Go to tryfum.com/WHATABOUTIT or scan the QR code and use code WHATABOUTIT to get your free FÜM Base when you order your Journey Pack today. What do you think? Was this to save time, or maybe there was just some internal miscommunication, and we will see yet another engine swap and static fire on Ship 30?
Get that out of your mouth! If you have an oral fixation and there's tobacco in that, just picture a methane-based propellant exhaust in your mouth every time you want to use it!
As a kid in the early 60s I remembered watching old sci fi movies from the 50s where the rockets landed on their tails. All the kids would laugh and say- that is impossible... We were so wrong.
@@fredrikcarlen3212 the moon landing. It’s just some conspiracy theorists that make up pretend reasons. It’s like flat earthers saying they’ve debunked the fact the earth is a globe. They don’t need evidence. They just say it’s debunked.
No hoovering was done by nasa in the 60s. So weak arms on motors is the only difference. That is no where near the space technology maneuver since the moon landing.
As I understand the land dispute, SpaceX bought several parcels from the company, but the contract stipulated the company could not purchase any additional land within five miles of star base. After that contract, they purchased another parcel and refused to sell. SpaceX sued for breach of contract and argued they should only have to pay what the company in breach of contract paid the original owner.
Hopefully Butch and Suni don't end up as the guy who lived at an airport for 18 years. -"Who they are -that's Butch and Suni -they got stuck here back in 2024 a couple of years before they built the space elevator."
Funny how the FAA has no problem letting a crewed capsule with known defects launch with crew to the ISS, possibly endangering it as well, but an unmanned ship landing/crashing in a sparsely populated area might be a problem.
The new and recent CEO of Boeing, Kelly Ortberg, has a Mechanical Engineering degree. The previous CEO, Dave Calhoun, has a degree in accounting. Maybe Boeing is learning from its mistakes.
Not sure where you got the video of someone applying teflon tape to pipe threads, but they’re doing it backwards! As presented, the tape would loosen as the pipe was turned.
boeing was caught using unqualified people working on the space launch system causing major delays in the program. no reason they wouldn't do the same with starliner.
"That's impossible": Do you remember that experts said that it's impossible to land an orbital rocket propulsively? (with engines only). They said something like: 'it's physically impossible to start a rocket engine in hypersonic speed against the oncoming air pressure, that's just not possible. That would never work. And there's a reason that NASA doesn't land their rockets: Because it's impossible'. The experts said something like this and some laughed at SpaceX. Well, SpaceX tried and it works now very reliable to land the boosters of their orbital rockets. So it's just a matter of fine tuning to catch the Starship booster. That's an engineering problem, not even rocket science. So, it's doable. After they figured it out and dialed in all parameters correctly for catching, they would need a low wind, a predictable low wind or no wind. Just like for landing the Falcon9 boosters. They landed the Superheavy booster softly in the water and in the line of sight of that buoy. So, they already know how to slow down that giant booster and bring it round about where they want it to be. And I guess, they have escape maneuvers when the position would not be right, unable to correct it. They might fly out to a predeclared place in the ocean (that's what all others do with their boosters, dump them in the ocean...). And catching Starship (the upper stage) has more to it, withstand the entry heating and so on --- and then it's about the same, do a precision landing at the catch tower. ------ Oh by the way, the current tower could become a catch tower only and the new one with the flame trench could become the new launch (and catch) tower. It's just a guess. But when the new tower is so much better for launching...
Here's a rocket R&D expense that few are talking about: liability. If you are going to even consider the types of returning rocket capture or landing anywhere near a population centre, it has to be demonstrated very safe and repeatable. Liability insurance is a massive expense for any business that has plans of longevity. We see the repeated dance of landing Falcon 9 boosters and have gotten quite comfortable with it. But that's done at the Cape or at sea. Recovering a Starship and booster is a whole magnitude more hazardous. Anywhere within endangering civilian or commercial infrastructure, add an exponential risk factor. So if the FAA is concerned with safety, don't be too surprised.
Catching a booster in mid flight is impossible to do. ecxept for a Rocket company called SpacX. The World was saying same thing about the Falcon 9. And look were it is now. And if the catching part fails or not, it will be spectacular.
Please check. Starliner's automated program will only work if all 5 thrusters are working. Their computer program doesn't cover maneuvers with only 4 thrusters. Therefore, it required manual docking and will require manual reentry. They are trying to reload a computer program that will allow it to use automated program with only 4 thrusters. They don't want to loose their prototype but it requires manual reentry until new program allows automated program to work. That's why it can't disconnect from the space station and back away with it's present automated program. I would be dangerous for the space station to allow it to disconnect at this stage.
NASA did give the green light for a capsule that couldn't tolerate failure? I mean, that starliner is a death trap piece of trash - but that's beside the point. I never thought NASA would allow something that couldn't cope with the loss of 20% of its thrusters. I mean, I wouldn't. This is the kind of thing that one puts redundancies on the redundancies.
during the starliner launch, i can only imagine those 2 listening to the news while waiting inside starliner and finding out about yet another boeing plane falling apart and being like "uhh... can we call elon instead?"
Raptor 3 looks more like what the "simple concept" of a rocket engine sounds like when you first hear it: 1. pump fuel into chamber 2. ignite 3. profit. On the other hand, from working as an engineer, I know that making something that looks messy, but works is easier than making something that works and looks elegant and effort less. Putting in the work to make that step will almost always make you improve your product to the best version yet.
You kind of made this point, but it’s worth reiterating. The phrase “abundance of caution“ takes on different meaning for viewers of this channel that witnessed Challenger explode live in person. Love the content keep it coming.
There are reports that Starliner could become a problem as they currently do not know how to disengage it from the ISS without a crew that has to do some work. The capsule has no automated departure system. They can not simply release it as it could bump into the ISS. So it currently blocks one of two docking ports. I hope they solve that.
The incompetence at Boeing Starline is unbelievable. They've had all this time to fix any issues and make sure the flight would go smoothly. Its not like they were rushed, or in a deadline with SpaceX.
@@gizmo8760 I guess it is an effect of the fixed price. That was a massive miscalculation but they had to deliver. So I guess at one point they decided to cut corners and be as low quality as they can. I think that showed when they needed ages to redo the insulation instead of proceeding with a second capsule to keep the timeline. I guess there will be no further Starliner missions, even if they manage to land it with a Crew.
@@gizmo8760the only reason for launching starliner when they did was to save face and it's totally backfired putting those astronauts and the iss at risk , it should be scrapped
I will come to visit starbase on September 9th for roughly 10 days... would be amazing if it could launch in this time. Just a few days of delays regarding the regulatory approvals would make it possible. Great video by the way and greetings from Germany
It depends, you might want more government paperwork with Boeing, sure it is a hassle but it is almost an insurance policy, it is in our interest to keep SpaceX safe and uncontentious
It’s the Gummint and Deep State wot stopped Elon landing 200 tons of cargo on Mars in 2022. The only way to fulfill the Musk delusion of a million strong self sustaining colony on Mars is to shut down FAA & NASA .
You can't take the booster and put it back on the launch pad. You have to send it back to the Garage to do NDI tests on the components to limit and reduce mechanical fail points. They do this in the US Navy on airframes every day because of the high stress on aircraft structures and equipment.
Hey.....i belive in the end of 2024, spacex will be go go go for reusing superhavy and starship and catching with megazila like a pro....thx for all updates from spacex...love from Slovenija
@@acasualviewer5861 The guy has been dissing and spewing lies about Spacex for a decade. He testified before Congress that Falcon Heavy was physically unable to have the long coast time needed to perform direct to geo, if that rocket ever mompleted development, while his Vulcan would be 40% more capable than DeltaIVHeavy and fly by 2019.
For now, I'm sure they're thrilled to have extra time in orbit (and to be alive!) but that may change if the ISS runs out of busy work for them. I'll be happy cleaning the toilets, but I'm not a highly trained specialist or space pilot.
No mention about the autonomous software that wasn't installed on Starliner? why didn't it get installed, issues with it? So now it's being installed remotely, without out the software it cannot detach from the ISS autonomously if needed. Personally, I wouldn't trust any Boeing hardware including a new airliner. They have been asleep at the wheel and riding purely on their reputation and like other companies greed has taken priority over everything else. It's time to start locking up CEO's and Board members for negligence in safety. I digress, love the channel, your personality is the driver of success! Thanks for being you!
Yes, Boeing won't change until executives GO TO JAILl. Never forget they shoved bigger engines under the 737 instead of designing a new Max airplane, told airlines it was the same plane and they wouldn't need to retrain pilots, had to add the MCAS system to prevent the unbalanced plane from stalling, and when it went wrong pilots didn't know what was happening and 346 people died.
From the movie, "Alien": "In space no one can hear you scream" Space is not a forgiving mistrees, I think. Small mistakes can be fatal. This is not at the stage of "going out for a Sunday drive," yet, IMO. I hope the two of them enjoy their stay. They are adding numbers to the book of records, too, I think, like "longest unscheduled stay on ISS, to begin with?"
That catch animation is wrong ! They definitely won’t try to catch the booster directly above the Orbital Launch Table - they would catch it off to one side - where they normally pick the booster off of an SPMT. That way if the catch fails, then it won’t crash right into the Launch Table. That should be pretty obvious..
I’m not sure it is certified. This was their final (?) certification launch. It was to show it could safely take people to the ISS and safely bring them back. It’s looking like that won’t happen.
@@naroe2001 I try hard to separate between Elon the engineer and Elon the person. I still admire the engineer and the technical innovations he keeps pushing, but his pushing out far right conspiracies on X and political activities is disappointing.
5:00 I saw 20 years ago where people laser etched aircraft wings with a particular pattern that initially allowed ice to form but afterwards would not allow anymore ice to accumulate. Doing that to starship would probably save quit a few tons of weight on initial launch.
My initial reaction to the idea that the booster would be caught was total disbelief. I thought it was a fun SciFi idea that would garner a lot of publicity but then soon be replaced with some more realistic procedure. I still think it's a crazy idea. The precision required seems impossible. This is obviously something you can't afford to get wrong even once. I was 100% certain this was BS. Now I'm only 40%. I will be absolutely ASTOUNDED if it works on the first try.
The Super Heavy Booster will be able to hover for a while much like Blue Origin's New Shepard booster...so get ready to be astounded because I have a strong feeling SpaceX may well pull this off.
Send crew 9 up with the 7 seat configuration. Transfer the back row seats to crew 8 capsule and get them home earlier. Of course this requires jettisoning starliner to free up the parking spot
I’m curious as to why Felix didn’t discuss the fact that Starliner wasn’t launched with software to allow it to land autonomously and that they have to upload the software from the ground. Seems incredibly shortsighted. Also, Felix is saying it’s not a death trap. We really don’t know that. That 1% may be enough to kill the astronauts. Maybe not, but maybe yes.
Yeah, that's the concern. It's not that it *is* a deathtrap... it's that nobody is entirely confident that it's *not*. However, a correction - it does have the software for autonomous flight, and on paper it's just a matter of configuration. The real problem is that it's disabled because it apparently hasn't been tested with the latest hardware/software changes since the previous uncrewed flight... it wasn't expected to be needed, so they just turned it off so they could cut some corners on testing. This is where SpaceX win again - *all* Dragon flights are autonomous by default, whether carrying humans or not. If there are passengers, they can take manual control, but they're not a required part of the system.
Nose cone tiling would be much easier if it had discrete cones rather than compound curves. Airflow over 15 degree angle change behaves like a continuous curve.
F 9 was crazy till it’s normal now! Go Spacex! Thanks Felix! Be wise not to complain till they are back on earth and not in control of Boeing, or be lost in space.
There is a line between "Very sure it's okay to return" and "Sure enough to put astronauts in it", and Starliner is stuck both on that line and on the station. It has enough redundancy that a few thrusters being out aren't going to cause a failure of the mission - but the question that puts them on the line is "Could more fail unexpectedly?"
I suspect block 3 Raptor engines will have the shortest life span engines. Since after the engines start returning, which is still amazing thing to say. But the soon to be named Raptor 4 engines will be redesigned to make maintenance easier for refurbishment and reuse process.
Crazy question --- Why aren't they doing low-altitude catch tests, Felix? Like when they did originally when testing starhopper and such... so launch the Starship with low fuel, go to 30,000 feet, come back down for the swing-and-catch maneuver with very little fuel, and less risk?
Very diplomatic commentary on Tory Bruno’s remarks. Also…the movie script version of this starliner thing would be, they upload software to the starliner so it can get off station on its own, they do that but something goes a bit wrong and as a result the crew abandons the space station using the spacex lay on the pallet option. Boeing get enough control of starliner to avoid it demolishing the is but it disappears off into space. Crew dragon returns the crew safely home and the next crew dragon takes up the next crew to re inhabit the station without issue. In the post script, the crew 9 guys bring home a plushie that was left behind in the emergency that means the world to one of the kids of the Crew 8 crew
Maybe they should have a curved or angled flame trench under the OLM so that the catch of boosters and Starships doesn’t put flame exhaust on the OLM. So, catch to the side of OLM, over flame trench, and then swing the chopsticks over the OLM. Or, possibly an extendable concrete platform over the trench so that the chopsticks can lower the caught vehicle onto a mobile platform to roll it to a high bay for inspection and refurbishment. Well, test flights will show if that’s necessary.
I still think this maneuvre is insane.. However, what worries me most, are the 2 pins that should be caught by Mechazilla. Why just 2 pins? Wouldnt a ring all around the ship be better? Or, at least, 2 symmetrical subsections of a ring. I mean: what if the booster lands perfectly in Mechazilla's arms but it does so with a less than perfect rotation, so that the 2 pins are not at Mechazilla arms'reach?
With all the recent raptor 3 performance improvements I think they can afford the added weight of landing legs just in case they are off target or prefer to land anywhere else
Raptor 3 is not being flown yet. Other changes have increased overall weight in the meantime. SpaceX can hardly afford more reductions to orbital payload weight. I believe similar constraints reduced the space shuttle's usefulness to relatively low Earth orbits for heavy payloads.
I wonder what kind of progress has been made on raptor refurb? If R3 are single pieces that need to be cut open in order to be serviced that sounds more difficult than just replacing it. With high volume production too refurb doesn't seem like a point of emphasis. How does this translate to in-situ missions like the moon and mars, like just bring 6 extra engines? Crazy to imagine "patching" an engine bell!
My theory about the static fire is they damaged engines because of bounce back from the pad below. If so, the static fire will confirm function without that risk.
hi Felix has anyone have an idea what spacex will do with all the surplus engines that they seem to have. Seeing that the progress is so fast that it is hard to keep up with the rate that technology is advancing, They are building them sooo fast that it makes me wonder about what seems to be a surplus?
On the last flight they did a simulated test. The booster went exactly where it was supposed to, how it was supposed to, when it was supposed to. Marine assets are expensive, ones for rockets larger than the Saturn V would be incredibly more so. Also the first successful F9 landing was on land.
I wonder what the mission will be for starship on IFT. What equipment are they testing this launch? What is the flight plan? Where would they land starship during IFT6? Thanks for a great video!
I wish Elon would have been, behind the scenes all along, prep’ing a SpaceX Dragon. So he could just announce publicly “just wanted to let NASA know we have Dragon that can launch immediately to retrieve Suní and Butch.” Even if NASA would say “no thanks” (which they wouldn’t) it would still be a HUGE blackmail on Boeing. If NASA said “yes” well… we all know!! 😂
