After watching SpaceX, it is even more remarkable that we landed people on The Moon in the 1960s (60 years ago). SpaceX tested dozens of rockets to get to the Raptor engine and Falcon rockets. Not even to mention the advantages in computers, production sciences and materials. Even given all that they are just now ready for a Moon mission.
I mean to be fair NASA had something like over 10 times its current annual budget, adjusted for inflation, during the Apollo era, so that was a pretty big advantage
I mean you're not wrong it looks kinda odd. But this is the first rendering of this new concept design. It could change a lot in the coming years and perhaps look less, for lack of a better word, weird.
@@SebastianWellsTLI would point that same reaction we had on first renders of Starship itself. It was something wrong with aerodynamic surfaces so far in front. We just get used to current proportions.
It’s hard to see how any lunar habitat can function long term without keeping the dust completely sealed outside. Space suit condoms and a mud room? Like a thin plastic film applied in the outside of the suit upon egress that is easily removed when returning to the habitat. Alternatively the idea of keeping the suits “docked” on the outside which astronauts can climb into may be the way to go. It would be awesome if electrostatics is enough to keep the suit clear.
The solution is to electrically charge the outside of the suit. Moon dust is charged, such g is why it sticks to everything. That also means it can be easily repelled.
Lol, I can appreciate the dig, but starship is already the most powerful rocket ever made. It is already succesful in bringing more mass to space than any other rocket before. Only the reuse part still needs to develop further but that is a completely new thing that only falcon 9 rockets can do. So yeahh starship is already the most succesful rocket except for their own falcon 9 rocket.
@@thotmorganaYou are funny saying that a rocket that is never made It to orbit or recovered a single bit of itself is the most successful rocket ever. I will refer you to the Saturn V which is the actual most successful rocket ever. You should read more history before you spew your muskness.
It's a system still in development. It's premature to judge it at this point. Hyperloop? That's still an ongoing R&D thing, it's likely a pipe dream but it keep engineering students thinking.
1:42 Musk: “It needs to be pointier. It just doesn’t look menacing enough.” SpaceX engineers: “Sir, the nose is shaped like that for aerodynamic reasons sir.” Musk: “I see. Why that was a foolish call on my part.” *Gestures to security to disappear the engineer and his family.*
Eventually, when they start using nuclear fuel, the existing sizes would be good enough for upto Mars, perhaps. 😂 No refueling stops. How good is that.
Thank You and a Job Well Done on being one of the Very Few Space channel's willing to discuss the Moon Dust issue. NASA doesn't talk about it but their last Apollo Missions w/ extended Moon excursions told the rather scary tale of what Moon Dust does to equipment & people. That stuff ruined and nearly disabled a LOT of equipment that was exposed and being statically charged make it a problem that can't be ignored. Without Weather to wear the stuff down, every particle is Razor Sharp and looking for a new home.
Lots of people in the comments boasting about how powerful v3 is supposed to be, but v1 was supposed to be powerful too. There is more distance between what v1 delivers and what it was supposed to than there is between what v3 is supposed to deliver and what v1 was supposed to deliver.
How far could Starship 3 take a 100 ton load. Not every flight needs to be "as much as it will carry" How fast could it go without any payload, just a speed run?
If it can take 200 tons into LEO, and it's dry mass proportion is the same as current starship (7.7%), then starship 3 can give a 100 ton payload 800 m/s of extra delta-v. Lunar transfer is ~3150 m/s. With no payload, starship 3 has ~2000 m/s of delta-v to play with.
Once you are in LEO travelling at nearly 20,000 mph you can travel anywhere in Earth's influence, including the moon, for peanuts. Accelerate from LEO about another 30,000 mph (to leave Earth's sphere of influence and find yourself orbiting the Sun) and you can go anywhere in the solar system for the price of a biscuit. Leaving the Sun's influence, so that you are orbiting the galactic centre, like our Sun does, must take a lot more again, but I don't know how much.
@@thomasmount7388 Using Methalox, you need to double you fuel mass every ~3800 mph. It's 4500 mph for Hydrolox, 3500 mph for Kerolox, and 3200 mph for hypergolic. Landing on the moon and returning takes bare minimum 18000 mph...
What does increasing the fuel tank size in Starship V2 have anything to do with how much thrust the Raptor engines output? Your technical credibility took minor hit with that one.
Isee your Reveal Stars Ship V3,150 meter tall. Attractive & Interesting. People Like. Excellent Magical Surprising. Performance. You are Genius& Inspiration....
I think with the capability and the added load capacity V3 could have landing legs for the booster like the falcon rockets which I think would be safer and more flexibility when it comes to landing
I would point that 2mln for Starship is related to internal cost of launch. Internal cost of launching reused Falcon 9 is ca 20 mln. Variable price is dependant on configuration of second stage, place where it desired landing, or fairing price. 67 mln is what SpaceX charging customers.
He could put Space Shuttle like doors on the SpaceX Starship and have cargo pods (24’ X 48’ to 68’) that are pushed out of the cargo bay using springs, and have anti-spin, course correction devices on the cargo pods and use a cargo pod pusher to push the cargo pod towards the moon / Mars, and use a cargo pod lander, to land the cargo pods on the moon / Mars. And have at least two doors on the bottom of the cargo pods, and connect the cargo pods together using inflatable tunnels, covered with cement by 3D printers, the cargo pods could also be covered with cement by 3D printers, the cargo pod could have built in facilities in them, like everything a moon / Mars lander would have in it, or everything a space capsule for 100 people would have in it. Or a refinery, factory, warehouse, farm, orchid, dairy, ranch, fish growing facility, grocery store, retail store, hardware store, park, amusement park, arcade, night club, city hall, police station, jail, recycling plant, repair shop, etc., etc.. Also he could use inflatable habitats / buildings, covered with cement by 3D printers, when larger facilities are needed / wanted.
Who is supplying the Space X, Propellants.... Should Space X invest in Propellant Production Facility andactualy just "Pipeline" the Propellants , instead ot hundreds of semi trucks servicing the supply chain? Could you cover the Fuel Supply Chain?
The fact that it is taller and the wings are somewhat wider creates that illusion. They are actually exactly the same width even as represented in this render.
Increase Thrust = Increase Vibration, Shock, Thermal Energy, Structural Stresses..... WAIT ELON, refine What You have - Following "Several Successful" 2-WAY MANNED MISSIONS of 2 weeks or more -EACH WITH DUAL LAUNCHES & LANDINGS. Reliability is a function of---Time.
When you talk about sand, moon dust is not akin to the beach or builders' sand which is thick and course. It is more like desert sand, very fine particles, i.e.. the Sahara as it gets in everywhere, including my camera when I visited the region, and it cost a lot to get it removed
since they swapped to steel, I wonder why they still restrict themselves to 9m diameter. why not 12m or even 15 or 18m? just saying, with steel, they aren't really restricted, unlike with carbon fibers.
@@TheEvilmooseofdoom sure, they need a new launch pad, they need some new tools, but it is not as complicated as trying to make larger and larger carbon fiber parts. even 9m was complicated. but with steel, it's not a problem.
And how are we going to build an aircraft large enough to carry a SEVEN THOUSAND TON rocket into the stratosphere when the biggest airbreathing engine yet built is only 135 thousand pounds (i.e. less than seventy tons) of thrust, and no aircraft ever built has exceeded even seven HUNDRED tons?
@@sailordolly 90+% of a rocket is fuel and engines - that means if you can utilize a launch system which can reduce this mass. There are current aircraft which can lift 150 tons. Nowhere near the 700 ton payload that presumably the 7000 ton rocket delivers. At that scale it would be cheaper to build a rail gun on a mountain and launch materials to be assembled in space...
I don’t quite get what you could drop at a lower cost than getting the stuff there traditionally would be? Or conversely, what interesting opportunities this opens up for that is worth the price? Military / secret service agencies most likely
Tourism, beaming solar power back to Earth, human race no longer has it's eggs in one planetary basket, practice for expansion in the future, access to the quadrillions of dollars of precious metals in the asteroid belt, Mars real estate sales. That's about it.
im pretty sure it’s meant to be already in orbit and then drop in 90 minutes. no possible way you get a launch license that fast. so the concept is stupid af
How about a version 3B upgrade to empower post orbital space travel? Remount the combined power unit and fuel tanks from the common dome through to the rocket nozzles. Then the entire power unit is mounted so that it can be extended until the existing common dome is locked in to its new position 10 metres from the base of the external body skin.This would only be completed after the achievement of orbit. This would create a sizable area for long trip duration use. By incorporating 2 Sierra space 12 metre inflatable habitats inside the newly created area (after extension) each with access airlocks there would be considerable new space for storage, recreation, work areas or even a greenhouse to grow food and thus increase oxygen. The trip to the moon or mars would become much more comfortable and actually productive. As in space there is no resistance there would be no requirements for retracting the power unit until entering orbit at the destination. Thus the inflatable areas would probably have a 3 longitudinally spaced floor levels of 1 x 3m plus 2 x 2.6m. The 3 m floor area would be an added safe zone for radiation or space debris impact. This structure would be the cheapest orbiting hotel or other use for mars. Obviously it could carry enough supplies to cover extended trip consumables including the air used to inflate the habitat units.. i am sure Sierra Space could sort the mostly existing habitat units if Space X could re engineer the power unit requirements. This would coincide with the already proposed in orbit refuelling methods. Just a thought from downunder in Sydney. A Space X admirer from the beginning but no engineering degree. I hope the idea supports some innovations.
A while ago I suggested an inner and outer shell . for a maned flightship. An inner shell for the human part of the ship to consist of carbon fiber and the outer shell having a hollow shell , filled with an i nert gas ie argon to protect the humans from radiation ! Of course this ship needs to be built in low obit, wirth 5 nulcear engines . 4 for thrust. 2 for internal power and for a debris shield ! A shuttle needs to be brought along for a return voyage and entry module . Habitats need to bulit and sent to Mars before launch of the human depature. I suggest somewhere in Vallis Mariara as it has a higher pressue in the lower basin of the Vally and oxygen may be in greater abundance as well as caves suitable for human protection . A door could be built to trap the oxygen and radiation. Water may be more accsessable in this region also. Mike.
I think it's a bit too soon to be designing any new versions, since the original can't even achieve a stable orbit. Elon's plan to get to Mars is the same plan I came up with when I was 13. And as likely to come to fruition.
Do people seriously still pay attention to Elon Musk and his tech hype? Starship will never work. Not V2, not V3. Not even V4 (that can carry 500t of payload and a symphony orchestra directly to Saturn’s rings and back in 4 days on a single tank of fuel).
when I was a brainless newt in the 60's watching the Jetsons and all the Nutty Professors saying by the 70's no one will need to work and everyone will be wealthy beyond their wildest dreams I was jumping for joy in front of the 26 inch black and white telly. Now a fizzer of my former self I realize I was spooned mental nonsense, ah , the joys of life.
Emergency!!! THE ONLY SOTUTION! Baffles will not work to prevent the fuel slushing problem, because the tanks of the starship system are too large. That is the only reason why the starship engines have been exploding every time. The solution: The tanks of Starship and Superheavy need 2 disk valves, expanding the diameter of each tank. One of the disks, the one on top, rotates above the contiguous disk to close the overlaping holes on the surface of the disks; to reduce the Size of the tank by dividing it, before any rotation or acceleration of the rocket. This will prevent slushings and protect the plumbing, if located 10% above the bottom section of each tank. Large telescopic pistons can be attached below the bottom of disk valves to control the fuel pressure as the piston expands into the fuel tank. I have built a model that works perfectly. The second disk valve can be located 10% below the front of the tank, to also protect the front of the tanks from the slushing forces. The gridfins are too flat and too small to be effective enough and will not be able to control the booster. Why is Elon not using four pins instead of three to secure each heat shield tyle? Four anchor points provide far more stability to secure a tyle, not three.What is more important than securing the heat shield? Four anchor points would eliminate the problems of tyles falling off the ship every time there is an engine ignition. Please get this message to Elon. Thank you. Also, Spacex needs 3 actuators to move the payload bay doors correctly, not two. They have only two now, one at each end of the payload bay. They need one at the center position. Three will guarantee that there will always be enough support to open and close the doors, even if one of the three fails. I know the spacex engineers can see these problems. It is like ignoring the elephant in the room. Musk needs to hire people who can be trusted and who will not continue accepting bribes from Jeff Bozo to sabotage Spacex.
I imagine you are aware that requires changing the speed Mars spins at. Mars is quite heavy, about 40% the size of the Earth. Do you feel that we are close to being able to alter the speed at which the Earth spins?
"It's too round on the top. It needs to be pointy!" he said. 😅😅
lmao
Take a look at Flash Gordon's rocket of 90 years ago. It looks just like this one.
😂U Dic-tator
But how do they plan to cover it with heat shield?
@@СергейБолдин-в9мSame as they do right now - they glue the heat shield tiles to the nose cone.
"I don't like regolith, it is Eletrostatyc, and it is everywere" Says Anakin Moonwalker
Lol
It is "omnipresent"
After watching SpaceX, it is even more remarkable that we landed people on The Moon in the 1960s (60 years ago). SpaceX tested dozens of rockets to get to the Raptor engine and Falcon rockets. Not even to mention the advantages in computers, production sciences and materials. Even given all that they are just now ready for a Moon mission.
I mean to be fair NASA had something like over 10 times its current annual budget, adjusted for inflation, during the Apollo era, so that was a pretty big advantage
Ya id say that would help a bit
With all the Apollo technology we could only land in the equatorial zone. We didn't have enough power for polar landings
Starship Version 3 will be like NASA's Artemis SLS being used as a booster to launch NASA's Saturn 5 as a second stage.
“I don’t like sand, it’s course and rough and it gets everywhere” ~ Anakin Skywalker. Hats Off
Pointier is scarier.
Sierra never ceases to impress.
damn that thumbnail looks cool
at 1:35 always consider pointy end up, flamy end down ;-)
quite ancient rocket wisdom
the v3 had me laughing so hard, looks like someone just resize the image XD but its pretty cool
I mean you're not wrong it looks kinda odd. But this is the first rendering of this new concept design. It could change a lot in the coming years and perhaps look less, for lack of a better word, weird.
@@SebastianWellsTLI would point that same reaction we had on first renders of Starship itself. It was something wrong with aerodynamic surfaces so far in front. We just get used to current proportions.
It’s hard to see how any lunar habitat can function long term without keeping the dust completely sealed outside. Space suit condoms and a mud room? Like a thin plastic film applied in the outside of the suit upon egress that is easily removed when returning to the habitat. Alternatively the idea of keeping the suits “docked” on the outside which astronauts can climb into may be the way to go. It would be awesome if electrostatics is enough to keep the suit clear.
The solution is to electrically charge the outside of the suit. Moon dust is charged, such g is why it sticks to everything. That also means it can be easily repelled.
If their hopes for water on the moon are anything like they hope that opens another door for cleaning things.
The higher thrust on the V2 is because it will use Raptor 3s (maybe even 4?) not because of the tank stretch
Yup, tank is stretched because higher thrust allows that and is needed to feed more powerful raptors
Promises of success in the future, but will Starship ever be as outstanding as the Hyperloop?
Lol, I can appreciate the dig, but starship is already the most powerful rocket ever made. It is already succesful in bringing more mass to space than any other rocket before. Only the reuse part still needs to develop further but that is a completely new thing that only falcon 9 rockets can do. So yeahh starship is already the most succesful rocket except for their own falcon 9 rocket.
From the most successful rocket company ever? Not making sense.
@@thotmorgana No it is not because flight 3 has a payload of 40-50t as Elmo said himself.
@@thotmorganaYou are funny saying that a rocket that is never made It to orbit or recovered a single bit of itself is the most successful rocket ever. I will refer you to the Saturn V which is the actual most successful rocket ever. You should read more history before you spew your muskness.
It's a system still in development. It's premature to judge it at this point. Hyperloop? That's still an ongoing R&D thing, it's likely a pipe dream but it keep engineering students thinking.
I wouldn't be surprised if the wing design changes considerably for V3 Starships.
Larger?
BIGGER BETTER STRONGER
Any taller and Starship can simply start in space!
1:42 Musk: “It needs to be pointier. It just doesn’t look menacing enough.”
SpaceX engineers: “Sir, the nose is shaped like that for aerodynamic reasons sir.”
Musk: “I see. Why that was a foolish call on my part.” *Gestures to security to disappear the engineer and his family.*
Great video as always. Thank you!
The future is going to be amazing
Eventually, when they start using nuclear fuel, the existing sizes would be good enough for upto Mars, perhaps. 😂
No refueling stops.
How good is that.
Will the rockets now emit colored fireworks when they explode as an upgrade?
Will you make sense?
@@TheEvilmooseofdoom As soon as the Grand Muskrat does, I also will.
@@TheEvilmooseofdoom will you ever understand sarcasm/jokes
It already burns green upon reentry... from the engines burning up in plasma.
@@nickl5658 LOL maybe the next step would be burning blue as well!
150 meters tall that is like a 50 story building. That is so huge!!!
“Calling in strategem!” -Siera Space, probably.
Sierra Space making actual hellpods is insane
Thank You and a Job Well Done on being one of the Very Few Space channel's willing to discuss the Moon Dust issue. NASA doesn't talk about it but their last Apollo Missions w/ extended Moon excursions told the rather scary tale of what Moon Dust does to equipment & people. That stuff ruined and nearly disabled a LOT of equipment that was exposed and being statically charged make it a problem that can't be ignored. Without Weather to wear the stuff down, every particle is Razor Sharp and looking for a new home.
Lots of people in the comments boasting about how powerful v3 is supposed to be, but v1 was supposed to be powerful too. There is more distance between what v1 delivers and what it was supposed to than there is between what v3 is supposed to deliver and what v1 was supposed to deliver.
❤😂🎉 wish SpaceX CEO and SpaceX Team great work and success. AMEN 😢
I'm guessing now that the V3 has been announced that all lessons have been learnt on the V1 prototypes
Congrats to SpaceX on their success.
Space X Is Outstanding!!!
As in Rubbish?
No, there rocket is *_really_* big
Are we launching v2 for the next flight, or we still doing v1 for a bit? I don't remember.
They have four more v1’s to fly first. I won’t be surprised if one or more of those get skipped though.
They still have some V1 test articles.
Sierra Space, it's all well and good for supplies, but what about reinforcements?
How far could Starship 3 take a 100 ton load.
Not every flight needs to be "as much as it will carry"
How fast could it go without any payload, just a speed run?
If it can take 200 tons into LEO, and it's dry mass proportion is the same as current starship (7.7%), then starship 3 can give a 100 ton payload 800 m/s of extra delta-v. Lunar transfer is ~3150 m/s.
With no payload, starship 3 has ~2000 m/s of delta-v to play with.
@kolbyking2315 Thank you greatly!
This is why I ask.
I don't learning new things.
The real question is. "How far can Starblip 3 scatter 100 tons of debris over the planet?"
Once you are in LEO travelling at nearly 20,000 mph you can travel anywhere in Earth's influence, including the moon, for peanuts. Accelerate from LEO about another 30,000 mph (to leave Earth's sphere of influence and find yourself orbiting the Sun) and you can go anywhere in the solar system for the price of a biscuit. Leaving the Sun's influence, so that you are orbiting the galactic centre, like our Sun does, must take a lot more again, but I don't know how much.
@@thomasmount7388 Using Methalox, you need to double you fuel mass every ~3800 mph. It's 4500 mph for Hydrolox, 3500 mph for Kerolox, and 3200 mph for hypergolic. Landing on the moon and returning takes bare minimum 18000 mph...
What does increasing the fuel tank size in Starship V2 have anything to do with how much thrust the Raptor engines output? Your technical credibility took minor hit with that one.
i noticed that
Isee your Reveal Stars Ship V3,150 meter tall. Attractive & Interesting. People Like. Excellent Magical Surprising. Performance. You are Genius& Inspiration....
He is a smart person.
Dude love you’re channel! Please tell me you aren’t Canadian!?
Perfect video 👍
I think with the capability and the added load capacity V3 could have landing legs for the booster like the falcon rockets which I think would be safer and more flexibility when it comes to landing
I would point that 2mln for Starship is related to internal cost of launch. Internal cost of launching reused Falcon 9 is ca 20 mln. Variable price is dependant on configuration of second stage, place where it desired landing, or fairing price. 67 mln is what SpaceX charging customers.
With V3 being taller , there should be a smaller section on top for astronauts similar to apollo
really good video!
He could put Space Shuttle like doors on the SpaceX Starship and have cargo pods (24’ X 48’ to 68’) that are pushed out of the cargo bay using springs, and have anti-spin, course correction devices on the cargo pods and use a cargo pod pusher to push the cargo pod towards the moon / Mars, and use a cargo pod lander, to land the cargo pods on the moon / Mars. And have at least two doors on the bottom of the cargo pods, and connect the cargo pods together using inflatable tunnels, covered with cement by 3D printers, the cargo pods could also be covered with cement by 3D printers, the cargo pod could have built in facilities in them, like everything a moon / Mars lander would have in it, or everything a space capsule for 100 people would have in it. Or a refinery, factory, warehouse, farm, orchid, dairy, ranch, fish growing facility, grocery store, retail store, hardware store, park, amusement park, arcade, night club, city hall, police station, jail, recycling plant, repair shop, etc., etc.. Also he could use inflatable habitats / buildings, covered with cement by 3D printers, when larger facilities are needed / wanted.
If two booster strapped together what would the ultimate lift pay load be to orbit?
or two solid boosters strapped on as shuttle
They haven't gotten V2 to work yet. LOL
My ocd is killing me why did you switch starship 2 and 3 at 1:20
Space the Final frontier and SpaceX is getting closer to a real star ship like Star Trek 👈 The blueprints are there for the build keep looking up
starship is a spaceship that would take you star to star, good video tho
Be great when the first version is actually cruising space first
I love this channel
Can the space ship hold two of the bottom tanks in the spaceship. With out making it bigger too carry them.
Yea yeah yeah. I'd have expected he said it would eventually work fine.
They will need to increase the water pressure for the OLT with Raptor-3.
Is this the beginning? Of space drop pods for soldiers. It looks very similar to a sci-fi soldier delivery system.
Cmon you apes, you wanna live forever?
Didn't Musk say the version two for Starship was going to be twice the diameter?
Who is supplying the Space X, Propellants.... Should Space X invest in Propellant Production Facility andactualy just "Pipeline" the Propellants , instead ot hundreds of semi trucks servicing the supply chain?
Could you cover the Fuel Supply Chain?
Interesting times 👍🚀
I think it would be better if SpaceX get a contract of GigaSpaceStation, oribiting Earth and and smaller Space Station orbiting Mars
ทุกท่านสุดยอดมากค่ะ
All praise the Emperor of Mankind, beloved by all.
V2 is taller but looks thinner.
The fact that it is taller and the wings are somewhat wider creates that illusion. They are actually exactly the same width even as represented in this render.
@@SebastianWellsTL ok
what will he SpaceX hls version be?
I feel like Starship is slowly morphing into a spaceplane.
Increase Thrust = Increase Vibration, Shock, Thermal Energy, Structural Stresses..... WAIT ELON, refine What You have - Following "Several Successful" 2-WAY MANNED MISSIONS of 2 weeks or more -EACH WITH DUAL LAUNCHES & LANDINGS. Reliability is a function of---Time.
This payload is giving me Battle royale's vibe😮
"POINTIER..." 🤔🧐 Yep sounds like a legitimate engineering term. 😬
When you talk about sand, moon dust is not akin to the beach or builders' sand which is thick and course. It is more like desert sand, very fine particles, i.e.. the Sahara as it gets in everywhere, including my camera when I visited the region, and it cost a lot to get it removed
5:05 has footprints
If they all stop blowing up, it might be impressive in the future.
All KSP has taut me is: trust the process
Fully reusable? Not when they blow up or burn up. This simply translates to larger fireworks. SpaceX is great at everything except Starship.
Wow, you are really in way over your head.
@@TheEvilmooseofdoom Explain. Your words do not clearly communicate your point.
since they swapped to steel, I wonder why they still restrict themselves to 9m diameter.
why not 12m or even 15 or 18m? just saying, with steel, they aren't really restricted, unlike with carbon fibers.
Because it's not so simple to just go wider, it would require a re-build of a lot of equipment and set them back years.
@@TheEvilmooseofdoom sure, they need a new launch pad, they need some new tools, but it is not as complicated as trying to make larger and larger carbon fiber parts. even 9m was complicated. but with steel, it's not a problem.
Interesting topic about the moon dust
Isn't more effective to launch a rocket off a very large aircraft? No damage to launch facilities from hot rocket exhaust.
And how are we going to build an aircraft large enough to carry a SEVEN THOUSAND TON rocket into the stratosphere when the biggest airbreathing engine yet built is only 135 thousand pounds (i.e. less than seventy tons) of thrust, and no aircraft ever built has exceeded even seven HUNDRED tons?
@@sailordolly 90+% of a rocket is fuel and engines - that means if you can utilize a launch system which can reduce this mass.
There are current aircraft which can lift 150 tons. Nowhere near the 700 ton payload that presumably the 7000 ton rocket delivers.
At that scale it would be cheaper to build a rail gun on a mountain and launch materials to be assembled in space...
I don’t quite get what you could drop at a lower cost than getting the stuff there traditionally would be? Or conversely, what interesting opportunities this opens up for that is worth the price? Military / secret service agencies most likely
Tourism, beaming solar power back to Earth, human race no longer has it's eggs in one planetary basket, practice for expansion in the future, access to the quadrillions of dollars of precious metals in the asteroid belt, Mars real estate sales. That's about it.
Always wondered why the N1 interstages were like that.
Cigar shaped mother ship actually ❤❤
Within 90 minutes? That must be a world record, if they get a launch license ready and find a rocket to launch the shuttle within that time frame?
im pretty sure it’s meant to be already in orbit and then drop in 90 minutes. no possible way you get a launch license that fast. so the concept is stupid af
Is it physical possible to harvest meteorites
How about a version 3B upgrade to empower post orbital space travel?
Remount the combined power unit and fuel tanks from the common dome through to the rocket nozzles. Then the entire power unit is mounted so that it can be extended until the existing common dome is locked in to its new position 10 metres from the base of the external body skin.This would only be completed after the achievement of orbit.
This would create a sizable area for long trip duration use. By incorporating 2 Sierra space 12 metre inflatable habitats inside the newly created area (after extension) each with access airlocks there would be considerable new space for storage, recreation, work areas or even a greenhouse to grow food and thus increase oxygen. The trip to the moon or mars would become much more comfortable and actually productive.
As in space there is no resistance there would be no requirements for retracting the power unit until entering orbit at the destination. Thus the inflatable areas would probably have a 3 longitudinally spaced floor levels of 1 x 3m plus 2 x 2.6m. The 3 m floor area would be an added safe zone for radiation or space debris impact.
This structure would be the cheapest orbiting hotel or other use for mars. Obviously it could carry enough supplies to cover extended trip consumables including the air used to inflate the habitat units.. i am sure Sierra Space could sort the mostly existing habitat units if Space X could re engineer the power unit requirements.
This would coincide with the already proposed in orbit refuelling methods. Just a thought from downunder in Sydney. A Space X admirer from the beginning but no engineering degree. I hope the idea supports some innovations.
My question is, why taller rather than wider?
Drag?
A while ago I suggested an inner and outer shell . for a maned flightship.
An inner shell for the human part of the ship to consist of carbon fiber and the outer shell having a hollow shell , filled with an i nert gas ie argon to protect the humans from
radiation !
Of course this ship needs to be built in low obit, wirth 5 nulcear engines .
4 for thrust. 2 for internal power and for a debris shield !
A shuttle needs to be brought along for a return voyage and entry module .
Habitats need to bulit and sent to Mars before launch of the human depature.
I suggest somewhere in Vallis Mariara as it has a higher pressue in the lower basin of the Vally and oxygen may be in greater abundance as well as caves suitable for human protection .
A door could be built to trap the oxygen
and radiation.
Water may be more accsessable in this region also.
Mike.
8:04 Why does footage from 2002 look like it’s from 1902?!
it doesn't look like 1902 not even close maybe early 90s world Trade centre blogs from new York City but not 1902
I think it's a bit too soon to be designing any new versions, since the original can't even achieve a stable orbit. Elon's plan to get to Mars is the same plan I came up with when I was 13. And as likely to come to fruition.
Version 10 will be able to launch Earth into space.
seems so fun and adventure
we really getting fortnite supply drops irl 😂
First ever force field!
Just watched the House committee for NASAs budget. Sigh, doesn't look good.
😢3-2-1 booom
Elon Musk, the new Friedrich Wilhelm I of Prussia. Everything must be bigger.
it look like "real life tony stark" really want something
Do people seriously still pay attention to Elon Musk and his tech hype?
Starship will never work. Not V2, not V3. Not even V4 (that can carry 500t of payload and a symphony orchestra directly to Saturn’s rings and back in 4 days on a single tank of fuel).
when I was a brainless newt in the 60's watching the Jetsons and all the Nutty Professors saying by the 70's no one will need to work and everyone will be wealthy beyond their wildest dreams I was jumping for joy in front of the 26 inch black and white telly.
Now a fizzer of my former self I realize I was spooned mental nonsense, ah , the joys of life.
sounds like SIERRA is trying to do a AMAZON type setup.
SpaceX always impresses the hell out of me
Simple things for simple minds.
Emergency!!! THE ONLY SOTUTION!
Baffles will not work to prevent the fuel slushing problem, because the tanks of the starship system are too large. That is the only reason why the starship engines have been exploding every time.
The solution:
The tanks of Starship and Superheavy need 2 disk valves, expanding the diameter of each tank. One of the disks, the one on top, rotates above the contiguous disk to close the overlaping holes on the surface of the disks; to reduce the Size of the tank by dividing it, before any rotation or acceleration of the rocket. This will prevent slushings and protect the plumbing, if located 10% above the bottom section of each tank. Large telescopic pistons can be attached below the bottom of disk valves to control the fuel pressure as the piston expands into the fuel tank.
I have built a model that works perfectly. The second disk valve can be located 10% below the front of the tank, to also protect the front of the tanks from the slushing forces.
The gridfins are too flat and too small to be effective enough and will not be able to control the booster.
Why is Elon not using four pins instead of three to secure each heat shield tyle? Four anchor points provide far more stability to secure a tyle, not three.What is more important than securing the heat shield? Four anchor points would eliminate the problems of tyles falling off the ship every time there is an engine ignition. Please get this message to Elon. Thank you.
Also, Spacex needs 3 actuators to move the payload bay doors correctly, not two. They have only two now, one at each end of the payload bay. They need one at the center position. Three will guarantee that there will always be enough support to open and close the doors, even if one of the three fails. I know the spacex engineers can see these problems. It is like ignoring the elephant in the room. Musk needs to hire people who can be trusted and who will not continue accepting bribes from Jeff Bozo to sabotage Spacex.
Why the moon when we have so much more to explore about our own planet 6:23 ???
Every time Elmo says next year you can add 10 years to that. And that ghost concept from sierra space is absolutly BS and a waste of money.
no weapons
Could they terraform mars and make the Mars day equal to Earth Day cause I think they’re only 36 minutes apart
I imagine you are aware that requires changing the speed Mars spins at. Mars is quite heavy, about 40% the size of the Earth. Do you feel that we are close to being able to alter the speed at which the Earth spins?
you're right about the 36 minute difference.
dev is cooking
Have a bath section for the astronuats before reentry into their ships
Until we can actually travel at the speed of light (which is impossible ) or anywhere near it, interstellar travel is just pointless !
True. Nobody can ever go faster than light. What about harnessing gravity so we can shorten the distance and not have to travel at all to get there?
@@thomasmount7388 Never thought of that! Bloody good idea !👍👍👍