Starship 4 Test Flight - Highlights

Starship 4 Test Flight - Highlights from the live show.
If you find my videos useful you may consider supporting the EEVblog on Patreon: / eevblog
Web Site: www.eevblog.com
Main Channel: / eevblog
EEVdiscover: / eevdiscover
AliExpress Affiliate: s.click.aliexpress.com/e/c2LRpe8g
Buy anything through that link and Dave gets a commission at no cost to you.
T-Shirts: teespring.com/stores/eevblog
#Space #Starship #spacex

[@WacKEDmaN]

every time it launches it gets 10x better!

[@donwald3436]

10 x 0 lol.

[@WacKEDmaN]

@@donwald3436 is that your IQ?

[@donwald3436]

@@WacKEDmaN yes 3436 is my IQ getrekt

[@LogicalNiko]

yep it appears that they probably need to extend the joint coverage on the flap out a bit. The best analysis I've seen so far is that there was enough space for the extremely high pressure air/plasma to be shooting through the fin hinge and eventually just burn through. They are realistically looking at making something that can keep that flow at bay for 5-10 mins longer and it'll be fine. So my guess is if they'll need to extend the base out just a little bit more to over the hinge gap.

[@Cezij]

​@@LogicalNiko they have completly new flap design on the block 2 s36 onwards

[@ijacobs333]

it was spectacular , against all odds, the ship made it

[@atlesifeyst2185]

looool the naysayers in the live chat screaming for it to blow up, then getting disappointed and leaving. fucking beautiful.

[@qwerty112311]

But the flap partially melted and even though the landing maneuver/splashdown was successful it was still a failure reeeeeeeeeerrrreerr

[@LodewijkVrije]

@@qwerty112311 except in an interview before launch. elon musk literally said they did not know if the hinges in their current design would prevent plasma from entering the hinge gap. and that they were going to find out during this flight, and they did. every objective they had was met. they gathered data on the 3 missing tiles they took off on purpose on the lower end of the ship. they got data on their heat shield design as well as on the hinges. the booster successfully simulated a landing. the ship successfully simulated a landing. all the objectives stated before mission start, were met. so how is it a failure?

[@JurassicJenkins]

17:30 - You make a good point on reusability. There is a long road ahead. Great video!

[@lazarus2691]

Worth noting the first Falcon 9 boosters that came back were pretty toasty and never flew again. The cork (yes, cork) heatshield on the base was pretty badly charred, the engines had cracks in the turbopumps, and on one occasion all of the grid fins got a bit melted (though not quite as badly as Starship's fin did here). Anyway, it took SpaceX several years and two more revisions, Block 4 and Block 5, before they got to the point of actually being able to really reuse them. It would not be at all surprising to see Starship require similar development going forward, at least on the ship - booster reuse will probably be easier/sooner.

[@g-urts5518]

Its crazy to think that right now,asssuming you could somehow fit it all in the payload bay, you could put the entire ISS into orbit with starship in 3 launches.

[@AmericanCrusader222]

It’s about to revolutionize how we can conduct orbital payload injections for sure! The Hubble, in theory, could be brought back in just one Starship!

[@pavnazwisko9196]

Bringing The Hubble back either for revamp (if that could make any sense) and send back to orbit or just simply put into some space museum, it would be absolutely awesome!

[@william-wallace]

Seeing someone older than me being excited and actually understanding what is going on throughout the mission makes me so happy. Subbed and liked!

[@prathameshdighe6359]

Had the same reaction when the booster soft landed. Pretty incredible.

[@SurvivalSquirrel]

I haved not seen a landing at all...

[@crunchyfrog555]

"Soft landing" aka we did something correct.

[@VColossalV]

​@@crunchyfrog555 and that makes you upset

[@SurvivalSquirrel]

@@crunchyfrog555 You mean soft crashing?

[@crunchyfrog555]

@@VColossalV Strawman much? Demonstrate how disagreement means I'm upset. Are you 5?

[@MrMcbear]

0:21 The Screech she made right as the engines spooled up sounded INSANE..

[@evensgrey]

To get into orbit is mostly about horizontal speed above the atmosphere. So the part that goes into orbit has to thrust horizontally, on it's side. Every surface-to-orbit launch does exactly this.

[@brumbymg]

Remember, this is still a development program. Melting flaps is exactly the sort of thing they want to find out about. Nevertheless, despite the issues seen, the intended objectives were achieved for BOTH the booster and the ship. That is a phenomenal achievement! Every flight to date has been an improvement over the previous flight ... which means this flight is the WORST example of the achievements for future flights. They will only get better!! Don't forget, this flight hardware is already outdated! I can't wait for Flight 5 !!!!!

[@Martin-117]

The engineer, welder, and any other trade responsible for that flap need to be recognized.

[@zazoreal5536]

This is why space can be exciting.....Against all the odds! It said....I'm gonna land!

[@RobTaylor-HiTech]

It goes horizontal to gain forward speed to attain orbit. Orbit is more about forward speed than altitude.

[@LogicalNiko]

Yep beyond the initial phase where you are just getting off the pad, building some momentum, and through the thickest part of the atmosphere your better off just slowly trusting as much as possible into the earth rotation (technically once you are going you want a parabola trajectory ending at orbital altitude on the horizon). However from the launch perspective you really don't want to go up, you want to go very quickly away that you frankly keep falling down and overshooting the earth

[@explorewithgeoff]

Thanks for doing the highlights for us Dave. I managed to miss most of it live so this was great.

[@fablearchitect7645]

what a massive contrast between Dave Jones and Phil Mason's reaction

[@crunchyfrog555]

So what? Doesn't mean anything. Maybe try listening to what's being said instead of focusing on dumb histrionics

[@VColossalV]

Let's not do any of that ​@@crunchyfrog555

[@fablearchitect7645]

@@crunchyfrog555 so who do you think is the histrionic?

[@karliszauers1]

​@@crunchyfrog555 Ironically phil is the one who refuses to listen and unsurprisingly keeps getting stuff wrong

[@crunchyfrog555]

@@fablearchitect7645 Not sure you understand how words work. I never said anyone was histrionic. I said to stop focusing on a histrionic VIEW. Can you not grasp what that means?

[@tapio83]

Minor correction. Suicide burn is when you have more thrust on your single engine than the rocket weighs so you cant llight engines too early. Here you can shut down extra engines and adjust thrust. You can hover. Falcon cannot hover as single engine has more thrust than the weight of empty booster so they cant start too early.

[@noahgossett6134]

Seemed like the engines maintained their gimble slightly longer to compensate for the burnt flap and still made a great success 🎉

[@lazarus2691]

I had heard that you'd fallen down the same hole as Thunderf00t, which was disappointing to hear, but didn't really surprise me given you've had similar outlooks on things in the past. However, it's clear from this stream that whatever your personal feelings about Musk may be, you're remaining pretty objective about SpaceX, which is very heartening to see. It's also clear that you had a much better understanding of what you were actually seeing happening on screen (aside from that part where you accidently had two streams running :P) Anyway, I'm sorry for doubting you, keep up the good work!

[@Nil-js4bf]

Never heard of it so I checked it out - wow 1 mil subscribers. Hate boner content is really popular nowadays.

[@MrCarGuy]

​@@Nil-js4bfIsn't that the same fool who was telling people to short Tesla years ago?

[@j.f.christ8421]

@@MrCarGuy Considering how overpriced Tesla is and how far its price has dropped, shorting it would have been a good idea. But yeah Musk is a dick, Thunderf00t's hatred of him gets a bit tiring, we're not going to Mars, StarShip's capabilities are a bit overrated (Musk = BS artist) but SpaceX is cool anyway.

[@imviciously]

@@j.f.christ8421 he hates engineers at spacex and calls them morrons + laughs at them. the same company that has landed 300 first stages of an orbital class rocket

[@lasersbee]

That Successful Flight Test sure out a damper on ThunderF00l's Starship Flight #4 "Destruction prediction" Elon Bashing Live stream....😂😂

[@LogicalNiko]

They ran till the tanks were nearly empty on purpose. It's part of the FAA approved flight plan. They are not yet cleared for full orbital operations and they are also not cleared to return with any significant amount of fuel (nor would you want to for efficiency or risk). They were 100% cleared to proceed without oversight if they had any burnup in flight or problems landing as those were the approved testing goals of flight 4. The only thing that would cause another FAA investigation is if they lost the vehicle on the pad or in the early launch phase. So based on the performance of test 4, they will be likely given Clearence for full orbital flight on 5 as soon as they make the needed change. Also note there are sections on the vehicle (I don't think shown in the public camera views) where heat tiles were explicitly left off the vehicle to assess the impact on specific areas of the structure with and without the heat shield as part of the flight so there always was going to be a part that was damaged (however the fin was clearly not planned).

[@weekiely1233]

That’s not why they don’t carry a full prop load. The deficit is to simulate a payload Plus the indicators we see are likely not accurate

[@evensgrey]

I hadn't looked at the actual form of the vehicle before. The shape ended up being really cool.

[@myleft9397]

great video, I caught part of it live, too bad about the lost camera feed and messy lens at the end

[@LogicalNiko]

Everyone knows what held that fin on. The inanimate carbon rod of course. IN ROD WE TRUST!! BTW did someone toss some fireworks in there...that scream taking off was pretty interesting.

[@MrMcbear]

That's the sound of 33 turbo pumps spooling up all at once.

[@user-ce7ic1ze2u]

What a success! Both rocket stages made it back in one piece (although with some damage on the ship)!

[@nolsp7240]

At a guess, the reason starship was coasting on it's side was so that the starlink panels near the nose would be facing the starlink satellites.

[@alwestpfal1245]

Thanks for staying up late!

[@EEVblog2]

It cost me fun time with Mrs EEVblog 🤓

[@jasongoodacre]

I think they might have had some debris hit that engine. Hard to say how they can completely remove pad damage. But as you say they can probably afford to lose 3 engines without impacting flight too much.

[@LawpickingLocksmith]

A new satellite for Dave's shoephone?

[@DonaldHolben]

Super Heavy and Starship have header tanks that have the for landing.

[@jetraid]

Acording Elon its posible next flight they try to catch the boster with the Mechazilla. Can´t wait for it

[@zebo-the-fat]

The flap was held on using Duck tape... wouldn't dare fall off!

[@jackburton8352]

Piss Flaps

[@justthisguyyouknow666]

I guess I missed it, but I haven't seen external views of the booster and Starship landing.

[@robertjung8929]

son of a b... it's doing it .. that reaction was golden ! 😀

[@Anamnesia]

I'm curious (but not curious enough) what nonsense those with Musk Derangement Syndrome were saying on Thunderf00t's channel?

[@weekiely1233]

He’s got absolutely violated lol. He had no idea what anything was and people are starting to realise he isn’t the genius they once thought

[@user-hb7py7xy7b]

It was glorious. 2 hours of pure copium.

[@OidhcheMhath]

At one point towards the end he claimed it probably had already disintegrated and we were getting live feed from a piece of debris... that somehow still had working camera, battery, telemetry, antenna, and was maintaining attitude and uplink.

[@100SteveB]

I think they concerned that the hinge area would be a possible weak point in the system when it came to the thermal protection. But the fact that the ship survived bodes well for the rest of the tile system - no tank burn through. Will be interesting to see what solution they come up with for the flaps, could be just a simple change in the shape of the leading edge tiles, just enough to deflect the heat away from the critical points, or could prove to be a very tricky problem to solve. The bigger problem is the fact that at the moment the ships fuel and oxidiser is only just sufficient to get an empty starship to orbit. Larger tanks are planned for the next version, but that is obviously also going to increase the dry mass of the vehicle. They need to lose a lot of weight, but just to get it to this stage they have been adding weight - stiffeners added here, doublers added there, the weight of all of that added strength is playing havoc with their original payload calculations.

[@weekiely1233]

Musk actually told Tim Dodd that the hinge is a huge weak spot that’s being redesigned for V2 and beyond. The fix is to change the mechanism and move it leeward to be less of an impingement and have less hot gas forced through It’s worth noting that the fuel is more than enough to get to orbit with a payload. What you see is the main tank not the header tanks and even that tiny bit is prop is enough for a deorbit burn (the tanks are huge). Currently version has been tested to 50T to LEO on flight 3. 100t with upgrades doesn’t seem all that hard now especially as Raptor evolves

[@100SteveB]

@@weekiely1233 What I find so encouraging is their track record of fixing issues that show themselves on a mission. Each test flight then proves the fix they had incorporated and make great progress. And what a great bonus Starlink is proving to be, to be actually able to see the failure points whilst they are happening, rather than relying on interpreting telemetry data alone.

[@KeritechElectronics]

Who needs a DeLorean when you have a huuuuuuuuuge rocket? Ha. Had fun hanging out live, and it's nice to watch again. Next step for SpaySex: use multiple redundant outside cameras on the ship!

[@bill6255]

This a great idea to show the edited stream. I always get the weirdest vibes from the cheering employees. I am an anti establishment _____ to be fair..

[@VColossalV]

Why would their celebration at all their hard work be in any way have weird vibes?

[@bill6255]

@@VColossalV your right to question my comment. Something bothers me about the cheering and jumping up and down, ect.

[@SeanBZA]

Problem is the payload bay was empty, so it got up, but not with any sort of payload at all.

[@weekiely1233]

They have for the past 4 loaded less or more propellants to simulate a payload You don’t need to fly with a boiler plate to know what the performance of the vehicle is. Flight 3 and likely 4 flew with a simulated payload of 50T

[@S1nwar]

lost 1 engine in the last 99, pretty good

[@alflud]

This is all certainly spectacular but it's true that many know there will never be any real colonization of Mars and it's the same with Blue Origin and their stated goal of lifting all of humanity's industrial processing off-world and into orbit - hardly likely. And yet there they are building these massive rockets. What for?

[@antoineroquentin2297]

But can it run crysis?

[@DonaldHolben]

Pads not dodgy.

[@alansmith4734]

I was watching a Border Patrol Show on TV in the US. An older American guy drove his truck (ute) into Mexico to explore the beaches. He crossed back with 2 whale vertebrate and a large cylinder. He declared them, but the Border Patrol found out that the cylinder was from a Space X Rocket that some Mexican Fishermen caught, and sold it to him for $1600. The Border Patrol called Space X, and they wanted the cylinder back. The BP also took his whale vertebrate. This was taped back during COVID, (shown recently) but he is still lucky to be alive! 3 young Americans went into Mexico to surf, and were killed for their truck tires! Proof: kzbin.info/www/bejne/Y5-3mWaplNCrqKs

[@calholli]

I know this is supposed to be a "test" .. but the fact that they had the cameras down for so long before reentry, makes me think they actually did deliver something anyway. Why waste the trip if you could drop off some black budget cargo for Uncle Sam.

[@mikesradiorepair]

That pile of junk couldn't take a bag of marshmallows into orbit. I give it 2 to 3 years before they get a almost useable spacecraft. Musk will be bankrupt before they make a useable payload delivery vehicle.

[@calholli]

@@mikesradiorepair Sending things into orbit is the easy part.

[@WacKEDmaN]

it was only launched balistic trajectory... so the payload would have needed its own propulsion (relatively large amount of fuel) to get itself into a stable orbit... i doubt this had anything on it

[@EEVblog2]

That's the rumour flying around.

[@thedausthed]

​@@WacKEDmaNIt would also need to be small enough to fit out the "PEZ dispenser'.

[@xKynOx]

We have been launching ships in to space for years, this is useless money sink.

[@weekiely1233]

Tell me you don’t know anything about spaceflight without telling me you know nothing about spaceflight

[@Wayoutthere]

cope harder bot

[@user-hb7py7xy7b]

There is an Uroboros in space industry: payload engineers design satellites to fit in existing rockets, rocket engineers design rockets capable of launching existing payloads with maximum efficiency. Starship and Heavy provide more room for payload, so Jupiter-3 for example wouldn't exist as it is if FH wasn't created first. Same with Starship. When it will be flight-proof new bigger payload will be created.

[@bigdogben]

6:00 They got the ground footage! Amazing stuff @eevblog2