Yes, please do more segments like this. Very informative! As I watch most of these from my backyard, it's really cool to have the commentary, Great job!!
i wish to add a correction , Air is not particulates , it is Molecules , O2 oxygen is 2 combines oxygen elements , (a Molecule) Carbon Dioxide (1 carbon 2 oxygen Molecule ) so in the absence of other rare elements air really is full of molecules
John, former NASA spokesman at KSC here. That was a darn good analysis. The main reason they delay the leg deployment until the last second is to keep from burning the legs. I wish they'd describe how they navigate the booster with such precision - but that's likely their secret. As always, it is simply astounding. (I was also an AF pilot and WISH we had that kind of precision landing ability!)
They did talk some about it. It's just a fancy flight controller with a GPS and an altimeter. They put into it the target coordinates, the estimated wind, and the rest is the controller solving the trajectory optimization problem in real time. There was a good article on it, which also gave some additional references: _"SpaceX’s self-landing rocket is a flying robot that’s great at math"_
Basically PID loop control of engine gimble, cold thrusters and grid fins. Nothing terribly exotic, once it is turned properly. Tuning crashed many rockets but now they've definitely got it!
The problem is that if you can land a rocket on target you can land a bomb on target and the military wants a monopoly on that ability, so sharing how you do it even for educational purposes or hobby size payloads is a no-no.
One point you didn't mention, but i think fits very well into this discussion, especially adding to the whole point of flame expansion: You can see that at the beginning the engines produce these long orange flames. As the rocket goes up and air pressure falls, the flames expand. But then one more thing happens: the flames become less and less bright, until at some point you can see barely any flame at all. Just before stage separation there is only a black cloud of exhaust gas coming out of the engines. The boost back burn does not produce a visible flame either, again only a dark cloud. Reason: The engines are running fuel-rich. That means that the mixture rate between fuel and oxygen inside the engines is such that not enough oxygen is present to burn all the fuel. There are several reasons why that is done, and i don't want to start that explanation since it would make this comment 5 times longer. But the point is that there is unburnt kerosene and soot coming out of the engine, together with all the exhaust gasses. That is all the black stuff you can see when the engines are running at high altitude. (And also the stuff that causes the "jelly-fish effect" if the lighting is just right) When the engines are running at low altitude, the exhaust flow mixes with ambient air. This allows the fuel from the exhaust stream to react with oxygen from the ambient, and burn. This causes the bright orange flames you see behind the rocket. Or at least the largest part of those flames. But as the rocket rises up in altitude the air density drops, there is less and less oxygen available in the ambient air, and the flames dim down, until they eventually fade out and you only see the soot.
You know, the moment you mentioned flame color, I immediately knew where you were going with it and thought to myself, "Oh, hey, that's a neat point." ... but as many of these as I've watched, I just never registered it myself! Thanks!
@@bdickinson6751 One of the purposes of running fuel rich is to *drastically* reduce both mass, which would require a great deal more fuel to offset (and the fuel to *lift* that fuel, Tsiolkovsky's not very forgiving on that), and part/material complexity. By running fuel rich, they give a film over the nozzle that keeps it cool. If they instead went with more "active" cooling (and ran perfect fuel/oxydizer ratios and had an idealistic environment), they would need to potentially change the nozzle material, as well as add all of the mass and complexity of pumping the coolant and removing heat from the coolant too. Energy cost of manufacture of the components themselves would potentially overshadow the fuel saved, and paired with the fuel needed to *then* lift those components, and it's *very* likely far worse, ecologically. Lastly, you *still* have to err towards fuel rich. Rocket engines are just fire. Fuel, oxygen, heat. Given enough heat and oxygen (which you have in a rocket engine) nearly *anything* can work as a fuel. Including the nozzle itself. Excess oxydizer can and often will *find* something to react with to burn when provided an ignition source. Running engine rich is *very* bad for a rocket. The other detail is the fuel used. While hydrogen is great for cleanliness through the launch, that may be offset by the costs of production and infrastructure. It's also simply *very* hard to work with, as shown by the repeated issues on the ground side infrastructure for Artemis 1. RP-1 and Methane are simpler, and simpler allows a much higher launch cadence (which favors reuse, which means *not* producing and then throwing away the rocket after one flight, which is *also* better environmentally). Eventually, maybe, we'll get hydrogen production from green sources, cooling, storage, and use down to allow the same levels of use, but that'll be a while yet. Also, cutting out all spaceflight tomorrow would provide such a negligible change in carbon emissions on the whole that it's *definitely* not the tree to bark up.
One little note: Falcon 9 is not falling during the boost-back burn, in fact, it continues to gain altitude well after the end of the burn (at roughly 3:23 min into the flight). During the Transporter 6 mission, the booster eventually crested at 146 km roughly 4:31 min into the flight. - Edit: Sorry, TH-cam is reading the mission elapsed times as timestamps for this video, resulting in nonsense links.
It's falling (ballistic) the instant the engines are off. Whether it still has some upward momentum is a red herring unless it has escape/orbital velocity and vector. But it lacks that velocity, so it's falling back to Earth, period.
@@linuxgeex He is talking about the boost-back burn. At this point the rocket is climbing again to increase time of flight for the return. Although Some on the forum have said that this is not always the case.
Yes, and the boost-back burn is a horizontal vector to cancel horizontal thrust and return to the cape. There is also quite a bit of slewing (horizontal flying) by the booster after the entry burn, so the return is more than just a ballistic trajectory. (If the booster loses complete control, it's ballistic flight will leave it short of the lz and it will fall into the water)
@@alankott3129 Even then the boost-back isn't adding velocity. It's actually cancelling out the horizontal component of the vector away from the LZ, and it's still ballistic, which is falling, even if it's falling up temporarily. The flamey bit needs to be pointed a different direction for it not to be falling. NSF is right, he's wrong. Though he's understandably wrong, ie it's not an easy concept for people new to rocketry that you can be *falling* *up.*
@@isbjorneliassen Agreed, but ballistic is the overwhelming flight behaviour, lol. They have a small amount of discretion *where* it is falling, but they reserve what little discretion they have *whether* it is falling for the last few seconds so they don't make a crater ;-)
There are occasionally forward facing cameras (such as the view of the payload once the fairing separates or some booster cameras on the space shuttle) but the cameras are primarily for engineering value and the stuff the want to look at it down near the bottom of the rocket. Looking up at the sky just doesn't get them too much beyond interesting views for the livestream
Simplified without being "dumbed down". Precise explanations with awesome visual examples. As always, great job! Thank you JG and NSF for everything you provide!!
Conspiracies theories are usually not tolerated by those who orchestrate the conspiracy. The fact that your comment has appeared here almost gives their b.s credibility. I am guessing that negative comments are selectively shadow banned.
@@rickyevans5822 Lol, I love it when flat earth people launch themselves up in homemade steam rockets strapped to an rv and accidentally unlive themselves to prove the flat earth.
I think these videos are very helpful for those less versed in spaceflight tech. You explained Falcon in a way that my mother would understand, and that's quite a feat!
This is one of the best videos I’ve seen on TH-cam. Interesting, entertaining and informative. Thanks for taking the time to put it together and explaining everything so well.
@saschay2k. But when you Master your skills, you can identify them, easier. Nasa is a side-dish of the Bible. Both have same purpose. Distract humanity’s mind. Only lazy parrots are submerged into the Lie. But the Bible gives you hints. Nasa doesnt, nor the Gov.
Why is it that just moments after take-off, when the land is still clearly the launch area, the edge of the Earth's curve comes into sight? Aren't there meant to be miles and miles of sea before we see that?
Another thing that's great about this video is watching the F9's position relative to the Earth during the boost back burn. You can see it moving downrange as it flips, and then slow down, but still travel upwards as it completes its "altered" ballistic trajectory. The Earth appears to stop revolving below, but keeps getting farther away. The boost back burn is intended to change the horizontal velocity and direction of the booster, but no so much in the vertical. It starts to descend a little later.
(Pls answer me) On some F9 booster's landing shots I saw that it ignites one center engine and for a short time 2 more so 3 engines are burning. Only a while later it turns to 1 engine and of course lands. But in most videos everyone says it's "1 engine landing burn". Does it sometimes ignites one engine and sometimes three? Or it always ignites 2 more engines just for a short moment?
It varies landing by landing. Using 3 engines for part of it improves performance because it spends less time slowing down, but it also puts more wear and tear on the booster, so it only gets used when needed. So if you see a 3 engine burn you can know they're pushing the capabilities on that profile, and if you see a 1 engine burn you know they have a bit of margin
It's one I've begged for, for so long! Now they need to do the same thing in their livestreams a single take livestream on board the f9 and also a full single tracking camera video would be great!
I have always said since I first saw Falcon 9 launch that nobody, not even Boeing/NASA with its many years of experience can produce the viewer experience like one gets from a SpaceX launch, the photography is second to none. Now you come along and blow that right out of the sky with more SpaceX photography. That was amazing footage thank you so much for showing it.
@MarrtinoJennings oh look at this guys, we've found the genius. You guys just don't understand anything space or physics related and thus, it's fake or CGI. Sad.
One of the best NSF videos by far! Great explanationn an yes, I like these fuller, more complete, explanations! You (NSF-team) should do more of these analytic videos.
What I did notice was that x space walks with all our newer technology shows the space walks looking much different in every way than the supposed old ones
I hope that Spacex tells us one day how they refurbish the boosters. That would be so awesome to know what the process is and how much is actually refurbished! Awesome video as always!
Been watching NSF and similar content streams for years, familiar with everything you described. Yet, this was perhaps the best overall description of an RTLS F9 mission because of the format. Thanks to spaceX for sharing this footage and everything they have made public and Please provide more content in this format going forward!
This was an awesome explanation and I would LOVE to see more videos like this. You did a really good job of explaining things and keeping it interesting.
I love space, I love exploration, I love information. Only thing that makes all of these better is it being delivered by a Smexy man, and YOU have ticked all of those boxes!!! 😍🥰
I love these kinds of breakdowns! I'm not well-enough educated to notice them myself, but I absolutely love to learn about them. These kinds of videos are my favorite. Please keep them coming! (Especially as we start to get starship videos...)
Thank you for doing this. It really helps me understand more of what is going on during a launch and landing. I am grateful that SpaceX is mindful enough of the public to share this with us.
That’s how you enter an orbit. Getting to space is easy, STAYING in space is hard as you’d have to accelerate to over 17,500mph horizontally at around 100 miles in altitude.
Yes please to more of these! To include each stage of falcon and starship. I don't have the time to follow as closely as you folks can and a concentration look at all of them is a great thing. Thanks NSF. You folks are awsome!!!
@@keith726able dont knock the basement ive seen some pretty sweet ones full bar, stripper pole, pool table and vintage arcade games plus they stay cool trmps in the summer
Yes please do more videos like this and I think the question everyone was really asking about was the cords inside the innerstage that you see dangling during stage separation. Also even though it might be old could you do one of these types of videos on the space shuttle. I grew up with them and was in the 5th grade when we lost Challenger. Up until that point she was for some reason my favorite vehicle and I was very sad that day. I was sad for Columbia as well but even sadder when the shuttle program was shut down and today I am proud to say that the falcon 9 and Crew Dragon is my new favorite space vehicle and can't wait to see a launch in person. Please guys at NSF keep up the great videos and thank the whole team for bringing us such great material. You guys are Awesome
I just really like the way you explain this, you are easy to understand and get into little details without getting too geeky. Hope you continue and would like to see similar vid on starship.
I'm not sure I see any sun reflection at that point (other than a diffuse one off the body of the rocket). There are some puffs of reaction control thrusters that might be what you're seeing, where the booster's shooting compressed nitrogen out to control its orientation
It’s pushing the top of the booster to swing the base around. If you hold a pole on its centre of mass and you push on the side near the top of the pole, the bottom will swing out from the same side you pushed from.
This was a great explination of some things I knew, some things if didn't, and connecting them all together. Looking forward to more of this type of content!!!
It was very informative, especially for people that don't know a whole lot about F9. Even if you do understand it all, it can be helpful having the explanation next to the visual. Personally I thought is was a magical shot. Getting to see the whole adventure the booster goes on. It would be great if sometime we got to see the entire adventure of the 2nd stage, in time lapse or something like that. :) Good work Das!
@@johndododoe1411 I still want to see it and there is the little fuzz out thing that is often used. lol Anyway, do you have a link for the Shuttle refurb?
It’s partly true but it’s more used to mitigate any potential fires caused by the launch. During landing, there’s basically nothing that can catch fire except for the rocket which is why they have remote controlled fire extinguishers aimed at the rocket
Thanks Das for the deep dive that was cool! I knew a lot of that but it was still nice to get a play by play break down. I know NSF does have a lot of great coverage options but I would enjoy more of these.
Shame that the video shows the curvature of the earth at that extreme at only a few miles up instead of about 200 miles like it should be showing. Absolute bollocks. Fake!
Excellent piece Das and +1 to management to let you do more of these. I love little dissections of process. Like “why do they need to extend the TE for Falcon Heavy?” An add to this one would be the fact that we clearly could see the booster still gaining altitude after MECO. I don’t think we had seen it that clearly before and certainly not on stream. Saved the video just for that piece alone, to describe what’s cool about RTLS.
At VAFB SLC-4E the flame bucket would direct hot exhaust from Titan III and IV rockets onto a hillside across from the pad 1000 feet away. In summer and fall the hillside would catch fire. Base FD always plowed a big firebreak around the area before launches.
Hi There John, having spent my almost entire working life in aviation (predominately engineering and project management), this clip is both informative interesting and very well presented, so thank you and very big yes to doing more of this type of commentary. Rgds BH from NZ
Thanks Das, I'd personally be well in favour of more explanatory videos from NSF like this one. A well informed nerd is a happy nerd. Keep up the great work.
Great video! I grew up here on the Space Coast, watching launches ever since the first Mercury rockets. I still get a thrill with every launch! And I really appreciate these informative videos.
@@archierush868 No it's not. Why add cgi flame on the launch pad. You can't and won't answer. Looks exactly like the cgi lava the geological videos fake. Answer the question, why do they use cgi ? Other than to mislead, what is the purpose of all these cgi images and videos.
@@aaroncangemi9057they don’t use CGI. I literally just watched a Falcon 9 launch earlier today on a livestream and several people in the chat were also watching it in person. This is all real. Go to Florida if you still don’t think live-streaming an event is enough evidence to prove it’s real
That was absolutely awesome John.. Most people go thru life never getting the opportunity to see something like that up and close... Then to have everything explained like you did... Gives someone like me the entire package.. if you want to call it that. So thank you. If you keep producing.. I'll keep watching..
See WHAT?????? WHAT DID WE MISS? BESIDES THIS CGI SHOWING ZERO LAND,ZERO STARS,NO 'ENTRY' NO 'EXIT' 😂!! JUST EDITED CGI BULL💩 AS USUAL,AND WHOS THE GUY UR FOLLOWING??? WHO MADE HIM THE LIAR TO FURTHER MISLEAD FOLLOWERS???
Falcon Heavy coming up soon. Merch available (of course!) shop.nasaspaceflight.com/collections/falcon-heavy
High quality commentary!
Fascinating, clear, precise and enthusiastic technical comments. Thank you.
Yes, please do more segments like this.
Very informative! As I watch most of these from my backyard, it's really cool to have the commentary, Great job!!
i wish to add a correction , Air is not particulates , it is Molecules , O2 oxygen is 2 combines oxygen elements , (a Molecule) Carbon Dioxide (1 carbon 2 oxygen Molecule ) so in the absence of other rare elements air really is full of molecules
Every flat earther, that is totally cgi....
🤣🤣🤣🤣
John, former NASA spokesman at KSC here. That was a darn good analysis. The main reason they delay the leg deployment until the last second is to keep from burning the legs. I wish they'd describe how they navigate the booster with such precision - but that's likely their secret. As always, it is simply astounding. (I was also an AF pilot and WISH we had that kind of precision landing ability!)
They did talk some about it. It's just a fancy flight controller with a GPS and an altimeter. They put into it the target coordinates, the estimated wind, and the rest is the controller solving the trajectory optimization problem in real time. There was a good article on it, which also gave some additional references: _"SpaceX’s self-landing rocket is a flying robot that’s great at math"_
SpaceX actually wrote a paper with NASA a few years ago on propulsive landings. They use something called non-convex optimisation
That's why there's a Navy flight bunch, have a son that's a 18 pilot so I'm biased
Basically PID loop control of engine gimble, cold thrusters and grid fins. Nothing terribly exotic, once it is turned properly. Tuning crashed many rockets but now they've definitely got it!
The problem is that if you can land a rocket on target you can land a bomb on target and the military wants a monopoly on that ability, so sharing how you do it even for educational purposes or hobby size payloads is a no-no.
One point you didn't mention, but i think fits very well into this discussion, especially adding to the whole point of flame expansion:
You can see that at the beginning the engines produce these long orange flames. As the rocket goes up and air pressure falls, the flames expand. But then one more thing happens: the flames become less and less bright, until at some point you can see barely any flame at all. Just before stage separation there is only a black cloud of exhaust gas coming out of the engines.
The boost back burn does not produce a visible flame either, again only a dark cloud.
Reason:
The engines are running fuel-rich. That means that the mixture rate between fuel and oxygen inside the engines is such that not enough oxygen is present to burn all the fuel. There are several reasons why that is done, and i don't want to start that explanation since it would make this comment 5 times longer. But the point is that there is unburnt kerosene and soot coming out of the engine, together with all the exhaust gasses.
That is all the black stuff you can see when the engines are running at high altitude. (And also the stuff that causes the "jelly-fish effect" if the lighting is just right)
When the engines are running at low altitude, the exhaust flow mixes with ambient air. This allows the fuel from the exhaust stream to react with oxygen from the ambient, and burn. This causes the bright orange flames you see behind the rocket. Or at least the largest part of those flames.
But as the rocket rises up in altitude the air density drops, there is less and less oxygen available in the ambient air, and the flames dim down, until they eventually fade out and you only see the soot.
Spectacular Clarification. Thank you so much
Excellent, thanks! I always kinda noticed it but never really thought about it.
You know, the moment you mentioned flame color, I immediately knew where you were going with it and thought to myself, "Oh, hey, that's a neat point." ... but as many of these as I've watched, I just never registered it myself! Thanks!
But..................but..................what about pollution and global warming?? 😲
@@bdickinson6751 One of the purposes of running fuel rich is to *drastically* reduce both mass, which would require a great deal more fuel to offset (and the fuel to *lift* that fuel, Tsiolkovsky's not very forgiving on that), and part/material complexity. By running fuel rich, they give a film over the nozzle that keeps it cool. If they instead went with more "active" cooling (and ran perfect fuel/oxydizer ratios and had an idealistic environment), they would need to potentially change the nozzle material, as well as add all of the mass and complexity of pumping the coolant and removing heat from the coolant too. Energy cost of manufacture of the components themselves would potentially overshadow the fuel saved, and paired with the fuel needed to *then* lift those components, and it's *very* likely far worse, ecologically. Lastly, you *still* have to err towards fuel rich. Rocket engines are just fire. Fuel, oxygen, heat. Given enough heat and oxygen (which you have in a rocket engine) nearly *anything* can work as a fuel. Including the nozzle itself. Excess oxydizer can and often will *find* something to react with to burn when provided an ignition source. Running engine rich is *very* bad for a rocket.
The other detail is the fuel used. While hydrogen is great for cleanliness through the launch, that may be offset by the costs of production and infrastructure. It's also simply *very* hard to work with, as shown by the repeated issues on the ground side infrastructure for Artemis 1. RP-1 and Methane are simpler, and simpler allows a much higher launch cadence (which favors reuse, which means *not* producing and then throwing away the rocket after one flight, which is *also* better environmentally). Eventually, maybe, we'll get hydrogen production from green sources, cooling, storage, and use down to allow the same levels of use, but that'll be a while yet. Also, cutting out all spaceflight tomorrow would provide such a negligible change in carbon emissions on the whole that it's *definitely* not the tree to bark up.
So are you telling me that there was no cameraman physically hanging on the rocket filming all this?
Dang... Technology!
🤣
And all this time I thought Tom Cruise was the camera man 😅
no they're just trying to hide the infinite power of the cameraman
You bust me up! Laughed so hard, Cheeto's came out my nose!
@@richardpark3054 😂😂 you made it visually clear... No need of a cameraman there 😂
One thing you can certainly see is the Go-Pro fisheye lens view of Earth, making it look ridiculous. All the worlds a stage.
Came to the comments to see if anyone else saw that…
Why the need for it..
just giving flat earthers more fuel to prove their point…
What do you mean? Fish eye lens and earth looking ridiculous?
@@shtoleva07the camera lens is a fish eye lens. It curves everything in picture. And since when is the whole earth water.
They don't want you to see how flat it really is 😂
😂 no stars,1of many RED FLAGS!! AND WHO TF MADE THE GUY TALKING AN OFFICIAL SPINNING BALL BABBLER 😂😂!!! @opposition13
One little note: Falcon 9 is not falling during the boost-back burn, in fact, it continues to gain altitude well after the end of the burn (at roughly 3:23 min into the flight). During the Transporter 6 mission, the booster eventually crested at 146 km roughly 4:31 min into the flight.
- Edit: Sorry, TH-cam is reading the mission elapsed times as timestamps for this video, resulting in nonsense links.
It's falling (ballistic) the instant the engines are off. Whether it still has some upward momentum is a red herring unless it has escape/orbital velocity and vector. But it lacks that velocity, so it's falling back to Earth, period.
@@linuxgeex He is talking about the boost-back burn. At this point the rocket is climbing again to increase time of flight for the return. Although Some on the forum have said that this is not always the case.
Yes, and the boost-back burn is a horizontal vector to cancel horizontal thrust and return to the cape. There is also quite a bit of slewing (horizontal flying) by the booster after the entry burn, so the return is more than just a ballistic trajectory. (If the booster loses complete control, it's ballistic flight will leave it short of the lz and it will fall into the water)
@@alankott3129 Even then the boost-back isn't adding velocity. It's actually cancelling out the horizontal component of the vector away from the LZ, and it's still ballistic, which is falling, even if it's falling up temporarily. The flamey bit needs to be pointed a different direction for it not to be falling. NSF is right, he's wrong. Though he's understandably wrong, ie it's not an easy concept for people new to rocketry that you can be *falling* *up.*
@@isbjorneliassen Agreed, but ballistic is the overwhelming flight behaviour, lol. They have a small amount of discretion *where* it is falling, but they reserve what little discretion they have *whether* it is falling for the last few seconds so they don't make a crater ;-)
Great talk through, thanks Das and NSF team.
Great work, Das & @NASASpaceflight!
Why does the camera never face forwards on all these launch videos? Can it not withstand the force or something?
There are occasionally forward facing cameras (such as the view of the payload once the fairing separates or some booster cameras on the space shuttle) but the cameras are primarily for engineering value and the stuff the want to look at it down near the bottom of the rocket. Looking up at the sky just doesn't get them too much beyond interesting views for the livestream
@@thomashayden804 yeah I just think it would be cool to see forwards and backwards instead of just backwards all the time.
they put this videos in the algorithm so u dont see what u really looking for
The Earth is flat! That's what they are hidding with Fish eye lenses !
then, fill the comment section with 50% of reinforcing bots and wah-lah!
facts
what?
Right before he pointed out the camera location, I saw what I expected to which was surprising!
One of the best NSF videos by far! Great explanation!
Yes!
Wow are you that stupid
Simplified without being "dumbed down". Precise explanations with awesome visual examples. As always, great job! Thank you JG and NSF for everything you provide!!
I think the part of the legs deploying because of momentum didn't require a long explanation of what momentum is. Other than that, I agree.
"Whatever you wanna call it" multiple times lol. Precise.
fake af lol
@@DoctorZisIN haha I was just going to say this 😅
@@MHollywood5 i'd think its pretty precise to call you a prick.
I understand there would be ice but what about that mouse that was recently caught on one of the rockets after it had left the atmosphere?
Conspiracies theories are usually not tolerated by those who orchestrate the conspiracy. The fact that your comment has appeared here almost gives their b.s credibility. I am guessing that negative comments are selectively shadow banned.
This is a very well done video. Really appreciate the excellent commentary. I would love to see more videos like this!
@@rickyevans5822 Lol, I love it when flat earth people launch themselves up in homemade steam rockets strapped to an rv and accidentally unlive themselves to prove the flat earth.
@@thefunniestfarm4731oh that guy wasn’t a flat earther. He was just using the flat earthers money to have fun in his life. God bless that man.
@@CarbonMonoxxide If that's the case, too bad he couldn't make it to orbit on their money :( Would have been epic fun.
@@thefunniestfarm4731 for sure. It kinda makes that guy more of a legend to me, as he literally scammed the flat earthers with their stupidity.
@@CarbonMonoxxide Is there proof out there that this was his goal and he wasn't a flat earther?
I think these videos are very helpful for those less versed in spaceflight tech. You explained Falcon in a way that my mother would understand, and that's quite a feat!
I would love to like this comment but unfortunately I cannot add a like to the current 69 likes
😂
Loved that in-depth walk through, yes! With such amazing footage, as well! Thanks Das and NSF-Team!
Agreed!
Yep, bang on! I thoroughly enjoyed watching this one. I think that all the questions were answered.
This is one of the best videos I’ve seen on TH-cam. Interesting, entertaining and informative. Thanks for taking the time to put it together and explaining everything so well.
"Everything can be an UFO, if you’re really bad in identifying flying objects." Made my day!
@saschay2k. But when you Master your skills, you can identify them, easier. Nasa is a side-dish of the Bible. Both have same purpose. Distract humanity’s mind. Only lazy parrots are submerged into the Lie.
But the Bible gives you hints. Nasa doesnt, nor the Gov.
Why is it that just moments after take-off, when the land is still clearly the launch area, the edge of the Earth's curve comes into sight? Aren't there meant to be miles and miles of sea before we see that?
The booster was already extremely high up when the horizon became visible. By then you are able to see hundreds of miles of the ocean.
Curvature 😆 🤣 😂 😹 😆 🤣
Fish eye lenses, notic that at some point is curved and while flipping it goes flat.
Another thing that's great about this video is watching the F9's position relative to the Earth during the boost back burn. You can see it moving downrange as it flips, and then slow down, but still travel upwards as it completes its "altered" ballistic trajectory. The Earth appears to stop revolving below, but keeps getting farther away. The boost back burn is intended to change the horizontal velocity and direction of the booster, but no so much in the vertical. It starts to descend a little later.
😂
It only appears to stop revolving ....must be refraction of some kind LOL ☯
(Pls answer me) On some F9 booster's landing shots I saw that it ignites one center engine and for a short time 2 more so 3 engines are burning. Only a while later it turns to 1 engine and of course lands. But in most videos everyone says it's "1 engine landing burn". Does it sometimes ignites one engine and sometimes three? Or it always ignites 2 more engines just for a short moment?
It varies landing by landing. Using 3 engines for part of it improves performance because it spends less time slowing down, but it also puts more wear and tear on the booster, so it only gets used when needed. So if you see a 3 engine burn you can know they're pushing the capabilities on that profile, and if you see a 1 engine burn you know they have a bit of margin
@@thomashayden804 Thanks bro!
@@thomashayden804 thanks!
That is a really cool video from SpaceX
It's one I've begged for, for so long! Now they need to do the same thing in their livestreams a single take livestream on board the f9 and also a full single tracking camera video would be great!
Thanks John, can't get enough of the coverage from SpaceX.
You like cartoons, Eh?
This fake
This video has generated a lot of interest.
Can you please provide a link to the uncut launch video please and let me know? Very important
Here you go! twitter.com/spacex/status/1611024931348959232
Yes. I like these fuller, more complete, explanations!
I have always said since I first saw Falcon 9 launch that nobody, not even Boeing/NASA with its many years of experience can produce the viewer experience like one gets from a SpaceX launch, the photography is second to none. Now you come along and blow that right out of the sky with more SpaceX photography. That was amazing footage thank you so much for showing it.
Lol cgi
I've seen better on video games and Hollywood movies. They need a better production crew.
@MarrtinoJennings oh look at this guys, we've found the genius. You guys just don't understand anything space or physics related and thus, it's fake or CGI. Sad.
One of the best NSF videos by far! Great explanationn an yes, I like these fuller, more complete, explanations! You (NSF-team) should do more of these analytic videos.
What I did notice was that x space walks with all our newer technology shows the space walks looking much different in every way than the supposed old ones
Please do more of these videos. Das does a great job explaining these videos. His energy is so wonderful as he explains these issues.
12:13 YES please do more of these commentary videos! They are very informative, have great hosts and are very well produced! I yust love them! Please!
I hope that Spacex tells us one day how they refurbish the boosters. That would be so awesome to know what the process is and how much is actually refurbished! Awesome video as always!
I think their potential competitors would love to know that process.
@@robertweinmann9408 indeed!
The engineering behind this is just top notch amazing
Its a balloon with a smoke machine ////////////////////////// Growup //////////////////////////////////////
@@kipbrown1549 What 'balloon' are you referring to?
Been watching NSF and similar content streams for years, familiar with everything you described. Yet, this was perhaps the best overall description of an RTLS F9 mission because of the format. Thanks to spaceX for sharing this footage and everything they have made public and Please provide more content in this format going forward!
Oh man, one of my favorite videos from you guys ever. Which is saying so much.
Well done Das and well done team.
This was an awesome explanation and I would LOVE to see more videos like this. You did a really good job of explaining things and keeping it interesting.
I love space, I love exploration, I love information. Only thing that makes all of these better is it being delivered by a Smexy man, and YOU have ticked all of those boxes!!! 😍🥰
Look up Werner von Braun, Jack Parsons, Elron Hubbard and Alasdair Crowley in relation to space and NASA
I love these kinds of breakdowns! I'm not well-enough educated to notice them myself, but I absolutely love to learn about them. These kinds of videos are my favorite. Please keep them coming! (Especially as we start to get starship videos...)
i bet within the next decade a human can really walk on the moon
@@KillerCuddles-fc6kgcan’t walk on something that’s not a rock
@@ClappyCakes I did... I walked on a tree branch after I climbed the tree
@@KillerCuddles-fc6kg .... dude what? You missed me point entirely.
@@ClappyCakes LMAO Did I? ;-)
Need more "Das explains" videos, this was cool to watch
Thank you for doing this. It really helps me understand more of what is going on during a launch and landing. I am grateful that SpaceX is mindful enough of the public to share this with us.
Why this rocket start going horizontal?
That’s how you enter an orbit. Getting to space is easy, STAYING in space is hard as you’d have to accelerate to over 17,500mph horizontally at around 100 miles in altitude.
Learn whats an orbit, then ask
Yes please to more of these! To include each stage of falcon and starship. I don't have the time to follow as closely as you folks can and a concentration look at all of them is a great thing.
Thanks NSF. You folks are awsome!!!
I enjoyed the narrative. I had seen the video and understood the general principles of what I saw, but your narrative made things clearer. Thanks!
Please continue to cover topics like this. I'm not an engineer and found this information informative and easy to understand.
Every landing I witness makes me giddy inside.
Nice fisheye lense for the camera too
Yea to make the earth appear round smh
@@BahamianKingGaming IDIOT 🤦🏾♂️🤦🏾♂️😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣
@@BahamianKingGaming keep shaking your head. The rest of us will keep doing real science.
Don't leave your mother's basement!
@@keith726able dont knock the basement ive seen some pretty sweet ones full bar, stripper pole, pool table and vintage arcade games plus they stay cool trmps in the summer
Keep using your dumbo lenses viewin the world, n keep your delusion of flat earth
Yes please do more videos like this and I think the question everyone was really asking about was the cords inside the innerstage that you see dangling during stage separation. Also even though it might be old could you do one of these types of videos on the space shuttle. I grew up with them and was in the 5th grade when we lost Challenger. Up until that point she was for some reason my favorite vehicle and I was very sad that day. I was sad for Columbia as well but even sadder when the shuttle program was shut down and today I am proud to say that the falcon 9 and Crew Dragon is my new favorite space vehicle and can't wait to see a launch in person. Please guys at NSF keep up the great videos and thank the whole team for bringing us such great material. You guys are Awesome
5yrs old, such EM damage it caused . hahahahha
Always enjoy Das commentary. Good mix of knowledge and humor.
Definitely do more of these it’s only gonna get more complicated very well explained thank you
I loved this and this was the first video of this channel Ive ever watched.
I just really like the way you explain this, you are easy to understand and get into little details without getting too geeky. Hope you continue and would like to see similar vid on starship.
Outstanding commentary John! And yes, we'd like to see more of this!
Great video Das!
I want a camera facing up toward space too
This was an excellent video that they posted, and you did an equally excellent job explaining everything. It would be great to see more of these!
Yes more of this please! Maybe do one for drone ship landing or this but for Falcon Heavy. That would be cool.
Their pinned message is them saying Falcon Heavy coming soon. So :)
@@Vatsyayana87 oh lol Im dumb. I didn't see that the first time lol.
@@forge_gamer5174 lol, i only see the pinned if im just going through looking for questions i might have an answer for.
I love hearing Das' enthusiasm for rockets
0:36 what's the sun reflecting off of?
I'm not sure I see any sun reflection at that point (other than a diffuse one off the body of the rocket). There are some puffs of reaction control thrusters that might be what you're seeing, where the booster's shooting compressed nitrogen out to control its orientation
Brilliant vid Das, sharp, concise, and extremely informative. Definitely add these type of videos to the channels repertoire
Well done Das! Love the humor peppered throughout! Great explanations and breakdown! NSF rocks!
More, more, more! Loved the commentary. Well done
The fact that we are living in a time where we have relanding space rockets amazes me.
We had a reusable landing spaceship years ago!!
Where my flat earthers at?
Not here but some weird shit is going on earth for sure
@@ParkesyBeamsI choose not to believe scientists and science that have invested interests, like trillions of dollars of Interest..
Here
😂🖐
I loved this! More please?
Been watching NSF for years now. Great commentary and video-love your work-thanks as always!
So what your saying is You've been watching NASA deception for years 😂
Why did the rocket tilt towards the thruster instead of away from it @0:26?
It’s pushing the top of the booster to swing the base around. If you hold a pole on its centre of mass and you push on the side near the top of the pole, the bottom will swing out from the same side you pushed from.
@@archierush868 the thruster looks to be at the base of the rocket, not the nose..
@@c3surfopthey are inline with the gridfins. You can see it right next to them just a few seconds later as he shows where the camera is.
@@archierush868 I do see that now. Camera angles sure paint a different picture.
@@c3surfopall good. Just odd camera angles and trying to interpret 3d space using a 2d screen.
Love these types of videos! More of them please!!!
Excellent review John. Would love to see more of these when possible. Thank you!
I saw the video when SpaceX released it but didn’t really “see” all of it until I watched this. Thanks for the awesome explanations.
This was a great explination of some things I knew, some things if didn't, and connecting them all together. Looking forward to more of this type of content!!!
John, that was brilliant, so much information, delivered in a very entertaining way. Thank You =)
Great job as always Das! Miss your KSP streams. Glad you’re enjoying another chapter in your career with some neat science.
It was very informative, especially for people that don't know a whole lot about F9. Even if you do understand it all, it can be helpful having the explanation next to the visual. Personally I thought is was a magical shot. Getting to see the whole adventure the booster goes on. It would be great if sometime we got to see the entire adventure of the 2nd stage, in time lapse or something like that. :) Good work Das!
Unfortunately we don't see the life if the booster between flights, not even a timelapse of the few days or weeks in the hangar.
@@johndododoe1411 That too would be cool to see, but I am guessing the refurb process would expose a lot of IP things... :/
@@R0bobb1e Well that's their problem, not ours. But they did release such video of space shuttle refurbishment.
@@johndododoe1411 I still want to see it and there is the little fuzz out thing that is often used. lol Anyway, do you have a link for the Shuttle refurb?
question : though the sprinklers are there to deal with sound ? is that wrong ?
It’s partly true but it’s more used to mitigate any potential fires caused by the launch. During landing, there’s basically nothing that can catch fire except for the rocket which is why they have remote controlled fire extinguishers aimed at the rocket
Thanks Das for the deep dive that was cool! I knew a lot of that but it was still nice to get a play by play break down. I know NSF does have a lot of great coverage options but I would enjoy more of these.
What a fantastic video showing from go to woah ❤ with explanations well done guys 😊
Love the narrated commentary. More please! Keep up all the great work you guys do @NASASpaceflight!
Amazing Video. Loved it
Shame that the video shows the curvature of the earth at that extreme at only a few miles up instead of about 200 miles like it should be showing. Absolute bollocks. Fake!
@@MichaelTate-m8uThe video is sped up, you do know that right?
I learned more about rocket launches in this video than ive ever learned throughout my life! Thanks!
Excellent piece Das and +1 to management to let you do more of these. I love little dissections of process. Like “why do they need to extend the TE for Falcon Heavy?” An add to this one would be the fact that we clearly could see the booster still gaining altitude after MECO. I don’t think we had seen it that clearly before and certainly not on stream. Saved the video just for that piece alone, to describe what’s cool about RTLS.
lol he showed the same streams u could get public. lol .; little searching and would have found.
I currently work at SpaceX and this video was very informative. Great work!
I want to work at space X
Fake X
@@ClappyCakes XDXD but you real m0r0n XD
So what exactly is the mission of this rocket?
Transporter-6. Multiple small satellites SpaceX launches these for companies and some governments
To hoodwink the gullible.
The flight clip (first 35 secs) is compelling! One of the most amazing things I’ve seen in years.
Great video buddy. Love it when you guys speak freely and don't read a script. Big thumbs up.
Great explanation! Would be cool to see more of these videos going forward. I think they could help everyone understand things better :)
At VAFB SLC-4E the flame bucket would direct hot exhaust from Titan III and IV rockets onto a hillside across from the pad 1000 feet away. In summer and fall the hillside would catch fire. Base FD always plowed a big firebreak around the area before launches.
Hi There John, having spent my almost entire working life in aviation (predominately engineering and project management), this clip is both informative interesting and very well presented, so thank you and very big yes to doing more of this type of commentary. Rgds BH from NZ
I love when he says “air particles or whatever you want to call it”. This is real science and engineering!
Brilliant :D love this style of educational commentary. More please!
Awesome video! Would love to see more of this "educational" content.
This video brought me to your channel, pretty damn cool.. Thank you for posting this.
Thanks Das, I'd personally be well in favour of more explanatory videos from NSF like this one. A well informed nerd is a happy nerd. Keep up the great work.
Nice explanation, and brake down. Thank you 😊
Great video! I grew up here on the Space Coast, watching launches ever since the first Mercury rockets. I still get a thrill with every launch! And I really appreciate these informative videos.
Oh so you’ve seen the fake launches first hand?
@@ClappyCakes stop being a dumbass person trying to deny what people seen with their own eyes.
At what altitude does everything turn into cgi? And why are some of shots of take off , the orange flame is cgi?
Never, it’s all real footage. Go to Florida and watch one in person
@@archierush868 No it's not. Why add cgi flame on the launch pad. You can't and won't answer. Looks exactly like the cgi lava the geological videos fake. Answer the question, why do they use cgi ? Other than to mislead, what is the purpose of all these cgi images and videos.
@@aaroncangemi9057they don’t use CGI. I literally just watched a Falcon 9 launch earlier today on a livestream and several people in the chat were also watching it in person.
This is all real. Go to Florida if you still don’t think live-streaming an event is enough evidence to prove it’s real
So funny people like u are trying to deny everything 😂
@archierush868
Should we be impressed with Helium filled 'payloads'.?
Loved the commentary -- very informative!
Absolutely loved this video. You explained so much in such a short time. Thank you.
That was absolutely awesome John.. Most people go thru life never getting the opportunity to see something like that up and close... Then to have everything explained like you did... Gives someone like me the entire package.. if you want to call it that. So thank you. If you keep producing.. I'll keep watching..
I have a couple of bridged I want to sell are you interested??? You bumb enough to belive space I said why not ask .
See WHAT?????? WHAT DID WE MISS? BESIDES THIS CGI SHOWING ZERO LAND,ZERO STARS,NO 'ENTRY' NO 'EXIT' 😂!! JUST EDITED CGI BULL💩 AS USUAL,AND WHOS THE GUY UR FOLLOWING??? WHO MADE HIM THE LIAR TO FURTHER MISLEAD FOLLOWERS???
This is one hell of a breakdown. Good video.
Awesome video, very well explained
Super cool John!
I don't care how many times I watch a booster landing, it still blows my mind that it's even possible!! :o)
😂😂😂
@@James-zp5poBecause it's possible.
Keeping asking questions. 'Seeing is believing' is no longer reliable.