Dust is ballistic in a vacuum. Dust can't "billow" or "swirl". It just flies like microscopic cannon shells. No dust clouds. Man! What good stuff nit picking be damned! Amazing, every time.
Very good! The only thing I would point out is the landing, the dust cloud kicked up looks like what would occur in an atmosphere not a vacuum. The dust should be projected directly outward and away, not into "clouds".
its got a low enough center of gravity that it should be fine as long as they scout a landing location beforehand thats nice and flat, and a few backup landing zones nearby
We did it before, and with much more primitive technology. The Space X team is landing rockets like that on Earth NOW, and it's much easier to do in the Moon's far lighter gravity.
The landing legs must all be capable of extending/contracting to different lengths and making rapid hydraulic adjustments while "nose" thrusters must be capable of maintaining true vertical until the legs lock. I would have automatic leveling in case a rock under a leg abruptly crushed.
Well none of the replies to your question actually addressed your question, so let me just say that you are probably correct. The lunar surface has *some* dust, in a thin layer, but not enough for such voluminous clouds, and it would definitely be blown away at high speed, as there is very low gravity and no surrounding atmosphere to slow it down. What little there is would streak away in a quick blur, not billow up in clouds.
Well done and much appreciated. I doubt though that there would be that amount of dust blasted up on landing. Apparently the moons surface dust and rock fragments have a slightly damp type of consistency.
Gallium31 get confused how. like how fast a rocket moves and how much force on the body would kill the astronots going at insert copy and paste here If a rocket is launched from the surface of the Earth, it needs to reach a speed of at least 7.9 kilometers per second (4.9 miles per second) in order to reach space. This speed of 7.9 kilometers per second is known as the orbital velocity, it corresponds to more than 20 times the speed of sound. only dumb people think a human body can withstand moving 4.9 miles a second
World of Gaming Can you withstand 30m/s? Yes. Can you withstand 0m/s? Yes. What if you hit a brick wall going 30m/s? Well if you're in a car, the frame and the body will cushion your deceleration. You might experience several hundred G's and survive. If you have nothing to cushion your body and you hit it straight on, you'll probably experience over a thousand G's and a LOT of trauma.
World of Gaming, it takes about 9 minutes for a rocket launched from the surface of the earth to reach a velocity of 4.9 miles per second. Astronauts only feel an acceleration of about 3 g's during that time.
Good stuff! It is definitely time to go back to the moon! It will be an excellent stepping-stone and testing-ground for technologies to go further into space - to Mars and beyond. The moon would also be an excellent launch-pad for a Mars mission - much easier to escape the moons gravity! With Bigelow looking like they will put up a huge inflatable lunar-orbiting station, I can envision shuttles from earth orbit to there (and back) and then shuttles from the lunar orbiter to the moon and back. I'm *sure* it will happen!
Here's to the great accomplishments of the hard working people at SpaceX for bringing the moon within reach in the 2020s. That Musk trying to take credit for the hard work of other people. The engineers, assemblers, quality control inspectors, machinists, subcontractors, they are the heroes. The accomplishment of going to the moon to stay is great. Just make sure credit is given to those who did the work to build it.
You used the word “Envy” in the wrong way. Envy is “jealous” so to correct your statement, it should be “i like your skills” or “im jealous of your skills”.
Love the historical voices of President Kennedy talking about the first moon landing on the video, my Granny watched us go from walking, horse and buggy, to cars and to rockets going to the moon in her lifetime.. Thankful there are people who decided it’s still important to go to the moon and Mars and explore space. Thankful we still have a space program and to all involved in making that possible.
HZQ Productions it has to do the orbit insertion burn / it has to slow down so the moon gravity catches it. Space works really different than they show in the movies. If they wouldnt do this burn they would get slingshotted intp deep space or maybe back to earth
Ships tend to go in "reverse" in space also in transit, because while travelling at 30 km/s even a grain of sand becomes like a bullet. So they put as much between spacecraft between debris and people as possible.
queazocotal But it’s wrong? In the presentation about BFR Elon even showed how it would dock-encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSEJuvHHNe8o8HyDeIq50j3rFSH2Z7kA2SM_xESUbuWWowTHcBw
Purpose wise, tankers don't need to refill other tankers though. The sole purpose of the tanker is to refuel ships heading out from LEO. The tanker docks with the outbound ship and refills it back to back, both with the same orientation (up down). I know it's for artistic purposes, but for detail purists like myself, it's a pretty glaring hiccup, plus the tankers don't have windows. They're tankers. They have fuel as the payload, not the pressurized habitat area for the passengers. The animation is still superb though, but ya can't blame ppl for noticing. Unless SX decided to change something, we're still detail purists and assume it's going to be the way shown in the presentation orientation wise. Plus, the ships are designed to have the pipelines interconnect (as shown in the animation in the presentation), so don't see why it's even a thing why they would need to be upside down anyway. Also, afaik there are 2 pairs of pipes and not 4. I love the animation as it's superb again like the Mars one, but the detail purist in me _really_ wishes it stuck to the script, even the mundane details. As an artist, I don't care cause it rocks. As an engineering enthusiast, I can't help but notice discrepancies.
Don't know how you would use tankers as in space boosters other than modifying them for that purpose, then they become space tugs rather than tankers, plus I haven't the faintest idea how you'd make the adapter for one of those. Also, what do you mean by "if the trajectory leaving earth skims past earth"? How can you skim past the Earth if you're leaving it??? If you mean if it leaves and skims past Earth on another orbit then I kinda getcha, but then the header tanks may have been spending too much time in space and boil-off will become a problem for maintaining margins. It's a neat idea for purely thought experiments, but would require too many mods to be considered practical when you can simply build bigger spaceships, or upgrade to the full ITS, potentially modified.
Well clearly the copyright laws needs some "adjustments"... companies lose more money from suing each other than they gain from not losing products to piracy and such.
@@ramirowendler Anything above LEO will require "refueling". Even a passenger ship could be used to bring up 100 tons of propellant, and would require about 12 launches to fully fill another passenger ship already filled with 100 tons of cargo. Since SpaceX is so badass, they will probably try to do a Moon fly-by or landing as soon as two Starships and one Booster are tested adequate for the task.
Nice video, but not sure why you choose to reverse the docking align, in the original spacex presentation is wing with wing.. this has the benefit than even two normal second stage can dock and transfer fuel without the need of a special tanker design with opposite fuel connections. It seems that your only concern is to crash the wings on a bad alignment in a docking process, but that approach is controlled by computers at very low speed, if they can land vertically in a boat from space, then this would be the less of the concerns. So next time, stick to the original presentation.
No, wing-to-wing is not androgynous, you need two different ships to mate together, with the design in this video both ships can be identical as far as the mating surfaces go. Clap your hands together and think of them as BFS rear ends, they match together, but left and right hands are mirror images of eachother, not identical, this would be the wing-to-wing configuration. If you had the misfortune of having two left hands you could not clap them together and have them match.
That would be correct only in the case where you use 1 lox pipe and 1 ch4 pipe offset of the center to the left or right sides to transfer fuel, but you can use 2 for lox (both down, female and male) and 2 for ch4 (both up) to transfer fue, I guess this picture show that method: www.illustratedcuriosity.com/files/media/39386/rocketenginebfg.jpg
Ah, okey, yeah now I get where the confusion is coming from, it's the same damn thing both ways. Over the line of anrogyny you must have matching resources, male to female and vice versa, two sets of everything. If you draw the line of anrogyny horizontally or vertically doesn't make a lick of difference. SpaceX drew the line vertically, this video drew it horizontally. Well there is one difference, with SpaceX approach you can have some connectors in wings. My geometric thinking broke down there for a while, thanks for bringing it back on track.
yeah, but having connectors in wings does not have much sense, because Elon Musk already said that the second stage fuel would be filled from the first stage without an external connection to the launch pad. So you just fill both stages using connections from the rocket bottom, which it become way easier for reusability.
Nice animation of BFR! Looks even better than the 2017 IAC illustrations of BFR. Wonder how the seating configuration will be like in BFR. They will need seats for landing & reentry. I think they'll place at least one to two seats per cabin inside the cabin sections of BFR . You should consider doing a detailed animation walk through of what you think the interior will really look like in the cabins, common area & cargo storage area.
Hi dude. Just a note about your particulate animation, as a VFX super and into physics myself, for realism remember there is no atmosphere in space so in maya or 3DS or whatever package you use don't put any drag value or speed decay on any emitted particles. Just allow inter-particle collisions. Stuff just doesn't slow down in vacuum which in fact is why some people think space footage is faked because stuff behaves differently to what they are used to seeing in an atmosphere and so "looks wrong" to them. When a rocket lands on the moon there is no billowing cloud. Again the exhaust and kicked up dust does not slow down because there is no atmosphere and so cannot form vortices, cannot hang around decelerating in a swirling cloud close to the base of the rocket the way helicopters kick up swirling dust clouds or the falcon 9 boosters kick up swirls on landing. That doesn't happen in space. Watch the Apollo LEM return to orbit footage czcams.com/video/sj6a0Wrrh1g/video.html Debris just gets the hell out of there depending on mass and each dust particle travels in purely ballistic paths. Try running a pure physics sim and see how much it more closely matches
thats actually just a mistake the creator of this animation made, the moon does have an atmosphere, but its so thin that you could say its non existant
Cannot see many BFR's landing on the moon before a variant without wings is designed that just goes back and forth from LEO to the surface. Probably several versions for different mission purposes. Likely the lander would dock with a tank station - not a tanker - in orbit and while there receive cargo from a range of launch vehicle sources.
Who is photography or filming this? That means to say their technology is better. Or is this a moonlanding simulation like the Apollo trip to the moon?
I love it when a video starts off with a space mating ritual.
Then you must love the beginning of dr. Strangelove
ASS TO ASS
It's refuelling
My guy went to orbit to have sex with starship, determination right there...
@@horiginsfs7561 r/whoosh
0:40 can you see the sad face on the earth. Like the rocket is leaving earth?
Like if you noticed.
i saw it
Every time I hear that JFKs speech, it gives me chills for some reason
Exceptional. Thanks for taking the time to create and share this!
Stephen I seriously hope we can see a simulation of a Mars landing.
These are too good. Keep them coming when u can!
Uploader should try out a job working for the SpaceX graphics team to make their animations.
Home
Bradenton sams
Tedd Wilson and I
berardis3579 You do realize this person makes these videos to show some amazing skills........don’t you?
Awesome animation! I can't wait to see more of these, I also love your newer Mars landing video.
Dust is ballistic in a vacuum. Dust can't "billow" or "swirl". It just flies like microscopic cannon shells. No dust clouds. Man! What good stuff nit picking be damned! Amazing, every time.
wow you did it, great work!!
that music eminds me of Rimworld for some reason.
That was awesome on so many levels. Bravo!
Wake up!!!
This was honestly beautiful, thank you.
Very good! The only thing I would point out is the landing, the dust cloud kicked up looks like what would occur in an atmosphere not a vacuum. The dust should be projected directly outward and away, not into "clouds".
yeah, no landing with that beast should be attempted without some infrastructure, landing / launchpad in place first, don't you think?
its got a low enough center of gravity that it should be fine as long as they scout a landing location beforehand thats nice and flat, and a few backup landing zones nearby
We did it before, and with much more primitive technology. The Space X team is landing rockets like that on Earth NOW, and it's much easier to do in the Moon's far lighter gravity.
The landing legs must all be capable of extending/contracting to different lengths and making rapid hydraulic adjustments while "nose" thrusters must be capable of maintaining true vertical until the legs lock. I would have automatic leveling in case a rock under a leg abruptly crushed.
Well none of the replies to your question actually addressed your question, so let me just say that you are probably correct. The lunar surface has *some* dust, in a thin layer, but not enough for such voluminous clouds, and it would definitely be blown away at high speed, as there is very low gravity and no surrounding atmosphere to slow it down. What little there is would streak away in a quick blur, not billow up in clouds.
10/10 animation
Uploader should try out a job working for the SpaceX graphics team to make their animations.
I think they did it on kerbal space program real solar sytem with some visual enhancements and BFR mod.
>Moon
>Turbulence
No.
dont need to have the heat shields protection, no atmosphere.
Corey Taylor it's to re entry earth's atmosphere not the moon
Well done and mesmerizing. Wish I could hop on board. The music fitted perfectly. Thanks for creating and sharing.
These are pretty darn incredible. No idea how you can put so much effort into these. Great job.
I tip my hat to you, good sir. I don't know how you keep doing these amazing animations!
Well done and much appreciated. I doubt though that there would be that amount of dust blasted up on landing. Apparently the moons surface dust and rock fragments have a slightly damp type of consistency.
Depends on where you land.
Can you put animation in the title because people with with little grasp on reality might get confused
Gallium31 get confused how. like how fast a rocket moves and how much force on the body would kill the astronots going at insert copy and paste here
If a rocket is launched from the surface of the Earth, it needs to reach a speed of at least 7.9 kilometers per second (4.9 miles per second) in order to reach space. This speed of 7.9 kilometers per second is known as the orbital velocity, it corresponds to more than 20 times the speed of sound. only dumb people think a human body can withstand moving 4.9 miles a second
Gallium31 "Cooper, what are you doing?!"
World of Gaming Can you withstand 30m/s? Yes. Can you withstand 0m/s? Yes. What if you hit a brick wall going 30m/s? Well if you're in a car, the frame and the body will cushion your deceleration. You might experience several hundred G's and survive. If you have nothing to cushion your body and you hit it straight on, you'll probably experience over a thousand G's and a LOT of trauma.
World of Gaming, it takes about 9 minutes for a rocket launched from the surface of the earth to reach a velocity of 4.9 miles per second. Astronauts only feel an acceleration of about 3 g's during that time.
Shhhh....don't spoil the fun. The NoLobes are too funny.
Nice BackGround Music.👌
I Love This.😍
love the music blends perfectly with space
Nice video, but during landing on the moon you'll get streams of dust not plumes.
Dust outflow during landing sequence looked perfectly realistic to me mate -- William Black, featured artist on Winchell Chung's Atomic Rockets site.
Good stuff! It is definitely time to go back to the moon! It will be an excellent stepping-stone and testing-ground for technologies to go further into space - to Mars and beyond.
The moon would also be an excellent launch-pad for a Mars mission - much easier to escape the moons gravity!
With Bigelow looking like they will put up a huge inflatable lunar-orbiting station, I can envision shuttles from earth orbit to there (and back) and then shuttles from the lunar orbiter to the moon and back.
I'm *sure* it will happen!
That's the best video I have ever seen on CZcams. Amazing.
Stammering Benny
really?
Video is so Beautiful... Music is like Heaven🚀🌕🎶💖
Ohh yeah, camera crew were already there to shoot moon landing on moon.... Cinematographers were already there in space to shoot the journey 😁😁
Accuser?
10/10
omg that engineering view of tanker separation was so good
Here's to the great accomplishments of the hard working people at SpaceX for bringing the moon within reach in the 2020s. That Musk trying to take credit for the hard work of other people. The engineers, assemblers, quality control inspectors, machinists, subcontractors, they are the heroes. The accomplishment of going to the moon to stay is great. Just make sure credit is given to those who did the work to build it.
JFK "I chose to sleep with Marylin Monroe not because she was easy but because I was hard".
OMG that gave me a chuckle.
And now youve completely ruined the atmosphere of the video xDD
Nailed it 🤗 10
Being polite comes naturally so I would rise up so she may sit down.
What r u talking about
Detail on the surface looks great!
I expect he used real photographs of the Moon.
Who came here after having known that Starship was chosen as a human lunar lander for Artemis?
Beautifully done! I love watching your videos!
Wow these are always amazing to watch!
I envy your skills!
Please show us how you make these!
Yes, the SpaceX people are pros at CG; just watch Feb launch of their Falcon Heavy.
You used the word “Envy” in the wrong way. Envy is “jealous” so to correct your statement, it should be “i like your skills” or “im jealous of your skills”.
Thank you to the Astronauts and Cosmonauts that have given us incredible dedication and sometimes their lives so we can go forward.
Love the historical voices of President Kennedy talking about the first moon landing on the video, my Granny watched us go from walking, horse and buggy, to cars and to rockets going to the moon in her lifetime.. Thankful there are people who decided it’s still important to go to the moon and Mars and explore space. Thankful we still have a space program and to all involved in making that possible.
Great visualisation/animation!
Very useful!
From 1:45 why is BFR orbiting the moon in reverse? I'm slightly puzzled. Is it because it's being prepared for landing or what?
Yes, it is preparing for it's landing burn
For lunar orbit insertion and landing
HZQ Productions it has to do the orbit insertion burn / it has to slow down so the moon gravity catches it. Space works really different than they show in the movies. If they wouldnt do this burn they would get slingshotted intp deep space or maybe back to earth
It doesn't really matter what direction the ship faces while it isn't burning
Ships tend to go in "reverse" in space also in transit, because while travelling at 30 km/s even a grain of sand becomes like a bullet. So they put as much between spacecraft between debris and people as possible.
why is docking upside down!?
It means that with the right design, the vehicles can be entirely identical and still dock and mate the right hoses up simply.
queazocotal But it’s wrong? In the presentation about BFR Elon even showed how it would dock-encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSEJuvHHNe8o8HyDeIq50j3rFSH2Z7kA2SM_xESUbuWWowTHcBw
Snowmobile2004 perhaps. It will be interesting to see reality, not videos, and how it's actually done.
Purpose wise, tankers don't need to refill other tankers though. The sole purpose of the tanker is to refuel ships heading out from LEO. The tanker docks with the outbound ship and refills it back to back, both with the same orientation (up down). I know it's for artistic purposes, but for detail purists like myself, it's a pretty glaring hiccup, plus the tankers don't have windows. They're tankers. They have fuel as the payload, not the pressurized habitat area for the passengers. The animation is still superb though, but ya can't blame ppl for noticing. Unless SX decided to change something, we're still detail purists and assume it's going to be the way shown in the presentation orientation wise. Plus, the ships are designed to have the pipelines interconnect (as shown in the animation in the presentation), so don't see why it's even a thing why they would need to be upside down anyway. Also, afaik there are 2 pairs of pipes and not 4. I love the animation as it's superb again like the Mars one, but the detail purist in me _really_ wishes it stuck to the script, even the mundane details. As an artist, I don't care cause it rocks. As an engineering enthusiast, I can't help but notice discrepancies.
Don't know how you would use tankers as in space boosters other than modifying them for that purpose, then they become space tugs rather than tankers, plus I haven't the faintest idea how you'd make the adapter for one of those. Also, what do you mean by "if the trajectory leaving earth skims past earth"? How can you skim past the Earth if you're leaving it??? If you mean if it leaves and skims past Earth on another orbit then I kinda getcha, but then the header tanks may have been spending too much time in space and boil-off will become a problem for maintaining margins. It's a neat idea for purely thought experiments, but would require too many mods to be considered practical when you can simply build bigger spaceships, or upgrade to the full ITS, potentially modified.
Animation is excellent
KSP 2 is looking sick
put fly me to the moon of background music :D
P illo copyright issues ... but that would’ve been great!
Well clearly the copyright laws needs some "adjustments"... companies lose more money from suing each other than they gain from not losing products to piracy and such.
P illo I want to sing that at one of those symposiums where Elon is giving a speech and then allows people to ask questions etc. afterwards.
The dust dispersion at the end is not accurate.
I look forward to repeated BFR moon landings.
Awesome, looks so nice:-) Amazing:-)
I think the BFR will be a passenger ship in the thermosphere . That's where the ISS too.
Animation was OK, until the billowing clouds of dust. That only happens in an atmosphere!
Oscar No it isnt
Because moon has no atmosphere to slow it down. Only the booster can.
Moon base alpha
Sunil Narine
Classic show
We all know what happened to that now don't we Hmmm... ;-)
Sunil Narine john madden
*John Madden*
*Football!*
This is Awesome imagery! I especially like the crater crossing (starting at 2:40).
Can't wait to see you produce a feature length movie
Why do both spaceships have windows? The BFS Tanker should not have windows as it has no cabins or crew space.
Geffen Avraham for illustration purposes
maybe for the fist flight they don't need a tanker, the can send people and take back without refuelling (only to the moon of course)
@@ramirowendler
Anything above LEO will require "refueling".
Even a passenger ship could be used to bring up 100 tons of propellant, and would require about 12 launches to fully fill another passenger ship already filled with 100 tons of cargo.
Since SpaceX is so badass, they will probably try to do a Moon fly-by or landing as soon as two Starships and one Booster are tested adequate for the task.
what KSP mod is this?
Mowne Latt hopefully tho sis s joke so I don’t get r/wooooshed but this is made with blender
Its not ksp
I simply love this stuff!,,,
I love the separation scene.
Nice video, but not sure why you choose to reverse the docking align, in the original spacex presentation is wing with wing.. this has the benefit than even two normal second stage can dock and transfer fuel without the need of a special tanker design with opposite fuel connections.
It seems that your only concern is to crash the wings on a bad alignment in a docking process, but that approach is controlled by computers at very low speed, if they can land vertically in a boat from space, then this would be the less of the concerns.
So next time, stick to the original presentation.
No, wing-to-wing is not androgynous, you need two different ships to mate together, with the design in this video both ships can be identical as far as the mating surfaces go. Clap your hands together and think of them as BFS rear ends, they match together, but left and right hands are mirror images of eachother, not identical, this would be the wing-to-wing configuration. If you had the misfortune of having two left hands you could not clap them together and have them match.
For a more practical example on how androgynous mating in space is done check out IDA docking adapter design.
That would be correct only in the case where you use 1 lox pipe and 1 ch4 pipe offset of the center to the left or right sides to transfer fuel, but you can use 2 for lox (both down, female and male) and 2 for ch4 (both up) to transfer fue, I guess this picture show that method:
www.illustratedcuriosity.com/files/media/39386/rocketenginebfg.jpg
Ah, okey, yeah now I get where the confusion is coming from, it's the same damn thing both ways. Over the line of anrogyny you must have matching resources, male to female and vice versa, two sets of everything. If you draw the line of anrogyny horizontally or vertically doesn't make a lick of difference. SpaceX drew the line vertically, this video drew it horizontally.
Well there is one difference, with SpaceX approach you can have some connectors in wings.
My geometric thinking broke down there for a while, thanks for bringing it back on track.
yeah, but having connectors in wings does not have much sense, because Elon Musk already said that the second stage fuel would be filled from the first stage without an external connection to the launch pad. So you just fill both stages using connections from the rocket bottom, which it become way easier for reusability.
In 2023 BFR will orbit the moon.
DRAGON OF THE WEST did you have a vision ? Lol
Onésime Basubi Elon said.
Nice animation of BFR! Looks even better than the 2017 IAC illustrations of BFR. Wonder how the seating configuration will be like in BFR. They will need seats for landing & reentry. I think they'll place at least one to two seats per cabin inside the cabin sections of BFR . You should consider doing a detailed animation walk through of what you think the interior will really look like in the cabins, common area & cargo storage area.
Moon is very beautiful
Hi dude. Just a note about your particulate animation, as a VFX super and into physics myself, for realism remember there is no atmosphere in space so in maya or 3DS or whatever package you use don't put any drag value or speed decay on any emitted particles. Just allow inter-particle collisions. Stuff just doesn't slow down in vacuum which in fact is why some people think space footage is faked because stuff behaves differently to what they are used to seeing in an atmosphere and so "looks wrong" to them.
When a rocket lands on the moon there is no billowing cloud. Again the exhaust and kicked up dust does not slow down because there is no atmosphere and so cannot form vortices, cannot hang around decelerating in a swirling cloud close to the base of the rocket the way helicopters kick up swirling dust clouds or the falcon 9 boosters kick up swirls on landing. That doesn't happen in space. Watch the Apollo LEM return to orbit footage czcams.com/video/sj6a0Wrrh1g/video.html Debris just gets the hell out of there depending on mass and each dust particle travels in purely ballistic paths. Try running a pure physics sim and see how much it more closely matches
Grommo buddy this is a video game
Its not a game its an animation made with blender@@clematis726
How the camera man get their first?
A really big cannon
+Secret Lee What camera man? It's a CGI animation. No camera man necessary.
My3dviews its a joke...
Beautiful as always!
I've been waiting for something like this. I want this to happen so much it hurts.
fake
clayman0 skycade You do realize this is animation.....don’t you? This person has skills.
/r/woosh
clayman0 skycade ?
Nm googled it...but I think your back pedaling now...unless you add (sarcasm) to justify your original comment.
clayman0 skycade pinnacle of humour
Nice video
What date was this video shot?
Just kidding.... lol... great photo realistic job!
Beautiful... Thank you
Keren kali.. Pengen naik roket ke bulan
This is really cool, did you leave out the leaving earth's orbit burn, or would it just look like nothing like that?
Amazing animation
I'll be Shure to construct this on KSP
If you watch it in reverse, it's like the last people fleeing a failed moon colony.
I like how the heat of the rocket engine makes the air flicker in the moons atmosphere
thats actually just a mistake the creator of this animation made, the moon does have an atmosphere, but its so thin that you could say its non existant
Ksp 2 looking good
Is this a variant of the Starship? or an early design? Fins look different.
11/10 good job
Wow Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious
i cant wait for this to happen for real
Cannot see many BFR's landing on the moon before a variant without wings is designed that just goes back and forth from LEO to the surface. Probably several versions for different mission purposes. Likely the lander would dock with a tank station - not a tanker - in orbit and while there receive cargo from a range of launch vehicle sources.
Cool I did this the other day in Space Flight Simulator
Great animation
Tuyệt voi
Did you render these yourself? Where did you get the assets from?
May I ask what rendering program you are using?
Good leanding on the moon.
excellent job, very nice video !
Looks more real than most actual space footage.
yeah, but actual space footage IS real. This is not
that was cool.
Nice make more!
I used to make moon landings better than that on an arcade moon landing game back in the 80’s.🚀🚀🚀
very nice!
Isaac fell asleep, watching with me next time he wants to go to the moon
I just saw the four pillars of the earth
no engine exaust
man o man what detailed
There are no visible flames in a vacuum.
It's very faintly visible
Knowledge of the forever time.
How are they going to deal with the dust while landing
Awesome animation!! (What's with all the 'thumbs down'? Oh yeah...flat-earthers...)
Muito legal. E será legal para quem poder pagar a passagem quando essas viagens se iniciar! Rio de Janeiro RJ Brasil
Awesome work 👍🏻👍🏻
Jet in vacuum..action and reaction 👀
Can you make a new one for Lunar Starship?
Who is photography or filming this? That means to say their technology is better. Or is this a moonlanding simulation like the Apollo trip to the moon?
Brilliant!
The Space Growth