The Space Thread - Launches, Events, Live Streams, Governments, Corporations, drama in Spaaaaaaaaaaaace

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Mikoyan said:
I know you're not implying but Tony Bruno doing something unethical enough to hack off ULA is a practical impossibility. Out of everyone in the space biz, I think he has the least concern for anything in life that isn't 'playing with space rockets'.

Anyway, Youtube said 'you like space rockets, go look at these koreans launching a rocket from Brazil.' Wild stream. Really good video but... no commentators. Or countdown clock. I caught one in the corner of the launch room so I had a vague idea at least of the launch time. Chat was insane. Hangul flying by at warp speed and Brazilians talking up Lula and how much they love Korea followed by strings of North Korean flags. It's BRs so you can't tell if they're taking the piss or just stupid.

Anyhow, thing launches and very quickly I go 'huh.' It's... pretty slow off the pad. Hey, maybe it's supposed to be like that, new rocket. Then it's throwing orange chunks out the exhaust. Oh, it's a solid? ...wait no, they said it isn't. Uhoh. Then some fumbled camera switches, a hard closeup of part of the launch pad, another like quarter second camera switch to some red flames, then the launch room with dour Korean faces. Amazing. "Anomaly experienced" was kind of an afterthought and not necessary.
Click to expand...
It seems to have gone boom right around Max Q. They cut the whole stream real quick afterwards, too. Spoilsports even turned comments off for the VOD, but the chat replay shows a lot of the gook viewers were having a laugh:

boom.jpg
That backwards F-looking character is pronounced like a softer, breathy english K. Spamming it is internet gookspeak for "lololololol."
 
Mikoyan said:
I know you're not implying but Tony Bruno doing something unethical enough to hack off ULA is a practical impossibility. Out of everyone in the space biz, I think he has the least concern for anything in life that isn't 'playing with space rockets'.

Anyway, Youtube said 'you like space rockets, go look at these koreans launching a rocket from Brazil.' Wild stream. Really good video but... no commentators. Or countdown clock. I caught one in the corner of the launch room so I had a vague idea at least of the launch time. Chat was insane. Hangul flying by at warp speed and Brazilians talking up Lula and how much they love Korea followed by strings of North Korean flags. It's BRs so you can't tell if they're taking the piss or just stupid.

Anyhow, thing launches and very quickly I go 'huh.' It's... pretty slow off the pad. Hey, maybe it's supposed to be like that, new rocket. Then it's throwing orange chunks out the exhaust. Oh, it's a solid? ...wait no, they said it isn't. Uhoh. Then some fumbled camera switches, a hard closeup of part of the launch pad, another like quarter second camera switch to some red flames, then the launch room with dour Korean faces. Amazing. "Anomaly experienced" was kind of an afterthought and not necessary.
Click to expand...
The chat looks sounds so crushed when it cuts to the propaganda video.
 
Is aerospace travel tech regressing? No manned moon missions in over half a century, and no supersonic airliners anymore either. 🤔

🚀
 
ToroidalBoat said:
Is aerospace travel tech regressing? No manned moon missions in over half a century, and no supersonic airliners anymore either. 🤔

🚀
Click to expand...
The dirty secret about the Apollo Missions is that booster rockets were ICBM's designed to deliver nuclear weapons. As part of the START treaty, the US stopped development and testing of these technologies. The people who developed them retired and have ultimately died and the original plans for the missiles were destroyed.

The tech was deliberately regressed as a part of cold war politics. In retrospect stupidly so, because soviet missile tech ended up being smoke, mirrors and the dog shit Laika spewed in the capsule as she was turned into paste on her one way orbit journey. But by the time people realized the soviets had pulled a fast one the cold war had ended, the great enemy was gone, and the general consensus was a shoulder shrug. The US kept to the treaty as part of the ultimate hope that the newly formed Russian federation would ultimately dismantle its entire strategic missile program.

The Clintons have so, SO many things to answer for. You think you hate the Clintons enough. Let me tell you why you don't hate the Clinton's enough. All the shit SpaceX and NASA are doing is a cargo cult trying to recreate from oral tradition what the Silent Generation said they did in their private memoirs and journals because there are no schematics or prototypes available, and their boomer apprentices are playing telephone with the info. Why? Because the Clintons held to the START treaty fastidiously and destroyed the plans as required. The reason we can't just make another Apollo rocket and lander is because WE CAN'T. Because of the Clinton Administration. We don't know how.
 
The basic technology of a ballistic missile and a space rocket are the same but you don't need a space exploration or space science program in order to develop ICBMs and manned spaceflight was seen as a strategic capability in its own right completely separate from long range missiles. There's basically nothing about the Saturn stack that would be useful for nuclear strike, developing it would have been a 100% wasted effort if the only intent was to produce a better missile. The Navy and Air Force originally wanted their own manned space programs, the government however preferred to have a civilian agency in charge of developing this capability because it was good PR to play up the "peaceful uses of space" angle with the assumption that NASA tech could be shared with the military if and when there was a mission for it. The real reason space exploration cooled off after Apollo is because the government decided the actual benefits didn't justify the expense and the military and other organizations that really did want a space capability could get by with cheaper unmanned satellites (many of which were launched by repurposed ICBMs such as the Minotaur rocket).

Aside from NASA which does science, PR and technical missions (weather satellites etc), there's also the military Space Development Agency and the glowie National Reconnaissance Office who both conduct more launches per year than NASA but don't make a big deal about it because they don't want to draw attention to the fact that America's real space programs are explicitly about fucking up other countries' shit rather than promoting the advancement of All Mankind. Thanks to the power of modern automated systems these guys don't really need a manned space capability so they don't bother with that shit. NASA's space station program is just a way to keep the idea of the dream alive until someone comes up with an actual justifiable use case for sending people to space. Looks like the closest thing we're going to get to that in the next few decades is "because if we don't the Chinese will get there first!" because history is a lot like pottery.

Plus NASA human space exploration division is one of those self-licking ice cream cones where it's only real purpose is to keep various factories operational in order to keep various people employed in order to justify various budget line items to various congressional districts so no one really cares if it works or not.

Supersonic aircraft likewise aren't commercially viable. A B-1 bomber might be able to justify its fuel bill in order to win a war but a Concorde can't because virtually nobody needs to get to a meeting in Paris this afternoon at twenty times the cost of doing it the next day.

So yeah we have regressed but only because we've stopped doing things that were too expensive to do in the first place.
 
Bob's Fuckass Head said:
It seems to have gone boom right around Max Q.
Click to expand...
That's what the stream implied but I'm not sure they even got there. It seemed kinda slow off the pad, and I think they just spammed the milestone notifications. I'd be interested to see a detailed breakdown but I sort of doubt we'll get one. Oh hey, looks like the Korean media has a video compilation. lol at the pic of their stock diving after the kaboom.
mindlessobserver said:
The dirty secret about the Apollo Missions is that booster rockets were ICBM's designed to deliver nuclear weapons. As part of the START treaty, the US stopped development and testing of these technologies. The people who developed them retired and have ultimately died and the original plans for the missiles were destroyed.
Click to expand...
Basically none of this is actually true. The closest you can get is some of the stuff that became the Saturn program started off as Air Force programs but they noped out early going 'wait, none of this stuff is necessary for military use'. If no development was possible, how'd we pull the EELV program off?
 
Mikoyan said:
Basically none of this is actually true. The closest you can get is some of the stuff that became the Saturn program started off as Air Force programs but they noped out early going 'wait, none of this stuff is necessary for military use'. If no development was possible, how'd we pull the EELV program off?
Click to expand...
Im not saying everything was lost. I am saying things were made needlessly difficult for political reasons and the START treaty. Something that didn't have to be so autistically followed and fell apart anyway because it was stupid and everyone knew it except Bill Clinton.
 
Eric Berger wrote this article ranking launch companies:

Ars Technica: Our annual power ranking of US rocket companies has changes near the top and bottom (archive)

Some were not happy with the Katy Perry joke:

2. Blue Origin (+2)​

This is the biggest mover on the list, leaping from No. 4 on the list to No. 2, and this is, of course, because Jeff Bezos’ company sent Katy Perry into space. (They could have achieved No. 1 had they not brought her back). In all seriousness, this was a breakthrough year for Blue Origin, finally shaking the notion that it was a company full of promise that could not quite deliver.
Click to expand...
perry1.webp
perry2.webp

As expected, the Trump administration couldn't overrule Congress and significantly cut NASA's science budget:

Ars Technica: NASA’s science budget won’t be a train wreck after all (archive)
Throughout the summer and fall, as the White House and Congress wrangled over various issues, lawmakers made it clear they intended to fund most of NASA’s science portfolio. Preliminary efforts to shut down active missions were put on hold.

On Monday, Congress made good on those promises, releasing a $24.4 billion budget plan for NASA as part of the conferencing process, when House and Senate lawmakers convene to hammer out a final budget. The result is a budget that calls for just a 1 percent cut in NASA’s science funding, to $7.25 billion, for fiscal year 2026.
Click to expand...
 
<3 norafawn said:
Ron soye is going to rape me to death but frankly I don’t want a dollar going to nasa or spacex until they begin producing the quarterly/progress film reports.

Imagine burning tax-payer money with LITERALLY no idea where it is going. Love space exploration but fuck that.
Click to expand...
They do plenty of outreach, all the time:

For the more pragmatic, they have NASA Spinoff, where they try to justify the spending by highlighting the practical technologies spun off: https://spinoff.nasa.gov/

SpaceX is a private company, and they are their own customer for the vast majority of their own launches (for Starlink).
 
Ars Technica: NASA considers evacuating ailing crew member from International Space Station (archive)
Someone on the International Space Station suffered an unspecified “medical situation” Wednesday, prompting the postponement of a planned spacewalk and raising the possibility of an early return for a portion of the lab’s seven-person crew, NASA said in a statement.
Click to expand...
the situation on the ISS appeared more serious after a second statement was released by NASA late Wednesday night. NASA confirmed the medical issue involved a single crew member and said the person was stable. Then, NASA said managers were considering bringing home the ailing crew member on a SpaceX Crew Dragon capsule.
Click to expand...

Ars Technica: Former Google CEO plans to singlehandedly fund a Hubble telescope replacement (archive)
On Wednesday evening, former Google CEO Eric Schmidt and his wife, Wendy, announced a major investment in not just one telescope project, but four. Each of these new telescopes brings a novel capability online; however, the most intriguing new instrument is a space-based telescope named Lazuli. This spacecraft, if successfully launched and deployed, would offer astronomers a more capable and modern version of the Hubble Space Telescope, which is now three decades old.
Click to expand...
Named for the deep sky blue of the rock Lapis lazuli, Lazuli is an optical space telescope with a mirror diameter of 3.1 meters (by comparison, the primary mirror of the Hubble Space Telescope is 2.4 meters). It is intended to launch as early as late 2028 and begin scientific operations in 2029.
Click to expand...
Hubble STIS = 115 nm - 1.03 μm
Hubble WFC3 = 200 nm - 1.7 μm
JWST = 600 nm - 28.5 μm

Hubble has coverage extending from ultraviolet to near infrared. JWST covers orange to mid-infrared.

Lazuli IFS = 400 nm - 1.7 μm
Lazuli WCC = 350 nm - 1 μm
Lazuli ESC = 400 nm - 750 nm

They appear to be ditching ultraviolet capability in this one, and arguably it doesn't cover the entire visible spectrum with all of the instruments, since violet is considered to start around 380 nm.

Still, this looks clearly superior to Hubble and is huge news.
 
ToroidalBoat said:
Is aerospace travel tech regressing? No manned moon missions in over half a century, and no supersonic airliners anymore either. 🤔

🚀
Click to expand...
Not any expert or anything so I might be mistaken, but I'm pretty sure there is a bunch of manned lunar stuff planned to happen around 2027-2030 for both the US and China. Not a guarantee for either of them, but from the bits I've read it all appears to still be going ahead, and US wise Trump has brought it up multiple times that he wants the US back on the moon and has even stated very ambitious stretch goals like lunar bases etc. Who knows if any of it will come to fruition, but I would say under Isaacman it probably has the best chances of happening as he seems pretty eager and is a lot more open to collaborating on missions with private companies like SpaceX, which is a benefit in this case since iirc a bunch of the issues NASA was having previously were around funding, unnecessary regulatory hoops, and general lack of interest from previous administrations. I do think though if it doesn't happen with Isaacman/Trump, it's very unlikely to happen with anyone who comes after them.
 
The Mass Shooter Ron Soye said:
Ars Technica: NASA considers evacuating ailing crew member from International Space Station (archive)
Click to expand...
NYT: NASA Will Bring I.S.S. Astronauts Home Early After Medical Issue (archive)
During the 25-year history of the space station, this is the first time that astronauts will return early because of a medical issue.
Click to expand...
Their mission, known as Crew-11, was to conclude next month after Crew-12, the next group of four astronauts arrived. Now they will undock and return to Earth in the coming days.
Click to expand...
 
The Un-Clit said:
I wonder why they are returning the whole crew and not just the sick astronaut? The Dragon capsule is perfectly capable of de-orbiting and landing itself without any human interaction. I don't see the need to cancel the entire mission, the others can return on their scheduled crew-change flight.
Click to expand...
Because we didn't end up going with the Crew Return Vehicle, so you have to have (preferably more than) enough seats to get everyone home at all times.
 
The Un-Clit said:
I wonder why they are returning the whole crew and not just the sick astronaut? The Dragon capsule is perfectly capable of de-orbiting and landing itself without any human interaction. I don't see the need to cancel the entire mission, the others can return on their scheduled crew-change flight.
Click to expand...
Because with the condition there's a sense of urgency, and that if Dragon was to return then the only crew return vehicle on the ISS would be a Soyuz, which can only carry 3 people, which the seats are customized for them and their bodies. So, if they were to stay then they would be at risk at any moment as there would not be a vehicle on the ISS to return them if say the ISS was to suddenly get hit by some debris that crippled the station (worse case, I know). And that, the Dragon is the only way back.

So, if 1 has to go, then they all have to go.
 
So, basic math then. Okay, unfortunate but makes sense.

I didn't know the Soyuz seats had to be so customized to the sitter, interesting fact but I guess with the thing being so small but still holding 3 cosmonauts they have to eke out every square cm they can.
 
The Un-Clit said:
So, basic math then. Okay, unfortunate but makes sense.

I didn't know the Soyuz seats had to be so customized to the sitter, interesting fact but I guess with the thing being so small but still holding 3 cosmonauts they have to eke out every square cm they can.
Click to expand...
It's because they want the best support possible in the seat while making it as small as possible because the Soyuz reentry capsule is fucking TINY even compared to Apollo, with Dragon being much bigger than that. (In total with the orbital module Soyuz has a bit more space than Apollo)
 
The Un-Clit said:
I wonder why they are returning the whole crew and not just the sick astronaut? The Dragon capsule is perfectly capable of de-orbiting and landing itself without any human interaction. I don't see the need to cancel the entire mission, the others can return on their scheduled crew-change flight.
Click to expand...
I am placing my bet now. One of the women is Pregnant. And if she is, she absolutely cannot remain in orbit. Radiation and the limited gravity could be a death sentence for the fetus.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom