It seems like the grid fins are too aggressive. They now need to take the data from this and adjust the grid fin control algorithms to make it less aggressive and that will fix this issue.
it seemed as if the gridfins where trying to save the booster as only one engine was working. i think it was an engine issue that the gridfins where trying to make up for. It seems as if the gridfins started to struggle to regain control of the booster after something caused it to happen. perhaps gridfins had something to do with it, but was not the main culprit.
Boosters engines didn't reignite correctly. They need those to stabilize. If you watch the data, it does appear that did not help. Could be over correction or they may have to refire engines earlier. We shall see by June.
@@ERA-ts9iq There's no video of the crash recorded from the ground released as of now, but here the last frame from Superheavy clearly shows water being ejected by the engines, meaning it was just about to impact it. I don't know if they used FTS, but it wasn't really necessary
this is all computer controlled. Back in the day when we only had bits of storage, not gigabyte or terabytes; man controlled the vessel. AI to this day does not have the decision making that 99th percentile decision making of a top tier pilot. You can't trust human error I guess.🤷♂
Why do you make these comments if you have no idea about the subject? This is a development like in every other field since you know nobody starts as an expert, they actively develop this rocket to be safe for humans , that is the point of these to spot the errors and improve on them , compare this to their first fight test a year ago and the improvement is insane , about the landing , look at Falcon 9 , the first ever and still only Rocket that can fly back to Earth and land, their last 100 or more flight was total success.....that is what SpaceX is trying to do with Starship , but that is a totally different concept, new engines , much bigger rocket, fully reusable , they proved they can do it with Falcon 9 so no doubt they will do it with Starship too, question is when cause they plan on flying to the Moon with people in it in 2026 which is unlikely , and keep in mind SpaceX didn't even spend 1/20 of what NASA spent on SLS which is all around a much worse technology and concept than Starship , but you seem the type of person who thinks Space don't deserve the tax money so why am I trying to explain.... Just keep talking about stuff that you actually know something about instead of making yourself look stupid online
Although they’ve had massive success with the Falcon 9 boosters, Starship’s booster is not only much more massive, but also made of new hardware that does not have the same flight experience that the falcon 9 has. SpaceX will eventually figure out how to catch their Starship boosters, but it will take some time, just like how it did initially with Falcon 9’s boosters.
Half a century has passed. All the technology is different. Most of the people from those NASA projects are senile or dead. I appreciate they are trying to break new ground, do it better, do it safe. History will remember how well it was done, not how fasr.
@@adellapigna7189 NASA doesn't pay for the Starship development, that's completely financed by investors. NASA only pays for the HLS version of Starship and 2 demo missions.The money is transfered in portions by successful milestones. So if a test fails SpaceX gets nothing from NASA. For example this mission is awarded aproximately 50 million for finishing one milestone: the successful propellant transfer test in orbit. That's all.
Plenty of work to do at SpaceX, model from the video and data, figure out what all happened and what to do to fix it good. its like a long journey, always difficulties, but the success is based on not quitting. Elon doesnt quit, and those SpaceX people need new progress to get happy about. At the present rate of learning from failure, we'll be back on the Moon before we know it...
For everybody doggin on it for not landing and stuff, the whole point of these launches is to launch, see what works and what doesnt, improve or fix and keep launching till it works. This is the biggest thing to ever fly, its not gonna work instantly.
It's pretty naive to think that Spacex has infinite attempts at this. Every test that ends in catastrophic failure of the entire vessel is not without a huge impact to timeline, cost, and customer confidence. At a certain point, they need to prove their engineers can deliver a functional and reliable vehicle.
Stop sugarcoating it and towing the corporate line. This was a failure, they are way behind and this is turning out to be a colossal waste of our taxes, which is how this is all be funded, make no mistake about it.
Men, especially American Men, love to say “Biggest” in front of anything. So what if it is the biggest thing to ever fly if it tumbles through space before burning up on re-entry! I would describe it as the Biggest waste of tax money in the past three decades, maybe more.
I'm pretty sure SpaceX is doing it's best. It could be that the whole program will be a failure and will have to be cancelled, but Elon Musk is determined and are building a factory of Starships, and Elon Musk is not going broke for a while, currently being one of the richest men in the world with an estimated net worth of $190 billion. As it seems he will use every penny to make this work, so excitement of a failure or success is guaranteed.
@@SmokeTheHolyChalice You clearly have no idea, way behind?? they are doing what no one else can, it wasnt a failure when it went further then previous attempt and passed a bunch of mission objectives getting heaps of data needed for future launches, just cause you hate musk or spacex or both doesnt mean you gotta talk stupid shit.
Never say never. A few years ago, landing a Falcon 9 Rocket Booster on a barge in the middle of the sea was pure science fantasy / fiction. It’ll never happen said the naysayers. And now? 🎶“Look at those cave men go - it’s the freakiest show…” 🎶 Electric cars in the past? Often considered glorified milk-floats. EV’s will never come to pass, they said. Look at the EV market today…!!! 😊👍🏾 It was once postulated that humankind couldn’t possibly travel faster than 30mph. Any faster and we would die. Yet, we’ve since had Concorde, The Space Shuttle Orbiters and the ISS - the latter orbiting in LEO today, often with up to 12 space humans on board (some visiting briefly). Mars? We’ll get there - it’s in our human nature to visit brave new worlds. Mars? We will boldly go. Why? Because it’s there! 😊
The NASA Apollo missions 11,12,14,15,16 and 17 landed on the moon 12 American Astronauts, that walked around setting up experiments, some still sending data back to earth today, they drove a lunar vehicle several miles out and back from their lunar lander and they returned safely back to earth...50 years ago, what's the problem now? I mean really?
Ever heard of Apollo 1? Three men died in a capsule caused by wiring that was badly installed. The whole thing had to be rebuilt. I notice you left out Apollo 13! That didn’t go well! When you look into the building of the Saturn V rocket and engines, everyone hand built to work. SpaceX are churning out the Raptor engines in days.
Those were also very short trips on comparatively very limited technology. Their aim was to land, get data, and get out of there as safely as possible. Those missions revealed a bunch of stuff we didn’t know about space travel, including some pretty dangerous aspects of space and the moon that weren’t well understood. NASA has been analyzing that data for DECADES, along with the data we’ve gotten from the space station, to ensure that when we go back to the moon, we can 1) do it PERMANENTLY and 2) do it as SAFELY as possible. As someone who works in the aerospace industry, I can tell you safety is a much larger priority than it used to be, simply because we understand the risks and dangers much better today than we did back then. We also operate under a lot more regulation than people did back then. Bureaucracy and politics is partially to blame for why it’s taken so long, but also, engineers truly value the ethics behind what we’re trying to accomplish, and we have a sense of duty to ensure people are safe. And trust me, Space is HARD.
It's also important to realize that project Apollo was performed under what amounted to wartime rules & constraints (e.g. "We don't care how much it costs, make the effing thing WORK!") SpaceX doesn't have that to work with; comparatively speaking they're working on a shoestring budget. And, to address the obvious - taking one of the existing Saturn V boosters & refurbishing it; well...that's analogous to pulling Peepaw's '72 Plymouth Satellite out of the barn, wiping the dust & chicken crap off, putting 5 gallons of unleaded regular in the gas tank and a fresh Walmart battery in it and expecting it to "just work". It might work well enough for a joy ride, but to get it to work like it did originally is gonna cost some serious bucks. Not something any sane person would risk their life on.
Booster didn't land? Orbiter didn't land? Huge success? I used to think that I'd see more than moon landings and more of the same old thing, but now its looking like its going to be routine as usual in my lifetime. I think that the whole Martian adventure is for later if ever.
@@Pranav-nn1lu People will never understand how to work in fast iterations and just test to get data to improve. We are reached to do everything perfect, because failure is unacceptable.
Considering how long Starship lasted while out of control during re entry, if they fix the issue that caused loss of control before de orbit I think it should survive.@@Pranav-nn1lu
The booster was plummeting at Mach 0.9 there at the end. Would have been a pretty spectacular impact.
They are having trouble turning those engines back on in both microgravity and at high speeds.. I hope they can fix it next flight
It seems like the grid fins are too aggressive. They now need to take the data from this and adjust the grid fin control algorithms to make it less aggressive and that will fix this issue.
it seemed as if the gridfins where trying to save the booster as only one engine was working. i think it was an engine issue that the gridfins where trying to make up for. It seems as if the gridfins started to struggle to regain control of the booster after something caused it to happen. perhaps gridfins had something to do with it, but was not the main culprit.
Boosters engines didn't reignite correctly. They need those to stabilize. If you watch the data, it does appear that did not help. Could be over correction or they may have to refire engines earlier. We shall see by June.
Grid fines were not aggressive. They were just trying to cancel the rotation of the booster, so as to save it from flying off course
Expert
They were doing their job Einstein
That was insanely cool!
I could hardly believe my eyes.
Give Elon some Lincoln Logs, but hide the matches!
An expensive.failure!
@@batcollins3714-
A failure funded by tax payers. When will we stop enabling this insanity?
where did the Booster come down into? the ocean or on land? I'm sure the booster is barely intact or under water.
It blew up. Flight Termination System
@@ERA-ts9iqdon’t think so.
It looked like it splashed into the Golf at Transsonic Speeds
@@JulesD92 I could not find any video. You have something?
@@ERA-ts9iq There's no video of the crash recorded from the ground released as of now, but here the last frame from Superheavy clearly shows water being ejected by the engines, meaning it was just about to impact it. I don't know if they used FTS, but it wasn't really necessary
I'll just tell you that it is no longer 233 feet tall. It may have shrunk a bit during impact ... I mean landing.
It seems like the raptor didn't started well although
Pretty sure we saw flight continue to the point where Flight Termination System is no longer needed.
That last frame totally looks like the booster was pancaked into the surface of the ocean, slamming down at the speed of a jet using its afterburner
@@Time2gojoe
Elon's an idiot and so are we for funding his idiocy.
How do you land on the moon if you can't even stop your lander from spinning out of control. Just asking.
this is all computer controlled. Back in the day when we only had bits of storage, not gigabyte or terabytes; man controlled the vessel. AI to this day does not have the decision making that 99th percentile decision making of a top tier pilot. You can't trust human error I guess.🤷♂
How about you try getting ur own life under control first, then maybe; just maybe you might be excused for asking such stupid questions.
Why do you make these comments if you have no idea about the subject? This is a development like in every other field since you know nobody starts as an expert, they actively develop this rocket to be safe for humans , that is the point of these to spot the errors and improve on them , compare this to their first fight test a year ago and the improvement is insane , about the landing , look at Falcon 9 , the first ever and still only Rocket that can fly back to Earth and land, their last 100 or more flight was total success.....that is what SpaceX is trying to do with Starship , but that is a totally different concept, new engines , much bigger rocket, fully reusable , they proved they can do it with Falcon 9 so no doubt they will do it with Starship too, question is when cause they plan on flying to the Moon with people in it in 2026 which is unlikely , and keep in mind SpaceX didn't even spend 1/20 of what NASA spent on SLS which is all around a much worse technology and concept than Starship , but you seem the type of person who thinks Space don't deserve the tax money so why am I trying to explain.... Just keep talking about stuff that you actually know something about instead of making yourself look stupid online
@@davidkosiba624 Exactly, they do this to find errors and improve on them.
The moon has no air, so the wind that spun the booster out of control wouldn’t be there.
with 1,200 Km/h re-entry speed with less than 1Km altitude,,,,, that booster is totally destroyed
Yeah, nothing 'soft' about that splashdown. Learn a little more with each flight.
They did that on purpose. For info, they really didn't care if the lost it
i thought they had landing booster tech down from all the falcon 9 launches.. what happened lol
Although they’ve had massive success with the Falcon 9 boosters, Starship’s booster is not only much more massive, but also made of new hardware that does not have the same flight experience that the falcon 9 has. SpaceX will eventually figure out how to catch their Starship boosters, but it will take some time, just like how it did initially with Falcon 9’s boosters.
Even tho it seems similar, the two vehicles are way more different than you think
Massive OPPPSSSS
So they want to catch it with the tower and if it blows????
They won't try the tower until they can work out the issues for a safe return.
@@xxZerosumxx Yeah but even the first try has its consequences
@SPak-rt2gb Its possible, but i guess we won't know until they try.
I saw only one engine light.
Half a century has passed. All the technology is different. Most of the people from those NASA projects are senile or dead. I appreciate they are trying to break new ground, do it better, do it safe. History will remember how well it was done, not how fasr.
"Why appollo was a success" is a great book to read. We should definitely take that knowledge instead of reinventing the wheel.
At least with this I get to see my Tax dollars literally burn up and disintegrate before my very eyes.
Do you pay taxes to SpaceX?
@@WhooptieDoyou pay nasa, nasa pays spacex and blue origin for the development of a moon cargo delivery system
@@adellapigna7189 NASA doesn't pay for the Starship development, that's completely financed by investors. NASA only pays for the HLS version of Starship and 2 demo missions.The money is transfered in portions by successful milestones. So if a test fails SpaceX gets nothing from NASA. For example this mission is awarded aproximately 50 million for finishing one milestone: the successful propellant transfer test in orbit. That's all.
this kind of comments are so short sighted that the only thing i can say is: womp womp cry about it
NASA contracted SpaceX for the Lunar variant of Starship. Prototype and designing all comes from SpaceX's pocket.@@adellapigna7189
The last moments of the Booster 10*, they have 4 more ready for flight
Plenty of work to do at SpaceX, model from the video and data, figure out what all happened and what to do to fix it good.
its like a long journey, always difficulties, but the success is based on not quitting.
Elon doesnt quit, and those SpaceX people need new progress to get happy about.
At the present rate of learning from failure, we'll be back on the Moon before we know it...
Can’t listen to those Jr High school style cheerleading outbursts. SOOOO darn unprofessional‼️
Starship ❤❤
"Starship"... snort. Elon's just a wasteful brat who'll never outgrow the symbiotic stage of childhood. No more tax dollars for Mushie!
Too heavy to land 🤣🤣
For everybody doggin on it for not landing and stuff, the whole point of these launches is to launch, see what works and what doesnt, improve or fix and keep launching till it works. This is the biggest thing to ever fly, its not gonna work instantly.
It's pretty naive to think that Spacex has infinite attempts at this. Every test that ends in catastrophic failure of the entire vessel is not without a huge impact to timeline, cost, and customer confidence. At a certain point, they need to prove their engineers can deliver a functional and reliable vehicle.
Stop sugarcoating it and towing the corporate line. This was a failure, they are way behind and this is turning out to be a colossal waste of our taxes, which is how this is all be funded, make no mistake about it.
Men, especially American Men, love to say “Biggest” in front of anything. So what if it is the biggest thing to ever fly if it tumbles through space before burning up on re-entry! I would describe it as the Biggest waste of tax money in the past three decades, maybe more.
I'm pretty sure SpaceX is doing it's best. It could be that the whole program will be a failure and will have to be cancelled, but Elon Musk is determined and are building a factory of Starships, and Elon Musk is not going broke for a while, currently being one of the richest men in the world with an estimated net worth of $190 billion. As it seems he will use every penny to make this work, so excitement of a failure or success is guaranteed.
@@SmokeTheHolyChalice You clearly have no idea, way behind?? they are doing what no one else can, it wasnt a failure when it went further then previous attempt and passed a bunch of mission objectives getting heaps of data needed for future launches, just cause you hate musk or spacex or both doesnt mean you gotta talk stupid shit.
Fail on land...
Think humans on mars is the same as nucleair fusion.
It wll be always 20 years away.
Never say never. A few years ago, landing a Falcon 9 Rocket Booster on a barge in the middle of the sea was pure science fantasy / fiction.
It’ll never happen said the naysayers.
And now?
🎶“Look at those cave men go - it’s the freakiest show…” 🎶
Electric cars in the past? Often considered glorified milk-floats. EV’s will never come to pass, they said.
Look at the EV market today…!!! 😊👍🏾
It was once postulated that humankind couldn’t possibly travel faster than 30mph.
Any faster and we would die. Yet, we’ve since had Concorde, The Space Shuttle Orbiters and the ISS - the latter orbiting in LEO today, often with up to 12 space humans on board (some visiting briefly).
Mars? We’ll get there - it’s in our human nature to visit brave new worlds.
Mars? We will boldly go. Why? Because it’s there! 😊
The NASA Apollo missions 11,12,14,15,16 and 17 landed on the moon 12 American Astronauts, that walked around setting up experiments, some still sending data back to earth today, they drove a lunar vehicle several miles out and back from their lunar lander and they returned safely back to earth...50 years ago, what's the problem now? I mean really?
This vehicle is double the size. Also nasa never tried to land its boosters.
Ever heard of Apollo 1? Three men died in a capsule caused by wiring that was badly installed. The whole thing had to be rebuilt. I notice you left out Apollo 13! That didn’t go well! When you look into the building of the Saturn V rocket and engines, everyone hand built to work. SpaceX are churning out the Raptor engines in days.
Those were also very short trips on comparatively very limited technology. Their aim was to land, get data, and get out of there as safely as possible. Those missions revealed a bunch of stuff we didn’t know about space travel, including some pretty dangerous aspects of space and the moon that weren’t well understood.
NASA has been analyzing that data for DECADES, along with the data we’ve gotten from the space station, to ensure that when we go back to the moon, we can 1) do it PERMANENTLY and 2) do it as SAFELY as possible.
As someone who works in the aerospace industry, I can tell you safety is a much larger priority than it used to be, simply because we understand the risks and dangers much better today than we did back then. We also operate under a lot more regulation than people did back then.
Bureaucracy and politics is partially to blame for why it’s taken so long, but also, engineers truly value the ethics behind what we’re trying to accomplish, and we have a sense of duty to ensure people are safe. And trust me, Space is HARD.
It's also important to realize that project Apollo was performed under what amounted to wartime rules & constraints (e.g. "We don't care how much it costs, make the effing thing WORK!") SpaceX doesn't have that to work with; comparatively speaking they're working on a shoestring budget.
And, to address the obvious - taking one of the existing Saturn V boosters & refurbishing it; well...that's analogous to pulling Peepaw's '72 Plymouth Satellite out of the barn, wiping the dust & chicken crap off, putting 5 gallons of unleaded regular in the gas tank and a fresh Walmart battery in it and expecting it to "just work". It might work well enough for a joy ride, but to get it to work like it did originally is gonna cost some serious bucks. Not something any sane person would risk their life on.
@@svenmorgenstern9506Would me more ‘analogous’ to Lotus 1972 F1 championship wining car, which I’m sure is in F1 guard in pristine condition.
Booster didn't land? Orbiter didn't land? Huge success? I used to think that I'd see more than moon landings and more of the same old thing, but now its looking like its going to be routine as usual in my lifetime. I think that the whole Martian adventure is for later if ever.
you dont seem to realise how big of a success all 33 raptor engines lighting up, a perfect stage separation and a perfect orbital entry really is.
@@Pranav-nn1lu People will never understand how to work in fast iterations and just test to get data to improve. We are reached to do everything perfect, because failure is unacceptable.
With Elon.... failure is an option.... and a learning experience@@ERA-ts9iq
Considering how long Starship lasted while out of control during re entry, if they fix the issue that caused loss of control before de orbit I think it should survive.@@Pranav-nn1lu
Show your rocket, boy
Just one more reason not to buy a Tesla.