Previous: >>14729729
Booster 7 is alive
Is For all mankind worth watching? Reading the season 3 episode summaries, it seems a bit sjw-ish. And it didn't feel that exciting, more like something you can keep playing in the background?
>>14734557>sjw-ishDude..come on.. it's appletv+
>>14734568im no american and i don't like american politics, so i had to ask even imgur and reddit front page is american politicsim sick and tired of it
>>14734557In the trailer someone says, 'being first is what its all about'But not america first.
>>14734557>>>/tv/>>>/n/(because you're the space board schizo trying to derail the thread yet again)
>>14734557Nope. Its just SJW trash
>>14734571I'm british, you know exactly what 'liberal' shit apple stands for.I don't care about a diverse cast within reason, but usually that means the writing is sloppy because they hired twitter posters.
If Starship actually works, the USA will have such an advantage in space technology. One that other countries can't hope to match for decades.This has both military and commercial benefits that no other country can touch.JAXA isn’t going to have a reusable rocket until the 2040s. ESA posted a diagram of their future rockets and they won’t have anything that resembles starship until the 2040s (someone post it I don’t have it saved) China won’t have a starship clone until as early as 2035Imagine what starship will be doing then?
LASERS... ON FREAKING MARS????AWESOME SAUCE!!!!! HOW COOL IS THAT EVERYONE
>>14734591Falcon Heavy works and is such an advantage, but is not utilized at all.
>>14734591Nvm I found it. What a fucking joke
>>14734576>Its just SJW trashI did not truly understand the insanity of the SJW until I watched Sandman and they made Lucien (a White male) into Lucienne (a Black female). WHY??? It is like they feel a compulsion to put Black people into EVERYTHING.
>>14734619The insanity is real. The propaganda is real. Its just nonsense.
>>14734608whoops heres a better one
>>14734620 fucking retardposter bro. feels like he's a recent addition.
>>14734647Submarines in shallow water perhaps?
>>14734605>and is such an advantageNo it's not. Falcon Heavy is a good rocket and the most powerful one currently operational but it's not 100x cheaper for launch services like Starship is going to be.
so what's the point of this thread? elon musk is going down soon
B7 is airborne
>>14734664Falcon Heavy is the most powerful rocket in the world, its the most powerful rocket in the US arsenal for 4+ years and it has barely seen any use.
According to L2 the tower will be scrapped
>>14734670WTF HOW COME THEY CAN LIFT THE THING WITH A CRANE?I THOUGHT IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE WTF.
easy mnemonicperigee - pakathulaapogee - anga
>>14734619black females are 5% of us populationamericans are 5% of world populationyet the black female is everywhere, how?
delete this thread its redundant
>>14734685based. it will fall like musks crumbling facade
SOLAR MOUNTAIN COMES ON THE PERIHELIONNO REROUTING, ONLY COUNTIN' TILL WE'RE DONESHOUTIN' SINS UNTIL WE'RE IN THE SUN
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqbC916bH5MLIVE
>>14734695>yet the black female is everywhere, how?I can explain it int he Biden administration.Biden has a long history of sexism and racism, so to blunt any attacks on him about his past he is appointing black woman to high profile positions:Supreme Court JusticeRepresentative of the USA to the UNWhite House Press SecretaryVice President
>>14734695because it's equitable
>>14734716what are those things that bulge out of the cylinders above the grid fins
>>14734685According to L2 they will swing B7 around on the crane like wrecking ball to tear down the entire launch site.
Lift
This can't be happening
>The virgin chop sticks vs the CHAD CRANE
>>14734729If spin prime becomes success next week for 20 engines, they'll roll back with 13 more engines, then do another spin prime with other 13, then static fire is possible the week after
who this adrian guy and why he sound so girl
>>14734729
>>14734753
>>14734753where is sshot-048.jpg
hats off to the wondeful folks at nsf
>>14734755
everything's looking so huge
HE TRIPPEDLMAO
>>14734767LMAOIMAGINE WATCHING TANKS ALL
>>14734759>>14734729 you blind?
>>14734764
>>14734772no I'm Michael
>>14734777NO MICHAEL NO THIS IS SO NOT RIGHT
>>14734774Going down into the locking mechanism fast
>>14734780Toto its called a motor race, okay? We went car racing
what are you excited for? yeah oh im excited for another muskian rushed project that fails masterfully due to launch fever and elon's slavedriving. im sure that will work like it always does...oh wait
>>14734785
>>14734793don't you have like anything better to do? How old are you? You could be building an actual rocket instead of watching tanks
I LOVE Elon Musk!
>>14734804i love spaceflight period
>>14734808I don't like period
>>14734808And GARMARS
>>14734808Are there studies on the menstrual cycle in space?
>>14734813yes
>>14734808Go back
>>14734808 When she STOPS having her period, is when you ask... is a zero or no gravity environment OK for pregnancy?
>>14734808>>14734811Most don't know
>>14734808Elon Musk = spaceflight
> astronauts can't get erections in space have they tried sexier crews?
>>14734836i've read morning wood is pretty severe in zero g
>>14733089
>>14734839Miyasaki didn't get any morning wood
>>14734843>didn't get any morning woodWell, I guess I will not be living in zero G.
>>14734841
>>14734841More like this
first for premixed oxygen and methane.
How can beam propulsion work but you cant carry a giant laser and point it backwards
>>14734874Giant laser pointed backwards does produce thrust. It produces half as much thrust as bouncing a powerful laser beam off of a mirror. Since a mirror is much lighter than a superpowerful laser and its energy supply, it makes more sense to carry a mirror and subscribe to a laser.
>>14734872Isn't that just a sensitive high explosive
guess who's about to become the world's leading expert in bill nelson thought. the previous owner didn't even color in most of the pages!
>>14734877> your propulsion is a subscription streaming service this is my issue with them
>>14734881yes
>>14734886It's an issue, yes. it may also just be something we're stuck with if we want very high speed transportation in space and can't do fusion effectively for whatever reason.
>>14734894its acute in interstellar missions where you might travel for decades and expect a braking beam to decelerate you into the target system...and there has been a war/revolution/whatever so it never comes
>>14734736so two more weeks
>>14734918Eternally 2 weeks away
>>14734721the big things that cross the seam are the latches that hold the two parts of the rocket together, the little thing above the O in falcon is probably a camera
https://twitter.com/NASAGroundSys/status/1555549554560335872>Vehicle Assembly Building High Bay 3 Platform E was retracted last night. ½ of the platforms are now retracted. Platform K will be retracted tonight, with B, C, E next week, starting on Tues. What will happen to this general once SLS flies first while Starship is still eternally two weeks away from launching?
>>14734929I don't think starship is flying this year
>>14734929I don't know.https://youtu.be/4ptPdlVAwFg
It's true that we have been continually promised the static fire is some two weeks away for the last year but I feel like it's finally happening now. This is a big step and it's what will distinguish SS from N1
>>14734936>promisedyou don't know what that word means
>>14734929There's a good chance of flying in September
>>14734949Elon Musk promised me a pony. He's a liar
>>14734958he didn't lie, he changed his mind after he found out what you wanted the pony for you sicko
>>14734886Can sirius fuck off.Also i heard from anton channel there was this star at 0.8ly 70k year ago. https://exoplanets.nasa.gov/blog/1549/a-passing-star-our-suns-near-miss/
>>14734695>(((how?)))
>>14734911That's why most pioneering interstellar missions will very likely use laser assisted departure propulsion, but rely on their own power systems for deceleration at their targets.
>>14734808GIRUGAMESH!
>>14734971Sirius is good because you can do gravitational assists with the white dwarf to boost you to another system
How do you destroy a constellation with thousands of satellites?
>>14734545 >>14734536 I imagine hydraulics are attractive because they can strongly hold so much weight, what would be another option, to so strongly and with precise timing securely clasp?And how often are there such problems with hydrolics? You see videos of factories from the 40s and stuff, or big steel Mills, and there massive machines and hydraulic presses and other things, they look like they just work non stop>>14734443Instead of building the first mars base, any way one of the first starships can be built as the first mars base so when it lands there is a process to convert it into a base?Would there be any way to controllably get it from a vertical to horizontal position once on Mars?Or that is also too risky without much upside.Do the computers that control starships bellyflop to vertical landing manuvers going to simulation train on Mars atmosphere levels, and is there other ways?Like how different will the rates of fall and thruster power and angles be different in mars atmosphere?Or the thrusters just do whatever they must do so that they recieve readings that the ship is perfectly vertical?
>>14735036highly doubt Musk would do it considering he has a factory in China
What are the probabilities that there could be some amount of gas deposit at some percentages of locations at some depth ranges under the martian surface that if drilled into could exhibit some outward bursting or otherwise dangerous force?
>>14735036I really don't get how those American "patriots" can openly support authoritarian shitholes.
>>14734793>>14734774>>14734755Is that solely the booster? What are these different space flight ships?This one has a hugebooster it holds onto into orbit? And uses to get to mars? Or is that the whole ship there?
>>14734967but she was just the right heightno bucket required
>>14735036Once in place, the satellites have limited ability to maneuver. You toss up a bunch of debris into the plane you want to go dark. You can't just target one area on Earth, but you can target any plane that covers that area. More satellites would have to be launched to replace those lost and if the plane is littered with debris, you have to wait a couple of years for it to clear. Early on Musk said SpaceX wouldn't get involved in politics because it would be dangerous to the the survival of the Starlink constellation to do so but he quickly went full retard with Ukraine, angering one of the nations that can very easily destroy Starlink if it wants. Getting Starlink and SpaceX involved with Taiwan and China would be even stupider. Don't be surprised if at some point China has an "oopsie" that knocks out Starlink should SpaceX continue to operate as an arm of the US government.
>>14735064Perhaps they differentiate between their nation and the government of their country.
>>14735098You sound like you're one of them.
>>14735098They should hold their government accountable more often
>>14735092>More satellites would have to be launched to replace those lost and if the plane is littered with debris, you have to wait a couple of years for it to clear.Once Starship is operational, it'll be fairly simple to replace damaged sats & clear debris with other specialised sats, the payload capacity will be totally unprecedented. >angering one of the nations that can very easily destroy Starlink if it wants.>Don't be surprised if at some point China has an "oopsie" that knocks out Starlink should SpaceX continue to operate as an arm of the US government.And the US military can even more easily destroy Beidou and GLONASS - and again, the US will replace lost sats even more easily than Russia or China can (IIRC Russia can't even afford to replace GLONASS sats which decay out of orbit on schedule). If I were China I wouldn't do shit in space until:- Starship Clone - WWIII whichever comes firstand if I were Russia, I'd just swallow my pride already and buy Chinese
>>14735051effectively zero.
>>14735069>>14735040Why are you here if you apparently know nothing about rockets and are retarded?
lets go anons
>>14735189Where?
>>14735189ok we are going
>>14735189ikeeeeeeee
>>14735051near the poles? quite likely as it vents naturally
>>14735180>>14735186>>14735220Learn to recognize the retard and stop replying.
>>14735036Since we are at the threshold of Kessel syndrome destroying a few should do it
>>14735194to other worlds
>>14735194you moms house ;)
Are air breathing rocket engines worth it?
>>14734857To be fair, some of these are already researched, while others are so general as to be meaningless. What will be interesting is to see where Blue directs their energy after New Glenn is flying. They’ve already got a lot of commitments.
>>14735262They work well just not in space (no air)
>NASA’s chief astronaut says the entire astronaut corps, and not just an “Artemis Team” subset announced in 2020, will be eligible for Artemis missions. “As long as you are healthy, we’re going to load you on a rocket and shoot you off the planet.”A reminder to take care of yourself
>>14734557you can skip ahead through the gay shit but it gets increasingly prevalent with every season, by now it's sometimes like half the fucking episodethe space stuff is getting more diluted and stupid too
>>14735262if you're trying to put something into space there's a very limited window in which it's going to help. you're not going to be going fast enough to take in much oxygen at liftoff and there just isn't a lot of oxygen in the atmosphere above 50 kilometers.
>>14735315>the entire astronaut corps, and not just an “Artemis Team” subset announced in 2020, will be eligible for Artemis missionsSOON
>>14735092>into the plane you want to go darkbut the vast majority of starlink satellites share the same medium inclination orbit that passes over every spot on the earth's surface. to clear them out from an area you need to clear them all.
>>14735169>I'd just swallow my pride already and buy ChineseStopped reading there
>>14735236>Starlink sats causing Kessler syndrome
>>14735262Will they produce a lower cost launch system than a fully reusable conventional rocket? If the answer is no, then no.They would be interesting to study for Titan surface to orbit launch vehicles though.
>>14735364Correct. Niggas forget that the earth rotates and does not drag those orbits around for the ride.
>>14735236Kessler syndrome is certified impossible
>>14735408It's possible in higher orbits where there is minimal drag to de-orbit small particles but it requires a massive amount of stuff in orbit, vastly more than there is at the moment.
>>14735405You are standing in a field looking at the stars. Your arms are resting freely at your side, and you see that the distant stars are not moving. Now start spinning. The stars are whirling around you and your arms are pulled away from your body. Why should your arms be pulled away when the stars are whirling? Why should they be dangling freely when the stars don't move?
>>14735414you would need trillions of satellites. oh wait, there's already trillions of rocks out there and nothing bad has happened
>>14735169I also stopped reading at the end of the post
>>14735092Given the number of satellites spread out across so many orbital planes it's simply not viable to take out Starlink with a shotgun approach. China simply can't lift enough mass to get the job done. That's not to say that China couldn't do it; they just couldn't do it with shrapnel. A Starfish Prime sized nuclear test at the right altitude would get the job done. If you fill LEO with enough radiation you'd take out everyone's orbital infrastructure, at the cost of making everyone with satellites extremely angry and violating the Outer Space Treaty, which China is a signatory to. If you really want to take out a constellation like Starlink you need something like a high powered laser that could plink each satellite as they come over Chinese territory. The cost of firing a laser would be less than the cost of launching a Starlink satellite even with Starship, so you're winning the classical asat economic contest, and it's precise enough that you won't make an enemy out of every other nation with satellites. >>14735169The problem is that the Russians tried buying Chinese back in 2015 and the shit the Chinese were selling turned out to be even worse shit than the Russians were expecting it to be.
>>14735364>>14735405>>14735427I don't get it
>>14735465They don't have to take all of it out, just the planes that intersect with areas they don't want to have service.
>One year ago today, SpaceX stacked the biggest rocket ever assembled.im not bitter
>>14735523me neither. i'm excited and happy for every piece of progress made since.
>>14735527it was sarcasm, im bitter angry and distraught
>>14735525heh
>chinese spaceplane disappearedprobably landed...why do they only keep it in space for a day or two?
>>14735528You should find more important things to care about.
>>14735523it was all for show
>>14735541>space colonization is one of the most important things in human civilization right now>"its not important bro!"
>>14735545Do you work at SpaceX?
>>14735528well that's on you
If I'm trying to land on Io, does it sense to enter Jupiter orbit first, or try and direct approach Io? Would it be smarter to enter a high jupiter orbit, or an orbit close to Io's orbit and then enter? Does it make any difference in terms of fuel spent? Basically I'm asking, what's the most fuel efficient way to enter Io orbit, without use of gravity assist maneuvers? (I'm not opposed to gravity assist just I want to also have the most expedient trip possible)
Ariane 6
>>14735570never done it before but your oberth gains low over jupiter are gonna be so much stronger that i can't see how a direct io approach would work better
>>14735581Are you saying to enter an orbit closer to Jupiter than Io? I'll try it
>>14735586good luck with it. io's probably the hardest body in the game to land on.
>>14735507That's all of them, dumbass
>>14735570It depends on the thrust to mass ratio of your spacecraft. If you can just capture at Io it's fine, provided you're moving in a favorable direction relative to Io. If you can't physically complete the entire burn at Io you should capture into Jupiter orbit first. Also, using gravity assists from a captured elliptical Jovian orbit is feasible, and could save a lot of delta V in exchange for much more time needed.
>>14735577long ass combustion chamber on that engine in the background
>>14735589>>14735608interesting. It will be a fun evening indeed, thank you anons.
>>14734932Would you like to elaborate further?
>>14735577>>14735610yeah it's cringe
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjoELEjw0WkGOOD MORNING SIRS
>>14735632designated shitting orbits
>>14735350Can we PLEASE make decent looking space suits!!!
What's the schedule for launches, everything go right the last few days?
>>14735676Starship launches in a few weeks, Orion launches in a few weeks. That's all you need to know.
there's water on mars!
>>14735709>Starship launches in a few weeksI stopped believing that more than a year ago.
>>14735350Can you imagine the jockeying going on in NASAEverybody wants to be the first crew on the Moon
>>14735570Direct to Io would be ideal but nobody's packing enough dv for thatI'd be interested to see numbers on the tradeoff between the rad shielding you'd need for gravity assist at jupiter vs the fuel you'd need for a direct approach
Has there been a proposed design of what the cabin of a crewed starship would possibly look like? If you are not American, please don't respond.
>>14735726Kill yourself, you fat faggot
Other than Juno's Europa flyby on September 29, what can we expect this year from ongoing space missions?
>>14735729No, I don't think I will.
>>14735739Morbid obesity is in itself a slow suicide, lol
>>14735741I'm very muscular. But this you already know. People like me make things happen. Physical prowess is equally important to mental prowess. I have note than you in both, by far.
(you)
>>14735737Plenty:2 October - DART impact13 November - CAPSTONE Lunar orbital insertion16 December - Danuri Lunar orbital insertion
for the newfren who doesn't know how to filter and ignore
>>14735806thanks
>>14735813any time
>>14735806Filtering doesn't actually address the issue because most people won't bother, the thread will still get derailed regardless of if you see it, and once namefagging takes hold it's the death knell of any general. Fucking jannies do your job
r8 my stack
>>14735838that's the most aesthetic hotstage open decoupler I've ever seen
>>14735842what'd you use to make the bay?
>>14735843bet it's the most expensive one, too
>>14735851Indians love their flashy decorations
>>14735842it even has a functioning chomper that doesn't flail around during max-q. gotta add more hinges though because i can only open it in zero-g right now.>>14735846procedural fairings
Okay what the actual fuckI'm starting to think that Aliens and UFOs may actually be real.Been seeing loads of shit coming out lately and it's blowing my mind, still confused asf thoughCan one of you nerd cunts get me up to date? Ty
>>14735880it was just venus
>>14735880>loads of shit coming outBut the SSLV hasn't launched yet
>>14735880they're not aliens...
>>14735880
>>14735870>procedural fairingsthink those are up to surviving reentry? it does look really good though, i'm envious.
You are fucking retards who worshiped a fucking slice of chorizo. We are not doing space flight anytime soon lol.
ERROR: No text entered
why is saxon musk such a cringe retard? who will carry the torch as emperor of mars? god i hope not him
>
>>14735914>who will carry the torch as emperor of mars?Does Zubrin have any sons?
>>14735919he has a daughter but she's ugly :/
I'm not ashamed to say I avoid watching SpaceX streams nowadays. Super boring. Maybe I'll watch Starship or SLS
>>14735933>the year is 2022>our best method of fine tuned control of heavy crane lifts is to have a bunch of guys run around and tug on stringsembarrassing!
>>14735946Just pull up pictures of slices of chorizo. You science fans are all the same simple minds, it'll entertain you for hours on end.
>>14735946I feel the strong urge to straighten her out using my cock
god damn I love ignoring trolls. Anyway, spaceflight?
>>14735963if you want to discuss it nobody's going to stop you
>>14735956Go BIG or go home!
>>14735963spaceflight, but up close
>>14735972Based chinks and their complete lack of ability to gauge proximity danger levels
>>14735769Cool, though half of these are lunar.Curiosity and Perseverance are still going on, but I don't know if they have any specific objectives in the near future.
>>14735984This just in from the minds of /sfg/, 2/3 is now one half, more at 11
>>14735963?
sooooooo when will hls option b be chosen (alpaca)??
>>14735948Now you're thinking like NASAWhy spend a dollar when you could spend a million
>be space flight enthusiast >no friends >no communication skills>no manipulation tactics>no ability to physically detain>thinks he would be valuable on an actual space flight journeyFriendly reminder that Sir Francis Drake had an upset crew member drawn and quartered on the southern shore of south america on a quick respite to the landmass, than quickly continued the journey without the burden; leaving the bones to serve as a landmark to others he would never think about. The only thing that matters to colony captains is control. I don't condone his actions.
>>14736004Once they redesign it to be physically possible
How profitable do you think mining in space would be in 2030?
>>14736020In 2030? If somebody can capture a gold or platinum rich asteroid and bring it to Earth orbit it could be extremely lucrative. It won't happen though, even though crashing the price of gold to near-zero would be based. Tell me you wouldn't want a gold-handled toothbrush or gold-accented wallpaper.
>>14735904no i don't think so, still trying to figure it out but the simplest way seems like cheating and editing the parts to have higher max temperatures.maybe go full autist and give them a nice texture too.i'm new to RSS and don't really know what profile to fly but i managed to get 92 tons to LEO, leaving enough in the booster for landing and with a full header tank.the pitch kick works great.
>>14734546Are you exited about the future of spaceflight?
>>14736016they did that already
>>14736025I was mainly thinking atleast in the US on how they would try to tax the shit out of whatever you bring back.
>>14735988I was counting Juno's europa flyby too
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0tsABQCW1MISRO stream is liveyou will enjoy the squealy elevator music
>>14734591It's almost weird to think about how space is just going to be a more pure American culture with everything and everyone else only being present as at best little enclaves like Chinatowns in America.
>Compact Composite Objects (CCOs), nuggets of dense Color-Flavor-Locked Superconducting quark matter created before or during the Quantum ChromoDynamics phase transition in the early universe[1, 2, 3], could provide a natural expla-nation for both dark matter and the observed cosmological baryon asymmetry[4, 5, 6], without requiring modifications to fundamental physics. This hypothesis predicts a relic CCO population in the solar system, captured during its formation, and thus both massive strange matter cores in the centers of the Sun and planets, as well as a present-day population of "strange asteroids," bodies with mm-radii quark matter cores and ordinary matter (rock or ice) mantles. Methods based on neutrino radiography and solid-body mechanics are developed to detect such strange matter cores in solar system bodies. The CCO hypothesis is directly supported by the observed population of small Very Fast Rotating (VFR) asteroids (bodies with rotation periods as short as 25 sec); the VFR data are consistent with the existence of strange asteroids with core masses of order 10 10 -10 11 kg. If the VFR asteroids are indeed strange asteroids their CCO cores could be mined using the techniques being developed for asteroid mining. Through a process analogous to Andreev reflection in superconductors[7], even normal matter CCOs could be used as antimatter factories, potentially potentially producing as much as 10 9 kg of antimatter per CCO. While of course speculative, this energy source, if realized, would be suitable for propelling starships to a substantial fraction of the speed of light, and could be found, extracted and exploited in our solar system with existing and near-term developments in technology.
>>14736058Thanks anon. This is the maiden launch, so expect fireworks
>>14736058Less annoying than Biden's Webb reveal waiting music
>>14736058india is back baby
>>14736058>elevator musicI'd rather listen to this elevator music insteadhttps://www.youtube.com/shorts/oTH3mq7SsK4kinda sounds like evangelion too
>>14736058india > chyna
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dlV4EWMohcRocketGyan also has a stream up if anyone is interested in commentary >>14736074They've got less budget but they've got more heart
Translation : after final preparation onboard computer will take over
>>14736081Can take 500 kg to 500km orbit.Costs $4M. Can be prepared very quickly (launch on demand). Production will be transferred to nsil (consortium of private companies)
Electron - 12.5t, 300 kg to LEO SSLV - 120t, 500 kg to LEO So this is the power of solids
It's being launched from sriharikotta but we are building a new spaceport near tuticorin (my home town), where it will launch in the future.
>>14736091You missed the most important factor, cost. This only costs $3.8M but electron costs $7.5M.
Thoughts on spin launch?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrc632oilWo
>>14736100same as last time: it's bullshit
>>14736091It's a lot heavier because solid propulsion is about 75-100s less efficient than the liquid engines Electron uses.>>14736097One of the big reasons it's cheap is cost-sharing with the Indian ICBM program. It's easy to get a cheap launcher when the same production lines are rolling out bulk orders of missiles to aim at China. >>14736105But it'll be entertaining bullshit, so it's not a complete loss.
>>14736092good morning sir
Does Russia possess the best space technology?
>>14736091>SSLV - 120tJust glanced at the post and for a second thought India built a SHLV that I didn't know about.
>>14736112Morning sir, watching from church lol
>>14736097They're not directly comparable, SSLV manufacturing cost is 3.8-4.4 million, Electron is PRICED at 7.5 million. Not to mention Electron was designed for a market that at the time had basically no other small launcher competition but now most of its peers are cheaper.
>>14736113>stillNow this is multiple layers of cope
>>14736118Cope and seeth
LiveSSLV 1st Flight! EOS-02 Missionhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNTLY2QQQHwhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNTLY2QQQHwhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNTLY2QQQHw
>>14736113Putin can snap his fingers and all of musk starlinks will fall from the sky. dont threaten the greatest space power
>>14736123You're either trolling or an Indian shill.
>>14736100Here, again
>>14736124Based
>>14736100debunked alreadyhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ziGI0i9VbEhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE
>>14734557*jew-ish
>>14736124HOLY FUCKING CUTE WHY HAVENT YOU GUYS EVER POSTED HER BEFORE????
>>14736109This is just the side booster of gslv and pslv
>>14736140How new are you?
>>14736142i have been here much longer than anyone posting here
1 min 30 sec from launch!
we are about to redeem the rocket sirshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZ9zDWqpf9U
>>14736140How new r u?
>>14736058shinga binga bangalore tea now sirtech support-2 activatingbangasat now transmitting 76 gift cards per second
>>14736141The boosters on the GSLV are a LOT chunkier than this. They've got a diameter of about 3.2m, the SSLV is only 2m.
>>14736140And from this day forward, anon was never the same.
REDEEMED
I wonder how many gift cards that rocket can carry to LEO.
looking a little wobbly on the flight tracker
>>14736165Anon discovers vtubers, develops severe schizophrenic delusions. Many such cases!
It looks like the third stage underperformed. Partial failure?
it's ogre
Success
Do any of you shits actually watch that vietnamese v-tumor unironically? And if you do, how do you not commit suicide in the process?
>>147361783rd stage seemed fine to me, the 4th stage(velocity trimming module) may have shut down early.
>>14736168If the average gift card is 5 grams, then roughly 100,000 cards. Exact performance will vary depending on the orbit the IRS will require you to have them delivered to.
>>14736188So it reached orbit but different altitude?
>>14736193Made orbit, but not the target orbit, yeah.
>>14736194Pretty impressive for first attempt
Thank you, come again!
>Starship and Super Heavy still no first attempt yet
PRUFROCK fits in a starship with room to spare.>It should fit in Starship which is where I’m guessing you are going. SpaceX site doesn’t list it but based on a couple of visual clues it will fit in a Starship and be roughly 1/3 the total weight. The tunnel dimensions it can dig are ~12 feet in diameter and on SpaceX site it’s shown in a graphic being transported on a flatbed truck so it’s max length is about 50 feet long. That is about 60% of the projected space in Starship cargo bay. On the weight part… A truck and trailer typical max weight is 80k lbs and some states allow a max tonnage with 3 axels on both the trailer and a drop axel on the truck to hit 100k lbs. truck and trailer weight is ~35k lbs so that means PRUFROCK has to be between 45-65k lbs or 22.5-32.3 US tons which is about 30% of the Starship projected tonnage capacity.https://www.reddit.com/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/whu4rh/elon_musk_said_the_pace_of_progress_on_mars/ij8n1qw/
go back
>>14736027yeah they really need to have more options for procedural parts with heat shielding. you've got wings and tanks and that's it i think. if you want to make it feel less cheaty you could edit the fairing to weigh more too.meanwhile my flyback booster experiment has me convinced this was always a horrible idea for gameplay reasons alone. it's going to take like 45 minutes to get back to the cape and i'm too scared to touch timewarp.on the other hand i'm kinda seeing the logic for real-world. reversing your course in space takes like 4 km/s of delta v and with a true flyback you can kill your velocity in the atmosphere and then the jet engines' ISP is so high that you can almost make it back on propellant residuals alone.
REDEMPTIONS WILL CONTINUE UNTIL MORALE IMPROVES
>>14736218Are you using the latest RO versions of everything? There should be some more bits.https://github.com/KSP-RO
>>14734755It's so janky with the exposed pipingI love it
why cant india into spaceflight?
What has the USSF been up to lately?
I miss ITS bros why didn't they stick with this design
A interesting mars EVA suit design. It uses oxygen for the helmet and compressed martian co2 for the body.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6s-c1af7GC0&t=75s
>>14736240Too expensive and slow to produce
>>14736231i keep the install up to date but i wouldn't put it past me to miss something obvious. do you know what the parts are besides the shielded tank and the b9 spaceplane wings?
>>14736244So just like now?
>>14736239nothing interesting afaik
>>14736214you fucks are so cringe it's unreal
>SSLV-D1/EOS-02 Mission: Maiden flight of SSLV is completed. All stages performed as expected. Data loss is observed during the terminal stage. It is being analysed. Will be updated soon.https://nitter.net/isro/status/1556136626278912002Which doesn't make sense because if they lost telemetry they shouldn't be able to tell if the fourth stage performed nominally and according to the flight events log the liquid engines shut down less than a second in. They could be about 500 m/s dV short of desired orbit.
>>14736247much worse
>>14736292I read it as 4 th stage performed normallyAttitude control system failed, causing tumblingtelemetry lost
If the fourth "VTM" stage did not fire, vehicle would complete about half an orbit and fall in the Pacific near the third stage NOTAM zone around 138W 30S after passing over Australia and New Zealand-Jonathan McDowell
>>14736305>Third stage orbit would be around -58 x 351 km x 41.6 deg
>>14734677its not cheaper than regular falcon launches, that's whyraw upmass isn't the important factor, cost per kilo is, and falcon heavy's increased ability is entirely offset, if not put into the negatives, by heavy's increased costStarship on the other hand will drive costs into the floor to the level that it would be worthwhile to totally overhaul satellite building methods to capitalize on it, though it'll undoubtedly require a lot of boomers retire or die before it can happen
>>14736320>Starship on the other hand will drive costs into the floorAt least initially, Starship will be more expensive than Falcon Heavy. Musk recently said marginal launch cost will be $50M to $100M.
>>14736314>>14736305>would have impacted at 0431 UTC
>>14735064they're edgy teenagers that want to be special, so to them, popular thing must always be badUkraine is fashionable, so they masturbate over Russia to be contrarian
>>14736325costs per kilo, you illiterate pavement ape100M at 150 tons is substantially less than Heavy
>>14736329Did you read the previous post you pre-cambrian worm? The whole argument is falcon heavy is already cheaper in $/kg but isn't used much.
>>14736344*FH cheaper than falcon that is.>>14736329Also you are dreaming if you think 150tons. Its going to be 80-100 tons.
I think spacex can make halo 3 odst real
>>14736352Just need to modify a Crew Dragon to use Super Dracos for landing
>>14734808i fuckin dont so there
>>14736305Bastard. This was a successful test of agni 6 ICBM. Okay.
>>14736349>Its going to be 80-100 tons.It's going to be 150 tons.
>>14736381yeah, just like starship was supposed to launch in 2020, 2021 and 2022
Go back to twitter.
>>14736382Eric Berger, who holds himself highly on being the best predictor in the industry fell for this too.Its hilarious to watch the cope.
100 tons to orbit is 100 tons to orbit. Quantity has a quality all on its own.
>This post(>14736399) is extremely low quality >>14736109The Isp is horrendous even for solids. Vega is only 15t heavier but can do 2t to a 1500 × 200 km orbit.
>>14736400>VegaCosts 10 times more than sslv
>>14736410We know, Ramesh. Neither rocket is good or has much of a commercial opportunity.
>>14736413It has the same capacity as Electron and is 2x cheaper. Electron has launched 15 times already.
SSLV made it to orbit! Unstable yes, but it still made it to orbit. !!!
>>14736426Source? >>14736415Electron was a single example out of literally hundreds of small-lift rockets, most of which are still in development or have issues like SSLV and Astra Rocket>Electron has launched 15 times already.So what? That isn't a lot of launches for such a small vehicle despite the lack of small-lift competition for most of its history and the immature rideshare opportunities on larger rockets like the Falcon 9
>>14736431https://www.isro.gov.in/update/07-aug-2022/sslv-update-all-stages-performed-normal-both-satellites-were-injected-orbit
>>14736431sslv is currently the cheapest small sat launcher. Every other small sat launcher is RIP.
>>14736433How can something perform normal and still achieve a less than expected orbit
>>14736441I'm willing to bet that the trajectory is suborbital and they're lying yet again. >>14736439Astra Rocket is 2.5 million and don't you dare kvetch about the smaller payload when you handwaved the fact that Vega has >4x the payload of SSLV.
>>147364413 SRBs norminalfinal velocity trimming module failed
>>14736441It's designed to underperform.
spaceplane spotted again
>>14736444Anon didn't you hear the news? Astra 3.3 is cancelled. Also Vega has 4x the payload but 10x the cost.SSLV has 10x the payload of astra, but just 2x the cost.
>>14736450>RCS <1 sq. meterIt's even orbiting shuttle style, normal to the earth
Dishy now only costs $199 in ItalySpaceX desperate for more customers?
>>14736462SPACEX BUSTED!How will Elon ever recover?
>>14736451Once again cost =/= price. The price of SSLV is unknown. >SSLV has 10x the payload of astraNo, SSLV can do 300 kg to SSO, Astra Rocket 3 would have been 150 kg. Shilling here won't change shit.
>>14736466Better short Tesla, on margin. I am certain this will lead to bankruptcy.
>>14736462How much do the dishes cost to make?
>>14736472Over $9000
>>14736470Astra 3.3 payload capacity is 50 kg. You are the one who's shilling. https://spacenews.com/astra-cancels-rocket-3-to-focus-on-larger-vehicle/.
Why is no new space company making a heavy lift launch vehicle? Imo its the only market which makes sense (now that sslv has taken away the small sat market).
>>14736496The only people who need heavy lift are government agencies and good luck getting them to break existing contracts
>>14736477You better go edit Wikipedia then, but you Indian shills are busy elsewhere on the site.
>>14736426It crashed in the ocean
>>14736477>We are currently offering dedicated launch services of 50kg-150kg payloads (to 500km SSO reference orbit) in 2020 and 2021.https://web.archive.org/web/20200425105538/https://astra.com/services/
>The first demonstration flight of SSLV was not alone, on top, the fairing was carrying the aspirations, hopes and hard work of 750 girl students from across India, who had toiled and built AzadiSAT, a nine-kilogram CubeSat that has a mission life of six months.>The satellite was built under the guidance of Isro by school students from rural regions across the country and was then integrated by the student team of "Space Kidz India". The CubeSat contains 75 payloads and includes not just a UHF-VHF Transponder working in ham radio frequency to enable voice and data transmission for amateur radio operators, but also a selfie camera.A loss for all of humanity. How could this happen?
>>14736500What's your point? That's the mass of the first payload, not it's capability. >>14736503150 kg is for a future iteration, 3.3 was not capable of that. And 3.3 has been cancelled anyway so your whole point is moot.
>>14736516Dude why are you shilling for government babus here? At least simp for agnikul or skyroot
>>14736500Haha imagine being this insecure. I pity you man, must be sad you realise your worldview sucks.
Nobody on /sfg/ can tell me about starship cabin design. I wonder why that could be...
>>14736520Sslv will be manufactured by private companies thoughNot shilling, just pointing out the ridiculous state of small launch even after investing multiple billions
>>14736516>What's your point?That the launch wasn't a success and there are countless Indians like you playing defense to cover for a failed launch. >your whole point is mootYou're the one trying to confine the discussion just to Astra Rocket 3.3 because you have zero evidence in support of a 4 million dollar price for SSLV, after it was pointed out that the rocket itself is complete and utter trash by any performance metric.
>>14736109>One of the big reasons it's cheap is cost-sharing with the Indian ICBM program. It's easy to get a cheap launcher when the same production lines are rolling out bulk orders of missiles to aim at China.that's nothing new or specialalmost all launch vehicles started as ICBMs and launching probes and people on top of it was an afterthought (Atlas, Titan, R-7, Proton)US and Russia both sell ICBMs with best-before date running out as commercial launch vehicles (Minotaur, Dnepr, Rokot, etc.)
>>14736531Who cares about performace metric? Only number which matters is cost.It's sslv's first launch and it reached orbit. You were the one who brought up astra, about a rocket which doesn't even exist anymore. Cope harder.
>>14736536>reached orbithaha
>>14736526Probably something to do with the fact SpaceX has released literally nothing about the subject except teasers of sleeping berth prototypes.
>>14736537Better than failing what, 5 times? I couldn't even keep count anymore.Now astras next launch will be in 2024. They burnt $200M in 6 months and only have $200M left in cash. Good luck selling electric propulsion units!
>>14736536>Only number which matters is cost.So how much does it actually cost? In its entirety, not the production cost for a single rocket that doesn't factor in development costs and the hundreds of other expenses to run that part of ISRO. >You were the one who brought up astraYes, as a quick way to show that you're full of shit because Rocket 3 was priced cheaper than SSLV and so will Rocket 4 and dozens of other small-lift rockets from new space companies. This part of the industry doesn't have a future but that's to my point and SSLV will have few customers.
>>14736548>A rocket which doesn't exist anymore and only had a payload of 50kg was priced cheaperTurns out you are full of shit. How much ASTR are you bag holding?
>>14736578I frequently point out similar issues with Astra and their business model, retard. I was one of the people discussing their cash flow in recent threads and I made the somewhat detailed post about their ion thrusters.
>>14736242this doesn't make senseour skin needs oxygen too
>>14736651>Mars>Makes senseGetting a little ahead there, aren't we buddyFuture is cis lunar and anyone disagreeing is a lunatic
bad morning, sirs>"orbit" has a perigee within the atmosphere and the satellites were quickly destroyed
>>14736709Kek its techincally an orbit
>>14736709Moral of the story - If you go all solid stages, you best know what the fuck you're doing because there's no brakes on that train.
>>14736709>a committee would analyze and recommend>go for a salvage actionThey need someone more fluent in english to type their tweets out
>>14736709>356 km x 76 km elliptical "orbit"
>>14736721Would be a proper orbit if Earth didn't have an atmosphere.
>>14736720Indian English is pretty much its own thing
>>14736719The 3 srbs were nominal. Issue was with liquid kick stage. >>14736709Not bad for a first attempt! Sounds like an easy fix
>>14736719Nah, the 4th stage didnt fire at all.
>>14736725It would be pretty neat if it branched off and became its own language, like with dutch and afrikaans
Kek some bird got fried at ignition https://youtu.be/m0tsABQCW1M?t=2582
>>14736738Hello Ohsin didn't know you were on 4,chan
>>14736727Technically it fired for 0.1 seconds
>>14736729It pretty much has branched off somewhat, even if only as a very distinct dialect? Indians don't even try to learn American/British English and just learn their own variant.
>>14736744Depends, if you are a rich kid then you go to posh schools where they teach the American/British variant.
>>14736742I'm not him, i did pick it up from his reddit post.>>14736744I's can talk fluent american english mufugga watch yo ass before i bust a cap in yo ass punkass whiboi.
basterd bitch spacx hacker, fuck you!
>>14736758https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/explained-global/china-vessel-yuan-wang-5-sri-lanka-india-concern-explained-8067508/
Energia-Buran stamp from Cuba, 1991Someday I want to find the one and only Soviet Buran stamp ever printed
>>14736755Where you from?
>>14736754Yeah but their lingua franca that they use all the time is this broken variant of English. ESLs in other areas start leaning into more and more fluent English as they progress.
>>14736771Not the rich kids though. I talk to them and it's like taking to an American.
EU institutions have the best English language culture. Mish-mash of different barely understandable accents.
uh spacex bros?should they really be using this booster for a crew mission?
>>14736808It may not be your way but its the spacex way.
>>14736808imagine the memes if boeing did it
>>14736808They have a process for reusing and validating boosters for use. I don't see why you wouldn't trust that.
>>14736817starlink? okcrewed lives at stake? not oknasa astronauts are literally 1 in a billion, creme de la creme, best of our generation. We shouldn't lose them.
>>14736820>nasa astronauts are literally 1 in a billionThey literally are not.
What's up with all those concern trolls?
>>14736821https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonny_KimThese people can't just be replaced. They are the harbingers of our species!
>>14736821>As of May 2020, the corps has 48 "active" astronauts consisting of 16 women and 32 men>~1 in 10 millionThe Asian guy >>14736826 is pretty based though. I wouldn't mind him to be the token diverse man on the Moon.
>>14736833Dear Anon, 10 people would be 1 in billion. So 50 people would be 1 in 200 million.
Musk is no longer spending $44 Billion on Twitter. The World’s population is 8 billion. He can now give each person $5 billion and still have money leftover. I feel like a cheque for $5 billion would be life changing for most people. We’re waiting, Elon.
>>14736835I was only counting Americans. Dunno how many cosmonauts there are, and ESA only has 7. So counting everyone its probably like 1 in 100 million.
>>14736838retards like you who can't even do basic math don't deserve any handouts
>>14736843I don't consider cosmonauts to be real astronauts.
>>14736847Newfag. Not even to here, but to the internet.
>>14736855Go be a retard somewhere else.
>>14736859you are the astra shill aren't you
>>14736864I can be whatever you want me to be.
>>14736723We've talked about this before, but nobody's actually bothered to get up and do it.
Artemis III landing will have either a black man and a white woman or the other way around. The two people who remain in the Gateway are irrelevant.
how to emotionally deal with the fact that demand for SpaceX launches has barely increased in the last few years? All the increase in launches is due to SpaceX launching their own shit at their own cost
>>14736886it's literally over
>>14736880>Artemis III landing will have either a black man and a white woman or the other way around.>or the other way around.Impossible. They'd never do that. Space is already colonialism, can't encourage it further.
>>14736886Why are you lying?
>>14736891I don't know, there's this geologist black woman they're grooming and they obviously would want a very experienced astronaut landing with her. There's no experienced blacks atm, so it would have to be white. I guess it could be two females.
>>14736886Spaceflight will never be commercialised. It will always be spy sats and weather satellites.
>>14735610to give the gases more time to mix and burn?
>>14736894what are they supposed to manufacture in space anyway?is there anything that would be worth that cost?
>>147369053d printing of specific things that don't print well in gravity and production of carbon nanotubes.
>>14736892Yeah it seems like commercial and government demand for SpaceX has decreased since '18
>>14736894>It will always be spy sats and weather satellites.I unironically think earth observing satellites are based. We need to measure sea levels and stuff
>>14736912And it seems like there's a massive increase in 2022.
>>14736769North sentinel island
>>14736915all slipping. How many FH launches were supposed to happen this year
>>14736930>all slippingwow, you're literally retarded
>>14736886Bottle neck is cost of flight. If Starship launches and still no demand increase, then it means airwaves will utilize the excess capacity themselves and make money off of starlink and Mars mission.Government will become a minority player at some point
>>14736954Bottleneck for commercial is ambition and cost.Bottleneck for gov is politics and ambition.So I don't expect any real or meaningful change from gov side of things.
>>1473454649 New stamps from Cuba, from 1965 to 2005Cuba seems to have more stamps on obscure satellites and historical events, like the Rocketmail craze of the 30'shttps://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1w9AESodBpRBVfpNGBjnIbyJPzWyH2oNt?usp=sharing
>>14736974One of the more obscure Interkosmos sats, one of two DS-U1-G satellites made for studying the effects of solar radiation on the upper atmosphere, launched in 1966-67
>>14736387For me, it's him bragging about his old "SLS in 2023" prediction early this year only for the delays to stop coming.>>14736709As orbital as the "orbital" Starship test
>>14736978And one of the stamps about the rocketmail phenomena of the 30's
>>14736978>studying the effects of solar radiation on the upper atmosphereif only SpaceX looked into those effects... RIP starlinks
>>14736539>Gives that attentionwhore retard a (You)You can fuck off too>>14736847Another episode of the taking-everything literally no fun allowed faggot. This general is compromised
>>14736320>cost per kilo isCost per kilo ANDraw upmassAre in favor of Falcon Heavy. You're probably thinking of cost per launch rather than cost per kilo.
>>14736982>For me, it's him bragging about his old "SLS in 2023" prediction early this year only for the delays to stop coming.This wasn't because he was necessarily wrong, it was because NASA choose to ignore many failures during the tests and go with launch at all cost, including failures.
>>14736709Sirs, someone didn't do the needful
>>14736387I am the best Elon predictor. Remember when I said he was gonna move Tesla HQ to Texas? I said that a few days before him
>>14736232That shit is going to be covered with more... covers.
>>14736990>cost per launchI wish Astra wasn't so retarded, because I actually find their thought process interesting. It doesn't matter how bad your cost per kg is as long as you have the smallest cost per launch. And then you can shit out rockets like sausages and drive down cost purely by mass production. Instead of launching like 500 Starlinks on a single Starship for $20 million, you can launch one on an individual rocket directly to its trajectory for only $5000.
>>14735194
>>14737026Astra costs $2.5M
>>14737028If SpaceX can mass produce a Raptor for less than a million, Astra can weld together some rings for a couple grand.
>>14737035If SpaceX can do it, then SLS should only cost $100M at max. But it cost $4.1 billion per launch. Turns out two organizations are not same.
>>14737026At the peak of Astra hype, I liked them merely for trying something other than reusability to get price down, but then it became apparent that the financial case wasn't there and that their QC was shit and the dream came crashing down.Also, there's no way for an orbital rocket to cost less than a car, let alone an expendable one. The most optimistic Astra estimate had their rockets costing about two orders of magnitude more in the long term.
>>14737026>Instead of launching like 500 Starlinks on a single Starship for $20 million, you can launch one on an individual rocket directly to its trajectory for only $5000.This is the most delusional post I've seen in recent /sfg/ threads and this place has multiple people with outright schizophrenia.
>>14736820NASA disagrees, lol
>>14736823They're just trying to get a rise
>>14736886Who cares? SpaceX is still making the most money for their cash burn rate and can afford to build out Starlink without annual government injections of billions of dollars. They're on a trajectory to achieve actual financial self sufficiency, which would be a first for any space company. That is to say, depending on Starlink, SpaceX could soon remain in the black forever even if they never launched a commercial payload again.
>>14737049>there's no way for an orbital rocket to cost less than a carThis is completely analogous to people saying Starship will cost a few million per launch
>>14736808they take Falcons to McGregor?
>>14736902It's an indicator of low combustion chamber pressure I think, I could be wrong. Basically yes though, longer chamber for longer gas residence time to allow increased combustion efficiency. Both RS-25 and Raptor have very short combustion chambers because they have very high pressure chambers with good mixing efficiency and therefore don't need much residence time to achieve high combustion efficiency (by combustion efficiency I'm only referencing getting all of the oxidizer reacted with the fuel, the mixture will still be fuel rich but ensuring there are no O2 molecules exiting the nozzle is important for maximizing efficiency).
>>14737091I though there could be a opposite effect taking place, higher pressure engine have their gases leave faster which gives them less time to burn
>>14736912I'm fairly sure the apparent demand reduction is an artifact of SpaceX accelerating their launch timeline and eating up backlog. They're at a point now where commercial flight schedule movement is completely dominated by payload readiness, not by launch vehicle readiness. For example, the Falcon Heavy launch delays this year are because the payloads it's meant to throw up there aren't ready yet. Many such cases.
>>14737085Not that guy, but no it's not and that's also a difference of at least two orders of magnitude. Take your meds.
>>14736930Payloads weren't/aren't ready. FH is good to go whenever.>>14736967More or less agreed, however as cost is reduced the commercial space ambitions should increase (we already see this with commercial Moon and Mars robotic missions), and as the commercial sector starts doing things on par with or even exceeding what government missions are doing, the government ambition should also increase (in such a way that total volume of money being spent doesn't change much but procurement pivots to the more economic options).There's also a chance that government exploration programs cede ground to commercial activity and push farther out as a result. Maybe with much more commercial activity around the Moon and Mars and Asteroids, the government programs shift focus to things only they can currently do effectively, like high power to mass ratio nuclear energy solutions in space, and ultra deep space missions. I would expect that in a world where Starship is doing Moon and Mars landings and spawning a commercial ecosystem of extraterrestrial surface resource exploration, the government would take advantage of Starship to launch some very large, advanced probe spacecraft to go orbit the gas giants and ice giants and Kuiper belt objects, things on the scale of the Leviathan Venus probe concept and perhaps even bigger depending on where they're going and what they're doing.
Soviet Proton-3 cosmic ray research satellite as seen from Gemini 11 on 13.9.1966This was three days before Proton-3 would be destroyed during reentry, and it was seen tumbling by the Gemini crews Charles Conrad and Richard Gordon
>>14736984>loss of ~50 satellitesit was a blip honestly
>>14737035That's not how work culture works, SpaceX didn't just invent a booth that shits out rocket components at 1/500th typical costs or whatever.
>>14737094Nah, that ESA engine is an expander cycle (low pressure), and has a long chamber. Meanwhile Raptor is the highest pressure engine of all time, and has a short stubby chamber.
>>14737108>Payloads weren't/aren't ready.>>14737095>Many such cases.SpaceX knows payloads get delayed and take that into account. You can't attribute the low number of launches this year to that
>>14737119>that ESA engine is an expander cycle (low pressure), and has a long chamberMaybe it needs that long combustion so it can extract more heat to boil the gases
Starship will be A architecture with C processFalcon 9 is B architecture with A processNewGlenn will be B architecture with C processAtlas V is C architecture with B processVulcan will be C architecture with B processAriane 5 is C architecture with C process
>>14737136Yes I can, what the fuck do you want them to do, start cracking whips at their customers?
>>14737109Never heard about this. Actually pretty cool. I wonder how much other examples there are of manned spacecraft either intentionally or unintentionally observing other spacecraft
>>14737149>Starship will be A architecture with C processIt will take a year to get to a B process (many fully reusable launches) and maybe 2-3 years to get to an A process (frequent fully reusable launches with full refueling options)
>>14737160it probably happened a lot more in the '60s when they wanted to test how reliable naked eye observation could be vs. ground tracking. i know the gemini missions observed a few rocket launches and they were found to be pretty effective at that when they knew where to look in advance.
>>14737139Maybe, but then that implies some level of turbopump inefficiency compared to the RL-10, unless this engine produces significantly more thrust. Jumping off this topic, I really want to see someone try to build a 100 kN staged combustion hydrolox engine. Why do I want this? To put to bed the idea that the expander cycle engine is the most efficient engine cycle. It's not. It's decent, it's about as thermodynamically efficient as a staged combustion engine, except it's got such a low chamber pressure that it misses out on some significant Isp gains. A similar mass, similar thrust staged combustion engine would have a waaay higher chamber pressure and could be as much as 5% more efficient than an equivalent expander cycle. By the way, the reason the RL-10 has the record for the highest Isp engine to ever fly (465.5 Isp) is because the vacuum optimized version has a really big nozzle ratio (280:1). For reference, the RS-25 had a weird shaped nozzle with a ratio of just 78:1 but produced 452.3 Isp. At a nozzle ratio of 280:1 and a true bell shape suitable for vacuum optimization, the RS-25 would have easily blown past 470 Isp, so imagine what a raptor-architecture-based FFSC hydrolox engine could achieve.
>>14737149>Starship will be A architecture with C process>Falcon 9 is B architecture with A processAre these process ratings relative to the architecture or what? The Starship team would need to be pants-on-head retards in order to turn around a Starship stack for more time and money than a Falcon 9 booster.
>>14736905Sending components as neatly packed pieces to be assembled into a larger, habitable structure would allow for greater projects. If somehow we end up being able to produce metals and pressure vessels from lunar mining it would open up the entire solar system (with a magnetic rail launcher and fuel production, too)
>>14737186Process is how well polished the stated architecture is. Architecture is how capable the design is.Falcon 9 is B architecture because its only partially reusable, but has an A process because its a lean machine now. 5 years ago, it would be a C process when they're learning the curves. 2-3 years ago, it would be a B process when there were still some small hickups.
>>14737181the original plan for the ssme back in the dolphin sex days was that the orbiter's engines would have extendable nozzles with 120:1 ratios in flight that got it up to 459s ISP. it's kinda a shame they didn't design it for air-starting from the beginning but maybe that would've just made it prohibitively difficult to design.
>>14737160Dunno if this counts, but Pesquet saw the 2nd stage of the Falcon 9 that brought them up.
>>14736894>expendable launch vehicles in 30 yearsLMAO
>>14736894Only way expendable rockets will still be a thing in 30 years is if for some reason some countries are still using expendable rockets being made today, or if specific missions require a reusable rocket be used in expendable mode
>>14737203
>>14737195Okay, so why does Starship get a "will be C" for process? It's a C now, sure, since everything from the vehicle to the GSE is prototypes interfacing with prototypes, but I expect Starship to reach A process status in roughly as many launches as it took Falcon 9, which will occur much faster in real time compared to Falcon 9 due to full reusability eliminating the fabrication time of new stages from the equation.
>>14737221C for now and C for a year from now. It will switch to B once they get a decent launch candance, that will take a year+ atleast
>>14737210or if SLS is kept flying
>>14737181why does the expander cycle have low pressure
>>14737221>>14737225Also process is dependent on architecture. So 20 launches per year Starship isn't same process as 20 launches on falcon 9. The difficulty curve is higher for higher architecture. To get to B process on Starship, it would have to do ~20 flights a year, but that's A level process for F9. A level process for Starship is 40+ launches a year
>>14737201There's a big difference between an extendable nozzle curve being used to allow for altitude compensation and an extendable nozzle that only deploys in space and exists purely to improve packing efficiency for the second stage engine (what the RL-10 does these days). The difference in the curve impacts Isp significantly. For example, if that RL-10 with the extendable nozzle fired at sea level with nizzle extension stowed away, it would produce trash Isp, due to having a horrible nozzle shape. Think RS-68 on the test stand with no ablative bit. For a vehicle trying to launch under its own power then extend nozzles later, this Isp hit at sea level is unacceptable, so the nozzle shape needs to be adjusted and tightened up in order to keep the Isp and TWR good enough for launch. However, this means that no matter what the nozzle extension looks like, it will never achieve the Isp of a vacuum optimized curve of the same expansion ratio once in space, because the upper section of the nozzle can't have the "perfect" shape due to that sea level performance requirement. Basically it all comes back to "split optimization between sea level and vacuum Isp sucks mega shit dicks".
Fully reusable nuclear ICBMs when?
>>14737181>that implies some level of turbopump inefficiency compared to the RL-10, unless this engine produces significantly more thrustfrom the photos is looks like Vinci (it sure as hell isn't Vulcain)it supposed to have almost the same ISP as RL-10 (give or take), at the same weigh, but ~50% more thrust and lower cost because it doesn't use the autistically artisinal tubular bell (Aerojet Rocketdyne must be Mike Oldfield fans)so you get the same performance as 2 RL-10s for the price and mass of 1>>14737139that seems like a reasonable assumption to me
>>14737229It's because of the way it is. Expander cycle is effectively the fuel rich staged combustion cycle except running with a MUCH colder working fluid (boiled hydrogen versus 90% hydrogen 10% water vapor belching out of a preburner). The expander cycle engine's relative power output is fundamentally determined by the ratio of heat conducting into the walls of the engine from the hot gas in the main combustion chamber to the propellant mass flow rate. More heat per kg of propellant equals more turbopump power. More turbopump power means higher propellant pressure. The square cube law means that smaller expander cycle engines have higher performance upper limits because there's literally more nozzle wall area per kilogram of propellant flowing through the engine. The main drawback is that the heat powering the engine is conducting through the solid nozzle wall components, which means that you are limited in engine power by your materials, whereas in a staged combustion cycle you are burning propellants to make heat inside your working fluid, so the temperatures you can achieve are much higher. Also, in a staged combustion engine you can have a dense liquid propellant mixture burn to produce a dense hot gas which can immediately expand across a turbine to do work on a pump, whereas in an expander cycle your working fluid must boil at high pressure in the nozzle walls then flow through channels and pipes to reach the turbopump, resulting in a large pressure drop before reaching the area where it can do useful work in the engine.To summarize, a staged combustion engine cycle allows for much greater power to mass ratio, higher chamber pressures, higher Isp, and generally better performance (it also throttles faster, though not as deeply). The main drawback of staged combustion is the requirement for advanced materials, but now that we have those materials the challenges are mitigated for the most part. Raptor proves they can be cheap, too.
>>14737259Finally, a method of launching smallsats that is less flexible in terms of target orbit than a conventional rocket, and isn't any cheaper.
>Be India>Can't into fully liquid rockets despite buying engine technology directly from Ukraine >Okay we'll do all solids and gain an ICBM platform>Wait residual thrust will fuck up our orbit, we better add a small liquid stage for small adjustments, ez>That stage fucks up and leaves them short of the desired orbit, payloads get destroyedlol
>>14737263sending a sex object to be the first woman on mars to own the sjws
>>14737263>posting twitter screenshot>cropping out the name of the person writing the tweet>the tweet itself isn't even partially relevant to spaceflight Oh yeah, /sfg/ is back in full swing baybeee
How many different kinds of electric and magnetic experiments have been done outside the iss in 0 g free 'vacuum' space?I understand the difficulty and danger and fear of such experiments possibly messing up machines and equipment or suit. I'm curious as to how 2 or more very strong permenant magnets act on one another at decreasing distance; and if such field qualities in-between them can be detected or measured.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2bRfHwaeUsWhy are "SLS Stans" so willing to lie to defend the SLS?
>>14737303Contrarianism is a hell of a drug.
>>14737263We already saw this one, get new material
>>1473612920ms is a huge amount of time for a computer
10 points to whoever can help me identify the absolute mess of a satellite in this stamp, likely a Soviet scientific satellite
>>14737332Not so much for physical mechanisms, though.
>>14737295>How many different kinds of electric and magnetic experiments have been done outside the iss in 0 g free 'vacuum' spaceI'm thinking get like 10ft x 10ft x 10ft or so Plexiglass boxe, with robot extendable arms that reach inside and set up materials for experiment,
>>14737335Could it be an artists concept? ie, made up in a similar way that kids 'science' books written by english majors fuck up rocket illustrations
>>14737340I doubt that it's made up, as every other stamp from Kampuchea has had real, albeit obscurer satellites on them, like the Proton, Elektron-2, and even a Nadezhna
>>14737336The response time of physical mechanisms can be characterized. The only thing that matters is computer timing, and Spinlaunch's window is large enough for even a garbage collected program on a normal OS to handle
>>14736113
This guy's making his promotional rounds with space bloggers
>>14737262the spinfag schizo already deleted itit must have been by accident, I'll just repost it for himhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrc632oilWo [Embed]
>>14736651It will take a very long time for that to be a problem, probably way longer than someone can stay in a suit
>>14737422I think the problems will arise from the fact that you're putting radioactive CO2 inside of the suit, which will almost definitely lead to it being absorbed through your pores.And how will you make sure that CO2 doesn't leak into your helmet?
>>14737438>radioactive CO2No.>how will you make sure it doesn't leak into helmet?Higher pressure inside helmet.
>>14736651Sealed space spandex with bit of oxygen layer + large amount of CO2 layer to keep the suit itself pressurized.
>>14737438>And how will you make sure that CO2 doesn't leak into your helmet?Maxwell's demon
>>14736651Drysuits for scuba diving already exists. Martians would only need to wear that in case of explorations. And they can do that for days at a time in drysuits.
>>14737438>radioactive CO2kill yourself. it's really not
>>14737446>>14737454>the radiation isn't a problem just wear the suit haha :^)it becomes a problem when you can't get rid of it. Putting it inside the suit is the exact opposite of what you want to do for a crew that lasts more than ~5 years on the surface
>>14737464the co2 is not radioactive you fucking imbecile.
New future engine design what do you think? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvZjhWE-3zM picked it up from scott manely yesterday. That's nuclear fission and the fuel is something called uranium bromide
>>14737468It's Martian CO2 it is radioactive.And if you bother running the whole thing through a rad filter then you've already made the system more trouble than it's worth
>>14735583Building something like that must be like rocket science
>>14737380it took me almost half a minute to stop clicking the wrong []
Long March 2F
>>14737240You joke, but if anti-ship balistic missiles become a new paradigm for naval warfare, then I could see the utility in having a re-usable HGV thrower, a VTVL rocket can theoretically land in a much smaller space than an aircraft.And reusability could allow for lower costs and deeper magazines.
>>14737509https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THNPmhBl-8I
>>14737526Starship will throw 100+ HGV from its payload as the HGV makes it way down to orbit and to their target destination. It can also stay in orbit for years if necessary, with or without humans on board, refueled if necessary, etc
>>14737490It's no more radioactive than Earth CO2.
>>14737484this zubrin guy who designed it sounds pretty smart. anybody know anything about him?
>>14737484You have to go back.
>>14737545sending humans to earth is too dangerous
>>14737422Humans can't stay in water over 24 hours if i remember right. Our skin starts breaking downProbably the same amount of time for lacking oxygen too
>>14737545>>14737490given them fact radioactive 14-C is produced from nitrogen and Mars atmosphere has only 3% N2, Martian CO2 should be 25 times LESS radioactive than Earth's CO2
>>14737612Nope, even three days is not long enough to kill skin.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrvRwNaE7Eo&ab_channel=SkyNewsBy the way, the skin is supplied with oxygen by the blood. We aren't frogs. You're thinking of the surface of the eye, which actually does diffuse its oxygen in from the atmosphere.
EARTHER (derogatory)
>>14737615Correct. There's still some C-14 but it's smaller than Earth's concentration despite the overall CO2 partial pressure being much higher.
Russia has developed a technology for creating closed ecosystems for space based on the methane processing cycle:https://www.energia.ru/ktt/archive/2021/04-2021/04-07.pdfRussian manned Soyuz spacecraft use orientation engines repeatedly:https://www.energia.ru/ktt/archive/2021/03-2021/03-04.pdfThe fundamental problem of developing high-temperature converter power systems for promising nuclear tugs (including for the Martian flight complex) has been solved:https://www.energia.ru/ktt/archive/2021/03-2021/03-05.pdfExperience and prospects of launches of small spacecraft from the Plesetsk cosmodrome:https://www.energia.ru/ktt/archive/2021/03-2021/03-06.pdfCalculation of ballistic flight path options for a manned expedition to Mars (2049-2050):https://www.energia.ru/ktt/archive/2021/03-2021/03-08.pdf.
>>14737644cant open any of the fucking pdfs
>>14737644>Calculation of ballistic flight path options for a manned expedition to MarsFast transfer is the only option. You wait for the launch window to almost close, then you burn with the hohmann transfer delta V plus 1.5 km/s, then you aerobrake on arrival.If you cannot aerobrake or you cannot provide the extra 1.5 km/s above Hohmann transfer delta V, your architecture is incorrect.
>>14737644>options for a manned expedition to Mars (2049-2050)At that rate cosmonauts are going to be beaten to Mars by slavic tourists flying as commercial passengers
I hate the term microgravity. The fuck do you mean when you use it
>>14737695it just means zero-g
>>14737695it means one one-millionth the force of gravity on earth's surface
>>147376442049-2050 is too late https://futurism.com/elon-musk-is-officially-sending-humans-to-mars-in-2024
>>14737515a cute
>>14737695that gravity's effects are microscopic (but not 0)
>>14737713musk is just known as the mars man meme let me know when he starts landing rockets on mars and that the methane refueling works as intended besides everything being hypothetical.
Staging:>>14737738>>14737738>>14737738
>>14737737>>14737706so if the astronauts on the ISS float perfectly still they will start accelerating toward the bottom of the ISS (closest part of the ISS to Earth)
>>14737695It means you're in freefall but close enough to a source of gravity (ie a planet) that tidal forces are inherent to the environment. Effectively, the gradient in gravitational strength between one side of your experiment and the other is equal to about 1 one millionth of Earth's gravity. Ultra low tidal force environments, like the Earth-Moon L1 point, can get down to picogravity conditions, and super deep space environments like the scattered disk far from any other objects and hiding behind a sunshield can achieve even lower "gravities".
>>14737743Nope, it's referring to tidal strength, which results from gravity being stronger at your feet than at your head. It's a squeeze and stretch, not a "real" acceleration towards anything.
>>14737777>>14737779the (pseudo)forces due to the rotation of the ISS far exceed any tidal forces. I think using the term microgravity for the ISS environment is a misnomer
>>14734546Wouldn't 10000G destroy any possible rocket?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrc632oilWo
kill yourself
>>14736526Actually kill yourself. This isn’t your blog, faggot.
>>14736880We definitely need blacks on the moon. 150 years after the civil war, the moon will enter the union as a slave state.
>>14737026> you can launch one on an individual rocket directly to its trajectory for only $5000.Please tell me what that $5000 represents and how you’re accounting for infrastructure, maintenance, replacing hardware, labor and fuel.
