/sfg/ - Space Flight General

[Anonymous No.11763201]

Previous: >>11761581

[Anonymous No.11763204]

First in for homemade lithium/fluorine rockets

[Anonymous No.11763205]

>>11763201
That's a pretty big crane.

[Anonymous No.11763208]

>>11763201
Holy shit look at all the starships.

[Anonymous No.11763210]

Remember, no baiting.

[Anonymous No.11763214]

Be sure to wish her a happy 10th anniversary everyone!

[Anonymous No.11763215]

>>11763210

[Anonymous No.11763218]

>>11763201
Anyone know that the mystery dome is?
>https://youtu.be/B60oNzlS_ro
>https://youtu.be/PFbhDfKsYeI

[Anonymous No.11763220]

>>11763214
Happy 10th Birthday Falcon 9-chan!

[Anonymous No.11763222]

>>11763201
Remember to exercise! No fatties and skinny-fats in space

[Anonymous No.11763224]

>>11763214
He just said no baiting...

[Anonymous No.11763230]

>>11763204
>The impracticality of this chemistry highlights why exotic propellants are not actually used: to make all three components liquids, the hydrogen must be kept below –252 °C (just 21 K) and the lithium must be kept above 180 °C (453 K). Lithium and fluorine are both extremely corrosive, lithium ignites on contact with air, fluorine ignites on contact with most fuels, including hydrogen. Fluorine and the hydrogen fluoride (HF) in the exhaust are very toxic, which makes working around the launch pad difficult, damages the environment, and makes getting a launch license that much more difficult. Both lithium and fluorine are expensive compared to most rocket propellants. This combination has therefore never flown.

lol

[Anonymous No.11763231]

>>11763222
And no transfats. Everyone start running

[Anonymous No.11763233]

>>11763231
How easy would it be to bike on Mars? With a non-bulky suit I imagine you could get some nice air off sand dunes there, given the reduced gravity.
Also, if Musk ever uses Boring company to dig out big tunnels connecting habitats, a bike would be a cheap low-effort transport in there.

[Anonymous No.11763236]

>>11763233
Stationary exercise bikes aren’t that heavy. I’d expect a ton of similar equipment to be brought over for exercise

[Anonymous No.11763237]

>>11763233
>non-bulky suit

gonna be hard

Then again, 0.4G helps a lot

[Anonymous No.11763243]

>>11763233
I would not be surprised if an EV or methalox dirt bike/ATV gets made for Mars. In fact, Tesla is working on a companion ATV for their Cybertruck as an add-on.

[Anonymous No.11763249]

Every daydream about spacecraft when you should be doing something else productive? Post your ideas. Bonus points if they're reasonably attainable with today's or near future technology.

>"Venusian Lighthouse" - small unmanned space station/satellite in a high orbit around Venus (comparable altitude to geostationary height in Earth orbit
>while Venus itself is rarely considered as a target for exploration due to its extremely inhospitable climate the planet is frequently used by probe craft for gravity assist maneuvers, mainly en route to the outer solar system (Earth is occasionally used instead when Venus's orbit brings it too far away to reach)
>the purpose of the Venusian Lighthouse is to streamline exploration of the outer solar system that currently remains very expensive even with the upcoming reusable launch systems
>a probe approaching Venus for a gravity assist would communicate with the lighthouse which would diagnose its systems for any problems, and give it maneuvering instructions to reach its final target without depending on Earth to do so with the light-lag
>TL;DR a "Lighthouse" satellite orbiting Venus would make exploring the outer solar system easier for any probe using Venus for gravity assist maneuvers

[Anonymous No.11763252]

>>11763236
I don't want to be stationary, I want to tear ass down Olympus Mons. Stationary ones are a good idea for bringing on the trip though.
>>11763237
Wasn't some company working on some skintight pressure suit a few years back? Or did that just never work out? The prototypes just looked like a catsuit made of kevlar or something.
>>11763243
>Tesla is working on a companion ATV for their Cybertruck as an add-on.
Neat, definitely happening then.

[Anonymous No.11763254]

>>11763249
Real shame Venus doesn’t have a Gilly

[Anonymous No.11763256]

>>11763237
I imagine in the future the boring company could dig a tunnel and it could be partially pressurized. You could don a skin-tight pressure suit with a helmet and get some sick air. It would be easier for someone born on Earth though, if you were born on mars it would feel like “normal” gravity so they would probably need to practice coordination a lot more I assume

[Anonymous No.11763268]

>>11763201
>>11763201
Looks really promising, will SN5 be on the platform by tomorrow?

[Anonymous No.11763274]

>>11763268
Goddamn that didn't take long, I love this turnaround time for their prototypes, makes the failures far less consequential as each fixes the problem of the previous iteration.

[Anonymous No.11763275]

>>11763198
>>11763203
Fuck you, Janny. You do it for free, without payment, zero monetary compensation.

[Anonymous No.11763276]

>>11763268
>the Virgin Launch System taking half a year to test
>the Chadship rolling out prototypes monthly

[Anonymous No.11763278]

>Space X Falcon 9 crew launch core number # b1058 Being transported from drone ship to 39a
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SADSKsOfnnA

[Anonymous No.11763279]

>>11763218
test bed for new alloy

[Anonymous No.11763284]

the last new Shepard flight was 11 December 2019. What the absolute fuck are bob, blue origin, and Bezorple doing????

[Anonymous No.11763286]

Thoughts on this?
>>11763031

[Anonymous No.11763290]

>>11763274
>>11763276
Thats not even a current pic, that was days ago. They're moving so fast

[Anonymous No.11763299]

>>11763249
Colony tower
>Tower filled with basic drone/manufacturing equipment is launched at a site
>Tower sticks itself into the ground
>Drones begin strip mining the immediate area for all useful materials
>Tower refines it and begins orchestrating construction of a fully functioning town based on templates in database
>Builds load bearing structure using regocrete and produces pressure hull living spaces in pieces inside the tower then put together floor by floor
>When complete, it sends a ready signal to colonists ready for habitation
>Tower is then controlled from the city and continues to maintain and expand the city as needs change

[Anonymous No.11763305]

>>11763201
Has any space vehicle been comprised of more memes than VentureStar?
>hydrogen
>aerospike
>SSTO
>spaceplane
>carbon fiber tanks
Am I missing anything?

[Anonymous No.11763310]

>>11763218
>The Mystery Dome has "4mm" and "304L" written on it. Could be for testing a new steel alloy, 304L-series stainless (The "L" signifies low carbon amounts, to lower the amount of carbide buildup while welding).

[Anonymous No.11763311]

>>11763249
Martian Mass Driver
>~300km long up the western slope of Olympus Mons
>can accelerate a 50t payload of cargo or passengers to Martian escape velocity at 4G
>takes 10GW of nuclear reactors or solar to power
>does NOT require superconductors

The key partner technology for this would be the Plasma Magnet Drive - a smallish cylinder made of two pairs of saddle coils that let you interact with the solar sail (when rotating) or aerocapture (when fixed) by running current through it - a magsail without the kilometers of superconducting wire. It gives you enough anti-sunward delta-V to reach the gas giants, so you just need enough regular propellant to slow down, orbit a moon or asteroid, and then escape back to Mars. Conversely, it lets you get all the way back to Earth via aerocapture and reentry with no other propellant but some RCS thrusters.

https://www.centauri-dreams.org/2017/12/29/the-plasma-magnet-drive-a-simple-cheap-drive-for-the-solar-system-and-beyond/

The end result of this system is the ability to fling Cygnus style tin cans everywhere from Earth to Neptune limited only by Hohmann transfer windows, or to trade escape velocity for more mass and build monster ships in Low Mars Orbit for a pittance of launch costs. If you build particle beam "lighthouses" in orbit around the gas giants (possibly at their Solar L1s for ease of navigation) you can use the plasma magnets to brake, and then you only need enough propellant for breaking orbit to Trans-Mars Injection for the way home.

In short, the Mars Mass Driver is the key to the entire solar system if it gets built before torch drives become available to put on private sector starships.

[Anonymous No.11763312]

>>11763284
The problem is >>11762280 they’ve just been sitting on their asses. Bezos doesn’t seem too concerned with testing like an insomniac and going after NASA contracts like a mad dog. Blue Origin has the money to succeed, but ultimately I think it comes down to a shitty company philosophy

[Anonymous No.11763316]

>>11763305
Wasn't the whole point to test a whole bunch of cutting edge technologies all at once?

[Anonymous No.11763319]

>>11763312
4ASS violent take over of Blue Origin when? Imagine the amount of frogs that can be sent to the moon using those BE-4s

[Anonymous No.11763325]

>>11763249

>filename

[Anonymous No.11763326]

>>11763220
Does somebody have the one where FH is saying okaeri to F9

[Anonymous No.11763334]

>>11763319
There is at least one 4ASS OC creator currently working for Jeff. Frog march through the institutions begins now.

[Anonymous No.11763342]

>>11763305
It was sold as a “cheap” alternative (that never works), simple “hangar inspection”, also marketed with the ability to “land at any airport in the world”

[Anonymous No.11763344]

>>11763334
>There is at least one 4ASS OC creator currently working for Jeff.
Who? What OC did he make? Did he reveal any secrets? Is Jeff really a reptilian?

[Anonymous No.11763351]

>>11763286
You should have just posted it here

[Anonymous No.11763355]

>>11763311
Okay but hear me out: just make a big rocket kek.
A dedicated Martian launch stage would be so cheap that the difference to a mass driver per kg is quibbling over pennies, while being much cheaper to develop as it's just a rededication of existing tech.

[Anonymous No.11763368]

>>11763319
>First satellite is a swastika shaped solar mirror that concentrates light on Israel
>/Sci/entist shitposts on /x/ and /pol/ from the moon “flat earthers and moon hoaxers BTFO”
>/mlp/‘s built a temple to Luna on the moon
>/K/‘s built a weapon factory/planetary defense gun on Mars, the Basili/k/a
>/x/ is in deep space looking for the Allspark or something
>Reddit’s loosing their shit over all the nazi frogs in space
>Media says space racist so normalfags avoid it like the plague

[Anonymous No.11763400]

>>11763286
A man's body is his alone, but his phosphorous belongs to Sol

[Anonymous No.11763418]

>>11763355
Based and economics pilled.

The only place it makes sense to build an electromagnetic accelerator launch system is on the Moon, because on the Moon you can build it at ground level and have it encircle the entire globe. This is important because it means you can pick any comfortable level of acceleration that you wish, and just stay clamped to the track for as long as it takes to reach your target escape velocity, which can also be enormously larger than what you can achieve using a shorter mass driver. Hop onto a spacecraft the size of an ocean liner sitting on the Moon rail, accelerate at 1G net for ten hours and release, whizzing off at a comfy 294 kilometers per second towards the outer solar system. Slowing down left as an exercise for the reader.

[Anonymous No.11763435]

one day i'll go to america to see this in person: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBlIvghQTlI

so beautiful

[Anonymous No.11763440]

>>11763435
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUFwR364Hq8

[Anonymous No.11763441]

>>11763435
Indeed my friend hope to see you here

[Anonymous No.11763460]

>>11763368
>Reddit’s loosing their shit over all the nazi frogs in space
Thats what would be the most worth it IMO, imagine the sheer butthurt if the chans had swastikas all over orbit. And lets be honest if /k/ is going to make something it will be an orbital defense platform that can also rain magnetic rounds down on earth like in halo.

[Anonymous No.11763463]

So what is this thing.

[Anonymous No.11763464]

I felt like a genius when I realized that the reason I drop towards Kerbin when I burn prograde while crossing the face of the Mun is because I’m actually burning retrograde.

[Anonymous No.11763466]

>>11763464
based

[Anonymous No.11763468]

>>11763464
Landing on the mun is fucked i always wreck last minute

[Anonymous No.11763470]

>>11763464
The moment where you are able to visualize what's going on in orbital mechanics is enlightening.

[Anonymous No.11763475]

>>11763470
Orbital mechanics can be so counterintuitive. I was trying to explain to my dad how I could throw a ball down forwards Earth from the ISS and it would end up actually above you and could hit your station again and he couldn’t believe it no matter how hard I tried

[Anonymous No.11763479]

>>11763475
Just draw the classic 'cannon on a really big mountain' diagram for him, it's the best way I've found to explain basic orbit to randos.

[Anonymous No.11763482]

>>11763463
https://spaceflight101.com/cygnus-oa7/photos-atlas-v-rocket-assembly-for-space-station-cargo-run/

[Anonymous No.11763483]

So is the Orion actually cool or is it junk?

[Anonymous No.11763486]

>>11763463
Looks like an Atlas V core.

>>11763464
KSP taught me almost as much about orbital mechanics as my two orbital mechanics classes.

[Anonymous No.11763488]

>>11763460
I'm a /k/ regular.

I'd probably waste most of the money trying to adopt the G11 as standard issue because muh space magic.

[Anonymous No.11763490]

https://www.nasa.gov/audience/formedia/features/Advertising_Guidelines.html
>Astronauts or employees who are currently employed by NASA cannot have their names, likenesses or other personality traits displayed in any advertisements or marketing material.
the video just broke NASA's advertising rules

[Anonymous No.11763496]

>>11763482
So its a shitty expensive falcon 9?

[Anonymous No.11763501]

>On 1 May 2020, NASA awarded a $1.79 billion contract extension for the manufacture of 18 additional RS-25 engines. Ars Technica, in an article published on the same day, highlighted that over the entire RS-25 contract the price of each engine works out to $146 million, and that the total price for the four expendable engines used in each SLS launch will be more than $580 million. They critically commented that for the cost of just one engine, six more powerful RD-180 engines could be purchased, or nearly an entire Falcon Heavy launch with two-thirds of the SLS lift capacity.
So this is the power of a nationalized space project.

[Anonymous No.11763503]

>>11763468
The gravitational acceleration can be surprising. Minmus is probably a better first target.

[Anonymous No.11763505]

>>11763490
But what was being advertised even? What about all the promotional material NASA loved to broadcast before and during Demo-2?
Furthermore it would be the government doing the "advertising", none of this makes sense

[Anonymous No.11763506]

>>11763400
Why is phosphorous so important?

[Anonymous No.11763507]

>>11763490
The President as the fount of executive power is not bound by agency regulations. He'd have been fine if it was an official video rather than a campaign spot.

[Anonymous No.11763508]

>>11763503
So long as anon can into changing planes.

[Anonymous No.11763510]

>>11763505
it's not the government, it's Trump's campaign. The government doesn't pay for him to advertise his reelection campaign.

[Anonymous No.11763517]

>>11763501
Meanwhile Elon is pumping out dozens of the most advanced engine ever made for like 1m or something.

[Anonymous No.11763521]

>>11763506
Necessary element that is a strong limiter because most of the system is poor in it. Earth and Mars are good sources.

[Anonymous No.11763522]

>>11763521
Couldn't you make phosphorous from agriculture?

[Anonymous No.11763525]

Why don’t they use rolls of steel rather than small squares with tons of welding

Get a nice big roll, as much as you can fit into 50 tons let’s say, twisting it around a frame
Minimize the welding and seams

This stacking hoops idea is retarded

[Anonymous No.11763527]

>>11763522
No, because agriculture needs phosphorus. That's where most of the world's phosphorus goes to.

http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/mining.php#bottleneck

[Anonymous No.11763531]

>>11763501
"Aerojet Rocketdyne" is a cool name.
There's a brand premium for that.

[Anonymous No.11763532]

>>11763525
>Why don’t they use rolls of steel
Aren't they? Isn't that what the mass on top of SN4 was, one of those rolls welded together?

[Anonymous No.11763533]

>>11763470
That’s correct, right? The Navball is by default relative to whatever you’re orbiting, so if you burn prograde at the Mun (or any satellite I guess) when at the half of your orbit that is retrograde to the satellite’s motion, you’ll accelerate away from it and leave its sphere-of-influence, but drop towards the parent body because you were killing off your own orbital energy and slowing down too much to keep up with the satellite, which is why you burn on the daylight side of Kerbin whenever dropping towards Eve or Moho

[Anonymous No.11763534]

>>11763501
>Meanwhile at SpaceX: Rocket engine go brrrrr

[Anonymous No.11763538]

>>11763488
>adopt the G11 as standard issue
Over my dead body, M45A1 will win any space conflict you soulless commie

[Anonymous No.11763541]

>>11763527
Where does phosphorus come from?
>inb4 brainlet

[Anonymous No.11763542]

>>11763525
They are. They unroll the steel, cut to length to form the hoop, then do a single weld to turn it into a ring. Starhopper used the individual plates method to construct its hull because the metal was far thicker.

The individual plates method will have to stay for now for the pressure domes, its easier to do. I'm pretty sure in the future though once they have the production line going they're going to get a fuckhuge stamping machine and just smash out domes that way.

[Anonymous No.11763543]

>>11763533
I'm a tad drunk so I think that sounds about right, all I know is that if you fuck around in map view burning your engine in various directions for a while you quickly get a basic feel for how it works, even if you can't describe it fully to someone.

[Anonymous No.11763544]

>>11763483
Started cool, now with each passing day it becomes junk

[Anonymous No.11763545]

>>11763525
>Why don’t they use rolls of steel rather than small squares with tons of welding
Rolls of steel is what they do use, though.
As for why they can't just use a single 50 ton roll, it's because a piece that large would have to be tailor made specifically for the project and also is probably far larger than any mass-produced sheet of 300 series stainless available. Maybe once they bring stainless production in house, most likely not during prototyping.

[Anonymous No.11763546]

>>11763475
How do natural satellites and asteroids get captured? Every time I do an interception, I have to burn retrograde or do an aerobrake, but Triton is a captured moon and asteroids periodically hang out with earth

[Anonymous No.11763549]

>>11763501
And that's just the engines, let that sink in.

[Anonymous No.11763552]

>>11763464
>>11763470
>>11763486
If you really want to experience orbital mechanics install Principia tho. Or play Orbiter Space Sim if you don't mind not building the rocket yourself.
KSP is fun, but it uses 100% patched conics, and that is not how reality works (particularly in systems like earth-moon which are fairly chaotic, not to speak about Jupiter...)

[Anonymous No.11763556]

>>11763546
You have to be going slow enough relative to the target for it to grab you and pull you towards it.

[Anonymous No.11763558]

>>11763546
>but Triton is a captured moon
IIRC, Triton orbited another body that rammed into Uranus, so the motions are abit more complicated. Also there's the fact that retrograde orbiting satellites can be more stable when captured.

>asteroids periodically hang out with earth
Again, retrograde orbits. Also Earth has an atmosphere to slow things down.

[Anonymous No.11763561]

>>11763552
Orbiter lets you build shit now? I remember following a checklist to launch Apollo 11 in it like 7+ years ago but that's all it was, loading craft other people made.

[Anonymous No.11763562]

>>11763541
>Where does phosphorus come from?
Concentrated forms on Earth? From lifeforms that gathered a bunch of phosphorus themselves and deposited it somewhere. Either when they die (forming phosphate rock) or when they poop (forming guano).

[Anonymous No.11763568]

>>11763538
>fudds in space

Cringe and cringepilled

Although really, if you're fighting a conflict somewhere other than Earth, I imagine that you'd want small arms using something other than powder, due to heating issues. Without the air to radiate off the heat, air cooled weapons won't be usable for very long.

[Anonymous No.11763571]

>>11763544
I can't seem to find much on what makes it so complex

[Anonymous No.11763573]

>>11763501
>>11763549
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RhyDY3kuShQ
What did the OIG mean by this?

[Anonymous No.11763578]

>>11763483
>machining all of that out of a single piece of metal
I know the window parts need to be stronger, but holy shit is that expensive

[Anonymous No.11763579]

>>11763525
Ok let us know where you can buy a custom alloy sheet that is like 70m*27m

[Anonymous No.11763580]

>>11763558
>IIRC, Triton orbited another body that rammed into Uranus

I’ve only ever heard the idea that Triton came in alone and knocked all the earlier moons into Neptune. Is there a paper on that?

> Also there's the fact that retrograde orbiting satellites can be more stable when captured.

Why’s that?

[Anonymous No.11763582]

>>11763568
I was kinda joking, although space fudds would be kino. I think the biggest problem will be cooling, i
So im thinking we might want to bring back the vickers

[Anonymous No.11763585]

I was kinda joking, although space fudds would be kino. I think the biggest problem will be cooling, i
So im thinking we might want to bring back the vickers

[Anonymous No.11763587]

>>11763568
Gunpowder is fine, or at least the alternatives are worse (lasers and railguns already want to melt themselves on Earth). Modified rifles with heat pipes and radiators, you're good.

[Anonymous No.11763590]

>>11763582
If cooling is an issue, maybe tensile force can be revisited for killing folks, space-crossbows and shit.
Obviously shit like rubber is out, but what other materials exist that have elasticity at vacuum temperatures?

[Anonymous No.11763596]

>>11763561
No. That is what I meant. You still need to use mods (or make them but that takes skill)

Principia is an add-on for KSP that introduces N-body physics.

Just to put things into more perspective:
In our solar system, in transfers to the Moon you can get in trajectories where the pull of the Sun becomes more than two times that of Earth. Essentially "orbiting the Sun more than you do Earth" It is simply too much to accurately simulate with patched conics.

I don't know about the Kerbal system because I do not know the numbers, but I am sure it will also be significant.

[Anonymous No.11763597]

>>11763590
The steel pill strikes again.

[Anonymous No.11763600]

>>11763590
Well modern crossbows are make with basically cable so that'll work.

[Anonymous No.11763602]

>>11763587
I was wondering how efficient radiators could be in a vacuum or near vacuum.

The good news is that if you're in 0.4G you can pack a heavy ass system with no difficulties.

Also, external ballistics would be different because little to no air drag and terminal ballistics would be different because anybody whose suit fails gets automatically sent to the shadow realm.

My personal theory is that flechettes fired by CO2 would be a good idea, but the low temps might make that implausible.

[Anonymous No.11763603]

>>11763590
Can you "shoot fire" in space? Like if you lit a sphere of gasoline + oxidizer and set it in motion?

[Anonymous No.11763607]

>>11763249

That's literally the stupidest idea I've ever heard.

[Anonymous No.11763617]

>>11763600
If they work in vacuum, cool. Wooden/plastic bolts might have less of a chance of hull-breach than a metal one, a crossbow will shoot whatever ammo you want.

[Anonymous No.11763618]

>>11763580
>I’ve only ever heard the idea that Triton came in alone and knocked all the earlier moons into Neptune. Is there a paper on that?
Your theory seems to be more accepted. What I said seems to be just a passing idea.

>Why’s that?
There's lots of complicated explanations about it. The simplest I can describe is that tidal bulges of a planet due the gravity of it's moons also pulls on all of the moons in the planet system. If the moon is orbiting prograde then it'll spend alot of time near those bulges as it orbits, thus being gravitationally more affected by said bulges than retrograde moons which would spend less time near those bulges due to passing by them much more quickly.

[Anonymous No.11763624]

>>11763233
> low-effort transport
It's not going to take long for you to end up a weak low-effort person on Mars though. This only really applies to fresh Terrans who've travelled in 1g conditions for the last 7 months.
I guess air resistance might make it a bit better.

[Anonymous No.11763629]

>>11763617
Why not create reliable slingshots?

[Anonymous No.11763630]

>>11763602
Radiators will be smaller than the ones you need for the astronaut anyway, because they can run hotter. Combat zero in free fall or low-g with no drag is basically point blank at any distance you want to use small arms at, although it could get more sophisticated than that. Getting a pinhole in a suit is not a death sentence with egress, focus should still be on damaging the meat inside.

[Anonymous No.11763631]

More Orion discussion

[Anonymous No.11763637]

>>11763629
There are more cheaper cross/bow-friendly materials than there are for slingshots. Rubber is absolutely out.

[Anonymous No.11763640]

>>11763629
Slings certainly can be lethal, with either stone or metal slugs and good aim. I wonder if the slingshot has been developed much beyond the basic wrist-rocket? Could you make something approximating a handgun based on the same mechanic?

[Anonymous No.11763641]

>>11763561
>>11763596
PS: most of the fun in orbiter comes from recreating historical or future missions (with very good accuracy, down to the kilometer perhaps, either flying them manually or using autopilots), using real spacecraft in unintended ways (try for example doing a lunar flyby with a crew dragon), and planning complicated trips with real or fictional vehicles.
There are very good add-ons like IMFD or TransX that allow you, thanks to the realistic physics, to design Voyager-style flight plans.
Slingshots work, Lagrange points, everything.

Principia for KSP introduces Orbiteresque physics. Not sure if it is as accuarate, but a good tradeoff maybe.

[Anonymous No.11763642]

>>11763579
I make them in my backyard, special alloy recipe too, 50% stronger than any known steel

[Anonymous No.11763651]

>>11763522
Phosphorous is an element. You cannot make it. You can only use what you can mine. Phosphorous is the rarest of the 100% no-way-around-it vital elements to Earth life (DNA uses phosphorous for its main structure). This means that no matter what other hurdles we overcome, how far we go, what places we colonize, etc, there will ALWAYS be a relative scarcity of phosphorous. Recycling it will be paramount. Phosphorous will be far more valuable than gold or platinum or diamonds or whatever. It will be so important to all humans and so coveted that accidentally dropping significant amounts of phosphorous into places where it is hard or impossible to retrieve (into Jupiter, into the Sun, onto a neutron star, into a black hole) would be an egregious crime.

[Anonymous No.11763652]

>>11763630
I think an automatic firearm produces way more heat than a human.

Human body heat is equivalent to like a lightbulb. Throw in the various mechanical shit and the suit and it's still a lot less than mag dumping an AK.

[Anonymous No.11763656]

>>11763652
High instantaneous heat is the ideal case for radiators. They're much shittier at getting rid of the kind of constant low-level output you get from meat.

[Anonymous No.11763661]

>>11763541
>Where does phosphorus come from?
Fusion reactions inside giant stars billions of years ago. Phosphorous will be extremely expensive in the future because it will be scarce if we can't make it, and even if we can somehow make it using extremely energy intensive means like particle accelerator fusion, the sheer amount of effort required to produce a single gram of the stuff would mean it would stay just as valuable, if slightly less scarce.

[Anonymous No.11763663]

>>11763631
Why ESA loves to be NASA's bitch? They had the opportunity to develop their own spacecraft but as soon NASA threw a bone to them they rejected the idea.

[Anonymous No.11763666]

>>11763656
Interesting.

Then the idea might be some kind of belt fed 6.5 with massive amounts of radiators.

Also, full body ballistic shielding might actually be viable when the gravity is super low and everybody is wearing space suits anyway.

[Anonymous No.11763667]

>>11763556
No, you need a third body to exchange momentum with. Doesn't matter how slow two bodies approach in space, they will escape each other again unless there's a third object to interact with.

In Triton's case we believe it had a companion object (just like Pluto has Charon), and when the pair encountered Neptune the companion was accelerated away into interstellar space while Triton was left behind and captured. As for objects that get captured into orbits around Earth, you can thank our own big ass Moon for that.

[Anonymous No.11763668]

>>11763558
>Also Earth has an atmosphere to slow things down.
Irrelevant. Earth has a big ass Moon with big ass moon gravity to yank on an asteroid and slow it into a briefly stable orbit before it inevitably encounters the Moon again and gets shot off back into interplanetary space.

[Anonymous No.11763669]

>>11763290
>ultra boom

[Anonymous No.11763671]

>>11763571
>I can't seem to find much on what makes it so complex
The engineers and designers made it complex, anon. They made it complex for various reasons I'm sure, probably to do with optimizing for strength and weight, but they really didn't need to. The decisions they made were approved by managers who wanted to make more mmmuney $$$$

[Anonymous No.11763672]

>>11763652
adults are about 100 watts, grub stage humans a bit less

[Anonymous No.11763673]

>>11763666
Self-supporting ballistic shields akin to stabilized camera mounts, supporting maneuvering thrusters and stuff that would normally go in a back rig. Really more a spacecraft with a human attached than infantry, but shit's weird in space.

[Anonymous No.11763677]

>>11763667
>No, you need a third body to exchange momentum with
Did the 'second/third moons' interact with the main Moon to get captured? I was under the impression that if their speed was slow enough relative to us, Earth's gravity would overtake the pull exerted by the sun and tug it our way, possibly into an ecliptic orbit that settles out more regular over time.
Or I'm high and dumb, I concede the possibility.

[Anonymous No.11763680]

>>11763464
someone please explain. face of mun? so in orbit around mun?

[Anonymous No.11763681]

>>11763667
> As for objects that get captured into orbits around Earth, you can thank our own big ass Moon for that.

Ah, gravity braking. Giga-chad Tylo has saved hundreds of thousands of kilometers per second of delta/v by now I’m sure

[Anonymous No.11763684]

>>11763249
Holy fuck are you me? I literally daydream about Space missions and alternate space history 24/7

>Writing a short story about DIRECT
>Made a technical report about a comet Sample Return in an alterna 2019
>Manned Mars mission by 2039 but with DIRECT instead

Etc etc etc

[Anonymous No.11763688]

>>11763578
Is it actually machined from a single giant chunk though? I thought for parts like these it starts out flat and they bend it into a round shape bit by bit using a brake press or something.

[Anonymous No.11763692]

>>11763603
sounds like a rocket engine to me

[Anonymous No.11763693]

>>11763677
>ecliptic orbit
Eccentric orbit, blame the booze

[Anonymous No.11763695]

>>11763673
I was imagining specific infantry scenarios. For example, you're storming the Chinese Mars base, and you need to clear out the catacombs underneath.

For actual zero g it'd be like air or naval combat in that nobody gets out of the ships for any reason.

[Anonymous No.11763697]

>>11763651
Could chondrite-like asteroids be a good source of phosphorus?
I am reading some data and the concentrations seem to consistently be around 1000ppm (on mass). More abundant than titanium for example.
The human body contains around 1% so the equivalent to 1 ton of those meteorites.

[Anonymous No.11763702]

>>11763680
I meant the face of the Mun visible from Kerbin’s surface. It’s tidally locked like Luna, so if you’re in a prograde orbit around Mun or Luna, and you’re crossing the face of the body from the perspective of Kerbin/Earth, you can burn prograde at that time and drop towards the parent body. If you burn over the side facing away from the parent body,the “dark side of the moon”, you’ll go into an even higher orbit than the satellite is at once you leave it’s sphere of influence. You’d do the same in LEO if you want to go upwards from the sun towards Mars or beyond, start your burn on the night side.

[Anonymous No.11763704]

>>11763695
Boarding actions will still be a thing. Infantry doesn't have place in all-out war but that is not the normal state of affairs.

[Anonymous No.11763710]

>>11763637
You can make a slingshot out of the same material as a crossbow. A sone won't have the same penetration

[Anonymous No.11763714]

>>11763663
Because their countries won't give them funding. NASA likes international cooperation so they offer everything to ESA. Otherwise the ISS would be Russia America and Japan

[Anonymous No.11763716]

>>11763640
Probably, just make it slower and larger than a bullet

[Anonymous No.11763719]

>>11763558
>IIRC, Triton orbited another body that rammed into Uranus, so the motions are abit more complicated.
Triton orbits Neptune, and it does so in a retrgrade orbit. It was likely part of a binary pair (Think Pluto-Charon) and on encounter with Neptune interacted in such a way that one of the pair got shot off into space while Triton captured around Neptune.

[Anonymous No.11763720]

>>11763702
oooooh it just clicked, I had the mun rotating the wrong way, but because it's locked it rotes CCW in this pic. so prograde on the 'bottom' there, earth-side, is retrograde for earth's 'orbit' that you're not-really in. something like that.
Man I need to play KSP again, I stopped playing soon after they *added* the mun lol

[Anonymous No.11763721]

>>11763704
I can't really see a reason to do boarding actions in space.

In symmetrical naval warfare you just absolutely rape everything with missiles from BVR.

The only time you board a ship is in case of pirates or drug smugglers

So in other words, not until the space wolves show up.

[Anonymous No.11763723]

>>11763710
The mechanisms are completely different. I would love to see your slingshot powered by wood, steel, plastic or carbon fiber in place of rubber

[Anonymous No.11763724]

>>11763721
>I can't really see a reason to do boarding actions in space.
They have a ship, you want that ship. Simple as.

[Anonymous No.11763727]

>>11763669
Fucking kek

[Anonymous No.11763728]

>>11763724
Yeah, but you have to match orbits, and somehow prevent them from making tiny orbital adjustments constantly.

Docking is hard enough already when both parties consent. If you're trying to space rape somebody it'd be damn near impossible.

[Anonymous No.11763729]

>>11763721
>I can't really see a reason to do boarding actions in space.
>The only time you board a ship is in case of pirates or drug smugglers
So you can tho.
Like I said, not during actual conventional engagement but that will be exceedingly rare. The glorified coast guard will be the only guys actually seeing anything like action.

[Anonymous No.11763730]

>>11763720
You are still playing a toy model. As I warned above, patched conics are not the full story. In an orbit like that, for better accuracy, you should consider your trajectory to be relative to the barycenter of Kerbin, Mun and the Sun, -at that particular instant-. That is if KSP had realistic physics.
For patched conics your new understanding might be enough.

[Anonymous No.11763732]

>>11763720
Oh shit that totally makes sense. It’s easier with a picture. Yeah I can get to orbit in KSP and I’ve gotten to the Mun by lucky burns, but I really lack the fundamental understanding of how to get into specific orbits, other than Kerbal adjustment orbits. The idea of planning a Mun landing or even simple rendezvous is so out of my league. Also fuck me the thought of landing a space plane on the runway seems IMPOSSIBLE

[Anonymous No.11763735]

>>11763671
Yeah, there is absolutely no reason the payload on the SLS with over a decade of development should be a fucking 4 person capsule.

[Anonymous No.11763738]

>>11763671
Yeah, there is absolutely no reason the payload on the SLS with over a decade of development should be a fucking 4 person capsule.

[Anonymous No.11763739]

If funded the constellation program would have been great

[Anonymous No.11763742]

>>11763739
Much better than sls

[Anonymous No.11763743]

>>11763732
I learned how to do that shit by watching how Mechjeb did it, and then aping it. Eventually I got experienced enough to not need mechjeb anymore.

[Anonymous No.11763744]

>>11763728
It could work if you disable their engines, or brick their ship some other way. It would be easier to just poke holes in the hull and wait out the people on board, but that could take too long. You want your piracy to occur before anyone can get a ship or missile to your location.

[Anonymous No.11763745]

>>11763738
>hey /arg/ did I cut enough speed holes in my billet lower yet?

[Anonymous No.11763748]

>>11763739
>>11763742
That yuppie nigger did it.

[Anonymous No.11763750]

>new Scott manley video about NASA's path from the shuttle to now
>completely glosses over the funding cuts from 2008-2016
He's really skirting the line there, he is normally good at keeping his biases out of his videos.

[Anonymous No.11763751]

>>11763732
Just get to orbit in a cable vessel. Then set a waypoint on your orbit and adjust it until it sends you on a trajectory passing about 100k km from the mun. If you are playing career mode, you might need to upgrade your tracking facility until you have the capability to set maneuvers like that.
Its pretty easy if you just click on the blue trajectory from the map line and add waypoint.

[Anonymous No.11763752]

>SOIboi vs n-chad

[Anonymous No.11763753]

>>11763750
He's been in full ORANGE MAN BAD WE MISS YOU OBANANA mode on Twitter lately. Guess it leaked through.

[Anonymous No.11763755]

>>11763750
he showed a graph and said NASA was underfunded, fuck off

[Anonymous No.11763757]

>>11763750
Most YoutubeTards are doomed to become cowards. He will not blame a nigger.

[Anonymous No.11763759]

>>11763755
I'll rewatch it but i don't remember that. I do remember him praising the council and talking about spacex for half the video.

[Anonymous No.11763760]

>>11763757
>>11763753
Its really not even about what his politics are its just sad to see someone who is normally objective becoming less so due to politics.

[Anonymous No.11763764]

>>11763759
literally at 11:15
>they had expected launches as early as 2015, but the continual underfunding made those untenable
associated with a graph showing how none of the budget requests between 2011 and 2015 were properly funded

[Anonymous No.11763774]

>>11763764
That is talking about the underfunding of constellation, not about the underfunding of NASA as a whole...

[Anonymous No.11763775]

>>11763774
which is the only relevant part of the history of manned spaceflight in America that the video is chronicling.

[Anonymous No.11763776]

>>11763774
I should add i think the underfunding of NASA as a whole is important to bring up because it brought a lot of challenges to everything space related, not just constellation.

[Anonymous No.11763779]

>>11763775
Hardly, there was a lot more than what he covered. Also why nothing about the soyuz?

[Anonymous No.11763781]

Obama good orange man bad

[Anonymous No.11763783]

Jupiter Icy Moons Explorer. Any updates on it? Its the only ESA program that im excited about.

[Anonymous No.11763798]

>>11763783
Also Europa rover when?

[Anonymous No.11763804]

>>11763783
Launch in may 2022, not much else. If everything goes as planned. Afaik.
I also like this mission.
Jovian moons are interesting. Haunting for some reason. I once dreamed I walked on Callisto.

[Anonymous No.11763807]

>>11763571
thank goodness they have their masks on. wouldn't want the rocket to catch covid-chan

[Anonymous No.11763812]

>>11763783
Also Europa rover when?

[Anonymous No.11763822]

>>11763804
Yeah same minus the dream. We really should examine those moons and juice should give us some good info. I want a probe though I think there is life on europa

[Anonymous No.11763835]

>>11763720
Yes, exactly. If I remember correctly, the Apollo missions went into retrograde orbits so that if something went wrong, and they didn’t perform the deceleration burn, they would go back to Earth after they left the Moon’s sphere of influence rather than sailing off into the interplanetary void

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free-return_trajectory

[Anonymous No.11763841]

>>11763822
Europa Clipper is also scheduled. It should launch 3 years later but will arrive at the Jovian system at roughly the same time as JUICE.

[Anonymous No.11763872]

>>11763841
God damn i wish i was on that project. That patch is so cool.

[Anonymous No.11763874]

>>11763541
It generally weathers out of phosphate minerals like apatite.

[Anonymous No.11763883]

Where exactly would you want to live on Mars?
Valles Marineris looks awesome to me

[Anonymous No.11763894]

>>11763883
My question is why the hell we havent sent a rover or lander to Valles Marineris in the first place.

[Anonymous No.11763900]

>>11763894
No clue. Must be interesting geology

[Anonymous No.11763911]

>>11763894
Somewhere with caves and lava tubes to explore.

[Anonymous No.11763919]

>>11763233
Mars' surface is covered in regolith, which has a consistency between fine gravel and dust. Unless you find a particularly rocky area, you as well be riding a bike in a desert.

[Anonymous No.11763922]

>>11763894
Have you seen our rovers and delivery systems? They suck ass at navigating rough terrain. Valled Marineris is deeper than the Grand Canyon. That's going to need firsthand exploration.

[Anonymous No.11763923]

>>11763911
There’s gonna be aliens down there

[Anonymous No.11763932]

>>11763922
Make a rover that isn’t dogshit.

[Anonymous No.11763949]

>>11763932
Harder than it seems. We are limited to what we can program. Also Valled Marineris cuts deep into the rock and offers a free peek into geologic history, but it’s hard as fuck to land there and it would be almost impossible to communicate with a relay satellite, much less direct communication with Earth using a high gain antenna

[Anonymous No.11763950]

>>11763779
Soyuz isn't relevant to the story.
The US wants an independent crewed capacity because it wants to be a major player in space.
The last time it was between systems, there was also a years long gap between launches.
Only difference is that the US had an alternative to simply not sending anyone up.

[Anonymous No.11763976]

>>11763739
>If funded the constellation program would have been great
SRBs as a first stage is such an awful idea. Astronauts would die of embarrassment if nothing else.
Orion wasn't ready, and would still be an overexpensive "solution" for reaching the ISS.
>A review of experts concluded that it would cost $150 billion for Constellation to reach its destination close to the original schedule. The Obama administration instead canceled it.
>Much better than sls
As per the Augustine Commission, Ares V would not be available earlier than SLS, even with unconstrained funding.
Similarly, Ares I would not have been available earlier than Commercial Crew, even with unconstrained funding.

[Anonymous No.11763991]

>>11763976
>>11763739
>>11763742
SLS looks like they just skipped to ares 3

[Anonymous No.11763993]

>>11763976
>SRBs as a first stage is such an awful idea. Astronauts would die of embarrassment if nothing else.
What about space frogs? A Karman line hop with an SRB should be doable for a frog and a parachute.

[Anonymous No.11763998]

>>11763976
what's so bad about srbs as first stage?

[Anonymous No.11764000]

>>11763714
NASA only offers leftovers. ESA was in conversations with Roscosmos for jointly developing a new spacecraft. But guess who didn't liked the idea?

[Anonymous No.11764007]

>>11763704
>boarding actions
>in a battlefield where distances will be measured in light seconds or more

Lmao

[Anonymous No.11764010]

How big is jupiter in the sky from its various moons?

[Anonymous No.11764023]

>>11763435
It is a shame they’re so keen to retire it.

[Anonymous No.11764027]

>>11764007
I would envision planetary ground invasion being only doable and necessary against an Earth like planet with a protective atmosphere and a decent amount of planetary defense keeping orbiting warships at bay. The way I'd invade a planet would be to do a "pump and dump" landing where dropships along with a shit ton of decoys are released from carrier craft that are just on a "skimming" trajectory and not in orbit. This forces land with the goal to be to take control of enough ground surface to enable warships to position in geostationary orbit without the risk of having shit being shot from directly below them like lasers and particle beams and shit. Making it much more doable to keep ships in orbit to commence, or at least threaten orbital bombardment through the use of casaba howitzers to conquer the rest of the planet.

Due to the amount of ground you'd have to invade and conquer would be huge, you'd probably require at the very least, an entire Army group to multiple Army Groups to succeed. Not only that, but you are also racing against the clock to conquer enough ground to get the warships in a safe geostat orbit before the enemy maneuvers dozens of Army Groups from around the world onto the continent(s) that your Army Group(s) are on. All of this of course being a potential what if situation of an interstellar civilization that's disregarding how interstellar travel is done which could drastically change what I just said in this post. Anyways, just thought I'd give my own autistic idea a chance.

[Anonymous No.11764029]

>>11764023
It really is something else to watch two boosters land at once, but I think there will be plenty of awe when superheavys and starships start landing everywhere, the fucking absolute units

[Anonymous No.11764035]

>>11764029
SuperDuperHeavy direct Mars insertion flights soon.
>five first stages

[Anonymous No.11764038]

>>11763998
For Ares I,
SRBs can not be throttled or shut off. If something goes wrong, you are effectively stuck until it burns out.
SRBs have low specific impulse, which is partially why the Ares I models have those huge upper stages, even for operations to LEO.
IIRC SRBs for Ares (and SLS) would still be made at that plant in Utah, which limits the diameter of the SRB to that which can pass through rail tunnels, which limits total impulse, again forcing a larger upper stage.
Even when Nasa was designing the thrust-assisted orbiter shuttle, they wanted liquid boosters but had to do solid because development costs would be lower.
It would still be subject to Nasa and contractors' high fixed costs.

[Anonymous No.11764045]

>>11764038
What a weird looking thing. I know of no other launch vehicle that gets so much wider at the second stage. They’re either the same diameter or smaller typically

[Anonymous No.11764063]

>>11764027
If you are stuck with chemical or similar propulsion, interplanetary war to Mars will probably be too hard to justify. You can only move forces every two years and they take 3-6 months en route, 45 minute time lag, no resupply, no refuel unless you can seize a fuel depot, etc...

Organising a war like that at our current technology is laughable. Whoever is being invaded will win so long as Mars has infrastructure to build a basic level of weapons. Situations very similar if not worse for other planets. You need a torch drive to engage in a proper interplanetary war.

[Anonymous No.11764078]

>>11764045
Without shifting production from Utah, they're stuck at 3.71 SRB diameter so the only thing they can do is add a fifth segment to make it taller.
The Ares I upper stage was inspired by the Space Shuttle External Tank and the Saturn IVB. It has about the same volume as the S-IVB, and an engine from the same J-2 family.
Between those, the result being this tall, interestingly proportioned rocket.

[Anonymous No.11764115]

>>11763976
>As per the Augustine Commission, Ares V would not be available earlier than SLS, even with unconstrained funding.
>Similarly, Ares I would not have been available earlier than Commercial Crew
how the hell does that work when Starship is gonna be ready in a few years and ELON MUSK MADE IT IN TEXAS WITH A BOX OF SCARPS!!!

[Anonymous No.11764120]

>>11764027
You would need a few billion men

[Anonymous No.11764125]

>>11764078
>from the same J-
The Ares V would have been so good

[Anonymous No.11764130]

why not just launch a rocket and put a bunch of earth dirt on mars
this idea came to me when i noticed falcon9 looks like a dick

[Anonymous No.11764131]

>>11763546
As far as I understand, usually through third body interaction

[Anonymous No.11764132]

>>11764078
>>11764125
>>11764115

I'm gonna say it...

The Ares rockets were beautiful though. I remember going to "Space Camp" back in 2009 before they were cancelled and we watched a documentary on Ares I and Ares V. It was really exciting.

When I learned it was cancelled I was still a kid and I was very very upset. It wasn't until two or so years ago that I learned that Constellation wouldn't have worked anyways - even with unlimited funding - as the designs were just flawed overall.

What SHOULD have happened was certifying Delta IV Heavy to carry Orion, or an Atlas V Heavy. Commercial contractors build the Crew rocket, while NASA uses something like SLS but with a balloon upper stage. Can hold something like 350 tons of propellant at one 27 metric tons and two J-2X's.

Ah well.. one can dream

DIRECT is pretty cool though. I typed up an alternate history mars architecture that made use of DIRECT and was technically conservative too, It had no zero bailiff tanks, no NTR, not even ISRU. It was a cool writeup.
My ex set it on fire when we broke up. But I still remember 99% of the math.

[Anonymous No.11764136]

>>11764125
Is this a meme or is this true? Some people are so adamant it would have been worse. How fucking hard is it to convert the shuttle’s External Tank into an extended stage and stick a second stage with a capsule on top
>>11764115
Government. Imagine having your rocket built by the local DPS/DMV, vs. having it built by hardcore enthusiasts who get to change what they want when they want

[Anonymous No.11764138]

>>11764120
A few million would suffice.

[Anonymous No.11764143]

>>11764136
Ares V would have been cargo, Ares I would have been crewed. SLS is designed to do both. It’s still a piece of shit though that has gotten bogged down in politics (I like the DMV comparison lmao). After looking at Starship and reusability, I can’t help but look at SLS and fucking cringe. It uses Hydrogen, It uses SRB’s, it fucking eviscerates 99% of its own weight because it’s expendable, and it was supposed to be a cheap use of shuttle tech but it’s been in the works forever and we’ve only gotten one flight from Orion so far and IT WASNT EVEN ON AN SLS. I wonder if Jim believes in it or if it stresses him out at night and he just wants to kill it and rely on Starship for the latter half of Artemis’ life cycle.
Also when the fuck are other companies (including NASA) going to start utilizing reusability. At first it was a meme but Elon has changed the game and set a new standard imho

[Anonymous No.11764156]

>>11763949
It's deep, but it's also super large and the cliffs aren't vertical so there wouldn't be lots of LOS problems. You can check altitude profiles here: https://trek.nasa.gov/mars/ (if the website unfucks itself). IIRC, Marineris was one of the possible landing sites for Mars 2020, but the previous rovers couldn't land precisely enough.

>>11764063
>Whoever is being invaded will win
Depends of your definition of win, Mars bases will stay ridiculously fragile for a long time, except if deep underground: just throw a volley of missiles (nuclear if needed), and you've killed all these Martian revolutionaries

[Anonymous No.11764161]

>>11764156
>Starships depart mars with hundreds of tons of dirt in their payload bay
>Aerocapture into LEO
>Starships and their crew sacrifice themselves, detonate the tanks in LEO.
>Dirt is deployed from the explosion
>Dirt blocks LEO
>Dirt leads to Kessler Syndrome, LEO satellites are totally wipe out in a few days
>No humans can leave Earth again for hundreds of years
>Mars wins

This could be a cool miniseries desu

[Anonymous No.11764197]

>>11764138
no it really wouldn't

[Anonymous No.11764202]

>>11764197
But yes, it would.

[Anonymous No.11764205]

>>11764161
But what would stop Earth from doing pretty much the same to Mars?

[Anonymous No.11764207]

>>11763950
>Soyuz isn't relevant to the story.
Are you stupid?

[Anonymous No.11764210]

>>11764202
Okay bud tell me how you plan to conquer a planet with 1million people

[Anonymous No.11764222]

atlas 5 isogrid

[Anonymous No.11764223]

>>11764210
By doing exactly what I said in my original post.

[Anonymous No.11764235]

>>11764210
Nuke it until there’s only ten people left

[Anonymous No.11764236]

>>11764222
Kino
Machining (?) all this shit must be a PITA though

[Anonymous No.11764245]

>>11764223
>>11764235
Yeah your post didn't say shit and you are retarded if you think 1million troops is enough

[Anonymous No.11764248]

Apparently Chinese carmaker Geely is building a LEO constellation to support it's driverless cars. The first satellites will be sent to Jiuquan this month.

[Anonymous No.11764252]

>>11764248
Sounds like a meme honestly

[Anonymous No.11764259]

>>11764245
In Star Wars, there were only a few million clone troopers, which is absolutely fucking ridiculous and insufficient to wage war in an *entire galaxy*. On the other hand, the Separatists were once quoted to have “quintillions” of Battle Droids, which is much more feasible.

[Anonymous No.11764266]

>>11764252
Maybe it's the best way for them to go? Or maybe they are backed by the government and there is more to the constellation than they are saying?

[Anonymous No.11764268]

>>11763249
I have vague fantasies about living in hyperadvanced rotating habitats like those in The Culture.

[Anonymous No.11764271]

>>11764266
>maybe they are backed by the government and there is more to the constellation than they are saying?
That I'll believe, yeah. If Starlink does work, there will probably be similar systems from Europe, Russia and China, like for GPS

[Anonymous No.11764274]

>>11764245
Check your reading comprehension before you post some gay shit nigga.

[Anonymous No.11764282]

>>11764259
Just for some context here, the initial invasion of iraq had just under 310,000 personnel on the coalition side against an iraqi force of about 1,300,000. And that was a large technological and training advantage shared by the coalition. But that guy thinks a force just 3.3 times that initial coalition force is enough to take over a force 6000 times that of the Iraqi force. Which by the way is probably going to be a near peer adversary.

[Anonymous No.11764290]

>>11764282
If Reticulans invaded I think they could take over Earth with about 5000 dudes

[Anonymous No.11764291]

An article about the Geely LEO constellation https://rntfnd.org/2020/03/05/commercial-chinese-leo-pnt-launching-in-2020-spacewatch-global/

It says that position/navigation info is the main function but that it won't just focus on cars, but on other unmanned vehicles too. Military drones? The article also mentions that the US military has been interested in a similar capability.

[Anonymous No.11764295]

>>11764274
Or you are just retarded, see >>11764282
If you think you can cover any significant ground on a planet with just a million people the you are retarded.

[Anonymous No.11764303]

>>11764290
So we are resorting to pure fiction,?

[Anonymous No.11764307]

>>11764303
Reticulans are real we just have no real idea of their offensive capabilities

[Anonymous No.11764308]

>>11763468
Just minding you don't come in too hot and at an angle is the trick. Learning the Navball in all its crappiness helps a lot.

[Anonymous No.11764309]

>>11764295
Yeah, and we had only 8 million during WW2. The fuck is your point? My point still holds true. An Army group to multiple Army Groups is what would be required.

[Anonymous No.11764315]

>>11763249
Call it Anusian Lighthouse and we have a deal

[Anonymous No.11764319]

>>11763991
That is exactly what they did. Constellation got taken out behind the building and shot in the back of the head, the designers went to the drawing board and waited for a change in the political climate because what else could they do?
In comes a president who wants to do a grand gesture.

Bam, same program is reborn with a slightly modified rocket using the same parts and a new name.

[Anonymous No.11764325]

>>11764236
Computer CNC does that shit. Inspecting it afterwards is the pain in the ass.

[Anonymous No.11764335]

i wish i had a cnc machine
i would have made smol rocket

[Anonymous No.11764369]

>>11764325
I wonder if SpaceX will eventually do this kind of stuff to shave more mass on Starship, it would kinda defeat the simplicity of "just welding steel rings together" but they'll really want less mass on Starship

[Anonymous No.11764371]

>>11764369
What are they using again? 4mm cold rolled steel? Not much to mill out there, man. You can guarantee that the Aluminium alloy F9 stuff is milled out in the same way though to cut down on weight where they can to keep strength though.
Completely different beasts.

[Anonymous No.11764402]

>>11764371
>You can guarantee that the Aluminium alloy F9 stuff is milled out in the same way
iirc they stir weld all the stringers or something.
Pretty sure they don't mill them anyway, it's ridiculously wasteful and would balloon the cost.

[Anonymous No.11764405]

>>11764402
The inside of the tanks and whatnot are most likely milled out to make them lighter while maintaining strength. The fact that they're friction welded together is something completely different. They don't mill them out of a single block, don't get me wrong. That was not what I implied.

[Anonymous No.11764408]

Like the slow decay into disorder occurring in the universe these threads turn to veritable diarrhoea.

>>11764223
>>11764156
> just throw a volley of missiles (nuclear if needed)
"Just throw" something that people have months to prepare for at worst.
Please do not join the actual military bro.

[Anonymous No.11764412]

>>11764405
>The inside of the tanks and whatnot are most likely milled out to make them lighter while maintaining strength.

Nope. They actually use stringers and runners.

[Anonymous No.11764413]

>>11764408
>pops out of subspace behind you
heh, nothing personell kid

[Anonymous No.11764414]

>>11764412
Ah, ok.

[Anonymous No.11764418]

>>11764405
>The inside of the tanks and whatnot are most likely milled out to make them lighter while maintaining strength. The fact that they're friction welded together is something completely different.
That's what I'm talking about though. Milled isogrid is stupid expensive and you can get most of the benefit from welding without it.

>SpaceX uses an all friction stir welded tank, the highest strength and most reliable welding
technique available.

>Apart from its enticing features, the isogrid structure is extraordinarily expensive to manufacture. The commonly pursued route to manufacture such a structure is to start from a thick piece of metal and machine it down with a computerised numerical control. This technique leads to a waste fraction of 95%. For this reason, SpaceX did not use the typical isogrid structure, but obtained a similar effect with stir welded strengthening stringers.

[Anonymous No.11764437]

Elon is dispensing redpills again. This is why all those "why dont fix Earth before we go to space" idiots are wrong. We dont know how long the window of opportunity to colonize space will last. Lets do it sooner rather than later, because it might be too late.

[Anonymous No.11764464]

is that meteor recovery mission permanently shelved?
it's one of the better/interesting ideas NASA put put out

[Anonymous No.11764468]

>>11764405
>>11764412
There's some milling on the second stage, you can see the patterns here https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/875849793204928512?s=20

[Anonymous No.11764470]

>>11764437
that's a terrible way to argue against "why don't we fix Earth first." The real argument is that "fixing Earth" is a moving goalpost that can never be satisfied. The human race is never going to think it's done fixing itself.

[Anonymous No.11764478]

>>11764437
A global collapse resulting of climate change is not a redpill but common knowledge everywhere but on this board, homo sapiens existed for 200 000 years at most, half a billion year is a number so big humanity will not exist because evolution and technical progress are real things. Understanding how to live on mars and the science behind the planet will help us to fix our shit there anyway so space exploration is win win, if you want to take money from somewhere try useless and polluting corporations like mcdonald before space shit.

[Anonymous No.11764650]

>>11764468
That are welded mounted points for ring stringer structure and longeirons also welded into that this is not any form of iso/ortho grid

[Anonymous No.11764684]

>>11763812
I actually fear a mission like that.
Unless we develop a safe way to absolutely sterilize the probe we shouldn't even think about sending anything there.
We could risk to lose the only alien ecosystem we will ever be able to put our hands on.

[Anonymous No.11764686]

How the fuck do I get to dres? I know the phase angle,ejection angle and the velocity I need to be, but I can never get an encounter when I try to match the planes later.

[Anonymous No.11764693]

>>11764437
What the fuck is with Elon's raging hard on for mars? Just make a bunch of perfectly habitable oneill cylinders or other space drums. Seriously I don't believe Elon just doesn't know about building space habitats, did he adress it at any point?

[Anonymous No.11764699]

>>11763233
>fine, dusty sand
>low-g pulling you down
you'd have terrible grip, it'd probably be an awful experience. Maybe if you had big old strakes on the wheels it might be okay.

[Anonymous No.11764700]

>>11764693
>orbital-first faggots
No. Mars is already there with all of the necessary resources and an easily navigable gravity well. Colonizing Mars and the Moon is a much faster way to get gigatons into orbit than trying to do it directly from Earth.

[Anonymous No.11764701]

>>11764693
Because people want ground under their feet. O'Neill cylinders is more far fetched than a Mars colony with our current technology and nobody wants to live in fart boxes in the great black inhaling recycled rectal fumes for the rest of their lives.

[Anonymous No.11764716]

>>11763546
triton was in a binary pair of kuiper belt objects, the partner was flung off into interplanetary space or collided with neptune, providing the impulse to get triton captured. then it circularised more due to tidal effects, i'd imagine. here's a good video on it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBunWOUJlUA

[Anonymous No.11764722]

>>11763201
Let me take a shot at making this is manageable. Bigger planet means bigger opportunities. Your brain can't react because it doesn't understand. The Earth is overpopulated. You can't run. That's what the smoke said. See where I'm getting at. So how do you expect different wavelengths, microorganisms and new elements to appear. I gave you enough to traverse all of the universe and you spent it on killing yourself. Cum re-imagined. Modern fossil fuels and particle accelerators. Fun work you're doing. Even our president joined in. But he wants to pay me to make room for his kids.

[Anonymous No.11764729]

>>11764161
>Starships and their crew sacrifice themselves, detonate the tanks in LEO.
What about stopping the bad influence of islamic terrorism and thinking about an escape before the explosion?
>>11764205
The kessler syndrome.
Whoever does it first cuts it opponest away from accessing space.

If you really want a cool series forget suicides and think about doing it at the same time by chance, both crews can't go back to their planets and they must unite forces to survive even if they were enemies.

[Anonymous No.11764733]

>>11764701
>Because people want ground under their feet.
Weak people, but those are the same guys who will remain on Earth anyway.
Real spacemen will inhabit space itself and laugh at you puny earthlings.

[Anonymous No.11764736]

>>11764733
Yes, just what these threads need, more stupid memes and less reality.

[Anonymous No.11764740]

>>11764693
spaceX is all about PR, you try explaining to the general public the principle behind o'neill cylinders. There just isnt the cultural background to do it, as opposed to "MARS GOOD", which people can get behind and support.

[Anonymous No.11764749]

o'neill cylinders would require decades of R&D—we already have all the technology needed for a bunker base on Mars.

[Anonymous No.11764805]

>>11764729
>Whoever does it first cuts it opponest away from accessing space.
Nah, stable orbits maybe, but it will always be possible to send something through in a direct escape trajectory

[Anonymous No.11764815]

i've been learning a lot of space-related things from these generals, thanks anons

[Anonymous No.11764828]

>>11763677
>>11763693
It doesn't matter what velocity your object encounters Earth, it will be on an escape trajectory, because orbits are always symmetrical and it's coming in from interplanetary space, so it's going to end up leaving back into interplanetary space again, unless it interacts with a third body to lose energy from its orbit.

[Anonymous No.11764829]

>>11764749
Ignore the Oneill cylinders nutcases. They're talking about timelines in the 100s of years. They're bozos.

Mars can hold 100+ people in potentially a decade or so of hard work.

[Anonymous No.11764835]

>>11764828
Then how do bodies with no moons capture anything?

[Anonymous No.11764836]

>>11764437
>>11764470
Going to Mars is how we are going to fix earth. Most saliently, how we handle climate change and other human environmental problems.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Mars will never be green, “terraforming” that place is a fucking meme. Mars is going to be a foundry planet that we export all of our nasty industrial processes to. There’s no EPA, there’s no environment to fuck up. We can dump waste wherever we want, run everything off nuclear power, and smash asteroids into the surface for processing of their precious metals. Meanwhile, back on earth, we “terraform” our existing habitat into an agrarian garden of eden. The whole of the earth will be almost exclusively for habitation and food production, which is a much more realistic outcome than trying to put a fucking magnetosphere around a dead planet.

[Anonymous No.11764837]

>>11763697
It really wouldn't matter if there were a type of asteroid made 100% of phosphorous, because in terms of the entire solar system's mass it is very rare. It's going to be the limiting factor that human populations run into when we're building a Dyson swarm of habitats.

[Anonymous No.11764839]

>>11764733
Enjoy your jellybaby's.

[Anonymous No.11764852]

>>11764836
It will never be cheaper to make something on a planet and transport it to another planet to sell. Asteroids will be much more convenient foundries, since you only need to go down gravity wells. And even then, barring insane environment regulations, it would probably still be cheaper to produce locally

[Anonymous No.11764855]

>>11764839
Nah I'll enjoy my healthy 1G(or more, I can do whatever the fuck I want) bred babies while you grow some mongoloid 0.4G acclimated bitch with the bone structure of a house of cards

[Anonymous No.11764861]

does spaceX impose a limit on how many times they will use a rocket before retiring it? The starlink mission the other day was what, the 5th or 6th flight? Do they cap it at 10?

[Anonymous No.11764862]

>>11764852
>It will never be cheaper to make something on a planet and transport it to another planet to sell

Wrong. Environmental compliance to do business here on earth is a massive overhead burden and even if you only just break even, it’s still worth doing because you aren’t shitting up the Earth with whatever residual pollution and carbon footprint is left over.

[Anonymous No.11764868]

>>11764829
>100s of years
Not even(what is automation for 400), but even if it is 100s of years we're talking about the terraforming of mars here which is arguably going to take much longer. Is /sci/ actually /sci/ or just mouthbreathing retards, seriously. I like Elon, but god damn please get off his dick it might break.

[Anonymous No.11764872]

>>11764868
>muh terraforming
Dumb retard

[Anonymous No.11764880]

>>11764861
no, but they also don't want to jeopardize payloads by pushing the boundary. The reason all the reuse records are broken on starlink launches is because it's internal and not precious cargo so they can push the limit and see how far they can go. Things like crewed missions will always be first-time boosters until they have mountains and mountains of data precisely detailing the limits and effects of reusing boosters.

[Anonymous No.11764884]

>>11764078
How did Ares I get past the design stage and actually fly?

[Anonymous No.11764890]

>>11764852
And remember that no environmental restrictions goes all the way up the logistics chain. Imagine how cheap a nuclear reactor would be to build and operate if you could just throw out most of the restrictions that we have here on earth. If you melt down a reactor on Mars, who gives a fuck? Bury the fucker and build another one a couple miles away.

[Anonymous No.11764892]

>>11764862
The thing is, the world is not one country... I don't see regulation blowing up prices to the point where deep space or even orbital manufacturing becomes competitive for staple products globally.

[Anonymous No.11764895]

>>11764693
If we can't even turn Mars green with life yet, what makes you think you can just make a habitable giant tube for people to live in? You have to take steps nigga

[Anonymous No.11764900]

>>11764855
You won't be laughing because you're puking from insufficient size. If you're gonna live orbital, at least live somewhere that isn't utterly retarded, like a Von Braun Station. That shit is at least somewhat viable in today's economy.

[Anonymous No.11764911]

>>11764010
Large but not overwhelmingly big.

[Anonymous No.11764919]

>>11764892
It wouldn’t be all products. And it wouldn’t even be complete products that get made off world. Just the nastiest ones and only the process steps that are heavy polluters. Final assembly/packaging would/could still be done here. Semiconductors and battery manufacturing are two industries off the top of my head that have enough environmental restrictions globally that they could be profitable from off world production.

[Anonymous No.11764936]

>>11764900

>insufficient size

What do you mean, insufficient size?

[Anonymous No.11764941]

bro hear me out.....what if we named our <aerospace project here>........ after....something from. ............................................................................................................................. GREEK OR ROMAN MYTHOLOGY!!!! WOW

[Anonymous No.11764951]

based

[Anonymous No.11764952]

>>11763305
After all those years I still believe.
One day...

[Anonymous No.11764953]

anyone have that gif of the spacesuit being used as a satellite and flying off to space?

[Anonymous No.11764960]

>>11764900
Dude I'm sorry but you just don't know what we're talking about here.

[Anonymous No.11764970]

>>11764895
Why do you think making our own environment on a very small scale is less feasible than terraforming an entire planet?

[Anonymous No.11764977]

>>11764468
I see what you're seeing, but milling a plate of aluminum flat by taking off ~3 thou using a 4 inch wide bit is not as expensive or time consuming as milling 500 thou deep triangular or square holes into an aluminum plate.

[Anonymous No.11764978]

>>11764953
I gotchu anon.

[Anonymous No.11764979]

>>11764861
they haven't reached 10 so nobody knows.
presumably they'll keep pushing them with starlink payloads till they break

[Anonymous No.11764988]

>>11764686
Use the old overshoot-and-adjust method, where you wait until the end of the launch window, then get onto a trajectory that takes you further from the Sun than your target, do a mid course correction to get into the same plane, and then a final course correction to adjust your apoapsis up or down in order to fine tune a perfect encounter.

Advantages; piss easy, works every time. Disadvantages; you need more delta V than a single-burn autistically calculated departure from Kerbin, but those aren't any fun anyway.

[Anonymous No.11764989]

>>11764872
Oh, what? Biodomes? Bunkers?
Biodomes are basically the same tech as making orb habs but on a planet with a significant gravity well that's far away from us
Bunkers are all well and good, but we're talking about Mars in the context of colonization. When we have bunker cities on Mars that house a couple hundred thousand souls we have already made plenty of orbhabs.

[Anonymous No.11764990]

>>11764978
thank you my jogga

[Anonymous No.11764997]

>>11764989
>When we have bunker cities on Mars that house a couple hundred thousand souls we have already made plenty of orbhabs.
>Make some pressed bricks and a trench and pressurize it
>this takes longer than making an o'neill cylinder somehow
No lol

[Anonymous No.11765002]

>>11764990
np, I love how casually he just tosses it aside like it's in his way.

[Anonymous No.11765015]

>>11764997
We'll have a million people on Mars before 100 in oneill stations lmao.

[Anonymous No.11765024]

>>11764997
>This takes longer to make an oneill cylinder somehow
We have all the material to make some just 380,000km away. Literally what are you thinking about when I say "o'neill cylinder", are you thinking about Halo? We don't need supertensile strength material, you're being kinda retarded, Anon

[Anonymous No.11765026]

>>11764693
Mars has the low gravity you need to make space travel cheap and easy. From Mars, colonizing the asteroid belt actually makes sense instead of requiring a million assumptions and esoteric economic theory to justify doing it from Earth. Obviously colonizing the asteroid belt requires you do spinning habitats from gravity. From there humanity will increase and the default lifestyle will be that of a person aboard a rotating space habitat. Consequently, colonization of the entire remainder of the solar system will follow, and interstellar colonization fleets departing for other stars will become routine.

You need Mars first though, to do this. In fact Mars is so perfect it's arguably spooky that it exists. Mars has the perfect amount of surface gravity, strong enough to keep people healthy and not clumsy, but weak enough to make space access really easy. Mars has an abundance of all the elements we require to grow food and to supply our industries. Mars even has two asteroid-like moons for us to practice mining and to exploit for materials to build large orbital rotating habitats.

Rare Earth hypothesis? Hardly, basic life is probably common throughout the universe. However, intelligent life evolving on a habitable planet with low enough gravity to make access to space possible using chemical propulsion, in the same solar system as a much smaller planet with all the same resources plus a thin atmosphere plus tiny moons that orbits right on the border of a huge asteroid belt? We're definitely living inside an ultra rare special edition holographic star system, guys. We need to take advantage of the fact that we can A; even get to space, and B; have actual destinations within reach in space, because we're probably the only intelligent life to EVER have this level of luck.

[Anonymous No.11765029]

>>11764309
Against a the forces of a planet, that would get attritted to nothing, even if it won its battles.
World War II featured tens of millions of personnel on both sides, and tens of millions more on the home front supporting them. Both sides were helped by already owning substantial chunks of the planet.

[Anonymous No.11765033]

>>11765024
Admitting that it's better to start from the moon than doing it from Earth is just capitulating on the original point: Martian/Lunar colonization before mass orbital habitation.

[Anonymous No.11765048]

>>11765033
I didn't say start from anything, you'll barely have a 1000 people on the moon. People will be LIVING on cylinders, not a shitty trampoline planetoid that atrophies your muscles, same with Mars. All of this guy's
>>11765026
groundwork will be almost entirely automated, by the way. That's not colonization, orbhabs are the only marketable PERMANENT living space in...Space.

[Anonymous No.11765058]

>>11765048
Good luck making a fucking O'neill cylinder with 1,000 people and some garbage robots, lmao. You're talking about the largest scale undertaking in human history.

[Anonymous No.11765068]

>>11764835
They either do not, or they do something called a 'weak capture' whereby an object happens to pass at a very low velocity through one of the Lagrange points between that main object and the Sun, which can cause the new object to remain orbiting the main object for a while, but almost always these objects are lost to interplanetary space again because they end up passing through another Lagrange point.

The only time a weakly captured object can become strongly captured is if another force beyond simple gravitational attraction has time to act on the weakly captured object before it can orbit through another Lagrange point and escape. This is technically possible through tidal force interactions, but the parent object in this case must have a highly asymmetric gravitational field and must be rotating relatively rapidly in order to produce enough tidal drag to make this possible in the small time before the new object is lost. Tiny moons of asteroids are probably gained and lost all the time through this mechanism, since asteroids encounter each other at extremely low velocities all the time as they orbit the Sun, and medium sized asteroids are commonly very stretched out and potato shaped while having short rotation periods. These small asteroid moons, once strongly captured, either migrate into stable orbits aroudn their parent asteroid, or eventually have their orbits decay until they collide at low speeds and collapse into a single asteroid. It seems likely that a great many rubble pile asteroids were formed through this mechanism.

[Anonymous No.11765071]

>>11765058
>Garbage robots
If automated mining/manufacturing technologies aren't on par with making at least one o'neill cylinder a year then we have no business being in space beyond exploration and research. Like what star wars fantasy are you living in to believe that we're going to have millions of people in hardhats out in space setting up space industry?

[Anonymous No.11765080]

>>11765071
>If automated mining/manufacturing technologies aren't on par with making at least one o'neill cylinder a year then we have no business being in space beyond exploration and research.
First it was that we should just go straight there with no intermediate step, then it was "well we'll just colonize a little", now it's stamping your feet and throwing a tantrum if you don't get an O'neill cylinder per year. This fantasy is degenerating quickly and contains no trace of a sense of scale.

[Anonymous No.11765109]

>>11764989
the main advantage of o'neill cylinders is that you can have pretty much optimal conditions for human life, for a lot of humans. The main issue isnt economics or technology, it's demographics. You just aren't gonna have enough people to warrant more than a few dozen to hundred o'neill cylinders for a long, long time yet.

[Anonymous No.11765115]

>>11765080
>straight there with no immediate step
What was I referring to here? I was referring to living in space, that's what all of us were talking about. Are you implying that I was implying that we build an O'Neill cylinder from scratch using material from Earth? That's a strawman, we were talking about permanent settlement.
>you don't get an o'neill cylinder per year
Seriously what the fuck do you think an o'neill cylinder is, because you make it sound like it's the equivalent of constructing a ringworld or something. An O'Neill cylinder barely counts as a "megastructure", a space elevator/orbital ring on Mars is a bigger undertaking, which I'm sure you have no problem with constructing. Talk about sense of scale, you don't even understand what I'm talking about.

[Anonymous No.11765122]

>>11765109
How does this problem of demographics compare to colonizing the Moon or Mars for permanent settlement? So far all of the arguments levied against orbhabs have been economical or technological problems so I'm genuinely interested.

[Anonymous No.11765132]

>>11764951
While I don't think they'll make this deadline, I'm getting increasingly worried that they're cutting a lot of corners on Starship's safety to meet this goal. 2024 cargo and 2026 crew would still be a bold and immediate target with less silliness.

[Anonymous No.11765143]

>>11765115
>Are you implying that I was implying that we build an O'Neill cylinder from scratch using material from Earth?
You sure as shit aren't building one anywhere that lacks a strong construction-oriented infrastructure already, which you aren't going to get without significant colonization.
>. An O'Neill cylinder barely counts as a "megastructure"
You keep thinking that while you figure out how to get hundreds of millions of tons of shielding and structure into orbit and constructing something useful out of it with ~1,000 people and some robots.

[Anonymous No.11765146]

>>11765132
It's very clear that Musk has no problem pushing back a deadline if something isn't good enough. There's nothing wrong with having ambitious timelines as long as you aren't so shamed by the failure to meet them that you push something out before it's ready. Musk has no such shame.

[Anonymous No.11765170]

>>11765132
>>11765146
the cargo target is within plausible
the manned mission will slip for sure

[Anonymous No.11765171]

>>11764836
Nuclear power is the cleanest form of energy production, and no society running off of energy that cheap would bother with landfills, because it would be cheaper to power the processes that are required to strip waste products down to simple elements or chemicals for complete recycling than it would be to mine more, 'fresh' material and extract those same substances from the rocks. Not to say we wouldn't still do the latter, we'd just have no reason not to do the former.

Space industry will help 'fix' Earth by providing new technologies and a huge amount of excess industrial capacity with zero additional impact placed o Earth's environment. It won't be the case of "all our dirty shit happens in space", it'll be a case of "we really don't have any 'dirty' processes anymore because it doesn't make any sense not to take all our waste materials and reuse them". Even shit like fission products from breeder reactors will be highly valuable, because if you just alloy those isotopes with iron and cast that hot iron slug inside a stainless steel capsule, you now have a source of heat that stays hot for a decade with no input power and lets you melt water ice for extraction basically for free.

[Anonymous No.11765174]

>>11765143
>You sure as shit aren't building one anywhere that lacks a strong construction-oriented infrastructure already, which you aren't going to get without significant colonization.
Significant colonization is what, exactly?
>You keep thinking that while you figure out how to get hundreds of millions of tons of shielding and structure into orbit
What orbit? Are you still talking about Earth?
>and constructing something useful out of it with ~1,000 people and some robots.
Love the way you downplay that shit. Like what is the alternative? I jokingly implied earlier that you expect millions of people in hardhats to be working on infrastructure in space, but I'm starting to believe you actually believe that. Are you arguing that robots aren't a lot more efficient than people at building anything, especially orbital infrastructure? That's my argument literally what is the alternative?

[Anonymous No.11765179]

>>11764309
The allied powers had 70 million troops in WWII and they only had to fight in 2 theaters. 70 million to overcome just the axis powers and you only want to send 2 army groups to neutralize an entire plant? You are retarded.

[Anonymous No.11765185]

>>11765048
>groundwork will be almost entirely automated, by the way
Science fiction.

[Anonymous No.11765191]

>>11765174
>Are you arguing that robots aren't a lot more efficient than people
Anyone who argues that robots are better at anything more complicated than stamping sheet metal parts is a retard

[Anonymous No.11765192]

>>11765122
Think of what an O'Neill cylinder is: a massive fuck off megastructure. Sure, it's probably a more desirable place to live than on a planetary surface (other than maybe Earth), but why would one get built when you've got a population of maybe 5 million on the Moon or Mars, and no bottleneck in sight other than the minute natural population growth?
The people who could go about constructing something as major as an O'Neill cylinder, could spend the same amount of money on creating something much, much more desirable to live in on Earth, because frankly, when you look at population trends, it's pretty clear that overcrowding isn't going to happen or become a major issue, unless something major changes.
Of course, its perfectly possible that a couple get manufactured as presige projects or w/e, but I really cannot see the demand for many of them (to the point that they become a place the majority of people live) for a long, long time yet.

[Anonymous No.11765196]

>>11765185
seriously, where do people get the idea that these autonomous building robots exist or are close to existing? Have they ever seen anything on any construction site ever that is even remotely autonomous? Even factories have a hard time integrating AI for trivial, single-purpose, stationary robots.

[Anonymous No.11765232]

Even if Starship doesn’t fly until 2030 - which is unlikely given how fast they’re going - it’ll still dominate the aerospace industry within a year of its first flight.

Have faith bros

But holy shit if it flies before SLS NASA will commit suicide on live tv

[Anonymous No.11765238]

>>11764900
Excuse me? It would literally be cheaper to land on the Moon/Mars and build an O’Neill cylinder on the surface to simulate earth gravity using in situ resources vs. launching stuff into space to build it in orbit

[Anonymous No.11765240]

>>11765196
Agreed. Source, I worked for 4 years in a factory that was supposedly 90% automated. Literally every fucking day we were running around unclogging shit, fixing shit, replacing fuses, replacing motors, replacing valves, replacing belts. The idea that automation is almost ready to take over all manufacturing is such a joke it isn't even funny. Grease monkeys lubing machines and running electrical cables will be an essential job forever.

[Anonymous No.11765241]

>>11764729
>UNSA -Starships are cut off from Earth Orbit
>Mars Defense Navy starships can’t go back to Mars
>The crews rendezvous in geostationary orbit
>The Martian crew will travel to an asteroid and attach a mass driver which will act as an engine
>The asteroid will then take a several-year-long trip to Titan
>The Earth crew will take a direct flight to Titan to establish a colony

Also sounds KINO

[Anonymous No.11765248]

>>11765196
ZeroG would make a lot problems robots have a much easier.
And a giant ring rig that slowly "prints" a oneill cylinder is the most accept theory on how these would be made.
The amount of materials i would need would still be astronomical and would demand a big space industry something that is still decades to a century away at our current rate of advancement.

[Anonymous No.11765254]

>>11765248
>ZeroG would make a lot problems robots have a much easier.
no, because the primary problems are software problems, not robotics problems. We've had robotic arms and tools with enough fidelity to accomplish these things for decades—actually orchestrating them in a robust and useful way is the difficult part.

[Anonymous No.11765258]

Don't mind me, just 鹘-9 passing through...

[Anonymous No.11765259]

>>11764437
Based

[Anonymous No.11765262]

>>11765258
*lands on your village house before falling over and exploding*
nothing personnel comrade

[Anonymous No.11765263]

>>11765258
Whatever happened with pic related?

[Anonymous No.11765265]

>>11765238
This is a thing people don't often consider. There's no reaosn why you couldn't do rotating habitats on the surface of the Moon, they'd still be cylinders just oriented vertically, and they'd spin to produce a combined total of 1g apparent gravity, at an angle that would make you feel like your city was built on a hill. You can't do dish shaped like some people suggest, because you'd have significantly less gravity at the inside rim compared to the outside, and it would be at a different angle too. The weaker the surface gravity of the object you're building your habitat on, the smaller the apparent 'slope' you'd feel on the interior surface. Mars gravity is probably too strong to do this, but Moon gravity should be alright, and the gravity on anything Triton sized or smaller is definitely weak enough to deal with.

Ceres would be a good place to cover with rotating habitats to a depth of a few dozen kilometers, in fact you could use Ceres' surface as a habitat factory and lift them into space using a steel cable space elevator 900 km long, and release them on a Ceres escape trajectory so that they orbit the sun and can maneuver close to other, smaller asteroids to mine them as well.

Once we have big enough rotating space habitats that each one can house the labor force and industry necessary to build more habitats, the colonization of the solar system by mankind would appear analogous to bacteria colonizing an agar plate, ie exponential growth. There wouldn't even really be anything stopping us from doing interstellar colonization at that point either, just send ten thousand habitats on a 1000 year trajectory in a big cloud and have everyone pack a lunch. If 1000 habitats break down every decade, all you need is the other 9000 habitats to disassemble those broken down ones and use their materials to build fresh new habitats.

[Anonymous No.11765271]

>>11765248
>ZeroG would make a lot problems robots have a much easier.
Metallic dust getting into the electronics gets worse in zero G. Software drivers aren't affected by zero G. Lack of convection makes thermal management worse in zero G. Objects floating and spinning in zero G are much harder for software to recognize and for robot arms to grab than stationary objects laying on a surface. Robotics are already far stronger than necessary to comfortably handle heavy objects in gravity, zero G is not a benefit in this aspect. Zero g means bubbles in hydraulic fluids do not rise to bleed points and instead pass through pumps and into actuators. Etc etc. Zero G is a nightmare design environment for automation.

[Anonymous No.11765291]

https://twitter.com/nextspaceflight/status/1268702421414371329
>SpaceX appears to be targeting no earlier than June 12/13 for their next Starlink mission, per marine hazard zones.
>https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=50923.msg2092446#msg2092446

[Anonymous No.11765310]

>>11765291
I wonder how many of those will have the new sunscreen measures.

[Anonymous No.11765330]

>>11765291
holy shit they're starting to really pick up the pace, good

[Anonymous No.11765343]

>>11765265
>You can't do dish shaped
i mean, you can, so long as the radius is quite a bit larger than the actual height of the cyclinder/bowl, so it'd be more of a circular section of a bowl rather than the whole thing. Even then, having sections of differing gravity could be a good thing, for anything from housing the elderly, heavy industry, recreation, or acclimatization.

[Anonymous No.11765351]

2020. I am forgotten...

[Anonymous No.11765355]

>>11765241
>attach a mass driver which will act as an engine
>mass driver
>act as an engine
How?

[Anonymous No.11765362]

>>11765351
They probably found some problems they needed to fix before launching people, I wonder what...

[Anonymous No.11765365]

>>11765355
Throw shit in one direction, go to the opposite direction

[Anonymous No.11765370]

>>11765365
That doesn't sound reliable.

[Anonymous No.11765372]

>>11765355
newtons 3rd

[Anonymous No.11765379]

If kessler syndrome happened couldn't it be cleaned up with high density magnetic cannon balls shot en masse through orbit? It would take awhile but be relatively low cost.

[Anonymous No.11765391]

>>11765379
would nukes work as well i wonder?

[Anonymous No.11765398]

>>11765391
Nukes fuck up the atmosphere way too much. If you just have a super heavy cannon ball do a few orbits before flying off into deep space that would be pretty effective at cleaning debris. Most debris would also eventually settle on a similar plane making it easy to target.

[Anonymous No.11765407]

https://9to5google.com/2020/06/04/google-satellite-internet-job/

>A Google Careers listing today reveals a “Partner Manager” role to “help launch a global satellite-based broadband service.” The emphasis is on “help,” with the next line noting how “you will support satellite broadband service providers, productize the solution and make it available to other satellite broadband ISPs.”

>From this description, Google does not appear to be launching its own satellites, but rather helping an existing partner establish their network. It’s unclear who that partner is, but Google will use what it learns to offer similar services to other companies.

[Anonymous No.11765418]

>Musk calls Amazon a monopoly and calls for it to be broken up
dangerously based and also true, fuck monopolist campaign funding that has stopped long-overdue trust busting

[Anonymous No.11765425]

Kind of an odd question but do y’all think part of the Artemis objectives should be to send astronauts to the lunar surface to construct like, say a kilometer of perfectly flat and level land to help future missions? A sort of landing area? Obviously the first missions will have to go Apollo-style and search for flag land, but wouldn’t it be advantageous to create an area dedicated to safe landing? I mean they’re already sending geologists up there so they could check the structural integrity of the modified regolith and streamline future landings

[Anonymous No.11765428]

>>11765407
Prob Starlink. Alphabet/Google/Sergey are big into SpaceX/Elon

[Anonymous No.11765435]

>>11765425
No anon, that would mean the flights were actually doing something and that would be too cost effective.

[Anonymous No.11765439]

>The satellites are working. We've got a launcher which is mostly reusable. 80% reusable. Our marginal cost of launch is much lower than it's been ever in the past. A million dollars a turn. That's really pretty low.

brainlet here, could someone explain how marginal launch cost is different from regular cost?

[Anonymous No.11765446]

>>11765439
Marginal cost is the cost of launching one more time after developing all of the rocketry and manufacturing process and getting past the red tape. Fixed cost would be all of that money that needed to be spent before one launch happened.

[Anonymous No.11765458]

>>11765439
where is that quote from?

[Anonymous No.11765463]

>>11765458
https://www.reddit.com/r/Starlink/comments/gr6742/at_3400_in_the_aviation_week_interview_elon_musk/fs08xcy/

[Anonymous No.11765475]

>astronomers are still complaining about starlink
imagine how angry they'll be when other constellations go up who's owners don't give a fuck about astronomers

[Anonymous No.11765477]

>>11765463
Nice black reddit logo. Good to see the white staff still have white guilt

[Anonymous No.11765479]

>>11765463
thanks fren

[Anonymous No.11765480]

Upcoming Launches
>June 11 - Electron - NRO sats
>June 12 - Falcon 9 - Starlink 8
>June 14 - Long March 3B - final BeiDou sat
>June 17 - Long March 2D - Chinese spy sat
>June 19 - Vega - alot of cubesats
>June 30 - Falcon 9 - GPS sat

[Anonymous No.11765482]

>>11765477
Yeah its cringe but at least the website is useful from time to time. I just bite the bullet and visit the website when I need to. It's also very active in the space community, i.e. Elon and other SpaceX people pop in from time to time

[Anonymous No.11765490]

>>11765475
Anti-musk shilling pays better

[Anonymous No.11765510]

>>11765475
Honestly they’ll probably be silent about the Chinese constellation.

Why are people afraid to call China on their shit? It’s weird.

[Anonymous No.11765511]

>>11764836
>mars is going to be a foundry planet that we export all of our nasty industrial processes to.
I agree but thats going to terraform it

[Anonymous No.11765519]

>>11764693
Mars is easier than an oneil cylinder. Also mars is where we should get the resources for the cylinder.

[Anonymous No.11765525]

>>11764815
Be skeptical of everything said here please

[Anonymous No.11765526]

>>11765510
>Why are people afraid to call China on their shit? It’s weird.

Because China's providing the agit-prop guidance to the journalists.

[Anonymous No.11765534]

>>11765510
Different channels, it's useless to do it publicly on twitter, but they may use diplomatic channels

[Anonymous No.11765548]

>>11764892
Long term everywhere will end up with those protections. Also precious metal mining is one of the biggest environmental issues we have. Imagine being able to transfer that elsewhere

[Anonymous No.11765549]

>>11765475
It's fucking crazy because in terms of the entire field, a full fledged observatory on Mars will likely make discoveries dwarfing and invalidating everything we do here on light polluted moon polluted earth. Thou doth protest too much and should just let the cathedral be built and astronomy to advance as a whole.

[Anonymous No.11765554]

>>11764941
Better than naming it the McDonald's rocket

[Anonymous No.11765561]

>>11764478
>Muh climate change

Roughly as big an issue as microtransactions in video games.

[Anonymous No.11765562]

>>11765549
They might not be interested in picking through data from a remote observatory. To them the enjoyment is actually working closely with a terrestrial observatory.

[Anonymous No.11765563]

>>11765554
relevant figures > mythology > just cool names > pop culture > corporate sponsors

[Anonymous No.11765567]

>>11764693
Mars is cool. Space habitats are disinteresting and have no resources.

[Anonymous No.11765569]

>>11765475
Because Elon Musk is the rich billionaire who got ~$3bn in tax payer money to get shit done. And That's A Bad Thing.
Because who fucking cares if a faceless corporation without a charismatic billionaire frontman took $20bn and delivered fucking nothing.

It's jealousy driving it, "don't think you're a big deal because you succeeded, get the fuck back in the crab bucket you upstart".

[Anonymous No.11765573]

>>11765562
If that's true then Uncle Ted is right and academics are fetishists who don't care about truth. Absolutely subversive.

[Anonymous No.11765574]

>>11764970
Because one can be done gradually while also sustainability living on the planet. The other one takes a massive amount of upfront resources, R&D and manpower before you can even start to live in it

[Anonymous No.11765575]

>>11765563
everything else >>> Opportunity, Curiosity, Endeavour and those other gay words NASA uses as names

[Anonymous No.11765580]

>>11764836
inb4 polluting on Mars is banned by international treaty because they find deep-soil microbes

[Anonymous No.11765587]

>>11765580
Mars recognizes no authority except Weyland-Yutani

[Anonymous No.11765593]

>>11765575
This, hearing Bob say that "we can do better" and then name it Endeavour was the worst moment in spaceflight in quite a while

[Anonymous No.11765608]

>>11765593
What should the first working Starship be called?

[Anonymous No.11765610]

>>11765608
won't it be Heart of Gold? Or am I misremembering

[Anonymous No.11765611]

>>11765608
SS So Long Suckers

[Anonymous No.11765612]

>>11765563
James Webb Space Telescope
Hubble
NGRST

I don't much mind the naming conventions for everything else. BO is using the names of pioneers in spaceflight. Chances are we keep using neutral things until large scale militarization happens. And then we get Starship John F. Kennedy.

>>11765593
It was the first space shuttle they both flew on. Probably represents sentimentality and 'continuity' of american manned launch capability. What would you name it?

[Anonymous No.11765616]

>>11765608
Probably something really gay, Enterprise, or SN34.

[Anonymous No.11765619]

>>11764478
Climate change is a meme. Long before it does anything drastic enough to outrun our adaptability and threaten the wellbeing of human race we'll fuck it all ourselves with bullshit wars, liberal cancer and corporate feudalism, draining resources required to advance.

[Anonymous No.11765628]

>>11765612
the SS Tiananmen Square Massacre

[Anonymous No.11765629]

>>11765616
>Enterprise
Would’ve been cool 10 years ago but the current state of Trek has made me do a complete 180 on that

[Anonymous No.11765634]

>>11765619
>Being a delusional pessimistic monkey

[Anonymous No.11765636]

>>11765629
Name it the Orville

[Anonymous No.11765641]

>>11765629
Name it the Seed of the Omnissiah

[Anonymous No.11765659]

>>11764936
Anon means that the diameter of the station is too small so the tidal forces from spinning make you nauseous or something. The smaller the station is the faster it has to spin.

[Anonymous No.11765662]

>>11765608
Shelby's Folly

[Anonymous No.11765670]

>>11765608
Von Braun

[Anonymous No.11765673]

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

SS is for steamships you retards, pick a better prefix

[Anonymous No.11765679]

>>11765673
RS
Rocket Ship

[Anonymous No.11765681]

>>11765673
god forbid there's a confusion and someone thinks they're launching a steamship into outer space

[Anonymous No.11765682]

>>11765608
USS Hitler

[Anonymous No.11765685]

>>11765612
>What would you name it?
I would name it after meaningful people in spaceflight, like Braun
But just not reusing names would already be a good start, reusing names can eventually lead to confusion, since it is a crew dragon capsule a dragon name would be fitting, that is a low hanging fruit in the naming tree and would already be miles better than anything that NASA can come up with

[Anonymous No.11765691]

>>11765673
S.X.S for SpaceX Starship

[Anonymous No.11765692]

>>11765682
I unironically support calling the first Artemis ship the Moonman

[Anonymous No.11765695]

>>11765681
this, who the fuck cares; the callback is kino anyway.

[Anonymous No.11765696]

>>11765681
When will Starships be big enough to launch a steamship into space?

[Anonymous No.11765704]

>>11765673
>>11765681
Hydrolox rockets are steamships.

[Anonymous No.11765706]

>>11765685
Yeah I’d rather names be chosen after famous scientists like Braun or Wegener. Although naming after legacy ships is cool. I hate the name Endeavour, but Challenger was named after the HMS Challenger (the first oceanographic mission to chart the ocean floor)

[Anonymous No.11765710]

>>11765704
delet this

[Anonymous No.11765716]

>>11765706
inb4 Musk, self ascribed "nauseatingly American", calls the first starship to bring people to Mars the "Mayflower"

[Anonymous No.11765720]

>>11765716
He could also name the first three cargo ships to Mars the Nina, the Pinta, and the Santa Maria after Columbus's ships.

[Anonymous No.11765722]

>>11765720
the optics on that would be awful

[Anonymous No.11765727]

>>11765722
They'd be the first ships to a New World. It's an appropriate metaphor. There are no indigenous Martians.

[Anonymous No.11765755]

>>11765071
>Like what star wars fantasy are you living in to believe that we're going to have millions of people in hardhats out in space setting up space industry?
What Star Trek fantasy are you living in to think that we can actually make a gargantuan Halo-tier orbital ring with crummy ass robots? Your meme AI robots don't sufficiently exist, and probably will not until nanobot repair systems are made, which by then will probably be when humanity has mastered planetary colonization.

[Anonymous No.11765760]

>>11765722
fuck your optics, we're going in

[Anonymous No.11765765]

>>11765727
You don't know that you fucking bigot. They could be invisible or underground.

[Anonymous No.11765767]

>>11765727
it's not really, Columbus was trying to go to India, not settle the new world. The Puritans were actively trying to find a new life.

[Anonymous No.11765769]

>>11765720
The first three ships should be named Wind Thunder and Cloud, because when they get to Mars they'll raise a storm

[Anonymous No.11765774]

>>11765765
>>11765767
fuck you

[Anonymous No.11765775]

>>11765765
>t.

[Anonymous No.11765782]

>>11765774
Yeah, I'd fuck me, too

[Anonymous No.11765787]

>>11765727

[Anonymous No.11765806]

>>11765608
Eseles

[Anonymous No.11765812]

>>11765608
SS White Power

[Anonymous No.11765816]

>>11765608
SS Goebbels

[Anonymous No.11765817]

>June 12 - Starlink 8 (9?)
>June 20 - Starlink 9 (10?)
They're going to try for Starlink launches once a week now?

[Anonymous No.11765824]

>>11765608
Gushing Granny, Enola Super Gay, Short Bus, Red Rocket

[Anonymous No.11765827]

>>11765812
>>11765816
Based
>>11765782
I'm sure you already do.

[Anonymous No.11765833]

>>11765026
Yep we are really lucky and we need to push for it now. Especially because we won't have the ease or the will to make things like Oneil cylinders until we are off of earth

[Anonymous No.11765835]

https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-awards-northrop-grumman-artemis-contract-for-gateway-crew-cabin
Northrop Grumman won a contract for another Cygnus-derived Gateway module

[Anonymous No.11765839]

>>11765835
It's the same contract as before, just "finalized."

[Anonymous No.11765847]

fucking moderation team, Char is spaceflight related
anyway, after getting a 24h ban last night I walked down the train tracks to the lake and watched the Starlink pass at 9:35pm ET
It was beautiful, glittering like gemstones as they passed above the moon and into the shadow of the Earth
I weep for all those whose souls are still bound by earth's gravity
speaking of being bound by Earth's gravity, the engineering camera videos for DM-2 were just released
https://images.nasa.gov/details-KSC-20200530-MH-AJW01-0001-SpaceX_Demo-2_Isolated_Launch_Views-3250046

>>11765480
there will be two Starlink launches in between now and GPS, anon
https://twitter.com/nextspaceflight/status/1268997874559225856
>>11765673
I don't see how that's relevant
>>11765691
>SEX
thank you Elon very nice
>>11765716
already confirmed to be Heart of Gold after some Iain M. Banks book
>>11765817
you fucking betcha

[Anonymous No.11765848]

pic related is a congratulatory message from the remaining Apollo astronauts to Elon Musk and SpaceX for a successful DM-2 launch
Some of these men had spoken out against Elon and commercial space early on in the course of the program, and that story is in the next post.
No, I don't know what the Arab is doing in this photo.

[Anonymous No.11765849]

>>11765439
Marginal cost is just what it cost spacex to get reused f9/refuel/pay employees for their time.

[Anonymous No.11765851]

this is the next post

[Anonymous No.11765859]

>>11765817
That's what reusable rockets are for anon

[Anonymous No.11765862]

>>11765232
It does look like the SLS program has a fire under their ass but i don't think it will be enough.

[Anonymous No.11765865]

those motherfuckers at SpaceX put RGB on their hopper

[Anonymous No.11765866]

>>11765848
>Arab
Sikh?

[Anonymous No.11765867]

>>11765263
>>11765258
Fucking Chinese

[Anonymous No.11765868]

>>11765866
he doesn't have a knoif on him

[Anonymous No.11765879]

New launch pad already. SN5 might get testing real soon

[Anonymous No.11765882]

>>11765848
Is that picture the first Falcon 9 launch? That looks nothing like DM-2 on the pad.

[Anonymous No.11765884]

>>11765882
yes

[Anonymous No.11765888]

>>11765879
they've got closures scheduled for next week

[Anonymous No.11765892]

>>11765848
>Arab

Looks like a Sikh

[Anonymous No.11765894]

>>11765892
where's his knoif

[Anonymous No.11765895]

>>11765851
>I never read any of this in the news. Why doesn't the press report on this?
Someone is bullshiting, either Cernan or this guy, the press loves to talk about this, every other report/news on Musk and SpaceX mentions how he used his own money to start it

[Anonymous No.11765898]

>>11765894
Hidden on his legs.

[Anonymous No.11765900]

>>11765898
>ankle carry
hmmmm okay I'll believe it

[Anonymous No.11765901]

>>11765894
Probably on his waist out of view ?

[Anonymous No.11765904]

>>11765894
Buried in the effigy of Shelby out of frame.

[Anonymous No.11765906]

>>11765866
>>11765868
The guys name is posted here >>11765851
>Mohanjit Jolly
He's from India

[Anonymous No.11765911]

>>11765906
>Jolly
>fat
>beard
ELON HIRED SANTA CLAUS
STARLINK DELIVERS DIGITAL PRESENTS TO EVERYONE IN THE WORLD IN ONE NIGHT

[Anonymous No.11765915]

>>11765906
Indian immigrants are generally top tier

[Anonymous No.11765925]

>>11765835
Good, hopefully will prevent the axing of gateway if Grumman is also getting a piece of the pie.

[Anonymous No.11765955]

>>11765563
No individual ships, stations, habits etc should be named after real people. Programs named after mythology are better because it is an ideal and a lofty one at that. The only issue i have is they aways use roman or greek deities, i want to see a woden information gathering rover network, A Belenus sun orbiting probe program, a Tyranis weather satellite system, a Wayland base building
Program, a perun gas giant weather orbiter program and Hermod Mars-Earth communication program. The only reason we don't like mythology recently is because they lazily did artemis because muh Apollo's sister muh womyn bullshit.

[Anonymous No.11765958]

>>11765835
>These first two elements of the Gateway – HALO and PPE – will launch together in 2023
So this confirms Falcon Heavy or Starship co-manifest, right?

[Anonymous No.11765959]

>>11765906
>Jolly
Also traditional Sikh/Punjab name too, no sarcasm.

[Anonymous No.11765961]

>>11765958
currently planned for a Falcon Heavy co-manifest

[Anonymous No.11765966]

>>11765955
>No individual ships, stations, habits etc should be named after real people
why not? It's not like Neil Armstrong is going to come back from the dead and ruin his reputation by shitposting on twitter. He's probably the least controversial figure in all of American history, same goes for most 20th century astronauts.

[Anonymous No.11765975]

>>11765966
Neil was a quiet, humble man. Michael Collins is also a hero but unfortunately no one remembers him

[Anonymous No.11765977]

>>11765955
The biggest city on Mars will be named Elontown, and there's nothing you, I, or anyone else can do to stop it.

[Anonymous No.11765978]

3 more launchs of falcon 9 this month. Shit's packed.

>June 13/14
Starlink
>June 24
Starlink
>June 30
GPS

[Anonymous No.11765980]

>>11765977
Elonopolis

[Anonymous No.11765981]

>>11765975
he's still alive, so still time to ruin his legacy...

[Anonymous No.11765990]

>>11765961
Very nice. It blows my mind that we have a commercial, semi-reusable rocket capable of reproducing the Apollo mission profile and the company just isn't bothering to get it human rated because their next rocket will be so much better.

[Anonymous No.11765992]

>>11765866
>>11765892
Who gives a shit r*dditfags i swear if you start spouting off about them.

[Anonymous No.11765993]

>>11765980
Muskville

[Anonymous No.11765996]

>>11765915
>top tier of India maybe but all the ones I've met are retarded and rude.

[Anonymous No.11765997]

>>11765847
>already confirmed to be Heart of Gold after some Iain M. Banks book
Douglas Adams you fucking pleb

[Anonymous No.11766000]

>>11765966
>>11765977
I fucked up the punctuation, i meant individual ships statons and habitats should be named after people where programs should be mythology.

[Anonymous No.11766005]

>>11765992
>everything is redd*t
I first learned about sikhs years ago on /k/ though

[Anonymous No.11766008]

>>11765990
Way to ruin a good picture

[Anonymous No.11766010]

>>11765835
>Cygnus
nope, that fucker is going uphill on Falcon Heavy

[Anonymous No.11766019]

>>11766005
That was from the post 2016 crowd. R*ddit brings up the old sikh propaganda (and it is propaganda) in damn near every thread. That is why it is easy to figure out which of you are from that garbage website.

[Anonymous No.11766027]

>>11766019
I'm not gonna egg you on because you're gonna take over the thread throwing a tantrum but I'm much older on this site and in general than you think lol

[Anonymous No.11766029]

>>11766010
Cygnus is the tin can, not the rocket. Antares is the rocket.

[Anonymous No.11766030]

>>11766010
Imagine the embarrassment of launching Orion on a FH

[Anonymous No.11766033]

UPDATE: Public Notice of Cameron County Order to Temporarily Close State Highway 4 and Boca Chica Beach

Primary Date June 8, 2020 7:30 a.m. – 8:30 a.m. Closure Scheduled
Primary Date June 10, 2020 6:00 a.m. – 2:00 p.m. Closure Scheduled
Backup Date June 11, 2020 6:00 a.m. – 2:00 p.m. Closure Scheduled
Backup Date June 12, 2020 6:00 a.m. – 2:00 p.m. Closure Scheduled

[Anonymous No.11766034]

>>11766030
Boing would rig it to explode

[Anonymous No.11766035]

>>11766033
cryo tests for SN5?

[Anonymous No.11766036]

>>11766027
You might be and i just go by tells so I can be wrong i just know as a rule of thumb that sikhs, puns, actually posting, and any opposition without substance tend to mean they are snoofags. Anyway to bring this back to spaceflight conversation, what do you think of blue origin.

[Anonymous No.11766037]

>>11766008
you mean improve

[Anonymous No.11766038]

>>11766036
>that pic
Any recent news about New Glenn?

[Anonymous No.11766039]

>>11765847
>[Deleted]
motherfuckers

[Anonymous No.11766040]

>>11766036
I think they should actually launch something, even if it RUDs 30 seconds into flight. If Starship launches before New Glenn there's really not any point to New Glenn.

[Anonymous No.11766041]

>>11766035
>pneumatic proof, cryo proof, static fire

[Anonymous No.11766042]

>>11766033
Oh hell yes

[Anonymous No.11766044]

>>11766019
nobody's even brought up any of that, you're just getting mad about nothing
pancakes.jpg

[Anonymous No.11766046]

>>11766040
>If Starship launches before New Glenn there's really not any point to New Glenn.
Starship launches next year?

[Anonymous No.11766047]

>>11766041
they need to close the roads to move it, then test it, then static fire
one of the tests should be an hour long (I didn't look at the picture)

[Anonymous No.11766048]

>>11766035
June 8 will probably be a farm and equipment test with SN5 being moved into position on June 10th. That or they are only giving an hour to move SN5 then a cryo 2 days later, which could be possible but it is thought that they did cancel the planned test last week.

[Anonymous No.11766049]

>>11766046
It's supposed to.

[Anonymous No.11766051]

>>11766049
A full stack launch? Or just a suborbital hop?

[Anonymous No.11766053]

>[Deleted]

[Anonymous No.11766054]

>>11766051
Full stack. We're supposed to see a hop THIS year.

[Anonymous No.11766056]

>>11766046
Starship launches this year, anon. It will probably slip into next year though.

[Anonymous No.11766057]

>>11766019
>Crying about Sikhs

[Anonymous No.11766058]

>>11766035
cryo/pneumatic/static fire

[Anonymous No.11766059]

>>11766040
I kind of think they know that and have given up

[Anonymous No.11766061]

>>11766040
>If Starship launches before New Glenn there's really not any point to New Glenn.
This. If Starship is going to obsolete a workhorse like F9 (and it will, although I think the tail will be longer than anticipated because oldspace contractors hate change), new unproven partially reusable vehicles are dead in the water. At least other projects like with ESA and China have the "practically obsolete but national interest demands it" thing going for them, BO relies entirely on grabbing contracts from salty Starlink competitors that won't launch with SpaceX, which is a suicidal market that doesn't have long term solvency.

[Anonymous No.11766063]

>>11766044
2 posters started on it, i stopped it before they went further

[Anonymous No.11766070]

>>11766061
The only real starlink competitor OneWeb filed for bankruptcy.

[Anonymous No.11766074]

tried going to NSF and i forgot how fucking awful forum layout was. 4chan has spoiled me

[Anonymous No.11766076]

>>11766061
>BO relies entirely on grabbing contracts from salty Starlink competitors that won't launch with SpaceX, which is a suicidal market that doesn't have long term solvency.
>>11766070
Amazon is working on Project Kuiper. I suspect they'd buy Blue Origin if given a choice.

[Anonymous No.11766078]

>>11766074
I can't believe they're still using simple machines forums in ano domini 2020

[Anonymous No.11766083]

>>11766070
And was the biggest chunk of NG's manifest, but iirc every other contract has been with prospective constellations as well. At least OneWeb may be saved by SpaceForce, I guess.

[Anonymous No.11766085]

>>11766063
you didn't do shit

[Anonymous No.11766086]

>>11766038
No

[Anonymous No.11766087]

>>11766076
So they're going to try to win it by what? Branding? Starlink will have 1000 satellites deployed before blue orgin has a rocket.

[Anonymous No.11766089]

did anybody else go stargazing last night to see the clumped-up Starlink pass?

[Anonymous No.11766090]

>>11765428
Yes, Starlink is the only one exists and google is largest SpaceX's stock holder after Elon.

[Anonymous No.11766091]

>>11765997
oh shit is that the improbability drive craft?

[Anonymous No.11766093]

>>11766083
>At least OneWeb may be saved by SpaceForce
Didn't the military already sign a contract for starlink?

[Anonymous No.11766095]

>>11766087
>So they're going to try to win it by what? Branding?
Bootstrapping internal use. Every Amazon office building and fulfillment center needs a reasonably fast connection to Amazon's datacenters, which limits where they can be located. Switching to Kuiper keeps it all in-house and allows any two-bit flyspeck town with an airport large enough for cargo planes to have a fulfillment center. This massively expands Amazon's potential for same day delivery, and so Amazon will be buying lots of launches.

[Anonymous No.11766097]

>>11766087
Price maybe? or Bandwidth?
We have to wait anon, if there's going to be competition for fast internet in far off areas there's going to be more money poured into space

[Anonymous No.11766098]

>>11766047
1hr closure on 8th (beach remains open) prolly for the move, 10-12th >>11766041

[Anonymous No.11766108]

>>11766093
Yes, but they would rather have a redundant network and simultaneously avoid OneWeb going to China.

[Anonymous No.11766111]

>>11765992
What does reddit have to do with sikhs you absolute fucking mongoloid

[Anonymous No.11766113]

>>11766095
That would make sense, so its still going to happen then. I just can't imagine them competitive with starlink but if they have the network and integration then they may be able to compete

[Anonymous No.11766117]

>>11766089
Be sure to tweet what you see along with #gohumanity to gather some tasty salt.

[Anonymous No.11766118]

>>11766030
Kek imagine sticking Orion in the payload bay of a Starship cargo. The absolute state of spaceflight

[Anonymous No.11766119]

>>11766038
I heard the head engineer at blue origin actually woke up and made a cup of coffee this morning

[Anonymous No.11766120]

>>11766117
pretty sure I'm shadowbanned on twitter

[Anonymous No.11766121]

>>11766120
What did you do?

[Anonymous No.11766122]

>>11766121
dunno, but nobody's following my juicy juicy content

[Anonymous No.11766127]

>>11766122
My twitter account was made purely to shitpost conservative stuff after I grew tired of seeing liberal propaganda, but I started following spaceflight people. I’ve gotten replies from NASA and Tory Bruno and stuff and now a bunch of spaceflight people have followed me and i’m afraid to shitpost now. Back to square 1...

[Anonymous No.11766128]

>>11766097
We don't need money poured into low earth orbit and starlink will pay for mars. I don't want amazon taking that out so they can have more control over the earth. I'm really happy how much of a lead they have.

[Anonymous No.11766129]

>>11766119
fake news, he doesn't drink coffee and has no coffee making supplies

[Anonymous No.11766133]

>>11766129
Yeah you’re right- they’re still trying to design a coffee maker

[Anonymous No.11766139]

>>11766111
>sikhs are so based, not like arabs
>omg sikhs are so badass guyz
>sikhs in Vietnam, my uncle daid they would be on patrol at night and just feel a hand reach over to check if US
>muh knives badass
>omg diversity
Its almost as annoying as the pun chains and song lyrics.

[Anonymous No.11766140]

>>11766108
Thats true.

[Anonymous No.11766144]

>>11766118
Fucking kek

[Anonymous No.11766146]

>>11766113
>I just can't imagine them competitive with starlink
Four words: "Discount for Prime Members."

[Anonymous No.11766148]

>>11766119
It sucks that Blue Origin is going so slow. With NASA and gang it's understandable due to their age and structure, but Blue Origin has a chance to be the Pepsi to SpaceX's Coke but they're not pushing forward.

[Anonymous No.11766155]

>>11766127
Yeah don't shitpost, its worth it to have a space account.

[Anonymous No.11766157]

>>11766127
Make another one without your information and use that to shitpost

[Anonymous No.11766159]

>>11766148
Then we should fill the void and be their sodastream

[Anonymous No.11766162]

>>11766139
Not as annoying as your strawman

[Anonymous No.11766167]

>>11766146
Yep that'll do it.

[Anonymous No.11766168]

>>11766159
>SpaceX establishes the first Martian base
>4ASS lands the next week to steal SpaceX's flag from their base

[Anonymous No.11766179]

>>11766146
Yeah that could be a problem

[Anonymous No.11766190]

>>11766146
it's all for AWS which is where Amazon makes most of their money. Their big clients who actually care about carving a few ms on each transfer would happily pay a premium for a dedicated fast track. Think PoS systems getting people through checkouts faster or competitive video games or critical infrastructure reporting—stuff like that.

[Anonymous No.11766196]

>>11766190
We already sell direct fiber connections to AWS datacenters through partner companies, that'd be faster than any satellite. I'm pretty sure the big push is for getting retail FCs and devices into more hands in rural areas and the third world.

t. AWS dev

[Anonymous No.11766204]

>>11766196
>that'd be faster than any satellite
this is for starlink, but it applies to any constellation:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m05abdGSOxY
it's even faster if they actually figure out the satellite-to-satellite laser link

[Anonymous No.11766211]

>>11766196
>We already sell direct fiber connections to AWS datacenters through partner companies, that'd be faster than any satellite.
Light moves slower through fiber than vaccuum. That speed advantage is one of the big prospective opportunities for Starlink (high frequency trading) but it'll have to wait for the inter-sat laser uplink to take advantage of it.

[Anonymous No.11766222]

>>11765848
Anyone got a better picture?

[Anonymous No.11766233]

>>11766168
>4ASS calls the FAA for a launch window
>"It says that your solid fueled first stage is called Big Chungus Ate All The Rocket Candy, your liquid second stage is Laughing Gas Giga Nigga, your first stage's projected landing site is Senator Shelby's house, your payload fairings have grid fins and are programmed to land on flat-earth fundamentalist churches, and the environmental warning section just says YES."
>"So can we launch or not?"

[Anonymous No.11766249]

>>11766139
lyricposting has been on 4chan much longer than your reddit ass

[Anonymous No.11766257]

>>11766168
We wouldn't fuck with Musk.

We'd be like the SpaceX equivalent of the Dirlewanger Brigade. Doing all of the dirt that the main organization doesn't want to deal with.

[Anonymous No.11766263]

>>11763344
>Who?
>>11766233
>>11766196
Are both me. That's my OC.
> Did he reveal any secrets?
No.
> Is Jeff really a reptilian?
You are what you eat.

[Anonymous No.11766281]

>>11766233
>and the environmental warning section just says YES.
based

[Anonymous No.11766287]

>>11766233
>4ASS crashes local steel market trying to make a Sea Dragon sized rocket candy SRB

[Anonymous No.11766304]

>>11766196
Satellite is faster than fibre for long distance

[Anonymous No.11766309]

>>11766263
>Seattle lib is a retarded shitposter
>not even a good or funny shitposter

[Anonymous No.11766311]

>>11766233
Would you guys watch a live stream of frogs in space? What would make it interesting?

webm semi-related

[Anonymous No.11766319]

Any news on the sls?

[Anonymous No.11766329]

>>11766311
>Would you guys watch a live stream of frogs in space?
Yes.
>What would make it interesting?
Either being launched by amateurs (4ASS) or periodically inducing and removing spin gravity to fuck with them.

[Anonymous No.11766339]

>>11766040
Not really. Blue Origin exists because Bezos wants independent access to space.

[Anonymous No.11766343]

>>11766329
>Either being launched by amateurs (4ASS) or periodically inducing and removing spin gravity to fuck with them.
This

[Anonymous No.11766347]

>>11766319
They re-started assembly after closing for chinky flu but have over the past few months kept there heads down after the Inspector General politely tore NASA a new asshole a few months ago.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RhyDY3kuShQ

[Anonymous No.11766353]

Am i the only one here actually excited for Artemis? It seems like spacex is forcing NASA to go faster which means a lunar presence by NASA and a martian presence by SpaceX within our lifetime.

[Anonymous No.11766358]

>>11766353
Artemis would be cool if it ever launched. I have my doubts that it will unless Jim Bridenstine just says "fuck it, do it all with Falcon Heavy."

[Anonymous No.11766365]

>>11766353
I am, hope it doesn't get fucked up.
jimmyboy is the first NASA admin who was born after we stopped landing on the moon and he is salty af about it, he'll pull this off if they let him

[Anonymous No.11766366]

The first Space force Starship should be called the USS Thunderchild

[Anonymous No.11766371]

>>11766358
that shit looks sketchy
upper stage larger than the first stage is cursed, look at delta 3

[Anonymous No.11766372]

>>11766347
Fucking based. Also 18 billion? Are you fucking kidding me? Could you imagine the progress spacex would have with 18 billion in funding? WHAT THE FUCK

[Anonymous No.11766378]

>>11766358
Boing would demand billions more and years to build the adapter. Not to mention the Congress chimpout which would do everything possible to secure jobs.

[Anonymous No.11766380]

>>11766353
I have never been interested in Artemis because the concept of intermediary stations as a bottleneck to the surface makes no sense. Lunar development interests me but it can't rely on Artemis because the project is too conceptually broken.

[Anonymous No.11766388]

>>11766329
>periodically inducing and removing spin gravity to fuck with them.
How about letting stuff like that and other parts of the habitat be controlled by the live stream chat? Such as lights, music, or internal doors?

I think the largest issue is what to do near the end of the satellite's life. Letting those frogs die up there once food air or water runs out would be bad optics, but making the satellite recoverable would be a challenge.

[Anonymous No.11766391]

>>11766388
>How about letting stuff like that and other parts of the habitat be controlled by the live stream chat? Such as lights, music, or internal doors?
Twitch plays astrobiology. I love it.
>I think the largest issue is what to do near the end of the satellite's life. Letting those frogs die up there once food air or water runs out would be bad optics, but making the satellite recoverable would be a challenge.
Make it deorbit in fresh water (great lakes maybe?) and blow the top. Frogs wander out and keep on froggin'.

[Anonymous No.11766393]

>>11766372
See >>11763501 to really get your blood boiling.

[Anonymous No.11766430]

New thread:
>>11766429
>>11766429
>>11766429

[Anonymous No.11766488]

>>11765616
>>11765629
Star Trek didn't invent the name "Enterprise" you cocksuckers

[Anonymous No.11766508]

>>11765379
Why use high density magnetic object when most of the debris won't be attracted to a magnet when you can instead lob large balloons full of expanding foam onto suborbital trajectories that catch huge amounts of debris and slow them down to suborbital trajectories as well, dropping that debris out of orbit.

[Anonymous No.11766513]

>>11766378
wouldn't it be dynetics or lockheed building the adapter?

[Anonymous No.11766547]

>>11765879
>>11765888
>people thought SN4 blowing up set us back weeks if not months
>one week later new pad is almost ready
don't underestimate speedy gonzales anons

[Anonymous No.11766573]

>>11766319
From the thumbnail I thought that was a picture of a cluster of african mud huts with a grain silo mocked up to be a rocket lmao

[Anonymous No.11766652]

>>11766573
nah just a loser in the mars plug contest

[Anonymous No.11766746]

>>11765851
>Why doesn't the press report on this?