I made a thing. ITT talk space.-Will the Chinese conquer the far side of the Moon?-What data on Ultima Thule is pending?-What is Musk doing?-Will Richard Branson take his high-altitude flight and come back alive?-Quiz: which spacecraft was launched without a crew, but returned to Earth with one?
>nasa getting lots of funding>military space getting lots of funding>sls getting canceled so nasa can get to the moon fasterAlot of this is due to the China scare surrounding their space programs. It looks like we finally got a new space race that everyone was hoping for.
>>10465370IIRC at the speeds a rocket travels at a raindrop hitting it could cause some serious damage if it hits a sensitive component.Or maybe I'm thinking of just the Space Shuttle and it's tiles.Plus lightning isn't good, should be avoided during a launch.
There's another possibility we may not be considering about EM-1. Looking at budget figures, Orion may not actually be ready for manned operations at all until as far out as 2023. NASA may go full-bore and cut Orion out of the plans entirely. What would they replace Orion with? Well, the Dragon 2 was built with possible lunar missions in mind. Let's say that NASA is flipping the table, and intends to take CCDev to another level. How might you do that?Have two Falcon 9's set up, one with crew dragon on Pad 39A, and another with a super-stretched second stage plus nosecone at LC-40. They launch, and the super-stretched F9's second stage pops off to reveal a docking adapter. They dock in LEO, and the extra fuel capacity in the extra-long second stage is sufficient for a lunar free return trajectory (or maybe even orbital insertion and return).Does anyone have any ideas about how Boeing/ULA might do this with CST-100 and Atlas V?
>>10465385correction>and the super-stretched F9's second stage's nosecone pops off to reveal a docking adapter.
Ugliest rocket ever designed.
>>10465376More like, lot of this is because SLS keeps delaying further and further.AND political reasoning such as wanting a good news just before re-election season.
>>10465385Orion might still be used simply because it can be remade to be launcher agnostic.>>10465392Who cares as long as it's functional.
>>10465392most functional rocket ever designed
>no new hopper photosdarn
>>10465396Yeah, but Orion has cost something like $1.35 billion per year for the past two years>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orion_(spacecraft)I think NASA just might be reconsidering that level of spending on a single capsule, especially if it's still not ready to even support astronauts if you launched it tomorrow.
>>10465376We'll be damned if another country especially Chyna lands humans on the moon first before us, especially after all the bullshit and flak NASA has gotten for years about the moon landing hoax, what better way to stick it to the conspiritards and show other nation's who's boss of the moon by landing there again before everyone else.
>>10465385NASA should cut itself entirely>>10465392You're right, it's nothing withoutUNITEDSTATES
>>10465406You have a point, but I strongly doubt that NASA will shift to Dragon 2 because then that would mean that one company has a monopoly on crewed spaceflight to the Moon. ULA would have to either refit Starliner to be Moon capable or make a new capsule before NASA would consider Dragon 2.
>>10465364Doesn't soyuz have that capability?
>>10465364the other general hasn't been filled yet. Damn gacha game posters.
>>10465417If you are referring to the quiz question: you're getting warm...
>>10465413That's a good point, NASA will want the second vehicle option. I suspect if they do bring SpaceX into manned lunar operations, a contract renegotiation will be in order with Lockheed to get costs under control.
>>10465421it’s your fault for giving in and joining the new thread lolBut yeah OP quit it
You idiots, Bridestine himself said he wants EM-2 to be SLS and Orion but wants no delays on July 2020 EM-1 that's why he's open to non-SLS launch
>>10465364That quiz question is killing me.
>>10465426how the mighty have fallen...
>>10465437How does this thing not tip over?
>>10465439You mean in flight? Or just standing on the pad?
>>10465440Didn't it crash into the ocean unmanned?
>>10465439Well its grounded in solid foundation. Little wind wont blow it over. Every patriotic American has one in their front yard.
>>10465439It does like half the time
>>10465453One of the Soyuz missions to it
>>10465454Let's see if this works...https://krikienoid.github.io/flagwaver/#?src=https%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fen%2Fthumb%2Fa%2Fa4%2FFlag_of_the_United_States.svg%2F1280px-Flag_of_the_United_States.svg.png
>>10465468What does reddit have to do with this?
Aha! the answer to the quizhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soyuz_4
Human beings have never traveled one solar radius away from Earth.
>>10465473because you're a retarded newfag who thinks typing in the url to your comment will link the mediaat least you didnt redditspace it though
>>10465480No. As the article clearly states, one man was aboard on the way up. And no, the question was not posed with any "plural" trickery: by "crew" I meant any human presence whatever, whether one or more people.
>>10465364>Apollo autism editionDoes anyone actually steer conversations to this shit to anyone who will listen? Have you gotten the whole family immersed? Do your colleagues excuse themselves from the conversation when someone says the magic words "rocket" or "moon?"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asperger_syndrome#Restricted_and_repetitive_interests_and_behavior
>>10465488oh I see, not just crew transfer but no crew-crew transfer
>>10465487>because you're a retarded newfag who thinks typing in the url to your comment will link the mediaI didn't think this. I was worried that the website wouldn't show the flag that I wanted it to wave. That post was the first time I linked that website in that way.>at least you didnt redditspace it thoughWhat's "redditspace"?
>>10465494So-called "reddit spacing" is when you separate paragraphs by full breaks. It is a good way to format posts on text fora. Despite being an intrinsically good style choice, 4chan users have taken to incorrectly hating it over the past five years (particularly on /tv/) because the practice is associated with reddit.t. guy who has used 4chan on a daily basis since its beginning and who has spent under 12 lifetime hours using reddit, and who will continue "reddit spacing" to spite all the stupid faggot zoomers
>>10465501Thank you for your explanation. I was half expecting someone to call me a newfag and not explain anything.>>10465502I've never seen any of his videos in full so I don't know his connection with reddit.
>>10465487Well how the fuck else do you expect him to do it then? By the way, you probably should have 'Linkify URLs' enabled in the settings.
>>10465501>So-called "reddit spacing" is when you separate paragraphs by full breaks. It is a good way to format posts on text fora. Despite being an intrinsically good style choice, 4chan users have taken to incorrectly hating it over the past five years (particularly on /tv/) because the practice is associated with reddit.The difference between paragraphs and reddit spacing is that paragraphs have more than one sentence.>>10465507>I was half expecting someone to call me a newfag and not explain anything.It's called lurk moar. And spoon-feeding.
>>10465509can we please fucking talk about space oh my god people
>>10465488I figured it out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soyuz_34
>>10465509Funny, your definition has more in common with greentexts.>>10465501So in other words: ITT A newfag thinking he's an oldfag
>>10465512Agreed.What are your all's opinion on the future of the ISS? Do you think that it'll be "saved" for future use? Such as in-orbit-assembly of deep space missions? Or do you think that it will be left to burn up?
>congress coming out against the space force because it's too expensivewhat the fuck am i reading? the trump proposal is the cheapest they can get. it's only a few million dollars more than what we pay now. to me this reads like certain members of congress aren't getting their pork so they're going to throw a hissy fit until they get it.
>>10465522We should utilize it as a Mars transport vehicle, slightly reconfigure and strap on a transport booster.
>>10465522disassemble it and return the chunks in starships then literally hang it over a football field for once
>>10465528>certain members of congress aren't getting their pork so they're going to throw a hissy fit until they get it.That's the SLS story in it's entirety.
>>10465538we need more bakers like you
>>10465528It's the same reason they're against The Wall. Trump wants it, so their TDS won't let them allow it, even if they spoke out in favor of it three years ago.
>>10465530Yeah, if cargo starships are running bringing at least the modules and central pieces of the truss back as a museum exhibit is a solid idea. The unused/demo/training Skylab at the Smithsonian is awesome.
>>10465522It's kinda neat for certain instruments (can't wait for GEDI data), due to its ephemeris. Would be a shame to see it go, but I guess the price tag is a bit too steep just to have some funky observation geometries.I'd love to see a smaller station purely designed for EO instrument hosting - just imagine what you could do with a dozen instruments doing co-located measurements.
OH NOOOOOOOONOT THE CONTRACTORS WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THE CONTRACTORS
>>10465592Jesus christ. No wonder why it'll never fucking fly.
>>10465592>Alabama>Texas>California>Florida>LouisianaAll literal nigger tier states.
>>10465592Where did you find this list? I'd like to see it without someone scrolling so fast that they could get ticketed by the cyber police.
>>10465592Well - it's not like the endeavour is to bake a cake here. But I guess the 5 primes know who they are subcontracting, and it probably comprises everything from pencils, over gyroscopes, to catering supplies.
>>10465662I bet you're right. Somewhere in there is the source of their offices' janitorial supplies.
>>10465666Offices need lightbulbs.
>>10465666>>10465668I'm going to have to agree here, Satan. Sometimes you just need more light bulbs, or even paint for minor renovations to an office.
>>10465670Cabela's is also in there
>>10465675Don't forget about the pitchforks to poke the unpaid interns with.
>>10465676The astronauts have to be prepared for Moon Bison.
Let's be reasonable here, even if they are supplying lightbulbs every additional contractor adds a leak to the leaky mess of money, competency and accountability It's ridiculous
>>10465592wtf I hate all government now
Describe this guy using a single word.
>>10465698NASA Presents: The FRANK of BRIDENSTINE
>>10465683>Let's be reasonable here, even if they are supplying lightbulbs every additional contractor adds a leak to the leaky mess of money, competency and accountabilityEhhh. Not really. It makes things more traceable, but obviously - big projects get messy. Rather than swiping everything under the rug, the big 5 have contracts with Home Depot to supply lightbulbs when needed. This way, the purchase of any lightbulb is going through the contract, rather than than through a single purchase. And makes getting new lightbulbs obviously simpler and more efficient, since you don't need to glue thousands of Home Depot receipts onto sheets of paper and then convince NASA auditors that all these were really for lightbulbs.
>>10465698Fucking Bridenstine. Who would've thought that some random climate change denying dude from the middle of nowhere would be a Godsend for NASA.
>>10465741>https://www.apnews.com/bd45c372caf118ec99964ea547880cd0hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.I do wonder, could something be wrong with the starting assumptions for the models?
>>10465698>Diet Mountain DewINTO THE TRASH
>>10465378>>10465370Rain in Florida usually means thunderstorms, which have lightning (bad), ice pellets/icing conditions(bad) and wind sheer(bad).
>>10465668>>10465675How many subcontractors does it take to change a lightbulb?
>>10465825I'd reckon one per building / campus.
This triggers the Americans.
>>10465836How so? It might actually encourage Congress to take spaceflight seriously again.
>>10465836Chink, you have a LOT to fucking catch up on today if just one little fucking rocket is going to ruffle our breeches.NASA's Administrator JUST FUCKING SMACKED-DOWN THE ENTIRE SLS PROGRAM ASIDE FROM A FEW CARGO MISSIONS.AN ENTIRE LUNAR FREE-RETURN MISSION MAY FLY, HELL OR HIGH WATER, BY JUNE 2020
>>10465836Why is it floating in space with its boosters? Why is the moon potato shaped?
>>10465861When they say it's three stage to orbit, they MEANT all three stages.
>>10465855>three shy, and are all in one stageComputers are i m p o r t a n t.
...I hope nobody bites my head off by linking this here. It's very related to OP>>10465856
>>10465878They also flew like, 500 merlins without incident before ever launching FH.
>>10465883Oops, meant to reply directly to OP. FOR SCIENCE AND CIVILIZATION>>10465635
>>10465883>admitting to ban evasionReported.Also, I was the one who got your last celebrity worship thread deleted. Enjoy you're ban. :)
>>10465890I wasn't "worshiping" anyone, you misguided fool. And no one banned me anyways, it was a kosher thread about space colonization. Fuck off, jew.
>>10465885That helps, definitely. Musk's dream right now seems less getting to Mars and more proving that you can build a rocket engine as safe as an aviation turbine engine.It's a very worthy goal, and if he pulls it off he's going to be rich enough to own a moon.
>>10465592lol is that real? source?
>>10466074nwm source was posted
>>10465649SLS actually has the smallest numbers of the suppliers from the three. Why the fuck does Orion have so many different suppliers though?
>>10465900which one? they're in pretty short supply locally
>>10465900Rocket engines aren't the issue when it comes to reusability.
>>10466124What is then mr rocket scientist?
>>10466140I am actually a graduate student in aeronautics, so you are not wrong.
>>10466144>Graduate student in aeronauticsHahahahaOk well enlighten us with your high quality opinion.
>>10466146You already have formed an opinion, so no.
>>10466149What a high quality argument.
>>10466149>I am smart and U r dum
>>10466149oh, okay then
>>10466149shit man tell us now I want to know
>>10466149you are in public forum, even if he made up his mind there are still people like me curious to learn and want to hear your argument.also>flexing your education instead of providing argument.something tells me you won't even respond
>>10465392She's awesome. I bet you like the giant white whale look of the first BFR project right ?
>>10465878>So many enginesThats just sexy
>>10466556This is going to be hopper V2.0.
The planned lunar gateway station will establish US dominance over the moon. China cannot compete.
Orion is sinking alongside the sls. No commercial vehicles will save it.
>>10466581looks like retrofuturistic rocket designed on sci-fi from 60's. i personally love it, though the composite design looked better imo
>>10465522When ISS is finally decommissioned it should be boosted to a higher orbit and stored there as a legacy for future generations. Maybe it can be brought back to Earth and put in a museum sometime in the future when space transport is more routine and much cheaper.
>>10466620no double hull for the cooling. No gradual metal thickness taper. So probably not an orbital test article, just higher hops with more engines
>>10466786Which is just hopper V2 lol, the orbital version isn't going to be called a hopper
>>10466620Why Hopper 2? isn't this the replacement of the cone that fell down?
>>10466834the hopper is already at the hop site Plus the top of the dome is already cladded
>>10466834Probably as a spare in case the first one blew up.
>>10466834Saw few pictures of welders working on things that look more like tank domes than the pointy end of a nosecone. If any suspicious holes or attachments appear on the water tower in the coming week or two we'll know for sure what it is.
>>10466840Ah I really wanted to see the hopper fly with its cone
>a year from now we could see a Falcon Heavy and Delta IV Heavy launching from Cape Canaveral within hours of each other to send a spacecraft to the Moonno way it happens
>>10466556>literally building a spaceship out of junk and spare parts just like in an old scifi novelYou know Elon Musk is going to fly this thing into space just to show that he can
Panels are up.
>>10467066Two of these tapered sections were picked up and put on a flatbed. Trucked over to the other side of the tent and unloaded.-NSF
>>10465364>Will the Chinese conquer the far side of the Moon?Yes, the far side will be covered with greenhouses, including silkworms. >What data on Ultima Thule is pending?5G>What is Musk doing?Taking us to Mars>Will Richard Branson take his high-altitude flight and come back alive?Musk will have him assassinated in the mesosphere>Quiz: which spacecraft was launched without a crew, but returned to Earth with one?Dragon
>>10466556>you will never hook a ladder over the side of a half-finished rocket and climb down insideI'm crying
>>10466667a shame composites are pure fuck to deal with
>>10467113they're like the perfect substance to make subsonic planes out of but they're pure fuck for anything with a hot or cold environmentStarship is going to have both due to cryogenic and reentry
>>10465453Rather large chunks of it landed on ground
Soyuz crew launch in T-15 minhttps://youtu.be/21X5lGlDOfg
>>10467180>FUCKING BLEW UPRIPDid the escape tower trigger? I didn't see anything in the fireball.
>>10467218it's fine nigger, they've been flying the R-7 for like 80 years now, they've got the fucker figured out
>>10467219>80 years>figured out*drills hole in your orbital module*
>>10467180Why they never translate all this infographics into English?They translate it on NASA channel after all.
>>10467222Even the most robust and proven designs aren't immune to fuck ups in the assembly line.
>>10467222I'm sorry, 60 years. My bad.
So, how weather proof will Starship Super Heavy be? It's a fairly wide and squat design made out of a sturdy material, right?
>>10466934Hopper might could get up there, but no way can it get back down intact, it's not built for re-entry. It's got no heat shield of any sort.
>>10467271The goal is ICBM tier zero fucks given
Is this last time Americans flying on Soyuz?
>>10467371No. NASA bought Soyuz seats past 2020 so while most Americans may be on Dragon/Boeing, a few will be assigned to Soyuz.
>>10467372Imagine being the poor bastard who has to go up on Soyuz while your colleagues fly on Dragon/Starliner
>>10467371>>10467372>>10467394You are correct, but Russian astronauts will also fly on Dragon 2 and Starliner as part of the international partnership between the ISS partners.
>>10467401Imagine being the poor bastard who has to go up on Soyuz while your colleagues fly on Dragon/Starliner
>>10467404I wonder if Roscosmos will tell their astronauts to say bad things about Dragon to spread FUD...
>>10467418Already started. Apparently Dragon "smells bad" on ISS
>>10467412Where did you source that pic?
>>10467427Source on this? I wonder if it's true
>>10467431A CIA black-budget surveillance project called "Project Nomad".
>>10467453Other than twitter and NSF, I'm not sure where people are posting OC starship pics. would appreciate the source, thanks.
>>10467450This seems like it could potentially be true. Still, it's obviously a poor attempt at propaganda. >Sir, the Americans are developing spacecraft to replace us. how do we respond?>tell everyone they smell bad
>>10467459boca chica FB group also
>>10467464I totally can imagine that Russians refuse to fly on Dragon because of their muh national prestige.
>>10467506Unlikely. With nasa money drying up supporting their own launchers will become more difficult. A regime change in the coming decade is also quite possible.
>>10467533Well Putin is supposedly out in 2024, he'll probably be replaced by a handpicked successor/puppet but there's no certainty this guy will be accepted and many anti-Putin people will choose this as their time to strike...
>>10467533I wonder what happened if Russia will not be unable to support ISS anymore.
>>10467545>Putin is supposedly out in 2024Why? He was in power for almost 20 years.
>>10467450Would there be any legitimate source from where that alcohol could leak?
>>10467549I read an article that quoted him saying he'd abdicate after this current term ends.
>>10467564Even if he really said it, I doubt he actually will do it.Maybe he will switch places with his prime minister, he did it before.
>>10467464>>tell everyone they smell badIT STINKS, AND I DON'T LIKE IT
https://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/local/county-approves-authority-for-road-closures-for-rocket-testing/article_ef6a2fd4-466b-11e9-aa6e-1b3a1be10f5a.htmlone step closer to the first test
>>10467696Igniting the methane vs engine firing.Sound?
dae tweetdeckgod please help me
>>10467737blame the compression godsit's a screen cap of a youtube stream
>>10467739we need some archeologists in here asap, I just found a load of artifacts!
>>10467731That doesn't look a video of a spacecraft. It looks like a video of some cryptid that you'll find on some conspiracy blog.
>>10467759Like some sort of tall-shelled, firebreathing tortoise in the distance.
>>10467371Ironically, keeping Roscosmos ufloat is in US interests.If Russian space industry collapse it will encourage them to sell technologies and hardware to countries like Iran or North Korea.Also countries like China can employ jobless russian engineers and so on.
>>10467762So some new evolution of the Shuckle?
>>10467776Confirmed for Poke'mon movie leak
>>10467545Putin in 2024
whats the best evidence of round earth and apollo mission!?!??!?!?!?!??!?!?!
>>10467889>Round EarthSouth Celestial Pole>ApolloIf it were faked, then the Soviets would've figured it out and exposed the whole thing.
>>10467450No worries, just a bit of moonshine.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WKs3B2pX6EDocking in under 30 minutes, I'm also gay btw if that matters.
>>10467992>I'm also gay btw if that matters.do you have a nice ass?
>>10467997Not so good. I have nice eyes though haha.
I guess it is a couple hours until the crew enters the station.
>>10467992That was nice to watch. Thank you, anon.>I'm also gay btw if that matters.I don't that does matter unless you were trying to make a "docking" joke.
>>10468047You're welcome, anon. And I was referencing a /ck/ meme if that matters.
>>10467450wasn't that from the Russian air systems that had a catastrophic failure during the docking?
>"starship">doesn't travel to other stars
>>10468159I agree. I think it's a silly name too, but hey whatever pleases the stockholders and the hype machine.
>>10468159To be fair, it says "star" ship, not "stars" ship.Its a single star system ship trapped to single solar system.
>>10467363It wouldn't have to go all the way to orbit. If Hopper can reach 50 miles altitude it has technically entered "space". A suborbital flight like that shouldn't need a heat shield either.
>Tesla will be on Mars in 10 years
>Defense officials want to test a neutral particle-beam in orbit in fiscal 2023 as part of a ramped-up effort to explore various types of space-based weaponry. They’ve asked for $304 million in the 2020 budget to develop such beams, more powerful lasers, and other new tech for next-generation missile defense.https://www.defenseone.com/technology/2019/03/pentagon-wants-test-space-based-weapon-2023/155581/Looks like Star Wars is back on the menu
current locations of science spacecraft
>>10468420If nothing goes wrong, there will be three rovers operating on Mars silmantaniosly in 2021. Sad that Opportunity died too soon.
>>10467564Oh how _generous_ of him.
>>10467901That's nothing, do you know there's an entire NATION run by JEWS?
>>10468435The winner gets to catch a ride home on the sample return mission, whenever that may be.
>>10468430>Yay, more rovers.These government efforts are so disappointing. Especially the american consensus and the politicians they appoint.
/sci/ what do you think will be the ISRU spacecraft propellant of the future?Obviously for the immediate future the choices would be either methalox or hydrolox. But maybe there's other options that you feel is worth a consideration? For nuclear engines the answer might seem to be hydrogen only, however nuclear engines (like all thermal rockets) could in theory be able to use just about any fluid as a propellant as long as the turbo machinery can handle it. So maybe a propellant which is easier to make/store/sell/use could be viable.
>>10468481of the far future? metallic hydrogen and antimatter that they will produce on the spot with their nearly magical powerplants
>>10468474they will run for decadesand then some jackoff with a shovel will surpass their scientific output in the span of an afternoon
>>10465501It's the superior formatting style. Apparently reddit does something to force spaces between paragraphs or something.>>10465509Yea. Some people over-use it. Sometimes you do have to use it to seperate independant, unrelated ideas which consist only of a single sentence.Grammar. Is it even real? I'd hate to be a future archaologist trying to decode acroyms, slang and lingo from somebodies facebook chat record found on a rusty two thousnd year old HDD.
>>10468503To be honest, going to Mars itself is folly, when almost nothing has been developed between it and Earth.
>>10465522Russia plans to claim their pieces. The rest will fall into earth orbit and disintegrate.It has been exorbitantly expensive over its lifetime. Scientific returns were low. The scientific returns peaked long ago and are in decline.The next real space station will have microgravity and it will be mobile. It will probably be owned by a company not a government. It will probably orbit the moon a short time before heading to Mars where it will support industry there while recieving a makeover and gaining substantial upgrades.Russia and China both have plans for ramshackle tin cans in space orbit.
>>10468524>Grammar. Is it even real? I'd hate to be a future archaologist trying to decode acroyms, slang and lingo from somebodies facebook chat record found on a rusty two thousnd year old HDD.Yeah that's very chaoshi. I can easily draw up some history dwarfs trying to pick away and being all pyrro about it. They'll definately be like keanu as they try to repuzzle our biemdubluu speak. Sowing machine.
>>10465376China has only orbeted taikonauts a few time with a copy of soyuz. They have their work cut out building their next space station.
>>10468535>The scientific returns peaked long ago and are in decline.Science on the ISS is growing, not in decline.
>>10468420just to save the googling if any other anon is interested:NH is going 14km/s while voyager 1 is going 17km/s so it will never catch up
>>10468420Huh, its been so long since the STEREO craft launched they've now completely swapped places with each other. Speaking of which, isnt one of them offline?
>>10468481Electricity generated from locally fabricated solar panels to power a mass driver on the lunar surface. A mass driver will allow payloads to be launched quickly and cheaply from the moon back to Earth or to Mars or wherever. Spacecraft will still need locally manufactured propellant, probably hydrogen and oxygen made from lunar water, but they won't need as much if the mass driver gives them the initial boost into space.
>>10468568wow, what a profound statement
>>10468481ethane, propane and butane could make sense because of their higher density
>Am hearing varying ranges as NASA assesses new dates for first SLS flight. Median is around November, 2021.HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAOHOHOHOHOHOOHOBUWHAHAHAHAHAHA
>>10468481Carbon monoxide/lox from Venus.
>>10468173That's retarded. That's like calling air plane "planet ship" because it travels around one planet.
>>10468481It's going to be hydrogen. If we won't solve something as simple as hydrogen storage we won't be able to solve the much bigger technological standards that come with space colonization anyways.
>>10468730it's not that hydrogen storage and use isn't solvable, because it is, it's just that you need to make compromises in material choice when you use hydrogen that you don't need to make for methanehydrogen resistant alloys are not as good as alloys that don't need to be resistant to hydrogen impregnation
>>10468481The moon seems to be the next big destination for the major spacefaring nations. For the near future that means ISRU fuels will likely be hydrogen/oxygen because the moon has no carbon. Carbon based ISRU fuels won't happen until we go to Mars or an asteroid.
>>10468742>For the near future that means ISRU fuels will likely be hydrogen/oxygen because the moon has no carbon.Do we actually know that? There may very well be methane frozen along the water ice on poles.
>>10468737Liquid hydrogen doesn't brittle per se, what you need to solve is how to prevent it from boiling off. Liquid methane and oxygen boil off, too, so you are going to need to solve that problem anyways.
>>10468746There could also very well be carbon from asteroid impacts deep within the moon's surface. We don't know though because well, we've never done any in-depth prospecting on the Moon.Digging that shit out and purifying it enough to be used as feedstock for methane production is going to be an interesting (read: pain in the ass) experience. I can all but guarantee power for it is going to require gigawatt-class reactors
>>10468750Liquid hydrogen does brittle, and especially at higher pressures such as in the engine. This is not something you want if you desire your engine to be reusable indefinitely. It also has cryogenic temperatures that are low even by cryogenic standards. Nasty stuff.Methane and oxygen boil-off is much less significant than hydrogen due to their larger molecules.
>>10468746There was that mission that slammed a rocket stage into the moon to look at the spectra of the debris cloud to detect water. I recall reading there may also have been trace amounts of methane detected but not much. If methane was found on the moon in significant quantities like water you'd think it would be big news.
>>10468754No, it doesn't. In the engines the hydrogen is gaseous so it does brittle there. Liquid hydrogen doesn't brittle. Liquid methane boils off about half as much as liquid hydrogen, liquid oxygen about 70% as much.
>>10468525luckily there's almost nothing between Earth and Mars which means we are go for Mars surface missions as soon as the lift capability and payloads exist.
Reposting my space colonization plan here for critique, other thread is dead:**0.** Establish an Equatorial Launch Ring. No, not that sci-fi nonsense you are probably thinking about. What I mean is a string of launch platforms on the equator, around 150 of them encircling the Earth, spaced ~250 kilometers apart. Then have SpaceX style reusable methalox rockets continuously hop around the ring in the direction of Earth rotation, launching payloads with every hop and landing on the next platform to be immediately reused again. It should be possible to cheaply orbit hundreds of thousands of tons of payload per year with this system. No need for RTLS also increases payload mass and reduces wear on the engines. Optional upgrade: use carbon neutral nuclear power or renewable electricity to manufacture propellant (oxygen and methane) directly at the launch pad, from seawater and CO2.Another crucial step is to develop closed loop life support systems that can function almost indefinitely with the only input being energy. This should be possible because there are sealed bottle gardens thriving for over 50 years and counting. Biosphere project also worked well after initial problems were solved, and failed mostly due to crew conflicts, not the technology.**1.** Build large spinning (for gravity) space stations in equatorial low Earth orbit. It is the only place where galactic cosmic rays are significantly reduced due to our magnetosphere, while at the same time with low inclination to avoid radiation from the South Atlantic Anomaly. This leads radiation levels that almost approach Earth-like ones, in space! Coincidentally, it is the easiest orbit to launch to from Earth. Some prime real estate indeed.http://space.alglobus.net/
>>104687702. Optional: space station with a propellant depot in frozen lunar polar orbit. These are rare low lunar orbits that are stable, and we need a polar one to easily access lunar poles. Fortunately there is one at 86° inclination.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frozen_orbit#Lunar_frozen_orbits3. Settle lunar poles. There is solar power available constantly at peaks of eternal light and also valuable volatiles frozen in permanently shadowed craters (hydrogen, and maybe nitrogen and carbon). ISRU produce propellant and many other things.
>>10468767What? he did say the future. It's absolutely plausible and metallic hydrogen is super dense
>>104687714. Establish Mars surface base. See SpaceX plans for details. Here comes a crucial fork in our space colonization plans. Either Martian gravity is enough to support human life long term, including pregnancy and growing children. In which case Mars colonization will become the focus of our efforts at this stage. Or Martian gravity is not enough and then we merely establish a modest base on the surface and go to the next step.5. Colonize Martian moons Phobos and Deimos. Put a spinning space stations around retrograde (for stability) orbits around them. Use local resources and ISRU as much as possible, especially for construction materials and radiation shielding. Availability of volatiles on these moons is a big question mark here.
>>104687736. Colonize the asteroid belt (Ceres, Vesta, Pallas..), again with rotating stations in low retrograde orbits around the roids. Apply what we learned on Martian moons here, this time with plentiful volatiles available. 7. Expand to outer solar system, here you will probably need large rotating city-sized spaceships with heavy radiation shielding, or alternatively very fast propulsion systems.
>>10468775I think we should skip 5, and work on NEO exploitation in that step instead. Venus also has potential, and is a much easier target than the outer solar system. You could possibly do space Las Vegas in the upper venusian atmosphere to service Belters. If you were willing to put up with Earthgov shenanigans you could maybe do lunar space casino.
>>10468763>Liquid hydrogen doesn't brittle.Okay, but hydrogen vapors are going to exist in the tanks and plumbing anyway so your point is moot.>Liquid methane boils off about half as much as liquid hydrogen, liquid oxygen about 70% as much.No, the idea is that while all three will boil off if simply left in an un-insulated tank, stopping boil-off of methane and oxygen completely is much more feasible than doing the same with hydrogen, because hydrogen requires much lower temperatures to keep it stable. This means therefore that a stored-hydrolox vehicle needs a much bigger refrigeration and radiator system than a stored-methalox vehicle, on top of the fact that it would also need a much bigger tank to hold a similar mass of hydrogen anyway. It's a double whammy on mass fraction, which negates a lot of the advantages of the higher Isp even for an expendable stage. Once you start looking at reusable systems the advantage of hydrolox pretty much goes out the window. The exception is for nuclear thermal rockets, which can get high enough Isp to make up for the mass fraction hit, at the cost of literally being much more pricey than a chemical engine. Reusable hydrogen propelled NTR vehicles would be most useful for their ability to actually get to Jupiter from Earth, whereupon they can refill using hydrogen or if the engine is designed for it, water. While water gets a much lower Isp of around 380 in an NTR that gets 1000 Isp using hydrogen, if the water is also being stored in the hydrogen tank they can carry ~14.3 times the propellant mass and get a way better mass fraction, making up for it especially once you consider that water needs t be simply melted and filtered before use while hydrogen needs to be produced via slow and energetically intensive electrolysis.
>>10468777NEOs are smaller compared to Martian moons, dryed out by their proximity to the Sun, and have no atmosphere for aerobraking (contrary to Mars, and you can use it even to achieve orbit). Additionally, you have a Mars base anyway, with all the associated infrastructure and regular flights, so you can use it to kickstart the colonization of Martian moons, too.Phobos and Deimos are really the most promising "near Earth asteroids".
>>10468772The 'antimatter they will magically produce' bit is gay, why do you need it if you have power plants capable of making it? At that point you have access to enough energy that you can make vehicles that can achieve 20% light speed anyway and going much faster means you're pretty much guaranteed to be vaporized on impact with a piece of cosmic space dust. Also antimatter looks good on paper but in reality the energy released is mostly in the form of gamma rays which makes it really difficult to capture that energy and redirect it as thrust. Metallic hydrogen would be nice as long as it's stable enough to not completely detonate instantly if you tap it with a hammer, ideally it'd take something like a very high power electrical pulse to start the reaction, sort of like how C4 needs a detonator to set off and can be burned in a fire without exploding. Also we need some way of producing it that doesn't also make it so expensive per kilogram that it can't compete with nuclear fuels. Otherwise why use a metallic hydrogen rocket when you can just use a z-pinch fission rocket that gets 50% better Isp and potentially better thrust overall? Sure it's more radioactive but in space everything is radioactive anyway and the exhaust is moving so fast it won't concentrate in any one area, it's just get blown into interstellar space by solar wind. IMO the rocket fuels of the future are U-233 and Pu-239. Both would be formed into roughly 1 gram massed hollow spherical pellets and surrounded by a neutron reflector (for extra kick put a pinch of tritium inside the hollow pellet to boost the fission reaction). In operation the pellets are shot into the reaction chamber where they encounter a very strong magnetic field and are quickly crushed, forming a critical mass that then sets off a chain reaction and blows up the pellet in a tiny nuclear explosion (a few hundred kg's of tnt worth). This process is repeated several dozen times per second.
>>10468778negatives towards performance of hydrolox stages:>hydrogen resistant alloys are worse than nonresistant (engine performance isn't as optimal as it could be) (this is a minor quibble desu)>hydrogen has terrible thrust/hardware weight and area (only affects stages that need a high T/W ratio to minimize gravity losses, minimally impacts mass fraction otherwise)>hydrogen has a low density requiring big tanks (impacts mass fraction)>extremely cold cryogenic storage requirements and quantum phase change settling shenanigans (significantly impacts mass fraction and/or boil-off losses)>leak-proofing hydrogen storage is essentially impossible (basically boil-off losses but impossible to stop instead of difficult)
>>10468771If you built a big pressurized dome over one of those ice craters would the ice thaw out and become a lake? A lake on the moon would be cool.
>>10468814No wonder they are considering divorcing the orion from that disaster.
>>10468784Hmm you're right might as well just blast light / particles out the back instead of making AMCould always pump it out as reserve fuel i guessInteresting idea with the mini nukes though
>>10468785Thanks for that. Sometimes seems like hydrogen is more problem than it's worth as a cryogenic chemical rocket fuelNot him btw.
>>10468778For ISRU you need a big amount of carbon for methane engines, while you need only water for hydrogen engines. Getting a lot of carbon on the moon is impossible, and on Mars very hard, plus, that carbon that you can mine is going to be needed for other stuff, too, on Mars. So I think that is a very big advantage for hydrogen. Of course storage is harder, but it is not impossible and the technology can improve. There is no way you are going to ever mass-produce carbon on the moon or Mars however.
>>10468894>Getting a lot of carbon on the moon is impossible, and on Mars very hardIt is not hard at all on Mars, as you can readily use atmospheric CO2 in a Sabatier reaction. Certainly it is much easier to get carbon on Mars than mining and splitting water ice.
Raptor just pulled up at Hopper
>>10468894>For ISRU you need a big amount of carbonOnly 20% of propellant by weight is methane. The rest is oxygen. It could actually make sense to produce only oxidizer on the Moon, and dont bother with fuel ISRU. WIth a Starship, you can do a round trip from LEO to lunar surface, offload full 100 tons of cargo, refill oxygen only and get back to Earth. Amout of refueling flights would still significantly decrease.
>>10467572>>10467580>>10467584God damnit, the hopper vapes, what a fag
>>10468913It is not difficult at all. Carbon capture for fuel production is borderline feasible even on Earth. Martian atmosphere, while thin, has an order of magnitude more CO2 pressure than Earth has. Also the process is exothermic. If you can mine and split water on Mars, then converting it to methane will be a piece of cake. In fact it could make sense to convert hydrogen to methane purely to store it in a practical manner, regardless of methane rocketry.
tf misogynist firstly how will they make enough money to buy enough wood to build a ladder that big
>>10468907Splitting CO2 is actually really hard, it requires a lot of energy, and after you done that you first only have O2 and CO, so you need to split the carbon from the oxygen again, again requiring a lot of energy. Massproducing carbon this way in the thin atmosphere of Mars is nearly impossible. If anything, you will search for carbon-rich ice and try to mine it out of that.
>>10468922>>10468907Well, since you think it's the Sabatier process that splits CO2, you are obiously illiterate, anyways.
>>10468933That is not how this is done at all. You directly react carbon dioxide and hydrogen to get methane.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabatier_reaction>The Sabatier reaction or Sabatier process was discovered by the French chemist Paul Sabatier and Senderens in 1897. It involves the reaction of hydrogen with carbon dioxide at elevated temperatures (optimally 300–400 °C) and pressures in the presence of a nickel catalyst to produce methane and water.
>>10468942?What does that have to do with splitting CO2? CO2 does precisely NOT have a catalyst reaction that makes it easy to split them.
>>10468910>yfw the nightpic "fires" were simple projectors
>>10468944Lets get one thing straight.You claim you need "carbon" to make methane, and since there's no known (pure) "carbon" on Mars you say it is very hard to make methane there?
>>10468778Developing storage technologies for hydrogen are not as challenging as you think, since it doesn't need to be that lightweight for interplanetary travel like it needs to be for rocket launching. You can put a big spaceship into space, than fuel it, and off you go. You have a net gain of payload capacity that is correlated positively with the size of the ship. Only for really small ships you wouldn't have a net gain of payload capacity.
>>10468778>Okay, but hydrogen vapors are going to exist in the tanks and plumbing anyway so your point is moot.No, that gets vented off. The whole point of avoiding boil off is minimising the hydrogen you have to vent off.
>>10469001Holy shit you are dumb.
To get carbon to make lunar rocket fuel can't they just capture all the CO2 that humans exhale and extract the carbon atoms? If there is a big lunar colony with lots of people that's a lot of CO2 being exhaled.
Carbon can also be recovered from human feces and urine. Humans don't stop shitting and pissing just because they are in space of course. Even a small lunar colony will generate huge amounts of human waste and hopefully this material can be recycled to obtain carbon and other elements that are scarce on the moon.
>>10469055TANSTAAFLEither you put that carbon into hydroponics to keep crew alive, or you bring up more weight in food. (The latter is probably easier on Luna, harder on a Mars transfer orbit.) Either way, it's going to be nowhere near enough carbon for even one launch.>>10469001Does it really matter if embrittlement eventually causes the tank to fail?
>>10469066You have a point. In space human waste will be very valuable for food production until mankind reaches Mars or goes out to the asteroids where organic chemicals are more abundant. Maybe NASA should require the ISS astronauts to save their poop for future use instead of dumping it back into the Earth's atmosphere like they do now.
>>10468407Good, can be useful against potential future NEO threats
>>10468420Wow look at all the attention Mars gets, what a diva
>>10469039That carbon will already be used to grow plants and food. Any space colony must recycle waste, including CO2 from exhaling. You need additional carbon, and tons of it, to produce rocket fuel.
>>10468535>ramshackle tin cans in space orbit.Why is everyone ignoring the inflatable meme?
>>10467901>>10468450These nonspiracies are great.
>>10468052The O-rings cannot sustain launch above 30,000 feet. Do not attempt launch if the weather is above 30,000 feet conditions.
>>10468814>yet another two years to weld space shuttle engines to a metal cylinder
>>10468497>antimattercan't wait for one RUD blowing up a whole planet.
>>10469231For real. How the fuck can it take so long? They only need to build the first stage. The second stage is just the Delta 4 one, anyways. How long can it take to build one single stage?
>>10469197I remember someone in /his/ made one of those to counter all the "holohoax"-threads, making ones about how the bombing of Dresden was a conspiracy by Nazi Germany. Used the same logic as holohoax-posters, triggering the fuck out of them
>>10469247Poor management motivated by the desire to keep jobs open I'd guess. Whatever the case may be, there should be an investigation on this. Nearly a decade of design work (this is ignoring the time spent on Ares V) and $7 Billion yet not a single launch. Imagine if Apollo was managed like this, we'd be lucky to have Apollo 8 happen by 1975.
Close up of recovered Dragonhttps://twitter.com/ShuttleAlmanac/status/1105955784733548545
>>10469307Holy fuck its a total write-off, SpaceX is finished
>>10469268>and $7 BillionIf only. As of the end of 2018, we are at $15 billion spent on SLS and $18 billion spent on Orion, inflation adjusted.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Launch_System#Funding_history_and_planninghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orion_(spacecraft)
>>10469312>SpaceX is finishedHow so? The capsule in the image just looks dirty. SpaceX has refurbished capsules before, so I'm sure that they can fix this one up. I mean, it would be silly of them to advertise that the Dragon 2 is reusable but launch it before they've figured out how to reuse it.
>>10469327Oops, I was reading the 2014 costs by mistake. My point still stands however.
>>10469329Look at that salt-water corrosion and de-orbit burn marks holy shit its over, pack it up, spacex is done
>>10469334Even if that capsule was ruined, it doesn't mean that SpaceX has failed. It was a test flight after all, test flights are meant to look for faults that were missed in the design stage. And again, how is SpaceX "done" or "finished"?
>>10469342>t. SpaceX damage controlSpaceX is really done now, they can't recover from this
>>10469346>SpaceX is really done now,How are they done for?>they can't recover from thisWhy not? Can you please elaborate?
>>10469307>>10469312>>10469329You do know most of that isn't actually scorching right? The majority of the 'scorch marks' are just a layer of residue created by the ablated heatshield's products. You can see where the layer of residue has cracked off to reveal a pristine white outer-shell.
>>10469348Press 'F' for SpaceXF
>>10469349I'm aware of this. I've personally seen how "dusty" ablation can be. Although I'm wondering how much damage the ocean water has done to the capsule.
The LOX truck has arrived
>>10469247I'm expecting big things given how long it's taken. FTL drive? Anti-gravity drive? 1000t to GTO? Artifical gravity?
>>10469353One of Musk's tweets makes it sound like SpaceX have done extra work waterproofing the Dragon 2, so it shouldn't be too bad.
>>10468525Would be cool if a decently profitable lunar business could be established first to pave the way. What options are there?
>>10469359Hopefully that waterproofing was enough. I guess we'll see once SpaceX refurbishes it. It's just that with every mention of ocean landing I hear, it's made to sound like the spacecraft is landing in some horrific acid.
>>10469353I honestly don't understand how a dunking can do that much damage. Err, perhaps just have a jetwashing machine on the deck and immediately blast it clean with desalinated water? Can a few minutes really cause that much damage? And why not build it out of stainless in the first place?
>>10469312Crew dragon isn't supposed to be reusable iirc
>>10468839oh, no, it's still amazing and probably the future, but you don't strictly need it for inner solar system stuff and it might even be easier for thatmaybe material science will improve and the gap between hydrogen resistant material and non-resistant material will close
>>10469312Every single capsule with an ablative heatshiled that has ever been built has looked like that.Apollo launched with a mirror shine and came back brown.Your post is retarded.
>>10469381Holy fuck its a total write-off, NASA is finished
>>10469370I don't know how long it took for Dragon 2 to be recovered, but I recall that it can take an hour for a ship to find the capsule and recover it.As for saltwater damage, this article isn't in the context of spaceflight, it should give an idea of how nasty it can be: https://www.911restoration.com/salt-water-damage/>>10469378No. Dragon 2 is supposed to be reusable.https://aviationweek.com/space/spacex-unveils-step-change-dragon-v2https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragon_2>>10469381I think he's just trolling for that sweet r/EnoughMuskSpam upvotes
>>10469312That's why they say reusability is a meme.
Holy shit its completely ruined, how could Kraft recover?
>>10469432Salt water is bad for capsules, mainly for the electronics due to the corrosive salts in it. Landing in water requires more refurbishment than on land due to this.
>>10469433tbf you cant eat a space capsule
Arabsat 6A – the second flight of SpaceX's Falcon Heavy is scheduled to launch no earlier than April 7 at 6:36 pm ET (22:36 UTC).The static fire is set for March 30.
>NASA will still use Soyuz This is retarded. The whole point of CCDev program was to stop giving money to Russia for seats on Soyuz.Right now funding Russia is clearly not in US interests.
>>10469446It suppose to be in full expandable mode, right? So no double boosters landing?
>>10469463>>It suppose to be in full expandable mode, right?No
>>10469461It's just a way to maintain international cooperation in space between the US and Russia, Russia will also be using the Crew Dragon and Starliner as well. The idea of CCDev was to make America no longer dependent on Soyuz, not abandon Russia altogether. The American-Russian partnership in space has not been influenced by geopolitical tensions so far, so why would things change?
>>10469461There are some reasons why it's in US's interest to still buy some seats on Soyuz.>Keep a good standing with Russia>If by some terrible bad luck both CCDev options were unavailable, then Soyuz would still be an option>Keep Russian aerospace engineers employed in peaceful spaceflight instead of them wandering of to make weapons for a questionable country
>>10469268It's rather poor political decision "to make NASA use those old Space Shuttle and Constellation parts". It sounds good, like you are going to save money, but you actually don't because the modification is expensive. It's a typical bullshit political decision, like when laymen think that reusing rockets actually works.
>>10469529wrong, read up on Jupiter, its what we should have gotten if Congress didn't interfere in order to keep jobs in their districts
>>10469537The SLS essentially is a Jupiter except it even goes a step further as it doesn't even have a new upper stage and instead just uses the Delta 4's one.
>>10469529>It sounds good, like you are going to save money, but you actually don't because the modification is expensive.I doubt that. The 5 segment SRBs were already done. The RS-25s are sitting in a warehouse left over from Shuttle. Worst case scenario designwise would be that the core tanks would have to be redone, but that shouldn't take 9 years and $15 billion. Meanwhile the Saturn 1 was a similar concept of reusing preexisting rocket parts and it took ~3-4 years from initial design request to first launch.
>>10469307that's one crispy marshmallow>>10469378It is reusable, but NASA is insisting on a fresh one for every crew mission. So what can SpaceX do with a pile of slightly-used man-rated capsules?
>>10469577>So what can SpaceX do with a pile of slightly-used man-rated capsules?Maybe hold on to them until NASA changes their mind like what they did with Dragon 1. Or maybe use them for crew transport for other projects where BFR would be too big.
>>10469551>SLS essentially is a Jupiternope. Everything that was good about Jupiter was borked. New engines. No reuse of tank structures, just diameter. New SRBs, including TVC and propellant mix. Reworked and added upper stages. Not the same umbilical plates. Not the same software. In short, looks the same from a distance, is a totally different beast.
>>10469577>It is reusable, but NASA is insisting on a fresh one for every crew mission. So what can SpaceX do with a pile of slightly-used man-rated capsules?Tourism, the same Boeing wants to do with Starliners.>>10469573Yeah, it all sounds so great, but try to build a new car engine out of car parts from several different car brands and you will get a feeling of why that isn't actually a good idea. But plebs don't want to "waste so much money on launching" meanwhile nobody cares the actual probes and space hardware is many times more expensive. If you want to save money on space exploration, drive down that cost.
>>10469461There's talk that Boeing had to write off the capsule they were planning to re-use for an upcoming abort test (because of the previous test where the abort system spewed hydrazine all over), so now they're one capsule behind in their pipeline.tl;dr: those Soyuz seats are to cover for Boeing not being ready on time
>>10469597Why is it that SpaceX cultists always need to shit on competition? Starliner like Dragons will always be new for NASA missions so that certainly isnt the reason. The Soyuz seats are bought for any unexpected delays in development by whomever.
>>10469661I'm guessing you don't own a NSF L2 account...
>>10469694No, I don't own a cultist membership account.
>>10469354>tfw standing next to 60,000 liters of liquid oxygen
>>10469597>>10469661>>10469694>>10469700https://twitter.com/SciGuySpace/status/1106637988979712000Speak of the devil and he will appear, it's almost like the OFT-1 capsule will be closer to the final product, because it's actually the capsule originally designed for OFT-2...
>>10469438Yeah i know this, but what damage has been reported on the Dragon?
>>10469268Zero time was spent on Ares V (aside from the 5-segment solid rocket motors, which are already done.)
>>10469731Nothing so far, Dragon is currently being analysed by NASA.
>>10469730You really need to set up some filters.Also, inb4 some faggot decides to start a new thread before page 10.
>>10469098I'm not sure but I often dream of constructing things in space and having a rigid body makes me a lot more comfortable. I've never really thought of an apropriate use for them.I've assumed that brazing can be done in vacuum. This greatly simplifies manufacturing requirements. I want a design which is constructed from sheets and pipes. This way you can easily add extensions from remote locations.Any inflatable design would take advantage of the advantages of that system. Unfortunately those advantages are largely irrelevant.It's still food for thought and might be suitable as an initial structure which is built around.
>>10469694>he pays money to use an internet forum
>>10469661>Why is it that SpaceX cultists always need to shit on competition?Because they have worthless lives and are extremely insecure about it, so they project those insecurities and attach their "worth" to fandom of Elon Musk.
>responding to yourself this fucking transparently
>>10469900>It's the "every post against Musk is done by one redditor"- anon again
>>10469247Space is hard.Space is expensive.
>>10468777>Venus also has potentialno
>>10468933>Splitting CO2 is actually really hardIf you reduce CO2 to water and methane using hydrogen gas you actually release energy, enough that once you get the reaction going it keeps itself hot on its own. The biggest energy input requirement is actually the electrolysis required to make the hydrogen used to reduce the CO2, and if your rocket burns hydrogen you need to expend that amount of energy anyway.
>>10468944A mixture of hydrogen gas and carbon dioxide in the presence of nickel metal catalyst causes them to react with one another and produce water and methane, releasing energy. You don't have to split any CO2, you only have to split water and use the hydrogen from that water to react the CO2 to make your methane. This is century old chemistry.
>>10469366there's little difference between "salt water" and "horrific acid" in the context of steel and electrics
>>10469364A previous thread discussed the merits of exporting lunar basalt countertops and making bank because of the exclusivity.
>>10469364Same guy you're replying to. The means to mine, transport, refine, forge and build structures in outer space instead of having to rely on Earthside launches to get materials. Also, having a bonafide colony near Earth already.
>>10469856Sounds like something awful.