Starship & Superheavy Become The Biggest Rocket In Space.... Before Exploding
Vložit
- čas přidán 17. 11. 2023
- SpaceX finally got to fly their second integrated flight test of the fully reusable Starship & Superheavy system, the launch was spectacular, excitement had been guaranteed and excitement was delivered. The reusable part however remains elusive for now, but I look forward to seeing the next launch be even more successful.
Follow me on Twitter for more updates:
/ djsnm
I have a discord server where I regularly turn up:
/ discord
If you really like what I do you can support me directly through Patreon
/ scottmanley - Věda a technologie
The reason everyone in the SpaceX control room looked puzzled after the test flight completed, was because they were still waiting for Scott Manley's video to explain what exactly had happened.
THIS
😂
In the end, the Plumbing did the rocket in. Nobody cares about water hammer until it ruins their day. If Mario is on the team, I bet you this would not happen. But plumbing is NOT rocket science until it IS. hire a freaking Plumber spaceX.
@@LinKongDaHow about hiring the Culligan Man😂
Why are we not surprised that the best analytical video put out early is yours Scott! We're lucky you have such a good handle on the science of space flight! Thanks!
I was about to write the exact same comment! Thanks for giving us a prelimary analysis so quickly Scott!
Yeah, his years of experience and shear passion is what makes him so efficient at this, i love it.
It's not offical until the Scott Manley analysis comes out.
That sleep is well deserved now 😴
Scott works for the PRC and gets data live from CCP analysts. 😂
Chicom assets all over CZcams with different accents.
This technical analysis is what sets your CZcams channel apart from the other space enthusiasts. Thank you. I love it.
Agreed. Knowledge bombs. i love it.
You can't beat knowledge with enthusiasm, that's why I stopped watching other channels.
yep
the fact they didnt lose any engines, and then had a sucessful deluge and hot disconect, very impressive
Could be argued they lost 39 engines…
haha touche@@Malc2169
Wow, the most basic task in rocket science is "impressive"...
@@SwordQuake233 engines with consistent reliability - until the booster attempted to reorient is pretty impressive. Even then we really don’t know what was supposed to happen regarding actual shutdown order versus scheduling.
Do we know how the FTS system works on the booster? Where are the pyrotechnics for example.
@@SwordQuake2 lol clown the most basic task in rocket science is designing an engine with positive thrust ratio that works long enough to reach space
Seeing all 33 engines working perfectly was awesome to witness...
You didn't see anything
We invite you to a vital event on December 2 at 17:00 GMT: *"Global* *Crisis.* *The* *Responsibility"* (international online forum). There will be voiced the information on which the fate of each of us and the entire civilization depends.
@@rickyfitness252lol
Was definitely a relief!
@@rickyfitness252lol you must not have even watched then ! Cuz it was beautiful 🚀🤘💯
The way you extrapolate details from simple video footage is astounding.
11/10 hands down the best description of this starship’s flight test.
Thus far the most comprehensive and comprehensible early report of the test flight - Kudos and thank you, Scott! 👍👍👍
NSF’s zoomed out view of the explosion was absolutely breathtaking. It looked like a nebula
Can I ask for a link?
Thansk that was amazing. Just search for spacex NSF its a 4 min video
It actually was, technically speaking!
and they didn't even notice it
We invite you to the vital event on December 2, at 17:00 GMT: *"Global* *Crisis.* *The* *Responsibility"* (international online forum). There will be voiced the information on which the fate of each of us and the entire civilization depends.
It's amazing how you were able to watch the launch and flight and then create such a great analysis and theory all in one day. You're a machine. Great video as always sir!
I came here to comment on how great this video was but then I read this person's post... I couldn't do it justice . Great comment, sir! 🙂
@@cuisinartOH1 Yep, I learned a lot.
probably started working on this immediately after launch, just to get his initial thoughts in while the experience is still fresh in his mind.
@@livethefuture2492 He was sharing draft analysis with EDA on his livestream at 8:56:00 in only 86 minutes.
As always, Scott delivers the best post launch coverage on CZcams!! Thank-you!!!
As usual, the calmest and most helpful analysis of this historic event, thanks Scott.
i love the fact that the booster had all of its engines lit all the way to hot staging...so big improvement there....and the ship separating
I suspect that was aided by the engines not eating stage 0 this time. :)
@@Stormcrow_1i believe its more about the electricle TVC instead of hydraulic
@@futurespace2380I believe it's quite a lot of both.
I'm happy we got a launch 😅😅😂😂
This is of course due to many things. First as Stormcrow said, it is easier to not blow up your engines if you are not throwing high energy rocks at them. Also, as futurespace said, the electric TVCs are far simpler and more reliable than the hydraulic ones. Also as we all know, the vibration profile on the bottom of the rocket was softer due to the deluge system.
All in all, a well done must be said to SpaceX. They actually have a working Stage 0, an almost working Stage 1 and an almost working stage 2. This is massive. Looking forward to the third launch before Christmas. The really nice thing about this launch is that the only government agency that will be involved is the FAA and that should be simple. SpaceX already knows what happened, they have already discussed the needed fixes and will just need to implement them. This may be just a software issue on the main booster, change the way the turn and boost back is done. The Starship may also be a software fix, time will tell there.
I think the fact that 100% of the engines remained lit during the ascent and with no signs of engine rich combustion is a massive improvement and showing how much the raptors have progressed. They will definitely get some good data from this. If it turns out to have been a fuel supply issue on the booster during separation I wonder if a higher thrust on the booster at they stage will help.
Thrust is way too high as it is!!!! WHAT ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING?? 😢😢 These things should only be allowed to run on electric power... This madness has to stop before all the stray kittens end up drowning.
@@MattyEnglandman i hope this is sarcasm 😭💀
@@MattyEnglandlol
@@dylanwastakenwasalsotaken Makes about as much sense as all of the other global warming B.S.
How considerate for the rocket to disassemble itself after use.
i like to imagine the SpaceX team watch these videos and are like 'yup, scott came to the same conclusions as us, we're good.'
SpaceX added header tanks to Starship to help with the flip maneuver they want to perform while landing, perhaps they will add header tanks to the booster to reduce the amount of sloshing that can occur during the boost back flip.
That would make a lot of sense.
I had the exact same thought. They already have experience with it, so the implementation probably wouldn't be too challenging and it seems to work well.
Well said and make sense
The boosters already have header tanks, they are just different from the header tanks in the ships (in the ships the tanks are in the nosecone, in the booster they are much lower down and consist of the methane downcomer and a surrounding vessel which is the LOX header).
@@SlartiMarvinbartfast Could you direct me to a source that shows off the booster internals? I know about the methane downcomer (which might not have the capacity for the boost back) but don't know about the surrounding vessel for the LOX portion. I admit, I haven't been keeping up to date on the changes from one booster to the next, so it'd be great if you could direct me to some place that has such information.
In all honesty, you’re probably one of the only channels i actually Trust to give me unbiased facts about space and rocket details when it comes to things done by companies. A lot of CZcamsrs who cover this either are obsessed with Elon and say he does nothing wrong ever or hate his guts and refuse to acknowledge anything
Watching the booster engines cut off cluster by cluster looked so awesome. Such a beautiful piece of technology.
The world's most powerful light show. 33 Raptors is about 100GW.
Scott's explanation was worth a lot more about why "tank sloshing, etc." amazing analysis.
They went to the Moon 50 years ago with rockets built in Alabama and a guidance platform built by a lingerie company, are we that desperate for a win to call this awesome?
But it doesn't work, kinda lame
Well if they didn't attempt to reuse anything this would be a thousand times easier lolol.
The one thing I can’t wait to hear about is how well the deluge system worked if there’s any damage at all from the launch
There is a new dent in the tank farm.
There are some overhead drone shots on reddit floating around, pad looks good. Scorched and dirty and wet, but no real damage.
@@PromptCriticalJelloThat was from the shockwave from the booster! Damage didn't actually affect the tanks though, so its not an issue
@@PromptCriticalJello😮😮😮
i do still think they should move those tanks a lil further back@@ASAVSP
Honestly, the fact that all 33 engines finished the stage 1 burn and the launch pad survived liftoff makes this a successful test.
Had this been an expendable rocket, this would've been considered just shy of a complete success. The only milestone that wasn't accomplished was reaching orbital velocity. So, yes, SpaceX has a lot of work to do, but this was so very close to getting there.
@@vicroc4it failed as the mission didn’t go as it was planned and vehicle was destroyed prematurely, so I don’t understand how this can be touted as a success. Biggest rocket in the world didn’t even reach Freedom 7 level of apogee. And it seems to be very expendable rocket, because launches tend to end in a massive explosion. This thing should be operational, including crew rated second stage, for Artemis in two years. So far SpaceX hasn’t delivered anything which even remotely shows that they can indeed deliver. Even if they get this candle doing basic rocket things, they haven’t even scratched the refueling or anything relating this to be useful for manned missions. This is incredibly embarrasing situation for Nasa.
@TheGrunt76 Yes, of course, the mission didn't go as planned. I want you to watch the footage from the first attempt, though, and still somehow deny that significant progress was made.
Let's also remember that for every test flight - which, yes, this was a test flight - there are a list of objectives that need to be achieved. For this one, you had: 1. Light all 33 first stage engines. 2. Liftoff without destroying the pad. 3. Pass Max-Q without breaking up. 4. Hotstage without damage to Starship or Super Heavy. 5. Land Super Heavy. 6. Starship attains orbital velocity. 7. Starship survives re-entry.
Their first flight didn't achieve any of those objectives. This flight achieved 1, 2, 3, and 4. And once they get the data analyzed from this flight, they'll be much closer to achieving 5, 6, and 7. That's how iterative design works - Build, Fly, Analyze, Modify, Fly Again. Every time it fails, you look at what went wrong and change it so that it won't fail the same way. Maybe not the most efficient way of doing things, but it's a good way to absolutely guarantee that the end product works.
Now, as for why it's taking so long, I want to ask you something. When did SpaceX have the whole vehicle stacked for the first time? That was quite a while ago, yes? Why didn't they fly then? Oh well, they were waiting on regulatory approval.
Now, what entity has to provide regulatory approval? Oh yes, the same government that runs NASA. Which seems to insist on shooting itself in the foot.
Edit: Oh, and as for it not attaining "Freedom 7 level of apogee..." Go watch Everyday Astronaut's video on suborbital vs. orbital spaceflight. Freedom 7 was downright easy compared to what Starship accomplished here. So easy that Blue Origin and Virgin Galactic are doing it on a fairly regular basis. This is several orders of magnitude more difficult. And SpaceX already goes way beyond Freedom 7 on a regular basis with the Falcon 9, so they know a hell of a lot better than you what it actually takes.
@@TheGrunt76NASA has already embarrassed itself plenty with SLS and Orion being 6 years late. 100% over budget. For a rocket that was obsolete when it hit the blueprints. SLS uses engines from the fucking 70’s.
If NASA congress wanted a lander by 2025 it shouldn’t have waited till 2021 to give a fuck.
It was a success it’s successfully getting data to the builders and it’s progressing from its first test.
@@TheGrunt76 afaik they're cleared for 5 launches per year. Do you reckon they need more than 10 launches from now to have a workable result? The engines hold up. The stage separation works. The mars-fit water-cooled launch platform works. As Scott says they likely have an issue with the their tank and fuel management systems not coping with stresses. And the heat shield needs touch ups. This could be fixed by changing the 1st stage burn parameters to take longer and lower the stresses on the 2nd stage, plus changing the chemical formula for a sealant/binder a little. I fully expect this to be "fixed" in 2-3 launches tops.
Scott never disappoints with the amount of imformation he can pull from such videos :)
Love my NSF and EDA channels but damn…no one gets right to the point with such class as Scott. Amazing work and breakdown 🎉
I find the other channels to be scatterbrained and WAY too long. They intentionally bloat the videos to 20-25 minutes for extra revenue.
Exactly. Scott is way better, or better say completely other level of analysis.
Sir Scotty is such an accomplished speaker compared to NSF. He doesn't say "UM" three times in one sentence. NSF just slowly gives you speculation rather than facts asking the audience "what do you think? write it in the comments below"
Those other channels are like high school rocketry clubs. Totally absurd.
Amateur vs Pro. That's the thing
This is how rockets evolve at SpaceX. Journalists calling this a failure should watch the SpaceX compilation video of falcon 9's first landing attempts on a droneship.
Muskrat, please see the Apollo program for how spaceflight is done. Starship is a sardine can toy.
@@kennethc2466 The Apollo program killed a crew, so far SpaceX has not, I would say SpaceX is doing better...
Not to mention the fact that the apollo system was far far simpler and had much fewer things to go wrong (it was also smaller, and weaker).
The whole thing was pretty successful, definitely better than the first flight. But there were clear failures of both the booster and Starship. I've seen fan boys claiming it's an overwhelming success, but I think that's too optimistic.
So if it's a success are they moving on to the next milestone, like payload delivery or fuel transfer demo? Or are they repeating IFT until they achieve it's goal of successful flight? I don't get that obsession with sugarcoating.
@@viliamklein Agreed, its more of a "well, we got further this time, and hopefully next time we get further still" until its doing the whole flight correctly.. since its unmanned, you can just keep refining the design each time until it works perfectly.
Your channel Scott is my go to for fantastic analysis and replays of what happened. Thank you for all your work on the launch.
I hope you slept safe, Scott!
Thank you for another great analysis - it was exciting to watch this one being so much more successful than the first, and I am reminded of Falcon 1 flights 1 and 2. They didn't get very far either, but each further than the last and we all know how that ended, so I am honestly hopeful for Starship! 😀
No shade on the other streams, but it's incredible how you manage to see and say so much in an 11 minute video. . Fantastic stuff.
Exactly, watched everyday stream didnt hear anything apart from thanks and ads
To be fair, they are trying to do it all live. He also has the benefit of all of their video to go over. But yeah, he has the best engineering breakdowns.
the other streams sound like an NFL or NASCAR broadcast
Scott spent 8 hours analyzing, while they were still streaming. They had to entertain the audience during all this time, and couldn't focus on the analysis like Scott could.
Scott doesn't have to fill-up hours like the other space flight channels who were live.
In my book, the biggest milestone success is all raptor engines worked perfectly through separation. And Starship raptors worked great for almost the whole duration including first time in a vacuum. Raptor reliability is key.
It mean’s nothing if the reentry system is a complete failure. All it would be good for is possibly an unmanned orbital refueling system.
@@oregonsbragia One thing at a time. Would have been nice if everything just worked, but at least the engine reliability and pad destruction issues were solved this flight. We can solve a couple more issues on the next one.
@@oregonsbragia Too many extra unnecessary superfluous redundant apostrophes makes your meaning completely unclear. I'm guessing that you are a glass half empty person :-)
@@paull3278 lol. They have know that the tiles are a problem for literally years now. If they had a better solution, they would have utilized it by now. I’m not holding my breath.
@@oregonsbragia NASA solved a lot of deadly problems with space flight after manned space flight was already a reality. That's the trajectory engineering takes.
I can't help but feel that there are retired NASA and JPL engineers looking at this and saying "Yeah... That's why we didn't do powered rapid flip maneuvers of fueled large-body rockets."
Scott's post-flight analyses still manage to exceed my expectations every time. I should be smarter at this point lol. Truly amazing work there Scott, astounding really.
Bro. How do you deliver such quality so quickly? I get excited every time Scott Manley posts, especially on days like today when big events happen. Thank you, sir.
Because he’s an actual engineer observing events and developing a scenario. Stop watching those amateur sophomoric CZcamsrs like NSF EDA.
Bro.
Lol I don’t. Scott Manley is my main source along with a couple other good quality CZcamsrs.
Still, his ability to discern and breakdown things and then relay them to his audience is incredibly impressive, even when you consider his background and expertise.
Thanks Scott. Yours is by far the best summary and analysis of the flight. This is the kind of detailed information I like. Not a failure at all!
I have watched a few of the post flight videos and as expected yours has been the best. Please keep up the awesome work.
Always amazed by how much you can infer from just the official video footage!
Kinda odd we didnt get a single onboard camera view this time
Ik right
They posted them to Twitter but there was no-one there to see them. (JK)
Great post flight analysis Scott! I love that you synced the stream with the telementry and everything.
The heaviest object to ever leave a launch pad, what is it 5 times the weight of the Saturn 5 rocket, all rockets successfully lighting, not 5 rockets but 39 rockets!, a successful separation, I personally am continually awestruck at the never ending successes SpaceX continues to produce which if the media fails to mention is light years ahead of everyone else…
Having a scientist and a rocket nerd geeking out on space for all of us is priceless. You're always spot on with your after action analysis. A true blessing to us non scientist geeks. Thanks a bunch and keep up the great observations.
I'm surprised how well it held up through it all, would never in a thousand years have expected all 33 engines to make it to stage separation, plus minimal ground damage this time too, can't wait for IFT-3
As always, another terrific early analysis! I look forward to seeing just how much detail/info SpaceX releases over the next few weeks that confirms or refutes your suspicions! Keep up the great work!!
Fantastic second attempt. There is plenty of flight data collected this time. Excellent commentary, Scott.
WOW Scott, what a mad scientist you are! (MAD RESPECT!) You are the ONLY one to notice the accelerating Oxygen loss and figure out what actually happened! BRAVO!!! Keep up the great work my friend! We're lucky to have you!
I got to see this launch today in person. Definitely was the most rewarding experience of my life, and thanks Scott for getting this analysis up so fast! Feels like you know more stuff then even spacex
I hope some day you have kids. 😀
An explosion/complete disaster was "rewarding" to you???
@@leonardothefabulous3490 You are aware what a "test flight" is right?
Oh, didn't realize, "'test flight" means "explosion"? @@LeutnantJoker
@@leonardothefabulous3490
Most often, yes. Please read a book.
Such a great analysis of the launch. Scott, you make it easy to understand what processes are happening. I missed the launch live, but I was on the edge of my seat when I saw all 33 engines light and her lift from the pad.
We're living in exciting times for sure. Amazing to be here for the start of it all and see it live. All 33 engines lit up was glorious.
Great analysis, Scott. I wonder if the starship created an extra fast flip - the booster really flipped quickly.
It had to, right? The ship blasted it almost point blank in the dome.
Completely dependent on the gas thrust used to push it away from the same trajectory.
Too much? Maybe. Internal liquid propellants shifting in a water hammer effect? No idea. I don't have the data.
The booster is designed to fly and land in worse weather than the Falcon 9 limits, and will eventually need tower-catch accuracy, so it must have plenty of maneuverability. Maybe they should not use 100% of that fro the booster flip.
@@iamaduckquack correct, even a very small deviation off the centre, will exaggerate lateral forces. I think the flip was way more violent than intended and resulted in some of the internal plumbing being damaged, which is why they had engine relight problems. They will either need to reinforce it in some way, and/or have a really responsive RCS program.
Man… the shockwaves coming off of stage zero at liftoff was insane! It would be interesting if they ever tested the atmospheric pressure at take off. I’m certain that it’s crazy.
IIRC each shuttle launch hit the maximum/minimum vacuum pressure possible in Earth atmosphere. The sound waves produced by the shuttle launches were so loud they were literally clipped by the ambient air around the pad
Launch pad*
It was also at the same frequency that male alligators use to growl at each other when challenging for territory and mating. Each shuttle launch cucked every male gator within 1000 miles.
@@texasforever7887 i wasn't joking that is literally true what i said. At 194 dB, sound waves create vacuum regions in Earth's atmosphere and the Shuttle launches were 204 dB
Awesome video Scott, very informative, thanks.
Seeing the mach diamonds in the booster exhaust was really cool.
Overall, it's a pretty good success, and SpaceX now has boat loads more data to pour over and analyse. I can't wait for the high-resolution pics of stage 0 to start popping up.
Thanks Scott for this very informative breakout of the sequence of events.
Have a good rest!
Achieving such a feat after only the second attempt is really impressive from SpaceX, they keep on improving
Thank you Scott for pointing out that a lack of TOTAL success does NOT mean it was in any way a complete failure.
Nor even a failure at all. SpaceX is finding things out in flying that can't be found out in computer simulations.
This is especially true on a vehicle built so close to the raggedy edge of what is possible.
It wasnt even a failure. The goal of these missions is to collect as much data as possible. Aside from re entry they got every data points they aimed for
Why does everyone lack nuance these days? There were both successes and failures in this attempt.
Total fail , the launch should have been sorted on first launch as that`s the easiest bit by far . You be saying if they crashed with a hundred souls on board it would be a partial success as all the engines lit .
This thing will never fully work, they've already failed.
I can not fathom for the life of me why the News media is calling this a failure. It by far was a success as it went way further than before and SpaceX got so much data from this launch with minimal damage to the launch pad. This was an awesome morning seeing a 400ft rocket take off hit stage sep and get close to space well technically in but not orbital. WAY TO GO SPACEX can't wait for the next.
They dont understand the engineering cycle.
The Artemis 3 mission is now in jeopardy, there's plenty of reasons to call it a failure. Good on SpaceX for collecting data, they may have just doomed their moon shot exploding their rocket to see what happens.
And who do you think is going to produce a new moon lander at this point? haha @@Edax_Royeaux
SpaceX is going to have another 10 launches of Starship before another provider could finish one example of the lander.
They thrive on controversy. Bangs = bucks
A lot of journalists and media in general has a bit of a hate boner for Elon and are just looking for any reason to revel in schadenfreude even if it’s a complete lie. I mean I lost a ton of respect for Elon over the last few years as he’s gone further and further off the deep end and I’m especially disappointed reading the stories of how he has essentially stopped deferring to the advice and expertise of others who know better and now just fires or cuts off anyone who dares to tell him he might be wrong about anything, but rooting for SpaceX to fail out of spite is the definition of childish.
Thank you Scott for always covering these launches!
Thanks for doing one of these videos so quickly, and while tired from waking up at 4am! It's been difficult to get good info on how it went and you covered it all thoroughly and succinctly! Awesome!
Incredible, well-made, and rapid analysis as always!
For once I was glad of the launch delay so I wasn’t at work to miss this.
Fully successful test as far as SpaceX were concerned from what they said the objectives of the flight.
Test it break it and rebuild better.
Pretty much same for me. If it would have happened as planned on friday, I would have missed it, because I was on my way home.
I have no doubt the SpaceX consider this a success. It’s certainly job security! Inventing rocket science could be monumental for human kind. Oh wait, space agencies around the world have been doing this for decades, my bad. But SpaceX is using the biggest rocket, fueled by methane, a gas that is 80 times worse for global warming than CO2 according to the EPA. Burn baby burn! 🔥 Yeah, the heavy booster exploded, the second stage exploded, but the engineers keep getting a paycheck! That is a success by Millennials standards!
That's the soviet way.
its a joke
I love how massive explosions are always a huge success for SpaceX. It's a theme for Musk.
Great video and commentary.
Thank you. Your high quality work is appreciated 👍
I’ve listened to a few evaluations of this launch and yours is definitely the best!
02:00 - Flashes coincident with flashes. That's like. so deep...
😅
Thank you for this analysis. It's pretty cool that we can see the propellant levels during a livestream with enough accuracy to notice rate changes like that.
This brought tears to my eyes. The sheer scale of the thing is truly stunning and I can only imagine what it must be like to get anywhere near that monster. I know nothing but it felt like a success to me.
I can tell you that being there this morning, tv or computer monitors do not do any justice whatsoever for how bright the exhaust plume is. You could clearly see the shock diamonds but it was much brighter to look at in person than I would've thought. The rumbling of the engines when it got to my location five miles away was beautiful and everything I hoped it would be. I had two friends with me who put up with my love for astronomy and they were wide eyed the entire time and just said "Holy shit that's beautiful" when the first stage exploded.
Of course I'm super jealous and hate you lol Thanks for sharing that though, I felt more of the emotion from the reaction other people were having and I got swept up along with it. @@FTW3152
@@FTW3152
33 Raptors is about 100GW of power. That's a medium size country's total electricity consumption.
@@andrasbiro3007Is that jiggawatts??
@@andrasbiro3007How many dead polar bears does that equate to? 😢I think we should only have Electric engines in rockets, these ones are going to push global warming over the edge and we will all boil in our own sweat 😢😢
This is always such a spectacle to watch. I wasn't born when the first rockets were launched into space or for the first man to land on the moon. But I feel like this will be what gets remembers the most about the space race during my generation. And of course landing rovers and drones on mars but this, this is on a whole different level. To watch a rocket half a football field long launched into the air is just breath taking.
this is really encouraging to see, I remember the very early days of the first starship mockup and seeing it come so far is so exciting! This has only been a few years, imagine the progress in the next 5-10 years! Look at the falcon 10 years after, what a beast, if starship can succeed in the same way imagine where this will put humanity. Awesome!
Insane looking, I had my alarm set but I overslept! All of the engines lighting for the ascent perfectly, the insane Mach diamonds, the successful hot stage of starship, it’s all so much better than last time. Let’s see if they can relight those raptors more reliably!
I woke up just by random luck and it was about to launch. Didn't even know that was happening today. But lucky that I got to watch it live. Way more exciting that way. 😂
I literally couldn't sleep because I was excited for the launch. I woke up and caught Everyday Astronaut's stream about 20 minutes before launch.
On night shift and rushed home to watch the launch, then too excited to sleep. I was very revealed to to see all 33 engines run the whole launch, the shock diamonds in the whole plume was awesome. Great analysis and breakdown as always!!!
Same!
This is the best recap I've heard the whole day yesterday. Thank you, Scott! ☺
Thanks Scott for getting this out in a timely way. A big help for my understanding of the Starship systems.
The booster flipping that fast definitely caused a lot of sloshing.
Not only that, but it also slowed down, which means that propellant likely sloshed to the front end and engines might have ingested gas.
@@Martinit0 not to mention all that liquid going forward means it's impacting the internal bulkheads with quite a bit of force.
That Purple Jet of flame and those perfect mach diamonds coming off all 33 raptors firing perfectly in unison was the most beautiful sight i've ever seen!
Congrats to SpaceX for this incredible launch spectacle! Can't wait for the next test flight. GO SPACEX!
for me I think Starship is always going to be the big purple rocket in my mind.
Yeah one of the last crashes was pretty diassapointing because you could see and hear it breakup. This burn was a LOT better! I'd say there was an issue when unpairing that caused failure this time.
@@cynvisionI hate you now. Because I read that and my internet degen mind said.
_Thanos Cocket_
@@sirseven3 IMO it would have taken a miracle for everything to go right in the hot staging and burnback process of this launch. The complexity of that operation is insane. I suspect that portion of the launch profile will be more challenging to get right than the actual landing and catch process.
I waited for your report. Perfect balance of detail vs brevity. Thanks.
thank you for the edit we needed!
It's worth noting that even before it lifted off they stated that they were only hoping the hot staging to succeed which it did; the flight was a success.
I believe it's what con men call lowering expectations so success can be claimed in failure.
The commentators didn't sound totally confident.
"Maybe it will....maybe it won't...we'll see"
@@tiredoldmechanic1791 I mean, you can't make the biggest and most reusable ever made in the first try
I recall the first booster recovery didnt go well either........Now it's foolproof.......Same here....This was a successful test.....( Space-X is so far ahead of NASA, it's embarrassing )@@tiredoldmechanic1791
@@tiredoldmechanic1791No, it’s what engineers tell lay people when they test a prototype, because lay people only see an explosion and think it’s a failure.
In conclusion, if you believe the flight was a failure, skill issue.
Excellent, thorough, brilliant analysis! Exactly what we've come to expect from you Scott.
ye dude knows his things
Excellent video, it recaps the event nicely, thank you.
I cant tell if the video at the start is a mockup or the actual footage. What a time to be alive. EDIT: I think it was the clean footage stabilization and the jerky lag like motion at 0:18 that made it feel almost game like, and the last time i watched this channel was my Kerbal days yeaaaars ago. The first thing I thought of was "Man Kerbal nailed down their smoke physics".
Great use of what a time to be alive, you can't deny that history is being made as we speak
Rewatching the relight sequence in slow motion has me thinking if they would have had the same problem had they just waited until the three center gimbling engines slowed the vehicle down enough to stabilize any sloshing. Because if you'll notice those three engines stayed lit until they tried firing up the other ten.
Well worth getting up on a saturday! I can't believe all the engines worked!
Thanks once again for providing us with your dedication and expertise. It's always a joy to hear your take on the more experimental side of rocketry.
Great analysis, thanks Scott!
0:52 Me too, I think this was a successful test flight: it got further than ift-1 and there were many noticeable improvements too! (All engines running, successful stage separation)
First one would`ve been just as good if they didnt feed it full with fresh concrete.
It looked like a normal launch compared to the last one. The last one just didn't seem as erect
Importantly, all failures look to be in systems not previously flight tested. With SpaceX’s launch philosophy, failures in systems that haven’t been flown previously are to be expected.
They wont be able to see that hot staging did to the booster because the booster blew up so that's already a huge setback.
@@Edax_Royeaux If they *expected* the booster to make it back to the ground, they're idiots.
I fully expect they have enough telemetry data to have a good idea what happened, and how to fix it next time. Will they be 100%? Probably not - since that's not how SpaceX operates. They get something that they're 80%+ sure will work, then test it to see what goes wrong.
What an amazing launch! so much better than IFT-1, they really showed their iterative design philosophy at work.
Scott you just have to be there, on location, for IFT-3!
What an utter failure, showing the 'design philosophy' is hot garbage.
"iterative design philosophy" ... aka lame excuse that only silly people buy
@@ricksimon9867 Are you smoking something or are you a bot maliciously designed to sow cynicism?
@@ricksimon9867 what’s the most prolific launch vehicle in the world? The one that’s landed over 200 times?
I wonder how they learned to do that? 😃Overnight perhaps…a fluke maybe.
@@clevergirl4457
That's like praising a super reliable car as if the manufacturer invented cars. Falcon is progress, not revolution.
Thanks for the interesting recap! It was awesome to watch
very impressed how you produced so detailed an analysis so quickly
love hearing your analysis Scott!
Good engineering analysis, Scott! Propellant sloshing is a good candidate for the RUD.
As always brilliant commentary, Scott. Thank you.
I was waiting for your analysis. Excellent! It was an improvement over the first flight but still more to learn.
This was easily and by far the most detailed and best summarized commentary and analysis of this launch (and by a long shot)!!
Thanks Scott! 👍
I liked that cheeky "3 phases of Starship:"
1) Launch
2) Staging
3) R.U.D.
Thanks for your intelligent and thorough breakdown lol.
Excellent recap as always thanks Scott!
Thank you for your work on this video.
That was an absolutely spectacular first stage explosion! It it was the flight termination system… good test!
This is pretty well following the first 4 Falcon launches in SpaceX's infancy. We will see if anything rears its ugly head in Flight 3 as it took until the 4th launch of Falcon 1 before it was able to fully complete the mission profile.
Plus, with 33 engines, there is only so much testing they can do on the ground. While NASA was able to perform a full 8-minute firing of SLS in a test stand, that was of a system with “only” 2 million pounds of thrust, whereas Starship’s first stage generates 14
million pounds of thrust… it’s almost impossible to perform a complete hot fire of that in a test stand. The only way to truly get data on Starship is to fly it.
THANK YOU FOR THE EXPERT ANALYSIS!
Interesting perspective of success
Note that for any other company, or any other country engaged in heavy lift launches, the booster would have deemed to have been 100% successful, as only SpaceX cares about re-use. The booster delivered its payload exactly the way it should have.
Note that, until they are not able to fix this, they are just like everyone else...
@@WilhelmImperatorRex Cool story, bro. Name anyone else who has ever launched 250+tons into space as SpaceX did today.
@WilhelmImperatorRex no they aren't, as no one else is even trying to do this.
But nice cope bro.
@@WilhelmImperatorRexGood...good...let the hate flow through you...
@@deth3021 Honey, i hope the succeed, but until now, they have along way to go...
The video we've been waiting for. You can always trust Scott Manley to come to the rescue.
Terrific breakdown, Scott. Very impressed and thank you very much. I appreciate the explanation even if working on theories because it helps better understand what did or may have happened. Terrific.
Superb, cheers for the analysis Scott.
This is why I watch your channel. Great analysis. No one else is close to the technical reviews you give. Keep up the great job.
what a great second go, i have to say having spent the last 50 years wishing i could get into space i found the fact this went so smoothly a little emotional. i might actually see a base on the moon, and a human on mars. i remember as a kid getting a little plastic spaceman carrying a UN flag out of a box of cornflakes - it's taken us way too long to become interplanetary.
And it's going to be a truly horrible compulsive liar who controls the company that decides how we get there because we've given up our government's ability to get into space in favor of purely private enterprises. Super.
A UN flag? That's interesting.
@@odysseusrex5908*Conspiracism intensifies*
@@odysseusrex5908can sell it more areas? Idk
@@YuhyuhmuhmuhHonestly I‘d rather the first human planted flag on Mars be a flag representing all of humanity, not just any one country.
Thanks for the update, hope u had a lovely quality nap!
Best analysis I've seen yet!