A Closer Look At SpaceX’s Starship Booster Landing
Vložit
- čas přidán 9. 07. 2024
- It’s now been a few days since Starship’s fourth Integrated Flight Test and the company just released some ground footage of the booster’s landing. While short, it gives more details into the exact orientation, engine use, and even proximity to the intended landing site.
This comes in addition to more comments from Musk talking about the boosters landing burn and why they might try to catch it on the next attempt. Based on the time between launches going back to IFT-1, the 5th flight could be sooner than many think. Here I will go more in-depth into the new booster footage, the launch timeline, catching challenges, and more.
For more space-related content check out - thespacebucket.com/
Credit:
SpaceX - / spacex
Booster Landing Link - x.com/SpaceX/status/179945885...
Chapters:
0:00 - Intro
0:31 - New Booster Video
3:20 - The Next Flight - Věda a technologie
“SpaceX likes to take the occasional risk”
Understatement of the month.
The goal for Starship Flight 1 was to clear the launch pad...
They weren't sure it would clear the launch pad and they still launched it lol
🤣🤣
But look how it's paying off for them! Back in 2020 they only thought they'd be on Mars by now. But look! They're already doing booster relights and soft splashdowns. It's almost going TOO fast. 🤔
@@zotfotpiq Better late than never, eh? Aerospace projects are pretty much always delayed, no matter who tries.
@@zotfotpiq relax lil bro, every company yapps timelines. But looking at it without the promises they are innovating so fast! Rockets that have been in development before falcon 9 even landet it's first time still haven't flown ONCE! and when they do the first launch it takes years for the next one. Starship has launched 5 times already, at probably less of the cost of ONE SLS launch. And it pays off!
IMO. SpaceX should do a short test hop with Heavy Booster to test the concept of catching Heavy Booster. The same goes for Starship.
Fair if need be, but if they could do this as a full rocket this would allow them to both iterate the design of both parts at once. We'll have to see what the future gives🤞
Return of the 150m hop 🔥
wourldnt make it easier. they have done a virtual test, and from what i can tell it went really good. there is no point in doing a hop.
I agree since the booster appeared to be too unstable for a catch.
@@apollomoonlandings definitely not, it looks really distorted because of the lens on the small ship. I think it looks really stable and based how how little the chopsticks moved it probably was really good
SpaceX have been landing boosters for a long time and the expertese they gained from that is obviously helping with getting the SH booster to exactly the right spot to be caught. Have to say IFT-4 was incredibly exciting to watch but seeing a booster literally get caught out of the air is going to be an insane thing to witness.
I'm believing that they'll get to catch the boosters...which will be a massive savings into the future, but I'm worried about the Starship being able to re-enter without damage. That's a TALL order especially after watching the fin burn away...that would suck SO bad being on that ship and seeing it burning away control surfaces. Lots of work to be done on Starship and they might eventually make disposable versions which would be easier than making one live happily through the heat.
It still seems like an incredibly risky strategy considering the only purpose for doing this is to eliminate the need for landing legs. Musk wants to make space travel more like commercial aviation but we don't take the landing gear off airliners and attempt to catch them at the destination airport!
But landing on I still love you with a 50 ft target area is a lot different when the landing is going to be a matter of inches
@@recoilrob324 The fin issue is just an engineering problem. They have more data points to adjust the ablative tile coverage on the next flight.
@@recoilrob324I think the plan is to reposition the fins so the hinges are out of the plasma. The hinge is the weak point because it leaves a gap and exposes parts which can’t be shielded with tiles. I’m sure this is fixable. I think their biggest challenge will be catching the booster with enough precision to avoid wiping stage zero out.
SpaceX are getting a feel for how difficult it is to perfect a heat shield. Just remember how long it took NASA to find a system for the Space Shuttle and they flew a first mission of that craft manned. I think a lot of younger folk don't appreciate how groundbreaking the Space Shuttle was considering it was developed in the 70's
and it showed how just one tile missing could show disaster, showing even more how its incredibly complicated, and still, the shuttle heat shield is relatively simple compared to the starship as it doesnt have any exposed moving parts, while the starship has to make a shielded hinge which sounds ridiculously complex to make work
The hotspot under the forward flap seems like an easy fix. Not sure why they chose such a plasma concentration design. A minor shift in geometry could lessen that high intensity plasma in that location.
The Space Shuttle was a truly magnificent achievement. SpaceX has the Shuttle's shoulders to stand on and much more advanced technology to work with so the challenge is not to make something that works, but to make something that's fast and cheap to manufacture and inexpensive to maintain. SpaceX has solutions that would, at this very moment, work: Glue all the tiles on and deploy the fins after max heating. But they don't want something that just works, they want something that is cheap and fast to manufacture and inexpensive to maintain. The fin failure was dramatic, but that's an easy problem to solve. The harder one is finding a fast, inexpensive method of attaching the tiles to the skin of the ship. The current pin attachments are too sensitive to the vibration of the ship's stainless steel skin. Dampening the vibration or making the pins more robust both add unacceptable weight. Boeing and NASA might have added that weight, SpaceX is just going to keep blowing things up till they iterate their fast, cheap, and light pins to work. With the data from this last flight, it's not going to take them very long.
Yes, the Space Shuttle was the last big achievement of the German „operation paperclip“ engineers around Werner von Braun, the greatest rocket engineer of the 20th century.
It most certainly was !
It's a shame they gave it up !
As far as I know, there was nothing which the FAA would consider a failure, so I don't think they have to submit any accident investigation reports this time.
Bots don't think they just steal.
look at the size of that vapor cone at 0:37!
It's not vapour. It's propellants during spinning engines. Look at any static fire. They spin turbopumps then fire .
@@just_archanhard to say. It could be a supersonic cone that was created in that part of the air. It could also be a startup puff of gas that forms that cone because of the supersonic speed.
@@just_archanmore likely a shock cone
I did some quick math and based on the booster (71m tall) that cone has a diameter of around 175m! That's 1.6 times the length of a football field!
@@just_archanthat is in fact a vapor cone as a result of interactions between a vehicle in the trans-sonic region and humid air. The gas youre referring to is nigh invisible in these conditions.
I’m just happy we got 3rd person vision of it at all
Next time we'll have multiple cameras watching them try to catch it, can't wait. Gonna be another epic show from starship, it never disappoints.
Heyyyy..... yeah... why did they do that?
I noticed we had the better third person view of the booster for a little bit and then For some reason they went to the crappy first person view of the booster. Why did they do that? I wanted to see it splash from a distance.
@@Eman-vp5wkI'm sure they had their reasoning. I would speculate that there was some landmark visible once it panned down that would identify where it landed and they don't want treasure hunters going after it.
I was wondering if we had footage, especially in flight three, seeing as it got pretty close! Glad we got to see the booster from another angle; it performed spectacularly!
IFT3 had a lot of engines fail for its boostback burn, I expect the booster ended up quite far from the intended splashdown location for that one.
Why did they switch to the crappy view just before splashing down?
@@Eman-vp5wk Maybe they didn't want a video of a Superheavy falling over and exploding to be floating around just yet. SpaceX hasn't been shy about showing their rockets exploding in the past but controlling *when* that video goes out is reasonable PR.
@@facedeerI have another theory. That perhaps a landmark in the background when it panned down would have given away the target location and prompted treasure hunters.
I went nuts when they landed in the water and now they’re gonna make me go insane if they actually manage to catch it
Its just the camera distorsion, if you see the onboard footage you'll see that is pretty stable
:3
Landing in the water was 10 times easier than catching it three times in a row and catching the second stage good luck with that.....
Its absolutely very exciting to witness SpaceX push space exploration forward
Now waiting for ground footage of the Starship.
Never going to happen. China doesn't want to show it grabbed it.
It is my understanding, it landed about 6 km off target. This was probably due to damage on re-entry.
If they find it, it'll be right next to MH370!
@@brucelytle1144 6km off target ?
In short, as fan boys will proclaim it, a SUCCESS.
Isn't it amazing how good they are, the empty badly damaged melted scrap metal fell into the correct ocean.
WHOA
What a feat of engineering.
(yes, sarcasm)
?
I love the no bs takes you produce. You are a rarity on yt
The BS is using the word precise when it missed location by 6 km.
@@helihootthe booster didn't miss. Just the 2nd stage Starship, probably due to the flap damage on re-entry. All things considered, 6km isn't THAT bad. There was wreckage from South Texas all the way across Louisiana when the shuttle blew up.
@@jonathanbranyon thank you. I was mistaken
incredible , hoping to see another in 60-70 days
I've been waiting for this video since the day it landed. Thanks!
I was hearing some of the media were claiming the booster was wobbly but it wasn't the booster it was the camera
Yeah the media is pretty stupid
Correct. The booster is massive; it physically cannot move as fast as it appeared in the video. It's an artifact of the recording.
It's melted T bottom part 😮 you see the fire is orange 😮
@@PlanXVyeah, rocket motors can burn metal. That was a result of that one motor not relighting.
Wow. Do you remember when the sound level peaked? That landing peaked my eyes similarly. WOW. 😎
They will launch more frequently... eventually, every day. What a treat. We'll live in GATTACA.
I hope we can avoid the genetic perfectionism...
@@jonathanbranyon
I hope we don't avoid it. Fixing genetic diseases would be wonderful.
@@MrNote-lz7lh simply preventing people from getting generic diseases isn't AS problematic if we cured say sickle cell or Downs. That's a scary road to go down though, and potentially a slippery slope. A similar example would be the way we handle crop plants and the secondary negatives that come with GMOs. You may get far higher yield and insect resistance, but the resulting food is far less nutrient rich, etc. We may gain a lot from generically modifying people, but we may also have other consequences to consider. I'd say at the VERY LEAST we should tread that path lightly.
Great report as always 👍
Thanks so much
You missed that SpaceX actuated the tower arms in concert with the landing of the booster. This is a pre catch maneuver.
Good report. Thanks.
Imagine seeing a building falling out of the sky, and then just landing lol.
Its not a building, its a cylinder of metal.
@@paintspot1509 oi, its still a good metaphor considering its the size of a building...
@@paintspot1509a cylinder that's structurally sound and nearly 400ft tall...
Sounds like sci-fi from 20 years ago.
@@jonathanbranyon correct, that all thay impressive when you think about it.
None of them have actually been structurally sound yet either.
I think we can reasonably expect the next test flight to occur sometime in August.
Excellent summary. Thank you!
I would say if the progress continues at the same rate IFT5 will be in 2 months.
Absolutely amazing footage.
Brilliant! Thank you for this update.
Awesome segment
TY!!
I don't think they'll attempt a booster catch until the second tower is built. If they damage their only tower it'll be a long pause before we see another launch.
I would agree with you, but Musk tweeted that they might try it next flight.
@@user-tk5cp6dl6bHe didn't say when is 'next'. I think he also said they will relocate the fins on the Ship to mitigate the plasma burn- through issue. It may give them more time to build the second tower.
If he does miss the catch, I'm sure the FAA is going to wait for an accident report, which may take long enough for the second tower to be completed during the investigation
Why would anyone build failure into their overall timeline.... that's a piss funny attitude... 🤔😂😎🇦🇺👌
That would makse sense, but I don't think you're factoring in Elon. ;-)
Awesome video. I wish they had shown the actual touchdown, but it’s still awesome regardless
Hi, from New Zealand. I saw it live, and it was awesome. I appreciate your additional coverage.
Thanks for posting.
As an old Science Fiction fan, one who thinks his dreams of ever seeing the stars in person or walking on another planet died decades ago in the abomination that was the Space Shuttle, I watch those videos with the wonder of a 16-year-old boy that understands that this is the step into the stars, finally. It is primitive to what we will have in decades, but it is so much better than what we had for decades, and it follows the old dreams of Werner Von Braun - the man who invented basically rockets and then after WW2 the NASA Space Program.
And it is not that. AI is coming, Fusion is close, we work on medicines that would have been seen impossible a decade ago, and long life - let's not say immortality - is around the corner. The young boy in me, one that thought his dreams are dead for decades, smiles.
Don't forget that we also recently had a breakthrough that will allow us to grow new teeth at any age!
@@LuMaxQFPV Yeah, that one was interesting enough one of my "man, the teeth will be a problem" things and guess what - they are in the process of being solved. Insanity for sure.
Space shuttle was cool they just never got the turnaround anywhere near what it was meant to be.
@@stevenobrien557 Yeah, promises broken - also, they never really went anywhere with it, in terms of further development. It was a dead end, sign of bad engineering way below the plans. And then there was a crazy company names SpaceX and suddenly things move.
crewed spaceflight is a waste of resources. there's nowhere to go that is habitable. at least not without warp drive.
FINALLY!!!! LOOKS PERFECT!!!
No. Not yet. Something exploded at the bottom/side, whent the center engines lit. If you catch it like that it sould be immediately drowned in water to prevent it from blowing up.
slap on paint on it good as new. no fire damage there
@@Avatar2312probably the engine that didn’t ignite during the landing burn exploded
Look at the video between T+07:10 and T+07:14. Those big chunks of metal exploding off of the bottom of the booster are something less than perfect 🙂
@@blueskytoday2230 Ok rainbow, probably Jeff Bozo lover... Still landed didnt it!!!
its always the youtubers with no avatar, nothing subbed too, no playlists no nothing.
you know whats less than perfect? Starliner with 2 souls on board as Guinee pigs.
Hi from new zealand , watched it live , so cool, like your extra coverage..
awesome footage! I have no doubt that they will nail the catch eventually, maybe even on the first attempt. That will be nuts to watch!
Bros pumping out these videos! Lets go
fr, its been like 5 in the last 2 days
The yellow flames on the side look to me like sumpin' ain't quite right. Recognizing the degree of difficulty in sticking the landing, Simone.
It was probably related to the middle-ring engine that failed to re-ignite. They'll figure out what happened and design a fix for IFT5. Even then, it landed, so it's not a big deal.
Yah. Not exactly “perfect”.
Just amazing!
Excellent report!
The main thing that needs to be known, other than the orientation and precise location, is did it hover? And, for how long did it hover?
Jeff Bezos is angrily punching air right now
Jeff Who?
Let him pound sand!
First video of yours I’ve seen. Superb presentation. No bullshit, no cruft. IPO be back.
Any videos of starship landing
If you find one of the 156 raptor engines can you keep it? Just asking for a friend.
Planning to fit one to your Subaru?😁
I would
Lol. Subaru with a third of a MILLION lbs of thrust! 🚀
Build just a catching tower, then there's less risk if there are problems.
The booster can always be put on the launch tower base . 😮
I wouldn't be surprised if they turn around and say that the supposedly second launch tower they are building turns out to be just a catching tower only lol
@@valvedore no reason for it not to do both if they eventually want it anyway. The most I could see is that they'll hold off on building the launch mount until they get a couple catching tests done
The big difference would be all the fuelling and engine start hardware. That's pretty easy to leave out, and it would seem to make sense to do so.
Great video! Thanks
Excellent synopsis!
If you haven't been down to see the beautiful Starship on the OLM, what are you doing with your life?
It's truly a marvel of human engineering. To think humans went from building huts from mud and straw to this is astounding. My first trip to Boca Chica brought tears to my eyes.
You didn't read the memo?
NASA already landed in Mars in 1976 and a total of TEN Mars landings by robotic, uncrewed spacecraft have had successful soft landing.
There were six crewed landings between 1969 and 1972, and numerous uncrewed landings. All crewed missions to the Moon were conducted by the Apollo program,
Did you heard of the Saturn v?
As of 2024, the Saturn V remains the only launch vehicle to have carried humans beyond low Earth orbit (LEO).
The Saturn V holds the record for the largest payload capacity to low Earth orbit, 311,152 lb (141,136 kg), which included unburned propellant needed to send the Apollo command and service module and Lunar Module to the Moon.
@@joannewilson6577I didn't see where they discredited the Apollo missions, but rather at celebrating the next chapter that THEY get to witness. So many of us were born in the Space Shuttle era, we never saw a moon landing, so getting to see the next generation go back to the moon to verify the tech, then heading to Mars is really incredible.
Musk said they would change the position of the flaps to eliminate the disintegration of the flap seen on this flight. I would say it is very likely they will catch the Super Heavy on the next flight. Whether they try to catch the Star Ship is another matter. I don't think they are there yet. I think there is still a long road ahead on the tiles.
Yeah the next iteration or version of starship has its flaps moved more leeward. Basically they already know this issue and already had a solution for it, still not a guaranteed solution and needs to be tested out but yeah I'm impressed!
@@Jamux69 - some tiles are still disintegrating so moving the the flaps alone won't solve the problem. If I had to use tiles, I would bake the pin into the tile using a matrix screen and attach the pin into a locking mechanism on the rocket. That's reverse of what they are doing now. You can see the rocket side disintegration of the ceramic material around the pin caused by vibration and heat, etc. - it's a breaking point. I believe the tiles could be increased in size and made generally thinner with fewer pins. That's my take on it:-)
@@rocroc If the flaps are moved more to the leeward side of the ship it stands to reason that they receive less heating from reentry at least at the base of the flap which is the most vulnerable point anyway.
Then it is only the outter end of the flap that would take the heat. The tiles could be made thicker like you suggest.
Moving the flaps more to the leeward side could cause the ship to lose some stability on descent, but that is not obvious either.
@@rocroc That's the point why they are moving the flaps leeward, to avoid direct stress from the heat and the hinges where the plasma was able to pass through, if tiles was the problem the whole ship could have disintegrated already.
@@rocroc That was because the heat was getting in through the hinge seam. If you can avoid that by moving the hinge to a more protected spot, the flat parts should be fine.
Excellent analysis
Great edits of video
Dud, you never sleep? How do you manage to consistently play so close to the ball?
Yo, don't be calling him a dud! 😂😂
don't call him dud guy..
A man of focus, commitment and sheer will...
Seeing that booster hang itself up on that tower, like a wall phone gets hung up, will be the most spetacular thing ever to see. It would bee a whole lot easier to have the booster just parachute into the water. Then a boat crew pulling it to shore.
quick and economical turnaround =/= landing it in the water
You are wrong
Parachutes aren’t that simple and you have zero idea how huge that parachute would have to be.
sea-water is not realy that good for any type of machine.. you realy dont want to deal with that for something that should be rapidly reuseable AND good enough to be launched into space..
@@LashlayDS9and only a 12 hour turnaround.
This stuff NEVER gets old, its amazing
Same for first ever simultaneous triple boosters landing
@@GreyDeathVaccinethat'll be awesome!
Way to go All the best cheers!
Why do they follow the booster almost to the water, then switch cameras to looking down on the booster. I want to see video of it actually landing, straight up, on the water. This cutting off vids at what should be the best parts is starting to get real suspect! 😠
Yes this pisses me off. I want to see if it hovered or slowly landed on the water.
We don't see the actual touch down in the water. Nothing is perfect. It's as if people have to have something to complain about.
Yeah it's all fake! SpaceX isn't real, you can't just. Go there!
@@michaeldeierhoi4096 Or worse, comment self righteously 🙄
Probably BC the steam created covers everything from that angel. And no it is not suspect
They should build a landing tower not blow up launch tower
In order to have rapid reusability they have to land the rocket on the same infrastructure that's going to launch it if they landed it on a separate structure they would not be able to execute rapid reusability
@@nerys71 for development, they should have a seperate catch tower. Isn't the plan to have 2 towers in Texas.. they can put up part of the 2nd tower, enough structure for catch only testing.
Yeah but its better to test with the actual tower so they have experience with the actual tower and not just a extra landing pad @KrustyKlown
@@KrustyKlownthe other tower is for double the launches
@@KrustyKlown why would they build a whole new tower, dedicated entirely to a singular catch test? The point is to be able to catch and then relaunch *rapidly*. At least within in the same day. The only way to do that is if the catch tower and launch tower are the same tower.
this thing looks so gd glorious! i just love to see it fly. everything about it is beautiful.
Great video...👍
No mishap investigation this time. The license is basically in the bank. Haters are really mad I bet
I don't think those people are as much haters as they are doubters. I'm sure most people, if not all, would be happy to see them succeed. I myself will probably be proven wrong but I just see so many potential hazards and dangerous things that could possibly go wrong using a system like this. I'd like to see them succeed.
@@jayrussell3796 There are haters though, most prominent being Thunderfoot who was gleefully toasting the "failure" of both the booster and Starship before they had actually failed. One could hear the bitter taste of humble pie when he begrudgingly had to congratulate SpaceX on their success.
It's one thing to be pleased that you were right all along about something, quite another to gain pleasure from the failure itself, and particularly so when you start celebrating on line early! Needless to say I have unsubscribed from that hater's channel!
@@chrisantoniou4366 that is the distinction between haters and doubters. Doubters are indifferent or disappointed when you fail. Haters are elated and filled with schadenfreude when you do.
@@jayrussell3796 the haters are more haters of the man than the machine.
@@tazerface8659 There is nothing wrong with reasonable doubt, and we're all guilty of schadenfreude on occasion, but haters, and especially Thunderfoot, takes the glee he felt at the imminent destruction if both the Starship and Booster to a whole new level. The fact that he was caught out celebrating far too early and had to eat humble pie is the sort of schadenfreude I believe I'm justified in feeling. 😊
I was watching a notorious Elon hating youtuber's stream and he was seething when Starship's camera feed came back from the dead and we saw the half melted flap still work and the thing splash down successfully. Still declared it to be a spectacular failure.
He has a right to believe different things than you.
The haters would point to a paper sign that got ripped off the rocket during launch and chant that the entire flight test was a complete and total failure.
not if he's fukin stupid@@TheMoneypresident
I which he was clearly wrong.
Who ThunderFoot 🤣?
Incredible video.
Hey SpaceX thank you for the show!😊
I'm one of the biggest SpaceX skeptics out there but the booster relight was legitimately encouraging.
I'll still complain that, if they'd accepted the help from the army corps of engineers in the first place, they may have been able to attempt the exact same thing as early as ift1... but it was still impressive AF and I clapped.
You know... Maybe SpaceX deserves a little criticism for setting unrealistic expectations with their Mars and HLS timelines. I only had positive feelings about them before they took the Artemis contract.
the melting Starship was not encouraging, but yes, the booster did good, seems they will get to reusability for the booster, IMO, starship won't end up being reusable.
@@KrustyKlown Because of the roasting?
it blew up ift1 wtf are you even talking about?
@@KrustyKlown living up to your name lol
@@zachmoyer1849 that musk turned down an offer from the ACoE to build a flame trench before they built stage 0.
I would rather they launch 200 to 1000 starlink 3 satellites. 5 to 10 launches could easily do that!
That's a lot of space junk. You could close the skies for a century if something went wrong and they weren't deorbited responsibly.
@@gdutfulkbhh7537 I think they nailed getting to orbit, now they just need to come up with a better shield to survive reentry.
@@gdutfulkbhh7537he's got 4k up there now and they will all deorbit within 5 years. Also, he could reasonably launch 250+ on a single flight.
Great video
The video from the bouy is truly mindblowing.
If you can afford a 10ton hotstaging ring, just put fkn landing legs on it and start reusing them like the falcons
legs would weight like 15 tons 😆
@@surf2257 so make the whole thing 10 feet taller and put more gas in it lol
They can't afford the ring's mass. That's one reason they jettisoned it, and why there is no dummy payload. This version of the vehicle is too heavy, and the raptors are not quite powerful enough. Yet!
@jackmorrison8269 . Then you will have to make it even taller to put more even fuel it to carry the extra mass of the first lot of fuel you put in it. ... This really is rocket science 😅
@@jackmorrison8269there is an eventual point of diminishing returns, where you're just flying it to get it to space, but you don't have any weight capacity to haul anything.
In my opinion SpaceX should used all that funding and resources to Starship program towards building a bigger payload fairing to Falcon Heavy. Able to fit a small lander and a kick stage. And then build a Methalox rocket similar to New Glenn, with a flight path similar to Falcon 9 with reentry burn. And then iterate towards a reusable upper stage.
They don't need all that, they have Starship basically worked out
Yes but even though Falcon Rockets are incredible, RP1 ( rocket grade kerosene ) produces a lot of soot necessitating engine overhauls after a limited number of flights or the swapping out an engine that is too clogged with soot. Methalox produces far less soot thus is a better fuel and far easier to handle than Liquid Hydrogen. Methane is natural gas BTW and we all know that it burns much cleaner than Petroleum based fuels
It is unbelievable impressive. The combined strength of bright minds, effort and funds are really proving its logic.
Yeah did not get to see that one. That was awesome, the touch down in the ocean.
is there any footage of Starship doing the flip and soft landing? I don't get why i can't find anything
What I love about this is that each test will move us closer to affordable (at least for big corporations) space travel. This ships are still in the prototype phase, so having a succesful launch and landing may give less data than a having a partial or total failure. We all saw the melting flaps and some boosters failing will give them tons of data to work with and see what needs to improve, but also allows them to test the redundancy of their designed, specially the automatic computer that managed to land the already damage ship.
The new video shows some good detail of the engine failure.
what is that object u can see floating inn 00:14 ?
Why they cut external video final sequence?
At 2:29 it appears there is a 3D (insta 360) style cam set up as you can see the "digital cut" during the feed which may not mean that they had cameras pinpointed. but either way was a nice landing as alway by Space X. and an even cooler flight.
Ahhh finally.. a comment that sees sense.
Those flames were mostly the 10 middle raptors shutting down, that one engine already had it's fun before it broke the clouds
Really Good. A lot of detail info not widely avail on all the reg channels (i sub to mannny spacex etc, of course) Good Work TSB
Are you going to make videos about every miniscule SpaceX video now? ...I'm all for it.
Excellent Presentation....the dynamics and Uncertainties of Precise Attitude Control of a ship that huge are presented...................basic wind loads alone on the booster could be 8 to 10 tons... on a moderate day.
The chopsticks can swing quite a bit, and also have the treadmills to move the caught booster into the correct position for the mount, so accuracy could be more than just a few feet off without impacting the catch. Rotation is a bit more important though, msybe theyll make the catch points a lot wider to give them more leeway there.
Thanks muchly.
I'm such a fan boy! They'll get it right and perfect it. Each attempt is exponential progress. I feel like such a chimp in comparison with these brilliant humans. Never gets old
Why does no one have the full side view camera footage...
I think the hardest part of a rapid turnaround is the orbital launch table. Getting it back into serviceable condition takes a lot of time, well it has so far. Also the Ship Quick Disconnect arm looked skewed again. If they have to do major repairs each time then it will be quite awhile before we get much shorter between launches. I can't wait for the next one 👍
Maybe the QD arm needs to swing farther back, get itself more out of the way
@@karlwest437 agree 100%. But until they do that it won't be a quick turnaround. I'd also like to see if the Booster QD faired any better this time with the changes they made.
that's why they fly and then make changes and fly again.. until it works?!
How will the booster orient and position itself for the catch? Will it use optical or radar markers on the launchpad, or will it use GPS?
When you consider how difficult it is to get a rocket engine started in the first place, it's so impressive how preceisly the Merlins and Raptors ignite.
Incredible!
Didn't know such footage existed!
its doesn't it fake
AI couldn't render the water landing good enough so they switched to the onboard camera and still cut the splash down.
@@TheMusicHeals.kjhjhhg Ya, instead of just having more cameras placed for an event thousands of people witnessed 1st hand, they spent money and man hours creating world class special effects to created what was already seen by eyeballs. Makes sense ... to someone I guess.
try catching NOW, before the second tower is complete, then you can easily make necesarry design changes.
tower is pretty simple any design change woudl be to the arms which can be done at any time really.
That's awesome that they got video, wonder if they got any from Starship?🤔
I think the smart way to try catching the booster would be to have a dedicated catch tower that has plenty of clearance from all the fuel and O2 tanks. Also there is so much stuff that has taken a long time to build on the current launch tower and the platform that would not necessarily be needed for a dedicated catch tower. If the build a separate tower I don’t think the platform would be needed at all if the booster was not taking off front m that tower, which would then mean the whole tower could be significantly shorter that the current tower.
If the goal is true rapid reuse, you want the booster to land on the tower so it can literally be fueled up and launch again.
What if they didn’t catch the booster and explode the pad, do they have a new pad or how long would it take to build
Booster usually aims to miss right before it re-orients itself for landing. So, it could be fine, or it could be catastrophic
That was so beautiful. But I really want to see what starship look like when she landed
Be there next time! Will be wild! Oh, sorry, that was for a different event in January!
The fact they put a buoy in the middle of the ocean where they wanted the booster to "land", and it landed next to it, proves that the booster's trajectory is controlled with the same level of precision as that of Falcon 9. There's probably a lot of commonality in the guidance software. One thing's for sure, that's definitely a good sign for the upcoming attempt to catch one of those.
It is, it's one of the things I was wondering about. I knew they were off target with Starship, but had no word on the booster.
0:51 Why is the video cut before the booster settles on the water? It would seem to me that was the whole point of taking the video?
I am assuming they activated fts for it to sink right away and wouldn't want to show the explosion but who knows, that's just what I thought.
@@Jamux69 Except there was no explosion. Only the burning off of excess methane from the engines.
@@michaeldeierhoi4096 I agree. One of the on-board cameras shows the touchdown up to the point where the booster starts to fall over. No explosion was evident up to the point that clip ends.
Perhaps they don't want to share it yet for trade secrets.....etc.... the booster landed as it was supposed too .....almost perfect.
@@michaeldeierhoi4096 No I mean on the time the camera went off and the booster was falling over and also I am just assuming and I didn't say it didnt touch down. Just one reason in my mind why the camera went off right away not even half way it was falling over and also not showing it to us from the buoy cam.
What a strange footage is that rolling shutter or why does is look so distorted?
Probably water drops on the lens, seeing as it is on a ship
I was not sure about catching the booster but after seeing this external video i think elon is right to attempt a catch next flight. This was a precise steady landing despite what looks like engine RUD in one the raptor center engines. Recovering this booster would have accelerated the journey to booster reusability.
What kind of g forces are being applied when decelerating from 1200 to 0 in a single kilometers?
A mean about 5.7 g, if I am not mistaken: 333 m/s to 0 m/s in 6 seconds.