Last Flight of the Delta IV and the Creation of Raptor 4 and Starship v3
Vložit
- čas přidán 13. 04. 2024
- There are many lessons to be learned in the rapidly changing Space Industry, and one of the most important is that no matter how successful you have been, tomorrow might be the end if you don't innovate fast enough.
Starship Integrated Flight Test 4 should launch in May, and Elon Musk has given us a preview of Raptor 4 and Starship 3. SpaceX plans to use these innovations to dominate the space industry, but can they make it possible to colonize the Moon and Mars within our lifetime?
Shop the Academy store at...
shop.spreadshirt.com/terran-s...
Please help support our channel at...
/ terranspaceacademy
Thank you so much for watching!
Ad Astra Pro Terra
Artists
/ c_bass3d
/ labpadre
/ neopork85
/ hazegrayart
/ alexsvanart
/ _fragomatik_
/ nickhenning3d
/ rgvaerialphotos
Companies
/ nasa
/ spacex
www.cochranex.com
/ blueorigin
/ space_ryde
/ virgingalactic
/ relativityspace
/ neutronstarsys
Credits
ULA
NASA
SpaceX - Věda a technologie
Nice overview. Thank you for reminding people not to fall in to extreme dichotomies.
You are most welcome and thanks for watching! We appreciate you.
I hope that this time we go into space and stay, we don't change our minds :)
I do too...
We will. Back then we did it for the national prestige of winning a race. Once we had won federal priorities shifted. And that was that.
Now we are going back, both because there’s stuff on the moon that we need especially at the south pole and as a stepping stone for Mars.
The history and comparisons are so cool! Thanks Much
Glad you like them!
Not mentioned in efficiency comparisons: hydrogen requires a much larger tank than methane. Per Elon subcooled methane is more efficient than hydrogen.
Actually hydrogen requires much larger tanks, Insulation not required for methane, fully seperate tanks as opposed to a common dome used for methalox so the tank weight is much higher.
Falcon heavy is much smaller than delta heavy but can deliver a much larger payload.
Hydrogen being the smallest molecule in existence leaks from anywhere if you as much as look at it. It causes hydrogen enbrittlement.
Hydrogen, although it has some very good use cases is a horrible choice for a booster, and a worse choice for a reusable booster.
Not more efficient by Isp but overall, yes. Explained in our methane rockets lesson.
Moon first vs Mars first is a distraction. Space first is the only goal that matters. When we learn to live comfortably in space then we can go anywhere and do anything. Whether the planet below us is habitable becomes irrelevant as it is only a means to an end, not the end of the journey. This change in mindset changes everything.
I would agree with that... Orbital, Lunar, or Martian. A space base anywhere gets us started... (A big one... the ISS is too small)
Delta IV, now the buggy-whip of payload rockets.
Indeed! The Packard of the Past! The DeLorean of De Nada! The Buick of Bust!
I do not understand the lack of enthusiasm and applause; I'd be tickled to be part of that.
Indeed! Just to see it happen in person would be amazing.
39:45 "Five or six refilling missions for every one mission that goes to Mars..." - I find it very hard to believe.
I question that too. But at 1,200 mt and 200mt to orbit that's six.
@@terranspaceacademy Does a fully fueled Starship have enough Delta-V to reach Mars and land? If so, how much fuel would be required? Could Starship be partially refueled to 80% full to possibly save a refueling ship?
Would it be possible to add chepter breaks: main segment, supporting segments? (ref NSF video summaries)
Still amazing 'lesson.' Yes, the RL-10 and RS-25 are amazing engines...but are they practical? Aside from the cost of each engine, what is the the difference in fuel costs?
Thank you again.
Great suggestion! I'll try to work that out. The RL-10 is unmatched in efficiency and can throttle down to just 15% full power. They are about $10M each so not cheap but by space industry standards they are hard to beat. The RS-25 is overpriced and under available. I would go with the RS-68 for a non-reusable LH2/LOX engine.
@@terranspaceacademy Do you know what is penalty to prevent propellant boil off for HydroLOX engines (insulation, pumps, etc)?
I used to wonder before about those forward flaps for long time that " why they don't put those flaps far ahead . that could increase torque around cg which could make belly flop more effective ( aerodynamic standpoint offcourse Tvs could do much more)" it would increase centre of pressure ahead which make it unstable during ascent but's not at all a probelm for modern day sensors and processors (n1 flashbaks💀) now they changed it. 👽
Indeed... Constantly innovating
Is this live?
:-) couple days ago...
On a different topic, somewhere around 10/15 years ago, I came across an article it might have been new Atlas, or another one.
It was describing how to use 3D printing where was printed as a lattice, which actually gave more strength and lighter weight.
However another interesting phenomenon was that this kind of structure not only lighter and stronger, it also engendered radiation protection.
I suspect you may know this already, however in case you haven't I will pass this on to you I do not have the URL, so it may require some research.
Scientia Habet Non Domus,
(Knowledge Has No y)
antiguajohn
Do you remember the material? Lighter elements produce less secondary radiation but don't block as well...
I think Elon needs to fundamentally rethink the propulsion choices for the interplanetary vehicles and opt for a high ISP choice in the nuclear/electric (direct explosion to vasimr) family of engines. Near term methane works for ascent, it also works on Mars with some fiddling. Better long term solutions are needed though. If I had to bet on a solution I would go with "static" laser propulsion.
A South African company would have the resources and knowledge to make a nice space reactor for that purpose.
@@terranspaceacademy I do agree that it won't be done in the US as the atomic energy people don't want to share. Sadly the americans will be begging to get a seat at the table when things are starting to get moving in space.
The Valles Marineris on Mars is4,000 km. Long & upto 7 km. deep and has many side canyons that could be covered over and pressurized in segments.
Due to the depth there will be added radiation protection and also increased protection against meteor strikes that are on an angle.
This would provide vast areas for habitation agriculture and the laws for expansion to other side canyons, linked by tunnels.
It would also allow by being segmented and in various canyons protection against a single failure event
I suspect they will also be a multitude of other advantages.
Scientia Habet Non Domus,
(Knowledge Has No Home)
antiguajohn
I've thought the same thing. Plus you can see a cutout of Mars history, looking for fossils etc...
However, you must take into account the risk of landslides.
That's true... And some idiot from a competing colony dropping a rock on your head :-)
Something to discuss:
The “Achilles heel” of Starship that no-one is talking about: The Human Factors element of riding Starship to a retro-rocket landing. Going to be a terrifying ride every time. Even when everything goes right.
I think they'll come back on Dragons for a while... Probably up too.
@@terranspaceacademyI think that is a smart and viable interim solution. Long term I envision a mini winged vehicle.
I do love spaceplanes :-)
50 tonne is very low, how can you refine in another 50 tonne. It just seems unlikely. The only thing that I think can give 50 tonne is to use aluminum.
The Raptors are gaining power and they will be stretching everything, increasing the launch mass and therefore overall mass to orbit.
@@terranspaceacademy they are already pushing those raptor thrusters. It will have in total a larger quantity of fuel in orbit , but the tanks get larger , so the problem still remains. What they have is 50 tonnes to orbit, at this point I don't even think they can add a single tonne more . There nothing left to optimize. I think it's time they start considering shrinking the starship, and increasing the booster length only . Thus it can release starship at a higher speed .
@@terranspaceacademy just to be sure that I'm being fair. Is it that starship can launch and land back with 50 tonne of payload . Or is it that starship can launch 50 tonne of payload, leave the 50 tonne in space and land again or
In other words can starship launch 100-150 tonne leave it in orbit ,and land without any payload.
If it's the first one my point still stands.
Right now it could get about 150mt to LEO if it was optimized to do so... To come back and land it's down to 50mt.
@@terranspaceacademy I will have patience, I do hope what ever these optimization are , works .
What views does Elon Musk have that are outdated ?
Nothing obvious that I can see. He has come a long way since his first days at the Mars Society.
make your voice alittle more exciting i often get a little bored while watching
Only for Patreon members :-)
For God sake, does every CZcamsr think that they have to artificially induce Cam shake whenever they show a starship taking off.
It’s Hollywood pathetic.
I turned the video off as soon as I saw it, for God sake please stop doing that
What are you talking about? That's raw footage from SpaceX. It does kinda shake things. I quit listening as soon as I realized you were wrong.
I think that it's really interesting that in the Bible in Matthew chapter 13, Jesus himself says that the Son of Man will send out his angels to gather his elect from the ends of the earth and the ends of HEAVEN, so as a Christian I see that it is entirely possible that we will be living among the planets, if not the starts, by the time Christ returns to bring ultimate justice to the world (Cosmos) of humanity. The answer to the problems of the world, is to re-create the broken souls of humanity. The day is coming when He will sort out the truly evil people (deny and refuse Him) from those who are truly good (in true sincerity say yes to Him when they hear of Him). The sooner anyone starts the conversation with Him in their heart (the true meaning of Jesus saying the Kingdom is near is that He is near to all of us right now), the better life will ultimately be in the long term (ultimately for eternity).
I'm not sure about all that Mark but put in a good word for me if you turn out to be right :-)