What Exactly Caused SpaceX's Falcon 9 Landing Failure
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 4 ธ.ค. 2018
- Follow up video here! - • What keeps everyone sa...
Today SpaceX experienced their first landing failure of a Falcon 9 since 2016! So what went wrong? We'll dive into the details and explain what exactly happened!
Thanks so much to Daz Valdez of K Space Academy for letting me use his amazing footage!!! - • SpaceX CRS-16 Falcon L...
Grid Fin Not-A-Coasters are available on my new webstore! - shop.everydayastronaut.com/pr...
Check out my album "Maximum Aerodynamic Pressure" anywhere you listen to music (Spotify, iTunes, Google Play, Amazon, etc) or click here for easy links - everydayastronaut.com/music
I the cohost of an awesome podcast where we talk all about current technologies and how they shape our future! ourludicrousfuture.com or here on TH-cam / @ourludicrousfuture
Show your support by becoming a Patreon - / everydayastronaut
This video had two "Moon Walkers" who helped make this possible - Blake Jacobs and Mac Malkawi
Buying a Tesla? Already ordered a model 3? Consider using my link for a referral! ts.la/tim19804 - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
"it's only a failure if you don't learn anything from it" -Tim Dodd
Henry Ford...."the only real mistake is the one from which we learn nothing"
Actually a quote by Wernher von Braun
Who? "Steve dodds"" - black sheep
"It's only a failure until it's not" - Jean Luc Dodd. ;)
(was one of the highest liked tweets on the spacex twitter too, and it wasnt by Tim :P)
Landing failed, successfully?
That's one way to say it! And hi!!! I haven't seen your name in a while! How are you?
@@EverydayAstronaut you remember me? Awesome! I'm doing great by the way but this accident did raise a question for me:
Can this be considered the first ever successful emergency landing for a rocket?
@@Hirosjimma Wow. You just blew my mind. I think you're right. @AspireRL lmao.
Task failed successfully
@@Destructor111 lmao
Did they try putting it in rice?
Thanks man
William Arthur NO YOU um um idk
William Arthur that’s just funny. Crack open the tanker of WD-40!
Vãi Le Channel parachutes? We don’t need no stinking parachutes!
ye it dried
When a failure to land a rocket stage is news, they're doing pretty well.
True
Maybe because we're so used to them landing successfully that a failure is news lol
@@swedixz +rep friendly guy
Cubic-RegenT that's the point.jpeg
@@cubic_regent r/woosh
now they have to update the “how not to land an orbital rocket” video
_ mbisaf _ "How to land a malfunctioning orbital rocket"
@@TheWarrior2387 yea that seems about right
they'll need to add the heavy core booster to it aswell
They also need to add GovSat and FH center core
They do also have the Falcon heavy core they could add. And potentially the one that flew on Govsat when it landed in water and survived at the beginning of this year
Even though the first stage landing "failed", it was a wild success in showing how to gracefully recover. They will learn so much from this event. Just wonderful!
Chris Brush
Psalms 19:1
“(To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David.) The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork.”
Shep'Herd 🌈Herd'Shep... please stop helping my brothers and sisters space-out bad guys
Today everyday astronaut gets his first MILLION views on a video
13 January 2019
4:05 i like how it lands and then gently flops over
Almost did it
"It works in Kerbal Space Program."
@@DistracticusPrime lol I smiled
Good video, but realtalk: we all know why the falcon failed...Musk himself just wanted to check how fast the Everyday Astronaut makes a video about the failure. I think he's your biggest fan.
Scott?
Why not? - Tim is really passionate and informed about what he does.
Kell Cat yeah, scott too
GameCheck.TV seriously though, does Elon know who the Everyday Astronaut is? I know he’s at least interacted with him, I’m thinking of the unveiling of Musk’s plans to send the BFS around the moon where Tim asked about the rocket’s specs I believe. Is there any other interaction they’ve had or is Tim simply “another fan” in Musk’s eyes? I get he’s busy running 12 corporations in all different areas of society; he’s a busy man, but if anybody could point me to an interview or something that would be great, seeing as a quick google doesn’t give me much. Cheers
Do you mean an interview with Tim or with Elon? Just ask either of them, if you are not "simply another fan" you might get that interview.
The fact that this thing tried to land, and managed to have such an incredibly controlled landing even with a failed hydraulic pump for the fins is a testament to the engineers and software developers at SpaceX. That first stage did its very best and almost stuck the landing despite the disability. This is yet another reason why SpaceX is defining the cutting edge of rocket technology. I have every confidence that they will make good on their plans for Starship.
u ever been aston hill downhill mtb?
SplatNode no, I haven't done that one. Where is that?
I've seen a Ted talk about self flying drones where they started cutting off propellers and the drone could recover. SpaceX must've hired those guys :D
Elon said we are on the Mars in max 9 years. usually he doesnt lie
We dont need to go to Mars though, they're just going to go to Devon Island in Canada anyway...and tells us its Mars
Why is nobody asking the real question? Why didn't Superman step in when the rocket lost control? What the hell are we PAYING the guy for?
..."Superman never made any money
For saving the world from Solomon Grundy
And sometimes I despair the world will never see another man
Like him"...
@@jdavis417
Sometimes when Supe was catching redundant-systems-lacking rockets, I'll bet that he was tempted to just quit and turn his back on the private space industry, join Tarzan in the jungle...
That was fiction... we're talkin' 'bout real life here!!!! ;)
@Jeffrey Spinner
Yes, but like the Monty Python peasant who was turned into a newt, he got better.
@Jeffrey Spinner
Best try from memory -
Who does he think he is?
I'm your king.
Well I didn't vote for you.
You don't vote for kings.
Well how did you get to be king then?
The Lady of the Lake, her arm clad in shimmering samite, held aloft Excalibur from the bosom of the lake, signifying my divine right to be KING.
Listen, strange women lying about in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
Be quiet!
To wield supreme executive power you need a mandate from the masses, no some farcical aquatic ceremony.
Be quiet!
I mean, if I went around proclaiming myself emperor because some watery bint lobbed a scimitar at me, they'd put me away.
Be QUIET! I order you to be quiet!
Oh now we see the violence inherent in the system! Come see the violence in the system! Help help! I'm being repressed!
BLOODY PEASANT!
Oh did you hear that? What a giveaway. That's what I've been on about. Did you hear him repressing me?
if you'd said to me 15 years ago that in 15 years time it will be possible to land a rocket backwards onto a platform in the sea using automated thrust, I'd have told you to seek professional help. Give them a break
yep. and some say they landed with rocked engine on the moon in sixties...
@@johndoe-bu7vt not "some", that word is only applicable to dense people claiming it was fake.
Dear sir , the russians brought tbeir space shuttle out of orbit to a landing on an airport landing strip on fully automatic mode 30 years ago, what's so big deal about this ? The reason for the dog leg move near the end is to line the booster up with the barge 'cause they really have no idea ( not with in 20 miles ) of where this piece of crap will come down .
Landing with reverse thrust is absolutely a stupid way to approach space travel because it means carrying more fuel than would otherwise be necessary which increases mission cost by adding extra weight which also reduces the effective range of the craft! There are good reasons why engineers at NASA have not done something like this before. Elon is a crackpot and hopefully the world will see this soon enough for themselves.
@@Shiskabobber1 Transport 30% more fuel, don't have to rebuild the rocket....
THE ONE TIME I DON'T watch the stream
something goes wrong!
Aha! So it was your fault!
Tim, I found the culprit! 😂😂
LIKE ACTUALLY
please call mr Musk immediately!!
Funny how it's now more exciting to see it fail than succeed. I also missed this flight :(
But they cut away from the failure so you still wouldn't have seen it live.
If they re-fly this they should call it "Sully"
@SebiTimeWaster oh my!
Loooool nice one
@SebiTimeWaster it was also still transmitting "data" after the the landing😜
''Mr. Steven’s 2''
YES
Follow up video here: “What keeps everyone safe when a rocket fails?” We talk about why the Falcon 9 didn’t crash over land. Lots of your follow up questions answered here! Check it out! “What keeps everyone safe when rockets fail? Why did the failed Falcon 9 rocket land in the ocean?” th-cam.com/video/_KAK64wtMe4/w-d-xo.html
Everyday Astronaut this link just brings me back to this same video
I just can't wait because star Trek is becoming reall with technology
@@dylanbertwell that link takes to one that is longer though
moby1kanob what do you mean? I click the link and it just brings me to this exact video. It’s the same length 10 minutes long.
Wrong link. This links back to this video here.
Falcon 9 rocket: I’ll try spinning, that’s a cool trick
Mission Control people: Spinning is not flying
Landed pretty close to Blue origins new pad... humm.
That's a nice launch facility you got there Bezos sure would be a shame if ...
Hahahahahah
XD
hehehe
Yeah, wouldn't want any giant dildos to get torched...
Rip
It'd gotten quite dirty on that reentry burn so it just wanted to take a little bath, that's it. Tried to do a flip as well.
Maybe a little splashy splash
It's feeling the heat so decide to take a dip.
🚀 ❤️ 🛁
Can't land on water, because water isn't land.
SpaceX could land Falcon 9 in a ICE pack or a Glacier.
@@markplott4820 wouldn't that melt while landing?
Oh.
@@davejones5640 - on Sno pack , yes, on , Glacial ICE no, it will leave a nice crater for the Rocket to sit in .
very dank +1
have u applied for Nasa yet?
7:04
It´s not possible
No, it´s necessary
**Interstellar music intensifies**
To pan on an aircraft vertically and keep the object centered and stable is top notch. Your buddy got some amazing footage.
Jeffrey C they're called tripods.
Das is a twitch streamer, it was all done live
Fake footage
@@AlphaFlight fake post.
It's good but there's better official footage which I'm surprised he didn't bother showing...
I convinced my teacher to show the live stream of the launch. hopefully, this failure will make the class more likely to watch rockets in the future!
dazzi foxking good. More people need to be interested in things like this.
Smart!
Are you the guy from r/SpacexLounge ?
@@sportsfails4998 No, Sorry
This could be an attention seeking maneuver by Elon Musk.
i'm so happy that i've found an excellent explanation on what exactly happened with Falcon 9 as the feed was cut immediately without knowing anything. i already clicked the subscribe button if that matters lol.
Launching a package into orbit = successful mission...landing the boosters = extra credit... I think SpaceX has a 4.5 GPA atm
C"mon man yep space programs are a lie, those gps satellites that your phones communicate too are all made up... 😂 found the village idiot guys
@@probablynotabigtoe9407 Well, when Bigfoot pays your "salary", can you blame him? :)
C"mon man gps is a positioning system not a data transfer service.... if you want to test it, set your gps to the middle of nowhere and when you drive out of range of a cell tower you will notice 2 things: you can no longer access your Data, but your gps can still track you even with no cell service... it will still be able to track your position.
Just make sure to set the gps before you leave service area because the app will require data to set your course.
You seem to lack basic understanding of how science and technology works.Just because you don’t comprehend how something works doesn’t mean it’s fake or false.
@@probablynotabigtoe9407 there is no point in even arguing with dummies, They can watch a rocket fly into space in real time and they still say its lies. Some idiots still think the world is flat and that airplanes dont use fuel, LMFAO. Lost hope in the human race honestly.
@@seedplanter7173 What you're explaining is satellite phones. There was a big push for them in the 90s, but the cost of satellite communication alone is inefficient alone. Because of that modern cellphone connections are based on a mix of cell towers and satellites.
It didnt explode so it'd still call that a mostly succesfully landing. It almost looked like it would have landed perfectly fine despite the grid fin failure if it landed on the landingpad.
Honestly, I'd remove the "almost" from that. I wouldn't be surprised if this had been a successful landing, if only it had landed on solid ground instead of water.
I agree, however, I’m pretty sure that having such drastic roll would’ve made it impossible to steer over the landing pad anyway, so whether or not ditching it in the ocean was a concious decision may be a moot point.
@@hatman4818 oh yeah for sure i just mean that it seemd to be landing fine even with grind fins not working
Could have probably landed fine if on even ground.
Yes, it appears that the thrust vectoring on the booster engines was sufficient to right the stick to vertical as it was within meters of touching down.
I think it would have landed ground with a stronger bounce than usual but would have stayed upright. This failure mode highlights the good engineering behind the design...the fact that with the boosters almost and perturbed via a failure of the fins it still was able to right itself before landing with only a bit more delta v than ideal due to recovering from the chaos induced by the fin failure.
So fixing the fins to make them redundantly actuated by multiple pumps would dramatically reduce the failure landscape for a grid fin failure (one failure would instantly trigger the back up system and thus much less chaotic weight would be injected into the descent dynamics to landing pad).
Imagine having your car's steering fail at top speed. Imagine stopping your car as gracefully as this rocket just did.
The rocket was so straight upright and the water landing was so smooth, it might even have been a successful landing if there was a drone ship waiting for it. Super impressive
Agreed, that thing landed and then fell over as the water couldn't support its weight.
But but but...what about my cat? I mean my car? Come on now, you've made the same type at least twice. Cat vs. Car as in Meow Meow vs. Vroom Vroom
Yes, lets crash elegant way!
@Tintin Sharma yea but theyre pretty slow :P
@@Krish0916 yeah slow for one, a couple of them covering the expected area can probably do it
Great explanation and demonstrations. Thank you for the clear info.
Isn't it IP68??
IP68 is dust resistant and can survive a 1.5 meter or about 5 feet under water for 30 minutes so I think that the rocket has been under water for at least an hour and definitely deeper than 2 meters
They're not as visible as they are in vacuum, but you can see the cold gas thrusters trying to oppose the spin. As the air speed drops and the fins lose authority the roll stops
yea, and the landing legs extended, which increased the moment of inertia just as the fins were losing roll authority. Kinda cool to see it stop the spin at the last possible moment like that.
It was more like when you get on a tire swing and you ball up and spin real fast its hard to stop the spin, but if you stretch yourself outside the swing you slow down a lot easier. In this case, the spin stopped when the landing legs deployed, which was the same thing as adding extra resistance to the spin. THATS the only reason why it stopped, otherwise it would have kept spinning straight into the drink cuz those things were the reason why the spin started in the first place. One got locked in the rotation position while the others were trying to correct the failure.
@@GokouZWAR The legs aren't that heavy, but even if they were they don't make it 'easier' to slow down, rotational inertia is conserved. The spin rate goes down but that makes zero difference in how hard it is to come to a complete stop (if I'm wrong then you've just invented a perpetual motion-free energy machine, well done...). All that you're really seeing is that the legs come out when the rocket has nearly stopped, and the grid fins stop working, also when the rocket is nearly stopped. You can see the rotation rate slowing long before the legs are deployed and just as significant, after they're deployed.
I noticed that. It might even have landed properly on flat ground.
Great video. Short to the point, accurate. Thanks for posting.
Sir it's a 10 minute video.
@@braydenhavenstein5755 Yes, short for an Everyday Astronaut video.
Bill Kerr good video, but still ain’t subscribing
I miss one piece of information: what was that small fireball when it tipped over?
Booster didn't "stabilize" itself (without functional grid fins). The rolling reduced in the end because the speed reduced and less force (from grid fins) acted on the booster.
It landed successfully.
It just got sunk after landing.
It didn't sink. It's still floating, and they towed it into Port Canaveral this morning:
twitter.com/Cygnusx112/status/1071081139299905537
they should make the landing platform ship adjust itself to make up for the booster's position
It looked to me like if they hadn't avoided the platform, which they did for safety reasons, it could have probably landed successfully on the pad. It basically landed successfully on the water until it just tipped over.
@@djjazzyjeff1232 - Rather be safe than sorry. But holy cow that was impressive!
@@SomethingSeemsOff No I 100% agree which is actually a good thing because in the future, even though they've said they'll put in a redundant hydraulic system, it's good that it could still potentially land with a problem like that.
Thanks, Tim. That was a good use of 10 minutes of a Sunday morning. Very educational.
its all fake nothing educational about it
Is that sarcasm? considering the video is exactly 10 minutes. I hope you are. this could have been explained in 3 minutes tops but was dragged out for ad revenue imo. I'm believing it is sarcasm, simply because it makes me laugh. You don't have to respond. don't spoil it for me.
Ha! yeah, it's my first video this Sunday too...;)
I wonde' if this is bloody sa'casm o' not
@@madhu5465 Sarcasm?
Well, at least the recovery ship still loves her.
you shoud have read the instructions.
"of course" it does
Despite all of her "shortcomings".
The recovery ship names need more gravitas.
That was a rather frank exchange of views.
1050-1 - A swimmer
Noice
Nice one
Your wisdom and character is outstanding. Thank you for reinvigorating my passion for all things space & beyond.
Great post and now a subscriber cheers Tim
It really sucks when a rocket lands on your dog
hate when this happens smh
What was your dog doing in the middle of an ocean exclusion zone?
James Lewis long story
Or on people for that matter. That's why SpaceX went into the ocean and not towards the spectators. That was on purpose!
@@machelvet9594 dont think it has enough fuel to get near people anyway, at least not in re entry.
perfect 10min explanation! 10/10 lol
With a 5 sec ad
9 min 40 sec to be precise. Last 20 seconds are only garbage filling to reach the 10 min bar allowing to show multiple adds on a video. Thumbed down just for this!
I came home from a Saturday night out, and remembered I had this to watch. I'm also going to watch your other video on what keeps rockets safe, so you could say that I'm binge watching your videos. That was very relaxing and fun to watch. Great work, mate.
Congrats on 1 million! Love your content and I have one of your Falcon heavy posters in my dorm. Keep it up!
Great explanation. Even SpaceX’s failures are some type of win 👍 🚀
*Attention SpaceX*
I submit this as Tim Dodd's application for SpaceX's new Broadcaster position.
I have no doubt that Mr. Dodd could and would be prepared for this kind of feed/spin on the circumstances as they happen and with any outcome. After watching his live stream for the first time on this launch, and then this upload, SpaceX hasn't got a single application or employee that can compete with what is being done here. Objectively, this is better than what SpaceX is currently capable of.
The intelligent thing to do would be to contact Mr. Dodd and make him an offer he can't refuse. That said, I have no affiliation with him in any way. I've never met the guy. This is just a message from a stranger stating the obvious.
Sincerely.
-Jake
Only I can make offers someone can`t refuse, but I could give spaceX advice...
Better idea is lead anchor for MuskChannel, SpacexTV division.
I think rocket lab will do so as he already has a great relationship with them.
Tbh just have John Insprucker be the only newscaster
Oh man the guys presenting this were so wooden. I can't help but think it's partly the fact that whoever directed the coverage cares more about SpaceX PR than the event itself. You're launching a bloody rocket into space live on the internet, the advertisement does itself if you hire people who sound excited about that.
Amazing video!!
Extremely professional explanation towards a launch failure, Tim. Bravo!
I'm amazed you put together a video of this quality in... hours. Same day. Kudos. And I'm now patreon-ing you! (is that a verb?)
Wow! Thank you so much!!! That really really means a lot!!!
You are patronizing him...? 😂
This guy has passion. Big up to THE EVERYDAY ASTRONAUT
Its actually patronizing. Usually thats negativly connotated (because its just words) but its correct usage when you are actually meaning "financially supporting an artist" as the term Patron implies.
Patreonizing
Just amazing to see them able to still (just about) land this stick under such circumstances.
The most incredible part is that the booster is essentially undamaged because everything else kept working.
Cool glasses btw. Just subbed! Awesome video
Subscribed...thanks for the information. Very interesting. Keep it up man!
As always, my old pal 'Everyday' had all the answers for my questions.
Ethan Sommer
Psalms 19:1
“(To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David.) The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork.”
are you guys pretending
I'm going to try to film the Falcon Heavy launch friday night
TAOFLEDERMAUS is there a falcon heavy launch??
@@ahmedrahi9775 It's actually a Delta heavy launch in California.
You near vandenberg? I remember seeing rockets launch there when I was a kid.
PS, love your channel, it’s like a home grown supersonic and projectile physics lab.
@@hatman4818 About 120 miles away. I filmed the Falcon launch a month or so a go at twilight, it was a really nice show.
Salt water damage might scap the reuse of this booster.
Great video, very informative. I agree with most of what you said. Looking forward to future landings.
You're commentary is awesome Everyday. Please keep it up.
SpaceX: Ok let’s add a second pump.... problem solved. NASA would have taken 3 years of investigating to add a second pump.
The big difference: Humans on board
@@javaman4584 plus $8 million in research and development cost. Don't forget the overhead.
NASA would have had zero transparency, too, and they're a public entity. They'd probably all still be locked in a room somewhere.
@@PaulPaulPaulson NASA hasn't had an astronaut on one of their rockets in a very long time. They actually have been outsourcing to Russia and recently the Russians had a failure too. It was considered a success because the crew, an American astronaut and a Russian cosmonaut, escaped successfully. But the mission itself was a failure and the vehicle was primarily a loss, by design, not being reusable. If this Dragon would have had humans aboard, this would still have been a successful mission. Space X is an order of magnitude ahead of NASA, at the moment.
They certainly like to take their time doing things. But they do tend to be the first to do big science in space. Take Osiris-REx, for example (th-cam.com/video/NYGHbl_esgw/w-d-xo.html). Kinda frustrates me that that mission will take so long, and return such a small sample.
3rd take's a charm Tim XD Thanks for all the effort you put into your videos, they are amazing.
It's great to have such up to date and informal information on the space race. They are pushing this so fast now. I'm in my 60's and never thought we would get this far.
So cool. Thanks for putting this together.
You're channel is underrated. Great explanation!
Travel-Nomad I know i‘m annoying but in this case it’s „Your“, because its a relative pronoun and not a connection of „you“ and „are@
@@tomlademann2521 haha your right didn't even realise it. I'm joking, I know it's "you're"😈😂
I'm a new subscriber and I got to give you major Kudos about the way that you explain yourself in layman's terms that we none nerds can understand in a concise comprehensive form again thank you so very much for your information salute to the goat!
This was really helpful - thanks so much Tim.
Great video, very educational and entertaining at the same time. I liked that you explained how the rocket worked before going onto what failed.
watched that live and it was mental
The second it made the first hard turn I got worried.
I watched it too and the second i saw the spinning, i knew something was wrong
Watched this from cocoa beach pier,immediately apparent problem in the works,amazing recovery by the booster.
Excellent video and best explanation out there.
Getting that footage out as quickly as possible was absolutely the right thing to do. We want it warts and all. Respect for the transparency which fosters more confidence & trust. Still a success with more learned than could ever be with near perfect performance every time.
i gotta say you did a great job explaining all this - thanks so much - new fan
It’s kinda funny that the rocket was named 1050. Because where I’m from that is the code that emergency crews use for an accident.
Well you nailed it. Thank you for this video it is Accurate and direct to the point. Good job.
Thanks, love you shows !
This is juicy footage for a flight guidance programmer. Just watching this booster struggling with chaos and managing a soft landing is amazing.
"Bringing space down to earth", i like that :)
Elons failures are even impressive, she landed, BRAVO ELON!!!
Great stuff Tim! Thanks!
good explaination :)
Great video man, thorough covering of some points I was thinking about
It's important to remember that before SpaceX and Blue Origin, the landing "failure" rate of rocket boosters was 100%.
Were they trying to land though?
@@zahidcan that's why he said 100%
@@FireWyvern870 There is no point of talking about persentages if they were not trying to land them so
@@zahidcan that's the point. SpaceX developed the technology to do it. No other company or country bothered. The technology used here can be used elsewhere as well.
To be fair, the Space Shuttle reused their rocket boosters (almost) 100% of the time. :-) Yes...they LANDED them in the ocean, but not because they failed.
Awesome commentry ... thank you for the vdo
Great over view, success is learning from it!
Keep up the great work
"Jesus, take the wheel!"
"I'm commenting on Tim's live coverage, can somebody else do it?"
"Oh for crying out loud.."
"OK, OK, I'll see what I can do.."
Rather impressive that it landed like it did with hydraulic failure! May be even more impressive than with perfectly working systems. It just tipped over due to an overhydrated landingpad
"overhydrated landingpad" lol.
Aside from, you know, landing in the wrong place...
@@insertphrasehere15 Well it was actually the intended spot. there where system failures and to protect the main landingpad they change the targeted landing/impact spot
(well at least, that is how I interpreded the information given by Tim, Scott and some space-x posts on twitter)
Thank you for your amazing videos and instructions
The suspense was killing me! THANK YOU for the update and detailed explanation! Between you and Scott manley my thirst is satisfied. just subscribed, Thank you Tim! :o)
Hey Tim, You mentioned that the hydraulic fluid is Helium. The hydraulic fluid on the Falcon is actually the RP-1 from the main tank, they use a pump and a small tank to pressurise the fluid so it can be used to steer the vehicle.
Thanks for clarifying hoping to be a future Aerospace engineer and have been reading all about Falcon 9 and initially thought that SpaceX uses RP-1 for their hydraulic fluid great to see my brain is learning the right things
Adding a second pump and lines will be simple. Just a few check valves, some line, wire the pump into the flight control system and then run both pumps at the same time. If one dies, then the other is still providing pressure.
Hydraulic systems for engine vectoring uses RP-1, are you sure they use it also grid fins, those systems are clearly separated?
They are using their rocket fuel also as their Hydraulic fluid, really!?
@@livefire666 It makes perfect sense to do that. It really just has to be liquid and it saves them a whole separate system. On top of that if they run out of fuel they don't need hydraulics anyway.
Like the great Bob Ross said "There are no failures, just happy accidents"
OMG, you're the best!
Wow, love your channel Tim... I was fortunate enough to be rounding Cape Canaveral on a boat about 12 miles offshore at the time of the launch.
I was impressed with how bright it was in the day time and that I could hear it quite well. Then we saw the booster return and land but from our perspective it looked like it landed on it's pad. I was there by total coincidence but it was one the great experiences of my life!
Good video without trying to over simplify it. Subscribed!
So now they should be able to tear apart that hydraulic pump to find out why it stalled.
Give it to AvE
I suspect is is not the pump so much as a hydraulic line as two of the fins were still working
Jttv None of the fins were working. If two still worked, then they could counteract the rotation. What we saw was rotation, reversing the rotation, and then reversing again. That happened as pressure was lost and the grid fins couldn't do anything.
@heatshield You Sir have good taste.
While 1046.3 went a legend, 1050.1 is a fallen hero.
Hope to see him rise up as 1050.2.
More of a washed up hero, but yeah - all is not lost.
Excellent and informative
Great footage, that's what we're all waiting for
1:42 he states that the booster he's holding is 150 feet tall. That would make this man at least 500 feet tall. Almost as tall as *Wario*
I thought I was watching this live earlier today lol
Congrats on a million!!!
Thank you, i did not expect any details about what happened or that there was actual footage of the landing/crash.
I love how during the stream you said “will land” instead of if it lands, and it fails it’s landing. 😐
yeah, that was funny. I though it was a bit optimistic but probably more likely than not.
It failed a correct landing, but it did land, softly :-)
Exalerion Gaming it watered 🤣
@@HandyC The new booster didn't want to be sooty already so it went for a quick swim xD
Was just about to point that out. It did land safely and according to design parameters. What it didn’t do was land at its primary target.
here before this video is viral
Stop
too late
@@Barsabus no
This will never be viral.
@Grant Peace thanks I appriciate it
I love how there's like a launch so often now. It's honestly, amazing!
Did I just stumble across a video on TH-cam that was straight to the point, well explained and intelligent? Well done, Sub'd.
I think it's a good thing that this booster was a new one and not a reused one. Had it been a reused one, the public probably would have lost a bit of faith in SpaceX's ability to reuse boosters.
7:34 booster is landing in the ocean
*DEPLOYS LANDING GEAR*
To soften the fall of course,never deployed your landing gear in KSP to break the fall?
@@marcoseduardocastro781 I wonder if the rocket's systems were aware that it was landing in the ocean?
@@Jake-fd3tt it probably had no clue it just knew the target was off and was trying to straighten out
10:00 minutes even.
Great video Tim.
I was watching this live and i saw the whole thing :)