SpaceX's Water Landing Reveals Rocket "Secrets" (or, What We Learned from CRS-16)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 7 гру 2018
- Now that the CRS-16 capsule has berthed at the space station with a load of Christmas presents and other essential supplies it's time to look at what we've discovered in the last few days, and clear up a few misconceptions.
In particular I want to thank John Kraus for taking some great photos of the event - which is pretty much exactly what he does -check out his work and support it here:
/ johnkrausphotos - Наука та технологія
Some important updates on things which I probably got wrong:
* The external camera is in a different place, so that bundle of cables at 3 O'clock isn't a camera.
* Most people believe the pusher mates with the narrow throat of the engine rather than the top of the combustion chamber.
Scott Manley, you mentioned that it knows that it is “aware,” but do you think the rockets have an extra fuel supply in case the rocket gets too close to land and the system says that there is an issue.
Throat of the engine makes more sense to me (complete amateur btw) than the back of the combustion chamber. From what you've talked about before, there can be a good amount of hardware up in there that something resting and vibrating against could damage. Throat of the engine is probably just a ring which holds the engine bell and provides an escape for the controlled explosion that is a rocket launch, which sounds like a more structurally sound place to put a pusher.
I wonder if this was the cause of failure: at T+ 2:33 approximately, right after MICO, the first blast of the second stage enters the top of the booster, with what looks like a frazzled video for a moment. Perhaps that blast affected the pumps, pressures, electronics, etc., leading to grid fin failure.
What do you think?
Pusher - It looks like air-air refueling probe TBH. I'll go as far to say that the pressure within the throat of the engine pushes that central round part, which then disengages the petals around it.
To me it sort of looks like the pusher mates to the pintle injector. FWIW, this is just an educated guess. Im sure the injector is strong enough to handle it plus the size/shape of the pusher just seems like it would fit..
Thanks for the shoutout, Scott!
I hope all of you guys enjoy the closeup photos :)
yah seriously thank you for the pictures, this is very interesting. must be fun traveling to watch launches all the time
I bet you have no eyebrows left
You are doing the world a service with great photos, please keep them coming!
Thanks John for your incredible pictures ! Keep it up, you're sharing pieces of dreams all over the world :)
johnkrausphoto - - Absolutely amazing, the best pictures ever published . Thanks.
i love how there was a second of "awww" then continued celebration. lmao.
I was picturing some guy in the back screaming "ffuck ya man" when it started going down
🤣🤣🤣 still they are winners... And look at you bruh...🤣
lol priceless: “we’ll take care of small detsils later, let’s party!”
JITENDRA SINGH NATHAWAT everything ok at home? I hope you find some humor sense soon.
An interesting point: it must be unusual for space engineers to have an intact failed vehicle to examine. They usually don't get that.
One of the many benefits of a self landing rocket
I bet the amount of data they would get from that will really benefit them in the long run
I had the same thought.
yeah, and that's why they have been cheering in the spaceX live stream ;)
RagingHammer simply a failed hydraulic pump... they had planned on adding redundancy pumps but didn’t think it was necessary on the booster since they were trying to cut weight, a mistake they won’t make again I’m sure.
Not much “data” other than the sensor registering the failed pump would be helpful.
As a hydraulics guy, I just want point out the bits that I recognize lol
On upper side of the upper blue actuator cylinder, you can see a silver rectangle, with a smaller silver rectangle one above it that has white wires coming out.
The larger one will be the 3 position spool valve (extend/hold/retract) with the pressure and return lines coming into it, and the smaller one is the wiring junction box.
It will then either have hard lines running from the valve to each end of the cylinder, or it may have bored channels inside the walls of the cylinder.
Then at the rear end of the cylinders, you can see another box with wires coming out, and that is going to be the linear positioning sensor that tells the computers exactly how far out the cylinder is extended, thus what angle the grid fin is at.
Judging by its position, I would guess that the center of the piston and rod is bored out, and a skinny tube runs down the center of the bore from the rear end of the cylinder. Inside the tube would be magnetic sensors, and there would be a magnet imbedded in the piston, allowing the exact position to be detected.
Nice
thanks for the info!
do you have any idea about the landing legs' hydraulic retracter? is it even hydraulic or is it something else?
@@anuragshinde9208 So far, leg retractions were only practiced by using cables. A winch is mounted on the "cap" attached to the interstage while the rocket is being transferred from the drone ship and is put horizontally on the transporter. Attaching the cable to the tip of the leg allows to pull it up into a locked position.
You can see how it was done in the video "SpaceX - First Leg Retract - Booster Lift 07-27-2018" on USLaunchReport
channel. AFAIK, the legs are still removed from the rocket for transportation.
@@cogoid oh thanks, actually i think i used the wrong words lol, i was trying to ask about the big black hydraulic looking thingys that open the legs while the stage is landing. Are they hydraulic? How do they work?
Nothing that a little flex tape can’t fix. The booster might be a bit salty about it though.
Salty Booster Lol
I sawed this booster in half!
speed tape, much better
That booster is 100% fixable with flex tape. Scott obviously isn't aware of the product (somehow!). Put a double layer on it and you've effectively got Falcon 9 Block 6.
@@kevin6666123 If flex seal can seal a screen door on the bottom of a boat, it can obviously do the job here too!
Failures like this one is a real gold mine to actually test the software and the hardware reaction in catastrophic events during the flight. Honestly, it feels much safer to see a booster having a problem but managing to land incredibly safely and softly. I guess it's good advertising for the block 5 reusability as well as Scott said. Still, I am now much more confident in SpaceX's rockets
exactly- its easier to have confidence in something when you know how it handles minor/moderate issues/malfunctions- the launchers ive made in KSP that worry me the most are the ones that work right the first time....
im really surprised the amount of failsafes they put on their rockets
It could even see potential customers with very expensive kit lifting jobs to invest in enough packaging to take advantage of abort modes like this.
What is fucking amazing on this landing is that if, for whatever reason people were in stage one, and couldn't eject until the last 5 seconds during the fall, they still would have a contact light on the ground.
@@enkiimuto1041 spaceX would have to furnish them new pants though lol
10:40 Three white hoses (+ three on the other side that are not visible) -- these are always seen flopping around the interstage after the stage separation. Before the stage separation they are attached to the second stage engine plumping, and carry the purge / engine chill gasses overboard. The ports on the engine to which these hoses attach are often seen spewing solid oxygen "snow" when the engine is chilled for the second time in GTO launches, and a little less during engine operation.
Nice
Lay it in some rice over the night and its going to be ok tomorrow.
imagine the amount of rice you would need xD
JL S *D O N T S T E A L M Y R I C E* just because you need a few hundred tons of it
They should start landing the rockets in Vietnam if they expect water landings.
Lol
hahasha this was so funny like 15 years ago.
I could’ve really benefitted from having circles added around the things you were talking about. Or arrows or something.
Snowflake. Deal with it
Spoiler Alert ❄
would have delayed the video. And you gotta be fast :)
I agree, I see no evidence of dented engines or a missing leg
@@Iahusha777Iahuah Almost positive the missing leg he's referring to would be underwater, based on his comments about water depth.
And again, Scott scratches my rocket itches just about the right way!
You can sue for that.
Ahem... That's what she said
The real treasure trove of such a landing is not the spoil of the booster, but all the data which have been logged during the landing event.
This is why, one year later, the landing of the booster has been perfected and has become almost a show of engineering magic. All problems had had ways to show themselves, and they have been corrected one by one.
Thanks to Mr. Manley for the video. I re-watched it after one year - with a different level of knowledge about SpaceX methodologies.
I was impressed with how controlled and "soft" the landing was considering some of the controlled surfaced failed, especially in the positions they were in.
When Spacex boosters don’t land the way they were supposed to they land safely and are good demonstrations of the technologies involved and how they work. That can’t really be said about many other agencies boosters though which tend to like houses.
Wait what? Did boosters hit people's houses before?
@@ComradeDragon1957 In China there have been pictures of spent side boosters and other stuff crashing into populated areas.
china doesn't really have much choice but to launch over populated areas because of their terrible geography for doing said launches
Scott did a video about a booster that came down in china. Most impressive red cloud of smoke I've ever seen. The video's name is "What Happens To Discarded Rocket Boosters And Old Satellites?"
@@haraldhonk4650 The red cloud was probably the dinitrogen tetroxide. Impressively toxic and should never be anywhere near a civillian population. It's advantage is it's an oxidiser that gives relatively good ISP with various propellants, is hypergolic with many of them, and unlike liquid oxygen can be stored at room temperature for an extended period of time.
IM A FISH!
Zerofever at least im not the only one that noticed that
@@lukeakarobertlaux536 Perfect little easter egg haha
Does a funny little dance and falls over too hehehe
I SAW THAT TOO - LOL!
FEEEEEESH!!!
When it is a new vehicle suffering glitches but the proven ones operate with no issue, that is the moment rocket science arrived at car manufacturing levels.
spaceX is still miles ahead nasa
did we forget CHallenger? or Columbia?
kyle smith challenger 1986, Colombia 2003.
The shuttle program had multiple failures that were never improved upon or even fixed. Spacex is a breath of fresh air for space exploration and their achievements can’t be overshadowed by the disasters of an underfunded , underused and under appreciated space agency.
Even when disasters occur in future which will eventually lose lives in the dangerous gambit of space exploration that should not stop us even for a second from pushing towards the stars the achieve the dreams of those lost in in its discovery.
The public opinion change on space travel due to those disasters set us back decades simply from fear of disaster and humiliation in a very dangerous area of study.
I always used to think the ols 50's sci fi vertical rocket landings were silly.
And here we are now, as it turns out, not a silly as it seemed
I mean, they still look silly, but they're also super cool.
Still missing the 50's giant fins.
Dethmeister they were, but now we can build supercomputers to carry in our pockets, . Supercomputers using the 90s definitions. So with so much power it’s not silly anymore
@@RS-ls7mm They're coming soon. Musk's Starship will have the 50's giant fins.
Finally someone explains the fire poot for me. I knew they did the oxygen depressurization immediately after landing because obviously it's a boiling cryogenic liquid that needs to be vented, but it makes sense that the helium pressurization of the kerosene tank would also need to be vented. I suppose the helium vent valve has a small portion inside the tank that captured some liquid and aerosolized it like an atomizer when it opened.
No, there is soot on it before it even lands from the engines burning, for its first landing burn and the last one, and it is because they are using kerosene
um ya, everyone knows that. what's that have to do with anything
@@Iahusha777Iahuah : 10mintwo said "poot", not "soot". It refers to a small fart.
This amazing postmortem analysis from just a photo is the reason I always smile when I get a notification.
I've learned a ton by Scotts breakdown!
What a time to be alive from tossing away expensive hardware to saying: "You know a reused rocket is the more safe and reliable option."
And really it makes sense, it done the job before, you know it works. Also boosters not having a perfect landing is news, cause well the perfect landings became so normal most people do not care anymore.
Well, the idea is not exactly new. We used to reuse whole space ships. That day will come again.
@@odysseusrex5908 No, we refurbished. The space shuttle required a long turnaround and full engine rebuilds, like a top fuel dragster.
It was a brilliant idea that didn't have advanced enough tech to not be a deathtrap.
@@chyza2012 Well, no, you're simply wrong.
@@solquint2390 I am well aware of the refurbishment required. To claim refurbishable means not reusable is simply twisting the meaning of words. Has there been technological advance in the last forty years allowing us to do things better than we could in 1980? Of course. Nonetheless, the Space Shuttle was fully reusable and was the first true space ship. It had capabilities which no other launch system has ever matched, or will, until BFR starts flying. The Falcon 9, excellent as it is, doesn't come close.
@@odysseusrex5908 As capable as the Shuttle was, I'd rather go into space in a Mercury capsule. The SST currently tops the leaderboard for fatalities. Not exactly something to brag about.
The Russians have achieved a much better track record with a modified ICBM.
Thanks Scott and John.. this was a grand close up off things...
I would definitely prefer to have my payload on a reused booster. I know I’d prefer to not be on the maiden flight of an airplane.
The Lion Air 737 MAX that crashed recently was essentially brand new and a bit of a lemon.
Well, the payload was delivered just fine. The going up part worked perfectly. It was the coming back down where they had difficulty.
I love that rocketry is heading in this direction:)
Sort of like Version 1.0 of any software release (particularly Microsoft)?
Same with any software, including games (including game for biggest companies) and, basically any new product.
Watching this photos im now realising how DAMN BIG! Is this rocket
Michał Seeing one on the pad a year ago, I realized it was big...
REALLY BIG.
@@EricHallahan Oooh I envy you so much. Wish to see one, some day
Michał Wasn't there for launch though.
Even watching the picture is still hard for my brain to make out the exact dimensions. I think it's because of the camera lenses that compressed the depth of field.
How big did you think it was?
Thanks Scott for this video. I can watch it over and over again and it's amazing any time!
I find it encouraging that also a failed landing worked out as well as it did, considering how bad it could have gone.
Failures will always happen. Knowing they are able to steer things towards a safe end is also very important.
Same with the failed soyouz launch. Everything worked as it should to avoid a catastrophe..
@@baronvonlimbourgh1716 Listen to the video more carefully. It wasn't actively steered toward safety. The initial trajectory is such that it puts it in the water if there's no control available. So if it doesn't try to steer (or can't because of malfunction) it will passively land in safe water.
It's a passive safety, not an active one.
@@zolikoff: Listen till the end, it's actually both.This time the malfunction happened before the course was altered to head for the landing site, it could have happened later however, and in this case it would have had to actively steer away from danger. The aiming for the water is mostly so that if something goes catastrophically wrong during reentry, the debris won't hit Kennedy Space Center. Once the rocket starts maneuvering after reentry, that passive safety aspect goes away relatively quickly. Still, even if the returning rocket were to hit the Space Center, I don't it would do that much damage (unless it crashes right on top of a building of course), since the tanks are almost empty at that point, there won't be any huge explosion or something like that (of course there's still stuff that could explode, but it would be on a different scale than the rocket explosion you are normally used to see).
Every rocket drops the boosters. Why the concern about SpaceX boosters. China drops them on the land.
@@blahfasel2000 It says the guidance has that capability (which only matters if it has some active way of control), but in this case clearly it wasn't needed.
13:30 Failed landing. Mission itself went off fine, so in that sense the Falcon 9's are extremely reliable. Its the beancounters that get stressed over this.
For SpaceX, landings are always in the win column. Expended boosters are break-even, the way rocketry has always been done. Every time they fly, they assume they won't get the booster back.
Nicely done video Scotty and nice work by John Kraus also, kudos to you both.
Wow. John Krause's photographs are excellent. Thanks for sharing that with us.
This failure allowed me to learn more about how SpaceX returns these rockets than I've absorbed in the last 2 years. It was nice to see that even in a failure, it's not a total loss.
Wee are the World Album
You'll notice the rotation slowed dramatically when the landing feet deployed. A lot like a figure skater stretching out their arms to reduce their rate of rotation.
Thanks for your video. I live about a 1/2 hour to 45 mins north of the cape, on the ocean and I just love all this stuff. Keep your vids comming.
VERY interesting and absolutely gorgeous photographs. Thanks Scott and John!
considering the assumed damage by landing, breaking, and salt water, i doubt they reuse that one.
On a completly different topic.... does SpaceX sell used surplus Rocket engines? i would like to up the power on my car a bit...
They coud actually sell the scraps to enthusiasts and make a lot of money out of it. Well i woud buy it
Rocket backpack woohooo
I contacted the SpaceX media relations officer about getting some scrap from them since I'm speaking on a space development panel in a few months. Crickets.
@@AdventurousJohn Probably better luck asking someone on a factory tour... Well good to know, I also wanted to ask if they sell me a bolt or something from a flown Falcon. Would love to frame it. :)
If anyone would sell it, it'd be SpaceX. Them or Roscomos/Energia.
It's heartwarming to see the overwhelmingly positive and encouraging tone of people's comments here. Yeah this beautiful baby got wet and a little banged up but two things about the return make me excited... one, she came down in the water as she was precisely programmed TO do in such a situation... and two, to my armchair astronaut eyes the booster had managed to very nearly stabilize herself just before contact. TOTALLY IMPRESSIVE! Green lights! GO GO GO!
@Scott Manley
I've been watching your videos for some time now, and I've learned a lot.
Just wanted to thank you for a nice work. Keep it up :)
Thanks for the pic next to the boat it gives a whole new perspective on the size and scope of this, great content.
The hydraulic fluid is Skydrol or red oil, red oil is cheaper but will catch fire while Skydrol is not and used on commercial passenger aircraft. The hoses are HDPE from the looks and the O-rings will be Fluorosilicone to deal with the extreme cold temp at that altitude. Any salt water contamination in exposed systems will have to be replaced
Is there any point to talk about hydraulic fluid costs in reusable space vessel? They could use liquid gold if necessary.
@@heyhoe168 They could, but everything about Space X is about reducing the costs of re-usable rocketry to as little as physically possible. And at the same time as safe and reliable as possible.
@@livefire666 my point was you get your hydraulic fluid back with vessel. Why would you choose the cheapest one?
Seems to me this will turn out to be a really valuable experience.
You tend to learn more from failure than you do from success.
@@Bakuryu0083 especially when you get to physically examine the thing that failed.
Thank you for your valued insight and perspective. Terrific analysis of the hardware. The photos were better than being there and I was there in person.
VERY illuminating video, Scott. Thanks!
A bunch of Chinese techs are drooling over this video.
I was just thinking that
they are already shipping
What does this mean?
All that you can see there are more or less standard industrial components (of course they are probably custom built, but how they work isn't exactly a secret). The really interesting stuff would be the guidance software, which you obviously can't see on a picture, no matter the resolution. Maybe the pusher nose shape might help someone very knowledgeable about the subject infer some things about the engine injector, but there were already pictures available of it before, published by SpaceX themselves.
Edit/PS: odds are, if there really were something important to see there, they would have quickly thrown a tarp or something over it before towing it into port.
During the cold war this video would have been classified as top secret and Scott would have been charged with espionage. Oh how times have changed.
ive done this maneuver in ksp a LOT
spinning out of control then crashing into the ocean? me too
@@SuperAWaC Savage 😂
@@heavypizza Thats awesome, I have the same goal.
I've landed mine on Mars to rescue stranded Kerbals, returned to Earth etc.
KSP
Gotta wonder if Elon gets a lot of these ideas from KSP. We've been landing and relaunching rockets for a loooong time there, complete with landing legs (assuming you have them unlocked, if not the engine bell works just fine), frenzied ditches away from the KSC, and still being satisfied when things don't go quite to plan.
@@Restilia_ch Can't wait to see Starship's final design as some sort of extreme asparagus staging with struts all over the place ;)
I can just imagine the robot managing the landing thinking, "Oops, not supposed to be wet".
Very informative and great attention to detail. Keep up the good work!
If SpaceX builds a ramp and boat trailer for it. It should be called Didn't Read The Instructions.
Thanks Doug. This is what you've done.
Why’s it still look so impressive even when it’s crashing
Because it almost completly restabilzed befor touch down. Completly counteracting everything that went wrong.
Nanomachines son
Thank you both Scott and John for the lovely images of the Falcon 9 floating in pretty good shape. The SpaceX team they are the only ones at this moment seriously developing the re-usability of the rockets at the same time they are using them. They are getting the know-how and that will be essential for the continuous growth of space exploration and its survival. Please keep sending us updates and images. You fly safe too.
This is amazing! The photos and your examination, thanks!
What the hell youtube notifications? I found this by browsing not by being notified by you!
Re-bell
Click the bell in the first place
Yep completely busted, clicking the bell supposedly fixes it, but it very clearly doesn't
Notifications has always been buggy.
well youtube want to show us the new "Justin Bieber x cardi b gucci khalid - Hypebeast is fucking Dope & Cool" video clip
2:40 "over the curvature of the earth"? *_*prepares nikon p900*_*
Hah, we already have p1000 footage in this video.
dont get the flattards ale hot in the pants over this i cant handle debunking their insanity for the next two weeks
@@foobarmaximus3506 We as in humanity. Dude. Seriously.
Great combo of your narration & John's photos very interesting
Very nice presentation and kudo's to the young man and his photographs. I also live nearby and go to every launch I can. I am 51 years old and I still feel like a kid at each launch.
Everyday Astronaut suggested that it would probably be when the landing legs deployed that slowed down the spin, like if you were to start spinning, then bring all of your limbs closer, you would speed up. Just that in reverse.
He also said the hydraulics used helium ;)
@@scottmanley damn.... that was savage...
I think Everyday Astronaut is a great entertainer and certainly very good at getting people excited about space stuff.
But when it comes to the technical details (or physics) he's way out off his league.
Scott Manley You never know, maybe they do in fact have an MRI machine in there somewhere.
Literally 5:33
Falcon 9 after mission:
YES! AHHHH.... I'm tired.
*falls asleep*
Hi Scott,
As a Fan of Space, it's really awesome to see someone taking the time to dissect the delivery systems. Its also great to see your assessment of the stage separation and flight control systems whenever we get new info. This was an easy sub and bell ring! Looking forward to many more videos.
Thanks again pal!
beautiful pictures and great commentary!
the best failure i've seen in a rocket ever :D
A failed rocket in one piece is pretty good
I would like to see this in a museum after it gets analyzed and scavenged. It seems a waste to scrap the whole thing.
Seems a bit big. Maybe just the engine assembly or something.
I mean, Space Center Houston has an entire Saturn V on display. Falcon 9 is considerably smaller-especially if we're talking about just the first-stage booster, without stage 2.
@@dgwdgw That baby should have gone to the Moon.
@@odysseusrex5908 yup, Apollo 18, and beyond!!
Part it out and sell the bits on eBay. :)
great video, so many features I was wondering about - you've explained perfectly!
Really great info and dive into what’s known and revealed from the pics and video! I watched the launch and landing naked eye and appreciate the info!
When the legs deployed the rocket slowed the most. Its like putting your arms out when spinning fast and then all of the sudden going slower. The RCS is too wimpy to do that and the fins are just freaking out so they wouldn't do anything that significant.
Next time, please use a pointer on the screen to point to exactly what you're referring to.
In the old days, they would have used a pointing stick. But, you could just use a cursor.
BirdValiant - Excellent suggestion!
Awesome pictures and explanation!
You give amazing technical overviews, especially through just analyzing publicly available info/pics
Fine job. However, if possible in future post flight analyses, some computer "pointers (?)" would helpful to the common viewer when identifying items. Thank you.
The crushed in Interstage seems to be made up of an Aluminium honeycomb core wrapped in something (Carbon/Kevlar?)
Carbon fiber/ Aluminum honeycomb, yes. The Inter stage is design to be able to take the force of the 120 tons above it, and the aero load and the thrust from below. It is not that strong in the side force direction.
Very interesting photos of the insides. Quality content as always!
I don't know why but this video is very very well done thank you Scott and Space X rocket I hope you go to space again
Oh yeah! Dragon 2 hype!
Yet there gonna cancel it prematurely & the falcon heavy thanks to the BFR.
@@pricelessppp They weren't gonna cancel it too fast though.Dragon 2 will be a failsafe to NASA when BFR goes out because NASA don't really like new untested stuff
@@pricelessppp That's like saying F1 was prematurely cancelled. At least F9, FH and Dragon 2 will be flying for years until they are retired (which is the correct term, you can't cancel something you already flew, you can say you have retired it but cancelled it is not the right term).
@@pricelessppp not untill the BFR exists. 2020 - 2022
@@pricelessppp : I half-expect Musk to make a worker-bee derivative of the Dragon series if any private stations get launched. Maybe even for his own projects.
I've never seen a video with 1k likes and 0 dislikes before
1.4k 0 dislikes...
BTH... scott used to put me to sleep but his delivery has gotten a LOT better.. i love his videos a LOT more these days from a few years ago.
Some ahole put a dislike. 2100 GMT
2 Dislikes {currently} were probably flat-earthers...😊
Because it's Saturday night in Russia. Shit'll hit the fan as soon as the vodka comas wear off...
Yeah 4 dislikes now. These idiots should go and watch grass growing, or perhaps concrete curing!
Wow. Great info, Scott. Love your videos. Thanks so much.
Exceptional video Scott!! Love it 👍🏻👍🏻
i dunno how many times my rocket in ksp rolled just like that its like hard not too.
And now we have it. 5 dislikes .... some flatearther must have found this.
Hahaha
I dislike flatearthers myself, but damn, these comments get old. Get over yourself already.
Yeah cause you have to be a flatearther to see the Hollywood fakery in these. 😂🤣 Lol what’s worse, flatearthers ‘ falsified model who disbelieve everything, you sci-fi dorks ‘ falsified globe model who refuse to see how Hollywood and sci-fi prime your interest for years so you become emotionally connected that you want to believe anything known liars tell you about “space”.
@@germavery2223 i´m really trying to read sense into that comment but it just escapes me. Either you missed some words in there or some signs.
Scott. Really enjoy your video. Lots of information & insight. Thanks Stafe Safe😷
John Kraus consistently produces great launch photos. I can't wait to order a huge print. I am just waiting for the right one.
Some people think that the spin is stopped when the legs come out because of the conservation of angular momentum.
That is certainly part of it. Throwing those legs out would have slowed the rotation. But the grid fins effect reducing as it slowed and the actions of the cold gas thrusters was also important. I also wonder if that serious kick out near the end could have been the rocket using gyroscopic precession to counteract the spin.
Honestly, even while watching it, I don't know that any one factor would have been enough by itself. The cold gas thrusters were doing an amazing job but it was clearly rotating much faster than it was in the mere seconds the legs deployed. The amount of thrust from the thrusters didn't appear to change that significantly in order to effect that kind of change we saw. Also, just throwing the legs out alone wouldn't have been enough either. It was a combination of all things. The RCS and the change in angular momentum worked together right at the end to nearly halt the z-axis spin.
@@mycroft16 maybe the vapor caused by the exhaust burning over the water helped too (by adding more viscosity to the air)
Well now someone will make a rule 34 pic about this piston...
I love how the landing legs just kinda creep down. it really adds to the dramatic effect of the water landing
Fantastic video and analysis. Thank you.
Would you rather fly on a fresh booster that has never flown... or a reused one with 10 successful missions under its belt?
Depends on the cost.
funny you @@Bogwedgle
Did Elon state he was going to go with a dual pump set up in the future.
"Given this event, we will likely add a backup pump & lines." - Elon's Twitter, Dec 5th, 2018
@@nemo-xi think allot of issues are honestly born from the fact that on a rocket there is so much shit that can go wrong. And its mostly up to human error something overlooked or brushed off in checkup. So maybe redundancy is a good idea? Honestly just talking out of my ass. Not really educated in the ways of engineering
@@Destructo54555 : There's also environmental extremes to magnify any defect.
@@nemo-x Well, you have to keep in mind that the Falcon 9 is an incremental step toward the real goal... mass interplanetary transport of humans. At which point landing is no longer icing on the cake, but mission critical. So now that they have encountered an issue where a backup hydraulic loop would have completely made the failure a moot point, time to implement it and make that the new standard. It becomes even more critical when you realize that Musk has been talking about having these things so accurate that they will be able to land back on their launch restraints, get refueled and be ready to fly again in a matter of hours. At that point you definitely want redundancy in literally every system.
yes
Nice pics and explanation. Subscribed.
Great commentary. Really describes how complex space flight is, even though it looks so routine in the video.
Scott, you change the end music, why.... I loved the old one. Also, why no close up pictures of the engines, the chambers, the nozzles? :D
WOW! You got this before I do!
Does your profile pic really say NASA in Arabic? Thats creative af.
Hmm. NASA in Arabic, I believe we have met before.
@@heatshield Have we? I might need another hint ...
No one can stop Scott Manley, lol. Don't even try.
love the new outro music btw Scott! great video as always much love
I love videos like this, getting into the technical parts of the launch vehicle. It would be great to see a video that touches on the second stage latches and the helium pneumatic pusher and the overall design of how the two stages are mated together. I'm currently looking for technical drawings for this section. Keep up with the great videos!
100% like to dislike ratio. It's the first time I have ever seen that.
wut? So 1 like for every dislike? That's terrible! (and not true).
Not anymore lol
@@benjaminmiller3620 This is not the page I expected to find faulty math on. But then, infinity is difficult to wrap one's mind around. :P
I think you and the 25 idiots who liked your comment, need to go back to school, since when was 17k and 446 exactly the same amount?
@@Bpg5012trick I'm sure you understand the concept of time. With your exceptional math and inference skills I will let you extrapolate what is going on here.
Did he say he'll reuse this booster again?
Before he got a close look.
@@scottmanley oh so he's not reusing it? Will he at least reuse the engines cause those are expensive
It'll prolly show up on Ernest Tubbs used rocket lot. Previously enjoyed! Low miles! Only used once!
Excellent video, thanks for that!
scott manley. you have been one of my fav youtubers since i first encountered your kerbal space program vids. keep being awesome
I believe Elon mentioned they'd be looking into redundancy with the grid fin pumps, but what are the chances that a second engine could be used in a circumstance like this? I know the fuel supply is a big concern with a mission like this.
The landing looked pretty decent even without the grid fins fully operational. If the fins were deployed but stationary and a second motor were used, is it theoretically possible to land on target? Secondarily, - safely?
If I was going to hop a ride to Mars on a system designed to land like this, a redundancy capable of landing without grid fin control would make me feel a little better. Heck, I think I'd like an AI that could leverage several options.
-Jake
With 1/3the gravity just jump out when close and flap arms real fast
@@sambrewer2306 : Not enough air, clamp a long stick to the side and repel down instead. Worked for the "sky crane" system.
After this nominal but f'd up landing, I'm sure that they are thinking of a motor-servo system to the grid fins in lieu of hydraulic system. Sometimes the spool gets stuck in the solenoid valve causing the grid fin to stay in one position.
@@robertgardner7470 : That would essentially require a whole new electrical system, whereas just adding a pump would... just require adding a pump. I'm sure an electrical upgrade either has been, or is being, considered for the SpaceX Spaceship, but the current replacement plans for the Falcons lead me to consider such a major overhaul on the Falcon 9 unlikely.
*helium* interesting.....
thank you Manly.....
what would the dual purpose be for the helium?????
To operate pneumatics
Love Your videos! What a WEEK to be alive in!
Excellent analysis, thanks Scott
"I'm a fish."
~Scott Manley 2k18
Thought they would have had a emergency parachute for these situations.
It landed without it.
That would be extra weight. Why design something into the vehicle if your goal is never to need it? It's not like a failed landing affects the primary mission performance.
The booster is, essentially, a flying 20 story building. Just think how big a chute you'd need and you'll see why it's impractical.
Logical idea but a chute deployed during the spin would've never fully... what's the word... unfurled? Filled?
Very nicely done analysis!
Thanks for these video updates. I am interested in the news and footages which were not part of the main broadcast, but I do not follow the twitter buzz or any other media. You post there videos on time and well sourced. Keep up the good job!