The Astronomy Thread

LachiusTZ said:

Is there any advantage to the SLS? Besides it will be ready to test sooner (I don't expect NASA to beat space X to a fully functional system by any useful margin)?

Click to expand...

The only advantage is that it has twice+ the payload of any other nation currently, including Russia. Private space programs is the greatest thing ever both for advancement and my Murica freedom, but the US like every other major country still needs a space program that is ran by the government. What purpose does the SLS provide? It ensures we stay as a country on the top of the space race and more capability than others. That is what it boils down to. The SLS program was designed and built long term as a direct replacement program to the space shuttle. It has been in the works for some time but the design phase is done and now in manufacturing and testing.

meStevo said:

Twitter speculation that Jupiter could eventually eject the Tesla from the solar system, interstellar space junk!

After a few thousand years the orbit gets really eccentric (less and less like a circle). I need orbital images to really make sense of some of this stuff though.


It certainly won't be around for a billion or whatever years like the expected Mars heliocentric orbit (orbit around the sun, reaching at times as far as the orbit of Mars)

Click to expand...

Millions of years from now, some green man will be asking his multigendered mutant wife on some distant planet if there is other life out there when a Tesla car falls from the sky and kills them both.

LachiusTZ said:

Oldbased

I get that, but with the falcon heavy, bfr (if it works), I don't see the point in paying billions to build and launch the SLS beyond the first one which I'm sure will test several systems.

Wouldn't the money be better spent at JPL, and the labs working with theoretical engines (em, warp, etc)?

Seems like pride and vanity is going to cost billions and accomplish not much.

Click to expand...

Sad but true. A few key differences here. THE BFR is more like the space shuttle than a rocket. I guess technically it is a rocket but you get my meaning and if you don't then realize the BFR as suggested now is a 1 stage vehicle. It is the entire package. It launches into space as a unit, refuels from another launch then heads to where it is going. The shuttle couldn't really do that but neither it was a space vehicle. The SLS is traditional just with a massive lift capacity. On paper the SLS will be more adaptable for missions if required than the BFR. The BFR is designed to go places and with moderate comfort if early designs hold true. The SLS is designed to lift things into space, be it low orbit, Moon, Mars, and whatever else is needed or conjured up.
As for costing billions for nothing, well, welcome to the US Gov. The danger is realizing that SpaceX is not beholden to the US. They like any company able to walk away if they should choose to do so, although not without danger obviously. While they and other space labs are doing great service and far cheaper to the US, there is no promise of it years from now. The US as a leading super power cannot put full faith into that.

It would be nice if they could and all things point to them being able to but it is not a guarantee.
Many of the SpaceX/NASA goals are aligned right now. Both plan to go to the moon. Both plan to go to Mars. There may come a day when those parallels don't match up, say for example the moon becomes militarized or we find unobtainium on Mars or something and then what would the US Gov do?

For several years, we have relied on a country many proclaim to hate us/be at war with us( Russia ) although not quite that bad, to ferry us into space. Would we be better off depending on a private company to do the same? Not a solid leader in the space industry if so. The US Gov needs NASA and it needs the options of its own delivery vessels. Once THAT is out of the way, if it is cheaper to pay another to do something then by all means, let us save money. The US needs SLS though, just to remind other countries of our space capability as a country.

Big Phoenix said:

Because the SLS is nothing more than an Obama era pork barrel virtue signaling mess. Obama canceled the Orion project which was an even bigger launcher + associated payload for Moon and Mars missions. But we know the leeches in DC love their pork and Obama also wanted to show he was still committed to space after cancelling Orion, so SLS was born.

Problem is there is zero payload or missions for it, aside from putting the Orion orbiter into space and sending it around the moon. Which you dont need SLS to do. Its really a massive scam, as the cost for a SLS Moon or Mars payload would probably put it right back at the cost of the Orion program. Instead the they cut payloads and just build a rocket and acted like they where doing the samething as Orion.

Click to expand...

You keep saying this but there is a manned Orion mission in 2021 using it and Mars missions after that. It will need that payload for Mars. Just like the BFR LEO payload is not the same after orbit. You NEED a rocket that size and capability to carry the fuel needed to reach the moon. That 130 ton ability to reach space becomes only 40 tons or so if you need to go to Mars.

I should add that I am not a huge fan of the SLS, even if it is taller and more powerful by 200% than the Falcon Heavy. I would have preferred a modern more capable shuttle program( deep space ship ) but it is what was agreed upon and funded and most of that design and research is now done. It is the pig given, time to put some lipstick on it and dress it up.

Tuco said:

SpaceX might get to Mars a few years after SLS does, assuming no delays or reorganizations. But if they have a launch vehicle that can get there at a tenth of the cost of the SLS, it'll be tough for NASA not to try and divert resources to either a SpaceX vehicle or to create their own that's built off SpaceX's design.

And even if NASA / Boeing / Lockheed hear/see/speak no evil and continue with a one-shot SLS, they're going to redesign for the next generation.

Click to expand...

Ya this. I don't expect we'll see EM-100s like the shuttle program. We'll be lucky to see EM-15. EM-1 is the moon launch, EM-2 manned moon mission and from there it can go more moon or first mars. It is mostly just important that we have the capability and do the moon/mars initially then after that I suspect we may use BFR's, especially for supply and maybe even park one for disaster event possibility. Just like the space station, the US Gov will not likely use BFR for people until proven multiple trips privately, so we are talking 2030+ for that. Far to much of a time gap to NOT have the SLS.

LachiusTZ said:

This is where I was going with it.

The one shot systems are quickly becoming pointless from a cost value standpoint

Click to expand...

That is why I don't think we'll see more than 15 launches compared to the shuttle STS 135 missions.
What I do expect is this will carry us for the next 12-15 years and just like SpaceX which now declares Falcon as "finished" and maybe only a few revisions on the Falcon Heavy so they can start work on the BFR, NASA will declare SLS "finished" after a few launches and all that research and development will turn into the next vessel.

Cool video of the 2 boosters landing (commentary aside lol)

Cybsled said:

Cool video of the 2 boosters landing (commentary aside lol)

Click to expand...

You think you're watching CGI effects, but it's real!

Photos of the Tesla roadster that went to space prototype released.

Archeiron said:

My favourite weather app, Carrot, had a "yo mama" joke about this:

View attachment 161331

Click to expand...

I was kinda hyped to not use a shit weather app but I can't find it, must be some gay Apple only shit.