Agreed.. It does look goofy as hell..but im 99% sure that wont be the final design.. theyll stretch it but the flaps would be different in shape or size for sure
I can't figure out why SpaceX dispensed with the re-entry burn on Super Heavy. They successfully proved that the re-entry burn was effective at preserving the Falcon 9 booster through re-entry, and then they just forget about it? Sometimes SpaceX mystifies me.
Flaps wont be fixed. How you got that from a graph is hilarious. The flaps absolutely have to move, as they orientate the ship during atmospheric reentry phase. V3 is just ridiculously hugh. That is what will be needed for Mars.
I hope that SpaceX has factored in the very probable destruction of at least one of the launch towers. Now, I certainly hope SpaceX keeps up its corporate luck. Their emgioneers seem to really know what they're doing.
At 2 million per launch isn't that insane for space tourism even, if it was double that cost. You could pack a lot of people into a star ship for a joy ride into orbit. you could even use ships as space stations they are freaking huge. Space tourism could actually become affordable with this ship, I feel crazy writing this lol
If they really wanted to test catching they could take a booster, fill it with minimum fuel to reach 5 km altitude and try to catch it, or eve try to "virtualy" catch it over some remote place. No need to wait for ITF4
Size and prop load are irrelevant as Raptor development to push all that extra fuel and metal is more important. I don’t see V3 for a long time as Elon is too optimistic on his Raptor advancements and until we see it, it hasn’t happened.
was a rationale ever written out in any detail to support that target of around $2 million dollars per launch? See 2:47 in on the time tracker. For instance, was a number of needed flights per year given?
Makes sense to recover the booster and prioritize on that. I hope they are not really working hard on Starship v3 and that it's just some kind of a teaser.
lets see if it finally lands ofter 3 failed flights, 1 enviromental disaster and 6 billion dollars of taxpayer money dumped into the gulf of Mexico lmao
How did you arrive at $6 billion dollars of taxpayer money when it comes to Starship? As far as I can tell, the public investment has been in a lunar starship, with a contract award of $3 billion in 2021, and then a contract modification that included another $1.5 billion. That is for the Artemis program. Now much less than $6 billion, but still a difference, and for a worthy program. As for the environment, the rockets use methalox engines - which tend to be better than kerolox engines say like the F-1 engines of the first stage of Saturn V. As for the flights, those are test flights. Don't think the third was seen as a failure.
Oh dear, let's make it bigger, let's give it more engines, why? Because the best part is no part, right? Do the math for 100 tons and 100 people. What SpaceX has built is a copy of a famous Russian failure that he thinks he can make work. Good luck with that. He will need even bigger ones for his numerous re-fueling in space just to fill one Starship. So far it has cost the taxpayer over $2 billion dollars and counting. He has failed to meet any of Nasa's technical milestones, cue Blue Origin, the tortoise to SpaceX's hare. You might have faith in musk, but NASA is quickly losing theirs. Chandra is now in doubt as NASA's funding is being squeezed and squeezed as I write this. It is time to do a full technical reassessment on SpaceX's capability to manage this project anymore. He was supposed to have gone to the Moon on this brainfart already and yet in the last test they failed to even reach orbital speed. I understand the China Russia thing and how you don't want them to beat you there, but that is not a good criterion for any design going to space. Russia beat you to space, actually they beat everybody to space, get over it, and get back to work, sensibly.
Because PROTOTYPE. There are NO STARSHIPS YET. These are only PROTOTYPES. TEST rockets.. TEST TEST TEST. It'll be a bit before a finalized Starship gets the first weld.
the pay load was extra lox, thats actualy what killed ift 2, when they got rid of it to simulate mass but it ended up blowing the rocket because of a fire that was ongoing.
Go big or go home! This will be “entertaining” to watch. Considering that the last launch didn’t get everything they needed on the tiles performance and they seem to be doing a lot of rework on the tiles it seems to be brave to be jumping to even larger configurations before the details have been validated.
Multi-variable testing is possible if done properly and it is the best way to get the most value out of each launch. Space-X has some smart cookies working there, they seem to know what they are doing up to this point.
No argument about getting as much “useful” data on each launch. My point is that they didn’t get much useful data about the performance of the tiles on this launch other than there was some tile failure early on and what appears to be substantial failure of tiles in an out of design reentry. Considering that little has been said by official sources and substantial tile rework is happening, one must assume that the final design has not been perfected yet. So assuming that the next launch has a reasonable start into reentry, it will be the first opportunity to “start” figuring out what is working and not working. Despite they are using almost identical tiles that the Shuttle used, starship’s structure is considerably more flexible and the mounting technique is “unique”. It would be one thing if they just continued on with what they were doing, but they seem to be changing many things simultaneously which I have found to make data analysis significantly more difficult.
@@Mentaculus42 Appears. I have not seen anything that has convinced me that a lot of tiles were spalling at all. And the tiles are not the same as the shuttle tiles. Testing and changing things is the whole point of what's being done.
@@TheEvilmooseofdoom The tiles are basically chemically and physically identical to the last iteration of shuttle tiles. Spacex even hired the people who worked on the shuttle tiles except the tiles appear to be not as structurally refined (they are cruder) when analyzed using an electron microscope. So spacex just copied the Shuttle technology, this has been carefully verified and an excellent youtube video shows the results. It appears in the video at a relatively late time that significant numbers of tiles break off but that sorta doesn’t matter as the ss was in an improper angle relative to reentry. So from the camera it is hard to say if anything was learned .
SpaceX would been far better financially, if they developed a standard Methalox rocket as New Glenn, and as a side project develop a reusable upper stage in cooperation with NASA, which could be an updated version of the Space Shuttle.
Are you an engineer? Or a rocket scientist? Experienced in oversight of a large technological company? Answer yes to any one of these questions and you may have what it takes to understand the complexity of what it is Space X is attempting. If no, well, you know! Thanks for your comment!
We'd would've been far better off financially if we never went the moon. Maybe we should appreciate that SpaceX is going out of their way to try and change conventional space travel.
Where are you mate? Three weeks, no videos? I hope you are OK. Cheers.
looks goofy that stretched out.
Hell yeah it does
Flying pen 🖊️
Agreed.. It does look goofy as hell..but im 99% sure that wont be the final design.. theyll stretch it but the flaps would be different in shape or size for sure
Who gives a shit what it looks like? It isn’t a conversation piece. It’s a tank with engines attached to it FFS.
just a minor observation FFS
Babe Wake up the Space Bucket Posted!
We'll have to see what impact this video has on the space industry.
Where are you??? Your videos are the best!
there’s going to be a starship sized hole in the ground once they try to bellyflop then land v3
I can't figure out why SpaceX dispensed with the re-entry burn on Super Heavy. They successfully proved that the re-entry burn was effective at preserving the Falcon 9 booster through re-entry, and then they just forget about it? Sometimes SpaceX mystifies me.
Flaps wont be fixed. How you got that from a graph is hilarious. The flaps absolutely have to move, as they orientate the ship during atmospheric reentry phase. V3 is just ridiculously hugh. That is what will be needed for Mars.
I hope that SpaceX has factored in the very probable destruction of at least one of the launch towers. Now, I certainly hope SpaceX keeps up its corporate luck. Their emgioneers seem to really know what they're doing.
Thanks! Very informative! Like the progression of Starship variants!
has anyone at spacex said what they need to do to offer $2m per flight? like how many satellites need to be launched?
Boring musk propaganda without a proper analyst of the facts...
comical
At 2 million per launch isn't that insane for space tourism even, if it was double that cost. You could pack a lot of people into a star ship for a joy ride into orbit. you could even use ships as space stations they are freaking huge. Space tourism could actually become affordable with this ship, I feel crazy writing this lol
I'd wait until the booster has a successful track record of accurate soft water landings before risking all of stage 0.
If they really wanted to test catching they could take a booster, fill it with minimum fuel to reach 5 km altitude and try to catch it, or eve try to "virtualy" catch it over some remote place. No need to wait for ITF4
I think they're pretty confident that they can catch it if they manage to get it through the flip and reentry.
If you're going to expend a booster, might as well test as much as you can.
@@ascherlafayette8572 But are they ready to risk a huge explosion on launching pad if something goes wrong?
If it RUDs that's gonna delay the IFT4
So we need that second tower up asap for the explosive shenanigans
Common Sense Skeptic
Whenever he says "Here I'll go more in depth", it always seems to sound like "Your uncle Morgan dead" lol
Size and prop load are irrelevant as Raptor development to push all that extra fuel and metal is more important. I don’t see V3 for a long time as Elon is too optimistic on his Raptor advancements and until we see it, it hasn’t happened.
was a rationale ever written out in any detail to support that target of around $2 million dollars per launch? See 2:47 in on the time tracker. For instance, was a number of needed flights per year given?
Makes sense to recover the booster and prioritize on that. I hope they are not really working hard on Starship v3 and that it's just some kind of a teaser.
6:31 This must have been the thermal reentry data for “backwards & sideways” attitude configuration.
Hey bro that's probably the first of its kind 😂
Epic! 😎
lets see if it finally lands ofter 3 failed flights, 1 enviromental disaster and 6 billion dollars of taxpayer money dumped into the gulf of Mexico lmao
How did you arrive at $6 billion dollars of taxpayer money when it comes to Starship? As far as I can tell, the public investment has been in a lunar starship, with a contract award of $3 billion in 2021, and then a contract modification that included another $1.5 billion. That is for the Artemis program. Now much less than $6 billion, but still a difference, and for a worthy program.
As for the environment, the rockets use methalox engines - which tend to be better than kerolox engines say like the F-1 engines of the first stage of Saturn V.
As for the flights, those are test flights. Don't think the third was seen as a failure.
Long Starship is loooooong.
6:14 Opening and CLOSING of the Pez dispenser door ?!?!
Oh dear, let's make it bigger, let's give it more engines, why? Because the best part is no part, right? Do the math for 100 tons and 100 people. What SpaceX has built is a copy of a famous Russian failure that he thinks he can make work. Good luck with that. He will need even bigger ones for his numerous re-fueling in space just to fill one Starship. So far it has cost the taxpayer over $2 billion dollars and counting. He has failed to meet any of Nasa's technical milestones, cue Blue Origin, the tortoise to SpaceX's hare. You might have faith in musk, but NASA is quickly losing theirs. Chandra is now in doubt as NASA's funding is being squeezed and squeezed as I write this. It is time to do a full technical reassessment on SpaceX's capability to manage this project anymore. He was supposed to have gone to the Moon on this brainfart already and yet in the last test they failed to even reach orbital speed. I understand the China Russia thing and how you don't want them to beat you there, but that is not a good criterion for any design going to space. Russia beat you to space, actually they beat everybody to space, get over it, and get back to work, sensibly.
hls was spacex showing the world that nasa is corrupt and incompetent. the damage is already done.
The battle over Tesla's Berlin Gigafactory | DW News
Currently the vehicle isn't carrying anything to orbit.
...Why would you put a payload on a ship you know you have a 90% chance of blowing up the moment it misbehaves?
Because PROTOTYPE. There are NO STARSHIPS YET. These are only PROTOTYPES. TEST rockets.. TEST TEST TEST. It'll be a bit before a finalized Starship gets the first weld.
@@inthefade water can be a payload and gives exactly the data of a fully functional ship. 3 ran out of fuel empty.
Incredible observation
the pay load was extra lox, thats actualy what killed ift 2, when they got rid of it to simulate mass but it ended up blowing the rocket because of a fire that was ongoing.
space as highways -early days
(rockets are eternal )
to master a solar system as identity has become a talent to explore
Intresting.
Thanks man....😎😎😎
scam artist at work here.
Ik right? I mean, they get farther every time . . . But surely they'll totally fail next time right?
And what scam would that be?
People criticizing starship lol. Majority of these people are just haters. Space x will change humanities course forever.
Go big or go home! This will be “entertaining” to watch. Considering that the last launch didn’t get everything they needed on the tiles performance and they seem to be doing a lot of rework on the tiles it seems to be brave to be jumping to even larger configurations before the details have been validated.
Multi-variable testing is possible if done properly and it is the best way to get the most value out of each launch. Space-X has some smart cookies working there, they seem to know what they are doing up to this point.
No argument about getting as much “useful” data on each launch. My point is that they didn’t get much useful data about the performance of the tiles on this launch other than there was some tile failure early on and what appears to be substantial failure of tiles in an out of design reentry. Considering that little has been said by official sources and substantial tile rework is happening, one must assume that the final design has not been perfected yet.
So assuming that the next launch has a reasonable start into reentry, it will be the first opportunity to “start” figuring out what is working and not working. Despite they are using almost identical tiles that the Shuttle used, starship’s structure is considerably more flexible and the mounting technique is “unique”. It would be one thing if they just continued on with what they were doing, but they seem to be changing many things simultaneously which I have found to make data analysis significantly more difficult.
@@Mentaculus42 Appears. I have not seen anything that has convinced me that a lot of tiles were spalling at all. And the tiles are not the same as the shuttle tiles. Testing and changing things is the whole point of what's being done.
@@TheEvilmooseofdoom
The tiles are basically chemically and physically identical to the last iteration of shuttle tiles. Spacex even hired the people who worked on the shuttle tiles except the tiles appear to be not as structurally refined (they are cruder) when analyzed using an electron microscope. So spacex just copied the Shuttle technology, this has been carefully verified and an excellent youtube video shows the results.
It appears in the video at a relatively late time that significant numbers of tiles break off but that sorta doesn’t matter as the ss was in an improper angle relative to reentry. So from the camera it is hard to say if anything was learned .
👍🖖🏽
SpaceX would been far better financially, if they developed a standard Methalox rocket as New Glenn, and as a side project develop a reusable upper stage in cooperation with NASA, which could be an updated version of the Space Shuttle.
Are you an engineer? Or a rocket scientist? Experienced in oversight of a large technological company? Answer yes to any one of these questions and you may have what it takes to understand the complexity of what it is Space X is attempting. If no, well, you know! Thanks for your comment!
We'd would've been far better off financially if we never went the moon. Maybe we should appreciate that SpaceX is going out of their way to try and change conventional space travel.
@@michaeldeierhoi4096 The Rocket equation has entered the room.
@@michaeldeierhoi4096 He's not even a clever faker.
@@TheEvilmooseofdoom 😅😂
Starship 1:🔥 starship 2:🥳 starship 3:🤮
Why? Why would you say that? What did ship 3 do so wrong?
@@ascherlafayette8572 spin uncontrollably