISS trip is kind of pathetic. I can understand the need for it in an Apollo-style mission to the Moon, but 400 km is LEO. Elon should do 3h speedruns like Roskosmos.

[Anonymous No.12349377]

>>12349014
Climate is more important than macho vanity projects on radioactive dead rocks.

[Anonymous No.12349384]

>>12349280
Reminder that Falcon 9's second stage is not reusable despite being totally feasible.

[Anonymous No.12349416]

>>12349374
1. Russia have to lower ISS orbit for 3 hours trip, NASA can't because lack of spacecraft to do it.

2. One day delay of Crew-1 caused 27 hours instead of 8 hours trip as planned.

[Anonymous No.12349423]

>>12349377

Among the dumbest and worst posts made on the website this year thus far, I will keep a copy saved for 50 years from now when I am retired peaceful at a higher altitude.

[Anonymous No.12349447]

>>12349416
>Russia have to lower ISS orbit for 3 hours trip
And that is only 1.3 km out of 400 km.

Excuses. If Soyuz can so can Falcon 9.
Even worse, Russia launchs from higher latitude.

[Anonymous No.12349452]

>>12349001
>space flight

[Anonymous No.12349460]

>>12349452
>sojarz macha rekoma
>being polish

[Anonymous No.12349556]

>>12349377
Troll post.

[Anonymous No.12349560]

We need to bring rats to Mars

[Anonymous No.12349590]

>>12349452
You dropped your ((hat)).

[Anonymous No.12349595]

>Former IDF fighter pilot, Eytan Stibbe, to become 2nd Israeli astronaut
https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/former-idf-fighter-pilot-to-become-2nd-israeli-astronaut-649247

Cool

[Anonymous No.12349597]

>>12349595
>Payed for by the US taxpayer.

[Anonymous No.12349601]

>>12349595

[Anonymous No.12349616]

>>12349452
>>12349460
poland cannot into space

[Anonymous No.12349666]

Daily reminder that the Spanish empire will rise again.

[Anonymous No.12349682]

>>12349666
>put mini starship inside big starship
>yeet it into space
>land the big starship
>yeet another mini starship

Makes a lot more sense than the "refuel cycle" they were thinking of doing

[Anonymous No.12349686]

>>12349595
I hope he doesn't blow the ship up like the first one did

[Anonymous No.12349691]

>>12349666
Saw the angry astronaut vid on this. It’s a pretty decent concept overall. Kinda weird how the narrator spent like a minute talking about how hot he thought the guy was, though lmao.

[Anonymous No.12349710]

so wait, the dragon changes its orbit via boosters in the nose?

[Anonymous No.12349711]

Starship should have piping on the reentry side to warm up the fuels, increasing their pressure to the point where it would be so high it would be enough to make the starship hover and perform a soft touchdown.

[Anonymous No.12349720]

>>12349711
Like a comet

[Anonymous No.12349729]

why did F9's exhaust turn blue towards the end of its burn?

[Anonymous No.12349734]

>>12349711
>using cold gas thrusters for landing burn
you would need some seriously high pressure for that

[Anonymous No.12349759]

>>12349729
Thinner atmosphere and plume expansion.

[Anonymous No.12349803]

>>12349711
wait holy shit that would be really fucking cool as like a shuttle concept.
almost like something from star trek or starship troopers

[Anonymous No.12349810]

>>12349734
>you would need some seriously high pressure for that
Which you can obtain... from the reentry heat

[Anonymous No.12349840]

>>12349711
Nothing about this makes any physical sense. It isn't even worth arguing against it's so retarded.

[Anonymous No.12349854]

>>12349711
I fart when I sit down to soften the landing, I thought everyone did this

[Anonymous No.12349864]

>>12349377
We should eliminate the climate entirely.

[Anonymous No.12349874]

>>12349840
It does because all the chemical energy from the first stage becomes potential energy. This wouldn't be using energy from nothing, but using energy that is now contained between earth and the ship.

[Anonymous No.12349890]

>>12349158
a really large number of really small solids

[Anonymous No.12349897]

>>12349874
That's not the problem, your shit just doesn't make any sense. We're perfectly capable of pressurizing any tank to its physical limits without this kind of system. The reason for not using cold gas to land isn't inability to generate high pressures, it's that cold gas is a shitty way to land. Also you don't start touch down burn with significant re-entry heating in effect, you've already since slowed to terminal velocity.

[Anonymous No.12349900]

>>12349890
Fully combustible solid motors where the structure is also fuel and burns up, leaving behind nothing but dust

[Anonymous No.12349902]

>>12349897
>it's that cold gas is a shitty way to land.
Absence of reason given

[Anonymous No.12349907]

>>12349902
Heavy and inefficient. A tank of pressurized gas with the power and energy content necessary to do the task would be oversized and overweight compared to existing systems for no benefit.

[Anonymous No.12349913]

>>12349711
Hmmm I feel like this is retarded but it has soul and it’s nice to see some original content hahah. I’m pretty sure even if you filled starship to the brim with gas (like, no payload bay OR rocket fuel- JUST gas) and magically deorbited the thing it wouldn’t be able to slow down enough

[Anonymous No.12349916]

>>12349711
As pointed out previously, cold gas systems with enough energy to land a Starship would be prohibitively heavy. Using the Raptors to land would not only be much lighter, but also cheaper as no additional systems would be required to use them.

[Anonymous No.12349925]

>>12349907
Imagine having 4 tanks of pressurized gas. Totally inefficient.

[Anonymous No.12349929]

>>12349913
>JUST gas
Is that what Boeing used for Starliner?

[Anonymous No.12349933]

>>12349925
Yes? I have a feeling you don't even know what a dry mass ratio is, or ISP.

[Anonymous No.12349937]

>>12349916
/sfg/ being a bunch of stupid fucking retards as usual. Empty the header tanks into the main tanks. Use reentry heat to pressurize. Empty tanks to cool down and land. Most of you retards would have said landing a first stage booster was Impossible because the vectoring and throttling systems would be too heavy and expensive. The typical no brainer, no effoer baby boomer engineering excuse.

[Anonymous No.12349940]

>>12349933
I'm sure you memorized a lot of random jargon without understanding any of it at all

[Anonymous No.12349945]

>>12349929
I have a feeling their code is running on a JUST in time compiler.

[Anonymous No.12349946]

>>12349937
>Empty the header tanks into the main tanks. Use reentry heat to pressurize.
What temperature and pressure do you expect to achieve?

[Anonymous No.12349950]

>>12349595
zionist pig

[Anonymous No.12349953]

>>12349925
>>12349933
Dude, cold gas thrusters have abymaly low ISP and need realy strong=heavy tanks because of the pressure.
They are shit in any application that requires any significant velocity changes, barely even sufficient as RCS thrusters.
>>12349937
That's just beyond stupid as the fuel when burned at about 300 bar chamber pressure and god knows how high temperature in a proper engine has a significantly higher ISP and the tanks don't need to hold absurdly high pressures.

[Anonymous No.12349956]

>>12349937
>Empty the header tanks into the main tanks
The main tanks are meant to handle a pressure of around 10 bar. That is much lower than what a cold gas thruster needs to land. In order to have the tanks be able to handle the increased pressure, then they would need to be much heavier and thus increase dry mass.
>Most of you retards would have said landing a first stage booster was Impossible because the vectoring and throttling systems would be too heavy and expensive
No. The vectoring and throttling systems would already be there due the fact that a rocket needs them to fly up.

[Anonymous No.12349965]

>>12349937
Alright bro go try to land your entire rocket in KSP with just RCS, tell me how it works out

[Anonymous No.12349971]

>>12349940
Now I know you're underage. Containing the high pressures necessary to get useful thrust requires a more robust tank than simply holding liquid fuel for a turbopump-fed rocket, meaning much higher dry mass ratio. Such systems also have hilariously poor ISP meaning you're going to need much more propellant. The factors combined mean a pressure-based landing system for Starship is DOA.
>>12349937
Also, if you try to use the main tanks you're going to be severely disappointed as they have an operational capacity of ~5bar and an ability to withstand up to ~8-9bar. Compare that to the hundreds you need for a half decent cold gas thruster. And good luck reaching those pressures on heat alone, the steel would reach thermal failure before contributing significantly.

[Anonymous No.12349977]

>>12349937
Header tanks explode at about 8 bars of pressure.

[Anonymous No.12350000]

Now that Elon has mastered gravity when is the TimeX branded timetravel watch hitting boutiques

[Anonymous No.12350006]

>>12350000
Significant digits

[Anonymous No.12350009]

>>12350000
>implying that it wasn't his very first venture

[Anonymous No.12350010]

>>12350000
It already did, in the future. TimeX has a strict corporate policy about altering its own history though, and will make no anachronistic appearances in public before the company is formed.

[Anonymous No.12350030]

>>12349977
I said EMPTY THE HEADER TANKS INTO THE MAIN TANKS

[Anonymous No.12350035]

>>12350000
TimeX already exists. It's not anything cool though.

[Anonymous No.12350037]

>>12350030
Ask me how I know that's the only reply you read kekelstein

[Anonymous No.12350084]

With mini starships, I don’t even see why they need the wings and canards, just make them a bullet shaped giant dragon capsule that ass slams into Mars atmosphere and then performs a powered landing. After all in the 3.0 plan the mini ships will never return directly to Urf, there’s no need for aero surfaces.

[Anonymous No.12350094]

>>12350084
With mini starships, you lose! This post made by the 18 meter gang.

[Anonymous No.12350097]

>>12350084
Don't you need the wings to even do the flip from bellyflop to landing?

[Anonymous No.12350099]

>>12350084
Absolutely the most retarded thing I've read today

[Anonymous No.12350106]

>>12349937
>t.

[Anonymous No.12350110]

[Anonymous No.12350120]

>>12350084
Only men with faith of the heart fly with winglet flaps and do belly flop landings. You are not worthy

[Anonymous No.12350122]

>>12350097
You would, that’s why I specifically said ass slam instead of belly flop. Ass slam, like a conventional capsule, with powered decent like a Falcon booster instead of the Starship suicide flip. The whole point of the speculative Mars Direct 3.0 thing Zubrin and the Spanish kid are talking about seems like it would work best to sling a more specialist capsule design to Mars. Use starship parts like the landing legs, steel body, vacuum raptor, but in the shape of a wide bodied bullet. Actually it could essentially just be a starship nose cone but longer and slightly thinner to fit inside big starship. Heat tiles on the base surrounding the engine instead of on the side.

[Anonymous No.12350128]

>>12350122
There is genuinely no point to this whatsoever, it's just a waste of time, money, and payload

[Anonymous No.12350141]

>>12350128
Somewhat agreed, if the point is to get 100 tons to Mars per ship, then it’s a non-starter. I did find it to be an interesting proposition from an economics standpoint though since it completely eliminates the need for refueling, meaning a greater proportion of starship launches actually carry payload.

[Anonymous No.12350154]

>>12350122
I think you aren't taking something into account. Falcon launches up, hits an apex, and comes back down. Imagine trying to land a falcon first stage directly from orbit. WAY more energy is involved. I think the bellyflop exists because you have to shed a lot more kinetic energy than a falcon 9 experiences. (Also this is why superheavy does the F9 ass slam- it isn't coming in from orbit)

[Anonymous No.12350172]

>>12350141
In what way does it eliminate refueling? That doesn't work out.

[Anonymous No.12350197]

>>12350172
According to at leas Zubrin, SH lobs starship, starship burns to perform a lunar flyby, dumps out mini starship which then burns to TMI, while big starship returns to renter Earths atmosphere. So instead of four starship flights to get one Starship to Mars, one flight gets half a Starship to Mars. With the regime needing three refueling your hundred ton payload needs four launches, while at least supposedly miniship launching allows one flight to launch fifty tons.
I haven’t taken time yet to check it for myself, but I’m assuming that Zubrin wouldn’t propose something completely unworkable

[Anonymous No.12350217]

We're getting quite a lot of brilliant ideas today.

[Anonymous No.12350225]

>>12350197
That did not eliminate refueling. It just introduced staging complexity and the need to develop totally different vehicle that lands in vastly different way from starships.

[Anonymous No.12350226]

>>12350197
That's batshit dumb I don't think that's how that works. Zubrin is just married to his Mars Direct concept lmao

[Anonymous No.12350232]

>>12350197
> SH lobs starship, starship burns to perform a lunar flyby
Requiring almost as much refueling as as mars injection. As I said, it doesn't work out.

[Anonymous No.12350239]

>>12350217
nice to see /sfg/ return to form today

[Anonymous No.12350241]

>>12350225
Right, that's why I'm not exactly sold on it either, I just figured it would work better with a more capsule-like vehicle than a literal scaled down Starship copy. That kind of trade would only be worth it if the cost of the three refueling flights is more than the cost of a third stage, or if Starship's turnaround time ends up being significantly worse than Elon predicts.

[Anonymous No.12350245]

>>12350217
Could you make an inflatable centrifuge that could double as a reentry vehicle to Mars? Gotta get chickens to the colony somehow

[Anonymous No.12350263]

>>12350217
>>12350239

[Anonymous No.12350266]

>>12350263
brochocho....

[Anonymous No.12350277]

Is he right, /sfg/?

[Anonymous No.12350288]

>>12350263
This engine frightens me immensely. We should start building it right away.

[Anonymous No.12350292]

>>12350263
That's going to be a preburner rich preburner.
Not to mention an engine rich engine.

[Anonymous No.12350293]

>>12350263
Imagine one of these tanks crashing into a small village, full of Chinese people

[Anonymous No.12350295]

so what exactly does an EVA suit do that a flight suit doesn't? Is it just radiation protection or something? Would an astronaut be fine if he got vented while wearing his spaceX suit?

[Anonymous No.12350300]

>>12350292
It's an ablative nozzle, so there sure is some nozzle in the exaust.
The preburner needs to run rich for obvious reasosn.
>>12350288
Yes, dubs confirm.

[Anonymous No.12350303]

>>12350300
ClF3 is just not something you fuck with. We've read Ignition!

[Anonymous No.12350305]

>>12350300
Would it be possible to make a mentos rocket capable of reaching LEO?

[Anonymous No.12350306]

>>12350295
Doesn't get all stiff when in a vacuum.

[Anonymous No.12350311]

>>12350303
That's why it's an ablative nozzle made from asbestos and phenol resin.
>>12350305
Maybe with like 100 stages or so.

[Anonymous No.12350315]

>>12350311
The nozzle is the least of my concern regarding the engine design.

[Anonymous No.12350317]

>>12350295
Radiation protection, more robust thermal regulation, independent breathing air supply, ballistic protection, and in the case of a maneuvering pack, mobility without a true spacecraft.
Remember a flight suit only gets life support and thermal regulation if it's connected to the ship via an umbilical, so if your capsule/ship depressurizes you'll be safe, but if the umbilical cable is severed or punctured you'll be deep in the shit.

[Anonymous No.12350329]

>>12350315
What is you main concern?

[Anonymous No.12350332]

>>12350311
>Maybe with like 100 stages or so.
Got it, so it's doable.
New project found.

[Anonymous No.12350337]

>>12350329
Combustion chamber as well as preburner and plumbing.

[Anonymous No.12350350]

>>12350263
You know I think this would work if you took out the explosive pressurization

[Anonymous No.12350359]

>>12350317
I hope 50 years from now we have multiple commercial companies that make EVA suits. I imagine if starship is visiting Mars (and maybe the Moon) and other solar system bodies there will be companies making suits if SpaceX doesn't do it themselves. I wonder who will make the Nokia of EVA suits?

[Anonymous No.12350361]

>>12350329
>ClF3 tankage pressurized by pumping UDMH in and letting it combust IN THE TANK

[Anonymous No.12350367]

>>12350263
I don't even know how you could start the preburner without the whole thing combusting

[Anonymous No.12350370]

>>12350359
Yeah, unfortunately EVA tech is still in that stage where it's either done by governments or done by un*versities who operate at a glacial pace and a monumental cost.
It's another one of those super autistic fields where there are very few trained professional EVA suit makers and they tend to keep to themselves and their own projects rather than expand. After all, if barely anybody goes to space, there's barely any demand for EVA suits.
The more people we put into space, the faster we'll see EVA suit manufacture become a proper industry.

[Anonymous No.12350377]

>>12350332
I will moitor your project with great interest.
>>12350337
>combustion chamber
It's ablative.
>preburner
That's why it's fuel rich.
>>12350361
Is there a more simple pressurisation system?
>>12350367
Start my injecting UDMH and only inject ClF3 when the combustion chamber is well coated with UDMH.
No ignition required, it will start up right away.

[Anonymous No.12350379]

>>12350359
>I wonder who will make the Nokia of EVA suits?
Almost guarantee it's someone we've never heard of if it's not SpaceX (or maybe SNC? just spitballing because they seem fairly flexible). No one in that space has had real ambition for a while.

[Anonymous No.12350389]

>>12350370
>>12350379
Both good points. I know mechanical counterpressure suits are more of a meme than reality, but I really fucking hope they get to the point where they are cheap and reliable. Being able to throw on a nice MCP with hardsuit attachments would get us something straight out of modern science fiction

[Anonymous No.12350409]

>>12350377
An ablative nozzle doesn't remove a combustion chamber nor does running fuel rich remove the complications with ClF3.

[Anonymous No.12350421]

>>12350409
>An ablative nozzle doesn't remove a combustion chamber
If both are ablative, it's not an issue.
>nor does running fuel rich remove the complications with ClF3
If all the ClF3 has reacted with the UDMH before it touches anything, it's a non-issue.

[Anonymous No.12350423]

>>12350409
The combustion chamber is ablative too. In fact, it seems anon has designed an engine where literally every component ablates.

[Anonymous No.12350427]

>>12350421
I look forward to reading about you in the obituaries.

[Anonymous No.12350429]

>>12350423
I just don't get this 'reusable engine' meme

[Anonymous No.12350436]

>>12350332
wont you need boosters for that?

[Anonymous No.12350448]

Vega launch from Kourou, about 8 hours from now.
01:52:20 UTC on 17th (8:52:20 pm EST on 16th)

[Anonymous No.12350452]

>>12350448
>Vega launch

[Anonymous No.12350456]

>>12350452
ESA can launch something into space!

[Anonymous No.12350459]

>>12350448
My life savings says it scrubs lmao

[Anonymous No.12350462]

>>12350245
Smaller centrifuge in the 9m diameter crew starship will do. The chicken pentrifuge. Some care should be taken when opening it.

[Anonymous No.12350472]

>>12350263
okay, what if we improve this by making it closed cycle, instead of pressurizing the ClF3 tank with UDMH, we pressurize it with the UDMH rich preburner exhaust

[Anonymous No.12350485]

>>12350263

[Anonymous No.12350495]

think this is the prop heater error message

[Anonymous No.12350496]

>>12350472
Raptor BTFO’d

[Anonymous No.12350500]

>>12350263
We need to go deeper

[Anonymous No.12350503]

>>12350495
can see half of this diagram offline here. Cool shit. Just like in fiction.

[Anonymous No.12350504]

>>12350500
Social credit score monitor, kek

[Anonymous No.12350506]

>>12350503
That’s cool, looks like it’s from a movie. I mean it’s kind of scary considering it’s real. But cool nonetheless

[Anonymous No.12350536]

>>12350500
Where is piss airlock?

[Anonymous No.12350540]

>>12350506
>>12350503
they can also tap on parts of the system and have it display information relevant to that specific node

SpaceX's secret sauce is definitely their software division. Oldspace is very behind in this department.

[Anonymous No.12350550]

>>12350540
i..is the software ITAR too? not the flight computer, but the tac displays and stuff... I just want to be involved

[Anonymous No.12350576]

>>12350540
>SpaceX's secret sauce is definitely their software division. Oldspace is very behind in this department.
That's what happens when you don't/can't outsource your coding department out of the country.

[Anonymous No.12350594]

>>12350576
That's what happens when your leadership is not just bean counters.

[Anonymous No.12350610]

SpaceX mission control

[Anonymous No.12350614]

>>12350610
Blue Origin mission control

[Anonymous No.12350624]

>>12350614
Blue Origin is trying way too hard to look cool when they haven't done anything yet

[Anonymous No.12350631]

>>12350614
Useless if you don't have missions to control

[Anonymous No.12350637]

>>12350550
I would assume so. I know spacex released their simulator for docking (which shows the real displays and everything)... but I'm surprised they haven't released an entire package that lets you simulate alerts and failures and stuff just to play around and see what the astronauts see. It's either locked behind ITAR, or it just takes too damn long to program a simulated variant that can run in a browser and the programmers have better things to do with their time

[Anonymous No.12350645]

>>12350614
>Alright gene, pumps are opening
>Fluid has begun flowing
>Copy fluid is flowing
>80%
>90%
>T-7 seconds to full fluid transfer... We have 100%
The coffee in the break room is now ready

[Anonymous No.12350658]

>>12350614
Seems like a cool place to work at. The employees are definitely thrilled to sit there once a year.

[Anonymous No.12350662]

>>12350645
Slow and steady wins the race :^)
Blue Origin is the Tortoise, and SpaceX is the hare or something something

[Anonymous No.12350666]

>>12350614
>crickets.wav

[Anonymous No.12350671]

>>12350614
https://youtu.be/4QKr4-tNtPc?t=228

looked super cool when starliner was having a seizure lmao

Does anyone have a webm of that? Shit's funny.

[Anonymous No.12350674]

>>12350614
>empty seats
Confirmed!

[Anonymous No.12350675]

>>12350671
at this point how the fuck are they still trying to get it in space? If I was an astronaut I wouldn't want to step 1 foot in there.

[Anonymous No.12350689]

>>12350675
after it got lost they found another issue where the service module would have hit the capsule after separation. Only reason it didn't was that some engineers ran sims, found the problem (valves mapped wrong lol), and uploaded a fix before separation.

The pressing question then becomes: if they're not finding this basic stuff till the last minute what are the chances they've found less catastrophic bugs? The entire thing is an unholy mess.

https://youtu.be/Mx6Vjw489WI

[Anonymous No.12350692]

>>12350675

[Anonymous No.12350696]

>>12350689
>The entire thing is an unholy mess.
exactly how has Boing! not been reprimanded? I've only heard of software glitches and mistakes to fix from Starliner. Has NASA done anything about it?

[Anonymous No.12350697]

>>12350692
If I have to ride in a deathtrap I'd choose the shuttle. At least I'd look good before being turned into ash.

[Anonymous No.12350699]

>>12350696
You're implying that military contracting companies get reprimanded at all.

[Anonymous No.12350705]

>>12350689
>found the problem (valves mapped wrong lol)
I heard the problem was that it didn't update the vehicle mass after detaching the service module, but that sounds fun too.

[Anonymous No.12350706]

>>12350696
>Has NASA done anything about it?
The did an independent review of the software and software development processes, and issues recommendations and identified ~60 other software issues that needed fixed.
>https://blogs.nasa.gov/commercialcrew/2020/03/06/nasa-update-on-orbital-flight-test-independent-review-team/

[Anonymous No.12350711]

>>12350706
>https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-and-boeing-complete-orbital-flight-test-reviews
Here's a better page with more info about what NASA "asked" for.

>Testing and Simulation: 21 recommendations including the need for greater hardware and software integration testing; performance of an end-to-end “run for record” test prior to each flight using the maximum amount of flight hardware available; reviewing subsystem behaviors and limitations; and addressing any identified simulation or emulation gaps.
>Requirements: 10 recommendations including an assessment of all software requirements with multiple logic conditions to ensure test coverage.
Process and Operational Improvements: 35 recommendations including modifications to change board documentation; bolstering required participants in peer reviews and test data reviews; and increasing the involvement of subject matter experts in safety critical areas.
>Software: 7 recommendations including updating the software code and associated artifacts to correct the Mission Elapsed Timer Epoch and Service Module disposal anomalies; and making the antenna selection algorithm more robust.
>Knowledge Capture and Hardware Modification: 7 recommendations such as organizational changes to the safety reporting structure; amending the Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) approach; and the addition of an external Radio Frequency (RF) filter to reject out-of-band interference.

[Anonymous No.12350717]

>>12350706
>"Boeing doesn't roll out of bed for less than $1 billion"
They expected SpaceX to fail and the Starliner to turn into a cost plus program. That's what happened to the CST-100 Can't Sustain Trajectory.

[Anonymous No.12350723]

>>12350705
not sure which one is worse

[Anonymous No.12350724]

[Anonymous No.12350759]

>>12350717
Now imagine that alternate timeline where Boing!'s expectations played out. A heavily delayed return of American manned spaceflight with an ever growing price tag, and no one would ever think "surely there is a better way?".

[Anonymous No.12350762]

>>12350759
But anon, Space is Hard!

[Anonymous No.12350766]

>>12350610
Comfy, real, human.

>>12350614
Wage slave trigger, empty, SOULESS

[Anonymous No.12350791]

>>12349729
is that a real visible spectrum image

[Anonymous No.12350805]

>>12349729
there was methane in the bottom of the tank

[Anonymous No.12350812]

>>12350805
t. hunderf00t

[Anonymous No.12350819]

>>12350791
https://youtu.be/3R4BIMxt46k?t=15130

you can watch it shift in real-time

[Anonymous No.12350886]

>>12350263
UDMH isn't the worse idea in the world compared to the fucking CIF3

[Anonymous No.12350907]

>>12350886
The CC Sabathia posts always give me a good laugh. The ClF is fucking insane, it can ignite sand and I'm pretty sure it can ignite ash that has already been burned

[Anonymous No.12350914]

[Anonymous No.12350917]

>>12350907
https://youtu.be/M4l56AfUTnQ

[Anonymous No.12350921]

>>12350389
I'd say in the near future, with cheap heavy lifters, it would simply be an easier solution to have a 100% hardsuit that's more of a little spaceship than a bulky suit. Huge propulsion unit backpack using COPV compressed gas tanks and a hard jointed outer shell suit made up of ballistic weave composites. They can simultaneously be simply larger and bulkier but by having smooth joints and possibly mechanical hands as opposed to bulky gloves you could easily make one which is more pleasant to work in, more maneuverable and survivable, and importantly more dextrous than a soft suit.
If robots can be designed to be precise and dextrous enough to perform surgery, it should be essentially childsplay to build a hardsuit with human-sized hands, pressure pads and haptic feedback gloves can also give you a sense of touch which would actually be superior to fumbling around in gloves with heavy plastic finger caps.

[Anonymous No.12350924]

>>12350917
was this recorded in the mid 60s?

[Anonymous No.12350929]

They put a bag of snacks in the hand of baby yoda that's kinda cute

[Anonymous No.12350931]

>>12350917
The fucking chillax music while the entire room burns mixed with the 5-pixel camera... idk why but that made me audibly laugh

[Anonymous No.12350944]

When does Elon build a nuclear lightbulb thruster?

[Anonymous No.12350950]

Are open cycle engines even relevant anymore in 21st century rocket design? Disregarding the Merlin because that was developed in the 2000s.

Say I want to design an open cycle engine that runs on Propylene and LOX.
Is it even worth going to an open cycle design
Or would it be better to spend the extra time and money to make it a closed cycle running oxygen rich?

[Anonymous No.12350954]

>>12350944
Seemingly if someone could convince him that it would be as easy and efficient to do as building a bipropellant LPRE.
It won't be, because even if he could put together a team of nuke experts and even though he's definitely got the money to fund development of an engine, firstly it will be behind Raptor in the dev cycle, and secondly nuclear technology regulations are going to slow everything down substantially, even though closed-cycle gas core NTPRs are substantially more inherently safe design-wise compared to open-cycle solid cores.

[Anonymous No.12350962]

>>12350950
I find the Merlin to be a bit puzzling. In spite of it being open it has a pretty good ISP for a keralox engine and it has a completely insane thrust-to-weight ratio. Would making it closed really improve it any? Would increase in ISP compensate for the added weight and complexity? For a 1st stage engine it's hard to beat as it is.

[Anonymous No.12350963]

>>12350950
>propylene and LOX
Like... molten plastic and LOX? I'm trying to imagine how this works period

[Anonymous No.12350969]

What would be a good way to learn about engines? I’ve been in the normie sphere of spaceflight for around 4 years and I really want to learn more. Any recommended resources?

[Anonymous No.12350972]

>>12350950
Open cyclers are fine, especially for boosters where you don't need to maximize your ISP, the reason they're still used often is because they're comparatively simpe and inexpensive to design and build, since you don't have to worry about meme plumbing like with closed cycle film cooled or full flow staged cycle regenerative cooled engines.
The reason Merlin was given a closed cycle variant was to include film cooling so that a large expansion bell could be used without the bell running the risk of being melted, and because film cooling slightly boosts your combustion efficiency by letting that preburner gas get lit up in the chamber while saving you the trouble of the excessive weight of an ablative bell.

[Anonymous No.12350974]

>>12350929
BABY ASS YEEEEEEDDDD IN DA HOUSE

[Anonymous No.12350982]

>>12350974
pretty based, huh?

[Anonymous No.12350984]

>>12350962
It's because it's got a very high chamber pressure, like Raptor, especially for a LOX/RP1 setup. In addition, open cycle doesn't really cost an enormous amount of ISP, I think something like 3-5% normally, most of Merlin-Vac's ISP improvement came from continued uprating of the operational pressure, with the switch to closed cycle film cooling more to due with not melting the nozzle extension in an environment where there's no atmosphere to help remove heat.

[Anonymous No.12350985]

>>12350969
Rocket Propulsion Elements by George Paul Sutton

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL99EA5ECCC34949DB
These videos are dry as fuck, but are really useful if you can't just read a textbook and learn. I watched about 30 mins a day taking notes, and learned tons.

[Anonymous No.12350993]

>>12350969
Depends on what you really like, since a rocket engine can be broken down into sub-parts which you could spend an entire education on learning about. There's combusion chamber and powerhead design, bell design, plumbing, injector nozzles, and if you are suffering from advanced and severe autism, turbomachinery design.

[Anonymous No.12350994]

>>12350985
Best book I ever read on the guts of rockets.

[Anonymous No.12350995]

>>12350969
have a better Raptor diagram

[Anonymous No.12351001]

>>12350969
>>12350985
I've also been looking for resources on this. Especially nozzle geometry

[Anonymous No.12351004]

>>12350985
Thanks a lot, I’ll have a look after I take my morning shit.

[Anonymous No.12351013]

>>12350972
I don't think Merlin has a closed cycle variant. Film cooled yes for the vacuum variant but that's just dumping the generator exhaust into the bell like F1, isn't it? You can't really do a closed cycle with a fuel-rich RP1 preburner because it shits garbage.

[Anonymous No.12351014]

>>12350929
Oh, their zero gravity indicator was baby yoda? That's disgusting.

[Anonymous No.12351016]

>>12351001
>>12351004
I've got a stack of rocket engine books at home and I'll post the titles when I get back from work. Sutton's Propulsion Elements is among them, but there's some other good shit in there too.

[Anonymous No.12351017]

>>12351014
Gotta make the zoomers and normalfags interested somehow.

[Anonymous No.12351021]

Just woke up. How long until docking?

[Anonymous No.12351024]

>>12351013
Oh, I guess I figure there might be a slight bump in combustion efficiency from dumping that into the last bit of the combustion chamber, but if I'm not mistaken yeah it's pretty much exactly like the F1 film cooling system. Fully closing the cycle would probably be too expensive and not really worth the slight efficiency bump it would give, after all Merlin is already more than sufficient for the 2S of Falcon rockets, to the point where fully opening the throttle would just squish the payload anyways.

[Anonymous No.12351033]

>>12351017
You mean women.

[Anonymous No.12351034]

>>12351017
If they wanted to be on-topic while engaging a new generation they should have gone with this

[Anonymous No.12351038]

>>12351013
yup. You can see where the preburner connects to a ring around the bell in launches

[Anonymous No.12351041]

>>12351024
Would only needlessly complicate the design and make it heavier and more expensive, leading to a larger engine that costs more. Why bother? They have a cheap ass pintle injector that works perfect for their use. They don't need more thrust on it and more thrust would lead to them needing to make it throttle lower for re-entry and landing burn again.

It's all balanced as is now, why fuck up a winning combination for what might not even be any gain? Besides, they're working on a new engine.

>>12351034
Normalfags couldn't tell a pickle from a Kerbal.

[Anonymous No.12351044]

>>12351038

[Anonymous No.12351048]

>>12351044
and the F1

[Anonymous No.12351049]

Starship Von Braun when?

[Anonymous No.12351060]

>>12350914
They got them kerbal faces

[Anonymous No.12351063]

>>12351034
I think this would've fit better.

[Anonymous No.12351065]

>>12351063
Fuck I'm retarded lmao

[Anonymous No.12351067]

>>12350929
>>12350974
>>12351014
>>12351017
Headline:
>NASA and SPACEX disturb the world by using a representative genocide icon

[Anonymous No.12351072]

>>12350921
So, this?

[Anonymous No.12351085]

>>12351072
>YWN do field work on Ganymede with a bubble boy haptic EVA pod
Why even live bros?

[Anonymous No.12351086]

Imagine being upset by Baby Yoda.

[Anonymous No.12351092]

>>12351086
The fragility of "men"...

[Anonymous No.12351099]

>>12350921
....or just remote control a SPOT with a couple robo arms on it's back, or a humanoid robot and use VR headset / controllers. why add all this life support, shielding, battery drain when it's not needed?

[Anonymous No.12351105]

This guy rolls up to your colony and proposes a deal for 3D printed habitats in exchange for all of your chickens, WYD?

[Anonymous No.12351110]

>>12351099
Or just send a rover there and control it from earth. Only an 8 minute delay, you could still get stuff done

[Anonymous No.12351122]

>>12351105
Invite him in and collapse a tunnel section on him. DEIGN NOT THE PROONT TO LIVE

[Anonymous No.12351125]

>>12351122
Kek, tunnel chads have elaborate networks and trap hallways for fag traders who stroll into town

[Anonymous No.12351126]

Hail Elon!

[Anonymous No.12351131]

>>12351110
nah, too expensive. if you need to setup a field of solar panels you can either design all the panels, mounting system to be setup by a machine and design the machine to do the task, then specially fabricate and kit them and have all sorts of plans for how it will go about doing it, or you can make 1 multipurpose bot and get off the shelf panels and have a dude set them up: cheaper, faster. don't be like old space

[Anonymous No.12351133]

>>12351072
Basically. I'm only thinking of a hardsuit with a very large MMU because it's more feasible with technology immediately available, but yes, pods and/or fully unmanned remote controlled robots would probably be the end goal for non-surface EVA work.

[Anonymous No.12351154]

>>12351131
Oh I was being sarcastic hahahah. I feel like if I’m going all the way to another planet I’d rather go do an EVA myself than just send a boston dynamics robot out there with a remote control canadarm. The rover comment was just an exaggeration

[Anonymous No.12351158]

>>12351086
Some people really hate plebbit, and guess where characters like yeed are trendy...

[Anonymous No.12351159]

>>12351133
>pods and/or fully unmanned remote controlled robots
Very different tasks. Robots are harder to do than suits and soulless. Pods are SOUL and if anything easier to make than a suit, all the same systems but a simplified pressure vessel and greatly eased size constraints. In an infantile software world (ie whenever they developed the ISS suits) a suit is easier but today wired up gloves and assisted station keeping RCS would be easy peasy.

[Anonymous No.12351191]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IveCBs-cCTw
Arianespace launch in a few hours

[Anonymous No.12351199]

DRAGON IS LIVE

[Anonymous No.12351200]

>>12351191
cant wait for the humanity faggotry. How can they even say it with the MAN in the middle?

[Anonymous No.12351204]

>>12351159
Agreed, just have a tic-tac shaped pod where the front hemisphere of one end is a cockpit with a small diameter docking hatch on the nose. UHD cameras feed like a 260 degree surround view to a screen inside, plus a toggleable rear view. One set of small joystick controls for 3D maneuvering plus a pair of haptic feedback gloves to use two of four available tool arms, calibrated in such a way that fully extending your arm will synch up with fully extending the tool, so your depth perception is actually useful.
The whole rear of the pod is a super high pressure COPV containing pressurized CO2 or Nitrogen or whatever's cheapest to use as reaction mass, and a cluster of RCS packs at various points.
Better endurance than a suit, greater flexibility for tasks, greater strength than a human limb, in a pinch you could probably even use one as an emergency booster for stationkeeping.

[Anonymous No.12351210]

Check out these lists of industry space companies, great info + ratings of how "realistic" they are based on various parameters
https://spacefund.com/reality-rating/

here's specifically a list for launch companies
https://spacefund.com/launch-database/

[Anonymous No.12351216]

Crew Dragon is really BIG

[Anonymous No.12351226]

>>12350950
>is X relevant in this century? Ignoring the iconic and wildly successful X from this century

[Anonymous No.12351232]

>>12351216
The trunk section really embiggens it. I really wish they'd just create Long Dragon and turn all of that shit into pressurized volume.

[Anonymous No.12351233]

[Anonymous No.12351236]

>>12351204
I think with any indirect system there would be inevitably some loss of dexterity so I would throw in auxiliary exterior gloves for fine work, kinda like those baby arms you see on some mecha

[Anonymous No.12351238]

Astronauts are so cool

[Anonymous No.12351241]

glover got his gold pin !

[Anonymous No.12351246]

>>12351241
This guy has literally not stopped smiling the entire time he's on camera.

[Anonymous No.12351253]

>>12351232

What is the reason for both Starliner and Dragon to have the 210 day limit while being docked? I know the Soyuz has its limit due to the RCS propellant breaking down after 180 days.

[Anonymous No.12351254]

>ywn find a girl that looks at you the same way Victor looks at his astronaut pin

[Anonymous No.12351256]

>>12351253
Seeing people stand in the capsule,
a long capsule is better than a wide capsule for moving around lel

[Anonymous No.12351257]

>>12351232
Isn't that exactly what Dragon XL is?

[Anonymous No.12351259]

>>12351232
There is no demand from NASA to create a larger dragon capsule, so nobody is going to fund it.
Besides starship will be so big that your farts will create a echo.

[Anonymous No.12351265]

>>12351257
Dragon xl is just a cargo capsule, it will never be man rated.

[Anonymous No.12351266]

>>12351232
>create long dragon
Starship is super super long dragon, it's bigger than the volume of ISS

[Anonymous No.12351269]

>>12351256
doesn't really make much difference in 0g...

[Anonymous No.12351274]

Quick retard question. Y literally we don't have advanced mobile suits like >>12351236
for space? Shit y we don't have them for stuff here on ground already? Are we till too retarded to make them or it's a power issue? think of the prawn suit from Subnautica

[Anonymous No.12351278]

>>12351241
>>12351246
guy's just thrilled to be in space.

Honestly, I'm pretty pessimistic about the future but that could all change if Elon's plans work out and space becomes viable for the average person. There's just something about space that makes people happy and changes perspective. Maybe it could be the "cold water" that would snap us out of our current stupid trajectory.

[Anonymous No.12351281]

>>12351265
the difference between a pressurized cargo capsule and a manned capsule is a bunch of oxygen candles and gumption

[Anonymous No.12351299]

>>12351278
yeah man, it's like how you can't see borders from space cause they're not real, and up there you realize that we're all humans and we should put aside our differences and shit and just be kind. so true

[Anonymous No.12351305]

SN9 has a lot of heat shields mounts and heat shields

[Anonymous No.12351315]

[Anonymous No.12351316]

>>12351278
enh, idk about that. I think if space was colonized to the extent earth was it would become boring again. Maybe more being on the forefront of human exploration/technology is what makes people happy. I guess space has the advantage of being infinite so there is always more to explore, but still

[Anonymous No.12351317]

>>12351274
>>12351274
Large (say 20-30+ft) mecha are out due to scaling factors but small/mid-sized ones like those I think are in the realm of near future tech if seriously pursued. The biggest issues are you need limbs with high power and robustness that are also compact, quickly responsive and capable of fine control, and you need software that can turn inputs into fluid human-like movement with awareness of its balance and surroundings. Guys like boston dynamics show the software part is coming along. The hardware part is lagging behind I think, probably need something like artificial muscles which people are futzing around with but no serious demonstrators that I know of.

[Anonymous No.12351335]

>>12351253
Dunno about Starliner, but the solar panels degrade on Dragon

[Anonymous No.12351337]

>>12351305
Tile robustness is lagging behind other development, kinda expect to see a ton of debris off that thing if they fill those mounts desu

[Anonymous No.12351339]

>>12351274
Power issue. You either need a ridiculously small nuclear power source, or batteries that are several times more energy-dense than what we have now. Otherwise you've got a near-useless operation time before a recharge is needed.
In space, you could get away with a power tether more easily and not need it onboard, but there's just not enough happening in space right now to make suits like that necessary for any of the ongoing activities.

[Anonymous No.12351354]

>>12351339
I don't think power is necessarily the biggest barrier, guys are fitting around 20kwh on bikes these days and you can pair that up with a fuel cell or turbine to keep it topped up

[Anonymous No.12351358]

>>12351317
Not him
While I mostly agree with you, I'd say the size limit isn't that small.
I'd say the limit is more like 20-30 m on earth, higher in lower gravity.
However the best practical size depends a lot on the use case, there is little reason to have a 20 m tall mobile suit for regular EVA operations for example.
>>12351339
A small one with a battery, cable, enviromental system and RCS thrusters might be realy usefull for EVA as it doesn't leak like a regular space suit and is more versatile.

[Anonymous No.12351361]

>>12351317
They’ll need to do a combination of hydraulics, pulleys and flywheels to get the proper range of speed dex and str

[Anonymous No.12351365]

>>12351361
It is easier to use geared steppper motors.

[Anonymous No.12351367]

>>12351274
>>12351317
>>12351339
Have we not done shit in the Human+Robot science field in the past +20 years? That stupid yellow robot is literally the only thing I can recall right now and it's just a fucking expensive ground drone which you need to pay even more for extra stuff

>>12351315
>Then we lost the Nazis
>Then we lost the spirit
>Then we got Nixon
>Then shuttle
>Then politics hit the final FUCK YOU nail

Apologies in advance for any noticeable doomerism, not really one but you get my point.

[Anonymous No.12351377]

>>12351367
>Have we not done shit in the Human+Robot science field in the past +20 years?

[Anonymous No.12351382]

>>12351253
Because that's what NASA needed them rated for, so that's when the "warranty runs out". We had a few Mars rovers that were only rated for 90 days too.
>>12351269
It makes a difference if there is no way to stretch out to full length in any dimension. (I don't think we have anything that cramped that goes to orbit.)
>>12351337
Every one that breaks or falls off is data for how (not) to do them next time. They have plenty of time before doing "real" launches, but they do need to get a few of those things up to find the right way to do it.

[Anonymous No.12351391]

>>12351367
That stupid ground drone represents what portion of the tech they are so confident in they put it into a full commercial role. Meanwhile out back they have a ninja robot doing cartwheels but probably shits its circuits every once in a while.

[Anonymous No.12351404]

>>12351317
I dunno, even in Earth gravity a 30-40ft mecha would be feasible with the right power source, if you were using hydraulics for mobility. Huge Excavators and other construction equipment can move very quickly and precisely with hydraulics, it's a matter of software control and power.
Granted, finding an actual use case for a big-ass mecha on Earth is the bigger barrier there.

[Anonymous No.12351413]

>>12351377
Superior Mobile Suit coming through

[Anonymous No.12351422]

thunderf00t says reusing boosters/spacecraft is not cost effective and musk just does it for show. why is he right?

[Anonymous No.12351429]

>>12351367
We need the space-nazis to fix it...
https://youtu.be/x2xn0UAkw5I

[Anonymous No.12351431]

>

[Anonymous No.12351434]

>>12349384
What would you rather have SpaceX spend money on, getting Starship working or reusable Falcon 9 uppers?

[Anonymous No.12351438]

>>12351422
What are thunderf00t's evidence and maths behind his claim?

[Anonymous No.12351445]

>>12351438
pff he doesn't have any of that stuff. he is "skeptical" because the space shuttle was reusable and it was expensive

[Anonymous No.12351451]

>>12351422
He is wrong, by using an oversized upper stage the booster of F9 doesn't have to reach as high of a speed.
The lower speed means re-entry is relatively easy.
Refurbishment and slightly reduced payload capacity are cheaper than building a whole new booster each time.

[Anonymous No.12351454]

>>12351438
He references the space shuttle, and because the space shuttle was expensive to refurb, therefore Falcon 9 is also extremely expensive
Also you lose so much deltaV landing/returning to launch site that could be spent on inserting into orbit/ launching a larger payload

[Anonymous No.12351459]

>>12351451
saves time not having to build a whole new booster, and time is money!

[Anonymous No.12351460]

[Anonymous No.12351466]

>>12351454
>Also you lose so much deltaV landing/returning to launch site that could be spent on inserting into orbit/ launching a larger payload
So just make the rocket bigger. Chubby rockets have less of a mass fraction penalty from tankage.

[Anonymous No.12351467]

>>12351445
I figured. The problem with comparing the Falcon 9 to the Shuttle is that both vehicles are/were operated in completely different ways. The Falcon 9 recovers the booster stage from a low-energy suborbital hop, is allowed to be iterated on, and nearly every design choice was made to reduce costs. The Shuttle recovers the upper/sustainer stage from LEO, was never iterated on in any meaningful way, and every design choice was made to increase the number of jobs required.

[Anonymous No.12351469]

>>12351454
He's a fucking retard who knows nothing about rockets. He even thought F9 ran on methalox. Just fucking ignore him.

[Anonymous No.12351472]

>>12351454
>Also you lose so much deltaV landing/returning to launch site that could be spent on inserting into orbit/ launching a larger payload
See >>12351459

[Anonymous No.12351479]

QUICK LIFE HACK ADVICE:
Don't watch, listen or acknowledge the existence of burnedf00t, k thx have a nice day :D

[Anonymous No.12351480]

>>12350500
You people non ironically believe in nuclear thermal rockets but don't understand how the very same principle can be used for propulsive landing with the reentry heat instead of a nuclear reactor

[Anonymous No.12351484]

>>12351459
Time, material and labor.
>>12351454
>you lose so much deltaV landing/returning to launch site
Not that much, especialy when not returning to launchsize but landing on a droneship.
Keep in mind that especialy in F9 the upper stage performs the most accelleration after all.
Besides, the payload of F9 is more than sufficient even for manned launches in reuseable mode.

[Anonymous No.12351485]

>>12351479
elon musk = debunked

[Anonymous No.12351490]

>>12351466
>>12351472
Thunderf00t is stupid, he's thinks with the engineers mindset of "every bit of deltaV not used is waste", so even if you scale up with superheavy he'll continue to use the argument even if it doesn't make sense
He makes the horrible error or forgetting the falcon 9 is also a payload, and not trash to throw away after use

[Anonymous No.12351491]

>>12351484
it sounds like phil mason got his information on rocket reusability from a ULA exec. he parrots the same talking points

[Anonymous No.12351492]

Have you guys noticed how SN8 is a bit oxidized already? The finish is now all dull

[Anonymous No.12351500]

>>12350500
>califag detector
kek

[Anonymous No.12351501]

>>12351479
I mean, thunderf00t isn't stupid, but you can quickly see he isn't looking at it from an engineers or buisnessmans perspective.
That way of thinking also lead NASA and ULA to use hydrogen lower stages...
>>12351491
Kek

[Anonymous No.12351511]

>>12351501
>engineers or buisnessmans perspective
10 years ago enjuneers and bidinessmen were parrotting that it was impossible and too expensive, many still are

[Anonymous No.12351518]

>>12351480
Don't be passive aggressive later when you didn't even respond when you were BTFO

[Anonymous No.12351519]

lori garver seemed excited about crew-1, maybe she will find to kill boeing's gravy train once and for all

[Anonymous No.12351521]

CONTACT

[Anonymous No.12351523]

>>12350245
why the hell would you bring live chickens on a space journey when frozen eggs which can be fertilized later can both save time,energy and space.

[Anonymous No.12351525]

>>12351511
Guess what, if you can convince the goverment to pay you to build a whole new booster for each launch, that's REALY profitable.
And if you can convince them to build them even larger due to hydromeme lower stages, it's even more profitable.

[Anonymous No.12351532]

AND RESILIENCE RISES!
NOT EVEN GRAVITY CONTAINS HUMANITY AS WE EXPLORE!
ONE FOR ALL!

[Anonymous No.12351537]

are the super dracos used for anything other than abort? How about the fuel? Is the reservoir shared with the normal dracos? Do the normal dracos provide all the delta V to get to the station?

[Anonymous No.12351539]

>>12351523
soulless

[Anonymous No.12351542]

>>12351532
Not gonna lie, that was cringy.

[Anonymous No.12351549]

>>12351523
Ok chink

[Anonymous No.12351550]

>>12351537
The Super Dracos were supposed to be used for propulsive landing but NASA insisted on parachutes.

[Anonymous No.12351555]

why doesnt space station grow crops already

[Anonymous No.12351563]

>>12351555
Plants don't grow vertically in zero gravity they just turn into small balls of plant material and die

[Anonymous No.12351565]

>>12351555
They have, anon

[Anonymous No.12351567]

>>12351563

[Anonymous No.12351570]

>>12351537
"No, no Elon, you can't use Super Dracos on our missions, maybe on abort situations if we feel at least one astronaut is important enough to be saved from the bunch, much love, NASA"

[Anonymous No.12351571]

>>12351555
Insufficient space to grow any meaningfull quantities.

[Anonymous No.12351576]

>>12351563
That's bullshit lol

[Anonymous No.12351578]

>>12351570
well, superdracos were the reasom the demo-2 capsule fucking annihilated itself so they have even more good reasons

[Anonymous No.12351581]

>>12351576
Good thing you're around. How else would we be able to tell what's true or not???

[Anonymous No.12351582]

>>12351571
lies, you can be way more volume efficient in space than on the ground

[Anonymous No.12351587]

>>12351581
>he's mad

[Anonymous No.12351589]

>>12351587
He's not me, I am me anon :(

[Anonymous No.12351592]

>>12351589
>he's he

[Anonymous No.12351593]

>>12351582
Dude, ISS is pretty cramped.
They can't spare a whole segment to grow a little food on the side.

[Anonymous No.12351595]

>>12351576

[Anonymous No.12351598]

>>12351593
WHAT THE FUCK AM I PAYING THEM FOR?

[Anonymous No.12351609]

Y do they have to do all these space yeeting again?

[Anonymous No.12351616]

>>12351049
Soon

[Anonymous No.12351617]

>>12351609
You ever done a dock in KSP? Mine would have about 400 small burns in there

[Anonymous No.12351620]

>>12351537
Fuel is shared. I heard during the launch podcast.

[Anonymous No.12351622]

>>12351617
practice
https://youtu.be/WwWccjAD2i8

[Anonymous No.12351629]

>>12351609
You dont drive a space craft in orbit like you drive a car.

[Anonymous No.12351631]

>>12351622
That's just final approach and they set you up pretty decently in position, this is the orbital ping pong before you get there

[Anonymous No.12351635]

>>12351049
>Elon and Shodan have basically the same speech pattern
Bros, did we just discover Neuralink's endgame?

[Anonymous No.12351637]

>>12351609
spacex is inefficient and poor programming. should have automatically been in the perfect trajectory as soon as they staged of second stage. instead the need a ton of rcs/draco firings (i call them bandaid burns). it's absurd and shows how innacurate the systems are

[Anonymous No.12351639]

>>12351637
t. thunderbutt

[Anonymous No.12351641]

>>12351232
crew dragon is reusable for crew now i thought. is this an old video?

[Anonymous No.12351644]

>>12351637
learn orbital mechanics thunderf00gposter

[Anonymous No.12351645]

>>12351316
once you can cheaply get shit into orbit its not that hard for a dozen or so smart people to pool resources and create their own interplanetary space craft

[Anonymous No.12351647]

>>12351609
Learn orbital mechanics. Kerbal Space Program is a good start.

>>12351637
KSC is hardly an optimal launch site for ISS insertions.

[Anonymous No.12351650]

>>12351637
Brachistochrone to ISS when

[Anonymous No.12351651]

>>12351641
Any estronaut video talking about SpaceX stuff gets almost immediately outdated by the day, ofc Elon being the only motherfucker doing something it's expected this happens.

[Anonymous No.12351653]

>>12351454
>>12351454
>>12351438
>>12351445
>>12351434
just fucking ignore thunderfoot. as another anon said, he fucking thinks falcon 9 runs on methalox and thinks the space shuttle is comparable to falcon 9. he clearly knows little if anything about aerospace in general

[Anonymous No.12351654]

>>12351650
I don't think you can ever do a true brachistochrone when the first half is fighting gravity and air drag losses.

[Anonymous No.12351662]

>>12351653
athletesf00t has debunked this post

[Anonymous No.12351677]

>>12351650
can someone explain this type of trajectory? it sounds cool

[Anonymous No.12351680]

>>12351617
>keep having to switch back to the station because it drifts slightly out of alignment
>finally get it lined up
>sunset, can't see shit
>ram it home anyways
>jeb sent flying to duna

[Anonymous No.12351681]

>>12351001
>>12351004
OK guys here goes.
Rocket Propulsion Elements, An Introduction to the Engineering of Rockets, George P. Sutton
Rocket Propulsion by Marcel Barrere
History of Liquid Propellant Rocket Engines, also by George P. Sutton
and finally Rocket Engines by S. L. Bragg

[Anonymous No.12351691]

>>12351681
based. Thanks a lot anon. I'll look into these.

[Anonymous No.12351693]

Uhhhhh .... wasn't a "Vega" launch suppose to happen or something?

[Anonymous No.12351697]

>>12351681
Naisu, thank anon, here's a cute selfie of me in return.

[Anonymous No.12351706]

>>12351693
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IveCBs-cCTw

Live in 65 minutes.

[Anonymous No.12351707]

>>12351693
that's in roughly 2 hours. Not sure if there's a livestream for it

[Anonymous No.12351709]

>>12351691
I've mostly been reading through S.L. Bragg right now, it deals primarily with gas dynamics, thermochemistry, propellant chemistry, combustion and chamber engineering, it's another good one if you want to really learn about what's going on inside the engine, very math heavy despite being a small book, brush up on your calc and trig and you could actually follow along since it does give example equations.

[Anonymous No.12351718]

someone redpill me on euro rockets

[Anonymous No.12351724]

>>12351718
Expensive sluts who have taken a hundred government dicks but still barely put out any launches.

[Anonymous No.12351746]

>>12351718
I want to make sounding rockets with Ariane!

[Anonymous No.12351750]

>>12351718
I want to sound ariane!

[Anonymous No.12351753]

>>12351650
When SpaceX begins running competetively.

[Anonymous No.12351754]

>>12351677
>fuck walter hohmann, fuck orbital mechanics, i don't have time for this and have dV to spare so i'll go straight there and flip halfway

[Anonymous No.12351772]

>>12351677
Basically you fire the engine balls out half the way towards the target to accelerate and then half the way in reverse to decelerate. A sort of suicide burn taken to extreme. Very fast in theory but requires retarded Isp not possible with current engine technology. Also if your engine fails midway you're yeeting yourself to fucknowhere beyond any help.

[Anonymous No.12351789]

>>12351772
You can actually do a brachistochrone between orbital locations at 0.01g / 0.1m/s^2 and still get from LEO to fucking Saturn in under 40 days. 1g is just for Earth lift, express deliveries of expensive cargo, or VIP transport.

[Anonymous No.12351792]

>>12351616
Saved lmao

[Anonymous No.12351798]

>>12351422
>thunderf00t
It's pretty safe to just categorically ignore him

[Anonymous No.12351812]

>>12351789
What the fuck? You can do that?

[Anonymous No.12351823]

>>12351812
That's why people are so hyped for these up-and-coming magnetoplasma engines. It doesn't matter that you could produce the same thrust with a strong exhalation, if you run the engine for weeks on end it will radically outstrip a chemical rocket in terms of the total amount of thrust delivered over it's burn lifetime.

[Anonymous No.12351844]

>>12351812
Yeah torch ships are actually way more attainable if you spend the extra mass budget on rad shielding the hab module (meaning longer MBTF for your crew or other rad-sensitive parts) instead of fucking multiplying your delta V budget by 100.

>>12351823
The big advantage of the newer designs is that they don't have electrodes in physical contact with the plasma, which means very long potential service life. No point in a torch ship if you have to replace the engines every ten days.

[Anonymous No.12351846]

>>12351422
Why does he say this?

[Anonymous No.12351853]

>>12351844
having ~0.01TW makes a big difference when traditional ions have something like .0001

[Anonymous No.12351866]

Ariane Vega flight in 30

https://youtu.be/IveCBs-cCTw

[Anonymous No.12351870]

Another fun fact: 0.01g * 1 year =~ 0.01c
Get a system that can thrust for 20 years and you can build a generation ship that gets to Alpha Centauri in less than a century. These thrusters are a Big Fucking Deal.

>>12351853
They're also much better than ion drives on thrust efficiency. You can get like 0.01N/kW instead of 0.0001N/kW, and with much cheaper propellant.

[Anonymous No.12351872]

>>12351844
You talkin' about the HDLT I assume?

[Anonymous No.12351879]

>>12350245
Landing with chutes is a tough call, for an inflatable like that could fill it with a lifting gas, H2 or He, and just float down slowly.

[Anonymous No.12351888]

>>12351872
Sadly no. I am the big HDLT autist anon but I read some more papers about experiments with it and it just doesn't scale that well. All my assumptions did not hold true because they rested on linear scaling up to hundreds of Newtons. I'm talking about other thrusters in the general family. Here's a paper from 2017 on the state of the art in plasma thrusters.

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Stephen_Bathgate/publication/317700959_Electrodeless_plasma_thrusters_for_spacecraft_A_review/links/5b7ac05492851c1e12227615/Electrodeless-plasma-thrusters-for-spacecraft-A-review.pdf

[Anonymous No.12351896]

>>12351870
honestly if you're going interstellar you might as well use orion and get there in ~40 years instead

[Anonymous No.12351899]

>>12351879
>fill the hab module with inert lifting gas

[Anonymous No.12351901]

SpaceX stream shows Dragon in the distance approaching ISS

https://youtu.be/3hK540tMmvw

[Anonymous No.12351911]

are those stars

[Anonymous No.12351917]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFqdiW3oEbM
new video by the PEPE guys

[Anonymous No.12351920]

>>12351911
Probably nuked pixels in the camera.

[Anonymous No.12351922]

>>12351917
The absolute madman can't keep getting away with it

[Anonymous No.12351924]

>/sci/ thread open in one of the SpaceX control monitors

[Anonymous No.12351925]

>>12351917
>after firing for a few seconds it actually starts to REEEEEEEEEEEE

[Anonymous No.12351928]

>>12351917
Sick setup they have now. They need to stabilize the flow though, and didn't show the throttling at all.

[Anonymous No.12351938]

>>12351917
>>12351925
holy shit lmfao

[Anonymous No.12351944]

>>12351938
>>12351917
The man who will save spaceflight when all hope seems lost.

[Anonymous No.12351962]

>>12351917
The madlad is at it again

[Anonymous No.12351986]

is spacex doing it right by having mission control next to the machine shop?

[Anonymous No.12351989]

>>12351986
That's what happens when you don't have your operations spread across every single Congressional district.

[Anonymous No.12351992]

>>12351518
I wasn't even home. Expect a video to address reentry heated cold gas propulsive landing.

[Anonymous No.12352002]

>>12351986
Oy vey this mission control room isn't diverse enough

[Anonymous No.12352004]

>>12351986
>Elon didn't want to see computers, so we had to use mini desktops that are mounted on the underside of the table. Watch your knees.
>Wired keyboard and mice since you don't want to deal with dead batteries during a launch.
>We needed to use half-height PNY video cards to drive three monitors. Required weird breakout cables. (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/625342-REG/PNY_Technologies_030_0230_000_VHDCI_to_4x_DVI_D.html))
>Elon picked those monitors based on about 5 different ones I ordered. He picked the one with a weird resolution (I don't remember exactly). That resolution was different from just about every other monitor at SpaceX that ran the same software. Since the software doesn't resize with resolution we occasionally had to change the GUI to work in that room.
>The ceiling of this room is the floor of the 3rd floor. The 3rd floor used to be the garage, so every time someone drove their car the projectors would wobble.

[Anonymous No.12352008]

Apparently SN42 was installed on SN8. We'll see if SpaceX managed to fix the problem on this one.

[Anonymous No.12352010]

>>12352004
>The legs were IKEA Galant T-Legs. The tabletops were custom built, but they were just particle board with a fiberboard white top. As cheap as you could get. If you look at the first picture from OP you can see a bunch of chips taken out of the front of the table by the chair arms.
>I think all the money for the control room was for the glass walls and the projectors.

[Anonymous No.12352031]

>>12351992
>I wasn't even home.
hahahah yeah I'm sure that's it
>Expect a video
standing by to kek

[Anonymous No.12352034]

Ariane stream up?

[Anonymous No.12352042]

>>12351718
>Ariane 5
copy of the Shuttle architecture intended for the canceled Hermes manned program. Thus, oversized for standard launches. They made up for it by making dual satellite launches standard.
>Ariane 6
Ariane 5 more reasonably sized. Still... expendable.
>Vega
Turning a single Ariane 5 booster into its own launch vehicle (a popular choice: see Zenit, Epsilon). Not a bad way to get a cheap small launcher if you are already making the boosters.
>Soyuz-ST
plugging their medium launch hole until Ariane 6 comes online. They've been using it for a lot of the Galileo launches.

[Anonymous No.12352051]

>>12352004
>>12352010
I love it

[Anonymous No.12352055]

>>12352034
just a test pattern and annoying tone. Should go live in about ten minutes

[Anonymous No.12352056]

>>12350110
Excellent post. I seem a similar debate coming for Mars. Starship is cool big rocket, but the mission design makes no sense.

[Anonymous No.12352061]

>>12352004
16:10 isn't weird, it what everyone should use

[Anonymous No.12352072]

Why not just strap some merlins to the iss with a fuel tank and lander and fly that to Mars. Touchdown, do some geology and sabatier testing, rendezvous with the ISS in Mars orbit and fly back home, and land in a dragon? Seems easier than putting like 6 starship up and refueling them and risking everything on mars' shitty atmosphere and shuttle heat shield crap.

[Anonymous No.12352082]

>>12352072
ISS is old as shit, isn't designed to work outside Earth's magnetosphere, and doesn't have the solar panel power to work at Mars orbit. What you're describing is basically what Gateway is for, only they made the mistake of chaining it to ISS so it's not happening.

[Anonymous No.12352084]

>>12352056
>hurr durr durr dur weeeeeeeeee

[Anonymous No.12352087]

>>12351706
>BEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP

[Anonymous No.12352092]

>>12352087
just switched to a countdown, about to go live

[Anonymous No.12352100]

>>12352092
what in the fuck is this music?

[Anonymous No.12352102]

>>12350459
Reminder, I still hold this bet

[Anonymous No.12352109]

Fantastic production values.
>Stefan Israel
EVERY TIME

[Anonymous No.12352115]

>>12352102
I won't take that bet; they just said they are waiting on a lightning rule to clear

[Anonymous No.12352116]

Why does the mission control look like some soviet congress or ballroom

[Anonymous No.12352124]

>>12352010
>As cheap as you could get.
Based. Reminder that SpaceX also recycled pic related from NASA.

[Anonymous No.12352144]

>>12352116
Because the EU is Communist in all but name.

[Anonymous No.12352145]

thread theme: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BX3bN5YeiQs

[Anonymous No.12352155]

>>12352008
we're getting close to cutting-edge raptors, so hopefully

[Anonymous No.12352168]

>>12351706
LAUNCH

[Anonymous No.12352170]

>>12352168
OH FUCK THE ISS AND DRAGON ARE IN THE WAY

[Anonymous No.12352184]

>>12352008
>>12352155
Any issue the raptor can experience: melt, explode, desegregate, implode, whatever the fuck, by the end of the day we will have a fucking beast roaring like nothing we have heard in this modern times, it'll be mass produced and help mankind advance to the next level. LET'S GOOOOOOO.

[Anonymous No.12352190]

I didn't realize the Vega was so gay.
>three solid stages
>and then a hypergolic stage

[Anonymous No.12352198]

>>12352168
Well I'll be damned, an Arianespace rocket that actually went up on time.

[Anonymous No.12352201]

>>12352198
that sudden flip of the third stage was bizarre, though I know why they do it.

[Anonymous No.12352204]

>>12352190
that pretty cool desu. Looked like it was pulling some pretty healthy Gs there

[Anonymous No.12352205]

>tfw no qt spacex capcom gf

[Anonymous No.12352210]

>>12352201
For a very specific insertion no doubt. Polar orbit and the coast phase is going to be 2 hours or something.

[Anonymous No.12352218]

>>12352184
If Starship works like it says on the tin, the Raptor will be more iconic than the F-1.

[Anonymous No.12352220]

where the hell are they putting this sat?

[Anonymous No.12352224]

>>12352210
yeah, there aren't a lot of ways to fine-tune a solid motor burn for a specific trajectory. That's why they often are topped with a liquid fueled stage (and why PSLV alternates liquid and solid stages)

[Anonymous No.12352226]

>>12352220

[Anonymous No.12352230]

>>12352190
I think that kind of construction makes sense for an expendable rocket, but if you're going to end up with shit cost/kg anyway it's moot

[Anonymous No.12352232]

>>12352190
It's basically France's ICBM program. Speaking of which, North Korea recently unveiled a Titan sized road mobile hypergolic ICBM

Nork Gemini when?

[Anonymous No.12352236]

Houston ground control looks happy to hear from Dragon and that all is going well

[Anonymous No.12352240]

>>12352190
>Blocks your path

[Anonymous No.12352243]

>>12351492
Well yeah, they are operating near a beach. I propose getting FLEX SEAL to create a highly heat resistant version of Flex Seal clear, which protects the starship from corrosion, and is tough as hell.

[Anonymous No.12352247]

>>12352243
LAYERED
ABLATIVE
DUCT-TAPE
SHIELDING

[Anonymous No.12352248]

>>12352004
>Elon didn't want to see computers, so we had to use mini desktops that are mounted on the underside of the table

Autismus extremis

[Anonymous No.12352252]

>>12352004
>>12352010
>>12351986
Based Elon spared ALL EXPENSE

[Anonymous No.12352262]

UH OH

[Anonymous No.12352263]

>>12352240
Can northrop-grumman come back from the omegA's failure? Or are they doomed to be pushed out of the launch business?

[Anonymous No.12352264]

>>12352248
I don't get it why are people mad because of this?
Is it because there are no meme rgb led cases with fancy watercooling to be seen?

[Anonymous No.12352271]

>ISSUE WITH THE TELEMETRY
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARIAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

[Anonymous No.12352272]

>>12352240
>solids with solid side boosters
the audacity of these lads

>>12352263
NOC won the sole source contract to replace the entire Minute Man fleet, they'll be building solid rockets for years.

[Anonymous No.12352274]

pic related it's ESA rn

[Anonymous No.12352275]

Did they outsource their GNC to Boeing?

[Anonymous No.12352276]

>the trajectory is degraded
uh oh

[Anonymous No.12352278]

>>12352271
>AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARIAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
For a second there, I thought /dbs/ decided to move from /a/ to here.

[Anonymous No.12352280]

>>12352042
thanks for the rundown, anon.

[Anonymous No.12352282]

>>12352271
more like VegAAAAAAAAAAAAUUUUUGGGGHHHH

[Anonymous No.12352283]

Crew-1 live rn

[Anonymous No.12352284]

Live view from inside Dragon
https://youtu.be/3hK540tMmvw

[Anonymous No.12352291]

>>12352276
what does "degraded" mean in this context? Doesn't sound good

[Anonymous No.12352296]

Holy shit Dragon has a live camera view towards ISS?

That docking is going to be incredible

[Anonymous No.12352297]

>>12352004
Wonder why they didn't use thin clients and a server bank off to the side of the room. Maybe this was just cheaper.

[Anonymous No.12352299]

IT'S OVER

[Anonymous No.12352300]

>>12352282
More like: Veg-AAAIIIIIIIIIIIIIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

[Anonymous No.12352302]

>>12352291
The Dragon's orbit was slightly lower than expected, probably due to slight changes in the thrusters during the boost burns

[Anonymous No.12352303]

>>12352282
or blame the upper stage:
AAAAAAAAAAAAvum
or
a-BOOOM
>>12352291
that's the last thing they said before going quiet

latest news: "deviation of the trajectory"

[Anonymous No.12352304]

>>12352296
It will if they fucking turn on external lights

[Anonymous No.12352308]

Non-nominal trajectory on Vega. So much for that increased payload.

[Anonymous No.12352311]

>>12352308
>>12352276
The spacecraft might still be able to achieve its operational orbit but would need to use more of its own fuel than designed for.

[Anonymous No.12352313]

>>12352303
>>12352302
wait, are we talking about Vega or Dragon? Having two launches in progress is confusing. I know that Vega is shitting the bed. How is Dragon doing? From the livestream it looks great.

[Anonymous No.12352318]

>>12352313
I fucked up, its supposed to be Vega

[Anonymous No.12352319]

>>12352311
Yeah, but they've been hyping up how "improved" Vega is for payloads and with new fairing etc.
So much for that.

[Anonymous No.12352322]

>WHITE SCREEN
BUT IT IS NIGHT!

[Anonymous No.12352323]

That shot of ISS from dragon looks straight up from a Kubrick film

[Anonymous No.12352327]

>>12352323
>THAT'S NO SPACE STATION
>THAT'S A TIE FIGHTER

[Anonymous No.12352328]

FINALLY after decades of 144p black and white grainy views from Soyuz we get a real camera docking to ISS

[Anonymous No.12352329]

>>12352327
THEY FLY NOW?

[Anonymous No.12352332]

>>12352327
>Dragon tries to evade
>ISS has them on a tractor beam
>Imperial theme intensifies

[Anonymous No.12352337]

>>12352329
THEY FLY NOW

[Anonymous No.12352339]

>>12352323
who the hell is filming this and where and with what

[Anonymous No.12352340]

KINO

[Anonymous No.12352341]

>>12352339
Camera in the nose of the Crew Dragon, dumbass.

[Anonymous No.12352345]

T- to docking with ISS?

[Anonymous No.12352346]

>>12352339
It's an external camera mounted on Dragon pointed at ISS
https://youtu.be/3hK540tMmvw

It's a new view we have never gotten before

[Anonymous No.12352348]

>>12352345
25 minutes

[Anonymous No.12352352]

>>12352348
ah alright. and when is hatch opening?

[Anonymous No.12352353]

TARS, analyze the ISS' spin

[Anonymous No.12352355]

bros...

[Anonymous No.12352359]

>>12352352
At least a few hours after docking. They have to run several comm and pressure checks to confirm it's safe to open

[Anonymous No.12352361]

>>12352359
Yeah I know it usually takes hours, was just wondering if anybody knew when.

[Anonymous No.12352363]

>Europe rocket failed again
JWST will launch on a Europe rocket next year...it's ok, guys!

[Anonymous No.12352368]

>>12352355
That sucks. Hope they find the fix

[Anonymous No.12352369]

>>12352355
ouch, this is the second failure in their last three Vega launches. They are going to be the Fiat of launch vehicles at this rate.

[Anonymous No.12352370]

>>12352341
ok rude

[Anonymous No.12352376]

>>12352323
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPSBLFhz8i8

[Anonymous No.12352377]

SN9 is going all in on the heatshield.

[Anonymous No.12352379]

>>12352355
Give these stats your energy, /sfg/

TARANIS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TARANIS
SEOSat-Ingenio: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEOSat-Ingenio

[Anonymous No.12352380]

Lol fuck ariane and their dinosaur rockets desu

[Anonymous No.12352383]

>>12352363
>doesn't fall over in the assembly building
>finally passes all tests and is ready for launch
>doesn't explode on the pad
>doesn't reach desired orbit...

[Anonymous No.12352386]

>>12352377
Really interesting considering this is what happened to them on SN8, which hasn't even flown. Maybe it has something to do with that recent contract. Imagine if we see starships go orbital just to be thrown into the atmosphere for testing.

[Anonymous No.12352387]

>>12352377
SN9 is basically done, ready for nose mate and engines. SN8 better stop shitting the bed so the golden boi can rise

[Anonymous No.12352389]

>>12352368
hope so too but it doesn't seem likely

[Anonymous No.12352393]

>>12352386
I thought I had heard a while ago that they were experimenting with different mounting setups on SN8. Looks like some of them worked while others sucked

[Anonymous No.12352394]

>>12352386
that's the most successful mounting method yet, you kiddin?

[Anonymous No.12352395]

>>12352389
And they're in comms blackout, so no calling it up and reprogramming it.
Bye bye upper stage and payload.

[Anonymous No.12352396]

>>12352394
Sure, but that's just from ~3 seconds of vibrations. If they had done hops I'm sure it would be similar.

[Anonymous No.12352397]

>>12352395
what was payload? please be a climate sat

[Anonymous No.12352402]

>>12352386
forbidden oreos

[Anonymous No.12352403]

>>12352389

[Anonymous No.12352404]

>>12352379
Pls work LET'S GO

[Anonymous No.12352405]

>>12352397
2 satellites. No idea what purpose. I really don't care about junk that goes up.

[Anonymous No.12352406]

>>12352386
Hard to tell but it seems like the bolts on SN9 are way longer than the ones on SN8, unless the ones in your photo were shaved down for some reason.

[Anonymous No.12352408]

>>12352396
they've had like 3 static fires, first with 3 engines. then single, then i think double?

[Anonymous No.12352411]

>>12352405
one Spanish earth observation satellite, and one for monitoring strange lightning phenomenon (sprites and gamma ray flashes)

[Anonymous No.12352412]

>>12352408
And the last 2 definitely weren't totally nominal. Doesn't mean the tile mounting is figured out but until we start seeing how they handle flights I'm not too worried.

[Anonymous No.12352417]

>>12351706
Mommy

[Anonymous No.12352421]

>>12352397
>>12352379

[Anonymous No.12352425]

>>12350311
>That's why it's an ablative nozzle made from asbestos and phenol resin.
Asbestos is as flammable as cotton when exposed to ClF3. You'd need to use fibers made of some kind of fluoride ceramic.

[Anonymous No.12352427]

>>12352386
Looks like they should just go for four mounting points, maybe five with one in the middle and four at the corners. Seems like they're seeing how few they can get away with.

[Anonymous No.12352443]

>>12352427
I think it's the opposite, the mounting points clearly held the tile fine but the tile itself shattered. If anything I'd imagine that one bolt would be ideal if they could make it work, otherwise mounting with some tiny amount of flex would probably be better. No idea how that would work though.

[Anonymous No.12352445]

>>12352411
i don't give a fuck about the earth observation satellite but that high altitude lightning monitoring satellite could of been interesting. oh well.

[Anonymous No.12352446]

>ISS cam overexposed
NOOOOOOO

[Anonymous No.12352447]

>>12352446
by the time they dock they'll be out of the sun, so maybe it'll look better there

[Anonymous No.12352450]

Stay on target..

[Anonymous No.12352451]

>>12352427
The pins held while the rest of the tile failed so that's not the issue. If I were to cope I don't see any of the cementing the other tiles have around it so it's possible that was part of the variation (we often see varied assemblages together in these tests) and it failed. Otherwise it's the tile itself that is the weak point and they need to reformulate.

[Anonymous No.12352455]

An hour away from docking

[Anonymous No.12352459]

KINO

[Anonymous No.12352462]

So many KINO shots, hope there are webms made

[Anonymous No.12352466]

>>12352459
pretty sick docking angle. was this intentional?

[Anonymous No.12352468]

>>12352459
somebody make a webm of this with the interstellar music

[Anonymous No.12352469]

how do they go to the bathroom in privacy?

[Anonymous No.12352471]

>>12350984
Stop talking out of your ass.

Merlin doesn't have a very high chamber pressure.
Merlin 1D Vac is very efficient purely because it has a huge expansion ratio.
Merlin 1D Sea level uses regenerative cooling all the way to the nozzle lip. The atmosphere does not contribute to cooling in any significant way at all, and even if it did it would only work while close to the ground, while Merlin 1D needs to work in space because that's how high the first stage goes before it shuts down.

[Anonymous No.12352473]

>>12352469
They don't

[Anonymous No.12352479]

>>12350995
superior diagram
>>12350969
>helium system
No.
Both of these are fan made anyway.

[Anonymous No.12352484]

>>12352469
They are basically trained like the military. In the military you learn that being naked in front of others isn't a big deal.

I'm guessing they already saw each other in their underwear when they changed their clothes.

[Anonymous No.12352485]

Stream has been reported to NOAA

[Anonymous No.12352492]

>>12352468
>with the interstellar music
>not the Blue Danube
One job, anon.

[Anonymous No.12352493]

Damn those are some nice shots

[Anonymous No.12352496]

>>12352492
>not alien:isolation ost

[Anonymous No.12352498]

Looks like we will get some good views of the RCS bursts

[Anonymous No.12352499]

>>12351986
It’s a marketing ploy. They probably only build meme shit and props in that workshop.

[Anonymous No.12352500]

[Anonymous No.12352503]

>>12352500
All fine for me.

[Anonymous No.12352504]

The clouds look fake. So many repeating patterns, almost too perfect

[Anonymous No.12352505]

>>12352500

[Anonymous No.12352510]

[Anonymous No.12352511]

VEGA MISSION LOST

[Anonymous No.12352513]

VEGA UPDATE: mission is lost

[Anonymous No.12352516]

I DON'T SEE NO GLENN UP HERE

[Anonymous No.12352518]

>>12352511
>>12352513
F ;_;

[Anonymous No.12352519]

>>12351422
Thunderfoot thinks low Earth orbital velocity is 5 km/s. He's a literal retard.

[Anonymous No.12352522]

>>12351422
literally who

[Anonymous No.12352524]

I believe in musk but man the boring tunnels are a fucking stupid idea

If Musk didn’t do presentations himself and tweet about it so frequently I’d chalk it up to some random person in charge at the boring company not understanding a single thing about mass transit. But it all seems to be his idea. Very weird considering how well thought out SpaceX was

[Anonymous No.12352525]

>>12352511
>>12352513
If only it was a RELIABLE, AMERICAN, ULA ROCKET constructed by AMERICAN WORKERS!

[Anonymous No.12352526]

Rip Vega. And so the last days of whoever the fuck launched those satellites shall be removed from history

[Anonymous No.12352530]

>>12352518
F

[Anonymous No.12352532]

>>12351480
>What is specific heat capacity? What do you mean thrust chamber pressure cannot exceed propellant tank pressure in a pressure fed rocket?

[Anonymous No.12352533]

>>12352511
>>12352513
How?

[Anonymous No.12352534]

>>12352519
kek, how can anybody listen to thunderf00t for shit on aerospace. elon will have hundreds of starships launching towards mars and thunderf00t will claim that reusability still isn't a good idea

[Anonymous No.12352535]

>>12352524
SpaceX also has based shotwell

[Anonymous No.12352536]

>>12352533
something to do with "orbit degrading" whatever that means. press conference tomorrow with hopefully more details

[Anonymous No.12352538]

>>12352524
Boring company was literally a meme by Musk because he hated the LA traffic.

[Anonymous No.12352540]

>>12352524
It's a tiny side project 1/1000th the size of SpaceX. Not weird at all retard

[Anonymous No.12352543]

>>12352533
With SRBs, you lose.

[Anonymous No.12352544]

>>12352530
this one was Spain's first imaging satellite

>>12352533
Apparently the 4th stage went wrong. The 3 solid rocket stages were nominal but the final hypergolic one had problems. You can see the trajectory fail here >>12352421

[Anonymous No.12352545]

>>12352536
They didn't get high enough periapsis, so it's going to skim the atmosphere a couple of times at the closest approach to Earth and eventually dip low enough to burn up, and doesn't have enough Delta-V to raise that peri up above the necessary minimum.

[Anonymous No.12352548]

Whatcha reading there fren?

[Anonymous No.12352549]

>>12351718
>ariane 5
>a heavy launch vehicle
lolol

[Anonymous No.12352550]

>>12352469
I hope they are having bean burritos for extra trust.

[Anonymous No.12352551]

>>12352543
Hypergols? More like hyper LOLs!

[Anonymous No.12352552]

>>12352548
Just catching up on underwater basketweaving blogs

[Anonymous No.12352557]

>>12351853
>traditional ions have something like .0001
For the thruster alone; take into account the whole vehicle and you get much less than 0.0001 TWR

[Anonymous No.12352560]

Watching your rocket fail and letting down the people who trusted you to put their shit in orbit has got to be one of the shittiest feelings

[Anonymous No.12352562]

>>12352544
>imaging satellite
This was a job by the NOAA snipers >>12352500

[Anonymous No.12352566]

>>12352524
The boring company seems stupid right now because boring tunnels is slow and expensive. The whole point is to learn how to do it better. If it fails it's a fairly minor flop, if it succeeds it offers up huge dividends for colonization and traffic.

[Anonymous No.12352567]

>NOAA sabotaged Vega
I don't want to believe

[Anonymous No.12352575]

>>12352549
>look it up
>hydromeme
>less payload than an expendable F9
of fucking course

[Anonymous No.12352577]

>>12352525
RELIABILITY
OVER
RECOGNITION

[Anonymous No.12352579]

>>12352548
Hey man I'm just trying to kill time

[Anonymous No.12352581]

>>12352538
>>12352524
even its name is a joke

[Anonymous No.12352582]

God damn has ESA/Ariane had a single launch in 2020 that wasn't scrubbed or failed?

[Anonymous No.12352583]

for real though Arianespace is having a shit time aren't they

[Anonymous No.12352586]

>>12352582
the reckoning of oldspace came hard and fast. Space has a way of making the arrogant humble real quick

[Anonymous No.12352588]

>>12352582
Ariane off nominal, ULA off schedule, Boing off their meds
It's trying times

[Anonymous No.12352592]

Two cosmonauts have deployed in their Soyuz and are approaching Dragon proclaiming that this is Russian space.

[Anonymous No.12352603]

>>12352588
in my head i feel like theyre all relieved that no one expects anything of them anymore, it must be a huge load off. Now SpaceX can do all of their jobs, and they can rest easy. Was Boeing all that commited to comercial crew? if they werent gonna try before, why try for second place. Doubt they expected to get customers anyway.

[Anonymous No.12352608]

>>12352603
Boeing thrives from cost plus contracts, I guess they hoped the fixed price Crew contracts would eventually change to cost plus thanks to Congress. Didn't work out

[Anonymous No.12352611]

>>12352534
It's impossible for Thunderfoot to believe that SpaceX can actually do what they're doing because in order to do that he would have to also believe that NASA actually fucked up with Shuttle, and Shuttle wasn't a failure just because muh space hard. It's impossible for Thunderfoot to believe that private industry could win where massive science-driven public cooperation has failed.

[Anonymous No.12352612]

What a shot

[Anonymous No.12352616]

>>12352588
SpaceX is the pure golden light under which evil withers.
FUCK
OLD
SPACE

[Anonymous No.12352620]

>>12352612
marvelous

[Anonymous No.12352622]

>>12352612
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8JpG7Cah-c

[Anonymous No.12352625]

>>12352622
all that for a mobile game?

[Anonymous No.12352626]

>>12352622
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztzq05IzYds

[Anonymous No.12352628]

>>12352616
SpaceX has horrendous working conditions, though. Their work force only makes sense for a young person who is willing to devote their life to work. After 5 years of that shit you will quit and move on to somewhere else that demands less of you.

Of course there are always young grads who are willing to literally sell their life for a company like SpaceX so their business model works.

[Anonymous No.12352632]

>Launched at night, couldn't see shit
>Gonna dock at night

[Anonymous No.12352633]

>>12352611
This is probably the best explanation.

[Anonymous No.12352634]

>>12352626
very based

[Anonymous No.12352636]

>>12352628
>Oy vey they only let me take the same number of breaks in a day as are written in my schedule!

[Anonymous No.12352637]

>>12352061
it's 2048 x 1152

[Anonymous No.12352639]

>>12352628
To be fair, once you have SpaceX on your resume, you can go anywhere.

[Anonymous No.12352640]

>>12352632
It's actually daytime. Look at the Dragon being lit up by the sun.

The Earth is downward in the camera view, out of view

[Anonymous No.12352643]

>>12352628
No one is forced to work at SpaceX. You know what you sign up for and you are welcome to leave if you don't like it. People who work endless hours at spacex do it before they love the payoff

[Anonymous No.12352645]

>>12352628
And this mentality is why every other aerospace company doesn't accomplish anything. Imagine conflating long hours with "horrendous working conditions". God I hate boomers

[Anonymous No.12352647]

>>12352640
It is right now but they're clearly approaching the terminator. You know how long this shit takes.

[Anonymous No.12352648]

Prepare for some KINO lighting on Dragon as it slowly turns red

[Anonymous No.12352650]

>>12352628
Yeah, i'd rather work at mcdonalds or data entry, spacex is just very hard for me

[Anonymous No.12352652]

>>12352640
They just called a hold, as they came in too early haha.
They are going to wait for the sun to set.

[Anonymous No.12352656]

>>12352652
>Wait until sunset to FUCK the iSS in the dark

[Anonymous No.12352657]

>>12352652
can they not dock in sunlgiht?

[Anonymous No.12352658]

>>12352645
What is the average number of hours worked per day/week at Spacex? Are there hard numbers anywhere?

[Anonymous No.12352659]

The mods over at /r/spacex are so strict. Even Elon would be banned there.

[Anonymous No.12352660]

>>12352643
It makes me fume thinking about that NASA town hall where all the people were bitching at JIm. NASA is presumably hard (read: impossible) to get a job at. Yet a culture of relaxation and slow time tables have creeped in. I would kill for a job at NASA and would expect to work my ass off day in and day out. Jim should have fired half the force that day

[Anonymous No.12352663]

>>12352659
r/spacexlounge is pretty based though, check the replies to Zubrin's article there

[Anonymous No.12352667]

>>12352659
That sub went to shit years ago when they made it no fun allowed and only let like 4 users post anything

[Anonymous No.12352669]

>>12352657
they can, but the sun's in their eyes right now and they want to have visual on the port

[Anonymous No.12352671]

>>12352657
They have a hard time seeing some of the important bits right now, yes.

[Anonymous No.12352672]

>>12352660
I would imagine it would be easier to get a job at NASA if you first intern with them so you are in their network and build contacts

[Anonymous No.12352674]

MY PORT IS READY

[Anonymous No.12352676]

>>12352660
>Jim should have fired half the force that day
Civil servants including NASA employees are almost impossible to fire, especially the diversity hires, so the good workers rage quit or retire and the bad ones stick around. It's a classic failure mode of government bureaucracies.

[Anonymous No.12352677]

>>12352659
Reddit is pretty shit in general

[Anonymous No.12352679]

>>12352658
You can peruse the reviews on glassdoor, some employees mention their schedules there.

[Anonymous No.12352681]

>>12352524
Its not for traffic retard, that's just a cover story for developing rapid tunneling machines for Mars.

[Anonymous No.12352682]

>those port and starboard lights
PURE FUTURE

[Anonymous No.12352685]

>>12352682
>One day there will space ATC monitoring and directing space traffic in a sky of navigational lights

[Anonymous No.12352692]

THAT APPROACH VIEW

[Anonymous No.12352693]

>>12352681
musk said in his interview with zubrin recently that the boring company is not for mars. it's for traffic lol

[Anonymous No.12352695]

WE HAVE MOVEMENT

[Anonymous No.12352698]

I'M GONNA DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOCK

[Anonymous No.12352699]

>>12352693
That's bullshit and both Elon and Zubmeme know it.

[Anonymous No.12352701]

>>12352658
about 45-50/week

[Anonymous No.12352704]

>>12352685
>the twinkles of stars, spacecraft, and navigational lights blend together into a glorious bright sky
kino

[Anonymous No.12352709]

WE HAVE SOFT DOCK BOYS

[Anonymous No.12352710]

SOFT CAPTURE

[Anonymous No.12352711]

>>12352699
go watch thunderf00t's boring company debunk video, then take a long hard look at yourself

[Anonymous No.12352716]

CAPTURE CONFIRMED

[Anonymous No.12352718]

LET'S FUCKING GOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

[Anonymous No.12352720]

>>12352711
>thunderf00t says otherwise
That is the biggest confirmation yet

[Anonymous No.12352721]

>That bro fistbump

[Anonymous No.12352722]

>>12352701
>45-50 a week
You can't be serious.
That's fucking nothing!
The way people bitch about working there you would think that 80 hours a week is their MINIMUM

[Anonymous No.12352725]

>>12352721

[Anonymous No.12352729]

>>12352725
>BOB, YOU SONNA OF A BITCH
>What's the matter Glover? NASA got you pushing too many pencils?

[Anonymous No.12352739]

>>12352725
>tfw the fistbump was actually done with black and white dude

[Anonymous No.12352743]

>>12352739
ELON ENDS RACISM

[Anonymous No.12352745]

>>12352725
Starliner will have the sign of the cross and hugs when the alarms start going off

[Anonymous No.12352748]

>>12352616
Still producing cringe

[Anonymous No.12352753]

Hard capture complete

[Anonymous No.12352758]

>>12352722
I'm scrubbing through Glassdoor, some people say 50-60 which is getting up there
Either way it's not a slavedriver factory.

[Anonymous No.12352769]

>>12352721
>>12352725
>>12352729
>>12352739
10/10

[Anonymous No.12352770]

DOCKING COMPLETE!
>four astronauts from KSC to ISS in peak scrub season
>private rocket
>totally automated controls

[Anonymous No.12352772]

Moshi moshi

[Anonymous No.12352773]

>>12352770
>and immediately after an oldspace rocket ate shit

[Anonymous No.12352774]

>>12352770
The ISS is also now occupied by a majority of Americans instead of Russians. We have won the space war.

[Anonymous No.12352779]

Good job gentlemen, another succeful mission, now to set the next path to MARS

[Anonymous No.12352796]

>>12352758
Not to blogpost but I'm a medfag so I guess my concept of long work weeks is skewed
>Tfw you just get off a 24 hour shift
>Ruined an addicts high by giving him narcan to keep him from ODing
>He comes out of it pissed at me
>Sorry for saving your life asshole
People on 4chan joke about being useless to society but this piece of shit just got to me today

[Anonymous No.12352802]

>inb4 Crew-1 brought the flag up again as a massive fuck you so Boing can capture it in 2022.

[Anonymous No.12352808]

>>12352802
https://youtu.be/ZrCwNJno1HQ

[Anonymous No.12352811]

>>12352796
Should have let him die. Then again you'd lose your job and I sincerely wouldn't want that. Fucked up, sorry anon.

[Anonymous No.12352827]

>>12352802
>SpaceX brings the flag back up to the ISS
>Takes it down again on another mission before the Boeing crew can get it

[Anonymous No.12352835]

>>12352550
on the stream they said their last meal on the ground was steak and curry

[Anonymous No.12352838]

>>12352796
You are a saint anon, you help keep society at modern standards. You will be a beloved member of the mars colony fren

[Anonymous No.12352841]

Who is the lady with the spider ponytail?

Imagine the smell of her braps

[Anonymous No.12352849]

>>12352841
Kate Ruben

[Anonymous No.12352851]

>>12352838
Why so small

[Anonymous No.12352855]

Victor bumps his head or awkward handshakes with the Ruskies gets me a bingo

[Anonymous No.12352857]

CUTE
PONYTAIL

[Anonymous No.12352858]

>>12352851
this one is wayyy old, someone post latest

[Anonymous No.12352859]

>>12352857
space waifus

[Anonymous No.12352861]

>>12352796
Could be worse, could have been that first responder and firefighter who got shot and killed after they gave some junkie with a hidden gun narcan

[Anonymous No.12352862]

>>12352851
Aaaaahh fuck I thought I saved the correct one a long time ago. I haven't seen it posted in a long time

[Anonymous No.12352863]

>>12352663
Yeah, I saw that. Pleasantly surprised.

[Anonymous No.12352868]

>>12352663
link me pls

[Anonymous No.12352870]

Kate is a fucking CUTE. I also love both the Sergeys from MS-17

[Anonymous No.12352878]

The NSF should stop talking about their discord right now

[Anonymous No.12352884]

>>12352878
but the super chats

[Anonymous No.12352886]

>>12352878
shut up and pay little piggy

[Anonymous No.12352890]

>>12352863
Oh yeah look at that. I was inspired and went to check it out. Nothing but good takes and reasonable people over there.

[Anonymous No.12352895]

imagine being steve, getting to sleep inside dragon, entire room to yourself, personal toilet, no shit lashed to the walls

[Anonymous No.12352898]

>>12352862
>>12352858
gotchu bros

[Anonymous No.12352901]

>>12352890
link me

[Anonymous No.12352911]

>>12352901
I have a million tabs open, if I open it back up chrome might actually catch my laptop on fire lmao. Just google spacexlounge and type zubrin into their search bar, it'll come up first

[Anonymous No.12352913]

>>12352895
>3 monitors for widescreen porn

[Anonymous No.12352921]

>>12352901
https://www.reddit.com/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/ju6dnj/robert_zubrin_wokeists_assault_space_exploration/
Oh nevermind I copied the link earlier to send it to my friend. Check it out

[Anonymous No.12352935]

>>12352921
>Jesus Christ, they went full mask off. They're not even trying to hide their Marxism any more. These commies can fuck right off.
Based department is ringing

[Anonymous No.12352937]

lol crew complement's dragon's aesthetics

[Anonymous No.12352939]

>>12352913
>getting some succ from the piss vacuum

[Anonymous No.12352942]

>>12352937
Dragon is cute
CUTE

[Anonymous No.12352945]

>>12352898
https://youtu.be/HRaXoyvwIVg

[Anonymous No.12352952]

>>12352935
read on,
>The only thing by or about authentic Marxists I'd ever read is their death certificate.

[Anonymous No.12352957]

>>12352942
post the anime girl

[Anonymous No.12352964]

>>12352935
>>12352952
wtf I love reddit now

[Anonymous No.12352966]

>>12352952

[Anonymous No.12352974]

>>12352945
Hey, that's not Rick Berman!

[Anonymous No.12352979]

>>12352957
"We're doing some configuration."
Which configuration are they doing?

[Anonymous No.12352981]

>>12352952
Based. Fuck Commies

[Anonymous No.12352982]

[Anonymous No.12352983]

Just out of curiosity, what type of events would entail them to ask to keep the cameras off inside the dragon? I mean like besides taking a shit or something

[Anonymous No.12352984]

>>12352979
how am i supposed to know

[Anonymous No.12352988]

>>12352983
Changing clothe from pressure suits to comfy clothe. Also gangbangs (the most likely)

[Anonymous No.12352990]

>>12352983
Changing from their spacesuits into their normal astronaut outfits.

[Anonymous No.12352993]

>>12352983
sucking each others titties

[Anonymous No.12353001]

whens hatch opening?

[Anonymous No.12353002]

>shuttle external tanks
NSF visits /sfg/

[Anonymous No.12353008]

oof

[Anonymous No.12353013]

>>12352983
You want a camera on you all the time?

[Anonymous No.12353015]

>>12352952
>Avatar is not only about the failure of old-time colonization. It is also a love story that unites Jake Sully, a handicapped human and Neytiri, a Naʼvi (native to Pandora). I've not followed the story beyond the 2009 film, but it clearly paves the way to racial and cultural mixing.
Holy shit did Reddit admins forget to subvert this mod team?

[Anonymous No.12353019]

>>12353008
That sucks. They should retry a smaller sat on RocketLab's custom satellites for cheaper

[Anonymous No.12353021]

>>12353008

[Anonymous No.12353022]

>>12353015
lmfao

[Anonymous No.12353027]

>>12353008
>12 years
KEK sorry but lmao

[Anonymous No.12353028]

>>12353008

[Anonymous No.12353030]

>>12353019
They prolly had insurance so they’ll just build another

[Anonymous No.12353031]

>>12353008
why does estronaut have to be so cringe, it's like he's a fucking teenager with his first cellphone

[Anonymous No.12353035]

>>12353008
Imagine working 12 years on a project and watching it go up in smoke because the French can't into rocket design

[Anonymous No.12353040]

>>12353008
hate to say it, but they deserved it for launching on a shit vehicle designed by oldspace slouchers.

[Anonymous No.12353041]

>>12353035
how did the hypergolic stage of all things fail. I wonder if they problem is just shitty software. Seems to be oldspace's achillies heel

[Anonymous No.12353046]

Falcon could have launched the same satellite cheaper and actually got it to orbit

[Anonymous No.12353047]

>>12353008
I don't want to laugh but god damn...

[Anonymous No.12353054]

>>12353008
CALLED IT LMAO

[Anonymous No.12353056]

>>12353046
it could have gone as a rideshare in one of the Starlink launches. Their contract was probably signed years ago

[Anonymous No.12353060]

Hey look a the bright side....

THEY NOW CAN DITCH ARIANE 5 AND FULLY FOCUS ON ARIANE 6 LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

[Anonymous No.12353062]

>>12352115
I was wrong, it didn't scrub. It fucking FAILED bwahahahah

[Anonymous No.12353068]

>>12353060
Need funding from successful missions

[Anonymous No.12353069]

>>12353060
Yeah after 5 years of pre-planning, 8 years of R&D, and a 20 year nap

[Anonymous No.12353075]

What's with all that dust on the ISS camera, I've noticed it every time they film themselves for interviews and dockings. My guess is dead pixels from radiation?

[Anonymous No.12353076]

>>12353068
this failure came at an awful time for them. But when they're saying shit like pic related I can't feel too awful

[Anonymous No.12353079]

>>12353076
they should be allowed to fail utterly so a better company can pick up the pieces. fuck socialism

[Anonymous No.12353083]

>>12353076
SpaceX is fucking inspiring. That video of Armstrong talking them down. The failures of Falcon 1. Everyone laughing at the idea of reusable rockets and propulsive landings. Absolutely BTFO'd the world and blindsided oldspace (I think this is why Musk persisted. He knew it was a bloated industry that moved at a snail's pace)

[Anonymous No.12353085]

>>12353075
>My guess is dead pixels from radiation?
Yas. They replace the camera when it gets too dotty.

[Anonymous No.12353086]

>>12353076
>Oh no SpaceX has 1% of the 0.5% of the US tax payer how horrible

[Anonymous No.12353093]

>>12353076
oldspace definitely got too comfortable. SpaceX caught them with their pants down. They're going to have to floor it if they want to survive, but being so closely tied to gov they probably can't do that. Private's potential far exceeds public's

[Anonymous No.12353095]

Wuhh, was that a bug that just flew in front of the camera or dust? What are the odds something like a gnat could make it into a crew or cargo capsule and eventually find itself on ISS

[Anonymous No.12353102]

>>12353076
just a bunch of butthurt space Euro-Niggers

[Anonymous No.12353108]

>>12353086
someone in a prior thread showed that the ESA gets far more in the way of "unduly subsidizes" anyways. Comparing the F9 to the Ariane 6 is laughable

[Anonymous No.12353125]

I am a retard when it comes to foreign countries and their politics. Is it even within the realm of possibility for something like SpaceX to spawn in Russia?

[Anonymous No.12353128]

>>12353125
No. Every space company in Russia is state owned or controlled.

[Anonymous No.12353139]

>>12353128
Fuck. I absolutely love Roscosmos, as bullheaded as they are. Orel is cool I guess but it's taking a long time to do anything. And they have way too many rocket proposals for me to keep track of. I just want them to have a good future

[Anonymous No.12353142]

>>12353139
Russia understands the geopolitical strategy of maintaining presence in space so they should hopefully keep goign on LEO just fine for a while. They got some vague plans for a new crew capsule but nothing set in stone yet

[Anonymous No.12353144]

>>12353142
they've got vague plans for a lot of things

[Anonymous No.12353149]

that view..

[Anonymous No.12353151]

>>12353142
Their TEM would be really cool if it existed but I suspect it doesn't.

[Anonymous No.12353153]

Hatch is open!

[Anonymous No.12353158]

Kate seems like a funny person

[Anonymous No.12353161]

>Arrive at space station on a solo mission
>She opens the hatch
>'Thanks for making it up here anon, I was getting lonely'
wat do?

[Anonymous No.12353164]

>>12353161
fart in her face and humiliate her

[Anonymous No.12353167]

>>12353161
Read scientific papers with her and go to the galley to play with some food in microgravity. Not even kidding, it would be a fun date

[Anonymous No.12353171]

>>12353161
Start a space colony

[Anonymous No.12353182]

>>12353161
aeiou

[Anonymous No.12353185]

>>12353161
Smile creepily while mumbling "you too" then avoid her for the entire mission

[Anonymous No.12353194]

>>12353185
fuck this hit hard

[Anonymous No.12353209]

>>12353161
"hey baby are you a unix process because I want to fork and spawn children"

[Anonymous No.12353231]

>>12353040
no choice anon, Sir Shelbinson, a french representative from the EU, got contracts signed for EU payloads to fly on french rockets made by french people

[Anonymous No.12353239]

>>12353231
Jean Shelberre

[Anonymous No.12353279]

>>12352061
16:10 is the most based aspect ratio for computer displays, but they don't make it much any more because muh teevee screens, it's also great when doing remote VNC shit
>>12353161
Imagine being the one to forget to put the hatch target back when closing it up and having to do an EVA to fix it.

[Anonymous No.12353291]

>>12352628
>Noooo, you cannot possibly expect me to achieve results on my job and not have 20 years of 9 to 5 meetings on the diversity of a coffee machine menu before we even get to the drawing board

[Anonymous No.12353301]

Hatch open

[Anonymous No.12353303]

HATCH IS OPEN

[Anonymous No.12353322]

THE HATCHES ARE OPEN

[Anonymous No.12353323]

>COPY N-WORD

[Anonymous No.12353331]

[Anonymous No.12353340]

god damn where is there so many space mommies?

[Anonymous No.12353359]

>>12352725
YES WE GOT IT FOR REAL THIS TIME

[Anonymous No.12353366]

What's the micro-g effect on booba? Would it make them less saggy?

[Anonymous No.12353371]

>image limit reached

[Anonymous No.12353381]

HOT STAGING INCOMING

[Anonymous No.12353396]

Fuck I just noticed that everyone is still in the sticky from yesterday. Was wondering why it was so slow in here

[Anonymous No.12353409]

>>12353008
this is why you dont pull all of your eggs in one basket, that includes relying on a single launch

[Anonymous No.12353410]

>>12353366
Yes, sag is basically gravity damage.

[Anonymous No.12353447]

>wake up just in time to see hatch opening
>frogs just blew up another Vega
It's gonna be a good day lads

[Anonymous No.12353456]

>>12353410
So we gotta send all of females into space so they can have perky tits?

[Anonymous No.12353457]

>>12353456
Kill yourself coomer.

[Anonymous No.12353461]

>>12353457
Nah I just dont want saggy tits. If we can avoid that we should.

[Anonymous No.12353462]

Now that there are seven full time astronauts on the ISS, can we expect science output to double or triple?

[Anonymous No.12353499]

>>12353461
Nah

[Anonymous No.12353521]

>>12353499
I dont know man. I disagree. 4ASS should look into the effects of micro gravity and tit sags.

[Anonymous No.12353554]

Cute Crew Chorogon.

[Anonymous No.12353578]

Thread has staged.

Ignition:
>>12353577
>>12353577
>>12353577

[Anonymous No.12354033]

>>12352796
Yeah that's a thankless fucking job.

[Anonymous No.12354045]

>>12353076
>"Unduly subsidized"
It's called "delivering the best product for the best price".
I'm European and I can see that shit. ESA is doing nothing but throwing money at Arianespace for their rockets, every fucking country in Europe that has an aerospace industry is involved in the rockets and every fucking company is contracted to be involved. We have two companies here and naturally, both of them are involved doing extremely similar shit on the Ariane rockets, solid rocket tech.

How's that not "unduly subsidized"?

[Anonymous No.12354342]

>>12353035
The vega is italian