SpaceX Starship Landing Leg 2.0 Speculation.

What will the final version of the SpaceX Starship look like when it lands with reusable legs?
This is my speculation of what it could be.
Quite a bit taller then the 1.0 prototype legs we have seen while taking up less horizontal space in the skirt, due to the folded up, flip out foot. They also absorb the touchdown to different heights allowing landing on uneven surfaces.

[@Aceb_k]

Elon will always go for the simplistic design so Idk if he would go with this but good job.

[@inemanja]

I like how people refer to Musk as Elon - like they are close friends... :-D

[@Aceb_k]

Nemanja Ignjatović The best part is not part he says and he’s right more parts means more % of failure

[@thejesuschrist]

dope!

[@pomegranatepicker864]

wow

[@connorchristensen1836]

Jonathan Danaher gotta get to Heaven somehow

[@Dewolvez]

Maybe it has too many moving parts, very prone to failure.. But it’s a smart idea.

[@VictorECaplon]

TBH, if there is one thing worse than a moving part, it’s a crispy part and this style solves many issues in both height, footprint and exposure. Obviously not ideal but maybe a good starting although I’ll be honest and say it is a bit hypocritical of me to say this given I am not an engineer.

[@roberthale8407]

1st: The "knee" design will not support the weight. 2nd: I don't see any locking mechanisms. 3rd: For this to have shock absorbing characteristics it will need oleo-matic type struts with an extend/retract mechanism (this is going back up to orbit/space).

[@desigeekchishi]

I am not sure the locking mechanism in knee will be that strong , they need to have redundant locking segment too.

[@Calypso993]

i agree with telescopic style deployment for the legs from the skirt, but the knee extension, i dont know about that, looks weak, maybe using again telescopic deployment for that extension will make up for a stronger leg. Very nice 3D representation. you're good.

[@socalfishnoob9938]

Those legs look weaker than the ones on sn5 and 6

[@dinorei7364]

Very talented! I subscribed immediately.

[@ateslabattery115]

I love this design

[@garbon1450]

Good job Nick. Love your work

[@kenknudsen675]

A lot of the landing leg design depends on the final diameter of the vacuum engine bells. The ones shown here look considerably smaller than some of the figures I've seen, in which case the current folding legs would no longer have clearance, and a telescoping design like this might be needed.

[@HiroEne]

Looking slick

[@JSDudeca]

Cool design. My only worry is the size of contact area which is very important for soft surfaces.

[@merxellus1456]

Yea imagine those sinkin in through the martian dirt

[@MakeMySanctuary]

Hahahaha Remember when we thought we needed legs to land!? Hahahah

[@peterbarratt8699]

Great attempt, but Falcon style legs will be more appropriate for auto-levelling on undulating terrain. The spread needs to be somewhere near twice the body diameter, so 50% on each leg. Your design, although more complicated than the existing ones, are, at least, not going to be crushed if used for testing hops, etc.

[@whatthefunction9140]

Omg this thing is gonna tip over

[@kapybara8079]

It is really cool, but maybe over designed. I would guess it'll be simpler. Keep up the good work :)

[@sreerajr6470]

I don't see how this legs handle the weight pressure of starship. I am not that good in physics but... If am wrong please help me to understand. I very much like to.

[@SarkarAniruddha]

yes I also want to know. On the previous landing on SN6/7 the landing legs were damaged and yesterday when new landing legs had come to the bocachica , the thickness of them were not satisfactory for me

[@renchesandsords]

@@SarkarAniruddha Some assumptions, but considering that the animation shows the legs sliding out of the housing and retracting into the housing, the hollow section in the body of the starship can provide a lot more travel for damping and energy absorption. On Mk5 and 6 the legs only folded out, which means that the ship had a much shorter distance to stop from landing.

[@SarkarAniruddha]

@@renchesandsords so you want to say the legs will absorb the shock at first and then the total weight will be carried out by the body afterward?

[@renchesandsords]

@@SarkarAniruddha no, its just that with the design in the animation, the legs shouldn't be damaged as much due to the extra distance to absorb the shock

[@SarkarAniruddha]

@@renchesandsords would you mind telling , which software they used for animation? i hope what they are saying as an animation is actually simulation. If it is not and only animation than anything can be shown thrown animation.. but thank you for your reply :)

[@hkmp5kpdw]

I’d speculate Falcon type legs...

[@scabthecat]

Starship too tall for these narrow legs. Wide base of Falcon type legs needed.

[@tauraspace]

They are in the final version, these are just for test hops

[@hypervortex5930]

I believe they're are going for 4 legs with a wider stance now but good job nonetheless

[@davidlol1983]

that was referring to super heavy not starship. super heavy will always land on flat surface, starship has to land on uneven surfaces on moon and mars for example.

[@AnotherGlenn]

Exhaust impingement on the legs is an issue. I expect the legs to be on the outside and angled away from the skirt.

[@MauroE969]

Interesting. But I think at the end they will use moon Starship legs version. More stable.

[@RetroReaktor]

This is a good design. Can you make them less complex, taller and wider with larger footprint.

[@jq4700]

I'm sure that finaly the SN??? Will have a leg and a thruster at the top and the final maneuver after vertical touchdown will be a soft horizontal landing on the top leg. It'll be awesome if you can make a simulation landing that way

[@jahulath8441]

Lovely animation but would the angle of force not prevent the top part from acting like a piston shock absorber as you suggested?

[@glz1]

looks good and more air around rockets

[@cherry9839]

That looks super awesome, but too many moving parts I think.

[@user-mc5oh2pl7t]

I think the legs need to be like this, but like on ITS concept. I think ITS better because landing gears wider, that give extra stability for system (don't forget, we have 150 tons of cargo on top).

[@shibumi5210]

Looks pretty, but Musk already stated they would have to have a wider stance, i.e. wider than the diameter of SH...

[@VictorECaplon]

Really amazing ! I hope they’ll at least consider something alike before going falcon9 style (that will be exposed to reentry at high velocities and have more problems on uneven terrain).

[@DarkTheFailure]

Looks cool but that does add more moving parts and part that can malfunction which is bad. Simplier the better

[@magnamic5614]

Great job! Just gotta say, as others comments have said, too many moving parts. Keep up the good work!

[@jamesdewhalley2665]

1,000,000% not gonna be like this. The weight of the starship will act against the locking mechanism, rather than reinforcing the strength. Place the hinge on the otherside and you might be on to something

[@BlunderMunchkin]

Why would you need that second bit to flip out? What engineering problem does that solve?

[@jonbong98]

Elon has said 4 legs not 6. But failure of a single leg could be disastrous, whereas a 5 leg arrangement could cope with one , even two , without toppling. Nice to see Chines in this render, it's a critically important part of the design.

[@tauraspace]

4 leg for superheavy, 6 for starship.

[@mykolateren]

Цікаве рішення! Краще ніж було до цього, бо більший зазор під корпусом і є куди витікати газам продуктів згорання. Плюс захист можливої гідравліки опор від реактивної струї.

[@loopmix69]

it weights many tons those ones could be crashed at land, even the prototipe legs were more tougher(and they were smashed on land) than those ones that you show.

[@tylerleblanc520]

Looks cool as hell, but I don't think it can support the weight of starship.

[@jhunjhuncastro3811]

I think the legs is to small ..problem when its landing in soft portion of land.

[@eugeneminton2613]

look like they'd work on surfaces built for them to land on.... but if it misses the landing zone, it would probably not work as well.... they'd need to have more surface area not to sink into the dirt.

[@alancoker1459]

Dont think so Nick

[@HO-ck4ch]

Less moving parts would be good

[@Turbo999be]

It might work in Star Citizen...

[@danielwhyatt3278]

This one looks far too complex and thin to be able to support the weight. Not to mention that it increases the chances of one of them not deploying correctly. Elon will always go for more of a simplistic efficient design. This design still looks really nice though. Would just have to be a bit more robust.

[@yxhankun]

The legs will collapse because it can't withstand especially in the elbows.

[@shrek5629]

Elon said no legs

[@chuyencuabin5765]

Super heavy star ship need big leg

[@kevinisawake]

NOT WIDE ENOUGH

[@43.5]

Nop Terrin adapter

[@jocularjohn9807]

cool but too long and a bit to much for the landing legs

[@1974JSF]

It will be better if the body goes lower. And remove the bouncing on the springs.

[@skyhiker9669]

🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔

[@harrywissink842]

Too narrow .. must be much wider to land safe

[@callumscott953]

Props for the animation, but you haven't studied engineering have you?

[@Mantogods]

sexy

[@habibrehman5813]

Very small

[@theodorepietrzak5218]

too many points of failure. simple is best, single use crush zone is the best at this point of the development, and a flip out past 180 say to 220 0r 240 would auto lock at max range of movement, and could still have shock absorbing movements build in. invert the nee so it filps around from the inside to the out side and it would be better, the liner movement is also a possible weak point.

[@theelephantintheroom69]

Elon: *takes notes*

[@ryanmccawley5467]

No

[@Richgetmoney3k-xu5jh]

Hell naw those are terrible legs I'm scarred they want support dew to how they told out

[@tomomar123]

I'd be scarred dew told two, pacifically durrin the flip manure.

[@bluemamba5317]

They look too weak and complex