How is it that one person with a camera and some video editing/animation software can make better produced & more intelligent science documentaries than multi-billion dollar media corporations?
Genuinely one of the best 1 hour 'documentaries' I've seen. Those on TV are always dumbed down, hyperbole, unbalanced, or full of filler B-roll. This video was packed full of well-researched facts, videos, interviews with leaders in the industry. Thanks for making this and sharing it for free with the world.
I wanted to leave a comment like this, but I'll just compliment you on yours. These type of things are in my experience frustrating to look at on TV, much better to have the teachers (sort of) approach as Tim has.
@@ddhsd Amen! And I think that is his RUclips super power: He is a smart dude who came at this from a place of nearly complete ignorance. In learning it so well from a layman's perspective, he is able to explain it to us (generally smart but ignorant folks) in exactly the ways that make sense. This is why it is better to learn basic or intermediate science from a real teacher than from the hardest core scientist (who inarguably knows it better than the teacher - but teaching is the relevant skill).
This is what journalism should always be like. My understanding is that the Everyday Astronaut is not an engineer of any sort, yet he has presented this issue more clearly than anyone else. I had been reluctant to watch this, assuming that it would be filled with mistakes and lacking in analysis, but I'm happy to see that I'm wrong. Good job, and thank you.
Yes, the everday astronaut represents the best of the new media which will eventually replace the traditional news and entertainment outlets. I am a gen x person, so I have seen everything from radio to podcasts to this.
Everyday Astronaut has truly outdone himself on the aerospike video. What an amazingly researched video. Simulations from Stanford, restored footage from Aerojet Rocketdyne, great animations, reading through NASA's decades old documents & reviews from Elon Musk, Tory Bruno and Peter Beck.
I learned so much, and I will probably retain less than half of it--this is definitely one I'd need to rewatch a couple times to understand fully... Edit- maybe half of half, if that
Yes! So impressive he got personal comments from the CEOs of three rocket companies. More impressive is the knowledge he taught himself. And best, he processed and re-presented it so we get it all in just 1 hour. Incredible, Tim!
A doc i have been waiting for years for. i believe in the arospike we just need a reason to have an SSTO like the X33 to be worth making. if we expand the amount of orbiting stations then they would be in use
@@bryce4724 I don't think pure rocket SSTOs make much sense, the margins are just so tight. I do think air-breathing SSTOs are a little more promising, with a payload : gross mass fraction of 4.6% for the Skylon concept, compared to 2% for VentureStar and 4.2% for the Falcon 9. So there does appear to be a noticeable advantage there, as long as the SABRE engine meets it's design requirements it could be quite competitive. Of course, if we're talking more far future tech, say 100 years from now, where we could have metallic hydrogen engines or something similar in Isp, SSTO starts to look very attractive. But right now, fully reusable multi stage rockets look a little more feasible.
@@jeffvader811 Yes but SABRE and Skylon have been in development since the 90's and before that there was HOTOL in the 80's and reaction engines has more or less postponed Skylon in favor of SABRE powered hypersonic airliners. So great concept but while they where looking for money to develop SABRE, SpaceX and all that happened. So now Skylon isn't very attractive anymore. And certainly it's not gonna look any better next to Starship. I know we all want the scifi spaceship that can park in front of your house and go all the way to orbit, but it's just that. A cool sci fi concept. We shouldn't force reality to conform to what we want just because its cool. SSTO will never be great on earth. Sure someday, there'll be fusion powered SSTO and all that but not today. And also consider safety. If Skylon looses one of those super complex SABRE engines, say a bird flies into the heat exchanger at Mach 4, you're dead. Loss of thrust on either side at hypersonic velocity will destabilize Skylon and it'll break apart. So great for cargo but even Starship makes Skylon's possible abort modes look dangerous.
I agree for the most part. Really interesting and well-made video. I have so much appreciation for all the work he puts into these - I wouldn't be diving this deep into rocket science if it wasn't for these. The only segment I didn't like was the reading of some of the numbers on the comparison sheet at 36:00 - I prefer it when the numbers are kept at display while the presenter explains the context/meaning of them. I had to pause the video and try to make sense of it myself instead. I'm sorry to admit that I wouldn't have had the patience to do that if it happened many times throughout the video.
I really love this video, I did a 10-page report for one of my engineering classes discussing aerospike rocket motors. I only had a chance to do so much research before the deadline so it's awesome to see this full-length video go so in-depth and go so much further with research than I could.
Hey can you share your report if you dont mind, i am in my final year aerospace engineering and my project is about high efficiency rocket nozzles 💯 It will help my work🙏🏿
Every technological advance has been here. Its nothing new or insightful just a fact of research, development and engineering advances. It only means that right now (maybe ever) this is the impediment.
It's probably better to compare it to the 80/20 rule. Bell nozzles are just lower on the scale and the gains of AS just don't equate to the expenditure of resources to explore when viewed through that lens.
Well It's wrong though. Tim didn't account for the fact that you need two raptors (one atmospheric, one vacuum) to match a single stage aerospike. And with the two stage raptor, you always lose the second stage vacuum engine. I think he overlooked that not insignificant fact. The aerospike comes out way ahead.
Engineering science never stays still. I'm sure when the technology makes Aerospikes more viable then they will become the defacto standard. Like 3D printing has changed the way we can now manufacture these engines like never before while bringing cost way down.
@@Kismetix And that is oversimplifying for the fact that staging has a huge advantage on rocket efficiency, and as in the Falcon 9 / BFR, has a beneficial layout for re-use.
"Huh, it's going to be difficult to summarise the aerospikes vs nozzles in a 1 minute video. Wait a second, it's a whole hour!" Serious props, this must have taken a huge amount of effort! The animations are really slick too, I always found it hard to explain the concept of how the "virtual bell" works with aerospikes
This is what You Tube was built for, the amount of work that went in to this video is mind blowing. The way everything was explained was just right. Thank you for sharing your thoughts and experiences.
I just watched the whole hour long video and it was ABSOLUTELY WORTH IT!!! You explained things so well that even though I'm a complete newbie when it comes to rocket science, I could still understand the vast majority of your content. This must have taken an immense amount of effort, and I can't wait to see what you do next. You've definitely earned my subscription!
With 28 engines on the Space-X Heavy and looking at the inward angle of the Firefly Aerospike, it looks like Space-X has accomplished the same end result which is basically to vector the thrust inward around the outside to compensate for the expansion as the ship goes up in altitude, basically what you said in the video, combine this with multiple stages and there you go!!!
I’m only 15 minutes in, but I can already tell this is your current Magnum Opus. You’re doing a fantastic job, Tim! Edit: Yep, this is the best video you’ve ever made!
Amazing job Tim!! I’ve got three degrees in Aerospace Engineering, including a PhD, so I know something about this stuff, and your video is terrific. I think your nozzle pressure section will be used in a lot of Aero classes.
I didn't get around to seeing this vid until Dec 2022, having been referred to it by a Scott Manley vid, so I wonder if you have an update in the works. After all, a lot can have happened in the 3 years or more since it was posted. I was really glad to see this, as I had only the vaguest idea of what an aerospike engine was, though I had heard of them for a long time, but hadn't gotten around to reading up on them. A couple of ideas I had while watching this, with regard to ablative cooling. 1) A solid fuel aerospike engine. It wouldn't likely be reusable anyway, so ablative cooling would be the way to go. That would be for a strap-on booster or for a ballistic missile. 2) For a reusable engine, a replaceable ablative section for the areas most susceptible to heat overload. The other thing that struck me was the similarity (superficial, at least) of an aerospike to the tail cone of a turbojet engine.
These don't work, and will never will. The static atmospheric pressure does not push the spike wall enough, and can't (that is, there is, at most, 1 bar of pressure on the wall). The reason "research" was done on these engines because the *"engineers" didn't understand basic physics.* In effect, the only nozzles and bells, in a linear aerospike, is the little nozzles at the top of the engine. The traditional rocket bell has a higher static pressure (greater than atmospheric static pressure) pushing on the inside of the bell, making the engine work (the bell works poorly at suboptimal atmospheric pressures, but still works better than an aerospike). It would have been better if the video better explained that the Static pressure both pushes "out" on the engine bell, but also pushed "up" on the engine.
Right? Thank goodness for being able to speed up the delivery. I listen at 1.75 speed for most of the stuff and then slow it down to understand the statistics etc.
I watched you go full nerd for a whole hour. You did an amazing job. I can't imagine how many nerd hours went into the making this documentary. Truly, self publishing has come of age. My hat is off to you.
I think if the benefits of an aerospike were a little more advantageous we would put more effort into development, but I feel like simplicity and proven design are ultimately more favorable than efficiency in both space and at sea-level.
I forgot to thank you for your thought provoking knowledge. You are the type that does think out of the box. The very kind of people we need in this world.
Amazing video! Can’t believe my eyes. I’ve been searching for more than a decade an easy explaination, without equation, for why nozzles even exist. Thanks so much
@@EeekiE is totally right... I ran one of the bleeps through Audacity, and it says the peak frequency is 2477 Hz... and Wikipedia says the Quindar outro tone is 2475. Good ear!
This WHOLE video I was thinking about the rotary engine as a FANTASTIC analogy and was planning to proudly type a comment and communicate this stroke of pure genius to you and the community .... however you have RUINED my day by selfishly plagiarising my idea in your conclusion! Great video mate - outstanding work.
The fact that you realized that you needed to learn more about the subject after learning a little is something a vast majority of people don’t do. I appreciate that.
It was nice he referenced the Dunning-Kruger effect, as so many are effected. Yet so few even know about dunning Kruger, let alone realize they're doing it themselves.
A documentary with time stamps professional interviews, a summary, great explaining animations, a natural view, researched numbers and data and of course Tim dodd the everyday astronaut. Thanks for this awesome film
Timestamps for mobile users: 6:20 - How Nozzles Work 16:00 - How Aerospikes Work 19:55 - The Problems With Aerospikes 32:50 - Comparing Aerospike Engines To Bell Engines 41:30 - What The Experts Say 51:35 - Future Aerospike Prospects 54:00 - Summary Also sorry about including my ignorance on mixing temperatures 😂 when I realized that a few years ago, it kind of blew my mind but I hadn’t really thought about it too much I guess. And with no formal education or even ever having taken a single physics class, I definitely lack some of those basics. But I thought it was fun to include so people can remember that it’s ok to keep learning at all times! But yes everyone, I understand it now, you can stop explaining it to me 😂
I thought Elon took such a random question really well. After talking about Starhopper and Starship for an hour, suddenly being thrown a curve ball aerospike engine question -- he was a good sport and knew his stuff.
Thanks Tim. A worthy educational hour!!! I love the comparison between the Rotary and the Piston engine. I do believe that a well engineered and reliable AeroSpike engine is just a matter of time. Given the advancements in materials science, modelling, 3D printing, some of those engineering hurdles may be able to be mitigated, if not overcome completely.
Tim, please never stop making long videos or be afraid of making them. If you had even made a 10 part series, I would binge on them in one sitting. Thanks for all the hard work you put into these videos.
I m a hawker, i was taught by my senior to add oil to over heated oil to average it temperature. So one time i forgot about my wok of oil that is heating, it turn into frame, so i did what was taught，n d fire go off. Note must be adding oil n not water, water will cause explosion!
Honestly, this is a common mistake for engineers though I don't understand why. You see it allot with hybrid technology, they'll add the power of the electric engine to that of the gas engine and say the car has 900+ horses but yeah... it dosen't work like that.
I was really curious about it before as well, and kinda figured it out myself. But my other go to rocket science channel Scott Manley mentioned it and gave an in depth explanation.
I have loved the space program since my parents made me stay up to watch Armstrong take the first step. I was 6 1/2 years old. Yet no one (not even the NASA technicians) have ever explained the combustion chamber physics to myself. Thank you so much. However now I know why when you watch the launch of one of the Apollo's Saturn V. Do you see the flames diameter. At launch it's very much approx to the size of the bell nozzle's diameter at the end of the nozzle. Yet view the Saturn V at high altitude and the flame from the nozzle is huge like the wake of a ship. Thanks
Couldn't agree more. I was actually surprised to see it was over an hour long, didn't feel anywhere near that long since I found the topic very interesting and the presentation was excellent.
My Adult Children: watch nothing but fails and car crashes on RUclips Me: Why don't watch something like this where you might actually learn something?
Dear Tim, I've been following you for a while now and I am impressed by the quality of your documentaries. This one is fantastic and provides a great insight on the aerospikes. As an aerospace engineer I can only agree with you that aerospike technology doesn't have enough TRL to be commercially viable in a short term. And even worse than that, there is no reason now for a SSTO given the engines we have and the reusability factor. Nonetheless, I am a dreamer, and we won't be able to use multistage spacecrafts when landing and taking off from other planets. So, I still can't avoid thinking that the future of rocket engines is some sort of SSTO spacecraft powered by aerospikes, or increasing the number of steerable engines so the total plume could be fully controlled by hundreds of small engines, or some sort of adjustable geometry nozzle. I feel that the aerospike concept is like the electric car at the begining of the 20th century. It was way ahead of it's time. Looking forward to see your next documentary!
Starship is of course SSTO from Mars, and since watching this vid I've been wondering about how the positioning of its vacuum optimized engines interacts with the exhaust of the center 3 sea-level engines. But with Mars having such a thin atmosphere, there's so little difference between surface-level and vacuum.
The only time you need an atmosphere-compensating nozzle rather than a bell nozzle for SSTO is if you're taking off from a body with a considerable atmosphere. And as this video shows, even Earth's atmosphere isn't thick enough to make aerospikes better for SSTOs. In other words, even in an SSTO-from-other-planets future, you'd still only need aerospikes to take off from Venus and Titan. And those bodies have other considerations that would probably outweigh the problem of "my vacuum-optimized bell nozzle doesn't work here."
I am with Oscar on this one. As Tim explained it, bigger engines are relatively easier to keep cool. If we are serious about space exploration, we should expect larger and larger rockets with each generation. So, by the time our space ships are wider than football fields, aerospikes might not look so bad... ;-)
Don Jones Most sci fi spaceships have bell nozzles, though the freighter class of the Millennium Falcon is unique for having a flat bar behind it, a possibility that some sort of aero spike is being used.
@@yehudalanger it was a switch, to stop sending telemetry while they use vox. While they were not talking, they were sending telemetry over the same frequency.
"My tone change from >Aerospikes suck> to a little more neutral stance on the subject." It means you've acquired real knowledge and engineering perspective. Good job.
I think if the benefits of an aerospike were a little more advantageous we would put more effort into development, but I feel like simplicity and proven design are ultimately more favorable than efficiency in both space and at sea-level.
It's always cool to see random youtubers who like space, who you like for completely different reasons. Did you know that @Jesus Christ is a huge space geek? It gives me such happiness.
I am interested to Space my whole life. I thought I knew a lot about this topic, but then I've seen your videos. Now I can update my library of knowledge
OH MY GOD. I drove to Florida from Houston for my honeymoon two years ago and caught the shortest glimpse of this place.had no clue where it was and for two years couldn’t figure it out. If we’d known what/where it was it would ha e been a stop. I didn’t even intentionally click on this video. I recently subscribed to this channel and I’ve been loving it yes, but my cat walked across my iPad just now and boom. There was the sight I’d seen and couldn’t locate! I didn’t think we had been in Mississippi at the time! Thank you. My cat was given treats.
Wow!! I am a science teacher interested in how rockets work, not an engineer, and I still understood all of your video. Very well done, especially getting data from actual source material and conversations with those who have achieved workable products.
This documentary had me glued to the screen start to finish. Waited months for this, and totally worth the wait. A lotta effort went into it, and it really shows. Well done. ^_^
DAMMIT TIM! this got uploaded just as i'm about to head to work! D: i'm so psyched to get home again and consume this wholesome youtube goodness. Thanks so much (in advance) for all your effort, i'm 100% confident this will be well worth the wait :D
As I'm getting to the end, I'm realizing this reminds me a lot of piston engines vs rotary engines. Rotary engines sound so cool, but they're just nowhere near where piston engines are EDIT: WOW, just as I'm getting to the end, the comparison is made!
Xephon - Look up the LiquidPiston engine. It’s the inside-out Wankel and better in every way. It is operational today and has survived multiple funding rounds through DARPA for small scale power generation. The Wankel is still used for certain Mazda cars and custom high-performance cars. When this engine is Mazda-sized it will take over.
This content is really valuable because i'm a simple man, with 0 pre knowledge in this area but still didnt skipped even 1 second of the video. It is awesome and thank you for this awesome content!
5 лет назад+453
So aerospikes are like graphene: the physicsts love it; engineerings hate it
@@michalisdiakonikolis240 to hard to produce on mass and implement. All the theoretical applications need to be tested extensively to figure if this could be a viable option for the current standards they are ment to replace.
That is just a really bad analogy. 2 stage reusable vehicles make SSTO look dumb and therefore make aerospikes look especially dumb. Meanwhile graphene is just new tech in its early days. There is no reason to think it is unusable, no matter how hard it is to work with at our current tech level. We are hitting the end of Moore's law as well. We are going to have lots of time for alternative tech to catch up if it is better.
@@w花b Trying is the keyword. Last time I heard of graphene armour was this level iv plate but they later changed it to just being a composite. Maybe that was carbon nanotubes
"If reusability offered a clear advantage, everyone would have developed them." - Pretty much everyone when SpaceX announced their plans. Though with aerospikes I think it's not so much a solution to a problem, it's a problem people want to find a solution for, because it'd be cool.
I would say that reusability had pretty clear advantages from the start, hence why it has been worked on by many parties over the course of decades. Its just that the challenges to getting there were very daunting.
@@junovzla Not really. I'd say the known advantages of reusability far exceeded the known advantages of the aerospike. It really only has one advantage, so all that effort doesn't come with much of a payoff.
There wasn’t that much rocket development going on in the near past, most development just recycles old technologies and concepts. I think for reusable rockets you really need some high tech technology, which wasn’t available in the past when there were big developments in rockets. So now spacex came along and decided that they want to do something completely new and from scratch and realized that all the technology was there, they just had to do it.
Not really. Reusability has also been pursued since the '60s, starting with the Gemini wing that Amy from Vintage Space loves so much she has it tattooed on her arm. Then there was the Space Shuttle Program, the entire sales pitch of which was based on reusability, even though now that we can calculate the cost with hindsight, refurbishing the SRB's was more expensive than just buying new ones and the fact that the shuttles themselves needed to be largely taken apart between launches drove up costs as well. Propulsive landing, that was what everyone said would be impossible, and SpaceX was mocked open season style, right up until they pulled it off. For now, we're not even close to getting maximum efficiency with bell nozzles, which are far simpler to develop and work out their teething problems. SpaceX has only just cracked the holy grail of those, the full flow staged combustion cycle, and it has yet to fly beyond test vehicles. And because those are far from done evolving, there is just a lot more to be gained for a lot less expense by investing in bell nozzles. Maybe when there are no more places to improve those, and aerospikes are still more efficient on paper, then we can look again.
I just jacked into the Matrix for an hour and learned a whole new subject matter. Your extended technical videos are a boon to space education, and humanity. TY!
Super awesome video! I wanted to know about aerospikes and found this video. 1 hour later all my questions were answered; I cannot ask for a more efficient way to convey information. Thank you!
Wow! Basically a full feature length documentary all for free thanks to everyday astronaut! Super informative and we really enjoyed this video! Definitely have us some food for thought ;)
Thanks for the video.. well done.. FYI, I have researched such altitude-compensating nozzles over the decades with various partners/teams, and one of the most serious problematic aspects we kept running into was the aerodynamic interaction between exhaust flow and slipstream. There are very unstable and unpredictable side forces that can easily arise, especially when flying through jet streams, where angle of attack can suddenly increase, and fluctuate. Thrust Vector Control systems are very difficult to incorporate into such nozzle designs in general, but the magnitude of these suddenly shifting side forces are greatly amplified with aerospike-type nozzles, and were ultimately too great of a development risk for commercial LV programs. Keep on doing what you do! ;)
as an aerospace engineering student, i was looking for an explanation of how aerospikes work (my professor wasn't exactly dismissive of them, but he didn't spend nearly as much time explaining how they work as he did with bell nozzles). this is so much more than i could have asked for! hopefully in the future we will have advanced enough in terms of materials and production technologies that the aerospike will actually become a viable, advantageous option. they seem so cool!
@Will Swift if its a vertical rocket, because an SSTO is literally impossible unless its a tiny package like the mercury capsule (and even the Atlas booster dropped engines), or if it's a spaceplane, they are currently completely unworkable For instance, the closest model we have, Skylon, will use air-breathing and oxidiser fueled engines rather than aerospace because, like vertical rockets, it is simply far too heavy to build a practice model, it would be way more expensive than the Shuttle per kilo into orbit, and at that point you may as well just use the current Falcon 9 launches They're cool to think about, but the heating issues far outweigh the ease of developing a normal rocket bell, unless you want to spend almost half a century developing your spacecraft like Skylon, the X-37 and every other launcher that uses highly unusual engines
I'll see your "LOL" and raise you a "LMAO". Because that was totally my plan. "What's an aerospike? I'll watch enough to see what he's talking about and move on". "Sombitch, that was really cool. Hey, look at the time..."
If Aerospikes are the Rotary Engine of the rocket world, I seriously cannot wait to see the birth of the Electric one => Absolute perfection =O Just imagine a ioniq propulsion device as powerfull as a Raptor engine, and powered by a nuclear fusion reactor *MINDBLOW*. Would love to see this =)
Tim, awesome video and research! One small technical detail in the spirit of accuracy: When the nozzle in not truncated is called only spike nozzle (which would be very heavy and offset any benefits...), it is only when the nozzle is truncated that is called AEROspike, because now the air, or more precisely; the combustion gases take over the job of the now non-existent final portion of the solid spike.
Amazing video! i watch the whole 1 hour, subscribed, excellent work, i can't imagine how many hours it took, but it worth it, most of my questions and doubts about this engine has been answered, thank you.
I had this video postponed for more than a week. Very good subject explanation, multiple sources, interviews, a lot of great work was put in this. Worth every second, keep up the great work!
@@pfisherking Ooooh... now _there_ is an interesting problem. The 1.45x atmo. pressure might not be enough to push the economics over to favor aerospike, especially since titan has gravity low enough you could just wack a rock into space with a baseball bat. If it weren't for the ~200km worth of that thick atmosphere you would have to hit that rock through. The thickness, combined with surface pressure, and therefore the wide variance between surface pressure and vacuum, just might make the aerospace a more efficient design for Titan
But you still need two raptors - one atmospheric and one vacuum - to match a single aerospike SSTO. Tim should have divided the effective TWR of the raptor by 2 to get a straight across performance comparison. And you always lose the second stage vacuum raptor, it is not recoverable. I think Tim missed all that rather important aspect of the economics of the comparison.
I like how he totally downplayed the fact he gets to talk to ELON MUSK in this. "Oh yeah I get to talk to some people about Aerospike Engines" while playing a clip of him chatting with one of the richest and most powerful non-politician men in the world.
This is why Tim is taken seriously by professionals and executives, why he gets access. No hidden agenda, no stunts, no games, not a "media personality" or "influencer". Tim is NOT just trying to advance his own career through interviews. Tim is trying to explain, to broaden understanding, to make the world a better place, to make a better future.
@@GeorgeDolbier "not a "media personality" or "influencer"" You realize being a youtuber with a following makes you exactly that right? You can say he's humble and a great dude, which is true and awesome, but to say he's not an influencer or media personality is just incorrect. By definition of being a youtuber, unless you literally have no following, makes you an 'influencer', I.E. someone with a following who can get their word out to a large number of people. Media personality is a little harder to define, but dude puts up quality videos and in my eyes that involves having a media personality--he's comfortable talking to 100,000s of people through his videos, and does it in a professional manner. I do hope you're not mixing that with arrogant jackasses, major difference in having a media personalty--being able to be professional through media such as youtube--and your typical jackass 'Jake Paul' types--those are not 'media personalities' in my eyes. Don't get it twisted, I agree with you on him having access to such opportunities due to his professionalism and not pushing some personal agenda, through his quality work. I am just disagreeing with saying "he's not a "media personality" or "influencer"", just cause thats part of being a youtuber with a large number of subs--a following--is.
I'm impressed with your research and your presentation. You did a great job of explaining a complex subject. I used to think you were just a gushing and enthusiastic young space fan building a neat tv truck, but I now see you are a lot more mature, talented and hardworking than I thought. Congratulations and keep up the good work. A subscriber.
Amazing! Simply just absolutely wonderful video! This extremely well thought-through video essay was within perfection in every single second! I absolutely loved it and could even explain the whole functionality of an aerospike to my dad, who has never heard of this concept before. Thank you again for this unbelievable work!!!
actually grabbed my notepad, if this video is as good as you have hyped it for then i am a loyal sub. This feels like the history channel from 2005, god i miss those days...
have you ever heard of absolute history? it is awesome. i especially recommend anything with Ruth. she seems to have fun with yet understand whatever she is doing. i swear she has a time machine.
Whew, what a nerd trip. This has been in my recommendations for months, and it's a shame it took me so long to actually watch it. I had no idea even what an aerospike was this morning, and now after two Curious Droid vids and this, I feel I've acquired at least an elementary grasp on the concept. This was a brilliant deep dive into a concept that you/this guy clearly has biases on, but is presented in such a perfectly unbiased manner that I had to post a comment. Well done. ALSO, let me just say the rotary comparison is so apt. Between it's obscurity and it's "cool" factor I'm drawn to the rotary engine, and that perfectly sums up my sudden interest in aerospikes (though let me point out that the fewer moving parts in a rotary mean they can actually have better reliability than piston engines, just shorter lifespans and *much* worse economy). Something your video made me consider, though, is whether I would still love rotaries (and by extension, aerospikes) as much if they were widely adopted and developed to a point where they are a viable alternative. Or would the magic be lost without their obscurity? At the very least, even if aerospikes aren't helping humankind populate the stars, they are at least creating a small niche for curious people to nerd out about some really cool concepts. Thanks for the great video Everyday Astronaut! And thank you to you, the person who stuck around to read this unnecessarily long comment :D
Wow, mine just exploded. Never heard of an aerospike. More knowledge in an hour Ive ever learned. I'm just a enthusiast but enjoy listening to the technology.
Journalists on TV: 20 minutes documentary, earn a living. Everyday Astronaut: I’ll donit for fun. No production team. No-one. Just me. Free. For fun. Donate ;)
"this is a really long video"
Don´t be so modest Tim.
This is not a video. This is a high quality documentary.
Probably best on this topic.........
How is it that one person with a camera and some video editing/animation software can make better produced & more intelligent science documentaries than multi-billion dollar media corporations?
@@tewrgh TWO WORDS: Dedication and PASSION
@@tewrgh Probably by spending hours and hours on research and scripting and being genuinely curious on the subject.
Hello, my brazilian friend!
Genuinely one of the best 1 hour 'documentaries' I've seen. Those on TV are always dumbed down, hyperbole, unbalanced, or full of filler B-roll. This video was packed full of well-researched facts, videos, interviews with leaders in the industry. Thanks for making this and sharing it for free with the world.
I wanted to leave a comment like this, but I'll just compliment you on yours. These type of things are in my experience frustrating to look at on TV, much better to have the teachers (sort of) approach as Tim has.
I'm waiting on someone to rip this off..
This!!!
Agree Tim Dodd has one of the best channels about the space biz aimed at laymen but not dumbed down to a 6th grade level like most TV documentaries.
@@ddhsd Amen! And I think that is his RUclips super power: He is a smart dude who came at this from a place of nearly complete ignorance. In learning it so well from a layman's perspective, he is able to explain it to us (generally smart but ignorant folks) in exactly the ways that make sense. This is why it is better to learn basic or intermediate science from a real teacher than from the hardest core scientist (who inarguably knows it better than the teacher - but teaching is the relevant skill).
This is what journalism should always be like. My understanding is that the Everyday Astronaut is not an engineer of any sort, yet he has presented this issue more clearly than anyone else. I had been reluctant to watch this, assuming that it would be filled with mistakes and lacking in analysis, but I'm happy to see that I'm wrong. Good job, and thank you.
@Santina Murphy Do you have a website or link to those I wanna read up on them!
@@DestaniKitchen did he reply? I'd like to read up on that as well.
Yes, the everday astronaut represents the best of the new media which will eventually replace the traditional news and entertainment outlets. I am a gen x person, so I have seen everything from radio to podcasts to this.
Ya, Tim is actually a professional photographer.
Well said! This is incredibly well done
The comparison of the arrow spike engine to the rotary engine at the end of this video was brilliant
Everyday Astronaut has truly outdone himself on the aerospike video. What an amazingly researched video. Simulations from Stanford, restored footage from Aerojet Rocketdyne, great animations, reading through NASA's decades old documents & reviews from Elon Musk, Tory Bruno and Peter Beck.
And without anyone else helping him. Like editing, researching and writing. All on his own. Or am I wrong?
@@holyravioli5564 he mentioned people from his patreon discord channel helping him sift through documents
I learned so much, and I will probably retain less than half of it--this is definitely one I'd need to rewatch a couple times to understand fully... Edit- maybe half of half, if that
Yes! So impressive he got personal comments from the CEOs of three rocket companies. More impressive is the knowledge he taught himself. And best, he processed and re-presented it so we get it all in just 1 hour. Incredible, Tim!
@@donjones4719 these comments are actually from interviews. I highly suggest that you check it out
Truly surpassed the title of “RUclips video” this is a documentary
A doc i have been waiting for years for. i believe in the arospike we just need a reason to have an SSTO like the X33 to be worth making. if we expand the amount of orbiting stations then they would be in use
Lol, yeah this title doesn't do this video justice :p
Yes you got it there. As good as any TV doco
@@bryce4724
I don't think pure rocket SSTOs make much sense, the margins are just so tight. I do think air-breathing SSTOs are a little more promising, with a payload : gross mass fraction of 4.6% for the Skylon concept, compared to 2% for VentureStar and 4.2% for the Falcon 9. So there does appear to be a noticeable advantage there, as long as the SABRE engine meets it's design requirements it could be quite competitive. Of course, if we're talking more far future tech, say 100 years from now, where we could have metallic hydrogen engines or something similar in Isp, SSTO starts to look very attractive. But right now, fully reusable multi stage rockets look a little more feasible.
@@jeffvader811 Yes but SABRE and Skylon have been in development since the 90's and before that there was HOTOL in the 80's and reaction engines has more or less postponed Skylon in favor of SABRE powered hypersonic airliners. So great concept but while they where looking for money to develop SABRE, SpaceX and all that happened. So now Skylon isn't very attractive anymore. And certainly it's not gonna look any better next to Starship. I know we all want the scifi spaceship that can park in front of your house and go all the way to orbit, but it's just that. A cool sci fi concept. We shouldn't force reality to conform to what we want just because its cool. SSTO will never be great on earth. Sure someday, there'll be fusion powered SSTO and all that but not today. And also consider safety. If Skylon looses one of those super complex SABRE engines, say a bird flies into the heat exchanger at Mach 4, you're dead. Loss of thrust on either side at hypersonic velocity will destabilize Skylon and it'll break apart. So great for cargo but even Starship makes Skylon's possible abort modes look dangerous.
That entire hour was extremely watchable and quite enjoyable -- like a well produced TV show. Very well done.
Definitely. I should be shown on more than just RUclips.
I agree for the most part. Really interesting and well-made video. I have so much appreciation for all the work he puts into these - I wouldn't be diving this deep into rocket science if it wasn't for these. The only segment I didn't like was the reading of some of the numbers on the comparison sheet at 36:00 - I prefer it when the numbers are kept at display while the presenter explains the context/meaning of them. I had to pause the video and try to make sense of it myself instead. I'm sorry to admit that I wouldn't have had the patience to do that if it happened many times throughout the video.
I'm pretty confident, he's got better Experts than well produced TV show could get :D
I really love this video, I did a 10-page report for one of my engineering classes discussing aerospike rocket motors. I only had a chance to do so much research before the deadline so it's awesome to see this full-length video go so in-depth and go so much further with research than I could.
Hey can you share your report if you dont mind, i am in my final year aerospace engineering and my project is about high efficiency rocket nozzles 💯
It will help my work🙏🏿
Peter Beck summarized it perfectly: the advantages that the physics promise are lost due to engineering problems.
Magnificent video!
Every technological advance has been here. Its nothing new or insightful just a fact of research, development and engineering advances. It only means that right now (maybe ever) this is the impediment.
It's probably better to compare it to the 80/20 rule. Bell nozzles are just lower on the scale and the gains of AS just don't equate to the expenditure of resources to explore when viewed through that lens.
Well It's wrong though. Tim didn't account for the fact that you need two raptors (one atmospheric, one vacuum) to match a single stage aerospike. And with the two stage raptor, you always lose the second stage vacuum engine. I think he overlooked that not insignificant fact. The aerospike comes out way ahead.
Engineering science never stays still. I'm sure when the technology makes Aerospikes more viable then they will become the defacto standard. Like 3D printing has changed the way we can now manufacture these engines like never before while bringing cost way down.
@@Kismetix And that is oversimplifying for the fact that staging has a huge advantage on rocket efficiency, and as in the Falcon 9 / BFR, has a beneficial layout for re-use.
"Huh, it's going to be difficult to summarise the aerospikes vs nozzles in a 1 minute video. Wait a second, it's a whole hour!"
Serious props, this must have taken a huge amount of effort! The animations are really slick too, I always found it hard to explain the concept of how the "virtual bell" works with aerospikes
Hi matt
BOTH OF MY FAVORITE RUclipsRS ARE HERE!
cmon tim, heart this comment
hi matt your space shuttle video was cool
Matt just a regular viewer
hell yea
This is what You Tube was built for, the amount of work that went in to this video is mind blowing. The way everything was explained was just right. Thank you for sharing your thoughts and experiences.
RUclips was invented to make a few computer geeks rich. Don't fool yourself.
Normaly i get angry when youtuber put more then 4 advertising in one video, but if a so good youtuber like him does that i dont care
I just watched the whole hour long video and it was ABSOLUTELY WORTH IT!!! You explained things so well that even though I'm a complete newbie when it comes to rocket science, I could still understand the vast majority of your content. This must have taken an immense amount of effort, and I can't wait to see what you do next. You've definitely earned my subscription!
It's a historical documentary, not just a video.
It'll be used as a video learning material for future generation. It has all the info from 1950s to 2019...
This will probably be shown to highschoolers on Mars 150 years from now
we should award a "no-bell prize" for the first company to get one to orbit.
You're a genius
@@wherethewildthingsarenot more like he can copy and paste text
And not collapse from the Aerospike curse in the mean time
Ehre
With 28 engines on the Space-X Heavy and looking at the inward angle of the Firefly Aerospike, it looks like Space-X has accomplished the same end result which is basically to vector the thrust inward around the outside to compensate for the expansion as the ship goes up in altitude, basically what you said in the video, combine this with multiple stages and there you go!!!
FINALLLLLLYYY!!!!!!
Everyday Atronaut, you are the best
Well
well
well
well done
I’m only 15 minutes in, but I can already tell this is your current Magnum Opus. You’re doing a fantastic job, Tim!
Edit: Yep, this is the best video you’ve ever made!
Amazing job Tim!! I’ve got three degrees in Aerospace Engineering, including a PhD, so I know something about this stuff, and your video is terrific. I think your nozzle pressure section will be used in a lot of Aero classes.
I completely agree! That section can be broken down neatly for classroom discussion. Masterful storytelling
Keep doing amazing things with your education!
I didn't get around to seeing this vid until Dec 2022, having been referred to it by a Scott Manley vid, so I wonder if you have an update in the works. After all, a lot can have happened in the 3 years or more since it was posted. I was really glad to see this, as I had only the vaguest idea of what an aerospike engine was, though I had heard of them for a long time, but hadn't gotten around to reading up on them.
A couple of ideas I had while watching this, with regard to ablative cooling. 1) A solid fuel aerospike engine. It wouldn't likely be reusable anyway, so ablative cooling would be the way to go. That would be for a strap-on booster or for a ballistic missile. 2) For a reusable engine, a replaceable ablative section for the areas most susceptible to heat overload.
The other thing that struck me was the similarity (superficial, at least) of an aerospike to the tail cone of a turbojet engine.
These don't work, and will never will.
The static atmospheric pressure does not push the spike wall enough, and can't (that is, there is, at most, 1 bar of pressure on the wall). The reason "research" was done on these engines because the *"engineers" didn't understand basic physics.* In effect, the only nozzles and bells, in a linear aerospike, is the little nozzles at the top of the engine.
The traditional rocket bell has a higher static pressure (greater than atmospheric static pressure) pushing on the inside of the bell, making the engine work (the bell works poorly at suboptimal atmospheric pressures, but still works better than an aerospike).
It would have been better if the video better explained that the Static pressure both pushes "out" on the engine bell, but also pushed "up" on the engine.
Me: "I need to chill for an hour"
Everyday Astronaut: "I got you covered"
I need to chill for 45 minutes. Adjusting video speed to match my needs. Modern life rules!
601
When I see videos this long I always think man I’m never gonna get through this. Then it ends and I want more. Life
Right? Thank goodness for being able to speed up the delivery. I listen at 1.75 speed for most of the stuff and then slow it down to understand the statistics etc.
I watched you go full nerd for a whole hour. You did an amazing job. I can't imagine how many nerd hours went into the making this documentary. Truly, self publishing has come of age. My hat is off to you.
I think if the benefits of an aerospike were a little more advantageous we would put more effort into development, but I feel like simplicity and proven design are ultimately more favorable than efficiency in both space and at sea-level.
"this is a really long video"
Don´t be so modest Tim.
This is not a video. This is a high quality documentary.
I forgot to thank you for your thought provoking knowledge. You are the type that does think out of the box. The very kind of people we need in this world.
One hour long
The absolute madman
perfect full-length documentary.
Main argument for aerospike: they’re so cool
Main argument against aerospike: they’re too hot
Jumalauta, sinne meni tunti, kun tämän kommentin lukeminen olisi riittänyt.
Cool > hot
I like my engines like I like my women, cool and hot
And heavy😂
@@Czeckie hahaha yup
Tim Dodd. Started as an RUclipsr.
Became a famous interviewer
Became an awesome documentary producer.
What's next? Mars colonist?
He will most likely engineer the next level of rockets himself .... then visit Mars.
Tim develops a true friendship with Elon over time and Elon will let him board the Starship one day for free probably.
No, He started as a Photographer who bought a russian space suit on a whim.
@@hirvielain9013 And I think Tim would kindly decline the offer. :)
I saw him quoted in a mainstream article as "an industry expert," which is what he is now.
Amazing video! Can’t believe my eyes. I’ve been searching for more than a decade an easy explaination, without equation, for why nozzles even exist.
Thanks so much
So 'when its done' finally arrives.
He does not follows SLS timelines.
@@rogeriopenna9014 I am okay with him following any timeline as long as he releases all his videos at when its done. :)
I somehow just realized that when he censored Peter Beck saying "a**", he used a beep from Sputnik. Well played Tim, well played.
Sounds more like the outro Quindar tone as used by NASA to me
Oh and I think he was actually saying a*** 😁
@@EeekiE yeah I agree with you it is Quindar
Looks like I'm late to the party. I haven't bothered to run it through frequency analysis, but yeah, they sound like Quindar tones to me as well.
@@EeekiE is totally right... I ran one of the bleeps through Audacity, and it says the peak frequency is 2477 Hz... and Wikipedia says the Quindar outro tone is 2475. Good ear!
This WHOLE video I was thinking about the rotary engine as a FANTASTIC analogy and was planning to proudly type a comment and communicate this stroke of pure genius to you and the community .... however you have RUINED my day by selfishly plagiarising my idea in your conclusion!
Great video mate - outstanding work.
Came here by accident, stying for the love of sapce. Great video!
I know you have to put ads, so thank you for putting them in the transitions where they don't interrupt the watching experience.
The fact that you realized that you needed to learn more about the subject after learning a little is something a vast majority of people don’t do. I appreciate that.
Amen.
It's called intelligence.
The Dunning-Kruger effect
It was nice he referenced the Dunning-Kruger effect, as so many are effected. Yet so few even know about dunning Kruger, let alone realize they're doing it themselves.
A documentary with time stamps professional interviews, a summary, great explaining animations, a natural view, researched numbers and data and of course Tim dodd the everyday astronaut.
Thanks for this awesome film
Man you're so good at explaining, you could go straight to university and teach a basic physics course. Mad respect!
Timestamps for mobile users:
6:20 - How Nozzles Work
16:00 - How Aerospikes Work
19:55 - The Problems With Aerospikes
32:50 - Comparing Aerospike Engines To Bell Engines
41:30 - What The Experts Say
51:35 - Future Aerospike Prospects
54:00 - Summary
Also sorry about including my ignorance on mixing temperatures 😂 when I realized that a few years ago, it kind of blew my mind but I hadn’t really thought about it too much I guess. And with no formal education or even ever having taken a single physics class, I definitely lack some of those basics. But I thought it was fun to include so people can remember that it’s ok to keep learning at all times! But yes everyone, I understand it now, you can stop explaining it to me 😂
Can you pin this?
Ive already watched multiple times, and its great
*_...not the reason my 'thumb' is feeling historically light but advan-tech heavy..._*
Amazing video
Great video - perhaps could be even better if you maybe found a better way to present all those numbers in your comparison. TL:DR Learn to graph!
Great work on this 👍
That didn't seem long at all, I was really surprised an hour went by.
same man, thats when you know this documentary is amazingly made
I like how when I watched the unedited Elon Musk interview I didn't understand what he was saying and now I do.
I thought Elon took such a random question really well. After talking about Starhopper and Starship for an hour, suddenly being thrown a curve ball aerospike engine question -- he was a good sport and knew his stuff.
Thanks Tim. A worthy educational hour!!! I love the comparison between the Rotary and the Piston engine. I do believe that a well engineered and reliable AeroSpike engine is just a matter of time. Given the advancements in materials science, modelling, 3D printing, some of those engineering hurdles may be able to be mitigated, if not overcome completely.
Tim, please never stop making long videos or be afraid of making them. If you had even made a 10 part series, I would binge on them in one sitting. Thanks for all the hard work you put into these videos.
22:27: I thought this is pretty intuitive. If I mix a glass of hot water and cold water together, I get warm water. I don't get even hotter water.
Hell yeah
It's like he's never used a hot/cold faucet on a sink.
I m a hawker, i was taught by my senior to add oil to over heated oil to average it temperature. So one time i forgot about my wok of oil that is heating, it turn into frame, so i did what was taught，n d fire go off. Note must be adding oil n not water, water will cause explosion!
Honestly, this is a common mistake for engineers though I don't understand why. You see it allot with hybrid technology, they'll add the power of the electric engine to that of the gas engine and say the car has 900+ horses but yeah... it dosen't work like that.
Ayyyy, Nerd "Culture" in a nutshell. "That's the power of math people!"
Him using quindar tones to beep out Peter Beck swearing is such a lovely detail! :D
48:04 God I love his smurk as he answers "Oh there is stuff you can do! :)"
the part with the: "mach diamonds are a side effect of..." was really new and interesting to me
There's a great Scott Manley video which explains this in detail.
I am surprised that I haven't seen it yet :D but maybe i just cant remember
@@janos71 Look for the afterburn bloom from a SR-71 Blackbird, it also has the shock diamonds
I was really curious about it before as well, and kinda figured it out myself. But my other go to rocket science channel Scott Manley mentioned it and gave an in depth explanation.
Tim, your work here is extraordinary. I can't believe how well-researched this video is. And it's incredibly well-presented.
Well done.
I have loved the space program since my parents made me stay up to watch Armstrong take the first step. I was 6 1/2 years old. Yet no one (not even the NASA technicians) have ever explained the combustion chamber physics to myself. Thank you so much. However now I know why when you watch the launch of one of the Apollo's Saturn V. Do you see the flames diameter. At launch it's very much approx to the size of the bell nozzle's diameter at the end of the nozzle. Yet view the Saturn V at high altitude and the flame from the nozzle is huge like the wake of a ship. Thanks
Before watching: jeez this is loooooooong After watching: that’s it? How can it end so fast?
@@robhobsweden It seems wrong that it is gravity but it seems like it really is gravity
I've been reluctant to watch it since it's so long but yeah, it went fast.
Nearly a year later, I’ve just watched it again. Still cool and I still want to know if an alumina spike would cope with the temperature.
Very deep here... I've had to watch this twice, and some sections a third time to make sure "I get it"... very well done Sir!
I've watched shorter videos than this that were a lot longer...
Couldn't agree more. I was actually surprised to see it was over an hour long, didn't feel anywhere near that long since I found the topic very interesting and the presentation was excellent.
Same mate
This is going to be my standard go to comment on everything I watch from now on
My Adult Children: watch nothing but fails and car crashes on RUclips
Me: Why don't watch something like this where you might actually learn something?
Like vsauce hole vid
Dear Tim, I've been following you for a while now and I am impressed by the quality of your documentaries. This one is fantastic and provides a great insight on the aerospikes. As an aerospace engineer I can only agree with you that aerospike technology doesn't have enough TRL to be commercially viable in a short term. And even worse than that, there is no reason now for a SSTO given the engines we have and the reusability factor. Nonetheless, I am a dreamer, and we won't be able to use multistage spacecrafts when landing and taking off from other planets. So, I still can't avoid thinking that the future of rocket engines is some sort of SSTO spacecraft powered by aerospikes, or increasing the number of steerable engines so the total plume could be fully controlled by hundreds of small engines, or some sort of adjustable geometry nozzle. I feel that the aerospike concept is like the electric car at the begining of the 20th century. It was way ahead of it's time. Looking forward to see your next documentary!
Starship is of course SSTO from Mars, and since watching this vid I've been wondering about how the positioning of its vacuum optimized engines interacts with the exhaust of the center 3 sea-level engines. But with Mars having such a thin atmosphere, there's so little difference between surface-level and vacuum.
The only time you need an atmosphere-compensating nozzle rather than a bell nozzle for SSTO is if you're taking off from a body with a considerable atmosphere. And as this video shows, even Earth's atmosphere isn't thick enough to make aerospikes better for SSTOs. In other words, even in an SSTO-from-other-planets future, you'd still only need aerospikes to take off from Venus and Titan. And those bodies have other considerations that would probably outweigh the problem of "my vacuum-optimized bell nozzle doesn't work here."
I am with Oscar on this one. As Tim explained it, bigger engines are relatively easier to keep cool. If we are serious about space exploration, we should expect larger and larger rockets with each generation. So, by the time our space ships are wider than football fields, aerospikes might not look so bad... ;-)
@@qm_rev Do those enormous ships in Star Wars have engine bells or aerospikes?
Don Jones
Most sci fi spaceships have bell nozzles, though the freighter class of the Millennium Falcon is unique for having a flat bar behind it, a possibility that some sort of aero spike is being used.
RUclips: we're optimizing for watchtime
Tim: Hold my beer
Gavin Remme it should be "hold my areospike"
*hold my rocket fuel
@@maus9777 hold my methanol
I like when Peter is swearing you use the old fashioned telemetry 'beep'
to censor him! The ultimate nerd censor beep! (quindar tones)
Yes. Although I think that's the talk tone of apollo
@@yehudalanger it was a switch, to stop sending telemetry while they use vox. While they were not talking, they were sending telemetry over the same frequency.
Excellent deep dive. Tim’s superpower is getting people to talk in more technical detail than they intended. Keep it up!
"It's never too late to start learning thermodynamics." 22:nn
that...was a strange statement to put in an hourlong vid about rocket engine designs...
46:00 I love how you bleeped him out with a quindar tone.
I like how sometimes it bleeped but we still heard everything
Yeah that was a really nice touch. I chuckled.
I read this comment right after the first bleep lmao
Even after 4 years this is one of the most amazing video about space engine available on YT.
I realized how good this video is when on the bit with the Elon Musk interview I understood what he (and you) were saying. Awesome work!
"My tone change from >Aerospikes suck> to a little more neutral stance on the subject."
It means you've acquired real knowledge and engineering perspective. Good job.
I think if the benefits of an aerospike were a little more advantageous we would put more effort into development, but I feel like simplicity and proven design are ultimately more favorable than efficiency in both space and at sea-level.
Black Gryph0n The impression legend himself is watching everyday astronaut. Cool.
Space geek too? Cool.
Especially for space x that use proven designs...
It's always cool to see random youtubers who like space, who you like for completely different reasons. Did you know that @Jesus Christ is a huge space geek? It gives me such happiness.
@@burper-oe6tm Praise da Loard!
I am interested to Space my whole life. I thought I knew a lot about this topic, but then I've seen your videos.
Now I can update my library of knowledge
OH MY GOD. I drove to Florida from Houston for my honeymoon two years ago and caught the shortest glimpse of this place.had no clue where it was and for two years couldn’t figure it out. If we’d known what/where it was it would ha e been a stop. I didn’t even intentionally click on this video. I recently subscribed to this channel and I’ve been loving it yes, but my cat walked across my iPad just now and boom. There was the sight I’d seen and couldn’t locate! I didn’t think we had been in Mississippi at the time! Thank you. My cat was given treats.
Cool
Your cat helped
Finally, the masterpiece is ready!!
I hope you get this on Netflix as a full length documentary!
YEEEEEES
Thank you for your putting an insane amount of time and effort for the sake of the publics's understanding of areospike engines!
Wow!! I am a science teacher interested in how rockets work, not an engineer, and I still understood all of your video. Very well done, especially getting data from actual source material and conversations with those who have achieved workable products.
This documentary had me glued to the screen start to finish.
Waited months for this, and totally worth the wait. A lotta effort went into it, and it really shows.
Well done. ^_^
DAMMIT TIM! this got uploaded just as i'm about to head to work! D: i'm so psyched to get home again and consume this wholesome youtube goodness.
Thanks so much (in advance) for all your effort, i'm 100% confident this will be well worth the wait :D
As I'm getting to the end, I'm realizing this reminds me a lot of piston engines vs rotary engines. Rotary engines sound so cool, but they're just nowhere near where piston engines are
EDIT: WOW, just as I'm getting to the end, the comparison is made!
YESSSSSS!!!!! Great minds think alike! That’s so funny!
As a two time RX-8 owner I can appreciate the comparison. To hell with the MPG, enjoy the fun.
" Rotary engines sound so cool, but they're just nowhere near where piston engines are" 787B wants a word with you
@@davidruck7111 smiles per galon
Xephon - Look up the LiquidPiston engine. It’s the inside-out Wankel and better in every way. It is operational today and has survived multiple funding rounds through DARPA for small scale power generation. The Wankel is still used for certain Mazda cars and custom high-performance cars. When this engine is Mazda-sized it will take over.
This content is really valuable because i'm a simple man, with 0 pre knowledge in this area but still didnt skipped even 1 second of the video. It is awesome and thank you for this awesome content!
So aerospikes are like graphene: the physicsts love it; engineerings hate it
Why do engineers hate graphene?
@@michalisdiakonikolis240 to hard to produce on mass and implement. All the theoretical applications need to be tested extensively to figure if this could be a viable option for the current standards they are ment to replace.
That is just a really bad analogy. 2 stage reusable vehicles make SSTO look dumb and therefore make aerospikes look especially dumb.
Meanwhile graphene is just new tech in its early days. There is no reason to think it is unusable, no matter how hard it is to work with at our current tech level. We are hitting the end of Moore's law as well. We are going to have lots of time for alternative tech to catch up if it is better.
@@w花b Trying is the keyword. Last time I heard of graphene armour was this level iv plate but they later changed it to just being a composite. Maybe that was carbon nanotubes
engineerings lmao
"If reusability offered a clear advantage, everyone would have developed them." - Pretty much everyone when SpaceX announced their plans.
Though with aerospikes I think it's not so much a solution to a problem, it's a problem people want to find a solution for, because it'd be cool.
I would say that reusability had pretty clear advantages from the start, hence why it has been worked on by many parties over the course of decades. Its just that the challenges to getting there were very daunting.
@@ShaunRF more or less the same thing happens with aerospikes
@@junovzla Not really. I'd say the known advantages of reusability far exceeded the known advantages of the aerospike. It really only has one advantage, so all that effort doesn't come with much of a payoff.
There wasn’t that much rocket development going on in the near past, most development just recycles old technologies and concepts. I think for reusable rockets you really need some high tech technology, which wasn’t available in the past when there were big developments in rockets. So now spacex came along and decided that they want to do something completely new and from scratch and realized that all the technology was there, they just had to do it.
Not really. Reusability has also been pursued since the '60s, starting with the Gemini wing that Amy from Vintage Space loves so much she has it tattooed on her arm. Then there was the Space Shuttle Program, the entire sales pitch of which was based on reusability, even though now that we can calculate the cost with hindsight, refurbishing the SRB's was more expensive than just buying new ones and the fact that the shuttles themselves needed to be largely taken apart between launches drove up costs as well. Propulsive landing, that was what everyone said would be impossible, and SpaceX was mocked open season style, right up until they pulled it off.
For now, we're not even close to getting maximum efficiency with bell nozzles, which are far simpler to develop and work out their teething problems. SpaceX has only just cracked the holy grail of those, the full flow staged combustion cycle, and it has yet to fly beyond test vehicles. And because those are far from done evolving, there is just a lot more to be gained for a lot less expense by investing in bell nozzles. Maybe when there are no more places to improve those, and aerospikes are still more efficient on paper, then we can look again.
I just jacked into the Matrix for an hour and learned a whole new subject matter. Your extended technical videos are a boon to space education, and humanity. TY!
Super awesome video! I wanted to know about aerospikes and found this video. 1 hour later all my questions were answered; I cannot ask for a more efficient way to convey information. Thank you!
Wow! Basically a full feature length documentary all for free thanks to everyday astronaut!
Super informative and we really enjoyed this video! Definitely have us some food for thought ;)
I'm 14 minutes in and this is the most I've ever learned about anything in that time frame. Thanks Tim!
Thanks for the video.. well done.. FYI, I have researched such altitude-compensating nozzles over the decades with various partners/teams, and one of the most serious problematic aspects we kept running into was the aerodynamic interaction between exhaust flow and slipstream. There are very unstable and unpredictable side forces that can easily arise, especially when flying through jet streams, where angle of attack can suddenly increase, and fluctuate. Thrust Vector Control systems are very difficult to incorporate into such nozzle designs in general, but the magnitude of these suddenly shifting side forces are greatly amplified with aerospike-type nozzles, and were ultimately too great of a development risk for commercial LV programs. Keep on doing what you do! ;)
as an aerospace engineering student, i was looking for an explanation of how aerospikes work (my professor wasn't exactly dismissive of them, but he didn't spend nearly as much time explaining how they work as he did with bell nozzles). this is so much more than i could have asked for! hopefully in the future we will have advanced enough in terms of materials and production technologies that the aerospike will actually become a viable, advantageous option. they seem so cool!
16 minutes in and you're already teaching me rocket science and all of it makes sense. 🤯
TLDW: Because we have stages, we don't need a jack of all trades engine, when we can have a master of sealevel and a master of space engine
@Will Swift if its a vertical rocket, because an SSTO is literally impossible unless its a tiny package like the mercury capsule (and even the Atlas booster dropped engines), or if it's a spaceplane, they are currently completely unworkable
For instance, the closest model we have, Skylon, will use air-breathing and oxidiser fueled engines rather than aerospace because, like vertical rockets, it is simply far too heavy to build a practice model, it would be way more expensive than the Shuttle per kilo into orbit, and at that point you may as well just use the current Falcon 9 launches
They're cool to think about, but the heating issues far outweigh the ease of developing a normal rocket bell, unless you want to spend almost half a century developing your spacecraft like Skylon, the X-37 and every other launcher that uses highly unusual engines
@@lewisyeadon4046 the top section of starship (no bottom booster) is a SSTO, it is capable of getting to orbit.
Meant to watch about 2 minutes. Accidentally watched all of it. No Regrets.
lol
I'll see your "LOL" and raise you a "LMAO". Because that was totally my plan. "What's an aerospike? I'll watch enough to see what he's talking about and move on". "Sombitch, that was really cool. Hey, look at the time..."
Personally I'd like to see an aerospike with a surface texture designed for drag rings, kinda like a golf ball. Like an inverted flow separation.
"If God himself came and knitted those molecules together you'd be1% better" - Elon Musk
He would be one percent better
Poetic
1.5x playback everything - thank me later best quote evr! 😎
Tho you couldn't use it to go and visit 'that one planet'
Good quote
1 hour? Who needs to work on a Friday anways?? 10 minutes in and this is great so far Tim!
Aerospikes: The Rotary Engine of the rocket world.
Damnit... I posted this comment and seriously a minute later, you said it in your video. XD
And both of them really needed to have some kind of comeback
Wankels are also extremelly fuel inneficient..
@@noobplayer_23 Check out Mazda latest news, Rotary comeback is confirmed ;)
If Aerospikes are the Rotary Engine of the rocket world, I seriously cannot wait to see the birth of the Electric one => Absolute perfection =O
Just imagine a ioniq propulsion device as powerfull as a Raptor engine, and powered by a nuclear fusion reactor *MINDBLOW*. Would love to see this =)
@@WlerickBigotOfficial A space elevator would be the "absolute electric perfection".
First rate work; you obviously put a huge amount of effort into this, and it's greatly appreciated.
People who disliked this failed making an SSTO
In KSP...
Tim, awesome video and research!
One small technical detail in the spirit of accuracy: When the nozzle in not truncated is called only spike nozzle (which would be very heavy and offset any benefits...), it is only when the nozzle is truncated that is called AEROspike, because now the air, or more precisely; the combustion gases take over the job of the now non-existent final portion of the solid spike.
I'm so hyped. After 3 months of production this masterpiece is finally released.
Amazing video! i watch the whole 1 hour, subscribed, excellent work, i can't imagine how many hours it took, but it worth it, most of my questions and doubts about this engine has been answered, thank you.
I had this video postponed for more than a week. Very good subject explanation, multiple sources, interviews, a lot of great work was put in this. Worth every second, keep up the great work!
So, to recap:
Aerospike engines: *am I a joke to you?*
Planet with 1g surface gravity and 1 bar surface pressure: *yes*
now if we lived on Venus or Saturn.....
Would be nice if KSP has bigger aerospike that would make sense on Eve
@@GeorgeDolbier Or Titan.
@@pfisherking Ooooh... now _there_ is an interesting problem. The 1.45x atmo. pressure might not be enough to push the economics over to favor aerospike, especially since titan has gravity low enough you could just wack a rock into space with a baseball bat. If it weren't for the ~200km worth of that thick atmosphere you would have to hit that rock through. The thickness, combined with surface pressure, and therefore the wide variance between surface pressure and vacuum, just might make the aerospace a more efficient design for Titan
But you still need two raptors - one atmospheric and one vacuum - to match a single aerospike SSTO. Tim should have divided the effective TWR of the raptor by 2 to get a straight across performance comparison. And you always lose the second stage vacuum raptor, it is not recoverable. I think Tim missed all that rather important aspect of the economics of the comparison.
I like how he totally downplayed the fact he gets to talk to ELON MUSK in this. "Oh yeah I get to talk to some people about Aerospike Engines" while playing a clip of him chatting with one of the richest and most powerful non-politician men in the world.
This is why Tim is taken seriously by professionals and executives, why he gets access. No hidden agenda, no stunts, no games, not a "media personality" or "influencer". Tim is NOT just trying to advance his own career through interviews. Tim is trying to explain, to broaden understanding, to make the world a better place, to make a better future.
@@GeorgeDolbier "not a "media personality" or "influencer""
You realize being a youtuber with a following makes you exactly that right? You can say he's humble and a great dude, which is true and awesome, but to say he's not an influencer or media personality is just incorrect. By definition of being a youtuber, unless you literally have no following, makes you an 'influencer', I.E. someone with a following who can get their word out to a large number of people.
Media personality is a little harder to define, but dude puts up quality videos and in my eyes that involves having a media personality--he's comfortable talking to 100,000s of people through his videos, and does it in a professional manner. I do hope you're not mixing that with arrogant jackasses, major difference in having a media personalty--being able to be professional through media such as youtube--and your typical jackass 'Jake Paul' types--those are not 'media personalities' in my eyes.
Don't get it twisted, I agree with you on him having access to such opportunities due to his professionalism and not pushing some personal agenda, through his quality work. I am just disagreeing with saying "he's not a "media personality" or "influencer"", just cause thats part of being a youtuber with a large number of subs--a following--is.
I'm impressed with your research and your presentation. You did a great job of explaining a complex subject. I used to think you were just a gushing and enthusiastic young space fan building a neat tv truck, but I now see you are a lot more mature, talented and hardworking than I thought. Congratulations and keep up the good work. A subscriber.
How does this guy not have far over a million subscribers yet
He is getting there…
Algorithm kicking in
Whoopsie, he’s got them now!
Thanks for taking all the time to produce this...Great info.
I've seen the video many times and it only gets better.
I’m new to this channel, but I am severely impressed with the amount of research you did! Bravo sir.
Amazing! Simply just absolutely wonderful video! This extremely well thought-through video essay was within perfection in every single second! I absolutely loved it and could even explain the whole functionality of an aerospike to my dad, who has never heard of this concept before. Thank you again for this unbelievable work!!!
actually grabbed my notepad, if this video is as good as you have hyped it for then i am a loyal sub. This feels like the history channel from 2005, god i miss those days...
Modern Marvels baby!!! Those were incredible presentations.👍👍👍
you should have watched the old show beyond 2000 way back when ... before the days of the celleron and all that crud
have you ever heard of absolute history? it is awesome. i especially recommend anything with Ruth. she seems to have fun with yet understand whatever she is doing. i swear she has a time machine.
Whew, what a nerd trip. This has been in my recommendations for months, and it's a shame it took me so long to actually watch it.
I had no idea even what an aerospike was this morning, and now after two Curious Droid vids and this, I feel I've acquired at least an elementary grasp on the concept.
This was a brilliant deep dive into a concept that you/this guy clearly has biases on, but is presented in such a perfectly unbiased manner that I had to post a comment. Well done.
ALSO, let me just say the rotary comparison is so apt. Between it's obscurity and it's "cool" factor I'm drawn to the rotary engine, and that perfectly sums up my sudden interest in aerospikes (though let me point out that the fewer moving parts in a rotary mean they can actually have better reliability than piston engines, just shorter lifespans and *much* worse economy).
Something your video made me consider, though, is whether I would still love rotaries (and by extension, aerospikes) as much if they were widely adopted and developed to a point where they are a viable alternative. Or would the magic be lost without their obscurity?
At the very least, even if aerospikes aren't helping humankind populate the stars, they are at least creating a small niche for curious people to nerd out about some really cool concepts.
Thanks for the great video Everyday Astronaut! And thank you to you, the person who stuck around to read this unnecessarily long comment :D
Wow, mine just exploded. Never heard of an aerospike. More knowledge in an hour Ive ever learned. I'm just a enthusiast but enjoy listening to the technology.
Journalists on TV: 20 minutes documentary, earn a living.
Everyday Astronaut: I’ll donit for fun. No production team. No-one. Just me. Free. For fun.
Donate ;)
oh.. it's his living for sure. I saw ads so it's not free. Just like good old fashioned TV ;-)
if it didn't have ads i'd agree, even then it's not free it's support by donations, 2,456 people are paying him to make great videos like this.