Electric Sparks Fly on Ship 31 - The Flame Trench (Plus Starlink 6-59 Launch)
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 16 พ.ค. 2024
- Join us for our second episode of "The Flame Trench". In this Episode, Jack, Sawyer, Ej, and Trevor will talk about the recent issues with the Ship 31 prototype at Boca Chica, Starliner, and of course Starship testing for its WDR .
The Flame Trench is the new name of our weekly, 5PM Friday show, where we discuss all the recent space news, and developments of the space industry.
If you are interested in using footage captured by this stream, please review our content use policy: www.nasaspaceflight.com/conte... - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
![[TH] 2024 PMSL SEA GF D2 | Summer | ร่วมส่งแรงใจ เชียร์ไทยไปพร้อมกัน](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/dN2gLsCJ0T0/mqdefault.jpg)
These flame trenche discussions are great 👍 👌
Spectacular jellyfish effect! Lotsa replays pending!
That jelly fish was just amazing!
Yo No Cap I Was Walking home from taking out the trash and i saw the launch happen😂
yes... that was an insane launch view!! Thanks to all!!!
I got to see this one in person. What a privilege! I will be missing the Starliner launch, but I got this.
I gotta say; this was THEeeeeee most exciting launch since like Crew-2 mission. It was SOOOOOOOOO GORGEOUS!!! 😍😍😍😍
WOW I thought the ussf 67 flight was spectacular but that topped the lot. Utterly gobsmacked
Once again, amazing tracking footage!
2:04:34 Jake makes an appearance
2:24:36 Start of Falcon 9/Starlink launch coverage
3:25:22 Liftoff of Falcon 9
3:28:22 Awesome "Jellyfish"
Something tells me that this channel is on its way to greater things. Outstanding job gentlemen.
I didn't get notified but watched it on my porch go up.
None here too.
Great coverage!!!
Loving the movie references. Last week was Clerks, this week it's Happy Gilmore.
The space port in Boca Chica is called Star Base 1. The space port in space is called Star Base 2.
We heard you. Audio 5/5
Rest up Jack! Gotta take care of you before you take care of us!
Fairing halve simultaneous attitude control pulses! That might be a first!
Attach a starlink derived sattelite to the soft grapple point on the hubble and use elextric thrusters for reboost and pointing?
No one seem to notice the eksplosion sound at 3:26:24. Sounded pretty wild. But i guess it was not a problem since it launched anyways
That's venting from the rocket, it sounds like that
That's the crackle from the rocket going supersonic, breaking the sound barrier
PLEASE release uncut footage of 3:32:55
NASA-X is the right way to go. If they collaborated, we would be 10 years ahead of the game.
Who is behind this guy on the poster( on the right)
I watched Live but had to come back in to grab URL with timecode for a friend, and have watched the whole launch thru' landing again. Thanks again
Yeah, hot mic.
How do you forget to purchase the launch vehicle lol. Sounds like nasa wanted to use falcon heavy anyway lol.
Trevor Sesnic is a great addition 👍
Science already has a price whether NASA does it directly or not.
Are you selling any of the images from tonight, @NasaSpaceFlight?
NASA got bit by its own exclusivity.
NASA being a jobs program has funded itself well for the past few decades, but don’t underestimate the power of corporate lobbying that will gain funding in this new era. Blue Origin lobbied a senator in their state to get them an Artemis contract
Trevor: I think NASA is hesitant to depend on Starship exclusively, banking on the system evolving to perfection, considering how exotic the launch platform is. Elon talks big, but radical things are risky, and NASA has learned to be risk averse. SLS is presently the extremely expensive bird in hand.
The problem with massive interdependent amalgamation projects that are expensive but can't be cut for fear of cutting something else is that they leave a sour taste in people's mouths and lower NASA's reputation from being devoted to science to just being another government agency. And that can work for a moment, or for a couple decades, but eventually the thing does get cut and you end up with a lower baseline of funding. Yes, once the SLS is cut you will probably have less money going to NASA overall, but only because it demonstrated that the money was spent inefficiently, like happened with shuttle. Had it been perceived as really well-managed, you might have seen the opposite, an increase in funding to see what NASA would do next.
I think your savings estimates are off. At least 4 billion probably 5 billion in savings.
Looks like water
All of NASA's launch vehicles are built by commercial companies. The ONLY difference is the contractual basis. And the efficiency and competence of those commercial companies which is reflected in the cost (overruns). NASA will be able to do more science without SLS and it's huge (pork barrel?) costs.
I personally believe that commercial launches for science is okay. Commercial space pushes innovation. Relying on SLS is a horrible idea. While I personally believe SLS is a good rocket, they are slow to make and grossly expensive. Relying on congress to give giant budgets is a bad idea. Commercial space allows NASA to put most of their budget into the payload with a cheaper launch. We are in the first two decades of proper commerical space. You will be surprised by the options NASA will have within the next decade. Think Starship, Neutron, Terran R, and many other providers. Consider Starship's payload bay could hold an efficient deep space stage and would allow us to send payloads to other planets in a more timely manner.
Test
My truck just had to pass massive emissions test in order for me to drive it. It is clear we don't care about our planet but we care about oppressing and profiting
Is 3:30:49 the VAB squeal?
NASA does the little, X does the big.
No jellyfish 🚫🪼
WOW can't believe I just renewed my membership in the NASA haters club.
Why is someone on this channel speaking like they know space flight, but who doesn’t know who Gene Kranz is? This is a low point for the entire NSF team.
I'd much rather EC get there and WORK vs get there faster and be the galaxy's most expensive paperweight which will never see a sheet of paper.
Different angle on Jared Isaacman and Hubble: All the worldly things Jared owns couldn't pay for a replacement if his private flight damages Hubble I have a hard time imagining anyone offering Jared insurance against a full spectrum of damage scenarios, including the loss of Hubble.
Being able to get there and offering to pay for transport doesn't just qualify you for tinkering with much of anything on Earth. Changing that would set a dangerous precedent for Space.
I don’t think it sets a bad precedent. He’s not going to repair it without NASA’s approval
@@zachb1706 For the moment, this seems like the usual media pressure campaign to get NASA to prematurely sign off on something that's not currently developed to the point where they are comfortable with the idea.
Going back to STS-125, it was rightfully off the books after Columbia, until NASA found a way to consolidate a flight rationale under their now better understanding of the dangers of flying a Shuttle to a non-ISS-aligned orbit.
The sad part is that there is all the time in the world to actually plan such a mission thoroughly and investigate all the question marks to their logical conclusion. Jared's next flight will already provide lots of data for the space suits and general space walk operations questions with Dragon.
E.J. is a great addition to the channel
Oxymoron
I’ve always loved NSF, and it’s the only reason I pay for YT premium. But I really can’t bring myself to like this AJ dude. Too much of a loudmouth, too much ego, too much bla bla bla. I don’t like it. Even his voice is a bit much.
@Nasaspaceflight we should start a jellyfish rating. If a lunch has a high probability of creating a jellyfish effect, it should get 4 🪼🪼🪼🪼. Put it in the live title.