/sci/ - Science & Math

6 more weeks

Wait, what is the point of this general? You guys talk about potentially rocket designs or the logistics of spaceflight?

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1770224502703882509
> Dragon is now operational on 2 launchpads!

https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/1770214627051471132
>Teams test the new emergency chutes from the pad 40 crew tower in Florida
This looks fun

>>16087241
https://twitter.com/TurkeyBeaver/status/1770218124459343894

>>16087236
We sling memes

>>16087237
the number of dragon flights per year is about to double

cringy video cringy op.

MOON TRAIN

>>16087259
>cringy op
beats a bunch of nigger mugshots

>>16087236
we fantasize about the coming judgement of e*rthers

https://live.douyin.com/317636109251

https://weibo.com/l/wblive/p/show/1022:2321325013736531558655
Long March 8 Y3 is launching the Queqiao-2 lunar relay satellite in an hour, and we've actually got a local launch stream

>>16087266
i love niggers.

>Somewhat to the ESA's embarrassment, the continent has had to purchase several launches from its direct competitor in launch, SpaceX, during the last two years. In 2023, Europe launched its Euclid space telescope on a Falcon 9 rocket, and later this year, an ESA Earth observation satellite and an ESA asteroid probe will launch on Falcon 9 missions.
spacex doesnt count as a competitor if you're self sabotaging. you cant say you ran a race if you never joined the race to begin with.

>>16087271
did he miss the launch the other day? it had lunar satellites that failed to insert into the correct orbit.

>>16087228
Hey OP,how come you didnt use this for pic? "Dragon 2 now vertical on Pad 40 for first time"
More relevant than a fake animation

>>16087285
true

>>16087285
The ESA suck the Cock

>>16087290
op is a tranny trying to derail sfg. check the op, its got furry stuff baked in

>>16087271
>>16087272
launch might be getting close

when is the next ift?

>>16087333
NET 2 weeks times 3

>>16087336
so times that by 4 to deal with elon time, its about 6 months. sounds accurate. hopefully they manage to build a reusable launch site.

>>16087341
Was that launch site damaged?

>>16087236
Juno, parker, webb, Hubble, super telescopes, ligo, rovers, new horizons, space helicopters, up coming missions, starlink 6000 says up, starship, sls, Artemis, super heavy booster, falcon heavy, falcon 9, new glenn b 4, blue ring, moon missions, mars shots, Europa, psyche, Lucy, sample returns from asteroids, Nancy grace. Poop

>>16087341
Starship will be early to mid May. He's got 4 ready to go. They are modding and waiting on the faa. 8 total built, 4 to crash. If the faa hope out of the way and it won't it would be late April.

>>16087236
We judge newfriends

>>16087272

>>16087276
racist

>>16087236
This is where elons xitter feed gets posted

>>16087342
yes, as always.
makes me skeptical of the full and rapid reusability stuff if they need to spend months fixing the launch site every time. Elon cheaped out on the pad and it shows.
I think parts on the pad and the ship breaking each time has a lot to do with the fact that the vehicle and launch site are bombarded by shockwaves for several seconds at launch due to no flame trench. Maybe one day they can move to pad 39A and have their problems solved.

>>16087346
they already had a backlog of ships when IFT1 flew. Bottleneck is always pad repair and FAA, and this flight was a mishap jsut like IFT2 so I expect it to take a similar time to solve.

>>16087355
>Maybe one day they can move to pad 39A and have their problems solved.
Thanks for letting everyone know that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

>>16087360
dont assume i dont know about the starship infrastructure there, passive agressive fag

>>16087341
took 4 months between launch 2 and 3.

>>16087355
maybe you should shut the fuck up about things you're completely ignorant of, FAGGOT

>>16087236
I throw rocks at "people" like you.

>>16087355
once everything that can break has broken, all that will remain is a launch-proof pad.

>>16087383
smoke my cock like a cuban cigar

>>16087412
...you want him to cut the tip off and light it on fire?

NOOOOO I DON'T WANT TO FALL INTO JUPITER I'M SORRY GOD NO NO NO AAAAAHHHHH!!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbn-tuYcScI

>>16087369
The LC-39A construction has a similar version of the orbital launch mount seen in Starbase. The Apollo trench at LC-39 that they're using for Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy is only rated to 1.5x the thrust of a Saturn V, not the 2.something Superheavy kicks out.

>>16087420
They launched on bare concrete. are you telling me they wont launch on a custom designed pad?

>>16087236
We watch steel tanks being assembled in Bumfuck Nowhere, Texas

>>16087416
i want him to puff every last hit because he cant afford another one

>>16087422
I don't know how you took that as your conclusion, but it should be noted that the flame trench at LC-39A is only 40 feet deep (about 13 meters) while the OLM at Starbase is 18 meters tall. A flame trench is just a diverter device, and the energy going down to the ground is invariant.

>>16087355
You are so clueless, there was a NASA study that found that SpaceX's setup (90 degree parallel no diverter) is actually most ideal for deflecting sound waves, and thats without the novel water deluge they have set up

>>16087426
>flame trench at LC-39A is only 40 feet deep (about 13 meters) while the OLM at Starbase is 18 meters tall.
I actually had no clue about that, godamn, if Starship went up there it might just crater the flame trench

>>16087429
thats a reason to try it.

>>16087263
CHOO CHOO
ALL ABOARD THE GENSOKYO EXPRESS

>>16087428
you are smoking. were all previous rocket engineers wrong? 90 degrees doesnt make any sense for sound supression.

>>16087417
Imagine trillions of rogue jupiters in the milkway, you can't even see them

>>16087241
https://youtu.be/dGW-xK22TNk?t=35

>>16087469
can they travel at 1/2 speed of light?

>>16087456
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/19710023719/downloads/19710023719.pdf

Read it and weep

>still seething about the showerhead diverter
KEEK. what even broke? i saw a cabletray. trenchtrannies delusional as fuck

Look -- you want high ISP? Well then, we're going to have to break a few eggs.

TOXMAX go vroom vroom.

>>16087228
https://youtu.be/pQwW8PO7bj0?feature=shared

>>16087513
>fluorine boiloff vent

>>16087513
>390C separation of two dense fluids with a common bulkhead

>>16087511
Lithium is $116/kg, Fluorine is $1900/kg, and Cesium is $73,400/kg, although that's just generic store-brand Cesium. Cs-137 is probably a bit pricier.

Just how big a rocket are we going to be gassing up, exactly?

>>16087528
it says "insulated wall" right there

>>16087513
Would be based, but good luck finding a material capable of handling that temperature difference while flourine tries to rape it.

>>16087228
amazing OP, good job. 10/10 thread

https://twitter.com/raz_liu/status/1770297598303445094
>Queqiao-2 antenna opens, shot by CZ-8 upper stage

>>16087561
BOOOOOIIIIOOOOIIIIIOOOOOIIIIINNNNNNGGGG!!!!

>>16086994
Columbia was really the nail in the coffin for America's optimistic age. I was young, but I remember before that in school one day they wheeled out the TV and showed us some recording from an astronaut on the ISS. I don't remember much but the gist of it was the plan for finishing the ISS with a late 90s/early 00's vaporwave animation that continued on showing us going back to the moon and then Mars. Basically the point was to say be good boys and girls, and study hard, so that you can be an astronaut and go to mars. Then Columbia blew up, we invaded Iraq the next month, and the rest is history.

>>16087469
I think the idea of rouge failed dwarf star/super Jupiter system independently orbiting the galactic center brings up an interesting question. What do you call them? They're obviously not stars, but they are also not planets, since they are their systems CoG (excepting binary systems, ect..) Trillions per galaxy may be a stretch, but it's likely that such systems make up at least a portion of any given galaxy's mass, and they'd be very hard to observe directly, so perhaps theus "dark stars" are at least partly responsible for the phenomenon we call dark matter.

Assuming a reduction of 45% time between each Starship launch, SpaceX will achieve a cadence of 1 launch per day by 1st August 2024

Huh, since google decided to just straight up tell me spaceguy5s full name when I searched it I was able to find his LinkedIn and he is an actual team manager at NASAs Alabama complex and makes about 126k a year. I don’t really get why it was so easy for me to find this all out, it was all front page of google stuff

https://twitter.com/Gwynne_Shotwell/status/1770261019237261778

Lol

>>16087685
More like goon shotwell hnnggghhh

https://twitter.com/DrPhiltill/status/1770318413652541582

>>16087693
what's so special with compute in space? you'd need to heat it up to some degree. it's more prone to errors from space radiation. rad hardening is pretty expensive at chip level. I don't see the benefits but I also don't know much about it so there's that

>>16087685

>>16087691

>>16087694
Its computer anywhere from the world. You could connect to starlink and have starlink connect to another ground relay which connects to a server some thousand kms away for compute, or you can just connect directly to compute above the sky and get rich compute access <20 ms ANYWHERE in the world.

I think there's a some special and ripe opportunity there. Something that is untapped market.

>>16087693
hardware will be the very last thing these ghouls take from my hands
I live in fear of the day that my only options are Linux or a remote OS

>>16087513
>TOX-MAX
kek, this is what the sky would look like after a launch

>>16087694
Heat rejection would actually be the problem, not heating. Computers put out masses and masses of waste heat and in space you can't just dump it into nearby cool fluids like a river or the atmosphere. Of course, this is solvable but adds an extra friction.

The hyperscalers already run basically lights out and decomission whole datacenters at a time when enough stuff fails inside them, so not being able to do maintenance isn't an issue either.

I guess this is predicated on massive space-based solar making it economical to do compute up there, but I'm a bit skeptical that the numbers will work out in favour of space datacenters any time soon. Power is the bulk of the total cost of a datacenter, but that already includes lots of cooling and that is worse in space; add on the cost of building for space and launch costs and, yeah, I doubt it works out.

A use-case might be extra data storage redundancy: most disaster are unlikely to affect both the surface of the Earth and whatever orbits space datacenters are flying in (except for nuclear war). Even if compute-sats aren't going to displace terrestrial compute economically, they might provide value like this. But, by the same token, space datacenters won't obsolete terrestrial datacenters because they're more vulnerable to things like solar flares.

I don't think I buy latency arguments like >>16087699 because, y'know, satellites move. You've either got to do some kind of complicated handing off of work so that it's always resident on the overhead satellite or eat a latency increase as yours moves away. I also expect that the cost of building out a sufficiently dense network of compute-sats is unfavourable compared to building out a sufficiently dense network of terrestrial datacenters (as Google, Microsoft and Amazon have already largely done), which is also easier since you can do it incrementally and get value from serving (e.g.) just rich Americans rather than being all-or-nothing.

>>16087723
you might be able to run chips in space pretty hot and then let the T^4 take care of it

>>16087693
https://twitter.com/somefoundersalt/status/1770193852244049942

>>16087694
>you'd need to heat it up to some degree
"Computers in space" is a classic filter, because nobody actually knows how heat transfer works in space.

>>16087723
>satellites move
Yes, but if your compute is only being done in <1 sec of workload or 1 min or 15 minutes, however many minutes it takes for sats to move away from your zone, then its absolutely worth it.

How many work are there where you only need small 1 sec - 15 minute window for powerful computes? A LOT. There will be trade offs where you need extremely powerful computes to do long periods of computes, but I think sat computes will have a use case that we aren't aware of it.

>>16087730
Not with the regular chips we have today. Thermal degradation starts kicking in once you get anywhere near 400 K for high-performance datacenter chips, and the stuff certified for HTOL is typically making performance compromises to get that certification (at a given cost). I don't even think it's a 'pick two' situation: with existing silicon processes, high performance chips are butting up against what look like physical limits and you might not be able to get them to work acceptably at high temperatures for any price. Maybe gallium chips or photonics or something would move the frontier, but those don't exist.

>>16087422
>bare concrete
it was the super tough high tech long dry space concrete that was (theoretically) supposed to handle all that thrust. worth trying out imo given they can't actually dig 20 feet down at their launch site since it's swampland

>>16087723
laser to laser communication between starlinks. probably not going to be actually worth it until a few countries start cutting the undersea internet pipes

is it hard to build satellites resistant to powerful solar flares? or is it cheaper to just replace them once fucked?

>>16087753
3 arm chips with polling costs <$100.
rad proof chips costs $100K

Its a no brainer

>>16087740
Issue is that this is competing against Cloudflare Workers and Lambda@Edge and whatever GCS's and Azure's versions of those are, all of which exist and benefit from sharing infrastructure costs with other lines of business and can be incrementally improved. If your two-way latency budget is 5 ms, it doesn't matter if you're being served by a terrestrial datacenter 200 km away or a LEO compute-sat 300 km away, but the former probably already exists and is likely cheaper than the latter.

>>16087751
Oh, yeah, I am bullish on Starlink doing inter-sat routing. Finance bois will pay lots of money to get stock prices from Tokyo to New York a few milliseconds quicker, and the extra backhaul option is nice for the rest of us. But this absolutely doesn't require having compute up there.

speaking of cooling chips in space is there any reason to not do total submersion in mineral oil for them?
https://www.pugetsystems.com/mineral-oil-pc/
I know some data centers are starting to actually scale the idea. Not sure what liquid would be best for space. seems a bunch of liquid would be way easier to heat disperse efficiently

>>16087759
If the budget is 300 ms for "real time" processing, and your starlink connection from ground to cloudflare server uses 300 ms because there's no cloudflare near where you're located, then its a non starter.

If you can get ~5 ms access to starlink and onboard compute spin up costs ~100 ms, thats 200 ms of free compute usage for you.

>>16087763
https://www.cloudflare.com/en-gb/network/

Just eyeballing it, there aren't many places with both significant populations and not being within a few hundred kilometers of a Cloudflare datacenter. If you live in Perth or Ndjamena, LEO compute-sats might make sense today. But the capital cost to Cloudflare to serve 18 million Chads or the two hundred people and fifty million sheep in Western Australia is the cost of a datacenter, while the LEO compute-sat business needs ~hundreds of datacenters in orbit before they can serve anyone anywhere who has any kind of latency requirement. And you'd better be competitive on unit costs or else Cloudflare (or Amazon, or Google, or Microsoft) can move in on your exclusively-served locations and eat your lunch. I'm not saying it's impossible, but I find it difficult to imagine that any savings from space based solar can possibly offset all of the operating & capital costs caused by doing space datacenters.

>>16087694
If you're going to be putting an industry in space, your best option is to process something that has low mass to save on launch costs. Conveniently, data has no mass.
While beam solar power is somewhat viable with Starship, if you beam processed data instead of raw power, you don't need a "killer cancer beam of doom" looming over you.

>>16087561
>cheechow 2

>>16087776
1) cloudflares are not everywhere on the planet
2) Routing inefficiencies from landline will be the expensive.

Opportunities are there

https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/03/its-official-europe-turns-to-the-falcon-9-to-launch-its-navigation-satellites/
> The heightened security measures are due to the proprietary technology incorporated into the satellites, which cost hundreds of millions of euros to build; they perform a similar function to US-manufactured Global Positioning System satellites. The Florida launches will be the first time Galileo satellites, which are used for civilian and military purposes, have been exported outside of European territory.
>Due to the extra overhead related to the national security mission, the European Union agreed to pay 180 million euros for the two launches, or about $196 million. This represents about a 30 percent premium over the standard launch price of $67 million for a Falcon 9 launch.

>>16087844
D...DERP

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k1oDLX5wwH0
>Second Starship Tower Progress | SpaceX Boca Chica

>>16087859

>>16087861

>>16087844
eurobros...

>>16087869

>>16087844
>This represents about a 30 percent premium over the standard launch price of $67 million for a Falcon 9 launch.
shotwell milking the euros for extra humiliation… bueno
This is what you get for the retarded rollout/retirement of A6/A5

>>16087885
its still much cheaper than A6 will be lol
and they are paying for extra stuff with the security, this is not just a "fuck you" arbitrary price increase

Europe needs indepedent access to space.

>china sent another satellite to the moon
ok...
>it'll be used to communicate with two robotic landers
sad

>>16087931
https://www.businessinsider.com/china-could-attack-us-satellites-from-moon-warns-general-2024-3

>>16087423
Yessir.

>>16087913
Yeah and they need to put in the work to do it. But they’re stuck at a crossroads
>can’t actually compete against spacex internationally
>need to rely on internal euro market and national security type launches
>this market is very small
>this disincentivizes reusable rockets
>this limits the amount of capital available for innovation
>protectionism forces other unfavourable labour conditions on them not dissimilar from NASA being mandated SRBs (among other things) by congress
They combine this with very foolish decisions like shutting down A5 early (lol, lmao) and it leaves them unable to react to fluid market and political conditions like soyuz becoming nonviable after dimitri stole that oneweb launch
They also rely too much on the crutch of their nearly perfect launch location, which has left them comfortable with not pursuing engineering advancements

>>16087933
>how do you know?
>because that’s what we want to do

>>16087944
There's only one thing left to do then

>>16087423
I still can't believe they have a rocket test facility a stone throw away from Mexico.

>>16087933
How feasible is this?
>set up a Project Harp on the lunar surface
>use in-situ tech to convert lunar soil into cannonballs
>fire it at sats in earth orbit

>>16087955
lunar railgun i mean

>>16087948
It’s a dumb decision but it’s not the worst decision! ESA planned on cooperating with Russia many times (thinking especially about the weird joint ATV/Orel capsule they wanted to build). And ESA has been interested in collaborating with China through ILRS to the Moon. Maybe Ariane could do some joint venture with CALT

>>16087963

Diplomatically it wouldn't work either, the US frequently pressures the Euros not to work with China.
They're also not allowed to use US tech when they do so, for example UAE's rover wasn't able to launch on China's rocket because it had ITAR restricted technologies.
if ESA uses their own technology then they can cooperate to some degree.

>>16087970
ehhh it’s funny but my gut tells me there’s like a 90% chance you just stole this from some actually pillow-biting ‘spitter’ user on twitter; so I can’t laugh at it out of principal

>>16088026
I got it from X

is starship really going to be $30 million to launch by next year? or did berger lie to us?

>>16087950
In case we decide to send illegals to space.

>>16088026
I get all my memes from r*eddit

>>16088041
>is starship really going to be $30 million to launch by next year?
A report by Payload estimates that each stack costs ~$90M to manufacture, ~$27M for the ship and ~$63M for the booster. Just recovering the booster would put you in the right ballpark.

https://files.catbox.moe/2s0y7b.pdf
Figures on page 28.

>>16088050

>>16088057
>>16088050
either way, $30 million to launch 100 tons is going to get alot of customers. you can put three space station modules into orbit for the price of a single dragon launch.

I need assistance fellas
is there not a screenshot of some big wig saying new glenn will be ready before falcon heavy, because rocket science isn't as easy as "sticking 3 boosters together"?

>>16088060
it's not that easy in spoonfeedery

>>16087290
That last step looks like a pain if you miss it.

>>16087944
really the only incentive they have to make a reusable launch vehicle is for national prestiege. I think they will start getting serious about making an f9 ripoff once china is flying reusable rockets. meanwhile russia will never make reusable launch vehicles

>>16087561
>shot by
I misread that and thought the chinks were shooting satellites now.

https://twitter.com/VardaSpace/status/1770450983815901194

https://chemrxiv.org/engage/chemrxiv/article-details/65f8810e66c138172940cbf4
>Return of the Ritonavir: A Study on the Stability of Pharmaceuticals Processed in Orbit

>>16088096
https://twitter.com/VardaSpace/status/1770450987263697277

https://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acs.cgd.2c01017
>Ritonavir Form III: A Coincidental Concurrent Discovery

>>16088098
https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexknapp/2024/03/20/this-startup-is-one-step-closer-to-making-drugs-in-space/?sh=114bbba16b8e

>But why would anyone want to manufacture drugs in space? They’re expensive enough already, and rockets aren't cheap. The answer lies in the process of crystallization. In many drugs, the way that crystallization occurs can have major impacts on manufacturing costs, overall quality, stability and how well it works on patients. Plus, it can determine whether it can be made as a pill or will require an IV.
>And as it turns out, in the microgravity of space, it’s easier to make certain crystals than it is here on Earth, and to have finer control over the process. That’s why experiments with protein crystallization have been ongoing on the International Space Station for over two decades now. In the past year, pharmaceutical giants Bristol Myers Squibb and Lilly have both established protein crystallization experiments to the International Space Station.

IFT-3 bros we did it!

>>16088106
where is this from

Booster delivery

>>16088125
Your mom's dildo is here.

>>16088060
"it's not that easy in rocketry"

>>16088060
it was Charlie Bolden and it wasn't New Glenn, it was SLS
here's the full clip
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ptPdlVAwFg

>>16088116
https://russianspaceweb.com/2024.html

>>16088125
>SRBs

we're in dire need of a surprise announcement, like an unannounced space station is getting launched next month

What does /sfg/ think of taking Engineering Failure Analyais and Intro to Aero Structures as my concentration electives?

https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/02/elon-musk-i-will-eat-my-hat-if-a-competitors-rocket-flies-before-2023/

he turned out to be right, Vulcan had its maiden flight in jan 8 2024

>>16088173
is that interesting to you? sounds as good as any

>>16088175
only because BE-4 blew up on the test stand
he almost had to eat it

>>16088179
It is. All the other electives I can take this year are either not really related to my planned path for aerospace (i.e. supply chain or renewable energy) or I just cant take it yet. I wouldve liked to take Propulsion and Combustion Systems but I have Thermodynamics as a prerequisite which I unfortunately have to take the semester its available so.

>>16088182
>Maybe that plan works out, but I will seriously eat my hat with a side of mustard if that rocket flies a national security spacecraft before 2023

It might have squeezed out a test launch in late 2023, but Dream Chaser slowness would have pushed any NatSec launch into 2024.

>>16088175
lel that face he makes reminds me of the meme with "success breeds jealousy"

I think they should make a partially reusable variant of Starship: Super Heavy booster as is + second stage powered by 1 Raptor Vacuum and start launching Starlink/shield on it immediately.

>>16088188
>1 Raptor Vacuum
gravity losses would be insane. you would need to use at least 4 vaccum engines.

>>16088188
>33 raptors into the drink is nothing but let's save 5 raptors so that we can get an insanely inefficient 2nd stage
ok

>>16088195
well you land the 33 raptors and expend only the vacs

>>16088196
>Super Heavy booster as is

>>16088195
starship isnt an insanely inefficient 2nd stage tranny. its actually the most efficient by far.

>>16088206
with only one vacuum raptor

>>16087694
The benefit here is reducing the required downlink bandwidth by processing raw data on orbit and sending the results rather than transmitting everything down for processing. With how expensive and overloaded a lot of spacecraft communications options are these days (think DSN getting swamped during the Artemis 1 cubesat fuckery), this could actually be a pretty attractive option.

>>16088212
that makes it more efficient because theres less overall weight...

>>16088213
yeah, cost of transmission vs cost of local processing
general purpose data centers in space sound like they would need some tech development even assuming Starship works and mass is cheap

>>16087944
Euros have issued the US a challenge.
In a few years SpaceX won't be able to compete.

>>16088214
except not because you'd get gravity losses up the ass from having to burn at like 80 degrees from prograde to stop it falling too fast

>>16088226
>gravity losses
nice way to let us all know you know nothing about what your talking about. kek.

>>16088229
explain how I'm wrong

>>16088225
>this however will be their biggest weakness in a few years
This is pure cope. Falcon 9 is laughing at the Euro's fumbling. Starship doesn't even notice that they exist.

>>16088225
Let's see will the european numbnuts be able to compete with a successful private owned company

I think all the tourists finally cleared off

estronaut started a new podcast

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oGY-4QApGk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0oUejtpVmo
>SpaceX Starship Re-entry and Breakup: 3 Render Simulations!

>>16088225
I wish what he said was true, but it just isn't
europe and EU specifically is becoming just more and more bureaucratic
things are getting worse, not better

>>16088175
It's important to remember that he wants competition. More rockets means more space economy, everybody wins. Especially if you buy that multiplanetary backup plan stuff. So everything he says about ULA, Blue Origin, etc. is designed to egg them on. He's spent years trying to get Bezos to care about Blue Origin and not screwing models on his yacht

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3F8qf7Ann9w
>4K SpaceX Starbase Texas 3/19/24 2nd Orbital Launch Tower and Complex Work, Starfactory, Starship

>>16088276
pretty busy at the pad

https://www.seti.org/press-release/giant-volcano-discovered-mars

https://www.hou.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2024/pdf/2745.pdf

>>16088288
> Figure 2. Newly discovered giant volcano is located in the “middle of the action” on Mars. Topographic map showing the iconic location of the Noctis volcano between the largest volcanic and canyon provinces on Mars. (Credit: Background image: NASA Mars Global Surveyor (MGS) Mars Orbiter Laser Altimeter (MOLA) digital elevation model. Geologic interpretation & annotations by Pascal Lee and Sourabh Shubham 2024).).

>>16088290
>Figure 3: Topographic map of the Noctis volcano.
The Noctis volcano does not present the conventional cone shape of a typical volcano because a long history of deep fracturing and erosion has modified it. However, upon close inspection, key features indicative of a volcano are recognizable. Within the “inner zone” delineating the highest elevation remains of the volcano, an arc of high mesas marks the central summit area, culminating at +9022 m (29,600 ft). Preserved portions of the volcano’s flanks extend downhill in different directions to the outer edge of the “outer zone,” 225 km (140 miles) away from the summit area. A caldera remnant – the remains of a collapsed volcanic crater once host to a lava lake – can be seen near the center of the structure. Lava flows, pyroclastic deposits (made of volcanic particulate materials such as ash, cinders, pumice and tephra) and hydrothermal mineral deposits occur in several areas within the perimeter of the volcanic structure. The map also shows the rootless cone field and possible extent of shallow buried glacier ice reported in this study, in relation to the “relict glacier” discovered in 2023. Noctis Landing, a candidate landing site for future robotic and human exploration, is also shown. (Credit: Background images: NASA Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter (MRO) Context Camera (CTX) mosaic and Mars Global Surveyor (MGS) Mars Orbiter Laser Altimeter (MOLA) digital elevation model. Geologic interpretation & annotations by Pascal Lee & Sourabh Shubham 2024).

>>16088295
it looks nothing like a volcano. this shits so fake.

>>16088295
> As mysteries surrounding the Noctis volcano continue to puzzle scientists, the site is already emerging as an exciting new location to study Mars’ geologic evolution, search for life, and plan future robotic and human exploration. The possible presence of glacier ice at shallow depths near the equator means that humans could potentially explore a less frigid part of the planet while still being able to extract water for hydration and manufacturing rocket fuel (by breaking down H2O into hydrogen and oxygen).

>>16088295
Green text your shit fag

>>16088296
its an eroded volcano

>>16088304
soil is eroded plants. does that make it still plants? THINK FOR YOUR FUCKING SELF QUEER.

>>16088304
FUCIKING IDIOT!!!11

https://twitter.com/Firefly_Space/status/1770495311867261096
6 second Miranda test firing video

>>16088323
>RP-1 in 2024

>>16088311
like I said, its an eroded volcano, not a volcano
just like soil isn't a plant, its an eroded plant

https://twitter.com/Firefly_Space/status/1770495311867261096

>>16087693
https://twitter.com/DrPhiltill/status/1770497509757960295

12 tweet thread from phil about cooling in space

https://twitter.com/astrobotic/status/1770451410926109123

>>16088288
>>16088290
>>16088295
>valles marineris wasnt carved but water but by lava
MARS IS WATERLESS

>>16088225
>US earned
the gov is actively trying to lawfare the owner of their hot shot space company since they dont like him. They have earned not much respect, NASA is just a inefficient and laden with parasitical bloat as ESA.

Here is food for thought. What would /sfg/ look right now if SpaceX did not exist. Would there even be a dedicated general like it for space? Or just random space breads popping up on /sci/ only to slide into obscurity with some IQ shitposters dumping a few rounds into them

>>16088375
We'd be tankwatching Blue Origin like we were about to raid Area 51

>>16087762
Certainly could work. They use ammonia in the radiators on the ISS. You'd probably want a JWST tier solar shade shielding your computer housing and radiators from the sun and a way to keep your spacecraft oriented.

>>16088225
God I hate these coping "We'll catch up when they get complacent!" bullshit. No 'we' will not catch up because europe has the same bullshit as NASA but without any of the regional security autism that'd force something to happen. Eruope would rather not go to space than allow money to go to a single country.

>>16087228

>>16088383
based, reich is a fucking retard

>>16088375
schizoposting about depots and methalox and reusability

>>16088359
Mars has enough frozen groundwater at its equator to cover most of the planet in oceans.

https://twitter.com/northropgrumman/status/1770495526565196052
>Drum Roll Please
>In partnership with Firefly_Space, we're expanding access to space with our co-developed Medium Launch Vehicle.

Looks like the Antares 300 might have a shorter career than its predecessors

>>16088411
Couldn't care less.
>>16088387
There is zero reason to put computers in space. Everything on earth is cheaper.
Same reason solar power stays on earth.

>>16088411

>>16088413
streaming raw data isn't free

>>16088411
the US is required to have at least two working rockets capable of hitting all the major orbits
also NG probably lobbied the crap out of it

>>16088421
>the US is required to have at least two working rockets capable of hitting all the major orbits

Which are covered by SpaceX and BlueLA.

What happened to the ULA deal? I thought an announcement was imminent?

>>16088438
It's only March.

>>16088130

>>16088434
Why have one redundancy when you can have two for twice the price? They're not going to turn down more capacity when it's coming from a comfortably familiar name, and it doesn't hurt that MLV is one set of landing legs and grid fins away from evolving into a Falcon 9 lite.

>>16087336
>>16087233
Multiply the stated time by 3.14 and you get July 18th as the next launch date. This is one of Elon's inside jokes, they always divide the date by pi to fuck with the public.

>>16088438
i imagine its a big deal that will be undergoing alot of scrutiny so they need time to get it right. ULA was made by the feds, so everything needs to be in proper order.

>>16088059
There's literally zero way they're going to provide the heaviest lift launch vehicle in history at zero profit margin, especially at first. I would expect at minimum $100M for 1 commercial launch with a customer.

>>16088466
whos the fking customer other than NASA and NRO?

>>16088470
thats the secret to why they will fail.

>>16088470
some japanese company is the first customer
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superbird-9

>>16088470
people who want to move to Mars?

>>16088413
You're thinking too small. >>16088420 has the right idea. Who needs to pay for transit when your datacenter is moving at 28000 kph? "Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon filled with tape" meet "Never underestimate the bandwidth of a satellite full of SSDs in orbit"

If you go GEO, you'll additionally always have access to your data. It's the ultimate backup plan.

https://twitter.com/neuralink/status/1770537886389313831

>>16088470
Everyone who launches satellites right now plus all the upcoming constellations plus everyone who would given lower costs / kg.

>>16088470
k2 making big satellites, gravitics, vast, dear moon 1 and 2, isaacman has a test with a dragon docking with starship, rideshare with a bunch of spacetugs
and then of course you are going to have more businesses coming late, perhaps a bunch of them are already designing something but haven't just released it publically yet
axiom and voyager-airbus will probably launch space stations modules with starhsip too

>>16088478
Not spaceflight kill yourself NOW NOW NOW NOW NOW NOW

>>16088476
You're legitimately retarded.
>>16088420
It's very cheap see Starlink for proof. Launching stuff into space isn't.

>>16087612
>What do you call them?
Nigger dwarfs

>>16088478
>We’ll be live streaming an update on X today at 2:30 pm
probably california time? 2:30pm texas time was 25min ago, but cali time it will be in 1h 35min

>>16088480
most of those are vaporware
starshield is the only one i believe is going to happen

>>16088478
Is that Elon talking?

>>16088482
launching stuff into space is going to be very cheap soon and eventually you saturate all the bandwidth

>>16088485
Neuralink updated the post to specify 2:30 pacific

>>16088486
rideshare is guaranteed to happen, its simple economics

>>16088466
SpaceX isn't selling Falcon launches at their internal cost of some $20 mil per.

>>16088487
not necessarily
neuralink implanted a human with a neuralink chip like a month or two ago, this is probably about the results

>I Noticed Something Interesting about Elon Musk's Tweets

>>16088050
>A report by Payload estimates that each stack costs ~$90M to manufacture, ~$27M for the ship and ~$63M for the booster. Just recovering the booster would put you in the right ballpark.
no, you can't just split it up like that and say that reusing the booster costs $0. those cost estimates are based on building 6 ships a year, so the $35 million labor number is 1/6 of the $210 million total labor cost of starbase mentioned on page 29. if you're launching 6 times a year, then the labor cost per launch is still $35 million regardless of how much of the rocket gets reused. even assuming costless reuse of super heavy, that still pushes the price over $50 million.
if we get to full reuse and 10+ launches a year, then a $30 million total cost starts to look feasible.

>>16088507
>full reuse
>10 launches a year

>>16088411
what exactly does NG add to this that firefly couldn't have done on their own? a wallops launch license?

>>16088507
A reused Starship has zero manufacturing labor costs.

>>16088516
Have a reliable launch vehicle.

>>16087236
To post flat earth webms

>>16088519
doesn't matter, those 2100 employees at starbase are getting paid either way. in econ 101 terms it's an average fixed cost and the only way to get it down is to get the launch cadence up.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ula/comments/kkmoyz/what_is_ulas_internal_view_and_reaction_to/
r/ula: What is ULA's internal view of Starship
This is a very interesting read.

>>16088516
What did Northrop bring to the Antares that Orbital Sciences couldn't have done on their own?

>>16088489
So 50 minutes from now?

>>16088546
$7.8 billion

>>16088507
>biggest rocket in history costs less than Falcon Heavy
ridiculous

>>16088531
got the video without the schizo text?

>>16088551
Falcon Heavy are partially expended.

>>16088533
youre a fucking retard. im not gonna even explain why.

>>16088533
why not jsat fire them all in between launches, and rehire just before?

why dies starship not use gridfins when its a proven technology?

>>16088478
>>16088485
>>16088489
>>16088547
Someone please post a link to the livestream tweet, but not the bullshit /i/broadcasts/ one. thanks

>>16088567
a livestream just flew over my house

https://youtu.be/eaFyTIsowqY

>>16088566
gridfins only give appreciable control authority when the vehicle is supersonic (I think)
they wouldn't work for the bellyflop

>>16088570
I stopped watching this guys videos a year or two ago, severe EDS

>>16088561
its trudeau
high cadence amortizes fixed costs.
>>16088566
Difference between orbital and suborbital reentry.

>>16088551
it's like back like the mk1 days musk would be throwing around all these crazy-sounding cost numbers and we were all saying that if it could do even a tenth of what he was saying it'd still be the biggest thing to ever happen to spaceflight? we're basically at that point.
>>16088561
weird, it was pretty easy for me to explain why you're a retard

>>16088533
The ongoing cost of the manufacturing base and the operating technicians are part of the operational cost of the program and the production costs of ships are going to vary with the production rate of Starship and Superheavy. These two things together are not equivalent to the current production costs of Starship and Superheavy.

>>16088558
Nope dont have it

>>16088570
oh this dude was actually at the launch

>>16088587
lmao, he looks just like I expected

>https://vocaroo.com/16FkdT1peKXm
>You're Patrick Bateman, what do you think about 4chan's /sfg/ (dedicated spaceflight thread) . Rant.

>GMTI tracks overlaid on a SAR image
a look at what's possible with starshield, except that it would be a livestream with instant data analysis from machine learning readily available to the government

>AWACs and other intelligence aircraft are being retired because they're being replaced by starshield
https://www.twz.com/space/if-spacexs-secret-constellation-is-what-we-think-it-is-its-game-changing

>>16088507
>>16088533
The anon who originally asked about $30 million didn't specify, but the logical interpretation is that he was asking about the marginal cost to SpaceX--that is, if SpaceX decides to launch an extra Starship, how much more money do they spend than if they didn't do so. The pre-existing $210M/year labor cost at Starbase would contribute to the average cost of a launch, but not the marginal cost.

>>16087933
>OOGABOOGA SCARY COMMIES AHHHH!!!
>now gibsmedat funding
Thats DoD 101 kids

>>16088616
Get the shittle OUT OF THAT STARSHIP PICTURE YOU FUCKING SMELLY SUBHUMAN MONGREL

>>16088610
While it is true that to DoD begs for money only a wumao would pretend that China is not a hostile adversary to America.

>>16087286
That was a different lunar mission

>>16088570
lol he is shilling some news app at the end
>each story comes with information about the bias and factuality
come on now, jesus christ

https://twitter.com/neuralink/status/1770563939413496146

livestream on

>>16088567
https://twitter.com/neuralink/status/1770563939413496146


LIVE LIVE LIVE

>>16088641
>>16088640
KILL YOURSELF YOU NASTY NIGGERS THIS IS NOT SPACEFLIGHT GET THIS CRIPPLE OFF MY SCREEN

>>16088607
marginal cost is basically useless except as a theoretical curiosity in spaceflight. the launch market is nowhere close to competitive, firms exercise massive market power, and the entry costs are extreme. if you went by marginal cost, then the space shuttle was cheap - less than $100m per flight in today's money, see pic. the cost estimate pdf provided was clearly not talking about marginal cost since it specifies that it's including amortized costs.

>>16088616
DELETE THIS!

>>16088616
>american space marines coming in hot over taiwan

>>16088669
Orbital drop pods dont make sense desu. Just bomb out the locations instead of dropping people in.

>>16088616
Four more years until point to point passenger travel on earth with this. I do have my doubts.

>>16088674
Retard. Nobody would get on those when you can just fly in a plane.

The only 'point-to-point' flying that will be done is from one planet to another or from planet to orbit,

>>16088188
Here ya go

>>16088685
Uhh because FAA wont allow SpaceX to compete and bankrupt Boeing completely

>>16088682
I would pay just for the experience, don't even care where it lands

It doesn't really make sense.

Do American launch companies other than SpaceX have any future?

How are Rocket Lab, Stoke, ABL, Firefly, Relativity, etc, not going to be perpetually stuck in NSSL Lane 1 and fighting over the tiny handful of payloads that require dedicated launchers? ULA can't survive losing NSSL Lane 2, which they will sooner or later do. Unless they get acquired first, which seems likely.

BO seems it will have the best offering for those looking to launch with someone other than SpaceX. It also has a deep-pocketed owner who is willing to bridge major funding gaps with his own money. Even worse for others are that SpaceX is now and BO is trying to be big in the payload business. BO also seems like a high probability choice for future Kuiper contracts.

What are your predictions for the future structure of the American launch sector? Is it going to be essentially a SpaceX monopoly, a SpaceX / BO duopoly, or something else?

>>16088688
Yeah they will sell rides to orbit you fucking numbskull just book a night on the Vast Haven station and you get an even better experience.

>>16088699
BO has Bezos money funneling in billions. Relativity has Bill Gates money trying to invest there I think. I think some others might be trying to compete here as well. Legacy defence companies might buy ABL or Stoke.

>>16088699
all i know for sure is that political concerns will prevent a spacex monopoly from ever happening

>>16088699
They need to work on some niche stuff like on-orbit operations (maybe BO/ULA will work on ACES depot some more)
This small/medium sat business is really not going to go anywhere.

>>16088699
Stoke has a chance because they're pursuing full reuse with a dissimilar design, which the Department of Defense loves for risk mitigation.

>>16088699
Stoke will be fully reusable and can offer competitive prices to smaller payloads even with Starship for customers that dont want to wait for Transport missions or to pay for a full Starship for their small payload. The rest are not reusable and will have no shot at surviving with their current plan. Jarvis is a total meme and anyone who says otherwise is a BO shill and you shouldnt listen to them.

>>16088699
Rocket Lab gets most of it's revenue from non-launch sources. They'll be fine, even if the transition away from launch is an awkward one. ABL will linger on space force launch on sudden demand contracts. Firefly will become a division of Northrop. Stoke is leapfrogging the rest into full reuse and has the best chance to survive just on their launch services. New Glenn is well positioned for the Starship Era, since they've got enough payload capacity to barter some of that away to reach full reuse with something like Jarvis. Even without that they'll have about half of the big government contracts once the sale of ULA goes through.

>>16088712
Fucking disgusting BO shill you should kill yourself. I predicted your Jarvis nigger meme right here >>16088706

>>16088375
>What would /sfg/ look right now if SpaceX did not exist.
There wouldn't be one because /sfg/ started from tankwatching.

>>16088706
Why are Stokefags so delusional it has all the same problems that every other smallsat company has (SpaceX destroys them on cost per kg) and it has to develop unproven tech. It might launch once or twice but there's no way it'll turn a profit

>>16088253
It is rare for a failing business to recognize the problem and take the steps needed to save itself before it collapses. I can only imagine that turning a country or whatever super national government that the EU has become around would be near impossible. But as a state, it also can't really fail like a company, it will limp on in its degraded state. It is not like a competitor can come up and take its market share. No state would allow that.

In the end, I don't think EU space flight can recover. Look forward to decade long plans for probes, some of which may fly, and instruments on NASA missions. This is the future for european space flight.

>>16088644
Get out, flesh weakling. This is Adeptus Mexicanicus territory.

>>16088603
>"Starlink's inter-satellite laser communications terminal, which is the only communications laser operating at scale in orbit today, can be integrated onto partner satellites to enable incorporation into the Starshield network."
wait this is what we were talking about yesterday with spacex now selling their lasers to other satellites and spacecraft. if they're integrating other military sats into starshield via lasers, then its possible that they may open starlink up to other companies via laser connections too.
https://www.reuters.com/technology/space/spacex-says-plans-sell-satellite-laser-links-commercially-2024-03-19/

>>16088733
>reuters
pozzed source that pushes tranny narrative

>>16088725
>SpaceX destroys them on cost per kg
This is complete speculation and ignores the fact that Starship isn't going to be launching regularly to every orbit and no small payload is going to pay full price for a specific orbit. Getting to where they're going may require contracting with a 3rd party tug service and none of those have a great track record just yet. If Electron is still finding customers even with Falcon 9 rideshares ruling the market, then Nova can get payloads even with an operational starship looming over things.

>unproven tech
All full reuse is unproven. It's also essential to have serious prospects beyond the intermediate future

>>16088713
If you're smart enough to predict it, you're smart enough to see that's a viable option. Adding more reusability to an existing launch system means trading off some of its payload capacity. New Glenn is just 5 tons away from being a superheavy lifter. It's got capacity to spare.

>>16088741
How much is Bozos paying you to say this.

https://youtu.be/LWvB9SoUPC4

>>16088741
>existing launch system
it doesnt exist
>trading off payload capacity
what 40 tons to starships 200+? and its more expensive to produce? and it uses hydrologgs? yeah youre a fucking fat moron i can tell
>just 5 tons away from superheavy lift
theres a massive fucking difference between 50 and 200.

>>16087236
Psyop to convince /pol/ that the earth is round when it obviously isn't (don't tell them I said this)

>>16088751
Enjoy your vacation

>>16088752
the mods are so desperate to cover up that earth is oblate, it's pathetic

F*el d*pots.

>>16088750
>it doesnt exist
"Adding more reusability to an existing launch system means trading off some of its payload capacity." Falcon 9 lost payload capacity when it started reusing boosters. Reusing the second stage would have incurred more losses.

>what 40 tons to starships 200+?
Any excess capacity beyond the payload's weight is irrelevant to the customer.

>and its more expensive to produce? and it uses hydrologgs?
Reusability spreads construction costs over enough flights to make it a meaningless figure. You also shouldn't use internet memes as your primary means of understanding anything.

>>16088759
The Richard Shelby Memorial Depot.

>>16088723
>remember that time in Boca Chica?

>>16088531
The RCS poofs are kino

>>16088389
It's just people who read The Tortoise and the Hare and saw themselves as the tortoise looking at people who saw themselves as the hare.
Consolation to the tortoise versus warning to the hare.

>>16088762
You completely ignored the New Glenn doesnt exist yet point even though you tried to pretend you didnt (ignoring even Jarvis extremely developmental right now), you completely ignored rideshare and Transporter missions as well as anything past LEO needing significantly more thrust to orbit, you completely ignored the existence of Starship being years ahead of development than BO who will produce more ships and launch faster all at a lower cost per kg, and you completely ignored its use of hydrolox by waving that as a meme even though there are significant cost advantages to as well as reuse advantages due to hydrogen embrittlement and fuel storage conditions.
You are very obviously arguing in bad faith for BO when it has no advantages over Starship whatsoever. It is very obvious that youre a paid shill and you need to fuck right back off to reddit. Dont bother responding because this is the last (You) that youre getting from me.

so project jarvis uses stainless steel tanks?

>>16088783
And what a glorious six years its been since then!

>>16088686
NOOOOOOOOOOO MUH JOBS IN ALL 50 STATERINOOOOS!

>>16088699
It'll look similar to our freight railways. 2 unassailable titans of spacex and blorg dominating the industry. There may remain a niche for the bespoke orbit
/ on demand launch, but I think most of these launch companies sgould pivot their resources and talent to developing tugs/ satellite buses/ other hardware and accept that they will be riding to orbit in Starship's boxcar.

>allocation for returned lunar samples on Orion is 100 kg, which includes mass of the sample containers
Lol

>>16088566
They'd melt dumbass

>>16088783
>if that thing flies, consequences will never be the same
lmao at nsf boomers

>>16088791
I didn't ignore them. I just didn't bother acknowledging them because none of them were relevant.

>You are very obviously arguing in bad faith
I'm just trying to point out how your meme-level understanding of space launch isn't accurate. I wish I was getting paid for this, but I've also always been told that the real rewards of teaching are non-monetary.

>Dont bother responding because this is the last (You) that youre getting from me.
I'll accept the concession, but I am a bit disappointed that I couldn't at least inspire an attempt at punctuation.

>>16088793
We haven't seen much of Jarvis beyond a sketch on a post-it note that said "maybe we could try reusing the second stage?" It's a good idea, but if it's any further along than that it's still hidden behind the usual Blue Origin lack of transparency.

>>16088566
Because elon f*cking musk

>>16088812
why not make the gridfins with ceramic tiles protection?

flight radar has a new map: global gps jamming
https://www.flightradar24.com/data/gps-jamming

its tangentially spaceflight...something that space securityfags are more interested in than rocket launchfags

>>16088815
>We haven't seen much of Jarvis beyond a sketch on a post-it note that said "maybe we could try reusing the second stage?" It's a good idea, but if it's any further along than that it's still hidden behind the usual Blue Origin lack of transparency.
they tested a tank in 2021 which was allegedly for jarvis and allegedly stainless steel. kind of wierd to have the booster made froma different material to the upper stage if thats true.

>>16088797
It be hilarious if SpaceX made that and completely cucked Artemis by parking a SS in lunar orbit to act as a Gateway. Realistically, how would NASA react?

>>16088699
>Do American launch companies other than SpaceX have any future?
>Do American plane companies other than Boeing have any future?
>>16088819
Wtf? Can someone explain why half of Turkey is being jammed? Or the red dots in Texas and Australia? Military bases?

>>16088706
I'm not sure. While Nova benefits from greater reuse, NG benefits from scale. And I doubt NG will be BO's final word when it comes to launch vehicles. BO just has such a great war chest, and great scale potential with all their payload contracts

>>16088818
Because they would melt. Plasma eats sharp edges pointed prograde, and grid fins are lattice of sharp edges pointed prograde.

>>16088826
>why half of Turkey is being jammed?
not sure, might be due to kurdish rebels since they're located in the eastern half of the cunt

>>16088389
>>16088790
"we'll wait for them to get complacent" is a severe form of complacency in of itself

>>16088826
>Do American plane companies other than Boeing have any future?
For military purposes, yes. Also, the American space sector isn't really exposed to international competition like civil aviation is. The main competitors will be Chinese and that's a no-no

>>16088823
SpaceX isn't run by zoomers who will self immolate for the lulz

>>16088699
Rocket Lab may be smart enough to defy their namesake and give up on launch vehicles in favor of payloads to survive. Maybe.
Relativity could have a pretty good niche locked down with in-orbit manufacture of pressure vessels, but their prospects in launch are of course pitiful. Their choice is also to pivot or die.
ABL, Firefly, and all the other normal-rocket small-launch companies are totally doomed. Stoke may narrowly evade death if they can get a fully-reusable system going in the next couple years, otherwise they're in the same boat as the rest of the chumps.
The upcoming Blorigin Launch Alliance will survive indefinitely on the basis of Jeff Who's bottomless pockets and their position as Spacex's government-mandated "competitor". I expect them to pretty badly fumble on reuse of New Glenn.

>>16088699
the second one left alive will have to develop a fully reusable system as well or just be basically on life support through NSSL

perhaps there will be a third too at some point, should be somewhat easier to follow in spacex footsteps eventually
but in the short term everyone else is basically fucked

NG and Jarvis aside, is there any fundamental reason why BO couldn't design a new fully reusable rocket that uses BE-4 engines? (or a slightly modified variant of BE-4). If they can use the same engines, it should reduce the development time for a new rocket a lot

it was nice watching starship spin in space. i wanted to do a lil animation for it

>>16088831

>>16088855
is that a benis? :DD

>>16088706
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TnxBkJ4Ez3g

eager space was skeptical on Stoke and I think he makes some good points
basically it boils down to, there is no founder/entrepreneur person that will get funding etc, the two founders come from blue origin both and are engineers

>>16088857
The only thing I'm skeptical about with Stoke is whether their heat shield concept will actually work without requiring so much hydrogen mass that it makes the launcher's payload mass fraction uneconomical.

>>16088820
Isn't steel potentially better for a reentering upper stage for thermal reasons?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PV0mMcsZBn0
>Communication Satellite Launch Wars

>>16088737
How big is the bespoke launch market though? Low marginal cost of launch does you little good when you lack scale

>>16088237
Meanwhile, in the world of civil aviation...

>muh european
Dumb argument. What ESA and NASA both will do is stop wasting government money on rockets and focus on science missions. The same way the fire department doesn't produce its own fire trucks. It makes no sense when there are better and cheap private alternatives. The biggest losers will be BO, ULA and all the meme launchers.

>launch IFT-3
>launch FSD v12.3 which blows everyones expectations
>open source Grok-1, the biggest open source LLM to date
>demo neuralink in a human patient

how does he do it?

>>16088889
I'm genuinely worried that they will kill him. He's getting too powerful.

>>16088570
He sounded like he was forced to make this video. He is so monotone that I was it was voiced by AI.

>>16088863
It's also better if you want the minimum dry mass metallic tank structures. That's why Centaur is made of steel.

>>16088734
>Reuters
>pozzed
>heckin trannies!!
>this definitely matters when they’re just reporting on a statement made by spacex about selling satellite laser links
You’ve been mind broken

>>16088889
white man with a 9+ incher

>>16088723
>yet another "club" of noisy autistic faggots that were "there from the beginning!" and think their retard speculation is influencing IRL events

>>16088899
and sizeable balls

>>16088902

>>16088819
Fucking Kaliningrad

>>16088902
none of that is accurate
faggot

>>16088734
>>16088898
obvious /pol/ tourist is obvious

>>16088908
>NO U

>>16088902
Elon never would have launched Starhopper if not for internet speculation. Prove me wrong.
>pro tip: you can't

>>16088898
You get your space news from Trump?

>>16088727
>It is not like a competitor can come up and take its market share. No state would allow that.
>he doesn't know about the Caliphate

>>16088353

>>16088355
Xodiac is pronounced ______.

>>16088948
shodiac

>>16088889
QRD on the other stuff?

>>16087693
Great one flare and no internetz.

>>16088826
>the red dots in Texas
hard to tell exactly at that resolution but that seems to be along the border

>>16088889
Unfortunately >FSD v12.3 is still DOA for anything beyond L2 like all prior versions, still can't perceive random road obstructions.

>>16088934
What? I was saying Reuters is reliable.

I was slack jaw and unblicking when I watched the Starship reentry plasma sheath. I had no idea that Starship was big enough to prevent the sheath from surrounding the ship and allowing transmission.

>>16088972
Starship is fat! FAT!!

>>16088889
>>open source Grok-1, the biggest open source LLM to date
big and shittier than a 7B

>>16088846
Jokes aside, if Elon and SpaceX are to realize their ambitions of Mars colonization and not just be a good launch provider, they will need to learn how to operate independently outside of LEO. They have a long way to go, and NASA will be there to hold their hand through the Artemis program, but they're going to have to grow up and start running their own missions, and the moon is a better place ti learn those first lessons than mars.

remind we our thanks to elon's abusive asshole father who was so mean to elon that elon escaped to scifi novels to numb the pain, which eventually led him to dreaming of a future of spaceflight

>>16088978
high-iq boys with nice fathers never develop an interest in science fiction

>>16088851
Very cute, thank you!

>>16088978
Reminder that papa musk banged his step daughter which is why Elon refuses to talk about him

>>16088969
Reliable as Trump on news.

>>16088995

>>16088851
paizuri from starship chan!

>>16087723
Massive space based solar for use IN space is just a scaling problem. Most of the SBSS problems come from beaming down the power instead of just trading data laser pulses with Starlink.

When will /sfg/ accept the truth that TRIGA pulsed nuclear rockets are the future and end all be all to rocketry? There is literally nothing better than this except for things that are pure hypotheticals and can't actually be made i.e. fusion.

>>16088889
He doesnt. His teams do it, he did do allot to get the companies up and running but its not like he's literally doing everything alone. Hes a very handsoff CEO clearly with how much he tweets, but sometimes thats a good thing when you got the right people to do your job for you. Sometimes its just best to step back and only give the greenlight to your team while making sure there arent any major failures.

>>16088972
>sheath
Has someone made a starship knife now that i think about it

>>16089046
he's a hands-on ceo (used to be anyways). Slept on the factory floor during model 3 ramp and whatever

>>16088218
Less than you'd think. Datacenters even on Earth are already built to endure random bitflips from cosmic rays striking memory or disk, and most are run with little to no in person administration. It's mostly about cooling, power delivery, and designing chunks of compute that can be physically swapped out by robots or untrained crew.

>>16089048
Used to be. Now much less so and it seems fairly obvious with how much he gets involved with political shit.

>>16089005
Fuck off

>>16089047
Or a horsecock.

You guys could learn something from David

>>16089059
I just fucking put one of these up. Quit your shit fag

>>16089072
Buy an ad

>>16089083
>my little pony invented horses

>>16089090
The only 'people' that talk about horses on this website are ponyfags.

>>16089086
why you already clicked

>>16089072
i could learn that tweeting an apophatic hagiography because you're too lazy to think up actual words of praise makes you look really stupid

>>16089098
Youre retarded

>>16088976
>SpaceX announces self-funded mars missions
>NASA not included in any architecture, resources or guidance
>Media starts fabricating bullshit, "Elon is in China's pocket", "Starship is unsafe and won't work", "Should one company have a monopoly?"
>Elon commits suicide with dual gunshot wounds to the back of the head in a housefire to a gun never recovered.

rocket lab launch in 4 minutes if anyone cares https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Coa3GZtotQo

>>16089131
I care, but the launch is on hold

I wonder what small spoopsats the NRO is putting up with RL. I assume it is tech testing and not operational spying equipment

>New T-0 in five and a half hours

>>16089142
Now reset to T-12 minutes and holding

>>16089146
Now T-30 minutes and counting.

>>16088851
Now draw her burning up

>>16089054
Shitposting when you are on the plane doesnt take much time

>>16089151
Oh yeah Im sure you would know wouldnt you

>>16089135
You would be surprised. https://dragonflyaerospace.com/smallsat-cameras/

>>16089159
He usually has a burst of posts eithin a short time period, so probavly on the plane or taking a shit
Tends to fly quite often
Then some days with not much activity

>>16088213
Doesn't make sense for any Earth orbit. But it'd be kino and possibly even workable to have shared compute farms orbiting the outer planets to process data from missions there before sending the much-smaller results on to Earth. And, hey, if the infrastructure is built, we might as well fling loads of missions up there to use it, and Neptune can finally get some love (which is totally not my ulterior motive for wanting this to happen, I promise).

>>16088851
She rotatin'
Very cute.

elon could die at any moment. global warming is killing us. the west is pushing for nuclear armageddon... we're living on borrowed time. we needed to get to mars yesterday.

>>16089245
People usually don't die at any moment.
Also Gwynne would do just fine continuing the mission. She's a real believer.

>>16088699
How can I make money on this? Are any of these shitters publically traded? I know rocket lab is.

>>16089250
elon is old, unhealthy, and has lots of enemies

>>16089251
only dying launch companies are publicly traded. successful ones dont need the money.