/sfg/ - Space Flight General

[Anonymous No.14707873]

Kennedy Starbase edition

Previous: >>14704647

[Anonymous No.14707880]

[Anonymous No.14707881]

Posted here earlier, good interview.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgT4JOJMaqQ

[Anonymous No.14707886]

>>14707880
There's a deficit of young female astronauts.

[Anonymous No.14707887]

>>14707738
>>14707786
Localized inflation, inflation, eternal inflation, etc

[Anonymous No.14707900]

>>14707886
Women are bad luck on ships. Every sailor knows this but modern society has forgotten.

[Anonymous No.14707909]

[Anonymous No.14707931]

>>14707909
kinda cute, kinda soulless

[Anonymous No.14707934]

>>14707745
Would galaxies nessecerily have started off much more compact?

Think of the proton, neutron and electron scale.

Clusters of these seperated from clusters of these (they would become the galaxies)

They are small and would have been in close proximity. Then in these proto galaxy clusters
100 million atoms here, seperated by a relatively small distance with 100 million or quadrillion atoms over there seperated by a relatively small distance with 100 trillion billion atoms over there et etc

Formed the seperate stars of the Galaxy.

If everything starts close together at first;then even the stars of galaxies were likely close together at first;

And then as they sheded em energy, and gravity worked, they actually spread out?

Or could it have been there was a class of stars early in the universe that were all big and close together in galaxies, and they all exploded info smaller stars spreading out a greater distance in the galaxy? Ding ding ding?

>>14707739
This really is or actually may be quite absurd.

The possible varying different rhythems of cosmological epochs of universal construction may though kinks in measuring it's absolute rate of change consistently in earth years.

>>14707814
>Galaxies don't just suddenly assemble at redshift 10, with absolutely nothing before.
The stuff that makes up the galaxy was moving as a cluster since the start

[Anonymous No.14707940]

[Anonymous No.14707946]

>14707934
the posts weren't good the first time you made them romanischizo

[Anonymous No.14707962]

>>14707881
This guy really hates BO huh
>not ambitious
>not inspiring
>not viable
based

[Anonymous No.14707965]

>>14707962
the interviewer or ellis? on the edge of committing to watching or not.

[Anonymous No.14707967]

>>14707962
Very interesting he mentions up coming contracts. Speculation as to whom?

[Anonymous No.14707969]

>>14707962
When BO does something better than a carnival ride, they might earn some respect.

[Anonymous No.14707982]

Any idea how they are going to make heat tiles? Will SpaceX sell tiles?

[Anonymous No.14707984]

>>14707982
3d printed superalloy metallic heatshield

[Anonymous No.14707988]

>>14707982
Relativity will make a sweating mini Starship.

[Anonymous No.14708002]

scifi 1

[Anonymous No.14708009]

scifi 2

[Anonymous No.14708058]

>>14708009
>no more hops

[Anonymous No.14708085]

So from last thread we now know that the JWST is not only being useful, but is actually making cosmologists happy, as now they can publish papers saying that their previous papers were wrong?

[Anonymous No.14708129]

>>14707880
Probably the best webm I've made for this general

[Anonymous No.14708169]

[Anonymous No.14708172]

>>14708169
Everyone who works on this will be in their 60s by the time it's finished

[Anonymous No.14708173]

So Lambda CMD is dead, right?

[Anonymous No.14708190]

>>14708169
I love these small missions

[Anonymous No.14708193]

>>14708173
astroanon will be by shortly to tell you you are a schizo moron for entertaining such an opinion

[Anonymous No.14708195]

>>14708085
Who knows, I just want more images and data. When are we getting new stuff? This drought and drip feed is killing my soul.

[Anonymous No.14708221]

Booster 7 is dead...

[Anonymous No.14708229]

>>14708195
Lots of data is being published but no more official press releases yet. In the past it typically happened when a paper was published, but that takes months.

Check Judy Schmidt on twitter (@SpaceGeck). She is not an astronomer but she makes nice composites out of public stuff. Some of the stuff in the media comes from her.

[Anonymous No.14708240]

remember when spacex applied for an FCC license of an orbital starship flight window starting August 2021?
haha..

[Anonymous No.14708241]

>>14708173
>>14708193
Yes I will call you a moron for saying Lambda Colour-Magnitude Diagram is a dying cosmology.

[Anonymous No.14708247]

>>14708240
Wtf were they doing in that year?

[Anonymous No.14708248]

You should be able to solve it.

[Anonymous No.14708267]

>>14708240
it was the FAA's fault

[Anonymous No.14708276]

>>14708267
Incorrect. SpaceX didn't and still doesn't have launch-ready vehicles.

[Anonymous No.14708278]

>>14708267
This but completely unironically.

[Anonymous No.14708283]

>>14708276
>they can't launch something with working engines because...
The fact is that they could've launched something as a test very early. The chance of it succeeding would be very low, but they could've done it. If they had done it back then they wouldn't have launched with Starlinks. They've been delayed so long that they can launch vehicles bordering on being functional articles rather than just pure prototypes.

[Anonymous No.14708306]

>>14708248
>obvious filename
You should at least bait the hooks, anon.

[Anonymous No.14708314]

>>14708306
I didn't ask for its name.

[Anonymous No.14708318]

OH N-

[Anonymous No.14708328]

>>14708314
Okay, then solve for what?

[Anonymous No.14708332]

>>14708328
I don't know.

[Anonymous No.14708346]

video from DART collision will be ebin

[Anonymous No.14708357]

[Anonymous No.14708370]

>>14708357
>$750

[Anonymous No.14708372]

>>14708370
Considering concorde tickets were $1k+ that would not surprise me

[Anonymous No.14708377]

>>14708370
Explain this

[Anonymous No.14708406]

How come Tim Ellis is from Texas yet speaks like a grade A turbofaggot?

[Anonymous No.14708415]

>>14708406
he's from upper middle class suburbia

[Anonymous No.14708423]

>I am incredibly pleased Congress has passed the NASA Authorization Act of 2022 – the first authorization for our agency in five years. This act shows continued bipartisan support of NASA’s many missions, including our Moon to Mars approach, as well extension of U.S. participation in the International Space Station to 2030.

>2030
Mooooooooooooooooooold

[Anonymous No.14708424]

>>14708370
the $750 was in 1960 dollars so it's even worse. it should be noted that flying was way more expensive before deregulation in the '70s so the prices weren't as crazy when this was written.

[Anonymous No.14708426]

>>14708406
I would have bet 500$ he was from CA

[Anonymous No.14708429]

[Anonymous No.14708433]

>>14708429
Where's my H3 japan

[Anonymous No.14708434]

[Anonymous No.14708436]

>While the Booster that will carry out the first orbital flight may still be Booster 7, SpaceX teams are readying the next one in the line, Booster 8, for potential rollout in the next few days. It is expected that Booster 8 will start its pre-launch test campaign sequence with ambient and cryogenic proof tests, just like previous vehicles did.

New NSF article dropped. B8 will rollout before B7 does again. B7 isn’t done yet but they’re prepping B8 just in case

[Anonymous No.14708449]

>>14708433
https://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/14628668
>Tokyo has said it hopes to put one of its astronauts on the lunar surface--the first non-American--in the latter half of the 2020s as part of NASA’s Artemis program to return humans to the moon.
>Japan’s space agency, JAXA, last year reopened astronaut recruitment for the first time in more than a decade to revive its pool of ageing astronauts.

[Anonymous No.14708453]

The only pic we have of the Minotaur II failure is this

[Anonymous No.14708455]

>>14708449
I can't wait for a remake of Space Brothers

[Anonymous No.14708460]

>>14708449
>>14708433
How did Japan go from one of the evilest and most brutal nations in history to America’s best and only friend

[Anonymous No.14708465]

>>14708460
>America’s best and only friend
that would be israel

[Anonymous No.14708469]

>>14708460
National Stockholm syndrome

Also it helps that of all postwar reconstruction efforts in history, Japan got the best one

[Anonymous No.14708471]

>>14708346
it's not being videotaped

[Anonymous No.14708475]

>>14708471
It is, a camera was launched specifically to watch it

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LICIACube

[Anonymous No.14708482]

>>14708465
Jewish conspiracies and stuff aside, why would America make Israel their friend and not the surrounding Muslim nations? The lefty answer is because Israel is made of a lot of white Europeans, and also a lot of upper class white people moved there

[Anonymous No.14708485]

>>14708482
This belongs on /pol/

[Anonymous No.14708490]

>>14708482
Same people in control on both sides, not a conspiracy

[Anonymous No.14708501]

>>14708485
>>14708490
I know that’s why I want a non-/pol/ answer I mean why does the US love Israel and not say Palestine or Iran or something

[Anonymous No.14708513]

>>14708482
>It's so strong you wouldn't believe now. We have the Israelis coming to us for equipment. We say we can't possibly get the Congress to support that. They say, 'Don't worry about the Congress. We will take care of the Congress.' Now this is somebody from another country, but they can do it. They own, you know, the banks in this country, the newspapers. Just look at where the Jewish money is.
-chairman of the joint chiefs of staff george brown, 1974

[Anonymous No.14708518]

>>14708513
The fact that Israel commits atrocities in Palestine and the US turns its cheek is asinine.

[Anonymous No.14708525]

>>14708482
And because the surrounding Muslim nations have values that are fundamentally at odds with our own, and because most of them spent the second half of the 20th century being balls deep allies of the Soviet Union.

Also, fuck those nations none of them have space programs. The Emiratis are the only Muslims that are space based right now. The rest of them are either poor and filled with religious fanatics or super rich and wasting all of their oil money on vanity megastructures and Haitian sex slaves. Buy a moon program with those trillions you backwards motherfuckers.

[Anonymous No.14708549]

>>14708501
Because Israel was strategically useful to American interests in the region when they decided to be friends. Israel has outlived its usefulness in that regard, but the reason they're still allies despite America having other nations in the region with a positive view of them is a /pol/ answer.

[Anonymous No.14708556]

>>14708549
>>14708525
Thanks. I still feel bad for the Israeli dude who died on Columbia though.

[Anonymous No.14708580]

>>14708525
>Buy a moon program with those trillions you backwards motherfuckers.
I'd rather keep the goat fuckers off the moon

[Anonymous No.14708584]

>>14708169
Can those gravity sling shot moves work in the direction opposite the bodies rotation and/or travel?

[Anonymous No.14708590]

>Russia causes trouble with the ISS every few months
>Russia promises to leave every few days
Why does no one just say “okay how about you leave next week?” What are they going to do?

[Anonymous No.14708592]

>>14708229
Thanks friend, I appreciate it.

[Anonymous No.14708611]

>>14708590
Seeing as the ISS depends on them to survive since there's currently no replacement for Russian attitude and altitude control, why would they?

[Anonymous No.14708613]

>>14708611
You just need a dragon for altitude control and a Cygnus for reboosts

[Anonymous No.14708617]

>>14708423
>including our Moon to Mars approach
What's this about?

[Anonymous No.14708618]

>>14708613
Cygnus has like 1/5 of the Delta-V capability Progress has and Dragon wouldn't be able to maintain attitude control during Cygnus firing from any of the American docking ports.

[Anonymous No.14708621]

>>14708424
>>14708372
>>14708370
Aren't 1st class international flights or even not first class like $1,000-$5,000

I don't get if that anon was implying $750.....$2,500 is cheap or expensive

[Anonymous No.14708622]

>>14708617
There has been considerable waffling over whether or not NASA should even bother with further manned moon missions or focus entirely on Mars

Marsbros consider moon spending a fiscal trap that prevents future exploration

[Anonymous No.14708650]

>>14708622
We should do both. Materials on the Moon could be useful for building habitats near Earth for things like zero-g manufacturing. The dark side of the Moon would be very useful for astronomy.

[Anonymous No.14708695]

Theoretically, could you land a Starship Falcon 9 style without the bellyflop?

[Anonymous No.14708703]

>>14708590
Considering the state of Zvezda and Zarya it's likely that the Russians know internally that they can't keep the modules operating much longer but are making these bold statements to try and save face rather than admitting their own inability to continue supporting the ISS

[Anonymous No.14708709]

>>14708695
Theoretically yes but you would come in probably like 5 times hotter because of lower area and inability to surf the atmosphere.
Heatproofing the bottom of the vehicle including the engines against bellyflop reentry conditions would already be stupidly hard and mass hungry so with the increased heat it would probably make your whole rocket unviable.

[Anonymous No.14708711]

>>14708695
Yes but it would have shit payload.

[Anonymous No.14708717]

>>14708703
>Russian segment is dying
>Claim you’re leaving because Russia strong
>No one knows the ROS is shit
>Profit
This is their mindset

[Anonymous No.14708724]

>>14708711
>>14708709
Thanks. I was wondering if Starship could land “faster” if it had to P2P to a battlefield

[Anonymous No.14708727]

>>14708724
You've heard of the Vomit Comet, now get ready for the Shit-yourself Starship

[Anonymous No.14708731]

>>14708471
It doesnt specifically say videotaped, but there will be a camera trained on the impact

[Anonymous No.14708734]

>>14708709
Could it be made to have engine thrusters come out of the belly so if can land bellyflop down?

Because it's sketchier landing starship upright on Mars than large surface area belly down.

As it's gently descending belly down; steel frame brace kick stand landing gear extends to rest on, as also balencing on the engines would be tough unless they were flush with the ship body

[Anonymous No.14708739]

>>14708482
>why would America make Israel their friend and not the surrounding Muslim nations?
more than half of the cabinet of every administration is Jewish, with Biden 80%

[Anonymous No.14708742]

>>14707940
The Baldy edit is funnier.

[Anonymous No.14708746]

>>14708002
Blue flame cause hydrogen or is r1 methalox??

[Anonymous No.14708750]

>>14708709
reminder that SS is descending belly first mostly because the Martian atmosphere is thin

[Anonymous No.14708751]

>>14708734
only brainlets worry about the ship tipping over. it's a non issue.

[Anonymous No.14708754]

>>14708482
Because Jihad? While Muslims are focused on destroying Israel, they can't dedicate much to conquering other countries.

[Anonymous No.14708760]

>>14708746
methalox autogenous pressurization.
it'll be the first orbital methalox rocket ever.
they've made the decisions necessary to go full steam ahead on a large fully reusable starship competitor.
I unironically have more faith in them than hobbitlab.

[Anonymous No.14708765]

>>14708750
It could descend no other way on earth or on Mars. Reentering like an f9 from orbital velocity would be an exercise in stupidity.

[Anonymous No.14708777]

>>14708525
>And because the surrounding Muslim nations have values that are fundamentally at odds with our own
ok moishe

[Anonymous No.14708781]

>>14708760
>I unironically have more faith in them than hobbitlab.
I know it's a meme but Relativity is rightfully 2nd only to SpaceX. they're poised to dominate the not-SX market

[Anonymous No.14708787]

>>14708650
>The dark side of the Moon would be very useful for astronomy
FAR SIDE YOU DUMBFUCK, FAR SIDE

[Anonymous No.14708790]

>>14708787
No. Dark side is cooler.

[Anonymous No.14708793]

>>14708790

[Anonymous No.14708803]

>>14708760
what engine cycle

[Anonymous No.14708807]

Reminder that we could see Terran R come together in short order.
They have to develop a new engine, extend the linear rail upwards and make the welding arm a little bit longer.
The impact of such low tooling requirements on the R&D timeline of a new rocket could turn out unbelievably huge.
>>14708803
gas generator cycle

[Anonymous No.14708809]

>>14708556
That he died over Palestine, Texas should have been a hint of how the universe views them.

[Anonymous No.14708816]

>>14708724
>landing in a giant rocket that can't maneuver in a battlefield

[Anonymous No.14708819]

>>14708816
>that can't maneuver
bring it wingcuck >>14708009

[Anonymous No.14708833]

[Anonymous No.14708836]

[Anonymous No.14708890]

>>14708833
>>14708836
Is this one of JWST's instruments?

[Anonymous No.14708893]

>>14708751
>only brainlets worry about the ship tipping over. it's a non issue.
How much does the ship way? How sturdy flush is it's base? How does it insure it's landing on extremely solid martian surface?

[Anonymous No.14708897]

>>14708760
>methalox autogenous pressurization
What's this mean, methalox?

[Anonymous No.14708903]

>>14708893
>way
>it's
>insure

[Anonymous No.14708905]

>>14708890
nah it's the tng hydrodynamic simulations we were talking about last thread.
https://www.tng-project.org/movies/tng/tng100_sb0_inside_bfield_1080p.mp4

[Anonymous No.14708908]

>>14708903
Should I delete the post and edit it, or do you get what I mean? I'm real tired bud, I've been shilling for 9 hours straight

[Anonymous No.14708911]

>>14708002
exhaust porn

[Anonymous No.14708915]

>>14708893
>How much does the ship way?
120 tons dry + 130 tons payload.
>How sturdy flush is it's base
extremely sturdy, it's where it clamps to the booster. see touchdown velocity here >>14708009
>How does it insure it's landing on extremely solid martian surface
orbital observation and having a lot of orbit to surface comparisons from the various rovers.
during landing it'll use computer vision to look for big rocks and maybe sand too. the rocks part has already been proven out on the landers of said rovers.

[Anonymous No.14708916]

>>14708911
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBMU6l6GsdM

[Anonymous No.14708922]

the Burundians were ahead of the meme

[Anonymous No.14708929]

>>14708916
excogitate

[Anonymous No.14708932]

>>14708929

[Anonymous No.14708937]

Just discovered BD Armory for KSP. Holy shit this is so fun

[Anonymous No.14708967]

[Anonymous No.14708974]

>>14708967
they miss the part where it does the exact same maneuver starship does.
it sure can't flip like that with rcs.

[Anonymous No.14708979]

>UCLA scientists discover places on the moon where it’s always ‘sweater weather’.
>Future human explorers on the moon might have 99 problems but staying warm or cool won’t be one. A team led by planetary scientists at UCLA has discovered shady locations within pits on the moon that always hover around a comfortable 63 degrees Fahrenheit.
>The pits, and caves to which they may lead, would make safer, more thermally stable base camps for lunar exploration and long-term habitation than the rest of the moon’s surface, which heats up to 260 degrees during the day and drops to 280 degrees below zero at night.
>Pits were first discovered on the moon in 2009, and since then, scientists have wondered if they led to caves that could be explored or used as shelters. About 16 of the more than 200 pits are probably collapsed lava tubes, said Tyler Horvath, a UCLA doctoral student in planetary science, who led the new research. Two of the most prominent pits have visible overhangs that clearly lead to some sort of cave or void, and there is strong evidence that another’s overhang may also lead to a large cave.
t. https://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/places-on-moon-where-its-always-sweater-weather

[Anonymous No.14708988]

>>14708979
If the pits are a vacuum it doesn't matter how hot they are?

[Anonymous No.14708991]

>>14708979
just as predicted

[Anonymous No.14708996]

>>14708988
yeah i mean you bleed a bit more heat to a very cold floor but in the end what matters is your habitat being in shade.

[Anonymous No.14708999]

>>14708979
does this mean we'll have sheep on moon?

[Anonymous No.14709002]

>>14708974
>>14708967
Video on Delta Clipper Flight 8, where she actually did a bellyflop.
> https://youtu.be/wv9n9Casp1o
The new comments are retarded though

[Anonymous No.14709004]

>>14709002
well okay but that's cheating

[Anonymous No.14709008]

>>14708915
>orbital observation and having a lot of orbit to surface comparisons from the various rovers.
>during landing it'll use computer vision to look for big rocks and maybe sand too. the rocks part has already been proven out on the landers of said rovers.
The rocket engines are blasting! You see those fire balls when it lands, 30 seconds or more of straight extreme heat and force blaring down on that martian surface, that's certainly not going to alter the stability of the ground?

It's gonna blow a lot of dust up asit does in that vid.

Any chance rovers and 3d printers can be sent before hand to pave and cement a landing area or could that hardly help

[Anonymous No.14709012]

>>14709004
Tbh DC-X was cool but it had zero relation to the actual full size vehicle. Different engines, different tanks, etc. it would be like SpaceX claiming that Grasshopper or a regular Falcon 9 was the same as Starship

[Anonymous No.14709014]

>>14709008
Why do you do this every thread?

[Anonymous No.14709016]

[Anonymous No.14709017]

[Anonymous No.14709019]

>>14709016
Ariane 6 is cool

[Anonymous No.14709026]

>>14709017
>>14709016
There is a video from 2015 of teenage me explaining airbus Adeline to my 80 year old Mexican grandmother who barely speaks English and the entire time she’s just nodding her head. Ariane 6 will always hold a special place in my heart

[Anonymous No.14709027]

>>14709014
I've brought it up maybe 1 other time before and it is a severely rational concern. I don't know how geological earth science works, I have no clue how geological mars science works.

[Anonymous No.14709029]

>>14709019
>>14709026
anons... that's 5...

[Anonymous No.14709031]

>>14709029
:( damn I got all excited. I heard A6 is almost done though

[Anonymous No.14709035]

It's back
>logo of the goons who ousted tom on the second stage

[Anonymous No.14709037]

>>14709016
I have a mental image now of someone's grandma knitting covers for rocket engines

[Anonymous No.14709038]

>>14709031
here is 6

[Anonymous No.14709039]

>>14709035
Why was Tom kicked out?

[Anonymous No.14709043]

>>14709016
>>14709017
Why does she have nuts?

[Anonymous No.14709045]

[Anonymous No.14709048]

>>14709039
Someone explained a couple of threads ago that he made a deal with the devil to get the money to keep Firefly going, and in exchange they kicked him out as soon as the ink was dry

[Anonymous No.14709049]

>>14709038
Too bad it’s expendable. All that work only to throw it away. Ariane 5’s boosters were recovered a few times but never reflown

[Anonymous No.14709052]

>>14709048
Let’s hope his sacrafice was worth it

[Anonymous No.14709053]

Going on vacation in a few weeks, gonna go to KSC. Do the bus tours go up to the SLS launch pad?

[Anonymous No.14709065]

>>14709053
No, the tours you have to register for ahead of time shuttle you to various facilities but the Visitor Center is the closest you get to the launch pads

You will only get closer if you have a ticket for a launch, the viewing stands are closer but you're still over a mile away

I recommend the launch simulator in the Atlantis exhibit, it's actually pretty convincing

[Anonymous No.14709074]

>>14709049
SRB recovery will never do better than breaking even.

>>14709043
They're liquid helium containers for spinning up the engine's turbopumps before ignition.

[Anonymous No.14709078]

>>14709074
Surprised they don’t do autogenous

[Anonymous No.14709079]

>>14709049
If it's any consolation it is ~$50 million cheaper than A5, so you're not losing as much. A62 will be $100 million usd cheaper, though at half the payload capacity

[Anonymous No.14709103]

>>14709078
>Surprised they don’t do autogenous
im not. they have blankies for their copvs, they're as oldspace as it gets.

[Anonymous No.14709106]

>>14709078
>>14709103
also autogenous doesn't imply you don't need high pressure spin start gas anymore

[Anonymous No.14709113]

terran 1

[Anonymous No.14709123]

[Anonymous No.14709129]

>>14709106
The shuttle bootstrapped from nothing but tank pressure, actually

[Anonymous No.14709149]

>>14709106
Actually, it looks like the balls are mostly used for repressurization of the first stage propellant tanks, but it flows through the engine before heading up to the top of the tanks. I'm not sure if that's just taking advantage of engine heat to warm the helium or if its doing some work first.

[Anonymous No.14709161]

JWST can see all the way to o jects made a few hundred million years after the big bang. But can it see when BE4s will get a payload to orbit?

[Anonymous No.14709162]

>>14709149
iirc, one bottle is spin start, the other bottle is LOX ullage. The hydrogen tank is autogenous.

[Anonymous No.14709197]

>>14709161
They have to put JWST's lens in backwards for it to see into the distant future, anon.

[Anonymous No.14709201]

>>14709079
$100 million cheaper still is gonna be a hit if they have to stop launching soyuz from korou

[Anonymous No.14709212]

>>14709201
Soyuz will leave a hole, though ESA does have a 2 ton, 10 ton, and 22 ton launcher. Soyuz is 8200 kg to LEO so it is replaceable by Ariane 62, but 62 is more expensive.

[Anonymous No.14709213]

>>14709197
They did this in the 90s and saw only fire everywhere

[Anonymous No.14709214]

give me one private space agency without the retarded le futuristic style fonts and I will shill it for life

[Anonymous No.14709216]

>>14709214
>unfiltered by an atmosphere
as their logo

[Anonymous No.14709226]

Guess what time it is spacebros

[Anonymous No.14709230]

>>14709226
Time to go feed an earther a double fistful of dirt?

[Anonymous No.14709231]

>>14709230
/tv/ time

[Anonymous No.14709233]

>>14709231
gross

[Anonymous No.14709236]

>>14709212
You'd think it would be, but the 62 might actually end up being cheaper than the Soyuz. You gotta remember that the Soyuz was manufactured by Roscosmos first before it was sold to Arianespace for marketing to actual customers. There was about an extra $40 million tacked on in that transaction.

[Anonymous No.14709297]

[Anonymous No.14709298]

You jus' pull the lil' handle...
https://youtu.be/Okw3R9pspPc?t=1589

[Anonymous No.14709311]

>>14709298
I found this comment under the video. SLS stans are deranged

[Anonymous No.14709320]

>>14709311
>Shits on the shuttle but ignores that SLS costs even more than that and is expendable

Where the hell is he even getting those Falcon 9 numbers, 2016?

[Anonymous No.14709328]

>>14709311
Most sane SpaceX skeptic.

[Anonymous No.14709330]

>>14709320
he's using the price of a launch for a reused booster instead of the true internal cost, which according to their director of vehicle integration was $28 million

[Anonymous No.14709341]

>While the recent hacks have highlighted the issue, cyber threats to space systems are not new. In 2015, the Congressionally-established U.S.- China Economic Security and Review Commission reported on hacks in 2007 and 2008 to the Landsat-7 satellite. The Commission also noted that cyber actors targeted NASA’s Terra Earth observation satellite on two occasions in 2008.

So far satellites haven't been hacked but the ground stations have been compromised

[Anonymous No.14709349]

>“Finally, I am thrilled to have helped craft and secure the first NASA authorization in five years. I commend the staff of the Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee, led by the indefatigable Pamela Whitney, as well as my own space policy advisor Grace Rubinger, who put in countless hours to help make this a reality. And I thank congressional leaders, including Chairwoman Johnson and her team, Ranking Members Lucas and Babin, Chairs Cantwell and Hickenlooper, and Ranking Member Wicker for their good faith negotiation, which was supported throughout by Administrator Nelson and his staff. This bill is a big win for space policy, the U.S. space program, and NASA.”

Bill "Give Us Two SLS Launches a Year" Nelson

If they don't increase the budget by several billion dollars next year, they're going to cannibalize the rest of NASA to fund the manned space program

[Anonymous No.14709352]

>>14709341
Imagine if the Soviets actually had gotten their hands on the documents for SDInet.

[Anonymous No.14709355]

This image dates back to 2011 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6Sk8WaERao)) when Charlie "It's not that easy" Bolden was administrator. What the fuck was some random senator doing announcing SLS?

[Anonymous No.14709357]

>>14709330
Might also be using non-inflation adjusted dollars for the Shuttle cargo costs.

[Anonymous No.14709362]

>>14709355
>some random senator
Look at what fucking state he's from.

[Anonymous No.14709367]

>>14709355
if you can strongarm nasa into letting you fly on the shuttle then getting them to let you point at a rocket picture showcasing an intentionally deceptive paint scheme they never intended to use is pretty easy

[Anonymous No.14709368]

>>14709355
Are you referring to Bill Nelson, the current NASA administrator who was an astronaut and chair of the house space subcommittee?

[Anonymous No.14709373]

>>14709368
>>14709367
Idgaf if he flew on the shuttle to show off, but I didn't know about the space subcommittee.

[Anonymous No.14709376]

>>14709368
>who was an astronaut
space tourist*

[Anonymous No.14709377]

>>14709368
Do you mean Bill "Ballast" Nelson, one-time space shuttle payload?

[Anonymous No.14709382]

https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2022/07/starship-24-awaiting-static-fires/

Static fire in coming soon.

[Anonymous No.14709385]

>>14709376
>>14709377
don't even care for the guy but this is cope

[Anonymous No.14709393]

welp i'm gonna buy a used copy of ballast's book and see if there's anything worth greentexting

[Anonymous No.14709396]

>>14709311
>overhauled, not through caution
On the final, winding down shuttle missions they spent another entire mission's worth of resources trying to prove that it wasn't going to burn up.

[Anonymous No.14709399]

>>14709349
>the first NASA authorization in five years
So was NASA just a rogue agency since 2017? How have they been funding themselves?

Is the SLS at Kennedy even legal?

[Anonymous No.14709402]

>>14709399
in nasa's case the authorization is a glorified mission statement and appropriations are where all the real action is at

[Anonymous No.14709406]

>>14709385
Calling Bill Nelson an astronaut is like calling anyone with a PhD a doctor, it's technically true but no person in their right mind would consider them a real doctor unless they went to medical school. Similarly payload specialist were just scientists and space tourists, the latter were only brought in for so called public relations purposes and they were hated by professional astronauts.
>Payload specialists were aware of full-time astronauts' dislike of the program. Garn advised STS-51-D colleague Jeffrey A. Hoffman to not play poker because, the astronaut quoted, "'It took you a while to disguise your initial skepticism about this whole thing'". Merbold said that at JSC he was treated as an intruder.

[Anonymous No.14709411]

>>14707900
That's what the naval sodomy lobby wants you to think

[Anonymous No.14709436]

>>14709311
Why does it cost so much to reuse? Lots of man hour labors and parts for repairs?

[Anonymous No.14709453]

>>14709436
They have to build a brand new second stage every time. This is why people are projecting the fully-reusable Starship will make launches vastly more affordable since refurbishment is going to cost way less than brand new builds.

[Anonymous No.14709477]

>>14709406
everything you said is right but i feel compelled to point out that the astronauts didn't hate all of the payload specialists. the ones from aerospace companies like charles walker and greg jarvis weren't a problem because they spent years in training and there was at least some logic in having someone from the company who made a satellite have somebody on board to monitor its deployment.

[Anonymous No.14709504]

>>14709406
A doctor is just a guy who does surgery and knows what drugs to give you

[Anonymous No.14709630]

>>14709043
that's where the rocket pee is stored, duh

[Anonymous No.14709632]

>>14709043
Propellant is stored in the balls

[Anonymous No.14709639]

SLS LAUNCHES IN ONE MONTH
EEEEEEK I'M GIDDY AS A SCHOOL GIRL

[Anonymous No.14709668]

Fly into the danger zone

[Anonymous No.14709694]

[Anonymous No.14709695]

[Anonymous No.14709700]

>Nuclear 70% of French capacity
>Half the fleet offline at a critical moment.
Let it be a lesson. Solar + storage can be modularized to absurd degree and fails gracefully.

[Anonymous No.14709707]

I think B7 is dead bros. NSF said B8 rolllloit is next week

[Anonymous No.14709711]

>>14709016
>>14709017
>only four left
I'll miss her

[Anonymous No.14709713]

Anyone wanna play?

[Anonymous No.14709719]

you can make your own astronaut gf

[Anonymous No.14709721]

build your very own international space station whatever you want

[Anonymous No.14709740]

https://youtu.be/A0myszg-ey0
chris dav and loren gash (from the vag) on off nominal :)

[Anonymous No.14709746]

>>14709700

[Anonymous No.14709776]

>>14708434
someone help me locate the impeller in the diagram

[Anonymous No.14709778]

>>14709700
Ok kraut

[Anonymous No.14709779]

[Anonymous No.14709785]

>>14709779
>NOOOO U CANT JUST PUT A BRUSH
JPL did, and it works. seethe

[Anonymous No.14709789]

Tory Bruno has a screed:
https://medium.com/@ToryBrunoULA/how-hard-is-going-to-space-20637c846ea3

[Anonymous No.14709790]

>>14709711
her hotter, cheaper sister will be a good replacement
hopefully

[Anonymous No.14709791]

>>14709740
Loren is beautiful o_O

[Anonymous No.14709797]

>>14709713
Damn I remember pirating this like 10 years ago. It was like the Sims, but in space.

[Anonymous No.14709801]

[Anonymous No.14709816]

>>14709436
>>14709453
The second stage makes up 20 percent of the rocket's cost, so like 10 million. That screencap guy is mixing up the price they charge vs the price it takes to reuse the rocket. They charge 50 million per launch to make up R&D costs, and because they can. But it costs much less than that for them to launch it

[Anonymous No.14709818]

If anything similar transpires to those rocket girl friends we live in a just world.

[Anonymous No.14709822]

>>14708781
When did spacex launch a methalox rocket into orbit?

[Anonymous No.14709833]

>>14709818
One day i will ride a rocket girl

[Anonymous No.14709838]

>>14709822
with one simple sentance the musk-chumps are btfo

[Anonymous No.14709848]

When's Rocket Lab doing more of that catching business?

[Anonymous No.14709850]

>>14709639
Literally how

[Anonymous No.14709855]

>>14709848
Electron is cancelled

[Anonymous No.14709861]

>>14709700
Fuck off with your green scam

[Anonymous No.14709863]

>>14709789
SpaceX now regularly flies to MEO (first in 2018) and did everything in between LEO and MEO
direct GSO commercial flight is planned for September this year

much like snake is legless, Tory is engineless liar

[Anonymous No.14709868]

>>14709816
still no figure on how much f9 actually costs. Figures

[Anonymous No.14709874]

[Anonymous No.14709881]

>>14709868
Just look it up if you want to know about it, I looked it up recently and they calculated that refurbishing costs like 15 million with 10 million for a new second stage and 5 million for refurbishing the booster. Although another anon in this thread said they spend 28 million on it

[Anonymous No.14709883]

>all these posts
>no new glenn / blue origin
sfg continues to ignore the elephant in the room. the spacex killer

[Anonymous No.14709890]

>>14709883
Go home Jeff, you're drunk.

[Anonymous No.14709898]

>>14709883
>t.

[Anonymous No.14709918]

>>14709789
Don't be hypnotized by Snakes chart. The only metric that matters is getting to a stable orbit in leo and then refueling it.

[Anonymous No.14709919]

[Anonymous No.14709921]

>>14709789
Tory makes good points, ignore the haters

[Anonymous No.14709933]

>>14709883
blocks your path

[Anonymous No.14709942]

>>14709883
Relativity is the spacex killer. Spacex bit off more than she can chew

[Anonymous No.14709944]

>>14709942
>Spacex bit off more than she can chew
Painfully true every goddamn day :(

[Anonymous No.14709954]

>>14709311
So he's delusional for saying that F9 is more expensive $/lb than Shuttle. It's literally 5 times cheaper.
But isn't it true that cost to customer (50M$ per wikipedia) for a reused rocket should result in better $/lb to orbit than the expendable version if reuse were to make sense?

[Anonymous No.14709961]

>BO put "for the benefit of earth" on the header of their website
doing their best smallsat launcher impression with that motto

[Anonymous No.14709970]

>>14709961
dont care

[Anonymous No.14709980]

>>14709961
Lol

[Anonymous No.14709982]

>>14709954
That's not how price economics work. Increased savings only get passed on to the customer if there's a competitor undercutting your price. Since there isn't one, SpaceX is able to increase their profit each time they reduce costs. They have no reason to pass the savings on to customers.
If some other company comes along and prices similar launches for less than SpaceX, then they might reduce their prices to compete.
The only reason to cut the price to the customer in the absence of a lower price competitor is if you're able to make up for the smaller profit per launch with more launch volume. If there are lots of customers who can't afford your price now but could if it were reduced, you can increase overall profit by charging less per launch but having far more of them. It doesn't appear to be the case that there's a huge market waiting to be exploited there, so the prices stay put.

[Anonymous No.14709984]

>>14709818
Absolutely based chang examiners

[Anonymous No.14709989]

>>14709311
will smoothbrains ever understand price vs cost? the marginal cost of a reused F9 is about $15 million, no more than 20. the price to a customer is much more. SpaceX profits far more from reuse, it's critical to their business model.

[Anonymous No.14709991]

>>14709700
>+ storage
or to put it another way
>then a miracle happens
If storage was cheap and easy, we'd already be doing it. Instead we have weird schemes like pumping water on top of hills or building towers to push heavy rocks up during the day. Just saying "+ storage" doesn't magically make it exist at the necessary scale.

[Anonymous No.14710007]

>>14709982
So Starship is gonna play in the $/lb ballpark of existing rockets for anything other than Starlink.
That's so dumb

[Anonymous No.14710018]

>>14709311
isn't $59 mil still substantially cheaper than Shittle

[Anonymous No.14710021]

>>14709801
why do these two calamities look so damn good

[Anonymous No.14710028]

[Anonymous No.14710034]

>>14710007
Starship will still be far cheaper to customers per kg than F9 or Heavy. Shotwell is quoted as saying customers can expect to pay "in the Falcon range" for early starship flights. I take that to mean $100 million

[Anonymous No.14710035]

>>14709311
in other news, both Dunning and Kreuger are in hospital for injuries sustained from a facepalm as a result of this midwittery

[Anonymous No.14710039]

I'm in the SpaceX boat but you cannot take anything SpaceX says for granted. We know their rockets are the cheapest by looking at the market and not by listening to what SpaceX is saying. Taking Musk for granted is an unironic delusion

[Anonymous No.14710041]

>>14708169
I misread Orus as Orcus and got excited. Trojans are still cool, I guess

[Anonymous No.14710045]

>>14709694
uncucked image

[Anonymous No.14710048]

>>14709801
Incomplete ISS looked cool

[Anonymous No.14710063]

>>14708370
I'd book a ticket on that thing right now for $2,700 dollars and I don't even want to go to Paris.

[Anonymous No.14710074]

>>14710048
who took the picture

[Anonymous No.14710077]

>>14710074
shittle

[Anonymous No.14710092]

Better Space Station Freedom design?
Double keel?

[Anonymous No.14710095]

>>14710092
or Power Tower?

[Anonymous No.14710108]

>>14710092
>>14710095
how about no tiny module bullshit?

[Anonymous No.14710110]

>>14710092
>>14710095
funny how nasa couldn't realize even the most "realistic" (sóy) of these designs

[Anonymous No.14710123]

>>14709818
rent free

[Anonymous No.14710130]

>>14710095
tower of power, if for no other reason than the gravity gradient stabilization would have forced them to kick all the microgravity experiments off into a free flyer so they could have used it as a real habitation testbed. also would have potentially been useful in settling the propellant in a dep*t

[Anonymous No.14710142]

>>14710130
>a real habitation testbed
if its not spinning its worthless

[Anonymous No.14710157]

>>14710092
Power Tower looks cool, but with the dual keel they would have had power generated via solar mirrors heating a generator.

[Anonymous No.14710165]

>>14710092
Dual Keel Freedom is based because NASA planned on having the astronauts manually assemble the truss segments in orbit rather than launching them pre-fabricated like on the ISS. I'm pretty sure I also read somewhere that at one point they planned to launch the modules bare and outfit them with life support and scientific equipment on subsequent flights in order to maximize their size. Shuttle Optimism Era space station designs are a lot of fun

[Anonymous No.14710190]

>>14710157
That's pretty neat. Must suck to be the guys who design this kind of stuff and never see it built. Guess you have to get used to it.

[Anonymous No.14710208]

>>14710165
>NASA planned on having the astronauts manually assemble the truss segments in orbit
Was this plan why they had the astros test building on that one shuttle flight that ended up failing badly?

[Anonymous No.14710226]

>>14710190
imagine being born in like ~1950 and then deciding to go into aerospace at the height of apollo. your entire career would've been false hopes and broken promises about how we're going to get back to doing real exploration like what you watched growing up any year now.

[Anonymous No.14710234]

>>14710208
Yep. NASA clung onto the idea regardless until the late 80's until they reluctantly switched to prefabs in order to try and get the costs under control. It also ended up causing a congressional hearing when it was revealed that NASA had been massively downplaying the amount of spacewalks that would be necessary to construct the station the way they wanted to. The whole Space Station Freedom story is wild

[Anonymous No.14710239]

>>14709818
>congenital feeblemindedness
Animefag coomers stomped

[Anonymous No.14710241]

>too many spacewalks
just pod up nigga

[Anonymous No.14710249]

>>14709311
it's kinda funny when you lurk various spaceflight forums and see posts from 2011 arguing whether Falcon 9 reuse is viable business model
>3 months ago
lel, guy is off his meds

[Anonymous No.14710254]

>>14710241
>unknown

[Anonymous No.14710272]

5th section up

[Anonymous No.14710275]

[Anonymous No.14710290]

>>14710234
it would have been a boondoggle regardless but congress deserves a lot of blame for trying to micromanage construction. they wanted a design where the initial modules could function as a man-tended free flyer so they'd have the option of killing the program after a few launches.

[Anonymous No.14710318]

>>14710275
Saturn V production ended in 1968 sadly. Johnson fucked over Apollo too although Nixon was a cunt who finally killed her.
Interestingly enough, Saturn V production capability was maintained until 1974, which is also the year that the Soviet N1 was finally cancelled. Some speculate that the Saturn V was basically kept on life support in case they needed it again if the N1 worked

[Anonymous No.14710325]

>>14710290
>congress deserves a lot of blame for trying to micromanage construction
For sure. One of my favorite addendums from the Freedom saga is the Industrial Space Facility free-flying module that a private company was trying to build. Congress kept going back and forth demanding NASA fund development of the module using part of the space station budget to encourage private space enterprise and then acting enraged that NASA is wasting money on the module instead of focusing on the space station

[Anonymous No.14710326]

[Anonymous No.14710340]

>>14710318
>Johnson fucked over Apollo too
To be fair to Johnson he did go to bat for Apollo Applications funding multiple times and spoke of the merits of making the most of the hardware developed for Apollo. It's just that congress wanted nothing to do with it. I will agree that it's a meme that Nixon single-handedly killed AAP and the Integrated Program Plan. Those programs, IPP especially, were unlikely to happen regardless of who the president was

[Anonymous No.14710347]

The DIRECT team believed Ares I and V would cost $35 billion to develop, while Jupiter + its upper stage was $15 Billion. In hindsight, SLS has cost $23 Billion so far. So the DIRECT team is somewhat accurate in their assessment

[Anonymous No.14710355]

>Maybe O-F should also drop the links to very old Orbiter versions and leave that for hobby-archeologists. It would just make the reality clear: the community shrunk and the main developer practically left. That huge addon repository is only a faint remembrance of long lost glory days, and as you wrote, it belongs in a museum.
Sad reality sets in Orbiter community.
KSP literally was launched on Orbiter forums. How the table turns!

[Anonymous No.14710358]

This is interesting. The DIRECT team believed that a Jupiter launch would be about 3/4 the cost of a Shuttle launch despite throwing away three RS-25 engines with the latter because they avoided all the insane tile problems and inspections of the Space Shuttle.
Of course, they also assume that at 5 flights per year, the shuttle is $520 Million per launch, while Jupiter is $380 Million. How accurate is this? No idea.
In defense of the Jupiter team, who could’ve predicted SLS’ massive costs? The Shuttle was able to fly 5 times per year at a cost of $0.5-1 Billion per launch. Logically, a vehicle derived from the Shuttle should cost about the same, maybe cheaper, and fly at least the same too.

[Anonymous No.14710360]

>>14710347
Those costs could have been much lower if they dropped the hydrolox and solid motor grift

[Anonymous No.14710364]

>>14710226
>Born to late to witness NASA’s finest achievements
>Born to early to conquer the solar system
>Born just in time to be a part of the dawning of a new era
We’re gonna make it bros. I love you all.

[Anonymous No.14710365]

Last one. The DIRECT team states that a single launch of even a giant rocket is cheaper than dozens of medium launches, at least with regards to building a space station. For the most part, this is true

[Anonymous No.14710366]

>>14710364
Gay

[Anonymous No.14710378]

> off-world well dwellers are better than Earthers
lol no, they're all scum

[Anonymous No.14710382]

>>14710378
big rock > small rock

[Anonymous No.14710384]

>>14710382
t. coping rust sucker

[Anonymous No.14710391]

>>14710384
>nooo I don't want to struggle to achieve anything, give me easy mode where I can break orbit with a wet fart!
Pussy

[Anonymous No.14710414]

>>14710391
By that logic I assume you wish we lived on a super-Earth where it takes 15 km/s to reach orbit

[Anonymous No.14710426]

>>14710378
I'm sorry anon, but there's just no mass in flatspace, you'll have to descend at some point.

[Anonymous No.14710429]

>>14710340
yeah, if lbj couldn't make AAP happen nobody could have. there were a lot of good arguments against a make-work program for apollo hardware it and those arguments only got more persuasive once the budget crunch started hitting.
you can hear lbj throwing around the idea of gutting AAP on a suggestion by florida senator spessard holland, who presumably would have been very pro-nasa, as early as '66 here at like 10:10 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_SwB2lNbrs

[Anonymous No.14710437]

>>14710426
>there's just no mass in flatspace
I beg to differ, filthy dumb well dweller scum

[Anonymous No.14710447]

>>14710437
>pic of man at the bottom of a tiny well
I don't know why you think this is impressive.

[Anonymous No.14710453]

>>14710355
lmao no one on /sfg/ even knows Orbiter 2016 exists, tells everything you need to know about Oribter

[Anonymous No.14710457]

>>14710453
Orbiter is cool but it lacks the creative ability and huge community of KSP, which is why it never “made it big”

[Anonymous No.14710463]

>>14710447
It doesn't count if you're taller than the well you're standing in, just like going higher than the Karman line doesn't count as going to space unless you've also achieved orbital velocity.

[Anonymous No.14710465]

>>14710457
i remember trying to play orbiter in like 2007 and the learning curve was just way too steep. granted i was a babby back then, but with ksp i never had that much trouble picking things up.

[Anonymous No.14710468]

[Anonymous No.14710475]

progressing nicely

[Anonymous No.14710483]

>>14710414
NO PAIN
NO GAIN

[Anonymous No.14710494]

>>14710475
granes

[Anonymous No.14710507]

>>14710475
>progressing nicely
This is agonizingly slow progress. SpaceX spoils the shit out of me for speed, while everyone else does things needlessly, or even detrimentally slowly.

[Anonymous No.14710511]

>>14710494
and lots of trusses

[Anonymous No.14710557]

>only brainlets worry about the ship tipping over. it's a non issue.
>>14708751

When those firing rocket engines approach ground, do they alter the topography andor structural integrity of the ground surface?

Or it's all about finding flat flat bedrock?
Alot of pictures from rovers of mars surface looks lumpy, rocky, muddy, dusty, sandy

[Anonymous No.14710560]

cant believe we're already at 90 launches this year

[Anonymous No.14710562]

>>14710475
Indeed. Just a few weeks ago SCHOTT announced they had produced the 500th Zerodur mirror blank for ELT. More than half way now.

[Anonymous No.14710564]

[Anonymous No.14710570]

>>14709639
Least gay space launch system fan

[Anonymous No.14710575]

>>14709991
>weird schemes like pumping water on top of hills
this scheme can be particularly elegant if you have the right topography. Neither nuclear or renewables deliver the right amount of power to match demand so you can use reversible power plants to efficiently absorb excess power

[Anonymous No.14710613]

>>14709991
>If storage was cheap and easy, we'd already be doing it.
>Just saying "+ storage" doesn't magically make it exist at the necessary scale.
It is going to require a big infrastructure project. I didn't say it would be airlifted out of the clouds.

https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20220210-announcing-new-reactors-macron-puts-nuclear-power-at-heart-of-carbon-neutral-push
>EDF estimates the cost of six new reactors at about 50 billion euros ($57.36 billion), depending on financing conditions.

It's not like their existing solution or plans are cheap and easy or likely to meet schedules.

[Anonymous No.14710656]

Masten is officially dead
:(

[Anonymous No.14710689]

>>14710656
what is launch credit

[Anonymous No.14710691]

>>14710656
Masten: First of the fallen
Astra: The second of the fallen
Firefly: The third of the fallen
Relativity: The undead

The four horsemen of the apocalypse

[Anonymous No.14710696]

>>14710656
Let's hope this doesn't domino to Astrobotic because of those liabilities

CLPS is barely hanging on by a thread

[Anonymous No.14710707]

>>14710696
Their CEO was a retard because he tried to underbid, but it looks like he forgot that he's not a billionaire.

[Anonymous No.14710710]

>>14708584
There are no slingshot maneuvers, it goes onto an elliptical orbit. This is simply what that elliptical orbit looks like from Jupiter's frame of reference. Here's what the entire trajectory looks like from the Sun's frame of reference.

[Anonymous No.14710711]

>>14710707
It's chapter 11, so it doesn't mean they're completely done. It lets them ask for more time

It is a death rattle though

[Anonymous No.14710715]

>>14708897
You don't know what methalox is? Lurk moar.

[Anonymous No.14710719]

>>14709027
>I don't know how geological earth science works, I have no clue how geological mars science works
Then why are you concerned?

[Anonymous No.14710734]

>>14710711
They're done, I read that majority of people involved with their Moon lander is gone.
As for the rest of CLPS, I think other companies are safe, maybe aside from Firefly. Both Astrobiotic and IM are getting ready to launch their landers this year.

[Anonymous No.14710740]

>>14710691
why can't ever the bad guys fall? The SLSes and the Shittles of this world

[Anonymous No.14710745]

>>14710740
Both of them are government projects, results of grift and corruption.

[Anonymous No.14710757]

>>14709801
How much money do you think they spent designing, sewing, and installing that bizarre fabric patchwork inside the cargo bay

[Anonymous No.14710762]

>Blue Origin today announced its sixth human flight, NS-22, will lift off from Launch Site One on Thursday, August 4. The launch window opens at 8:30 AM CDT / 13:30 UTC. The webcast will start at T-30 minutes.

THERE'S YOUR HOP NOW STOP ASKING

[Anonymous No.14710767]

>>14710575
Most of the planet doesn't have the required topography. It's a nice niche solution in the areas with the right topography, which is good those who live there but not relevant to the bulk of humanity. It's just a bit annoying when someone like that "+ storage" poster pretends that storage is a solved problem in order to make his preferred energy generation solution appear viable.

[Anonymous No.14710790]

>>14709818
>chink weeb rejected
LMFAO
>>14709833
What really irks me about these designs is that they barely even look like the rockets they're supposed to be even representing.

[Anonymous No.14710793]

>>14710762
Isn't it a bit early for the autumn carnival to come to town?

[Anonymous No.14710797]

>>14710757
Yeah I was thinking about that after I posted that pic. Would be cheaper to use Gucci shirts and belts for those fabrics and harnesses

[Anonymous No.14710803]

>>14710767
It so much better living near some mountains and not in a desert. Elon is wrong about the Earth being underpopulated

[Anonymous No.14710821]

>>14709719
That's what female kerbals are for.
>>14710457
That, and the physics IIRC are basically non-existent. I remember trying to dock with the ISS in one simulation and the orbiter just phased through.

[Anonymous No.14710824]

>>14710803
He means the White population.

[Anonymous No.14710830]

>>14710790
she looks and dresses yuro to symbolise being yuro
big heavy tits because big heavy rocket
I think that's enough. that's the 2 defining things the A5 has. you can't really make a human look like a rocket.
taking off clothes for stage separation is a cute detail DESU

[Anonymous No.14710845]

>>14710821
https://iss-sim.spacex.com/

[Anonymous No.14710867]

>>14709797
What is happening in this picture

[Anonymous No.14710887]

We need more rocket girl cosplay

[Anonymous No.14711009]

[Anonymous No.14711067]

>>14710887
hot but the face is orcish

[Anonymous No.14711082]

450 new stamps and a new stamp booklet.
I'll start scanning after the sauna

[Anonymous No.14711097]

>>14711082
How can I find you when I come to Finland?

[Anonymous No.14711101]

[Anonymous No.14711107]

>>14711082
kino

[Anonymous No.14711112]

About to LARP an airbase attack in KSP
The year is 1987. Soviet-backed Iran launched an assault on a US military aircraft several weeks ago, prompting a war.
The target is an airbase near Semnan, Iran. The airbase is equipped with twin rocket SAM sites, a cannon Anti-Air emplacement, and a squadron of AL-26 fighter jets (OC planes) purchased from the USSR.

The mission will see Jebediah kerman leading a squadron of USAF pilots, who will take off from Palmachim Airbase in Israel, with small but nimble F-17 fighter aircraft.
It’s unlikely all of them will come home in one piece

[Anonymous No.14711145]

>>14711082
>>14711112
based

[Anonymous No.14711149]

Do you think a venus sample return would be worth trying? All you would get is the top layer of whatever volcanic splooge had weathered into dust (or you could get hard rock if you brought a mechanical hammer that could chip away a few rocks) but it could tell you a lot about the recent volcanism. Sucks that we will most likely never, ever get a deeper sample and be able to study what the older geological units are made of, unless there’s a huge crater somewhere that I don’t know about that has managed to carve into the older layers.

[Anonymous No.14711156]

>>14710887
No

[Anonymous No.14711158]

>>14711149
>sample return
No, but a large dirigible probe with a good power supply and active cooling of electronics would be able to go down to the surface and collect samples to study using an internal laboratory, which would be good enough for the goals you described.

[Anonymous No.14711163]

>>14711149
It would alway be worth trying, but doing it is near impossible with modern technology.
Rocket engines can’t even ignire on its surface, the fuel and oxydizer just can’t leave the engine to ignite, the atmosphere forces it back in

[Anonymous No.14711173]

>>14711158
That probe would likely be a monolithic effort nearing JWST’s level of technological sophistication.

[Anonymous No.14711174]

>>14711158
ENTER
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMcsWbfHTpY

[Anonymous No.14711185]

>>14711101
>it was all a ruse
>I didn't actually mean to say anything of substance
>NASA please buy more seats

[Anonymous No.14711188]

>>14710762
Blue can't stop winning (and won't stop)

[Anonymous No.14711189]

>>14711112
>“In the midnight hour, she cried more more more. With the rebel yell, she cried more more more”
Jeb, Bill, and Bob all fly in close formation towards the Iranian airbase. The F-17 is a nimble fighter but it lacks much of the armament of its larger siblings

[Anonymous No.14711191]

>>14711189
Pic goes hard holy shit

[Anonymous No.14711193]

>>14711082
Cool stuff anon! my dumbass family sold my grandfather's stamp collection before i could get to it...i always wonder what space stamps he had. i have some from the Mercury program

[Anonymous No.14711213]

>>14711191
Halfway to Iran, Bill’s plane suffered an engine failure forcing him to make a crash landing in the desert. Bob and Jeb push on.

[Anonymous No.14711215]

>>14711082
Forgot to mention that I also have quite a lot of newspapers from 1958 to the 1980's
Found an issue of Newsweek my grandfather picked up from his visit to the US in 1986. There was an article about Voyager 2's flyby of Uranus, to which my granddad struck first and clipped a photo out, so that's missing.

>>14711193
I guess I'm lucky that my family is more of the hoarder type where nothing is ever thrown away. Although nothing is in order and stamps are everywhere in random boxes and such. Found quite a few stamps from his collections to add into mine.

[Anonymous No.14711218]

>>14711213
>>14711189
Pic

[Anonymous No.14711220]

Starship is gonna look so huge on the LC39 pad

[Anonymous No.14711221]

>>14711215
forgot image like always

[Anonymous No.14711222]

>>14711149
The biggest problem with such a mission would be going back to orbit due to the high gravity, slow rotation rate, and thick atmosphere. If you just land and take off even the high temperature won't be a problem. The high pressure would lower the rocket engine performance but not quite like >>14711163 suggests. At this point a actively cooled nuclear powered rover is in principle possible. With the recent confirmations of detection of phosphene in Venus' upper atmosphere (60 km) an atmospheric sample return look interesting

[Anonymous No.14711224]

>>14711220
ffs, they didn't even try to find a matching perspective photo and the actual OLM legs are right fucking there

[Anonymous No.14711244]

>>14709504
doctors don't do surgery, dedicated surgeons do
docs just deal drugs and guess at what problem you have after the fact

[Anonymous No.14711251]

>>14711222
An atmospheric sample return could be done within 8 years or so, if development started now.
What that ship would basically be would be a funnel with fins so it doesn't tumble in the upper atmosphere. Everything aerodynamic would be detached after sample gathering, then you just return back to Earth.

[Anonymous No.14711258]

>>14711251
for sampling the height where phospene was detected you would need a heatshield and multiple stages

[Anonymous No.14711269]

I met a amateur radio enthusiast today. He told me he measured the distance to the moon with one of his antennas

[Anonymous No.14711276]

Wtf Japan

[Anonymous No.14711281]

>>14711276

[Anonymous No.14711294]

>>14711276
Reminder that JAXA kis going to fly the H3 without boosters first

[Anonymous No.14711320]

>>14711163
It’s possible without a rocket, you could balloon the samples up and scoop them out of the upper atmosphere

[Anonymous No.14711324]

>>14711276
This is why they made the H3, the H2 couldn't cut it for ambitious missions without ridiculous booster arrangements

[Anonymous No.14711333]

>>14710656
>NASA statement on Masten, which was paid $66.1 million to date for the CLPS contract:
>"In the event Masten Space Systems is unable to complete its task order, NASA will manifest its payloads on other CLPS flights."

[Anonymous No.14711337]

>>14711276
Wow

[Anonymous No.14711345]

>>14710691
Relativity will probably fall but I want them to succeeeeed

[Anonymous No.14711379]

Relativity deserves the hype. RocketLab is overrated. S24 spread her wings btw

[Anonymous No.14711382]

top 10 banned launch towers you can't use anymore (real) (you won't believe #3)

[Anonymous No.14711388]

>>14711174
Would this work?

[Anonymous No.14711391]

Brightness mitigation: Best practices for satelite operators
https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1553109015491657728

>Error: Our system thinks your post is spam. Please reformat and try again.
>Error: Upload failed.

[Anonymous No.14711392]

>>14711333
Masten is lucky they aren't being criminally investigated for that underbidding

NASA OIG doesn't play games when it thinks they're being cheated

[Anonymous No.14711398]

>>14711388
yes.

[Anonymous No.14711399]

>>14711391
It's kind of funny that something that NRO et al. do as a matter of course ends up being important later

It should have been studied way back when the Iridium flash became a meme but people just shrugged and went about their business until a madman started putting thousands of sats up

[Anonymous No.14711401]

>>14711392
NASA wanted rhem to underbid and sell slots to reduce the cost for them
Masten just got fucked over when the slot pulled out

[Anonymous No.14711406]

>>14711382
Why the fuck is every space news channel embracing clickbait ahhhhhh what the fuckkkkkkkk

[Anonymous No.14711409]

>>14711406
Live by the algos, die by the algos

[Anonymous No.14711423]

>>14711382
Matt Lowne is legit though, he's just more into KSP videos. Haven't checked his channel in a while, seems he's following the same route hullo and Marcus House took, basically transitioning from a KSP to a spaceflight/SpaceX channel.

[Anonymous No.14711426]

>>14711423
Marcus and Matt kind of embrace flashy thumbnails and big titles. Scott makes Kino

[Anonymous No.14711427]

>>14711392
Why can't those guys investigate SLS

[Anonymous No.14711428]

>>14711391
>SpaceX will continue to work closely with the astronomy community to mitigate the effect of all satellite operations on their important work. SpaceX engineers will be presenting in-person and answering questions at the Vera C. Rubin Observatory Project & Community Workshop 2022. SpaceX also participates in other astronomy conferences and workshops.

[Anonymous No.14711433]

>>14711427
The guy who runs NASA, Bill Nelson, is also one of the senators who pushed for SLS in the first place after Constellation got cancelled over his objections

[Anonymous No.14711435]

>>14711391
satellite flashes harm indigenous communities

[Anonymous No.14711437]

>>14711427
Because SLS is real.

[Anonymous No.14711440]

>>14711427
They did
Its fucked and thats why we know it costs 4billion+ a launch

[Anonymous No.14711444]

>>14711435
Doesn't harm them enough
They should look upon our creations and go blind

[Anonymous No.14711449]

>>14711423
Matt and Marcus are indistinguishable Starship clickbait at this point. Pic rel (kinda old) makes good points. I still watch his rare KSP content, but Starship spam on Youtube gets old, both the "GAME OVER!" type stuff and the update videos.

[Anonymous No.14711456]

>>14711423
My userscript blocks him because he makes too many clickbaiy trash. If you're saying he's legit, then I'm inclined to belive youre a low iq trash.

[Anonymous No.14711464]

>>14711449
>Europa Clipper
>Cruise: 5.5 years
>Science phase: 4 years
Yeah, no wonder why people are more excited about the launch.

[Anonymous No.14711465]

>>14711449
What a faggot ass response. Bending over backwards for the algorithm when it's not even what you want to do.
Scott does whatever he feels like and it's working out just fine.

[Anonymous No.14711470]

>>14711449
>I make clickbait trash and people refuse to watch others, therefore I'll make more clickbait trash to get more views
Absolute trash

[Anonymous No.14711476]

I don't even watch those youtubers because by the time they release their videos, I already know everything from /sfg/ or twitter.
Chocolate boy and Eric are exceptions, though.

[Anonymous No.14711484]

Scott is making a three part mini documentary on the history of the Delta rocket and so far it’s really good.
Tim Dodd is a man child but his content is great and you can tell he puts work into it.
Matt and Marcus are pathetic sellouts who are slaves to the algorithm. I say this as a former fan of both.

[Anonymous No.14711485]

>>14711435
I know you are joking, but how could that possibly be true?

[Anonymous No.14711488]

>>14711449
I like Marcus House because he combines all the relevant SS news on a weekly basis. I don't have time to browse NSF and /sfg/ every day

[Anonymous No.14711492]

Any reason why flyback boosters couldn’t work? I know their mass pentalty is worse but still

[Anonymous No.14711496]

>>14711492
>flyback boosters
you mean this?

[Anonymous No.14711498]

>>14711492
There's no technical reason why they couldn't work if you were determined enough to develop them. It's just never been worth it

[Anonymous No.14711501]

>>14711496
Lol. Nah I meant more like pic related.

[Anonymous No.14711511]

>>14711485
notwithstanding satellites' direct impact on astronomy which is pretty fucking bad, the manner and pace of ‘occupying’ near-Earth space raises the risk of repeating the mistakes of colonization literally on a cosmic scale. We need to consider the impact of satellite constellations on the essential human right to dark skies and on cultural sky traditions across all peoples. Space is really a global commons that contains the heritage humanity’s scientific and cultural practices. Putting bright satellites in orbit amounts to affecting and destroying a peoples' culture associated with the sky

[Anonymous No.14711516]

>>14711511
>essential human right to dark skies
Where is that written? I want to sue my city.

[Anonymous No.14711518]

Original New Glenn design 1/3

[Anonymous No.14711521]

>>14711501
Eh why?
We already have a proven system

[Anonymous No.14711522]

>>14711518
2/3

>>14711521
Just hypothetical stuff desu. Vertical landing is 100% better

[Anonymous No.14711523]

>>14711518
>>14711522
3/3

[Anonymous No.14711525]

>>14711484
Lowne's issue is he waited way too long to pivot from pure ksp content.

[Anonymous No.14711527]

>>14711082
All stamps are now sorted.
New countries include Congo, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Sahara, Afganistan, Equatorial Guinea, and North Korea

[Anonymous No.14711528]

>>14711522
>Just hypothetical stuff
Stop wasting your time on garbage
I bet you do alt history too

[Anonymous No.14711530]

>>14711528
No it’s for KSP

[Anonymous No.14711534]

>>14711530
>KSP
like i said stop wasting your time
You were meant to grow out of video games years ago

[Anonymous No.14711536]

>>14711534
Says the guy posting on 4chan

[Anonymous No.14711550]

>2016
Jeffy B. is pathetic

[Anonymous No.14711553]

>>14711163
Dumb. 93 bar is not that hard to push against when it's ambient pressure. Your tanks are automatically also sitting at 93 bar, just like how on Earth everything is automatically at ~1 bar. You then pressurize to 4 or 5 bar to feed your propellant pumps and they bring the propellants up to high pressure. The expansion ratio of the hot gasses would be very low however, so rocket launch directly from the surface would not be ideal.

Instead you take advantage of the very dense atmosphere to mechanically fly to roughly 50 km altitude then release your rocket powered vehicle from there, where it's about 1 bar pressure and of course 90% of Earth's gravity. You still need a two stage rocket but it's not nearly as hard as trying to do rockets from the ground.

[Anonymous No.14711591]

>>14711553
>you take advantage of the very dense atmosphere to mechanically fly to roughly 50 km altitude then release your rocket powered vehicle from there
you do realize that that rocket would be similar to the ones that can reach orbit from earth

[Anonymous No.14711594]

[Anonymous No.14711597]

>>14711591
Astra's rocket fits inside of a shipping container.

[Anonymous No.14711600]

>>14711594
Need this to be funded by redbull

[Anonymous No.14711604]

[Anonymous No.14711614]

>>14711591
>you do realize that that rocket would be similar to the ones that can reach orbit from earth
Yes, that was my point. Did you not read ahead to the part where I stated that you do this to circumvent the challenge of launching from Venus' deep atmosphere, thus making the rocket technology requirements fit easily into what we already do here on Earth?

[Anonymous No.14711642]

Why don't some launch providers make their payload user's guide accessible on their site? Hate getting cockblocked by "request guide" links.

[Anonymous No.14711651]

dissecting the western devils' stratagem

[Anonymous No.14711677]

It's over

[Anonymous No.14711683]

So Congress just approved the Block Buy of SLS

https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/nasa-space-mars/2022/07/29/id/1080993/

[Anonymous No.14711689]

>>14711683
100 YEARS OF SLS

[Anonymous No.14711690]

the absolute magnitude of autism required https://miro.com/app/board/o9J_lK2RYC4=/

[Anonymous No.14711692]

>>14711683
>The legislation also details that NASA will use its Space Launch System to send the first humans to Mars for an "orbital mission and a human mission to the surface."
Its over
NASA will not be allowed to use starship

[Anonymous No.14711694]

>>14711692
SpaceX will not be going with NASA, they're doing it themselves. Elon literally said that.

[Anonymous No.14711696]

There has got to be a simpler explanation for Mars' strange radiological signature than a container ship sized hydrogen bomb.

[Anonymous No.14711698]

>>14711677
>that man/woman divide
Oomph.

[Anonymous No.14711703]

>>14711694
The official NASA mars mission will require SLS
private companies will be banned from landing on mars because of planetary protection

[Anonymous No.14711704]

>>14711703
>The official NASA mars mission will require SLS
I do not care about the official NASA mars mission because they first gotta get to the moon.
>private companies will be banned from landing on mars because of planetary protection
Cringe if you actually believe that

[Anonymous No.14711713]

What’s the big deal with hypersonic missiles?

[Anonymous No.14711741]

not spaceflight but maybe? the US government approved a small modular commercial nuclear reactor. maybe these things can be used to provide power to colonies.
https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/07/us-regulators-will-certify-first-small-nuclear-reactor-design/

[Anonymous No.14711756]

>>14711741
Based. Simply on the grounds of not being a nuclear decay stirling pozzbox.

[Anonymous No.14711778]

>>14711741
Nah, it's designed with gravity-based failsafes that will not work on the moon, and another anon explained a week or two ago that water-cooled reactors aren't feasible in vacuum for temperature dissipation reasons IIRC

It's a shame because it would probably fit into rockets that exist today

[Anonymous No.14711788]

Would love to see BO and Relativity make their own Starship clones njw2v

[Anonymous No.14711791]

>>14711778
>It's a shame because it would probably fit into rockets that exist today
Kek have you seen a reactor vessel before? The thing is made of decimeter thick steel and weighs 700 tons

[Anonymous No.14711799]

>>14711788
wtf i typed the captcha in my post and it posted

[Anonymous No.14711804]

>>14711799
newfag

[Anonymous No.14711834]

>>14711788
Blue origin could turn New Glenn into a fully reusable system without too much extra work. You'd just need a second stage that'd do what SpaceX originally planned for the Falcon 9 second stage to do.

[Anonymous No.14711890]

>>14711788
If BO really cared about its mission and focused on LEO, an uprated and fully reusable New Glenn would work nicely for them for a while. I doubt they could pull off anything more for the foreseeable future.
I think Ellis recently said that Relativity could build a Starship-size rocket. At least they haven't flat-out announced one before even reaching orbit.

[Anonymous No.14711916]

>>14711276
I didn't even do this shit in KSP, wtf

[Anonymous No.14711929]

>below orbit is full globohomo
Never rooted for these niggers but holy fuck I didn't expect them to be this low

[Anonymous No.14711935]

>>14711916
C'mon, it's cool.

They're reusable.

[Anonymous No.14711936]

Noticed a brighter than usual star in the sky, turns out Mars and Uranus are right next to each other in the sky. Tried to get a good picture of it but I was only able to see them separately with binoculars, so no image of that.
I did however run into this foreign guy who was looking for his shitfaced friend who had wandered into the same park. Didn't speak finnish that well but not complete gibberish. He asked me what I was looking at and I told him, to which he asked if I'm astronomer. After a bit of chat he asked if I wanted a cig and if he could take a look through the binos.
Didn't happen to catch his name, but it did make me wonder if I should start studying more into astronomy after highschool. Might buy a real telescope someday.

[Anonymous No.14711950]

I was at the beach today. Got some crummy phone pics through binoculars.

Before

[Anonymous No.14711955]

After, load spreader detached.

[Anonymous No.14711962]

>>14711690
jesus

[Anonymous No.14711975]

>>14710719
I assume it is possible it can work
And possible it cannot work (in different occurances)

I assume it is harder to make it work than not work

I assume the variable nature of the ground is a main source of possible failure

I have witnessed the power of fire to alter substance

I have witnessed the large amount of substance blown up by starships descent

I hope they have it all figured out

I hope to see starship flawlessly land on Mars soon

I would feel intense cringing sadness if it lands and tips over because the nature of the ground.

Thus, I concern

[Anonymous No.14711978]

>>14711929
check the size chart. Does it have suggestions for men and women?

[Anonymous No.14711981]

>>14711929
>XL, 2XL sold out

[Anonymous No.14711986]

>>14711642
they feel shame

[Anonymous No.14711988]

>selling branded hawaiian tshirts
ISHYGDDT

[Anonymous No.14711990]

>>14711988
Wearing apparel for an aerospace corporation you don’t work at that isn’t NASA is cringe in general. This includes SpaceX.

[Anonymous No.14711994]

>>14711990
Leave, subhuman
I WILL advertise starlink wherever I walk

[Anonymous No.14711998]

>>14711690
Based high level autists satisfy my diet autism gracefully

[Anonymous No.14712007]

>>14711778
>water-cooled reactors aren't feasible in vacuum for temperature dissipation reasons IIRC
Everything requires big radiators, using water changes nothing.

[Anonymous No.14712009]

>>14711834
That method of stage recovery doesn't work though, the reason they never tried that is because the plasma sticks too close to the tank ands overheats the thing unless you cover the entire surface area in TPS.

[Anonymous No.14712011]

>>14711936
That can't be to scale, Uranus' moons aren't nearly that big

[Anonymous No.14712015]

>>14711950
>>14711955
The Leaning Tower of Cape Canaveral

[Anonymous No.14712019]

>>14711703
>The official NASA mars mission will require SLS
The official NASA Mars mission will never happen because by the time they get around to even attempting one, thousands of people will have gone to Mars via SpaceX
>private companies will be banned from landing on mars because of planetary protection
They have no power

[Anonymous No.14712031]

>>14712009
that would explain why all the '80s OTV concepts had the fuckhuge heatshields then

[Anonymous No.14712039]

>>14711696
>42 pages of font 56 schizo rambling
hmm

[Anonymous No.14712063]

https://twitter.com/bps_space/status/1553103061135945728
joe won
sfg lost

[Anonymous No.14712090]

>>14712063
>sfg
Speak for yourself; I had no horse in this race

[Anonymous No.14712093]

>>14712009
Overheating as in "we built it out of aluminum and the damn thing just melts" or overheating as in "we were going to land it propulsively, but the remaining liquid hydrogen refused to cooperate."

New Glenn planning to lift 45 tons to LEO which is way more capability than most missions would need. If you need to cover the whole thing in shuttle style TPS blankets it's got enough spare capability to spend some on reuse and still be a commercially viable rocket.

[Anonymous No.14712103]

>>14712063
Elon (known /sfg/ peruser) landed boosters propulsively long before bpsspace

[Anonymous No.14712112]

>>14712063
>guy undertakes cool rocketry challenge
>insists on doing it in a suboptimal way for reasons
>eventually does it
>sfg loses

How?

[Anonymous No.14712116]

>>14712093
Even steel would require TPS coating to avoid overheating. Starship's spine doesn't because the curvature of the cylindrical shape lets the plasma detach easily.
>blah blah NG capability
It already has really significant payload mass dropoff if you compare its LEO and GTO capability, adding tonnes of TPS and landing legs are going to fuck that even further.

[Anonymous No.14712118]

>>14712063
This is actually very impressive

[Anonymous No.14712168]

>>14712116
>It already has really significant payload mass dropoff if you compare its LEO and GTO capability, adding tonnes of TPS and landing legs are going to fuck that even further.
yeah but the only way you're going to fix that is with an upper stage

[Anonymous No.14712189]

>>14712116
That’s true, but I think it’s overselling the point. Right now New Glenn has enough lift and volume to easily handle double-manifested payloads to GTO, but if you make the rocket fully reusable your only costs are fuel and refurbishment. You could launch payloads singly and still be a more attractive option than the Ariane 64 or Vulcan Heavy launching doubles. You would get pushed right out of the running for Lunar or deep space missions but those are too few, too far between, and too vague right now to plan a rocket’s economic success around, and if you really did want to pursue them you could always bring back the NG’s three stage version.

[Anonymous No.14712196]

>Slowly realizing everyone is going superheavy because SLS makes zero sense without the man-rating

FAA's going to lock everyone out of flying passengers aren't they

[Anonymous No.14712205]

https://twitter.com/torybruno/status/1553198911212457985

it's time

[Anonymous No.14712208]

>>14712205
JEFF

ENGINES IS A PLURAL

[Anonymous No.14712212]

[Anonymous No.14712214]

>>14712212
I heard MMX is going to do a Deimos flyby on its way to Phobos

[Anonymous No.14712224]

>>14712212

[Anonymous No.14712227]

>>14712205
So at this rate Tory is only going to have to wait 7 more years for the second BE-4. They're making good time.

[Anonymous No.14712229]

>>14712224

[Anonymous No.14712231]

>>14712229

[Anonymous No.14712234]

>>14712231

[Anonymous No.14712236]

>>14712212
>>14712224
>>14712229
>>14712231
>>14712234
so the moon wins?

[Anonymous No.14712239]

>>14712168
A third stage, you mean.

[Anonymous No.14712241]

>>14712189
Yeah, IF the rocket can still actually do enough payload to GTO and IF blue origin reuse logistics are cheap enough, which I don't have much faith in.

[Anonymous No.14712248]

>>14712196
>>Slowly realizing everyone is going superheavy because SLS makes zero sense without the man-rating
What does this statement mean? I am too drunk to parse it.

[Anonymous No.14712249]

>>14712236
it occupies more area in its planets sky than all other moons so yeah

[Anonymous No.14712253]

>>14712205
Look at all that cabling and shit

[Anonymous No.14712255]

>>14712253
>>14712205
embarrassing....

[Anonymous No.14712258]

>>14712241
You'd have to lose half the payload capacity before GTO missions slip out of reach. Blue being shit at refurbishment is a valid worry if New Shepard's flight rate is any sign.

[Anonymous No.14712262]

>>14712248
Brain running to fast for my fingers

What I was trying to say is that everyone is developing super heavy lift rockets in anticipation of a robust manned exploration program led by NASA

None of these will be allowed to fly passengers if NASA is launching its own man-rated rocket as it will be competition for a congressionally-mandated program (although the recent authorization does include language directing NASA to study whether or not it needs to buy capabilities it does not currently have)

On the flip side this does free up a whole lot of untapped and otherwise unnecessary launch capacity for moving heavy stuff into LEO that those SLS launches can use

[Anonymous No.14712265]

>>14712262
>Brain running to fast for my fingers
unless you have frostbite this seems highly unlikely

[Anonymous No.14712287]

>>14712258
>You'd have to lose half the payload capacity before GTO missions slip out of reach
Very possible given that this stage would need the hardware and TPS necessary to survive a GTO trajectory coast period and entry into Earth's atmosphere at like 10 km/s, all with the ability to store hydrolox with minimal boiloff during that coast period too.

[Anonymous No.14712305]

[Anonymous No.14712318]

>>14712305
I know For All Mankind gets stuff wrong but it’s endearing in a way

[Anonymous No.14712333]

>>14712305
is the soviet mars thing single stage to mars?

[Anonymous No.14712343]

>>14712305
what a load of bollocks lmao

[Anonymous No.14712347]

>>14712333
They flew shuttles to the moon without any fuel tanks. They set up a moonbase without anything more capable than the dinky LK lander. It's not a series that puts any stock in realism.

[Anonymous No.14712361]

>>14712305
wait if they have sea dragon why are they bothering with the shuttle???

[Anonymous No.14712368]

Where's it gonna land?
https://youtu.be/-0SMa85OwUU

[Anonymous No.14712375]

>>14712347
i'm sure this is just fish in a barrel here but
>having a sizeable moon surface base supplied from a gateway-sized lunar orbital station
>making a lunar orbital station with 15-foot (or less?) diameter modules when you have the meme dragon operational
>making a completely different shuttle just 2 years after the first one launched
we have so much concept art from the time periods covered of the actual missions they would have done given the capabilities. we know they're capable of looking at (if not comprehending fully) concept art from the sea dragon. whatever, i'm too old to get mad at tv shows any more.

[Anonymous No.14712381]

>>14712368
new dehli for maximum rage

[Anonymous No.14712417]

Chunk of dragon lands in australia:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-07-29/space-junk-found-in-nsw-snowy-mountains-paddocks-/101277542

[Anonymous No.14712420]

New bread
>>14712419
>>14712419
>>14712419