SpaceX's DESIGN NEW MAJOR CHANGES for upcoming Starship prototype, Musk revealed...
Вставка
- Опубліковано 24 кві 2024
- SpaceX's DESIGN NEW MAJOR CHANGES for upcoming Starship prototype, Musk revealed...
===
#alphatech
#techalpha
#spacex
#elonmusk
#starship
===
Sources of image & video:
LabPadre Space: / labpadre
Evan Karen:
/ @evankaren
C-bass Productions: / cbassproductions
iamVisual: / @iamvisualvfx
TheSpaceEngineer: / @thespaceengineer
THELONELYCAT: www.youtube.com/@thelonelycat...
ErcX: / ercxspace
Owe: / bl3d_eccentric
3DDaniel: / @3d_daniel445
ACTUSPACEX: / @actuspacex6995
Christian Debney: / @christiandebney1989
@tomket7: / @tomket7
@InfographicTony: / infographictony
Cosmic Perspective: / @cosmicperspective
SpaceXvision: / spacexvision
Velin3d: / velin3d
ErcX Space: / ercxspace
Project Road to Mars:
/ @projectroadtomars
Everyday Astronaut: / everydayastronaut
Starship Gazer: / starshipgazer
/ starshipgazer
WAI: / @whataboutit
TijnM: / m_tijn
/ @tijn_m
Jenny Hautmann: / jennyhphoto
Starbase Surfer: / cnunezimages
Stanley Creative: / @stanleycreative
Ryan Hansen Space: / ryanhansenspace
/ ryanhansenspace
Coop: / cooper_hime
===
SpaceX's DESIGN NEW MAJOR CHANGES for upcoming Starship prototype, Musk revealed...
If I had to choose a single word to encapsulate the essence of SpaceX, "Flexibility" would undoubtedly be the perfect choice.
Following Staship Flight 3, SpaceX quickly mobilized its resources to address the encountered issues and prepare for the next launch. With an estimated timeframe of six weeks, SpaceX set the goal of achieving readiness for Flight 4. They will have new modifications for Ship 29 and Booster 11 specifically, which I am confident is necessary for SpaceX to ensure the next launch goes smoothly.
These new designs are based on the issues we have identified from the launch process.
SpaceX's DESIGN NEW MAJOR CHANGES for upcoming Starship prototype, Musk revealed...
First, there is a change to the Grid Fins of the Booster.
This stems from the landing process of B10, which highlighted an important area that needs improvement in SpaceX's Starship program.
During the landing process, B10 exhibited significant instability, as we can see from reviewing this video segment, the grid fins were rolled, shaking vigorously in an uncontrollable manner.
SpaceX's DESIGN NEW MAJOR CHANGES for upcoming Starship prototype, Musk revealed...
So what could be the cause? SpaceX has not made any announcements regarding this issue, but we have some very interesting speculations.
The incident with the grid fins may be related to the control capabilities in its drive system. Actuators serve as the mechanisms responsible for controlling the movement of grid fins, enabling adjustments in pitch, yaw, and roll.
===
Subcribe Alpha Tech: / @alphatech4966
=== - Наука та технологія
I hope they work out the heat tile issue. I like Dreamliners' pattern. Like bricks, overlapping on the side and rectangular. The hexagon shape kind of makes me wonder if they create vortexes as the atmosphere hits it. I'm sure they have simulation software, so what do I know?
Stage 2 had major problems, it was tumbling which meant it was never going to survive reentry.
Excellent stuff bro, go Elon
Tumbling will vary on each flight with the butterfly effect. Somehow stabilization has to be more aggressive not under engineered.
As i said , The booster needs to do the same as F9, A entree burn!!!
Lets hope SpaceX doesn't go full blown DEI
Perhaps the plasma shorted out the electric motors.
Think that was valid comment about tiles falling off on Launch OFT-3 .
If fins turn edge on at lift off and twisting out flat at seperation
less forces would be on them.
Muilti Tiles on multiple protection skins
curving around the ship in three four bands nay be better
than the whole tile sytem being indevidual.
enabling mass change on ever launch
akin to taking of a jacket onb off
tiles locked from behind
The Falcon One was never a full reusable rocket as you say @ 12:10.
i saw this same video some where else 2 weeks ago GG
Again,Why is the Pez Dispenser on the HOT Side?
🚀👍🚀
Glad to hear talk of control surfaces and glide.... Means the next flight will go better even without those assets.
On flight 2, I suspect the problem was they got greedy on the retro burn, and ended up skating backwards into the thicker atmosphere, and getting locked cockeyed... If they use a high glide to reduce velocity after a short re entry burn and reorientation of nose first, should be a much better flight. And maybe more interesting video.
As one will see the Earth get closer more gradually. And if velocity reduction glide is efficient, should see less plasma burn.
Way less embarassing... Some day we will miss this kind of experimentation, and flights will be Ho-Hum...
I'm old enough to remember when the US Military ordered all family dependents flying on civilian air liners to be wearing Military dog tags...
The attitude was a tich different back then about potential risk.
I was pretty young and asked why? and what the little notch was for?
The answer was one of my first wide eyed reality checks...
Now days people take flying for granted, back then fear of flying wasnt a joke...
Some people got really scared...
Space will be like that too for awhile. but soon just a minor adventure.
🥇💖
How significant are the changes to the heat shield of Starship 29 in terms of material or design to ensure it withstands the harsh conditions of re-entry?
Q: Why did the SpaceShip decide to fail and fall out of the sky ? - A: It had a bad attitude.
9:30 you cannot predict the success rate of a craft you have not developed yet. 12:29 if the cost estimate for Starship is as much off as for the other claims it makes i would not be surprised if the real cost would be higher than that of a Falcon 9 in reusable mode. Yet claiming that ANY rocket of that size would cost 3 million is absolutely delusional. The cost of a A320 (quite normal mid size airliner) is of about 100 million with its 2 jet engines. At the moment building a Starship is estimated at 2 billion. Bringing that to 3, or even 300 million is pure BS.
9:30 it has already been mostly developed and flown 3 times now, once to orbit, Starship itself if you include stuff like starhopper/early starship series (which really was testing Raptor 1 and the ascent, hold, land), Starship Super Heavy IFT4/5/6 just need to stick the landings, orbit, etc (which SpaceX is probably the best equipped team in the known Universe, that we know of, to achieve this engineering goal. Once it starts landing more than once per rocket it suddenly becomes a matter of time/engineering to get it to 99%. People said the same abouit planes.
12:29 the cost estimate being higher than that of a falcon 9 in reusable is a bit of a tell that you don't really know much beyond surface level stuff on this topic. Starship takes like 7-8 as much mass to LEO per launch as Falcon 9, so even if it was 3.5-4x as pricey as falcon 9, it would still be 50% the cost per unit mass to orbit - which is what matters at the moment - prices used to be over $1m per kg to orbit (probably more in the early space days), SpaceX have driven it down to like $1500 and it could go lower if Starship achieves a high reusability rate.
You say they "have not yet developed" starship... it is beyond 80/20d. The thing has almost all systems mostly developed and is just patching out issues now and refining efficencies (like Raptor 3 is about to do to Raptor 2).
I love hen people don't even read posts correctly, get their information only from PR statements and then go on to lecture people.
1. No, starship is nowhere near being developed. At the moment it demonstrated none of the required capabilities and is at the stage of "expensive firework". The goal might to get to 99% reliability, yet at the moment they still are at 0%.
2. The undersell the price by at least 2 orders of magnitude and you still think the information is credible?
@@yoshyoka Ranting confidently doesn't make your whining correct lol. why you so salty over SpaceX reducing cost to orbit by orders of magnitude? Absolute Luddite. You probably couldn't engineer a bowl of cereal
@@yoshyoka btw you should learn some engineering basics, it changes your life. Starship demonstrated no capabilities? LOOOOL. Raptor 3 the most innovative powerful small rocket engine in history, starbase the most productive rocket factory in history at the start of its exponential ramp
pioneering methane-oxygen rockets (thought not worth it) for cost reduction
Pioneering 304 SS body for rockets, again thought not worth it previously in the perfect, expensive rocket paradigm of years gone.
IDK why I am wasting my time on someone who is clearly sick of the world and closing in on Nature's guarantee of forcing the world to be aware of itself.
@@ohhmanitscam I think that my degrees, a career in R&D and several patents to my name are enough to state that I know the basics.
So, No, Starship has demonstrated none of the new capabilities (notice, not new hardware) it promised. It did not demonstrate the ability to re-fire the engine in a vacuum, to control the spacecraft attitude in suborbital flight and reentry, reliably re-start the engine on re-entry, make craft to craft orbital refueling, , make a landing, have turnaround times on schedule, be able to land on an other body, have the necessary 100t to orbit... etc.. NONE of the above has been demontrated while all of the above should have ben demonstrated by Q1 2024.
SpaceX did not pioneered Methalox rocket engines. The Soviet made the first Methalox engines while the Chinese flew the first Methalox rocket.
It did not pioneer to make Stainless Steel rockets either, with the Convair X-11 ICBM using it back in the 50s.
I should be wondering why I waste my time on someone that only gets his information from Musk statements.
Moreover, far from being "sic of the world", the very reason I am frustrated with SpaceX is because its over-promise and poor delivery is what is jeopardizing the whole mission. I would love them to succeed, yet they are far from the mark.
If they made the grid fins out carbon fiber they would be much lighter !
Lighter - but useless, as they would burn up !
First I read the comments, and then I reckon it's not worth watching this video...
I know we can't leave the atmosphere we can travel it , but can't not bust out , in an emergency but we can jump to another planet from planet , ,hmmmmmm
The only trouble with Elon musk say and it's going to cost between two and three million dollars to launch the starship when it's working. What about paying for the infrastructure, and the spaceship itself.
That cost gets factored in if you consider its meant to be reusable. If it costs 50 mil to build but is reused 20 times, then the cost per launch would be 2.5 mil…
This thing will be mass produced eventually, its going to be much cheaper to build than traditional rockets of the past. 3 million per launch is entirely realistic estimate
Starlink makes enough money to build thousands of starships and dozens of launch/landing sites or mobile seaworthy starports world wide.. which will itself create another new market for space tourism.. and rocket Cargo of course
Pretty sure he’s talking about marginal cost per launch. Not price of launch.
It would have been interesting if Elon said “we ARE breaking the known laws of physics”
You cannot break the laws of the world. But maybe we don't know everything...
But still, you cannot move your hand through a desk.
Imagine when fuel is produced ON THE MOON. They can even be shipped it to Earth orbit for refuel duty.
triangulate and have them cone out
From ift-1 to Ift-4 booster is bugging out at lower and lower altitudes. This is not fixing the design. If booster and I use the term lightly, can’t take starship to at least 170 kilometers. You need to slap on some more rockets. Say two more boosters. ift-4 will only like the rocket to 45 kilometers? But what ever.
As to the tiles. The pins are useless. The heat shield tiles while the have great thermal properties. When glued are nothing more than styrofoam. So the parents won’t help you at all. either the glue holds them or it doesn’t. But with stainless steel still it doesn’t..
But I will give Elon one thing. He is a gambler.
What is your field? It isn't space science or engineering. Stick to something you have at least a modicum of knowledge.
Another big fail is coming soon.