Uncovering The Mystery Behind Elon Musk's Wild SpaceX Starship Launch!

[@Whataboutit]

What do you think? When can we expect another Starship launch out of Starbase? One to Two months, as Elon said? Half a year? Next year? Let me know your thoughts!

[@patty2Strk]

3-4 months !

[@chmodrick2960]

Friend at SpaceX said 8-12 months.

[@paulcarpenter999]

Next year at the soonest.

[@lawrenceallen8096]

Thrust to weight ratio: is that significantly different for liquid-fueled vs. the SLS's SRBs? My understanding is that SRBs are all on, or all off, and that throttling is done by the companion liquid-fueled rockets. Space shuttle for example: light the SRBs and... hold on to your hat! I suppose the tradeoff would be, in addition to throttling, that a liquid-fueled rocket could continue longer and higher for the same weight? Don't know?

[@VegetarianZombie]

No way it launches this year. There needs to be a lot of testing not to mention new FAA requirements. That said, I do expect we will see multiple full engine static fire tests.

[@jimlaz7456]

Feelix!! Where you been?!

[@gameftf4555]

At Starbase xD

[@loganford1220]

Uhh.. did you watch the start of the video

[@Moe_Lester_fromUptwn]

Busy trimming his brows?🤷🏾‍♂️

[@arturwyscioek899]

I will bright u up fellows: earth is flat and there wasn't a moon landing yet 😊

[@hamzamahmood9565]

Cleaning the debris under the launch tower

[@moritzheintze7615]

10:18: Yes, it rose quite slowly. Plotting the speed data over time gives a value of about 1.3 until throtteling down for max-Q. The problem was: The Falcon Heavy really speeds up after max-Q reaching 3 - 4 g, while the vehicle never went past 1.7 g until the thrust failed about 2:15 into the flight.

[@marcusoutdoors4999]

Great analysis, thanks for taking the time to analyse this

[@Rawkus919]

Also had no fuel left. No return landing.

[@marx.soguilon]

comparing it with other launches, it was indeed struggling going up to speed. even maxq never felt maxq enough.

[@NeonVisual]

The booster was intentionally only throttled at 50% power for the first 6 seconds before going to 90%. Given that previous 50% booster tests didn't damage the pad, it's likely all the damage occurred within those two seconds during throttle up and lift off. You can actually see the sound waves really crank up just before it lifted off and the pad was flying.

[@737smartin]

If true, this is good info. 👍

[@plainText384]

It's been some time, but didn't the 31 engine static fire at 50% thrust also damage the concrete? Not a giant crater, but it still caused damage.

[@NeonVisual]

​@@plainText384 They reformulated the concrete mix prior to the static fire. Looking at the damage from RVG photography, the destroyed pad is a patchwork of missing squares and rectangles, indicating that once the plume got under the pad, it blew away all previous repairs. I wonder if part of the problem is the patchwork, rather than a solid single pad made of one material. Once the plume gets through a crack by mechanical buffeting it's going to excavate everything under it like a pressure washer under paper cups. Next time use plastic cups and cement them to the ground so the pressure washer can't get under. Elon wants as little material as possible to be used, so they will keep working on new ideas like these liquid cooled metal plates. I highly suspect that by the time they've figured out a solution, it will probably make flame trenches and diverters obsolete, simply because no one has ever had to make a reusable system before.

[@AG-ig8uf]

@@NeonVisual Or.. just with so many other things, after wasting years of time and hundreds of millions in funds, they will realize that flame tranches and water deluge systems in common sense since before Musk was born, and start using it. Naturally with some bs wording, presenting it as yet another genius Musk invention.

[@NeonVisual]

@@AG-ig8uf flame diverters and water deluge are not even remotely suitable for rapid reusability of up to two flights per day. You are operating under the completely incorrect belief that they are cheap and reusable just because you've only ever seen NASA use them on large rockets once in a blue moon.

[@U2EdgeFan]

Danke Felix. We'll see another year before being ready for another launch. Furthermore, it will have a significant impact on the construction of the launch facility in Cap Canaveral as well. I think it is safe to say that the fix cannot be done within two months.

[@drdrew3]

Very obvious

[@christopheryoder8292]

I think the angular takeoff was a tower clearance maneuver given the direction of the wind and the possibility of it pushing the rocket into the tower.

[@rorykeegan1895]

Space X confirmed that ...

[@danielblea3520]

I don't believe them on this one, I think they lost two engines on one side and had to adjust immediately upon liftoff

[@Doubie.]

@@rorykeegan1895 yea I might buy that if they didn’t flame trench demolish there launch pad because they wanted to rush the launch remember they can’t say that it was unintentional without opening up legal problems from them with the NTSB and FAA Also it didn’t look like it set off from the clamps clean because it tilted corrected the pushed left again

[@christopheryoder8292]

@@Doubie. 500 days waiting on the launch license + having b7 and S20 built for a year + delaying the launch != Rushing the launch. Granted they should have waited a few more weeks but to say the launch was rushed isn't true.

[@danielblea3520]

@@christopheryoder8292 if the pad wasn't ready and they launched anyway then it was rushed regardless of how long they waited beforehand. Would you drive your car without lug nuts? Probably not because the wheels would fall off and destroy the remainder of the system. Same thing applies here, wait another few months for proper flame mitigation and they would be launching rockets every other week. Now they will have to wait much much longer to launch a second. Not a good idea to launch regardless of the data they received from the flight

[@wafikiri_]

13:43 "even though Starship had to be detonated" The Fast Termination System did not detonate the rocket. Its detonations opened fuel-venting holes in the hull, tiny in comparison with the rocket's size. Its purpose: to depressurize the hull and allow for most of the fuel to be vented. It took 50 seconds to depressurize the hull, which then, its stiffness gone, succumbed to aerodynamic forces, crumbled, rip open, and exploded. Edit: minor correction.

[@canonicaltom]

Starship is way more durable than I expected. Having to rebuild the OLM might be a good thing, they can take everything they've learned and iterate again.

[@scoremat]

An interesting takeaway for me is that the heat tiles on StarShip seemed to hold up incredibly well... I've watched a lot of the reaction videos and have not heard of any falling off... I remember that these were causing a lot of concern earlier on.

[@krazenes]

There was an image released by Spacex moments before FTS that showed a few of the heat tiles missing but yes I agree they held up incredibly well. And newer ships have greatly improved heat tiles as well.

[@Oblivionsurveyor]

I think that is a minor problem compared to others they are working on, They will change the surface so that tiles can move around without losing structural integrity. They have to be able to move because of the Thermal changes as it is filled and launched/de-orbited. I think that is why they fall off at all is because they are still working the right design to achieve that, If they move around too much, they fall off. If they move around too little, They fall off. I personally think changing the surface from just pins to slightly round recesses with pin so that the Pin is not doing all the work. The current surface allows for lateral movement too easily and relying on pins for each tile. If they put the pins in a slightly recessed round surface, that rounded surface will help that pin stop lateral movement while also allowing for expansion and contraction without breaking the tiles. The slightly recessed rounded surface would also help insure proper tile installation.

[@Mallchad]

​@@krazenes I honestly think that could have been an anomaly from excess venting and spinning. I'm amazed the tiles have held up as well as they have still far

[@russellharrell2747]

The tiles holding up is actually amazing. The shuttle always lost a few during launch, so that’s expected. Too bad we didn’t get to see reentry on this flight…if only the launch pad hadn’t exploded into the rocket and damaged it to the point of preventing separation and orbital flight phases.

[@CountryLifestyle2023]

I was happily surprised as to how well the heat tiles held up. Alot different than a year ago. Truly shows SpaceX progress

[@christopheryoder8292]

I am hoping for four to six months. Ideally, they will have the next launch in the summer so I don't have to take my son out of school to go watch it.

[@owibanbenoki]

Glad for you you could be there to see it. : ) I don't think we will see another launch before this autumn, but definitely the next one will be before next year, fingers crossed!

[@9r33ks]

Great video, Felix!! Exactly the kind I was waiting for, you rock!! :D

[@changbeerbeer]

Felix that must have been some view and feeling watching StarShip launch! Good for you. 👌🚀

[@revilod20]

seeing you speechless makes me emotional, brings me back to watching it from my computer live with my 3 daughters under 3:) truly incredible!

[@hallron_]

Great script of this video. All informations was described in detail and at the same time short (not boring one). Live the video.

[@spacexrocks1041]

Thank you for the expertly detailed analysis. * Great job!! Q: If Starship had lifted off more quickly, would there have been less damage?

[@ellieinspace]

Great recap Felix!🎉🎉

[@marcusoutdoors4999]

The summary of the flight test we’ve all be waiting for. Great to see you Felix

[@johncampbell9216]

You’re right on one thing… no concrete on earth could withstand a steam bleve as the one that occurred under the pad. This was a heat issue, not a blast issue. Eliminate the moisture beneath the pad and it’ll be fine.

[@EmbSys]

Never stop saying: "Starship Updates"! I'd miss it so much.

[@joanwhiteley9686]

I like your calm, educated comments. So much better than other commentaries I have watched over the last few days.

[@neoanderson7]

I always want to see your coverage of Starship info. It was fantastic seeing it live! Even better after seeing the aftermath you guys covered. Honestly, I'm pretty sure these guys will get everything cleaned up and set to go possibly be end of summer if not mid fall. The base itself took a major hit. I wonder if it;ll be possible to move the entire tower structure and remake another orbital pad. The original pad took an enormous amount of damage. Those engines are crazy powerful!! Despite people worrying it wouldn't lift, people can't comprehend the sheer size and weight of such a structure. It was truly glorious seeing this beast take flight! Truly unfortunate it couldn't separate from Starship itself. Hugely impressive it was able to survive so many flips at Mach2!! The structure is crazy robust!! I've got faith they'll have most of the base fixed up by late July, early August.. Possibly get 2nd attempt at launch by end of September.. 🙂

[@MrMR-hp6ed]

I was there from Ohio Felix! I was looking out for your Tesla but never saw it. Launch was amazing, I’m looking forward to going to future launches.

[@THX..1138]

The booster's engines never shut down cuz the Starship never made it anywhere near the altitude for main engine cutoff or stage separation. The commentators were telling us what was supposed to be happening by that time in the flight. MECO and stage separation were most likely meant to happen at somewhere just over 60km altitude, though Starship never made it past 39km.... IMO with all the engines that failed they never got up the speed they needed and basically ran out of fuel. When the rocket started to tumble it was because of engines on one side of the outer ring shut down and the others kept firing a little longer as the fuel (oxygen probably) ran out. You can see the center engines that were still working tried to null out the rotation, but even at full gimbal they couldn't.

[@marx.soguilon]

good point. given the speed and its altitude, i didnt expected any separation. it was already struggling speeding up with the lost of those engines. i read that a lost of 1 or 2 will still be ok but man there are 6 at most that were lost in its course. im even worried for the center engine for gimbaling.

[@wielkopletw]

You don't even know how long i was waiting for Your updates

[@Ohjeezno]

Prior to the launch I'd think about the proximity of the tank farm and wonder how it would not be affected. I assumed the Space X engineers had a trick up their sleeves, but it seems that they didnt think this through well enough.

[@Mallchad]

The assumption was it's not meant to survive an explosion... I think. Normal use should be fine

[@Ohjeezno]

@@Mallchad you mean that continuous explosion we call 'a launch'? 😉

[@Mallchad]

​@@Ohjeezno I mean yes, but that force is redirected by the blast shield/ramp in front of the tanks- the exhaust is *very* straight so none should stray behind the deflectors Sudden pad or ship :D explosion was not accounted for

[@ooooneeee]

I'm sure that the engineers saw this coming years ago but the SpaceX bosses didn't listen to their concerns and requests for flame trenches, deluge systems etc.

[@AG-ig8uf]

It yet another tell tell sign how messed up SpaceX leadership is. Engineers not working in SpaceX have been pointing out sutidity in launch pad design, notably absence of flame trenches and water deluge systems, common practice even before Musk was born. Proximity of fuel tanks to pad is another thing. At this stage it looks like Starship primary objective is not space but entertainment and creating excitement in Musk fan base.

[@jeffreyrizzo785]

I'm fairly disappointed that WAI did not do a livestream for the Starship launch. I had to watch it on the SpaceX live stream. Hype hype. Please let me reiterate though. Disappointed that there wasn't a livestream not disappointed in this channel. It rocks!

[@MrJdsenior]

Musk isn't, and I'm pretty sure that was intentional. He probably wishes THEY hadn't shown in live now, at least without running a long loop for editing. :-) Artemis goes to the moon and back, with no failures of any consequence, UNFLOWN, while Starship self destructs (as far as being able to complete the mission) before it even leaves the pad. If I were Musk, I would be hiding UNDER that pad, except that I'm sure it's already been condemned, and he might break his neck falling into that asteroid sized crater below it. I expect he is NOT a happy camper right now...he sure didn't look like it when they showed him in the control room right afterward, anyway. He looked like he was going to need some TMJ treatment, or if he'd had some nails, he would have been chewing them.

[@jeffreyrizzo785]

@@MrJdsenior are you kidding me? NASA is nothing but a bureaucratic black hole that's sucks in hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars in spits out nothing but empty promises. Artemis is old Tech with a new paint job. Atleast SpaceX is doing something new and innovative. SpaceX has thoroughly embarrassed NASA with Falcon 9, Falcon heavy, Dragon cargo and crew. NASA don't make me laugh. Before SpaceX Dragon crew, NASA was using Russian Rockets to send astronauts to the ISS. All the while still sucking in hundreds of billions of dollars into that black hole bureaucracy

[@SmashPlayz]

18:05 - I would say 12 to 15 months. It's not just a question of repair, but a lot of redesign of Stage 0. If no flame trench then they need to raise the OLN and the launch tower. Thanks for your amazing channel Felix!!

[@Soulleey]

i think the next launch will be in november... but thats with a lot of hope too. probably all new ships and boosters are scraped and something like booster 11 and ship 29 will be the next pair to fly

[@FreeSpeechXtremist]

​@@Soulleey don't think they'll scrap any ships still much information to gain from test launches and they will want to test the smallest flame diverter possible they want to do this at sea they simply cannot imitate what traditional rockets do. They need to avoid a classic flame diverter or they will have to give up on sea launch altogether which causes alot of problems with their launch schedule you do not want starships taking off 4 times a day anywhere near you!

[@AscendDynamics]

How long until the launch facility at the Cape is ready? Could the next launch happen from there? Though how on earth would they transport a ship and booster there? LOL!

[@bindingcurve]

@@AscendDynamics Well, send up a heavy booster only with a light fuel load and minimal engines on a ballistic flight. Starship can make the flight without the booster.

[@SmashPlayz]

@@AscendDynamics I think the infrastructure they're building there is of the same design as the one at Starbase. If I were them, I'd halt construction on that until they're sure how they want to redesign this.

[@stephenbrickwood1602]

30 seconds, 340 klm/hr, 1 kilometre above ground. Fully loaded, 5 seconds to start moving. Amazing work 👏

[@MrGoesBoom]

At first I figured while Musk's estimate of 1 to 2 months was ludicrously optimistic that within 4 months, 6 at the outside, that we'd see more attempts be possible. But as more footage and information comes to light of just how much damage happened, and speculation on what the FAA might require before another launch, I'm starting to think the people saying at least a year might be closer to the mark. But damn I hope that's wrong.

[@andreiionescu205]

Musk is crazy with his timelines

[@Mallchad]

I might've have been possible if the OLM wasn't literally toasted... more aspirational right now really

[@rorykeegan1895]

If the FAA have anything to do with it, never is the next launch. They really don't understand or approve of rapid iteration and frequent failure.

[@edgarslinis5873]

@@andreiionescu205 he’s not crazy, he’s just lying

[@erictam7014]

If this was NASA, the next launch would be 5 years out and NASA is part of the government. Since this is Space X, (not part of the government) I feel we just witnessed the last attempt we will see from Boca Chica. It was fun while it lasted., but everything has to come to an end someday.

[@stokesseegers5012]

I'll never forget that engine shot, it reminded me of the Millennium Falcon flying away

[@MrJdsenior]

Sans six engines.

[@mrmcnobed]

JUICE ....... JUpiters ICey-moon Explorer makes sense to me

[@throwabrick]

I love how you didn't wait more than a second to hit the obligatory flight termination joke. I was already giggling to myself About It, so it was a nice icing-on-the-cake moment. :) My contribution to the jokes is, when looking at the photo of the tank farm damage: "good thing that berm was there, eh?"

[@hankkingsley9183]

I want to find a recording of Gwen talking to Elon about needing to wait for flame diversion before launching test.... Elon stamping his foot "BUT I WANNA LAUNCH MY ROCKET ON 420!!!!!"

[@executivesteps]

Exactly! And if he delayed after getting approval from the FAA he could no longer gaslight his fanboys that the FAA was holding him up. It wasn’t true a year ago because he was no where near ready to launch back then and it wasn’t true on 4/20.

[@angelarch5352]

This is probably exactly what happened, Next most likely Starship launch I would say they need over a year to redesign build and approve a new OLM, so 2024 on June 9, ... 6-9 ... you know it will happen

[@tycurtin7565]

The maneuver to clear the launch tower quickly by veering to the side was planned. "Save the clock tower!!!" at all cost.

[@MrJdsenior]

Yeah, and BOY, did it help, or WHAT? The tower was only marginally destroyed, everything else in sight is a write off, including that poor SUV.

[@spacekrebel2331]

Sorry about your TECH problems glad to see your video! Keep your head up, keep up the great work and thank you very much!

[@londek]

eryk gawron is my favourite youtuber, messiah of rakietomania, kind of rockets, master of space science, priest of rockets, ruler of space, patriarch of space technology, shaman of cosmic powers, general of rocketmania

[@kingfish1790]

niech żyje rakietomania 🔥

[@picklesontheroad]

I thought it was pretty cool watching your car drive past us as we were headed to South Padre as well. We had the same problems with the wifi connections. I told my wife (as she was blaming our hotspot,) that it's 20,000 nerds and a bunch of news casters who crashed it. It took over an hour to find a working connection so that I could upload a 60second short of the launch. It was truly a week to remember!

[@mattfirestone1]

It's insane how much alike my kerbal launches are. I say at least 8 months for another launch attempt and we see a flame diverter added.

[@sfs_fan_e]

i saw your tesla pass by my school in brownsville and i was screaming bc youre like one of my favorite space youtubers

[@Wingman77tws]

Elon says 2 months, I think that is crazy. they will be luck to fly again this year.

[@rorykeegan1895]

I have my doubts the FAA will ever let them launch from Boca Chica again. The FAA successfully stopped the development schedule for 2 years after Musk okayed a launch without an FAA Inspector present. Now they have a good excuse to just wave it off forever on "safety" grounds ...

[@matejzizanovic7959]

Elon said were gonna have full self driving cars "october next year" in 2013, landed humans on Mars by 2018, Hyperloop was "not that hard, like air hockey in a tube"... He says alot of things to boost his stock prices, and it works for him... Realistically, this time next year is probably an option, maybe even later...

[@Wingman77tws]

@@matejzizanovic7959 yep all that is true. but at the same time he has made colosal achievements faster than any other group of humans ever... so I am still a huge suporter, but it does boggle the mind to hear his idea of what the timelines should be.

[@matejzizanovic7959]

@@Wingman77tws Well thats the whole thing with Elon, he invested in Tesla and it became big, and then the entire cult of personality started around him, he realized that quickly and is making ludicrous claims and people just believe him and invest in his companies. Look at his stock prices after those CGI presentations, they skyrocket. Its not about timelines, its about making people excited. Noone not totally blind believed hes gonna put humans on Mars by 2018, but the CNN, Time magazine, all huge media houses made a story like its really happening. Its crypto market logic into the real world stock market - its driven by hype. Just look at Boring company, they made 1 tunnel, its a shitty tiny tunnel in Vegas, and the company is worth 6 billion - way more than companies with decades of experience in digging massive tunnels. Hype is the driver of todays market, and Elon figured that out fast and capitalized. Yes his companies did some amazing things noone can deny this, but we have to be realistic and not blinded by being a fan of the person.

[@SP4CEBAR]

I can't wait for the next episode to see the repairs in action

[@sgfx]

15:10 A flame trench may not necessarily solve all problems, It cannot guarantee better handling the force generated by a super heavy launch. There has never been a blast as strong as that of the super heavy, so it's difficult to determine how effective a flame trench would be in handling its force. Although it may seam logical to redirect debris in one direction, i'm not sure how wise that would be. Currently, during a launch, the fire, and blast waves push out in all directions, spreading the force over a wider area. If a flame trench is used, it would channel all the force in one direction, potentially causing more damage and reducing its efficiency. And, pushing the force away from the launchpad could also decrease the rocket's launch's efficiency. A possible solution could be to use a thicker cement pad, measured in feet rather than inches. This could help to reduce the damage caused by the flow of the blast getting under the slabs, causing them to fly away like tiles in the wind. SpaceX boasts some of the world's most talented engineers, as evidenced by their recent feat of successfully launching a 400+ foot, 9-meter-wide tin can almost 30 miles in the air. I believe that they are already working on the blast problem and don't require armchair quarterbacks, who are likely only aware of 10% of the issues at best, trying to do their jobs for them.

[@sauceboss1846]

Exactly!

[@allangibson8494]

NASA has been there and done this. The Saturn V and Space Launch System is in the same thrust class as this first generation Starship and they had twenty years of experience that told them flame diverters and water sprays are essential. SpaceX had them on order but not installed. (Elon’s go go strikes again - Elon likes to overrule his engineers (a lot)).

[@sgfx]

​@@allangibson8494 Ya, we'll look at the mess SLS left. Not sure about the trench, but the tower was an absolute wreck and they are noway near the same class. SLS block 1 is 8.8 million pounds, (15% more than Saturn V) starship is over twice that at 17 million pounds. So my statement stands ,"There has never been a blast as strong as that of the super heavy," so we really don't know what the fix will be.

[@allangibson8494]

@@sgfx The first generation Starship is just slightly more powerful than the SLS (about 20%). Very comparable. 5000 tons vs 4000 tons. Yes NASA learned lessons from the first SLS launch. SpaceX should have too. The second generation Starship which is actually capable of orbital flight will be much more powerful.

[@sgfx]

@@allangibson8494 The lower thrust mentioned earlier only occurred during the test fire, where the raptors were not operating at full power. Even with reduced power, they still produced more thrust than the SLS or Saturn V, and the launchpad remained intact. Booster 7 was at about 90% for the launch. In fact, Booster 7 and Ship 24 could have reached orbit if that had been the goal. However, to ensure a safe return, the plan was to go "just short of orbit." so again my statement still stands ,"There has never been a blast as strong as that of the super heavy,"

[@ryansaving]

One, fire rocket with multiple engine failures. Two get past pressure barrier, three exert extreme tolerances on rocket, explode everything happen perfectly.

[@mm-dw4rr]

Why does Felix always say, "Hi, I'm Felix, your host for today" when he's always the host? 🙉 P.S NOT THAT THERE'S ANYTHING WRONG ABOUT THAT! BUT HAS THERE EVER BEEN A DIFFERENT HOST?

[@MrGoesBoom]

because for some people this might be their first time ever watching his channel, so he introduces himself for the newcomers

[@filonin2]

@@MrGoesBoom You missed the point. That does not explain why he says "for today."

[@mm-dw4rr]

@@MrGoesBoom Cool. Thanks ✔

[@patrickdurham8393]

No one knows what the future holds!

[@simongeard4824]

Yes - his wife did a couple of episodes a few years back!

[@markhuebner7580]

Go Felix, go! Awesome footage & commentary, thanks!

[@sirsavientraliard6781]

I think 6 months is possible being optimistic. I don't think just placing a water cooled steel plate under it ist going to be sufficient, in the very least the shielding for the tankfarm must be sigificantly upgraded🧑‍🔧🧑‍🏭. I also doubt the launch platform is salvageable. I hope the next test launch will be soon but I'm not counting on in it. 😣

[@MrJdsenior]

The platform is toast, and they would NEVER use that brain fart again anyway. Right now it is their biggest embarrassment. There is a crater underneath it that excavated the now shattered concrete legs, just rebar showing in some places. It would be like jacking up the radiator cap, and putting a new car under it. And they are going to have ZERO CHOICE about redoing the whole concept, because now even the FAA is pissed off. You really don't want to piss the FAA off. Remember the Monty Python running line, "Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition". They may not have expected it, but it's on the way.

[@victorkrawchuk9141]

If you look closely, you'll see both FTSes being triggered, but there was a delay of several seconds before S24 and B7 were destroyed. There were two jet streams emitting at a 90 degree angle from both intact and still-connected vehicles. Is this normal behavior of the FTS? Or is it just more evidence that Starship is very tough and hard to knock down?

[@douglasbushman]

NEXT LAUNCH WILL NO SOONER THAN SEPT 2023

[@no0ne000]

35 km is way too low to do stage separation. The SpaceX team was referencing that event based on the mission time, but the flight computer knew there was no chance of orbit unless it got higher, hence no engine shutdown.

[@rorykeegan1895]

65 kms was the planned separation ...

[@simongeard4824]

Yeah, it puzzles me that so many people keep asking why they didn't separate. Sure, mission time said it was due to occur, but the vehicle was obviously nowhere near being ready to stage...

[@hamzamahmood9565]

In my opinion, this was a huge setback for SpaceX and the entire space community. The rocket did fine, but the lack of flame diverter broke the launch pad thanks to cheap thinking on Elon's part. Furthermore, FAA/EPA is launching an investigation into the environmental effects which has been devastating to say the least. So there won't be another Starship launch anytime soon.

[@rorykeegan1895]

Unfortunately you're correct

[@miso519]

The quality of this episode 🙏

[@bakerfx4968]

The rocket vibrating wouldn’t cause the rolling shutter we saw. It would have to be vibrating so much it was moving laterally by feet back and forth. The tripod vibrating would though. Otherwise we’re just seeing atmospheric refraction with all the air we’re looking through with different temperatures (or a combination of that + tripod movement)

[@filonin2]

The rocket is what is vibrating the tripod.

[@johnwick5894]

Great video dude.

[@Anusfisch]

9:01 SpaceX got extremely lucky there. This was no clearance maneuvre. Due to the engine failure, there was an extreme asymmetry in thrust, resulting in a roll moment around the COG. To compensate this moment, the flight computers tilted the inner raptors to reach momentum equilibrium. This gimbaling comes along with a horizontal thrust component.

[@737smartin]

Was it luck or good contingency planning? Wouldn’t seem hard to have pre-programmed thruster solutions for every survivable engine failure combination. Sense the failures, run appropriate the code to gimbal as needed, boost power on the right engine(s) as needed, and (perhaps) reduce power on some to maintain trajectory. 🤷‍♂️

[@larryluffel777]

Musk already confirmed it was a planned tower clearance procedure.

[@c.bro.572]

SpaceX already confirmed that this was a planned tower avoidance maneuver

[@ericrandall3539]

Do you have a source saying this was not planned? Many rockets have performed pad avoidance maneuvers at liftoff, this wouldn’t be the first. It’s still all speculation.

[@rorykeegan1895]

Space X have already confirmed the non vertical aspect was deliberate to ensure pad clearance.

[@factsforlife0O0]

Bro all it takes is 1 heat tile missing to recreate Columbia shuttle also I recommend they use a Tungsten Pad since wolfram had a melting temp of around 6,200 degrees F

[@yanlzkurt847]

Musk invested heavily into Metabourne. Metabourne Token will make millionaires, after CEX listing it will blow up. Metaverse VR gaming and crypto have the potential to transform the gaming industry and create new business models. Metabourne Token is awaiting major CEX listings. It's possible to hit 200x this year. The integration of crypto in metaverse VR gaming can create new revenue streams for game developers and publishers, leading to more innovation in the industry. I will retire after this. Mark my words!

[@angelarch5352]

that would be fantastic news except that the metaverse is being shut down due to lack of interest right now.

[@koriegoss1741]

​@@angelarch5352 you're responding to some spam bot trying to trick people into investing in some garbage token ....

[@angelarch5352]

btw Great video Felix! Glad to see you are back!:)

[@mglenadel]

What might have happened to the concrete under the OLM is that a small crack formed and a jet of ultra-hot, high-pressure exhaust gases penetrated down to the dirt underneath and, having nowhere to go, blew the remaining concrete upwards and away.

[@cgeorge6786]

Yes I think that is what happened.

[@shannonkohl68]

Alternate possibility: water in the concrete (or under it) got heated to the point that it flashed to steam, causing explosions. Those chunks getting tossed look a lot like what happens when a volcano does the same process. But maybe Super Heavy could not heat it to that degree.

[@readysetawesome]

or they needed to use the metal plate and water deluge that was originally specified but cut because Elon is impatient...

[@angelarch5352]

@@readysetawesome Elon saw the date "4.20" and that is what doomed this launch... he really needs to put the value of Starship success higher than his desire for jokes.

[@niehlsbohr]

Been waiting for this. Thank you!

[@JennieXdOyunlarFann]

News Leak: Elon Musk invested millions into Metabourne Token

[@Squirrel-Chaser]

Go away scammer

[@cy-one]

r/nobodyasked

[@aedanacheson6148]

Because he has millions to lose lol

[@Peachcreekmedia]

No one cares...

[@cy-one]

@@Peachcreekmedia exactly

[@CuriousityRulez]

Great show again. To bad I couldnt follow you on the live event. Next time for sure. Good luck!

Did he launch it by himself? I'm confused about all the name dropping.

[@andreiionescu205]

There are his sclaves working for him,he doesnt do nothing exactly,just yelling and firing people that are smarter than him,the guy is just a narcisistic pos sob

[@filonin2]

He's the company owner and the one who decided to build these ships for the purpose of colonizing Mars. Are you a literal space alien?

@@filonin2You seriously don't understand what I'm asking and why? How?

[@UFO_researcher]

The reason the booster was able to Tumble without being ripped apart, was because it was at 36,000 m, which is clear of the atmosphere.

[@executivesteps]

And the tanks were still at a high pressure due to less consumption of fuel with 6 engines not working. When the destruct command was given punching holes in the tanks they depressurized and crush and exploded like beer cans.

[@psu2dcu]

This is one of the few times SpaceX made a poor decision to launch before the flame mitigation system was ready. The test that was used to justify the viability of the launch infrastructure's ability to withstand the force of the raptor engines was apparently only 50% of the full launch force. In my mind that was not a sufficient test. Consequently, the launch infrastructure will have to be upgraded and rebuilt. I will be shocked if they will launch again in less than 6 to 8 months perhaps more. There is also some talk that the impact of the launch affected the surrounding area to a much greater degree than was expected or disclosed to the FAA and EPA. So in addition to the redesign of the Stage 0 launch infrastructure there could be a new round of FAA/EPA reviews. What is disturbing is that many outside observers questioned the lack of flame mitigation? Despite all these questions, the launch went forward. From my perspective as a Cost/Benefit exercise this was a major failure.

[@hamzamahmood9565]

Agreed. It doesn't matter how reusable the rocket is if the launch pad breaks after each launch

[@zaphodbeeblebrox2817]

Yes huge disaster, it most likely damaged the booster and caused it to lose control and any other data that could have been gleaned. Someone is saying "I told you so"

[@filonin2]

They would have to rebuild it for a flame diverter either way.

[@warrenwhite9085]

The metal flame diverter & water suppression facility were all well under construction & were going to be installed next, so it was not a question of saving money. Elon’s team judged that the concrete would survive a single launch, they were wrong. Hopefully the diverter & water systems will do the job without major alterations to stage0. The pad damage is an unfortunate misstep, a self inflicted wound.. obviously SpaceX knew the blast deflector & water systems were necessary for Starship launches, why weren’t they built & installed a year ago, designed in? Also, too bad the flight software didn’t shut down the booster & release Starship when control was first lost, Starship flight & reentry data would have been nice. There was a 2015 incident where a Falcon booster failed, the Dragon craft got free but smashed into the water & was destroyed simply because there was no flight software provision to order chute deployment after a launch failure, or the Dragon could have been saved. Someday Starship is going to carry important/valuable cargo or be manned. There should have been flight software provision to react to booster malfunction by separating Starship then soft landing somewhere in water. This was a lost opportunity to test that.

[@zaphodbeeblebrox2817]

@@filonin2 Yeah but this way they look really stupid and caused damage to their reputation, environment, etc.

[@bashndead]

Seit dem Launch sehnsüchtig auf dieses Video gewartet :D

[@Heathaze813]

I'm surprised you didn't cover the longer than expected pause on the OLM. The engines are lit ring by ring, then throttled up to 90%. Elon said earlier that with the high thrust to weight ratio it would jump off the pad, but it didn't exposing the pad to a long period of blasting. It will be interesting to see how they deal with that. Its also hard to believe that debris would be blasted straight up to the Raptors against all that force and not just to the side.

[@rorykeegan1895]

Everyone keeps saying x 5 engines out, while quite clearly x 3 were out within seconds of the start up, and x 6 by the time it aborted. No surprise it didn't jump off the pad or climb particularly quickly. Having lost its hydraulics within 30 secs its no surprise they could not steer it properly either.

[@shaung949]

They started the engines in three groups which would account for the time on the pad, the concrete started flying as the last set presumably the outer engines were lit.

[@stokesseegers5012]

Is there a video from onboard during Starship launch? I know they were recording from cameras on the ship. But has a full video been posted yet?

[@book3100]

the engines caused impressive damage. it'll be really interesting to see how they eventually solve that problem. i hope they got a ton of data, surely did, but more is better. ill be surprised if they fly another starship in 6 months, but with spacex, you never know.

[@executivesteps]

They got no data on stage 2 the actual Starship. I think engineers who have worked on Starship dont feel it was such a success.

[@rorykeegan1895]

It won't be up to Space X, it will be up too the FAA. So it will be years before they shuffle the paperwork again ....

[@MrJdsenior]

@@executivesteps I guarantee you the pad designer doesn't. He is what's known in layman's terms as 'up doo-doo creek without a paddle'. It's a good thing for him that legally all a previous employer can do now is verify employment there. I'm guessing he won't be asking for a referral.

[@drdrew3]

Elon said: water deluge system (parts already on site) and water cooled steel plated surface (already in production). They chose not to make these planned updates in order to avoid delaying the maiden launch.

[@agoodnight10]

@@executivesteps absolute bs. It would have been the best moment of their lives seeing it clear the launch pad alone. Errors were always going to happen with this type of launch

[@peettims6569]

Listen to Chris Hatfield talk about starship launch. Who better to listen to then an astronaut. He explains why the launch was a great success

[@myfavoritemartian1]

It is my understanding(And I may be wrong) that the FAA has revoked the launch license because of the size of the debris field. So, even if SPACEX has everything ready in 4 months, they still have the painful task of re-qualifying for a new launch license. Plus every license will be revoked and re-qualified until a normal launch has taken place. Landings will be another whole kettle of fish. (I have a fear that the EPA will throw a fit over this last launch and further delay things) It could be a year or more at Boca. NASA is uneasy about that last launch and will not tolerate such at the cape. SO SPACEX really needs an offshore launch pad and they have sold both rigs.

[@simongeard4824]

You're wrong. Yes, the FAA have grounded Starship for now - but that's just standard procedure for a failed launch... *any* deviation from the launch plan would have seen it grounded until they were comfortable that the reasons were understood. Nothing to do with them being upset at the size of the debris field... Also, I understand they were only licensed for a single launch anyway - that wouldn't be unexpected for something like this - so even if everything had gone according to plan and Starship and Booster had splashed down on target, SpaceX would likely still be needing a new or renewed license for the second attempt.

[@myfavoritemartian1]

@@simongeard4824 If media can be trusted the license was for 5 launches in two years. (Their words not mine)

[@simongeard4824]

@@myfavoritemartian1 I wouldn't trust the media to get the details of something like that right, but it's certainly possible I'm mistaken too... I've seen a fair amount of disagreement elsewhere on that subject. But the point is, this isn't that everything went so badly wrong that the FAA revoked their license, it's that the FAA followed standard procedure for *any* failure... disallow future attempts until the causes of failure are understood and mitigated to their satisfaction. And the re-certification will be largely a formality when it happens, because SpaceX and the FAA will be working very closely over the next few month... similar to how the first license was issued in just a few weeks.

[@killman369547]

This launch did prove one thing. How durable a rocket can be. I can't think of another rocket that could survive even a fraction of what starship went through in that launch without immediately exploding. This is good. This is the kind of durability that we need to eventually make spaceflight as safe and reliable as air travel.

[@markusrobinson3858]

Wonderful to see your whole family watching the liftoff! Disappointing the Musk has been less than frank about damage to stage 0. Launching BIG rockets has been a "thing" for well over three-quarters of a century. It boggles the imagination that the SpaceX team chose to have no flame diverter, no water suppression system, and yet have confidence in concrete that suffered during each of the previous less than 50 percent thrust partial test ignitions. How many other launch facilities world-wide have made the same choice? ZERO! So what was it? Hubris? cost-cutting? lack of focus on this mission critical aspect of a successful launch? The statistics that two engines right next to each other would be two of the three that failed to ignite suggests damage from debris, as does the explosive loss of the hydraulic system early in the flight. This damage and the associated delays is a self-inflicted wound to the SpaceX mission.

[@dr4d1s]

Remember SpaceX is a private company. They don't owe us an explanation about anything that happened.

[@stinkyfungus]

The only disappointment I had regarding starship was... it didn't land north of Hawaii as the plan originally showed. Was kinda hoping for a re entry flyover. Would've been pretty rad.

[@MrJdsenior]

That spectacular sh*t show didn't do it for you? Man, I thought they outdid themselves. There were pieces flying EVERYWHERE, some before it left the pad, motors knocked out, minor explosions on the way up, and then somersaults that would garner a 10 at the Olympics, followed by the rocket tearing itself in two, and then getting totally dismantled per the Flight Termination command. I'd hate to see your reaction coming off of Space Mountain. You'd be in full scale clinical depression. :-)

[@odysseusrex5908]

Thanks Felix, I understand the starship failure mode much better now. It's obviously going to be at least six months before they can try again. They have to come up with some kind of solution to the launch pad disintegration problem, and convince the FAA that it is sound, both on safety and environmental grounds. That might be harder than the engineering process, and will whatever they come up with work? I'm afraid all any of us outsiders can do is cross out fingers. Worst case scenario, they have to shut down Starbase all together and move all operations to the Cape, which will take a year or more. That will be a serious blow to Brownsville's economy.

[@charliekaiser482]

I was very disappointed WAI wasn't live! Ich bin sauer!

[@Southshore26]

The cost to live stream from South Padre is VERY expensive... I doubt WAI has the financial backing to do that.

[@andreiionescu205]

He doesnt do live streams anymore

[@wafikiri_]

11:20 About Raptor death rate: 11:25 "Five engines were already out" while showing the Super Heavy bottom with six, not five, engines out: five in the outer ring, one in the innermost trio.

[@shaywood2857]

Love the content...... Makes me happy to see this in my lifetime

[@Whataboutit]

Oh yes, same here.

[@shaywood2857]

You are by far the best content creator when it comes to this stuff...... We wish u the best from New Zealand

[@SuperGoldenv]

What did the starship say to the pad? - You rock 😂

[@AdrianLentz]

So gefreut auf dieses Video , weiter so ;D

[@billg3645]

Great show, Felix. I hope all goes well for SpaceX and their plans leading up to the next launch of Starship. I just saw the title of the most recent podcast from Engineering Today with words to the effect that SpaceX "is in big trouble with the FAA" after the orbital test flight explosion. I would really hope that's not the case. SpaceX intimated many times prior to the flight that that would be one of the very likely outcomes of the first test. So, the FAA knew well in advance what to expect...before they issued the launch license.

[@Bivs_setup]

Elon time is like Bali time. There is little repair with more replacement of OLM required. The shear power was 33 Booster 2 engines sorry 30, was truly underestimated. None the less, what a sight it was. Watching on TV from Australia 🇦🇺 was still an absolutely awesome. 6 to 12 months before the next launch I think. Love the channel Felix. Keep up the amazing coverage. 👏🏼

[@outofthisworld7019]

We miss your weekly update videos feelix. We need more Waiiiiiiii

[@hexacarbide268]

Simply amazing! I litterally she'd a tear. It was beautiful

[@BigHappysPlace]

can you imagine being one of the contractors on that project. Seeing all your work turned to dust, and then realizing. HEY!!!! Another job for me!!!!

[@thesteveruss]

Danke!

[@brandono-g2771]

Thank you soooooo much

[@ChrisRaynorMD]

Another information-packed episode Felix! Thank you!

[@Alienalloy]

starship update...we've gone from the analogy of not having to destroy the jumbo jet after a single use to, destroying the airport after a single use.

[@mglmouser]

To answer your question, I think SpaceX got extremely lucky for this thing not to blow on launch. In this video at 7:25 you see concrete blocks being thrown as high as the starship 24. These could have easilly bounce around structures and hit the booster tanks. In this video at 8:10 you see an engine blow up during ascend. This alone could have blown the tank. You can see the explosion and ourburst of material being blown out. So, in my view, looks like the rocket is performing as was intended, but certainly not Stage 0-the base. It was perhaps foolish to even launch it without proper water jets.

[@danielvazquez7482]

As I watched the launch I was surprised to see the entire rocket frozen and thought there’s no way there could be any separation because the release clamps were frozen solid. This is still my take. Moreover, I’m convinced concrete sharp mettle from the launch pad damaged a few of the engines.

[@mfreel1657]

Thanks. Best analysis yet!

[@rayoflight62]

A realistic estimate for the next Starship launch would be six months from the first launch, which will be on the 20th of October, 2023...

[@ryansaving]

The thrust coming out of that rocket do you really think you could even shot and gun and the bullet hit lose boosters, that thrust was overpowering in the debris, bouncing back up

[@trapjohnson]

I mean, just watching from home on my laptop with earphones in gave me ASMR tingles once liftoff occurred!

[@davidmacphee3549]

TOP NOTCH Reporting!

[@dirk26382]

Thanks

[@ericwilliams7965]

next spring 🎉 it's worth the wait

[@ElonMusk-m]

Hello Eric, where are you commenting from?

[@Muhammed_turap760]

Musk invested soo much into Metabourne Token I belive Metabourne Token will bring 1000x gains after launch on Binance.

[@svenbeowulfsson641]

Es ist schade Felix das Du und Dein Team nicht in der Lage waren den Start zu beschreiben. Dein Kommentar war mir wichtig über den Start zu berichten. Weil ich lange nichts hörte, macht ich mir Gedanken ob Eur vielleicht was zugestoße war. Erst das kommentarlose aktuelle Video vom Start überzeugte mich fast, das alles OK war. Somit bin ich froh das bei Deinem ersten heutigen Bericht gesund und munter ausschaust. Dennoch ich fand es schade das Du bei diesem historischen Start nicht dabei warst. Gruß, Sven aus Schweden