Fantastic renders and assembly description NSF team. What a team! I look forward to the next video, describing the stiffener's and stringers and how they keep the Starship System rockets from folding, buckling and collapsing. (Apart from the hot gas pressurisation that is) Great presentation Ryan, very professional. Thank you all so much.
This is like the 3rd iteration of this video. And the value of all those motion graphics and 3D elements is awesome to have. Will the IKEA inspired shift design get an update?
Ahhhhhhhh at last .... an non fake acting presentation.... Well Done Ryan.... other NSF presenters please take note.... Five star rating Ryan and really well done !!!!
Once again great job Ryan and NSF team. This video gives a nice overview of the whole process and the explanations, animations, pacing and editing are spot on. Btw I hope you are not uncomfortable with the very few negative comments on your appearance. I think your hairstyle looks awesome and everyone at NSF are QDs but that superficial stuff got nothing to do with the work you all put into these projects.
What a fantastic video! Thank you for explaining the full process. I've been watching them build the thing since day dot but that was really informative and filled in a lot of gaps.
Would you include the link for the StarShip development video somewhere? I don't remember watching it and looked back through the list of videos but can't seem to locate it. Thanks.
Another great video. One thing I would still like to see is an animation that shows the separation of Starship from the Super Heavy booster . During the test flight it was mentioned that the booster "tosses " Starship as there is no dedicated system to physically separate the two All the animations I have seen show Starship magically pop off like we see Stage two on a Falcon rocket and Im curious to see how dramatic the actual Starship separation really is Also the fact that Super Heavy DOES NOT have a reentry burn is kind of mind blowing!
Great manufacturing recap, encompass all detail mentioned in your channel !!!. Since the process change multiple time , good to know the last manufacturing builds ! Thank you !!! i would add welding technic - robot , material property of steal, etc : related to video title ....
Don't have nitrogen loading pumps, nor the plumbing that can fill the rocket. Only GCH4 and LOX. Also have different temps and density that wouldn't give the same test results.
Ryan did a great job describing the components which I do appreciate being a blind subscriber however could someone answer a couple of questions please What are stringers? Think they are longitudinal ribs but not sure also are there baffles in the propellant tanks? Cheers
A one piece dome section would need a very large chuck and a very large circular piece of metal + A machine to rotate it at high RPM ! I think SpaceX are doing great.
@@stephenguy6606 you are not wrong, but it is worth review as there is the potential to improve multiple aspects early in the process of history. What is the reduction of one inflight failure worth if it is better to know the better way to make a part? What is it worth to know how to increase production speed of a major component by a significant amount? It is better to make improvements now & take advantage early than to wait & miss the opportunity.
Catching would be misleading. The booster lands on the chopsticks. It just has its legs very high up under the grid fins. I am not sure the chopsticks have to move at all. The booster will glide in sideways and down, until it touches both rails of the chopsticks and kills the last Raptor. The chopsticks have thick rubber shock absorbers and hydraulic one too - combined they would make the contact rather soft.
The Two point, pin point, precision placement burn. (TP P⁴B) pronounced "[T P, P cubed B] landing". The 'Daniel son' fly catch burn. Ooooye! The 'Crazy Elon' chopsticks catch. 🤪 The Super-duper, Booster Scooper grab. The Boca Chica Crab Grab, with double pincer movements. The Broomstick wizard landing. The Booster serving, with Chinese styling. The 'High Tower' Texan Arrest-or, the Police Academy way.
The sentencing structure was referring to how much weight the Starship was, that the Booster had to lift. Yes, the gross lifting weight of the Starship System is indeed, as you so correctly pointed out, 5,000 US tons.
This is about the booster but on starship there are also large fuel and oxygen tanks. If, as an option, a starship is designed to be a permanent space station in orbit, would it be possible to use the fuel/oxygen tank volumes as habitation/storage space? Otherwise, seems like there's be a lot of unused volume. Anyone know if this would be technically possible (or advisable)?
It basically all boils down to: They aren't designing (openly) any of that yet. Getting Stage Zero, Booster, and the *default* Starship actually working ... -> "Ok, now we can branch out". There's a *lot* of possibilities once those first three are even partially working. (Plenty of stuff to do even if Starship never ever completes a successful bellyflop), I say this because the core technologies making this plausible are the Raptor and SpaceX's avionics. One should be about $6/million per Starship, and the other's primary cost is actually software - that is, not consumed. This makes *NON* reusable Starships viable, and reusable ones gravy. If you have a working Starship, exactly as "currently planned" at 150mt of payload - then yes. I can see a lot of ways to "spend" that 150 tons of payload to make the "regular" Starship better as a (semi)permanent space object. Hatches, solar panels, docking port, for instance. But, imo, that's still not even scratching the surface. "Space Construction" to date revolves around "assembling prefabricated stuff". The entire idea of sending a ship of people whose primary skillset is "welder" to space has never been vaguely plausible before. A payload of 150mt is roughly 100x "rolls of steel that can each make a Starship ring section". Yes, one needs to some specific and heavy tools and jigs. But - that mass payload could (hypothetically, of course) turn into another two and a half "Booster's worth" of volume. Shorter: A half-functioning Starship system will still cause a massive increase in all sorts of space activities.
It just struck me that SpaceX is building Starships like the US built Victory Ships during WWII, cranking out hundreds of ships of multiple assembly lines that, at over 10,000 tons capacity, were larger than the individually hand-crafted cargo ships. In the immediate post-war period those Victory Ships were the backbone of the global economy, justifying expanding port facilities and building the much bigger cargo ships we have today. That is just one lifetime ago. What will Starship engender in the next lifetime?
What is the exact number of internal stringers in super heavy? Is it 72? and it seems that Starship does not have internal stringers in propellant tanks.
I’m liking your style Ryan! (Unfortunately some of your NSF colleagues seem to be making for the under 5’s, I find it so unbearable I just have to switch off! 😂). Keep up the good work mate! 🇬🇧
Well, it does do a partial 'Belly Flop' maneuver (basically at a steep angle) as it enters the upper atmosphere, to help keep a lower re-entry speed. However, no, not when it is in the thicker atmosphere and as it approaches the chopsticks, as the grid fins help to create drag plus control descent and as Ryan said, the stainless steel can withstand the re-entry atmospheric friction heating. Also the weight of a near empty booster is around 300 tonnes plus whatever cryogenic fuel & oxidizer is in the tanks. The inner landing Raptor engines have enough thrust (230+ tonnes ) and gimbal control, to slow it down and do a landing similar to the Falcon9 Boosters. It is only because the parameters to burn for 69 seconds to get to MECO, then allows the Booster to still have enough fuel, that it results in enough fuel left over, to do the 'landing'. The Starship does not have enough fuel to do a re-entry burn, so has to use it's main body as a brake and then do a 'in the last seconds' a re-start, to use what is in the header tanks. I guess with the new Raptor 3 engines, there could be 'potential' to redesign the Starship, to allow it to have bigger header tanks? However, if the 'Payload' is reduced to do that, that would mean sacrificing your 'profit/cost to get to orbit' business margins and I don't think we are at a point in history yet, where we have such a luxury? Maybe, maybe not? In saying that , how much business is there currently, for a payload to LOE in space of 100-150 tonnes with a cylindrical area of 8m X 8m then tapering to around 1.8m over around 9.2m ????? ( or a GTO orbit carrying 21 tonnes ). Obviously the V2 Starlinks are close to this payload capacity and there is talk of inflatable habitats for tourist 'space hotels'. It will be new 'Space Market's' that will determine the maximum parameters at the end of the day. Interesting times ahead. Hope that answers your question. Sorry I got a bit off subject 😉I liked the 'brain test' and nice to dig out my written notes and pdf files from SpaceX's web site. As the 'laws of physics' dictate how we get off this '3rd rock from the sun' , it means there is no simple answer about getting into space. Kiwi David 🇳🇿 Couch 🥔engineer.
Mehthane, MEEthane, aluminum, aluminium, tomayto, tomahto, who cares? We all know what he is talking about. And isn't it nice that we're not all a bunch of identical robots?
Don't like the current focus on making every video narrated. I personally think half the speakers aren't that good in front of a camera and the presentation skills leave much to be desired. Had hoped the focus would remain on non-narrated content.
Isn't that funny, you don't like the current focus and I don't like your current focus. It's a topsy turvey world we live in. 🌏 Hi from the bottom of the Southern Hemisphere. 👋🏼
A lifeboat for the Elite? Someone is funding heavily for a way to get the hell out of dodge. Maybe they know something that will happen down the road. If so, would they tell us?
That's one way of looking at it. They may get the hell out of dodge, but they won't dodge the hell they will have to go through, to survive a 6 month trip to a planet that is currently uninhabitable. And whose only existence relies on supplies from Earth. Sounds more like a 'one way ticket' to very 'high risk' living! Maybe if I had a terminal disease (longer than 6 months and within the launch window to Mars) I might consider selling all I own to travel to a destination to spend my last days in. My last outlook on 'life' being a view of a cross between Antarctica and the Australian desert. One last 'fling' before I die. Paving the way (by funding) for the next pioneers of mankind's future generation.
⚡ Get a 7-day free trial and 25% off Blinkist Annual Premium by clicking here: www.blinkist.com/NSFfriends ⚡
Thanks! I needed this.
SpaceX's big yeet machine
YEET
The BYM
thanks, now I can build this at home.
"I assume you're following along at home" - not so fast, I'm still unrolling my steel plates! It's hard to do alone...
I'm still waiting for mine to be delivered :(
🤩 They delivered mine, but it sank into the swamp, so I ordered a second one. That sank into the swamp.............. 😉
Top notch material. Special kudos to the animator and narrator, well done,
Sweet, nice job with the animation as well as the script. Good job by the NSF team!😊
Very nice! Concise, informative, no distracting background. I could hear it really well.
Thanks for the explanations, thanks Ryan and NSF team.
Thank you for NOT adding background music.
there is background music
Excellent tutorial for all of us novices
Thanks for the explanation and thanks for revising the thumbnail. Good stuff.
Fantastic renders and assembly description NSF team. What a team!
I look forward to the next video, describing the stiffener's and stringers and how they keep the Starship System rockets from folding, buckling and collapsing. (Apart from the hot gas pressurisation that is)
Great presentation Ryan, very professional. Thank you all so much.
Ryan!! Thanks for the update. 👍 😉
Love the narrated content.
Wow! Slick, quick video!!
This is like the 3rd iteration of this video. And the value of all those motion graphics and 3D elements is awesome to have.
Will the IKEA inspired shift design get an update?
Thanks Ryan!!
Excellent animations man & coordination w/your narration!!
Great Explanation 🚀
Absolutely fabulous guys…well done
Ahhhhhhhh at last .... an non fake acting presentation.... Well Done Ryan.... other NSF presenters please take note.... Five star rating Ryan and really well done !!!!
*EXCELLENT VIDEO!* 💕
This was really cool, and I'm sure it took lots of work. Thank you!
Great presentation!
Brilliant vid. Well voiced. 👍💯👌
Raptor asembly video!!!🎉🎉🎉🎉❤❤❤❤
Once again great job Ryan and NSF team. This video gives a nice overview of the whole process and the explanations, animations, pacing and editing are spot on.
Btw I hope you are not uncomfortable with the very few negative comments on your appearance. I think your hairstyle looks awesome and everyone at NSF are QDs but that superficial stuff got nothing to do with the work you all put into these projects.
That was bloody cool
YAY! Been looking forwards to this video! 😊
Need more of this type of video❤
Excellent video, so informative and very nicely presented
What a fantastic video! Thank you for explaining the full process. I've been watching them build the thing since day dot but that was really informative and filled in a lot of gaps.
This is brilliant. Thank you
Wonderful attention to the details, and animation, of this presentation. It is well produced, and expertly narrated. Keep up the good work!!
I think I used to watch this young man on his own channel a while ago, but I might be mistaking him for someone else.
Nice, do you think we will see a 100 110% full stack static fire when the sandwich plate is installed, with a quick cut off if things look dicey?
Very informative, thank you!
"Stubby wings" on rockets are called "strakes."
Strakes vs chines is a whole conversation. These are chines. -Das
Very intriguing!
Awesome video, again!
This video (except the crap adds) is a real treasor of usefull information ! Thanks !
Nice to hear someone pronounce methane correctly
Animation so cool!
Great video, great animation, great information, and great content. Did I mention that I found this video to be great 😂
Would you include the link for the StarShip development video somewhere? I don't remember watching it and looked back through the list of videos but can't seem to locate it. Thanks.
There's a clickable link on screen at the end of this video!
Das
Cheers chaps, Love your work.
Absolutely Excellent Video!! THANK YOU
Excellent informative video. Thank you. 🚀🤙❤️🔥
I always was curious how thy built the boosters and hoe they put sections together
hey NasaSpaceFlight
3:04 You Thane? Me Tarzan. 😉
Superb presentation, very well done. Clear concise and excellent visuals!
Another great video. One thing I would still like to see is an animation that shows the separation of Starship from the Super Heavy booster . During the test flight it was mentioned that the booster "tosses " Starship as there is no dedicated system to physically separate the two
All the animations I have seen show Starship magically pop off like we see Stage two on a Falcon rocket and Im curious to see how dramatic the actual Starship separation really is
Also the fact that Super Heavy DOES NOT have a reentry burn is kind of mind blowing!
Well done as always Ryan! Very informative and concise.
Great manufacturing recap, encompass all detail mentioned in your channel !!!. Since the process change multiple time , good to know the last manufacturing builds ! Thank you !!! i would add welding technic - robot , material property of steal, etc : related to video title ....
Don't have nitrogen loading pumps, nor the plumbing that can fill the rocket. Only GCH4 and LOX. Also have different temps and density that wouldn't give the same test results.
i have Booster built and ready for testing
I heard the background music to the intro on a "international bird rescue" commercial on TV today. It was weird lol.
Ryan did a great job describing the components which I do appreciate being a blind subscriber
however could someone answer a couple of questions please
What are stringers?
Think they are longitudinal ribs but not sure also are there baffles in the propellant tanks?
Cheers
Stringers are hollow triangular prisms, much longer than they are wide.
China thanks you for the info.
Tell us how launch pad and cooling pad is made at star base
standby. -kmr
Theoretically the dome segments could be made as a single piece via a type of machining called metal spinning.
A one piece dome section would need a very large chuck and a very large circular piece of metal + A machine to rotate it at high RPM !
I think SpaceX are doing great.
@@stephenguy6606 you are not wrong, but it is worth review as there is the potential to improve multiple aspects early in the process of history. What is the reduction of one inflight failure worth if it is better to know the better way to make a part? What is it worth to know how to increase production speed of a major component by a significant amount? It is better to make improvements now & take advantage early than to wait & miss the opportunity.
Very impressive. How did you get such precise information?
Several years of watching it happen live lol
nice
Excellent video mate 👍🇦🇺
I feel like it should be the catching burn instead of landing burn lol
Well, you are landing, just not on land.
So should it be called a chopsticking burn?
Catching would be misleading. The booster lands on the chopsticks. It just has its legs very high up under the grid fins. I am not sure the chopsticks have to move at all. The booster will glide in sideways and down, until it touches both rails of the chopsticks and kills the last Raptor. The chopsticks have thick rubber shock absorbers and hydraulic one too - combined they would make the contact rather soft.
The Two point, pin point, precision placement burn. (TP P⁴B) pronounced "[T P, P cubed B] landing".
The 'Daniel son' fly catch burn. Ooooye!
The 'Crazy Elon' chopsticks catch. 🤪
The Super-duper, Booster Scooper grab.
The Boca Chica Crab Grab, with double pincer movements.
The Broomstick wizard landing.
The Booster serving, with Chinese styling.
The 'High Tower' Texan Arrest-or, the Police Academy way.
Hello friends from China do not feel shy to drop a comment here. ;)
magnifico reportaje parece fácil pero no lo es
Being from Texas I can't get over the "Me thane lol😂😂😂😂
Now you guys need to lobby Metal Earth model company (Fascinations, Inc.) to make a "Starship" + "Stage-0" product !?
1,300 tons? Not even close. Try something in the range of 5,000 tons at liftoff. Just the fuel weighs 3,400 tons.
The sentencing structure was referring to how much weight the Starship was, that the Booster had to lift. Yes, the gross lifting weight of the Starship System is indeed, as you so correctly pointed out, 5,000 US tons.
Оттачивая повседневно незабвенность/Красоту/
Поможем Мирозданию/осуществить мечту//
This is about the booster but on starship there are also large fuel and oxygen tanks. If, as an option, a starship is designed to be a permanent space station in orbit, would it be possible to use the fuel/oxygen tank volumes as habitation/storage space? Otherwise, seems like there's be a lot of unused volume. Anyone know if this would be technically possible (or advisable)?
It basically all boils down to: They aren't designing (openly) any of that yet.
Getting Stage Zero, Booster, and the *default* Starship actually working ... -> "Ok, now we can branch out". There's a *lot* of possibilities once those first three are even partially working. (Plenty of stuff to do even if Starship never ever completes a successful bellyflop), I say this because the core technologies making this plausible are the Raptor and SpaceX's avionics. One should be about $6/million per Starship, and the other's primary cost is actually software - that is, not consumed. This makes *NON* reusable Starships viable, and reusable ones gravy.
If you have a working Starship, exactly as "currently planned" at 150mt of payload - then yes. I can see a lot of ways to "spend" that 150 tons of payload to make the "regular" Starship better as a (semi)permanent space object. Hatches, solar panels, docking port, for instance.
But, imo, that's still not even scratching the surface. "Space Construction" to date revolves around "assembling prefabricated stuff". The entire idea of sending a ship of people whose primary skillset is "welder" to space has never been vaguely plausible before. A payload of 150mt is roughly 100x "rolls of steel that can each make a Starship ring section". Yes, one needs to some specific and heavy tools and jigs. But - that mass payload could (hypothetically, of course) turn into another two and a half "Booster's worth" of volume.
Shorter: A half-functioning Starship system will still cause a massive increase in all sorts of space activities.
I've always wondered if a main tank spiral wound single continuous weld would work.
I watched all videos but don't see how to build a starship "in previous video "
Bravo!
It just struck me that SpaceX is building Starships like the US built Victory Ships during WWII, cranking out hundreds of ships of multiple assembly lines that, at over 10,000 tons capacity, were larger than the individually hand-crafted cargo ships. In the immediate post-war period those Victory Ships were the backbone of the global economy, justifying expanding port facilities and building the much bigger cargo ships we have today. That is just one lifetime ago. What will Starship engender in the next lifetime?
Am i the only one having funny sound quality ?
Not first
Ryan is a great host. Thanks for a well made video team NSF!
👍
🎉
What is the exact number of internal stringers in super heavy? Is it 72? and it seems that Starship does not have internal stringers in propellant tanks.
China entered the chat
“Me thane” 💀😂😂😂 💀
Jeff Bezos & Beijing would like to thank you for this video. Please also produce teardown and production sequences for Raptors and Starship.
Oh noes....😞
first
No, its me
@@Santiagogleissner no me
I’m liking your style Ryan! (Unfortunately some of your NSF colleagues seem to be making for the under 5’s, I find it so unbearable I just have to switch off! 😂). Keep up the good work mate! 🇬🇧
Doesn't it Belly Flop to land like the Ship does?
Well, it does do a partial 'Belly Flop' maneuver (basically at a steep angle) as it enters the upper atmosphere, to help keep a lower re-entry speed. However, no, not when it is in the thicker atmosphere and as it approaches the chopsticks, as the grid fins help to create drag plus control descent and as Ryan said, the stainless steel can withstand the re-entry atmospheric friction heating. Also the weight of a near empty booster is around 300 tonnes plus whatever cryogenic fuel & oxidizer is in the tanks. The inner landing Raptor engines have enough thrust (230+ tonnes ) and gimbal control, to slow it down and do a landing similar to the Falcon9 Boosters.
It is only because the parameters to burn for 69 seconds to get to MECO, then allows the Booster to still have enough fuel, that it results in enough fuel left over, to do the 'landing'.
The Starship does not have enough fuel to do a re-entry burn, so has to use it's main body as a brake and then do a 'in the last seconds' a re-start, to use what is in the header tanks.
I guess with the new Raptor 3 engines, there could be 'potential' to redesign the Starship, to allow it to have bigger header tanks? However, if the 'Payload' is reduced to do that, that would mean sacrificing your 'profit/cost to get to orbit' business margins and I don't think we are at a point in history yet, where we have such a luxury? Maybe, maybe not?
In saying that , how much business is there currently, for a payload to LOE in space of 100-150 tonnes with a cylindrical area of 8m X 8m then tapering to around 1.8m over around 9.2m ????? ( or a GTO orbit carrying 21 tonnes ).
Obviously the V2 Starlinks are close to this payload capacity and there is talk of inflatable habitats for tourist 'space hotels'. It will be new 'Space Market's' that will determine the maximum parameters at the end of the day. Interesting times ahead.
Hope that answers your question. Sorry I got a bit off subject 😉I liked the 'brain test' and nice to dig out my written notes and pdf files from SpaceX's web site.
As the 'laws of physics' dictate how we get off this '3rd rock from the sun' , it means there is no simple answer about getting into space.
Kiwi David 🇳🇿 Couch 🥔engineer.
@@David-yo5ws Thanks for your reply 👍🏼
Chinas competing with a reuseable booster, and those side reusable proton like rocket small boosters.
The exact reason I unsubscribed from TMRO...
me-thane?
It's METHane, not MEETHane
The guy who discovered Methane pronounced it MEEthane. So I’ll follow his lead.
Mehthane, MEEthane, aluminum, aluminium, tomayto, tomahto, who cares? We all know what he is talking about. And isn't it nice that we're not all a bunch of identical robots?
Don't like the current focus on making every video narrated. I personally think half the speakers aren't that good in front of a camera and the presentation skills leave much to be desired. Had hoped the focus would remain on non-narrated content.
non-narrated content is boring
If you dont like narrated content, just turn the sound down and see if it works for you. Everyone else loves this.
Isn't that funny, you don't like the current focus and I don't like your current focus. It's a topsy turvey world we live in. 🌏
Hi from the bottom of the Southern Hemisphere. 👋🏼
Just came to say the thumbnail feels like clickbait. 60 days to make a full stack?
Pay an unaccented person to voice these videos to make them more accessible
A lifeboat for the Elite? Someone is funding heavily for a way to get the hell out of dodge. Maybe they know something that will happen down the road. If so, would they tell us?
That's one way of looking at it.
They may get the hell out of dodge, but they won't dodge the hell they will have to go through, to survive a 6 month trip to a planet that is currently uninhabitable. And whose only existence relies on supplies from Earth. Sounds more like a 'one way ticket' to very 'high risk' living!
Maybe if I had a terminal disease (longer than 6 months and within the launch window to Mars) I might consider selling all I own to travel to a destination to spend my last days in.
My last outlook on 'life' being a view of a cross between Antarctica and the Australian desert. One last 'fling' before I die. Paving the way (by funding) for the next pioneers of mankind's future generation.
Meeethane. who knew