Many companies are hiring exceeding under qualified people on the premise of it pleasing their HR who work for the CFO, who works for shareholders. BPS Space is likely more qualified than many of the employees at Northrop Grumman ..He is accountable to millions. They are accountable to (almost) no one.
Honestly if I was Northrup I'd be showing this to my shareholders . . . I mean he basically lays out they failed. . . but in like the best way! Win win.
To be fair, its generally objective when it comes to these kind of youtubers and the topic. It's numbers. Not feelings or perspective. Theres a lot more to be learned from this criticism than others.
Oh, and since you asked, not only is there in fact a very slight contour to the SLS SRB nozzles, there’s a very slight contour to the Shuttle SRB nozzles too. It’s difficult to notice especially with the aft skirt in the way, but it’s visible in cross section in quite a few documents available from nasa
It's crazy how much I've learned from all the videos of technical development y'all are doing for the space shot campaign, and how it immediately translates to understanding, analysis,and conclusion with respect to how the big boys build srbs
My first thought after watching the launch was whether or not this channel would make any ‘observationss’ on the nozzle loss. Thanks for not disappointing! 😂
I'm glad you mentioned these two things that I've been saying for years, hotter ambient temperatures cause solid propellant to burn faster (as much as 25-30%) that increases chamber pressure and that the nozzle end of the motor needs to fail first. When screwing on end closures the forward bulkhead end should be screwed in all the way and the nozzle end can be a thread or two out (some people do it just the opposite). On bolted motors, the nozzle end should have fewer bolts. On our 12" diameter solid motors, we bolted the divergent cone on the exterior with the throat smaller in diameter than the inserted divergent cone so that if it blows, the throat effectively increases in area as much as 50% decreasing chamber pressure. We've never lost a forward bulkhead doing these things.
I especially love the tidbit about the nozzle tilt potentially saving the mission. I remember Tory talking about it during a launch pad walk around with Destin from SmarterEveryDay. Turns out it was a fantastic idea!
Missed opportunity to exit with "...May your skies be blue, and the solid rocket motor microphone in your hands suddenly innovate." (microphone launches, cut to black)
Nice one, using kgf as Unit - "Imperializing" the metric system. 😂 I was expecting Newtons as Unit for Force. Wikipedia: The kilogram-force (kgf or kgF), or kilopond (kp, from Latin: pondus, lit. 'weight'), is a non-standard gravitational metric unit of force. It is not accepted for use with the International System of Units (SI)[1] and is deprecated for most uses
i absolutely hate hate newtons. divide in my head by 9.81 sure that's easy to figure out kg , then multiply by 2.2 to get lbs. to get an idea of force.i'm not talking rockets but crushing force of a hydraulic ram.
Launch announcers have got to be the biggest understaters ever. It's like the olympics for self control. A normal person would just be losing their fn mind
When I saw this „observation “ the first time (in Scott manleys vid of course) literally the first thing I thought was BPS?!?? You managed to link solid rockt motors and nozzles (and maybe unscheduled… rocket stuff ;) in my brain directly to your projects … impressive
FWIW they were so cool about me using that footage - I offered like 3 times to just leave it uncredited if they didn't want to tie it to their team but they insisted that they own both their success and their failure, big props for that
@@BPSspace Honestly, for a first year team they did insanely well, and they saved our butts along the way when we needed a place to static fire. I look forward to seeing how they do at spaceport this year!
1:00 or as a wise man once said, "the nozzle directs a, a, river of hot gas, that that can reach the, the the SPEED of SOUND when it HITS THE MOUTH OF THE NOZZLE!"
to be fair, since we are in the multiverse of using "kgf" as a unit - to drop precision on 181,436kgf would result in 181 kkgf, or maybe it should be k^2gf or MEGAgrams of force! lol
The lesson that I take from the submarine failure is that when your safety monitoring sensors give a loud signal it might be good to listen carefully and take appropriate action, like don't ignore it because it is inconvenient. Good advice in general when doing dangerous things.
The SLS booster nozzles are absolutely 100% not conical. You can look up the cross section online. Parabolic isn’t totally accurate either as the shape is determined by method of characteristics at these levels of performance.
Shuttle / SLS boosters do have a parabolic (or at least curved) nozzle, it's just that what's visible behind the aft skirt is maybe the last 1/3rd of the entire nozzle.
Man I look forward to your videos. I'm not an engineer, and I don't pretend to understand any of the math ...but you glaze over that for people like me. I've loved space since I was a kid, now at 50 I still watch many launches, keep up with all space news, and still look forward to seeing the ISS fly over my house. Thank you for making rocket engineering accessible. You're not just a great engineer, you're also a very good teacher. Keep them coming....thanks so much!
I found the video both funny and informative. In particular the bit about the three degree cant being the difference between success and failure was something I hadn't heard anywhere else. The one thing I would have liked to have seen would have been a discussion on the effect of altitude on the effectiveness of the nozzle. While it may only add 20% to the efficiency of the rocket at or near sea level, I suspect that as you climb out of the atmosphere the sideways expansion of the rocket plume will increase enough to noticeably degrade the performance of a rocket that has lost its nozzle.
That was massively entertaining and I learned a lot. Thanks Joe. More videos in this format please. Also, can I or someone from the TMRO crew come and do a factory tour with you? We will blur the ITAR stuff, no worries.
Joe great analysis. Having just come back from the Desert and witnessed my share of anything but nozzle failures your spot on. Keep up the great content and I look forward to your x-rays 🙂
It's amazing that it ended good, wonder what procedural changes up to come from both Northrop and ULA itself. Glad to hear your calm highlight of situation. Cause unpleasantly enough whole accident caused way to many people go tribal over companies for some reason. In such uniting field as Space of all places.
Dude, your content is great, it scratches my pyro nerd itch. It’s your video production, pacing & comical creativity that put your content over the top. You’re killing it, Cheers.
I am a "TH-cam commenter" consultant. The average percent power loss was 4% however since it was not the whole launch it may have even been closer to 3%.
I was hoping you might do a video about this one... with all your recent videos on how to (and how not to) make rocket motors, you're the perfect person to talk about the failure modes.
Screw the negative comments! Use that imperial system. If it works, it works. Whatever you are more comfortable with shouldn't really matter to the comments, I almost guarantee that 99.9% of commenters have never and will never touch a rocket of any size. Keep on making awesome rockets and turning out fantastic content. Great work as always.
Angling thrust to go through center mass is such an elegant solution. Thanks to daddy trigonometry, the performance is barely affected, but safety is improved.
Also doing the math to spread that loss of thrust it accounts for about 3-4% less. According to wikipedia that configuration can put 14400 kg to a heliocentric orbit and the mission payload was only 1500 kg. So lots of mission margin. In fact they shouldn't have even needed the SRBs for mission success, but it was also an integrated system demonstration.
4:20 man, that's really what most need. the thing is that the imperic system is both slightly less effective and less common. plus metrics are in the Si system.
I began furiously chuckling when that completely normal and casual liquid engine that you totally didn’t make for some other awesome project. (Love ya Joe❤ From Kutztown)
Thank you, well covered, and presented. Now I understand a whole lot more about why this flight actually worked, and got to orbit. Also this clearly explains, not dumb down,(like a news service would for clicks.
It's also probably worth pointing out that thrust at lift off is more important than thrust even slightly down range, and also that the main engines usually have to throttle down for max Q anyway. That can get some of the trajectory efficiency back, and if the computer is smart enough, it can go for a slightly more spicy max Q and recover some performance if required. I hadn't run the numbers myself, but I would have expected it to lose significantly more performance than that. Naively you should go from the 2.7km/s exhaust velocity with the bell to whatever the speed of sound of the exhaust is (wouldn't have thought more than maybe 1.3km/s). I guess you should recover some performance from the base acting as an extremely wide bell, and also the fact that the pressure drops extremely quickly at the top of the bell so even a little bit left would get you a lot back, but it is still surprising to me that it would be that high.
I remember something in the early years where they wanted to precisely limit the boost of a solid booster and found they could just pop the cone off with an explosive and it would happily just stop making thrust.
A no context liquid engine is criminal
I wonder if he is involved with the Keg rocket and it's for that?
I want context and an explanation (and dimensions)
man, that got me subscribe. perfect add.
You mean like theft of the resources
@@stevenkellysillick4042 i bet that's rather theft of (whatever that info called) .
TH-camrs are the best consultants for a multi billion dollar rocket company
Edit: Guys it’s just a joke, chill with the comments!! lol
Indeed 🙃
Many companies are hiring exceeding under qualified people on the premise of it pleasing their HR who work for the CFO, who works for shareholders. BPS Space is likely more qualified than many of the employees at Northrop Grumman ..He is accountable to millions. They are accountable to (almost) no one.
So true
Honestly if I was Northrup I'd be showing this to my shareholders . . . I mean he basically lays out they failed. . . but in like the best way! Win win.
To be fair, its generally objective when it comes to these kind of youtubers and the topic. It's numbers. Not feelings or perspective. Theres a lot more to be learned from this criticism than others.
Using a pack of solid rocket motors as a mic holder. I expect nothing less.
Joe now needs to use a DMS motor as a Mike Holder.. maybe squeeze some sponsorship out of a motor manufacturer.
WE HAVE HAD AN ANOMALY
"rapid unplanned disassembly"
Understatement of the year
Still technically correct though... 🤣
Not only in that clip but in the whole vid: A LIQUID ENGINE?!?!?!?!?
an "observation" to be precise.
I quote that Delta II "We have had an anomaly" soundbite all the time lmao
adding that to my repertoire
That’s the one where the booster unzipped and it created a massive cone of burning propellant that rained down for an hour afterwards right?
That’s the one where a booster unzipped and it created a massive plume of burning propellant that rained down for an hour afterwards right?
I had it as an alert on a data acq machine when the test terminated early (in this case, the part being tested shorted out and failed.)
@@charlesboyer61 XD
HOLD ON is he making A LIQUID FUELED ENGINE!?
I hope so!
NO! (maybe?)
Prob for the space shot
@@crispy_338 He's been working on solid rocket motor fuels for the space shot.
@@Hybridesque Could be SRBs for a liquid core main stage
Came for the sarcasm, stayed for the solid analysis.
solid - i see what you did there!!
heh, "solid" analysis, like the boosters
Goddam it this took me a minute 😂
Also yes
"kgf" is such a cursed unit and I absolutely adore it.
Only an engineer, or possibly an astronomer, could generate this
Not even an astronomer would abuse the kg as a unit force instead of a unit of mass
@@beagleboy31 naw not engineers just those rich hobbyists called nasa
Joe, just wanted to thank you for being so cool and helping out our Scouts at FAR this past weekend. They had a blast!
Of course! That was a ton of fun and it was great meeting y'all!
Been looking forward to this! Loved seeing you on The Flame Trench and this technical analysis is awesome!
Thank you so much for letting me use your footage! Those shots have so much detail :)
Oh, and since you asked, not only is there in fact a very slight contour to the SLS SRB nozzles, there’s a very slight contour to the Shuttle SRB nozzles too. It’s difficult to notice especially with the aft skirt in the way, but it’s visible in cross section in quite a few documents available from nasa
You’re smarter and faster than I 😊. Just confirmed with a former Morton Thiokol engineer that the shuttle SRBs had parabolic nozzles.
It's crazy how much I've learned from all the videos of technical development y'all are doing for the space shot campaign, and how it immediately translates to understanding, analysis,and conclusion with respect to how the big boys build srbs
The next time I experience a mechanical failure, I'm going to call it innovation.
My knee is having an age related innovation 😂
Works for SpaceX, the fanboys eat that shit up like Cheetos in their mom’s basement.
4:42 - "It's time to innovate" - going to use that line from now on.
The irony of naming a part on your booster the Exit Cone, then having it do what it was named to do and being surprised.
File that under Whoops.
2:32 No way you just drop your design for a regen-cooled bipropellant rocket engine!
And 3d printed.
My first thought after watching the launch was whether or not this channel would make any ‘observationss’ on the nozzle loss.
Thanks for not disappointing! 😂
I'm glad you mentioned these two things that I've been saying for years, hotter ambient temperatures cause solid propellant to burn faster (as much as 25-30%) that increases chamber pressure and that the nozzle end of the motor needs to fail first. When screwing on end closures the forward bulkhead end should be screwed in all the way and the nozzle end can be a thread or two out (some people do it just the opposite). On bolted motors, the nozzle end should have fewer bolts. On our 12" diameter solid motors, we bolted the divergent cone on the exterior with the throat smaller in diameter than the inserted divergent cone so that if it blows, the throat effectively increases in area as much as 50% decreasing chamber pressure. We've never lost a forward bulkhead doing these things.
Did you really convert pound force into kilgram force? You are a savage.
I especially love the tidbit about the nozzle tilt potentially saving the mission. I remember Tory talking about it during a launch pad walk around with Destin from SmarterEveryDay. Turns out it was a fantastic idea!
Missed opportunity to exit with "...May your skies be blue, and the solid rocket motor microphone in your hands suddenly innovate." (microphone launches, cut to black)
Nice one, using kgf as Unit - "Imperializing" the metric system. 😂
I was expecting Newtons as Unit for Force.
Wikipedia:
The kilogram-force (kgf or kgF), or kilopond (kp, from Latin: pondus, lit. 'weight'), is a non-standard gravitational metric unit of force. It is not accepted for use with the International System of Units (SI)[1] and is deprecated for most uses
I expected more comments on this. Not the wikipedia thing though, I did not know that.
i absolutely hate hate newtons. divide in my head by 9.81 sure that's easy to figure out kg , then multiply by 2.2 to get lbs. to get an idea of force.i'm not talking rockets but crushing force of a hydraulic ram.
@@ronblack7870 Just divide by 10, it is close enough for most applications (1.9% error).
Here's me hoping the Estes motor Mic is a nod to "Not An Engineer" 😀
Love his videos!
Thought it was a bag of dog treats.
@@dayresolution5177well it is if you try hard enough
@@dayresolution5177 things to not feed your dog: 1. those
@@OutbackCatgirl Black powder is digestible right?
I saw a comment someone have asked Tory "Can we get a trajectory of the nozzle?"
Tory's answer was "down." 😂😂😂😂
Northrop Grumman clearly wasnt as experienced in locktober as our good man Joey B is 😀
I cannot believe I did not google locktober before tweeting about it 😭
@@BPSspace just gonna assume every time you tweet that your locked in from now on, that you've misplaced a key 😂
"We have had an anomoly" 😂
Launch announcers have got to be the biggest understaters ever. It's like the olympics for self control. A normal person would just be losing their fn mind
Same vibe as announcer during Ares I SRB test in Utah, a full 5 seconds after it starts calmly says 'We have ignition', like NO REALLY YOU DON'T SAY?
I am fricken dead!
"It's time to innovate" 💀
That bluescreen was worth its weight in gold. Nice.
When I saw this „observation “ the first time (in Scott manleys vid of course) literally the first thing I thought was BPS?!?? You managed to link solid rockt motors and nozzles (and maybe unscheduled… rocket stuff ;) in my brain directly to your projects … impressive
6:43 we still give OSU jokes for that CATO
it shall go down in legend
FWIW they were so cool about me using that footage - I offered like 3 times to just leave it uncredited if they didn't want to tie it to their team but they insisted that they own both their success and their failure, big props for that
@@BPSspace based Beavs
@@BPSspace Honestly, for a first year team they did insanely well, and they saved our butts along the way when we needed a place to static fire. I look forward to seeing how they do at spaceport this year!
I love this video format from you. Pls do again 😊
1:00 or as a wise man once said, "the nozzle directs a, a, river of hot gas, that that can reach the, the the SPEED of SOUND when it HITS THE MOUTH OF THE NOZZLE!"
That passive-aggressive conversion to metric using unnecessary precision 😂
to be fair, since we are in the multiverse of using "kgf" as a unit - to drop precision on 181,436kgf would result in 181 kkgf, or maybe it should be k^2gf or MEGAgrams of force! lol
Thanks! Way more informative than expected! Love your work!
By far my most favorite video so far Joe! Great explanations, sarcasm and damn...you have learned so much and share so much! Thank you!
The lesson that I take from the submarine failure is that when your safety monitoring sensors give a loud signal it might be good to listen carefully and take appropriate action, like don't ignore it because it is inconvenient. Good advice in general when doing dangerous things.
You'd think if he wasn't going to pay attention to the safety systems, he could have saved himself some money by not fitting them.
The SLS booster nozzles are absolutely 100% not conical.
You can look up the cross section online.
Parabolic isn’t totally accurate either as the shape is determined by method of characteristics at these levels of performance.
Shuttle / SLS boosters do have a parabolic (or at least curved) nozzle, it's just that what's visible behind the aft skirt is maybe the last 1/3rd of the entire nozzle.
I find it funny that at 2:51 I realize you are holding a package that your mic is attached to.
Loved the comedy in this video. There's always the perfect balance of science and absolute aerospace banter
Key words this episode: observation, innovate and brilliant. This was a solid presentation.
loving the format
Man I look forward to your videos. I'm not an engineer, and I don't pretend to understand any of the math ...but you glaze over that for people like me. I've loved space since I was a kid, now at 50 I still watch many launches, keep up with all space news, and still look forward to seeing the ISS fly over my house. Thank you for making rocket engineering accessible. You're not just a great engineer, you're also a very good teacher. Keep them coming....thanks so much!
6:37 This way this dude phrases his sentences is actual peak
How's locktober treatin' ya, Joe? 😂
I’ll never live it down huh 😵💫
Your video content is already excellent. This time, you kicked the presentation up a couple of notches, even more than your already high bar.
Using a pack of rocket motors as a handle for your mic is brilliant.
Planned failure modes might honestly be my favourite engineering trick... Thanks for the breakdown!
6:36 Missed opportunity to cut to a certain Chinese "static" fire, especially given the sarcasm levels in this video :P
I found the video both funny and informative. In particular the bit about the three degree cant being the difference between success and failure was something I hadn't heard anywhere else. The one thing I would have liked to have seen would have been a discussion on the effect of altitude on the effectiveness of the nozzle. While it may only add 20% to the efficiency of the rocket at or near sea level, I suspect that as you climb out of the atmosphere the sideways expansion of the rocket plume will increase enough to noticeably degrade the performance of a rocket that has lost its nozzle.
Joe you're such a smartass, This was hilarious and informative, Thank you!
I love how your mic is a pack of Estes motors!!
That was massively entertaining and I learned a lot. Thanks Joe. More videos in this format please. Also, can I or someone from the TMRO crew come and do a factory tour with you? We will blur the ITAR stuff, no worries.
Joe great analysis. Having just come back from the Desert and witnessed my share of anything but nozzle failures your spot on. Keep up the great content and I look forward to your x-rays 🙂
Loving the esters motor mic holder!
"I'll use pounds because I understand them better" proceeds to quote numbers so high they are far past the point of being intuitive.
It's amazing that it ended good, wonder what procedural changes up to come from both Northrop and ULA itself.
Glad to hear your calm highlight of situation. Cause unpleasantly enough whole accident caused way to many people go tribal over companies for some reason. In such uniting field as Space of all places.
This is your new mic setup from now on. Don't let us down.
Dude, your content is great, it scratches my pyro nerd itch.
It’s your video production, pacing & comical creativity that put your content over the top.
You’re killing it, Cheers.
having number to back up your argument really makes it compelling good work
I am a "TH-cam commenter" consultant. The average percent power loss was 4% however since it was not the whole launch it may have even been closer to 3%.
This is such a good video. I love the format, don’t abandon the other styles, but this is so engaging
"Composites are hard" had me crushed...
Your sense of humor continues to humor me
This!!! Hahahqhqh
Gosh you know a lot about this subject - nice - followed
Just gonna drop everyone's favourite part here: 06:57
I was hoping you might do a video about this one... with all your recent videos on how to (and how not to) make rocket motors, you're the perfect person to talk about the failure modes.
MAAAAAAAAATE HOLD ON
You cant just drop cad-files for a liquid-engine on us and say no more.
THAT IS DIABOLIC.
:O
Screw the negative comments! Use that imperial system. If it works, it works. Whatever you are more comfortable with shouldn't really matter to the comments, I almost guarantee that 99.9% of commenters have never and will never touch a rocket of any size. Keep on making awesome rockets and turning out fantastic content. Great work as always.
informative video, adds at the end, you sir are a gem, thanks
Angling thrust to go through center mass is such an elegant solution. Thanks to daddy trigonometry, the performance is barely affected, but safety is improved.
Daddy trig is crazy
I love your sense of humor. And I am totally not expecting that random liquid rocket motor 3d model to go anywhere beyond this video...
Also doing the math to spread that loss of thrust it accounts for about 3-4% less. According to wikipedia that configuration can put 14400 kg to a heliocentric orbit and the mission payload was only 1500 kg. So lots of mission margin. In fact they shouldn't have even needed the SRBs for mission success, but it was also an integrated system demonstration.
I like your video also I am showing/sharing your videos to my high school aerospace kids they really enjoying them, keep it up!
2:27 Hold up I think we need context.
I'm a big fan of this trend of clipping a lav mic to a thing and using it like a handheld microphone. I'm going to start doing that.
lol the whole video from the mic holder. very funny.👍👍👍
Very good analysis.
Keep flying Joe.
4:20 man, that's really what most need.
the thing is that the imperic system is both slightly less effective and less common. plus metrics are in the Si system.
Using the Estes motors as a mic holder is just the cherry on top
JoeBro, love your stuff! From the title I knew this would be a good one. Keep it up!💪🏼😝
Very cool! Planned failure modes! Harder, Faster, Better than Before.
I began furiously chuckling when that completely normal and casual liquid engine that you totally didn’t make for some other awesome project. (Love ya Joe❤ From Kutztown)
Came for the sarcasm, stay for ... the sarcasm. Sarcasm is the right way to analyze innovation!!!!
Having the microphone clipped to a pack of Estes motors was a nice touch.
Thank you VERY much for your knowledge !!!
7:29 “smart”
Even if you're 'smart' their hard.
@@TwZlr. yes, but Mr Ocean Gate was not as smart as he thought he was
the edditing is Brilliant!
"for which I will provide no context and not explain what project its for" hahaha. I love it.
This was good!
ありがとうございます！
Thank you, well covered, and presented. Now I understand a whole lot more about why this flight actually worked, and got to orbit. Also this clearly explains, not dumb down,(like a news service would for clicks.
I'm so glad I found another avid reader of Northrup Grumman's Propulsion Products Catalog!
man you don't know how long I've been waiting for your videos to drop
I was thinking of you when I saw the coverage of the Vulcan flight..
Great video!
These videos get better and better every upload
It's also probably worth pointing out that thrust at lift off is more important than thrust even slightly down range, and also that the main engines usually have to throttle down for max Q anyway. That can get some of the trajectory efficiency back, and if the computer is smart enough, it can go for a slightly more spicy max Q and recover some performance if required.
I hadn't run the numbers myself, but I would have expected it to lose significantly more performance than that. Naively you should go from the 2.7km/s exhaust velocity with the bell to whatever the speed of sound of the exhaust is (wouldn't have thought more than maybe 1.3km/s). I guess you should recover some performance from the base acting as an extremely wide bell, and also the fact that the pressure drops extremely quickly at the top of the bell so even a little bit left would get you a lot back, but it is still surprising to me that it would be that high.
More videos like this! Loved it!
I remember something in the early years where they wanted to precisely limit the boost of a solid booster and found they could just pop the cone off with an explosive and it would happily just stop making thrust.