Space Chat | Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known.
659 replies, posted
[QUOTE=cqbcat;45967532]The reason why we struggle to get a few tons of payload into orbit is because is because the thrust also has to lift the fuel. If we didn't have to account for lifting the fuel, we could lift a lot more payload. Imagine if the Saturn V didn't have to lift 5.6 million pounds of fuel, but instead 5.6 million pounds (2800 tons) of extra payload ([I]every aerospace engineer in the world would cream their pants)[/I].
To me, this means the fuels we have right now are INCREDIBLY potent if they can provide so much thrust as to lift in excess of 2800 tons. But if we want to get serious about colonizing space, we're gonna need to develop fuels far more potent if we want to put enough tonnage into space. That is if we don't develop more elegant solutions to putting stuff in space besides exploding thousands of gallons of fuel.[/QUOTE]
fuels have been tapped out, there's only so much you can get out of chemical bonds without having to deal with the increadibly deadly
RP-1/LOX is about the best combo of fuel both price wise and density wise, its simple too since RP1 and LOX have about the same density
[url]http://library.sciencemadness.org/library/books/ignition.pdf[/url]
i read this thing cover to cover and really not much has changed, we worked out the mysteries of chemical propulsion decades ago, hydrozene offers some better benefits but for actual non-military launch vehicles its not really worth it either
the only improvements that could be made are in using some form of nuclear or microwave heating or remove most of the propulsion job from the rocket by using mass accelerators to give it a huge boost in velocity before the rockets ignite
EDIT
thinking on it, there's another way to boost rocket performance, air launched payloads like virgin galactic off of white-knight offer a good alternative to launch low powered vehicles to higher orbits using conventional jet engines
Forgot how many stars there were man
[t]https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3881/15274122661_c16864a764_o.jpg[/t]
SpaceX seems to have a lot of problems with the weather.
what's a nice beginner's telescope?
fairly decent budget
Color version of the Rosetta pic posted above:
[T]http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/1409/cometCG01_rosetta_2048.jpg[/T]
Clouds or full moon, pick one.
[QUOTE=thefreemann;46077095]what's a nice beginner's telescope?
fairly decent budget[/QUOTE]
Depends what you want to do. If you want to look at things and learn the sky, I would reccomend the Celestron powerseeker line. Nice telescopes, and they are pretty cheap. It also depends on what you want to look at. If you want to look at bright things like planets and the moon, a refractor telescope might be a good idea. For nebulae and dimmer objects, a reflector is good (try to get one near or above 130mm)
Now if your budget is high enough or you want to do astrophotography, try looking at a computerized go-to scope. With a go-to scope you just give it an object or some coordinates and it will drive itself to that position, with a manual equatorial mount you usually just find an object via the stars and try to eyeball it until you see it. Or if you can figure it out you can use the coordinate system.
Also generally the more expensive it is the higher the quality will be and the less headache you will have if you end up getting more serious with it.
Orion reflectors are pretty great for budget telescopes too imo, the 6 or 4.5i will work just fine.
Soooooo I made it to my dream Uni. I'm a week into classes and my focus is fading. But I have to remind myself that if I wish to take all the cool classes shown [URL="https://www.aa.washington.edu/courses/courseResult.php?search=ALL"]here[/URL] I've got to focus. 3.4 or above, all credits completed for prereqs, and a gotta nail the interview or no space plasmas (or fusion reactor fundamentals, or orbital mechanics) for this guy.
[t]http://images.natureworldnews.com/data/images/full/7637/rocket.jpg?w=600[/t]
guess what this thing's going to be hauling
[video=youtube;g_rcIynwmbk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_rcIynwmbk[/video]
[editline]5th October 2014[/editline]
even if NASA's being told what to do by idiots, they're still getting a kick ass space capsule out of it, so maybe once thats settled they can actually demand to go to the moon like every other space program out there wants to, you know maybe we can even get the other programs to chip in a little for each ship instead of trying to buy one every 4-5 years
[editline]5th October 2014[/editline]
if russia's going to scalp us for tickets to orbit, we can at least scalp them for tickets to the moon
Infrared video of F9 reentry after CRS-4
[video=youtube;_UFjK_CFKgA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_UFjK_CFKgA[/video]
Since the clouds don't seem to be going away for a while, I was thinking about buying one of [url=http://www.astronomik.com/en/photographic-filters/mc-glass-for-dslr-astromodification.html]these[/url] and sending the camera somewhere to be modified. It's supposed to make it easier to capture emission nebulae because the default Canon IR filter cuts off most of their wavelengths.
Also [url=http://www.astronomik.com/en/clip-filter-system.html]these[/url] look nice. Contrast/light-pollution and narrowband filters for Canon DSLRs.
Partial solar eclipse happening [B]RIGHT NOW[/B] guys.
[url]http://new.livestream.com/accounts/813119/events/3495184[/url]
If you're in LA or close and have the equipment to look at it, now's the time.
China just launched a lunar sample test mission yesterday and on it, the first private lunar "probe" made by a Luxembourg private company.
[video=youtube;aL5eddt-iAo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aL5eddt-iAo[/video]
say what you will, but rockets failing are as spectacular as rockets working
the antares always launched weird, like a big pillar slowly rising off the ground, not like the falcon which is there 1 second, gone the next
[editline]29th October 2014[/editline]
you can never not learn something from failure
[t]http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/thumbnails/image/launch-pad-looking-south-after-failure.jpg[/t]
not so amazing, but still rather interesting, this is the launch site i assume after most of the wreckage was removed, with all that big bang, it didn't come back down on the pad and asside from scorch marks, looks pretty good
[editline]30th October 2014[/editline]
[video=youtube;0_3NqeRJizg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_3NqeRJizg#t=166[/video]
cool video from skylab
I'm sure most of you have seen it already between NASA's FB page and reddit, but might as while post it here anyways
Specualr reflection on Titan, the sun is glinting off of the seas on titan. was captured by cassini, and the brightest shine was so bright it temporarily washed out the camera
[t]http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/pia18432.jpg[/t]
wow, really makes you wonder if it truly is an empty world
Hey guys, how about a protoplanetary disk around a very young star:
[t]http://d1jqu7g1y74ds1.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/ALMA1.jpg[/t]
Taken by the [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atacama_Large_Millimeter_Array]Atacama Large Millimeter Array[/url]
This is a solar system in the making.
Luckily Veterans' Day and the time period of my region's best ISS view coincided this morning, so I got up at 5am to catch a glimpse of the ISS transiting the morning sky for the first time with my own eyes.
[vid]http://a.pomf.se/hlwplk.webm[/vid]
Cell camera footage can never really do it justice. If you're interested in seeing it for yourself, [url=http://spotthestation.nasa.gov/sightings]NASA has an excellent webpage[/url] dedicated to showing you the date and time you can see the ISS given your location. Its max height where I was this morning was 81 degrees, so its path went almost directly over my head. It was awesome.
Also, as a reminder, Philae is scheduled to detach from Rosetta 08:35UTC tomorrow. Best of luck to the guys at the ESA!
Today, the Philae spacecraft lands on a comet!
[url]http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1436679[/url]
[quote]This Week in Spaceflight[/quote]
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/nZdLe9K.gif[/IMG]
3 Dec Hayabusa 2
5 Dec Orion EFT-1
6 Dec DirecTV14/GSAT16
7 Dec CBERS-4
Rosetta results: Comet of this type now speculated not to have brought water to Earth however, more data is needed
[url]http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-30414519[/url]
"The authors conclude it is more likely that the water came from asteroids, but other scientists say more data is needed before comets can be ruled out."
[img]http://4st.me/YqreX.png[/img]
WIP, but I was amazed how much detail it has even with 43 frames. Too bad the cheap Tamron doesn't capture colors well, though it was only at 160mm or so (300 is max)
Submitted a query for HEQ5 Pro SynScan for 835€
Would pretty much solve all my current problems with Skytracker and the weight of the whole system fucking up my alignment + it's a GoTo mount so it wont take forever to get the camera adjusted.
This thread is pretty quiet, huh?
Anyways, I curse North Europe with 6 weeks of clouds.
[t]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B82T6dYIYAIEhr4.jpg:large[/t]
A stacked jupiter!
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/iywDcAn.png[/IMG]
Stupid rings appeared when I tried to bring out more detail. The video resolution wasn't enough.
[QUOTE=Swebonny;47095531]A stacked jupiter!
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/iywDcAn.png[/IMG]
Stupid rings appeared when I tried to bring out more detail. The video resolution wasn't enough.[/QUOTE]
What camera are you using?
I just got my ASI120MC for my dob (XT10i)
This is one image using a 5x barlow and taken at 60fps:
[IMG]http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/5527081/jupiter-025402-edit6.jpg[/IMG]
Think I used around a 1 minute video, stacked with AutoStakkert and processed in Photoshop.
Although I had vibration in the mount and focus wasn't perfect
Probably going to get a eq mount for mine, with a 10 inch scope you can get results like [URL="http://www.astrobin.com/full/152249/0/"]this[/URL] when the seeing is good
That's amazing. I'm using a DSLR, Nikon D7000 with a 2x barlow on a 8 inch scope. Video was only 23 seconds at 24fps.
I'm guessing using a larger magnification + a longer video would give much better results?
[editline]8th February 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Hattiwatti;47061540]This thread is pretty quiet, huh?
Anyways, I curse North Europe with 6 weeks of clouds.
[t]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B82T6dYIYAIEhr4.jpg:large[/t][/QUOTE]
Is that a Skywatcher 200P-DS? I only got the 200P version, it's an amazing scope.
[QUOTE=Swebonny;47096037]That's amazing. I'm using a DSLR, Nikon D7000 with a 2x barlow on a 8 inch scope. Video was only 23 seconds at 24fps.
I'm guessing using a larger magnification + a longer video would give much better results?
[editline]8th February 2015[/editline]
Is that a Skywatcher 200P-DS? I only got the 200P version, it's an amazing scope.[/QUOTE]
The main factors seem to come down to; scope cooled down to outside temperature (takes about 1.5 hours for my scope), target decently high in sky (at least 45 degrees), collimation and focus (I use a bahtinov mask on a star).
With my camera and barlow I get about 0.13 arcsec/pixel, with yours you get about 0.50"/pixel, I'd say the sweet spot is around 0.25"/pixel. I'm pushing my scope a little too far, making it difficult to focus (using [URL="http://www.12dstring.me.uk/fovcalc.php"]this [/URL]to calculate resolution and fov).
The planetary camera gives me the higher fps, so higher chance of capturing a period of good seeing and higher sensitivity.
Longer video also gives a higher chance, but after about 2 minutes you will have to de-rotate the video
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
