/anthro/ - Anthropomorphic

All things anthro


New Reply[×]
Name
Email
Subject
Message
Files Max 8 files48.1MB total
Tegaki
Password
Flag
[New Reply]

Read the RULES before posting.
If (You) don't like something then post what (You) want to see.
Remember to support your Anfoo buddies
PARTY HARD
Gems Meta Art
[Index] [Catalog] [Archive] [Banners] [Logs] [Archive]
4b21e8 No.89408 [Reply] [Watch] [View the full thread]
ClipboardImage.png U A
[Hide] (132.4KB, 576x576) Reverse
boarding-pass.jpg U A
[Hide] (692.5KB, 1200x490) Reverse
https://www3.nasa.gov/send-your-name-with-artemis/

will the 'foo send their waifurs around the moon?
Replies: >>89428
No.100989 [Reply]
ClipboardImage.png U A
[Hide] (589KB, 890x500) Reverse
https://www.youtube.com/live/Tf_UjBMIzNo?si=t0nLmqjckBZ3iR9A

@6:24 PM EST
Replies: >>100991
No.100991 [Reply] 
>>100989
Please don’t blow it up Kitsune I need this… My space exploration is kinda underfunded…
Replies: >>100992
No.100992 [Reply] 
>>100991
right now they're tracking a temperature issue with a battery for the the launch abort system
Replies: >>100995
No.100993 [Reply]
ClipboardImage.png U A
[Hide] (1.5MB, 1349x759) Reverse
naw bruh they're playing KSP3 in mission control 💀💀💀
No.100995 [Reply]
ClipboardImage.png U A
[Hide] (1MB, 1349x759) Reverse
>>100992
the issue has been cleared
L-18 minutes
Replies: >>100996
No.100996 [Reply] 
>>100995
Inshallah may it crash and keep american devils grounded
Replies: >>100997
No.100997 [Reply] 
>>100996
aryanveri wouldn't say Inshallah
No.101002 [Reply]
ClipboardImage.png U A
[Hide] (1002.8KB, 1349x759) Reverse
holding at t-10
No.101003 [Reply]
08c122a70b76c784b2130094d08f0c558f79daa161cebaaad995cf786b5c760f.jpg U A
[Hide] (184KB, 1500x1158) Reverse
Pls sars launch I wanna go to sleep.
Replies: >>101004
No.101004 [Reply] 
>>101003
GO/NO GO POLL
Replies: >>101010
No.101005 [Reply] 
What stream you guys on I’m on NASAs.
Replies: >>101006
No.101006 [Reply] 
>>101005
NASA and NSF because they're ahead by like a minute for some reason
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8c-GAkIzpGE
No.101007 [Reply] 
They’re going with t-10
No.101008 [Reply] 
6:35:12 EST is the T-0
No.101009 [Reply]
ClipboardImage.png U A
[Hide] (1.4MB, 1349x759) Reverse
crew access arm is retracting
No.101010 [Reply]
1e94e1e6209d11fcb0c7eed17c9d898810f09359c00b23d7cb828500d9075fa4.jpg U A
[Hide] (297.4KB, 2048x1354) Reverse
>>101004
FLUFF DIRECTOR?
No.101011 [Reply] 
Thank God. Seems like launch went well.
No.101012 [Reply]
fa1718f443c1267624d0784bce032070d333c0351f6dba376fc95a09ec904ba8.webm U A
[Hide] (3.8MB, 1586x720, 00:40)
Godspeed, burgers, I'm rooting for you.
No.101013 [Reply] 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3FF9Uba3DE
No.101014 [Reply]
ClipboardImage.png U A
[Hide] (10.8MB, 2731x4096) Reverse
No.101265 [Reply]
ClipboardImage.png U A
[Hide] (7.3MB, 4096x2731) Reverse
ClipboardImage.png U A
[Hide] (17.3MB, 4096x2731) Reverse
some kino pics from inside the capsule as they coast on their way to the moon
Replies: >>101266
No.101266 [Reply] 
>>101265
Love photo two, feels like you never actually see a stary sky in space photography. I think you need a long shutter to actually see them.
Replies: >>101272
No.101272 [Reply] 
>>101266
Would be curious to see the settings used there. Modern sensors are miles ahead of old film in terms of dynamic range but looks like they've struggled with making a clean pic with Earth in shadow.
Looks like the sun is obscured by Earth. Hence the halo in the bottom corner. You can see Aurora Borealis on both poles at the same time (there was another storm yesterday plus they cranked the shadows up; ISS is too low for you to see both polar regions at the same time) and it's actually night time on the visible part of the Earth; that's Gibraltar at 7 o'clock, one can clearly see the city lights of Madrid, Barcelona and Lisbon and the countless smaller settlements along the coast.
Replies: >>102207 >>102209
0c9d10 No.102165 [Reply]
ClipboardImage.png U A
[Hide] (1.4MB, 2048x1365) Reverse
ClipboardImage.png U A
[Hide] (1.4MB, 2048x1366) Reverse
Replies: >>102210
31d3ab No.102207 [Reply] 
>>101272
in b4 "it's AI slop"
Replies: >>102209
0c9d10 No.102209 [Reply]
ClipboardImage.png U A
[Hide] (398KB, 1225x833) Reverse
>>101272
>>102207
You can check the metadata if you get the images directly from the NASA gallery
https://www.nasa.gov/artemis-ii-multimedia/#images
c977e3 No.102210 [Reply] 
>>102165
Can’t wait for the 2037 “Epstein Moon Base”.
Replies: >>102211
f41284 No.102211 [Reply] 
>>102210
Can't wait for the 2037 KKKitsune Moon Laser to obliterate the non-Japanese
Replies: >>102214
c977e3 No.102214 [Reply] 
>>102211
They’d gunk up the electronics with human blood.
4b21e8 No.102941 [Reply]
ClipboardImage.png U A
[Hide] (545.3KB, 1349x759) Reverse
Artemis II is reentering Earth in about 3 hours
Replies: >>102942 >>102943
085059 No.102942 [Reply] 
>>102941
Usually the splashdown isn’t all that eventful from my experience. I just hope Artemis 3 doesn’t get canned.
4b21e8 No.102943 [Reply]
ClipboardImage.png U A
[Hide] (451.9KB, 805x374) Reverse
ClipboardImage.png U A
[Hide] (16.4MB, 5079x3839) Reverse
>>102941
FYI, the heat shield on Artemis I suffered more damage than NASA anticipated, so they're going for a different reentry angle for this one. Future missions will use a redesigned heat shield.

>I just hope Artemis 3 doesn’t get canned.
Does he know? 
Artemis III is now targeting 2027 for a low Earth orbit docking test with the landers. The landing is Artemis IV in 2028. The good news is that Artemis V is ALSO targeting 2028. The new NASA admin is focusing on increasing the launch cadence of SLS to at least two flights per year alongside a proper moon base by 2030. 

https://www.nasa.gov/directorates/esdmd/nasa-strengthens-artemis-adds-mission-refines-overall-architecture/
Replies: >>102944
fc340a No.102944 [Reply] 
>>102943
>proper moon base by 2030
snca
shit nofoo cares about
Replies: >>102945
4b21e8 No.102945 [Reply]
nophoxo.mp4 U A
[Hide] (1.7MB, 560x560, 00:06)
Gh_6FCbbAAAAAn7.jpg U A
[Hide] (59.5KB, 500x765) Reverse
>>102944
Trillions for space
Nothing for the poor and hungry
Replies: >>102946
fc340a No.102946 [Reply] 
>>102945
It's going to go nowhere, better focus on the here and now instead of fictional fantasy stuff. The economy needs to get fixed. I'm not saying space is gay (it is tho) but the only shit that matters is satellites for consumer and military operation. Everything else is a drain of money
Replies: >>102947 >>102950 >>102972
4b21e8 No.102947 [Reply]
ClipboardImage.png U A
[Hide] (34.4KB, 259x372) Reverse
>>102946
Replies: >>102949
fc340a No.102949 [Reply] 
>>102947
>muh timeline
The guy behind those comics is a massive faggot btw
The timeline could be 100k years because that's how long it would take to explore a planet anyways. Maybe we could mine them for resources, but that doesn't require sending any people anywhere and can be done all remotely through drones.
Replies: >>102952
085059 No.102950 [Reply] 
>>102946
The economy usually isn’t fixed by throwing money at it.
Replies: >>102951
fc340a No.102951 [Reply] 
>>102950
>look goy we sent a black woman to the moon!
Replies: >>102952
4b21e8 No.102952 [Reply]
ClipboardImage.png U A
[Hide] (420.9KB, 534x986) Reverse
ClipboardImage.png U A
[Hide] (75.7KB, 590x385) Reverse
ClipboardImage.png U A
[Hide] (11.8KB, 511x125) Reverse
>>102949
>The timeline could be 100k years
see pic rel

>but that doesn't require sending any people anywhere and can be done all remotely through drones.
Put too much faith in robotics award. You still need people to maintain them when they inevitably break down. There's a reason why mining on Earth hasn't been fully automated yet.
Wouldn't it be better to exploit the nearly endless resources of Space? This weird crabs-in-a-bucket mentality will get us nowhere.

>>102951
you're on the side of the black women rn btw
Replies: >>102953 >>102954
085059 No.102953 [Reply] 
>>102952
Asteroid mining is a meme but lunar mining could be viable with set up I’ve heard.
Replies: >>102955
fc340a No.102954 [Reply] 
>>102952
none of that will EVER happen in our lifetime or the following thousands of years. The best we can do is send a few people here and there, everything else is a hype and grift for investors. Also comparing a fucking wooden boat to a complex spaceship that takes years and millions to make is wild, and each boat then would have 50% mortality rates which I'm sure the insurance companies would happily cover for space expeditions (not). The best you will get is these wunderbar one off missions of zero value to anyone
Replies: >>102955
4b21e8 No.102955 [Reply]
corona.png U A
[Hide] (121.4KB, 480x700) Reverse
>>102953
>Asteroid mining is a meme
unfortunate trvthnvke... for now at least. But asteroids with a high concentration of rare elements may be worth mining.
>>102954
>none of that will EVER happen in our lifetime or the following thousands of years.
bro wtf are your timelines? lmao I think you're just projecting your suicidal /pol/ doomer worldview.
Replies: >>102956
fc340a No.102956 [Reply] 
>>102955
>My timeline
I'm being serious, where are you going to get the money to send enough rockets to make it profitable? Especially with how dangerous each flight is, it's too expensive to make it solid like current one off flights. So you cut corners, but that means taking a risk that's too expensive arm for anyone to cover. You get one off missions like these, a d you'll be happy because no one minds spending a few billions here and there once in a while lmao
Replies: >>102957 >>102973
085059 No.102957 [Reply] 
>>102956
It shouldn’t be dangerous it’s just the way we do it at the moment is because the government chooses contracts to launch their shit. Space X can do hundreds of flights a year for starlink just fine. As soon as shit can be fabricated on the moon it’s becomes exponentially cheaper.
Replies: >>102958
fc340a No.102958 [Reply] 
>>102957
SpaceX is good at launching satellites. For a minimum operation on the moon you need to launch supplies daily, sustain life, and be able to bring back the material which is a lot easier.
There's also no proof of any value on the moon besides the soil content, it's like trusting the soviets of their rare earth deposits reports etc. all fictional in the moment
Replies: >>102973
fc340a No.102959 [Reply] 
On the topic of SpaceX I'm looking forward to their accounting books, apparently they are very "profitable" because they don't take depreciation and amortization into account lmao
It's so over for spacecells
Replies: >>102973
fc340a No.102960 [Reply] 
I'm not against exploring space, but everything happening right now is wrong but I can't explain cuz phone so I'll try to make a good faith post later :3
3e46c7 No.102972 [Reply] 
>>102946
nigga, it's never getting fixed lmaooo
4b21e8 No.102973 [Reply]
ClipboardImage.png U A
[Hide] (487.5KB, 1349x759) Reverse
ClipboardImage.png U A
[Hide] (477.8KB, 1349x759) Reverse
ClipboardImage.png U A
[Hide] (322KB, 1349x759) Reverse
>>102956
>You get one off missions like these, and you'll be happy because no one minds spending a few billions here and there once in a while lmao
The Artemis missions cost billions because NASA contracted Boeing and Lockheed Martin to make the SLS rocket and the Orion capsule, respectively. Since it was a cost-plus contract, the contractors weren't incentivized to keep costs low, and I'm sure you already know about the various stories of delays and cost overruns regarding other programs from those defense contractors, so a NASA contract wouldn't be any different. Not to mention that the rocket and spacecraft are expendable after one mission.

>>102958
>There's also no proof of any value on the moon besides the soil content
The real value of the Moon is that you can use it as a base for infrastructure to support other space missions. It takes around 8-9 km/s of delta-v to launch to low Earth orbit, but it only takes around 6km/s of delta-v to go from the surface of the moon to low Earth orbit. It could be as low as ~3km/s if you use aerobreaking using Earth's atmosphere (Obviously, this requires your craft to have the appropriate hardware to do so). The end goal would be to build a mass driver on the Moon, which would take care of the delta-v costs of launch and ejecting from lunar orbit. 
TLDR: you can launch stuff cheaper from the Moon to LEO than from the Earth to LEO, which would open the way to more efficient space exploration.

>>102959
I haven't heard anything about that. If anything, now they aren't profitable, mainly because they acquired xAI. Interesting since they're targeting a 1.75 trillion IPO in the summer.
https://www.reuters.com/science/spacex-posted-nearly-5-billion-loss-2025-information-reports-2026-04-10/
https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/unconventional-logic-behind-spacexs-175-trillion-price-tag-2026-04-10/

btw they're splashing down now
[New Reply]
[Index] [Catalog] [Archive] [Banners] [Logs] [Archive]
102 replies | 46 files | 8 UIDs
Connecting...
Show Post Actions

Actions:

Captcha:

- news - rules - faq -
jschan 1.7.3