Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by ThatGuyWithALongUsername

  1. https://xkcd.com/2214/ (Also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Island_of_stability. Still radioactive, but perhaps usable, in the same way other radioactive isotopes are used) (Or if you want something more hypothetical but also more useful, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continent_of_stability)
  2. Yeah, I don't think it makes sense to make assumptions like that about things we, by their very definition, haven't discovered yet. And to be fair to metallic hydrogen, "know" is a strong word at the moment. Definitely need more research to actually say that, outside of a couple of random, not-yet-reproduced isolated experiments with different results. I really like the "make everything out of a single, giant carbon molecule" idea, though. And why limit ourselves to just Carbon? There's a lot of possibilities there.
  3. Looks like it got a bit taller, interestingly. Very unique design- interesting open area in the descent module.
  4. This timeline actually suggests (to me at least) that they're sticking to their original Mars timeline. Think about it- the 2022 landing can test all the fancy cargo deployment things to make sure it all works and then send that same equipment to Mars later that year (of course, there's no CO2 so they can only test fuel depot deployment on the moon, but they can test fuel depot systems on Earth separate from testing their deployment). Next, they work on the crewed version a lot, with 2 years to mature it. They can then test the surface habs and landing with crew on the moon in 2024... all the systems they need before they launch to Mars later that year. If something goes wrong with the cargo and crew to the moon, it's easier to recover and safer for the crew to abort. They might even be able to repeat the mission before sending it to Mars if it just needs a simple fix, and if not then they can catch the problem in time and move the Mars timeline 1 window back.
  5. Fortunately, in this case the SpaceX "top brass" DEFINITELY understands it. NASA might not, but they don't really have to- SpaceX kinda seems to be doing their own thing without them with Starship.
  6. Has it truly been an entire year since the last post? Have we all forgotten about this? The probe-hailing must continue! this is like the oldest thread in the forum, we can't let it die! : Hailprobe! :
  7. I think that's just a result of taking a picture of a preojector creen, and the render is actually just like the others. But I have to agree... it looks really cool this way. Now I want a higher-res one done like this on purpose! C'mon, SpaceX! ...and yeah, that would be he KSP way, wouldn't it
  8. Yeah, this is still the max capability of the rocket (kind of?). It was clarified in this tweet in July: and I believe mentioned at the presentation last month in a graphic or something. I'm much more interested in the "elevator" thing to get cargo to the surface? How does that work? I'm a bit confused? Also, this is a new, 4th "cargo to surface" variant, is it not? (Source: dgmckenzie on NSF forum, taken from presentation)
  9. Woah woah woah WOAH THEY DIDN'T JUST REDESIGN BETA FOR NO REASON I JUST READ THE ARTICLE It didn't *just* say Beta is now single-stick, IT SAID IT'S REUSABLE! THIS MAKE SO MUCH MORE SENSE NOW maybe I should lay off the caps for a bit BUT STILL
  10. I thought the Beta was just a triple-core Alpha though? What's wrong with the Reavers? Looking at the payload user's guide, this was clearly the plan before now. Why would they change it? I don't get it at all. Besides, "AR-1" isn't a Firefly reference! And they STILL haven't named anything Serenity or something more obvious like that!
  11. ....what the? Don't they have their own engine already, though? Wouldn't it just be less money to use the Reavers from the Alpha again, rather than both paying for additional development costs of needlessly changing the engine and paying a probably high upcharge to Aerojet Rocketdyne? I mean, the AR-1 isn't even fully developed, while the Reavers are already being tested in quads- by the time Beta flies, the Reavers should have flown at least once and thus automatically be more reliable. Seriously, what's the point? Other than some gravy, I guess...
  12. I mean, this is... ok... but only because you wouldn't be missing out on much since you would only be heading to a space station in the same initial orbit after only a few hours at max. Now, a space station or other long-term habitation without windows would be a true crime. (IIRC Bigelow might even be trying to do this with the B330 at the moment, it's unacceptable!)
  13. That's... uh... I get "function over form," but that red white and blue looks hideous, and I'm pretty sure isn't a "function"
  14. Well, it finally happened, after over a year and a half of waiting this thing actually launched. It will be sad to probably see Pegasus go, though... that was probably the last Pegasus launch ever. Early Orbital Sciences was so cool and ambitious and forgotten, you know? They anticipated the small satellite launcher boom, they just built their vehicle 20 years too early...
  15. I'd say this is getting ridiculous but I think it got ridiculous around mid-2018
  16. Oh, and in completely separate but somehow missed news, A Shortfall Of Gravitas is cryptically still on the table. Out of curiosity, what kind of ASDS might Starship/SuperHeavy need?
  17. They could do that with SAOCOM 1B also, though (that's what they did with SAOCOM 1A), and yet they still changed it to the Cape. So it's not just about the droneship. Seriously speculating here, but... maintaining facilities is expensive. Cutting an entire launch site would be a fairly effective cost-saving measure, and maybe there just aren't enough SSO/Polar missions to justify having their own launchpad. Just "Cape Kennedy" and Boca Chica might just be their new plan.
  18. That one that was "late this year/early next" was SAOCOM 1B I think, before this change... They still have those SSO rideshare missions... but the launch days aren't really clear, and maybe those could be out of the cape now, too? Also, yes, SSO, not just a regular polar orbit. Apparently, SAOCOM 1B is SSO, so SSO from the Cape is definitely possible, not just regular polar orbits. Can't seem to find any other info on that though? Is there just an inclination change or something?
  19. Good news for South Texas ...bad news for Vandenberg. No seriously, with JRTI and both fairing catchers away from the west coast and launches shifting towards the Cape... do they plan on launching anything else out of Vandenberg at all? Are they trying to phase it out? Just a bit of worried speculation there, that's all- it was always great to see everyone in the LA area go crazy about UFO's whenever a launch happened at the right time. Hopefully this will look sufficiently different from normal launches that people in Miami will freak out too. It is Florida, after all.
  20. ... ... Meanwhile at Wallops, NG-12 or CRS-12 apparently has been delayed to November 2nd. I live ~5 hours away, I think I could spare a weekend- I really hope that date sticks!
  • Create New...