Go to upliftdesk.com/felix to check out their special offer exclusive to our audience! What do you think? When will we see the next launch after this violent end to flight 7?
Yeah, I've seen that photo before, but I still had to pause and look at it again. And the improvement isn't just visual, it's all the way to the core. A totally new way to build an already totally new engine design. I sure hope it works well because mods are going to be a lot harder on this one.
@@billkew5385 In the other video it is lightly discussed that some of the things that are on the outside are instead built into the metal via 3D printing. Having canals etc built in. So basically making the core more complex to remove components, which is fine if you 3D print.
Sad to see how Starship loss overshadowed the second flawless Booster catch wich is a huge achievement considering how far we have advance since the 1970's
@@you_are_soul "it came in too fast" based on what information? How do you know they didn't update the profile to come in faster to use less fuel or something? The end result was the same
I think your argument is flawed at best and disingenuous at heart. Every test flight of this system showcases another milestone along the test campaign journey. To say that they’re failing while actively developing the first ever reusable launch vehicle is laughable.
@@gor4988They have over 12 years of reliably delivering cargo to orbit, it’s not a matter of if starship will start contributing to these orbital tonnage stats, but when.
I'm 72 years old and I remember Alan Shepherd's first sub orbital flight with the Mercury Program in 1961. I remember Neil Armstrong and "One small step for man, one giant leap for mankind" in 1969. It's hard to believe it's been that long. We, as a species, are driven to explore and hopefully this drive will continue. I just wish I could be the first to set foot on Mars.
yes he did, compare that to the everyday astronaut's version, him yelling into his microphone on his condo deck and worrying about his photography setup.
Scott Manley did say that the "rapid unscheduled disassembly" wasn't because of excess pressure build up, but most likely caused by the FTS triggering as the rocket went outside its designated flight path. Edit: the replies are filled with absolutely *restarted* individuals
Space X stated they implemented FTS at the end, and that one video clearly shows it. People have to keep in mind- these are TEST flights- we are learning!!!
I hate seeing all the negativity after IFT 7... They caught a booster and tested the largest upper stage ever flown, which was basically a completely new design... The RUD seems to have proved that should a launch go wrong planes, boats and people are not in any serious danger. I truly, therefore, believe that considering this was a TEST flight, this was a grear success.
@NScherdin I don't even think they're trolls, they're just ignorant and it angers me... They're everything wrong with they world, always negative with no ambition or hope for the future. It's just sad to see.
Why be angry? Does the hating serve you at the end of each day? I see more space garbage. I’m going to listen to Yes-Starship Trooper. It rocks more than watching space tech. Gotta pay the bills (and just like most people on socials) ergot many opinions on what my cousin Elon’s up to. There were two lunar landers launched with real-time tangible implications in our lifetime. Going to Mars is great to fantasize about. Most people won’t be here to see it. Be. Do your thing. Judge less and try to get along more often. Your life will be easier if we all attempt to reduce suffering for self and others. Which makes all this a bit superfluous to most people. Hate isn’t the greatest word for your inner dialogue. Hating externally…obviously friction and chaos? Yeah not fun for most
The demise of the Ship yesterday earily reminded me of Columbia's break-up in '03. Creeping anomalous sensor readings as the RCC leading edge panels were perforated, followed by a big debris trail. Thanks for your positivity, Felix. I cannot watch these DIY pundits crying about the 'disaster' that had just occurred. Except it isn't a disaster; it's an accepted and acceptable risk. No big deal. And, what a catch! Can't wait for ITF-8!
What? Stop being so sensitive. Starship is still undergoing testing, while Columbia was not, and no one died. It burned up in the atmosphere, just as satellites occasionally do...
I've heard people crying for flight lockdown due to debris causing diversions, but it all came down in the pre-filed risk corridor. This was ways a known possibility.
Felix. The reason I like your SpaceX page compared to all the others? You always get right to the point. You NEVER demean anybody efforts in Space faring and your explanations are always easy to understand. You grasp that there is plenty of room for all of the other privately owned efforts to exploit the vast resources in space and that it's not who is better or best but who succeeds in their efforts. Thank you for a well grounded page. 👍👍👍
Yeah, sadly this channel isn't what it used to be. Seems to be getting way too repetitive and dumbing things down too much, not to mention the excessive "built in" advertising.
A few years back I left a snarky comment on one of his vids about the excessive animations and noises in the vid cuts. I’m so glad I’ve continued to stay subscribed. He’s really got one of (if not the best) channels on all things SpaceX. 👏
We tend to take it for granted now, but damn, those onboard views that SpaceX shares with us are so amazing and high quality. Just compare that to any other rocket company
There was a major leak and fire. This began disabling the engines, one by one until only one outer engine was still running and this imbalance took it off course probably beginning to tumble, so the Flight Safety System activated and blew it up. I don’t think the loose, flapping panel was the cause, but this defect was probably going to cause issues on the belly flop through the atmosphere, potentially dooming Starship with a different type of death.
Interesting how much has improved on the launch tower that is now protected/shielded from the heat of the engine flames on launch. I toured Cape Canaveral back in 1970 and saw first hand how much was melted on the launch tower that had to be replaced. Now things like the catch arms stay functional.
Thank you, Felix, for keeping us informed. I can't thank you enough. I sent you a nice monetary gift during the live broadcast but it came in a busy moment and not sure if you even saw it :)
Hey, Felix, glad you made the move to the Space Coast and am enjoying your enthusiasm and attention to detail on the massive evolution of our space program. 👍👍🚀🚀🚀🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
I think you're misunderstanding the comment about increasing the diameter. He was saying that they'd make it taller before they'd ever make it wider, he was not saying they plan to do both, and certainly not for block 3.
I think they will push it as far as they can with length but there is not really much room left. It is already overweight. I think as soon as it becomes operation, perhaps even before, they will start working in earnest on a much wider one. I think they'll skip 12m and go all the way to 15 and make it shorter than it is today. That will give a much needed improvement in volume to weight ratio. Quite possible also to make the booster 15. and starship 12m.
Agreed... Musk was basically saying the opposite of how Felix interpreted it, that making a wider rocket was unlikely for all the reasons Felix subsequently went into.
Thanks Felix, always a good energetic recap. An overall successful test. The booster was caught(again) and tons of new data from the 1st block two Starship. It was early enough in the flight that it seems like the RUD was from an FTS initiation. I guess more info to come.
I have been watching your channel for some time now, and i do enjoy your left handled dry humor while you present very interesting details... I finally subscribed...
Felix, a larger diameter booster does not necessarily require massive changes to the launch and catch infrastructure. SpaceX could retain the current diameter of the 'engine room' but increase the diameter of the rocket above that, increasing the tank capacities for the booster as well as the spaceship. Continued development of the current engines may provide enough thrust to lift more fuel to support longer burns en-route to higher orbits and greater distances as well as larger payloads. We already know the Starship has room for at least three more vacuum engines but it's possible a greater diameter ship would permit even more engines, but that would require changes to the ground testing fixtures to suit.
The super high quality of the video from SpaceX has set the standard of our expectation (and for the professionals who design and build these vehicles). Geoff Bezos is going to need to ask Elon if he could get a Starlink setup.
A larger diameter rocket not only increases the volume to surface ratio but also increases the column stability. On the other hand, the thickness of the tankage skin is directly proportional the pressure and the diameter. So, this, like all engineering, involves a tradeoff.
I doubt that we'll see changes to the diameter anytime soon. Maybe once they got everything figured out how to build and operate block 2 with relatively reliability. I'm not a rocket engineer, but my gut says that the diameter change won't change the whole system so much that solutions from block 2 can't be translated. It's more a scaling thing, than a "does this even work" thing.
Tks Felix, been patiently waiting for your follow up to #7, I'm here for the winter at RV Park Center with front row seats. Hard to put in words watching the launch. Wife and I were surprised by how late that last boom was. So, loud !!Crazy. Bring on flight 8. We are ready!!!!
I don't normally like his videos because they are usually this long boring description of structures being built or moved around, like watching paint dry, and then having a narrator describe the process minute by minute. I watched this time because I wanted to know more about what happened with flight 7. But this video was very good. He went into indepth analysis of an event utilizing his knowledge of the technology. More intellectual persuits like this is what this gentleman is good at, and I believe he will become more popular if he leans more in this direction.
Watch the video pinned at the end of this one. ☝️ Thank you very much for the honest feedback! Popularity wise WAI is the fastest growing space related long form video channel on RUclips right now. We’re baffled and mighty proud of our audience! ❤️
@Moe_Lester_fromUptwn Yea, true. But he is smart and knowledgeable, and if he does more analysis, and deep diving, instead of narrating construction and rocket parts being moving around, I think he will be more popular than he is now.
Block 3 rockets would be the answer to refueling the smaller 9 meter Starships by building the first Block 3s as tankers to reduce the number of fuel transfers to get out of Earth orbit.
I kind of see a pattern in how SpaceX develops the starship. They make a point in seeing how little components are needed for it to function and only ADD to them when they have a serious "event" that needs correcting. Of course, they will correct the defect and add measures to prevent what happened on flight 7. Nothing more will be done unless something NEW and unforeseen happens.
That's not a big secret. And it's not that simple, they don't just start with an empty can, and add parts one by one. It's more like when they are in doubt, they delete the part in question, while most designers prefer to add everything that may be necessary. The latter approach makes much fewer fireballs, but also makes the rocket heavier, more complex, and more expensive.
@@andrasbiro3007would argue it only results in more fireballs during development. Less parts means less points of failure, and generally less problems on a final design.
If you were to build a much bigger booster. You might then launch all the fuel in one shot all the way to lower Earth orbit. And then you wouldn't have to refill a starship you'd have the booster full of fuel up there. Continue with the starship as it's going but as a fuel delivery system bigger's better.
Not happening. You're basically describing an SSTO system, but you're missing the fact that if you make the booster bigger, it's a lot heavier, and needs a lot more fuel and even more engines to get anywhere... and if you want to put the booster into orbit, it needs even more fuel and thrust than that. The rocket equation is not your friend.
@@Prasah1711x no, the two boosters that were recovered. for a small bonus we will even throw in an additional Raptor, so you have two complete boosters. Just feed it a Chicken or two every Day.
You claim the starship was likely tumbling because the telemetry showed engines out except on one side. Never mind that the telemetry also showed the attitude and it wasn't tumbling.
That’s because it lost communication at that point likely due to the flight termination system blowing up the rocket. If you watch closely, the methane fuel level rapidly falls off, all but one of the engines shut down including the ones that gimbal allowing the ship to stay oriented, and the attitude of the starships telemetry freezes right as the attitude starts to rotate indicating it froze at that point and lost communication. It was likely in peices already at that point and not tumbling at all.
2 options: 1. Pray that a V2 doesn’t destroy our aircraft. 2. Ditch in the Caribbean, and destroy said aircraft. What does this guy mean: No reason not to launch again in a month?!
Felix, thanks for the great update as always! But one nitpick: you made a cylinder’s surface area to height scaling sound much worse than it is. Surface area of the curved wall scales linearly with height - they are directly proportional. It doesn’t get worse the longer you make the cylinder. In fact, since you also need caps at the top and bottom of the cylinder, rather than an open-ended tube, the total surface area scaling is better than linear because the caps don’t grow in size. They do grow when expanding the diameter of the cylinder, along with the curved walls, but not as much as the volume gained. However, any increase in the size of a cylinder expected to contain heavy liquids and/or high pressure gases while coping with the stresses of flying through the atmosphere at high speeds and maneuvering in space, will need to be accompanied by increased structural strength. Expanding the diameter is still the best way to go, but probably not by as large a margin as you would think purely on the basis of geometric calculations!
It feels to me that increasing the diameter of super heavy and starship by as much as 3m would basically end up to be like building another rocket, Falcon 1 to falcon 9 kind of change, changing the tooling would be small in comparison to having to change things like work platforms in the high bays, work and transport stands. You would have to build what would amount to whole new launch mounts. Not to mention things like the fluid dynamics in a significantly wider ship. If they ever do this I would think that the only way would be once starship 1 was in operation and making money other wise I just can’t see how spacex could stay profitable.
I think there may be another reason to increase the diameter rather than continue to make the current Starship design taller and taller: stiffness. A larger diameter pipe is stiffer for a specific length. There must be a LOT of flexing under full thrust and during maneuvers like separation/boost-back. Even if that doesn't cause the rocket to break up, it will cause premature weakening and failure. It's clearly a very sturdy rocket right now, but you just can't keep lengthening it or it won't be. Incidently yes, the first thing I thought about when you said increased diameter was all of the jigs and fixtures and the space in the assembly buildings and the launch pad. They would need to build new jigs and fixtures, but that's usually true for a new product. (Remember, these are intended to be assembly line products.) It does look like they have room in the megabays for larger diameter tubes. If not, they are planning a "gigabay" and maybe this is why. And if you look at the outside dimensions of that new launch mount that they are building, it looks like there is plenty of room to build a replacement with a larger diameter hole in the middle, thus allowing them to re-use the same flame trench. I think the tower is really the biggest question. The current one is already pretty flexible and bobs and sways a lot during a catch, as do the chopsticks. They've already reinforced the tower once. I'm not sure it can do much more, though a well attached cladding would really stiffen it up while protecting it from that landing blast. And it seems likely that the chopsticks would need to be redesigned and replaced. Not sure about the carriage. They also did a lot of work on the supports and tracks for it a while back, suggesting that it might not have a lot more margin for a heavier vehicle. BTW, if they ever expend that big booster, it will probably register on seismographs around the world. 🙂
@@Xenomystusyes. My thought is that they need the sat deployment capability, so that while going to the moon, they can dump a few along the way and have internet on the moon? 🤔😆
@@blacksheep7389 they can dump a few along the way and have internet on the moon? No. It doesn't work that way. Their relative positions would be constantly changing.
Great video the idea of increasing the diameter of block 3 is exciting. The efficiency increase through scale would get so much done in one trip when going to space. I can hardly wait. Until then it’ll be great to see a bock 2 successful missions including a catch of both booster and ship.
Scuttlebutt is: Overpressure from 6 Engine light against Hot Stage Ring. The pressure wave was unintentionally contained within the firewall compartment (Not enough surface area of venting to allow volume of gases being forced into this space.). Ruptured new Vacuum jacket plumbing. Fire took out EEC & ECU ,going engine by engine. and then wiped out the entire avionics computer suite. LOC2 . Auto-Activation parameter for FTS satisfied with LOC2.
Scott Manley did say that the "rapid unscheduled disassembly" wasn't because of excess pressure build up, but most likely caused by the FTS triggering as the rocket went outside its designated flight path....
There's no reduction in complexity in the engine... Raptor 3 is at least as complex as Raptor 2, if not more so. It's just much cleaner on the outside because most of the plumbing is hidden inside other parts.
@simongeard4824 Hidden inside ! Sounds like that would make inspections/refurbishment harder for the quick turnaround time as promised years ago. He's on the record stating that unless relaunch window is comparable to aircraft, it isn't viable
Thanks for the video. However, consider talking like a normal person. The affected, punched cadence is irritating. FFS just talk like you do on the live shows... perfectly fine!
I was at new Glenn that morning. If you were looking for a good place to go next time Felix then you can go to the beach right beside jetty Park and walk right down the beach almost to the jetty. You have a full vantage point of the rocket and the feeling of takeoff hits you like a wave😂 kind of fitting😅 I watch starship online but I think next time I might drive to the keys
@@paulbizard3493It is far more complex than any other rocket. They have effectively solved the booster. The second stage is completely new, thermal tiles, relightable engines, massive size, vertical suicide landing.
It will be interesting to look at what effect the double wall down feeder pipes had during this flight. I'm curious as to the connections of a double wall pipe on the bottom of the fuel tank exit point. This is a significant design change from block 1 .
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
Go to upliftdesk.com/felix to check out their special offer exclusive to our audience!
What do you think? When will we see the next launch after this violent end to flight 7?
A larger diameter means a thicker wall to support the contents. +Q
@@Whataboutit just wait for people to watch your videos for future history classes!
Feb 28 2025, Elon said he expects next launch in a month.
Felix, mach doch mal bitte weniger Prosa, weniger Füller. 0:37 - aus solchen Sätzen nehme ich nichts mit.
@@asmael666 Use sponsor block browser extension, it blocks all that stuff if you want it to.
That image of the raptor engines is mind blowing. The visual simplification of Raptor 3 over Raptors 1 and 2 is just insane.
Yeah, I've seen that photo before, but I still had to pause and look at it again. And the improvement isn't just visual, it's all the way to the core. A totally new way to build an already totally new engine design. I sure hope it works well because mods are going to be a lot harder on this one.
@@briangodfrey7424 yes it certainly is impressive when compared to any other engine I have studied though I still love the old Gamma engines.
It looks like they took off a lot of sensors, and just put a cover over what was essential.
@@billkew5385 In the other video it is lightly discussed that some of the things that are on the outside are instead built into the metal via 3D printing. Having canals etc built in. So basically making the core more complex to remove components, which is fine if you 3D print.
Timestamp?
Sad to see how Starship loss overshadowed the second flawless Booster catch wich is a huge achievement considering how far we have advance since the 1970's
Space program was 1000x better in the 70s.
@@DouglasLippi How? Instead of using one-time use rockets, we are now developing reusable rockets? What's there to frown about that? Nostalgia?
@@DouglasLippiobjectively untrue.
@@you_are_soul "it came in too fast" based on what information? How do you know they didn't update the profile to come in faster to use less fuel or something? The end result was the same
Hilarious.Trying to play of a complete failure and risk to multiple countries as a minor event 😂😂 You americans are stuck up your own ass
Jokes on us, Marcus and Felix swapped days XD
@@trapjohnson 🤣
Hey hey!
Marcus ROCKS!
So do you Felix ❤
Seeing the booster being caught by the chopsticks is literally breathtaking.
@@humbertosoares3563 Especially if that was the goal
Reality
Delivering a payload into space was the objective
So nice try, but, fail.
@@gor4988partial fail
No one pays to have a booster stage caught.
I think your argument is flawed at best and disingenuous at heart. Every test flight of this system showcases another milestone along the test campaign journey. To say that they’re failing while actively developing the first ever reusable launch vehicle is laughable.
@@gor4988They have over 12 years of reliably delivering cargo to orbit, it’s not a matter of if starship will start contributing to these orbital tonnage stats, but when.
I'm 72 years old and I remember Alan Shepherd's first sub orbital flight with the Mercury Program in 1961. I remember Neil Armstrong and "One small step for man, one giant leap for mankind" in 1969. It's hard to believe it's been that long. We, as a species, are driven to explore and hopefully this drive will continue. I just wish I could be the first to set foot on Mars.
Y'all did exquisite coverage yesterday, really, the best. And today too. Butt yesterday's launch was riveting and you all totally delivered. Thanks!
yes he did, compare that to the everyday astronaut's version, him yelling into his microphone on his condo deck and worrying about his photography setup.
Deine Begeisterung ist so ansteckend und unterhaltsam.
Anybody Watch'n this from 2030..
Pin me if You're from Mars..
Code Word: This is just the beginning💥
🤩🔥🤘
😂🎉
Won't happen
This is just the beginning💥
@@SterlingArchimedes space cadets 😂
I did not hear you proudly report that now famous Raptor serial 314 was used on flight #5, and re-installed for flight #7. USED ON TWO FLIGHTS ! ! !
it was used on flight #5. #6 was not caught remember? 🙃
@@debec Looks like he corrected it. But it was probably a simple goof like we've all made.
Keep pumping out great content WAI
A double ad read before even a minute has passed is insane. You gotta earn my attention
Brave is a good browser and grayjay is a good app.
those of us with ad blockers salute you.
A tiny bit of faith and patience and you will be blessed with what you ask for.
Also, hit the "skip" button when it pops up.
Or maybe, you need to learn how to use ublock or ad block plus. I saw zero advertisements. Give it a try, it's free, and it works.
RUclips Premium FTW...😎
Thanks!
You are welcome! 🙏
Scott Manley did say that the "rapid unscheduled disassembly" wasn't because of excess pressure build up, but most likely caused by the FTS triggering as the rocket went outside its designated flight path.
Edit: the replies are filled with absolutely *restarted* individuals
This was my fist thought as well.
simply it failed.
Space X stated they implemented FTS at the end, and that one video clearly shows it.
People have to keep in mind- these are TEST flights- we are learning!!!
@@speedcookie flight termination system (the explosives)
@@speedcookie
Flight termination system
I hate seeing all the negativity after IFT 7... They caught a booster and tested the largest upper stage ever flown, which was basically a completely new design... The RUD seems to have proved that should a launch go wrong planes, boats and people are not in any serious danger. I truly, therefore, believe that considering this was a TEST flight, this was a grear success.
Ignore the trolls. They literally get off on pissing people off.
Nasa is doing their best with their bots to justify their under performance and overinflated costs while burdening american tax payers.
@NScherdin I don't even think they're trolls, they're just ignorant and it angers me... They're everything wrong with they world, always negative with no ambition or hope for the future. It's just sad to see.
Why be angry? Does the hating serve you at the end of each day? I see more space garbage. I’m going to listen to Yes-Starship Trooper. It rocks more than watching space tech. Gotta pay the bills (and just like most people on socials) ergot many opinions on what my cousin Elon’s up to. There were two lunar landers launched with real-time tangible implications in our lifetime. Going to Mars is great to fantasize about. Most people won’t be here to see it. Be. Do your thing. Judge less and try to get along more often. Your life will be easier if we all attempt to reduce suffering for self and others. Which makes all this a bit superfluous to most people. Hate isn’t the greatest word for your inner dialogue. Hating externally…obviously friction and chaos? Yeah not fun for most
You all need to get off of musks nut bag... It sad
The video of Starship breaking up keeps giving me flashbacks to the loss of the Columbia Space Shuttle.
I got flashbacks of Challenger.
The musk man self destructing rocket will never carry a crew, so infinitely safer.
Unless you're on the ground near where the debris falls
I thought of Jack, from OBLIVION, lying down on the grass, and him jumping up when he heard the explosion overhead! 😮
@@gor4988 You think you're clever but you aren't even close.
@@roycsinclair That's ok, wasn't aiming for clever
Simply stating facts !
The demise of the Ship yesterday earily reminded me of Columbia's break-up in '03. Creeping anomalous sensor readings as the RCC leading edge panels were perforated, followed by a big debris trail. Thanks for your positivity, Felix. I cannot watch these DIY pundits crying about the 'disaster' that had just occurred. Except it isn't a disaster; it's an accepted and acceptable risk. No big deal. And, what a catch! Can't wait for ITF-8!
No good deed goes unpunished. People always gotta complain about anything linked to musk
What? Stop being so sensitive. Starship is still undergoing testing, while Columbia was not, and no one died. It burned up in the atmosphere, just as satellites occasionally do...
I've heard people crying for flight lockdown due to debris causing diversions, but it all came down in the pre-filed risk corridor. This was ways a known possibility.
@@Graham.556 people almost died to Spacex stupidity.
@@Darthquackius that is false not true no one knew that it would explode. Spacex has bad track record of getting things right.
Felix. The reason I like your SpaceX page compared to all the others? You always get right to the point. You NEVER demean anybody efforts in Space faring and your explanations are always easy to understand. You grasp that there is plenty of room for all of the other privately owned efforts to exploit the vast resources in space and that it's not who is better or best but who succeeds in their efforts. Thank you for a well grounded page. 👍👍👍
If the videos and advertising doesn't continue to increase faster than the launch frequency I'll be happy.
Thanks, William!
I don't like how other news channels like to belittle the achievements of other countries.
The in-Video commercials to content rate gets concerning
Dude, do not watch this channel. This channel is horrible.
Seriously. There was a commercial in the first 2 mins wtf
Grifters grifting of Elon Stans
Yeah, sadly this channel isn't what it used to be. Seems to be getting way too repetitive and dumbing things down too much, not to mention the excessive "built in" advertising.
i've watched all your videos, about Starship, you are the best keep the great work WAI
Thank you from the entire team!
Just remember that if a test flight goes perfectly it means you weren't ambitious enough
Yeah with that mentality you will be sending people to the moon in no time
@@seventeeen29 thanks for the Migraine
Well put
Just watched the Lex Fridman podcast with Elon Musk, and I’m all in on XAI01v now!
A few years back I left a snarky comment on one of his vids about the excessive animations and noises in the vid cuts.
I’m so glad I’ve continued to stay subscribed. He’s really got one of (if not the best) channels on all things SpaceX.
👏
We tend to take it for granted now, but damn, those onboard views that SpaceX shares with us are so amazing and high quality. Just compare that to any other rocket company
Be nice if they offered to help BO do the same.
prehaps technology has advance a bit since Nasa's days after all they send a signal back from the moon.
There was a major leak and fire. This began disabling the engines, one by one until only one outer engine was still running and this imbalance took it off course probably beginning to tumble, so the Flight Safety System activated and blew it up. I don’t think the loose, flapping panel was the cause, but this defect was probably going to cause issues on the belly flop through the atmosphere, potentially dooming Starship with a different type of death.
That panel looked superficial to be honest, people have mentioned that flapping piece so often.
Interesting how much has improved on the launch tower that is now protected/shielded from the heat of the engine flames on launch. I toured Cape Canaveral back in 1970 and saw first hand how much was melted on the launch tower that had to be replaced. Now things like the catch arms stay functional.
Back in the days when they used asbestos and lead. Glad we're moving forward
😅
SLS did significant damage to its tower on launch.
shame the same couldn't be said for Starship
Díky!
❤️🙏
ive never went from an ear to ear smile to a 1000 yard stare faster in my life, the second i saw an RVac go out i knew it was over RIP S33
Thank you, Felix, for keeping us informed. I can't thank you enough. I sent you a nice monetary gift during the live broadcast but it came in a busy moment and not sure if you even saw it :)
Hey, Felix, glad you made the move to the Space Coast and am enjoying your enthusiasm and attention to detail on the massive evolution of our space program. 👍👍🚀🚀🚀🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
I think you're misunderstanding the comment about increasing the diameter. He was saying that they'd make it taller before they'd ever make it wider, he was not saying they plan to do both, and certainly not for block 3.
With the descent braking method, there is a balance between mass, length and girth. Longer/taller creates issues faster than girth increases.
I think they will push it as far as they can with length but there is not really much room left. It is already overweight.
I think as soon as it becomes operation, perhaps even before, they will start working in earnest on a much wider one. I think they'll skip 12m and go all the way to 15 and make it shorter than it is today. That will give a much needed improvement in volume to weight ratio. Quite possible also to make the booster 15. and starship 12m.
I don't expect diameter change in next 10 years. They need to get this thing done, optimizing is one thing, diameter change would take years.
Agreed... Musk was basically saying the opposite of how Felix interpreted it, that making a wider rocket was unlikely for all the reasons Felix subsequently went into.
Thanks Felix, always a good energetic recap. An overall successful test. The booster was caught(again) and tons of new data from the 1st block two Starship. It was early enough in the flight that it seems like the RUD was from an FTS initiation. I guess more info to come.
R.A.T.S !!! Rough and Tumble Starship! 🚀🚀🚀🚀🚀🚀🚀 Great catch Mechazilla!!! 🕯🥢🦖🍾
🤘🤪❤️🔥
I have been watching your channel for some time now, and i do enjoy your left handled dry humor while you present very interesting details... I finally subscribed...
Felix, i came here for the actual reason for the loss, at least you didn't say it was a Warp Core Breach ☺️
It was the Space Monkey searching for another banana.
🤣
Felix, the future's so bright, I gotta wear shades.
Felix, a larger diameter booster does not necessarily require massive changes to the launch and catch infrastructure. SpaceX could retain the current diameter of the 'engine room' but increase the diameter of the rocket above that, increasing the tank capacities for the booster as well as the spaceship. Continued development of the current engines may provide enough thrust to lift more fuel to support longer burns en-route to higher orbits and greater distances as well as larger payloads. We already know the Starship has room for at least three more vacuum engines but it's possible a greater diameter ship would permit even more engines, but that would require changes to the ground testing fixtures to suit.
The super high quality of the video from SpaceX has set the standard of our expectation (and for the professionals who design and build these vehicles). Geoff Bezos is going to need to ask Elon if he could get a Starlink setup.
A larger diameter rocket not only increases the volume to surface ratio but also increases the column stability. On the other hand, the thickness of the tankage skin is directly proportional the pressure and the diameter. So, this, like all engineering, involves a tradeoff.
@@andrewadams3894 ie lots of math!
I love your bloopers at the end! Never stop doing that!😂
Sci-fi is right this is straight out of the future.
Just noticed your small space suited companion - good touch!
I doubt that we'll see changes to the diameter anytime soon. Maybe once they got everything figured out how to build and operate block 2 with relatively reliability. I'm not a rocket engineer, but my gut says that the diameter change won't change the whole system so much that solutions from block 2 can't be translated. It's more a scaling thing, than a "does this even work" thing.
Tks Felix, been patiently waiting for your follow up to #7, I'm here for the winter at RV Park Center with front row seats. Hard to put in words watching the launch. Wife and I were surprised by how late that last boom was. So, loud !!Crazy. Bring on flight 8. We are ready!!!!
I don't normally like his videos because they are usually this long boring description of structures being built or moved around, like watching paint dry, and then having a narrator describe the process minute by minute. I watched this time because I wanted to know more about what happened with flight 7. But this video was very good. He went into indepth analysis of an event utilizing his knowledge of the technology. More intellectual persuits like this is what this gentleman is good at, and I believe he will become more popular if he leans more in this direction.
Watch the video pinned at the end of this one. ☝️ Thank you very much for the honest feedback! Popularity wise WAI is the fastest growing space related long form video channel on RUclips right now. We’re baffled and mighty proud of our audience! ❤️
Then dont watch it
@greslycraane1986 I said I normally don't. You apparently don't read very well.
Lol nah he's still kinda annoying. But simplistically detailed enough to follow along. I drop in every launch for a recap
@Moe_Lester_fromUptwn Yea, true. But he is smart and knowledgeable, and if he does more analysis, and deep diving, instead of narrating construction and rocket parts being moving around, I think he will be more popular than he is now.
Super, wie immer lieber Felix. LG aus Acapulco!
Block 3 rockets would be the answer to refueling the smaller 9 meter Starships by building the first Block 3s as tankers to reduce the number of fuel transfers to get out of Earth orbit.
Watching the booster delicately captured by the chopsticks is an awe-inspiring feat of engineering. It feels like witnessing the future in action!
"Uncle Elon, get this man a greencard!"
❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️
Another great report! Thank you WAI team!
One of the “upgrades” was clearly a downgrade.
Its obvious that when changing lots of hardware, errors will be occurring more before learning about it, this will definitely be an upgrade eventually
Thanks for your lives and épisode about starbase. Best show on SpaceX ever … so fun jokes also :)
I kind of see a pattern in how SpaceX develops the starship. They make a point in seeing how little components are needed for it to function and only ADD to them when they have a serious "event" that needs correcting. Of course, they will correct the defect and add measures to prevent what happened on flight 7. Nothing more will be done unless something NEW and unforeseen happens.
That's not a big secret. And it's not that simple, they don't just start with an empty can, and add parts one by one. It's more like when they are in doubt, they delete the part in question, while most designers prefer to add everything that may be necessary. The latter approach makes much fewer fireballs, but also makes the rocket heavier, more complex, and more expensive.
@@andrasbiro3007would argue it only results in more fireballs during development. Less parts means less points of failure, and generally less problems on a final design.
@
Of course.
I do appreciate the inclusion of flight of the navigator footage 👍
If you were to build a much bigger booster. You might then launch all the fuel in one shot all the way to lower Earth orbit. And then you wouldn't have to refill a starship you'd have the booster full of fuel up there. Continue with the starship as it's going but as a fuel delivery system bigger's better.
You're saying this one isn't big enough 😂😂😂
Not happening. You're basically describing an SSTO system, but you're missing the fact that if you make the booster bigger, it's a lot heavier, and needs a lot more fuel and even more engines to get anywhere... and if you want to put the booster into orbit, it needs even more fuel and thrust than that. The rocket equation is not your friend.
You should do more deep dive videos. I loved the raptor deep dive. It'll be a good change from the weekly repeating stuff. Cheers.
Just seen that the used booster is already on eBay, collection only, discount if you buy two.
you mean the debris?
@@Prasah1711x no, the two boosters that were recovered. for a small bonus we will even throw in an additional Raptor, so you have two complete boosters. Just feed it a Chicken or two every Day.
@ Did you not see the booster catch? I know it is so small it’s easy to miss.
@@unitrader403is it a raptor 3? If not then the deal aint worth it 😔
It's been a tradition for me since this channel started, that I press like before watching 🎉 great content and presentation, never disappoints🇿🇦
Success is not guaranteed like the 60s, but entertainment is 😂😂😂
I seem to remember people dying in the 60s. 2 burnt to death on the pad.
@@firebush1343you sure people died on launch pad? did not hear before
There were many similar failures in the 60 's . For both Russia and America
@michaeldespirito9595 I know. It's been 70 years since 1960 and we made hardly any progress in space travel. Harsh but true
@@firebush1343It was 3 not two
Gus Grissom Ed White and Roger Chaffee were heros of the Gemini program and a blow to Apollo program
WoW - RUclips actually notified me this time.
You claim the starship was likely tumbling because the telemetry showed engines out except on one side. Never mind that the telemetry also showed the attitude and it wasn't tumbling.
Or telemetry was wrong. Maybe it was spinning on its axis.
That’s because it lost communication at that point likely due to the flight termination system blowing up the rocket. If you watch closely, the methane fuel level rapidly falls off, all but one of the engines shut down including the ones that gimbal allowing the ship to stay oriented, and the attitude of the starships telemetry freezes right as the attitude starts to rotate indicating it froze at that point and lost communication. It was likely in peices already at that point and not tumbling at all.
Great content. Nice insights into the future starship. To increase the diameter will require a huge rebuild of the tooling and the base.
I know homeboy’s gotta eat but the plugs are getting so out of hand
Let him make his money... no harm done, for a lot of work.
We need a go fund me to get Felix, Marcus and Scott on that first flight to Mars. I hear the WiFi there is quite bad.
Not really, wtf?
“It slices, it dices; you need 10 for your kitchen“
I remember those old days on television with the infomercials.
Ben shapiro type shi
Nice job! I like your energy and enthusiasm and ability to explain things.
19:54 you know what else is massive
LOWWWW
TAAAAAAAAAPPPPEEEEERRRRRRR
FAA~AADEEEEE
You know, the low taper fade meme is still MASSIVE
Uranus
Thanks agin Felix! I hope the next launch goes better! I appreciate all you do!
Well, it is pretty much impossible for the next launch to be worse! 😁
@@david.stachon You really don't want to put money on that . Hahaha
@@gor4988 haha maybe. I guess it could always worse.
@@david.stachon With musk man calling the shots, anything is possible, except fulfilment of promises
Any pilots here: I’d like to hear from you! How do you feel about the idea of declaring Mayday Fuel, so you can hold your heading beneath that debris?
2 options:
1. Pray that a V2 doesn’t destroy our aircraft.
2. Ditch in the Caribbean, and destroy said aircraft.
What does this guy mean: No reason not to launch again in a month?!
Felix, thanks for the great update as always! But one nitpick: you made a cylinder’s surface area to height scaling sound much worse than it is. Surface area of the curved wall scales linearly with height - they are directly proportional. It doesn’t get worse the longer you make the cylinder. In fact, since you also need caps at the top and bottom of the cylinder, rather than an open-ended tube, the total surface area scaling is better than linear because the caps don’t grow in size. They do grow when expanding the diameter of the cylinder, along with the curved walls, but not as much as the volume gained. However, any increase in the size of a cylinder expected to contain heavy liquids and/or high pressure gases while coping with the stresses of flying through the atmosphere at high speeds and maneuvering in space, will need to be accompanied by increased structural strength. Expanding the diameter is still the best way to go, but probably not by as large a margin as you would think purely on the basis of geometric calculations!
It exploded because the fire spread rapidly... pretty straightforward.
not to be like a nerd or anything, but it exploded because they exploded it on purpose because of the fire.
It exploded because of shoddy rushed engineering.
So many answers!
@@SterlingArchimedes Failure is not an option < Fail and try again
@@SterlingArchimedesAI system crashed, not the rocket.
Rock on Felix, another good update
these are prototypes and failure is a learning process not a setback
💯Thank you!
42 engines!! Crazy. So much to look forward to.
So, we're perfectly on track for that manned moon shot in Q1 2025, it seems...
What are you talking about?
Still salty about that? At least you're funny mate.
What’s your space company? I’m sure we’d all love to invest
@@monjava 1960s Russian technology doesn't explode 7/7
Not sure on current stock prices, ask dony on Monday
why is it whenever this or other things are pointed out that’s your guys response? You do realize how dumb of a response that is right ?
Awesome coverage and top notch graphics. Thanks!
Flight 7 was fantastic, i wonder if the 3 Split downcomer was the issue with this ?
Same
Oh good point. That was one of the mayor changes. Forgot about that one. Could very well be the case
Nice vid again thank you fore your hard work❤
Fire suppression sounds like more weight...
Don't have to be much. Just a small bottle of some inert gas to displace other gases. In vacuum you really don't need much as the pressure is minimal.
Adding bigger vents could reduce mass enough to compensate.
If your ass was on fire the last thing on your mind would be is weight! True?
Very good video. That said - where's the Blue Origin launch coverage? Sad to see no recap video from you on that one.
That'll be in next episode, that being said we did do a rundown of new glenn in the second half of last episode 😁
❤️
looked to me like spacex has brought on board some of the tesla QC guys.
Returning watcher here! Just subscribed, i cant believe i wasnt already 😂
It feels to me that increasing the diameter of super heavy and starship by as much as 3m would basically end up to be like building another rocket, Falcon 1 to falcon 9 kind of change, changing the tooling would be small in comparison to having to change things like work platforms in the high bays, work and transport stands. You would have to build what would amount to whole new launch mounts. Not to mention things like the fluid dynamics in a significantly wider ship. If they ever do this I would think that the only way would be once starship 1 was in operation and making money other wise I just can’t see how spacex could stay profitable.
Thank you Felix, astronomic greatings from Germany😃
I think there may be another reason to increase the diameter rather than continue to make the current Starship design taller and taller: stiffness. A larger diameter pipe is stiffer for a specific length. There must be a LOT of flexing under full thrust and during maneuvers like separation/boost-back. Even if that doesn't cause the rocket to break up, it will cause premature weakening and failure. It's clearly a very sturdy rocket right now, but you just can't keep lengthening it or it won't be.
Incidently yes, the first thing I thought about when you said increased diameter was all of the jigs and fixtures and the space in the assembly buildings and the launch pad. They would need to build new jigs and fixtures, but that's usually true for a new product. (Remember, these are intended to be assembly line products.) It does look like they have room in the megabays for larger diameter tubes. If not, they are planning a "gigabay" and maybe this is why. And if you look at the outside dimensions of that new launch mount that they are building, it looks like there is plenty of room to build a replacement with a larger diameter hole in the middle, thus allowing them to re-use the same flame trench. I think the tower is really the biggest question. The current one is already pretty flexible and bobs and sways a lot during a catch, as do the chopsticks. They've already reinforced the tower once. I'm not sure it can do much more, though a well attached cladding would really stiffen it up while protecting it from that landing blast. And it seems likely that the chopsticks would need to be redesigned and replaced. Not sure about the carriage. They also did a lot of work on the supports and tracks for it a while back, suggesting that it might not have a lot more margin for a heavier vehicle.
BTW, if they ever expend that big booster, it will probably register on seismographs around the world. 🙂
Thank you for the video , also your eyelashes wow😅
He curls them.
The word "mishap" shouldn't even apply to an experimental under development craft. Failure is EXPECTED and potentially anticipated.
mishap criteria are less strict but anything that could cause a public safety hazard is a mishap no matter what caused it.
Great show.
the catch was epic! my friends and I were watching it live, get em elon! from australia!
Why don't they fly the last version first
It's hard
just landing it is not the goal, they want to upgrade the ship for Mars.
@@kratosgodslayer6171 First goal would be to bring starlink satellites up. Second goal would be moon i guess...
@@Xenomystusyes. My thought is that they need the sat deployment capability, so that while going to the moon, they can dump a few along the way and have internet on the moon? 🤔😆
@@blacksheep7389 they can dump a few along the way and have internet on the moon?
No. It doesn't work that way. Their relative positions would be constantly changing.
Great video the idea of increasing the diameter of block 3 is exciting. The efficiency increase through scale would get so much done in one trip when going to space. I can hardly wait. Until then it’ll be great to see a bock 2 successful missions including a catch of both booster and ship.
Scuttlebutt is: Overpressure from 6 Engine light against Hot Stage Ring. The pressure wave was unintentionally contained within the firewall compartment (Not enough surface area of venting to allow volume of gases being forced into this space.). Ruptured new Vacuum jacket plumbing. Fire took out EEC & ECU ,going engine by engine. and then wiped out the entire avionics computer suite. LOC2 . Auto-Activation parameter for FTS satisfied with LOC2.
Thank you for the comprehensive report!
Excellent work.
Thank you for watching! 🙏❤️
It exploded cuz some fire got big fast... obviously
It was from am oxygen leak I think
🤡🙄
Scott Manley did say that the "rapid unscheduled disassembly" wasn't because of excess pressure build up, but most likely caused by the FTS triggering as the rocket went outside its designated flight path....
SpaceX does nothing but surprise EVERY SINGLE TIME! God Bless SpaceX (and Blue Origin... But mainly SpaceX)...
I noticed also on the relight second time they changed engine ignition order/sequence on the engines.
The reduction in complexity in the engine is remarkable. Compare that with the look of New Glenns' engine and its stark.
Stark as in, one works and the other doesn't?
@@gor4988 I this week we can call it a score draw.
Now some of the NG will be instrumentation.
But the reduction in complexity is huge.
@@adenwellsmith6908 But isn't the goal to reach orbit ?
Catching boosters is nice, but pointless if payload ends up in a million pieces
7 from 7 🧨
There's no reduction in complexity in the engine... Raptor 3 is at least as complex as Raptor 2, if not more so. It's just much cleaner on the outside because most of the plumbing is hidden inside other parts.
@simongeard4824 Hidden inside !
Sounds like that would make inspections/refurbishment harder for the quick turnaround time as promised years ago.
He's on the record stating that unless relaunch window is comparable to aircraft, it isn't viable
Thanks, Excellent information in this video. Keep up the good work WAI team.
Thanks for the video. However, consider talking like a normal person. The affected, punched cadence is irritating. FFS just talk like you do on the live shows... perfectly fine!
I was at new Glenn that morning. If you were looking for a good place to go next time Felix then you can go to the beach right beside jetty Park and walk right down the beach almost to the jetty. You have a full vantage point of the rocket and the feeling of takeoff hits you like a wave😂 kind of fitting😅 I watch starship online but I think next time I might drive to the keys
How tf do we have leaking tanks this long into the program I was very disappointed when I heard that’s what caused the fire ☹️
Same. When will he carry out a few missions? Is this rocket designed to be a test program only?
@@paulbizard3493It is far more complex than any other rocket. They have effectively solved the booster. The second stage is completely new, thermal tiles, relightable engines, massive size, vertical suicide landing.
@@paulbizard3493 this launch was supposed to be testing deploying payload/dummy starlink sat...
It's the first block 2 starship, wtf are you talking about...
It will be interesting to look at what effect the double wall down feeder pipes had during this flight. I'm curious as to the connections of a double wall pipe on the bottom of the fuel tank exit point. This is a significant design change from block 1 .