How would you counter reusable rockets from space landing anywhere in the world with entire platoons and vehicles plus escort?
Orbital Supremacy
How would you counter reusable rockets from space landing anywhere in the world with entire platoons and vehicles plus escort?
By joining the United States.
What if they don’t want drag queen story time?
>What if they don’t want drag queen story time?
Then stay down amongst the inferior plebs? Maybe eventually reflect a bit on how well Big Manly Ruska/Slav/China values have actually worked out vs "drag queen story time".
Antisat missiles can be fired by basically any jet fighters
Fit it out with stealth.
Now how do you get a lock on a rocket that can be practically anywhere in space?
Stealth isn a thing in space, if you think thermal optics are OP on planet earth, imagine in space where the background temperature is basically absolute zero
>Stealth isn a thing in space
It can be actually but it's complicated.
>imagine in space where the background temperature is basically absolute zero
Not remotely true in LEO though anon. Tons of noise there. But I assume the "stealth" part would be about the reentry part, where a lander would have a radar stealth shape under a discardable ablative shield or something. For something in orbit just blap missiles coming up.
>stealthy atmospheric rentry
How stoned are you right now?
How is thermal optics supposed to not notice the 1000 degree celcius layer of plasma that develops on the heat shield of reentering vehicles
>How stoned are you right now?
How bad are you at reading?
>How is thermal optics supposed to not notice the 1000 degree celcius layer of plasma that develops on the heat shield of reentering vehicles
>where a lander would have a radar stealth shape under a discardable ablative shield
Ie, no of course the reentry is obvious. But it's also very hard to shoot down at that point, and a lot of its path wouldn't necessarily even be in a target nations airspace at all. Once it drops down to the final two hundred thousand feet though and dumps its heat shield it could be a stealth high speed glider. That would also be the period during which more conventional SAMs might engage it.
>very hard to shoot down at that point,
Well, weve had missiles capable of intecepting ICBMs in their terminal phase since the 60s soooooo.. no?
>stealth glider
Its like you want it to get shot down, why not just do vertical landing ODST style. Then you can at least be literally on top of your target within moments.
Also how is any heavy equipment supposed to fit inna glider?
>Well, weve had missiles capable of intecepting ICBMs in their terminal phase since the 60s soooooo.. no?
You heard it here first folks, MAD hasn't been a thing since the 1960s because it became super easy to take out reentry vehicles not super hard and expensive even with nuclear tipped interceptors. Glad to have the whole nuclear threat thing cleared up. And everyone else on the planet can also do this, it's as easy as setting up an S-300 (which can only go to 20km) yessir.
honestly, your response to my points about the glider, which was to igbore them entierly, was a stronger response than this triggered sounding sarcasm.
Anti Ballistic Missiled do not eleminate MAD becauee yeah, theyre nowhere close to 100% when it comes to interception.
but against orbital troop drops that doesnt matter, a 40% interception rate is still almost half your enwmys troops gone.
i suggest you take a moment to calm down and collect yourself before replying to this post.
You're the only one who keeps putting this "troops" nonsense. I didn't bother with the rest because I don't think it's good faith argumentation to blow off economics and actual real world military realities about things that are purely about those aspects. It's exactly like people saying that tanks are worthless because of ATGMs existing or planes worthless because SAMs or whatever. This is /k/, you can have a somewhat higher level conversation than that anon.
Ah, i see you have become mad. Also your post just doent make grammatical or intellectual sense.
Anyway its clear that my contributions on this uzbek sheep herding forum have cused you to become agitated, and so, out of pity, im going to stop replying to you.
If you do choose to write a response to this post, which i would caution you against, rest assured that i shall not read or reply to it.
Good day sir
Stealth isn't a thing against thermal detection in space unless you invest in a massive heatsink, but a lot of ASATs seem to use radar guidance (like SM3) where conventional stealth shaping and materials might make a difference
I'm pretty sure the basic design of Starship, a simple massive steel cylinder with big flappy wings, doesn't lend itself to stealth anyways though
>Stealth isn't a thing in space
Honestly I'm glad that moronic shit entered into the internet's public consciousness somehow. Instant small brain detector
In space, everybody screams in stealth.
Okay so how do make a spaceship stealthy?
The background temperature in space is 3 degrees above absolute zero so if your ship is any hotter than that is shows up in thermal optics
Add to this, how do space ships get around? Oh yeah, rocket engines, kinda easy to detect those
How does a 'stealthy' spaceship overcome this?
Helium steamer midwit
Fellow ToughSF appreciator
There's already stealthy satellites in space. The main method to track space objects is still radar.
>The main method to track space objects is still radar.
Yeah there's a reason we didn't just build JWST on the ground lol. Saying "just use thermal!" to look through variable atmosphere into cluttered orbital space is non-trivial unless the objects in question are quite big/hot. Even on /k/ people constantly confuse "stealth" with "invisibility magic field". Stealth isn't about invisible, it's not even just about making detection harder, in a military context it's about making detection within a given set of precision/time parameters harder. "Looks pretty sure something is in that area of sky" is useful in certain respects, but that's not a missile firing solution.
Show me these stealthy satelites
I think you have made this up
You can't see them, obviously.
They cant be seen because in order to see something first it has to actually exist
A reusable rocket can't be stealthy at any point when it's in range of SAM. It will be glowing in every band, then turning thrusters towards the ground and turning rockets on.
LMAO you're going to have a fighter ready, in the air, doing nothing past waiting for an ICBM to launch. You're going to cover your whole nation with these fighters somehow. The round the clock maintenance and huge numbers of fighters necessary costs a shitload of resources in manpower and money.
By the way, most fighters can't do shit about an ICBM even if you have thousands of them flying constantly. You need a large fighter that has a very high thrust:weight ratio while carrying heavy missiles.
>ICBM
>Same as starship
Anon, they just watch your trajectory, send a plane to the general location, and while you're still busy trying to get off the thing you all die to CAS as one small bomb lands on you. If shrapnel hit starship and the remnants of pressure and fuel in the starship exploding outwards makes you all dead too.
>he actually thinks an aircraft has unlimited loiter time and can be over anything in a couple of minutes
oh im laffin
>How would you counter reusable rockets from space landing anywhere in the world with entire platoons and vehicles plus escort?
I actually don't think that's how it'd work anon. The rockets themselves won't come down they'll release dedicated expendable landers, 150 tons is a lot to work with (a C-130 is 19 tons). I also don't think they'll ever carry troops in that role, troops will be moved in via other methods and the drops will be used to bring in otherwise impossible resupplies, or used in imaginative ways like air deployed mass drone swarms or the like. With no humans onboard they'll be free to do extremely high-g entry and maneuvers, spend life support space on counter measures etc.
Countering that would be not impossible but the economics could be hard. If the US is getting hundreds of tons up on top of the gravity well for 2 orders of magnitude less than anyone else can that's a massive advantage, simple as. Stuff like won't work, because shooting down antisat missiles coming up will be trivial and more economic then making and firing said missiles. It's just plain a big physics advantage. VLEO also becomes possible for use, and that's impossible to have any Kessler Syndrome in too.
By sitting down and watching them explode before they reach orbit
The size of that thing is crazy. I know everyone is calling it a success sense the only official goal was to achieve lift off, which it achieved, but that explosion had to hurt.
>but that explosion had to hurt.
It genuinely, really didn't anon. Any more than, you know, the last 20 explosions or whatever it was (including SS test sequence, F9 and F1). They literally have 3 more boosters, one almost ready to go already, other two close. The only part that they probably are bummed about is that without stage separation they couldn't try out the SH landing sequence. The second stage was completely irrelevant, just stretch goals.
As far as official goals they wanted stuff for both stage 0 and stage 1, and got all for 0 and 2/3 for 1. That's fine at this point. They'll chomp through it and go again in 2-3 months or something. Hopefully by attempt #4 or 5 they'll nail actual landing of SH. Then it'll be ready to start dogfooding.
That's not how greatness works. I guarantee you Elon is obsessing over what went wrong like a possessed demon. I'm not calling it a failure but I guarantee the elation is more than a little tempered by the failure to separate.
What the interview they did with his mom just after the launch. I guarantee you that's how he feels emotionally.
Can't argue with 4x4s. But that's also Elon and his autistic ocd energy. Him obsessing over details and performance matters. But I can also guarantee you in turn that he was clenching hard at the moment of lift off, you can see it there on the video. The let down of stage separation was more along with the relief and rising hope of more success then they'd expected. But he and the rest were clearly envisioning it blowing up at or near liftoff, and then watching the tower fall over on fire, the tank farms blow up, and basically a super bad day. Once that was over people were really happy. Then next "will it get through maxq", and then as it continued to head towards meco spirits were really going up. So spiritually sure, lack of separation was a let down. Like I said landing SH is genuinely super critical, so not getting to give that a run no doubt stung. But it was still a really successful test objectively. It proved out a lot, it gave them a set of very concrete (literally in the case of the pad haha) problems to work on and fix. If anyone doubted it could work though they don't know. It's details and work from here, but not like they got their math all wrong on the basic structure or something.
The main thing they lost was any chance of getting data on re-entry. I would not be shocked if they lose a Starship or two finding out what works and what doesn't, and if stage sep had worked, they would've gotten a head start on that process.
The funniest part is that if stage separation hadn't gotten stuck, they'd have still made orbit despite doing this
Elon is spinning a lot of plates at the same time and there are only 24 hours in a day which a certain percentage must be sacrificed for downtime like sleep. At the end of the day he is a manager to manage all of his managers with at best quick, superficial understanding of what all of the crews are doing in detail.
The crew of SX is gleeing with joy though as this was extremely impressive how tough of a beast this is with all of the failure states it had. If they keep pushing it and ironing out the bugs is guaranteed to reach its objective of orbit and full reusability.
It really is amazing, it blew up the launch pad and blew itself up but just kept going anyway, it only exploded because of stage separation.
>it only exploded because of stage separation.
No, it only exploded because it was going out of its launch corridor and range officer hit the explosive safety system and destroyed it. Shockingly tough bird given it was DO A BARREL ROLL FOX for a while there.
Kek. For once it didn't need more struts.
Actually it's too many struts, so many struts it failed to seperate, the auto staging flags also failed to trigger correctly and his space(kek) key was broken.
>Actually it's too many struts, so many struts it failed to seperate, the auto staging flags also failed to trigger correctly and his space(kek) key was broken.
Nah, they never tried. Obviously from the video. It didn't make the requisite altitude due to engine outages and they lost control, hydraulic issue maybe, or perhaps simply due to too much atmosphere still in play too long. They would have shut down all the engines prior to attempting that, so it never made it to MECO. They let it spin a while and gathered all the useful data then FTS'd it.
Anyway, next steps are clear, they'll have to deal with the exhaust better, and use the data from the few minutes of run to make improvements to those next 3 boosters. Then try again.
They already have parts for a water-cooled steel plate flame diverter system
>They already have parts for a water-cooled steel plate flame diverter system
yeah noticed that, does make one wonder further why they ran it as they did. They must have just really wanted to see what happened without anything. I guess if they could get away without it that'd affect future plans in terms of building other pads. Now they know lol no.
They'll need to redesign the launch pad. It simply can't be set up the same way again.
I think they said they were going to be installing a water deluge and likely stronger concrete pad anyway.
They installed stronger concrete after the previous explosion. How many more stronger levels of concrete can there possibly be?
>How many more stronger levels of concrete can there possibly be?
Actively cooled steel plate over concrete? I mean honestly it'll be interesting what they try, or if they just give up and brute force that part.
I mean at a certain point you just dig a massive flame diverter.
>I mean at a certain point you just dig a massive flame diverter.
That's what I meant by sucking it up and brute forcing it vs trying to find clever workarounds. Only reason to do the latter might be if they saw some other future value in it, but not sure what it'd be. R&D for future oceanic platforms? But I figure they'd just plan on it blasting right down into ocean in that case, all the water you need is right there.
>R&D for future oceanic platforms?
already planned, they HAD purchased a used oil drilling platform or two, but they recognized not too long after that it would require a LOT of structural changes to modify them for an oceanic starship launch platform, so they sold them.
But I think the idea is still on the table, they'll just need to get something custom-made for them, as it'll be cheaper in the long run, and once they have a final starship vehicle that they know can get to orbit and come back THEN they can start working on ocean launches.
They seem to be looking to get set up at a new pad at Kennedy along with the existing Boca Chica test facility should suffice for the next ~5+ years. Maybe in the late 2020s or early 2030s we'll start to see more about ocean launching starship, as long term I think that is still the goal to remove sound pollution and other potential issues with a non-ocean launch.
What part of "do nothing but pour a concrete pad" was a clever workaround, anon?
??
I didn't say it was? I was talking about what they might do in response to this, not saying what they already did was. I was just wondering whether they'll simply dig a trench, or whether they'll use the full force deluge in combo with something different. I have no horse in that, just kinda curious to see which way they go.
You can't make a rocket with twice the thrust of a Saturn V and no flame diverter. No amount of deluge will save that concrete.
Sure? But that was part of the test too. They learned in the last few years that the government isn't ever going to let them do serious cadence out of Boca Chica, which means it's never going to be much use beyond testing. So figuring out what they could get away with there was also part of the test. And the rocket still got off (I don't think it was hit by any FOD actually, I think the engines failed to ignite, but guess we'll hear about it). They had big pipe work in place for a much better deluge system so they're just going to have to that, a cooled diverter/trench, or both.
This though will also be data for the much, much more important one in Florida.
Sure, but the destruction of the Boca pad means instead of a 1-2 month recycle for another test, it's "6 months or when the KSC pad is ready"
>Sure, but the destruction of the Boca pad means instead of a 1-2 month recycle for another test, it's "6 months or when the KSC pad is ready"
Do you have a SpaceX source for it taking that long? Not questioning you just honestly curious? I knew the tower being lost would mean that kind of delay but it didn't sound like the pad damage alone was that big a setback. If it is then sure that's a shame.
Nah, I'm guestimating, I think it'll take a while because it looks like the foundation itself was dug out and might need repoured
>Nah, I'm guestimating, I think it'll take a while because it looks like the foundation itself was dug out and might need repoured
Guess we'll find out then. They'll probably just make an announcement once they have a better idea, since not like it can really be a secret anyway given launch license applications is all public.
It may or may not be due to pad damage, but Elon tweeted that it would be "months" to the next test. And that's in Elon time, so...
2-3 engines failed well after launch, based on both the telemetry they were showing and the shots of the engines once it began the initial pitch maneuver.
That was uninentional? I was under the impression they were shutting off engines as a form of steering
No, look at the video again. At least one engine failed catastrophically early in flight, blew a hole through the outer part of the thrust structure and took some skin with it. Later on another engine blew and seemingly caused the very large plume we saw before it began spinning.
You're probably thinking of the thing that some other rockets do with their un-throttleable engines, they'll shut them down mid flight to limit acceleration.
That's a bit silly though because then SpaceX would win on two separate metrics anyway.
>I work for ULA
[doubt]
>everything about this "test" was moronic.
Had to fly a SH at some point lmao
>>I work for ULA
>[doubt]
His seethe checks out. I honestly have more faith long term in Relativity or Rocket Labs or some other hungry faster moving player than fricking ULA who tied themselves to Bezos and Below Orbit (great move) to produce an F9 tier rocket that costs like a Falcon Heavy expendable. Tick tock too, exactly two launches left and they will no longer be a heavy rocket player at all.
Fortunately something the US government is more than willing to pay for is reliability & high energy orbits. Expendable rockets have trash energy and have to fly compromised orbital insertions. ULA will be fine.
No doubt, see my other post.
They could have flown SH after they'd worked out the ground kinks. Blowing up your launch pad and killing 6 of your engines on the way up is basic shit that can be figured out without blowing up your rocket.
2-3 failed basically instantly, and another 2-3 failed throughout the rest of the flight.
SpaceX's own telemetry data showed 5-6 engines out with the 6th one going on/off/on at least once.
The fact it was still making good pace with 6 engines out is a good thing though.
>2-3 engines failed well after launch, based on both the telemetry they were showing and the shots of the engines once it began the initial pitch maneuver.
Yes, but 1 of them at least came back on again. Either it was intentional or they were actually able to restart it in flight.
It genuinely baffles me that they didn’t build a flame diverter. They have the most powerful rocket ever built and they just expect that none of the massive amount of energy could damage the rocket. Even small rockets have flame diverters.
I've been hearing that they didn't even have the deluge system installed. No idea how true that is, but it seems like there were a lot of easy to identify issues that just weren't addressed for whatever reason.
They didn't install anything. They just poured concrete and sent it.
I work for ULA and everything about this "test" was moronic. There was so much that they could have ironed out on the ground instead of burning up an entire rocket.
But Elon wanted to wag his dick and say they had a successful launch before Vulcan. Too bad he blew his fricking load and they won't be launching for months.
>I work for ULA
My condolences. Have they successfully prostituted you out to whoever they're selling you to yet?
>and everything about this "test" was moronic.
Imagine spouting that when you have yet to do one manned Constellation flight yet and your F9 competitor is fully expended and only barely got a few engines at last. Are you still claiming you're going to "reuse" by jettisoning the engines alone with parachutes? Good one guys.
>There was so much that they could have ironed out on the ground instead of burning up an entire rocket.
Oooh, an "entire rocket."
>and say they had a successful launch before Vulcan
Do you even have cert 1 and cert 2 test payloads lined up at all for this year after the Dreamchaser delay? Or have you managed to suck off enough brass again to get them to waive that before you can finally start on your natsec manifest?
You're a Black person but I'll take the bait, for the sake of actually contributing something to this thread instead of being a contrarian moron.
>My condolences. Have they successfully prostituted you out to whoever they're selling you to yet?
Wow, good own
>Imagine spouting that when blah blah blah
Literally unrelated to my point, is that your cope about why SpaceX's testing methods are shit? Reuse uses an inflated aeroshell, which, fun fact, has actually been tested.
>Oooh, an "entire rocket."
Yes, an entire rocket and also their only launch pad. Good thing Elon burned that one up for his tiny dick ego trip. Can't wait until they fix it 6 months down the line with the features it should have had from the get go.
>Do you even have cert 1 and cert 2 test payloads lined blah blah blah
Astrobiotic's lander is sitting and waiting for them to figure out what they're going to do after the centaur testing anomaly. Both certs are still planned for NSSL.
So now you have the facts, how does it feel to be a useless Black person with the taste of South African dick in your mouth? Is the taste really so good that you're going to go full reddit sperg tier and defend his moronations at every chance you get?
I was really hoping PrepHole wouldn't have the same embarrassing worship that moron has, yet here you are.
>Reuse uses an inflated aeroshell, which, fun fact, has actually been tested.
LMFAO
>and also their only launch pad.
Looks fine to me senpai. I know you're going to try to do an appeal to authority and say "well ACKSHUALLY YOU DON'T KNOW BUT IT HAS TO BE TOSSED OUT NOW" without proof but it's all still there. You know they were openly talking about the possibility the first stage blew and took the entire thing out right?
>elon worship cope
Nope, absolutely hate the butthole, hate it when people post links to his twitter as I have him blocked (multiple times as he seemingly undoes it), think everything he said/did after 2019 was a fricking mistake and am grateful he's no longer in a major leading role with SpaceX. Gwynne is bae.
I don't care to analyze his seethe man, he's probably just some moron jumping on the hate train.
Please post proof that your system has that engine-out capability.
Talk about seethe lmfao. Disappointed you never did anything meaningful with your life?
Vulcan doesn't need engine out capability because the engines are reliable LMFAO
>Vulcan doesn't need engine out capability
:^)
>because the engines are reliable LMFAO
>after be-4 engines sent back for service again delaying things yet again
YEAH BUT OUR ENGINES HAVE NEVER EXPLODED, CHECK MATE!
hey john can you please sweep that away- yeah that stuff- yeah i know it's a lot thanks- yeah just away from the camera- ok thank you
They installed a seal backwards in a turbopump and it had to be sent back to be rebuilt. It was immediately detected during normal acceptance testing, as designed.
You're not expected to build everything perfect every time, you're expected to know how to catch it when you don't.
>talking this level of shit when SpaceX just successfully flew all but 6 engines on SH while the others were exploding
OK now I believe you work at ULA.
>super reliable
>doesn't work
>9 years after development start announced
uh huh. Remember when Vulcan was launching in 2020? Good times.
How many rockets has ULA launched that failed? I'll save you the trouble of googling it, but it's 0.
I'll talk shit all day about their development practices since none of you morons seems to know anything about it. It's one thing to blow the rocket up when you're trying something new, it's another to blow it up because you frick up basic ground testing and rush your engineers to get it out the door before Vulcan.
>How many rockets has ULA launched that failed?
First Delta IV H launch was considered a partial failure, you didn't hit your orbit. I didn't need to look that up either. Nice try though buddy. Also at almost a half billion a pop yeah you better not lose one. Unfortunately for you F9 long since passed your Atlas V in consecutive successes, and F9H has had zero failures as well while offering much more cargo at 1/3 the price. Did you have some point you were trying to make?
>Comparing a suboptimal orbit that still allowed the payload to function to multiple full mission losses
Ok
>implying anyone cares about your pissing contest except you
also, ula literally did not exist at the time of the Delta IV Heavy demo mission
If you want to to ignore everything Boeing and Lockheed did before their shotgun rocket marriage fine, but you don't get to count any of the success before then either in that case which just makes you look even worse vs Falcon. It will be nice to see you finally stop giving money to Russia for the vast majority of your launches though and give the money to Bezos instead.
>It will be nice to see you finally stop
Sorry but I'm not ULAbro.
There's no shame in having a propulsion partner, anyway. Especially when it means you get to have high-performance engines with reliable, well-characterised behaviour, without having to sink billions into a propulsion division, which is relevant when you do not have access to the infinite loan spigot SpaceX has found.
>attempting to compare ITS/MCT with Tory Bruno's cope rocket
If that helps you sleep at night anon. How'd it feel to listen to everyone start cheering when the FTS activated?
No current fan consensus is that it's very likely the rocket blew apart some concrete below the launch mount, said concrete flew up towards the engines and took 3 out before liftoff. After that another 3 engines blew on ascent, then the rocket lost attitude control and began to spin (probably because of the engines), then the two stages failed to part (I don't think anyone knows why) and the explosives on the rocket to prevent it from going into populated areas activated.
Chad
How was some fod blown by the downward stream then fly up, through the blast of 26 raptors, in order to hit the engines, and then somehow not cause any sort of plumbing issues or fires or whatever? Why is this "fan theory" a thing vs something simple like "they had igniter issues again"? Everyone knows that's happened repeatedly, the igniters are one of the the completely radical new things they're going for here, and hard. Failure to ignite properly (or at all) is how they lost some of the SS lander tests (when they weren't running engine-rich).
There's the appeals to authority lmao, are you sitting here wondering why nobody wants to listen to your bullshit?
Yeah because it's more fun to speculate while completely uninformed.
I get why you morons like doing it, but that doesn't make it any less stupid.
Hey anon, if you're unwilling to post your diploma or evidence of working at ULA nobody is going to believe your shit. I will take the well intended speculation of people on Reddit or NSF before I take any of your bullshit, and that says a lot about your credibility and attitude.
>dox yourself to win an online argument
Are you moronic?
>I have 2 degrees and 9 years of experience so I'm right
>why would I prove this to you?
I believe the dude shitposting while pretending to be drunk and working for SpaceX more than I do you lmao.
Ok
>Fan theory
This is why I hate you Black folk. "I have an opinion and it's therefore equally valid"
I have 2 degrees and 9 years of aerospace experience but I guess McDonald's trumps that
Yes, we all saw that reliability in the Centaur test last month. Good job.
Are you really comparing a ground test failure to a failed full rocket test?
>full rocket test
tbf they didn't try and test catching either booster or starship this time. Not exactly a 'full'-full test then innit?
They were going to do facsimile landing attempts for each. Not 100% but close enough.
Note that they did the same thing with F9 before attempting the first drone ship landings; they "landed" in the ocean, monitoring telemetry in order to learn how to slow it down to a safe touchdown speed. Those boosters were being thrown away anyways, so why not learn from them?
ULA spends years not flying hardware, while "testing it rigorously" (and producing lots of paperwork), in order to statistically prove that it's safe and will almost never fail.
SpaceX builds rockets and rocket parts in bulk, launches a few of them with dummy payloads just to find out what they missed, so that they can eventually prove that it's safe and will almost never fail.
On paper, you could make the argument that ULA's approach is cheaper, because paper is cheaper than metal. In practice, SpaceX has proved (so far) that decades of paper (rather, millions of white-collar man-hours) is more expensive than metal. That doesn't mean it'll always be the case; but for now, they're clearly winning. BO was making fairly good progress several years ago when they were making regular test flights, but then they switched from SpaceX's approach to ULA's approach. Where's BE-4, these days?
on the other hand, there's some shitty smallsat launch company right now - forget the name - who is doing the other extreme. their special shitty management idea sauce is 'hmmmm like 70% of space company cost is payroll.... what if we just have basically zero employees?' so they want to make a full vehicle with like 15 people
SpaceX has unlimited investment money to blow on exploding rockets to learn something you could learn on the ground.
ULA has purse strings tightly controlled by Lockheed & Boeing, who see ULA as a cash cow and nothing more. ULA being sold would be the best thing that could happen for it.
a cash cow that has been milked dry, correct https://arstechnica.com/science/2023/03/sources-say-prominent-us-rocket-maker-united-launch-alliance-is-up-for-sale/
The rumor is that Boeing is selling it's half to hopefully cover 737max losses.
Or do you really think a several billion dollar backlog full of improvements that Amazon is paying for is somehow "milked dry"? moron.
>hopefully cover 737max losses.
Anon I know you're going to say ULA and Boeing are different companies but saying this as an excuse is not a good idea.
Every part of Boeing that was passed down to ULA has been purged. Their management structure was moronic, the Delta rocket is moronic, there is nothing good Boeing ever gave ULA and the last bit they could do would absolve themselves of ownership.
OK, your thoughts on the fact that your company was part owned by Boeing for a long fricking time and the 737max meme happened during their ownership?
Bait but as anon correctly predicted ULA isn't Boeing. The company is much smaller, transparency is valued, and "doing it right, even if it takes longer" is pushed at every level. I wasn't around when the Boeing purges happened but in my experience here the only influence they or Lockheed truly have on the company is their budget & who they appoint as CEO.
Tory Bruno is a bit of a moron and wants to be Musk lite a little too hard but he does an alright job.
Aside from that there is 0 influence from Boeing, so it's largely irrelevant that they own the company.
>SpaceX has unlimited investment money
And a constant cash flow from Starlink and all the launches it does for other customers.
SpaceX didn't have unlimited funding back when they were trying to get F1 into orbit, or even when they were trying to land F9 boosters. And yet they still managed to successfully implement that kind of a strategy.
Smaller rockets with less lofty goals. People forget how aggressively litigious they were against the US government to grant them contracts as well. ULA slept and SpaceX took their chance.
>Literally unrelated to my point, is that your cope about why SpaceX's testing methods are shit?
Oooh, hit a little close to the bone huh? SpaceX who has utterly demolished your shitty little government scam operation and produced the most reliable economic rocket in history already? THEIR testing methods are shit? Come back to us when you actually even launch Vulcan once, let alone a couple hundred times.
>Yes, an entire rocket and also their only launch pad. Good thing Elon burned that one up for his tiny dick ego trip. Can't wait until they fix it 6 months down the line with the features it should have had from the get go.
Imagine a Bezos dick sucker writing this ahahahaha. Yes you can be very proud of all the stuff you've built ON THE GROUND THAT DOESN'T GO TO SPACE huh? Given that you aren't launching anything competitive to space. Two years from now where do you think your relative progress will be vs SpaceX?
I don't even know what I'm trying to engage with your /misc/-tier moronic baiting.
I do: because you're waiting to have some form filled out in triplicate before you're allowed to have three people work to tighten a bolt and then you're done work for today :^). Gotta be thankful the DOD gave you life support for another time around before you're obsoleted.
Kuiper gave ULA life support more than anything. If you're going to try and throw moronic insults around you should at least try and get them accurate.
I make $150k doing a job I love so I can pay copers like you $7 an hour to make me a burrito.
>Kuiper gave ULA life support more than anything.
Getting 60% of NSSL was complete life support pity money because the military wants to preserve two launch providers and everyone knew Boeing would quit otherwise. You're not fooling anyone. Boeing still wants to quit anyway.
>If you're going to try and throw moronic insults around you should at least try and get them accurate.
You've been spouting PR line evasive bullshit the whole time. Speaking of Kupier you've been burning through your remaining Atlas V's ahead of schedule because of shit like having to switch USSF-51 since Vulcan has been so fubar'd. Better hope you actually can make this fricking thing work this year and thus get a little ROI before you get steamrolled.
>150K
Pajeet tier salary, no wonder SpaceX is kicking your ass. No talent is going to work for poverty wages, boomer MIC companies are finished
SpaceX pays less than the competition
>ULA mfs in this thread
b***h I work for SpaceX and I was at the launch. The froyo flavor of the week was oatmeal chocolate and vanilla. Fricking @ me.
what does Tice smell like
Also I didn't mean to reply to that post, I've been drunk since 3:45 PM PST today
We laughed at all you homosexuals clapping when you blew up your half baked rocket. Congrats
t. salty National Team member
>We laughed at all you homosexuals clapping when you blew up your half baked rocket. Congrats
We laughed at Constellation not being designed to be outdoors for a few minutes in Florida. Your b***h tears and cope will be all the more delicious.
*starliner lol time for bed
Still Boeing, not ULA. Those idiots are moronic I wish they'd sell us already
Black person constellation wasn't ULA. Are you really that drunk.
Be honest and tell the thread why you rushed the launched and skipped component/subsystem tests.
the best subsystem test is no subsystem test
t. Elon, maybe
damn that's more than when I was talking like 16 credit hours lol. I hate being an adult. Does spacex care if I have my name on random-ass research papers? I'll keep applying but it just feels futile.
Stay safe out there brother
Research is nice but definitely learn to pull your head out of your ass. Books and analysis aren't everything, and when it comes down to it you need to learn that things built in real life just don't match the equations sometimes.
Don't be scared of the work hours. If you really truly want it, need it, and you HAVE to want it, then the hours won't matter to you.
He's not the drunk mf, I am Spartacus, and I'm gonna tell you to one up us. Do it. Launch something with more thrust. With more payload to LEO. I'm waiting for it to leave the pad.
They're probably going to launch Vulcan without completely closing out the centaur structural quality, so you'll get your wish. Well finally launch a rocket like SpaceX does.
I still really don't get the point of Starship. That payload bay is funky, I don't believe Elon about the cost projections, and the capacity is way more than any satellite that exists today. I could see it being the A380 of rockets, a nice pride project but at the end of the day a niche product with few real uses.
Starship means my internet gets faster (starlink) so I have a direct involvement.
How's the latency on starlink? Last person I knew with any sort of satellite internet had something like a 600ms ping back in 2008-ish.
Granted those were the geostationary sats and starlink is LEO, but curious what the real world experience is.
I can topfrag in CSGO or TF2 no problem. 40-70. Worked fine in New England snowstorm too. HEAVY rain and you get fricked.
>How's the latency on starlink?
nta but I just remotely logged into the one I setup for a client for you anon:
>Speedtest probes: 6
>Average Download speed: 106.58 Mbps (min: 38.68 Mbps, max: 163.07 Mbps)
>Average Upload speed: 12.01 Mbps (min: 4.64 Mbps, max: 22.54 Mbps)
>Average Latency: 29.33 ms (min: 19.92 ms, max: 39.98 ms)
So there you go. When I first set it up I saw speeds up to 240 Mbps down and 46 Mbps up, so I assume that's closer to the hardware limit when there is no contention. Full size V2 Starlink sats would help. In terms of latency obviously that's nothing like fiber but it's completely usable, not worse than rural ADSL in general.
Note this is in a rural area. Options before were GEO sat (horrible), dial up modem, or 10 Mbps line for just $350/month. Bargain! So yeah. This is what Starlink was made for basically, well, as far as land goes, obviously it's an even bigger deal for ocean and aircraft over ocean. If you live somewhere with cable or whatever then it's probably not a good choice. But I'm grateful.
Starlink on a plane is an absolute game changer. Bring on the 11 hour flights, I got YouTube b***h.
Planes are what it's really going to do wonders for. The prices they have to pay the geostat guys are crazy. Too bad it's probably going to take a while for the airframers to get around actually fitting starlink antennae to their planes.
The entire point of Starlink is to replace vulnerable low latency undersea cables with even lower latency satellites. It is faster to talk over an ocean through Starlink than it is through a fiber optic cable.
>I still really don't get the point of Starship
Colonizing Mars and leaving the E*rthers to wallow in their own degeneracy.
If you ironically think this is happening in the next 2 decades I have a bridge to sell you.
Is 2 decades supposed to be a long time? I'll wait.
It's right around the corner, just like everything else Elon shills for.
> he's in a thread about test-flighting rockets that WILL place buildings on the Moon this decade
> he's ignoring that every American who passes the paper bag test is fleeing cities and inner-suburbs suburbs to get as far away from certain people as possible.
Lmao. We will have humans on the Moon building colonies within 20 years.
>Comment about mars
>Makes statements about moon
Ok anon, I know it's late and reading comprehension is hard, but slow down a little and you might learn something
If you really believe that SpaceX / US govt abandons an at-arms-length Mars colonization push aimed at before-2043 once we have an existent Moon base up by 2030, you're mistaken.
New frontiers would be the best thing to happen to the West since Columbus' discovery in 1492.
The point is that full reusability requires a fairly big rocket to begin with. Elon always wanted big for Mars, but there was a time before Starship when he was seriously looking into recovering F9's second stage. He determined that there would be no margin left over for payload, even *if* you could pull it off (you might recall the SSTO craze of the 1990s, and the impossibly-tight margins that those designs worked with). The only way to stop throwing a stage away was to use a much larger rocket than even FH. And if he's doing that, he might as well make it big enough for his dreams of a Martian colony.
The cost projections are probably too optimistic. However, the key is to evolve the design to a point where engines are replaced about as often as engines on a F9, and none of them are ever just thrown away (like the second stage always is, even on the F9).
As for feasibility? Well, fifteen years ago, who believed that this private startup created by a nutty dotcom guy on a proverbial shoestring was going to come out with a first stage that could be recovered and re-flown over a dozen times with minor maintenance? Or that it would spend years trying to catch falling fairing halves in nets in order to save a few million bucks a flight, only to find a way to re-engineer them so that they could survive an unassisted splashdown and a salt-water bath until a boat could fish them out of the ocean? Not everything that Elon proposes works out. But, SpaceX has done what most people considered impossible (especially for the time/budget) several times so far.
drunk SpaceX mf here, Elon could bite the dust tomorrow, the machine he has created will not stop until it has reached Mars. There are too many bright minds here; Elon's basically performed artificial selection to produce a culture of the most motivated minds on earth. Sure they aren't as book learned as the nASA or ULA guys, but they simply refuse to give up.
Profoundly based anon. Congrats on today's test flight. You deserve this huge win.
Maybe Bezos should hurry up and launch something to orbit if he wants space colonies so bad
>Maybe Bezos should hurry up and launch something to orbit if he wants space colonies so bad
In all seriousness I think actually his best move would have been to switch BO to a partner with SpaceX like 7 years ago. None of his stated actual interests involve launch, it's about doing stuff WITH launch, and in particular space stations/colonies. That completely different, and in fact incredibly complementary, with what SpaceX wants to do, which is launch and planetary colonies. Musk has repeatedly stated (and shown) zero interest in space stations and space colonies. On the other hand, SpaceX would be delighted to have another big partner to help increase demand and cadence for Starship, which would help more quickly bring down prices for both.
So if it wasn't for Bezos just having to do the big dick swinging "I can do everything" the intelligent thing to do would be to take all those billions getting pumped into BO and turn it into billions worth of stuff ready to launch on Starship and actually DO things. BO could be in an incredible position in that case, with tons of stuff ready to go. In 2-4 years it could have the biggest most advanced space station ever, get money from NASA that way (rent them an area), and off to the races. Like, they clearly are good at just building stuff on the ground, at building structures. That's what they want to do. They've been shit at the rocket part. But imagine BO had been in charge of the ground infra at Boca Chica, would have looked very different.
Oh well, everyone has blinders.
The problem is each wants their names permanently etched into the history books. Rockefeller isn't so widely known to this day because he shared, same with Edison. They don't want to be written down as partners, they each want to be the titan of industry to kick everything off.
Its more of a legacy thing keeping them apart then anything else
>The problem is each wants their names permanently etched into the history books.
Building the first permanent space colonies would be up there at the fricking top, especially because in the long run that's where most people will live.
Exactly why they are they are not working together, each wants that name to be their own.
>The problem is each wants their names permanently etched into the history books
Like
says though, there is room for both, and indeed they'd both be more likely to make it together. This is a case where each has distinctive areas. In a century there could be millions of people living in the Bezos Cylinder, oldest and greatest of space habs, AND in Musk City, Capital of Mars. Each style of living would appeal to different kinds of people too.
And as far as launch Bezos "losrt" forever ago anyway, even if eventually BO does actually manage to get to orbit, nobody is going to think of them in the history books vs SpaceX. Or hell at this rate even vs RL or Relativity or some other player. Yeah space needs money but culture is a huge deal too and BO stupidly imported Old Space culture and it shows. But that wouldn't be as bad for building good infra.
I understand your position, but just because there is room to share and it would benefit both to do so (assuming the partnership works out). That doesn't mean that they want to share. Elon is currently massively in the lead, spacex and blue origin are not equals. I can't imagine there is any real inclination from musk to have anything to do with blue origin. It's the classic mindset of "If I am already in the lead, why would I need their help?"
Why share half the glory, when you can take it all?
It's not about what would work better, if any partnership was going to happen it would of needed to happen a decade ago when the playing field was more equal. To the winner goes the spoils, and all that jazz.
BO sucks though. It isn't that Elon is mean and doesn't want to work with them, it's that they objectively have nothing to contribute.
>It isn't that Elon is mean and doesn't want to work with them
Not anything close to what I was saying. But you are right about the nothing to contribute thing
I'm saying though anon that this doesn't involve sharing. You keep bringing up that word, but the entire thing here is that no sharing is involved. Musk is flat out disdainful of O'Neill Cylinders, or maybe that's too strong, but he's just not interested. His focus is Mars. Not even the moon actually. He's not stupid, he can see how someday they could offer advantages, how asteroid mining could matter etc, and he's perfectly willing to offer infrastructure services, but he has zero interest in it. It's not a race, if someone else doesn't do it, then it just won't happen at all. "Sharing" would be if Bezos wanted Mars too and they were combining efforts to that. But there is ample room for people who want to do orbital hotels and colonies and moon people and SpaceX's Mars efforts all at the same time. They don't trample on each other's toes in the slightest.
>Elon is currently massively in the lead
In launch, sure, but that only matters if you care about launch. Bezos has no reason to care about launch though by his own words.
>I can't imagine there is any real inclination from musk to have anything to do with blue origin
Of course there is, if they were a space hab/moon company. BO would represent a huge, visionary, non-competitive anchor customer. That's EXACTLY what SpaceX would desperately love to have another of (Starlink is their current anchor).
>cont
point is, Starship is about mass production. The more they can make, the higher the cadence, the better they can amortize capital expenditure, drive down costs and refine it. They can pass some of that onto their customers, thus driving more space industry and setup a virtuous spiral, which is key to their Mars plans. They'll need enormous volume for that, they can't do it 100% solo. Some stuff is zero sum but some is unironically win/win.
So yeah, if 5 years ago Bezos has said
>I never wanted to be in launch, but when I kicked this off in 2000 (yes it really was that long ago) the launch market sucked, ultra expensive big government contractors only. So for my space station dreams I decided we had to do rockets too. But now SpaceX has done it better, and we can pivot towards what I really care about in partnership with them!
And then Musk comes out and they shake hands then get blow jobs from some models while answering fawning questions from carefully picked youtube personalities, having cut some big backroom deals in terms of savings for volume. BO is also American so no ITAR issues, they could sign all the deals they want and have their own ocean launch platforms etc. Shotwell knows her shit and would have been pushing it quietly hard.
Bezos is kind of a psychopath or something so whatever, I'm just saying not doing that was dumb.
Thanks for the posts Anon, very informative.
>Like, they clearly are good at just building stuff on the ground, at building structures. That's what they want to do.
Yeah, but so is SpaceX. They've got, what, two different factories for Starlink now? And they are building at least three for Starship.
>Mars
Planetcucks scuttle from one gravity well to another; spinchads rule supreme from their mighty habitats
Char?
>Elon could bite the dust tomorrow, the machine he has created will not stop until it has reached Mars
lol no, SpaceX would be scooped up and pozzed within a year of Elon dying. Look how fast similar companies with strong engineering cultures got wrecked once their founders retired, died, or got removed
Musk's "genius" is simply allowing autistic white and asian men to work without shitskins or women slowing them down and being willing to take the PR hits to shield them
>SpaceX would be scooped up and pozzed within a year of Elon dying
That's good
>Elon could bite the dust tomorrow, the machine he has created will not stop until it has reached Mars.
Why does Elon want ot go to a heavy planet with nothing of value on it when he could go to any other place in inner the solar system? Only worse pick possible would be Venus.
Because it's there.
>with minor maintenance
pure copium
Have you followed the turn-around time of some of the F9 boosters? 6 of them have been re-used within a month of their previous launch. That's pretty fast.
haha you're a homosexual whoring yourself out to a moronic manic man child vat Black person.
wow, racist much? there isn't any problem in 2023 working for an African-American
half wit mouth breather with a pile of guns and no ambition
>ULA
>seethes about /misc/
it all makes sense now, reminder that the US space program was built by Nazis you homosexual diversity hire. Shouldn't you be studying for your mandatory weekly diversity seminar?
Whiter than you. Post hands
It's ok anon we don't all suck Elon dick. We do have a few Serb-Americans looking for cum though so it's to be expected.
> I was really hoping PrepHole wouldn't have
It's a real indictment of /k/, the things that are flying around in these threads. The level of braindead posting going around probably reflects the fact that this board is people who yell loudly about things they don't have the first idea about. People post about tactics and materiel with the same or less knowledge that they have about carrier rockets here; it's shameful.
>ULA employees are butthurt PrepHole shitposters
Life imitates comedy
Vulcan will never see any real payload volume. You lost.
>already has half a dozen launches planned
>Memeship currently lying in pieces after destroying its poo in loo tier launch pad with only a "le moon dream" mission on its "docket"
actually its below the poos because at least the poos know how to build a launch pad lmao.
Vulcan is a dead end. It's the 90s repackaged.
Only rockets that made it to the moon are allowed to be in this club.
There can only ever be three SLSes because they have to cannibalise a shuttle for parts to build each one
Nah they can make new components, it's just theoretically cheaper to use up the old shit they already have on hand, even if it belongs in a museum.
There might not be more than three of them due to costs though, if Starship is successful.
>Only rockets that made it to the moon are allowed to be in this club.
Only rockets that made it to Mars are allowed to be in this club :^)
>I work for ULA
I also work for ULA and I can attest you are a flaming homosexual with a prolapsed anus
>flame diverter
>water deluge
It's almost like SpaceX had to go re-invent the wheel.
I mean, NASA figured that shit out back in the 50's. Did Elon just think that they were bluffing??
>33 engines, only 25 remained lit
Read into the N1 rocket. More engines=more complexity and more points of failure.
I just don't understand the design philosophy here.
>I just don't understand the design philosophy here.
Environmentalists complaining and filing suits. They've been complaining and filing lawsuits and sabotaging since day 0.
Just do what NASA did and build a platform for the launch pad. But I guess they needed data on how to build a launch pad that doesn't destroy the rocket so I guess its a success.
>build a platform for the launch pad
build an inclined, elevated approach to the pad
put flame diverter below pad
put water suppression device on the pad
simple as
I mean, NASA figured this out during the Mercury program and included such a setup with Gemini and every launch vehicle since.
It's literally rocket science.
The explosion didn't hurt but the destruction of the launch pad did. No more launches from Boca for a while. Although it's hilariously impressive they made it all the way to booster engine cutoff after blasting 3 to 7 Raptors with concrete
Is that what flew out of the fireball during launch? I noticed it on the video and thought,
"That's not good." but didn't know what it was.
I was seriuosly asking though. I wonder if this stuff damaged the engines.
people don't realize how big of a deal this is. Space is all about how much mass you can move. This chart is pre-starship
>China
lol, lmao
Tracking by payloads is a moronic metric with megaconstellations going up.
Track it by payload weight and you might have a useful chart.
>Track it by payload weight and you might have a useful chart.
Agreed, though it'd push it ludicrously more in favor of SpaceX and the US. Other countries love the "launch" metric precisely because it equates 200kg cube sats and F9 launching 22 tons a pop.
And the vast majority of SX launches are just Starlink becase lmao guess the payload market didn't really care about marginally cheaper rockets when the average satellite is still 10x the cost of the launch vehicle.
it is legit the sparks that ignite industrialized space. Best analogue I can think of is Liberty class cargo ships of WW2 and the war altering effects it had around the globe with the amount of pure shit it could haul everywhere
They are iterating on the design and building new vehicles at such a rate that it doesn't hurt as much as you might think. Even without launching they are learning new things with each vehicle they build, and each improves upon the previous one.
We've seen a number of vehicles get scrapped just because they were already obsolete before ever flying.
In general we've all gotten a little too used to NASA's risk-averse approach of spending 10+ years and a gorillion dollars to make sure everything is perfect before ever flying the thing.
tbh we would have seen a lot more SLS launches if Congress didn't also require the first SLS flight to double as an Orion check-out flight. That bone-headed "chase the penny, lose the dollar" mentality arguably delayed the moon landing by a decade
>but that explosion had to hurt.
anybody who has been watching this for years and not a yesterday tourist is recalling Falcons first legs. Doomer posting is unironically laughably stupid and just exposes either stupidity or malicious intent like seething thurdies trying to crab bucket
Did they expect anything different?
I mean, the laws of physics should be pretty well known by this point.
>I mean, the laws of physics should be pretty well known by this point.
Unironically anon knowing the laws of physics is not the same thing as being able to CALCULATE with them to an arbitrary degree. There's a ton of stuff where the underlying rules are known and fairly straight forward, but completely intractable to get solutions with using a computer merely be crunching the actual numbers. The complexity goes up n^m or worse m^n. Chaotic fluid interactions are like that, hence why there is a need for IRL testing and we can't simply model everything perfectly ahead of time. At best we can use approximations to get pretty close. Sometimes that's close enough, sometimes it's not. Of course, you can also just use enough extra margin to be safe even in an approximation, if the computer model says you need X+/-50%, and then you just build 3*X, obviously even in the worst case no problem. Like, our guns are all proofed way above the maximum standard pressure for a cartridge. But if someone wants to push it and save money by trying to get as close to the bleeding edge as they can, sometimes they're going to get it wrong and bleed.
>anybody who has been watching this for years and not a yesterday tourist is recalling Falcons first legs.
Anybody who has been paying attention knows that he was one failed launch away from no SpaceX.
I point this out but not often enough it seems. They even brag about funding issues making it a close thing to them not existing in their documentaries.
>/k/ - Spaceflight General
Honestly, reading this thread, it's better than whatever PrepHole can shit out.
Then you haven't browsed PrepHole outside of /misc/ bait threads.
I honestly agree, I just think it's funny that /sfg/ has been filled with /misc/ tourists kvetching about "it blew up", and that /k/ has no less than two poorly disguised Starship threads up right now with actual genuine discussion in them.
I mean spaceflight has been weaponized since ICBMs, and the implications of starship being able to carry massive loads to space implies it can be weaponized. The Soviets put an autocannon on a space station in the 70s (Almaz I think). Also
It will be used a logistics vehicle not a combat vehicle. Basically a really big C17
I don't understand why stealth glilders would be bad. We used them (stealth for the time) during the normady invasion but would it not make more sense to push them out of the back of some military cargo planes?
Or is the idea that you could have a giant rocket ready and launch from home? I think you'd probably a nuclear war if you tried that.
>I don't understand why stealth glilders would be bad.
They're not. But some people for some reason keep insisting they'd be for troops to travel on and just cannot wrap their heads around the idea of unmanned resupply or drone drops or the like, or that they'd either be an economic based tool or surgical one vs right in the most moronic place. Dunno.
>Or is the idea that you could have a giant rocket ready and launch from home? I think you'd probably a nuclear war if you tried that.
Liquid fueled rockets from fixed civilian pads don't look anything like ICBMs/SLBMs and don't follow remotely similar trajectories. Wouldn't be more of a nuclear war risk in general at all, though that doesn't mean you should use one towards beijing or moscow either.
Reuse them. Every rocket fired at me is a rocket fired at you, making it pointless
Attack the launch pads, physically destroy them or through a cyber attack, it’s been done against Iran and potentially North Korea
i for one do believe him. makes sense to me ula engineers would be on PrepHole rather than doing their jobs.
Anon it's 10pm in Denver
Everyone knows you rush orbital first in PA so that you get the Helios Titan to frick shit up
Jesus how many /sfg/ anons are also /k/omanndos?
I pop over to see what's happening in /hg/ and see a serious starship thread in the catalog? huh howdy
didnt this thing essentially shake itself apart because of the sound waves?
isn't elon musk simply repeating the mistakes of the Soviet n1 rocket? why is he such a vatBlack person?
>didnt this thing essentially shake itself apart because of the sound waves?
are you literally moronic? did you even watch the launch?
I imagine Patriot or s400 could swat one if it wandered into range
This comment really took me by surprise, I was so engrossed in the ULA drama I forgot the premise of the thread and thought you were gonna patriot the Vulcan launch
spacex anon I want to work for spacex but I'm not that sort of S-tier recent engineering grad just a shitty engineering grad, so I thought I could work for a spacex supplier instead? what do you thonk thanks
All I can say is if you work for one of our suppliers just do the best work you can to fix as many problems as you can. Put in ten hours a day minimum. Do your absolute best and keep applying to SpaceX; the folks here care more about your ability to both solve problems and deal with shit situations than your academic credentials.
>reusable rockets from space landing anywhere in the world with entire platoons and vehicles plus escort?
Landing the actual rockets just to launch them in a return voyage sounds incredibly expensive and unintuitive.
Much more efficient to release the cargo of equipment and personal overhead of the target and let the rocket fly back to base for refueling.
The equipment and personnel would then airdrop and parachute or use whatever technology there is to land on their target.
SpaceX anon is the "spin to stage separate" rumor true? Sounds KSP-tier
not him but that's been a known element of the SS design for like 1.5 years.
ayy lmao
>like SpaceX does
mkay lil baby man, come back when your thrust mogs Saturn V
ULA so bad even their employees sound uninformed lmao
And to the /sfg/ frickers reading my.posts, yes I am very drunk and yes today was a success. All the doubters can get fricked lmaooooo
Good work anon
y'all sounded quite excited for the launch. Couple years of work justified eh https://twitter.com/CamBamJamFam/status/1649143290657140775
It's a shame, Pizza Hut will probably have its own liveries on a Starship before Space Force. Capitalism be like that.
"Guardians" is still a terrible fricking name btw
>It's a shame, Pizza Hut will probably have its own liveries on a Starship before Space Force. Capitalism be like that.
I fail to see the problem here.
The things that really matter are delivering the best product at the best price in the best timeframe with the best employee satisfaction.
Doesn't matter if its a government, private corporation, or worker cooperative.
if the Chinese land humans on mars before USA we might as well throw in the towel as a peoples and dissolve the union. it's that critical.
It would be freakishly embarrassing but aligned with history. Portuguese and Spanish arguably "lost" the conquest of the New World to the English.
While the former 2 got LATAM, the British Islanders received the USA and now Anglo-American hegemony has run the globe since the fall of Napoleon.
People cite "anti-sat" missiles but I challenge anyone to name one that exists and has been tested against high-altitude sats.
I don't think even the Norks are brave enough to piss off all of the GEO sat people by fricking that space up. Unless you mean MEO?
Ballistic trajectories are trivial to predict so starship trooper style deployments are not going to end well. Large rockets like this one could theoretically aid logistics though.
Wild thread
This is the most aesthetic modern launch
Cool tropical location, rad as frick engine flames
How do you counter a zeppelin raid? Shoot at it until it blows up.
What do you think the RCS of starship is?
Shit is the size of an aircraft carrier flying through the sky at supersonic speeds
You can see it on weather radar, so that's a metric.
You shoot at them. Rockets are very fricking explosive and cannot dodge
>anywhere in the world
>what are slopes
>cannot dodge
>he doesn't know
Woah, starship can dodge rockets pulling 40Gs? I really didnt know!
>cannot dodge
I dunno man. This one did a few flips.
I imagine it's gonna be easier than shooting down ballistic missiles. For one it's frickhuge, and unlike a missile that only needs to plow into its target to be a success, this thing will need to decelerate, disembark its complements, and (ideally) leave
Imagining these to actually land to disembark logistics, you could kill them with just about any MANPADS
to land they are going slow as frick, cannot change their velocity vector because otherwise everyone will die, and they are also filled with a dozen or two tonnes of oxygen and fuel in gaseous and liquid forms, even when empty
theres a reason why ICBM RVs aren't blunt bodies, and why everyone spent billions on making miracle materials for their pointy tips
>he thinks anyone would put people on them
guess it makes it easier for you cope by engaging strawmen lmao
i never implied people would go on them
using it as a 200-tonne FOBS system sucks because its bleeding all its speed
Using it as a logistics vehicle sucks because its not meaningfully faster than C-130, requires enormous infrastructure to deploy and land, and is extremely easily shot down
simple missiles,
Is that 6 failed and two reduced throttle engines?
Jesus Christ that's awful.
I would make sure they're using rockets made by Elon Musk
Correct me if I'm wrong but couldn't you just shot it with lasers while it's landing? Or shot it with another missile? Or like a bunch of Flak Cannons since it has to land in a vertical line and can't maneuver much as it lands. Seems like an easy to hit target.
Wouldn't the rocket be extremely vulnerable on the ground? It would be easy to surround the forces inside or guarding it's perimeter. Divide their attention and probe the defense circle for weak spots. Likely no heavy weapons on the rocket as weight is a huge issue Vs fuel consumption. Then any explosions near the rocket will tip it over, top heavy. So even a near miss from say a tank or rocket blast could still score a fatal blow on the rocket. Does the rocket even have enough fuel to land then take off again, is it refuled in space for the final attack or is it UP-down-UP again?? Seems like a lot of expensive fuel for a small attack force. Once the attackers come out of the rocket can't I just unleash like 30 military killer dogs from all directions and just let my murder pack rip them up and distract them as my commandos sneak in to mop up?
Why insert your forces via complicated Starship when the same basic results can be had by a HALO jump of commandos which is common practice today. The only advantage the Starship would give a force a possible egress vehicle. But having a vehicle on site means someone has to defend it and it's a giant hard to hide target sitting in enemy territory. It'll be a beacon for enemies to assemble on your only way out. As opposed to have a evacuation chopper just out of range waiting. You can also move pick up zones and stay fluid.
It's just another example of morons trying to fix things that aren't broken so other morons will shower them with money and attention.
they cant land anywhere and (You) know it. at best they'll land at a SpaceX (TM) spaceport somewhere within a few hundred miles of the war zone.
i knew from the beginning that virgin orbit wouldn't work out economically but i'm still sad about it because it would've been really cool.
Manned space flight is a waste of resources.
Nah, great use of resources.