SpaceX Starship’s Major Upgrades for Flight 2

Join us as we delve into the significant upgrades SpaceX introduced for Starship’s second flight! From the intriguing hot staging ring, new vents, and gimbal changes to the major launchpad modifications, we leave no stone unturned. Relying on weeks of observations, official confirmations, and some theorizing, we uncover what makes Flight 2 unique. Strap in for a journey of exploration through SpaceX's engineering marvels. 🔥✨🚀
⚡ ⚡ Get Your Free 30 Day Trial of Brilliant and 20% Off Your Annual Subscription: brilliant.org/... ⚡⚡
🔗 NSF Store: www.nasaspacef...
⚡ Become a member of NASASpaceflight's channel for exclusive discord access, fast turnaround clips, and other exclusive benefits. Your support helps us continue our 24/7 coverage. Click JOIN above to get started.⚡
🤵 Hosted by Ryan Caton (@dpoddolphinpro)
🖊️ Written by Alejandro Alcantarilla Romera (@alexphysics13)
🎥 Video from Jack Beyer, Sean Doherty, BocaChicaGal, Nic Ansuini, Michael Baylor, Sawyer Rosenstein, John Galloway, Chris Kleindl, Starbase Live, NASA, SpaceX, Elon Musk.
✂️ Edited by Sawyer Rosenstein (@thenasaman).
💼 Produced by Kevin Michael Reed (@kmreed).
🔍 If you are interested in using footage from this video, please review our content use policy: www.nasaspacef...
L2 Boca Chica (more clips and photos) from BC's very early days to today.
🔗 forum.nasaspac...
(Join L2 and support NSF here: www.nasaspacef...)
#SpaceX #Starship #ElonMusk #HotStaging #Flight2 #Booster9 #Ship25 #Engineering #RocketScience #Innovation #SpaceExploration #LaunchPadUpgrades #RaptorEngine #SpaceTechnology #NewVentingSystem #Starlink #FTS #RocketLaunch #NextGenSpacecraft

[@realfoggy]

My daughter and I can't wait to see this one lift off. She was very sad when the first one failed. Go Starship!

[@Bear-form]

The dog is already wagging his tail towards the screen.

[@HighDraDWG]

Awesome we will be blown away upon the next IFT

[@barbedwirerat661]

I set my kids expectation that it would most likely fail in a spectacular awesome way and that is just part of Space X design process, though making it to orbit would be cool too. We had also watched the series of suborbital flights so that kept them interested each flight to see which one would finally have a proper landing.

[@moondevell]

The booster looks neat. Congratulations to the engineers and welders

[@thebarkingmouse]

It didn't fail. It failed successfully. Big difference.

[@Rosieplayz100]

This iterative design process SpaceX is using sure makes each launch more exciting than the former. Great update!

[@oldbloke135]

Exactly. There is a saying used by old engineers like me. "Show me a man who never made a mistake and I'll show you a man who never made anything." Sure, the last launch showed up a lot of problems, but that is what testing is about. Finding those problems BEFORE ever trying a launch would take years.

[@Spacey1800]

4:29 I like when you are explaining stuf and there is just casually a starship flying in the background

[@PurpleMrMojo]

Best video of anything spaceX all month. You do it 100% correct ✅. Thank you and the team. Please keep it up and more often. There are some super cheesy contributions out there. Your at the top of the best of !

[@waynzignordics]

This guy's a great addition to the NSF team. Great presenter.

[@M_IkeLeBlanc]

Another great report Ryan! 👍👍👍 You guys have really upped your game.

[@CooperHawkins4]

Me and my grandpa have been following Starship from the very beginning and cannot wait till the next launch. Great video👍

[@austyn8708]

Loving these concise yet comprehensive updates from Ryan! Very excited to watch IFT2 with everyone at NSF! Any speculation as to the Fish and Wildlife review?

[@corrinastanley125]

Thanks Ryan and everyone else on the NSF team.

[@TexanMiror2]

Thank you for this video, it's quite useful to have all these changes summarized.

[@Eagle621]

Great commentary Ryan! Nice delivery without the childish quips. Keep up the great work👍

[@ghost307]

11:22 When talking about testing the flight termination system you can clearly see a piece of equipment that is labeled "ULTRABOOM".

[@David-yo5ws]

Yes. And next years model is going to be called the "ULTRABOOMBOOM". 😁

[@Alpha-Whiskey-Kilo]

Dude, hats off to you guys. Well done. Super informative. Please update on eta of next liftoff. Love yalls coverage in the lead ups to launch on the big test launches.

[@ramblinred1]

Great delivery! Keep it up.

[@Thomas-lw1ct]

Loving this thumbnail. Very nice 💪

[@jamani1086]

Thank you Ryan!!

[@christiantamminen8998]

Very concise NSF. Thank you. Great video. Its hard for us non space geeks to keep track. But nicely explained and very informative. Many thanks. Onwards and upwards.

[@TheBunzinator]

I do believe your arrows for "Acceleration" and "Gravity Effects" are arse-up. But otherwise, nice video, as usual.

[@danswan1047]

Excellent video, and presented perfectly. Thanks for posting this informative video for those of us who can’t keep up with all the advancements at Starbase.

[@phazix6529]

Its bonkers to think of everything happening in one moment at liftoff, water deflection system, quick disconnect retracting, fueling switching to internal tanks, co2 pumping to stop flames, copv's back pumping, raptors changing thrust and vectoring, electronics switching to flight mode, and so much more i cant think of, just insane stuff

[@just_archan]

Hehe, look at video of Everyday Astronaut about "how to start rocket to engine", THEN you will be stunned how PRECISE has to be even lighting the candle

[@FirstCatch]

Very informative. Thumbs up!

[@innerspace3155]

Another nice summary update, guys. I'm always impressed by Ryan's enunciation on such quick dispatches of info. Hearing it called (yep, American here) "boostah" makes it all the better. Looking forward to IFT #2 to say the least!

[@ThompPL1]

Great Job on the debrief ! . . . keep up the good work.

[@sander915]

This is an awesome video, thanks!!!

[@ThePhantomRocket]

the new vents are likely just that: vents, the thing is tho having them higher up gives them more control the farther from the center of mass, so, basically more control for the acs is my theory.

[@Ron4885]

Ryan! 👋 Thanks for the new information. It will be Interesting to these new updates *in action* at the next flight. 🤩

[@neilcryer1]

That's how you do a advert, penguin flippers. lol. Your a bunch of geniuses.I love everything you do, been watching since s8 launch never commented cause I don't do it much. But I had to at penguin flippers. Take care guys, hope the next launch isn't to long 😮it'll be amazing. We all know it will.

[@jcgclu]

Another great video - Thanks NSF!

[@martinnolan5840]

Great video guys

[@kokomo9764]

Thanks, good update!

[@Travlinmo]

Thanks. Really hoping for all the tests to run like clock work this time. I have been wondering if the launch license could require SpaceX to blow up the first stage to test the new explode’ee bits?

[@ANGRY_AMERICAN]

As a Millwright and motorsports fan, Natural gas AKA Methane is more critical in reducing human pollution on the environment. Natural gas or CH4 is basically stabilized Hydrogen and easy to make, it can be made from cow poop and trash in a continues or batch method and can also be used to help prevent forest fires. On the motorsports side the best gasoline you can get at the pump is 92-94 octane, race engines use special gas with 101-112 octane, and all produce dangerous waste gas while natural gas doesn't. So if a turbo 4 cylinder running on gasoline makes 250-350HP the same motor designed to run on natural gas with 150 octane would easily make 100-200 more HP with far less pollution out the exhaust without any emissions control devices that cost 2K for cars and up to 50K for pickup trucks and semi tractors. LNG and CNG (CH4) is what is used to make the majority of the electricity that recharges those EVs, and when made from waste reduces the human carbon footprint with its main byproduct being non-toxic fertilizer.

[@Skipper92ful]

great video as always team!

[@DebraJean196]

Learned a lot. Wasn’t in from the beginning so I picked up a lot of basic knowledge as well as the info on the the changes. This was an incredible learning experience for me!!!! Thanks so much!!!

[@srinivasvellore447]

Good video 👍

[@paulmoffat9306]

The top vents on the booster, could be for the new CO2 fire suppression system, to inhibit any fires in the electric supply for the grid fins.

[@AndyOO6]

the main reason to vent the 20 is to lower the fire risk on the skirt and dmg of controlling thrusters suppressing the outer ring will help consentrate the center avoiding explosions that could dmg the center.

[@mattyboolin]

18:31 Came for the Starship, stayed for the LLLLLAWTS. Great video and nice vocal range, Ryan. 😂

[@gijoe1of3]

Learned a ton.. thanks! keep up the great work!

[@Graham_lee]

The new openings on the aft section I would suggest they are to equalise the pressure in that compartment to stop it either imploding or exploding due to heat and cooling. The openings will allow the air to flow freely in and out of that section, Im guessing the openings will also allow more cooling in that area during launch with convection happening.

[@knowledgeisgood9645]

It will make sure there is vacuum in the space between the forward dome and the hot-stage dome. Vacuum is a very good insulator.

[@yedidyah-jedshlomoh1533]

Good video. Thanks.

[@liamb8379]

will the hot staging ring be incorporated into the build of future boosters or stay as a separate item to bolt on afterwards?

[@jamesrosar3823]

That may depend on how well it survives multiple launches: it may be helpful to keep the ring as a rapidly replaceable component of an otherwise flight-worthy booster.

[@DEREKDMAYS]

The safety of the public and the protection of the environment is the FAA first and upmost priority and not a companies personal milestone. Spacex has done a extraordinary job , repairing the orbital launch mount and it's site ,the upgraded water deluge system a magnificent accomplishment in such a short period of time, you have to calculate using more powerful engines into the equation,( here's one of the main catch 22's so to speak) with the FAA and their licensing for the STARSHIP I have studied video's and comments for hours and days. SPACEX stated after the first orbital launch attempt that for a few sec. they (LOST CONTROL)of the STARSHIP we must prove without any doubt that we have (FULL CONTROL) of the vessel. DDM

[@TimAumuller]

Like everyone else Thank You! These explanations and theories were very informative.

[@amberar]

Can’t wait to see this thing fly… next year

[@David-yo5ws]

Well you can wait until next year. I'm catching the 'early bird' show. 😉

[@FutureAIDev2015]

One thing that I would be concerned about with a crew mission for Starship in the future is how the crew would evacuate in the event of a flight termination system activation.

[@olafmesschendorp147]

Early stage seperation I guess and some sort of emergancy landing..?

[@michaeldeierhoi4096]

​@@olafmesschendorp147 That's fine if the issue is with the booster, but not if the problem is with the ship. There is no way for crew to disengage from the ship if it fails somehow. The FTS could be triggered, but crew have no way back to earth except in the destroyed ship

[@iamaduckquack]

​@@michaeldeierhoi4096How did shuttle so it?

[@wb6anp]

@@iamaduckquack The Astronauts had no way of leaving the orbiter either, if they got a early enough warning the orbiter could separate from the fuel tank and hopefully return to launch site. If high enough they had alternate landing sites or go to orbit. If something happened to the orbiter itself it was the same as a crew in Starship.

[@David-yo5ws]

@@wb6anpThat was true, until after the Challenger disaster. Then they added explosive bolts to one of the front windows, added a curved rod just on the outside of the exit window and the Astronauts had parachutes that they clipped onto the rod and then 'climbed' out of the exit window frame and jumped. Whether they could do that during a 'tumbling fall' is pure conjecture. Pretty hairy to say the least, but at least it was better than nothing. So, perhaps they may have some similar system added to the 'Crewed Starship Rockets', in the design plans? Chutes Brah! 🪂

[@MaxenceHmt]

Nice video !!

[@TonyGBennet]

Godspeed 🍀

[@davidellis2021]

I wish you wouldn't play background music, it's very irritating.

[@RryhhbfrHhgdHhgd356]

I didn’t even notice said bg music existed. 😂 Very different thresholds for annoying here obviously.

[@user-fr3hy9uh6y]

Great info. The engines kept firing after they lost connection with the flight computer, not safe. Has this been corrected for the next launch?

[@johnwiles4391]

Does anyone know what the prime mover for booster HPUs is? I've searched a little but haven't found the answer.

[@NASASpaceflight]

⚡ ⚡ Get Your Free 30 Day Trial of Brilliant and 20% Off Your Annual Subscription: brilliant.org/nasaspaceflight ⚡⚡

[@HE-pu3nt]

Great video! I can't wait for the next video.

[@billybobthe9thjr786]

was it actually confirmed that the spin staging was meant to happen, because on all animations by spacex they always just stage normally.

[@David-yo5ws]

The SpaceX host, John Insprucker (Principle Integration Engineer), was making comments, that it was starting the 'separation turn', which supports the 'spin staging' idea. Of course that is all now redundant.

[@ale131296]

And prior to that they also explained it on the lead up to the launch when they overviewed what was planned to be the nominal timeline. Plus Elon also talked about it when he mentioned the switch to hot staging.

[@wadewilson524]

I’m a big SpaceX fanboy, (I know these are early prototypes) but the need for a stage 2 FTS and no launch escape system planned doesn’t give much confidence starship will ever launch passengers from earth.

[@AndyAndy-we9pe]

What about the fact that in all test firing of all 33 engines there have been multiple engine failures in the first 5-6 seconds, this worries me and i am sure many. Are the problems being ignored, like with the pad for a quicker attempt to reach orbit. I mean, they have many boosters and should be able to overcome this problem by testing different layouts or newer plumbing systems.

[@bobstrayer9004]

I wonder if the sub coolers and pumps are to support the outer 20 raptor startup?

[@ale131296]

They're are for fueling, not used for raptor startup. They're also not hooked up, just installed - they'll be installed for future flights though

[@cofishingfun8020]

Nice!

[@gilbert1975nf]

02:00 - I believe the arrows needs to be reversed. Gravity effects goes down, accelaration goes up!

[@MD.ImNoScientician]

Never Stop Thrusting. . . I'm sure that'll make a t-shirt. Or a dorm room poster 😂

[@novembern939nn5]

Any guesses why nitrogen isn't used for raptor start up?

[@hawkeartist]

I think that it's because it needs to be extra high pressure but not cryogenic. If you pressurized nitrogen to those levels it might be a solid. Helium should stay gaseous inside of the COPVs (just checked. Helium becomes a liquid at room temperature at 2.275 bar and it ridiculously hard to solidify). NItrogen solidifies at 63K.

[@novembern939nn5]

@@hawkeartist hmm I'm thinking why not hydrogen copvs. But I do get hydrogen is really explosive and hard to contain, yet at the same time helium is quite expensive. But of course, they have much more smarter engineers than me haha

[@diysecuritygear9594]

As a kid A shuttle astronaut had me hold a tile in my hand. He had a torch on other side of tile. Mind bending experience.igloo cooler glowing red and my hand felt nothing.

[@Spacey1800]

11:48 bro is playing daft punk !!! Musique

[@andrewhall7711]

What happens to the hot staging ring after separation? Is it ejected or does it stay attached to the booster?

[@knowledgeisgood9645]

It will likely remain on the booster unless it is torn by the ship and can hinder a safe sea-landing.

[@David-yo5ws]

My theory is, that as the hot staging ring has been subjected to heating, then the strength of the stainless steel will have been compromised and unless heat treated after landing, would not be able to be re-used. This launch is going to expend the booster and so they will not be able to recover anything (from current discussions) so they can't examine the hot staging ring this time round and so it will probably stay attached, unless they test the separation clamps and release it. Therefore, my guess is that in future flights, where they do recover the booster, that the hot staging ring will have long been separated and will burn up and crumple into the sea.

[@knowledgeisgood9645]

@@David-yo5ws I think that a steel ring that large will not be expected to burn up. I think having it come down with the booster is the safest way to de-orbit it. It might, or might not, be reusable, but that is secondary.

[@smokingfoxx]

Thinking those extra pipes are carrying o2 for hot staging.. just a thought

[@sixstringsimpleton]

I still say that sn20 is a possibility if things go smoothly...ish

[@leightonmacmillan3396]

Nice update. It such a relief to not have to listen to a bunch of hyperbolic rhetoric from "Kevin". Good info, keep it coming!

[@jblob5764]

I wonder if theyre using tesla motors for tvc like they did for the grid fins

[@hamzahkhan8952]

if the hot stage ring uses the same locking mechanisms, that means spacex could switch between using the hotstage ring and not using it whenever they want.

[@tim_peaky]

the next big ship to innovate is one that doesn't need a launchpad.

[@CrasyFingers]

is it true it's expected to launch at the end of october? i'm tired of waiting, and i'm tired of elon musk saying "we're launching 2 days from now" and it always end up being 8 years

[@michaeldeierhoi4096]

8 years?? 🙄. 😂😅

[@nilawilliams2167]

My God man...Don t you know that putting this together is genius..All you have to do is sit there and watch.. Elon Musk made it come together!!!😊

[@novembern939nn5]

Where are they filling the CO2 from? How are they getting the CO2?

[@ale131296]

They have a tank on the tank farm that fills it up

[@OlafGodredsson]

Have they actually tested the engine shielding at McGregor or something? Might be a good idea to test a shielded engine to failure

[@ale131296]

Yes, we have some older videos from McGregor of them blowing up engines on purpose to test these shields

[@OlafGodredsson]

@@ale131296 link please

[@fadhlialief99]

@@OlafGodredsson kzbin.info/www/bejne/mInQpWeIic6Mlbssi=LxtzRmBfOp67yqjF

[@CrasyFingers]

when they're hotstaging are they lighting up ALL engines at once? seems like it would make sense to only light one engine on minimum power and after enough distance go on full power, i'm not a rocket scientists but i feel like that's not a good reusable strategy

[@iamjadedhobo]

Unfortunately, the ship has to generate enough thrust to outmatch the booster thrust to fly away from it. So, it all depends on how few engines booster can get away with to keep accelerating and at which throttle setting.

[@knowledgeisgood9645]

The booster can reduce the thrust on the 3 remaining central Raptors enough for the 3 vacuum Raptors to put a good distance between ship and booster. Then the booster can start to turn and go back to full thrust, while the ship ignites the 3 remaining sea-level Raptors. That way the propellants are always settled and the Raptors get the propellants they need all the time.

[@jonathanbriggs4793]

How come best SpaceX videos come with a British accent?

[@phillipmathews8743]

That's a weird beret this guy wears!

[@MrSpace008]

Hello

[@r0cketplumber]

Quite informative and well-presented, but am I the only person amused by the narrator's sideways Mullet hairstyle? We can call it a Rullet, I guess.

[@dannyassmann7331]

I really thought the sponsor was going to be FanDuel 😂

[@wimzi9343]

Cute :P

[@Mallchad]

Vents == cold gas thrusters maybe? Also side note. I would be shocked if the fire surpression was actually CO2 because CO2's constituients are 100% flammable molecules. In the presence of metal fires and strong oxidizers (cough, stainless steel, cough, liquid oxygen, cough) the CO2 can be broken apart and become entirely flammable components, which is not super helpful.

[@knowledgeisgood9645]

The vents look to be above the forward dome. To make sure the volume between that dome and the hot stage ring is in vacuum - the best heat insulator. The fire suppression uses CO2. Labels have been seen. Many fire extinguishers use CO2, because it displaces or reduces the amount of oxygen in the atmosphere around the fire.

[@Mallchad]

@@knowledgeisgood9645oh sorry I belive you all about the CO2 thing. I just feel like it's an inadequte fire surpression in an environment prone to metal fires because of the extreme temperatures and liquid-oxygen rich environment. Obviously helium would be ideal but that's hard to manage

[@londonalicante]

@@Mallchad CO2 is a product of combustion, which makes it inert enough to be widely used as a fire supression. It will not break apart unless a massive amount of energy is put in. When people say CO2 cannot put out "metal fires" they are talking about things like magnesium and sodium (which are so reactive they can steal the oxygen from the CO2) not stainless steel, which is relatively unreactive iron, nickel and chromium. The main advantage of CO2 is that it liquefies at about 55bar (800psi.) All the other gases you might think of using won't liquefy so the vessels needed to store them are a lot heavier.

[@Mallchad]

@@londonalicanteYeah I know it's cheap and what normal fires are. I appreciate the comment that CO2 liquifiers at a fairly reasonable pressure and that makes it much nicer. I would note like I said that for many cases whilst CO2 is suffecient and stainless steel tends not to burn, high temperature fluid from the pumps as well as very oxygen rich environment both provides the energy and the oxygen to burn steel easily, should they be so unfortunately, as far as I can tell. Besides, not the entire rocket is stainless steel, there is a mix where electronics and fluid lines and pumps have to go. The Engine Bell itself is a different alloy and has polymer based insulation webbing

[@londonalicante]

@@Mallchad It's essentially impossible to get the thick hull plate to ignite, even though it's energetically favorable. The reason is that the combustion products from burning steel are solid metal oxides, and they form a protective layer preventing O2 from getting to the metal underneath. Finely divided steel (steel wool or powder) will burn as the O2 can diffuse a short distance to reach the metal inside. The amount of combustible material in the rocket's construction is only a few percent, not enough to cause any real risk. The real problem is the methane.

[@dineshhulangamuwa9364]

👍👍👍👍

[@PatrickPoet]

I don't understand why you and also some other media say that it is crucial for the next test flight to succeed. In previous development SpaceX often had several test flights fail. It's part of their rapid development. I'm really confused why you are essentially saying that SpaceX needs to abandon the development style that's worked so well so far. Comment?

[@ale131296]

No, we're not saying that. The difference here is in what you consider a success. For SpaceX, not repeating the same mistakes from Flight 1 is already a success and that would obviously include not wrecking the pad and getting through first stage flight without fires in the engine bay and leaking propellant on the way up. It's not like SpaceX does these upgrades for them to accept these not working. They've worked tirelessly to make sure the issues they faced on the previous flight and other older prototypes don't pop up again on the next flight - if that doesn't work, how could we still call it a success when in that case they would not even meet the most simple requirement of just "don't repeat the same issue" as threshold for mission success?

[@anonymoususer3561]

LFG

[@MrFoxRobert]

👋👍

[@samuelprice538]

Alex is a good writer but so is Ryan. Why not let Ryan write his own scripts?

[@neullanpassos79]

Salve

[@peetky8645]

gutter holes for top of tank

[@fa2rocket827]

Hmmm

[@TheMusicHeals.kjhjhhg]

Thanks

[@JezzBowden]

Are the presenters getting younger and younger, or am I just getting older!??

[@EMichaelBall]

Yes

[@ale131296]

Alternatively, you probably haven't watched the channel enough to notice Ryan's been at NSF for well over half a year so welcome, have a sit and keep watching, you'll find lots more young faces around here :)

[@MicahTischler]

Yes, probably partially motivated due to a lot of the audience complaining about Jack, etc... being old. Being non-young on KZbin is hard mode, as the phrase goes. Mind you, I like both Jack and Ryan myself (and some of the others).

[@TheMovieLoft]

First great video

[@dlbrooks2658]

to many adds - need to find a better solution -

[@narannag8851]

Musk could not do it Alon. He took help from other (per) fumes to go into outer space.

[@JeffreyCollyer-b9o]

Unfortunately I cant take him seriously with that haircut, should pick one or the other but both short on one side and long on the other are just distracting, makes me not want to watch him but he has a great voice and would listen to him all day long..just an observation but something to think about...

[@javonr7794]

Sad the F&W are trying to slow down the starship program!!! The government is never on the side of the people!!

[@pietrodania8064]

Hot staging. Or: you if want to go to space for cheap, do like the Russians did in the 60s! 😂

[@noname-zf5tb]

Is it boy or girl? :)

[@Vegetablebread]

There are no gravity effects. Gravity affects the vehicle the whole time, even in orbit. It's just atmospheric drag. You want to keep thrusting to get out of the atmosphere and for no other reason.

[@NASASpaceflight]

To help underatand gravity drag... imagine a ship that could burn fuel to hover. You could burn all your fuel simply counteracting gravity, hovering, but never going anywhere. The more time you spend "flying", the more time gravity has to waste your fuel. Running a higher thrust, or simply never stopping the forward thrust, gets you to orbit "more quickly", and thus gravity has less time to waste your fuel. Hope this helps- Das

[@erikb6836]

Aerodynamic drag is much less important than gravitational drag (thrust "wasted" fighting gravity instead of accelerating) for such large launch vehicles.

[@Vegetablebread]

If the earth was a point mass (aka no atmosphere), hovering would just be an inclination change, which is pointless. The only reason you point the rocket up is to get out of the atmosphere. Otherwise you'd point prograde (East). It's just atmospheric drag.

[@Aragorn450]

@@Vegetablebread It's a combination of the two. You're absolutely correct that you could orbit at "0" altitude if there wasn't atmosphere. But you're also wanting to get to a certain orbit distance and that means fighting gravity. And when you're talking about the distances from Earth that we're talking about (over 200 miles), the majority of the forces we're fighting to get that far away is gravity since the atmosphere is pretty thin at even 50 miles and "nonexistent" at 100 miles.

[@Vegetablebread]

@@Aragorn450 If atmosphere didn't exist, the "gravity effects" mentioned in the video wouldn't exist. You can call changes in orbit "fighting gravity" if you want, but the video is talking about air resistance.

[@LVVMCMLV]

When will we move on to the next pipe dream? This one is a loser.