The Consequences after SpaceX's Starship Investigation
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 ก.พ. 2025
- Try Rocket Money for free: rocketmoney.com...
Starship reenters over populated areas, and Airliners need to be diverted. Is this a problem? Starbase ramps up for flight 8 already! How long until the next Starship flies? VAST is making a new space station! Will this be enough? Stoke Space is building a pad! China is launching a reusable rocket! How’d it go? Europe is behind. Will they ever catch up?
#spaceX #starship #starbase #nasa
▶️Patreon: www.wai.to/pat...
▶️WAI Hub: www.whatabouti...
▶️Starbase Redline Helicopters: wai.to/redline...
▶️Merch Store US: whataboutit.my...
▶️Merch Store EU: whataboutit.my...
▶️WAI Orbit: In collaboration with our friends at SkyFi: / skyfiapp
▶️X (Twitter): www.x.com/Feli...
▶️Instagram: / felixschlang
▶️Facebook: / waispace
▶️TikTok: / waispace
▶️WAI Spotify Playlist: spoti.fi/39tmULH
Editing: John Young, Alex Potvin, Stefanie Schlang
Photography: Jordan Guidry, Sean Doherty, John Winkopp & Stefanie Schlang
3D Animation: Voop3D
Script & Research: Nathan, Felix Schlang
LIVE Production: Jonathan Heuer, Jordan Guidry
Host: Felix Schlang
Production: Stefanie & Felix Schlang
Graphics & Media Processing: Jonathan Heuer, Felix Schlang
Credit:
⭐SpaceX
⭐NASA
⭐Rykllan on X: / _rykllan
⭐SpaceX 3D Creation Eccentric on X: / bl3d_eccentric
⭐SpaceX 3D Creation Eccentric on TH-cam: / spacex3dcreationeccentric
⭐TijnM on X: / m_tijn
⭐TijnM on TH-cam: / @tijn_m
⭐3D Daniel on X: x.com/3DDaniel1
⭐Ryan Hansen Space on TH-cam: / ryanhansenspace
⭐Ryan Hansen Space on X: / ryanhansenspace
⭐Starship 3D on X: / dstarship3
⭐TDSN on X: / tdsn19
⭐ChromeKiwi on X: / ashleykillip
⭐Alex Delderfield on X: / alex_adedge
⭐LabPadre on X: / labpadre
⭐LabPadre on TH-cam: / labpadre
⭐VirtualSpace_3D on X: @Lolomatico3d
⭐VirtualSpace_3D on Patreon: / vs_3d
⭐Nick on X: / chameleoncir
⭐Jerry Pike on X: / jerrypikephoto
⭐Tony Bela on X: / infographictony
⭐Virtual Space_3D on X: / lolomatico3d
⭐The Ring Watchers on X: @RingWatchers
⭐Lunar Caveman on X: / lunarcaveman
⭐The Space Engineer on TH-cam: / thespaceengineer
⭐Starship Gazer on TH-cam: / starshipgazer
⭐Starship Gazer on X: / starshipgazer
⭐Greg Scott on X: / gregscott_photo
⭐www.nasaspacef...
⭐Nick Henning on X: / nickhenning3d
⭐ErcX on Twitter: / ercxspace
⭐Alex Svan on X: / alexsvanart
⭐Caspar Stanley on X: / caspar_stanley
⭐Neopork on X: / neopork85
⭐Corey on X: / c_bass3d
📄Links for this Episode:
www.spacex.com
www.spacex.com...
Try Rocket Money for free: rocketmoney.com/felix
Sooooo, another Subscription to deal with my other Subscriptions, that I will also have to pay for? Alllllrighty Then!
Rocket Money is a scam. Basically forces you to subscribe to try it out and then constantly nags you to input data when in reality it should be gathering the data itself. Terrible sponsor.
A simple parachute and soft landing in the water can do a much better job than the stuppid catching it. All those heavy control wings and fins increases the weight and drag as well as aerodynamic negative effect.
You will need lot more fuel for landing and the rocket exhaust gas burns and damages most or all of the engines (we see fire every time). And the most problematic is that parachute has only a few points of failure but rocket landing has thousands of points of failure and much less chance of success.
@@ShonMardani You should apply a SpaceX and give them your superior intellect. Of course you have a solution to the problem of corrosion from dropping a rocket into salt water?
@@ShonMardani having a parachute of that size would be pretty cumbersome and hard to implement, also, landing in the salty water of the gulf is far from ideal for rapid reusability, from the common sense I have, I know for a fact that highly complex raptor engines and salt water dont go hand in hand.
Space shuttle had to fly over land to touch down in Florida so starship would not be the first and there is always a risk of debris. You hope it doesn’t happen, but it’s a rocket.
That was STS-107, not 7
Hmmm nice to know
Space shuttle also carried crew to orbit and back on its first flight because it wasn't the result of a ketamine-fueled fever dream.
@@wyattnoise 'Space shuttle also '
It also had a ridiculously poor cost to benefit ratio.
SpaceX has a fantastically better development method, don't be butthurt.
@@ModelLights you aren't even engaging with their point, and they are correct. Starship has seen catastrophic failure after failure but compared to the shuttle program, sls and new glen is a massive failure. It was cheaper but the others worked on their first trials.
If spaceX is able to re-static fire booster 14, that would be a huge win.
heck...if it even passes a static test that would be impressive..say nothing of a static fire..
The question that I've not heard an answer to is Was it a RUD, or did the FTS get activated? This answer is important going forward. If it was the FTS activating then the question of whether it's better to keep the ship whole, or blow it up can be considered. If it was a true RUD, then all bets are off and it's coming down in pieces. Hopefully SpaceX will give us the answer to this question.
Why haven't they already revealed this?
The question of whether it’s better to keep the ship whole or blow it up can be considered whether or not FTS was activated in this case.
My guess is a whole ship would make it to land and cause massive damage
Look, I get that corporate buzz words are a thing, but we already have a word for what keeps happening and it is: catastrophic failure. I get why they don’t want to use the proper term because corporations prefer lies to truth but the truth is the rocket had a catastrophic failure, not a “rapid unplanned deconstruction” or whatever lie word they keep trying to use as opposed to proper terms.
Key point, they keep failing. They are not any sort of successes, they’ve all been failures. Let’s not lie about it.
It was a RUD they lost an engine which span it round and broke up.
Vast is impressive. I hope they're successful.
I hope so too BUT I am way more supportive of inflatable space stations. In my opinion they are superior in every way.
@@appliedfacts Eventually, they'll use a huge parabolic mirror to focus solar energy on a spinning iron asteroid, hollow it out, inflate it and it will be a nice cozy space station... about a mile in diameter.
@@appliedfacts Except complexity. If they were actually superior in every way, they'd be the method always used.
@@DerrickBommarito
How does complexity play into inflatable vs metallic?
I can see where most internal equipment would have to be installed after inflation but that is not so difficult. Considering the size and impact resistance is superior for inflatables plus manufacturing is quicker and cheaper, I still maintain that the finished stations would be superior to metallic ones.
The metallic ones are traditional. Manufactures like to stick with what they know and with what they find the most profit.
I think one of the things that SpaceX has done to help the space industry is a subtle improvement. Any aerospace project will be cheaper if it is done quickly. The longer the development process is drawn out, the more expensive the fixed costs of salary and facilities become. Keeping a bunch of engineers "on retainer" while the Congress cuts your funding continuously for decades makes the final cost for anything much greater. I think that is why companies like SpaceX, Rocket Lab, and Stoke Space are able to do so much with less money than Boeing or even Blue Origin. They know that time is money and work at the quickest pace possible. That is also why giant military programs like the F-22 and F-35 went over budget. And the unit costs of F-22 shot up when they cut the production numbers.
By rapidly developing Falcon 9, pushing reusability to cut costs, they captured a huge share of the launch market that allowed them to spread expenses over many launches. That is classic mass production or mass sales theory. Make up for cheaper prices with sales volume. And if you follow the history of military procurement, you will know that the B-52, Titan, Polaris, and Minuteman missile programs, the Atomic Submarines, and even atomic weapons were finished and deployed in record time, because Congress assigned National priorities to them and the military demanded they be finished rapidly. The costs of each of those programs would be considered very cheap today even when accounting for inflation. That is because they didn't allow the contractors to dawdle and suck on the public teet too long.
Except it's not being done "quickly" it's still in development with no stated date of completion as they continue to " dawdle and suck on the public teet" as you say.
what did spave x done for space industry lol ? i tll you what how to not build a rocket lol and no they want be cheeper its the same price as aleays he just lies and you zombies belive him
A great argument against free trade.
If we make it and you want it, pay up, because it took a lot to get here.
Only 12 aircraft were held or diverted? That's less than a typical thunderstorm.
Who said it was only 12?
Well, considering a thunderstorm can be a few hundred kilometers in size and isn't subject to simply wind resistance, initial velocity and direction, and gravity, it makes sense.
That way to many.... and damage to people property is bad.
Musk did promise everything to be over water... so he lie.
Yeah, if you put it this way, sounds quite chill. Although storms don't form in a few minutes. Flights might barely have enough time to get out of harm's way. Either we need massive precautionary no-fly zones, or just accept this new reality. Not to mention it's not only aerospace, anyone on the ground near launch and reentry trajectories may occasionally encounter heavy machinery falling from the sky. If you can't run at airliner cruising speeds, well... don't look up, I guess.
@ What I said was that storms weren't SIMPLY wind resistance, initial velocity and direction, and gravity. Key word is "simply".
Point is, storms are bigger and much less predictable than pieces from something falling out of the sky.
Thanks!
Thank you! :)
Thank you for including some coverage of progress being made by both VAST and Stokes. Very well balanced and enjoyable report. A hearty "Well Done" to you, the Mrs. and your team.
Thank you. 🙏
"Pad B has been flying up faster than the concrete of pad A during the first flight test" 😂
It definitely looks like Ship 33's FTS was triggered, when the ships flight computer could no longer control the main engines and directional stability.
Wouldn't just shutting off the engines and costing till reentry be better in that case? Felt like that thing went shotgun mode blowing up that early lol
@@NeXes42 FAA policy dictates FTS triggers when vehicle is not travelling according to flight plan, when the engines shut down early - the ship was unable to resume its flight plan, therefore FTS legally needed to be triggered
@@tylersherrock7649 Yes, but the question is really whether the FAA guidelines need to be updated to reflect the reality of a craft as big as Starship that's made from heat-resistant stainless steel rather than carbon fiber. At the very least, widen and deepen the flight exclusion zones, and fix what looks like a gap in the transition to the WATRS traffic control region over the Western Atlantic. When dealing with orbital craft that are designed to survive atmospheric re-entry, perhaps allow the option to delay or suspend triggering the FTS if there are alternatives that can reduce the size of the debris field or allow it to flow to less congested areas.
@@victorkrawchuk9141 Different rules for different folks ? Sounds like how all "leaders" want to operate. Why have rules that one is just going to argue over. If airlines get hit by debris they can just sue the debris maker...why prevent things that might not happen. Lawyers need more ways to make money !!
Vast Space seems like a legit innovative newspace company, passionate about Space not selling stocks (unlike many of the SPAC scammers). It seems to have the potential to become a great partner in the effort lead by SpaceX to create a vibrant, sustainable space economy to allow humanity to become multi-planetary.
I’d love to see a single episode where Felix manages to avoid using the word “likely” , however, given past experience, this seems “unlikely”.
What do you think?
Lol, impossible.
Likely
That is accurate tech-speech and science -speech. The correct terminology- except that with musk, the haughty brags night better be described as "unlikely".
Only death and taxes are certain. For scientific minds everything else is probably/likely OR improbable/unlikely.
Allegedly 😂
Supporting @MrKen59. The space shuttle had the same outcome. And, as we sometimes see, aircraft crash into populated areas. From birth to death even humans are prone to threats.
The best channel for space news and all things Space X! Thank you. PS love the out takes!!
Wow. Vast is also harnessing the power of working fast to keep costs as low as possible. And it is another example of how progress by SpaceX can enable other players to move forward. Vast has a contractor to rely on to get people up to their station. Bigelow did not have that luxury when they were attempting their designs. And now that SpaceX is so far along in making Starlink reliable and robust, Vast can leverage that communications system without having to develop their own at tremendous cost. Progress in any area makes it easier for progress in others.
I like the shorter version of the out takes / bloopers. Thanks for all the effort you put in Felix and the team behind the scenes.
Hi Felix, as always, your reporting is top-notch. Thank you for your full coverage, which keeps us up to date. You always go above and beyond in your reporting, which is very much appreciated. You do an awesome job every time which is a testimony to your professionalism. Well done bravo!!! Keep up the great work.
This content is gold! Thanks for generously sharing your knowledge.
19:09 Im really looking forward to seeing how the inflatable station sections are going! There are 2 companies who are in the lead testing inflatables and the spec sheets look impressive!
0:51
I see what you did there
Hundreds of videos seen, and I finally caught one....
Good job kid. Keep up the good work
18:48 , In space, only the one you're sharing your ride with will hear your coffee-spill screams.
With all the talk of space stations, I keep hoping for a Von Braun wheel.
Me too. See rotatingspacestation for an example.
Me too. Interesting that YT keeps deleting my responses.
Too impractical. It's not the same as gravity.
Thanks for starting to give more coverage to many of the other space companies, Felix, it makes your videos much more interesting and informative, you rock! 😃
Chopstick length is dependant on how close the bottom of the booster gets to the tower, due to its angle of attack when hovering towards the tower for catch.
Have they even verified any of that ground debris? I'm highly skeptical of some random video showing an indistinct shard of metal sticking out of a car...
If spaceX is grounded because of the ship loss surely BO should be similarly treated because it's booster was also lost instead of landing ?
Think of the whales! XD and yes, Bo should have solid answers before another launch.
BO is also doing a mishap investigation.
Starship fan here - but Blue didn't have debris rain down over populated areas or crowded airspace. That said, they are both facing FAA mishap investigations - as they should when things like this happen.
my weekly most waited video of-
SpaceX update by WAI
It'll be good to see Pad B lit up for the first time and demonstrate fow well its deluge and flame trench works. It would seem the only way to support many launch sites
Большое спасибо за контент! Я из России подписан на вас уже более2-х лет! И мне очень нравится тема Космоса! Благодаря вашему каналу я всегда в курсе актуальных новостей о проекте STARSHIP. Благодаря ИИ я могу смотреть ваши выпуске на родном Русском языке)
Thanks a lot for the content! I'm from Russia, I've been subscribed to you for more than 2 years! And I really like the theme of Space! Thanks to your channel, I am always up to date with the latest news about the STARSHIP project. Thanks to AI, I can watch your videos in my native Russian)
Comparing airliners flying overhead to the most massive rocket ever built is kind of silly. Even the Space Shuttle came down over land one time in 135.
On every landing, the Space Shuttle came down over land.
At Kennedy Space Center in Florida , or Edwards Air Force Base in California.
And once in New Mexico.
At 0:53 -- visible in the top here are whitish-greenish-blueish fireballs, as opposed to the more yellow of the other. I am thinking those are most likely the engines. They are made from a steel alloy called SX500 which has copper and aluminum mixed in. While the steel burns yellow and is what you mainly see in the debris trails, aluminum burns white, and copper burns greenish-blue.
We don't halt all global air flight because one plane crashes and we shouldn't halt space flight because of one failed test. Find out the cause, correct it, and move forward.
planes don't go 25,000kmph at 125km and scatter their debris over literal massive amounts of area lol...
@@CamimalFPV yeah, and when aircraft crash none of their debris burn up on re entry
Why would you compare apples to oranges? A plane crash and a rocket explosion are not the same thing. Not even remotely.
That’s why you halt flights of a rocket. To find out what went wrong, why, fix it then continue
737 max
Watched NSFs video about this stuff yesterday and let me just say, WAI does a much better job with the updates. More info, explanations. NSF just seems like they put out videos just to get the ad revenue while WAI actually tries to get you the information you need.
I'm thinking they will use Tower B for launch & A for catching
I find it hard to believe scuttled spaceship debris is worse than an intact, partially fueled starship impacting after traveling much farther. The kinetic energy from an intact ship would be much greater, not to mention the additional explosion from the unused fuel.
It would be minimal if the ship cleared land
@@chrishorne4016 Agreed. But it would travel much further than the scuttled pieces, making a substantial difference in the impact location.
@@chrishorne4016 That's the magic word though, isn't it. "IF"
After all the great information you gave us in the video. The only thing I can remember is the actor from the airplane movie head on a jockstrap.😅😅😅😅😅 and I’ve never noticed it was showing before😮😅
appreciate the content!
Alex, it was nice to see you waited until 4 minutes before giving us a Advert.
Lol.
Brave browser look into it
The Space Shuttle rained pieces down all over east Texas when it blew up. No one was hurt on the ground
So you're also fine with China dumping spent stages on villages? Also Space Shuttle was reentering from orbital velocity and burned up, meaning debris was much smaller than what you get from ascent failures.
That doesn't mean people won't be killed on the ground in the future. Also, given the facts that (a) Starship is far larger than the shuttle, hence a larger debris field. And (b) plans to fly LITERALLY a thousand times more often than the shuttle ever did, then it is a statistical certainty that people will be killed either flying in aircraft or on the ground. Will YOUR home be in the flight path?
That’s call luck.
@@delayed_control Nice try strawman.
@@LestatXP No it's called the law of probability and the big sky theory
Where was the car that was struck? It looks like the car was non-operational and in a junk yard. So, the part recycled itself. 😂
It looked suspiciously like a fraudulent claim, to me. How could falling debris peel back the plastic trim in the roof of the car? The video quality was terrible. Plus, all the debris on the beach probably washed up over a large area, days after the launch, and was gathered together to fit in one picture. An honest investigation needs to be done. Did ANY debris actually fall out of the sky onto land? Truthfully?
@@Andrew-13579 blatant insurance fraud attempt
There will be pieces of it found for awhile. I remember a fairing shell from an Ariane launch being found on a Ft Lauderdale Florida beach several years ago.
Another awesome update as always.. Just for giggles I went back and watched your first update, boy oh boy....go take a look.. if you dare.
great commentary. TY always so informative
Than You much dear Felix
Felix: You probably have an airplane flying over your head right now.
Me: Duh, I live right next to an international airport.
I really hope Booster 17 is the Block II We're waiting for.
I would love to see A starship “light show” for myself, it looked beautiful in the photos.
Pictures of mushroom clouds look beautiful too… but I doubt anyone wants to see that over their home.
Easy to say when your car isnt impacted😅
The one sure way to prevent debris landing on various Caribbean islands is to only launch from Florida.
A separate catch tower is first principle engineering. U shaped with air bearings. Something like an air hockey game. The arms direct landing force straight down to the feet/bearings. No bending moment forces. Inertia can be dealt with by using high speed jack screws.
A separate tower might be used to catch, but it's smart to make them all dual use.
@imaginary_friend7300 It's too much risk. A catch tower can be super simple, and if destroyed by impact you don't lose your launch capability. The air bearings float so the catch tower needs no elevator. Just do a hand off to the launch tower, which performs that complex function.
"China is launching their version of Falcon 9", fixed that for you. 😂
China is launching their version of the Falcon9 copied designs they received from a 1980s fax machine
FTS shouldn't trigger if Starship happens to be over or approaching a populated area like the Turks and Caicos Islands. If it's off course or lost control authority, flight control system should just shut down the engines. Blowing up the rocket might still be appropriate, but not until it's out of range of the islands.
If it's re-entering over a populated area and a problem is detected, there should be options available for the ship to divert if there is any control authority. Dumping fuel might also be a consideration. But a spray of stainless steel debris over a broad area is probably not a good idea.
Re: starship re-entering over land, the Space Shuttle did this too and didn't seem to bother anyone.
Felix is stupid.
Thanks Felix.
Hi Felix, looking at all the structure in the Vast Module, could the tank section of starship be converted in space into crew area or does it need to remain pressurized to maintain its rigidity?
SpaceX ought to charge for the memorabilia given to them and souvenirs they can sell.
Good day once again
Thanks for helping me keep my dream alive and aspiring for more goals to be achieved
It will all work out as testing goes on, with the cold temperatures of the liquid oxygen and methane it's amazing how the welding of the main hull withstand the sudden changes in temperature while it's being filled up and enters the freezing conditions into space, maybe a crack appeared in the Starship and caused the loss .😮
Very insightful bro, hopefully SpaceX has the same mindset.
Hi what about it thanks for the updates on the new rocket industry and space great 👍 👌 to see new industry making great 👍 strides David ❤❤❤
What about the Shuttle breaking up over Texas? The risks are the same.
spacepod seems to be able to hold only 3 people comfortably... we need to start thinking much bigger pretty soon.
i can´t wait for this live streams from the Spacestation, and for the next "Out of Service" message when an "not human spacecraft" is there for a visit ... or whatever they are there for
Those first gen launch pads will change, as some of your previous videos have indicated. Many of us remember the precautions NASA took back in the 60's with SaturnV. I'm a little surprised SpaceX underestimated the destructive force of their monster rocket. Just the acoustic shock coming off that symphony of Raptors alone would shatter steel reinforced concrete. Without the millions of pounds of thrust, and 6000°F+ heat exposure.
The footage we've all seen of the breakup looks to be fairly high in altitude, with a trajectory out over the ocean. But now there are reports of heavy pieces landing on Turks and Caicos. Is there a risk in standing outside and watching a breakup like this?
Thanks for another quality video
I am irritated. to your 2.8 m subscriber ad 😡 9:18 channel matrix
Thanks again Felix.
Go space.
I assume the next flight they are planning on launching from pad B.
I think they want to test out their new flame tench ASAP so that hopefully they can stop refurbishing the launchpad after every test.
The mecha arms should have been made so it could capture the booster on the side or back, to prevent further damage to stage 0 during return
When (if..) Starship flies, it might "land" back straight to Hawthorn (Space X's home). That would be interesting.. 🙂
I would love to see SpaceX invest a couple billion dollars into Vast, to either partner up or take them over. Quickly build a 2nd star factory dedicated to rapidly produce space station modules. Use Space X engineers prowess to design/iterate/build new modules. Then use Falcon 9, Falcon Heavy & eventually Starship to rapidly lift them up. I bet we could have a replacement for the ISS by 2028 and something large and rotating by mid 2030's.
i found 400 pounds of heat shield and a small stainless panel from one of the fins. cool stuff.
before I say anything, let me first say I think you are the best in the business and I really look forward to every episode.....at 3:35 you say the launch pad often needs "massive" amounts of refurbishments and show a picture of what happened after flight 1. Don't you think this is a bit of a dramatic take on the amount of work needed after every flight. Sure they have to do more work than they would like but it seems to me, and of course I could be wrong, that the refurbishment is getting faster and less work each time. I'm sure there are lots of things to do after each flight but to compare it to the devastation after flight 1, this seems to be overstated or over stressed. not sure why this rubbed me the wrong way so maybe I'm totally wrong about it. Thank you so much for all your hard work and dedication to bringing us amazing content.
3:54 excellent writing!
It says it includes a Paid Promotion... How much do we get paid if we watch it? Asking for a friend. Love your content, keep up the good work!
Impressive stuff. What improvements on the new quick disconnect have they made so it doesnt get cooked like the current model?
Still wondering how the development of inflatable space modules/station(s) is going... Last I heard is that they are also nicely on track.
Yeah, but I keep hoping they will stop using Vectran and go with better materials. Vectran is a relic from the cold war.
Another choice would be basalt fibers, far stronger, chemically inert, better temperature range, and they don't need to be protected from UV or X-rays. Its becoming more widely used in building construction so you know its cheaper.
Can you even call it a crash site when the craft is spread over a pretty wide area? :)
SpaceX will spin their own space stations. Gravity, baby!
I think that would be a good idea, however Elon is focused on Mars so very unlikely.
YT keeps deleting my responses.
❤❤❤ LOVE YOUR SHOW 😂
they should put a YBCO super conducting magnet on the 2nd stage to repel reentry plasma. this will allow them to make the tiles much thinner and keep the hull much cooler
I think they want a light weight solution.
Very cool!
Perhaps they should take some time and wait for Florida to come online .Go orbital from the Cape, land on big rig or barge in The Gulf of America .
I like the sound of that but the TDS and EDS(Elon Derrangement Syndrome) sufferers will be along shortly. 😂
Agree. Though at one point they were talking about landing the ship itself on a barge out in the Indian Ocean. I guess pending talks with the Aussies.
During the Vast segment, I noticed something incorrect. During the "cheers," we don't see liquid leave the open teacup
More air traffic is diverted by thunder storms than what starship caused.
We can't prevent acts of nature. Musky should have to compensate every airline and ship for time and fuel lost getting out of the way of his design failures.
Excuses, excuses...😅
@@slartibartfast1268He won't . Keep crying
You get more than 2 seconds of warning for a thunderstorm.
@@pi.actual yeah, and the Starship debris took at least 3 minutes to reach the ground, probably far more since it still had upwards momentum.. where do you get the 2 second warning from?
My dad was one of those airliners that got diverted. He’s a pilot and was heading towards Puerto Rico
Got any good videos?
Maybe the FTS shouldn't be activated at such high altitude. Let it naturally break up or delay the FTS until the projected debris cone is smaller.
Flight 7 catch was within a Mechazilla hair as that left chopstick was a little delayed coming in after its initial pause.
SpaceX will probably build a Megazilla Catch Tower on the West Coast of Australia which would be advantageous for catching Starship while not traversing over populated areas coming straight in from travelling over the Pacific Ocean or the option of landing offshore in the Ocean ???
That means another launch pad should be built, with boosters and all made in australia. What would be the use of a starship landind in a place where it cannot be reused, unless transported back to the USA? I do not believe spacex would be interested in spending money bringing back a starship by boat; not economically feasible, if we consider the time it takes to get shipped back home.
@@arkangeln910c8 technically, they could build in Boca and land in Australia, have the infrastructure there to repair, refuel and load new payload, be good for space tankers. Then launch it.
More then likely, they will build and launch from boca and then land in Florida, and do the repairs and payload and refuel then relaunch, rinse repeat
Federal laws around ICBM/rockets do not allow for them to land anywhere outside of the USA. The laws would have to change first. Before anyone says it, I know that it is not technically an ICBM but for the federal law it still falls under that provision.
15:15 due to SpaceX rapid iteration failures are expected. If the failure occurred within the plan zone and it was no physical loss of life or human harm then there should be no delays.
the real hero, thanks for saving me the time
Thanks!!!
yeah it's ridiculous that people are blowing this out of proportion. China literally drops boosters onto populated villages. This is nothing.
They planned to drop debris on another country? Even China only drops stuff on their own populated land.
I wonder if the FTS made the situation worse in this case.
Rockets are the most brute force and violent design of transportation. Humans are not yet able to develop elegant gravity drives, or harness Field drives in general. So they just have to accept the high risk open explosion drives. 🎉
Dig deeper. The tech you mentioned had been developed several times over the last 70-ish years (best guess)... and kept secret or the inventors stopped.
Hopefully this conspiracy theory comes out soon before another rocket explodes taking people with it.
TREX Arms! LOL!
I love watching these flights, but I'm very confident that we'll see less than 10 flights this year.
@@redcars72 I agree. I’m thinking more like 8 flights at most. There will be more failures and more things uncovered. Plus they still need to actually get a ship that does not suffer major damage on reentry. There are a lot of unknowns still here.
Nice to see SpaceX with a proactive approach to safety for people and property on the ground, unlike the Chinese….🚀💥
Hoping to be fortunate enough to make it down to Texas to see a launch live this year. What an experience that would be!
I suspect once pad B is complete, they'll shut down pad A to install its own flame diverter.
Seems rather pointless.
You don't think flame diverters work?
@_FightForYourFreedom_ A flame diverter is pointless, and the only reason they are adding one is to reward the engineers who wanted to build one on the new pad.
@@golanheights9000 so does that mean that a water deluge system is the one solution that works?
Pad B will ready NET April IMHO.
Didn’t the space shuttle come in over land on rentry? Even after they knew the risk of breakup was higher.
When did they "know" the risk of breakup was "higher"? The Shuttle had landed safely from orbit hundreds of times for 20 years before the heat shield damage caused the 21st century disaster. And afterwards the Shuttle was grounded for 22 months to modify it to reduce the chance that it would ever be brought down with a damaged heat shield. Procedures were changed. A heat shield inspection and repair protocol was designed and tested. And very few flights were attempted that did not go to the ISS, ensuring that the astronauts could stay indefinitely in orbit if a rescue mission was required.
That is why I think that the final human rated Starship will have 0 payload capacity and human abort systems. It will be a specialized version designed only to put humans into orbit or a ballistic transport trajectory. No matter how safe the current Starship design becomes, you would still be putting humans inside the second stage of a rocket directly over the fuel tank bulkhead with no means of escape. What could go wrong?
They landed at Edwards for the first 40 flights
@@i-love-space390 The Shuttle had landed safely from orbit hundreds of times
Really? That didn't seem right so I looked it up. 135 missions over 30 years.
@@i-love-space390 " No matter how safe the current Starship design becomes, you would still be putting humans inside the second stage of a rocket directly over the fuel tank bulkhead with no means of escape. What could go wrong?"
And passengers in jet aircraft with thousands of gallons of fuel don't have parachutes.
@@royh6526 Most of these fools use the thinnest logic there is and NONE of them think things through very far or very well. THAT is perfect example.
Starship as we all know was for all practical purposes indeed in orbit but technically it is true that it was suborbital.