Space and Science BS Thread

https://x.com/sciguyspace/status/1823085697236177325?s=46
https://x.com/spacex/status/1823085132234039706?s=46



I remember reading the prevalence of cancer was higher in high inclination Shuttle flights..

 

https://x.com/thejackbeyer/status/1823146259567218826?s=46

 

Have you heard the latest about Mars? Could be a game changer..
https://x.com/spacedotcom/status/1823397315580703225?s=46

 

Could they’ve made a decision? I don’t see a Boeing rep listed.
https://x.com/spcplcyonline/status/1823456270881370267?s=46


I put $20 on Suni and Butch coming home in a Dragon
https://x.com/thejordannoone/status/1823408375511834859?s=46

 

How much of a NSF fanboi is one, if one reads this in Jack's voice?

 

Flight readiness review keeps getting punted down the calendar..
https://x.com/dpoddolphinpro/status/1823839531260420252?s=46

 

https://x.com/nasapersevere/status/1823847477315035642?s=46

 

This is just another reason NASA chose 2 launch providers.

 

I can’t help but wonder what some of the other up and comers could have done with a portion of that 4B. I realize that it’s largely political but it would still be spent somewhere in the US and well spent still beats poorly spent. It might take investing in a handful of failures to get a few keepers but unless Boeing can right it’s ship it will keep on sinking those Billions into a company when they could have been jump starting the broader industry we actually need.

 

I could see NASA canceling Starliner after this. Probably go with BO and have a similar experience..

 

With Hydrogen and Oxygen so low on the periodic table it’s hardly a wonder that water is everywhere. What I’m curious about is the distribution of heavier elements in different types of asteroids and comets. They may prove more concentrated and accessible than here on earth.

 

At some point Boeing is going to be political dead weight.

 

There are not there yet?

 

Dream. Chaser.

Commercial crew was 'pick 2', and In 2014 Boeing and SpX were selected with DC being the 3rd option.

Boeing was widely seen as the 'safe' choice while SpX and DC competed for the 'upstart newspace' contender slot.

In hindsight (quoting Wiki/GAO) ...

Gotta love that 'technical approach, management approach, and past performance', eh?

 

Yeah, but I can see why they chose them. Boeing has been involved in space in a large way for over 60 years. They're the largest aerospace company in the world. While the prices suck, and there are always delays, etc, etc, they statistically were not supposed to be able to fail this hard. So it was a safer bet than choosing 2 unproven companies. Especially Blue Origin, the owner of which is one of the wealthiest men in the world, but is literally barely giving them enough of a budget per year to survive. Now, IF they can pull it off, BO will be a very thrifty company, which can be great once the company scales. But they've been going super slow because they have to go over every part 50 times before making it because making another might not be in the budget. And even once they do make the new rocket, it will take them ages to build them because they are not building an assembly line. They're in Spacex's tent phase, only the buildings are already permanent, so moving equipment around for efficiency will put huge delays on production. im betting 2-3 a year.

Spacex is an easy choice though. Elon started it with his own money, got great at iterative design, and then scaled up massively. HE started Starship in a field, then in some tents stacked on shipping containers. And in doing so he figured out what equipment he needed, where that equipment should be in the production line, and then built a factory to suit his exact needs. When that factory is finished and the assembly line is up and running, and all the parts are being moved on overhead gantries and gibs, the speed that they pump out Starships is going to be insane and the low cost just as insane. But it took a lot of capital early on to build that temporary production line. To work out the kinks. I mean, I've lost count of the rockets that they have literally cut to pieces and scrapped. Consequently, as the factory starts ramping up they're going to be asking for approval for more launches year over year. They've already started that. I wonder how that will affect access to things like the beach. Is Spacex buying up more land to trade and just make those entire surrounding area a no access preserve?

I would say going forward maybe they'll replace Boeing, but in the end they don't need to. Spacex has proven fairly reliable and repeatable. Dragon should be sufficient access until they retire the ISS in a few years. Though I wouldn't be surprised if they threw Boeing 1 more bone$$ because "we must insure access with 2 choices"

 

I wouldn't be either, but I'd be disappointed as heck. But in 2014, NASA wasn't ready to say Boeing is washed and broken, SpX has a working product (cargo dragon) that just needs a little bit of iteration. Heck, lots of y'all in 2024 aren't willing to give up on Boeing even though they've demonstrated they've destroyed their entire engineering culture....

 

Dream Chaser’s got to be the coolest spaceplane concept built to date.

The problem is it’s been under development since 2004 and hasn’t had one flight yet. It’s based on research starting off from the 1950s and intensely studied by multiple companies with several vehicles during the 60s and 70s. So in over 70 years, collectively, they haven’t been able to get this baby flying.

Sierra has grand plans but they have a lack of urgency and ability to get this thing flying much less to build multiple cargo vehicles and it’s planned interation into a crew.

 

Its name is appropriate.

 

Dude. I cannot WAIT for humanity to start mining asteroids! BELTALOWDA!

 

I got to see Dreamchaser up close this week and it's a really cool looking design. Kinda reminds me of an stingray/orca mix.

Blue had a pretty big anomaly this week I haven't looked on Reddit but there is footage floating around of it...hope nobody was hurt