>>675370273
i think rockit is pretty cool guy
eh explode at the bottom and doesnt afraid of anything

File: p2pb4334305.jpg (21 KB, 220x165) Image search: [Google]

21 KB, 220x165

Space makes waste

File: Launch_of_Falcon_9_carrying_CASSIOPE_(130929-F-ET475-012).jpg (846 KB, 2871x1914) Image search: [Google]

846 KB, 2871x1914

Bumping with Falcon 9

To be completely honest many of the things we use today have come at the expense of the space programs, digital cameras being one of them. Sure eventually it would have happened, but think of how much we have gained from exploration.

Now I know that some fag is going to come in here and talk about how we could be using our money to help people in underdeveloped countries, but I still think rocketry and space exploration is awesome!
(I want to be an aerospace engineer )

File: 3853h.jpg (761 KB, 3000x2400) Image search: [Google]

761 KB, 3000x2400

>>675373010
I like this guy!

Here's Discovery for your comment.

Also, ULA launch going on soon: http://www.ulalaunch.com/nasa.aspx

>>675373451
Thanks, Ill be looking forward to this launch. As much of an enthusiast for space exploration as I am, I've never actually seen any launches

File: 14-443.jpg (626 KB, 3200x4000) Image search: [Google]

626 KB, 3200x4000

>>675374647
T-0 at 11.05PM EST
I haven't seen a live launch yet either, but watching them on live stream is what we have to manage with.

Atlas V, though in a heavier configuration than tonight's flight.

Should be humanity's main goal

>>675373010
If you really want to do that, get very fond of Matlab and diff eqs.

>>675375968
Best wingman for that night is gonna be Jack Daniels.

File: 18mfuwreie0ecjpg.jpg (49 KB, 800x450) Image search: [Google]

49 KB, 800x450

Space shuttle launch as seen from F-15s providing "air support"

File: 62n5YQ6.jpg (1 MB, 4800x3200) Image search: [Google]

1 MB, 4800x3200

>>675373010
>>675373451
Fucking Finally A space thread

Would love to get a Job with NASA or ULA as much as I love spacex, from what I hear Musk pretty much abuses his employees and interns.

I mean the guys a cool guy, he can just be kind of an autist at times. I so want a Job working on Orion or SLS Mars program, currently just trying to get through pre-calc though

File: 5nhZlWn.jpg (373 KB, 1318x1074) Image search: [Google]

373 KB, 1318x1074

>>675377216
bumping with space

File: space shuttle launch.webm (3 MB, 1280x720) Image search: [Google]

3 MB, 1280x720

It is a lot more important than most of the public understands.

File: Apollo_11_lunar_module.jpg (541 KB, 2389x2306) Image search: [Google]

541 KB, 2389x2306

>>675377216
Aww Yiss, more photos.

SpaceX is all sorts of wrong. From parts bought regularly at hardware stores to a lot of sketchy/dangerous stuff going on at the pad before launch, I'm not too sure I'd put my life on the first Dragon 2 being launched.

Attached is one of my favourite space photos. Think about it. This photo shows every human ever, dead or alive, but the guy taking the photo

>>675370273
The industry has produced many technologies American's and the world enjoy everyday but have no idea their tax dollars paid for.

Right now what's the #1 enemy of human space exploration? My vote is us still using liquid fuel. It's expensive and it's heavy as fuck, plus volatile as hell. I'm hoping we develop space ready plasma based engines. We already have ion engines, plasma is the next in line right?

captcha 6662

I think space exploration adds much more to the human experience than is obvious. Bold exploration and advancement has always been the driving force of progressive societies. It can't be allowed to reach a ceiling.

https://youtu.be/2aCOyOvOw5c

File: Saturn_IB_(AS-201)_launch.jpg (4 MB, 2253x3000) Image search: [Google]

4 MB, 2253x3000

>>675378873
Technically, I think transit times are the biggest enemy. We can't explore anywhere further than the moon if it takes 15 years to get there.

But the bigger issue threatening it right now is government and popular support. The government won't give us any cash if the population just says "ehh, space is cool, I guess"

Saturn IB, the Saturn V's little sister

File: Proton M 1.webm (2 MB, 854x480) Image search: [Google]

2 MB, 854x480

>>675378873
>liquid fuel
>enemy of human space exploration
If you can think of a better way to have a rocket that can be throttled, there are lots of people that would like to talk to you.

>plasma based engines
Where would the energy come from?

>We already have ion engines, plasma is the next in line right?
Not really, no. Ion engines in their current form cannot do the heavy lifting required to get things into earth orbit. Ion engines are very attractive because they have a high remass efficiency. The amount of impulse they provide with a given amount of remass is better than practically everything else. However, their power consumption is very high.

If anything, we should look toward ground-based facilities that make launching easier.

File: 000824boeing.jpg (22 KB, 250x365) Image search: [Google]

22 KB, 250x365

>>675380027
>If anything, we should look toward ground-based facilities that make launching easier.

What do you mean by this, and in how many years?

Bad times with Delta III here

File: 1363237170846.gif (1 MB, 330x248) Image search: [Google]

1 MB, 330x248

>>675370273

We'll never come close to seeing it in our lifetime, but someday we're going to have to abandon this planet and find another home.

This is assuming humans don't destroy themselves or the planet in the process... Or a legitimate extinction event occurs.

So basically our chances are slim as fuck but we should at least keep baby-stepping further into the cosmos.

>pic related
>this guy got it

>>675370273
When I was in college forever ago Burt Rutan came and talked to us. He's a pretty bright guy. He concluded that the shuttle program was a massive waste of money and NASA put itself years behind where it could have been by pursuing it.

Rockets are the best means of obtaining orbit and escaping orbit.

As far as industry is concerned, government rarely does anything that industry can't do better. Companies like SpaceX are the way to go.

Mars and the moon are worthy pursuits if they're economically profitable or can spur technological development. Yes, shit here on earth is important too, but the advancements we made because of the space race have benefited us in ways that are difficult to measure.

>>675378614
Even when they blow up, SpaceX vehicles are so robust, it's sick. Notice how that Falcon 9 stays on course while it falls apart. It does not deviate until range safety blows it into tiny pieces.

>>675380027
>Where would the energy come from?
Not gonna pretend I even know enough science fiction to say something remotely intelligent sounding, I did however find this slightly old article.
I watched a video about some handsome nerd guy explaining how ion engines are ideal for unmanned space travel because of all the shit you said, plus they steadily pick up speed over time.

>>675380459
>Or a legitimate extinction event occurs.
Ever wonder why we haven't found a single intelligent species besides ourselves? They're all dead because they never made it past the crade stage. Just like us. That's what we have to look forward to: a universe of bones.

>>675381050
Damn forgot link.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3292291/The-plasma-engine-humans-Mars-single-tank-Breakthrough-Hall-thrusters-power-deep-space-missions.html

>>675381050
Regarding our development, this assumes that the technological singularity does not occur first, in which case we're either all destroyed by computers, or we upload our consciousnesses to computers and send them into space as energy rather than matter.

>>675381050
OP here, but without a space photo

>a universe of bones.

Dude, thats spoopy stuff. But I kinda agree

>>675378363
Off the shelf parts are actually a pretty good idea.
Sure, shit was impossible back in the 50s and 60s because literally everything needed to be made specially, but these days things have advanced so much you can get a cheap-ass box of screws from the hardware store and they'll actually be within tolerances for the apollo program.

File: Proton M 2.webm (3 MB, 1280x720) Image search: [Google]

3 MB, 1280x720

>>675380308
There has been discussion, off and on, of launching closer to the equator and at higher altitude to reduce the burden on the heavy lift rocket. There is also the idea of mass drivers/ maglev launch system so that it is already moving at, say, around the speed of sound before the rocket is ignited. There were other ideas, like using ground based lasers to provide power to heat the propellents, etc.

Each one is unattractive for a number reasons, but getting into LEO is like half-way to everywhere else.

>>675370273
>No rocket has ever left the Earth.
>The ISS is not real; just a floating tin can with no purpose but to decieve
>NASA is nothing but a fraud, a scam, a lie.
>The Hubble telescope, ISS, voyagers, apollo missions, curioisty, and all those other things, have done absolutley NOTHING for the good of humanity. Only give us fake videos and CGI imagery and our money stolen.

>>675370273
>>675370273
Someone back in the 15th century probably said exploring the seas was a wast of money.

Some investments only pay off in the very long term.

>>675381746
Yeah, it really annoys me that rocket launches are still done at sea level so far from the equator.
Imagine how much excess delta v you would have in LEO if you launched from the andes

>>675370273
If you believe the human race has unique or rare value, you will care about its longevity. Space travel is the only way to avoid eventual destruction.

>>675381746
We need to do what the total recall film did; dig into the center of the earth, build a giant slingshot and just hurl everything into space. Like the Earth throwing rocket stones at the universe's bedroom window. Romantic. Also I'm gonna go lie down and take my silliness with me so you gents can have decent discussions.

>>675382088
You have to take logistics into account.
How do you haul the rocket, payload, fuel, etc?
It's doable, yes, but also very expensive.

>>675382088
You'd probably have no excess delta v because the rocket would be optimized for the launch conditions. You would need less delta v to achieve orbit, but that doesn't mean you'd have "extra".

>>675382445
Never mind highly variable and potentially unpredictable weather conditions.

>>675382671
I think he's talking in terms of fuel savings.

File: 1453913681659-1.jpg (383 KB, 801x816) Image search: [Google]

383 KB, 801x816

>>675381050

You're argument for the rarity of stable technological civilizations is plausible I suppose. I'm inclined to belive that the existence of "life" is probably somewhat common in other worlds, but having a planet that's stable enough to support hundreds of millions of years of evolutionary progress may be far, far, FAR less common.

Still... The sheer vastness of the universe almost guarantees that right now there are beings that are on par or perhaps well beyond our level of technology.

At this very moment someone somewhere very far away is probably asking themselves the same question... And likely dreaming of seeing it answered some day.

EARTH IS FLAT. NASA LIED.

>>675383006
Then yes, you'd save rocket fuel, but getting fuel to the location would be challenging and costly.

>>675378177
can someone explain exactly what's happening here step by step? what is that coming out of the nozzles on the wall and down from the shuttle?

>>675382445
Those cost disappear once you already have the facilities setup, and it's a whole fuck load cheaper to truck things up 15,000ft than it is to launch it.

If the Saturn V was launched from near chimborazo, it would save around 300,000 to 400,000L of fuel.

File: awesome launch footage.webm (1 MB, 1280x720) Image search: [Google]

1 MB, 1280x720

>>675382445
>You have to take logistics into account.
Yeah, that is the rub. How do you get such large, heavy components these great distances and altitudes?

The madman in me says build it there. If you really did want a good spaceport, it would be a small city, complete with the factories to build these components. Obviously, there would have to be a lot of construction - the amount of things a spacecraft needs are from so many different industry sectors, it isn't funny. You also still need to get all of the raw materials there, but materials are more easily shipped by rail.

There are some mountainous areas near the Panama Canal that could be candidates, but to get anyone to commit to a project of that scope and scale is practically impossible.

>>675382671
Not if you launched an existing design from the higher altitude.

Providing it still has a decent TWR (it should be even higher for most rockets IIRC), you've saved all the fuel it would normally take to hit 15-20,000ft. Sure, you lose the velocity you would have gained by then, but you still have all the fuel you can burn higher in the atmosphere giving you better specific impulse.

>>675383340
Getting fuel up a bunch of roads is so, so much cheaper than building a bigger, heavier rocket to carry more fuel from sea level.
A road train can carry 100,000L worth of kerosene at once, and it would pull up decently designed mountain roads at a pretty good speed all things considered.
Sure seems like hiring 1 dude and fueling a truck would be cheaper than making the rocket bigger.

>>675383872
>can someone explain exactly what's happening here step by step?
I will do my best.

>what is that coming out of the nozzles on the wall and down from the shuttle?
Those are sparklers.

Seriously.

The SSME (Space Shuttle Main Engines) are fueled with liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen. You need a good, reliable way to ensure all 3 engines ignite together, within a short period of time, so they use these giant sparklers that burn really hot, ensuring ignition. They are lit about 2 seconds before liftoff, and if the computer detects that they haven't started properly, the launch can be aborted safely then.

You can see at about 5 seconds in, the engines are on and throttled up, then you'll see the nozzles move. The nozzles can be moved independently to steer the craft,

(continued)

File: SpaceX-truck.jpg (45 KB, 485x231) Image search: [Google]

45 KB, 485x231

>>675384003
You are aware trucks exist, right bro?
Pic related.

You don't need to build everything in the mountains, trucks can deal with hills.
What you don't want to or can't truck, you can simply have an airport setup. Think of the 747 carrying the shuttle.

Technically it makes massive amounts of sense, the fuel savings from launching that high are massive. Imagine how much the full SLS could take to orbit if it had essentially 20,000ft for free.
It's all politics and humans being too shit to work together to find hot alien bitches.

>>675370273
The world is getting full of people and void of resources. If the human cancer is to survive in the universe, it must infect other planets.

File: 1454401795399.webm (3 MB, 1280x720) Image search: [Google]

3 MB, 1280x720

>>675385127
It is harder to see because it cuts, but the ignition of the SSMEs cause the entire launch stack to tilt to one side, then rock back. When it rocks back and the stack is vertical, the SRBs (Solid Rocket Boosters) are ignited. Unlike the SSMEs, the SRBs cannot be throttled, and, once lit, will burn until they are exhausted. When the SRBs are lit, you are going up, no matter what (if the hold down devices fail to release, they will simply be torn out of the ground).

The wider view shows a plume of steam on the left, from the SSMEs, and when the SRBs are lit, a massive cloud of smoke and steam on the right. Note the flickering in the clouds - those are shockwaves from the SRBs. The fuel burns with such ferocity that it is literally a continuous explosion that pushes the entire ~1 million+ pound stack into the air.

I go back and forth on my opinion of the value of manned flight. Space exploration is definitely important and I fully support that, but I think the expense of manned missions to places outside earth orbit/moon is so high it is a tall order to justify against possible greater benefit of physical astronauts vs. robotic systems. How many unmanned missions can you send for the cost of a single manned one? Will the manned mission bring in data of significantly higher value? I dunno.

File: verysmallman.jpg (219 KB, 800x994) Image search: [Google]

219 KB, 800x994

>>675383872
You know how you light a BBQ?
You put a little flame into the gas so it lights?

Think of that, but with rocket engines so hilariously powerful they're being considered viable replacements for pic related on the SLS.

>>675373451

>Columbia, Houston, comm check...

>C-columbia, Houston, comm check...

>...

>pls? ;-;

Would trump Dump the space program?

Also would he dump the EPA like cruz? Surely he cant be that stupid

>>675385127
>>675385898
I figured it was something along those lines, but wanted the full rundown. You didn't disappoint, thanks anon. And to think someone is working on this while I work at a grocery store kek

>>675386426
...Lock the doors.

>>675385998
Well the thing you need to remember is that humans can do a lot of shit that unmanned vehicles just can't or take ages to do.

Take mars for example, the spirit rover was considered a success partially because one of its wheels jammed and was able to scrape top soil off so we could see what was underneath, meanwhile curiosity can drill 2 inches into rock, both of which takes very large amounts of time.

Now think of a single dude with a shovel and jackhammer in 10 minutes.

File: 1454402297467.png (264 KB, 911x507) Image search: [Google]

264 KB, 911x507

>>675385316
>Think of the 747 carrying the shuttle
At the altitudes where you'd get the savings, the load carrying capacity of heavy transport aircraft is greatly reduced. The aircraft can cruise at those altitudes, but the low speeds required for take off and landing cannot be safely achieved.

As for trucking and rail, it is still a massive infrastructure challenge because routes capable of handling heavy loads may not exist. A lot of central and south america has some pretty undeveloped areas. I remember seeing a docu on the Darién gap that drove that home.

File: Saturn 5 launch.webm (3 MB, 1280x720) Image search: [Google]

3 MB, 1280x720

>>675386426
>>675386865
Damn, I remember that. I felt so bad for the controller when he said that. Interestingly enough, I actually saw it re-entering, and even though I knew the shuttle was due to re-enter, at the time I just assumed it was a meteor because I could see it breaking up.

>>675385898
There's a great video of a launch (which I can no longer find) with a view from the top of the tower, and you can see and here the whole shuttle vehicle shift back and forth when the SSMEs ignite. Very cool.

Actually I just found it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujrA7vFSN_4

>>675370273
I think it's retarded. We have bigger problems down here. We should probably stop shooting one another over whose imaginary friend is better before we go to space, you know? And what are we going to tell the Intergalactic Council the first time they see an unwed teenage mother drop her baby in a dumpster? And what, are we just gonna tell them it's just a local custom that was women around the world have their clitorises forcibly removed to reduce sexual pleasure and keep them from cheating on their husbands? Or are we going to go to war with them and colonize their planets with our fast food, dragon dildos and sneakers with little lights in the heels? Can't you just fucking sense how eager everyone is for humans to show up to the party?

>>675387447
see and hear.

christ

File: image.jpg (575 KB, 1024x768) Image search: [Google]

575 KB, 1024x768

EMD SW1500

>>675386796
OP here. Thats not quuuuuuite it. The Shuttle Main engines light themselves with ignitors inside the bell of the engine. Throughout the launch procedure, gaseous hydrogen goes through the engines, and can actually collect inside the nozzles. If it remains there when the engines are properly lit, it can cause a hard start (too much pressure) and bad things happen. The sparklers ignite any of that extra hydrogen

>>675386764
Anyone?

>>675370273
They actually want to get off Earth and onto Mars when the SHTF. Planet X is near and ready to make another passage, which will cause a polar shift.

>>675386960
15-20,000ft isn't that bad for aircraft, the trick would be to keep loads fairly light. A pretty heavily loaded 747 needs 3km of runway at 16,000ft, which isn't actually that bad.

You're also thinking of the infrastructure being setup in the short term, of course it's going to be expensive.
After 100 NASA launches and charging spacex/etc to use the facility, however, shit starts to seem a whole lot less expensive.

Going from the coast up to the andes with a decent dual lane highway would be expensive, but it wouldn't be Saturn V expensive.

File: images081010-soyuz4.jpg (34 KB, 525x325) Image search: [Google]

34 KB, 525x325

>>675387921
Space trains!

Train carrying Soyuz to the pad at Baikonur in Kazakhstan

File: 1454401151478.jpg (3 MB, 3000x1993) Image search: [Google]

3 MB, 3000x1993

>>675387447
That's cool. Did you ever see any of the videos from the SRBs? They have a wide-angle camera near the top, pointing downward.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QoG9AiZBAIU

>>675386764

http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2015/11/donald_trump_on_nasa_space_is.html

He may keep it as an issue of national pride? Republicans in general seem to like space. Not the earth sensing stuff that proves global climate change, though

File: image.jpg (29 KB, 300x200) Image search: [Google]

29 KB, 300x200

>>675388287
Looks like Soviet TEM2 locomotives

File: 1418801104369.jpg (164 KB, 1600x1067) Image search: [Google]

164 KB, 1600x1067

>>675374647
>>675375121
Unless you live in the area seeing a launch isn't very easy. They often get scrubbed or their dates changed. It's risky buying plane tickets for a launch that might have its date changed on very short notice.

I plan on seeing one at Cape Canaveral but it will be a small part of a larger trip to florida. She really wants to see harry potter world in Orlando and I would love to just go chill on the beach for a few days too.

My point is that while I do plan on going to see a launch, I have backup plans that won't make the whole trip a waste if the launch gets postponed.

>>675387498
Yea sure but what do you think it would do to the way we think, if we could actually prove that there was other non-dna based life out there, or if we would make contact with other intelligent life? It's completely impossible to predict, but it would sure as shit be the greatest discovery of our species and it would change the way we looked upon the world and each other

>>675389123
Pick a ULA launch (Atlas V or less likely, Delta IV) over a SpaceX launch. While landings are cool, ULA knows its shit and scrubs less often, like tonight. Flawless flight

File: missile chase cam.webm (3 MB, 1280x720) Image search: [Google]

3 MB, 1280x720

>>675388221
>After 100 NASA launches
And that's the problem, right there. It is politically unpopular to commit to something like that. It makes sense from a cost, science, and engineering standpoint, but NASA's funding gets turned off and on at the whims of politicians trying to get re-elected. A lot of the contracts for NASA go to the states of politicians that want the jobs in their state, but don't know or care about the science.

(webm almost related in that this is what aerospace means to politicians).

File: 1384993078706.jpg (587 KB, 3000x2400) Image search: [Google]

587 KB, 3000x2400

>>675381746
Moving close to the equator isn't that much help. The weather is much more unpredictable and prone to rapid rain cloud generation at the equator. It also only increases velocity for a equatorial orbit. Most orbits for useful satellites are polar type orbits.

>>675388516
That's pretty Neato. If anyone was wondering what happens to the SRBs here's a video of how they recover the SRBs from the ocean and tow them back to land.

>>675370273
No point in space bases. Just more stuff for terrorists to blow up.

File: 1385335812673.jpg (1 MB, 3244x4096) Image search: [Google]

1 MB, 3244x4096

I love this video. It's a compilation of Apollo footage and a tribute to Neil Armstrong.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdVMoYH0zLs

>>675387940
Also, now that I've actually had a chance to watch it, I can talk a little more on it. After the sparklers go and water suppression system (to kill dagnerous acoustic effects) go off, the three main engines ignite in a sequence controlled by the orbiter itself. They have to all get to full thrust in a certain amount of time (that clean, crisp flame), then the "twang" as their thrust pushes the orbiter away and then back into its original position. Once the system confirms its completely upright, the solid rocket boosters, which as said cannot be throttled or turned off, are lit, and the 8 bolts that hold them down are blown with pyrotechincs and the vehicle is free to fly. As soon as the stack clears the launch tower, Houston takes over communication and control, and the shuttle rolls so that in ascent, it has contact with a radio station on the ground, as well as to help with aerodynamics

This thread is fucking awesome

>>675389730
maybe if I actually posted the video...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gbtulv0mnlU

>>675389557
Geostationary satellites are very important for communication, among other things. You can only be geostationary if you're on an equitorial orbit.

File: space6.jpg (30 KB, 419x277) Image search: [Google]

30 KB, 419x277

>>675389839
>Implying an Islamic terrorist could ever reach orbit.

And NASA doesn't fuck around with the security at the launch facilities either. There is a reason they haven't attacked one yet.

File: maxresdefault.jpg (99 KB, 1920x1080) Image search: [Google]

99 KB, 1920x1080

More space shuttle goodness from OP

>>675390253
Not true. Most "geostationary" satellites aren't purely geostationary. You can have an orbit with inclination that still has a 24 hour orbit period. That means you cover the same ground every day and end up in the exact same spot every day. You can have a network of satellites all moving in a synchronous network around the planet. Yes they move, but they all compliment each other and pick up an area of coverage that another just left behind.

Few satellites are totally 100% geosynchronous and equatorial in orbit.

>>675389557
Then we move from the andes to the atacama. Still high, still near the equator, dry as fuck.

You also don't need a single launch site. Have 1 big launch facility in the south american mountains and another one in bumfuck russia and there's both major launch types covered.

>>675373010
>Now I know that some fag is going to come in here and talk about how we could be using our money to help people in underdeveloped countries,
Neil deGrasse Tyson on the nasa budget:
https://youtu.be/CbIZU8cQWXc?t=2m2s

>>675390348
Given 9/11, anything's possible.

>>675389987
Mostly true but the roll program isnt so the shuttle has radio communication, it's to put the shuttle in the correct attitude for the planned ascent to final orbit.

>>675390956
>Given some dickheads walking into an unlocked door on a passenger aircraft terrorists could infiltrate something so tightly controlled the astronauts piss temperature is monitored

>>675390761
height isn't important. The rocket is above the height of mount Everest within 1 minute. That altitude is pretty insignificant to the 17,000 mph lateral velocity needed for a low Earth orbit.

File: taurus_400598.jpg (44 KB, 400x598) Image search: [Google]

44 KB, 400x598

>>675390740
Fair point. I wasn't aware that most aren't actually geostationary. As penance, here's a really ugly rocket.

>>675390973
I may have gotten that wrong. Eventually it does roll ET-down to make contact with the TDRS satellite, right? My mistake

>>675391207
lol

File: 1405992785094.jpg (115 KB, 650x427) Image search: [Google]

115 KB, 650x427

The cock and balls NASA drew on the surface of Mars with the rover.

>>675391225
And within that 1 minute the majority of the fuel is burned.

Height is extremely, ridiculously important because it's much, much easier to pick up speed when there's less atmosphere and gravity to deal with. Most liquid rocket engines also gain both thrust and specific impulse at higher altitudes.

This is why rockets go up before they burn sideways, rather than picking up a fuckton of speed at sea level and then pointing straight up.

>>675391640
kek

>>675391655
If height is so important then why are all the major launch facilities at sea level. People much much smarter than you have been in charge of multi billion dollar budgets and they chose very opposite things than you.

>>675378873

The biggest enemy of human space exploration is radiation. Transit times aside, the cosmic radiation outside the earth's magnetosphere would give anyone on their way to another planet cancer. Until a viable way to shield people from the radiation can be developed, interplanetary travel is essentially a death sentence.

>>675370779
that's gonna confuse 99% of the cunts on /b/

>>675391982
This is true. NASA admits the Apollo missions were risky and that the ship did not have sufficient radiation protection for a longer journey.

>>675378177
takes balls to sit on top of one of these....

File: SpX_CRS-2_launch_-_cropped.jpg (708 KB, 1996x1944) Image search: [Google]

708 KB, 1996x1944

Elon Musk is a real life Tony Stark or Bruce Wayne

I can answer questions about the SLS if anyone has any. Opinions are my own personal thoughts and do not reflect the stance of entities involved in the program.

>>675392398

Except he is a dickhead to the people who do the work that makes him famous. Tony Stark developed the iron man suit himself. Musk only bankrolls the operation and takes all the credit.

>>675392676
You do know that Tony Stark isn't real right?

File: 1434336879761.webm (3 MB, 960x544) Image search: [Google]

3 MB, 960x544

>>675392398
I hear he's a lot more like Steve Jobs than either of those.

>>675392622

The SLS is military-industrial complex garbage meant to line the pockets of those involved. It is embarrassing that they are still doing engine tests while spacex has come out of nothing in less time.

>>675377029
That is a Delta rocket, not the Shuttle

>>675392958

Exactly, and neither is the Elon Musk that people seem to revere. There is a big difference between having a lot of money and being a real life Tony Stark.

File: SPAC_EELV_Atlas-V_Launches_AEHF-1_lg.jpg (102 KB, 1024x680) Image search: [Google]

102 KB, 1024x680

OP out. Enjoy the thread, space /b/ros. I'll make another one some other night, hopefully along with another launch. One last image. That Atlas V is a very pretty rocket

File: Screen Shot 2016-03-23 at 12.20.13 AM.png (125 KB, 690x530) Image search: [Google]

125 KB, 690x530

>>675393056

>>675391915
Did this stupid cunt just argue that the government actually know what they're doing just because they control 'multi billions'?

Have you not heard about the military aircraft that got built and then flown straight to the boneyard be dismantled, or how they're still building tanks despite the army telling them to stop?

The reason the launch facilities are where they are is because there's no good, flat areas with minimum people downrange at high enough altitudes in the US to matter.
If, however, we had a properly globalised space industry it would be retarded not to use the south american mountains.

>>675387498
We have scum and depravity living today that wouldn't have been imaginable 200 years ago. If we do meet this "Intergalactic Council", their trailer trash will be so desperate that they eat their children.

>>675385316
Space is not about altitude, space is about fast.

>>675393694
And at 20,000ft almost all rockets only have vertical speed, not horizontal. Cutting out all that bullshit frees up more fuel to be used to pick up orbital speed, increasing payload.

It's not fucking rocket surgery, assholes.

Also, this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1n-HMSCDYtM

>>675383310
But are they 4chanarians or reddites

>>675370273
Rockets are good.

Humanity's best hope for survival is space colonization

>>675391640
Worth every penny

File: laughing-smiley-cries-tears-of-joy.png (35 KB, 600x600) Image search: [Google]

35 KB, 600x600

>>675393940

>>675375968
This

>>675381761
What is: GPS

>>675370273
A waste of money is war.

File: New Bitmap Image.jpg (622 KB, 3360x1995) Image search: [Google]

622 KB, 3360x1995

>>675393940
Not sure if troll...
here, take this https://what-if.xkcd.com/58/

@jpl.nasa.gov/

>>675381761

Yeah and the Earth is flat and Obama is a Muslim. We know.

>>675393940
>>675393585
Trying to build a launch facility high in the mountains is not a way to avoid "bullshit". It would be an enormous pain in the ass and very expensive to support thousands of staff in a remote location. Not to mention the challenging weather and wind situations in the mountains.

You have no fucking clue what you are talking about.

>>675394691
Nigga are u dumb?

Starting at a higher altitude means you have more fuel to burn to achieve orbital speed, you don't need to burn as much of it getting up high enough that you can start building speed without dealing with the atmosphere and higher gravity.

Liquid rocket engines produce more thrust and have higher specific impulse at higher altitudes, meaning you burn even less that way.

It's not all horizontal speed, asshole, or else we'd just orbit the planet at 2,000 feet.

>>675395292

Someone got KSP and thinks he is a rocket scientist now.

>>675395292
You could, but there would be a lot of heat to deal with. Google hypersonic flight. It is really hard.

>>675370273
Working my ass off in school getting an aerospace engineering degree hoping i can work in that field one day. Commercializing spaceflight is the best thing thats ever happened to space exploration

>>675395146
>wah it's expensive
Welcome to space. What's expensive is launching away from the equator at sea level, requiring more fuel and thus more rocket.
>weather
Ahh yes, because the US is perfect weather all the time. That's why rubber o-rings work so well and never cause any problems.
>wind speeds
The amount of fuel saved can go into attitude control, making this a non-concern and improving overall safety compared to now.

File: Ice-on-launch-pad_1453503582433_1881555_ver1.0_320_180.jpg (23 KB, 320x180) Image search: [Google]

23 KB, 320x180

>>675396142
>That's why rubber o-rings work so well and never cause any problems.

>arguing that launches should occur at high altitude where low temperature is much more common.
>uses an example where cold weather caused a major catastrophe

You have gone full retard

>>675396142
We get it, you play KSP. You still have no fucking clue what the fuck you are talking about, you autist.

>>675396440
Doesn't matter if low temps are 'more common', they happen at the current launch locations anyway so that doesn't matter for shit.

>>675396707
Says the faggot who doesn't understand what specific impulse is.

>>675396142

You are the dumbest dumbshit of all time. Literally everything you are saying is at a middleschool level understanding of spaceflight. How are rockets going to be assembled and shipped to the mountains? When will there ever be a calm day for a launch in the fucking Atacama Desert? Launch sites are chosen for convienience and weather conditions, not altitude because the logistics involved in a launch are more complex than building a bigger rocket. Plus fuel is fucking cheap, dumb shit. Fuel accounts for a very small fraction of the cost of each launch. That is the entire reason SpaceX is trying to develop reusable rockets.

>>675397043
Show me, show me what 15,000 feet of magic mountain altitude will do for my rockets.

Use a delta 4 Heavy

http://www.ulalaunch.com/uploads/docs/Launch_Vehicles/Delta_IV_Users_Guide_June_2013.pdf


ill even help you, have an equation cheat sheet.
https://spaceflightsystems.grc.nasa.gov/education/rocket/rktpow.html

File: 1364349248741.jpg (1 MB, 2960x4216) Image search: [Google]

1 MB, 2960x4216

>>675397043
I'm perfectly aware of what specific impulse is. It is how much work you get per unit of fuel consumed. It's basically just a rocket nerd elitist's fancy way of saying efficiency. I play KSP too, I have since 0.17 dropped. And I've been into rockets since I was a little kid.

Doesn't change the fact that launching from the top of a mountain is dumb, unrealistic, and the amount of fuel saved is insignificant compared to the other complications it introduces.

Why hasn't a single space agency like China, Russia, Europe, NASA, SpaceX, or any of the other startup agencies done it from a mountain?

You really are smarter than every rocket scientist in the world? Go fuck yourself.

>>675390033
This
First time seeing a space/rocket thread on b. Have to say it's fairly satisfying

File: 1374219151563.jpg (1 MB, 4288x2848) Image search: [Google]

1 MB, 4288x2848

>>675398092
I should post pics from my collection more often

>>675386919
jackhammer is a horrible idea in space. You wouldn't want to use something with so much recoil, it's much more safer to use an auger like drill. With a jackhammer and 0 gravity, there's just so much other things to look out for

>>675380459
Whos lifetime? Im 22. We will have a man on the moon within 30 years.

>>675377216
Musk is actually a pretty chill guy in person. He can be kind of an autist at times but I've never seen him be needlessly hostile to his employees.

Many people, especially in engineering can't take any kind of criticism without considering it a personal attack on their very existence and a feel that's partly what leads to his bad rep.

He doesn't sugar coat his opinions or expectations, on the other hand, I've always found him very receptive to any concerns as long as you don't waste his time.

I have bad news but I have serious doubts that SLS will ever get to Mars, hell, I doubt it will fly more than 3-4 times before cancellation.

File: 1416890646742.jpg (1 MB, 4096x1714) Image search: [Google]

1 MB, 4096x1714

>>675398258
He was talking about on mars

>>675397155
Are actually that fucking retarded?

Yes, moron, fuel is cheap. Fucking putting it in a rocket and burning it is not.

>>675397361
>Sea level: 360s
>Vacuum: 412s
Probably another ton or 2 to LEO

File: 1452504910156.jpg (87 KB, 960x960) Image search: [Google]

87 KB, 960x960

>>675398458
>Probably another ton or 2 to LEO

Who can argue with those equations?

Space is fake. The space race is fake. It's a money laundering scheme. Wake up, man.

>>675393469
This is a dumb picture with the filename. Space shuttle program is retired

File: 1371228322634.png (1 MB, 1920x2160) Image search: [Google]

1 MB, 1920x2160

Just so you KSP faggots know how small and easy mode the game really is.

File: new-shepard-rocket04.jpg (285 KB, 1589x945) Image search: [Google]

285 KB, 1589x945

>>675370273
NASA, Elon Musk, Richard Brandson and Jeff Bezos want to get off Earth and onto Mars as soon as possible. No time to waste.

File: 12734020_10153859078480502_5179477612323821602_n.jpg (85 KB, 960x540) Image search: [Google]

85 KB, 960x540

>>675398458
Delta 4H is already carrying 63,470 lb to orbit.

Fuck your "ton or 2" extra.

Autistic fucking KSP players.

>>675398860

Space doesn't real, up is an illusion. Dogs can't look up bcause they now about the illusion.

God gave us the Earth and kept for Himself the heavens. Space travel makes baby jesus cry

File: Capture.png (44 KB, 860x351) Image search: [Google]

44 KB, 860x351

>>675398458

>>675399183
You small minded fucking retard, any extra weight capacity is a good thing.

If the IV is already so good why is anyone bothering with the SLS?

>>675398943
The difficulty ease doesn't come from scale, that takes no effort to increase, it comes from the physics engine.
N-body be complicated, yo.

>>675398980
Bezos and Brandson are building carnival rides for the rich and famous that give you a sub 15 minute weightless experience. Musk already has a rocket capable of putting people in orbit if he really wanted.

>>675399581

What is your day job so I can pretend to be good at that?

>>675399642
Why do you think they need to land on a barge out in sea? There's plenty of launch pads available on the ground. Hint: it makes it much easier to control hoards of angry people.

>>675399581
No, my point is that idiots like you play a Lego rocket game, land on the fucking Mun, and then think they are a fucking rocket scientist.

You have read a few wikipedia articles. You most likely don't even know how to do calculus. You have no fucking clue WTF you are talking about. The difficulties introduced by a mountain launchpad far outweigh the benefits of the altitude.

Launches are scrubbed all the time due to wind shear conditions. The wind shear in mountains is horrible. You have all kinds of crazy wind and weather coming over the tops of the mountains.

File: 18enfuwsagjl5jpg.jpg (142 KB, 640x360) Image search: [Google]

142 KB, 640x360

>>675370273

We need a space lift!

>>675400294
This

>>675400177
>Why do you think they need to land on a barge out in sea?

Because on heavier Falcon 9 launches it doesn't have enough fuel remaining to make it back to shore. That's why they go for the barge landing. The pulled off a landing on land. They would do that every time if they could.

>>675399581

lol butthurt that your KSP mentality is failing you? Try living in a world where rockets don't snap together magically and asparagus staging is impossible because of how difficult it is to pump liquid oxygen. Go back to 7th grade numbnuts

File: 2013-1875b.jpg (1 MB, 2924x1676) Image search: [Google]

1 MB, 2924x1676

>>675400294
Just hauling all my Ground Support Equipment up this mountain... lol

>>675400483

It had literally nothing to do with that. It was entirely because they weren't allowed to land on US soil by the government.

>>675392972
That's a huge insult to Elon Musk and you should be ashamed.

The future of space travel is by privatized space companies.

>>675390956
Implying Jamal or muhhammed would know how to operate the damn thing.

One does not "fly a rocket" you are merely a passenger along for the ride when going to space

>>675400294
This is the answer to pointless arguments on this thread. People think they are so smart because of the articles they've read when they can't even begin to fathom the simplest understandings of rocket science from top to bottom. People spend their live studying the efficiency of every single option and newfags here think they have all the right answers

>>675400704
Asparagus staging would also cause very strong spinning forces.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtVs4SGZYvM

When you move weight inwards it will amplify and spinning motion the rocket has, just like how a figure skater speeds up a spin. In a rocket we are talking about thousands of lbs a second. If all the fuel was being pumped in a spiral pattern towards the middle of the rocket it would need to steer very hard to counter that motion

Fuel has no inertia in KSP, it's just numbers moving up and down. It has mass in KSP but no inertia. When you pump fuel from tank to tank the game doesn't calculate any forces involved.

>>675400854
Until they were allowed. And the pulled it off. Why haven't they done it again? Because they can't being it back to land every time. Not enough fuel.

>>675400834
So like... if I shot that tank with a pistol, it goes boom?

>>675400294
And wind is a problem because rockets have fuck all attitude control.
If you have all the spare fuel from launching at a higher altitude, you can invest in shit like wings and/or ullage/RCS engines, meaning the entire ascent is safer not just worrying about wind speeds at the time/low altitude.

You have very little crazy weather in the atacama and the wind speed for shit like the Atlas V needs to exceed fucking 32 knots, not a particularity common scenario.

Not my fault your bitch ass is underestimating how much fuel you save launching from 15,000 feet. That's a huge chunk of the Saturn Vs lower stage right there.

>>675392972
yah dudes his own worst nightmare. pretty sure his marriage went to shit after he fired his wife

>>675398904
the other Clinton you retard

>>675395292
Troll harder... You still have to get into space, else you have the problem of air resistance.

You didn't even read the link:

"Only a fraction of a rocket's energy is used to lift up out of the atmosphere; the vast majority of it is used to gain orbital (sideways) speed."

>>675381291
It's already happened. We are a hologram

File: vector.webm (2 MB, 1920x1080) Image search: [Google]

2 MB, 1920x1080

>>675401555
Rockets have tons of attitude control. Thrust vectoring is very powerful.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_jserW1Mbk

I don't have a webm of thrust vectoring rockets so enjoy this sexy Russian jet.

>>675401549

No, it's not explosive as there's no oxygen in there, think of it as petrol and that's roughly how it would act.

>>675370779
ty for refreshing old maymay

>>675401543

Ok, you are right. I was under the impression that they had not used the barge since they got permission.

>>675402259
Uh..
Hydrogen gas combines with oxygen gas explosively in proportions ranging from 4.1 - 71.5% hydrogen - ignition temperature is ca. 580 °C. The gaseous reaction is

2 H2(g) + O2(g) → 2 H2O(g)

This exothermic reaction yields 232 kJ/mol of water formed.

>>675401896
It was fine for its duration? You realize he had nothing to do with it ending, nor did anyone else. The program ran its time. The fuck you on about

>>675402549
Yes when mixed up. If you rupture a tank of hydrogen you will just get a big fireball, not an instant explosion.

>>675402259
but I mean the bullet hitting metal and sparking makes the flammable hydrogen spark up right? Then it goes boom

>>675402809

It would still need time to mix with air and also to be re-ignited after the initial puncture too, it wouldn't make a fireball to begin with, films unfortunatly way over-exagerate how things would react to bullets...

>>675402929

No, you can't ignite something if it doesn't contain oxygen, like the hydrogen in this tank, there's no air inside there, it's pure Hydrogen. Think about what would happen if you shot a tank of petrol (again, contains no oxygen)

How can I contribute to space exploration?

>>675403258
http://www.csb.gov/-csb-releases-analysis-showing-cause-of-rupture-and-hydrogen-blast-in-2009-silver-eagle-refinery-accident-in-woods-cross-utah-pipe-walls-thinned-due-to-corrosion-that-went-uninspected-for-years-/

>>675403465

Getting into astromomy, it's one of the few sciences that are still easily accessable from amature level :)

>>675403601
Worst idea ever, get into mechanical or aerospace engineering.

>>675403258
Wow, my whole life has been a lie. There has been so many times where I've seen a flammable tank in public and thought. Holy shit imagine the catastrophe here if someone shot it. My mind is crazy, I know. Thanks anon, makes perfect sense tho

>>675403533
>http://www.csb.gov/-csb-releases-analysis-showing-cause-of-rupture-and-hydrogen-blast-in-2009-silver-eagle-refinery-accident-in-woods-cross-utah-pipe-walls-thinned-due-to-corrosion-that-went-uninspected-for-years-/

Yeah, that's a good example, that was a ruptured pipe, the hydrogen mixed with surrounding air and then was ignited.

Once Hygrogen mixes with air then it's very explosive (hence used for rocket fuel)

>>675403686
lol, I assumed he didn't mean he'd have to get a degree first, I guess you don't know what "amature" means :P

>>675403465
>>675403601
>>675403686

I meant as a post college adult.

>>675403842

np :)

themoreyouknow.gif

>>675404065

That's what I assumed...

>>675403601
Astronomy has been primarily classified since Dec 30, 1983. If you recall something spectacular happened on that day.

File: 24-Feb-2011-STS-133-Discovery-Launch-4.jpg (229 KB, 1024x704) Image search: [Google]

229 KB, 1024x704

>>675404065
You could probably be a janitor at a cool facility. Or be the guy who drives that sweet van they take the astronauts to the launch pad in. That think looks awesome. I bet it has shag carpet interior and lava lamps.

>>675403842

There's a film called "Last action hero" that I love, there's a bit where basically an action hero ends up in "real life" and he shots a car's fuel tank expecting it to explode and it of course, doesn't. Which I find really great :)

>>675377216
ULA is an interesting animal.

The Atlas side is pretty streamlined and well done. The Delta side is a complete clusterfuck that somehow manages to launch without an anomaly.

Having worked Atlas, Delta, Falcon, MM, Shuttle, etc. I am amazed anytime Delta even launches. Shit was basically 3 managers for each engineer doing real work, so everything was endless meetings trying to educate retarded systems engineers what was done.

>>675404297

No idea, sorry...!

>>675404158
>>675404319
I meant like charitable donations, buying bumper stickers/tshirts etc...

>>675398417
in all honesty thats probably true, Ive had a couple engineering courses with some group projects I wanted to do it this one way that would be easy but this one guy was so dead set on his idea that he would not go with anyone elses input.

As for SLS, Who knows, could fly 3-4 times or could fly 10-15 times, Shuttle went for 30 years. I honestly think they should make it like the CRS program where both Boeing and Spacex make a reusable heavy lifter.

Im just hoping like hell they somehow make it to mars surface by 2045

File: th-4.jpg (4 KB, 160x120) Image search: [Google]

4 KB, 160x120

Is this a more pleasing image

>>675399183
hey, don't lump in ksp players with this shithead

>>675404705

Oh, I see, I assumed you meant scientifically contribute, sorry...!

I don't know really...

>>675390973
And also so it doesn't blow up from vibrational and dynamic forces in the lower atmosphere.

Similar to how a rifled bullet flows through the air better than a non-rotating bullet.

File: 1024px-Tracy_Caldwell_Dyson_in_Cupola_ISS.jpg (125 KB, 1024x680) Image search: [Google]

125 KB, 1024x680

>>675404805
I just hope that by the time I'm an old man I will be able to easily afford a trip into orbit. Not just a suborbital trip but actually reaching orbit and maybe staying overnight or something.

I would love to just stare out the window back at Earth.

>>675405044
Yeah I already have a degree and working in a career not much sense in going back to school right now. Wouldn't mind making a donation or 2 throughout the year tho.

>>675405399
Keep your money. It's noble of you but these guys have billion dollar contracts. Your hard earned money isn't even a drop in the bucket.

>>675405564

Yeah, pretty much this...

But wearing a NASA bumper sticker wouldn't hurt I guess ^_^

File: 800px-PIA17358-MarsInSightLander-20140326.jpg (133 KB, 800x863) Image search: [Google]

133 KB, 800x863

>>675400294
This times a million. KSP is fun and all, but its a game, a kids game. Ive seen fucking 10 year olds play it.

also equatorial launch sites would suck ass becuase of humidity, So much rust and boil off I cannot even comprehend
as for mountians Launching a rocket from one would cause a huge fucking avalanche killing tons of villagers. Rockets are fucking loud you can Hear a rocket launch from like 40 miles away Hell the closest town to cape Canaveral is like 10miles away, and they still complain about the sound

File: speed_of_light.jpg (19 KB, 367x265) Image search: [Google]

19 KB, 367x265

CNN, the bastion of accurate reporting

>>675370273
Earth is fucked in a couple hundred years so we have about 100 years to start making mars liveable then the lucky few hundred will live their while the rest survive on earth best they can.

luckily the rich people realise that their wealth will only go so far so if they want to keep their money and their status in life they need to have a planet to live on and living on mars wont work unless they can buy the resources them selves to get themselves their then they would have to work to live because money doesn't mean shit in a community that small.

but we will all die before then anyway, probably by some biological weapon like flesh eating super cancer

>>675404319

Yeah dude that is a sweet fuckin van! If I could I would buy a replica.

File: veuve-clicquot-nv-champagne-france-37-5cl-half-bottle-.jpg (8 KB, 298x298) Image search: [Google]

8 KB, 298x298

I wish NASA would allow booze back in Space
seriously a glass of champagne isn't gonna kill the fucking crew and would be great to have after landing on Mars or staying in space for a year

>>675401214

you lost your way halfway through that statement

>Implying jamal would be able to fly the thing he wouldnt need to fly

File: 6a00d8341c73dd53ef01774377459d970d.png (324 KB, 659x450) Image search: [Google]

324 KB, 659x450

>>675404649
This.

>>675404319
I hear they changed vans to something less cool looking and modern

>>675404463
I remember when watching EFT1 they scrubbed like 4 times because of valves, winds and other shit
the only thing more or equally reliable to atlas is the soyuz. Im guessing Proton would be the equivalent of Delta with its insane failure rate