What are the military use cases for a space plane?
https://www.space.com/sierra-space-completes-first-dream-chaser-space-plane-tenacity
What are the military use cases for a space plane?
What are the military use cases for a space plane?
https://www.space.com/sierra-space-completes-first-dream-chaser-space-plane-tenacity
>ypipo be hiding Jordans up in space now, sheeeiiit
they're safe up there because nigs can't jump
But nigs can jump, its about the only thing they do well.
glavset working overtime today I see.
people can't make fucking jokes anymore without being accused of being fucking russian shills?
you NEED to go back
No need to get all butthurt about getting called out, dog.
Post guns.
fuck off nagger
Go die in a drone video.
you're a falseflagger most likely, someone made a funny joke about it looking like a shoe with ebonics.
do you actually think nobody can see you doing this? go back to nu/misc/ homosexual.
>I got called out, time to shit all over the thread
fuck off.
>i'm obnoxiously pretending to be the other side and accusing anyone and everyone of being a zigger, because in my nu/misc/ mind those ebil NAFO trannies think anyone who uses racial slurs is a zigger
like really, can you stop crying now? it's not working and it makes you look like a retard.
>I am upset and need attention
Hahaha.
>i still haven't dropped the act, because i don't believe anyone has noticed what i'm doing
first post you made i just thought you were retarded but your insistence on calling some random guy a zigger made it clear you're falseflagging.
who spends their time doing this sort of thing? where did you go wrong dude?
Boy, you really do need to let it all out, don't you?
How embarrassing.
why are you pretending someone else is upset? someone made an ebonics joke and you went ballistic.
now that's embarrassing, i feel bad for you.
yes, that's amazing footage, i'm sad we'll never see anything like it ever again.
now what does that have to do with my post zigger falseflagger?
Can it, nig.
Shut up homosexual
>black tiles on top
I wonder what the planned AOA is for this thing.
Won't be just a brick falling from space kind of glide like the Space Shuttle, that's for sure.
Maybe they didnt want to look racist so put blacks on top of whites.
Go woke go broke
The whole team is White.
you forgot your >
or something?
there's 8 black guys
Less than what's ran through your mom. Not great, not terrible.
They’re in charge of cooking, so it’s fine
Could be a rolling airframe similar to the mercury capsule
>All black tiles are thermal insulation for re-entry
R e t a r d
Ok then what are they, and if they're not thermal protection for re entry then why are they also on the leading edges of the wings?
>Everything black is exactly the same and in my world there is no way that two separate things could have the same coat of paint
R e t a r d
Why are the tiles on the top identical to the tiles that would experience the most heating then?
>Two things are black and therefore they experience the exact same environments
Do I need to keep writing "retard" in the annoying zoomer way or are you going to get it through your thick, dumbfuck skull that all thermal insulation is not the same?
>Can't read
>Thinks the colors of a spaceplane exterior are due to paint
>Calls other people retards
Also before I post actual sources to prove you're a retard and you leave the thread in shame why don't you answer why parts of the orbiter would be painted black if they weren't subject to high re entry heating?
Not Op but the "color" doesn't really have anything to do with whether it's TPS or not.
But you're not. That anon is right. The black tiles are High Temperature Reusable Surface Insulation (HTRSI) made of Alumina Enhanced Thermal Barrier (AETB) with a Reaction Cured Glass (RCG) coating. Both the underside, and top are tiled with these do to the expected plasma flow over the craft during reentry. The white tiles are low Temperature Reusable Surface Insulation (LTRSI) made of Rigid Silica - most likely LI 900 - to reflect sunlight during orbital operation to keep the inside of the craft cool. I don't know why you would call someone a retard when it's quite clear you're retarded, and know nothing of what you're talking about.
https://www.nasa.gov/general/thermal-protection-materials-branch-coatings/
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20160003291/downloads/20160003291.pdf
https://www.nasa.gov/general/thermal-protection-materials-branch-reusable-materials/
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2020/06/dream-chaser-receives-tps-for-2021/
https://web.archive.org/web/20221204115913/https://www.sncorp.com/blog/tps-tiles-boned-to-dream-chaser-spaceplane/
On how they bonded and tested the adhesion of the tiles:
https://ati.mydigitalpublication.co.uk/articles/testing-dream-chaser-s-thermal-protection-system
those look tasty
My bad, I was pretty drunk when I made those posts and didn't make it clear,
and
are both replies to the same post and I was asking why sierra space was painting parts of their orbiter a color that's going to absorb more heat in orbit if the colors are due to paint.
I was going to post https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2023/09/dream-chaser-tps/ https://dewesoft.com/blog/space-thermal-protection-system-fitting-control https://www.linkedin.com/posts/sierraspace_dream-chasers-thermal-protection-system-activity-7112183223152979968-1GkD and https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2020/06/dream-chaser-receives-tps-for-2021/ if the original guy replied, but he left as I predicted
I read the CAIB and crew survivability reports a couple times and finally have the chance to talk about it on PrepHole
>Thinks the colors of a spaceplane exterior are due to paint
>answer why parts of the orbiter would be painted black if they weren't subject to high re entry heating?
Might want to get your story straight before you start calling anyone else a retard
White tiles are used on top because they reflect the thermal radiation of the plasma wake during re-entry, black tiles are used in direct contact with the plasma stream because black radiates thermal radiation better than rejects heat faster.
t. /sfg/ autist
Better to have protection where you don't need it than unprotected areas where you suddenly do need it.
At most deploying satellites, it's otherwise just meant for gliding back down for reuse like the old shuttle was.
We're not getting into that stupid argument about what shit like a big balloon can do that satellites can't are we?
>fox 3 launch from 300k feet and mach 10
Imagine
doesn't matter
everything it can do, starship does but cheaper and more
They are not comparable at all. Starship is a flying grain silo. Dream Chaser is a space lorry.
starship can do return cargo missions too
Ferry can transport anything from one point to another (and back), that doesn't make motorboats pointless.
it does when the motorboat costs 100x more than the ferry
Such motorboat will still exist regardless of the ferry.
SpaceX fags are truly the fucking cancer in the spaceflight community. You’ve probably never even heard of this thing.
https://spacenews.com/sierra-space-and-u-s-military-to-explore-using-dream-chaser-for-point-to-point-cargo-delivery/
Military space planes can be outfitted to function as different types of satellites would, then they can land and be set up for a completely different mission type.
So they have a lot more utility than satellites and with proper planning can cover gaps or restrictions to satellites caused by being more or less slaved to their orbit and weather on the ground.
They can deploy things into orbit as well.
Inspect satellites, kill satellites, charge something’s batteries through microwave beams if the thing is equipped to receive it, in space or on the ground.
If you had the correct information you could have one pretend to be an enemy satellite to gather intelligence and or feed back false intelligence.
The real strength here is that it can land and be adjusted to adapt in a potentially dynamic signals/mission environment.
The military already has a space plane, the X-37, which does all sorts of secret squirrel shit. Dream Chaser is a purely civvie program as part of NASA's goal over the last decade of offloading the basic fundamental aspects of human spaceflight to private companies, namely the aspect that has had NASA functioning like a glorified taxi service for the last few decades instead of focusing on their preferred goal of science and exploration.
Of course NASA managed to partly fuck up the Commercial Crew competition and chose SpaceX and Boing. SpaceX has worked out beautifully but Boeing's Starliner STILL hasn't launched with people on board and won't do so for at least another year, by which point SpaceX will have been at it for 4+ years.
NASA chose Boeing over Sierra's Dream Chaser. Sierra said 'fuck you we'll carry on building it anyway' and continued with development, Dream Chaser is now planned to launch a cargo resupply mission in April 2024. Starliner is currently planned for NET August 2024. Sierra have very strong ambitions of making a human-rated Dream Chaser, I can only wish them luck as it'd be the ultimate fuck you to oldspace.
I hate oldspace so much it's unreal
>t. /sfg/
About time. I’ve been waiting for a dream chaser flight for years.
Based, fuck oldspace and fuck boing.
mandatory engine exhaust flogging for every oldspace exec
mandatory front row seats for every oldspace exec at the next Super Heavy engine test
i am honestly curious what it would look like if you actually taped a human to the bidet as this thing fires. would he get squished through the waterholes?
Given the forces and temperatures involved I imagine you'd be atomized before any significantly sized chunk of you gets to the holes. You'd be another small component of the giant cloud of expanding gas. You'd be so thoroughly destroyed that it would be as if you never existed at all. I can't think of anything more final and thorough and instant besides being close to an atomic blast. Even something monumental like a 2000lb bomb or a fertilizer warehouse explosion will leave some detectable chunks of you that can be used for DNA testing.
The noise itself would be enough to kill them
Boeing will launch in 2024, but the launch will lead to many deaths. The executives will hire more layers of management, lay off tons of engineers, and give themselves large bonuses. Boeing will continue to be a miserable failure.
satellite interception http://www.spaceforce.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/3566022/space-operations-command-reveals-futuristic-official-painting/
>space planes
Fuck yeah, they are so cool
i agree, but if only they were as practical as they are cool. it's such a shame that it's a bitch to make them worth it.
Dream Chaser, my beloved. Still wish the crewed version looked like this though.
What is oldspace guise?
SpaceX covering starship in thermal blankets, and adding a pair of solid rocket boosters, not to mention one extra fuel tank, covered in orange foam.
That'll be $500 million per launch plus tip, thank you
t. aeroisraelite shekeldyne, lockheeb martin, Boing!, United Launch Allegedly, etc. etc.
>aeroisraelite shekeldyne
They cost about 70 million per launch
Fuck you, Tory Bruno actually gets shit done.
the old giants of aerospace sucking the govt teet while providing nothing and refusing to innovate, jobs program after jobs program meant to keep people who worked on the shuttle employed.
they're currently being upended by commercial players who are way faster and cheaper, as well as safer and more effective if we look at starliner vs dragon.
cockheed, boing and northcock cummin' may be doing fine in the aero side of aerospace, but when it comes to space hardware the only things they can do consistently and on budget these days are satellites, most of their launch hardware fucking sucks.
>starliner
launched a doll in space twice, and docked to ISS on second try, three years apart
>dragon
launched so may times I lost count
FUCK BOING
Can you launch this on top of a Falcon 9?
That would be the first case of a completely reused launch system.
Yes. But I think ULA is going to launch it.
the 2nd stage would still not be re-used, the majority of the cost for falcon 9 is still having to build a second stage for each flight.
>dragon
>launches so many times i lost count
as of right now there have been 10 crewed launches and 9 uncrewed launches, one of those being demo-1 and the others all cargo dragon 2. time really flies by, they launched more than i remember.
there's gonna be another cargo dragon mission in about 5 days, and after that starliner STILL won't have brought any crew to the ISS, dispite their larger bid.
can you imagine being an engineer at boeing working on starliner? i don't know how they cope with the shame.
P.S
never seen any of the cargo dragon mission patches but they're actually pretty cool too.
>the 2nd stage would still not be re-used, the majority of the cost for falcon 9 is still having to build a second stage for each flight.
Which is part of why, IMHO, SpaceX should have built their own reusable second stage, getting some experience instead of pushing their luck on the Big Fucking Rocket.
Even if launched in a falcon-heavy configuration, since they've proven they can reuse the stage many time it would remain competitive and still useful for smaller cargo.
Yes I've seen fanboys who believe the BFR will launch every day without a hitch like musk promised, just like he did for Falcon 9.
It's not that I don't want the Starship to work, it's that I don't expect it to be human rated beyond one flight, the Falcon 9 today only use launchers that weren't reused too many times.
Yes it's amazing a manned rocket is reusable AT ALL but spaceship are far more difficult than airliner. Instead of being 10 failures/human error away from destruction you only have one and no redundancy.
smaller full reuse rockets suck ass
falcon 9 already loses massive amounts of payload from having to reuse btw
Yes they suck, but the loss in efficiency is insignificant in what you save in money from not rebuilding the rocket.
The only reason we didn't do that yes is that no government were going to RISK "taxpayer money" when there's no competitor or NEED for as many launch.
Hell, SpaceX was almost going bankrupt when they finally showed them all.
>to be honest with you, making a re-usable 2nd stage for falcon wouldn't have given them much useful experience and preparation for dealing with starship TPS.
I disagree.
You learn the most from getting the rocket back then studying what is worn out, what failed first. They won't be able to do that quickly with a giant vehicle.
That's when the fanboy tell me "they tested all the heat tile in a simulator!" and then the rocket blow up because the vibration didn't circulate in the structure the way simulated.
Also I don't buy the PR propaganda that they are just doing it smarter than NASA/ESA/... they just used an old engine design and were not bound by political red tape.
SpaceX is trying so hard to look "affordable" that they handed up with a single-use launch tower and no have to backpedal and do it like everyone else.
Even the idea of recovering the booster with the tower should be tested away from their critical infrastructure.
They'll likely sacrifice a few booster making it hover in a controlled place, before trying this above the real tower.
Hopefully they discovers the wind and backblast don't destabilize the rocket and require a complete rework.
>btw when DO you think starship gets human rated?
No point discussing that before we know if it can actually fly unmanned.
The only thing encouraging is that their engines failed without taking out every other around.
I'll just tell you this:
Airliner are human-rated because outside of absolute fuckup/sabotage they always have 3 back-up solutions for every failure.
With current rockets design, including Starship you cannot have such redundancy.
>"they tested all the heat tile in a simulator!" and then the rocket blow up because the vibration didn't circulate in the structure the way simulated
that's the point, flying completely different hardware will give you completely different problems, including vibration.
there's no issue the would've found with a falcon 9 second stage that would translate to starship, one of them would have far more lift and enter at a completely different angle from the other, as well as being the size of a 747.
Sorry but I challenge your understanding of engineering.
By your logic we could never build any prototype that isn't the final model, except that's not how it work.
We want prototype because digital simulation have limitation, a prototype will bring you the missing data.
In the case of the tile, the error is wishfully thinking resistance to vibration is done on a ship to ship basis so it justify that choice.
But that choice was more motivated by time/business(wanting ASAP the ship needed for Starlink bigger sat)/overconfidence than by engineering reasons, same cause for their "single-use use launchpad".
SpaceX is just betting to apply the same "quick trial&error iteration" of Falcon 9 (who was operating 100% the same as any other rocket +20% landing) to a spaceship that would operate only ~50% the same.
IMHO (not my specialization, not full engineer), what they need is a proper fixation system so that it work regardless of the range of vibration/heats/pressure. It's new to them because no ship before used such tiles before.
Also
>completely different angle from the other
You are confusing with the difficulty of calculating the angle of reentry to avoid bouncing/burning which is piloting.
In our case, a tube-like ship would brake with the same attitude.
Also do not confuse with the space shuttle who had aerodynamic concerns and thus required a non-optimal reentry attitude.
If you want something that would NOT translate, it's the need for different thrusters. Now that's something I admit would be a very costly engineering choice (but still useful to have).
Starship is hoping for redundancy by having lot of cheap thruster even if unreliable.
I suspect that the Starship/Superheavy stack will fly successfully within 3 more attempts, but I suspect NASA won’t rate it without an abort test and Elon/SpaceX are such confident technocrat dweebs, they don’t think they need one and haven’t built an abort mechanism. I suspect that the Hotstage ring is baby steps in the direction of rectifying this. I hope NASA demands a full up launch abort test before they let astronauts take off in Starship (the Starship HLS variant avoids this, for this reason), and that the abort test is just a 9 Raptor hot-stage and a can-opener charge to cut fuel to the Superheavy’s engines. Simply because that would be baller as hell to watch.
I have no worry that it will "fly".
Or even that they'll manage the fly back maneuver of the booster.
Catching the mega booster is well within feasible but I expect them to fuckup multiple time.
The reentry alone is one major hurdle even if they waste fuel to slow down manually
And the actual challenge will be reusing the thing without feeling like you are filling with methane an made-in-china used firework.
>abort mechanism
Quoting fanboys for once, "that's what's the extra thrusters are for".
Because there's simply no other way with such design.
As I said:
Airliner at any point in time have 3 backup solutions, more than 2 jet-engine to cross the sea, 3/4 separate fuel/hydraulic lines
Even running out of fuel they
- can be in gliding range of ground by regulation
- have battery to power hydraulics control
- can power stuff with a desperate windmill
- can deploy landing gear by gravity
With rockets we cannot have redundancy for every phase of flight and that change everything.
These regulation is what can define design forever.
By the way, this is also why I think all spacecraft will need multiple modular main engines.
to be honest with you, making a re-usable 2nd stage for falcon wouldn't have given them much useful experience and preparation for dealing with starship TPS.
the two systems would be so very different in entry trajectory, reentry time, comms and peak heat load, i doubt they would gleam anything that would actually help them later.
i guess it would prove to normalfags that they can recover a second stage or something dumb like that but the margins on just sticking a heat shield on the front of an F9 2nd stage wouldnt make it worth it.
i think they made the right choice ignoring it as a dead end and focusing on building a completely re-usable architecture from the ground up.
btw when DO you think starship gets human rated? because i seriously doubt it will get human rated for at least the next 6 or so years. they'll probably just do cargo missions to see how far they can stretch re-usability.
>6 years
do you have any fucking idea on how many times they could launch in 6 years?
do the math yourself on how many they can build a month and how often they could launch
it quickly becomes absurd
i guess i should've said "at most" instead of "at least".
i don't think it would take much longer than that to get starship human rated, but you have to understand that normalfags are scared of new things. also time will tell how quickly they ramp up cadence, IMO its more up to regulatory fuckery and political whinging from naysayers/EDS sufferers. getting flight cadence up quickly might actually be more difficult than you think as long as they dont have cape canaveral as a launch site, as it stands they are good to go for what, five launches per year? i really hope there won't be too much local pushback at boca. tons of astroturfing company agents from competitors there already.
Numerous.
Launching satellites.
Intercepting satellites.
Being a datalink and/or surveillance satellite itself.
An orbital nuclear bomber.
Bring back venturestar btw
So was it smart to have a space force to deal with these things instead of airforce?
Doesn't really make a difference, honestly.
Where did you even get the idea to ask this weird-ass question? It's a spacecraft, why wouldn't the USSF operate it?
crush the xenos
see them driven before us
hear the lamentations of their women