Smarter Every Day BOOST-ED!
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 14 апр 2024
- Kinda... THIS!
• I Was SCARED To Say Th...
You can support this channel directly through patreon:
/ thunderf00t
or at my amazon affiliate store:
www.amazon.com/shop/thunderf00t
or my other channel: / @voiceofthunder9620 
Развлечения
![ian - Fit Check (Feat. VonOff1700) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/sDGWDBg45Dw/mqdefault.jpg)
Destin's video was mind-blowing - fantastic that you're covering this as well. And thanks for shouting us out midway through :)
We need a full on collab between you two. Ripping aparts scams is what you two excell at
@@memestealer6348
Common sense showing data from coursts qnd stuff and thundefoot showing the science stuff thingy
Remember Musks title at SpaceX:
Chief Designer. That’s all you need to know.
@@cowpotpi3 imagine going through years and years and years of education then getting employed at SpaceX only to make your boss's doodles real... somehow, and him take all the credit for it.
next video: ift4(20lol)?
I had no idea Kennedy offered joint space program with USSR. Holy shit.
Some people claim that was his end trying to cooperate with the Soviets both for him and Khruschev
@@rankoorovic7904 The story went that Kennedy was compromised in a Russian honey trap after the war when he was overseas. His father had been a diplomat so the doors overseas were all open.
@@rankoorovic7904
Would make sense. IMC don't want peace.
@@rankoorovic7904 Idk about khruschev, but it was indeed a hot times in soviet politics (y know, tend to happen with multiple strong influential leaders in the same room that have different thing in mind).
@@alexturnbackthearmy1907 after the moon the soviets gave up the space race
Quick correction to your math: the space program doesn't cost 3% of our military budget. It costs 1/3 of one percent of the military budget.
3%, was just for space station I think? NASA and space are actually 10x this... Or counting all aerospace 30x. We have a lot of money going to imagine different ways to fly when aerospace and air cargo is just 1% of our GDP. But sea and road moves 99% of our GDP. We should have a huge ground and ship research agency. Aerospace research by this math IS a scam, while Korean and China research and build ocean ships.... Leading in tiniest segment of transport is not admirable it's a PR stunt... It's like having a fancy agency to research fanny packs , while Korean and China research and dominate luggage, just a scam by fanny pack engineers who want applause for taking our tax money.. or who knows... Peace
Huuuuge difference that he missed.
Defense r&d is $175b about $100b is fancy materials, rockets, and electronics. Rest is ships and bio. So NASA is $25b but US blows another $100b on similar research. W 100m houses this is $1000 per household in US for nerds to research and then claim we got our moneys worth.. Bio and ships and stuff including rest maybe $300b more. So $4000 per household is taxed to spend on research. Be honest we are NOT seeing advances yearly that are worth $4000 to avg family. Life is good already. Flying bit faster or letting 90 year old live to 91 via advance is NOT worth $4000. 90% of people live to 70 that's enough lifespan. . .. so yes let's cut most R&D paid by taxing people including NASA. Rockets have NOT improved much since 1965 so NASA has failed, that's 55 years. I want my $4000, let me take kids to week on beach, that's better than science research which again is NOT worth it. I'm a science guy but gotta compare and look and numbers not just nod like idiot. END GOVT R&D $4000 TAX!!!! I am right but y'all can't fight the brainwashing..
He said the budget for the ISS was 3%, not the whole space program.
Relative to the weight of what the citizens fear more. But my bias, as a veteran from a family of veterans, is I don't think we spend enough $ the right way when it comes to defense.
We seriously need to stop allowing governmental employees who are in charge of awarding billion dollar contracts to private companies to leave their posts and then take money from those same companies.
We need to stop pretending a single person was able to make a decision about where $3 billion was allocated on their own. They just followed what the committee who analysed the 3 submissions found
Thunderf00t never passes up an opportunity to flex that majestic PhD photo. I don't blame him, lol, it's an awesome picture.
The pic is convincing evidence time travel exists. He looks straight out of the 1400s
@@SampsonoffA true Renaissance man
Yup. It's very rock 'N' roll
Louis XIV.
PhD regalia is pretty swag, a graduate commencement ceremony at a big university is quite the spectacle. Lots of pomp and circumstance. But, by the time you’ve finished grad school, it’s all worth it!
5:50 “We choose to go to the moon, not because it is easy, but because we thought it would be easy. I mean, it’s like an air hockey table in a tunnel - it’s really not that complicated!” 😅
sounds "boring"-
@@jackprier7727Ok, you’re definitely ready to be a father. You got the dad jokes down.
@@jackprier7727🤣
Under-rated comment.
@@angrydoggy9170 Given how many children Elon has, he must have the best dad jokes!
"You know the truth and you're afraid to say it."
Righteous bro.
I heard orchestra were just so noblemen could show off how wealthy they were by being able to support so many musicians.
Ego is a powerful drug.
Lawns were originally something one surrounded one's castle with so as to say "Look how much land I can waste!"
When I saw the thumbnail I was like NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!! no way! not Destin! WTF, wait what woot. then I got closer to the screen and saw the hyphen. Dr Mason, well played. Well played, you glorious bastard.
Yep, I thought Thunderf00t was doing a play-on-words for "busted", I'm glad that wasn't the case. I totally forgot he does these "boosted" vids, too many "busted" vids these days.
No doubt, I was like, "WHAT??!!"
@@cujoedaman Uh, he _was_ doing a play on words. To "boost" something is to increase its reach and recognition. In contrast to "bust" something, which is to demonstrate how it is inaccurate in some way.
Lol, people are so used to seeing Thunderfoot put people on blast that they had to do a double take when he wasn't.
Yep
Omg. The fact that one woman approved the plan for spaceX to do this, then quit to go work for spaceX, blows my mind. How is that woman not in prison?
Because corruption is legal.
Just look at the supreme court.
I think that not too uncommon a lot of industries. Like FDA and pharmaceutical
@@jointhefist1016 Yes, unfortunately.
Way of the world, gotta stay alert😊
The same way the "rest of 'em" ain't.
"It takes four hundred thirty people to man a starship. With this, you don't need anyone. One machine can do all those things they send men out to do now." - Dr. Richard Daystrom
"There are certain things men must do to remain men.” - Captain James T Kirk
Brilliant
The answer would be for that design better and cost effective system.
... and then over 500 people died to said invention in what is called the Daystrom incident showing that the solution of "software will fix it" isn't a thing and that software is more vulnerable to failure than many people think lmfao
Thunderf00t's mistake is assuming this is a solo pissing contest, or about science. The Chinese want to land humans on the moon by 2030, and build a moon station by 2035; and suddenly Nasa starts Artemis. This is an old-school Apollo-Era pissing contest, just against the Chinese. I'm just glad we get some space exploration and science out of it.
Could at least do a particle accelerator pissing contest, at least we'd have some hope of fundamental science coming out of it instead of "hmm, fascinating, this chunk of anorthosite has 5% more boron than expected, yes yes"
The moon and mars are dead rocks and there's nothing for us there.
(for context, what the americans did in this space was to cancel the superconducting supercollider and then fill the tunnel back up after spending a cool couple billion digging it)
@@isodoubletparticle accelerator pissing is less emotionally impactful and just as wasteful. There are basically no more big HEP theory tests within reachable energies.
I'd like to see a nuclear fusion pissing contest. That seems like it'd have some scalable benefits.
@@appa609"emotionally impactful"
Don't care
" just as wasteful"
no
"There are basically no more big HEP theory tests within reachable energies. "
And you know that... how? Who told you? God?
At least with HEP we're learning about the fundamental structure of the universe, instead of "oh look pretty rocks".
The lesson of SSC is they should have just not done it to begin with and collaborated with CERN. Two colliders cost twice as much as one collider but do exactly the same amount of physics. It's not like LHC is constantly running.
There is an old Chinese morality tale, it about the emperor giving a bunch of kids seeds with the order to grow them and return in a few months with the results.
The story follows this kid, it does everything right, but the flower won’t grow.
Come delivery day the kid has an empty pot while all the other kids have flowers.
With shame the kid presents the empty pot.
The emperor proceeds to give only that kid a reward.
Because all the seed were cooked and couldn’t sprout. So all the other kids lied and used new seeds to not shame themselves.
I feel like these are important lessons that we have to incorporate into our cultural understanding.
This was a fable not only for children but also for rulers.
A honest person who makes no excuses for their failures is worth more than a liar who gives the impression of success for selfish reasons.
Musk has indeed brought us a lot of empty pots
@@shanent5793 More like musk provides the cooked seeds, stalks the engineers he's given them to in order to watch if they replace the seeds, and then when the engineers go to sleep at night Musk sneaks in and replaces the engineer's non-cooked seeds with more cooked seeds.
"As long as people speak up about their mistakes we got a shot. If people keep sweeping things under the rug, we're not going to New Jersey, let alone The Moon." -From the earth to the moon, series.
Reminds me of a somewhat inversted tale from Young Justice. Ironicly it involes the villians sending his son to attack and blowup a rocket launch. The attack fails and they can't reach the rocket site because defenders block them. But then the Rocket blows up in fight on it's own due to an aparent routine technical failure. The Son returns and reports that he has Failed in the mission.
His Father says that he actually passed, because he had planted a bomb on the rocket months ago and just wanted to see if his son would claim success that was unearned. Had he succeded in the mission he would have just kept testing him like that untill he had failed yet had the opportunity to claim unearned success. The lesson is that the hardest thing is to be honest about failure when luck actually delivers you an unearned win.
If only modern China under the CCP wasn't the complete opposite of that. Everyone, from top down, cheats with their seeds.
When I woke up, I saw this thumbnail. I was instantly excited, then horrified to learn it was about Destin, and then relieved to learn it was Boosted, not Busted. This is some of your best work, Thunderf00t. Keep them coming... Cheers...
This was my exact thought process this morning as well. Saved me the time of typing it, thanks.
@@JoeRitze Something similar happened to me, gang... I was on the brink of loosing faith... thinking "Not Dustin... nooo!" 😭
@@Kriegerdammerung instead we got a rare Boosted Thunderf00t video :)
I even got my far-right "Jews-control-the-world" father to like and watch Smarter Every Day. I would have been devastated
me too 🤣 i was like goddamit i love that guy!
I swear I read and saw busted, happy it's not.
Good for both voicing up on the BS, as much as I would love to see people head to Mars, I still think we don't have (or willing to use due to it being too unstable or new) the tech needed to accomplish it.
The greatest thing about this vid is it was the opposite of a takedown of Destin. Love both of you
Destin's video was amazing. I'm glad that Thunderfoot spread the message that Smarter Every Day put forward. When I saw the proposal for the HLV I thought to myself "Why would they choose a system that could never come to fruition" David Wood's book "How Apollo Flew to the Moon" is an amazing record of the Apollo program and the systems involved in the success of the program. It's a 20 hour listen on Audible, but well worth it for those interested in this kind of endeavor.
You are the same people that said falcon 9 would never come to fruition. So excuse us for not giving aSht what you haters think.
...
What do you mean?
Like seriously
Starship is closer than any other system to "coming to fruition". Even if launches 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 are all complete failures and we pick up on 9 in 3 years they're STILL further ahead than ANYONE else.
@@HavokBWR That's an over-generalisation. There are certainly people (such as myself) who acknowledge F9's achievements (even TF admits that while being sceptical of the economics of its reusability), while being doubtful about starship, and especially the HLS. They're quite different systems.
@mt-mg7tt it's not an over generalization. Thunderf00t is a pathetic hater who thinks he's far smarter than he is. Just because he's a chemical engineer does not make him an expert in the things he is criticizing. He got a taste of fame with the solar roads and has been desperately chasing that dragon. And his fan base... just look at the comments. It's a circleJ of the same kind of pathetic haters.
He was wrong about falcon 9. And now he's shifting his focus to the next this that has yet to happen so he can poke holes in it up until reality sets in and he has to shift to the the next thing that nobody can challenge him on, because it's just hypothetical speculation.
The moon mission, yeah it looks ridiculous needing 18 launches. But it's not going to stay like that. They are adding in multiple redundancies since it's so new. The plan is to have it be like 4 launches..
@@HavokBWR I do worry about echo chambers and the like. And you could say it’s merely shifting focus to the next thing. But one cannot generalise that all who are suspicious of Starship dislike F9, there are people who dislike the former because it’s a fundamentally different rocket that is way behind schedule and part of a very complex launch system (as you admit). In Starship’s defence I could say that orbital refueling is worth developing if it can work - even if this isn’t the way to get to the moon.
Re 4 re- fueling launches, you seem to be referring to the same diagram that Destin looked at, but I have heard various numbers.
"Failure is not an option" - NASA , 1960s
"Everything after clearing the launchpad is icing on the cake" - Space X / Elmo, 2020s
SpaceX nowadays: _"There's an option that isn't failure????"_
"success is just the friends we made along the way!" maybe we should start awarding spacex participation trophies for their starship launches!
My favorite Space X euphemism is that the call the rocket explosion "spaceship disassembly"
@@rankoorovic7904 I think they call it a RUD. Rapid unscheduled disassembly.
SpaceXer : "There's cake??? yay! what blew up..?"
Destin's video was fantastic! I was impressed by his frankness with the audience and he's absolutely correct.
Yes. Dustin is a fine example of how you criticize and educate. Phil could learn a lot from his content.
For wee while, I was getting my feathers a bit ruffled, but then I remembered this concerns MUSK..the habitual over-promiser...
Destin had (a year ago)? a terrific rocket-building video also-at the factory-
@@goodgremlinmedia2757 Phil can't have a face to face discussion with anyone he disagrees with, without them despising him. If it was him up there giving that talk, the audience would have cleared out before he got to the mid point of his presentation.
@@my3dviews He’s a small minded asshole that has an intense disdain for new technology. Not only that but when it comes to SpaceX he simply has no idea what he is talking about. In his last video he took the total development cost of the starship program for 2023 and divided it by 2 to work out how much each stack costs. This guy has a doctorate and that that was how the math worked out.
The cost of mass is basically the first thing you ever learn about rocketry. Great work folks, I hope the message is not ignored.
I was shocked when I first learned that they were going to use a Starship variant to replace the LEM. That's like using a full-size freight train to go to the corner store to pick up a carton of milk.
The plan sort of works if we skip the return trip...
The reality was that congress cut the promised funding for the lander prototype (upon realizing that little to none of the money would reach most states.) For 2 of the 3 companies, they deemed the amount too small. Only SpaceX was able to afford it since they were already building Starship. It's just extra funds to help them achieve their goals.
@@Ncyphendidn't realize they treated it like the MIC. A glorified jobs program.
@@nilsdock Isn't that ultimately the point?
@@NcyphenThe program was also years behind schedule and way over budget.
The Artemis 1 test flight was scheduled for 2016. It launched in 2022.
Artemis 1 alone was 46% over budget.
The development of the Orion capsule cost 13 billion dollars.
The total projected cost of the program 2012-2025 is 93 billion dollars.
So no, the corrupt senators weren't the only reason it got cancelled.
I used to defend SpaceX. I felt like they were getting us closer with each launch. But now that I've seen the information about Lueders spending my taxpayer dollars on SpaceX before leaving her role and joining SpaceX, I'm convinced we've been swindled.
There are no good billionaires.
@@leighz1962better said. There is no good government. If government was incorruptible. Then billionaires would just be regular people with a lot of money.
You should be mad at people spending your tax money on SpaceX, not on SpaceX. In fact you should be mad about taxes.
@@ianniculescu1625Corruption of this kind usually involves two parties, both guilty. There's no sensible argument for blaming just one party, but since you believe there should be no taxes, I imagine you have a very peculiar view of how governance should work.
@@ianniculescu1625 Nah, taxes are good. Pretty much entire civilization thing is based on taxes, anything other then it is anarchy, that will evolve back into civilisation as we know it.
I think Destin is hitting on something that I've recognized recently with negative feedback. In a democracy, if you cannot be critical of ideas or implementation of ideas without fear of retribution you are no longer in a democracy.
That's nice. The problem is now y'all just invent facts to match the story you want. Face it. You're doomed.
@@plab0187 what? Can you explain what you mean? Your comment is vague.
@@jacobframe8769 "alternative facts" as invented by a certain orange traffic cone of treason.
That has nothing to do with democracy. Even in the most authoritarian regimes there were many ideas that could be criticized without fear of retribution
@@shanent5793 get out of here clown.
"keep it simple" i remember seeing a post where they celebrated the advancements of the new rockets designs and all i saw inside were screens instead of switches, can you imagine dying in orbit because the touch stopped working?
My Dad worked for Handley-Page during the Bay of Pigs, he and Mum lived in a cottage on the Handley-Page site at Radlett. A site manufacturing a V-bomber. A known first-strike target. Mum would not move out of earshot of the radio for the whole period. We have no clue how bad it was back then.
when shipping an entire refinery and the pig iron it needs to orbit, and then building a new space station and taking that to the moon starts to sound easier than flying a rocket there, perhaps we have a problem
Money gets poured into every stupid idea now. Just so rich people have some gimmick to make themselves richer. None of them even care if it works, or blows up with a crew onboard. It's wild. Never imagined it would get this bad.
@@dmwalker24 that's the economic reality of low interest rates. Money seems cheaper.
What are you talking about? Making steel in space is also going to need huge amounts of oxygen so it would never be easier. If cryogenic fuel transfer is questionable then you shouldn't even try to work with molten steel in zero-g.
@@challox3840 I think we're a bit beyond that. Interest rates have been very low for a very long time, and they're higher now than they have been since 2008. This is the result of people with vast wealth, using that wealth to make more wealth, and not actually giving a shit if any of the steps in the process involve the production of anything useful to anyone.
The fact that Destin went swimming with the astronauts recently, probably shows they highly welcomed that wakeup call in form of an epic speech.
In the same video, Destin also said he got exited once he realized how big HLS actually is
Yeah it's definitely not because his dad is working for Nasa...
The video footage of him swimming is 2 or 3 years old. He even mentioned it in the video
Some of them probably felt trapped as well. He said what they couldn't.
they don't want to die so elon can larp as wernher von braun
Don't let him sell you a monorail.
The saddest thing is if by some miracle Space X worked once you know there would be a massive push to put people on it and send them to mars. In some way we are lucky the rockets keep blowing up, no one can force "live trials" on us like they do with the Self driving Tesla's.
"Some of you may die trying to get to the moon in my shitty rockets; but that is a risk I am willing to make."
Elon Musk
"Some of you may die trying to fix Twitter algorith.; but that is a risk I paid libs billions for."
-Xielon Mausk
It's really not that hard guys, we could do it... today.
He didn't even offer them ponies...
Some of you will die waiting for your Semi truck pre-order
As long as he isn't going to be in those rockets.
I think perhaps the ability to make 'anything' LOOK so completely real and possible with CGI has done something to human brains.
Yep. Some of us live in a goddamn cartoon
Exactly described! So many people who saw space shows, etc., are quite sure of what is possible, and incorrectly-
It is actually rare to see any CGI that looks real. It all looks to me like a Pixar Movie/Cartoon.
@@bonzey1171 Yeah I want to blame them but for a while the US president was an orange guy with a bad wig or something... And the other guy says a 9mm bullet blows your lungs out of your chest.
At this point living in a cartoon really wouldn't feel that surreal.
Also... It's 2025, Still no flying or self driving cars, No robot butlers, No moon bases... But at least we did get the phone wrist watch things from spy movies... And we have the technology to make shoe phones too...
Actually nevermind I totally get it... If I could I'd lie to myself just like them.
fantastic follow-up .. I can't begin to describe how impressed and thankful I am of all the work you do
Oh man that last segment hit hard - specifically the meme "calling you out" for being negative, when all you're doing is saying 'I have been hearing the same shit for 40 years it's never worked out before'.
I don't have people memeing me but... FML that is my daily experience at work.
The budget is 0,3 % of the military budget😉
Also U.S. Military protects americans from foreign attacks 99%. Spacex is a complete waste of tax payers money😉
The millitary itself is probably spending more on space stuff than the entire budget of Nasa?
The difference is we are safe cause of the military.
@@SoloEchoYou are safe regardless of the military. In fact, you would be much safer without your military meddling with other countries' business.
Meanwhile, you are much poorer and falling behind in every measure (except the number of billionaires) thanks to neglecting advanced research like NASA.
@@erikkarsies4851 at least part of that maintains GPS. Thanks American tax payers, but Galileo as a newer system is much more accurate.
I watched that entire Destin video and it was a breath of fresh air seeing someone smart, well read and most importantly having an audience tell them all off for not doing the bare minimum and learning from those that came before us.
I hope his talk woke some of those far too idealistic people to the reality that just because you can make it more complex and “modern” doesn’t mean it’s better. Why we are struggling to do things that NASA did over 50 years ago is fairly indicative of how lost modern NASA has become.
Or maybe it really was Kubrick 😂
We are just as broken as we were then it just happened that we got lucky that a few level headed and desperate engineers made it work despite the politics.
@@somethingsomethingsomethingdar And that they were given enough funds to actually develop the solution, along with several second chances. Something N-1 wasnt lucky enough to have...
I used to watch him, but got tired of his religious comments.
@@Beer_Dad1975 Me too.
SpaceX found SuperHeavy/Starship has a 50% under performance issue and it only took three test flights to discover this. Simply amazing.
Just because they didn't state the payload capacity publicly prior to flight 3 doesn't mean they didn't know it.
It's almost trivial to calculate the payload capacity of a rocket given just four figures: the thrust of the engines, the fuel consumption rate, the mass of fuel in each stage, and the mass of the empty stage. I find it hard to believe that SpaceX did not have those numbers internally.
@@lazarus2691 100 tons to orbit was its advertised payload until EM announced last month flight 4 payload would be 40-50 tons to orbit and future ships would be stretched to carry more fuel. Seems strange to be working on design that they knew could not deliver 100 tons to LEO, if they knew.
@@armandomercado2248 It's not that weird. The stretched versions require more powerful engines, which aren't ready yet. So either they sit with an idle production line, stockpile V2s until the engines are ready, or build V1s with the current engines so they can get flight data. SpaceX chose the latter, since they've done this sort of thing before.
Falcon 9 actually didn't fly until Merlin 3 was ready, and the performance on that still wasn't great so the initial version of Falcon 9 only got 9 tons of payload. On the 6th flight they moved to Merlin 4 downrated to 85%, which got them to 13 tons payload, and then gradually uprated them to 110% power by the 21st flight, reaching the current 23 ton payload capacity.
@@lazarus2691 Raptor 3 engines (which were coming anyway), adding 10 meters to SH/SS just to get to the original 100 tons goal? Good spin.
@@armandomercado2248 There's a reason they were "coming anyway". Raptor V3 was confirmed about a year ago, a month after the first test flight, and well before the third.
Although realistically, as I noted in my first comment, SpaceX very likely knew that the performance was insufficient even before that test flight.
Consider this: if SpaceX thought that the first version of Starship would hit it's target performance, then why did they skip straight to Raptor V2?
Could it be because they knew Raptor V1 was insufficient before it ever flew? And if so, then why is it a stretch to think they knew V2 still wouldn't be enough?
What I learned from this video is that the man more responsible for the moon landing than almost anyone else was Lee Harvey Oswald.
They went from exploding in a test rig, to exploding on the launch pad, to exploding in flight, to exploding in low earth orbit. That’s a lot of progress. They still have to explode in high orbit, explode in transit, explode in moon orbit, explode on the moon, explode on the return trip and then explode on earth re-entry. Never was much of a Musk fan. Thunderfoot's excellent reporting hasn't done anything to change my opinion in any positive way.
The irony is, due to the lack of resources, simulators and computing, that's how soviets made their rockets up to the moon-ready N1, they tested them by launching them (and early us rockets too, but they stopped blowing rockets up as normal development process)
That's why I'm so surprised that spacex is having so many issues with the rockets. Apollo, the shuttle, Buran-energia, Angara, Ariane*, they all worked well the first time!
*Ariane 5 blew up with one of the most commented software engineering bugs ever
@@georgH You forget that most of the people working on those are either old or dead.
And besides, they were doing the old, boring stuff, not the new hotness (MiB reference here).
They never reached LEO with Starship. It was a planned suborbital trajectory.
Yeah bro, and starlink will never work and re-usable rockets will never happen. Trust the deboonkers
@@subboid no one said starlink won't work, they said it won't be profitable, which it isn't.
I saw Dustin's video when it came out and it was one of the first things that lead me to looking further into it and realise how insane SpaceX and Starship was. The sad thing about Dustin's video though is he himself was still too scared to call out SpaceX specifically when almost all his issues are SpaceX's role in the mission.
There are actually people in the comments of that video saying stuff like we need SpaceX to fix this, money should go to SpaceX instead of NASA, etc. All because Dustin didn't call out SpaceX and they believe SpaceX isn't even involved.
True, but at the end of the day, NASA are the ones that awarded the contracts, they're the ones doing all the promo etc, they're ultimately responsible.
@digitalsparky well, one ex-NASA employee in particular. Who retired and, astonishingly now works at SpaceX instead of a FBP complex as a resident.
@@digitalsparkydid you watch the video?
@@HammerStudioGames I did, did you?
Isn't NASA already paying aspects of SpaceX already?
This is by far one of the best lessons I’ve got in my entire life. It’s all about honesty and delivery when we talk about science. A scientist must earn his or her place going hard on the facts without sugar coating the results.
Tyvm for this vital lesson. I wonder if we arrived to the moon.
13:22 - to provide negative feedback: 3bn is not 3% of 900bn, but 0.3%
When the Silicon Valley mentality is applied to something actually important, disasters happen.
Totally agree! I think Destin illustrates exactly what NASA had, and what they might have lost, that contributed to their success. They had the discipline of engineering. This is something that is being lost all across industries and is not being taught in the same way it was in the past. I think the "fail fast and fail often" mantra has been taken too far. I don't think that philosophy was really meant to replace good ol' NASA style engineering discipline, it was supposed to compliment it.
Yep, this is what happens when something like launch vehicle development is approached like a software project, it's Sillicon Valley brain rot, and the "iterative" development method is actually an old fashioned method that the industry abandoned in favor of current standard one many decades ago for very good reasons, they realized there was a much better and safer way to do systems development. Meanwhile Musk & co are spinning this like some revolutionary or innovative idea, which is so typical as that's the delusion that surrounds everything he's involved in.
@sevilnatas The problem with the Starship project, aside from the development approach, is that Musk prioritized hiring fresh out of college people who are inexperienced, and even a lot of those who don't have any aerospace background whatsoever, it definitely shows. SpaceX cultists constantly compare it to Falcon program and expect the same success which is a total false equivalence fallacy even if you ignore that predicting future success based on past is a fallacy anyway. Falcon program was worked on by experienced people with strong aerospace background, and a lot of ex NASA folks, it's a completely different story, even with development where the experimental stuff was only left to boosters once it completes its primary mission of delivering payload where it needs to be, so it was a very measured approach while the actual vehicle itself was developed in a standard and streamlined manner with lots of NASA help in tech, designs and funding. That's why it worked straight out the gate and never had any in flight failures except once or twice out of hundreds of missions. Starship is being experimented from ground up even including the launch infrastructure itself, it's a dumpster fire.
Venture capitalists exist to extract as much wealth from an operation as possible, they have no higher calling or responsibility to society at large. That's the mentality pushing startup culture, because that's who is funding it.
@@FrankyPi Totally agree.
What I find hard to swallow is the Musk fans, I've had a serious head injury (paralysis, unable to speak for weeks, near death type shit) and thus my memory is quite bad, like I have huge chunks of my 54 years that are just gone, but, what the hell is their excuse ?!! Elon Musk is a renowned , compulsive over promiser, not once or twice, not three or four times, I am talking relentless, and the fans just keep on adoring him, they must get up in the morning and bang their heads into brick walls until they can only just remember his name.
Well, he was proven right that reusable rockets are feasible and that electric cars can become practical and even popular. That's what gave people confidence in all his other BS ideas too. The jury is still out on starship, even Destin in the video thinks the plan is doable even though it's far from optimal - and optimal is what NASA should aim for.
Secondly I have a hunch that kids have been socialized with WWE Wresting too much where they get used to the idea of cheering in large groups to obviously fake things while acting as if it's real aka kayfabe. This way Musk and Trump can say the most outrageous things and the fans cheer even though they know it's fake, they're used to it since childhood.
@@thulyblu5486 True! Just check the comments in the youtube video where musk is giving the same speech shown here. Every comment is not just positive, but "how anyone could disagree with world's greatest innovator?".
In their mind musk has already achieved the impossible and the unthinkable
@@thulyblu5486 well people just ate the crap up about tesla, so that worked for tesla. it's numbers are still not anywhere what the company value would suggest.
and it was supposed to be profitable way, way way way earlier it's a downright miracle that it kept getting enough funding to keep going. this is why the alt other western ev car companies had hard times, getting the funding. sure fisker could've done just as well if it had the same cash injections.
Well, Falcon 9 is now reliable as fuck and we might get to a point when SpaceX flies 100 rockets in space a year without issue. Tesla proved EVs are viable and he has sold millions of them, SpaceX competion for crewed ship (Boeing) did not deliver, Trsla’s new self driving version is the best ever achived only eith cameras… there are actual successes by Musk. Thunderfoot used to laugh about the Starlink, the sheer scale of it. It is up there and playing a role in a major conflict and people use it, all similar scale plans by Google etc. with air baloons etc. have amounted to zero. Even Starship, he proved that basically he can get it to orbit, the largest ship ever with all of those engines etc. How reliably it remains to be seen, but it is not like he has not achieved anything.
That being said Starship for Artemis is a sucky idea and basically government is paying taxpayer money to SpaceX to develop its tech for its own uses…
Sorry I have to disagree with the statement of him being an 'over promiser'. An over promiser implies an individual of good faith that maybe isn't aware of the limits of their own abilities, and typically over promisers can be easily coached to actually promise with in the limits of their abilities. Melon Husk is a liar, he does it maliciously and is well aware that he (as in his companies) do not have the ability to deliver, it's instantly obviously by his body language, the way he talks and his mannerisms. He is fully aware that he is lying and being deceptive, and that the vast majority of what he does is to part simpletons from their cash and pump the value of what ever 'venture' he is lying about. The fortunate thing is that the walls are now closing in on one of the planet's biggest liars, his attempts at stock pumping are being met more and more with people seeing right through the lies.
To be fair, at the time putting a man in space is just as valuable as a symbolic result.
Even if there was no scientific reason for safely entering the core of the sun, the process of achieving the unthinkable generates crazy amount of knowledge.
It gets worse. They do not even know the shielding required to protect modern electronic. The distance between transistor gates are much smaller and we have forgot how to make them from Apollo. The shielding is approx 10 times that of Apollo.
"We choose to go to the Moon. Not because it is easy but because it sounds cool..."
"We choose to go to the Moon. Not because it is easy but because we measure our dicks in inches and not centimeters"
You're making false quotes of the same president who warned us about the CIA and unmentioned organizations. He believed in freedom of information. So I suggest doing some more research and swallowing your edgy teenager like comments.
Thats a good reason
Can't get star fleet without musk killing 3 astronauts todaym
Yes, that describes all human endeavors we have ever accomplished.
I was worried for a brief moment, before I've read the whole title.
the closeness to "busted" was worrying, lol.
I clicked it thinking it was a new smarter everyday video hyping Apollo more
Next level clickbait, I kinda got bored at the middle but I really wanted to know when Destin would be wrong and ended up watching the whole thing lol
I thought the same thing
Yep.
That lil squinty eye Dubya threw out when enunciating "worlds beyond" always cracked me up :D
Boob could not keep a straight face when bullshitting.
One thing to note is that this is why technocracy isn’t feasible because many of the problems can actually be solved through technology we already have.
Destin finally said what all engineers my dad's age have been saying for years. I ve been waiting for something like this.
what? That spaceX will never be able to land their rockets? Oh right, youve moved onto the next thing the programming told you to hate on.
@@HavokBWR
Is that how you form _your_ opinions?
Wait to be programmed?
Who programmes you?
@@stickiedmin6508 umm what??
YOU people decided long ago that spaceX was never going to be able to land their rockets. YOU were told what to think and blindly believed it.
Then when they succeed you were told the next thing to think, the next anti Elon opinion to be programmed into your head.
THats hOw yOu fOrm yOur oPiniOns ?? dURrrr🤤🤤🤤
You mean basing my opinions on someone's proven track record and not some obscure RUclipsr thats desperately trying to hate on literally anything a particular person does?
Wow, what a terrible way to come up with my opinions... Notice how YOU never mentioned how you come up with yours? Because you know you just get told what to think 🤖🤖🤖
@@stickiedmin6508 umm what??
YOU people decided long ago that spaceX was never going to be able to land their rockets. YOU were told what to think and blindly believed it.
Then when they succeed you were told the next thing to think, the next anti Elon opinion to be programmed into your head.
@@stickiedmin6508 @stickiedmin6508 umm what??
YOU people decided long ago that spaceX was never going to be able to land their rockets. YOU were told what to think and blindly believed it.
I understand why Buzz Aldrin was so upset about Elon taking over spaceflight
If you got video of Buzz Aldrin being upset over Elon I'd LOVE to see it!
@@theultimatereductionist7592 Maybe he said something on Twitter? He's quite active there.
That never happened and you're all literally just in a cult.
SmarterEveryDay: Talks about SpaceX
Thunderfoot: Makes a video about it
Me: Lets see how SmarterEveryDay is going to be roasted
Thunderfoot: I agree with him
Me: Surprised pikachu face and slow clap
Also me: Subscribes to SmarterEveryDay
are you 13 years old?
@@jnh8381don't be harsh, he might be 16
Tesla recalls all Cybertrucks! 😂
You know he is coming with a video boasting lol
In the 1960s the space program was driven by engineers, now it's driven by marketing.
basically by finances.
if it cost just 3 bil, why didn't musk just pay it himself?
like somehow going to moon was supposed to be cheaper than buying a social media platform that had not recouped even the investment put into it ever during it's existence and paying money for it.
Capitalism ruins everything. A both NASA and USSR had centrally planned space program and look what we got until free market came and ruined it
But wasn’t it driven by national pride, and wanting to prove that communism is wrong? 😑
@@shockcat5988 The godless commies are winning! Do something!
@@shockcat5988 Boeing was an engineer led company. Now it is a business led company. Look where that got them.
People need to stop living in a dream world and believing we're heading into "Star Trek" when the reality is we're more likely to head into a future akin to "Elysium".
How can you say that when we barely hit space as it is.. sure build a wheel out in space.. but let me assure you, the millionaires and billionaires would probably end up dead..
Wait.. let it commence.. 😊
Even that is a stretch.
I don't think @Cujoedaman's point is necessarily to do with the speed of technological progression, but the overall cultural/political reality of it. Meaning, whenever we do create a permanent presence in space, it's more likely that the poor will be left behind and space will be occupied by elites.
Nah, it's more like we peaked already and we'll forever be landlocked since we're wasting all our resources on the next iphone every year and billions of other useless junk since you're not allowed to use anything for more than 2 years. There is no space stage, only us sifting through trash, living off the old world.
@@gracialonignasiver6302 That's pretty much what I was going for. Sometimes what I think in my head makes sense, but not when I type it out.
I still remember a scene in "2012" (terrible disaster movie, btw) where one of the characters was stunned at all the super wealthy (like the Arabs) that were on the arks acting like it was a vacation on a cruise and one of the lead people working on the arks said "how do you think we funded it?".
Pressure fed hypergolic thrusters are still being used to stabilize the Voyager 1 & 2 launched in 1977.
We often forget that the space race, as much as a great human achievement as it resulted in, was at it's core, an ideological dick measuring contest.
Actually, it was about the rocket technology for the ICBMS. The rest is a nice story for the slaves who paid for it.
@@Testwest78edgelord 😮
Ideological doesn’t work in that last sentence, chief.
Also the Russians were really good at it and the USA only really got a step up from Nazi rocket scientists.
Desten's video was incredibly enlightening and alarming for a number of reasons:
15-18 launches per moonshot
Everyone in NASA is unwilling to talk about it
Almost everyone else is unwilling to talk about it to NASA
With proper mounting of the scope, problems appear small.
What do they have to add? NASA has already said they believe in this being manageable.
@@zachb1706 The fact that everyone is giving different numbers of launches required. It might be manageable, _if they start actually working out the problem,_ clearly that's not happening though.
@@ahettinger525 because there’s a lot of unknowns involved. How much fuel will be needed, how much a Starship can take up, how long the refuelling will take (longer = more boil off).
When we get closer we’d get a clearer picture
@@zachb1706 none of these should be so unknown that we have anyone claiming the number is below 6. That's an utter lack of communication which is because the truth of the matter is highly uncomfortable for everyone involved.
That's why the only realistic numbers are coming from _outside._ We see Desten's numbers, which aren't far off the GAO's numbers. Why are we not seeing numbers like this from NASA or Space X (well, okay, that's headed by a proven liar with a vested interest in under-counting)?
There shouldn't be many unknowns this late in the program. Artemis 3 was supposed to take it's moonshot _this year._ It was then delayed to next year. This year NASA delayed it to 2026, with the GAO saying it's unrealistic before 2027. Everyone's afraid to talk about the simple reality that this is a zombie program.
At Kennedy I asked an ISS astronaut what was going through his head when he went EVA.
His reply
“Don’t screw up, don’t screw up, don’t screw up”
"good thing i can just poop in this suit. sure they said that you can't but I've proven them wrong before and will prove them wrong again!"
@@lasskinn474
It's less you can't, and more you shouldn't.
Would be a bitch to clean up, and I don't think your colleagues would do it for you... XD
Jesus… no shit we don’t have an exact answer. It’s STILL BEING DESIGNED. Also, it’s REUSABLE, which means you need more fuel than if you’re just going to dump 99% of your rocket on the moon, or in orbit, or in the damn ocean!
Like, holy fuck, how dense can you be?
I’ll grant that Musk has a habit of over promising, which isn’t great. However, Space X is THE leading space program in the world. They’re designing and building a vehicle that not only can do things that no rocket has ever done before, but is also 100% reusable.
So far, it’s actually living up to the hype. Sure, it’s behind schedule, but literally every rocket ever built came out behind schedule. SLS is MORE behind schedule than Starship and they’ve been working on that for twenty years, not ten!
They know the answer. They just aren't being honest because they want that government funding. But no one can claim Starship is reusable until SpaceX actually reuses one that's been launched. That has yet to happen, so Starship is currently an expendable launch vehicle.
And Development of SLS began in 2011 and its first launch was in 2022 so it was in development for 11 years not 20.
@@DeepDeepSpace they built upon work they were already previously doing. It’s generous saying it was only twenty years.
@@UpperDarbyDetailing if you want to measure by that standard, then Starship began development in 2012 and is still in development 12 years later. So 12 years and counting.
@@UpperDarbyDetailing source ? Proof?
@@jacksmith-mu3ee source? Proof? Of what? For what? Be specific.
It's pleasantly refreshing to see Thunderf00t make a video speaking positively about someone for once
I grew up in the 1950's. My mother worked as a draftswoman at Harlan-Bartholomew first drawing top secret bombing charts of the Soviet Union, and then another hush-hush project which wasn't maps. After Apollo 11 splashed down the phone began to ring as everybody who had a part in it were calling each other to congratulate each other. One heck of a lot of people were involved in it, and most of them kept their mouths shut. My mother was drafting hinges for the LEM's landing gear, and also drafted some of the parts for the F-1 boosters in the Saturn V. My mother couldn't talk about it, and my dad, having been a Navy medical officer During World War II and again in Korea didn't even push her to talk about it. When the splash-down happened and she was jumping up and down and saying, "That's what I was working on! That's what I was working on! Just stood there grinning from ear to ear and said, "I'm so proud of you! Good job!" The phone didn't stop ringing until late in the evening, so Dad made dinner, and even made desert. He hadn't cooked a thing for us before, but he really stood up to the job so that Mom could share they joy with her friends. Back in those days we didn't have cell phones, and unless you were on a party line the calls were only point to point, party to party. Conference calls existed only for politicians and for elite people at big businesses. When we got her to talk about it after that she always pointed out that it took a lot of people working hard and to the best of their ability to make it happen, and said that even though the price tag was high, it couldn't be done on the cheep.
Elon Musk tries to do everything on the cheep, and works with a skeleton staff even on the most important projects. He will eventually get people killed, but he won't take responsibility for it. I also think that he didn't realize how difficult it was going to be in the beginning, and he can't admit now that he's probably not going to succeed, so he just keeps wasting money to pretend that he's making an effort, so that when (if) NASA ever decides to pull the plug on him, he can claim it was unfair, and his fanboys will go over the cliff without him. The Pied Piper just keeps playing his tune as the rats drown themselves in the water. Musk has zero chance of putting Starship on the moon. He has a non-zero chance of getting to orbit, but I think its a small non-zero chance, and I'll be astonished if he manages to refuel a Starship in orbit and if he gets both back to Earth safely. If he even gets one to orbit the Moon I'll be properly gobsmacked. Call me a pessimist or whatever you will, but nothing big was ever accomplished on the cheep, or by tweaking a bad design here and there and hoping it will work better next time. The American public seems to have an insatiable appetite for being grifted though, and will happily agree to throw their money, and everyone else's money down the money without being the least critical of what they're doing. I have a feeling it will ever be thus.
That's a really sweet story, thank you for sharing it.
What a memory. Beautiful!
TLDR
Good story and I agree totally with your conclusions.
What a wonderful memory to share
Destin's talk to NASA is so good, I've watched it all the way through twice 💯
I've seen enough nepotism to choke thru two lifetimes
@@richardscathouse Huh...? Where?
@@movement2contact trump and his kids?
i am very happy to see you making a positive video, Destin is a brilliant, curious, passionate person, but took a rare stand for something that was wrong that was important enough to him. that level of brave conviction makes me very happy
Yeah! When I saw Smarter Every Day on the thumbnail I thought "don't you be talking smack 'bout my boy Destin!". Then I noticed it's "Boosted", not "Busted".
Good job, Thunderf00t!
No Way SpaceX goes bankrupt.
Why 'no way?'
They've already come within a whisker of bankruptcy several times.
Just imagine a situation with a starship sitting in LEO, with people on board, waiting for its 12 refueling missions to complete, and then the 10-th refueling rocket explodes on the launch pad. What now? The whole thing is asinine.
I believe the plan is for it to be unoccupied until it is refueled.
Not that that makes it any less insane.
The working number is minimum 15 refuelings, but that's with payload capacity that was claimed, with current ~35 ton capacity it would take 34 refillings with ZERO boiloff, meaning around 40 with boiloff, it's a joke.
The thing that gets me is the launch windows and phasing maneuvers for refuelling. The satellite only passes over the launch site once per day. Are we refuelling over the course of 12 days? 15? 30? Or are we building massively paralleled launch operations, putting 6 pads next to each other? Either it's impractically slow, or we don't get the reusability benefits.
Mars is even worse.
@@phillyphakename1255 NASA expects refueling flights on rotations of every six days, meaning that the minimum of 15 refuelings would be done over a period of nearly 4 months assuming everything goes to plan. As I already mentioned, Starship as it stands has nowhere near the performance to accomplish this in these numbers because it can only lift 35 tons or less compared to the minimum of 100 tons that were promised, let alone 150 or 200. The refueling flights would be in numbers over 30 as it stands.
@@phillyphakename1255 reusability is a red herring and always has been. At best it's a totally unnecessary engineering flex.
Don't be fooled by the thumbnail! This is actually one of the best essays Phil has ever done, thoughtful and respectful all the way through.
It is - as usual - full of bullshit. Extraordinarily stupid bullshit. For example his false claim regarding the capacity to orbit followed by the sentence it would take 30 flights to refuel because: test flight three. Who t. f. refuels by 30 times doing test flight three?
Agreed. Phil Mason's style is quite flawed. His videos are extremely repetitive and he has an excessive emphasis on filling them with zingers. Most could be cut by more than half without losing anything. I recognize this because it is similar to ways in which my own discourse can be flawed (I tend to feel compelled to fill my comments with endless parentheticals and asides). Nevertheless, I still think that they are worthwhile.
This one is much, much better.
@@cosmicaugI don't consider it a flaw. Scamsters like Elon Musk should be ridiculed and shamed as much as possible.
This video is based on NASA too hence his change in tone.
Because NASA has some proven record to speak of.
While Elon Musk just has a proven record of pump n dump scams.
@@cosmicaug The whole video I was thinking "the parts with Destin are great, the rest could be cut off". I haven't watched a TF video for some years now and I can see no reason to come back.
I read your title like 4 times while my heart skipped a beat. So glad to see it says boosted. I was worried I'd have to watch both your videos multiple times and see who seems more right. I respect both of you as youtubers with scientific integrity so it would be rough if you busted his video.
I also went: "No, not Destin..." ... "Ahhn ok :)"
"boosted" reminds me of that thing the midwit wannabe scientists were obsessed over for 2 years and then forgot about.
In the late 50s, the most vocal advocate for manned space exploration was LBJ. One of the great ironies of this story is that without the assassination, we might have never gotten to the moon.
So was JFK, he started Apollo
New conspiracy theory: The second gunman was Neil Armstrong.
@@gcewing Holy shit
Don't you mean, "Without getting JFK out of the way, LBJ could not have faked the manned Moon landings?"
It’s interesting to me that articles don’t place the blame directly on Elon for wasting billions, but rather on “SpaceX”, and by doing so they give him an escape route…
Well, SpaceX is not just Elon, there are a lot of people there who pretend that their space game is viable for a paycheck.
NASA - SpaceX deal is fixed price contract. From NASAs budget perspective it doesnt matter how many rockets spacex blows up as long as they meet their goals.
@Kizmox well, the issue with that is they aren't going to meet any of their goals and it should have been pretty obvious from an analysis of the design proposals.
@@SilverMKI But who is at fault here? Buyer or seller? I cant see SpaceX wasting money with fixed price contracts where funding is tied to success.
@Kizmox well, given the one approving buying and handing over the money then got a lucrative job at the seller...
I'm not an Elon Fanboy, but two comments about Starship. The whole point about raptor engines failing on flight test one wasn't due to the engine design, the launch pad exploded and damaged the engines from debris. And in terms of the third flight test not making orbit, orbit wasn't the goal. Starship was launched on a ballistic flight path so they could test reentry without deorbiting it, but it did in fact reach orbital velocity during that test.
Awesome video though, and good job calling out the failed timelines.
If he really cared about failed timelines, he should be calling out Boeing and Lockheed for being 5 years behind with SLS+Orion, Boeing for being 6 years behind with Starliner, Blue Origin for being 4 years behind with New Glenn, etc. Starship being ~2 years behind is hardly noteworthy in comparison. Particularly not given the much larger budgets for some of the others.
The people that think you are a pessimist or being a naysayer don't have enough life experience to see they don't have enough life experience to judge someone who has seen multiple iterations
Commercialisation at its finest. You now need to pay for 24 launches, when ~50 years ago it was one and done.
Whaaaaat!!!???? You expect US TO PAY FOR ALL THIS??!!!!??!
The more I learn about Starship, the higher my hope that they launch unneccessarily wealthy people to mars very, very soon.
along with tonnes of resources for the goal of moving to -a 3rd world country- the 4th world
Glad someone is keeping receipts, as well as translating for Destin.
Thank you for this.
I dunno why skipped that video... gonna go watch it now
I saw the original video. Amazing talk and basically the polar opposites of SpaceX approach.
"We try everything possible to give it the best chance we got. 8 layers of redundancy! More if we can!"
Vs
"Well we might got a 50% chance? Uhm...pad wasn't ready... Boosters mixed builds... We start with 3 dead engines for 420 meme... And uhmmm great success cause we said so"
SpaceX pretty much looped around to the 40s & 50s era of rocketry with a side of Soviet engineering practice. Lots of iteration. Launch it and see if it explodes. One big advantage they have is the vast amount of telemetry data you can get out of a modern rocket means that it takes a lot fewer failures to determine their cause, that's how they're able to constantly improve.
That's fine for cargo but a human rated systems needs a lot more care.
They're both fundraising operations and little else. We cannot go into space. It's as simple as that. These hallucinations of space travel are lofty dreams of smitten dreamers. Most likely this was something NASA figured out early. Upon learning that sending humans into orbit causes them to cease life immediately, they went "Well duh, sh- What now?"
And in typical American fashion they say "We can't unveil that, we have contracts, we have responsibilities to uphold, we have a global space race - Fake it til you make it"
And from that day forward, til this day, they haven't made it since. That is perhaps the most truthful and least malicious interpretation of what happened and continues to happen.
There will be no humans on Mars by 2035. It will be an eternal string-along game, just like flying cars and other such grand "future visions".
SpaceX just had their 300th Falcon 9 landing, keep seething, this approach works.
Love the audio quality. Takes me straight back to the 00's
Nice to see that Destin isn't afraid to speak up, even if it would've been better for him to be more "direct".
Yeah this is one of thunderfoots better videos. Makes a lot clearer the impacts of what destin was saying
Of all the Musk predictions, my personal favorite is still the robot being controlled off-screen that can barely fold laundry. Keeping in mind that about 10 years or so ago, there was a completely automated robot that could break dance. That's like going from a car back to a stone wheel.
A (off) square wheel at that
Which robot could break dance 10 years ago?
@darekmistrz4364 my bad, it was a Korean robot and it was only 5 years ago at Boston Dynamics.
My favorit was the Tesla bot which was a guy in a suit.
Still thinking about that one occasionally. And am probably one of the few ones to do so lmao.
your channel is really a breath of fresh air in sea of snake oil content on RUclips
at this point there's so much snake oil it's turned into an oil refinery..
@@dimitar4y We've got weapons grade snake oil at this point.
@@themanhimself3 that's not even an exaggeration or a meme, people have actually weaponized snake oil marketing, and some street-smart people are dubbing it "the matrix" because their views are fundamentally incompatible with reality.
It's always very self aggrandizing though, which is why destin's video is just better.
Not everything we do in space has to be about writing science papers. We go there for the journey, for the human experience. Frankly, if it was me, i'd ban every non-essential science experiment on the first couple of flights, so the astronauts and ground crew can concentrate on getting the engineering perfected.
If that means shiffting the budget away from science without any practical applications like "how does a black hole work" or "building super expensive satelites to measure gravitational waves", i'm perfectly fine with that.
Our current approach reminds me of Anderson's Law: "I have yet to see a problem, however complicated, which, when you looked at it in the right way, did not become still more complicated". We know how to get people to the moon, why are we reinventing the wheel and making it a square?
Three reasons:
1. Congress forced NASA to keep Constellation alive with SLS+Orion, which means using poorly optimized Shuttle technology and a capsule that can't go to low lunar orbit.
2. NASA want Artemis to land large amounts of cargo for long duration missions and building a lunar base. The Apollo approach is woefully inadequate for this.
3. SpaceX are providing a majority of funding for Starship, and had already developed significant hardware. It's not ideal, but a purpose built lander would likely take even longer.
Last week the Russians were launching the new Angara heavy carrier and the delayed the launched 2 time so it wouldn't explode on the launch pad or in flight
Space X would have launched on the first try blew it up and called it a success 😁
Hey at least the fuel ignited!
@pufffincrazy5275 the pools in the Titanic are STILL filled with water. Amazing engineering...
It's crazy the amount of money we've blown propping up tesla and spacex that could have been spent on something with a chance of returning back value. How many Artemis missions could have been launched...
Like invading someone?
Tax payer dollars going to an evil billionaire who complains about people actually getting value from their taxes.
Why are you always pissing on my dreams... Keep it up, It keeps me grounded! lol
Congrats on the 1 million subscribers Thunderfoot
What a thing of beauty Apollo was....
Golden era of human exploration
@@FrankyPi we´ll have the same era for mars eventually... I just hope we´re around to see it, and not in 200 years
@@TheRealDJ-NEO It is doable this century for sure, but the timeline and scale entirely depends on funding NASA gets.
@@TheRealDJ-NEO Then we need to BACK ENGINEER ALIEN SPACECRAFT FIRST. Period.
Probably a stupid question, but why are no reputable media outlets calling Musk out on his BS?
...because there no longer are such things like "reputable media outlets". Outside a few voices (like Thunderf00t and the fellow in this video), there is a plethora of baboons depending on musk's BS like it were god's revelation.
Because he gave libs billions for twitter, wasting tax money, misleading the public.. Why criticize your own team?
They'd be losing interview rights in a split. Demigods don't like being challenged or questioned
Have you ever seen a reputable media outlet?
It's better to think of media as vultures rather than investigators. They watch something like SpaceX and Tesla hungrily, waiting for the companies to perish, and then they will feast. Why? Because tragedy sells, scientific analysis does not.
Technically, the Soviets even beat us to the moon with their unmanned Luna probes in 1959.
Did you hear of the Luna-25 lander that crashed lately?
@@IndigoSeirra I don't think so!
Thank you once again
We live in an age when context, detail and complexity are considered bad.
And hardly anyone cares about scientific truth.
@@Sunlight91you mean facts??
We live in an age of endless grift and enshittification.
@@garystinten9339 No I meant truths which includes concepts we don't understand yet. For example Dr. Becky has a popular Astronomy channel on RUclips. Regarding the Crisis of Cosmology her number one priority is for everyone to get along and she wishes for the answer (a future fact) to be a mixture of competing theories so that everyone got a fair share towards the answer. In her astronomy field the truth is irrelevant for humans, but in psychology, social and medical research for example not caring about the truth can lead to severe social decline.
You left out nuance
And Musk has announced a 500ft version of starship, yippee bigger rapid disassembly events.
That will also be 1.5 times heavier. Good luck trying to reach LEO on diminishing returns i guess.
starship can barely get itself into orbit. probably wont be able to do it with cargo
SpaceX developed a revolutionary new rocket engine that generates thrust by burning taxpayer dollars.
Outstanding video, TF!
I was worried you were going to say something mean about Destin, which would have sent me into hulk mode
Don't conflict religion with science
I wasn't, I knew immediatly that Destin talks truth and Thunderfoot recognizes truth.
When we have a communication problem, usually it's because someone is lying.
Sometimes lying is usefull, especially in advertising if there is no state to make it illegal!
@@randomsnow6510 "If the state doesn't do it, nobody will." lol fail.
"am mmmmm sooo huuuuh,, eeeeeeeh" 9mg.get a sentence together Elon
Not a Elon bootlicker, but this is so ironic lol
@13:25, 3%, looks closer to 0.3%, awesome video! The truth can be uncomfortable, but it helps you make better decisions.
You're gonna love this juicy insight coming from industry people, mostly on NASA side. Musk's 40-50 tons is embellished, actual metric is 35 tons or less. The reason why performance is so far off in reality compared to claimed/promised is due to high dry weight and lower ISP which is 8-10% lower than reported performance figures. They also throttle down the engines a bit, so no wonder NASA is questioning the viability of engines. They can only bring some limited improvements by extending the stages with versions 2 and 3 and adding several hundred tons of fuel, but nothing near 100 tons let alone more than that, rocket equation is a harsh mistress. There is no expendable plan whatsoever, they can’t afford to expend them due to lack of engine production.
The engines have a built in design flaw that causes water ice to build up in LOX tank which then clogs inlet lines and causes cascading engine failure on relight, this is why the booster keeps exploding. The engine flaw was introduced with Raptor 2 as the parts they deemed "obsolete" or "low value" that got deleted from Raptor 1 involved a standard heat exchanger that wouldn't result in water being produced from preburner combustion and getting frozen once reaching the LOX tank like it is the case with 2, it would only result in gaseous oxygen being put back into the tank as part of the autogenous pressurization. Best part is no part as they say. They're trying to fix this by adding more strainers, but doesn't seem to be working as it only got past boostback before failing again last time. The boostback burn was also off nominal and off course.
Their HLS interior is almost completely empty with a few bunks on the side and straps for cargo. Yeah, it's bad. For this program Musk prioritized hiring fresh out of college inexperienced people and even those with no background in aerospace whatsoever, and it sure shows with all the rookie mistakes. NASA tells SpaceX it’s not gonna work and SpaceX does it anyway, they’re not listening. This thing can do nothing but eventually launch their V2 Starlinks, if they don't run out of money first, and even that will be compromised due to much lower performance in reality, which won't be good for their already money bleeding Starlink program. As it stands with this performance, it would take around 40 orbital refillings for HLS, so making things a bit better won't help much for it to not be an unworkable and unfeasible concept. It's a total dumpster fire at this point.
At the end of the day SpaceX will continue with this. If they go bankrupt their assets will be sold and spunoff. Not a bad prospect when falcon 9 is quite a reliable rocket. Meanwhile starlink can be sold to the military.
And if it does work, well then we have no problem.