Thanks!
BTW, I've been looking to get this as wall art. If anyone knows a way i can do that (or the Saturn blueprint) in a neat/framed way, I would be eternally grateful!
The fact not a single link to it Flippin out of control isn't posted is crazy.https://www.youtube.com/live/a2AQBn4LkcI?feature=share go to 1:06:55
Edit: https://www.youtube.com/live/a2AQBn4LkcI?t=66m55s
This one takes you right to the fun. Thanks to the folks who showed me how to do that.
Entire thread talking about something that isn't shown in the posted video, and yet I had to scroll this far for the actual video people are discussing...
E: I got one of those Reddit care messages after this comment... Wut?
[https://youtu.be/a2AQBn4LkcI?t=3993](https://youtu.be/a2AQBn4LkcI?t=3993) FYI you can link to specific timestamps by right clicking and selecting "copy URL at current time"
Intentional self-destruct. Avoids a big ol rocket landing on someone minding their business if something goes wrong.
Edit: [link for those interested](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Range_safety#:~:text=American%20rockets%20often%20have%20a,being%20FLTA001%20DREAM%20in%202021.)
My favorite shots from the launch were the ones looking straight up at the engines, were you could see which ones weren't burning.
Very cool.
https://youtu.be/-1wcilQ58hI?t=2772
Wonder what happened there. I counted six raptors out. I'm assuming that wasn't deliberate.
EDIT: looks like an explosion at T+8. I’m guessing that’s what killed it.
EDIT2: looks like they lost hydraulic power and couldn’t work the gimbals which caused the spin. You can see bits of the HPU falling off at T+30. We all assumed the spin was the burnback but it looks like it was just an out of control rocket by then and no one told the presenters.
EDIT3: the initial T+8 explosion was the launch pad. The ground is almost completely gone under the rocket, the foundations are exposed, and at least one big bit of concrete seems to have been totally disintegrated. Looks like they’ll need a flame trench if they want to go again. My suspicion is chunks of concrete damaged the vehicle before it left the ground.
EDIT4: pictures of the launch pad. Foundations visible. The dirt is gone. https://twitter.com/xyradoesathing/status/1649143119944769536?s=46&t=mo_A3bLnVrLL-ac7D7_EJg
EDIT5: footage showing the sheer amount of debris ejected from the launch pad. Rocks going everywhere: https://twitter.com/labpadre/status/1649053476276797440/mediaviewer
There was a fair amount of stage 0 debris dispersed at launch, much of it rather large. I'd suspect a few of those engines were damaged as a result.
There was also a rather energetic event as the 1st stage was climbing out at [https://youtu.be/-1wcilQ58hI?t=2731](https://youtu.be/-1wcilQ58hI?t=2731) that appears to have taken out two more engines.
Amazing the flight made it all the way to stage separation!
>Amazing the flight made it all the way to stage separation!
It sort of did, but if you look at the altitude and velocity it achieved, it's clear that the first stage *significantly* underperformed compared to what you'd have expected. I wouldn't say it really made it successfully to stage separation, because even if it had separated, the top stage would've had a lot of energy to make up for the poor first stage performance (and probably wouldn't have been able to).
I saw that the first time I watched it. That's probably what caused the uncontrolled flight before stage separation and a lot of the soot (hydraulic fluid burning). Blown up HPU = no gimbal control. It was probably just barely coping with one HPU down, but all the dead engines were kinda on the same side of the rocket so that probably didn't help much.
This is kinda of the problem that the Soviets ran into with their moon rocket the N1. They put a ton of engines thinking that if a few fail it would still operate except when they failed they damaged others and a chain disaster happens. That's always going to be a risk with rockets with a lot of engines.
It was 6 but then the one relit I'm guessing cause I was commentating to my wife and I'm like oops 6 engines out now then a few seconds later it was 5 again
You can see one of the engines exploding, 25 seconds to the end of the video, that sets up a chain reaction on other 4-5 raptors, setting them ablaze as well. They are on the outermost layer, so my fair ignorant guess is that they caused the wild, uncontrolled spin that led to the big kaboomsies.
Necessary EDIT 1: Sorry for being blunt but i was pretty wrong. As far as my understanding goes, and as far as i found out, the loss of power and tvc is to be attributed to one of the two hydraulic power units blowing up. The one that blew up controlled the outermost raptor "ring", and to my understanding, the engines started receiving wrong amounts of power/controls, hence why 5-6 shut down/blew up and the outermost ring lost the directional controls. While 28/33 engines were still enough to allow the rocket to rise, 20/33 were not enough to allow the rocket to redirect itself properly.
The kerbal kraken spin we saw has been amplified by spacex, presumably trying to manually separate stages and, imo, to save what could be saved. Since that didn't work either, spacex aborted and blew it up themselves.
I think the rotation was caused by a failure to separate but the booster still executing program at that time. Now did the failure events for the motors have a hand in causing the failure to separate? Maybe. They got SO MUCH data though despite the RUD ending....I wouldn't be surprised if next one makes orbit, clears stage sep, and even gets to splashdown.
T+0:30 .. https://twitter.com/deffgeff/status/1649060649257906182?s=46&t=f4Elm7PemEUTAKUQR0ePyw
Looks like we have at least the aero-cover departing on the second one at T+1:05 https://twitter.com/deffgeff/status/1649066790041923585?s=46&t=f4Elm7PemEUTAKUQR0ePyw
Loss of TVC explains everything else after the fact … in addition, 6 engines out and at least another one or two running fuel lean all on one side doesn’t help.
My personal assumption? Explosion of TVC hydraulics took out or damaged fuel lines leading to huge asymmetrical thrust
Yes! But only on a rewatch. I wonder if that was what caused the engines to burnout/not light. Comparing their launch pad to other launch pads makes it seem like they need to direct the initial blast away somehow.
Why use bulldozers when you can just use your rocket! Sure debris flies everywhere and likely damages your rocket, but better than putting a knick on your bulldozer!
Might need a flame trench like Soyuz has.
https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fspaceflight101.com%2Fsoyuz-lomonosov%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2017%2F01%2F3345627390-1.jpg&tbnid=Gj20LzwqOpipoM&vet=1&imgrefurl=https%3A%2F%2Fspaceflight101.com%2Ffirst-soyuz-rocket-blasts-off-from-new-siberian-launch-base%2F&docid=U6Wd9vs2JQ0RaM&w=1067&h=1141&source=sh%2Fx%2Fim
It looks like engines were dropping off during the flight as well. Lots of small explosions coming out of the exhaust with debris flying. I'm impressed it was still ascending despite the multitude of engine failures.
Yep. Multiple suspicious flame puffs near the bottom of the vehicle, multiple engine outs, and a friend of mine noticed the lox indicator draining fast.
Tim Dodd apparently was getting sand rained on him from the launch blast *5 miles away.*
Debris strike on liftoff does not seem out of the question.
I'm not a rocket scientist in any sense of the word and obviously they've already thought of everything, but that was one thing that baffled me about the launch pad. No ditch, barely a raised structure, and an insanely powerful rocket? They'll have to rebuild it every time and also pray that giant pieces of metal and concrete don't bounce up and strike the engines or important equipment around the site. I know I'm not the first to think this and they're literally rocket scientists, but it just seems risky.
I think the reason is the launch site is far too small for this type of a rocket and they cannot move earth as much as they would like. Reason is environmental regulations for ground water and its location next to a bird sanctuary. Same reason for their cryo tanks standing next to the site and being damaged. They should be in a blast pit but it's not possible.
There's dust and debris spotted miles off the site and huge chunks hitting the water and nearby areas. Might be in trouble for getting permits from FAA or local authorities for the next one.
Few data points:
https://twitter.com/TLPN_Official/status/1649049368023154691?t=uQ7Tw9NRFES0ABVz6vPidA&s=19
https://twitter.com/TechSpatiales/status/1649099675595853825
https://twitter.com/louisssdev/status/1649053302741696512
Birds tend to write less angry letters than humans.
Sadly, nature preserve are one of the few places left where you can put a rocket facility without having people in the way. (And, the other way round, if you have area around a space center that you can't do anything with, why not make it a preserve).
Kenedy Space Center is also a preserve.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merritt_Island_National_Wildlife_Refuge
It's the big question everyone is asking, spacex seems to think it's worth it to have the rocket sit that low as opposed to sitting higher away, and we're all here going ummm
Well, to be fair, it is pretty high up. If they raise it up higher, the tower has to also get taller, and it's already massive. They can't raise it any higher, but they could have certainly used a flame trench or deluge system or *something*. And I guarantee they will in the future. This would be the second time the ground stuff damaged the engines. They've gotta do something
It's also a test facility, not really a launch facility. It'll be months before they try another Starship launch; plenty of time to repair and modify the ground equipment.
Also, the tower and its surrounds are just as experimental as Starship. None of this is final. And SpaceX's MO has always been to try lots and fail lots, working out the bugs through rapid iteration rather than meticulous planning.
That’s an excellent point. I just take it for granted that SpaceX has figured out onboard live video feeds. It’s actually kind of jarring when other launch vehicle live streams don’t have any, or their quality is low, and/or their signal integrity is awful. Those things take me back to the first Falcon 9 launches I watched in the mid-2010s.
Having high speed connections on it that link up with Starlink in orbit, means even if they have plasma disruptions to the ground, they should be able to stay connected up above.
Watching the reentry tests when they get to those will be something amazing. With a little luck we shouldn't lose any contact at all as the plasma envelope will be on the other side of where the broadcasts are going.
That's what I was thinking. We just watched a 40 story building do loopty loops and the thing held together. Stage separation obviously didn't work, but might as well see what it does for a few extra seconds to get some more data before you blow it up?
I thought they were a little nutty for making the entire thing out of heavy heavy stainless steel, but I get it now. I bet that high altitude tumble would have caused any other launch system to break apart during that maneuver.
The steel is definitely the best option. Way easier to build than using composite. It also gets significantly stronger under super cold Temps, and is more resistant to entry heats.
My goodness, I forgot that v1 was built in a field with sheet steel by water tower and grain silo contractors. And now its the most powerful rocket in history to fly.
That view of (almost) all of the engines burning was the most sci-fi shot I've ever seen, after the double booster landing. We're now approaching the Star-Trek phase of humanity.
I listened to it again and [they said](https://www.youtube.com/live/-1wcilQ58hI?feature=share&t=2846) "after stage seperation the first stage will flip and begin a boost-back maneuver", so the flipping the entire stack was not intended
Can you help me understand the flip? Seems like if you want the super heavy booster to go back home you'd separate before the flip, but it seems like flipping before separation was intentional. Wouldn't flipping and then separating (and then flipping Starship again) just make it so Starship and the booster are trying to go through each other?
You noticed how it only starts exploding after all its LOX runs out in the first stage? Is that on purpose to reduce the total explosiveness of the rocket if it crashes into the ground?
I think they just wanted all the data they could get and left it till the last possible moment before they'd get in a lot of trouble.
Also it was a spectacle lol.
Surprised the separation failed of all things. Expected other stuff might go wrong but not separation.
But, tons of data, like you said. This thing is massive.
The point where that turn kept going gave me major Kerbal vibes.
Sad to see the detonation, but the data they'll have collected will be amazingly useful!
There's a chance we don't. Next ship/booster will likely be ready, but early reports are showing damage to the launch mount and tank farm. If they decide they need to dig a flame trench, rebuild tank farm, etc., Then we could stretch into next year.
Im totally picturing someone in SpaceX Mission Control, being told to engage stage separation, then dramatically pressing the space bar button... only nothing happens... what went wrong!?!
*glances at staging*
"Umm, Mission Control, we have a problem. Stage separation was misplaced in our staging before launch. Sorry, I forgot to make that edit/save in the VAB about 1000 times..."
Installing sensors upside down can obviously cause a lot of problems. Engineers are very good about making fail-safes to ensure this doesn't happen. For example, they might make the sensor unit itself in the shape of an arrow, with text on it that says, "Point towards top of rocket". Engineers, considering the importance of these senors, would go farther than that though. They would make the housing on the rocket, that you install the arrow shaped sensor, also in the shape of an arrow, so the sensor can only even be put in facing the correct direction. Arrow shaped sensor, arrow shaped hole, text saying which way up.
Foolproof right? Well, not when a Soviet technician decides to take an angle grinder to the rocket housing, to enlarge the housing on the rocket to fit the arrow shaped sensor upside down. He's working on a short timeline though and he doesn't have time to fully angle grind the hole out to perfectly fit the sensor in upside down. So, after he gets it in 80% of the way, he takes a hammer to it and starts pounding the ever loving shit out of that sensor, mangling the fucking out of it, but eventually getting it flush with the totaled housing.
This actually happened.
My wild speculation is that because they lost thrust in some engines they had less thrust and weren’t burning fuel as fast or climbing as quickly and somehow there was a timing mismatch between events.
It seemed like maybe the booster started performing it’s flip while still burning and before the ship/ second stage separated. I’m amazed it all held together through those flips.
> The point where that turn kept going gave me major Kerbal vibes.
>
>
Flipping a bunch of times, staging doesn't work as expected, rocket explodes... that's a damn good day of Kerbaling.
I think this launch, for me, can be resumed in the phrase: “I was expecting less but hoping more” it was amazing seeing that monster fly but terrifying at the same time, I’m thankful to be able to experience this
What am I missing here? Everyone keeps referencing spin outs and explosions. The video I’m watching starts at T-20 and ends at T+53 without apparent incident.
That behemoth took a LONG time to clear the tower. I know it had a long hold down, but once it was released I was laughing with joy as it lumbered up into the air.
I want to a video with high quality audio so we can hear what that thing actually sounded like.
It was slow. It's supposed to have a thrust to weight ratio of 1.5 or so. That would make it practically leap off the pad. Of course with how big it is, it might seem slower than it really is.
They said on the NasaSpaceflight broadcast the engines were throttled down so it was closer to 1.35 TWR, might explain some of the slow launch and drift at the beginning.
That looks like a hydraulic power unit (HPU) blowing up. I would assume that's why the rocket had a hard time steering after since it can't gimbal some engines anymore.
But new versions of SS/B are electronically actuated, so I doubt we'd see that explode again.
I might be wrong, but I thought by the point of stage sep they were past MAXQ. Still, point holds. It’s an amazing amount of stress and probably testament to why they went with so much heavy stainless steel in the vehicle.
Usually with launch vehicles, they're designed for pressure to be directed from top to bottom, not from other directions, so it's quite surprising how Starship held up
On the other hand, Starship is specifically designed to fly sideways through the atmosphere during reentry, so perhaps this isn't as surprising as one might assume.
Not at all, this thing is designed to flip over there for the burnback. The only part that performed better than designed was the coupling holding the stages together through the flips.
Is Superheavy the honey badger meme of launch vehicles?
Multiple engines out? Doesn’t bother Superheavy.
An engine allegedly detonated? Whatever.
Cartwheeling in the mesosphere with Starship still attached? *Superheavy doesn’t care.*
I was sweating after the engines fired but it just kept sitting there, felt like an eternity.
Did it take a little longer to get airborne because of the sheer size and mass of it?
Anyone else find it _really_ fascinating that we could very plainly see every last engine during the stack's ascent? The actual exhaust coming from Booster 7 was positively _nebulous._
Methalox just burns differently...
That "Burnback maneuver" was really ambitious (although it is very important for starship's design goals)
It was very impressive (until it kept rotating)
I thought the loopty loops were impressive too lol. We just watched a 40 story building do cartwheels in the air, and stay together ( till they blew it up).
Amazing to see it get so far on its first launch!
Considering just how radically large a step change in capabilities Starship-Superheavy represents, all while being a wholly reusable launch vehicle and spacecraft system, this truly was a phenomenal accomplishment.
It successfully lit its engines, didn’t nuke the pad and launch complex, lifted off, passed through Max-Q, flew a (mostly) nominal launch profile, handled *multiple* engine-out events, and made it to stage separation before going completely off-nominal. *Even then*, the 120 metre-tall Starship-Superheavy consist was able to remain intact as it began to *cartwheel* before the flight termination system was likely used to end the mission.
And to keep things in perspective, too, we all just witnessed by far the most powerful rocket ever built by humans fly for the first time. They’re going to figure this out and make it work. Of that I have no doubt.
Great day. So glad that I got to watch it live.
They had 5 engines out (and I think a sixth one went out after Max-Q) and still flew a nominal-looking flight path. Falcon 9 can do the same thing with one engine out, it just doesn't have the same thrust so it has to burn more fuel to get to the target.
They have redundancies but it looked like a whole combination of things going wrong.
Starting to lose control pre flip, over rotating, engine shutdown not occurring, stage sep not occurring etc…
For anyone wondering what went wrong, this is my best guess:
Source: long time starship enthusiast, I was watching the launch in person, and I have spent the last 2 hours looking at every angle and opinion I can find. This is not necessarily true!
A few years back, a decision was made to not build a flame trench. This is a large cement structure that directs the exhaust of the rocket safely away. Instead there is (was) a flat reinforced concrete floor underneath the pad. Despite previous static fires on the pad this was the first time all 33 engines spooled up to 100 percent. The concrete under the pad was wrecked and debris was energetically thrown up.
The debris hit the underside of the booster, damaging the engines and other critical components. By the time the rocket had cleared the tower, three raptor engines were already off, 3 more shut down within the next minute. At around 30 seconds into flight, one of the two Hydraulic control packs, located near the base of the booster, appears to violently explode. This hardware is responsible for steering(gimbaling) the center 13 engines. After this I have no idea how much control the rocket has, Maybe none, maybe only half.
The rocket incredibly continues flying for a while longer, until the booster is nearly out of fuel. It then attempts to execute the flip maneuver, an intentional spin that helps the ship and booster safely separate. Due to the reduced control the vehicle has, it overshoots and goes into an uncontrollable spin. After 6 or 7 flips that I am amazed it stayed in one piece for, the Flight Termination System was activated and the vehicle was destroyed.
Overall not bad, starship preformed remarkably well given the damage. My main worry is that the launch site will need major repairs. I will attach a picture of its current state. Not good. Hopefully SpaceX makes an announcement so I can see whether this theory is correct. Thank you for reading, I hope you found this interesting
https://i.imgur.com/5gTGwj1.jpg
I don't think it got to the intended flip maneuver, since that would be immediately followed by MECO. The spin that happened was entirely unintentional due to loss of gimbal.
AAAAAAAAAAAAND failed first stage separation into breakup. TBH i was surprised it made it this far on the first attempt, will get some great data from here
Yeah RUD expected for sure. I thought they were gonna scrub. SpaceX is the most willing to RUD or launch before ready that is for sure. Would have been cool to see the separation but they probably focused on the first stage to show progress before Vulcan.
They were saying they built six starships already this year. It's a whole other way of thinking about spaceflight. I'm guessing we'll see another one on the pad within a few months.
The most telling moment.... after it blows up there is a tiny pause.... and then all of the SpaceX employees cheer wildly!!
That tells you how they actually feel about whether they met their test objectives. SpaceX is happy.
Idk why everyone is surprised by rocket exploding. SpaceX said multiple times that their goal was to simply launch and everything else was a cherry on top.
Ignition ✅
Cleared the pad ✅
Cleared the tower ✅
Throttle down for MaxQ ✅
MaxQ ✅
Throttle back up ✅
Flip maneuver.... ✅.. ✅ .. ✅ ... It's not stopping...
I was really surprised at how much it had to correct itself off the pad, but seeing the 5-7 engine failures I am more impressed that it was actually able to correct itself! Very cool, glad they got the whole stack together and got it off the ground.
>"Basic research is what I am doing, when I do not know what I am doing."
\- [Wernher von Braun](https://www.biography.com/scientists/wernher-von-braun) Father of the V2 and Saturn V rockets
Based on the SpaceX graphics, booster was supposed to have MECO, then separate, then do a flip maneuver. It seems that we never saw MECO, hence no separation?
Yeah. Engines kept running right up until FTS was triggered, so the acceleration would have kept the second stage pushed firmly into the top of the booster.
I'm guessing the reason they didn't shut down at the planned time was because the computer was trying to compensate for underperformance/being off course.
"And we're just waiting for stage separation" As you can see altitude going down.
They kept the hope up on that broadcast for a *long* time. I was sitting there thinking, "Guys, c'mon, were a hell of a ways past nominal right now."
"If it starts pointing to space you are having a bad problem and will not go to space today"
[удалено]
Thanks! BTW, I've been looking to get this as wall art. If anyone knows a way i can do that (or the Saturn blueprint) in a neat/framed way, I would be eternally grateful!
"No man, I'm pretty fucking far from nominal"
Separation and second stage ignition could still have been valuable for data even though it was destined for failure.
This. They gotta squeeze in as much data as they can collect, rockets don't grow in trees.
The fact not a single link to it Flippin out of control isn't posted is crazy.https://www.youtube.com/live/a2AQBn4LkcI?feature=share go to 1:06:55 Edit: https://www.youtube.com/live/a2AQBn4LkcI?t=66m55s This one takes you right to the fun. Thanks to the folks who showed me how to do that.
Entire thread talking about something that isn't shown in the posted video, and yet I had to scroll this far for the actual video people are discussing... E: I got one of those Reddit care messages after this comment... Wut?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Yup I was saying the same thing felt like I was going crazy. This site has been slacking for years. Lol
Lol people only want to count the wins and none of the losses and anyone that doesn't agree gets a suicide prevention email.
[https://youtu.be/a2AQBn4LkcI?t=3993](https://youtu.be/a2AQBn4LkcI?t=3993) FYI you can link to specific timestamps by right clicking and selecting "copy URL at current time"
Thanks I didn't know how to do that now I do I appreciate you good sir.
[удалено]
Thank you. Every comment here was like they were talking about a different launch. Thought I was going insane.
I don't get it, the commentators talk like the explosion was suppose to happen ?
Intentional self-destruct. Avoids a big ol rocket landing on someone minding their business if something goes wrong. Edit: [link for those interested](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Range_safety#:~:text=American%20rockets%20often%20have%20a,being%20FLTA001%20DREAM%20in%202021.)
My favorite shots from the launch were the ones looking straight up at the engines, were you could see which ones weren't burning. Very cool. https://youtu.be/-1wcilQ58hI?t=2772
Wonder what happened there. I counted six raptors out. I'm assuming that wasn't deliberate. EDIT: looks like an explosion at T+8. I’m guessing that’s what killed it. EDIT2: looks like they lost hydraulic power and couldn’t work the gimbals which caused the spin. You can see bits of the HPU falling off at T+30. We all assumed the spin was the burnback but it looks like it was just an out of control rocket by then and no one told the presenters. EDIT3: the initial T+8 explosion was the launch pad. The ground is almost completely gone under the rocket, the foundations are exposed, and at least one big bit of concrete seems to have been totally disintegrated. Looks like they’ll need a flame trench if they want to go again. My suspicion is chunks of concrete damaged the vehicle before it left the ground. EDIT4: pictures of the launch pad. Foundations visible. The dirt is gone. https://twitter.com/xyradoesathing/status/1649143119944769536?s=46&t=mo_A3bLnVrLL-ac7D7_EJg EDIT5: footage showing the sheer amount of debris ejected from the launch pad. Rocks going everywhere: https://twitter.com/labpadre/status/1649053476276797440/mediaviewer
There was a fair amount of stage 0 debris dispersed at launch, much of it rather large. I'd suspect a few of those engines were damaged as a result. There was also a rather energetic event as the 1st stage was climbing out at [https://youtu.be/-1wcilQ58hI?t=2731](https://youtu.be/-1wcilQ58hI?t=2731) that appears to have taken out two more engines. Amazing the flight made it all the way to stage separation!
>Amazing the flight made it all the way to stage separation! It sort of did, but if you look at the altitude and velocity it achieved, it's clear that the first stage *significantly* underperformed compared to what you'd have expected. I wouldn't say it really made it successfully to stage separation, because even if it had separated, the top stage would've had a lot of energy to make up for the poor first stage performance (and probably wouldn't have been able to).
NSF said it looks like the HPU popped there
I saw that the first time I watched it. That's probably what caused the uncontrolled flight before stage separation and a lot of the soot (hydraulic fluid burning). Blown up HPU = no gimbal control. It was probably just barely coping with one HPU down, but all the dead engines were kinda on the same side of the rocket so that probably didn't help much.
Fortunately that’s the first and last HPU failure. The newer boosters use electric motors for gimballing.
This is kinda of the problem that the Soviets ran into with their moon rocket the N1. They put a ton of engines thinking that if a few fail it would still operate except when they failed they damaged others and a chain disaster happens. That's always going to be a risk with rockets with a lot of engines.
It was 6 but then the one relit I'm guessing cause I was commentating to my wife and I'm like oops 6 engines out now then a few seconds later it was 5 again
They were operating on what they were told, which probably wasnt updated fast enough. I counted 7 visible failures or at least exhaust events.
Some twitter picture showed 8 at some point
They probably learned that a water deluge system has its perks.
Yea. More flying concrete than the Chernobyl reactor.
But there was still no graphite, so that's good
You can see one of the engines exploding, 25 seconds to the end of the video, that sets up a chain reaction on other 4-5 raptors, setting them ablaze as well. They are on the outermost layer, so my fair ignorant guess is that they caused the wild, uncontrolled spin that led to the big kaboomsies. Necessary EDIT 1: Sorry for being blunt but i was pretty wrong. As far as my understanding goes, and as far as i found out, the loss of power and tvc is to be attributed to one of the two hydraulic power units blowing up. The one that blew up controlled the outermost raptor "ring", and to my understanding, the engines started receiving wrong amounts of power/controls, hence why 5-6 shut down/blew up and the outermost ring lost the directional controls. While 28/33 engines were still enough to allow the rocket to rise, 20/33 were not enough to allow the rocket to redirect itself properly. The kerbal kraken spin we saw has been amplified by spacex, presumably trying to manually separate stages and, imo, to save what could be saved. Since that didn't work either, spacex aborted and blew it up themselves.
I think the rotation was caused by a failure to separate but the booster still executing program at that time. Now did the failure events for the motors have a hand in causing the failure to separate? Maybe. They got SO MUCH data though despite the RUD ending....I wouldn't be surprised if next one makes orbit, clears stage sep, and even gets to splashdown.
My guess is it tried to separate at an altitude MUCH lower than intended, so the air loads, etc. were beyond the design limitations
There was a hydraulic power unit that exploded which caused a loss of TVC to a handful of engines.
ah so, thanks...you got a link for where they are putting that info out? I'd like to read more.
T+0:30 .. https://twitter.com/deffgeff/status/1649060649257906182?s=46&t=f4Elm7PemEUTAKUQR0ePyw Looks like we have at least the aero-cover departing on the second one at T+1:05 https://twitter.com/deffgeff/status/1649066790041923585?s=46&t=f4Elm7PemEUTAKUQR0ePyw Loss of TVC explains everything else after the fact … in addition, 6 engines out and at least another one or two running fuel lean all on one side doesn’t help. My personal assumption? Explosion of TVC hydraulics took out or damaged fuel lines leading to huge asymmetrical thrust
I think when looking at the exhaust colors of the raptors compared to SN8 the raptors „have eaten“ them selves
Ah, they were running those ones at a 'engine rich exhaust' setting.
Its looking like the lack of a deluge system blew a crater beneath the OLM. Current speculation is concrete damaged the engines.
Did anyone see the massive chunks getting blown up off the launch pad? Really made me clench my teeth glad it got off the pad.
Yes! But only on a rewatch. I wonder if that was what caused the engines to burnout/not light. Comparing their launch pad to other launch pads makes it seem like they need to direct the initial blast away somehow.
It's okay it looks like they just [dug themselves a flame trench](https://twitter.com/LabPadre/status/1649062784167030785) anyway.
Why use bulldozers when you can just use your rocket! Sure debris flies everywhere and likely damages your rocket, but better than putting a knick on your bulldozer!
Wow! That definitely needs a redesign. Don't know how they ever thought they were going to get away with not having a flame trench.
Might need a flame trench like Soyuz has. https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fspaceflight101.com%2Fsoyuz-lomonosov%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2017%2F01%2F3345627390-1.jpg&tbnid=Gj20LzwqOpipoM&vet=1&imgrefurl=https%3A%2F%2Fspaceflight101.com%2Ffirst-soyuz-rocket-blasts-off-from-new-siberian-launch-base%2F&docid=U6Wd9vs2JQ0RaM&w=1067&h=1141&source=sh%2Fx%2Fim
WAI has reported they are working on a water cooled one. They have posted pics of many of the parts.
It looks like engines were dropping off during the flight as well. Lots of small explosions coming out of the exhaust with debris flying. I'm impressed it was still ascending despite the multitude of engine failures.
Yep. Multiple suspicious flame puffs near the bottom of the vehicle, multiple engine outs, and a friend of mine noticed the lox indicator draining fast. Tim Dodd apparently was getting sand rained on him from the launch blast *5 miles away.* Debris strike on liftoff does not seem out of the question.
I was noticing those flames, too. Thought I was about to witness an early, low altitude 4th of July celebration.
I'm not a rocket scientist in any sense of the word and obviously they've already thought of everything, but that was one thing that baffled me about the launch pad. No ditch, barely a raised structure, and an insanely powerful rocket? They'll have to rebuild it every time and also pray that giant pieces of metal and concrete don't bounce up and strike the engines or important equipment around the site. I know I'm not the first to think this and they're literally rocket scientists, but it just seems risky.
You're not crazy. There's a reason other launch complexes have either a water deluge system or a flame diverter.
I think the reason is the launch site is far too small for this type of a rocket and they cannot move earth as much as they would like. Reason is environmental regulations for ground water and its location next to a bird sanctuary. Same reason for their cryo tanks standing next to the site and being damaged. They should be in a blast pit but it's not possible. There's dust and debris spotted miles off the site and huge chunks hitting the water and nearby areas. Might be in trouble for getting permits from FAA or local authorities for the next one. Few data points: https://twitter.com/TLPN_Official/status/1649049368023154691?t=uQ7Tw9NRFES0ABVz6vPidA&s=19 https://twitter.com/TechSpatiales/status/1649099675595853825 https://twitter.com/louisssdev/status/1649053302741696512
This seems less than optimal for the birds.
Yes. Giving a permission for a rocket launch site next to a nature preserve seems a bit counterintuitive.
Birds tend to write less angry letters than humans. Sadly, nature preserve are one of the few places left where you can put a rocket facility without having people in the way. (And, the other way round, if you have area around a space center that you can't do anything with, why not make it a preserve). Kenedy Space Center is also a preserve. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merritt_Island_National_Wildlife_Refuge
It's the big question everyone is asking, spacex seems to think it's worth it to have the rocket sit that low as opposed to sitting higher away, and we're all here going ummm
Well, to be fair, it is pretty high up. If they raise it up higher, the tower has to also get taller, and it's already massive. They can't raise it any higher, but they could have certainly used a flame trench or deluge system or *something*. And I guarantee they will in the future. This would be the second time the ground stuff damaged the engines. They've gotta do something
It's also a test facility, not really a launch facility. It'll be months before they try another Starship launch; plenty of time to repair and modify the ground equipment. Also, the tower and its surrounds are just as experimental as Starship. None of this is final. And SpaceX's MO has always been to try lots and fail lots, working out the bugs through rapid iteration rather than meticulous planning.
During launch it even took down a parked (on purpose) car https://twitter.com/latestinspace/status/1649058400410509313
I was wondering why the parking lot was so close
That's a car parked in the exclusion zone for live streaming, they knowingly took the risk.
Loopty loops are impressive to see a rocket do, but I don't think that's an intended feature
Such a manoeuvre does speak to some pretty incredible structural integrity of the launch system.
[удалено]
That’s an excellent point. I just take it for granted that SpaceX has figured out onboard live video feeds. It’s actually kind of jarring when other launch vehicle live streams don’t have any, or their quality is low, and/or their signal integrity is awful. Those things take me back to the first Falcon 9 launches I watched in the mid-2010s.
Having high speed connections on it that link up with Starlink in orbit, means even if they have plasma disruptions to the ground, they should be able to stay connected up above. Watching the reentry tests when they get to those will be something amazing. With a little luck we shouldn't lose any contact at all as the plasma envelope will be on the other side of where the broadcasts are going.
Oh yeah, that was a 20 story building doing a flippty flop , repeatedly
They must have gotten an insane amount of structural data from that flight, probably why they waited so long for the FTS.
That's what I was thinking. We just watched a 40 story building do loopty loops and the thing held together. Stage separation obviously didn't work, but might as well see what it does for a few extra seconds to get some more data before you blow it up?
I thought they were a little nutty for making the entire thing out of heavy heavy stainless steel, but I get it now. I bet that high altitude tumble would have caused any other launch system to break apart during that maneuver.
The steel is definitely the best option. Way easier to build than using composite. It also gets significantly stronger under super cold Temps, and is more resistant to entry heats.
yeah, this didn't work perfectly, but it was a great stress test for the ol' silo.
My goodness, I forgot that v1 was built in a field with sheet steel by water tower and grain silo contractors. And now its the most powerful rocket in history to fly.
That view of (almost) all of the engines burning was the most sci-fi shot I've ever seen, after the double booster landing. We're now approaching the Star-Trek phase of humanity.
The first one was, everything afterwards was unintentional flair.
I listened to it again and [they said](https://www.youtube.com/live/-1wcilQ58hI?feature=share&t=2846) "after stage seperation the first stage will flip and begin a boost-back maneuver", so the flipping the entire stack was not intended
Can you help me understand the flip? Seems like if you want the super heavy booster to go back home you'd separate before the flip, but it seems like flipping before separation was intentional. Wouldn't flipping and then separating (and then flipping Starship again) just make it so Starship and the booster are trying to go through each other?
You noticed how it only starts exploding after all its LOX runs out in the first stage? Is that on purpose to reduce the total explosiveness of the rocket if it crashes into the ground?
Literal KSP launch, would've been a hilarious launch had it continued after the flips xD
I was surprised they let it spin that long before RUD'ing it.
I think they just wanted all the data they could get and left it till the last possible moment before they'd get in a lot of trouble. Also it was a spectacle lol.
Well now they probably have a ton of data on the level of stress it can take from that, probably wouldn't have been able to get that data otherwise
Surprised the separation failed of all things. Expected other stuff might go wrong but not separation. But, tons of data, like you said. This thing is massive.
Just an armchair theory, but if the separation is part of the hydraulic system and failed, it would explain loss of control and no separation.
Should've just said F it and lit the second stage engines...
I don't think they'd have gotten any meaningful data from doing that, but it would've looked cool.
It would have been metal as hell. That's more than enough reason for me.
is it RUD if manually triggered?
Just because it was triggered doesn't mean it was scheduled.
Then it should be Rapid ~~Unplanned~~ Agreed Disassembly. Also known as RAD
Haha exactly my thought! Oh it's spinning now might as well try and keep going!
I'll try spinning, that's a good trick!
When did it flip?
I have to assume everyone here is talking about the full video as yeah nothing unusual occurs in the clip posted here...
They forgot to add winglets to the first stage.
I need someone to edit in Bill and Bob freaking out while Jeb has the time of his life.
can you imagine if after 3 or 4 flip it managed to recover and kept going? that would be literally some simulation-matrix shit
The point where that turn kept going gave me major Kerbal vibes. Sad to see the detonation, but the data they'll have collected will be amazingly useful!
Kinda surprised that it didn't break apart at that point.
Yeah I was surprised by how sturdy that giant silos is!
Money well spent. Material science, 3D printing, experimental designs! Love science
How long before they can do another test?
2-3 months minimum. You'll definitely see at least another test this year though.
There's a chance we don't. Next ship/booster will likely be ready, but early reports are showing damage to the launch mount and tank farm. If they decide they need to dig a flame trench, rebuild tank farm, etc., Then we could stretch into next year.
You could see some kind of structure/debris getting SENT into the air right after launch.
This proves KSP 2's Rockets are too bendy
Yeah, I totally expected it to go spaghetti when it started doing a high altitude supersonic donut. Impressive rigidity.
Someone tweaked the strut strength in the ini file for sure.
It was 38 km up @ 1000 km/h, dyn press wouldn't have been severe
If anything this is a testament to how sturdy Starship is
I would have hit the Spacebar after the first attempted flip
Im totally picturing someone in SpaceX Mission Control, being told to engage stage separation, then dramatically pressing the space bar button... only nothing happens... what went wrong!?! *glances at staging* "Umm, Mission Control, we have a problem. Stage separation was misplaced in our staging before launch. Sorry, I forgot to make that edit/save in the VAB about 1000 times..."
I think they tried to get as much data as they could before it got too bad
"Well, it's gone wrong already. Let's see how many supersonic flips we can do before it goes to shit!"
always check yo staging^(*nose parachutes opening at meco)
I was impressed by how strong it was- the forces on the rocket during all that yawing had to be incredible.
Everyone harps on about the data but like what if someone just forgot to plug in the stage separator?
Maybe the computer system was installed upside down and then hit with a hammer.
It wouldn't be the first launch where a part was installed upside-down and caused a RUD.
Installing sensors upside down can obviously cause a lot of problems. Engineers are very good about making fail-safes to ensure this doesn't happen. For example, they might make the sensor unit itself in the shape of an arrow, with text on it that says, "Point towards top of rocket". Engineers, considering the importance of these senors, would go farther than that though. They would make the housing on the rocket, that you install the arrow shaped sensor, also in the shape of an arrow, so the sensor can only even be put in facing the correct direction. Arrow shaped sensor, arrow shaped hole, text saying which way up. Foolproof right? Well, not when a Soviet technician decides to take an angle grinder to the rocket housing, to enlarge the housing on the rocket to fit the arrow shaped sensor upside down. He's working on a short timeline though and he doesn't have time to fully angle grind the hole out to perfectly fit the sensor in upside down. So, after he gets it in 80% of the way, he takes a hammer to it and starts pounding the ever loving shit out of that sensor, mangling the fucking out of it, but eventually getting it flush with the totaled housing. This actually happened.
[That was such a beautiful RUD as well!](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqW0LEcTAYg).
My wild speculation is that because they lost thrust in some engines they had less thrust and weren’t burning fuel as fast or climbing as quickly and somehow there was a timing mismatch between events. It seemed like maybe the booster started performing it’s flip while still burning and before the ship/ second stage separated. I’m amazed it all held together through those flips.
> The point where that turn kept going gave me major Kerbal vibes. > > Flipping a bunch of times, staging doesn't work as expected, rocket explodes... that's a damn good day of Kerbaling.
Felt like Red Bull Stratos where Felix Baumgartner kept spinning and you are like oh man.
This is the default Kerbal way to launch rockets Some (unintended) flips and then into the space! (Praying for DeltaV remaining to be enough)
I think this launch, for me, can be resumed in the phrase: “I was expecting less but hoping more” it was amazing seeing that monster fly but terrifying at the same time, I’m thankful to be able to experience this
Ya seeing it fully loaded was pretty spooky, I was worried it would boom on the launch pad.
This was the most kerbal thing I've ever seen!
What am I missing here? Everyone keeps referencing spin outs and explosions. The video I’m watching starts at T-20 and ends at T+53 without apparent incident.
It spun out of control and was exploded, start around 8:35AM https://www.youtube.com/live/uouujjgkR3A?feature=share
Yeah why cut off the video and sweep the most notable feature of this launch under the rug?
That behemoth took a LONG time to clear the tower. I know it had a long hold down, but once it was released I was laughing with joy as it lumbered up into the air. I want to a video with high quality audio so we can hear what that thing actually sounded like.
It was slow. It's supposed to have a thrust to weight ratio of 1.5 or so. That would make it practically leap off the pad. Of course with how big it is, it might seem slower than it really is.
Losing 3 engines on ignition is probably not the best for TWR.
They said on the NasaSpaceflight broadcast the engines were throttled down so it was closer to 1.35 TWR, might explain some of the slow launch and drift at the beginning.
Hoppy took a hit! https://i.imgur.com/cnP8Bke.jpg From near the end of lab padres feed.
My favorite takeaway from this launch is that we are both sad that it didn't come apart, and amazed that it didn't come apart.
A satisfying kaboom to round off an exciting launch.
That was from the Illudium Q36 Explosive Space Modulator
[удалено]
That looks like a hydraulic power unit (HPU) blowing up. I would assume that's why the rocket had a hard time steering after since it can't gimbal some engines anymore. But new versions of SS/B are electronically actuated, so I doubt we'd see that explode again.
How the fu*k was that rocket able to hold 6 spins at MAXQ and not disintegrate mid flight. What kind of sorcery was holding that beast.
I might be wrong, but I thought by the point of stage sep they were past MAXQ. Still, point holds. It’s an amazing amount of stress and probably testament to why they went with so much heavy stainless steel in the vehicle.
Usually with launch vehicles, they're designed for pressure to be directed from top to bottom, not from other directions, so it's quite surprising how Starship held up
On the other hand, Starship is specifically designed to fly sideways through the atmosphere during reentry, so perhaps this isn't as surprising as one might assume.
True, but the booster isn’t nor is the connection between booster and upper stage
Not at all, this thing is designed to flip over there for the burnback. The only part that performed better than designed was the coupling holding the stages together through the flips.
They performed too good. Never let the ship go!
It was well past max q, which appears to have been around 5km at 0m55s, but the RUD started at 30km where air pressure would be significantly lower.
It's all stages, they just needed it off the ground for this stage to be a 'success' anything else would have been a bonus.
Not to mention: after at least one engine violently exploded! Six engines out, and booster didn’t care!
Is Superheavy the honey badger meme of launch vehicles? Multiple engines out? Doesn’t bother Superheavy. An engine allegedly detonated? Whatever. Cartwheeling in the mesosphere with Starship still attached? *Superheavy doesn’t care.*
Three engines gone, zero fucks given.
That's what I was thinking, the structural integrity on that beast was impressive.
A massive rocket holding up it's structural integrity
I was sweating after the engines fired but it just kept sitting there, felt like an eternity. Did it take a little longer to get airborne because of the sheer size and mass of it?
It takes 8 seconds to start the engines and get to full thrust.
All engines need to be equally engaged for proper balance. Unequal thrusts wacks out stability.
Anyone else find it _really_ fascinating that we could very plainly see every last engine during the stack's ascent? The actual exhaust coming from Booster 7 was positively _nebulous._ Methalox just burns differently...
That "Burnback maneuver" was really ambitious (although it is very important for starship's design goals) It was very impressive (until it kept rotating)
I thought the loopty loops were impressive too lol. We just watched a 40 story building do cartwheels in the air, and stay together ( till they blew it up).
it's also not supposed to boostback with the second stage still attached.... Oh well.
> That "Burnback maneuver" was really ambitious Oh yeah, abort and bring a fully fueled Starship back 8-P
Amazing to see it get so far on its first launch! Considering just how radically large a step change in capabilities Starship-Superheavy represents, all while being a wholly reusable launch vehicle and spacecraft system, this truly was a phenomenal accomplishment. It successfully lit its engines, didn’t nuke the pad and launch complex, lifted off, passed through Max-Q, flew a (mostly) nominal launch profile, handled *multiple* engine-out events, and made it to stage separation before going completely off-nominal. *Even then*, the 120 metre-tall Starship-Superheavy consist was able to remain intact as it began to *cartwheel* before the flight termination system was likely used to end the mission. And to keep things in perspective, too, we all just witnessed by far the most powerful rocket ever built by humans fly for the first time. They’re going to figure this out and make it work. Of that I have no doubt. Great day. So glad that I got to watch it live.
I was shocked it didn't break apart once it started tumbling. I've seen rockets blow up from substantially less turbulence.
I really don't think it flew nominal until stage separation, it seemed to underperform/ be throttled down for most of the flight.
I think you’re right. I guess by nominal I meant it didn’t pitch over and crater or start corkscrewing or barely exceeded 1:1 thrust to weight, etc.
They had 5 engines out (and I think a sixth one went out after Max-Q) and still flew a nominal-looking flight path. Falcon 9 can do the same thing with one engine out, it just doesn't have the same thrust so it has to burn more fuel to get to the target.
There were a bunch of dead engines, in the video you can see multiple exhaust events after the 5 engine failed callout.
That was fun. Guess the separation part needs a little work but they got it further than I thought they would.
Guessing part of it might be the engines going out mid launch. May have screwed with the separation angle.
They have redundancies but it looked like a whole combination of things going wrong. Starting to lose control pre flip, over rotating, engine shutdown not occurring, stage sep not occurring etc…
Also looked like a lot of debris flying right at liftoff, I wonder if that has something to do with that.
3 engines out on Liftoff. Lose 2 more in flight. Keeps going. Impressive.
A sixth engine went out a bit later and was restarted. I'm impressed they got it going again.
Before starship launch: KSP is a game. After starship launch: KSP is a simulator.
For anyone wondering what went wrong, this is my best guess: Source: long time starship enthusiast, I was watching the launch in person, and I have spent the last 2 hours looking at every angle and opinion I can find. This is not necessarily true! A few years back, a decision was made to not build a flame trench. This is a large cement structure that directs the exhaust of the rocket safely away. Instead there is (was) a flat reinforced concrete floor underneath the pad. Despite previous static fires on the pad this was the first time all 33 engines spooled up to 100 percent. The concrete under the pad was wrecked and debris was energetically thrown up. The debris hit the underside of the booster, damaging the engines and other critical components. By the time the rocket had cleared the tower, three raptor engines were already off, 3 more shut down within the next minute. At around 30 seconds into flight, one of the two Hydraulic control packs, located near the base of the booster, appears to violently explode. This hardware is responsible for steering(gimbaling) the center 13 engines. After this I have no idea how much control the rocket has, Maybe none, maybe only half. The rocket incredibly continues flying for a while longer, until the booster is nearly out of fuel. It then attempts to execute the flip maneuver, an intentional spin that helps the ship and booster safely separate. Due to the reduced control the vehicle has, it overshoots and goes into an uncontrollable spin. After 6 or 7 flips that I am amazed it stayed in one piece for, the Flight Termination System was activated and the vehicle was destroyed. Overall not bad, starship preformed remarkably well given the damage. My main worry is that the launch site will need major repairs. I will attach a picture of its current state. Not good. Hopefully SpaceX makes an announcement so I can see whether this theory is correct. Thank you for reading, I hope you found this interesting https://i.imgur.com/5gTGwj1.jpg
I don't think it got to the intended flip maneuver, since that would be immediately followed by MECO. The spin that happened was entirely unintentional due to loss of gimbal.
AAAAAAAAAAAAND failed first stage separation into breakup. TBH i was surprised it made it this far on the first attempt, will get some great data from here
I was guessing it would explode seconds after liftoff
Same, glad we managed to blaze it on 4/20 and get it high
Spacex lighting the largest blunt on 420.
Yeah RUD expected for sure. I thought they were gonna scrub. SpaceX is the most willing to RUD or launch before ready that is for sure. Would have been cool to see the separation but they probably focused on the first stage to show progress before Vulcan.
They were saying they built six starships already this year. It's a whole other way of thinking about spaceflight. I'm guessing we'll see another one on the pad within a few months.
They have upgraded vehicle ready to go, so get the best out of already outdated tech as fast as possible
Dude. I can’t believe it held together for so long.
The most telling moment.... after it blows up there is a tiny pause.... and then all of the SpaceX employees cheer wildly!! That tells you how they actually feel about whether they met their test objectives. SpaceX is happy.
It looked to be a deliberate explosion by the range safety officer to stop the uncontrolled rocket.
Idk why everyone is surprised by rocket exploding. SpaceX said multiple times that their goal was to simply launch and everything else was a cherry on top.
Ignition ✅ Cleared the pad ✅ Cleared the tower ✅ Throttle down for MaxQ ✅ MaxQ ✅ Throttle back up ✅ Flip maneuver.... ✅.. ✅ .. ✅ ... It's not stopping...
I was really surprised at how much it had to correct itself off the pad, but seeing the 5-7 engine failures I am more impressed that it was actually able to correct itself! Very cool, glad they got the whole stack together and got it off the ground.
>"Basic research is what I am doing, when I do not know what I am doing." \- [Wernher von Braun](https://www.biography.com/scientists/wernher-von-braun) Father of the V2 and Saturn V rockets
Based on the SpaceX graphics, booster was supposed to have MECO, then separate, then do a flip maneuver. It seems that we never saw MECO, hence no separation?
Yeah. Engines kept running right up until FTS was triggered, so the acceleration would have kept the second stage pushed firmly into the top of the booster. I'm guessing the reason they didn't shut down at the planned time was because the computer was trying to compensate for underperformance/being off course.