Often that “disassembly” is due to the RSO (Range Safety Officer) pushing the self-destruction switch, so that the rocket doesn’t come down in a residential area, or in an area where public safety might be threatened. That’s why launch complexes are built on the Eastern shores (most launches are eastward to take advantage to the Earth’s rotational speed) or in the middle of nowhere.
Even if it takes you like 5000 times to get something right, you haven't failed at all. You've just found 4999 things or ways that don't work... When I'm busy on something, if I'm not happy with it I'll pull it apart and start all over again till I am happy with it. Then I know that if I'm happy with it, so will someone else be happy with it.
Just imagine spending billions of dollars, annually, on the continuing war in Iraq. Only difference is we use rockets to explode and kill people. These rockets here are just duds, and didn't kill anyone. Sarcasm
Yes its worth every penny spent. Think of what would have happened if we stopped flying planes with the first failure or we stopped making cars with the first failure or maybe trains. With every failure comes knowledge, knowledge learned so it doesn't happen again. Hell we are still learning from failures from all these things. There is so much to learn from space and we are still in our infancy in what we know. The best is yet to come!!
Exactly. I never understood the idea that we should just stop launching shite cause of a few failures. That mindset is what keeps this country and society from advancing.
Yeah, look at the cost of rocket launches in the older time and look at the cost now. It has gotten much cheaper. Sure there are ocassional failures, but that is how the world works, how many car crashes happen a day. Do we use that as an argument to ban cars. People who suggest putting a stop to spaceflight are idiots and they should be ignored.
The root cause of #10 was incorrectly-installed positional sensors which ultimately led to that emergency shutdown. The rocket thought it was 180 degrees off-course.
To top it all off, every axis had three sensors: a primary, a backup, and a backup backup. For that one axis all three were hammered in upside down. I guess at least the worker was consistent in their incompetence?
@@JonMartinYXD To top it all off off completely, the wires were made short, in case the sensor was installed upside down, the wires wont reach the other end. The young technicion was very dedicated and somehow found a way. Not just that the rocket had a cavity for the sensors where the sensor can only be installed in one way only, he literally hammered them in place. (lucky that the sensors survived and worked after getting hit by a hammer.) At the end of the day, the engineers and designers of proton did everything right, but the technician was just an idiot. It reminds me that "No matter how much idiot proof you make your design, a bigger idiot comes along.".
That's like saying .... if it wasn't for poor people, we'd never be able to have rich billionaires. How do they "post-inspect" a missile after it blows up to nothing to determine the cause of the failure? I wonder if they know that there's a big risk in the whole operation working to begin with and simply take "pot luck" on whether its going to blow up or making it into "deep outer space" or wherever its aimed -- the moon, Mars, Jupiter, the next galaxy, the possibilities endless according to NASA. They OBVIOUSLY could give a squat about the millions of dollars invested as it wasn't their money at risk to begin with and you'll never see NASA on the stock market because NOBODY would buy stock in a company with such a track record. Its borderline "money laundering" as no sane person would invest in a company with zero quality control and zero return for the dollar ... unless you want your stock dividends paid to you in moon rocks?
It is WELL WORTH the Cost to keep building rockets-as the USA is already on Mars and terraforming it. Thank You for the awesome videos. Keep up the great work. ✌😎
The Proton M rocket launch failed due to the fact that the gyro platform was installed upside down. This lead to the guidance system being 180 degrees out of orientation in one axis. Opppsss.
It's worth the money , this rock isn't going to hold us forever and the fireworks are pretty good . Better to drop the odd clanger now than when we've all got to ship out
right at the start you lost me, the proton failed because 3 angular velocity sensors were installed upside down. So the rocket thought it was pointing in the wrong direction and it tried to point itself in the correct direction ( which it did) The rocket did everything right but the person who installed the sensors fked up.
The first one is wrong, the Proton-M crashed bcoz they installed the jyroscopes upside down so it thought it was flying upside down and tried to turn itself around and head what it thought was up.
also F9, grasshopper, vanguard and probably some of the others too, I just don't have the arrogance to pretend that I know what I'm talking about to completely trash this video. the maker should.
@@mocko69 arrogance isn't correcting someone who is presenting false facts, arrogance is thinking your opinion matters when commenting on someones else comment.
Well, those boosters (and payloads) are filled with sensors which send back radio telemetry, indicating how the rocket is functioning, and reporting any problems that occur. That’s how the engineers are able to figure out what went wrong. Because launches occur so quickly (in terms of the amount of time it takes for the booster to get the payload to orbit), it often takes awhile after even a successful launch to review all the data, and analyze what went right, and what went wrong. They don’t just eyeball the flight and guess. Also, you won’t see it here, except for the short clip at the end, but there are usually extensive tests on the ground in static test stands, testing engines, and then entire stages. The idea is to catch the flaws then and there, and fix them. That way, you minimize the threat of a catastrophic failure on launch. One rocket that didn’t undergo these static tests was the Soviet N-1, which was their booster developed to send a cosmonaut to the Moon. The Soviet Chief Designer Sergei Korolev, had died before this rocket was fully developed, and likely would have had the power to insist on ground tests. His successor just didn’t have the influence that Korolev had, and as a result, the only tests were “full-up” uncrewed launches. There were four, if I remember correctly, and they all failed. One happened right on the launch pad specifically built for it, pretty much destroying the pad, and thus resulting in the failure to beat the Americans to the Moon, and the cancellation of the entire Soviet crewed lunar program.
How -- in the name of any common sense -- do you figure out "exactly what went wrong" when the rocket blows up into one huge inferno of flames, yet you can tell -- beyond a shadow of a doubt -- it was a loose screw that somebody failed to tighten???? Gimme a break!
@@danielzielke9997 What is your profession? You might not be aware that when an airliner crashes, all the tiny parts are reassembled to determine the cause of the crash. Even if they have to dredge the bottom of the ocean, they will do this. You might not be aware that they do the same thing for launch vehicles. You might not be aware of the concept of forensics. Basically, you are not aware how teams of engineers determined the cause of failure, so rather than ask "how did they determine that?" you, in a state of ignorance, assert they make stuff up. By the way, engineers and scientists are two different things. I guess you're not aware of that either. Failure analysis is a fascinating topic. I wish I had a link for you. I was amazed by the Challenger's Failure Review Board back in the day.
Rockets are really great when everything works like it should. However because rockets carry huge amounts of fuel and oxidizer when something goes wrong, it goes wrong in a huge explosive manner.
At these prices, failure is only OK when it's costing someone else. Otherwise It's time to ask what the gains actually are? and secondly are they worth the price?
Space and rockets are high risk/high reward and are absolutely worth the cost. A thing to note though, all of these were not NASA rockets and the costs of the loses, especially in today's time, are not on NASAs shoulders. The launch tower and most modern rockets are at cost of private organizations. The payload is usually where the costs really are... But there's a lot of red ink that ends up dividing who covers the damages other than NASA. Rockets are made up of millions of components that are contracted out through various companies generally, which all plays part in investigations
I don't want to play the devil's advocate, but just WHAT are those "HIGH REWARDS" that are "absolutely worth the cost"???????? Let's not speak like we have a bottomless purse to draw from. The US squanders so much money on "high rewards" boondoggles they forget about all the people living in tents, under bridges and in their cars because they are homeless and can't afford to live in even the most modest of accommodations the way capitalism ... our alleged "gold standard of all economic systems" is pricing everything out of reach of the masses.
The Proton launch failure was due to the incorrect installation of some guidance control devices. To be specific, they were installed upside down and the rocket was trying to point it's nose down to compensate. Not a good way to start off a video.
For some reason people can't understand why things go wrong. The answer is It is brand new technology, never before tired. . We do not know everyone of what we are doing. We can only make educated guesses. Learn from the mistakes and do better next time It will not be perfect the very first time. Perfection will never happen the first time, never ! So is it worth the money , -- Yes.
It amuses me how some folks say space technology is a waste of money, yet they also say they'd be lost without their Satnav 🙄 How do they think those GPS satellites got up there?
We have lost focus. Spend the money on earth infrastructure first. What is plenty left over, spend on education. You need it. We are from and will always be of stardust. Love.
Did you know that $10 million in 1959 is about $100 million in 2022? Therefore, the cost of a lost rocket without specifying the year of launch does not make much sense.
uuuuhhhh..... 1:22 no it was the development of the falcon 9 and its a test veichle the reason it go unscheduled rapid disasambly becuase the malfunction of the censor thats why it tip over and go boom and its now incredible
It’s amazing to me that such incredible mistakes are still made in modern times. Are we not learning anything or are we expecting too much of a space program?
Actually we are still learning, rockets and space programs aren't easy things to do. If you look at the data, if we go into space today our chances of going to into space and return back to earth safely are much higher as compare to when we first put our first step on the moon and in fact any any insurance company aren't ready to provide back in those days. It took us more master the launch compeletely.
One of the best rockets, now retired, was the Delta. It had a 92.? success rate. Even with that if STILL had a 7.? failure that. If your kid gets a 92 on their math test, you are very happen. If a launch fails 7% of the time you are not happy. LIFE does NOT grade on a curve!
![10 MOST POWERFUL Space Rocket Launch Ever! [4K]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Ps9QD8XDVBg/mqdefault.jpg)
4:30 the whistling as the rocket is falling towards the ground is so creepy
Hey Guys! Please make sure to Subscribe to my channel! It will be greatly appreciated.
"Rapid unscheduled disassembly of the rocket."
I hate it when that happens.
Lol
I mean who doesn’t when that happens
I love when that happens
Often that “disassembly” is due to the RSO (Range Safety Officer) pushing the self-destruction switch, so that the rocket doesn’t come down in a residential area, or in an area where public safety might be threatened. That’s why launch complexes are built on the Eastern shores (most launches are eastward to take advantage to the Earth’s rotational speed) or in the middle of nowhere.
@@johncronin9540 Yes
At 0:30 it's me every morning after waking up for 20 seconds and deciding to go back to bed!😂😂
Mee too
@maddox minecraft i do this everyday...But minimum 2 timees xd 🤣🤣🤣🤣
lmao
@@Mr.Sab_ lllllllllllllllllllll)
@@WidoRPerca lol
Girl: Come to my House!
Me: I can't im trying to go to space
Girl: My parents aren't home
*0:40*
Underrated af
Morty!
DANGER! ROCKET DESTRUCT BUTTONS -- 0:54; 1:45; 2:44; 3:36; 4:18; 5:13; 6:07; 7:17; 8:03; 9:11 (It's gonna be loud!)
Lol!!
KABOOM!
Hehe rocket be boom boom :3
Lol!
Thanks for saving my ears
Yes, it's worth the money.
HELL YEAH!
No, it is not worth
This coming from somene that can't even finish the sentence they're writing, go figure.
Im just to big to be bullied thank godness. No worth ze cash
@@Alex-bw9lz what about cell phones, internet, wireless tools, WD40? those things weren’t worth the investment
Failure is an option here, if things are not failing you are not innovating enough. ~ Elon Musk
Great quote!
@@wyocoloexperience7025 Thanks to musk!! :)
Yes
Even if it takes you like 5000 times to get something right, you haven't failed at all. You've just found 4999 things or ways that don't work...
When I'm busy on something, if I'm not happy with it I'll pull it apart and start all over again till I am happy with it. Then I know that if I'm happy with it, so will someone else be happy with it.
lmao that's just an excuse for poor performance
Absolutely. One of the few gvt. agencies that accomplish something productive.
Others: Nooo u can't just spend millions of dollars to 1 rocket just to see it fail and blow up!!
Me: *Haha Rocket go BOOM!*
Yas
This made me laugh so hard
Just imagine spending 432 million dollars on something just to say “That didn’t work.”
Imagine spending 432 million dollars on something that did work
So then i'll freak out if that thing happened :P
Imagine spending 432 million dollars
I'd shit myself...
That's like 16 times more in our currency..
Just imagine spending billions of dollars, annually, on the continuing war in Iraq. Only difference is we use rockets to explode and kill people. These rockets here are just duds, and didn't kill anyone.
Sarcasm
Thanks for showing them in the first 18 seconds, gives me 10 minutes to watch something else.
These were over many many decades and worth every penny.
We all know that old saying: "You can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs." Failures are going to happen.
I must say the video production quality is improving with every new video. Great job!
Thanks ;)
I agree 👌
I was also impressed with the quality.
Someday we’re going to have to leave this planet and it’s better these failures happen now than when we’re trying to escape.
1:40 Mission control guy: Watch this 360 NO SCOPE!!!
Imagine the pain of spending years developing a rocket, only to hear a faint *Boom* whilst trying to command it
best firework show ever
Absolutely yes, it’s worth it
In race for space - Finding progress in every failure
Absolutely worth it.
Best fireworks show ever😁
Yes its worth every penny spent. Think of what would have happened if we stopped flying planes with the first failure or we stopped making cars with the first failure or maybe trains. With every failure comes knowledge, knowledge learned so it doesn't happen again. Hell we are still learning from failures from all these things. There is so much to learn from space and we are still in our infancy in what we know. The best is yet to come!!
Exactly. I never understood the idea that we should just stop launching shite cause of a few failures. That mindset is what keeps this country and society from advancing.
Yeah, look at the cost of rocket launches in the older time and look at the cost now. It has gotten much cheaper. Sure there are ocassional failures, but that is how the world works, how many car crashes happen a day. Do we use that as an argument to ban cars. People who suggest putting a stop to spaceflight are idiots and they should be ignored.
The root cause of #10 was incorrectly-installed positional sensors which ultimately led to that emergency shutdown. The rocket thought it was 180 degrees off-course.
make it better, they were designed to only fit one way! lol
@@milotv120 Yes, it was found to have been "hammered" into place; that should have been the first clue it was being installed incorrectly.
@@bob19611000 yes, there was even arrows showing up that were pointing down
To top it all off, every axis had three sensors: a primary, a backup, and a backup backup. For that one axis all three were hammered in upside down. I guess at least the worker was consistent in their incompetence?
@@JonMartinYXD To top it all off off completely, the wires were made short, in case the sensor was installed upside down, the wires wont reach the other end. The young technicion was very dedicated and somehow found a way. Not just that the rocket had a cavity for the sensors where the sensor can only be installed in one way only, he literally hammered them in place. (lucky that the sensors survived and worked after getting hit by a hammer.)
At the end of the day, the engineers and designers of proton did everything right, but the technician was just an idiot. It reminds me that "No matter how much idiot proof you make your design, a bigger idiot comes along.".
Alt. tittle: rockets having rapid unscheduled disassemblies for 10 minutes and 25 seconds staright
Aww, you missed the chance to squeeze in another advert at the end, what were you thinking?
You've reused some of the same videos that you used in your original upload?
Yes we did. But this time with an explanation of its cause ;)
@@darkspace3316 Should have included the year of the event. A lot of these were from the 1950s and early 1960s.
6:11 *"OH NO"*
ohⁿ⁰
oh no
@@wesleyseann-cloud177 HOW!!!!
OH NO!
_OH NO_
When rocket to explode, do they get destroyed?
Yes. If it weren't for NASA and the space program, the computer systems that we have today would not be here until tomorrow.
That's like saying .... if it wasn't for poor people, we'd never be able to have rich billionaires. How do they "post-inspect" a missile after it blows up to nothing to determine the cause of the failure? I wonder if they know that there's a big risk in the whole operation working to begin with and simply take "pot luck" on whether its going to blow up or making it into "deep outer space" or wherever its aimed -- the moon, Mars, Jupiter, the next galaxy, the possibilities endless according to NASA. They OBVIOUSLY could give a squat about the millions of dollars invested as it wasn't their money at risk to begin with and you'll never see NASA on the stock market because NOBODY would buy stock in a company with such a track record. Its borderline "money laundering" as no sane person would invest in a company with zero quality control and zero return for the dollar ... unless you want your stock dividends paid to you in moon rocks?
Is it worth the money ?
YES !!!
1:06, Listen to what the man says😀.
Sorry, I don’t speak italian
@@captainjackpugh6050 It's russian curse word
It is WELL WORTH the Cost to keep building rockets-as the USA is already on Mars and terraforming it. Thank You for the awesome videos. Keep up the great work. ✌😎
Yes it should get more.
I really love rockets since i was a child
oi, im getting you 3 months back
@@zmazn oi, I'm getting you 1 year back
I was not expecting the Soyuz rocket to whistle as it fell to the ground.
The most expensive firework ever!!
100k subs nearly
it is worth but its ofc sometimes anything can go wrong
You left out the Soviet N1, the Delta 1997, and, of course, Challenger explosions.
Far more gained in technology and development than the loss of some hardware.
The Proton M rocket launch failed due to the fact that the gyro platform was installed upside down. This lead to the guidance system being 180 degrees out of orientation in one axis. Opppsss.
The music on the 2nd to last one😂rip
1:24
Moo:Wtf is that??!?
The Proton was destroyed because a technician hammered all 4 directional gyros in upside-down.
Rocket 2: That rocket sequence was used as the end scene in Godfrey Reggio's movie Koyanisquatsi.
dude u didn’t added Challenger disaster
Yes, it's worth it. But the loss of 2 Space Shuttles is not. They both could have been prevented.
It's worth the money , this rock isn't going to hold us forever and the fireworks are pretty good . Better to drop the odd clanger now than when we've all got to ship out
Any idea about the nose of the first one??
Pls upload more 😁
Worth that cus space travel will got as more safe
right at the start you lost me, the proton failed because 3 angular velocity sensors were installed upside down. So the rocket thought it was pointing in the wrong direction and it tried to point itself in the correct direction ( which it did) The rocket did everything right but the person who installed the sensors fked up.
Failures are part of getting success
Who's to say that someone didn't tamper with something or get something for out of whack during those pre-flight inspections??
The first one is wrong, the Proton-M crashed bcoz they installed the jyroscopes upside down so it thought it was flying upside down and tried to turn itself around and head what it thought was up.
also F9, grasshopper, vanguard and probably some of the others too, I just don't have the arrogance to pretend that I know what I'm talking about to completely trash this video. the maker should.
@@mocko69 arrogance isn't correcting someone who is presenting false facts, arrogance is thinking your opinion matters when commenting on someones else comment.
@@tylerdurden4006 ehm... So you were arrogant too when commenting under this video? However, I was saying about dark space, not you lol
This is true. However dark space did not say that that was what happened, he said that is what people blamed it on. You are correct though
4:30 falling sound, is it real or what ?
What a waste of Human ingenuity and money. The economy tanks, Social Security cuts, government shutdowns....but this is so important. Thanks Elon.
ROFLMAO!!! Talk about being lost in a sea of stupid.
It’s not the falcon 9. It’s the grasshopper. Also the engine sensor failed so it auto destructed.
failure is always an option when it comes to space rockets
союз падает, а диспетчер говорит все в норме)) the soyuz-u falls, and the dispatcher says everything is normal))
It is tests or in there are peoples
4:23 Стабилизация изделия устойчивое... :))
What is said here? Can you translate?
I'm sorry man I don't speak enchanment table
@@patrickfarrell6353 stability of rocket is nominate
I love how scientists are able to determine exactly why these rockets 🚀 failed.
Well, those boosters (and payloads) are filled with sensors which send back radio telemetry, indicating how the rocket is functioning, and reporting any problems that occur. That’s how the engineers are able to figure out what went wrong. Because launches occur so quickly (in terms of the amount of time it takes for the booster to get the payload to orbit), it often takes awhile after even a successful launch to review all the data, and analyze what went right, and what went wrong. They don’t just eyeball the flight and guess.
Also, you won’t see it here, except for the short clip at the end, but there are usually extensive tests on the ground in static test stands, testing engines, and then entire stages. The idea is to catch the flaws then and there, and fix them. That way, you minimize the threat of a catastrophic failure on launch. One rocket that didn’t undergo these static tests was the Soviet N-1, which was their booster developed to send a cosmonaut to the Moon. The Soviet Chief Designer Sergei Korolev, had died before this rocket was fully developed, and likely would have had the power to insist on ground tests. His successor just didn’t have the influence that Korolev had, and as a result, the only tests were “full-up” uncrewed launches.
There were four, if I remember correctly, and they all failed. One happened right on the launch pad specifically built for it, pretty much destroying the pad, and thus resulting in the failure to beat the Americans to the Moon, and the cancellation of the entire Soviet crewed lunar program.
How -- in the name of any common sense -- do you figure out "exactly what went wrong" when the rocket blows up into one huge inferno of flames, yet you can tell -- beyond a shadow of a doubt -- it was a loose screw that somebody failed to tighten???? Gimme a break!
@@danielzielke9997 What is your profession?
You might not be aware that when an airliner crashes, all the tiny parts are reassembled to determine the cause of the crash. Even if they have to dredge the bottom of the ocean, they will do this.
You might not be aware that they do the same thing for launch vehicles.
You might not be aware of the concept of forensics.
Basically, you are not aware how teams of engineers determined the cause of failure, so rather than ask "how did they determine that?" you, in a state of ignorance, assert they make stuff up.
By the way, engineers and scientists are two different things. I guess you're not aware of that either.
Failure analysis is a fascinating topic. I wish I had a link for you. I was amazed by the Challenger's Failure Review Board back in the day.
Why do I like whatching this ?
Didnt see the N1 there?
Honorable mention Ariane 5 first flight
"Oh God.....Oh God.....Oh God it's gonna be loud....!!"
9:18 HOLD ON IT'S GONNA BE LOUD!
10 In Rockets Launch And Faliures
Rockets are really great when everything works like it should. However because rockets carry huge amounts of fuel and oxidizer when something goes wrong, it goes wrong in a huge explosive manner.
At these prices, failure is only OK when it's costing someone else.
Otherwise It's time to ask what the gains actually are? and secondly are they worth the price?
Space and rockets are high risk/high reward and are absolutely worth the cost. A thing to note though, all of these were not NASA rockets and the costs of the loses, especially in today's time, are not on NASAs shoulders. The launch tower and most modern rockets are at cost of private organizations. The payload is usually where the costs really are... But there's a lot of red ink that ends up dividing who covers the damages other than NASA. Rockets are made up of millions of components that are contracted out through various companies generally, which all plays part in investigations
I don't want to play the devil's advocate, but just WHAT are those "HIGH REWARDS" that are "absolutely worth the cost"???????? Let's not speak like we have a bottomless purse to draw from. The US squanders so much money on "high rewards" boondoggles they forget about all the people living in tents, under bridges and in their cars because they are homeless and can't afford to live in even the most modest of accommodations the way capitalism ... our alleged "gold standard of all economic systems" is pricing everything out of reach of the masses.
The biggest rocket failures is N1 series
ya.. umm Challenger didn't make the list i guess, or the N1..?
Challenger was fatal But the N1 should have made the list
1:16 is actually the grass hopper if u looked into it made by Space x to perfect their landings
Dont worry he has no brain
No, grasshoppers landing legs were much wider, this is the F9R.
Nope that is actually the F9R dev
The Proton launch failure was due to the incorrect installation of some guidance control devices. To be specific, they were installed upside down and the rocket was trying to point it's nose down to compensate. Not a good way to start off a video.
Absolutely worth the money spent by NASA, and lots of money wasted in other areas unrelated to NASA or space exploration.
Past?
For some reason people can't understand why things go wrong.
The answer is
It is brand new technology, never before tired. . We do not know everyone of what we are doing. We can only make educated guesses.
Learn from the mistakes and do better next time
It will not be perfect the very first time. Perfection will never happen the first time, never !
So is it worth the money , -- Yes.
It amuses me how some folks say space technology is a waste of money, yet they also say they'd be lost without their Satnav 🙄 How do they think those GPS satellites got up there?
5:47... How TF did they find out it was a bare wire that shorted??... what a crock
成功の裏には失敗があるってことすな。
We have lost focus. Spend the money on earth infrastructure first. What is plenty left over, spend on education. You need it. We are from and will always be of stardust. Love.
#8
Why would they launch at mid night?
Weather
Because the orbit that they want to get into only has a small window each day
Well at least the falcon 9 was improved to become a great space ship maybe one of the best in the world used right now
6:24 here's a one that this guy didn't do a chapter on
Did you know that $10 million in 1959 is about $100 million in 2022? Therefore, the cost of a lost rocket without specifying the year of launch does not make much sense.
They changed it for inflation
They put too much whiskey in their rockets
Muito perigoso viajar para fora da atmosfera pode dar tudo certo mas.......pode não dar
Ничего себе фейерверки ...
Expensive fire crackers...😉
"Rapid unscheduled disassembly"
Translation: it blew up.
uuuuhhhh..... 1:22 no
it was the development of the falcon 9 and its a test veichle the reason it go unscheduled rapid disasambly becuase the malfunction of the censor thats why it tip over and go boom
and its now incredible
what was that 1:07
It’s amazing to me that such incredible mistakes are still made in modern times. Are we not learning anything or are we expecting too much of a space program?
Actually we are still learning, rockets and space programs aren't easy things to do. If you look at the data, if we go into space today our chances of going to into space and return back to earth safely are much higher as compare to when we first put our first step on the moon and in fact any any insurance company aren't ready to provide back in those days. It took us more master the launch compeletely.
Yea its pathetic!
One of the best rockets, now retired, was the Delta. It had a 92.? success rate. Even with that if STILL had a 7.? failure that. If your kid gets a 92 on their math test, you are very happen. If a launch fails 7% of the time you are not happy. LIFE does NOT grade on a curve!
@@pauleveritt3388 i cannot understand what u r saying
@@aquaregia5948 No model of rocket has ever had a 100% success rate. Rocket launches have always had a element of risk involved and always will.
R.I.P Nasa's Bank account
4:38 nuke has coming up
4:40 nuke explode
I’d rather spend money to see space rather than spend lives being the world’s police.