For several years the 'big question' was whether SLS or Falcon Heavy would make it to orbit first. We know how that turned out and how little it mattered. Same here.

I find myself not caring about SLS's potential to be "first to orbit" because SLS's "first" flight is also intrinsically its last. a whole new rocket has to be built to then have *its* first (…and last) flight with astronauts aboard -- with the whole "proven technology" aspect out the window since major replacements / evolutions are part of the plan, at ENORMOUS expense

@Daneelro

8 ай бұрын

Um, this doesn't make any sense. SLS is a rocket to get a spacecraft out of Earth orbit, reusability makes little sense there. Starship is supposed to get things out of Earth orbit by refuelling, and the technical feasibility, much less economics, of that is still unproven.

Personally, I don't really care which of the two launches first. The first of the two rockets to launch a second time will be Starship though. In fact, Starship could potentially launch more than a half dozen times before SLS second launch.

@ddubzz_

2 жыл бұрын

Classic 🐢 and 🐇

@orbitron2330

2 жыл бұрын

@@ddubzz_ not really, the slow one is SLS and won’t ever catch up while starship being the fast one will always be faster than the competition.

@tfd5929

2 жыл бұрын

Very true

@draskuul

2 жыл бұрын

And all of those half dozen flights will probably still cost less than one SLS launch.

@nobodyhome2318

2 жыл бұрын

I read this and was like, what he said! I was thinking along the same lines.

Ooooh Don't forget the really exciting part SpaceX catching a starship and booster out of thin air. THAT is a guaranteed exciting moment.

@clayel1

2 жыл бұрын

its actually thick air bc they are at the ground level :D

Starship has a long way to go, but a very bright future. SLS not having any form of reusability, unfortunately, will not be a future player in the long term. Either way - super excited to see BOTH of these mega-rockets fly!

@paulmoffat9306

2 жыл бұрын

Also, the ENORMOUS cost of each SLS launch is it's downfall, with each launch costing about $2.2B+ (One estimate was $4.0B+) and some estimates place the number of launches as few as 4 to 6 ! And one SLS launch that was planned for the Europa Clipper has been officially moved to a Falcon Heavy launch.

While I applaud SpaceX for their speed in development and even starting everything from the ground on up and condemn the multiple SLS contractors for drawing every single penny they could out of the project through multiple years of delays and huge cost overruns, who gets to orbit first means very little. SLS is in it's final stage of production while Starship is little more than a shell with fuel tanks. SLS's first trip to orbit will also involve an orbit of the moon, not just earth (if it all works out), while SpaceX's initial test flight to space and orbit is simply a test bed flight with a crash into the ocean. Also, SpaceX development occurs differently than that of other current rocket builders. It does many live small tests of it's systems while boeing/Northrupt/ULA etc conduct multiple simulations and utilize designs based on well understood rocket dynamics and function (although the rocket system itself is highly inefficient with no reusable parts - except capsule). Musk is basically using the Apollo era development cycle with many different rocket prototypes all being physically tested until they get to the final design......like 1960's Mercury, Gemini and then Apollo methodology. My comment is NOT a slam on SpaceX. They have had massive development in just a few short years, developing everything from new engine types (raptor), to new rocket skin...the use of thin walled stainless steel vs the standardized use of aluminum, reuse and landability, new launch facilities and production facilities. SpaceX has had massive development and deserve a grand hurrah. I am simply pointing out that the SLS, although having never, ever flown is in it's finalized state. In theory, it's has full status to actually take men into orbit and go to the moon, orbit the moon and return within the next few months. SpaceX is a long way off from doing that.....but, will likely develop all the parts and functionality and procedures to do it in a whole lot less time than Boeing and Northrupt did in getting SLS up and running (and they didn't even have to develop new engines.....and they only had to do a partial redesign of the shuttle rocket and boosters).

@liamgriffiths9853

2 жыл бұрын

Cmon, It's a bit more than a shell with tanks. It's got some of the most advanced engines ever made, proven booster recovery tech scaled up from falcon 9, an already demonstrated propulsive landing system for the starship. The crash landing in the ocean is going to be just as impressive as sending a payload into a lunar orbit, it's a fullscale test of a potentially fully reusable rocket system.

@limiv5272

2 жыл бұрын

Take men into orbit? How about women?

@keyboardt8276

2 жыл бұрын

@@limiv5272 women will be prohibited

personally i dont think it matters which one "flies" first. reason behind my thought: the second starship launch will no doubt be months after the first, but how long will it take them to build another SLS?

@patrickunderwood5662

2 жыл бұрын

Artemis II currently scheduled to launch May 2024. Starship should have quite a few launches under its belt by that time.

@jamescobban857

2 жыл бұрын

There are two more SLS stacks under construction for Artemis 2 and 3. Artemis 2 is scheduled for 2024 and 3 for 2025. At $4.1 Billion per launch according to the NASA auditor, on top of the billions for development, the maximum cadence is once per year. By the time Artemis 2 launches Starship will almost certainly be launching at least once per month and of course is designed to launch multiple times per DAY.

@rocketcello5354

2 жыл бұрын

the difference is sls will fly crew on the next flight, but starship's 2nd will not

@jamescobban857

2 жыл бұрын

@@rocketcello5354 IMHO I think NASA is insane to risk human beings on essentially untested platforms. SLS is perhaps the most complicated mechanism ever created by humanity. It has MILLIONS of parts all supplied by the lowest bidder, and both SLS and Starliner are going to be carrying human beings after only ONE complete test each. True Starship will not be carrying humans on its second flight but SpaceX can carry out 100 test flights for the same $4.1 Billion dollar launch cost of Artemis 1! I do not believe SpaceX will perform 100 test flights of Starship before carrying a human payload mostly because SpaceX has learned a lot from the Falcon9 project and because they are spending Elon Musk's personal fortune, not $20 billion taxpayer dollars. True SpaceX will not put humans on the second flight of Starship. But at a modest monthly launch cadence over the two years between now and the NET May 2024 scheduled launch of Artemis 2 SpaceX will have launched 24 Starships. That is only 1/6th of SpaceX's current Falcon 9 cadence. That means it is technically possible that SpaceX could launch a human crew on Starship BEFORE SLS can. It is possible, although admittedly unlikely, that SpaceX could launch either Dear Moon or Polaris 3, which will send humans around the Moon, before Artemis 2.

@rocketcello5354

2 жыл бұрын

@@jamescobban857 The Artemis 1 mission is the test flight. But you are more educated on the subject matter compared to other stans, so thanks.

Regardless of which launches 1st, SLS represents 20th century spaceflight, Starship represents the future of spaceflight.

@Gnefitisis

2 жыл бұрын

Why do you have that thinking? SLS is the only rocket capable of getting out of the Earth's gravity well, without unproven orbital refueling.

@Firedraconian

Жыл бұрын

@@Gnefitisis unproven? How do you think they fuel the space station?

@Gnefitisis

Жыл бұрын

@@Firedraconian They send up Soyuz rockets that use their excess fuel to perform boost ups and/or use the remaining fuel in the other Russian segments. What, did you think there's like a space umbilical connected to the ISS magical space station engines? Get informed before you ask ignorant questions.

Great summary, either way summer 2022 will be amazing - not only we get 2 mega rocket launches but also JWST will start

@steveaustin2686

2 жыл бұрын

Plus up to 5 Falcon Heavy launches. The USSF-44 and USSF-67 launches will expend the center cores and try for double drone ship landings with the side boosters. USSF-44 has been delayed multiple times for payload issues, so it's kind of iffy.

@hitmaneoin

2 жыл бұрын

There is zero chance that Starship goes orbital this summer. And SLS only has a shot if things basically go perfect from now on, which we all know that they will not. Let's be honest...

@Jay-qs1ef

2 жыл бұрын

@@steveaustin2686 I can't wait for Falcon Heavy to launch again. They're really gonna do a double drone ship landing at once? That's amazing.

@steveaustin2686

2 жыл бұрын

@@Jay-qs1ef Apparently. Certainly will be interesting. I'm hoping I can get over to KSC for the Psyche launch in Aug.

what happened with the mic

6:00 The Air Liquid problem was not outside of NASA's control. Someone/a team managing ground systems should have done a full work-up of whether the vendor was able to supply the nitrogen as needed, with a system as "robust" as was clearly necessitated by the size of SLS. They know how to calculate cubic meters at KSC, I hope. I know the vendor routinely supplies the KSC pipelines with N2, but the size of the test, and the *expense and importance* clearly called for extra measures.

@Randyluck1

2 жыл бұрын

The plant is literally just outside the south gate on SR3. It's been there for years. It looks like it. There's no way anyone can tell me that they didn't know they weren't equipped to supply the nitrogen needed.

@steveaustin2686

2 жыл бұрын

As I understand it, they believed that it could support the SLS Block 1, just barely. They have wanted to expand the plant's capability, but that means shutting down LC-39A and LC-39B for a bit to do that. So they were waiting for a break in the launch cadence do so. Unfortunately, the gamble on just barely supporting SLS didn't pay out, so now they have to wait for an appropriate period to do the upgrade. A Starlink launch was done early this morning and apparently, a May 21st Starlink launch is the next LC-39A mission. Hopefully, they can complete it in that timeframe. .

@donjones4719

2 жыл бұрын

@@steveaustin2686 Thanks, very useful info. That addresses a lot of my complaints. Well, considering KSC ultimately controls the overall infrastructure and Pad 39A is only leased, they can certainly order the upgrade to be done and if it's not complete by May 21st, well, that delay is for SpaceX just part of doing business at a multi-user launch facility. No biggie.

@steveaustin2686

2 жыл бұрын

@@donjones4719 As I understand it, the Air Liquide problem only affects LC-39A and LC-39B. Starlinks can launch from SLC-40 and CRS flights have launched from SLC-40, so SpaceX has another pad available for the launches. But the cadence at SLC-40 is pretty much one after the other as well. Starlinks are likely to be bumped for other payloads if necessary. Hopefully, they can get it done between now and May 21st or worst case, by the Jun 7th CRS-25 launch.

@brettd3206

2 жыл бұрын

@@steveaustin2686 Would KSC be able to pass a full FAA study of its facilities or did they get grandfathered on environmental etc.?

LOVE THESE VIDEOS!

This was a great summary of the space race! Thanks

It'll probably end up like the race between SpaceX's Dragon and Boeing's Starliner.

@steveaustin2686

2 жыл бұрын

Hopefully not, as Orion is needed to get the crew to the Moon.

@jameswilson5165

2 жыл бұрын

@@steveaustin2686 Starship-Moonship will be crew-rated, just not from the ground to orbit. Once up there, it is probably NASA's backup to and on the moon.

@steveaustin2686

2 жыл бұрын

@@jameswilson5165 That's the problem, Lunar Starship is launched unmanned from Earth. It is also out of propellant once it leaves the Moon's surface and gets back to lunar orbit. The initial cadence for Starship for Artemis III is one Starship variant launched every 12 days (GAO pg 12). If Lunar Starship needs 10 flights to get to the Moon (GAO pg 27 & Musk), that will take too long to take crew to the Moon to follow behind Lunar Starship. So unless SpaceX matures Starship much, much faster than expected, Orion is needed for crew to get to and from the Moon. SLS is needed to get Orion to the Moon. Once Starship matures, it will likely replace SLS/Orion, even if crew need to be ferried to and from orbit on Crew Dragon and Starliner.

@jameswilson5165

2 жыл бұрын

@@steveaustin2686 I didn't say it was a perfect plan, most Backup Plans usually aren't. But as Elon would say: Fiddlybits.

@steveaustin2686

2 жыл бұрын

@@jameswilson5165 Per the GAO report denying the HLS complaints and Musk's response to that report, it looks like up to 10 Starship flights will be needed to get Lunar Starship to the Moon. From page 27 of the GAO report. [DELETED] is apparently at least a propellant depot from the context and SpaceX had the GAO redact that info. Added in Musk's payload update and he says that it is up to 8 Tankers depend on Lunar Starship's mass. My comments are in (). "SpaceX’s concept of operations contemplated ten total launches (down from 16), consisting of: 1 launch of its [DELETED]; 8 launches of its Tanker Starships to supply fuel to [DELETED] (down from 14); and 1 launch of its HLS Lander Starship, which would be [DELETED] and then travel to the Moon." IF [DELETED] is only a propellant depot, it seems silly to have the GAO redact that it is only a propellant depot, only to confirm it is a propellant depot from the context. I think [DELETED] is more than a propellant depot and I think it might be a crew transfer station to support capsules during a lunar mission. Neither Crew Dragon nor Starliner can fly on their own for as long as a lunar mission is expected to last. On the ISS, they are supported by the ISS, so can stay in space for up to 6 months. The ISS doesn't have the docking ports to host them though and it is almost certainly in the wrong orbit for a Moon launch. I think that is what [DELETED] will be able to do, is support the capsules during a lunar mission. Since Starship is projected to take a while to be man-rated for Earth launches and landings, sending up crew in capsules would be a way to get around that. So to replace SLS/Orion, you could start refilling [DELETED] with propellant again with 8 more Starship Tankers. Then you launch an unmanned Starship Ferry, which is a Lunar Starship without legs and the ring of landing thrusters. After it fills up from [DELETED], then you launch a Crew Dragon and Starliner to bring up 8 crew. One from each capsule stays on [DELETED] to babysit the capsules and do science in LEO, while the rest leave on the Starship Ferry to get to the Moon. Once at the Moon, 4 crew go down on Lunar Starship and the other 2 stay in orbit doing science on Lunar Gateway. After the surface mission is over, they take Lunar Starship back up and everyone takes the Starship Ferry back to LEO. They meet up with [DELETED] and transfer the lunar cargo to the capsules and a cargo Dragon. Then everyone comes back down to Earth on capsules. With the $2.94B HLS Option A contract being for 2 landings with up to 10 flights each, that puts a Starship flight at around $147M. So 9 flights to send the Starship Ferry to the Moon is $1.323B. A Crew Dragon is $300M based on the latest contract, a Starliner is $360M per the GAO, and a cargo Dragon is roughly $133M per its contract. You might need one more Tanker flight, if the [DELETED] needs to change orbital planes to meet back up with the Ferry, so that is $147M. That is about $2.3B, which is much less than the $4.1B the NASA IG laid out for SLS/Orion. The issue is launch cadence for Starship. Per the GAO report on page 12, a Starship variant will be launched every 12 days. That comes out to 108 days, which is longer than the 100 day loiter period for Lunar Starship in lunar orbit (NASA pg 9 Apr 2021 HLS Option A Source Selection Statement). So until Starship matures to about one launch a week, SLS/Orion will need to bring the crew to the Moon.

Why did the audio not turn out well on this one?

2:43 this video just dropped but already is outdated lol. I love this. Keep up the good work

Some of the most amazing footage I've seen of the big orange rocket for sure.

The more apparent question - which will be first to 5 flights... 10? 20? 50?

What would happen if SLS had a launch failure on Artemis I? Not that I'd wish this on them obviously, but what would that do to the timeline of the rest of Artemis, including crew rating the SLS launch stack and SpaceX's HLS using Starship?

SLS will be a spectacle and I am excited for that. However I do not support how it's funded and politically charged. Starship will be an even bigger spectacle with the landings and cadence. As nothing like it happens before. SpaceX has showed how it will prevail in the launch market by looking at launch statistics of this year or last year. Starship will will even outshine Falcon 9 in a few years and by the end of this decade we will look back at it's beginning in a similar fashion. As HLS Starship is only one landing, I can also seem them going more than once

@_reverse-psycho_855

2 жыл бұрын

You mean catching?

@davidbeales7390

2 жыл бұрын

I find the concept of Starship very reassuring, in that it is a scalable and practical concept for reducing risk for the continuation of life (mostly humanity of course). However, it is not finished, and engineering, logistical, and even political hurdles still remain. We should not "count our chickens before they are hatched", IMHO...

@listonheinz9103

7 ай бұрын

Those Starship “landings” sure are a spectacle to behold.

top notch small doco - well done NSF Team. You continue to delight me with these recaps of these historical days. 2050 is going to love this channel. Keep up the author acknowledgements

How do round rockets go into square space?

5:15 Somebody was feeling creative. haha!!

Loving these!

CONTEXT! These specialized vids help so much with that, thank you!!

Not remarked upon in this video, is that the SLS solid stacks that were completed on January 12, 2021 have a certification 'use by date' that expired on January 12, 2022, which means (by NASA's play book) are required to be de-stacked, inspected and re certified. NASA has in place, procedures that can extend the lifetime, but an August launch date will place it almost 8 MONTHS past due. What happens to the SLS program is there is a Challenger style malfunction on ascent?

good stuff! thanks

Really spared no expense on the audio with this one huh 💀

@donjones4719

2 жыл бұрын

Nice to hear from someone who's never had to deal with an equipment problem and get the job done anyway.

Thanks!

Well, I'm excited for Psyche anyway, that seems on schedule...

Hi, thanks for another great video :-) I feel the biggest difference between Nasa & SpaceXs' approach is each SLS is built on a one off basis, like each one is a prototype. SpaceX are developing both prototype Starships and working on mass production at the same time. That puts them so far ahead. Doesn't matter who launches 1st, SN15 has already won that battle!

Soooo looks like SLS won this race.

do we have any reason why the GSE tanks SpaceX build don't work for Methane? Were those tanks just bad or is there something about Methane storage that makes it more difficult than Nitrogen and Oxygen?

@KnightRanger38

2 жыл бұрын

I believe it was due to safety regulations relating to the methane tanks. Its possible that some of the state regulations were put in place after SpaceX had designed the Orbital Tank Farm but before it was completed.

@stanj7223

2 жыл бұрын

It's because the Texas Railroad Commission doesn't have a flippin' clue how to inspect a vertical methane tank. D'oh! Why a bleeping TRAIN commission gets to nix a SPACESHIP is utterly Texas. It also blows a hole in Abbott's line about doing everything possible to keep Starship in Texas.

@ThatGuyKazz

2 жыл бұрын

@@stanj7223 ahh gotcha and here I was foolishly thinking it might have something to do with an actual reason. That'll learn me, never assume a technical issue when a legal issue can ruin it just fine.

@climbingtiger

2 жыл бұрын

SpaceX - or worse, its building-design subcontractors - don't know how to follow run-of-the-mill well-documented building codes. Flammable liquids - in Texas, Flammable Liquid State Supreme, as well as all the OTHER states - require special handling w.r.t. firewalls, distance to other things, etc. And tall buildings with human-usable spaces (Highbay anyone?) require TWO sets of fire-safe stairs, fire-suppression plumbing, etc etc etc. One hopes that SpaceX has seen the light and retained better help.

Good video

When Starship flies successfully the SLS will be irrelevant.

@cameronh3260

2 жыл бұрын

Only sls can fly orion and starship is a long ways off from being human rated even if its successful on the 1st try

@kidsmithree

2 жыл бұрын

@@cameronh3260 SLS isn't human rated either, not by a long shot. If NASA were to impose the same standards on itself as it did Spacex, Orion wouldn't be carrying astronauts until after several unmanned successes.

@steveaustin2686

2 жыл бұрын

@@kidsmithree SLS has the Artemis I flight to be successful to get a crew rating. If you test the spacecraft enough in development, you can get a crew rating in as little as one unmanned flight. Crew Dragon had one unmanned flight before Bob and Doug flew on the Demo-2 mission to the ISS.

@kidsmithree

2 жыл бұрын

@@steveaustin2686 Many of the technologies of the human rated Dragon were tested first on the original Dragon cargo capsule. The SLS booster is also unproven. The falcon 9 had nearly 100 launches before it carried humans to space.

@steveaustin2686

2 жыл бұрын

@@kidsmithree SLS underwent extensive testing during development. Crew Dragon did not have do as extensive testing as Dragon 2 flew a couple of cargo missions. SpaceX was forced to freeze the Falcon 9 Block 5 design so that it could get a crew rating. There are multiple ways to get a crew rating. SLS took the extensive testing path and Crew Dragon did less testing, but a few flights first. Both work and both can fail.

I enjoy these narrated videos

Great videos, keep up the great work. Get a better mic for this guy, sounds like he's mission control

@Round_Slinger

2 жыл бұрын

No excuse for that with the amount of money you people are throwing at them during every livestream. IMO they are getting way too much.

@Jay-qs1ef

2 жыл бұрын

@@Round_Slinger Really? I think they keep using it to help other youtubers get their start in space news (like Adam Cuker's new raptor testing site setup). Not to mention the excellent 24/7 coverage, daily videos, and news site. I think the mic is the only problem I've ever had, and I can live with it if it means I get this in depth of detail every day. $1 per month isn't a lot, and I think they do well with the money they get. A bit harsh of a reaction for a bad mic (only time I've seen a narrated NSF vid with a bad mic).

@Flashlight005

2 жыл бұрын

I think it's his voice, not my favorite

When the start gun is held by the rule maker's, there is no race, the gun never gets fired

Starship has been off the ground under his own power

@delroyreid2678

2 жыл бұрын

Yes.

@Losttoanyreason

2 жыл бұрын

I love the SpaceX Starship program and see the SLS as a dead end but I am a realist when it comes to SpaceX. Not one booster has left the ground in a test flight. They really should have tested the booster separately. Also Starship while it had several successful launches only had one successful landing. I don't care how many simulations you run, it's practical tests that prove and verify what the simulation claim. If there is a failure I see a lot of SpaceX fans being disappointed.

Great video. The video touches on this but obviously, the business case, meta-engineering, financing, and manufacturing could not be more different. For an example of the meta-engineering difference, one rocket can go back to the high-bay one day and be back on the pad the next. The other one is a one-month turnaround just to move it. That is to say, iterative testing on the pad is possible with one and not practical with the other rocket. Iterative development, test, development test, etc is the only way to deal with the kind of complexity possible with modern software in systems like these rockets. So, choosing between the rockets is choosing a way forward into a new age of space travel or remaining trapped in the 1970s version of space travel.

good news, section 106 review was completed today

@steveaustin2686

2 жыл бұрын

That is good news. Down to just the Environmental Assessment section left.

Yay! Love these!

Awesome. Watching your videos several times! It's just one little favour I would like to ask you - could you please make outro music not so loud. Wakes me up every time))

*Race to Moon 🌙

With all due respect, I think working on your mic quality would be a good idea. It just stands out as distracting and I can't make it through the video even though the subject matter interests me. Rule of thumb is people will put up with bad video quality more than they will bad audio quality.

Which makes it to orbit 1st? I think SLS has an inside track due to the Environmental study holding testing of Starship back. I think if it was a level playing field, Starship would be smashing SLS. It matters not one bit. If SLS wins the race short term, it does succeed long term. I mean, the Wright brothers were 1st to fly. I don’t see many Wright airliners or military planes about. How did that 1st win work out? Just my opinion

@steveaustin2686

2 жыл бұрын

Eh, SpaceX is still apparently finishing up Stage 0, so it doesn't look like they are ready in the first place. Starship production is outpacing Stage 0 work.

There is not a race between NASA and SpaceX. NASA is a SpaceX customer and partner.

And New Glenn, unsurprisingly, doesn't even get a mention

Section 106 review is completed today

106 is now complete!

Aaaaand none of them launched this summer. Sigh. Your explanation of why SLS can do only a few attempts for each month was spot on. Let's hope something happens by the end of the year that is not an explosion...

@Irobert1115HD

7 ай бұрын

well musk managed to do two explosions as where the SLS may have worked better than the saturn V on first try.

A year ago I’d have said starship no doubt but now it’s not so clear

Remember when all B4 engines were installed in 12 hours?

@kidsmithree

2 жыл бұрын

Installed but not fully plumbed.

Successful launches SLS: 1 Starship: 0

The race???

Hi guys at NASA’s space flight ✈️ that was a great 👍 video of space x and SLS thy could maybe get into space before space x but with all there current problems I don’t think so David 🚀🇬🇧❤️🙏👍

Good news! The Section 106 review of the FAA PEA has been completed!!

@steveaustin2686

2 жыл бұрын

Shiny

@stanj7223

2 жыл бұрын

I'm actually kind of glad that I didn't add my comments to the draft PEA. I couldn't have said anything truly ground-breaking, and it'd have delayed the Environmental Assessment by another 15 minutes.

Really really good video but maybe switch microphone pretty please ?

There was a bit of repetition in this script. Could be tightened up.

SLS may very well be first, but that would not be on merrit...

I think with how many failures aboard SLS have happened even at the test stand that SpaceX will proceed with an orbital test launch before NASA

@TechNeo

2 жыл бұрын

Remember that SLS's issues are relatively minor, and happen to every new rocket. Starbase sadly still has a lot to get done before supporting an orbital launch. Thats not mentioning the potential need for a full EIS for starbase (which is typical for new launch sites)

@steveaustin2686

2 жыл бұрын

@@TechNeo SpaceX had an EIS in 2014 for Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy rockets. The FAA review is to see if Starship can be added to that orbital launch approval, without an updated EIS being needed.

@argoniastation

2 жыл бұрын

honestly, I feel it still could go either way. SLS has had minor setbacks and is using 50+ year old tech, sure...and SpaceX is designing all new hardware. it is still a toss up to me because how much money throws at Starship and how fast the iterations are coming.

@TechNeo

2 жыл бұрын

@@steveaustin2686 I forgot about that old EIS, though considering that basically everything referenced in it is no longer valid (not just the rocket, but all other site features), it might be the case that a new one is needed. The fact that this is right in the middle of a wildlife reserve may also strengthen the chances of a new EIS being necessary.

@steveaustin2686

2 жыл бұрын

@@TechNeo It was for Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy though. Starship has roughly 3 times the propellant of a Falcon Heavy, so there is a decent chance a new EIS won't be needed.

SLS might get there first but Starship is a better system for a sustainable space program.

I hope both are successful.

Definitely no race Starship is rapidly leaving everyone behind

However………doesn’t space x and Elon’s test times happen substantially quicker and easier than those of nasa on sls? The tortoise and the hare analogy? Just asking. However, above all, please keep up the sensational work NSF! Greetings from down under

Assuming launch licence work couldn’t start without the environmental assessment it will be around 3 month delay, so starship can’t launch till September regardless of if it’s ready. Sls will have two or three chances to launch before that. pity it would have been cool if starship made orbit closely followed by Orion making a Luna orbit.

My bet is on Universe Today hitting their supporter goal first :-)

SLS will fly first, it’s way ahead of Starship at this point but that’s no worry. I’d be surprised if Starship flies in the next 3/4 months. Also, for all those talking nonsense about the FAA; SpaceX are still working on Starship, they’re not at ‘Work stop’ because of the delayed FAA approval. Last I checked Artemis needs both SLS and Starship to be flying so it makes no sense to artificially hamper one over the other. Also if Elon had any small inkling this was the case everyone would know pretty quick. Hopefully both will be up and running by the end of the year and we can start moving forwards collectively.

@chrisduggan85

2 жыл бұрын

Ok so using your logic, you're saying that SpaceX should be doing nothing "work stop" if they are ready, right? Which means the millions in hired equipments and contractors together with SpaceX employees should just be loitering around wasteing time and money while awaiting for the FAA approval, instead of pushing ahead with the work by continued​ building and implementation of new designs, prototypes, tests, changes and innovations.

@ChrisUK27

2 жыл бұрын

@@chrisduggan85 - I'm saying they're not at 'Work stop' on Starship. Ship 20 has just gone off to the garden. The FAA review isn't preventing them from doing anything. All it's doing is giving some noisy KZreadrs and Twitter people something to moan about because it's spoiling their fun and they can't be bothered with 'Regulations'. This is a serious business and if you're putting something that size into the sky on a regular basis you'd want it to meet the regulations. Also I think I'm right in saying SpaceX originally took out the licence for launches of Falcon Heavy from Boca Chica, not BFR...Starship. I really want to see it fly but I know the regulators have to do their work.

@steveaustin2686

2 жыл бұрын

@@ChrisUK27 Well said. SpaceX did get approval for Falcon 9, Falcon Heavy, and experimental sub-orbital flights (Grasshopper at the time) back in 2014 at Boca Chica. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was done then for that at Boca Chica. The current review is about seeing if Starship can be added to that existing approval without needing another EIS. The Permitting Dashboard: Federal Infrastructue Projects has 5 sections to the FAA review. The first was completed in Oct 2021, second in Jan 2022, third in Apr 2022, and fourth in May 2022. So there has been continual progress and there is 1 section to go. Of course whining about the FAA gets clicks and KZread likes when your vid gets clicks.

SLS is mostly unusable and orders of magnitude more expensive. I understand the idea of spreading the risk and 2 separate systems, but to me cost is king as safe operation is built in to both systems.

Time to fix the problems big and little., and light these candles

they might both launch soon .. or maybe not .. but possibly ... sorta could ... maybe ... aaahhh just send them both asap ,... what could go wrong ?????

OMG! The sound isn't as good as usual, something's wrong with the mic... Geez, people here are spoiled. The narration is completely understandable and the audio levels are totally normal. Thanks for the review, with info I'd never heard of - especially the 3 days of actual launch window available to SLS out of a nominal 14.

@miroslavmilan

2 жыл бұрын

The sound was muffled. What’s wrong with pointing that out, so they can avoid it in future videos?

@donjones4719

2 жыл бұрын

@@miroslavmilan Nothing wrong with it basically. But some of the pointing out was done with some snark, and some were practically whining. Also, when I want to point out something that seems obvious I take a quick glance at the Comments to see if it's already been done. It's painful to see the same complaint made too many times. No snark directed at you, just at the whiners.

@kennethkho7165

2 жыл бұрын

@@donjones4719 Criticism is good as nothing is perfect.

@donjones4719

2 жыл бұрын

@@kennethkho7165 Criticism itself can be done well, perfectly, or badly. I'd just prefer criticism be done reasonably well, i.e. a couple of nicely worded comments, with a suitable number of thumbs up.

Take a look at SpaceX and SLS and what each had done, right and wrong. Whose hardware would you find most agreeable to park your carcass in??? No contest as far as I can see.

@riotintheair

2 жыл бұрын

If you wanted to live through either planned first test, then SLS/Orion is the only game in town, since Starship won't have any of it's on-orbit systems in place for its test as these mostly aren't available yet and won't be installed even where they are.

@stanj7223

2 жыл бұрын

Since Spaceship doesn't have a pressurized cabin, I think I'd have to go with SLS, much as it pains me to say it. Riding a suit all the way to the Moon and back would get very... messy. Diapers only hold so much poop.

As the same for Battle of Fontnoy "Messieurs les Anglais, tirez les premiers!" Who is winner?

The FAA who approved Boeing 737 max🤔

Maybe only 2 - 3 launches for SLS then it's gone. Maybe sooner once SS launches it's first cargo successfully. After that SS production will be the key & the florida launch site. If that comes about SLS is dead.

Water tank tech and new engines vs. NASA’s old shuttle engines government contracts. I have no idea who’s gonna be first.

Starship is probably a year out from orbit flight, maybe longer if they have to leave Boca, which may be a real possibility. If NASA gets SLS in shape it will be flying missions before a full Operational Starship flys.

@ckyownz9

2 жыл бұрын

I agree I think that's why elon has spent most of his time with tesla and twitter recently he knows that the SLUGS in government are going to delay them and he needs to bite his tongue in the meantime

highway and railway are worse for environment than rocket launch as compare to their purpose of uses and frequency of operation.. FAA must give SpaseX starship permission to test launch and even proper regular Launch(since, launch window for Mars is only after two year ).imo.

How long will it take NASA to fly SLS twice in a row and how much will it cost? another 20 years and another 200 Mil.???

@climbingtiger

2 жыл бұрын

How many millions do you think SpaceX has spent building and throwing away multiple rockets and discarding entirely ALL the Raptor 1 engines? Why do you think Starship "production" is any cheaper than SLS; there is NO viable Starship at the moment and, BTW, the SLS cost INCLUDES the launch "tower" - want to include that in Starship cost? There really should be an honest evaluation of the two that stops suggesting the "build paradigms" of either is "better" before we see the ACTUAL stats.

@twadswo

2 жыл бұрын

@@climbingtiger TAX PAYERS PAID FOR SLS Musk paid for Starship

@twadswo

2 жыл бұрын

I think we got the short end of the stick

@twadswo

2 жыл бұрын

@@climbingtiger If musk had millions of tax dollars and all of NASA 's resources he would probably already be on his way to mars

@twadswo

2 жыл бұрын

@@climbingtiger it was his money

Which one do you think will be human-rated first?

@steveaustin2686

2 жыл бұрын

SLS. It only needs one successful flight to get crew rated. Elon Musk has said that it would take hundreds of successful, operational flights before you could put people on board Starship launching from and landing on Earth. “'We’ve got to first make the thing work; automatically deliver satellites and do hundreds of missions with satellites before we put people on board,' Musk said, speaking Monday at the virtual 'Humans to Mars' conference" - CNBC Sep 2020 article

Looks like SLS will be rolling back out to the pad soon.

I agree with the general consensus. It's not a race and nobody cares who's first - but I hope Starship wins ;-)

Summary: SLS very old rocket. This problem brings very big problems with it. Also SLS launch costs over 1 billion dollars but Starship costs 2 million dollars. Lastly Starship is fully reusable but SLS is not. Which means Starship can be launched rapidly.

@iamaduckquack

2 жыл бұрын

I doubt SS will be 2 million right away. Maybe over time

@donjones4719

2 жыл бұрын

SLS will cost over $2 billion per launch, per government reports. That doesn't include any share of development costs. Elon has mentioned some low prices for future Starship launches, but they only apply when launches are occurring at a high frequency. Even by Elon's figures it'll be a while before the price gets down near $2 million.

@TechNeo

2 жыл бұрын

starship in It's current form will probably never cost 2 million per launch. I expect initial cost to be 100M+, and slowly going downwards to below F9 cost.

@steveaustin2686

2 жыл бұрын

Per the NASA IG, the first four SLS flights will be $4.1B each. Per the GAO report denying the HLS complaints and Musk's update of ~150t payload for Starship in response to that report, it will take up to 10 flights of Starship variants to get Lunar Starship to the Moon. The $2.94B HLS Option A contract is NASA's half of the project, so with 20 flights, that puts each Starship flight at around $147M to NASA. As others have said, the $2M figure is Musk's aspirational far future internal cost, so it will cost the customers more. Assuming that SpaceX can reach that price in the first place. Musk has said that he makes overly ambitious goals, so that they reach as far as they can, before settling on what they can do. He says that if you set goals too low, you will likely settle for too little. Even at $147M Starship can compete with the upper end of other launchers. If they get Starship down to $100M, it will compete even better. Getting to $50M, the Falcon 9 price, would be epic.

@Eselfar

2 жыл бұрын

@@steveaustin2686 Even if they sell Moon missions for $1B each (this including all the launches to refuel in orbit) it'll be far cheaper than the SLS as Starship can ship 100t+ of cargo to the Moon.

The major difference is SLS has permission to fly Starship does not.

SLS might fly. Maybe soon. But not for long.

Thank you and please fix the mic

Is sad that NASA does not believe in the KISS design system. They want it to be to complicated.

FAA is a convenient excuse. SLS and Starship is an apples to oranges comparison. Each does things the other cannot.

SLS, obviously. But then all SpaceX would be launching into orbit is an empty metal tube which is probably a decade away from being human-rated. The SLS in comparison will launch a human-rated vessel into orbit (not a sub-orbital flight) then perform trans-lunar injection, enter orbit around the moon, then return it to earth safely.

@chrisduggan85

2 жыл бұрын

And how pray tell will the SLS be launching a human rated vessel? Unless you are implying that the Orion capsule is human rated by double standards and not by the normal flight worthiness methods that NASA expects from others.

@steveaustin2686

2 жыл бұрын

@@chrisduggan85 Artemis I is the last test to crew rate SLS and Orion. Artemis II is planned to launch crew around the Moon on Orion via SLS.

#icps is the reason I missed sts119.. some twelve years ago.. #launchabortanomaly

@izanagisburden9465

2 жыл бұрын

Wtf? Where is the connection between ICPS and shuttle?

@batchint

2 жыл бұрын

@@izanagisburden9465 #icps is running on shuttle engines and have similar valve conditions..

Can someone buy this guy a better microphone? So many pops

@DrSpace-bz9mk

2 жыл бұрын

His microphone is kind of bad but it is unique.

Why dont they use the chopsticks for the booster?

SLS is definitely the way to go…plus it’s very inexpensive to launch, between 4-5 billion I believe. It’s a steal at that price.

@MTHEORYTECHNO

2 жыл бұрын

Hmm - I would check those numbers. Starship will be the lowest cost option to orbit, once it's in service. SLS is already technically, obsolete.

@karrotop

2 жыл бұрын

Sls cheaper per launch than starship? No way.

@patrickunderwood5662

2 жыл бұрын

Sarcasm, y’all.

WENORBIT?!

@Sam_Saraguy

2 жыл бұрын

When the English language is restored to its former glory.

I was gunna comment, but i guess I should pay my Verizon bill instead... wait, is this a paradox?

I am curious...how many tests and equipment failures did the Saturn 5 go thru before it launched Astronauts to the Moon? I mean really? it only took 10 years back then (from Alan shephard to Neil and co....what the H is the problem with these space companies today...maybe they should rehire the old NASA engineers (if they r still alive).

@StephenBoulet

2 жыл бұрын

Idk but i think it was because of the space race, because John F. Kennedy wanted the first humans on the moon. So NASA had all of this pressure into maling the Saturn V. But idk if this true

@StephenBoulet

2 жыл бұрын

Making*

@zarl5238

2 жыл бұрын

@@StephenBoulet idk???

when will NASA just admit that Boing picked their pockets and stole their shorts too-boot. seeing the simple build of starship shows that the old boy space industry lost the ability to build a rocket that doesn't include a gold mine to harvest first.

@steveaustin2686

2 жыл бұрын

SLS and Orion are cost-plus contracts and SLS is mandated by Congress. NASA Admin Nelson has said that cost-plus contracts are a plague on NASA. SLS/Orion and their sub-contracts are the only big cost plus contracts left. For almost 2 decades now, NASA has been moving to fixed price contracts and commercial programs. The first big fixed price commercial contracts were the two Commercial Resupply Services contracts in 2008 for Dragon and Cygnus to take cargo to the ISS. Commercial Crew contracts were awarded in 2014, Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) contracts started in 2019, HLS Option A was awarded in 2021, and Appendix P, HLS Option B, and Lunar Exploration Transportation Services (LETS) R&D/contracts started this year. ALL fixed price contracts.

@donjones4719

2 жыл бұрын

NASA has admitted it - indirectly, which is the only way they can. They've stopped using cost-plus contracts, afaik SLS is the last one left. And as Steve Austin points out, the NASA Administrator called big cost-plus contracts a plague on NASA a few days ago. Since SLS is the only such big contract, he called SLS a plague. Yes, it's ironic that Bill Nelson is the Administrator making the statement, since he backed SLS when he was a senator and was against the commercial programs when they started. But better late than never, and a reformed opponent can be a strong testimonial that an idea is sound. In fact, I think Bill is the ideal person to kill SLS. "Only Nixon could go to China." If Starship and SLS pan out the way we expect in the next few years, Nelson is the one who can figure out the details of how Congress can drop the ax, and work with them on it.

Buy this man a better microphone!!!

As much as I love starship, I do not see it going to orbit before SLS.

@iamaduckquack

2 жыл бұрын

At this rate it will be never then as SLS is falling apart it seems.

@TechNeo

2 жыл бұрын

@@iamaduckquack Small problems happen to every new rocket.You can't really say it's falling apart when SpaceX's potential orbital prototype (B7) just had its downcomer crushed in testing.

@johnvonludd1738

2 жыл бұрын

If not the FAA it would have already done it.

@kidsmithree

2 жыл бұрын

My sentiments exactly....