SpaceX's Official channel (some incredible camera shots) New vids posted every day from Boca Chica TX, home of SpaceX Starship Analysis of all things space and then some Lot's of good in-depth vids .
There's an app... I mean a video for that. More than you ever wanted to know about rocket abort systems. (Long, but very informative if you're interested. I crank up the playback speed on these long vids) It's complicated. History and statistics show .... Under video description, see 'Time stamps'/Show more. For short answer, hit 41:50 time stamp. .
Ive no doubt they'll figure out the landing. Surprised by now they haven't modeled it more accurately. Whats starship supposed to do? Is it a paradigm breaker. hard to seperate the fact from fiction.
Landed too hard and 3 of 6 legs (temporary design) did not lock. The 3 locked legs were completely crushed (as designed, but would not have crushed 6 legs as bad). Some plumbing was damaged from hard landing, leaked 'fuel' and BOOM! Good vid with 'likely' explanation Jump to 4:00 to see close-up of 3 landing legs NOT deploying properly. .
simple google would have answered your question. Elon Musk's goal is to colonize Mars. This is a multi-generational (looong term) goal. First the moon, to test and develop everything, then Mars. Is it achievable? Look what he's done with SpaceX (and Tesla) so far as a private company. All's it takes is vision and money. Lot's of it. His Starlink satellite internet constellation will pay for it. Bet against Elon Musk and you will probably lose. scroll down to 'Intended uses' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_Starship .
We lost a DC-X to a landing strut failure to extend. Crew serviced three before lunch and none after lunch. There were only four struts. Crew has just heard they lost the NASA X-33 competition to L-M, who wasted $1.3B and never flew.
I've kinda been wondering why they're landing with engines off when they have throttles. I figured that the rocket scientists had their reasons (wear?) but as an IT architect I've always been a fan of redundancy in systems.
All rocket engines are not easy to throttle and many will not throttle deeply. Sometimes takes a special type of injector, like the pintle they finally used on the Lunar Excursion Module (LM) after conventional plate injectors could not hack deep throttling. Using more engines to land like Musk suggested just makes them have to throttle more deeply. A trade, obviously. Solution sometimes is to use separate landing engines, but this hurts mass fraction (% of mass that is propellant).
slo-mo in 4k. Jump to 2:00 for explosion that would be right at home in Apocalypse Now Note how rocket crumples near top from upward force .
What are the dark tubular? things flying up & left at 3:03----- seem to be leaving little propellant trails?
Flyover of SpaceX Starship facilities in Boca Chica, Texas. Jump to 7:15 for SN10 wreckage on landing pad .
My understanding is this is not a prototype. It’s some sort of proofed of concept. We’re not seeing. Rocket that could make it into space or decend through and athmosphere. I guess you gotta Start somewhere though. Is this different to the Dcx?
Currently Space-X lands their booster. These boosters never go into orbit or achieve the speeds associated with going into orbit. So they don't have any significant TPS. Neither does this POC Starship. The DC-X design incorporated design aspects to return from orbit, with all the associated issues of re-entry.
Starship seems to me like a booster with a. Sci-fi capsule on top that goes up a bit and then lands. beaides the cool aspect what are they proving here. Is there a much bigger one coming that Can achieve orbit. what are we looking at here, what are they demonstrating and what does this then lead to.
