/space/ Comrade 21-12-20 05:21:31 No. 1460
The history of space travel. I want all material, factoids, trivia, books on space. From Sputnik to the recent Crew Dragon and further beyond
Anonymous 11-10-21 21:55:40 No. 8068
The only photograph of the surface of Venus is still from the Soviets. Looks like a land devastated by nukes. They even record the sound from the surface. There's a lot of thunderous sound, very spooky.
For anyone wondering
Surface photo :
https://www.space.com/18551-venera-13.html Sound recording :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jZDW53U8qQ Note: I only able to found the sound recording on youtube. I don't know if its the legit one though, I heard a different sound record by Venera 14 while watching a documentary about Venus by Discovery Channel. The real one doesn't sound that clear, it's more like a thunder sound made by electronic equipment from the 80s. Imagine it like a thunder sound in Mario Bros game.
Anonymous 21-10-21 05:38:38 No. 8423
Posting the 4-volume series
Rockets and People that was mentioned here
>>8064 Boris Chertok was a controls systems designer, one of Korolev's closest colleagues and deputy director at Energia, later on continuing to work at Roscosmos until his death. The English translation was done by Asif Siddiqi, author of
Challenge to Apollo >>8070 and published by NASA.
Future Space thrusters. Anonymous 01-11-21 03:34:12 No. 8531
Its been over 20 years since ion thrusters were developed how much longer should it take before rocket engines develop to a point where travelling outside the solar system becomes feasible for standard rockets, I know space isn't all that great but the technology and the advancements in particle physics that could be produced under the conditions of better space travel would be tremendously helpful to people worldwide. >inb4 billionaire shills, those rockets are made for marketing and use space tech from the 50s that even some 3rd world societies have passed The current focus of SpaceX, Blue Origin, etc is on optimizing the trip to low earth orbit. This requires high thrust to weight ratio, low ISP engines. What you are asking for is low thrust to weight ratio, high ISP engines for efficient travel in the vacuum of space. Once economical trips to low earth orbit get squared away maybe capitalists will move onto RnD for whacky interplanetary and interstellar engines. The requirements for lifting a rocket out of our thick soupy gravity well, and the requirements for a rocket that works efficiently in space are vastly different. There will never be a single rocket engine that can take a payload from the surface of earth, all the way to mars. The job requires multiple specialized rockets and boosters. >What about “exotic matter” and using the physical phenomena found in particles on the quantum scale There are a confirmed thousands of other unused particles and god knows how many physicial phenomenal in them that have been discovered over the past 50 years. But they have low TWR, and high cost at the moment, and aren't suited to atmospheric operation. A Ramjet for in-atmosphere launch could be a viable alternative.
Anonymous 13-05-22 13:00:52 No. 10662
I will start off with the subject of artificial ecosystems. Biosphere 2 was a financially colossal project in which a team of engineers and scientists worked to create a self-sustained ecosystem. Something clearly relevant to settling on planets and moons that don't have an ecosystem in which human beings can live in unprotected.
<Biosphere 2, scientific research facility located in Oracle, Arizona, U.S., designed to emulate Earth’s environment (Biosphere 1) that was perhaps best known for two missions conducted in the early 1990s in which crews were sealed inside the enclosure to study survivability. The driving force for these studies was to assess whether humans were capable of building and living in self-sustaining colonies in outer space. (…) Survivability missions in Biosphere 2 began on September 26, 1991, when four men and four women, referred to popularly as “Biospherians” (individuals trained to perform specific tasks during the mission) (…) Within several months of entering the indoor atmosphere, the Biospherians detected a decrease in oxygen levels and an increase in carbon dioxide. (…) Unable to identify the cause, officials decided to inject oxygen into the facility on at least two occasions, and the lungs were opened daily to allow inflow of air from the external environment. While this move was criticized because of the impossibility of such a rescue for a self-sustaining colony in space, the Biospherians experienced marked lethargy and difficulty breathing before the oxygen was injected, raising concerns about their health and ability to finish the mission. (…) The crew of the first mission also failed to achieve maximal food production. (…) The performance of the first group of Biospherians was further hindered about six months into the mission, when the group split into two factions. (…) On March 6, 1994, having made various upgrades and improvements in system engineering and having introduced additional species into the ecosystem and agricultural areas, the second mission, with a crew of seven, began. In September that same year, however, the experiment was ended prematurely following disputes over management and finances.https://www.britannica.com/topic/Biosphere-2 The project was a disaster despite best efforts. A project of that scale has not been repeated since, therefore one of the most basic ideas of settling on other planets remains unachieved.
Anonymous 15-05-22 05:18:58 No. 10669
>>10666 ppl were always cynical towards spacex imo
it's only the most gullible idiots that gravitate towards that stuff
Anonymous 25-03-24 17:37:26 No. 21791
Related slightly to the nuclear thread as well
>>20394 This is late news but a month back the US MSM was drumming up hysteria about Russian ICBM capabilities and supposed preparations in the use of space-nuking.
https://southfront.press/beware-of-big-bad-russian-space-nukes/ Russia is developing space nukes… as a response to the US refitting the space shuttle platform as an orbital nuclear launch system for glide vehicles in violation of the outer space treaty, which was a response to Russia developing hypersonics* and the US being unable to compete, which itself was a response to the US unilaterally pulling out of the ABM treaty so they could deploy dual use nuclear capable anti-missiles in Eastern Europe pointed at Russia claiming non-existent Iranian threats as justification to escalate to the current war in Ukraine. The USA is also working on space lasers for early warning and tracking against hypersonics and possibly direct energy anti-missile systems which is why in response china developed and successfully tested their satellite killer missile. The interesting part is that the USSR predicted this as being the end goal of NASA's Space Shuttle program, despite denial from them.
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/russia-thinks-x-37b-space-plane-could-drop-nuclear-weapons-208369 https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a36521988/russia-says-x-37b-spaceplane-is-secret-space-bomber/ Part of the reason for this hysteria is justified, in the sense that Russia's ballistic missiles of every type are superior to NATO equivalents, with only the aging Trident II SLBM being any actual threat and the LGM-35A Sentinel program being delayed heavily because of costs and mismanagement.
https://topwar.ru/232823-lgm-35a-sentinel-novaya-raketa-starye-problemy.html Hypersonic thread
>>>/AKM/2782 Unique IPs: 19