Scary Video Directly Under SpaceX Starship Explosion

[@ad9aggie]

I laugh at all of the news commentaries saying it was a failure, showing their lack of understanding of rapid innovation. I was bummed that we didn't get to see any of the new Starship things, but I also know that SpaceX is burning the midnight oil learning everything they can to fix it for the next launch. Keep on keepin' on, man!

[@jcristina]

These people are inept.

[@stagrye228]

I have full faith in Elon and Space X get back in the saddle. Giving us all the information on what went wrong and fixing the Starship to make it better.

[@JohnWallace74]

The question is would you have enough “faith” to be an astronaut in the next Falcon Heavy ? Not me…

[@tjmiracle6579]

Great coverage 🚀

[@jcristina]

Appreciate it!

[@paulmichaelfreedman8334]

Trust me, if it's overhead, and glowing like that, you are in no danger. Travelling to high. Further down range, when the debris has slowed enough to cool down, is where it gets gnarly. Those parts are still moving fast enough to sink a boat, but come out of nowhere.

[@jcristina]

I guess it would depend how far away it was when it blew.

[@RobertMarshall-v8l]

Thank you for the great show, J. As to the engines... The inner 13 Raptors are all new (afaik). Only engine #314 was reused from IFT5 and was located on the outer ring, between Raptors #257 and #357.

[@jcristina]

Thanks so much. 🍌

[@bp9097]

Just love ur intelligent analysis on Space X and Starlink stuff.

[@jcristina]

Blessings.

[@johntaylor8776]

Thanks!

[@jcristina]

Thank you John!! Truly appreciate your support. Many blessings to you and your family.

[@alarce5384]

Great channel.

[@RoySATX]

SpaceX is nothing if not boldly innovative. Perhaps with the new Block 2 Starship and the many, many design changes and tests they may have been a bit too bold here, but every launch of these vehicles is a success because, after all, these are all prototypes still in the design phase. Even RUDs provide valuable insight for the next flight. And what an incredible show, as always! SpaceX has never failed to be a visual spectacle!

[@jcristina]

🍌

[@danwiggins6947]

Thanks J ☕️🚀💥

[@MegaMastiffman]

Wow I wonder if it made any noise, sucks we lost it but hence test flight so wish it didn’t happen but this is part of the pursuit of perfection.

[@jcristina]

🍌

[@nordicresilience]

Watching the booster landing gives me goose bumps every time. When you get a grasp of the size of that object it is mind-blowing what they are accomplishing. Hopefully we will see rapid, monthly launches now with the new government in place (no massive delays due to political bs reasons)

[@jcristina]

🍌

[@koffeekage]

They were testing “Vacuum Insulation” on this flight right?

[@jcristina]

Correct

[@peterbush3972]

Are you going to be live next flight?

[@jcristina]

Absolutely.

[@johntaylor8776]

Great commentary and analysis! Will always be with your channel. Enjoy your insights. P.S. Love the roons.❤

[@Dutch-linux]

well the way I see it is... that if everything goes right all the time you do not learn what is the limit of the craft... when it blows up you get data of how and why and then you can work on it to make it better... as we can see they got it pretty much down with the booster catching... now it is starship it self the need to focus on and find the weak points and fix them.... and like I said if it never blows up you will never be able to find the weak spots to fix them

[@LordTimelord]

RUD = guaranteed excitement!

[@AnupomAG]

13:53 Is that guaranteed?

[@hippiehillape]

8 will fly on time. 9 is the first test retrieval of the starship This is how they learn, plan to fail

[@jcristina]

🍌

[@andrewf67]

Dude, do your homework. They reflew one engine in the outer ring of engines on the super heavy booster, #314 (pie engine). The super heavy booster has many more than 3 engines that gimbal. 13 of the inner engines gimbal. Starship has 3 engines that gimbal. The shower of Starship debris occurred some time after the explosion. The debris became fireballs from the super heated plasma that forms in front of the objects due to compression of the air molecules as the objects reentered the thicker part of the atmosphere at many times the speed of sound.

[@unbroken1010]

Do your homework? 😂. Ok genius 😂

[@sagecoach]

It has been brought up that it may be better to allow a Starship to make a controlled bellyflow landing in one big piece then blowing it up into so many pieces. If the failure and situation gives you that option. Perhaps just dumping the fuel on the way down.

[@jcristina]

The problem is once guidance is gone or steering engines rendered not functional the craft could end up anywhere.

[@Lynda-777]

I can’t believe they allow boats near it.

[@RobertMarshall-v8l]

I believe it was about 75 miles straight up.

[@jimle22]

The boat was parked in the harbor. They can't tell them to move it out somewhere else.

[@unbroken1010]

Freedom of movement

[@SuperUbuntudude]

[@jcristina]

🍌

[@hokimocus]

Cup of tea, yes, Earl Grey!

[@kurknielsen]

16:15 "a success?", how would you define a failure? Also, please remind me again what is the most important part of a rocket? I'll give you a hint, ITS THE PAYLOAD! It is the only reason a rocket exists.

[@jcristina]

🍌

[@jdilksjr]

It was a test. No test is a failure if you learn something from it.

[@jimle22]

They had no important payload. It was a test. Nuff said.

[@unbroken1010]

You sound unhinged

[@denishofman3703]

Grazie.

[@jcristina]

Thank you so much. Your support means a lot. Many blessings!

[@kensmith8832]

It appeared the Starship didn't coast through Max-Q, but they went through it at full power. I didn't know we could do this without a RUD.

[@jamescouture775]

If you see the dibris burning up over head as in the video you showed you are safe. That stuff was over 50 miles high further down range you may not be as safe.

[@jcristina]

Great point

[@mr123Skiddy]

The catch was amazing and proved out Musk’s vision. With regard to the starship, they will figure it out for the next flight. NOBODY was in danger. SpaceX and the FAA have clear guidelines and protocols to avoid potential harm to innocents. You could say that the protocols worked perfectly, as they have for over 20 years of space/aircraft test flights. The “News” coverage loves to create panic. Even though the Starship was lost, the “disassembly” and debris trail fell in a fully safe zone and should also be considered a huge success!

[@steveg2406]

Don't understand how orbital "live" video was shown if Starship exploded shortly after separation from the booster, nor closing East Indian Ocean air traffic due to falling Starship debris before the launch.

[@davidcolwell614]

It didn’t explode shortly after separation. It exploded way after separation when it was almost to space. It was at the Turks and Caicos Islands when SpaceX used the flight termination system to keep it from going out of his path.

[@mathewherges397]

Yeah, I mean I'm glad that BO is still trying and have finally launched, but too many people try to compare the New Glenn system to Starship. They aren't even close in comparison. NG is more aligned with the Falcon Heavy from SpaceX. I suspect it will launch around the same amount. Like 4 - 5 times a year at most. This is due to contracts that are available. Starship is not just about full reusability, something that BO wants for New Glenn, it's not just about rapid reuse, it's also about super heavy lift. Starship v3 is going to be designed for 200 - 400tons to LEO🤯. Then, they are designing it to be refillable in space, which will allow it to take that payload nearly anywhere in the solar system. New Glenn is currently designed for 30 - 45 tons to LEO or potentially MEO, period. If they want to fling something further out, the payload mass goes way way down. All of this is in spite of the fact that BO was the first company to land a rocket booster. So, let's look at the score: SpaceX Falcon Heavy --- First flight - February 6, 2018 reusable - yes (57 tons to LEO) First Payload - Elon's Tesla Roadster (still in orbit around the SUN whereisroadster.com) Landed? - Yes, both side cores and the center core landed. However, the center core was lost during its return trip due to high seas) Total Launches - 11 Blue Origin New Glenn ---- First flight - January 16, 2025 Reusable - partially (max 45 tons to LEO) First Payload - a small payload adapter Landed? - No, telemetry lost just after entry burn startup Total launches - 1 🤠

[@jcristina]

👍🏻👍🏻

[@mmast7554]

Space shuttle had 5 redudunt computers 4 failed the one took over the four failed because they all were identical with identical components and the component the failed was bad batch the one that didn't was i believe older and hadn't been replaced after that the were all different and changed not only space but all redundant systems

[@MegaMastiffman]

Awesome T-shirt JC!! We are soooo back!!

[@unbroken1010]

Maybe, why did Trump just make a 20 billion deal with the UAE for land and data servers. Not America first

[@kevinthiel9552]

[@JasmineSinclair-i3n]

There has been a lot of online chatter beginning even before the New Glenn launch, and now has intensified after their launch, about Blue Origin catching up with, and out competing SpaceX this year. They aren't taking in consideration how slow Blue Origin is. Both SpaceX and New Glenn had rocket issues just a day apart, New Glenn losing a booster, and SpaceX losing Starship. While it is impressive what New Glenn accomplished on its first launch, I don't believe it will be a fully reusable operational rocket (problems being solved) this year. They are just too slow. It took them twenty-five years to get to orbit. I believe SpaceX will be launching payloads (mostly Starlink) into orbit at least twice a month by this time next year.

[@RobertMarshall-v8l]

I seriously doubt any company will even come close to SpaceX in our lifetimes.

[@themikeymikechannel2947]

B.O. was a lose and failed mission , (launch was a success) mission incompleted!! SAD VERY SAD

[@rockinredheadUK]

innovation and "vehicle" testing has always been done this way. Musk knows that if you want to play in this space (sorry about the pun) then you don't get to success without vehicle crashes en route. He is a disruptive force for the right reasons. He challenges the time and inertia it takes to bring new product to market.

[@Nooneyouknow1980]

Was it Peter that got the video?

[@FragileNM]

I was wondering if it was the gentleman who had mentioned being in the Caribbean

[@themikeymikechannel2947]

I would of thought all cell phone cameras have a zoom feature , I guess I was wrong!!!! Why didn't anyone zoom in on it as it Fireball streak passing by you all that recorded it!!!!!!!!??????

[@patrut-v2q]

Wrong about the aircraft not in the warning area. ATC was scrambling to put dozens of aircraft into holding and some had to divert due to low fuel when unable to get to their destination due to the explosion! Otherwise they would have just continued on while it harmlessly passed overhead.

[@BigDsrq]

Thank you for wearing RED today, and #TYFYS 😃

[@unbroken1010]

Rocket 🚀 number Freemason "33" right before inauguration day. That's wild. A ritual? 🤔

[@JohnWallace74]

Good video. These major failures are a stain on SpaceX reputation in my opinion . Maybe they learn more, but it shows they take too much risk. Instead of doing more planning and preparation, they are sending up in the atmosphere something that might go boom. Will a SpaceX rocket explode over your house and drop debris over your house killing you inside. In any event, I surely wouldn’t want to take a ride as an astronaut in these SpaceX rockets that explode quite often. SpaceX and Elon Musk needs to build confidence in their ability to build stable Falcon Heavy rockets that don’t explode.

[@jcristina]

Great point. A few things John. The path of the rocket has is over the ocean so if a RUD needs to happen, no debris would fall on land. That said, the cadences of blowing them up quickly and making corrections as fast is what sets them apart from NASA and alike. As I say, what takes NASA 10 years would take SpaceX less than 10 months.

[@Bunnahabhain18]

Elon Musk's SpaceX starship debris almost hit his own Caribbean tax haven. Kinda scary.

[@drew-azureperthwestaust4818]

They are not using 316

[@MichaelKing4023]

This was the first flight of a block 2 ships and what happened will be found and fixed.

[@1donjuego]

Booster "Perfect landing." Huh? One engine completely failed on re-entry burn. The booster continued to leak burning gases for many many minutes after landing.

[@karlfortner887]

I'm putting my dime on the plumbing. Just like the stainless steel tubing on the raptor, there more than likely was not enough restraint to limit the effects of vibration and even stainless gets brittle at cryogenic temperatures.

[@lordinquis8r679]

Lots of FUD in the comments today.

[@jcristina]

🤦🏻‍♂️

[@tygerbyrn]

🚀

[@stephenprice1756]

😊

[@davidthacker4832]

🤔👍

[@jcristina]

🍌

[@FernandoVillanueva-x7s]

Here is my 💩for support.

[@jcristina]

Thank you. 🍌

[@Martinmack333]

It took Blue Origin 10 years and one flight to leapfrog SpaceX's 10 years and 7 flights, so there is that argument that careful planning wins over iterative development. It's kind of the difference between calm science and hype/chaos with the latter being more entertaining though not as productive.

[@Scotto97]

How has Blue Origin "Leapfroged" SpaceX? Can you give me even one example? BO is not even trying to reuse the second stage and SpaceX has recovered a single stage over 300 times at this point. BO in their very small rocket less than 10. You must work for NASA or BO

[@jcristina]

Leap frog? I’m lost here. Am I missing something. 🤔

[@Martinmack333]

literally leap frogged into orbit...

[@jdilksjr]

SpaceX has been flying and landing rockets far longer than Blue Origin. You can't compare New Glen to Starship. Starship is a new design in the prototype stage. You can however compare New Glen to Falcon 9 or Falcon Heavy, both have been on quite a few missions.

[@kurknielsen]

IFT 5 booster landing was hardly perfect.

[@jcristina]

Interesting.

[@jdilksjr]

It landed right where it was supposed to and didn't blow up.

[@kurknielsen]

@@jdilksjr pieces fell off, engine cowlings warped, flames all over the place.

[@RealDoomVoxel]

i don't want anything to do with anything elon musk has had his grubby little mitts on

[@OLDMANDOM42.Dominic]

💥💥💥💥💥💥💥💥💥

[@arnoldsmith5754]

🤠🤠

[@EK--ry3lr]

🛰🪐🚀📡

[@benzetasilva]

☕🇧🇷

[@JamieStuff]

Having worked for a subsidiary of Boeing Aerospace in the '90s, we were dedicated members of the Department of Redundancy Department.

[@jcristina]

Oh ya.

[@chautiendung]

Trump

[@petepop4319]

your sealing vapor, heat will flow down. The whole skin and frame should be liquid cooled through a capillary system and what can be cooled can be heated through same system. Is there a metal that's solid between 0° and 160° but liquid outside these Temps, use that as coolant. Honeycomb or triangle shaped capillaries.

[@EugeneElder]

💩

[@jcristina]

🍌

[@Bobsadventuresfl]

🚀💩

[@SteelWolf13]

:)

[@Eyecandylvr]

You obviously like the sound of your own voice, and facts seem to evade you! The stainless they use is a proprietary alloy!! You tossing around meaningless numbers…… well looks bad just saying!

[@jcristina]

Just saying. This is commentary and I’m not an engineer nor are you. Thanks for letting us no that they are using an alloy. 😂

[@evt641]

I like it when the title and thumbnail have zero sauce in the full length of the video... 🫡😐🤥

[@jcristina]

🍌