SpaceX's Biggest Starship Flight Is A Spectacular Success Even After Crash Landing 

the nose always carries all the important science anyways!

Any explosion you can walk away from is a landing!

@@Diggnuts you are not wrong, but I doubt that you would walk away from that

As long as a piece survives, succesfull landing! Kerbals are just colateral damage

Payload survived = mission successful

It needs massive brain powers.

Yep "Rocket Science"

I wonder if Spacex and Tesla are sharing the self driving/AI systems. Technically flying for an AI is easier as you dont have any traffic to watch out for but for the control surfaces to work perfectly means that they most have taught the AI pretty well.

@@cryan9376 I'm pretty sure they don't use AI for landing. Mostly because there's no need. You know exacly where you are going to land and your re-entry path, having an AI make the decisions would be pretty risky. Tesla needs a neural network because there's millions of different scenarios that can happen on the road

Clen Ryan i doubt it, flying a rocket is so much more complex, not to mention two completely different things

Right? So glad I got to see it live!

Same

same

I agree

I'll still say the FH boosters landing simutaneuously is the top though

It took me a bit to realize what that meant.😂

R.U.D. is also a very polite, euphemistic way to say, Rapid, Uncontrolled Disassembly.

@@OriginalLictre unscheduled ;)

@@jekoki01 both works. As does "unplanned" or "unintentional".

Isn't an euphemism, from chemistry know that a rich combustion is in a fuel exess, on the other hand a poor combustion is in an oxidizer excess situation.

Yes, it feels like the Apollo times, but ... now we can see the whole progress happening in front of our eyes, seen also from cameras of many enthousiasts, and that is sooo awesome. Anyone feeling they missed the Apollo times, be assured that you have your own amazing times right now !!

Plus: In the Apollo era I felt as a child rather dissapointed that that big rocket went up, but only a small capsule landed. Where did that rocket go? It's so great that we can now see rockets LAND !!! Like they were supposed to do.

Yep, I lived thru the 1960s space program, and this really is just as exciting. I agree with tubular that it's even better now, since we're seeing the rockets land!

This is what used to happen to American rockets all the time before the Mercury programme. It probably happened to the Soviets too, but they hid it better.

I was born in 1959, I have been privileged to be able to see Gemini, Apollo, Space Shuttle and now Starship.

One by one... 7 of them...

Hopper- I had friends on that Death Star

SN9, YOU'RE NEXT! SN9? SN9? ANYONE SEEN SN9?

Star Hopper looks like R2D2 hanging out to the side.

@@teodor4ik183 not quite 7, SN5 & 6 are still in one piece. Although they did hurt its legs a bit on landing

Lol nice

Emerald-green plasma flame, burning itself from within. 😢🚀

Like any car engine when nearing the dead

Like flame erosion in a diesel engine from faulty injectors but that doesn't make trucks crash and explode

"Engine rich exhaust" : The exhaust is rich in engine particals...😉

KSP may be a game, but from what i've heard it's not just fun

This is what I was thinking but I didn't realize it till you said it! My thoughts were essentially: "They are testing these massive vehicles assuming they will fail and are happy to do so if they get good data from the test." There's obviously a metric shit ton of science and experience behind these test flights but all I imagine is 15 people in a meeting and someone saying, "what if we belly flop back in rather than coming in vertically?". Then someone else saying, "Intersting, yeah. lets give that a try."

How are they **literally** playing?

@@MKeehlify see, apparently the word has lost its meaning and now can mean anything. There are some people that still try to use words correctly, but we're very, very few.

@@Ironman3333334 Its / It's

"Best moment of 2020" The bar is pretty low this year given everything thats happened but i agree this was spectacular. One step closer to Mars!!

@@raijin2950 bar *was* pretty low. Not so much anymore. That was truly impressive

@@raijin2950 There were 55.4 million deaths globally in 2019, this year it will be close to 57 million. Not a big difference. All that's happened this year is that governments, scientists and society at large got a great opportunity to be much better prepared for a potentially dangerous pandemic that is yet to come. Without the arrival of Covid-19 it would not have been possible to gain the insight that we now possess regarding the best course of action to prevent excess deaths. Towards the start of this year experts disagreed on many things, now we have empirical data. No simulation or warnings from experts could have produced the outcome that we now enjoy. This has been among the most educational and humbling years in history for much of humanity.

I'm starting to think that 2020 isn't so bad after all!

@@qorje let's not get carried away

I see a lot of comments like this as if humans are only just going into space. I wonder why the real aerospace history of the moon landings and the space shuttle era seem to be forgotten about?

@@guyincognito. It's what it represents. For how far Apollo and Shuttle explored new frontiers, very few people got to go. It's like poking a needle in the ceiling, ceiling will still be largely intact, even if you pushed the needle very far. Starship represents showing up to the party with a sledgehammer.

No history I saw. Everything has been done decades ago c what's the history? Or you just a millennial with no knowledge of the past?

Yeah we all flipped out when starship flipped out

Lol 😆

Water bottle flipping... now water tower flipping...

Hahahaha... ok you made me giggle there for a bit

@Rui - nice! comment of the day... :)

Praying for you and your dad. I’m sure he had a great view of the test flight from heaven 😊❤️

You were blessed for having that relationship with him. I envy you. My relationship was with my Mom. But yes, good times.

Real sad to hear .

If only that raptor abort hadn't occurred...

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 Stop! I'm sick! 🤧 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Yeah, was a bit suspicious when the exhaust turned the green of the restart fuel.

🤣

Damn you ... you made me spill my drink through my nostrils! Hahahahahaha.

@@DieyoungDiefast when I watched it live I thought it was TEA TEB being burned to restart the engine..... I was wrong.

Also just like a homesick safe.

True, I've never seen a brick do that.

That's my favorite line from all of Douglas Adams, and if you know Adams then that's a remarkable achievement.

His videos are bunch of shit lies. There is no curvature in the seas, large bodies of water at rest remains perfectly flat and level. Do your own measurements.

@@BobStein your brick did not have manoeuvering flaps ...

Kerbal SAS is real

Especially in the powered descent where they splayed outward in an anti-roll configuration.

AI is going to enable us to fly rockets anyway we like eventually. Maybe AI will even solve lightspeed travel like in the Isaac Asimov stories.

I was surprised too by how lively the system was. I didn't realize they could move so quickly

Can’t imagine the coding behind that

Elon couldn't wait for KSP 2 so he just made his own sequel irl

I actually pointed that out as my family was watching the stream and we all had a good laugh

I guess you could say SpaceX made the crash tolerance of what will eventually be the capsule that humans will sit in to travel throughout space extremely durable just like KSP. Theres were many times in KSP where only my capsules survived crashes.

I just want to point out that Kerbals would have survived this landing.

What does kerbal mean ?

Exactly what I thought hey is that our farms grain silo? 😆

Also it crashed at 6:42 in flight time.

Good bye and thanks for all the fish!

I don't believe Chinese picked up samples from the Moon. Sooner I will see flying grain silo than Moon samples brought to the Earth by Chinese... Oh, what was that?

"The ships hung in the sky in much the same way that bricks don't." - Oliver Jenkins quoting Douglas Adams

After watching the livestream last night (by my time zone), this was the first thing I looked for this morning.

First and only, every other review won't have as clear, accurate detailed information or they will take 1hr 45 to tell it... 😂

Same here, woke up and had a power failure during the night. Was stressed when my pc didn't want to start. Managed to fix it, first analasys I see I click, seconds later I see Scott's analasys and switched over.

@@hjalfi Same

Yes, this is the analysis I was waiting for, It pretty much mirrored my thoughts on what we saw from the live stream together with Elon's comments on Twitter. Scott's videos are always seem to be the best analysis with lots of background information and well thought through comment.

Too many commentators focussing on the RUD and the 'failure' - ignoring the amazing milestones reached.

For an early prototype flight this was extraordinary! True pioneering spirit by Spacex.... congrats

I suspect that's why most of us come to Scott. To the scientist it's no doubt informative in its own right but for joe public he dumbs it down just enough so the layman gets the gist but isn't patronised.

@Naruto Isan I would actually shit my pants.

@Shourya Bose it sure looked on target for a good landing if it'd had more thrust.

Yeah.. cant wait to see the super heavy booster make a landing too. That thing will be even larger than spaceship.

@@brandonfleming7118 AHAHAHA stop 😂

@@brandonfleming7118 u ok

Yes, I loved that line.

Engine-rich exhaust generally leads to lithobraking. :-)

@@cacogenicist I've heard lithobreaking is the most effective way to slow down a rocket. so what... :-D

It's been around since the early days of rockets.

@@neox2795 Depending on your metric of efficiency. It's certainly very fast and inexpensive to implement, but not that compatible with reusability if 100% of the landing mass (including the crew if any) functions as frangible shock absorbers.

I slept at the same time at you, how strange

This turned out much better than expected ^^

Same.

Same

Same

all the answers of universe

"no, i am, because I'm gonna lose me job!"

Engine 42 was just hitchhiking along for the ride I suppose.

It forgot its towel..

@@ravenna6543 was it a merlin engine? ...

Well.... It nearly did 😃 Awesome!

Flop*🤣

@hernandezmarzal It successfully demonstrated an RUD

Had to rewatch just to make sure he did not say "flip" xD a missed opportunity

flop flip

'Lithobraking' is a legitimate, non-euphemistic term, though. The way pre-Curiosity Mars landers touched down, with the airbags and the bouncing, for example - that was intentional lithobraking. Now, if you want a properly absurd term, try 'lithostaging', i.e. disposing of excess rocket parts via collision with passing mountains~

how RUD!

@Adam Gibb iirc scott manley has made a video on it in Kerbal

That's what happened to the third stages (S-IVb) of Apollos 13-17. Hurled into the moon for science!

@@Yaivenov no no, lithostaging is removing the stage in flight *while still attached to the vehicle!*

The footage from directly below the rocket looked so clear it seemed like it was from a simulation.

It lined up perfectly

yea

Not it wasn’t, check out the landing on the video - it landed at the edge of the pad

@@DavidHRyall close enough

@@DavidHRyall Thank you mr. perfection, for pointing this out.

Lol. Exactly the same here. Watching it yesterday the end raised an eyebrow, but reserved judgement until I’d heard Scott’s take...

EXACTLY THE SAME THING I TOLD MYSELF 😅

Me too. Scott is a Man.

Yeah, on the stream I was watching, the guy even said, "ooh, green flames. Scott manley will explain that to us tomorrow."

Loved the fact that Tim Dodd said pretty much that during his livestream

mummyyyyyyy

This is how Elon Musk will land on Mars. Then he opens the door of the nose cone sitting there, and walks out into his Paradise.

I was thinking, "Landing by Michael Bay."

@@bjorntorlarsson I wonder who will be on the voyage with him

Or he'll make a personal one out of a roadster

R&D is expensive in every field. Just be happy we get to watch it happen!

I wonder if it is cheaper to spend a long time designing and simulating a rocket, or do iterative testing with real-world results.

@@hamster9135 you need to enter some data to simulator in order to get a realistic result. however there are too much variable to enter and also there is the manufacturing point of view. You can simulate a working metal spring but how can you modify the variable that heat changes its features while simulating a tons of other shit. I think that is very expensive yet unreliable.

That was exactly my first thought this morning...

@@hamster9135 It's often worth making intermediate prototypes to test certain aspects of a design before designing and building the final thing. You need to do real world testing to validate a design, before going too far into the project and realising one particular aspect doesn't work. Sometimes its worth testing multiple new things at once to save time and money on prototypes. Here Elon said it went further than he expected, probably because of all the new things they were testing at the same time. Unfortunately it was the final fuel pressurisation step that failed, otherwise it would have been a very impressive first attempt.

I‘m a simple man, I see a timestamp, I upvote

@@CompanionCube lol.. thanks for the like (upvote?)

Elon tweeted the same :D

Good one indeed! 😆

How ironic that 42 was the one to fail.

Elon has stated that SN9 will have updated thrusters.

@@garrithsmith799 awesome ! Any chance we'll have an SN9 test flight for Christmas ? :-D

They were also a bit late on the suicide burn. They would have been able to counteract one of the engines eating itself and it would have landed just fine.

@@The_Forge_Master Valid observation. We are still learning. Now we know what to do next time. Just like babies trying to walk, expect a few falls.

@@The_Forge_Master how would they counteract if there is not enough fuel pressure from the header tank to any of three engines?

I think they use 42 time of engine not sn42 lol who knows

They failed the landing because they tried not to use it for it xD

do they also had an engine for lunch?

Unfortunately, it's gone.

@@etherialwell6959 well, obviously. How else do they power the bistromath drive?

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😎

Crumple zones work for cars.

Only needed if they land on Raptolox bipropellant.

Lithobraking

“ablative fuselage”

If SLS were given another $10 billion they could do it in the same time. :-)

@@harrisonmckenzie4905 they actually have... but it's just that they're being too complacent

@@flashbarry6838 they are going to do a test with the rocket at the end of december, but i dont Know if it will have the srbs or it will just be the core stage + rs-25 engines

@@tfishappeningxd5915 yeah. It won't get off the ground without the solid fuel boosters. It's a full test of the rocket and capsule with maybe a trajectory around the moon and back with capsule recovery.

Also you seem to forget that NASA is a government program and cannot risk killing rockets like spaceX can

And weirdly enough POCKOCMOC seems to be doing better than blue origin. Cheers from India.

RU-vid banned on russia

Greetings from America, fellow space enthusiast.

@@Dumbrarere Thanks for the kind remarks.

@@JackSparrow-xv7yk it is not. If you are talking about thing that happened 10 years ago, it was never enforced and canceled soon after.

Mainstream media knows nothing about space. They are clueless.

Which ones covered it like that?

@@ssecial Sky News Australia took a hit to their credibility (imo) with the video title: SpaceX experiences spectacular setback after prototype crashes on landing (lol)

The mainstream media merely follow the science, they haven't a clue what science is nor how it works. This was an amazing test where so much new went so extremely well.

@@ssecial most all of them.

I was really wondering whether the last shutdown after the flip was intentional too. Since the SN5 and 6 hops showed that one raptor is enough for a nearly empty starship to hover and land. Maybe they just needed the extra boost for the flip?! Could otherwise have been the lower fuel pressure and they tried to compensate it

@@derschone4234 The landing plan was with 2 engines.

for a sec i thought it was unintentional for the engine shutdown mid flight but then i remember back from the flying silo doing something very similar and didnt worry too much about it lol

Can't throttle below about 40 %, and most likely not using full power on ascent anyway. So you turn off engines to reduce the thrust as the fuel load lightens. Otherwise they;d be running out of atmosphere, which wasn't the point of the test. This was history in the making: the first time the SECOND STAGE of a rocket took off and flew on its own.

Yes. Why I Subscribed :-)

Yep, Tim's breakdowns are great as well

Waited all day

@@virgoshorizon2739 Tim even said he was waiting for Manleys on streams. He knows who daddy is here

Space x engineers waiting Scott's video to figure out what happened lol

That's what I dont feel will work for Point to point, the average person probably cant handle the Gs

@@virgoshorizon2739 this has been discussed on many streams, they say that it should be around 2 gs on landing so much less than the actual launch

Kind like riding roller coaster

@@virgoshorizon2739 That isn't producing enough g-force to be an issue. For most of it you are at less than 1G as you decelerate through the atmosphere, since the crew and cargo compartments are forward of the center of mass the first flip is slightly negative Gs and the final flip uses the area where the passengers would be located as the center of rotation. Overall comparable to a kiddie roller coaster.

@@jacobsmith4453 How quickly it happens though. The turn in direction while you're in the seat. I wonder how they'll set up the passenger seats.

Hillbillies have solved that problem ages ago with decomposition gasses and sparks... they just do not fly in any planned manner :D

As Dorothy said: I dont think we are in Kansas any more

My grain silo was being delivered today but the delivery crew messed up and couldn't make it stand it up.

Me too. I am elated that they pulled that part of the test off. That and controlling the skydive with the fins or "Elonorons" as some have taken to calling them were two critical mile posts that were accomplished.

Adapted Adama maneuver. Soon complete.

I had the same thoughts. I was also impressed how stable the belly flop maneuver looked. I was worried it was going to become a giant 100 ton Jart and not be able to flip back over.

Its not the outcome its the learning opportunity. With this machine the payload is the 2 tons of instrumentation and the 100s of terabytes of telemetry data.

I don't think they expected the vehicle to still be in one piece by the time it 'landed'. This is actually spectacularly successful test IMHO :)

@@andrewwhite1793 Yes i wholeheartedly agree, the telemetry data will be invaluable for the progression of this already amazing working concept!

@@rinner2801 Have to agree with you also. The fact that they got to the landing stage & stuck the flight path to the landing pad so well, is awesome! Just got to get the feed from the header tanks under control to achieve the required retro thrust now i guess!? I was actually concerned that the control flaps would not hold up from the air turbulence of the belly-flop free-fall!

@@Gdpud this is the cyperarrow they're trying to end. They'll in they're puppet and it'll be business as usual. A look in the future.

Exactly, the media is exagerated.

the cathedral media has always been full of nonsense, nothing new there.

There is also a bias in favor of privately developed stuff. If it was a NASA built spacecraft crashing you'd hear nothing but 'it's a waste of taxpayers' money!' (although much of the public is not aware that a significant part of SpaceX's development cost is subsidized by NASA) If you want a reliable skyscraper lift into the heavens... hello! Saturn V half a century ago already achieved that! Oh, but you don't want to pay for that. (admittedly because the rocket was not reusable, but thus far neither is Starship...)

@@pop5678eye dude, I was about to dish a more direct "whats your real reason for coming out with this?" and in some ways maybe I still am, but im happy enough with Elon tearing up when an interviewer let him know his NASA heroes thought he was a joke for wanting to go to space in regards to what you said

Douglas Adams would approve.

That’s pretty awesome actually.

right, if grain silos were meant to fly they'd have those "flipper thingy's" on them,....which seemed to work well BTW!! :D LOL

I agree, that would make a killer SpaceX t-shirt! Maybe something like "SpaceX: Making grain silos fly since 2019"

It does look like a grain silo.

As soon as it began eating itself I was just waiting for Scott's video to come out... I knew he'd help clear that up! Great video as always Scott.

@@JonathanMickelson couldn't agree more mate

Yeah it looks a bit like a V2 and if it can't get to Mars it would make a decent, though expensive, weapon :)

To think, two engineers sitting at the lunch room talbes at NASA in the 50's scribbling on napkins. NAH that'll never work .... Re-usability was shot down by many upper level people in NASA from Von Brauns peers. Shame we didn't get a Sea Dragon.

@@DVXCine a sea dragon? I’m intrigued. Could you elaborate?

@@bsl2501 big ass rocket to be launched from the ocean.

@@bsl2501 Von Braun design for a water launched super heavy lift. Search YT

The math all checks out! The question is if reality is close enough to the math!

I was super sceptical at the start of the year. I really thought the time line was totally in Elon-Time and the whole project might just be one of Elons sillier ideas like his Loop pipe dream (get it, pipe). But it looks like it is more Falcon 9, Tesla (I know he didn‘t start it but he believed in it enough to buy it) or PayPal than it is Hyperloop, Loop and to a much lesser extend Boring company. (Boring company did make some advanced but it isn‘t exactly revolutionary; mostly because those tunnels are way too small for anything useful)

Yeah, before today I thought the dream was unrealistic, but seeing Starship do the belly flop maneuver and then orienting itself afterwards with ease, I feel like this could go to Mars!

@@PhilfreezeCH It's big enough for the hyperloop, hyperloop will be a part of the boring company but now they are focused on tunnels.

Now I'm just picturing riding in an actual silo full of grain to Mars 😄

I completely agree with you. It's not that long we thought the same about booster landings on ships. Then we thought the same about boosters going back home. Then we thought the very same about simultaneous landing of two side boosters. And now this! ...wait it always has been SpaceX ;) (edit: thx Tobias)

@@volfcz always has been

Apparently you’ve never seen spaceship one returning.

@@stargazer7644 Yes I have, and it wasn't as cool as this.

@@RCAvhstape Meh. Spaceship one went higher, and maximizes drag using passive stability (so it's very reliable) as it falls back down. Starship relies on active stability that is so experimental even Musk wasn't that confident it would work on this launch. Other than the reliability, there's not much difference, except spaceship one actually goes to the edge of space to fall back down instead of a mere 40,000 feet.

Do you mean _"recovery"_ as in regaining health after being ill/injured, or _"recovery"_ as in they pick up ALL the separate remaining pieces to place in his coffin? 😊😊😊😊😊😊😊

@@Allan_aka_RocKITEman Yes, exactly.

@@souhung69 >>> 😄😄😄😄

No seagulls allowed during the recovery

Yes, seems scott has been watching it on Tim's channel. He was probably shouting like a toddler himself as well, which is why he doesn't cover it live :)

@@antondegroot6061 I watched Tim and thought he was going to have stroke. That was as entertaining as the flight.

'The green flame looks like tea-teb, maybe they were trying to light the third engine' - also Tim. Theres no tea-teb Tim.

@@eric3434 That's copper burning, not boron.

I'd think more of a spaceship from the 80's.

@@Rauruatreides The idea is from the 80s, but it was a vision of the future! So, it's now more of a prophecy coming true!!!

Emerald Green plasma flame, burning itself from within. 😢🚀

All I can think when the one engine cuts out early is 2 big men carrying an upright piano, and one of them just lets go when he hears the lunch bell.

Only if you're used to attributing such emotions to inanimate objects...

@@maxnaz47 Yeah, don't anthropomorphise machines. They don't like it.

@@bfunkt4313 I am wondering if that transition is intentional. Three would be most efficient for a suicide burn, but one gets you more thrust control.

YES

Perfect.

Respect

Prophecy.

we are still a long way off of Bistromathics though

haha, compared to what? it's not like there is a long history of rockets that can land.

@@daos3300 catch up kid ;) there's been well over 60 rockets landed by spacex

It accomplished more points than Elon expexted! This is why he testd like he does rather than take years like other companies, he rapidly proves most of the landing concept is feasable, and identifies something major to fix, all for the cost of one disposable testbed.

I had it spoiled by a news headlines saying it exploded, so when I watched the video I was expecting a pad explosion, flight termination, or a wildly off target impact. Needless to say the whole 6 minutes of the flight had me at the edge of my seat waiting for something to go wrong, so when I saw it perfectly flip upright and slide over the pad and come within a few M/S of a soft landing I was very pleasantly surprised. Really could not hope for a better first test of a vehicle with so much innovative technology, the actual rocket worked, the control systems worked, the maneuvers worked, the accuracy was good, but the header tanks obviously need some work. When you see that much new technology work on a prototype rocket first try it really bodes well for the concept.

BECAUSE IT'S BEEN A FAILURE

@@jhdsfalsjhdfjashdkhvjfldld8301 It's a major success not a failure.

about 95% success not bad.

Isn't that SLS?

I love that.

@@1953Johnnyp I guess he's talking about blue origin

This might be my mew favorite quote of all time 😂. Great way of explaining the test process and how this flight was a total success.

@johnnyp pi For the most part, NASA does exactly what the officials we elect, demand of them. Unfortunately, those demands are usually: 1. 𝘕𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘦𝘯𝘥 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘴 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘥𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘳𝘴; 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘬𝘦𝘦𝘱 𝘣𝘶𝘺𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘤𝘳𝘢𝘱 𝘥𝘰 𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘤𝘰𝘰𝘭 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘪𝘵! 2. 𝘚𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘥 𝘭𝘦𝘴𝘴 𝘮𝘰𝘯𝘦𝘺! 𝘚𝘵𝘰𝘱 𝘣𝘶𝘺𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘴𝘰 𝘮𝘶𝘤𝘩 𝘶𝘯𝘯𝘦𝘤𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘢𝘳𝘺 𝘤𝘳𝘢𝘱! 3. 𝘋𝘰 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘧𝘪𝘳𝘦 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘶𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴; "𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘪𝘧 𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘨𝘦𝘵𝘴 𝘰𝘭𝘥 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘥𝘪𝘦𝘴 𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘮𝘦, 𝘮𝘺 𝘢𝘤𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘵'𝘴 𝘴𝘰𝘯 𝘪𝘴 𝘢𝘯 𝘶𝘯𝘱𝘢𝘪𝘥-𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯 𝘢𝘵 𝘋𝘈𝘙𝘗𝘈 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘢 𝘗𝘩𝘋 𝘪𝘯 𝘈𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘰𝘣𝘪𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘨𝘺; 𝘐 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘩𝘰𝘰𝘬 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘶𝘱!" 4. 𝘕𝘰 𝘸𝘦'𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘤𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘨𝘳𝘢𝘮, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘢 𝘳𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘦𝘸 𝘩𝘢𝘴 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘤𝘭𝘶𝘥𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘯𝘦𝘴 2-4 𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘮𝘰𝘴𝘵 𝘦𝘹𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘷𝘦; "𝘌𝘭𝘪𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘮 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘴𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘵𝘢𝘹𝘱𝘢𝘺𝘦𝘳 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘱𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘨𝘳𝘢𝘮 𝘣𝘢𝘤𝘬 𝘰𝘯 𝘴𝘤𝘩𝘦𝘥𝘶𝘭𝘦!" 5. 𝙳𝚞𝚎 𝚝𝚘 𝚊 𝚐𝚘𝚟𝚎𝚛𝚗𝚖𝚎𝚗𝚝 𝚜𝚑𝚞𝚝𝚍𝚘𝚠𝚗, 𝚝𝚑𝚒𝚜 𝚛𝚎𝚚𝚞𝚒𝚛𝚎𝚖𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚜 𝚒𝚜 𝚞𝚗𝚊𝚟𝚊𝚒𝚕𝚊𝚋𝚕𝚎 𝚊𝚝 𝚝𝚑𝚒𝚜 𝚝𝚒𝚖𝚎.

Exactly, and it’s just a black hole.

Clearly not enough!

Raptolox mixture.

It was trying to imitate Branson's hybrid liquid/solid motor.

To be fair as far as rocket crashes go it is very survivable, relatively speaking. I'll take being carted away in a vegetative state over being atomized as a big win! I do wonder if in a final crew version whether the structural changes would provide more durability, my understanding is that the prototypes are pretty much just hollow in that area, with the final structure it might offer some decent survivability in a situation like this. The rocket didn't hit the ground all that hard and there's a huge crumple zone, the explosion seemed minor since there was effectively just fuel vapor left, so theoretically the G forces on the nose section would be pretty minor. As long as the bulkhead can withstand the explosion under it the crew would be pretty safe, other than suffering a fall the height of the rocket.

throwing shade at NasaSpaceFlight?

@@brycecohoon nah just tongue in cheek probably

ATWs

Is he throwing shade at the Texans in general?

Thats official name of NasaSpaceFlight channel, they even sell tshirts with it :)

From the sound of it, we want it in the Methane header tank instead.

@@brianflowers4217 Yes, the O2 couldn't find enough MH4 and took to eating copper, with predictable green in the engine-rich stool.

@@-danR I'm wondering if they won't consider programing a late stage failsafe where the third raptor pulls fuel from the mains once upright at minimal power to kick in if it detects a failure in one of the two being fed by the header tanks.

@@brianflowers4217 There would likely not be enough fuel left in the main tanks to be worth it / settle by the time engines are ignited. Ideally the tanks would be almost empty by the time its ready to land.

@@jacobbatesmitchell4189 why didn’t they put ten more gallons of fuel and save millions dollars of rocket. I would donate a hundred gallons of fuel to save the rocket.

Well, it could have exploded on lift-off ;)

It’s called a RUD-Random Unscheduled Disassembly- sounds like NASA speak for sure! Strange way to describe an explosion.

@@dannaumann9758 I thought that stood for _Rapid_ Unplanned Disassembly.

@@dannaumann9758 Naaah. NASA speak is, “mission anomaly…”

@@dannaumann9758 RAPID not random. not from NASA, from model rocketry

​@@karlwest437 agreed, respect to the goverment and everyone who supports and let this happened

True man , I kinda wish countries like China or India would do something of this magnitude

@@karlwest437 That's what billionaires have arrogantly been doing for decades.

Proger13 11 China just collected some moon samples and India has a successful space program with their small budget

To be fair, given the lack of walls and roof, a launch pad can reasonably be defined as not being a building, but a planned structure.

I noticed that and thought it funny that they said buildings, rather than people, since buildings generally contain people, because of the implication

@@user-my5ey6ow7m The nice thing about people is that they have the ability to run away

Yes I'd say this is more significant than Starlink, the crew demo missions and Falcon Heavy.

@@newsgetsold yeah all those things were a first for spacex but not a first for the industry.

Landing the crew dragon safely 1st time with passengers was also epic.

Nobody did anything like this before, SN8 is the first to perform this insane manuvre!

It will make all others launchers obsole, in two years.

it is probably because it is a small... small*er* rocket compared to the saturn v, so like balancing a pencil vs a broom on your hand, it needs faster and bigger movements

SLS: Look mom I gimbaled my engines, really slowly and one at a time while sitting on the test stand. SpaceX: That's cool, meanwhile we did our gimbal tests during actual flights.

And where is the evidence for transfer of tremendous energy. The cones seem to dangle whereas force is trying to push them up through the rocket.

@@jthepickle7 Um, what?

Engine number 42 likes...

Wish : Anti-gravity. Reality : BELLY FLOP !

Great nose art opportunity there.

@@johnmothershead1690 I'm thinking of the Pinto and LTD wagon falling from incredible heights in the movie " The Blues Brothers " ( cue the music too )

Among the most tired of memes

I was so happy when tim said this during the bellyflop

I agree. Mainstream media commentators are there for their looks only. No brains - check out MSNBC commentaries.

I just hope the losses TSLA stocks are having is not caused by this misinterpretation of the succesful test, cause it would be ridiculous.

@@aurelienpallot4246 As if FOX was any better, LOL

Underrated comment.

Starhopper: *_"NEENER NEENER NEE--NER!!!"_* 😄😄😄😄😄

“I stuck MY landing…” “I stuck mine IN!”

I’m actually a bit concerned that StarHopper, a very important historical relic, may be damaged during further tests.

Looks like an R2D2 by comparison to me. ;-)

I would like to add Steve Mould.

Plus a /huge/ budget.

@@patheddles4004 so add in some dude perfect?