SPAAACEEEEEE

>taiidan republic
fuck, did that mod finally release?

Not that I mind that. But in that graphic atleast the booster looks an awful lot like some handle for something you'd pick up at the dollar store.

Children of a Dead Earth has a custom ship and gear editor, by the way. Ez to make realistic spaceships for all.

>spaceX
>not NASA
Why would anyone get excited about some corp making the next big leap, or even want them to, rather than the nation itself.

...

We've been to the moon. It was boring.

Mai shippu.

Maybe because 1) Congress is full of term blinded idiots who love to cut corners on anything for points for 'doing something', 2) NASA is full of gen x idealists who fight with each other, up to the point of presenting ballooned up costly plans to destroy other plans in their own agency so their own pet project gets cash and that 3) half the populace will always see space travel as a needless expense.

So fuck them. There's nothing wrong with a corp to fill in where the government, quite plainly, refuses to go.

>There's nothing wrong with a corp to fill in where the government, quite plainly, refuses to go.
Except there is; it quite frankly cheapens the monumental wonder that is human space travel, and contains the achievement to an ignoble group.
If we're going to get boots on another planet, we're going to do it as a nation or as a species. Not some pet-corp of a glory-seeking autist trying to force his name into the history books,

In your idealistic dreams, maybe.

Nations and governments are fickle at the best of times. The 'species' will never do something together for the foreseeable future. NASA won't get to Mars. I'll be surprised if they even get an astronaut to a asteroid or the moon in the next two decades.

Some 'glory seeking "autist"' has stepped up to the plate. Fuck it. Let him have his glory, for 'science is a single light, and to brighten it anywhere is to brighten it anywhere'

>Fuck it. Let him have his glory, for 'science is a single light, and to brighten it anywhere is to brighten it anywhere'
And you're talking to me about idealism? This sets a dangerous precedent, user, to allow such small and effectively uncontrolled group to make such a big leap. There is a right way to do things, a proper way to do things in order to insure that the future is a good one we want, and blindly leaping forward for the sake of "lets do it now" is not the way to do it.

Perhaps NASA won't "do anything" because of this sudden push to have private spaceflight do more than just orbital infrastructure; we're pushing duties and goals off to the private sector that ought to and need to stay in the public sector.

NASA should be getting more funding, mostly because they're actually extremely profitable. That money going into NASA to fund space flights and studies of distant stars or local planets and celestial objects, or even Earth itself from space or from the ground? Well, every mission has new problems to solve, this means new technologies to solve those problems. What do those new discoveries produce? New patents. Those patents have their rights sold to whoever sees the potential in them, and they're often sold off as a whole for more than the project itself cost, bringing more money into the US government.

The Tempur Pedic "Swedish" sleep system is made from NASA's memory foam. Car manufacturers use NASA designed paint for longer-lasting and more durable car paint, airplanes use their materials to keep from icing up, software designers can use NASA designed algorithms to program their own machines... Even shit like MRIs which give us a great look into the human body were originally designed as a means for satellites to spot space junk.

It pisses me off when people bitch about NASA spending money on space flight when there's problems on Earth, mostly because it's making up its costs and then some, being a government program that actually puts taxpayer money back into the system, and it's giving us a greater understanding of the universe, which can help us find solutions to a whole lot of these problems we have in the US. And, fuck, a lot of the problems we have are not the fault of NASA eating up pennies, but corps. So fuck SpaceX.

Yeah, we might end up with a international space law written solely to cater corporate interests and stellar objects seen solely as either resoutces or personal playthings of the rich.

Yes, it's idealistic to back the guy who has already gone halfway to recoverable rockets, is building the first private landbased spaceport, has a full agency with a rocket series; than to hope a stifled bickering government agency of a stifled bickering government in a stifled bickering world will do anything they seek out to do than give up half way because of a policy change or a new administration.

While Musk is no messiah, and I doubt he'll reach his plan for the IST or landing on Mars himself, he's filling a void, that quite frankly, yes, needs to be done right now, because no government is in a state to even put a man on the moon in two decades.

I'm quite sure the heavily regulated and monitored space industry is already doing things controlled, effectively, and the 'right way'. There's no going back to the anomaly that was Apollo era NASA. There's no benign government wasting cash in space. Space is a waste. An expensive waste. As it stands the only ones who can thus waste cash on it are the rich; and most of them, seeing no profit, won't touch it. And once Musk lands a small crew on Mars in the 2030s; maybe then the global economy would stabilize enough, maybe then the governments of the world will be rich enough to turn humanity into a multi planetary species, maybe they'll take up the slack, maybe they'll help build up the moon and thus build a solid state for Mars and beyond for the whole race.

Or most likely they'll do jack shit and turn away from space like they've always done, and that 'glory seeking autist' would had thus done more than three governments and that's better for the future 'we' want overall. Since he wants to break every dragon from radiation to lack of gravity to long interplanetary voyages, and further more since he's actually doing something right now, quite frankly that's what we got. Good enough for me.

It should. But most likely it won't.

Right now we have a post recession world at the turn of an administration of the world's hyperpower, with both plausible candidates not giving one damn to space. They care about the economy; they're not going to look at the frill which is manned space travel or Trans-GEO rocketry. So that's 4, 8 years of an administration paying more lipservice. Meanwhile the PRC makes a station and maybe if we're lucky as shit they land someone on the Moon, and then, having gained all the geopolitical prestige that entails (and all the fancy rocket tech and experiment results for their own ends) will back down. Then there are the Russians, who also are focusing on their economy first; I don't see them making even Mir II by 2024. India, JAXA, ESA are also nowhere near of even sending an astronaut on their own systems.

So 'fuck SpaceX', right, for actually spending cash on this stuff, when they quite frankly don't have to but do (say Musk dies tomorrow. I guarantee you SpaceX dwindles off a year from his death) because one rich kid decided to waste cash into it. Yea, fuck em hard.

>I'm quite sure the heavily regulated and monitored space industry is already doing things controlled, effectively, and the 'right way'. There's no going back to the anomaly that was Apollo era NASA. There's no benign government wasting cash in space. Space is a waste. An expensive waste. As it stands the only ones who can thus waste cash on it are the rich; and most of them, seeing no profit, won't touch it.
And that's where you're wrong. Space is a big, expensive waste, which is why it's PERFECT for government and national agencies to focus on it. They don't need to care about profit or return on investment, they just need to do it.

>And once ... the whole race.
No, once Musk lands some people on Mars, it'll just embolden other private interests not as idealistic and "moral" as Musk, and we'll have ruined once and for all the best chance for humanity to go out into the stars as one (or few), rather than many.

>and that 'glory seeking autist' would had thus done more than three governments and that's better for the future 'we' want overall. Since he wants to break every dragon from radiation to lack of gravity to long interplanetary voyages, and further more since he's actually doing something right now, quite frankly that's what we got.
And what he's actually going to end up doing if successfully is ruining the one chance humanity had for unity going out into space, he's going to set a precedent for space being a playground of the rich and corporations, rather than people and humanity.

>Good enough for me.
In your (and his) drive for "lets do it within two decades", you're throwing a stable and good future under the bus for your own lust of progress. There is no shame in waiting and doing it right.

You do realize the moon landing was only funded so the United States could show that it could launch nukes higher than the Soviet Union could if it wanted to, right? Any craft that can carry people can carry a nuclear warhead, that is one of the primary reasons why they were so dedicated to sending people even if they could send probes for cheaper.

You're an idiot if you think a state is any better than a corporation. At least SpaceX isn't doing this to show that they could kill us all if they wanted to.

>So 'fuck SpaceX', right, for actually spending cash on this stuff, when they quite frankly don't have to but do (say Musk dies tomorrow. I guarantee you SpaceX dwindles off a year from his death) because one rich kid decided to waste cash into it. Yea, fuck em hard.
Yes, do fuck them, because both you and Musk are short-sighted idiots concerned only with shiny tech and "oh look what we can do" rather than how to best move into this pivotal era of human history.
It's "I Fucking Love Science!" tier idiocy and triteness.

>You do realize the moon landing was only funded so the United States could show that it could launch nukes higher than the Soviet Union could if it wanted to, right?
>"this was one of the reasons to justify the program to congress, so the nation can't take any credit for this achievement" :^)
Go fuck yourself.
>You're an idiot if you think a state is any better than a corporation.
Except it is, and you put far too much faith in the markets.

Tell me, what profit or return on investment is SpaceX getting? At best they're squeezing out as much money from payload launches. There's no profit on Mars. There's no profit in the asteroids. There's no profit at this at all. SpaceX isn't doing Mars for cash.

"We'll have ruined once and for all the best chance for humanity to go out into the stars as one (or few) rather than many" - what the fuck. There's no reason to believe this. At best, some other rich guy makes his own rocket company to offer for his own dreams. NASA, Roscosmos, the PRC agencies - they'll still be around. But you also sound like you really think the UFP or UNSC is right around the corner. With most of the world poorer than the rest and no where near post-industrialization, it really isn't. Focusing on doing anything as a 'species' is, again, extremely idealistic.

Again, 'one chance humantiy had for unity going out into space'? NASA didn't invite the Russians or Chinese to the Moon; and they have no plans for doing so. If SpaceX wasn't here, we'll be no closer to a united humanity

Space is already a playground of the rich and corporations! SubOrbital Space Tourism, private communication satellite constellations, even private spacestations and even a official corporate lab that the shuttle lofted up which they rented for experiments.

And, finally, there's no reason to assume a'stable and good future', and there's no reason to assume this isn't the 'right way' just because it's not Kennedy backed Apollo - which itself was a lust for progress for a sliver of mankind to thumb its nose at the rest of mankind.

>"this was one of the reasons to justify the program to congress, so the nation can't take any credit for this achievement" :^)

No I'm sorry, you're right, the death of millions being the driving force for securing a budget is far more noble than a group that gets its funding from people willing to give it money for peaceful purposes.

There's nothing 'pivotal' about this 'era' of humanity that concerns itself with space.

You want to make a nice humanity? What'll be pivotal are more communication satellites (which are corporate owned), more stable economies in the developing world, more Ghanas and less Syrias. If you really think 'short sighted idiots' (who are doing more than the government) are going to crash Humanity, then you are idealistic to the extreme. At best this will be, yes, a 'oh look what we can do' footnote in history. It will change absolutely nothing for the other 7 billion people on Earth; but it will do a lot for science overall; again, science which NASA can't touch, when it even wants to touch it.

>At least SpaceX isn't doing this to show that they could kill us all if they wanted to.
...probably.

I'm honestly not going to argue anymore, since it's obvious the both of us have very different values and conceptions, but I am adamant that letting private space flight go out and lead the way is not the right way to move forward.

>which itself was a lust for progress for a sliver of mankind to thumb its nose at the rest of mankind.
Yeah, but at least that "sliver" was a proper nation, and not some pet-project corporation.

If the former is a nation and the latter is a corporation, then yes, it is far more noble.

>REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE STOP WANTING TO MAKE MONEY

>If the former is a nation and the latter is a corporation, then yes, it is far more noble.

That is the most ass-backwards thinking I've ever heard. The advance of technology at the hands of private individuals for their own purposes is inherently less noble than the advance of technology by nation states for the express purpose of threatening species-suicide if they have to to prove an ideological point?

I can't even begin to comprehend how that makes any sense, on any level.

Be adamant. It's happening anyway. I'm the last person to defend corporations, I'm a solid Social Democrat pro regulation nordic model boohooey, but since

1) this isn't for profit, and
2) space is unprofitable, thus corporations WON'T follow anyway is a given, and
3) it fills in a gap where the government cannot fill even if it wanted to, there's no reason to be so against it.

SpaceX won't take the whole system for itself. It won't even make a colony on Mars. But it will simply work while the government cannot, when the government can waste cash like SpaceX can, they'll come back in. It's cyclic.

When it comes to space exploration and all that comes with it, yes; profit should not be part of the equation.

>The advance of technology at the hands of private individuals for their own purposes is inherently less noble than the advance of technology by nation states for the express purpose of threatening species-suicide if they have to to prove an ideological point?
Who said anything about technology? This is specific solely to space.

Space and technology is inseparable. Surely you know that a massive feat such as a heavy reusable lifter, unmanned supply runs to mars, then a crewed mission that lasts nearly three years to and on another planet will advance technology and science enormously.

Scenario 1:
Group 1: "Hey, you have experience building rockets, we want to go to space!"
Group 2: "We'll need funding for it, do you have x amount for us to build our rockets to take you to space?"
Group 1: "We sure do!"
Group 2: "Where's the money coming from?"
Group 1: "From our own bank accounts, it'll probably bankrupt us, but we really want to go to space!"

Scenario 2:
Group 1: "Hey, you have experience building rockets, we want to go to space!"
Group 2: "We'll need funding for it, do you have x amount for us to build our rockets to take you to space?"
Group 1: "We sure do!"
Group 2: "Where's the money coming from?"
Group 1: "From the bank accounts of people that don't want to go to space, it'll probably bankrupt them, but we really want to go to space!"

>Who said anything about technology? This is specific solely to space.

That doesn't make any sense either. What is it about space that makes it so semi-sacred? Exploring new territories has always been the province of rich dudes with money to burn in the search for more profits, it's not liable to change now.

>When it comes to space exploration and all that comes with it, yes; profit should not be part of the equation.

Literally everything humans have ever done has had an economic motive somewhere at its core. I'll agree our current conception of corporations often go too far. (Well, I suppose merchants always have, in a sense.) But implying this will ever get done just for some nonsensical ideal of glory and the human spirit is beyond blue-sky idealism. If it didn't profit somebody, somehow, it wouldn't happen. If the state does it, it just means some administration or singular official has it as a pet project, and it'll profit them by votes or jobs in their home district or some other equally mundane reason of economics or glory seeking.

B-but when the state does it, it's the 'will of the people!'

>taxes bankrupt people
>implying there aren't a lot of things the government spends money on that are far, far more wasteful than space
Let me guess, taxation is theft, right?

>If the state does it, it just means some administration or singular official has it as a pet project, and it'll profit them by votes or jobs in their home district or some other equally mundane reason of economics or glory seeking.
Theoretically, the "profit" of such long term initiatives on the part of the government is to improve the nation overall over time, expanding the economy indirectly and leaking new technology to the private sector, leading to larger tax revenue in the long term.

>B-but when the state does it, it's the 'will of the people!'
The same people who don't want to go to space? Fuck them and their will.

'Fuck them and their will'?

Yea, good luck having a united humanity rushing to space with that mindset. That's like the communists eventually hating the working class because they refuse to rise for their utopic vision.

>Let me guess, taxation is theft, right?
>The same people who don't want to go to space? Fuck them and their will.

So is this a like, state as absolute moral authority argument? That elected officials that represent the people should do whatever they think is best regardless what their constituents think? Or that only constituents who agree with you are 'real citizens' worthy of having their opinions represented? Taxation isn't theft, but it shouldn't be spent on enacting the will of the people that provided it? If it's only taken to pursue the goals of the government, then that is literally just stealing it to diddle themselves with.

>Theoretically, the "profit" of such long term initiatives on the part of the government is to improve the nation overall over time, expanding the economy indirectly and leaking new technology to the private sector, leading to larger tax revenue in the long term.

Are you high? The private sector can't go to space by itself, because they'd just use it to enhance their profits and the economy. The government has to do it, to give the technology to the private sector so they can advance their profits and the economy?

They're not going to be alive to enjoy that united humanity (and neither will you or I, for that matter), but not taking first step to bring it about because of their own wants and desires is, in my mind, nothing more than petty spite.

>Let me guess, taxation is theft, right?
If you don't pay your taxes you go to jail. You have no choice on what the government spends your money on. If the money goes towards good uses like directly improving peoples lives leading to less crime which improves your life it can be considered a necessary sacrifice.

>implying there aren't a lot of things the government spends money on that are far, far more wasteful than space
And they'll keep spending those tax dollars as long as people like you exist that are willing to sacrifice happiness for your own goals.

>The same people who don't want to go to space? Fuck them and their will.
Yes, fuck the poor that tax dollars could go towards improving their lives, right?

Well, actually Musk is deathly afraid of humanity's extinction, so he's investing his money into new technologies in a last-ditch effort to save it.

Why do you think he has his hands in so many pies? Space flight, electric tech, artifical intelligence... He's afraid we're going to get fucked over by ourselves so he's trying to spearhead technological development so we can avoid it.

So he's really taking the long view of things, rather than the short view and wanting to see shiny things.

You have gone down a dark road. For the 'common good' you'll abandon and detest the common people; who, newsflash, in a global recession don't just have 'wants and desires' to care for and pursue but even steady livelihood across the planet.

Space doesn't need a united humanity. It doesn't even need ten superpowers. All it needs is one group - government or corporate which will waste the money, have a plan, and hold the resources; even 50 billion could get someone to Mars or the Moon or have a nice station (or all three in some very penny pinching plans); while the global economy hovers around what - 70 trillion?

Fretting over...and demanding the uniformity of cause and support amongst the masses brings you no closer to a united humanity than the average joe who would cut NASA out of existence. I would say such a mindset is even toxic and would eat up those dreams even more than a successful push to dismantle NASA.

Where's this from?

X-Universe, a serie of games than aren't half bad apart of the last one.

store.steampowered.com/app/2820/

In short, imagine if a game like Freelancer evolved from 'one guy in a ship to 'small business empire' to 'corporate state' over the course of play. Start with shitty scout and pocket change, end by steamrolling the universe with multiple carrier battlegroups out of boredom.

neato

This. It doesn't matter who gets us to the colonization point, as long as we're there real progress can start. Let governments of the world focus on spending money on their citizens, private industry can take us to space and it should as it's entirely voluntary.

>If you don't pay your taxes you go to jail.
Yeah, that's how taxes work.
>You have no choice on what the government spends your money on.
It's not "your" money once it's taxes.

>If the money goes towards good uses like directly improving peoples lives leading to less crime which improves your life it can be considered a necessary sacrifice.
So only welfare is good? Tax itself isn't bad or even a sacrifice in the first place.

>And they'll keep spending those tax dollars as long as people like you exist that are willing to sacrifice happiness for your own goals.
Yes, "happiness" is less important than actual objectives and goals.

>Yes, fuck the poor that tax dollars could go towards improving their lives, right?
The tax dollars that already go towards them already ruin their lives.

>Let governments of the world focus on spending money on their citizens, private industry can take us to space and it should as it's entirely voluntary.
Please, welfare is the worst possible thing for the government to spend money on, and something being "voluntary" doesn't make it any better or worse.

If the government doesn't take care of its citizens, who give their money to it, yet you demand they follow it to whatever project it follows, then it's no government, it's a gang on a hugemonous scale. Citizens give to the government and the government's first concern is to use their resources for the citizens; not go off into space just because *you* think it's the best course for a better future that no one here will see; and if you can't see how people won't be onboard a government which, quite frankly, will misuse their taxes then you are detached from reality.

So in your ideal world I get money taken away from me to fund whatever it is you feel like funding, but if I lose my job and can't pay for your pet project I don't even get an unemployment check in return for being a taxpaying citizen?

Wow, great society you have there, sign me up.

The guy's gone full Rousseau. You don't go full Rousseau. For the 'common good', fuck if the common man gets squashed over and thrown about, right?

Fuck whatever advances of the social contract, duties, and rights between citizen and gubbermint, we gotta go to spess dis way!

>doesn't like welfare
>pro-government, anti-corporate
>supports taxation
>tramples on the rights of taxpayers

What the fuck is this even? Classical Monarchist Liberal from 1700?

SPESSSSSSS

...

...

I need a system that does Space Fighters fun. Whatta ya got?

Once upon a time, space ship design is great imho.

X-wing is fun.

Can it handle being played online? A friend wants a space adventure

Only with TTS or a shitload of work, unfortunately. It might be better to take cues from its movement system and write something more hex-friendly.

Dang, anything else you'd recommend?

Full Thrust is more a ship-on-ship wargame, but it's been suggested it could be refluffed into a dogfight sim. Especially if you track down the 'high res' rules and tweak it some to fit your character layer game.

The D20 starwars RPG had 'ok' space fighter rules you could maybe twist to your purposes.

Stars Without Number has a whole book for space combat, but it's not battlemat stuff, if you want actual positioning and stuff, take a pass on it.

That's...all I can think of offhand, unfortunately.

I'll check 'em out. Looks like I'm only going to have 1 player, but I'll see what I can do

How many of you are playing this this week?

Explain further

...

Children of a Dead Earth. Super-realistic space combat strategy simulator. Think space CMANO, from what I've seen. Guy did an immense amount of research to make sure it was all as accurate as possible.

the Devblog is a gold mine of space-war related information. childrenofadeadearth.wordpress.com/

Because NASA hasn't accomplished anything of note since 1969. We sent men to the moon and promptly gave up trying to aim for any further manned exploration. SpaceX looks like it is actually capable of getting shit done and isn't funded by a fickle government that would gladly cut funding to NASA first because nobody actually gives a shit about NASA.

Above poster here. Yeah CoDE has very realistic engine and powerful design tool, but the features are quite barebones so far. You have to decied if the pricetag is worth it for what is currently very much a beta. Ships need more possible orders in combat, interface needs to provide more information, you need to be able to customize custom battles in more ways, missileintercept calculations most certainly need some work, etc... So, very promising, I most certainly have a whole lot of fun playing with, but comparing it to CMANO at that point if a bit too much.

As an example, ball turrets have multi-axis of freedom build-in gyroscopes to avoid guimbal lock when firing near vertical, but can't reach target parallel to the hull, pic related would be so much more powerful if we could have traditional elevation+rotation turrets to allow forward fire concentration instead of having to orient broadside to unmask most guns.

On the plus side, it will teach you how fission reactors work. An numerous other things.

Meant the comparison to CMANO as in 'dense and somewhat opaque simulationist wargame,' rather than as any indicator of quality. Good to know it's still got some work to do before I drop any of my scant cash on it though. o7

>we have to rely on semi-governmental and heavily subsided public corporations, and that gives us SpaceX.

SpaceX is a fully private company (in fact, it's doubtful Musk will issue an IPO as long as he lives), is not semi-governmental, and the only subsidies it has ever gotten is $20M to construct a launch facility in Texas. Twenty fucking million dollars. Its funding has come from contracts with NASA, the Air Force, etc to either develop launch vehicles, to service the ISS, or to launch satellites; or it's been private capital from investors and Musk himself.

Whatever you think of the ITS plan's feasibility, the spaceship itself is certainly not just "for hype". SpaceX just signed a multibillion dollar contract with Toray to build carbon fiber tanks for it. Who knows if it's going to blow up five seconds after liftoff or reach Mars, but it's certainly going to be built.

I want Moon is a Harsh Mistress style moon first.
Use it as a shipping hub, jumping-off point, staging ground. Also magnetic catapults.

>Those patents have their rights sold to whoever sees the potential in them, and they're often sold off as a whole for more than the project itself cost, bringing more money into the US government.
ahahahah

Just make them public domain, and reap the passive benefits from minor boosting to the economy as a whole.

Patents and copyright are so fucked these days senpai.

>Global economy
>Spending money to develop things so third world shit hole can reap the benefit
Even more effective than sending them money.

Well if I remember properly you have basically no volatile to use as rocket propellant off the moon, or some that would be logistically complicated to extract and bring back in orbit.

Reaching the martian moons is cheaper is dV and are most probably chock-full of water right below the surface. They would make a much superior staging ground.

...

Elan Musk said we will have colonies on mars.

Do you want to believe?

The thing that gets me with the whole Mars shtick is that no one beyond NASA "testing" is putting legitimate thought into the EMdrive.

If we put Musks reusable rocket boosters and spacecraft into use we could build a nuclear powered EMdrive tug into space and use that to "pick up" spacecraft launched from earth and then drive-by drop them onto mars, and hoping that mars has the resources to build and fuel return ships have a permanent earth to mars pony express.

How or why has this idea not been put forward yet?

Surely a scaffold carrier with power, supplies and EMdrive engines would lower the cost of space even further? Hell, if it was big enough it could carry multiple craft, lowering the cost even more.

I think the upper atmosphere of Venus would be colonizable.
Imagine, zeppelin cities prior to any further terraforming.

We have to make sure they work first, why they work and what side effects there are. Hence the testing. We don't want to spend billions to build our special space tugboat only to realize it doesn't work or is shitting world crippling radiation when in space.

As long as whatever you build can survive the sulphuric acid cloud at those altitudes.

This is why science isn't going anywhere anymore. Everyone is too afraid to just fucking do it instead of sitting behind years of heavily funded tests upon test while really using the funding just to keep themselves running rather than any scientific advancement. Fucking cowards.

EMdrive was tested far more thoroughly than any magic drive should've been. It was silly to believe it could violate the laws of physics even before it was shown to be bullshit.

Yeah because wasting billions of dollars on a project that turns out not be physically possible is a great way to keep your funding and not look like a pathetic laughing stock of an organization.

Remind me of man made global war... I mean change.

>thermocouple options
but why tho

Also, a control rod made of fissile uranium? The fuck? You make those out of Boron. The point of a control rod is to absorb neutrons so you can control the reaction; u235 *creates* neutrons, not absorbs it, that's how a nuclear reaction works in the first place.

Aside from that it looks good, from a science point of view. I like that it's a fast reactor and not a thermal one. Makes sense for the size you'd need for a spacecraft. And also makes sense if you're using 97% enriched fuel, jesus that's some heavy stuff. Nuclear power plants use ~5% enriched fuel for fucks' sake.

>This is why science isn't going anywhere anymore.

Well, look at that, a real live moron.

Science is going places. But you're not bothering to check up where, or how fast. You just have your pet destinations that you watch, and then bitch about science not getting there specifically, without any thought given to how realistic that is, or what they may be doing instead.

NASA is a failed fucking agency that hasn't done anything of real merit since the moon landing.

Leave it to a corporation to succeed where government has failed to do so.

if you're using 97% enriched fuel, I have a feeling that shit's gonna be funny to watch as soon as it gets hit by literally anything

Ah, it's a mistake it should be U-233. which works just fine.

>but why tho
Because it determines your output and the best choices varies depending upon aforeselected options

That's no how criticality works. Since there is no cost associated so far with fissile enrichment we're having a whole lot of fun with stupidly overpowered compact devices.

Sulfuric acid isn't magic, It won't eat most plastics.

>Because it determines your output and the best choices varies depending upon aforeselected options
That makes absolutely no sense though. Thermocouples are measurement devices. Measurement devices don't (significantly) affect the system they're in.