We invite you to a vital event on December 2 at 17:00 GMT: *"Global* *Crisis.* *The* *Responsibility"* (international online forum). There will be voiced the information on which the fate of each of us and the entire civilization depends.
This is how we do space. We will fail miserably, but the data gathered will be useful to refine each successive flight. Bravo SpaceX for spending the money to push humanity forward into the stars.
@@mrtomdorn Apollo was a human rated program. By the time Starship becomes human rated it will be a completely different program from what it is now. Then it can be judged against Apollo.
@@jackking5567 The Everyday Astronaught channel showed during their coverage some footage of the pad area, no damage could be seen, not like last time.
Impressive, beautiful launch and a lot of major improvements over the first launch. They achieved that huge goal of a successful separation from the booster and also flew successfully a lot higher. Congrats to Elon and SpaceX.
Great vid. I don't think we should ignore that starship itself has never been over a few hundred miles an hour or ever into space above the Kármán line. Very impressive for such a big hunk. Well over 100 tons dry (heavier than the Shuttle), 30 feet in diameter, doing 4 miles a second? Which is quite quick. ....that is a little bit impressive which ever way you look at it! I'm 61, I grew up on a diet of Captain Scarlet, UFO, Thunderbirds and steam locomotives, and I am lucky to be around in the actual real Century 21 and see this stuff! It's brilliant.
Well you are wrong when you state that starship has never been over a few hundred miles per hour or reached the Karmen line! The booster reached 5000 mph before hitting MECO. And the second stage made up to 24,000 miles per hour which is about 6.5 miles per second. That is just under escape velocity. The second stage also reached 149 km in altitude which is well above the Karmen line of 100 km!!
@@michaeldeierhoi4096 You mean KM/H? 24000 MPH is WAY over orbital velocity. So what the hell are you talking about? It hit 24000 KM/H which is JUST UNDER orbital velocity on a normal orbit attempt.
@@michaeldeierhoi4096 Well I'm not wrong, this is the first time Starship achieved such speeds and into space. 24,000 km/h by the way, about 15000 mph, around 4 miles a second. Divide by 8 and times by five? Divide by 60 twice? Children's maths. Are you an idiot? Can you actually read? Do you read? Do you want me to read it back to you or can you manage to do that on your own?
@@michaeldeierhoi4096He's talking about before IFT-2, Starship has never passed the Karman line until now. He is wrong about it not going over a few hundred miles per hour
Both this launch and the last one, I found myself thinking 'damn it's a shame it blew up, they have to spend years making a new one' before I remembered they have like three more ready to go and more on the way.
@@macsdf1 FAA? Try fish and wildlife protecting the sensitive shoreline from the deluge system. SpaceX sat on the request for impact statement rather than complying probably so they would have someone to blame for the delays. They have done this before with FAA compliance at canaveral and when permission was granted they were still 2 months out. Please don't be a pawn.
First time watching the channel. This is the most concise, thorough and intelligent analysis of the second test launch of Space X’s Starship I have seen. The main objective of successful stage separation was accomplished. The goal is for test launches to become increasingly successful.
That was their first rocket and included landings. SpaceX is hundreds of launches in at this point but they are losing their best engineers due to the BS from the top.
What people need to remember is, this is still a first for Space X. The pad was the first test, this was a stage separation test but it still made it to where it needed to be. The next step with the more advanced rockets will be something special. There are a number of Starships waiting in the wings and ready to go. Now they have proved that they can safely get to where they need to be, the safety issue is pretty much wrapped up. Every step is a move forward, just like with Falcon 9. I wouldn't be surprised if they hit the mark with the first human flight in 2027. Huge respect to Elon on the team, it went better than expected.
I've noticed that after Stage Sep they didn't get all engines they wanted running again (as far as I know the wanted to boost back with all of the inner 13 engines) I thinkt that might've triggerd the FTS of B9 because with less engines it wasn't able to get back to it's desired landingzone. Still, it was a HUGE improvement when you think of IFT-1
Most commenters on technical issues have no real life experience. They base their comments, unfortunately, on either selected clips from entertainment media claiming to be History Channels or from things they see in the movies.. Before I get torched, yes, I worked on the Atlas SLV program and we learned a bunch through failure analysis and telemetry data. Back then, we had very smart people that worked these things out with pencils and sliderules. @@srs6461
They did an awesome job reaching this milestone and the lessons will be applied to attempt #3 - They will get this figured out and get Starship into orbit soon.
@@rcpmac SpaceX's budget is practically unlimited, they have government contracts and nowadays the Falcon 9/Heavy launch like 90% or more of all payloads into space
@@blackhatfreakfalcon 9 also had failures in the beginning, now it's the best rocket around. This is called R&D testing, but you're such an expert maybe you should teach them how to build it better 🤣🤣🤣
@@blackhatfreak - It is always striking that there is always someone who doesn't know the aerospace business who opens their mouth and shows just how little they know about it. That would be you BlackHatFreak.
Subscribed, looked all morning for info as to what happened to the Starship itself. Your RUclips is the first time I've found a detailed explanation of what happened after the launch. Most of the other sites are just Wow oh Wow with little step by step like yours. Thx.
Seems to me that stage separation might be causing some knockback. Especially with the amount of mass that's being accelerated. Gotta start working that one out. I think the main thing to think about is the force applied to the booster during separation, and the force applied to star ship. If you make things too loose, there could eventually be a Part that fails when the vehicle is under tremendous amounts of shock. Especially when you're trying to accelerate all of that mass.
@GilmanPando If you let NASA handle the entire mission, they'll do it correctly (maybe, but very likely) however, it will be in 2035 and after spending 40 billion dollars of tax payer money. SpaceX is private. They use the fail early and learn method with their own capital. Food for thought.
The boostback burn had one engine that never restarted after separation, then you could see that a few other engines on the booster shut off, later there was an explosion at the top of the booster. I believe this was another FTS explosion. I think Starship was supposed to have engine shutdown at 8:33 or so. But the graphic shows that it they shut off at about 8:03 and then a shockwave glow appeared at about 8:09 which I interpret as when the FTS exploded the ship.
Clear explanation! SpaceX did amazing and the crucial separation stage went well and even the booster turned and started its flight back to earth. Bravo SpaceX. I watched it live from Nairobi, KENYA
@@rcpmacIt wasn’t a complete success, but it was more successful than last time. Last time several of the rocket engines didn’t fire. Last time it didn’t make it to stage separation and also last time they destroyed the launch pad. When you’re designing and testing something of this magnitude there’s going to be some failures along the way.
@@rcpmac damn, you coping so hard my guy, posting on allot of comments because your below room temp IQ cant understand the concept of progress or learning from mistakes, huh?
@@micah6507 There is no dealing with Trolls. I'll bet that clown is still telling people that the Apollo mission was a fake, despite the fact that you can SEE the landings from here! :D: :D :D
Aside from the failure of the termination system, all the other failures of the first launch could be traced back to damage caused by destruction of the pad
That's certainly how it appeared, but according to SpaceX the fuel leaks and engine failures of the first flight were not caused by debris from the pad
I think they’ve found a good balance between moving quickly though design and building a prototype and launching it to see how they are doing. Takes money, but progress is quick.
Damn, my Engineering Teacher woke up at 5:30 AM PST just to watch the launch and it exploded. But to be fair one explosion is a huge step forward into the journey of spaceflight.
@@Renovatio2142 This flight was an uncrewed flight, but I see where you’re going. My point was that SpaceX will probably learn from the explosion and will innovate. Last time the second stage got stuck to the first stage and the first stage didn’t eject, leading to a controlled and planned explosion. This time the second stage ejected but exploded. SpaceX has only launched the Starship 2 times, I think they’ll constantly improve and will be successful.
Engine data display from the first stage clearly indicated that the exhaust plume from the upper stage was hitting the first stage engine bells. About a minute before the apparent upper stage explosions (+00: 07: 06 on the flight clock) there were plume of gas visible asymmetrically arrayed around the glowing engines followed by a second plume 36 seconds later and a third event 9 seconds later. 58 seconds after the first gas plume the ship exploded.
I’ve decided to not watch any corporate “news” about this. Every word they say is driven by the politics of the people who control the companies. There’s no truth in them anymore. Not only in major events, even in simple little things nobody would know about if some “journalist” didn’t run, salivating for promotion, at some small town tragedy that they found a way to spin into a friggn race riot or scandal. They’re worse than lawyers now. The new joke about lawyer jokes should shift to journalist jokes. What do you call a hundred journalists at the bottom of the ocean? A good start.
Bezos was willing to go on a flight. To me that says a lot. NASA picked Blue Origin over a rival bid led by Leidos Inc-owned (LDOS. N) defense contractor Dynetics that also included Northrop Grumman Corp (NOC. N). NASA's decision to go with Bezos and Blue Origin will give it a second option for sending astronauts to the moon under its Artemis program.
Blue Origin is NASAs "backup", as Bill Nelson stated when awarding the 2nd Option Lander contract in May. Blue Origin and its National Team partners are giving NASA a hydrogen fueled lunar lander, exactly what NASA wants for "sustainability" i.e. burning cheap in situ lunar H2 instead of expensive Earth CH4, hauled all the way from Earth to the Moon and down to the surface just to get back to LEO. Starship has no future on the Moon, with NASA or anybody: it is unsustainable.
It was one hell of a successful flight, the team should have plent of data to work with and improve upon. That flight termination system though, that thing is not messing around, the starship itself seemed to be on course everything nominal engines stayed lit yet it still blew to hell literally less than 30 seconds before it was supposed to shut off, almost made it the whole way, hopefully the abort was for a good reason and not just some shitty glitch, everything went way better on only this second attempt though.
Possibly....the way I saw it was the 2nd stage engine ignited too soon 2:23.... before the 1st stage even separated and could clear the exhaust blast, possibly creating a leak. Hard to tell from the angles and distance.
Space X had quite a few failures of Falcon 9 (especially regarding landing) but they gathered their data, worked through the issues and look at them now! I don’t understand the negative attitude. Could you have done a better job perhaps?
Thank you for the thoughtful reporting. All the major networks are using "reporters" that barely understand the pointy end goes up. Seriously, the quality of reporting on the networks never fails to disappoint. So your report is like a breath of fresh air. Again, thank you.
A Rapid, Unscheduled, Disassembly? Wow, today's generation are so easily impressed. Older generations simply call it another astronomically expensive f - - k up
To me, it looked like it started to drift slightly off course right before the stage separation. Either that or the camera made a huge change in location. It would be a shame if that was the reason for the Starship self destruct.
I think that was intentional to avoid the tower... it was exacerbated with the first launch because of the engine fails... which how lucky was that for the fails to be on the wayward side of the tower on that first one. They used up all the luck on that one.
This was awesome! I have watched this a dozen times since the live launch coverage on X… it would seem like the boost back burn initiated the RUD on the booster. Once you saw the atmospheric gases expand on stage 2… you knew she just blew up. That is the data I would love to see. Technically, the stress levels on stage 2 should have not been present. Great video once again sir
For the booster. I warched it live and after separation i actually thought something went wrong because the booster flipped so fast. Someone mentioned that the flip could have cause a Fluid hammer und destroyed some engines which subsequently destroyed more engines and ultimately triggered the FTS system
They blew up their first three Dragon's and a fourth would have bankrupted the company. Now they take off multiple times per week and its no big deal. No reason to think Starship won't follow the same sort of path.
@@exitdoor8695 Yeah… that ship ain’t going to leave earth orbit anytime soon. It’s never taking anyone to the moon or anywhere else for that matter. The program will end in a huge fiasco and be shutdown within 8 years. That’s my prediction.
I haven't watched a launch of any kind in a while and stumbled on Elon's subsidized space machine taking off. Man what a gorgeous launch. The camera views were stunning and I was pretty impressed with Space X. That was pretty bad ass. " A rapid, unscheduled unassembly" oh, you sillies...
If they can get into orbit with 30 engines then 4/33 engines need to fail. Unlike other rockets with a single engine that have a single point of failure.
@raydunn2582 When three Falcon 9 boosters are joined together in the Falcon Heavy you have 27 Merlin engines all firing at once on launch. I have heard no reports of Merlin engines failing on the Heavy so why have a different standard for starship??
Of course what went right before those explosions doesn't matter much by your estimation then right?? Falcon 9 had four flights before it was successful. 🙄
@@michaeldeierhoi4096 And four more landings before it was successful, we still got 6 booms to go and I am excited for em, but I do wish the team faster success ofc.
Actually there will be at least a couple dozen more test flights. Once the launch and boost back burns can be completed reliably with soft landings at sea they will go to catching the booster at OLT. I don't know what their plan for the second stage is yet. Space may start to deloy the Starlink 2 satellites in a near future flight once they learn to get to orbit reliably.
I think you mean two or three launches before they have a stable configuration. SpaceX is continually improving/changing things so, in that regard, every launch is a test.
I was honestly extremely happily surprised that all the engines managed to stay online for the whole duration until the separation. That's a significant improvement from even the static fires we saw when they first tested the deluge system.
It’s a different mindset to celebrate incremental improvements over the actual failure to complete the full mission. My old way of thinking wants to call BS but I must admit that actual progress is being achieved at a steady rate with huge innovations. I can’t argue with the progress that has been achieved.
Other way around, it shouldn't be exploding and failing this is the 6th time it blew up horribly These are atmospheric conditions that are well known, well studied and can be simulated It's not like it was hit by a meteorite, or something unforseen All this indicates that the science and engineering potential of the US has peaked , the engineers and scientists of today being pumped out by the US education system can't hold a candle to the guys that studied in the 1940s -> 1960s
The full mission was to get to stage seperation and gather data, but what are they supposed to do if it actually succeeds, just shut everything down and go home with hardware still in the air? That would be ridiculous, so they said if everything is still functioning at "this point" then we will attempt to do "this with it" until it runs out of altitude and airspeed, gently or otherwise. They will let us know when mission success will be defined by a controlled landing or splashdown.
@@xblade11230 are you stupid? What did you want when developing an entirely new ship? You cannot count the explosions for each generation because on their own they serve no purpose
Hey man just FYI I used to get your notifications daily but I haven’t gotten any in the past 2 months, luckily this one showed on my home page this evening
I see this as a huge success, despite both stages being lost. BOTH stages actually fired this time, so now they have extremely valuable data for the 3rd launch! (Edit: I also just realized that not even a single raptor engine went out! And that the launchpad wasn’t nearly as damaged as last time! That’s what I was most worried about lmao)
It definitely wasn't successful. The vehicle exploded before completing its planned objectives. But it was a lot closer to success than the previous attempt, and the booster completed its primary mission (getting to stage separation) without any immediately obvious issues.
@@plainText384there’s where you’re finding it to be not successful, in the words “planned objectives”. This was a test flight. Nothing was expected to work perfectly. If it actually made it to Hawaii, everyone would have been shocked.
@heatshield yeah, and the test wasn't successful. That doesn't mean they didn't improve on the last test. But it does mean that the systems they tested didn't all work.
This is how innovating companies work. Instead of thinking about challenges forever, they make their best guess and solution and try again. It may take another try or two but rest assured, Space X will master this just as they have mastered their other rockets. When they do, we will see another game changer for space travel just as their falcon rockets have changed orbital travel.
@@nickl5658 Do you even know how affordable Space X is vs NASA or their prime contractors? Just look at the falcon series. They can do a launch for a very small fraction of what NASA or their contractors charge. Plus, Space X is actually landing their first rockets and can turn around in days instead of years. Space X makes NASA look like a bunch of kindergarten students with legos.
What an improvement from the last launch! Bravo
We invite you to a vital event on December 2 at 17:00 GMT: *"Global* *Crisis.* *The* *Responsibility"* (international online forum). There will be voiced the information on which the fate of each of us and the entire civilization depends.
Yes the catastrophic failures were better this time
You’re insane.
really? it was worse in every way..they lost both modules and they don't know how.
@@zognaldblormpf5127 yeah cause every single human accomplishment has been on their first try...
This is how we do space. We will fail miserably, but the data gathered will be useful to refine each successive flight. Bravo SpaceX for spending the money to push humanity forward into the stars.
There were no Apollo flight failures 60 years ago. TD Atlanta
@mrtomdorn, there was Apollo 1, a deadly failure on the pad, and there was Apollo 13, which also had a (non-lethal) failure.
@@mrtomdorn Apollo was a human rated program. By the time Starship becomes human rated it will be a completely different program from what it is now. Then it can be judged against Apollo.
No its not. Maybe 70 years ago.
we?
Flight 1 max alt: 39km
Flight 1 max speed: 1700km/h
Flight 2 max alt: 149km
Flight 2 max speed: 24000km/h
A big improvement indeed.
I love the to the point info. If you could cover how the launch area survived that'd be much appreciated!
I'm looking forward to seeing those photos!
They will be out there checking as soon as its Safe.
@@jackking5567 The Everyday Astronaught channel showed during their coverage some footage of the pad area, no damage could be seen, not like last time.
@@ausman05 I'm hoping things can speed up!
Yes!
Impressive, beautiful launch and a lot of major improvements over the first launch. They achieved that huge goal of a successful separation from the booster and also flew successfully a lot higher. Congrats to Elon and SpaceX.
"We've experienced an unscheduled rapid disassembly of the vehicle" lol
Great vid. I don't think we should ignore that starship itself has never been over a few hundred miles an hour or ever into space above the Kármán line. Very impressive for such a big hunk. Well over 100 tons dry (heavier than the Shuttle), 30 feet in diameter, doing 4 miles a second? Which is quite quick. ....that is a little bit impressive which ever way you look at it!
I'm 61, I grew up on a diet of Captain Scarlet, UFO, Thunderbirds and steam locomotives, and I am lucky to be around in the actual real Century 21 and see this stuff! It's brilliant.
Well you are wrong when you state that starship has never been over a few hundred miles per hour or reached the Karmen line! The booster reached 5000 mph before hitting MECO. And the second stage made up to 24,000 miles per hour which is about 6.5 miles per second. That is just under escape velocity. The second stage also reached 149 km in altitude which is well above the Karmen line of 100 km!!
@@michaeldeierhoi4096 You mean KM/H? 24000 MPH is WAY over orbital velocity. So what the hell are you talking about? It hit 24000 KM/H which is JUST UNDER orbital velocity on a normal orbit attempt.
@@michaeldeierhoi4096
Well I'm not wrong, this is the first time Starship achieved such speeds and into space. 24,000 km/h by the way, about 15000 mph, around 4 miles a second. Divide by 8 and times by five? Divide by 60 twice? Children's maths. Are you an idiot? Can you actually read? Do you read? Do you want me to read it back to you or can you manage to do that on your own?
@@michaeldeierhoi4096He's talking about before IFT-2, Starship has never passed the Karman line until now. He is wrong about it not going over a few hundred miles per hour
@@TheMeslava So I meant to say km/h big whop! Did you ever use the wrong units before??
What a great summary of the events, thanks!!
Both this launch and the last one, I found myself thinking 'damn it's a shame it blew up, they have to spend years making a new one' before I remembered they have like three more ready to go and more on the way.
delay was FAA and the fucked up launch pad. Pad is fine, and lets see if FAA cockblocks again.
That wil also wind up as so much bent metal on the floor of the Gulf.
@@MrShobar They crashed ten Falcon 9s before they got it to land safely, and now they're almost up to 250 safe landings.
@@macsdf1 FAA? Try fish and wildlife protecting the sensitive shoreline from the deluge system. SpaceX sat on the request for impact statement rather than complying probably so they would have someone to blame for the delays. They have done this before with FAA compliance at canaveral and when permission was granted they were still 2 months out. Please don't be a pawn.
They make starship in motnhs
First time watching the channel. This is the most concise, thorough and intelligent analysis of the second test launch of Space X’s Starship I have seen. The main objective of successful stage separation was accomplished. The goal is for test launches to become increasingly successful.
¡Felicitaciones! ¡Excelente video!
¡ El progreso alcanzado es notable!
¡ Adelante, siempre! Ernesto. Argentina
It took four launches to get to the first successful Falcon One flight. I don't expect this to be different
That was their first rocket and included landings. SpaceX is hundreds of launches in at this point but they are losing their best engineers due to the BS from the top.
It’s crazy watching a documentary. If that 5th rocket failed SpaceX was bankrupt.
@@rcpmacDo you have any evidence for your claim? Also, starship is completely different, though I doubt you can comprehend that.
@@rcpmac Could you please show me where you got the info that spacex has launched starship hundreds of times?
If the initial reports of Stage 0 being undamaged are true, then the improvements on this launch could result in a much faster testing cadence. 🤞
When you consider the level of technology in the 1960ies it was a huge achievement that all Apollo 5 rockets worked fine from the first test on.
NASA only got to the moon because they stole rocket scientists from Germany after the war.
Huh, it’s almost to good to be true, like almost fake, right..?
Failure wasn’t an option back then. Different mindset
thats a question in itself
Yeah, for like a Hundred Zillion Dollars!
What people need to remember is, this is still a first for Space X. The pad was the first test, this was a stage separation test but it still made it to where it needed to be. The next step with the more advanced rockets will be something special. There are a number of Starships waiting in the wings and ready to go. Now they have proved that they can safely get to where they need to be, the safety issue is pretty much wrapped up. Every step is a move forward, just like with Falcon 9. I wouldn't be surprised if they hit the mark with the first human flight in 2027. Huge respect to Elon on the team, it went better than expected.
I've noticed that after Stage Sep they didn't get all engines they wanted running again (as far as I know the wanted to boost back with all of the inner 13 engines) I thinkt that might've triggerd the FTS of B9 because with less engines it wasn't able to get back to it's desired landingzone.
Still, it was a HUGE improvement when you think of IFT-1
2 KABOOMS BETTER THAN ONE
People in the comments don't seem to understand that. @@rcpmac
Most commenters on technical issues have no real life experience. They base their comments, unfortunately, on either selected clips from entertainment media claiming to be History Channels or from things they see in the movies..
Before I get torched, yes, I worked on the Atlas SLV program and we learned a bunch through failure analysis and telemetry data. Back then, we had very smart people that worked these things out with pencils and sliderules.
@@srs6461
They did an awesome job reaching this milestone and the lessons will be applied to attempt #3 - They will get this figured out and get Starship into orbit soon.
They forgot to iterate their iterative designs iteration. KABOOM goes the SpaceX budget after the next one
@@rcpmac SpaceX's budget is practically unlimited, they have government contracts and nowadays the Falcon 9/Heavy launch like 90% or more of all payloads into space
What milestone? LMAO it's another huge failure.
@@blackhatfreakfalcon 9 also had failures in the beginning, now it's the best rocket around. This is called R&D testing, but you're such an expert maybe you should teach them how to build it better 🤣🤣🤣
@@blackhatfreak - It is always striking that there is always someone who doesn't know the aerospace business who opens their mouth and shows just how little they know about it. That would be you BlackHatFreak.
Subscribed, looked all morning for info as to what happened to the Starship itself. Your RUclips is the first time I've found a detailed explanation of what happened after the launch. Most of the other sites are just Wow oh Wow with little step by step like yours. Thx.
try scott manley too
The boosted experienced “a rapid unscheduled disassembly”. That’s bound to be a classic description of this type of event!!!
Great summary! To the point, no Blabla. Thanks a lot!
That launch pad improvement was huge!!! The vehicle also wasn’t “locked” as long when the main engines fired.
It wasn't locked at all. In either flight.
Thanks for a great report, just what I was looking for, succinct, factual and well paced. Keep up the great work. Looking forward to your next one.
What a brilliant update. Top class work in such a short time!
How big is starship
Seems to me that stage separation might be causing some knockback. Especially with the amount of mass that's being accelerated. Gotta start working that one out. I think the main thing to think about is the force applied to the booster during separation, and the force applied to star ship. If you make things too loose, there could eventually be a Part that fails when the vehicle is under tremendous amounts of shock. Especially when you're trying to accelerate all of that mass.
I agree. Separation likely caused issues.
This launch clearly went much better than the first. They’ll get it sorted out.
@GilmanPando what have you gotten into orbit?
@GilmanPando your mother would need 66 engines just to clear the pad
@@cv8metal884 fanboi cant answer so goes for ad hominum insult..sad
@GilmanPando If you let NASA handle the entire mission, they'll do it correctly (maybe, but very likely) however, it will be in 2035 and after spending 40 billion dollars of tax payer money. SpaceX is private. They use the fail early and learn method with their own capital. Food for thought.
Also, how did the NASA Starliner resupply mission go on the first try? (Asking for a friend.)@GilmanPando
The boostback burn had one engine that never restarted after separation, then you could see that a few other engines on the booster shut off, later there was an explosion at the top of the booster. I believe this was another FTS explosion.
I think Starship was supposed to have engine shutdown at 8:33 or so. But the graphic shows that it they shut off at about 8:03 and then a shockwave glow appeared at about 8:09 which I interpret as when the FTS exploded the ship.
Great video. Finally, an update on Starship. Every other video just ends with Booster explosion.
Clear explanation!
SpaceX did amazing and the crucial separation stage went well and even the booster turned and started its flight back to earth.
Bravo SpaceX.
I watched it live from Nairobi, KENYA
Success must be a different concept down there.
@@rcpmacIt wasn’t a complete success, but it was more successful than last time. Last time several of the rocket engines didn’t fire. Last time it didn’t make it to stage separation and also last time they destroyed the launch pad. When you’re designing and testing something of this magnitude there’s going to be some failures along the way.
@@rcpmac damn, you coping so hard my guy, posting on allot of comments because your below room temp IQ cant understand the concept of progress or learning from mistakes, huh?
@@micah6507 There is no dealing with Trolls. I'll bet that clown is still telling people that the Apollo mission was a fake, despite the fact that you can SEE the landings from here! :D: :D :D
Excellent fast analysis of this second flight.👍
Great job catching me up. I missed the launch and was looking for an update. Thanks!
Very nice to the point explanation.Thank you.
Congraturations to team SpaceX who made progress on today's fight test. It's an encouragement to the teams next continue fight fight ...
One of the few actually testing and reiterating real things, not just thinking and complaining! 👍
"The entire booster experienced a rapid unscheduled disassembly"😂😂
Aside from the failure of the termination system, all the other failures of the first launch could be traced back to damage caused by destruction of the pad
That's certainly how it appeared, but according to SpaceX the fuel leaks and engine failures of the first flight were not caused by debris from the pad
...which goes back to Elon and 4/20 silliness.
I think they’ve found a good balance between moving quickly though design and building a prototype and launching it to see how they are doing. Takes money, but progress is quick.
Outstanding video sir, thank you. Subscribing 😊
Finally, an explanation of what happened to stage 2. Subscribing. 👍🏾👍🏾👍🏾👍🏾👍🏾
Congratulations SpaceX very educational video to the space bucket nice job with the detailed information keep up the great work
I appreciate the rapid review and fast turn-around analysis. Well done.
Excellent analysis done right quick! Thank you for fulfilling that need!
I'd say 3 more flights and we could see both booster and starship landing in one piece
3 or 2 more flights will put SpaceX in bankruptcy
"a rapid unscheduled disassembly" that's my new favorite expression when things blow up.
Damn, my Engineering Teacher woke up at 5:30 AM PST just to watch the launch and it exploded. But to be fair one explosion is a huge step forward into the journey of spaceflight.
no it's not... explosion is the last thing you want to happen.
@@Renovatio2142are you stupid?
@@Renovatio2142 This flight was an uncrewed flight, but I see where you’re going.
My point was that SpaceX will probably learn from the explosion and will innovate. Last time the second stage got stuck to the first stage and the first stage didn’t eject, leading to a controlled and planned explosion. This time the second stage ejected but exploded.
SpaceX has only launched the Starship 2 times, I think they’ll constantly improve and will be successful.
You're clearly not in this community because your passionate about Starship and Engineering. Go spread your negativity somewhere else. @@Renovatio2142
@@suspense_comix3237 SpaceX is going to destroy more material then NASA will ever throw away at this rate
Engine data display from the first stage clearly indicated that the exhaust plume from the upper stage was hitting the first stage engine bells. About a minute before the apparent upper stage explosions (+00: 07: 06 on the flight clock) there were plume of gas visible asymmetrically arrayed around the glowing engines followed by a second plume 36 seconds later and a third event 9 seconds later. 58 seconds after the first gas plume the ship exploded.
This was far from a failure as the mainstream media is reporting it. I just hope the FAA and related agencies continue to be helpful in future.
I’ve decided to not watch any corporate “news” about this. Every word they say is driven by the politics of the people who control the companies. There’s no truth in them anymore. Not only in major events, even in simple little things nobody would know about if some “journalist” didn’t run, salivating for promotion, at some small town tragedy that they found a way to spin into a friggn race riot or scandal.
They’re worse than lawyers now. The new joke about lawyer jokes should shift to journalist jokes. What do you call a hundred journalists at the bottom of the ocean? A good start.
Too much good Starship ! The new technology is still developed ! Bravo !
I am a fan of SpaceX because they are all about getting it done, unlike Blue Origin which is doing nothing at all.
Bezos was willing to go on a flight. To me that says a lot. NASA picked Blue Origin over a rival bid led by Leidos Inc-owned (LDOS. N) defense contractor Dynetics that also included Northrop Grumman Corp (NOC. N). NASA's decision to go with Bezos and Blue Origin will give it a second option for sending astronauts to the moon under its Artemis program.
Blue Origin is NASAs "backup", as Bill Nelson stated when awarding the 2nd Option Lander contract in May.
Blue Origin and its National Team partners are giving NASA a hydrogen fueled lunar lander, exactly what NASA wants for "sustainability" i.e. burning cheap in situ lunar H2 instead of expensive Earth CH4, hauled all the way from Earth to the Moon and down to the surface just to get back to LEO.
Starship has no future on the Moon, with NASA or anybody: it is unsustainable.
@@rcpmac Saying something and doing it are two different things, I love spaceX and have faith in them but fuck no I would NOT get into the starship
What a beautiful sigh seeing those thirty-three engines working flawlessly. Progress made.
2040: Starship landed on the Moon but tumbled and exploded. We gathered important data.
At least they would still gather more data than the entirety of India’s recent space mission🤷🏽♂️Or there entire space agency tbh😂
@@Jcron13 soon India and China will catch up and get in the lead.
Great program, enough detail & not too long.
It was one hell of a successful flight, the team should have plent of data to work with and improve upon. That flight termination system though, that thing is not messing around, the starship itself seemed to be on course everything nominal engines stayed lit yet it still blew to hell literally less than 30 seconds before it was supposed to shut off, almost made it the whole way, hopefully the abort was for a good reason and not just some shitty glitch, everything went way better on only this second attempt though.
I'm starting to think the FAA made them do it... lol
Thank you so much for your stage-by-stage detailed commentary. Even a layperson could understand you. Excellent.
Great no-nonsense commentary. Thank you.
I wonder if the propellants shifing after that flip maneuver ruptured the tanks.
maybe teh pressure on the engine also led to the explosion?
Most likely
Slower flipping would be nice.
Possibly....the way I saw it was the 2nd stage engine ignited too soon 2:23.... before the 1st stage even separated and could clear the exhaust blast, possibly creating a leak. Hard to tell from the angles and distance.
@@theadmiral5425 2nd stage ignition is how they seperate. try again
Great video, great narration and description🎉❤
What an improvement! It lasted for a whole 8 minutes before it blew up this time. Wow!
Was that intended to be a sarcastic response?
I’m sorry but I have to…
That’s what she said.
@@warrenjm9 that or he’s overly positive. Either way he’s not very funny at all lmao
Space X had quite a few failures of Falcon 9 (especially regarding landing) but they gathered their data, worked through the issues and look at them now!
I don’t understand the negative attitude. Could you have done a better job perhaps?
@@rustyshackleford234 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
The whole event was amazing.
Congratulations to all who made it possible.
Thank you for sharing.
😎
Huh?
Thank you for the thoughtful reporting. All the major networks are using "reporters" that barely understand the pointy end goes up. Seriously, the quality of reporting on the networks never fails to disappoint. So your report is like a breath of fresh air. Again, thank you.
A Rapid, Unscheduled, Disassembly? Wow, today's generation are so easily impressed.
Older generations simply call it another astronomically expensive f - - k up
Rapid, unscheduled, disassembly, screw musk, and his semantics. The damn thing blew up.
Glad your channel getting big you deserve it
To me, it looked like it started to drift slightly off course right before the stage separation. Either that or the camera made a huge change in location. It would be a shame if that was the reason for the Starship self destruct.
I think that was intentional to avoid the tower... it was exacerbated with the first launch because of the engine fails... which how lucky was that for the fails to be on the wayward side of the tower on that first one. They used up all the luck on that one.
@@hawkdslwtf are you talking about? They were 1.5 miles down track at stage separation, nowhere near the tower.
So much better presentation than nasa space flight ! Well done…
They separated and then they both blew up... Oh the horror.... 😮
Go SpaceX! The world needs your lander for Artemis III in 2025. It's been too many disappointing delays already in the Moon program.
This was awesome! I have watched this a dozen times since the live launch coverage on X… it would seem like the boost back burn initiated the RUD on the booster. Once you saw the atmospheric gases expand on stage 2… you knew she just blew up. That is the data I would love to see. Technically, the stress levels on stage 2 should have not been present.
Great video once again sir
For the booster.
I warched it live and after separation i actually thought something went wrong because the booster flipped so fast.
Someone mentioned that the flip could have cause a Fluid hammer und destroyed some engines which subsequently destroyed more engines and ultimately triggered the FTS system
Yes, this was a massive step forward for Starship.
But can we all just agree that the 2025 Artemis 3 deadline is not happening?
At the rate NASA is going with the SLS, I won't be surprised if the next crewed moon landing is conducted entirely with SpaceX Starships.
It's taking them two years to build Artemis 2 after Artemis 1. At this rate success is starting to merge with failure.
@@racooksterStarship is a fail.
@@skyemac8okay rocket scientist!😂😂😂
@@jszorc3488lol literally it blew up today both the booster and a starship and it already blew up like 5 other times...
Best summary I saw and heard .👍
7:18 If you want to climb on that thing in a couple of years after watching these two tests… You got some serious faith in the company. 😂
They blew up their first three Dragon's and a fourth would have bankrupted the company. Now they take off multiple times per week and its no big deal. No reason to think Starship won't follow the same sort of path.
They launch multiple rockets a week, no failures
REMARKABLE!@@exitdoor8695
@@exitdoor8695 Yeah… that ship ain’t going to leave earth orbit anytime soon. It’s never taking anyone to the moon or anywhere else for that matter. The program will end in a huge fiasco and be shutdown within 8 years. That’s my prediction.
Thank you very much for this detailed run down of what exactly happened! This is exactly the information i was looking all over for! Love it ❤
Nice and to the point. Well done. Looking forward to reports on how well the OLP did.
I haven't watched a launch of any kind in a while and stumbled on Elon's subsidized space machine taking off. Man what a gorgeous launch. The camera views were stunning and I was pretty impressed with Space X. That was pretty bad ass. " A rapid, unscheduled unassembly" oh, you sillies...
33 engines equals 33 possible points of failure. Just like the Titanic submersible, I'd never get on it.
"Titan"
If they can get into orbit with 30 engines then 4/33 engines need to fail. Unlike other rockets with a single engine that have a single point of failure.
@raydunn2582 When three Falcon 9 boosters are joined together in the Falcon Heavy you have 27 Merlin engines all firing at once on launch. I have heard no reports of Merlin engines failing on the Heavy so why have a different standard for starship??
@@michaeldeierhoi4096 Flight 83 of falcon 9 had a Merlin failure. But becuase they have extra engines they still were able to get to orbit.
Oops. Brain-fart. @@MrShobar
Very concise and understandable report!
Yep, this time we got two catastrophic explosions instead of one. Progress! /s
Of course what went right before those explosions doesn't matter much by your estimation then right?? Falcon 9 had four flights before it was successful. 🙄
@@michaeldeierhoi4096 And four more landings before it was successful, we still got 6 booms to go and I am excited for em, but I do wish the team faster success ofc.
nice video, very very clear and straight to the point
I predict at least two or three more test launches, but it's getting really promising!
Actually there will be at least a couple dozen more test flights. Once the launch and boost back burns can be completed reliably with soft landings at sea they will go to catching the booster at OLT. I don't know what their plan for the second stage is yet.
Space may start to deloy the Starlink 2 satellites in a near future flight once they learn to get to orbit reliably.
I think you mean two or three launches before they have a stable configuration. SpaceX is continually improving/changing things so, in that regard, every launch is a test.
@@michaeldeierhoi4096 Good lord imagine the amount of satelites that would fit in this giant thing
It went Boom!
That awesome shockwave on engine ignition is just awesome!
What about engine detonation? Better, I thought.
I was honestly extremely happily surprised that all the engines managed to stay online for the whole duration until the separation. That's a significant improvement from even the static fires we saw when they first tested the deluge system.
An excellent and realistic review of the IFT-2! Kudos!!!🚀🚀🚀🚀🚀🚀🚀🚀🚀🚀
Great video! And done in record time. Very good synopsis. Thanks!
Thats a lot of Raptors raining down, the recovery bill is going to be huge
Good and factual recap! A Hauge leap forward for Starship! Next time they’ll nail it! 😊👍
Great analysis, so soon after the event.
What an incredible achievement! I think the next launch will hopefully work perfectly!
Practice makes progress... they've improved alot.
Alot is not a word.
@@Vector_Ze 😂
It’s a different mindset to celebrate incremental improvements over the actual failure to complete the full mission. My old way of thinking wants to call BS but I must admit that actual progress is being achieved at a steady rate with huge innovations. I can’t argue with the progress that has been achieved.
Other way around, it shouldn't be exploding and failing this is the 6th time it blew up horribly
These are atmospheric conditions that are well known, well studied and can be simulated
It's not like it was hit by a meteorite, or something unforseen
All this indicates that the science and engineering potential of the US has peaked , the engineers and scientists of today being pumped out by the US education system can't hold a candle to the guys that studied in the 1940s -> 1960s
@@xblade11230uhh 6th? Its 2nd time for a fully integrated flight test what are you yapping about
The full mission was to get to stage seperation and gather data, but what are they supposed to do if it actually succeeds, just shut everything down and go home with hardware still in the air? That would be ridiculous, so they said if everything is still functioning at "this point" then we will attempt to do "this with it" until it runs out of altitude and airspeed, gently or otherwise. They will let us know when mission success will be defined by a controlled landing or splashdown.
@@gudbread8523
Starship SN1 = exploded
Starship SN3 = exploded
Starship SN4 = exploded
Starship SN8 = exploded
Starship SN9 = exploded
Starship SN 10 = exploded
Starship SN 11 = exploded
Starship integrated test 1 = exploded
Starship integrated test 2 = exploded
@@xblade11230 are you stupid? What did you want when developing an entirely new ship? You cannot count the explosions for each generation because on their own they serve no purpose
Hey man just FYI I used to get your notifications daily but I haven’t gotten any in the past 2 months, luckily this one showed on my home page this evening
I see this as a huge success, despite both stages being lost. BOTH stages actually fired this time, so now they have extremely valuable data for the 3rd launch!
(Edit: I also just realized that not even a single raptor engine went out! And that the launchpad wasn’t nearly as damaged as last time! That’s what I was most worried about lmao)
Yes but what matters is how the opposite of right party media will spin this right?
@@Fighter4Street It doesn't matter how media spins this because SpaceX is privately owned and funded.
@@Fighter4Street They can spin what they want, Musk has too much money to care
@@mercerwing1458 Yes but they are going after his advertisers and making people afraid to buy his cars.
Great synopsis. Thanks.
What a launch! GO SPACEX GO STARSHIP!!
GOING...GOING...GONE!!!
Sooo...everything went exactly as planned, right up until the MASSIVE explosions of BOTH stages. Seems fine, let's jump aboard, right?
This was a highly successful launch. I’m waiting for SpaceX to release the after launch results and review of their progress.
It definitely wasn't successful. The vehicle exploded before completing its planned objectives.
But it was a lot closer to success than the previous attempt, and the booster completed its primary mission (getting to stage separation) without any immediately obvious issues.
Long wait...
@@plainText384there’s where you’re finding it to be not successful, in the words “planned objectives”.
This was a test flight. Nothing was expected to work perfectly. If it actually made it to Hawaii, everyone would have been shocked.
@heatshield yeah, and the test wasn't successful. That doesn't mean they didn't improve on the last test. But it does mean that the systems they tested didn't all work.
Wait for the next FAA investigation report, that's the one that counts.
What a perfect informative video. Thank you. 👍👍
Incredible to see it all in person, I'll never forget this morning on the shore
:D you will remember how some rocket blow up during testing?
@@Renovatio2142 yeah, during testing, after getting much farther than the previous test flight.
You dam lucky dog you!
@@exitdoor8695 why are you lying to your self?
@@Renovatio2142 You can literally look at the bottom of the screen to see higher numbers than from the last launch. Where is the lie exactly?
This is how innovating companies work. Instead of thinking about challenges forever, they make their best guess and solution and try again. It may take another try or two but rest assured, Space X will master this just as they have mastered their other rockets. When they do, we will see another game changer for space travel just as their falcon rockets have changed orbital travel.
Thankfully elon has billions of NASA money to spend every year. Else spaceX would go bankrupt from expensive failures.
@@nickl5658 Do you even know how affordable Space X is vs NASA or their prime contractors? Just look at the falcon series. They can do a launch for a very small fraction of what NASA or their contractors charge. Plus, Space X is actually landing their first rockets and can turn around in days instead of years. Space X makes NASA look like a bunch of kindergarten students with legos.
I'm impressed that they were able to repair the launchad
I wonder what data they gathered. It would be very interesting to see the things they actually learn from this.
Tons of visual Data, all angles.
Right! 1st don't televize it, 2nd use more cute catch phrases, 3rd say we expected that, 4th obliterate then iterate