Just imagine how fucking terrifying it’ll be to make reentry in starship for passengers?! A 100km freefall before the engines kick after a 90° turn at 1km altitude. It’s basically a 40k drop-pod, which is awesome
I suspect Starship won't be for any average kind of passenger for a decade yet...Most people will not want to go through that flip like a kilometer above the ground. On the other hand, if someday SpaceX can get the Starship as safe statistically as modern commercial air travel, who knows how widely it might be used. Then again, perhaps In a decade the HALO method of landing Starship will be updated to avoid HALO in some way. Not talking about parachutes, obviously, just the flip maneuver and engine lighting so close to the ground reminds me of paratroopers trained to open their parachutes at relatively low altitude. But maybe engine relighting will become feasible at higher altitudes somehow.
and the short stretch of time between then and now is mind-boggling too. the other space agencies are looking on jealously and copying for the sake of copying.🤣 one day, they'll understand the logic of spacex and forget copying - do hope at some future point, there'll be a spirit of cooperation between them.
Before flight 5&6 a whole lot of people (and probably me as well) would have been super skeptical about a ship chopstick catch…. But honestly I have great confidence that they can do it. It’s incredible to see everything coming together after all these years!
And a lot of Elon Haters have complained about the whole thing "if they used a drone ship they could get more delta v" yet that completely ignores rapid reusability. Being able to use the rocket hours later and not days later. And these scientists (like Thunderf00t) think everyone that disagrees is stupid. There's so much people don't understand about Space X and we've all been in that same boat. I've learnt so much and they're knocking it out of the park!!
I was in the same camp but am not fully convinced. Doing it once is great, doing it 100x a year or more is another thing. I think it's worth the effort to pursue, I just can't say if it will ever be reliable enough. That is no easy call even for the experts despite the fans belief they can't fail and the haters belief that fail is all they can do.
I hear you i always thought that the ships would end up getting landing legs, they still need to find a way to add catch pins to the ships but definitely possible
Excellent as usual! It was cool to see the bottom flaps fold in right after the engines ignited while the nose flaps stayed open. The whole process looks like it's out of a '50s sci-fi movie! ... Just fantastic!!!
@@dalegray934 Isn't there going to be a lot of metal fatigue. Extremely fast airplanes are usually made by titanium not only for the weight also for less metal fatigue from the heat.
Imagine on November the 14th your population get hit by none radiator rockets near your 1 million population also not knowing if the red white and blue country was part of those warning firing targets.
The resilient seals that block plasma flow between flaps and body needed improvement. The tile durability on the flaps was another problem. For example, if the flaps' steel skin deforms too much, then the rigid tile (bonded to it) will crack. So the flap skin might need to be a more rigid honeycomb sandwich. Or, the intermediate layer needed to provide more resiliency, similar to hard tile underlayment.
The flaps still shows signs of high heating. You can see the colour changes on the stainless steel. I would expect that this needs to be reviewed to see if/how it has effected the stainless steel’s properties 🤔🤷♂️
The most important point made in this video is that there is a big difference between surviving one flight, and safely handling multiple re-entries. Without the need for extensive inspection, repair and refurbishment. This has everything to do with Starship's alleged economics. Yes the tiles are now "twice as tough" which means they are also heavier. Starship was touted as 150 tonnes to LEO. Now it's closer to 50. Adding more mass to the heat shield further erodes it's capabilities. Also, can we please see a different angle on the V2 flaps, and maybe closer up. because it's not apparent to me that the new flaps are fully sheltered from impingement from plasma shock waves and that plasma won't leak into the hinges.
You seem to be making the simpleton assumption that Starship development is over or that the early test articles were going to represent the finished version. Plasma shock waves? I think you're now making things up to try and sound smarter than you are. All they need to be is out of the stream and that they are.
@TheEvilmooseofdoom Before you start calling people simpletons, try googling reentry plasma shock. I'll repeat, let's see better, closer views of the V2 flaps and in particular, where the hinges and associated gaps are located.
Applying little heat shield tiles tiles is a very labor intensive process. There needs to be a faster way of applying heat protection such as using ultra high heat blankets.
15 years ago they said there is no way a Falcon 9 booster could be re used 20+ times. I expect several final versions of Starship and the super heavy boosters. They will tweak them for specific missions and continue to make advancements with design, tiles and other ways to combat the re-entry heating and damage it does
The accuracy? This footage maybe proves the landing accuracy to be better than a few meters, maybe even more. Not saying that the accuracy can't be in the centimeter range, just that this footage doesn't prove more. If they are smart, and usually they are, the camera on the buoy can move, so the ship can land in a relatively large area and still be on video perfectly fine. In any case, landing accurately is not a new feat for Starship, by now it's quite routine. The bigger question is whether they can achieve the reliability to risk the chopsticks.
If Starship was to be caught at Starbase, it would have to do several orbits, as the ground track would not remain over Starbase after 1 orbit, but would shift westward by approximately 22.5 degrees. If the orbital dynamics are not modified, it would take approximately 1 day for Starship to return to Starbase.
I think the biggest problem for this system will be reliability. They just had to abort catching a booster. That's a good idea for safety, but for Super Heavy to make any sense, they can't afford even the reliability similar to the space shuttle (say 99%). When they need 10 refueling attempts for the HLS, then that means a 10% chance of needing at least one extra booster or second stage. And getting that right, without the ability to abort a landing like a plane, and with the explosive nature of a rocket... that's going to be tricky and time consuming.
@@motokid6008 The steering or control isn't the issue with catching...it's how certain it is that the engines can power up in a very shor time. That may also come down to reentry heating and forces. In the end, precision doesn't matter shit if the starship hits the landing spot at a supersonic speed.
Reliability and reusability. For the Space Shuttle reusing the orbiter ultimately didn't lead to significant cost savings. Even though there's no external tank hitting the heatshield with spray-on insulation pieces on Starship, they still seem to be losing a lot of tiles, even after 6 flights and 4 reentries, in addition to warping some of the steel. If they need to go through extensive refurbishment after every flight like the Shuttle did, Starship may end up a big money losing operation for SpaceX.
@@plainText384 My point wasn''t about the reusability of the shuttle but on the reliability. If the booster or second stage are lost every 100 launches, which is slightly less often than the space shuttle failed, then that may be too much to make the system viable. Starship is already a huge money losing operation. Even the HLS contract won't pay for that. Maybe they can make some of the money back when they start launching Starlink satellites, but count me sceptical. And when speaking about Mars, Musk is entirely bullshitting people. The only way the first mission to Mars is happening is with massive government-led effort, no matter who provides the rocket in the end.
I expect that the ship launch and catch won't happen on the same day. They'll just park it in orbit and do a controlled re-entry later on when they're ready. Gives them time to do any repairs on the chopsticks after a booster catch, and also allows them to see how the ship holds up during an extended stay in space.
Starship couldn't return right away, anyway. When it's orbit brings Starship back around, Starbase will have rotated 22.5 degrees due to Earth's rotation. Because of this westward shift of the ground track the minimum time to return will be 1 day.
This is mind blowing that we can do this now I say this as someone who’s old enough to remember Apollo this is definitely a whole different thing isn’t it? The Apollo engineers would’ve said that this is a great idea but it’s just not now and probably will never be technically Possible .
They will strip it back as far as they possibly can while still safe, with the limitations on engine efficiency imposed by bipropellants every kilogram of weight saved make a major difference.
IFT8 is going to be lit! I wonder if they’re going to catch the booster prior to the ship. That means they’ll have to haul ass to get the booster back onto its transport stand and out of the way ASAP. Should make for some amazing entertainment!
@@lyricbread as others have said, it can stay in orbit while the tower is cleared. They showed that it can deorbit on the test by firing the single Raptor engine for like, a second. It was higher in altitude than the previous tests. The stream announcer said if they didn't do that it would continue to orbit.
Forgive me if this is a dumb question, but what happened AFTER Starship is in the water? Does it remain afloat and get picked up? Then what? I have not found anything about what is done with the ocean landed Starship OR boosters.
This view is spectacular! I worry though because every time I see these heavy stage boosters and crafts landing they all seem to be just a tiny bit crooked for the final contact. Is this planned ? EDIT. The little flap could is now the flap that can do! Just say 'in.
Great analysis. Thinking about ISS retirement makes me wonder how much of its contents have a salvage value. How much would you pay for a bit of ISS memorabilia?
@@TheEvilmooseofdoom I realize that, but the ship was in the center of the frame all the way down. I don't think a human operator could have done that.
need a backup PEZ dispenser escape protocol, whereby astronauts get "deployed" like atarlink satellites in emergency, adopting the no part is best part philosophy safety strategy lol
Looks like they have everything fairly sorted for catching both the booster and the ship to me . Its sucks they aborted the booster catch this time around because that landing looked perfect .
the most powerful rocket in history is going to fly 25 times in one year........ its very impressive if you think about, not even nasa in the cold war was capable of this
So if an astronaut was on board for this test he would have survived. Obviously not the explosion. He could of exited via a hatch into waiting rescue vessel.
If it doesn't sink on it's own they'll sink it, they had to do that with one of the early F9's when they were doing soft water landing tests, one fell over and broke up but on chunk would not sink and I believe they demo'd it. That was a lot closer to home though, out in the indian ocean I don't know, they might expect wave action and weather to sink it eventually or maybe the FTS charges are used.
@@schrodingerscat1863 Are any of the Raptor engines recovered after it sinks? I can see an adversary wanting to recover those from the bottom of the ocean!
@@Create-The-Imaginable Not so far from the Starship, the Indian ocean is way too deep to mount a salvage operation. They did lift raptors from one of the boosters as that is just off shore. After a short time in salt water the engines would be so corroded and damaged they would likely be useless to a competitor. I wouldn't be surprised if they salvage the booster engines again as they are in quite shallow water so it would be possible for competition to be able to get to them quickly.
I thought the ship had flames on structure after water landing and laying down on ocean ?? Yes lets see Ship orbit 2-3 times !! Actually dispense something , plush toy like used in Dragon/ISS !
The ship and booster are not designed to land in the ocean. If there were no explosions, I would be surprised. I don't get why people don't understand this. They always say it exploded, it failed. Sorry, that just shows a total lack of understanding.
It seems to me that once they can put the ship in orbit they will, and they will use that as time to remove the booster from the pad just in case of catastrophic landing failure to save the booster. Just to be safe for the first few, but once the landings are routine both will be on the pad at the same time and both land there.
Based on the motion of the buoy and the lack of motion of the camera I'd have to say that the stabilisation software is something else or that this footage is a fake.
It doesn't have landing legs, that's why. This iteration of the starship is expected to be caught by the chopsticks, but the eventual Lunar and Mars mission ships will definitely have landing legs as a necessity of course. They don't bother with landing legs on the ship and booster for earth missions in order to save weight and increase payload to orbit capacity.
That was just an iterative step to prove the flip and burn landing maneuver for the high altitude hop tests. They'll do at least one more ocean landing like this before trying to catch it like they did the booster. There won't be legs again until moon/Mars landers. There might be tests of that system on Earth, but the majority of ship returns to Earth will land on the tower except for some flight profiles where they will expend it in the atmosphere to burn up or ditch it in the ocean. Expect a long process with many different iterations and profiles as they optimize the design. We're still a long way from what it will ultimately become.
They cut away during the live stream but there is footage. It's not a matter of convenience, it's one person who has to try and decide which stream and do it live.
@ptech88 no catching is involved if you land on a platform a catch is like a hand grabbing a ball flying towards it or a bird claw grabbing a cylindrical branch in very similar way to catching a cylindrical rocket.
@@FLORIDIANMILLIONAIRE where is this video do they say anything about landing on a platform? It specifically says if all goes well on next flight they will catch both with the chop sticks on the following flight. Thats why im confused by what you say.
@@ptech88 yes catching a free falling body like a rocket is not a practical idea but landing it using active control on a moving platform like a raft on ocean sounds more practical and feasible to me as a scientist.
I would speculate that there will eventually be a titanium alloy or something similar version of the Starship. Most will be stainless steel for costs however the titanium versions will not only be stronger butmuch lighter therefore able to bring more mass to LEO and beyond.
I must say that I'm a bit surprised that both the booster and the starship weren't programed to come to a full stop at the height of the chopsticks. The way they "landed" after flight 6, they would have broken the chopsticks, they would have been falling too fast at the height of the chopsticks.
Traditional rockets are close to reaching the limit of their capability. RDE is the next stage in rocketry, all be it not traditional. I wonder when SpaceX will start down that road? Still new forms of space propulsion are need to be developed without the interference of nay sayers pretending that they know better.
@@motokid6008 It's a work in progress, but my understanding is that it has the highest efficiency with a much smaller lighter engine and the highest weight to thrust ratio known atm. Not sure how well they throttle but SpaceX has demonstrated that the multi engine approach is very effective. Built in redundancy has also proven to be valuable. There are more fringe propulsion avenues being explored that could use more funding and less ridicule. It's time to start taking a closer look at some alternatives IMO. For now I'm surprised that SpaceX hasn't been more on top of RDE's, or maybe they are but are keeping it close to the chest for now.
@@AnomalyXero Modern American spelling is better than old English spelling. One of the attributes of progress is spending less time doing something, which means that less keystrokes are required. Color, flavor, not colour, flavour. There is no need for the letter 'u' since the meaning of the word does not change. Program instead of programme. There is no need for the letters 'me' at the end of the word. So from now on, please write in modern English.
Modern American spelling is better than old English spelling. One of the attributes of progress is spending less time doing something, which means that less keystrokes are required. Color, flavor, not colour, flavour. There is no need for the letter 'u' since the meaning of the word does not change. Program instead of programme. There is no need for the letters 'me' at the end of the word. So from now on, please write in modern English.
@@AnomalyXero It "bobs" in the water like a boy would; it doesn't "booey" in the water! Hey-ho, Churchill always said we were two nations separated by a common language!
@@MrProach2 The English language is an evolving language. Just think how much it has changed since its origin in Northern Germany. Churchill was a madman like Hitler.
That is probably not pure Stainless Steel, I can see if being some kind of modified meta material that does not rust! Probably classified. It's called 30X and is a proprietary material.
![Stromae, Pomme - “Ma Meilleure Ennemie” (from Arcane Season 2) [Official Visualizer]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1F3OGIFnW1k/mqdefault.jpg)
![[DRAGON BALL LEGENDS REVEALS ＆ STUFF] LEGENDS FESTIVAL 2024 Special Edition Part 1](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/mV5bGIswTtQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Just imagine how fucking terrifying it’ll be to make reentry in starship for passengers?! A 100km freefall before the engines kick after a 90° turn at 1km altitude. It’s basically a 40k drop-pod, which is awesome
That’d make for one hell of a ride! 😂
Carnival ride, writ large.
F- bomb violation. There maybe young ones here.
I think they will pass out due to the g forces
I suspect Starship won't be for any average kind of passenger for a decade yet...Most people will not want to go through that flip like a kilometer above the ground. On the other hand, if someday SpaceX can get the Starship as safe statistically as modern commercial air travel, who knows how widely it might be used. Then again, perhaps In a decade the HALO method of landing Starship will be updated to avoid HALO in some way. Not talking about parachutes, obviously, just the flip maneuver and engine lighting so close to the ground reminds me of paratroopers trained to open their parachutes at relatively low altitude. But maybe engine relighting will become feasible at higher altitudes somehow.
The transition from Starhopper to this is actually insane
Facts!
This is Starfish?
It’s been 10 years…nobody will live long enough to go to mars. 😂
EXCELLENT REPORT! this channel is GOLD for just sayin' it like it is... no cheerleading, no selling, no spin! THANK YOU! 👍☺
Looks a bit cooked but absolutely incredible that thing came down in one piece from 17000mph.
and the short stretch of time between then and now is mind-boggling too.
the other space agencies are looking on jealously and copying for the sake of copying.🤣 one day, they'll understand the logic of spacex and forget copying - do hope at some future point, there'll be a spirit of cooperation between them.
@@audiocoffee Are you aware that the Space Shuttle did this long ago?
@@kanyequest8776 yeah, but spacex have definitely narrowed the gap.
It's the Adama maneuver!!
I did a painting of the Adama Maneuver for the show back in the day... Just look up "Jeffrey Stark Adama Maneuver"... That's done by me... 😁👍
Fracking A it is
best frackin comment here!
Unexpected BSG for the win!!!
Which Adama maneuver? Jk. My dad and I screamed and jumped up and down as Galactica was in freefall.
Thank you for the additional information AND non-AI voice !!!
Thought it was an ai voice. The cadence is quite off-putting.
Before flight 5&6 a whole lot of people (and probably me as well) would have been super skeptical about a ship chopstick catch…. But honestly I have great confidence that they can do it. It’s incredible to see everything coming together after all these years!
And a lot of Elon Haters have complained about the whole thing "if they used a drone ship they could get more delta v" yet that completely ignores rapid reusability. Being able to use the rocket hours later and not days later. And these scientists (like Thunderf00t) think everyone that disagrees is stupid.
There's so much people don't understand about Space X and we've all been in that same boat. I've learnt so much and they're knocking it out of the park!!
@@nicosmind3If I've learned anything over the years is that it's generally not wise to bet against elon.
I was in the same camp but am not fully convinced. Doing it once is great, doing it 100x a year or more is another thing. I think it's worth the effort to pursue, I just can't say if it will ever be reliable enough. That is no easy call even for the experts despite the fans belief they can't fail and the haters belief that fail is all they can do.
I hear you i always thought that the ships would end up getting landing legs, they still need to find a way to add catch pins to the ships but definitely possible
What is even more impressive to me is that it's really only been a handful of years since they starts SS/SH.
Excellent as usual!
It was cool to see the bottom flaps fold in right after the engines ignited while the nose flaps stayed open.
The whole process looks like it's out of a '50s sci-fi movie!
... Just fantastic!!!
ScottManley, WhatAboutIt, MarcusHouse, EverydayAstronaut, and TheSpaceBucket are the best
YES, that is precisely correct👍
Still can't believe that stainless steel body survived the re-entry told about being built to withstand the forces and heat
That variety of stainless steel has amazing strength even when heated to crazy temperatures.
Not surprised at all. It's one of the reasons they chose stainless steel. Carbon fibre would have been ash
^this, exactly.@@XCX237
@@dalegray934 Isn't there going to be a lot of metal fatigue. Extremely fast airplanes are usually made by titanium not only for the weight also for less metal fatigue from the heat.
@@lubricustheslippery5028 probably, thats how building a tech tree works
yeah bouy
🤣🤣
Imagine some guy fishing out there and this comes landing close to you
No one should out fishing in the exclusion zone!
Imagine on November the 14th your population get hit by none radiator rockets near your 1 million population also not knowing if the red white and blue country was part of those warning firing targets.
My first thought when I saw this.
Thanks for the update, can't wait for the next launch with the new and improved Starship.🚀👍👍
i used to be skeptical of starship, but unlike almost every other space company, spacex has evolved past CGI.
Nice job! Your delivery is sounding more relaxed too.
Short, sweet and to the point. Exactly what the Dr. ordered. Shows exactly what the title says. No click bait.
Am I the only one baffled by how the ships flaps survived this time better then ever. With less heat protection then ever!?
I think they altered how the ship re-enters the atmosphere. It was hotter but took less time.
The resilient seals that block plasma flow between flaps and body needed improvement.
The tile durability on the flaps was another problem. For example, if the flaps' steel skin deforms too much, then the rigid tile (bonded to it) will crack.
So the flap skin might need to be a more rigid honeycomb sandwich. Or, the intermediate layer needed to provide more resiliency, similar to hard tile underlayment.
The flaps themselves actually had more heat shielding this time round.
The flaps still shows signs of high heating. You can see the colour changes on the stainless steel. I would expect that this needs to be reviewed to see if/how it has effected the stainless steel’s properties 🤔🤷♂️
great coverage. thank you!
AWESOME...!!! THE CATCHING IS MY FAVORITE....!!!
All I can say is awesome...
that looks amazing
super cool channel. straight to the point.
Man its wild! Some of these videos look like CGI! Crazy amazing that theyre real!
Great sharing of the information.
Roji
The most important point made in this video is that there is a big difference between surviving one flight, and safely handling multiple re-entries. Without the need for extensive inspection, repair and refurbishment. This has everything to do with Starship's alleged economics. Yes the tiles are now "twice as tough" which means they are also heavier. Starship was touted as 150 tonnes to LEO. Now it's closer to 50. Adding more mass to the heat shield further erodes it's capabilities. Also, can we please see a different angle on the V2 flaps, and maybe closer up. because it's not apparent to me that the new flaps are fully sheltered from impingement from plasma shock waves and that plasma won't leak into the hinges.
You seem to be making the simpleton assumption that Starship development is over or that the early test articles were going to represent the finished version. Plasma shock waves? I think you're now making things up to try and sound smarter than you are. All they need to be is out of the stream and that they are.
@TheEvilmooseofdoom Before you start calling people simpletons, try googling reentry plasma shock. I'll repeat, let's see better, closer views of the V2 flaps and in particular, where the hinges and associated gaps are located.
Great video 👍
Why did the video end immediately after splashdown, I wanna see what happens after
Basically maritime privacy laws...for the disembarking aliens!
This looks a lot like when Battlestar Galatica did a jump over the firefight in one episode…. Freaking AWSOME
Hoping they either catch the next one or land it! Don't want to wait for two more launches.
This company is amazing. I want stock.
Amazing video!
how many times can you replay the same piece of footage....
Got to drag out the 30 second video to get those ads in.
Applying little heat shield tiles tiles is a very labor intensive process.
There needs to be a faster way of applying heat protection such as using ultra high heat blankets.
Well I love it
Reminds me of the “Adama Maneuver” in Battlestar Galactica (2004).
Thanks
The newly-released buoy footage had awesome audio, so why wasn't it used here. That's silly.
This creator doesn't understand the RUclips audience quite yet
Because then you wouldn't be able to hear TheSpaceBucket.
I think that "rapid re-use" is going to be the biggest hurdle.
You and everyone else including spacex since they announced the program.
Always has been.
15 years ago they said there is no way a Falcon 9 booster could be re used 20+ times.
I expect several final versions of Starship and the super heavy boosters. They will tweak them for specific missions and continue to make advancements with design, tiles and other ways to combat the re-entry heating and damage it does
well at least start with FULL reuse even if it takes a couple of months. Then upgrade it till its RAPID.
It is still a hurdle for Falcon9 btw. They still take a month between launches.
The accuracy? This footage maybe proves the landing accuracy to be better than a few meters, maybe even more. Not saying that the accuracy can't be in the centimeter range, just that this footage doesn't prove more. If they are smart, and usually they are, the camera on the buoy can move, so the ship can land in a relatively large area and still be on video perfectly fine. In any case, landing accurately is not a new feat for Starship, by now it's quite routine. The bigger question is whether they can achieve the reliability to risk the chopsticks.
Good spaceship beautiful low sea very good try next landing in Australia first landing? Next year?
If Starship was to be caught at Starbase, it would have to do several orbits, as the ground track would not remain over Starbase after 1 orbit, but would shift westward by approximately 22.5 degrees. If the orbital dynamics are not modified, it would take approximately 1 day for Starship to return to Starbase.
Even if it was 100% reliable, I don't think I'd want to be riding aboard that thing to a landing.
If it was 100% reliable.. why not? Don't like flying?
I think the biggest problem for this system will be reliability. They just had to abort catching a booster. That's a good idea for safety, but for Super Heavy to make any sense, they can't afford even the reliability similar to the space shuttle (say 99%). When they need 10 refueling attempts for the HLS, then that means a 10% chance of needing at least one extra booster or second stage. And getting that right, without the ability to abort a landing like a plane, and with the explosive nature of a rocket... that's going to be tricky and time consuming.
The big concern in terms of reliability and reusability is the heat shield on Ship. The booster catch will be nailed down eventually.
@@motokid6008 The steering or control isn't the issue with catching...it's how certain it is that the engines can power up in a very shor time. That may also come down to reentry heating and forces. In the end, precision doesn't matter shit if the starship hits the landing spot at a supersonic speed.
Reliability and reusability. For the Space Shuttle reusing the orbiter ultimately didn't lead to significant cost savings. Even though there's no external tank hitting the heatshield with spray-on insulation pieces on Starship, they still seem to be losing a lot of tiles, even after 6 flights and 4 reentries, in addition to warping some of the steel. If they need to go through extensive refurbishment after every flight like the Shuttle did, Starship may end up a big money losing operation for SpaceX.
@@plainText384 My point wasn''t about the reusability of the shuttle but on the reliability. If the booster or second stage are lost every 100 launches, which is slightly less often than the space shuttle failed, then that may be too much to make the system viable. Starship is already a huge money losing operation. Even the HLS contract won't pay for that. Maybe they can make some of the money back when they start launching Starlink satellites, but count me sceptical. And when speaking about Mars, Musk is entirely bullshitting people. The only way the first mission to Mars is happening is with massive government-led effort, no matter who provides the rocket in the end.
I expect that the ship launch and catch won't happen on the same day. They'll just park it in orbit and do a controlled re-entry later on when they're ready. Gives them time to do any repairs on the chopsticks after a booster catch, and also allows them to see how the ship holds up during an extended stay in space.
Starship couldn't return right away, anyway. When it's orbit brings Starship back around, Starbase will have rotated 22.5 degrees due to Earth's rotation. Because of this westward shift of the ground track the minimum time to return will be 1 day.
Well reported. Thanks.
Thought the starship land had sound! TFS, GB :)
This is mind blowing that we can do this now I say this as someone who’s old enough to remember Apollo this is definitely a whole different thing isn’t it? The Apollo engineers would’ve said that this is a great idea but it’s just not now and probably will never be technically Possible .
We have been doing crazy space stuff for decades, we landed on an asteroid recently
4:30 well… I would hope that the ship would have the common courtesy to give the Earth a go-around :-)
Its going to be so nuts to watch starship get caught after coming back from orbit.
Is survived unlike the shuttle blew up missing heat shield tiles. Bit I heard in a RUclips video that space x wants to use thinner steel.
They will strip it back as far as they possibly can while still safe, with the limitations on engine efficiency imposed by bipropellants every kilogram of weight saved make a major difference.
@ doesn’t sound safe.
IFT8 is going to be lit! I wonder if they’re going to catch the booster prior to the ship. That means they’ll have to haul ass to get the booster back onto its transport stand and out of the way ASAP. Should make for some amazing entertainment!
I think they're going to drop starship in the gulf for flight 7. Maybe 8. If not by 8, 9 will be a starship catch.
Will the second tower not be ready?
The other option it to leave starship in orbit until ready.
Yeah Starship can just stay in orbit until the tower is clear for another catch.
@@lyricbread as others have said, it can stay in orbit while the tower is cleared. They showed that it can deorbit on the test by firing the single Raptor engine for like, a second. It was higher in altitude than the previous tests. The stream announcer said if they didn't do that it would continue to orbit.
No green exhaust means no burning copper / metals, which surely is a good thing compared to the first succesful bellyflop maneuvers we saw.
Forgive me if this is a dumb question, but what happened AFTER Starship is in the water? Does it remain afloat and get picked up? Then what? I have not found anything about what is done with the ocean landed Starship OR boosters.
no, it's just sinks to the bottom of the ocean, i believe it's very deep in that area.
@@og_pfunke Interestingly, right after I posted that comment I found a video the partially answered my question. Not completely. but some.
I find it odd that almost all videos of the explosion have been scrubbed from the internet
Crazy Stuff.
They should use aerogel as the ablative material
This view is spectacular! I worry though because every time I see these heavy stage boosters and crafts landing they all seem to be just a tiny bit crooked for the final contact. Is this planned ?
EDIT. The little flap could is now the flap that can do! Just say 'in.
Starship usually is, that's the off center trust at the end. That's about it.
Great analysis. Thinking about ISS retirement makes me wonder how much of its contents have a salvage value. How much would you pay for a bit of ISS memorabilia?
Reminds me of the Adama maneuver in Battlestar Galactic. If I see the Starship activate an FTL engine, I’ll be shocked..
"Altitude 99,000 falling like a rock!" ruclips.net/video/ISmZKuRcAjM/видео.htmlsi=5Q1rB6-TEl1xzaGo&t=54 Love it!
dont you dare for one second think we didnt notice "they have their plate full with starship's heat shield"
That buoy should have a drone that can rise up 300 feet to get a better view.
I think the buoy was unmanned, so how did the camera track the ship to splashdown?
They have been remote operating camera's for more than half a century.
@@TheEvilmooseofdoom I realize that, but the ship was in the center of the frame all the way down. I don't think a human operator could have done that.
@@guypehaim1080 A human OR a computer could have done both easily. They have been tracking space launches manually also for a half century.
@@TheEvilmooseofdoom Okay, I concede, you have the last word.🤭
I won't believe it 'til I see it - people boarding a carnival ride to space ! ?
need a backup PEZ dispenser escape protocol, whereby astronauts get "deployed" like atarlink satellites in emergency, adopting the no part is best part philosophy safety strategy lol
Are these retrieved
Adama maneuver.
I did a painting of the Adama Maneuver for the show back in the day... Just look up "Jeffrey Stark Adama Maneuver"... That's done by me...... 😁👍
Looks like they have everything fairly sorted for catching both the booster and the ship to me . Its sucks they aborted the booster catch this time around because that landing looked perfect .
2:10 Prime for “Human Rating”?
the most powerful rocket in history is going to fly 25 times in one year........ its very impressive if you think about, not even nasa in the cold war was capable of this
Yeah because they didn't want to waste all that money. If NASA built stuff like SpaceX, they would never get the funding...
So if an astronaut was on board for this test he would have survived. Obviously not the explosion. He could of exited via a hatch into waiting rescue vessel.
Pressing forward for more smbitious planned failures.
..what?
I need the banana cam during the flip.
So does the ship just float throughout the ocean and then SpaceX just finds it and pulls it out?
No, they activate the flight termination system and blow it up so that it sinks.
If it doesn't sink on it's own they'll sink it, they had to do that with one of the early F9's when they were doing soft water landing tests, one fell over and broke up but on chunk would not sink and I believe they demo'd it. That was a lot closer to home though, out in the indian ocean I don't know, they might expect wave action and weather to sink it eventually or maybe the FTS charges are used.
@@schrodingerscat1863 Are any of the Raptor engines recovered after it sinks? I can see an adversary wanting to recover those from the bottom of the ocean!
@@Create-The-ImaginableThat's why they blow it up with the fts.
@@Create-The-Imaginable Not so far from the Starship, the Indian ocean is way too deep to mount a salvage operation. They did lift raptors from one of the boosters as that is just off shore. After a short time in salt water the engines would be so corroded and damaged they would likely be useless to a competitor. I wouldn't be surprised if they salvage the booster engines again as they are in quite shallow water so it would be possible for competition to be able to get to them quickly.
I thought the ship had flames on structure after water landing and laying down on ocean ?? Yes lets see Ship orbit 2-3 times !! Actually dispense something , plush toy like used in Dragon/ISS !
The ship and booster are not designed to land in the ocean. If there were no explosions, I would be surprised. I don't get why people don't understand this. They always say it exploded, it failed. Sorry, that just shows a total lack of understanding.
One step at a time. This is testing. You do understand what that means right?
Where's the kaboom? There was supposed to be an earth-shattering kaboom!
It seems to me that once they can put the ship in orbit they will, and they will use that as time to remove the booster from the pad just in case of catastrophic landing failure to save the booster. Just to be safe for the first few, but once the landings are routine both will be on the pad at the same time and both land there.
Based on the motion of the buoy and the lack of motion of the camera I'd have to say that the stabilisation software is something else or that this footage is a fake.
Why doesn't it land like it used to before?
It doesn't have landing legs, that's why. This iteration of the starship is expected to be caught by the chopsticks, but the eventual Lunar and Mars mission ships will definitely have landing legs as a necessity of course.
They don't bother with landing legs on the ship and booster for earth missions in order to save weight and increase payload to orbit capacity.
That was just an iterative step to prove the flip and burn landing maneuver for the high altitude hop tests. They'll do at least one more ocean landing like this before trying to catch it like they did the booster.
There won't be legs again until moon/Mars landers. There might be tests of that system on Earth, but the majority of ship returns to Earth will land on the tower except for some flight profiles where they will expend it in the atmosphere to burn up or ditch it in the ocean. Expect a long process with many different iterations and profiles as they optimize the design. We're still a long way from what it will ultimately become.
Why would they need to catch the upper stage 🤔
Exactly, they have to land people on the moon... Are they going to build a chopstick catcher on the moon?
🙂
Love how Musk always cuts the footage before the vehicle bursts into flames and the booster explodes. Next stop Mars!
I love how you fools seem to think he's controlling every single aspect of every single thing himself. You're being an imbecile.
Space-X conveniently left out the massive explosion which destroyed the entire spacecraft a few seconds after touchdown.
They cut away during the live stream but there is footage. It's not a matter of convenience, it's one person who has to try and decide which stream and do it live.
That's incredible, by all ods it should behaved worse ! But it was awesome and way better amazing !!!
PRESS F TO PAY RESPECT - TO THE BANANA.
This is a good idea compared to catching a landing rocket thats stupid
The plan is to catch the landing rockets, im confused by your comment
@ptech88 no catching is involved if you land on a platform a catch is like a hand grabbing a ball flying towards it or a bird claw grabbing a cylindrical branch in very similar way to catching a cylindrical rocket.
@@FLORIDIANMILLIONAIRE where is this video do they say anything about landing on a platform? It specifically says if all goes well on next flight they will catch both with the chop sticks on the following flight. Thats why im confused by what you say.
@@ptech88 yes catching a free falling body like a rocket is not a practical idea but landing it using active control on a moving platform like a raft on ocean sounds more practical and feasible to me as a scientist.
@@FLORIDIANMILLIONAIRE ok. Thx. We are not on the page at all.
At least consider the possibility these people are unqualified and insane.
Which people?
Yee
Looks like Boba Fett coming in for a landing.
I would speculate that there will eventually be a titanium alloy or something similar version of the Starship.
Most will be stainless steel for costs however the titanium versions will not only be stronger butmuch lighter therefore able to bring more mass to LEO and beyond.
No.
@TheEvilmooseofdoom
Come back in 5 years...
im more alarmed that americans pronounce buoy as bewee.
KOOL ASS SHIT
I must say that I'm a bit surprised that both the booster and the starship weren't programed to come to a full stop at the height of the chopsticks. The way they "landed" after flight 6, they would have broken the chopsticks, they would have been falling too fast at the height of the chopsticks.
Im kinda surprised about the sudden FAA cooperation... Is this another extra Trump Effect?
Traditional rockets are close to reaching the limit of their capability. RDE is the next stage in rocketry, all be it not traditional. I wonder when SpaceX will start down that road? Still new forms of space propulsion are need to be developed without the interference of nay sayers pretending that they know better.
RDE is interesting, but what kind of thrust and throttle control can they manage?
@@motokid6008 It's a work in progress, but my understanding is that it has the highest efficiency with a much smaller lighter engine and the highest weight to thrust ratio known atm. Not sure how well they throttle but SpaceX has demonstrated that the multi engine approach is very effective. Built in redundancy has also proven to be valuable.
There are more fringe propulsion avenues being explored that could use more funding and less ridicule. It's time to start taking a closer look at some alternatives IMO. For now I'm surprised that SpaceX hasn't been more on top of RDE's, or maybe they are but are keeping it close to the chest for now.
What does the FAA know about space flight? After seeing NASA's attempts....not much.
(except how to hold SpaceX back)
It's spelled buoy and pronounced "boy", not "booey".
Both “boy” and “boo-ee” are correct. The former is the British pronunciation and the latter is the America pronunciation.
@@AnomalyXero Modern American spelling is better than old English spelling.
One of the attributes of progress is spending less time doing something, which means that less keystrokes are required.
Color, flavor, not colour, flavour. There is no need for the letter 'u' since the meaning of the word does not change.
Program instead of programme. There is no need for the letters 'me' at the end of the word.
So from now on, please write in modern English.
Modern American spelling is better than old English spelling.
One of the attributes of progress is spending less time doing something, which means that less keystrokes are required.
Color, flavor, not colour, flavour. There is no need for the letter 'u' since the meaning of the word does not change.
Program instead of programme. There is no need for the letters 'me' at the end of the word.
So from now on, please write in modern English.
@@AnomalyXero It "bobs" in the water like a boy would; it doesn't "booey" in the water!
Hey-ho, Churchill always said we were two nations separated by a common language!
@@MrProach2 The English language is an evolving language.
Just think how much it has changed since its origin in Northern Germany.
Churchill was a madman like Hitler.
Yeah ok...
Yup, sending a steel ship to a literal rust planet…great idea
That is probably not pure Stainless Steel, I can see if being some kind of modified meta material that does not rust! Probably classified. It's called 30X and is a proprietary material.
@ doesn’t rust on earth. Things are probably more challenging on an entire planet famous for rust.
All the oxygen on Mars is already bound to the rocks, so nothing can truly rust within a human timescale.
I HOPE SPACE X DOESN'T LEAVE THE CHINESE TO STEAL THEIR TECHNOLOGY
Go SpaceX , Amazing what a private company can do. Looking at you NASA 😒