Here's What Happened To Starship During Flight 3!
Vložit
- čas přidán 30. 05. 2024
- How about that breathtaking re-entry footage? It was the gift that kept on giving.
🠴Join me to stay in the loop for more KSP stuff and general madness, Kerbal, space or otherwise!🠶
▶ Discord - / discord
▶ Mastodon - mastodon.social/@ShadowZone
▶ Twitter - / the_shadowzone
▶ Patreon - / shadowzone
▶ CZcams membership - / @shadowzone
0:00 Third time's the charm
1:03 What happened?
4:36 Awesome re-entry footage
5:46 The tally: What worked, what didn't?
6:37 If this were a "normal" rocket…
7:12 Onwards to flight 4!
8:28 Pie on π day
#starship #flight #spacex
🠴Interested in the vehicles I make in Kerbal Space Program? Check out my KerbalX🠶
▶ kerbalx.com/The_ShadowZone/
▶ steamcommunity.com/id/the_sha...
🠴Music🠶
"Invictus Outro" (c) The ShadowZone
Get my Music here:
▶ Spotify:
open.spotify.com/artist/0F8ZM...
▶ Apple Music:
itunes.apple.com/ca/artist/sh...
▶ Google Play:
play.google.com/store/music/a...
▶ Deezer:
www.deezer.com/de/artist/5298...
▶ Tidal:
tidal.com/browse/artist/10500010
"District Four" all (c) Kevin MacLeod ( incompetech.com/music )
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0
creativecommons.org/licenses/b...
🠴HELLO everybody and welcome to the ShadowZone🠶
Here you can find weird and funny videos about Kerbal Space Program and other video games. In general, if you like space, space ships, space stations or any space related video game, this channel is the right place to be!
I try to deliver you fascinating creations, tutorial and how-to videos about KSP and other video game content.
I also compose my own music from time to time.
Stay a while and join the shadowzone community by subscribing to my channel or following me on those social thingies up there. - Věda a technologie
It's their own fault for not quick saving.
lmao
I was yelling "F5 YOU IDIOTS!!" as it tumbled.
😂😂😂😂
Its awesome seeing an actual Company KSP the shit out of space flight.
Yes, yes, and yes!
It's not really, considering the expense of resources and the horrible conditions the workers are put under to make it happen. There's a reason videogames are videogames and real life is real life.
@@argon7624well as they say now pain no gain they are driven people and from what we know Elon his rough to anyone including to him self😂 well what I saw in the live they where happy
@@argon7624 What expense of resources? Doing this "NASA way" is way more expensive in terms both money and resources. Look at facility where SLS conducting green runs. In Mississippi, massive facility they conduct full run of engines. And they have to later refurbish whole core again. And it's can't test everything. Starship is cheaper than one engine of SLS. Space X is testing own rockets by launching them. This is how they can push technology so fast and far. Ie raptor engine cost only 1mln per piece, compared to BE-4, that costs 7-20 mln (different sources give different values), for engine that is not as efficient (less than 10 % more thrust, but twice the size. And be-4 is weaker than incoming raptor 3), or SLS/STS main core engine RS-25 that costs 140mln refurbished, or on case of new ones, 100 mln.
As for working conditions, they are not that bad. I know that this kind of pressure is rather uncommon in that line of work, over hours etc, but still they are much better in comparison to working ie on oil platforms, many farm jobs, heavy construction. Or even in majority of shipyards around the world. I work rn in very "lazy" way, but I worked before in construction or as mechanic in workshops, and I don't see working conditions at SpaceX or Tesla as especially hard.
True, they saw their terribly mis-designed architecture explode on reentry for the third time.
It’s unreal that Some of us had a better idea of what was happening because of a video game.
True, KSP is doing for a lot of people now what Star Trek did in the 70's and 80's (and Star Wars, Dune, Battlestar Galactica, etc.)
i think spaceX forgot to hit retrograde sas button or maybe its because they didnt have jebadiah onboard
I don't think anyone didn't realize what was happening the video showed black tiles falling off that isn't good.
The live shot of Musk showed the expression on his face he knew and so did everyone.
You just hope it comes down before failure
They should've added a jeb plushie in it for good luck
@@Azyraasr there learning
As a Industrial Automation specialist, I can tell you how easy it is to have a small error in a tuned loop, to run out of control similar to what we saw on the grid fins. Take a common PID loop, a small error on the Proportional portion of the control will cause large fluctuations on output. I think this will be an easy fix (Booster attitude control). I am much more interested in why the Ships engines failed to re-ignite.
Exactly.. and at such speed n size.. its like a Pendulum with a massive weight that just wont stop swinging..
But i bet if the raptors relight their centre engines well.. they could have saved the booster
I think something with spin priming. Or combined with lack of RCS it could be that it wasn't enough pressure in tanks (they released too much ullage before, maybe wrongly estimated boil off pace
It was leaking fuel after the engine shutdown…that leak created the spin. The waffle fins had no chance to do anything to fix that before reentry burn-up.
We saw the same thing on the falcon 9 booster that landed on the spelling and typed over (I don't honestly know which flight that was), but the grid find were wildly actually back and forth during descent, very similar to super heavy on this flight.
You're an AUToMotive TECH that specialises in oil change not a rocket scientist
I'd love to see someone recreate it's precise angle, attitude, roll, etc in KSP
It was quite crazy by the look of it I think they had a problem with some gyros of the reaction system maybe they try to compensate some limitation or try to economise and roll during the attitude change and probably some gyros got stuck because if you look closely the ship start spinning and then it doesn't stop until they have drag enough to start gaining some control but too late. You can see the plasma moving around which kinda indicates the ship still spinning during the reentry also the background is too. Most likely they burn too much the ship as the heatshielding wasn't properly oriented. In KSP would look like the classical spin of death out of control unable to properly align with the retrograde vector mark.
it was declared that nothing was going to be recovered in this test. There was no plan to recover anything, just test the systems.
Tests are conducted to verify the concept but not to make fiery show telling everyone "everything after clearing the pad was icing on the cake"
F9 launch and landing attemts were way more successful despite beeing first in the history to try that.
The absence of reaction thrusters on Starship was a visible concern.
Scott Manly pointed out RCS thrusters firing later. Either they were clogged or SpaceX wanted to see see if the vehicle could recover with the fins alone.
I think they were experimenting on using the ullage(?) gases for the rcs. They will need to work on that. Otherwise, back to using copvs.
The next test flight 2 months from now we'll focus on thrusters maintaining position
@@13thbiosphere2 months from now? 😂 Brother, someone has horribly mislead you.
Some of the seemingly uncontrolled rolling might have been part of the fuel transfer experiment. They have to settle the liquid at the tank outlet somehow...so either ullage motors accelerating it or spinning using centrifugal force. It did look like the hypersonic reentry dynamics might need some tweaking but SpaceX is great at fly, break then modify and fly again. As long as each try gets closer to the goal they're doing good!! Third flight was SO much better than the second...so we'll look forward to the forth flight which should go even better.
You missed that the closing of the cargo door - it didn't work, and I think the cargo door was suppose to open more than what it did.
It also wiggled as hell. Thank god it's not mine. Looks like a very shy attempt.
I dont mind that it was the first attempt and it was a good start - but saying that it worked and given a tick make people assume that it was all good when it was not. People should not sugar coat everything.
The amount of data that they gathered from this is massive. It will allow them to work out the problems and also be able have better computer modeling.
this is very cool and i approve, keep up the great work
one obvious thing is that when the plasma started showing up on the camera the spaceship was doing so Sideways, not hull down (Thermal tiles forward). This allowed the plasma to heat the unprotected portion of the ship for quite some time. It also puts the wings in the completely wrong position to control the ship in atmosphere. Think of a plane rolling over on its side so wings point at the sky and ground,
yeah the plasma shockwave was incredible. I love that they included all those cameras.
I never doubted Starship could make it to orbit. But I always wondered how something the size of the tower of Pisa, and seemingly non-aerodynamically stable, would ever survive re-entry. But...I have faith in SpaceX. They will get it done, and go where no Spaceship has gone before!
They didn't make orbit!.............fact
@@user-fd6rr4iz9m Like one commenter said, they could have easily made orbit but was not allowed to because of the risks if something happened.
@@user-fd6rr4iz9m
Orbit was never planned for safety reasons... They reached desired sub orbital trajectory which was just hair shy from being orbital one. It's not a question if they can get into orbit, they can, they showed with this test flight as they flew across half the earth. But this test flight was planned to end at specific point and for ship to fall back to earth even if 100% of communications with it cuts off. There is a reason why its called "test flight"
@@Zripas he hates it.. that is why he talks that way.
They are at least 10 years away of landing on Mars that is what NASA already did 50 years ago.
There have been nine successful US Mars landings: Viking 1 and Viking 2 (both 1976), Pathfinder (1997), Spirit and Opportunity (both 2004), Phoenix (2008), Curiosity (2012), InSight (2018) and Perseverance (2021). The only other country to land a spacecraft on Mars was the Soviet Union in 1971 and 1973.
Appreciate all you do man! Very cool sum up!
Seems the tumbling was to make some g's for the fuel transfer. RCS scenarios was tested too. Uncontrolled reentry was I believe part of the plan to verify the stability and validity of the aero model, which performed very well on reentry. This must have been part of the main or plan B after relight failure for the ship. Max gain!
This was the first starship launch I caught live. I'm so glad I caught it! The video feed of it punching through the clouds both up and down and then especially the plasma as it re-entered was amazing!
LOL. So....like every other video of a rocket, only those don't fail?
@@David-wc5zlexcept its the biggest rocket ever. And its the first time someone recorded re-entry from outside
Watching both vehicles fail to soft land was indeed amazing 😂 They also failed to open the Pez door and relight engines. This project is doomed.
@@mrjpb23 you guys say that every single time. And every single time spacex fixes the issues. Whats the point? Don't you see the pattern? But it is already at least a super heavy launch vehicle even if it has not been reused yet
@@mrjpb23
Are you people getting paid by someone to say such silly things?
THIS is what re-entry should look like in ksp, not a crappy glitchy blocky mess
The PC power needed would be insane. Never mind how much their code would need to change. Good luck with that.
@@Hossdelux It looks like a smooth and simple effect, to me; simpler than the flickering seen on other real-life flights. No idea why. EDIT: Literally the second after I posted, the plasma started flickering! ;)
I would add the reaction control system as a failure, since there is a good chance the craft might have achieved reentry if it had been at the proper attitude, it was clearly tumbling at the end, even with the flaps trying to straighten the flight path...
It's too tall to control in thin air. They need to reduce the height to make it manageable.
@@TheSoftwareJunction On the contrary, Musk has already said that the plans are to actually lengthen the second stage. Of course the flaps are not supposed to handle all the control needs at that altitude and density, and thats where the RCS should hace taken over that task, but for some reason didnt
This was great, all the news without being hyped out. Thank you
That’s a very good point indeed.
Great Summary ! Thanks 😊
As soon as heating began and the vehicle wasn't in the correct orientation, ya knew it was over
The problem with the Superheavy booster appeared to be a lack of stabilizing thrusters and a failure to reignite the three raptors it required for a soft landing. Starship had attitude control problems which is why the raptor re-light wasn't attempted and the reason it was in an uncontrolled tumble causing it to disintegrate 65km up.
The encouraging thing is that SpaceX fixed all the problems it had with its first launch on its second launch, and fixed all the problems with the second launch with this, it's third launch. The fourth launch will undoubtedly fix all the root causes of the third and hopefully come to a completely successful conclusion.
Let's not lose sight of the fact that Starship is currently the most powerful rocket ever launched by far and also the only rocket ever to be completely reusable, and this is all new territory. SpaceX should be applauded!
They had such great camera angles this time around!
My bet is next test, they will be able to "land" the booster and reignite the lander, but it will fail to land.
Test 5 will be mostly successful.
Depends with ship will be tested. One of existing, or v3? Shielding will be probably much smaller, as they tested recently another design of tiles
Terrific overview - thank you. New sub here from Texas. 🤠
if you look at the post separation there is visible gas leaking .. basically separation likely caused the creation of an unplanned RCS that started pushing sideways at the base top of thrusters, you can see this by their telemetry its corkscrewing slowly pretty quickly after separation. Seems to speed up and we get a lot of failed feeds due to rotation. depending on gas being vented could have caused an orbital mess if they fired the engines .. that they didnt fire them kind of tells us everything, unless you love doing kerbal style hot rentry coz you dont have enough deltaV left. I mean you could see 5% enough to reduce the velocity when hitting atmos.. I expect spacex will update us when they see fit, figure out a nice 'spin' on it..
i’m not quite sure that ift-4 has happened yet lol
To you maybe. I cannot say any more...
Yep agree. And cant wait!!!
Total success!!
1000 hours of ksp prepared me for this moment..
Some of those chunks of ice had part nos...
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
A very good accurate quick assessment
You nailed all the positive and issues
Continuing to fail forwards
Well done SpaceX
we are hopefully approaching a golden age in space exploration. it is truly amazing what space X has been able to achieve so far
Like... suborbital flight?
@@BaHo_0You think Starship is the only thing SpaceX does?
Let me guess you just hate Elon so you must be negative on anything he's involved in.
And btw could've achieved orbit, they didn't on purpose.
@@user-pc5qj2ix2cpeople would hate on anything by just knowing someone’s even a name is tied to it. a shame that ppl self bias gets in the way of humanity civilization growth
@@user-pc5qj2ix2cit would be a bigger shame if his neuralink actually solved actually problems in the world and one would rather suffer then let elon one up their bs they preach
@@SynPhysics Honestly the worst thing about these people is they would actually begrudge humanity as a whole the progress being made just because Musk is involved.
It's ridiculous. I bet if he set out to make a cure for cancer, some people would be hoping for him to fail. (and feel morally superior about doing so.)
Hi ShadowZone. You could count the door testing as a failure. If you watch carefully the video the door didn't fully open when they were opening it and worse, it fully opened when they were trying to close it. It well might the reason for the falling pieces while entering the atmosphere. About the comparison with Vulcan and Ariane 6. Starship is very powerful but low capable spaceship because it is made heavy for surviving all stage landings and being reusable. Without Starship successfully landing both stages, Vulcan and New Glen are preferred because they are lighter and could carry payloads to the moon without refueling.
Vulcan performs worse than Falcon 9 and New Glenn has yet to lift off at all. And, technically speaking, a rocket has NEVER launched properly on the first attempt. Ever. So when this New Glenn rocket gets destroyed, it'll take another while before their next rocket is ready for the test pad.
Given the options, Starship is the only option that CAN be ready on time. It may not, but it's the only one that has the chance to be ready. Then add onto the fact that Starship is much, much cheaper than the other two and you get the clear choice for NASA
@@snakevenom4954don't waste your time with this guy. 😂
I think its amazing the stream worked for so long
I'll guess that the Pez door took a beating and the opening influenced control.
the reentry plasma looks just like the one in KSP 2!
I think next flight:
- The booster is going to soft land
- the raptors will ignite in space
- the payload door will work better
- a better re entry for the ship
I dont think:
- Ship is going to soft land.
Given that ship is the newest component of SpaceX, it has the most unknown variables with the less knowledge transfer from existing projects. I think that is a good think though, because eventually it will give SpaceX a competitive edge in the long run.
I'd like to add an extra plus point I think they pulled off, the video link of the plasma formations & flows around the ship. Usually we get a comms blackout earlier on but they managed to maintain a decent bandwidth, clear image feed for a while. Good data stuffs & beautiful to watch 🏳🌈🔥🤩. Well done to them, good progression made overall! Thanks for the good break down video 👍
Great analysis. I predicted that Starship will burn up on re-entry and I was correct. I already saw some pieces flying off of the starship as it lifted off in Space. What I predict for the next flight is that the Booster will successfully do a soft landing but I think the next Starship will still fail to re-enter. Re-entry of such a large ship has never been done before and it will take many test flights and failures to figure it out. But what an incredible test flight it was!
It was a success! This is Space x's style. Launch, fix, launch, fix. They are getting there.
Like Scot was talking about, the lightly reason that the boaster didn´t relight was due to splashing that in turn was due to oscillation.
All the errors we seen yesterday was separate errors. Oscillation in both boaster and orbiter. Failure to relight, the door failure and the belly-flop failure.
So its lightly all those failures are fixed to the next time. Then we will see new failures.
I guess the failure next time will be one of incorrect touchdown speed
I believe you are correct they will use this to fix the problems and continue on with their mission.
I love that picture you got of space x 2002 :]
After SECO Starship continued emitting gasses. I'm not sure checking the launch video if the QC check valve sealed properly at disconnect. It looked like it was leaking from launch. I suspect the continuing emission of gas acted like a cold thruster that couldn't be compensated for with attitude control.
At 2:45, you can see the booster strakes start disintegrating and spewing metal debris up towards the camera and hit the grid fins.
More like a spray down. Disintegration at 65-70 km altitude and way before the target zone. There was also several tiles missing due re-entry, but not necessarily critical enough.
Both stages leaked LOX before lightup, and the first stake also CH4.
Reentry heat was spectacular indeed. About ift3, it was a good improvement, but they'll have to spend a bit more in the VAB and eventually unlock more of the tech tree. 😁
If they really have other 4 - 5 launches this year, we might see a fully successful mission with the same parameters, maybe even 2.
I'm curious to know if the roll during flight was deliberate. There's a good chance they never really had control of it, and if not the government may not pay out on the fuel transfer contract.
Reusability is the reason for 15 refuelings to get one person to the moon! .........is reusability a good idea?
@@user-fd6rr4iz9m 15 refuelings to get a 5000 ton Starship to the moon instead of a tiny capsule.
Yes, reusability is a good idea. When they finally get Starship working as designed the bottom will fall out of the cost of a kg to LEO. The only competition SpaceX will have is a Chinese company that's making a Starship clone.
@@user-fd6rr4iz9m starship is no good for anything by landing back on earth(maybe) and delivering things to orbit. as a space travel vehical its useless. look at how protected the iss is. its got thick layering all around it to protect against impacts. starship has zero protection. they should develope an actual space transport system that STAYS in space and gets refuelled and restocked. like a mobile space station. use that to go back and forth to the moon. booster is more than enough to get a resonably sized space craft into orbit. even better if they use it to bring multiple parts at the 100 ton range up to assemble. im sure a 1000 ton interplanatary spacecraft would be robust enough to survive interplanetary travel.
If you have a look at starship while it is in space, it looks like it is leaking fuel. Thus causing it to slowly spin around. This most likely would have caused problems with the landing due to fuel lost.
It wasn't leaking fuel, it was off gassing gasues propellants
@@DanielloDD86 Whatever, call it whatever you want, it was clearly leaking and spinning the rocket around slowly.
BRAVO
Crazy idea, you got lots of unused space on the top of Stage One. Drag chutes should be used to give a gravity assist to keep fuel down in the tanks.
I imagine drogue chutes won't work with such a heavy object falling at such high speeds. I'd love for SpaceX to prove me wrong though!
Thankyou
It was a massive success))
I think you mean third flight😅
Nah, just a ploy to get you guys commenting lol
@@ShadowZone I KNEW IT!
I think one of the Grid Fins got stuck & the others were trying to compensate causing computer induced oscillations & what not. I would like to see footage of the "Hard Splash Down," though.
At time stamp 5:17, the ship doesn't appear to be rotated far enough around to put all of heat shield tiles into the direction of travel. I think the ship failed due to overheating of the bare portion of the hull directed against the flow of air as it descended.
awesome, my thoughts exactly!
Looked to me like the ship was spinning out of control through the re-entry. A lot of time with the engine bay pointing directly into the oncoming plasma. Today was a good achievement but there is still a long way to go.
My new favorite expression in English : "Failing forwards"😁
They said that the loss of attitude control interfered with the relight test, which makes sense since they can't just fire into a random direction and hope they don't reenter over land.
I would remove two items from your list, as these tests failed. 1) the door failed to close. 2) the fuel transfer did not work (well). I am looking forward to the fuel transfer data analysis
Thats one flimsy door... I fell like boeing almost had a better one...
I think there's a chance that all the mist we saw streaming from the aft region was more than them just venting excess gasses. If they lost ullage pressure then that would be a factor in them skipping the relight test and loss of attitude control RCS (which on Starship is powered by ullage gas). The fin controls didn't make a lot of sense for the attitude I thought I was seeing either (based on plasma stream directions etc) Hypersonics might be counterintuitive but I'm pretty sure a huge flap extending in one place more than another shifts the center of lift towards the extended flap and creates a moment about the CG. I'm pretty sure the cargo door didn't work, it opened a crack, but not fully and then failed to close. Why it's not just on three rails with jackscrews and portcullis style gate is perplexing. The whole contraption looked like an over-engineered space wasting failure.
The reentry was at 26000 Km/h.. that is insane speed for data collection purposes.
We are learning so much on these rides! HAPPY BIRTH DAY!
There must be videos of both of these hitting the sea or something, there will have been many watching the area's where they were to land.
Because of the tumble, I’m pretty sure some sort of vent or thruster got stuck
Another great step. Good luck and Space X are amazing. 🇦🇺
I wonder if the re-lighting of the Raptor engines had to do with low fuel, cause both tanks seemed to be empty on re-entry.
Flight 4, we'll go forward more!!
I wonder if the electronics was affected by the plasma? I ,too, noticed debris flying off Starship, but the tiles seemed to be there. Fascinating rocket.
As far as i know.. no electronics were damage before they lost starship.. The only reason why Starship signal was fuzzy is caused by the build up of Plasma from re entry.. It interferes with the Radio waves communication and theres nothing one can really do about that.. Altho Starlink did a prettttyyy decent job transferring signal..
Yea those flaky stuffs are the heattiles fallin off..
The starship accomplished what it was set out to do except for the re-igniting burners in space. It was never expected to be recovered after re-entry.
With le booster seperation & landing it seemed to be all going well dropping through le clouds until those small ufos were seen, then it seemed to loose control on decent.
It went downhill long before the failure to re-light the engines. There was a visible leak, which caused the ship to spin. That is what doomed Starship on re-entry, as it went in with the heat shield pointing in the wrong direction.
Cargo door seems to not have worked properly : staid open after "close" order.^^
Perhaps this is why Starship has failed re-entry ?
That's why I said they "tested" it, I never said it worked properly ;)
But I doubt this was the cause for the re-entry failure. If the ship had been oriented correctly, the opening would have been on the leeward side, away from the plasma blanket.
@@ShadowZone Perhaps air penetrating into or some kind of depressurization laid to instability ?
( yes in void there is no air or depressurization, but at this altitude who knows what is happening, we can just speculate ).
@@netshaman9918 At faster than sound speeds, the compression of the air becomes significant enough that the density around the craft greatly changes and so do the air properties. Supersonic designs are much simpler that that of subsonic, but aircraft that have to operate in both conditions are more complex because of the changing work conditions.
If reentry wasn't well understood, like you suggest, we wouldn't be so successful at it. The problem is that Starship is far from finished and the biggest Spacecraft ever to re-enter an atmosphere, problems always happens with new stuff, they'll fix that.
@@ShadowZonebut it wasn’t, it was rotating around the longitudinal axis as it was reentering…
Man, they really need to buff those gridfins…
Gonna take at least 10 launches to fine tune the whole operation...
After that - Ad Astra per Aspera...
Correct me if I'm wrong but the cargo door didn't work as expected I believe, it moved a little but not as it should have.
The reentry was always going to be the most difficult part, seems they didn't have enough control power left to get rid of the rolling motion, they used a lot of those resources before reentry, or was it just leaking ?
Even Elon can't get away from Wobbly Rockets.
He hasn't updated Starship's software to the "For Science" version yet.
Door failed to close, Chunks of TPS flew off the ship, ship went into rotisserie mode. Some spot of the now unprotected ship go red hot, every rotation causes a venturi effect at the open door, down pipe from header tanks collapses, Fuel tanks depressurize engines wont fire, hull breaches and implode due to growing pressure outside and venturi vacuum inside: RUD! Could that be?
You didn't mention the booster actually ran out of LOX, so they couldn't have relit the engines even if they wanted to for a soft landing, assuming the engines would relight anyway. Maybe their calculations of fuel burn are way off, and Starship will need more fuel and have a correspondingly lower cargo capacity.
It will get better with every flight!🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩
Although some tiles appeared to be lost early in the flight, it appears the control system failed and had the reentry oriented incorrectly. Should be able to correct.
Still no orbit. Maybe next year? Meanwhile the wealthy space adventurers quietly cancel their reservations.
Steady improvement from SpaceX. They fixed almost everything that was known about from the last test, and succeeded on a couple of the tests that they'd never tried before
Things to work on:
Booster:
Work out why the engines didn't ignite properly on the final landing burn, and fix.
Work out why the grid fins/gimballed engines didn't completely compensate for the instability at the final burn
Starship:
PEZ dispenser assembly - looks fragile, didn't close properly on conclusion of the test. Possibly part of the reason for the instability?
Attitude control: Didn't compensate for the roll it was in for almost the entire (sub)orbital phase, and re-entry phase. Software issue maybe? It looked like the fins themselves were providing at least some steering authority?
All the things that went wrong were previously untested in real world scenarios, so the telemetry gathered will be hugely useful. I include the booster landing in this, because it was the first attempt at soft splashdown of a booster after hot staging.
Not a rocket scientist, so maybe I have some things wrong here? Please correct me if I'm wrong, as I'm interested and want to know more
Edit: Forgot to say, the footage from the re-entry phase was absolutely stunning!
Still need that engine relight in space to have normal rocket capabilities. Then they could start putting hundreds of tons of stuff in orbit while figuring out the landing. That's a lot of Starlink satellites.
I honestly shed tears of joy when I saw how far Elon got with this test. Our civilization is within spitting distance of re-entering our quest for the stars. This was a resounding success by any measure and Elon should be celebrating tonight.
I'll wait for the offical statement 😮
It wasn't a failure to re-ignite the ships engines, It was the fact that conditions were not met to even attempt it ( Im thinking if not the only reason, definitely a big one being poor attatue control ).
I thought they were going in head first, then slingshot back up and then lower it down like a booster
They need more or bigger control surfaces, more and more powerful thrusters or actuators and better guidance logic. Then this thing will reenter... That might be stripped back to essentials later but for now bigger is better...
It's amazing they got video downlink through all the plasma ⭐⭐⭐
Starship rolled onto its side during re-entry. There are no heat-shield tiles on the sides, so that's not a good way to re-enter the atmosphere while doing Mach 20.
Reentry isn’t that big of a deal if we create a Prisoner Nasa program.
Like they used to say - SHIP HAPPENS -
More RCS thrusters, then....AGAIN!
Booster wobling : it's like drone PID u have to tune them for a proper response ^^ 😅
special starship operation
I think flight 4, will be dalayed by the faa, till atleast October. I think there will be nasa, and faa inspections. Of the everything, and major changes to heat shield, vector and thrust engines working and bigger, wider, wings. The doors failed to close all the way aswell. A delay of 6 months. To fix, upgrade and ensure these issues are resolved and working.
Was the door opening actually successful? They definitely did something, but in the live stream it didn't really look like it opened or closed properly.