Revealed: SpaceX's Changed Plans to Catch a Starship Booster!
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 29 เม.ย. 2024
- Go to galaxylamps.co/wai, use the code WAI, and get your Galaxy Projector 2.0 with 15% off!
SpaceX modernizes Mechazilla! How will they catch the Super Heavy? Raptor static fire in slow motion! Why do they use two different engine types, and Falcon 9 reaches another milestone!
#SpaceX #starship #elonmusk #starbase
Application Form - WAI Script Writer Position: forms.gle/hZH6k8JNw9AprckH8
Thumbnail: Ryan Hansen Space on Patreon: / ryanhansenspace
▶️Patreon: www.wai.to/patreon
▶️WAI Hub: www.whataboutit.space
▶️Redline Helicopters: wai.to/redlineheli
▶️Merch Store US: whataboutit.myspreadshop.com/
▶️Merch Store EU: whataboutit.myspreadshop.de/
▶️WAI Orbit: In collaboration with our friends at SkyFi: / skyfiapp
▶️X (Twitter): www.x.com/FelixSchlang
▶️Instagram: / felixschlang
▶️Facebook: / waispace
▶️WAI Spotify Playlist: spoti.fi/39tmULH
Editing: John Young, Alex Potvin, Stefanie Schlang
Photography: John Cargile, John Winkopp & Stefanie Schlang
3D Animation: Voop3D
Script & Research: Eryk Gawron, Oskar Wrobel, Felix Schlang
LIVE Production: Astro Roadie
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
⭐Jessica Kirsh on TH-cam: / @jessicakirsh
⭐Jessica Kirsh on X: / jessica_kirsh
⭐Ryan Hansen Space on TH-cam: / ryanhansenspace
⭐Ryan Hansen Space on X: / ryanhansenspace
⭐Ryan Hansen Space on Patreon: / 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
⭐Ryan Hansen Space on TH-cam: / ryanhansenspace
⭐Ryan Hansen Space on X: / ryanhansenspace
⭐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 Patreon: / starshipgazer
⭐Starship Gazer on X: / starshipgazer
⭐Greg Scott on X: / gregscott_photo
⭐www.nasaspaceflight.com
⭐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/starship - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 60 | คู่เอก "สุริยันต์เล็ก vs ฤทธิเดช"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/2ls0lZplik4/mqdefault.jpg)
Go to galaxylamps.co/wai, use the code WAI, and get your Galaxy Projector 2.0 with 15% off!
What do you think? Will SpaceX be able to catch the Booster on the first try?
Retour de flammes au décollage
@@dandup168 Unscheduled rapid disassembly on landing attempt
The blue tint on the engine test footage is most likely a filter to stop the flare and makes it able to see through the flame to watch flame and flow characteristics, i use similar lenses when glass blowing.
No chance. It will be a nice fireball setting SpaceX back many months.
I only hope the stage 0 survives:-)
best channel for obsessive starship updates
Obsessive? :D
Two posts every week, new contenct, human narration and hosting. Yep, obsessive focus on quality content.
WAI is the only channel that I donate to as part of my subscription ($10/mo on autopay). I can't rave about this channel enough.
@@appliedfactsoof
Marcus House is good too
Scott Manley also
The simplest and safest way to catch the Starship is to use a second Magazilla with no stand or fuel connections. And using the crawlers to take it away once caught.
@johnw8056
Perhaps someone should mention this to Elon on X
Sorta defeats the purpose, doesn't it? (Fast turnaround).
@@tedmoss No. He mentioned a crawler or rail to move it back to the launch stand. It would be a hell of a lot slower for launches if a slight malfunction causes an entire Stage 0 complex to be destroyed by misaligned catch of a booster with massive explosive capability.
Also, they are talking about catching a STARSHIP, with PEOPLE IN IT. Personally I think that is pretty ridiculous, but Elon has his fantasies.
but it's not simple at all
Super Cool Dude !
Note: the suicide burn is not *100%* without margin, because the engines can be throttled. If you time your engine ignition so that you anticipate landing in the middle of your throttle range, you have room in both directions to move your v0 point upwards and downwards.
Rite On Dude !
Spacex is already doing what you said (Felix's words were only kind of right).
The rocket knows what it weighs by knowing how much propellant it has and how much propellant it will use between now and when it needs to land, so it aims for that spot.
There is no changing that point though. A dynamic landing time would be much, if not too hard to calculate, hence the reason they do a suicide burn. 300 rockets later, and the suicide burn is past being proved; it's the gold standard for rocketry.
Of course, they could throttle up or down with the remaining prop, but why would you?
It's like keeping your budget car under speed limit so if anything happens you can opt to either brake or accelerate quickly
This remains my favorite Starship update channel! Excitement guaranteed!
Thank you very much!
the whole chopstick landing maneuver is just insanely ambitious, to the point I'm sure many of us are dubious as to whether or not it could ever work. But I'm sure a lot of us thought that about landing on a ship in the ocean too!
I do remember some people suggested having a big arm catch the rocket, but other people laughed, saying the rocket would be crushed like a beer can, we'll soon see if it works or not!
what type of winds would make the catch impossible? and what to do with the starship if catching it is unsuccessful? full burn away from the site into the water?
@@michaelotoole1807 if catching it is unsuccessful I doubt they'll be able to accelerate away, at least not in one piece.
Yup. My biggest concern is that they’ll have to go thru a repeat- eventually widely successful - of F9 booster landing learning experience. Only problem here is, at a much larger scale- and doing it on land, with much less ‘expendable’ (than drone ship) pad area. It’s going to be max pucker time for the very first booster catch attempt! - Dave Huntsman
@dphuntsman They will practice over open water, not over StarBase. Expect a minimum of 10 test landings (ik musk says 5, so double, if not triple it) before the booster tries anything near the tower. Wind would never become a factor if they can accurately predict the weather before launch which doesn't seem to be a problem for F9.
One important detail - hovering is much less efficient than the suicide burn, since every second you're in the air with the engines running requires extra fuel in the tanks. So while Starship *can* hover, minimising that period will be critical to maximising payload... long term, I suspect we'll see them cut that margin to the point where it's essentially doing a suicide burn onto the catch-arms.
You know what would be cool is if mechzilla and the booster were connected on the upcoming landing so mechzilla is trying catch an imaginary booster and the booster is simultaneously running like its landing but out at sea.
You answered questions I've had about catching the booster that no other channel has ever addressed. Thank yoiu Felix and your excellent team for providing the best information about Space X and space flight in general on TH-cam
This is my favorite space news channel!! Seriously! I recommend it in the comments sections of other channels when their viewers complain about their content.
Thank you, especially, for the segment on how mechazilla will catch ships. Specifically, the screw type actuators for rotating the ship, catching to the side of the launch pad, and the less than catastrophic consequenses of a missed catch. Catching a ship seems comparable to using penciles to catch a single layered tube of tinfoil. The tower has such heavey duty steel that the thin walled ships will not hurt it much. Also, the ships will be mostly empty of fuel so reduced explosions. Also, catching to the side would reduce damage to the OLM. SUPER COOL!! 👍🏽😎👍🏽
Not mentioned, maybe not concidered, the water deluge could help extinquish fires!
Watch common sense skeptic, he’s recently done an episode debunking Elons bs
@6:28 explanation was the suicide burn was the best part of this video for me. Refreshing to learn something new other than the same old same old water tanks, launch pads, mechazilla, what was assembled or disassembled etc...
Agreed. I've noticed the same. Too often youtube videos cover the same information at the beginning (to bring everyone up to speed) that the first several minutes are not worth watching. It's not just Spacex either. How many times are we going to be reminded that 'X' was formerly known as 'Twiiter' lol. I would think by now even the yaks in Nepal have gotten the news.....yet the daily reminders continue.
The suicide burn wasn’t actually explained very well. The timing issue isn’t so much about ending the burn but rather starting the burn. If you start the burn too early, you’ll achieve 0 velocity above the ground. If you start too late you won’t achieve 0 velocity the moment you touch down (the maneuver is then called lithobraking,I believe).
@@DominikPinkas”Lithobraking” Love it! Don’t do a Wile E Coyote!
I didn't think about this before, but catching the ships also puts them in tension when landing, not compression, which happens with leg landings... this could result in less stress on the ships and longer lifespans.
I’m going into Mechanical Engineering, and your enthusiasm is one of the factors encouraging me to pursue such a complex degree!
I wish you all the best!!! We need more people to get this done! 🔥❤️
Yes, absolutely a great choice… make sure you don’t stop there 🎉
A total nonsense. Just build the second tower just to catch the booster. That way you don't risk the tank farm and the only launching tower. After many catches then you can dedicated to full launching and catching. Imagine a fail catch that would destroy not only the tower but the OLM, Tank farm and maybe even the water deluge. Just build the other tower for catching. No fuel lines, no tank farm, no OLM. Just extend the Water Deluge in case of fire on the landing. This is totally bunkers like it was to launch the first flight without a water deluge and reinforce foundation.
Agreed. The last booster didn't even make it to a successful splash down.
Build 1 tower a little ways off to operate as the catch tower. That way you don't risk the booster blowing up and wiping out all your launch infrastructure.
They are building a second tower already aren't they?
Yes they are but I don't think it's for catching the booster like he just suggested
It’s called quick iterations:
Launch, fail, launch, fail, launch, fail until you get it right
The second tower won’t be ready for at least another year repairs take a few months Simple math
I couldn't begin to tell you how much time my brain and imagination have spent considering these scenarios. Fun video. 👍
Excelente video, muchas gracias 💪
And in 10 years we laugh about ever having had problems with something that simple. It is amazing, though - dreams from 30 years ago suddenly happening.
Precisely correct. Most of us are all old enough to remember just how recently "impossible" and "foolish" it was for SpaceX to build a launchpad without a "necessary" flame trench. Bravo SpaceX!
Well... Who knows? Since the last Apollo flight people dream about return to the Moon for 52 years. And nobody knows how long will they still dreaming in the future.
@@Fhensleytx more like how some of us can remember when it was “foolish” and “impossible” to attempt landing boosters at all.
@@Isaacmantx Man will never fly.
At long last. Living SciFi.
Always good content, enthusiastically brought, always a pleasure! Well done and please keep on going! 😊👍
I had said a very long time ago that the door has to actuate down, and not from the side. Because it is open to the booster exhaust until the very moment it closes when moving from the side. But a door moving down is actually shielding the equipment when it only 25% closed because it is covering it from above.
I remember when SpaceX put a computer program out, for people to try and land the booster.
Whoever made the most computer simulated landings got a job with SpaceX.
One minute and 52 views , channels growing.
2 minutes, 271 views
7 minutes, 1223 views.
100 times that in 22 minutes
1 like already?
TWO!
Very informative update thank you Felix and team 👍!
1. Regardless of when they try to catch the booster, it will be the most highly anticipated live action ever! Excellent explanation about the difference in vacuum and atmospheric engine bells.
A particularly engaging episode. Thank you Whataboutit.
In this channel ,information is clear 🎉🎉❤❤❤❤❤
What’s up Felix and the team! Can’t wait for the fourth flight!
Same here! Another month!!!
You are literally my go to channel!
Thanks for the update, a great overall new cast.
Thx for your great information. Thanks again!
Thank you Felix. You spoke slower in this video wich made it a lot easier to follow along with all the names and technical terms.
I'm betting maintenance crews noticed a leak on that actuator. It looks to be hydraulic, so it could be as easy as replacing packing, or that could have been an entirely new assembly. I wouldn't be surprised if the ram was bent during launch.
A bent ram or leaking seal could be the case but my guess is a faster ram to facilitate the upcomming catch attempt.
@@appliedfacts if they needed more hydraulic volume, it would be both sides. Speed is a matter of how much volume you can push, so they might need to increase feeder line size and pump volume too if that's the intent.
@@kstricl
Yep, your right. Let's watch and see if they do the other side too.
The engineering question is why did it leak? Simple, improper over-load calculation 😂
@@Metalle how so? It's only under load when moving the arms in and out.
Really enjoyed the discussion on flow separation! Awesome Felix!
I think your spot on with the disconnect, protecting from the flame, maybe put some extra support in that hump on it.
I'm a little puzzled why they didn't use more passive alignment mechanisms in the catching mechanism for the chopsticks. For instance, on top of those movable platforms on the chopsticks, if the part that catches the pin was v-shaped, it could be several times wider than the pin and always would guide the pin to the same location on landing. This would be far more forgiving than their current mechanism.
One of your teams Best, well done! ❤
I think more than anything the tank farm suffered from a lack of planning/space at the site. No idea why they thought putting all the GSE so dang close to the pad would work out other than they had no choice. If they had been able to move the suborbital site sooner, the farm would probably have gone there and there would have been little to no issues with it
So cool seeing the mechanism that rotates the booster. I’ve never seen that before and always wondered about that! Thanks for the great video!! 👍👍
Great watch. Thanks.
I'm sure many have said it, but they definitly need a dedicated return pad with only the chopsticks, on the other side of the complex. That way the returnig boosters can come in safe, and flow through the facility for inspection and refits, then pushed out the other end, ready for flight. Then they can move everything by rail.
Hopefully they figure out the Feng Shui thing.
One of your better shows. Thank you.
Thank you Félix this channel is informative and Rocks 😊
WoW! Your channel is evolving quite nicely. My appreciation of the behind the scenes folk can not be understated. Great job team.
The end goal is to catch booster and also catch starship correct? So I assume starship will eventually be caught on a second tower. But then it’s onto the scary part. They want humans to ride on starship. Are they still wanting humans to return on a flip maneuver and be caught? What freaking wild ride!
A death sentence.
@@rogerphelps9939 that's what they thought about riding on a train going faster than 10 mph. 220 years ago...
The Starship will be returning from orbit, so it will be at a pretty high angle when arriving and shouldn't need a crazy flip. The catch looks like it will be at a near-hover, so it should actually be pretty smooth. Still, I'm sure it will be quite a ride, as it enters the atmosphere almost sideways.
So let’s pretend falcon 9’s 1st stage was able to carry humans for arguments sake. After hundreds of flights resulting in the most reliable rocket ever, would you put humans on it?
You're assuming that this thing gets human rated
Great Job team! Thanks for updating me with SpaceX and others Rockets 🚀 🙏🏻 😊
Again a great video.
No one in the 'SpaceX Community' seems to have recognised the crucial difference between landing the booster and landing the ship. The booster returns in a generally Westerly direction over the waters of the Gulf. The ship is returning in a generally Easterly direction which requires flying (or more accurately, falling) over land. When Elon talked about not wanting to 'rain debris' over Texas and Mexico he was not just talking about the immediate vicinity of Starbase, but a much longer footprint extending well inland. This is going to be a hard sell to regulators and it is unsurprising it is expected to take much longer than for the booster.
The chopsticks post landing booster alignment mechanism is genius. I had been wondering how they would go about that. I love the animation and info, thanks!
Wow, Wow, Wow, yet another set of extroidinairily awesome SpaceX updates!
Well done, Felix and Team, You Rock, too!
I question the Idea of catching the Booster. I think that Elon may of over engineered this one. Catching a 200 ton Booster requires percision /high accuracy each time, there's literally no room for error. A Booster Landing with Landing Legs on the surface is safer and leaves room for error
You and me both! I mean if it fails, and there's a good chance it very well could, you're looking at the probable destruction of the whole tower and collateral damage to the tank farm and surrounding complex. If Mechazilla fails to capture the booster there's no recovery whatsoever. It's not like it can keep hovering until it gets it right! I think Elon should push that idea back to maybe the 8th or 7th launch.
@@RobbyHouseIV I agree, was thinking a long the same line as far as damage is concern When the there's an accident. When you have a vehicle that requires precision/hi accuracy in order to land, You're going to have an accident at some point. The problem is the amount of damage when the the accident occurs. I feel a lot better with the Falcon 9 landing on the surface with legs. Falcon 9 has some room for error in addition, if Falcon 9 crashes the no damage to the infrastructure.
Thanks man!
Love the Red Line Helicopter. Wow! What a View. Super cool !!
Regarding chopstick, how about two stage: first only vertical stabilization, ie let it slide into some kind of grip (wheels, wheel bearings, something allowing vertical movement). Then when the first two dimensions (x, y) are stable, now you can do precision firing of vertical thrust so it slides up/down in z direction only, to get millimeter accuracy to engage the locking bolts.
That way you have a touch-down kind of maneuver, except the wheels are from the tower and they are vertical not horizontal.
Love the channel!
Has SpaceX provided any updates on the problems with flight 3? Any new speculation?
I think SpaceX has made a mistake by omitting the re-entry burn that works so well on Falcon 9 boosters. Are we forgetting that the Super Heavy on SFT3 did not make a soft landing in the ocean? Is it possible that re-entry damaged the engines due to the omission of the re-entry burn?
SpaceX still has quite a way to go on the system before it is truly reliable. And so far, I don't see a lot of redundancy built into the system on Reaction Control, or on the fuel system.
Everyone loves SpaceX forward leaning approach to development that speeds up the process, but they have not really experienced a real disaster yet. If they do, I have a feeling the culture may moderate somewhat.
That is why NASA is essential to SpaceX success. NASA is going to demand that SpaceX dot all the I's and cross all the T's on safety and redundancy. I expect a totally new version of Starship will be required if Elon ever expects to create a man-rated Starship Spacecraft. An abort system of some kind will be necessary. NASA has tried the old "the Titanic is its own lifeboat" plan with the Space Shuttle. It did not work well enough for the American public to accept.
Well I'm ready to see the catch attempt. It's fun watching the constant development and improvements on Starship and Super Heavy.
One problem with catching the booster on the left side of the tower is that it brings the booster closer to the water deluge farm. That puts it at greater risk of damage from debris if something goes wrong. Clearly non of the infrastructure/water deluge farm and fuel farm should have been built so close to the tower and OLM. Hopefully SpaceX won't make that mistake again.
What if they had 8 load points equally spaced around the booster perimeter allowing for more flexibility in catch position?
finally an explanation of the question I always had. how is the radial movement done to fit it on the stage again. Danke shön.
Hi Team.!
Great video.!
Do we know how much refurbishment have been done to booster B1062 doing 20 flights?
After every flight! It’s unknown how much exactly, but the hull is as it was on flight one.
0:59 the best picture to make sense of the site.
You can see why piles were needed after the first launch. 😮
Tidal swamp land.
You can see how close the tanks are.
You can see how different it is to a NASA launch site. 😊😊😊😊
Hey there! You got much better at this! You seem more relaxed and the humor is nice. Wanted to say about the projector. Real nice thing. Is there anything like that with a real star sky setup?
It's a big HEAT SINK on the cover for the quick disconnect arm. Absorbs a lot of heat vs it going into the cover and arm
The best part is no part, fold the flaps into the hot staging rings during take off, to contribute to its strength. Then during the boost back have the whole ring unfurl like a shuttlecock
:: eyeroll:: This is a LOT more parts.
@@jeric_synergy8581 not if you get rid of the hot staging ring entirely. Ring is for take, paddle flaps for landing, unwanted duplication and duplication of weight
Best yet
Great explanation Dr Strange😊😊 new sub!
Insulation for the ends /nozzles of quick disconnect.
Make sense to use horizontal tank farm for super booster landing test. Imagine if it land on the tank or other places other than mechazilla? Instant fireball + mushroom clouds?
great work
I like the idea of water protecting the OLM! Pipes could carry the water around the various legs, rings, clamp areas, etc.
Great idea!
IFT4 on May the Fourth...May the Fourth be with you.....
No chance. It is still several months away. Far too many things went wrong on the last flight and they will take time to fix and a good number of these fixes won't work.
@@rogerphelps9939I’m sorry but my rage has built up. I’m gonna take it out on you. Verbally to myself as none of the following slurs are appropriate for a civilised comment section.
It seems that SpaceX was not comfortable with clearances between the QD and the cover in the dynamic shock environment near the lifting booster. And when will they give up on trying to make cryogenic hoses flexible? They need to be twinned rigid pipes with right angle joints that pivot.
Felix, based on the quality of your videos, you deserve much more subscribers. Long time subscriber. A the best buddy. Keep up the great work.
4:42 on reconstruction of the launch platform why not use Tesla’s style valve technology and redirect some portion of the rockets’ thrust after it leaves the ship in a geometric way which generates a gas shield for the structure?
Would it make sense to make a simpler launch tower lite just for catching? It could be a bit shorter than the regular and wouldn't need to have quick disconnect arms, and could have a simplified launch table. Guess it depends on how much cheaper and quicker to build a simplified tower would be to make.
Something no one wants to discuss:
The “Achilles heel” of Starship that no-one is talking about: The Human Factors element of riding Starship to a retro-rocket landing. The natural fear the average person will have. Plunging toward the ground at a very high speed waiting for engine start just before potential impact. Going to be a terrifying ride every time. Even when everything goes right.
All the astronauts are already “made” for that. They already rode the rocket up.
You mean, kinda like coming back home in a capsule, waiting for the parachutes to open? That’s only not happened once in history of spaceflight, tho. Even a piece of music written for it/him: “Komarov’s Fall” (available on Spotify). - Dave Huntsman
Apollo astronauts did that multiple times though and so do all capsules returning to Earth that have to be braked by parachutes.
And yet that's what happened on the Moon for every Apollo lunar landing.
Agree, landing at sea with parachute is one thing, landing on a strip like the shuttle are somewhat predictable with thousands of feet or runway and backup systems…. Now attempting precision landing of a rocket with many more variables and unreliable real time data is unlikely to mate on pins… consistently…. But tickets 🤡 and enjoy IFT-5, odds are that statistically it will be a blast… 🍿
Congrats space x and Mr musk. Excellent update
They should build a big magnet to catch boosters and ships with magnetic field. Another way is - some drones should hook a cable to the fasteners of the booster or ship while they are approaching to the landing spot and to center the position of the booster or ship between the chopsticks.
I remember how difficult the "hover slam" was with an old arcade game called Lunar Lander 😂
I do too! 😂❤️
Clearly a safe lander is needed to practice catching. Test land a hopper with legs and catch pins until a legged landing is certain. Then come down for mechazilla to try catching. It might be so bad the hopper goes and lands on legs. Another day try again, nothing blown up. Once catching is successful, multiple approaches can be tried before the first large stage comes down. Many unknowns worked out in advance...
re: 7:30 hoverslam - not quite as impossibly hard as you present - because the engines can throttle - if you can throttle down to 40%, you plan your hover-slam for eg: 50% throttle - that way you can tweak your thrust up/down to stay on trajectory.
Without perfect weather etc., it might be a little TOO hard to hit two small load points. Maybe a ring. Catch it however it is aligned and then spin it to position.
It's easier to be more accurate while deciding coming in at an angle. You can use earth's gravity as an anchor pulling the object in , using less fuel for corrections , coming in vertical would mean more corrections .
I think
Very well-done update, folk!- Dave Huntsman
Pretty sure that was slow motion footage of the engine shutdown stage of the test. The rings were observed during the shutdown, not the test (I assume).
Correct.
Great sound effects, Felix!
Simulated landing, hover and control will be huge advance after loss of control on #3
Yes, but think of controlling 400,000 pounds landing vertically. In a 747 arriving at 100-200 miles per hour to keep it flying you need a runway and heavy landing gear with good tires… still lots of control surfaces but also a lot of variability… now try to land a 747 axially, use engines to hover and touchdown on pins? Think about it, Simply not happening 😂
I'd guess modified Quick Disconnect door is so that the Quick Disconnect itself doesn't need to retract as far in order to get out of the door's way, reducing the flexing strain on the fuel lines.
This, for me, has been the best episode; the explanations were things I found very interesting. For that, I’ve now subscribed.
should have a hydraulically elevated rotatable metal grill landing pad ring off to the side of the OLM directly under chopsticks, so booster base can initially take up some weight on pad as it slowly descends for chopsticks to align with a now more stable booster config which has route for extra safety options if load pins not caught adequately given hydraulic pad will ensure controlled deceleration if hovering becomes non normative
The fire suppression deluge system utilized also during landing would be beneficial, especially during a landing that goes wrong. Can the system be reset in time after a launch??🤔
looks like that QD wedge cover should be flipped the other way - to direct the flames down and back toward the center of the OLM - and away from the QD
Landing starship with chopsticks "all sounds straight-forward"??? Who ever thought that! It looks crazy difficult! I will believe it when I see it. Seeing how hard it was for them to take off and even keep straight and not spin during descent last time... trying to line this up and catch seems almost impossible
Thanks!
Maybe they should build a special Falcon 9 test article that mimics some of the dimensions of the Starship booster and use this to test catch.
That flow separation on the RVac is fuggen awesome! That’s pretty solid evidence that the Raptor engine is a pretty stout machine. Definitely more resilient than some others out there…(Cough! BE4 Cough!)
There was almost no fuel left in them when SN8 through SN11 hit the ground, but those looked to me like pretty substantial explosions. Why would a booster crash be less energetic?
Catching versus landing has additional advantages. The precision of requiring zero velocity at landing is not necessary. The arms can match the velocity.
Thats a valid thought but its likely not the case. None of what we saw sogar from observation or from SpaceX’s animations show any up or down movement from the Chopsticks during a catch.
@@Whataboutit that particular feature may be proprietary.
@@Whataboutit it occurred to me even if the animation moved the chopsticks you won't be able to see it if it only moved a meter.
The arms are springy.
There's another reason for not continuing with vertical tanks. A methane tank is required to have a containment wall around it that can hold it's full content. With a vertical tank, that would mean an unreasonably high or wide wall. So, if you need a wide area for containment, you may as well use horizontal tanks.
what if it just lose balance and crash tank farm ? which is exactly on Booster/Starship landing flight path ?
I believe this catch method could be perfected to the point where they could eventually test it with the Starship. This would allow faster future landings and launches to Mars or where ever we decide to colonize in the future. All decisions and experiments need to connect to a future goal. The key is to make it to the future and give us the opportunity to accomplish this. As we see we have stepped backwards compared to the Space Shuttles with the return of water based landings for human flights. This seems to be similar to taking 1 step back to get 2 steps forward.