is there any open source orbital launch technology?
>>108564487NASA is open source you dumb retard it publishes every single thing it does, it's just super expensive to /DIY/ but nothing stops you. That's why it's laughable when you see the chinks claim they are in a space race when the path has been cleared for them.
>>108564487NASA runs RedHat Linux on all it's machines. Even when Microsoft sponsored them, they just run Linux in VM on top of Windows until they stopped using Windows.
>>108564528if there is one link it
>>108564528You talking some serious bullshit right now. ICBMs are not open source tehc.
>>108565131>>108565151There's a billion papers online from NASA you retards. Artemis RS-25 is one of the most documented pieces of hardware in aerospace history. Just fucking use Google
>>108565131NTRS 19770045710NTRS 19870013332For links, but NASA servers are down rn
>>108565131some more details about the inner workings of the RS-25NTRS 19770045710NTRS 19870013332NTRS 20100023061NTRS 19830027830NTRS 19910014927NTRS 20150016499NTRS 20180006734
>>108565514its various papers about the engine not the actual source/cad files/schematics
>>108564528Don't be naive. All the actual rocket technology is made by military contractors and it's all under ITAR regulations.
>>108565586The knowledge is distilled in the papers not telhe cads>>108565631that's probably why hundreds of companies use those papers to make their own cads and that most ICBMs are actually solid fuel rockets ??? Don't be retarded the guidance system is what's hard in ICBMs not the propulsion
>>108564487
