[–]▶ No.862085>>862117 >>862538 >>862729 >>863143 [Watch Thread][Show All Posts]
Will we ever have flights at 50,000 ft at 1300 mph ever again like with the Concorde? Will Supersonic passenger flights ever be practical and not relegated to people who can afford thousands of dollars for round trip between London and New York?
A Boeing 747 cruising specs are 30,000 ft at 580 mph for perspective
▶ No.862086>>862405
>ywn join the mile-high club in your private room onboard an Airbus A380
▶ No.862087>>862089 >>862098 >>862916
Although its funny Muslims are the only people keeping this monstrosity on life support
Boeing made a good move properly evaluating seating needs and adapting accordingly the 787 Dreamliner has over twice as many delivered as the A380 despite not coming to market until more recently. I wonder how many A380 seats actually get filled on a given flight
▶ No.862089>>862090
>>862087
The muzzies are possibly the worst people alive when it comes to conspicuous spending. If you ever go to Dubai, especially, the entire city feels complete fake. It's like those fake supermarkets in north korea, but on the scale of an entire city.
▶ No.862090
>>862089
The UAE is basically blowing billions on infrastructure because the government wants to convert to a commercial based economy as a fallback after the oil dries up. Good plan on paper but also a very risky investment. The UAE is also majority immigrants from other countries as a result. They want to draw in western investment. The Burj Khalifa, tallest building on Earth for example, was designed entirely by American Architects and built by Samsung (yes, the Gook phone maker also has a construction branch)
▶ No.862095>>862729
>Hindenburg-Class Airships will never make a comeback
▶ No.862098>>862102
>>862087
The Boeing 747-8 is actually the largest airplane made by Boeing, the second largest behind the A380, and the longest in the world
And it's pretty much already more successful than the A380. Even if it sells significantly less (which is very unlikely by current trends) it will never mean any significant losses for Boeing if any at all since its still based on an existing and proven design model and is easily converted for air freight purposes
American engineering is practical and sensible
▶ No.862102
>>862098
Also it's a tad faster and more fuel efficient than the A380. Airbus really dug a hole for themselves because to revamp the A380 would be a significant cost that frankly will never be justified
▶ No.862117>>862119
>>862085 (OP)
By the time someone tries it again with passenger flights we'll already be at the point where it would be much faster to travel in rockets, and the only reason to continue to fly in planes would be that their fuel is cheaper and at that point why make the effort to go supersonic.
>muh elon musk spaceX is a meme
I don't believe his 2030 prediction nor that it will only take 30 minutes (they'll have to slow that shit down so the G's don't kill the passengers), but given where they're at now I don't think he's that far off.
▶ No.862119>>871294
>>862117
I think Musk has a pretty good chance of his 2030 manned flight aspirations actually. He's the only person with the willpower to plow right through R&D and development of the space industry is moving at speeds not seen since Apollo as a result
▶ No.862214
Commercial space flight is one thing
But will we ever have a launch vehicle that can comfortably seat the average pleb?
▶ No.862217
Its also pretty incredible Rocket Lab was able to come out of nowhere and deliver the first fuel injected rocket engine. 5 million a launch is insanely cheap albeit its limited to small payloads but the light commercial space industry is easily something they could tap with this
▶ No.862221
Why do rocket launches look so cool?
I really want to drive up to VAFB one of these days and go rocket spotting
▶ No.862224>>862244
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KufVg4vwWlo
Japan successfully launched Saturday the world's smallest satellite-carrying rocket following a failed attempt in January last year, the country's space agency said.
The rocket about the size of a utility pole, measuring 10 meters in length and 50 centimeters in diameter, lifted off from the Uchinoura Space Center in Kagoshima Prefecture just after 2 p.m, and delivered its payload to its intended orbit, according to the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency.
The No. 5 vehicle of the SS-520 series carried a microsatellite weighing about 3 kilograms developed by the University of Tokyo to collect imagery of the Earth's surface.
The launch was aimed at verifying JAXA's technology to send a small rocket made with commercially available components to the sky at lower cost amid growing global demand for microsatellites. The space agency used components found in home electronics and smartphones for the rocket.
▶ No.862232>>862255 >>862406 >>862410 >>864269
Do these planes use halal (Windows, BSD) or haram (GPL'd) software? I think we should clarify these questions first, before ranking them in order of greater freedom and safety.
▶ No.862244
>>862224
>The space agency used components found in home electronics and smartphones for the rocket.
So it's an rpi with a solar panel
▶ No.862255
▶ No.862396>>862399
I work as an engineer for lockheed
▶ No.862399
>>862396
I work as an engineer for jews
▶ No.862405
>>862086
That feel when you land and some dirty Arab Prince is bribing you with compromat.
▶ No.862406
>>862232
Of course not. When you buy a car, the computer firmware is proprietary. Given the added complexity of planes, do you think Aerospace companies are going to GPL their code bases?
▶ No.862410>>862469 >>862511 >>862634
>>862232
Modern airplanes are controlled almost entirely by digital computers between Fly-by-Wire systems and FADEC (full authority digital engine control)
AFAIK it's all proprietary. But isn't most of it written in ADA?
▶ No.862511>>862516
>>862469
>>862410
If anything it would be written in ADASpark as normal ADA is considered unsafe.
▶ No.862516
>>862511
> ADA is considered unsafe.
rewrite it in Rust
▶ No.862524>>862526
They apparently use realtime operating systems and language seems to be C/C++
> tf not Rust running on GNU/Linux
▶ No.862526>>862530
>>862524
correction :
Airbus uses C/C++
Boing ADA
▶ No.862530>>862531 >>862634
>>862526
More corrections / additions :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VxWorks
is the OS for Boeing planes
▶ No.862531
▶ No.862535>>862537 >>862542
>proprietary shit by the geniuses who brought you meltdown
I felt safer when I dud not think about this. Also why would the EU use a proprietary NSA endorsed OS? wtf?
▶ No.862537
>>862535
Because reality isn't like your LARPing hugbox anime plot world
▶ No.862538>>862573 >>862599
>>862085 (OP)
No. Because money. Air resistance increases to the 2nd power of speed, but starting at the speed of sound this factor skyrockets. It takes bullshit amounts of fuel to run supersonic even under best conditions (supercruise). To minimize fuel cost, jets are made spindle-like, which also minimizes amount of passengers that can fit in. Finally, going at mach 1.5 will save you 4 hours off 10 hour trip, for all the money you spent on the ticket.
▶ No.862542>>862546
>>862535
good point tho this all seems to refer to older aircraft early 2000s, a380, now i get the feeling they develop in house
▶ No.862546
>>862542
>now i get the feeling they develop in house
Why the fuck would they do that? They would need to re-certify their entire fleet which would come at a tremendous cost. Entire manuals would have to be re-written, technicians re-trained, not to mention the insane amount of cost on having to redevelop the FADEC systems which includes months of stability testing and for what? To prevent triggering LARPing autists in an Indonesian painting gallery? No thanks. Learn how this shit works
▶ No.862573
>>862538
Don't forget bitches complaining about sonic booms over their neighborhoods.
Light sleepers should kill themselves.
▶ No.862599
>>862538
>air resistance increases to the 2nd power of speed
Sort of. It's more complicated than that because the coefficient of drag actually decreases with velocity, particularly a specific component of drag which becomes negligible at high speeds. It becomes increasingly more complicated as you move past Mach 0.3 and into Mach 0.8 and beyond. But yes, the coefficient is multiplied by dynamic pressure which is a function of velocity to the 2nd power.
>starting at the speed of sound
Not really. It starts in the transonic region around Mach 0.8 and then drops off significantly after Mach 1.2.
▶ No.862610>>862973 >>866111
Personal Quadcopters when?
▶ No.862634>>862635 >>862645 >>862682
>>862410
(private) pilot here.
Its not as bad as that sounds; FADEC is fully embedded software, written in ROM, and with at least one level of redundancy. like most systems on commercial planes.
one engine computer not running properly? turn it off, give control to the backup. Any flight-critical systems in a commercial plane will have a couple layers of redundancy, with the pilots ability to disable and swap control whenever. Not just on your engine electronics, all your electronics is connected to a circuit breaker in the cockpit. Every plane i've flown in has this layout, and im not even a commercial pilot.
Aerospace is a horrendously risk-averse sector. Anything that could possibly hurt someone has to be made as safe as possible for commercial aviation; they don't care about how open-source it is, they only care about safety.
Keep in mind, 99% of aircraft electronics in use were developed before 1995.
I have thought about building a kit plane and an operating system based on BSD for homebuilders of airplanes to not have to pay garmin 10k for a GPS system. Could be done with a raspberry pi and shitty lcd for 150$. I'd make the operating system not airplane-specific, but able to bring the level of safety and redundancy considered necessary for airplane safety.
But i'm not a programmer, I just like how linux is configurable and free. I have a cursory knowledge of what hardware electrical standards are used in airplanes, it varies WIDELY. Different airplanes have different power sources; some have alternators in the engine, some have auxilliary power units for power, all run at various voltages, amperages and whatnot. A couple planes even have three-phase power provided all throughout.
I don't know nearly enough to start a free OS, let alone how to maintain one or what packages to choose to use. But there needs to be a better solution for operating systems on homebuilt vehicles, and it better be Linux and gpl. If anons would be willing to help me with this, i've been seriously consider it (it would give me a good excuse to build an 'expirimental' airplane to skirt various FAA inspection regulations)
>>862530
the engine controller is a seperate part, attached to/near the engine. It has its own firmware, redundancy, and interfaces. This is usually to simplify wiring into the cockpit(they use rj-45 for most data connections on airliners, to communicate between various systems(engines, flaps, gear, pressurization, de-icing, lights, radio, and nav equip. all flight-critical) and the central computer)
▶ No.862635
>>862634
>bsd
>better be linux
please excuse me im drunk and bitching about how fucking expensive avionics are
▶ No.862645>>862736
>>862634
As long as you stick to shit like GPS. You really ought to have a masters in flight control systems before you start touching anything that has to do with making the plane fly.
In that case just use an RPI and a GPS chip and let the builders figure out their power needs and what kind of adapter they need to power it. As for a distro just use raspbian and preload some sort of GPS program onto it.
▶ No.862647>>862674 >>863004
The Concorde was retired because of sonic booms. If we can ever come up with a solution to suppress them to acceptable levels or eliminate them entirely we may see it again. Vacuum tube maglev trains may make more sense by then though.
▶ No.862674>>863004
>>862647
>The Concorde was retired because of sonic booms.
There were several reasons for retiring the Concorde, but "sonic booms" weren't among them. The Concordes mostly flew at subsonic speeds over populated areas, and saved supersonic speeds for transoceanic flight.
▶ No.862682
>>862634
>Aerospace is a horrendously risk-averse sector.
It fucking better be.
▶ No.862729>>862736 >>862854 >>863006 >>864234
>>862085 (OP)
>Will we ever have flights at 50,000 ft at 1300 mph ever again like with the Concorde?
No. The business case is indefensible. You may see supersonic private jets in the near future though. Rich-fucks and (((CEO's))) are always willing to pay for quality when it comes to private jets.
>>862095
reinventing the airship with modern materials and avionics and operating as panam would be aesthetic. best outcome short of vacuum tube maglevs. and still best outcome for where the maglev lines dont run.
▶ No.862736
>>862645
the way i imagined it would be having a regular six-pack set of instruments to rely on, a standard radio or two, and just using something like a rpi to display gps, navigation and engine info on a screen, with some way for the pilot to interface it. Thats really all it needs to do. Interfaces on these are usually a bunch of switches and knobs, some newer ones are a touchscreen.
I'd like to use an rpi and its standard screen to display both digital and analog inputs(from traditional sensors), map info, airport info, radio frequencies, and weather info.
The main goal i want with this is modularity. I want to be able to have a screen below an instrument set connected to an rpi with 3g/satellite internet to play music over my headset. Its also far easier to add extra features; bluetooth, on a garmin setup, costs about a thousand.
>>862729
>not flying your own damn plane
▶ No.862770>>862771 >>862791 >>862805 >>863128
>crtl+f sabre
>ctrl+f skylon
>ctrl+f lapcat
nobody here has heard about the most revolutionary idea of the century?
tl;dr
>LAPCAT does mach5+
>skylon does mach 25+, can reach ORBIT
>first concievable single stage to orbit concept
>problem with hypersonic travel: engines melt due to air being too hot
>liquid hydrogen as fuel
>precooler rig on a seperate helium loop for control to cool the incoming air by more than 1000 degrees in 10ms.
>this sounds insane until you remember liquid hydrogen is stored at 50 degrees
>50 kelvin
>incoming air at mach 5 is about 1000 degrees
>Skylon has onboard oxygen tanks
>the engine closes the intake at altitude and turns into a fucking rocketship
>orbital insertion
>reentry is easier
>whole ship is basically empty tank, extra drag in upper atmosphere means less heat overall means less shielding needed(no fucking shuttle tiles)
>far cheaper per lb than any other method of getting to orbit conceived other than space elevators
▶ No.862771>>862805
>>862770
honestly it looks like a badly drawn anime from the early 2000s back when they were still experimenting with CGI
▶ No.862854>>862915
>>862729
So what's up with this then https://boomsupersonic.com/ ? Are they full of shit?
▶ No.862915>>862928
>>862854
All they have is a scale model and a failed business analysis. Scale model means best case it's still in preliminary design and ~7 - 10 years out. $2500 EACH WAY NYC - LON to save < 4 hrs off trip time. Ridiculous. Anybody who can afford this will have their own plane they can fly in comfort in or will have their own agents they can send in their place on a cheap subsonic ticket. ROUNDTRIP Virgin Atlantic currently is $700 - $1000 to give you an idea what price they need to be competitive with.
▶ No.862916
>>862087
Flew in the A380 from Dubai to Singapore last year. My girlfriend and I were almost alone in our section. Terrific plane, however.
▶ No.862928>>862952 >>863260
>>862915
I was kind hoping you'd provide refutation to their claims, not parrot what has already been stated in this thread. Just a small excerpt:
>Every passenger wants faster flights; every airline would like to offer a faster and more differentiated service to their passengers. The question is costs and fares. Concorde was troubled by (1) high operating costs, driven by fuel consumption, and (2) low utilization and load factors, due to the necessarily high fares.
>The viability of supersonic flight depends entirely on the ability to reduce operating costs sufficiently to allow a viable business model. A viable supersonic airliner achieve good load factors and strong margins, at fares passengers will pay.
>Surprisingly, this requires just a 30% efficiency improvement over Concorde's 50 year-old airframe and engines. The fundamental technologies required for this exist today and have recently been accepted by regulators (such as composite structure).
>With up to 55 seats, the Boom aircraft can achieve load factors similar to or better than premium cabins in subsonic widebodies.
>With lower operating costs and higher load factors, our airliner will bring supersonic flight back in economically sustainable fashion.
>Today, passengers pay a 4--5x premium for business class, even though those seats don't arrive any sooner than economy. Passengers in all service classes pay a premium for non-stop (vs. connecting) service, so it is reasonable to expect higher fares for still faster service.
>Final ticket prices will be set by airlines, but we are designing the aircraft so that airlines can operate profitably while charging the same fares as today's business class. Our ultimate vision is to reduce operating costs to make supersonic flight even more affordable.
▶ No.862952>>862957 >>863186
>>862928
>I was kind hoping you'd provide refutation to their claims
They can make all the claims they like. They have a scale model. That's it. It speaks for itself. They haven't:
>manufactured a prototype to test on
>put together required manufacturing and tooling
>flight tested
>gone through certification
They're 7 - 10 years out from operating, assuming all goes well. it won't
>(1) high operating costs, driven by fuel consumption
remains true. flying supersonic will always be less fuel efficient than flying subsonic. you can't cheat the physics. plane will also have higher maintenance costs and turnaround time due to the thermal stresses experienced flying supersonic.
>(2) low utilization and load factors, due to the necessarily high fares.
truer now than then.
<pajeet and ching chong lee will not pay more for a supersonic seat
<supersonic flight will remain a dream of white high trust societies
<unfortunately, these white high trust societies are being deconstructed
>the designers have not anticipated the arrival of newer more efficient CHEAPER subsonic planes they'll compete with
>the designers have not anticipated the market shift towards increased field to field direct flights
<if you fly NYC to LON supersonic then must wait 2 hours for a 1 hour connecting flight to reach Edinburgh vs flying direct NYC to Edinburgh why not fly direct to Edinburgh in nearly the same time for 1/5th the price?
▶ No.862957>>863001
>>862952
So your argument is
>people currently paying for business class won't be paying for supersonic flights because >muh white genocide
? Is that it?
▶ No.862973
>>862610
Asians only because Amerifats are guess what? Too fat.
▶ No.862977>>862995 >>863111 >>863186
How do rockets launch? Are they literally sitting on the ground or is something holding them up so the engine can exhaust properly?
▶ No.862995
>>862977
https://youtu.be/EzQpkQ1etdA?t=11m47s
Look at the bottom right; all the smoke and exhaust is being channeled away from the pad.
▶ No.863001
>>862957
>Is that it?
your argument is literally ignore everything posted so i assume you must be an illiterate cia nigger.
▶ No.863004
>>862647
>>862674
You also have to keep in mind that at the Concorde's cruising altitude of 50,00 ft a fuselage depressurization event is pretty much unavoidable death to the passengers and flight crew. At least at the 30,00ft cruising altitudes of normal passenger jets you still have ample time to lower to a safer altitude in the event of pressurization loss
▶ No.863006>>863186 >>864355
>>862729
>reinventing the airship with modern materials and avionics and operating as panam would be aesthetic.
The Zeppelin Company still exists and still makes airships. I see the Goodyear Wingfoot all the time along the 405 freeway. They're not as grand as the Hindenburg-Class airships though
▶ No.863111
>>862977
>energy goes one way
>for every action there is a positive or negative reaction
>rocket goes other way
▶ No.863128>>863186
▶ No.863143>>863161
>>862085 (OP)
It's entirely a political/public opinion thing. The crash that got Concorde shut down wasn't even the Concorde's fault. A piece of another plane fell off on the runway, and the Concorde just happened to be the one unlucky enough to use said runway next.
▶ No.863161
>>863143
The Concorde was inherently a non-viable operation, even before that accident. The world market for high speed planetary travel was much smaller than the cost of running the Concorde
▶ No.863186>>863200 >>863620
>>862952
depends on some things..
Liquid hydrogen has twice the specific impulse of kerosene(close enough to Jet A), and can be used to keep the engine from melting due to air at high mach being 1000+ degrees. (it's more expensive due to being kept at 50 degrees k)
Wait and see, SABRE and pre-cooled, liquid hydrogen engines will unlock hypersonic manned travel. I can't say whether it will be economical enough to become a commercial transportation standard, but the military and governments will definitely pick up on it. As it stands, DARPA gave them 10m and is still funding them.
The engine doubles as a rocket motor; Just carry some onboard O2and pump it into the chamber when the air is too thin. The result being, an airplane cabable of climbing and accelerating itself into orbit.
>>862977
Most rocket are sitting on a pad with a big concrete trench to direct the fire away. Usually, they also pump water into that area, to protect the concrete and dampen the sound a bit. Most of the structures on the pad are painted with a special paint that burns off, taking energy away by
>>863006
There's a reason there are more astronauts then there are blimp pilots these days.
>>863128
There's these three british autists who were unfourtunate enough to live in that country who came up with this idea in the early 80's. They've been begging their country(and later the EU) for funding money to develop the engine, but the money is 'better spent' eslewhere, according to them. DARPA and the recent european LAPCAT study are the only places they got realy funding, and they've recently proven the precooler and turbocompressor on a test stand.
▶ No.863200>>863215
>>863186
ssto is and will and should remain a meme. it can never achieve the same payload capacity or reliability as single use craft. ideally something like a launch loop or space elevator or space fountain will someday in the future be built to provide cheap space access. until then musk has the right balance with retrieving and refurbing the boosters only.
liquid hydrogen isn't a good fit for a supersonic jet because it requires a large volume to carry enough fuel. and large volume equates to greater drag and weight. aircraft weight scales with the square of aircraft volume according to boeing manufacturing engineers. so you double your volume and quadruple your weight.
lox is also not desirable for a commercial craft because it's dangerous as fuck to handle. and both lox and lh2 require significant insulation which in turn equates to greater weight.
▶ No.863213>>863215
>large volume equates to greater weight
▶ No.863218>>863221
>>863215
aircraft weight scales with the square of volume dude.
▶ No.863221>>863223 >>863224 >>863227
>>863218
>Jet-A fuel: 770g/cm3
>liquid H@: 70 g/cm3
▶ No.863223>>863224
>>863221
>liquid h@
fuckign drunk shitposting again
same thread too
▶ No.863224
>>863223
>>863221
those are also both in liters
▶ No.863227>>863255
>>863221
which means you require larger fuel tanks to hold required fuel
>larger tanks
<greater aircraft weight
▶ No.863255>>863262
>>863227
Liquid hydrogen also has similiar energy output per kg to jet-A(if you're using atmospheric oxygen).
im saying larger tanks dont always weigh more when the fuel being carried is 1/10th the density, and the extra insulation is negligable when the outside air is already 1000 degrees
▶ No.863260
>>862928
>the Boom aircraft
▶ No.863262>>863263
>>863255
hydrogen requires roughly 2x the volume compared to kerosene based. this article states 1.7x:
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4757-0489-1_1
here are some relevant wiki articles to start reading from:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen-powered_aircraft
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precooled_jet_engine
YES the volume problem with hyrdrogen fucks up the vehicle design. YES you will suffer weight penalties and drag penalties as you enlarge the aircraft structure to accomodate the hydrogen fuel.
if you want a practical commercial hypersonic aircraft imo your best bet is materials science:
>search for a superior absorbant material which can absorb and release hydrogen at greater mass percentage
https://phys.org/news/2017-09-scientists-material-hydrogen.html
>search for ultra high temperature alloys and compounds suitable for coating the aircraft skin and engine parts
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlite
i wish you the best of luck in this endeavour dude. i simulate similar materials in my spare time. if you can crack it and not get cia-niggered you'll be rich rich rich and can buy all the best thots.
▶ No.863263>>863271
>>863262
I've read all the wiki articles and even a few NASA journals. How would i go about learning how to simulate this? i have nothing but time and a good computer.
▶ No.863271
>>863263
there is of course open source software available you'll pay for most of it though.
but i recommend learning
>programming (at least c++11, python3, mariadb)
>general chemistry
>material science (generally, and specifically as it relates to thermodynamics and heat transmission)
>thermodynamics (specifically as it relates to material properties and governs heat transmission)
>machine learning (genetic algorithms are very helpful!)
<create an automated testing process to test materials irl
>i have nothing but time and a good computer.
>lots of time
excellent
>a good computer
i recommend practicing on this computer. if you ever get serious about it, a compute cluster will be helpful. but then you're talking 10's of thousands of $'s. i'm considering dropping the money when ryzen 2 comes available to build a compute server dedicated to this purpose. idk. it's a hobby currently. it'd be helpful to parallelize to gpu for which i need to learn vulkan but haven't had the time. if you don't have a graphics card consider investing in one and learning vulkan. it'll pay dividends in your ability to tackle challenging numerical computing problems.
if you're interested, drop your tox id and i'll get back to you someday.
▶ No.863620
>>863186
>There's a reason there are more astronauts then there are blimp pilots these days.
Because German exports took a nosedive as a result of World War II in addition to the fact Zeppelins were seen as tools for Nazi propaganda resulting in the majority of Zeppelin airships being scrapped for Warplanes including the US. Navy Airships and the Zeppelin company never completely recovered?
▶ No.863992>>864190
FALCON HEAVY LAUNCH WHEN?
▶ No.864021
>>864014
>That Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy reference on the infotainment screen
▶ No.864024
>>864014
>inb4 tesla starts advertising unlimited miles on a single charge
▶ No.864183>>864190
>>864035
I really hope I can get to space before I die.
tfw you know ywn go to space
▶ No.864193>>864208 >>864223
>>864190
Why a negress? Blacks have no business being involved in space ventures. WTF!?
▶ No.864208
>>864193
Nice meem, /pol/, but the first person in space was African-American
▶ No.864223>>864229 >>864233 >>864236 >>864921
>>864193
This is the current administrator of NASA, Charles Bolden, he is also a veteran Space Shuttle Pilot
What blacks lack in math skills they make up for in motor skills. That's why most athletes are black. They're like the anti-Asians. you literally never hear about blacks getting in car accidents. Blacks are not known for being bad drivers or pilots.
▶ No.864226
>>864035
Damn it's so satisfying watching those first-stage boosters land back down on Earth perfectly. The most powerful rocket since the Saturn V and they not only managed to reach orbit flawlessly on the first try but they fucking land it on the first try as well. Elon Musk must be jovial as fuck right now. Fucking historic launch right here. Definitely one for the history books
▶ No.864229>>864230
>>864035
This is amazing, and yet here I am being autistically triggered by the cheering. Shut the fuck up and man your stations.
>>864223
I'm fine with this as long as he's not an Affirmative Action hire, which doesn't seem to be the case.
▶ No.864230
>>864229
>I'm fine with this as long as he's not an Affirmative Action hire, which doesn't seem to be the case.
He was promoted by the Obama Administration, so there was probably some bias there
▶ No.864233>>864907
>>864223
>you literally never hear about blacks getting in car accidents
Nigger, please. The fatality rate from motor vehicle accidents is higher for blacks than whites, and it's the number one cause of death in blacks aged 4-15. It slips to the number two cause after that because homicide becomes the number one cause, as niggers love to kill each other.
https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/809956
▶ No.864234>>864252 >>864355
>>862729
Top speed for Hindenburg class was like 80-something MPH. It's hard enough to find a niche for operating trains in some places and they can run faster than that, even if they do have to deal with crossings, grades, going around things, etc. In order to make dirigibles feasible for passenger transportation, you'd need:
>upwards of 150 MPH top speed
>VTOL and good low-speed control
>better luxury and smoother ride than high speed rail
>ground infrastructure to facilitate landings near enough to cities to be practical
>giant hangers to store them
>no hydrogen, even if it's technically safe
I'm not proposing these as impossible roadblocks but merely points of consideration. Even today new innovations are being made, especially through defense contracts. Lots of cool shit even in the last decade. I know that if I had fuck you money and/or tax payer money, I'd be throwing a good chunk of it at experimental dirigibles.
▶ No.864252
>>864234
I can see them finding a niche in the ultra-luxury market sector.
If they can put private rooms in an Airbus A380, there's no reason I see that they can't make a grand airship with multiple hotel-like rooms in the gondola with a grand central promenade and restaurant where you can dine and order drinks from 20,000ft in the air
▶ No.864269
>>862232
>Do these planes use halal (Windows, BSD) or haram (GPL'd) software
>halal
>haram
you confused these 2 words, they mean the opposite of what you think
▶ No.864283>>865313
liquid fluoride thorium nuclear powered commercial jets when?
▶ No.864290
i dont know, is it economical for busses to have v8 engines?
▶ No.864304
why is no one talking about the falcon heavy
▶ No.864355>>864949 >>865313
>>863006
>>864234
>ground infrastructure to faciliate landings
Current decade rigid airship proposals do not have this requirement.
▶ No.864907
>>864233
abortion remains the #1 leading cause of death for blacks tbh
▶ No.864921>>864992 >>865268 >>865274 >>865385
>>864223
>skin color makes you better or worse at piloting and driving stuff
Americans, everyone.
▶ No.864949>>865015
>>864355
wow than masheen very cool can teknikaly get in space. (qwestion.)
▶ No.864992>>865010
>>864921
>skin color makes you better or worse at piloting and driving stuff
<implying race is only skin deep
skin color doesn't but race does asian women are provably the worst drivers and asian men are the worst pilots of all fucking time which is why they even have the goddamn kamikaze meme named after them crashing into things.
▶ No.865268
>>864921
>Skin color, physical traits, and likelihood of getting certain disease are all agreed to be determined by genetics
>But behavior and intelligence? Naw man that's racist!
hang yourself faggot
▶ No.865274>>865385
>>864921
Found the cuckchanner
▶ No.865300
>>865015
>venus
>blue sky and white clouds
doubt.jpg
▶ No.865313>>865342 >>865356
>>864283
Lockheed announced a compact fusion reactor project like 5 years ago and it sounded like a win-win for airships since it could produce energy and helium. They promised one that could fit in a semi, but they found could only create one that was like 100 times the size they were aiming for. (Who knew keeping super-cool superconducting magnets next to plasma would be a challenge?) No way you could stick that in any kind of practical aircraft.
>>864355
They still need a very large landing pad, which must be connected to existing ground infrastructure (mainly roads) to be useful.
Also RIP in peace Dragon Dream. Their helium compressor was a really clever solution to avoid the use of ballast.
▶ No.865342
>>865313
What about radiation ?!
Nuclear reactors have 6 ft thick walls to stop gamma rays.
how can they make that "compact" ?
▶ No.865356>>871294
>>865313
>Lockheed announced a compact fusion reactor project
See pic. What a surprise that you can't miniaturize a technology that barely even exists yet.
▶ No.865385
>>864921
>>865274
white manlets make the best pilots, everyone knows that
▶ No.865424>>866064
Can't wait for the BFR now.
▶ No.866064
▶ No.866070
>>865015
hey very nice i'm learn of more every day in english and very cool because i find support in thread
▶ No.866078>>866081
>>862222
go watch the falcon heavy launch and then come back you illiterate moron
▶ No.866081>>866092
>>866078
>go watch government sanctioned propaganda and then come back you uneducated shitlord
Theres a reason (((elon musk))) is so rich you know, HE'S ONE OF (((THEM)))!!!
▶ No.866092>>866464
>>866081
Unknown operator ELON at line 1
Cannot resolve operator at line 1
Cannot resolve operator at line 1
Unknown operator THEM at line 1
Cannot resolve operator at line 1
Cannot resolve operator at line 1
▶ No.866110
passenger miles per gallon of fuel is AWFUL for Concorde
Being 707 is double, these days quad-druple or 5 times more efficient these days
▶ No.866111>>866523
>>862610
Watch your legs lel.
▶ No.866464
>>866092
This is the results of floridation
▶ No.866523
▶ No.866564>>866571
>>862222
The sun clearly sets over the ocean. It doesn't get smaller and then vanish as is claimed in the flat earth model. There are many videos of this happening. Here's one of them.
https://www.hooktube.com/watch?v=nyMqnpaPD3k
If you doubt this, just take a trip to the beach during sunset/sunrise, depending on which beach you choose. This also works with a large enough lake.
Find a large lake or other very flat surface with a major landmark and get the longest straight shot over that level surface to said landmark. You can use a telescope and will find that the landmark is partially obscured, depending on it's height, which shouldn't be possible if the earth is flat.
https://www.hooktube.com/watch?v=AcdBFfoi3uU
Take yourself and a friend, stand a couple miles apart, and using telescopes find the angle between the line from you to the sun, and from you to your friend. Your friend should do the same. Now you can use trigonometry to get a rough approximation of the distance of the sun. You will find that it's millions of miles away. A sun that is millions of miles away doesn't work with a flat earth model, you need a sun that is much, much closer to explain the shadow experiment preformed by the Greeks.
You can track satellites using a homemade radio receiver. You can even get software online that can decode the signal from weather satellites and get orbital photographs that accurately show cloud cover. Those satellites come up from the horizon, go up into the sky, and then go under the horizon where you loose the signal. If the earth was flat you wouldn't loose the signal in that way.
https://hooktube.com/watch?v=cjClTnZ4Xh4
If you doubt these people as being government funded you can go and preform this experiment yourself. They tell you how to do it.
If it's something closer to the ground that is beaming doctored images down to earth, you can get some friends, use multiple receivers, RDF, and basic trigonometry to figure out how far away the signal is. My guess is that you will find that they are over 400 miles above the surface of the earth, which is too far for a passenger airplane, balloon, or even rocket plane.
And before you come back with "here are instances of people being able to see further than they should be able to see according to the round earth model" I can already tell you that those can be explained easily by the fact that they are over cool water and that the air is more dense than the air well above the water and said density difference bends the light around the curvature using the same principle as a fiber optic cable. But the light doesn't bend forever, which is why even though you can see further in those situations things still get obscured by the curvature of the earth.
▶ No.866571>>866575
>>866564
Why are you wasting your time arguing with a moron?
▶ No.870296
▶ No.870355
>>862222
If the earth is flat then when the sun rises shouldn't you be able to see it the same way over the entire planet? Why doesn't this happen? I'm curious...
▶ No.871080>>871099
>>866575
What if someone drew you your figurative Mona Lisa on a tissue? Would you frame it on the wall or blow your load inside and toss it under your desk?
▶ No.871099
>>871080
Blow my load inside then frame it.
▶ No.871145
▶ No.871294
>>862119
>He's the only person with the willpower to plow right through R&D and development of the space industry is moving at speeds not seen since Apollo as a result
>implying NASA didn't have any
I see that you've taken the bait.
What musk is doing is just fucking hype/distraction sure there's some good technological improvement but if you dig a bit you'll see that his funding's come from govs.
>>865356
>fusion reactor
>in a truck
fucking WEW
The smallest working public Fusion reactor was made by MIT staff and was the size of a house (which is pretty impressive) but the funds were diverted to ITER (NWO needs to centralize power to control the nigger cattle).