Why is Starship Important? | Starship Series Intro

[@mortallychallenged]

It's been hard to explain to someone who doesn't know anything about spaceflight about the importance of starship. I think this video does a really good job as an introduction, combined with the other wonderful content you've posted. Really looking forward to more!

[@MrWaldorfian]

Its also hard to explain to naysayers who don't get that Falcon and Dragon will be obsolete once Starship is operational. They can't seem to grasp that total reusability means actual lower mission costs. This video is a very good explainer for that.

[@Iamrich00]

....

[@Danuxsy]

@@MrWaldorfian it is even harder to explain that Starship is not operational whatsoever.

[@historicallyaccurate6635]

My boy got a sponsorship! Good job mate!

[@gamersheheryar8770]

@Dylanrules22 Lol !!!!!

[@lachlanhempell]

good on you for getting a sponsor, your content is seriously under-appreciated at the moment. keep up the good work!

[@jacobwiens659]

BO isn’t building New Glenn to “Better Compete,” New Glenn is there entry into the market. I wish people would stop treating BO like an established, successful space company when they’re not.

[@snuffeldjuret]

@@janos1945 but at the same time, they are not.

[@ReiseLukas]

@@janos1945 They haven't even sent a cockroach to orbit, and you call them successful?

[@sadiqahmed4143]

@@janos1945 that goes to virgin galactic

[@shuryimaziz3426]

@@janos1945 suborbital hops don't count as space

[@mirien7277]

Counterpoint: Competing is better competition than not competing. :)

[@SomeoneNamedTygget]

Great rundown. An interesting side effect of SpaceX's ridiculous speed and constant updates of the design is that most of the info out there on Starship is pretty outdated, so it's good to have a refresher every now and then. A lot of people get really annoyed at people treating Starship like it'll be god's gift to rocketry, but it really isn't an exaggeration to think that it'll signal a fundamental shift in how we access space.

[@raifikarj6698]

Yeah example as From interview of everyday astronout Space X will test many different engine configuration and currently testing 29 engine not 33 engine.

[@jagaszepielak2601]

Fack of hater 💩

[@torbenjensen189]

Starship would be awesome if it works the way Elon claims. Problem is its not build yet, and that its highly unlikely it can work as Elon has claimed.

[@espenha]

@@torbenjensen189 There are no showstoppers as far as I can see. Though it will likely take more time than what Musk is hoping.

[@RawandCookedVegan]

@@espenha The fact that the whole thing is reusable and that it can carry the amount of payload that it does is pretty impressive. I don't know how you define showstopper but these developments are certainly new to the space industry.

[@osirisapex7483]

This is the first time I’ve ever heard of “Yenisei” and “921,” wow, I didn’t know so many super heavy lift vehicles were in development!

[@topsecret1837]

Oh yeah. Even more interestingly, an Angara-based SHLV I’ve heard was being developed, alongside a vehicle borrowing much from Energia. But I’m guessing the Yenisei is related to Angara where I recalled hearing that from. Even still, there were attempts a few decades ago at shuttle derived SHLVs which were never put into production, despite not needing to have crew on board. For once, an American company is straightening out the backwards inside out style space politics in the United States, and I’m somewhat thankful!

[@Goulmy86]

That's because Chinese government isn't advertising like SpaceX or Blue Org

[@piotrd.4850]

Yeah, in slide/foil/ppt-driven-development. Energya flew.

[@221b-l3t]

The Russiams have at least 100 rockets "in development" at any given time.

[@rhover]

There's additional info at Wikipedia, and many links from this article: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_heavy-lift_launch_vehicle

[@rogerfreeman6787]

How dare you release this during the Starship stacking livestream?

[@spencerjensen1993]

Hahahahaha!!! 🤣🤣🤣

[@mdnafimkhandakernafim6718]

LoL

[@sadiqahmed4143]

Concidnare

[@regolith1350]

We're so used to the law of diminishing returns for payloads to more distant destinations. It's always been Rocket ABC can launch X tons to LEO, 1/2X to GTO, 1/4X to LLO, 1/8 to Lunar surface, etc. We have never seen "Rocket ABC can launch 100 tons to ANYWHERE." Orbital refueling makes that possible, and fully reusable rockets make orbital refueling possible (economically viable).

[@Mqrius]

It's such a gamechanger! Love your name btw :)

[@michaelvigil5321]

Russians should have just given him the missile. They accidentally made SpaceX and their own rocket development's demise when they didn't sell it.

[@shreysharma726]

lmao yeah

[@thestudentofficial5483]

Nah, we're living in a better timeline. Sometimes somebody has to lose so that the entirety can win.

[@michaelvigil5321]

@@thestudentofficial5483 well I'm talking about the Russian's interests.

[@mikerosoft8661]

Russia:- *rejects giving missile to musk Musk:- fine I'll do it myself

[@mordecaisackett9421]

Serendipity works in mysterious ways LOL

[@SomeBoredGuy69]

I am a novice when it comes to this subject. I started taking interest due to recommendations from KZbin for the live test flights that have taken place over the past year. I just finished watching Part 1 and 2 of Everyday Astronaut interview with Elon. I was left with questions about this program. You answered so many of those questions. A big THANKYOU for making this video!

[@Apogeespace]

I’m glad I could help! I definitely recommend checking out Everyday Astronauts other starship video. He has good educational videos, the Elon interview is much more high level than his videos. Thanks for watching!

[@spencerjensen1993]

Welcome to team space! :)

[@erichoberg3502]

I'd watch Common Sense Skeptics on Starship as well. Very interesting perspective. When they say "it can refuel in space"...have they actually done it. There's a lot of talk of what it can do without actually doing it as yet. So, it's good to look at a different perspective.

[@HarrisonAdAstra]

I already know this video is going to be amazing and I haven’t even finished the intro!

[@lolfreakwaca4328]

Same

[@morteza1024]

The entire video is intro for starship series😁

[@r_rumenov]

Man, this is such high quality content for the sub count. Instant subscribe

[@armchairrocketscientist4934]

If you want more, we'd love to have you on our discord server! We are pretty active in talking about anything space, and unlike a lot of discords for space, it is free, no patreon required.

[@rogerfreeman6787]

Blue Organ is making New Glenn!? I keep up with this stuff pretty closely, and I didn't know that. I guess one fairing is a start.

[@Evangq]

"Making"

[@Garryck-1]

A *very* slow start. They've been working for 20 years, and they still don't have an engine, they still don't have a rocket, and they still haven't orbited. Maybe they should change their logo to a snail.

[@erideimos1207]

I guess that second fairing is proving a real bitch. At least BO won't have to test anything: In the millions of renderings flown so far, New Glenn has a perfect flight record.

[@az09letters92]

@@Garryck-1 Very offensive for snails!

[@FallSkyX]

@@Garryck-1 they do have engines I think. Isn't the engines are the same used on ULA Vulcan?

[@adriank8792]

What a great day to get even more hyped about this amazing rocket. First full SS+SH stack, and now this

[@flashbarry6838]

I've been waiting for another video from you, thanks for another upload, I can only imagine that this will be another amazing and informative video... keep it up 👍

[@rogerfreeman6787]

And this is just the intro to the series!

[@ClearAlera]

Wow, this was great. I've been following starship development closely for a long time now, and you still dropped some history that was new to me. Thanks!

[@linecraftman3907]

Just when you think this channel has reached Apogee it keeps going higher! Looks like we're on a hyperbolic trajectory

[@LuigiRBedin]

A ha! You won! Your video out just before Starship staking! Congratulations 💕👍👍👍👍

[@jacobschwartz7500]

Damn Wind!!!

[@carlfranz]

This is exactly what I wanted -- a clear, concise history of the StarShip. Excellent work!!

[@cadenmurphy8371]

Amazing job! Your research and presentation makes it very enjoyable to watch. Keep it up!

[@michaelherron362]

I’ve been following your videos since they began. Originally I was skeptical, but I have come to value the manner in which you connect all the factoids into coherent narratives using logic, arithmetic, and bits of news (usually Elon quotes). Your videos are under appreciated. Keep up the great work.

[@garyc1384]

Yeah coz 'Elon' quotes are SO reliable

[@alisasuphap1759]

Excellent beginning to end

[@ParameterGrenze]

I appreciate the compactness of your graphs.

[@paulburrell4120]

Great content and excellent narration. The narrator’s voice is super-important in engaging the audience, and you have a gift in this regard.

[@drdoolittle5724]

Na, easily fooled, that was Speechalo!

[@topsecret1837]

Elon has said today that they have plans to stretch the already 120m tall 2-stage stack of starship, alongside a payload upgrade to 150 tons and an expendable tonnage of 250 tons. As of today, the first Starship stack was completed at about 07:55 EDT, paving the way to tank tests toward a launch within the month.

[@michaelsmith2723]

Elon has always said gen 2 is 18 meters, which means you have to stretch it as well. Building methods are the same and it is supper scalable.

[@michaelsmith2723]

18 meters needs a bigger, more powerful engine. Is Raptor scalable as well?

[@espenha]

@@michaelsmith2723 Raptor was originally intended to be a larger engine, so it should be possible to scale it up. But you don't need a more powerful engine to increase the diameter of the rocket. Going for an 18 meter diameter, 120 meter high Starhip would really only mean having to increase the number of Raptors from 33 to around 132. Stretching the Starship however might require more powerful engines, though. As this doesn't increase the area under the rocket for more engines.

[@snuffeldjuret]

@@michaelsmith2723 I don't think they will go for the 18 m wide one. I recall Elon tweeting about how it is increasingly difficult the bigger you get, even mentioning that 9 m might have been too big. Stretching the length comes as a consequence of improving the rocket, which changes certain equations making a taller one more efficient.

[@sadiqahmed4143]

@@espenha 132 😀😀 lol I just exploded while reading that

[@PeterAndrewsVermont]

Excellent summary. Happy to find your channel.

[@isaacstevens1912]

I've literally just found your channel and I'm already so invested in your success. Your content is incredible, high quality, insightful, intelligent, wonderful.

[@lambertenserink9724]

I just discovered your channel and this is fantastic. Keep it up!

[@eccentricity23]

Excellent breakdown. I can't wait to see future episodes!

[@uniter343]

Glad to see a new Video! Great Quality as Always. You have already become one of my favourite channels.

[@PaddyPatrone]

Love the fact based approach. Keep up the good work!

[@kumisz2]

The quality of these videos is just awesome.

[@jakobleedk]

Love your visualisations - it's clear that you spend a lot of time on them. Keep it going!

[@Fhensleytx]

Great job... Looking forward to the next in this series!

[@vinumcopia9850]

ON the cost breakdown, I think it would be important to include a line item for the amortized cost of the reusable components; based on the expected life-cycle of said component. For example, 10% of the cost of the Flacon 9 first stage construction based on an approximate life cycle of 10 flights.

[@christoferfinnietapper3288]

To make it a fair comparison you would have to factor in the infrastructure needed to operate the rocket, here I think the cost goes up dramatically. Stage 0 is probably the most costly part of starship.

[@phillipneiswanger5198]

You forgot the nitrogen used in cold gas thrusters on both stages of Falcon 9. Not as expensive as helium, but still an expense.

[@aaronmcculloch8326]

Absurdly high quality content! Keep up the great work

[@Round_Slinger]

SpaceX has been landing and reusing boosters for years now. Clearly most competitors don't want to adapt, just complain when SpaceX wins contracts and customers. Once Starship is ready, it'll be even worse for these other companies that have little or nothing in the works to compete with it, as they don't even have something to compete with Falcon 9.

[@yawnyawn6038]

It’s not that they don’t want to , they don’t have the capital

[@michalfaraday8135]

@@yawnyawn6038 ULA is a combo of Boeing and Lockheed, they got plenty of capital. Ariannespace got more than 4 billion dollars for Arianne 6 development. Capital is not the issue, they didn´t want to take risks in case it won´t work.

[@sensora194]

@@yawnyawn6038 that's a funny joke

[@Crunch_dGH]

Gee! Kinda like how Tesla's disrupting not only ICE, but EVs (& grid storage, tunnels, neural science, etc., etc.)! That Elon's one fun guy!🥳

[@H4hT53]

I really love your content. Well structured, well told, brilliant illustrations.

[@garyking6262]

Thanks for such a clear explanation of this capability. Eager to hear more.

[@karldergr0sse]

Damn, I cant wait for Starship to lauch the first time... Great videos man, you rock!

[@ryantyznar2247]

This is an excellent video channel deserves way more subs and hype. Extremely well done graphic design, easy to read and understand and thorough. Good work man.

[@Grig9700]

Feed the youtube algorithm by liking and commenting, it'll help to get this wonderful channel more attention! This was great! I finally have something to send to my non space enthusiast friends that explains the importance of Starship and SpaceX adequately ^^ Thank you sooo much for the vid, your content is always top notch. I hope you have an awesome day mate~

[@gamersheheryar8770]

Finally another apogee vid , good job bro !!

[@semosesam]

Damn dude, you really just came out swinging with your content! Really great videos, keep it up!

[@dasmilyshelf6999]

Apogee: “Very respected 3rd party, NASA” Flat Earthers: “BIG FAKE ROCKET BOIII”

[@dgsindelar]

incredible video! thank you for explaining how you arrive at your numbers and ideas. you've got some of the best videos i've seen on Starship

[@dartsntoys8445]

Thanks for making this I have been wondering about if instantly re using starship was actually feasible

[@martenhansen7419]

please keep making videos you are amazing!

[@stevecrye]

Very, very good! Super production values, scripted, researched, slick and professional!! Subscribed. Do you offer membership?

[@armchairrocketscientist4934]

There is Apogee's patreon, but we also have a pretty good discord, which is one of the few free spaceflight discords I've been in that actually has activity.

[@privateerburrows]

Excellent video! Can't wait for the following installments.

[@cozysewings]

I have watched your videos from day 1. Your subscriber count is far less that what it should be. Great vid again. Love it

[@khaccanhle1930]

Thanks for your work. You have the most well researched, technical videos about SpaceX on web. Nice job.

[@tinkumonikalita7459]

Everyday astronaut??

[@khaccanhle1930]

@@tinkumonikalita7459 yes but Tim doesn't address the details about the potential uses for the BFR in ways that this guy does.

[@jjcadman]

Great job with this latest video. Can't wait for the rest of your series.

[@orange_phoenix4774]

Absolutely amazing video really explaining some of the capabilities of star ship that I did not know about.

[@JoeLLundahL]

Awesome video! All the illustrations are so simple and clean, just great. one small thing I noticed at 27:10 A starship on TMI wouldn't have to cancel out its escape velocity to return to Earth. It could orbit the sun once and come back to Earth in 1-2 years. Takes a long time but saves kilometers of DeltaV

[@Apogeespace]

Thanks! Yes it doesn’t have to cancel out the velocity. But as I said I kind of wanted the booster to come back ASAP so I accounted for that in my delta v calculations. It only takes one more launch and the opportunity cost of a missing ship is more than that.

[@lynansheng]

​@@Apogeespace Your Earth-orbit rendezvous Dragon/HLS plan was remarkable. Have you considered the idea of putting a dedicated 'crew space' Starship into an Aldrin Cycler orbit; so a transiting crew starship can dock to it with a larger mass fraction of useful payload, and enjoy greater habitable volume during their transfer period?

[@antoriunge2194]

Finally after a long awaiting. Grate to have you back

[@davidhenry5128]

A great start to the series, much very looking forward to the next installment.

[@Crunch_dGH]

Very helpful, thank you!

[@Existence_Optional]

Amazing! Hope you keep up the good work on this channel. I really like the non-bias analytical position of all of your videos.:)

[@jeppejensen5382]

Finally have waited for it!!

[@Matthew-by6vl]

Great content guys! More please!

[@stuffthatneedsmanyhumans2499]

Fuel is

[@lynansheng]

As long as he's purchasing it. If only they had plans for an ISRU process to take atmospheric CO2, water, and solar-generated electricity to create their own supply of Methylox. But, I mean, where's the owner of Tesla going to find that kind of solar generating capacity? Atmospheric CO2 is hard to come by; and have you ever seen a free source of *water* on a beach in texas? Or on an ocean platform? It isn't like this is Mars or something. :)

[@jonbong98]

And that's before they start producing gas's on site, pumping methane from site, using their own solar and wind power, All of which is Already in process.

[@blaineallen]

This is great! Would you share the script for this? There’s so much info that you state very concisely. Either way thank you for helping make the significance of Starship so attainable.

[@staph8022]

good video! i subscribed, i also noticed jeff who at the end of the bill HAHAH

[@clarencehopkins7832]

Excellent stuff bro

[@kenhelmers2603]

Nicely done. Can't wait for the rest of the series! :)

[@davevann9795]

Starship can be used as an orbital booster or tug. Where one fully fueled tug Starship can dock its nose to the back-end of an orbiting payload-carrying Starship, to boost that payload-carrying Starship to a deep space mission at a faster speed than the payload-carrying Starship would have been able to do on its own. When used to hurry to a rendezvous with an incoming Earth-intersecting asteroid, multiple tugs may be able to be used, and the tugs expended, for protecting the Earth.

[@dyadyaboba]

Yeah, with a hammer in hand, every problem is a nail. Check, what kind of engines are used for "deep-space" missions.

[@leir6502]

Great video. Very balanced reporting and very informative. And unlike others that shall not be named here, you did not interject biases to the video or manufacture controversies for a schtick. Also I really appreciate the Quality of the videos you present. Unlike others that put out junk info for the sake of quantity. Keep up the good work.

[@ricodelpiero]

Finally, i've been waiting your new video to come out

[@Nazar_Melnyk]

Thanks for the video! Can't wait the first orbital launch and the series of such great analysis of the whole program!

[@April2058]

Well explained.

[@Jason-gq8fo]

You seem to hint that you don’t think the catching booster thing is a good idea but after seeing some recent animations of it I actually can’t believe it hasn’t been done sooner, but I guess people weren’t landing rockets before either… it will save them a lot of mass not having legs and once they get the hang of it it will seem easy same as f9 landing

[@snuffeldjuret]

and as long as they have multiple sea launch platforms, one RUD isn't as disastrous as with one launch platform only.

[@AhmedRw]

Congratulations on the sponsorship 💖

[@FL-om8vt]

Great video, I wonder what the skeptics would have to say in rejoinder to this.

[@clarencehopkins7832]

Excellent stuff

[@espenha]

I liked the video, and hope to see more videos like this one. But one thing that should have been adressed in the launch cost overview is that Starship is likely to move offshore fairly quickly because of noise and safety concerns. I'm sure they'll still do some launches from Starbase, but it likely won't be most flights. The relevant launch infrastructure are the launch platforms Phobos and Deimos, plus most likely at least one larger support vessel for each launch platform. I think it makes sense for SpaceX to buy and convert a few large ships for transporting liquid oxygen and liquid methane. Once they get into a rate of several launches per week, they'll be needing tens of thousands of tons of propellant every week. Producing it at sea is likely unrealistic, (oxygen might be realistic, if you have a nuclear reactor) so you quickly start needing tankers to transport the propellant from the production site. So, what will the cost of operating and maintaining the platforms and ships be? I don't really know. But probably not so expensive that it changes the cost estimate very much.

[@chrismoule7242]

Excellent stuff - as always. This should be the the start of the standard reference work for Starship.

[@KEB129]

I would like to correct you a little, if I may? If you use the rocket equation and we know it needs delta V of 9 km/s (when it is already empty of fuel in orbit) for landing on the Moon and return to the Earth, we can calculate the numbers. Empty weight: 100 tons. Weight of refueling in orbit: 1200 tons. Isp = 378 s and g = 9,81. Then we will only have 15 tons of payload available!! Let us try: With 100 tons of refueling pro tanker, it will take 12 tanker flights. m + fuel = 100 + 15 + 1200. So delta V =Isp x g x ln(m+fuel)/m. That is delta V=3708,18 x 2,43666 = 9,04 km/s. So you see it is only 15 tons for the normal version of Starship. The HLS version will probably have a mass of 85 tons and it will not need a TEI back to Earth. So that one will have a max capacity of 60 tons to the Moon and back to Lunar orbit. Try the numbers yourself. (I know you are so enthusiastic about it and I love it! Please don't be angry at me!)

[@Apogeespace]

Haha I won’t be angry! Yeah the main difference in our calcs was our dV trip to the moon is slightly different values. The truth may be somewhere in the middle. 15t on a round trip is still impressive but if they needed more just refuel in a more elliptical orbit.

[@KEB129]

@@Apogeespace Ok. You said 300 m/s in Delta V. It is 9000 m/s! No, not 15 tons for a round trip, but a full landing, ascent and return to Earth. So 12 tanker flights for 15 tons on the moon, that is 13 flights! More than the entire Apollo program, just for one moon trip. Zubrin talked about this early on and said this was the wrong way to do it.

[@sadiqahmed4143]

@@KEB129 Although HLS won't return to Earth for now normal starships will not land on moon they will land in thier massive craters created and fall over and explode

[@KEB129]

@@sadiqahmed4143 Yes, it should have 3 stages, and the upper part should be a dedicated and much smaller lander.

[@isaacstevens1912]

Your graphics are incredible for such a small channel

[@jakehefty8305]

Great video can’t wait for part 2

[@corey7135]

This is really high quality content man thanks. Subbed!

[@blacx2]

Small mistake at 25:51 with the 3 core reuse Falcon Heavy GTO payload.

[@snuffeldjuret]

what was the mistake?

[@Amadi605]

Intro music was so good I had to watch it twice

[@manofsan]

You're talking about Starship's capabilities as if they already exist. I'd use the word "planned" here

[@cidadaoPPT]

This video was simply perfect!

[@dust1209]

New Apogee video, lets go!

[@alexanderkenway]

Yet another quality video

[@mikewestlake5203]

Great Job. Clearly presented with relevant information. I look forward to each episode.

[@dionysus2006]

Very good job of summarizing a complicated subject 😊

[@gaborpokoradi969]

Excellent video. Thank you.

[@YaMumsSpecialFriend]

Nice work, subbed🖖🏼

[@nononono3421]

Great video!

[@leefonda6203]

Good Job! Keep it up, viewers like what you are doing.

[@ErikGoff]

Great video !! liked and subscribed !

[@faisalsheikh7846]

An amazing quality of content thank u very much sir ❤❤❤

[@drdoolittle5724]

Brilliant. Thank you!

[@JOlivier2011]

This cat needs more subs. Content so good.

[@mj6463]

Great video, apogee is a brilliant name btw.

[@innovatic5405]

Non vedevo l'ora che uscisse finalmente