How SpaceX Reinvented The Rocket Engine!

How SpaceX Reinvented The Rocket Engine! The Space Race 338K subscribers Join Subscribe 23K Share Download Thanks Clip 1,005,489 views May 4, 2024 #Spacex #Mars #Space Get yourself a Displate deal using my link https://www.displate.com/spacerace or my discount code SpaceRace to access my special promo on all designs | 1-2 - 27% OFF 3+ - 37% OFF available until May 14th excl. Limited Editions, Lumino and Textra. Last Video: NASA Reveals NEW Lunar Starship! • NASA Reveals NEW Lunar Starship! ►Become a member today: / @thespaceraceyt ►Support the channel by purchasing from our merch store: https://shop.theteslaspace.com/ ► Join Our Discord Server: / discord ► Patreon: / theteslaspace ► Subscribe to our other channel, The Tesla Space: / theteslaspace Mars Colonization News and Updates • Mars Colonization News and Updates SpaceX News and Updates: • SpaceX News and Updates The Space Race is dedicated to the exploration of outer space and humans' mission to explore the universe. We’ll provide news and updates from everything in space, including the SpaceX and NASA mission to colonize Mars and the Moon. We’ll focus on news and updates from SpaceX, NASA, Starlink, Blue Origin, The James Webb Space Telescope and more. If you’re interested in space exploration, Mars colonization, and everything to do with space travel and the space race... you’ve come to the right channel! We love space and hope to inspire others to learn more! ► Subscribe to The Tesla Space newsletter: https://www.theteslaspace.com Business Email: sean@creatormill.com #Spacex #Space #Mars Transcript Follow along using the transcript. Show transcript Transcript Search in video 0:02 if there's one thing that sets SpaceX 0:05 apart from their competition in the 0:07 Aerospace industry it's the courage to 0:10 dream up crazy ideas that no one else 0:13 would even consider to be 0:16 possible if there's a second thing that 0:18 makes SpaceX a very special company it's 0:20 their ability to take those crazy ideas 0:23 and actually make them into a reality 0:26 and the starship's Raptor engine is a 0:29 perfect example of this innovation in 0:32 action the Raptor is more than just 0:35 another rocket engine it is the rocket 0:38 engine 0:46 reinvented let's start at the beginning 0:48 with the first production rocket engine 0:50 from SpaceX the Merlin we saw a few 0:53 different iterations of the Merlin 0:54 design as SpaceX progressed with their 0:56 initial Falcon 1 rocket testing the 0:59 Merlin 1C was the engine that powered 1:01 the first successful Falcon 1 launch and 1:04 went on to be used in the first five 1:06 flights of the Falcon 9 SpaceX is 1:09 currently using the Merlin 1D engine 1:12 across their full line of Falcon 9 and 1:14 Falcon heavy boosters the design of the 1:17 Merlin engine was a product of the 1:19 chaotic early days in the life of SpaceX 1:21 to have a private Tech startup company 1:23 from California enter into the field of 1:26 orbital rocket launches was outrageous 1:29 back in the early 2000s unprecedented no 1:32 one thought they would succeed and 1:34 therefore no one was investing any money 1:37 in the project Elon Musk was self- 1:39 financing the whole thing with his 1:41 Paypal Fortune which was a lot of money 1:44 but SpaceX was burning through cash as 1:46 fast as they were burning Rocket Fuel so 1:49 elon's mission statement for the Merlin 1:51 was to build a rocket engine as simple 1:54 and cheap as possible so what does that 1:57 look like let's talk briefly about how 2:00 rocket engine works just so we're all on 2:02 the same page the basic concept here is 2:04 actually not that hard to grasp inside 2:07 the main body of a rocket there are two 2:09 propellant tanks one is for oxygen the 2:12 other is for fuel the oxygen side is the 2:15 same for every kind of Rocket because 2:17 fire needs oxygen to burn this is like 2:20 blowing air into your campfire to 2:22 intensify the Flames to make oxygen into 2:25 rocket propellant you first have to 2:27 liquefy it you convert oxygen from a gas 2:29 to a liquid state by super cooling it to 2:32 a cryogenic temperature the boiling 2:34 point of oxygen is 2:37 83° C or - 297 F so at any temperature 2:42 below that it will stabilize as a liquid 2:46 it's pretty cool then on the fuel side 2:48 the Merlin uses a chemical called rp1 2:51 which is basically just purified 2:53 kerosene it's cheap and accessible and 2:55 is liquid at ambient temperature when 2:58 the rocket engine starts two pumps will 3:00 move both the oxygen and fuel at very 3:03 high pressure into the combustion 3:04 chamber where the two liquids are 3:06 combined and ignited and that combustion 3:09 is going to release a massive amount of 3:11 energy as the propellants burn and 3:13 expand to create pressure all of this 3:16 energy will exit the combustion chamber 3:18 through the throat this is like blowing 3:21 out a candle by pushing the air in your 3:23 lungs out through a small opening in 3:24 your lips you create a high pressure 3:27 inside your mouth and force the gas to 3:29 exit through a small opening then all of 3:32 that high pressure high temperature 3:34 combustion exhaust exits through the 3:36 nozzle where it expands from the size of 3:38 the throat to the size of the nozzle 3:40 opening this expansion actually 3:42 accelerates the exhaust to an even 3:44 faster speed than when it left the 3:46 throat the greater the expansion ratio 3:48 from the throat to the end of the nozzle 3:50 the greater the acceleration of the 3:52 exhaust this process converts pressure 3:55 into thrust the faster we can throw that 3:57 exhaust gas out of the back of the 3:59 nozzle the faster the rocket will move 4:01 forward every action has an equal and 4:04 opposite reaction in the Merlin engine 4:07 design those twin pumps for the fuel and 4:09 oxygen are powered by something called a 4:11 gas generator this is like a miniature 4:14 rocket engine with its own combustion 4:16 chamber and nozzle except instead of 4:19 pointing straight out the bottom this 4:21 mini engine fires directly into a 4:23 turbine now the pressure from the 4:25 combustion reaction is spinning a 4:26 turbine which is connected to a main 4:29 shaft that power ERS both of the main 4:30 fuel and oxygen pumps after the gas has 4:33 done its work of spitting up the turbine 4:36 the excess is vented out the side of the 4:38 engine through an exhaust pipe this is 4:40 what we call an open cycle gas generator 4:43 and this design goes all the way back to 4:45 1944 and the first longrange ballistic 4:48 missile ever created the German V2 4:51 rocket so when Elon asked for the 4:53 easiest and cheapest rocket engine 4:55 possible this is exactly what he got now 5:00 imagine being able to see this 5:02 incredible view of outer space through 5:04 your window every day I can't offer you 5:06 a spaceship but I do have the next best 5:09 thing display while we continue to 5:11 explore the wonders of the universe I'm 5:13 going to tell you how to bring them into 5:15 your own home with display's massive 5:17 collection of stunning images from outer 5:19 space displate is a unique metal poster 5:22 designed to capture all your passions we 5:25 just picked up a collection for the 5:27 office that shows everything from the 5:29 starship launch to the Canyons of Mars 5:32 there are over 2 million artworks 5:34 available in the display catalog you can 5:36 choose from new original designs or 5:38 officially licensed images from your 5:40 favorite sci-fi it doesn't matter if 5:42 your team Star Wars or Star Trek 5:44 displate has something that suits your 5:46 style how could this possibly get any 5:48 better well magnets displates unique 5:52 magnet mounting system is toolfree safe 5:54 for your walls and super quick 5:57 everything that you need to magnetically 5:59 Mount Your system is included in the Box 6:01 no drilling no holes no frustration now 6:04 you can swap your displates anytime you 6:06 want simply take off your metal poster 6:09 and slap another one on go to www.d 6:12 display.com sspace or use my code Space 6:15 Race to access my discount this is 6:17 available for one week only so do it 6:20 today the Merlin engine continues to be 6:24 a fantastic product for SpaceX right up 6:27 until this day and it will probably 6:29 continue on like that for several years 6:32 but when it came time to begin 6:33 development on the next generation of 6:35 SpaceX vehicle it was going to require 6:38 the next generation of SpaceX Engine 6:42 with the Starship Elon Musk had a new 6:44 mission statement for his engineers 6:46 build the most complex rocket engine 6:48 ever made give it the highest thrust to 6:51 weight ratio of any engine in existence 6:53 and power it with a new rocket fuel that 6:56 no one has ever used before so the time 6:59 to just fall back on classic designs 7:01 from the 20th century was now long gone 7:05 this was time to reinvent the rocket 7:07 engine so let's start with the new fuel 7:10 source instead of kerosene the Raptor is 7:12 now burning methane Just Like Oxygen 7:15 methane needs to be liquefied at a 7:17 cryogenic temperature to make it into a 7:19 suitable Rocket Fuel so that adds an 7:21 extra layer of complexity to the system 7:24 but it's worth the trouble let me 7:26 explain kerosene is a longchain 7:29 hydrocarb carbon which means that it is 7:31 very difficult to fully combust and 7:33 convert into gas you're going to end up 7:35 with a lot of solid matter Left Behind 7:37 as a byproduct of the combustion even 7:40 inside an environment like the 7:42 combustion chamber of a rocket that 7:44 leftover carbon solid is what we would 7:46 typically refer to as soot just black 7:49 dust and the same as the inside of a 7:51 chimney that soot has a tendency to 7:54 cling onto the inside of a rocket engine 7:56 and cause a buildup known as cing now 8:00 since a typical rocket engine goes 8:02 straight to the bottom of the ocean 8:03 after being used once that typically 8:06 doesn't matter but in a reusable engine 8:09 like the Merlin that cing all needs to 8:11 be scrubbed out in between launches and 8:13 that's just not going to cut it with the 8:15 Rapid reusability schedule that Elon has 8:18 in mind for Starship he wants these 8:20 things launching multiple times per day 8:23 methane is mostly hydrogen with one 8:26 single atom of carbon for every four 8:28 atoms of hydrogen so it's pretty easy to 8:31 fully combust that carbon and leave 8:34 nothing behind as a byproduct for 8:36 example if you have natural gas in your 8:38 home that's almost entirely methane and 8:40 you can burn it all day in your furnace 8:42 or stove without having to worry about 8:45 carbon residue so that's fuel now how 8:48 does the internal system of a Raptor 8:50 engine compare to the old Merlin the 8:53 design of the Raptor is called a full 8:55 flow staged combustion cycle and it's an 8:58 exceptionally complex layout of pumps 9:00 turbines and plumbing let's go back to 9:03 our engine diagram in the Raptor cycle 9:05 the liquids move from the tanks to the 9:08 main pumps and then directly into a pair 9:10 of gas generators both the fuel and 9:13 oxygen hit their own individual turbines 9:15 so unlike every previous engine which 9:18 has used a single turbine either on the 9:20 oxygen side or in rare cases the fuel 9:23 side the Raptor is the only Engine with 9:26 dual gas turbines now instead of 9:28 everything rotating on one main shaft we 9:30 have independent turbines and pumps for 9:33 each tank when the cryogenic liquid 9:35 reaches these turbines the first thing 9:37 it will encounter is a pre- burner 9:40 that's a miniature rocket engine and the 9:42 pre- burner combusts the liquid just 9:44 enough to transform it into a gas but 9:47 since neither the oxygen or the methane 9:49 can combust on their own there needs to 9:51 be a cross connection between the two 9:53 pre-burners that allows a little bit of 9:55 oxygen to join the methane flow and a 9:58 little bit of methane to join the oxygen 10:00 flow once combustion is achieved the 10:03 exhaust gas is blasted into the turbine 10:05 housing where it spins the blade the 10:07 turbine blade spins the pump and that 10:09 sends our now gaseous propellants into 10:12 the combustion chamber at extreme 10:14 pressure but wait a second if the 10:17 turbine spins the pump and the pump 10:18 sends the liquid into the turbine then 10:20 how does the process get started in the 10:22 first place well SpaceX uses equipment 10:25 on the launch Mount to externally spin 10:27 start the turbines this is why the 10:29 Starship launch Mount is considered to 10:31 be a stage zero for the main rocket it 10:34 is integral to the successful ignition 10:36 of the booster two things to note here 10:39 number one this system has no exhaust 10:42 pipe for the gas to escape after the 10:43 turbine that's why we call the Raptor a 10:45 closed cycle as opposed to the Merlin's 10:48 open cycle so in a raptor all of the 10:51 pressure from both of the gas generators 10:53 is held inside the system making this an 10:55 extremely high pressure operation this 10:58 is also another area where methane 11:00 shines as a clean burning fuel source 11:03 because we are not venting the exhaust 11:05 from the pre-b burner if you tried this 11:07 with kerosene fuel the soot would very 11:09 quickly build up inside the system and 11:11 ruin everything number two there is no 11:14 direct path from the fuel or oxygen pump 11:16 to the combustion chamber that means all 11:19 of the methane and all of the oxygen 11:21 have to pass through a pre-b burner 11:23 before they reach the chamber this is 11:25 why we call the Raptor cycle full flow 11:27 staged combustion so now we have both 11:30 our oxygen and methane exiting their 11:32 turbines as very hot and very high-press 11:35 gases and that gas on gas reaction when 11:38 they hit the combustion chamber is going 11:40 to produce the most efficient combustion 11:42 possible significantly more energy is 11:45 going to be generated by gas on gas than 11:48 by liquid on liquid Elon Musk claims 11:50 that this reaction is over 99% efficient 11:54 the maximum that physics will allow Elon 11:57 says that only God himself could 11:59 possibly do a better job at combining 12:01 molecules than the Raptor combustion 12:04 chamber now if that all sounded very 12:06 complicated that's because it is it's 12:08 rocket science after all Elon has 12:11 referred to igniting the Raptor engine 12:13 as a delicate dance between the fuel 12:15 system and the oxygen system everything 12:18 is interconnected and everything affects 12:20 everything else so if anything goes 12:23 wrong or even if the methane and oxygen 12:25 cycle gets even slightly out of sync 12:28 with each other then the whole engine 12:30 will explode or at the very least parts 12:33 will melt so we know how the Raptor does 12:36 what it does let's talk about what all 12:39 that means for the performance and power 12:42 of this engine the Raptor is a 12:45 relatively small engine that produces a 12:47 relatively massive amount of thrust the 12:50 current Raptor version 2 is creating 230 12:53 metric tons of thrust at sea level this 12:56 is not the most powerful rocket engine 12:58 that title goes to the F1 engine that 13:00 lifted the Saturn 5 rocket it had more 13:03 than twice the thrust of a Raptor but it 13:05 was also an absolutely humongous engine 13:09 that you could park a Jeep inside of by 13:11 comparison the Raptor is super compact 13:14 at 3 m tall and 1.5 M wide at the nozzle 13:18 this allows SpaceX to pack 33 of them 13:21 into the 9 M diameter booster raptor is 13:24 much smaller than a close equivalent 13:26 such as the rs25 engines that powered 13:29 the space shuttle and have also been 13:31 adapted to the SLS Moon rocket but the 13:33 rs25 only produces about 1990 metric 13:37 tons of thrust so Raptor has an 13:40 unmatched power to weight ratio the 13:42 Raptor weighs in at just 1,600 kg while 13:46 the rs25 is nearly 3200 kg and Raptor 13:51 accomplishes this by running the 13:53 combustion chamber at significantly 13:55 higher pressure than any other rocket 13:58 engine in the world the Raptor 2 chamber 14:01 pressure is currently 300 bar which 14:03 converts to about 14:05 4,351 lb per square in for comparison 14:09 the old Merlin engine chamber pressure 14:11 is down at around 100 bar remember that 14:14 the rocket engine uses the throat and 14:16 the nozzle to convert pressure into 14:18 thrust so more pressure means more 14:21 thrust Elon Musk says that the work 14:24 going forward on the Raptor design will 14:25 be primarily to make the engine more 14:28 simplified and therefore cheaper and 14:30 faster to produce this comes back to one 14:32 of elon's favorite sayings the best part 14:34 is no part which is at the core of his 14:37 first principles philosophy the steps 14:40 that Elon follows when he's designing 14:42 something are to first question the 14:44 constraints and requirements and make 14:46 them less dumb AKA don't follow any rule 14:48 that doesn't make sense then second 14:51 delete any part of the design process 14:53 that isn't necessary if you aren't 14:56 forced to put back at least 10% of the 14:58 things that that you deleted then you 15:00 didn't delete enough step three optimize 15:04 step four accelerate step five automate 15:07 and we can already see that in action 15:09 with the transition from raptor 1 to 15:11 Raptor 2 there are significantly fewer 15:14 Parts visible on the new engine Elon 15:16 says that he wants to delete all of the 15:18 fiddly bits from the engine that means 15:20 integrating more of the small pipes and 15:22 wiring into larger conduits and 15:25 replacing bolted fanges and solid welds 15:28 Elon says that by integrating more 15:30 components of the engine they can 15:31 actually remove the shrouds which are 15:34 essentially protective heat shields 15:36 obviously removing anything from a 15:38 rocket ship design is going to make it 15:40 lighter and cheaper which is absolutely 15:43 critical for sustainable space flight 15:46 this process will also continue to make 15:47 Raptor cheaper and more production 15:50 friendly which is the ultimate main goal 15:53 you may wonder why do they need so many 15:56 engines if the rocket is going to be 15:57 fully reusable well we've got to think 16:00 longer term here that's where elon's 16:02 head is at his end goal with Starship is 16:04 to make these Rockets as common as jet 16:07 airliners are today a fleet numbering at 16:10 least 1,000 ships or more these ships 16:13 would be in constant operation for 16:15 Transit between the Earth and Mars the 16:18 Earth and the moon or even using the 16:20 ship as a point-to-point transport on 16:22 the Earth itself the endgame of the 16:25 Starship is to become one of the most 16:26 important vehicles ever created in human 16:29 history this is right up there with the 16:32 first sailing ships that crossed the 16:33 ocean and connected the globe the 16:36 Starship can connect the solar system The Space Race 338K subscribers Videos About X Discord Facebook Patreon Shop the The Space Race store Excitement Guaranteed Mug $14.95 Fourthwall Excitement Guaranteed T-Shirt - White $35.97 Fourthwall The Space Race Logo Dad Hat $24.95 Fourthwall The Space Race Logo T-Shirt $38.01 Fourthwall The Space Race Logo Hoodie $39.95 Fourthwall The Tesla Space Logo Dad Hat $24.95 Fourthwall 1,168 Comments rongmaw lin Add a comment... Pinned by The Space Race @TheSpaceRaceYT 5 months ago Get yourself a Displate deal using my link https://www.displate.com/spacerace or my discount code SpaceRace to access my special promo on all designs | 1-2 -> 27% OFF 3+ -> 37% OFF available until May 14th excl. Limited Editions, Lumino and Textra. 52 Reply 3 replies @MoempfLP 5 months ago “Everyone knew it was impossible, until a fool who didn’t know came along and did it.” — Albert Einstein 1.3K Reply 22 replies @AM-tu1rc 5 months ago I'm an engineer on Starlink and I always get lost when talking to my colleagues who work on Falcon and Starship. This really helped out! 885 Reply 48 replies @MosesMatsepane 4 months ago What people don't appreciate about Engineering at this level is the insane amount of tools, modelling, Simulation, mathematics, physics, and software engineering(not the cute app stuff, real software engineering) involved. Engineering and Physics can be borderline Magic at the highest levels, where the practitioners are blown away and marvel at their own creations. 226 Reply 5 replies @mkoronowski 2 months ago In the past, I had the privilege of working for a leading turbomachinery consulting firm located near Boston. As an aerodynamicist specializing in turbomachinery, I take great pride in my contributions to early aero-thermo performance maps, required in the cycle analysis of this and other innovative rocket engines under study at that time. The period was marked by significant advancements in turbomachinery technology, including Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD), structural analysis, and systems analysis. This confluence of this technology spurred these ambitious projects. As I reflect on those times, I extend my best wishes to all the companies rising to conquer the challenge. May they continue to push the boundaries of what’s possible. 56 Reply @jdjr3640 3 months ago “If you didn’t have to put back at least 10% of what you removed, you didn’t delete enough.” WORDS TO LIVE BY 199 Reply 7 replies @foxmccloud7055 5 months ago Now, SpaceX has reinvented the spacesuit. 185 Reply 13 replies @AlexandruVoda 4 months ago (edited) 6:53 Correction, SpaceX were certainly not the first to use methalox as a propelant (they are the first at the scale of Starship). At the very least, NASA's Project Morpheus is a precursor for both propulsive landing and for use of methalox. RS-16 and RD-0169 are also methalox engines that predate SpaceX's Raptor. The Full Flow engine however is indeed a world first by SpaceX AFAIK. 100 Reply 13 replies @TheMightyToshibaLad2012 4 months ago Correction: the most powerful rocket engine is the Soviet-built RD-170(has 4 chambers). The F1 is only the most powerful single-chambered engine. 146 Reply 34 replies @PaulCarl-q5l 1 month ago There is only one corner of the universe you can be certain of improving, and that's your own self 6 Reply @sibisanjay 5 hours ago 12:26 You do what you gotta do! I will Graze no matter how big the flare is 😎😎😎 1 Reply @bournejsn 4 months ago So relieved when you started from the Merlin engine and not the beginning of Rocketry LOL phew! 23 Reply @roberts.5790 2 weeks ago YES! I like the philosophy of not being limited by nonsense. Reply @TheNobbynoonar 4 months ago SpaceX did not reinvent the rocket engine-they have made big improvements to existing rocket engine technology and deserve the credit given to them. 130 Reply 42 replies @philip8201 5 months ago The voice is back! 158 Reply The Space Race · 8 replies @alexdylan04 5 months ago THANK GOD UR VOICE IS BACK 55 Reply @kmovaffagh 3 weeks ago You can say whatever you want, the man is a genius. Reply @ΔΗΜΗΤΡΙΟΣΓΕΩΡΓΑΝΤΑΣ-χ2θ 5 months ago Thanks GOD!!!! THE VOICE IS BACK!!!!!!❤ 18 Reply @chavdarnaidenov2661 5 days ago SpaceX has invented Space and X. Only SpaceX and Chuck Norris can divide by zero. Reply @weed...5692 4 months ago 9:16 "Unlike every previous engine, which had used a single turbine [....], the Raptor is the only engine with dual gas turbines" - but the Soviets were the first to do that. Most people watching space documentaries have seen that documentary - "The engines that came from the cold", about soviet closed-cycle rocket engines. 42 Reply 4 replies @aristoclesathenaioi4939 6 days ago If Starship needs a "starter motor" to get the turbines started then a Starship needs special launch pad. You might be able to land on a wide range of surfaces, however taking off again will require special facilities. Reply @muhammadwibisonojanuar7793 1 month ago I hope that Space X creates rotating detonation engine 3 Reply @pretty_birb__ 13 days ago (edited) My dream company. Studying for engineering, mechanics, and physics hoping one day I can make it and be a part of the team. Reply @maxheadrom3088 4 months ago Next week: how Americans reinvented the ball and created a game played using the hands and named it "football"! 19 Reply @BOWUNCE6126 3 weeks ago if it’s designed to be that important to space travel then it would be almost impossible to replace Reply @SLane249 4 months ago I was always confused about open/closed cycles and full flow. Your explanation has helped me understand. Thank you. 10 Reply 1 reply @peterkim2638 1 month ago SpaceX is the one of greatest and latest example of private sector's superior performance and results over Government driven projects. 2 Reply @adam_belounis. 5 months ago Can't be more exited , what a wonderful time to be alive ❤ 6 Reply @SaboStyle 1 month ago I didn't know about your channel. This is pure gold!!! Reply @DaT0nkee 4 months ago Actually Raptor originally was designed as a hidrolox engine, they switched to methane for economic reasons. As well as the rest of the industry. 4 Reply @zqwas6306 9 days ago Time to sign up for aerospace ! Reply @im_agine852 5 months ago That was f'n GREAT. Thanks 15 Reply The Space Race · 1 reply @SkyWriter25 1 month ago @12:25 Super powerful rocket engine blasting away. Cow: I'mma eat this grass. 🐄 2 Reply 1 reply @71degrees 4 months ago They aren't crazy ideas. They are just ideas. But, most humans don't have the backbone to follow thier dreams, they play it "safe" (whatever safe is) 6 Reply @FinleyBailey-e4j 2 months ago Everything will be fine and you will shine like a rising star, achieving great success and wealth Reply @TechTips437 1 month ago Respect for Elon just went even higher 3 Reply 1 reply @johnnym6700 1 month ago The new rocket motors are like giant Bunsen Burners! Reply @nicholashenning9034 4 months ago You got your voice back 5 Reply @adamgrundy4327 4 months ago the amazing part is the raptor 3 which is still in testing and not on starship yet has reached up to 350bar. its amazing how much they are improving it and at an incredible speed. 1 Reply @CyberSamurai4Life 5 months ago Well done. One small comment. Use of the term fuel would be better served with the term propellant 5 Reply The Space Race · 3 replies @Computeraidedautomation 3 weeks ago SpaceX has really pushed the boundaries of rocket technology! Their work with reusable engines and innovations like the Raptor engine's full-flow staged combustion cycle are game-changers for space exploration. Reply @MickHenry-p9y 1 month ago Always bear in mind that your own resolution to succeed is more important than any one thing 3 Reply @jamie0 7 days ago 12:26 Cows just eating grass while a f'n rocket engine blasting just a few hundred yards away. 😂 Reply @anthonylaiferrario 4 months ago One quick correction. Raptor doesn’t require stage 0 spin start support. We see all stage 2 raptors start in flight and we see a number of stage 1 raptors restart in flight 5 Reply 2 replies @271828epe 1 month ago Love this explanation Reply @Intellistan 4 months ago Outstanding production. Absolutely awesome 5 Reply @DouglasHenrietta 1 month ago There are no limitations to the mind except those we acknowledge. 2 Reply @johnstewart579 5 months ago Thank you for this educational video. Keep up the good work 8 Reply @rumbepack 2 months ago The raptor can definilety relight without a tower in fact is a absolute design necesity for starship as a concept to work. Reply @ballerdoc 5 months ago I actually find the guy's voice quite similar to yours . Taking some time off might be beneficial; people often respond negatively to change, so it's important to allow things to settle. The speaker just needs to refine his delivery a bit more to sound less ai-ish. 18 Reply The Space Race · 3 replies @2kalubafak404 1 month ago (edited) Albert Einstein: “Make things as simple as possible, but no simpler.” Only do what is necessary and sufficient. Reply @Randommemers 5 months ago Well constructed video ❤ 14 Reply The Space Race · 1 reply @andriescorneliusnienaber 1 month ago Great episode Reply @PhilfreezeCH 4 months ago 13:15 including the engine bell in the size comparison is a super weird move. The RS-25 also operates in space and just needs a larger engine bell than the first-stage Raptors. The second stage Raptors are also bigger. 3 Reply @davivify 2 months ago It's amazing that the Raptor can withstand the pressures it does considering it is largely a 3d printed part. You'd think cast-in-place would be stronger. Reply @The-KP 4 months ago It doesn't matter how efficient your engines are when just getting a ship to the next object in space multiples your mission complexity and raises your disaster risk by two orders of magnitude. One of the missing terms to the Starship equation, in this video, is how much fuel is needed to power your rocket on the mission for which it was designed? A dozen Starship tanker trips, it turns out. The Starship system offers the process for determining just how large a superheavy launcher can be and still be reliable, but you cannot change any of the variables in that equation! 33 engines, one large (and getting larger) ship, and a whole lot of hope that it will be not explode once people are onboard 5 Reply 1 reply @civicdude0009 2 months ago That actually explains a lot. Reply @MBSfilms77 5 months ago (edited) I feel really bad about the feedback (including mine) on the last video about thinking that guy’s voice was AI 24 Reply The Space Race · 1 reply @Mike20464 1 month ago Great video! Thank you Reply @nealkonneker6084 4 months ago I am curious why the Raptor isn't bigger. Fewer larger engines would seem to reduce the complexity, fewer parts to fail. 33 engines on the starship just seems like asking for trouble. 17 Reply 11 replies @ToddEugene 1 month ago What lies behind us and what lies before us are tiny matters compared to what lies within us. Reply @pleb1985 3 months ago (edited) Gonna say it even though someone else already has, however oxygen is not the only feasible oxidizer that the rocket industry or combustion in general has taken advantage of. The most notable ones that have been tested are the oxides of nitrogen (eg DNTO), oxygen as mentioned in the video, and fluorine. A reducing agent can burn with anything as long as there is free oxygen or a free halogen for it to react with, and by free i don't mean diatomic molecules of only the element, i mean still able to react with other substances regardless of other chemical bonds within the respective molecule. 6 Reply 2 replies @damarismaldonadorivera5037 1 month ago SOOOO BEAUTIFUL!,TO SEE ALL HIS HARD WORK, PERSEVERANCE & FINALLY COMING TO FRUITION. KEEP GOING✨️ Reply @justinschnepf 2 months ago Expect Blue Origin was first (Jan 2024) to use LNG/LOX engines (on ULAs Vulcan) to put a payload into orbit. 4 Reply 1 reply @larrymondello8475 1 month ago Thank you Reply @bazoo513 4 months ago 0:08 - I beg to differ. It's not that those "crazy ideas" were thought impossible, or haven't been tried before - its that other companies stuck to easily to the conventional wisdom that they are not economically viable. 8 Reply 1 reply @nikolatasev4948 2 weeks ago The Raptor can't be started only from the launch stand, it needs to be restarted multiple times - for the boostback, landing, for the second stage. The launch can save the mass for some of the engines - the ones which will not restart. It saves some mass, but the self-start parts still need to be designed. Reply @kennylandro5350 5 months ago Good video, welcome back ❤ 6 Reply @troyjean9850 1 month ago THANK YOU!! Amazing piece of information 😊 Reply @selectedvideos6180 4 months ago I believe this closed cycle engine is not new. The Soviet/ Russian RD180 was a closed cycle rocket engine designed in the 70's or 80's. 34 Reply 19 replies @MyEthan1998 4 months ago We feel the same way as we did when the Wright brothers created the first air plane. Difference now is that we know the impossible can be done when we try hard enough. 2 Reply 1 reply @DansHobbies 5 months ago easily the best explanation i have seen. 6 Reply @niu9432 3 weeks ago Starship can become a weapon. Reply @uncleal 4 months ago The de Laval nozzle is a thermodynamic thing of divine beauty. Appreciate a rocket "engine" from its elegant thermodynamics. BTW, "kerosene" That was naphthalene, a high-melting solid and perhaps the worst class of fuel imaginable (including massive loss of internal energy via 4n+2 aromaticity, plus graphitization). CH4 is hydrogen with a built-in supercompressor. All the fun is in the footnotes. 5 Reply @johnstraley9057 3 months ago Educational, to say the least. Reply @zam6877 4 months ago Great explanation Simple, so not burdened with alot of terminology and hitting all the main introductory points Thanks 4 Reply @matheiuss9760 5 days ago So they basically said "put a turbo on that thing!" Reply @TimRobertsen 4 months ago (edited) 13:03 - The F-1 had a bit more than twice as much thrust:p About 680-790 metric tons. It had all the tons of thrust:p Credit given where credit is due;) And, the RS-25 had an efficiency/specific impulse of around 450s, which is unmatch by any rocketengine ever produced/used. The F-1 and the RS-25 are both unmatch in their domain. The Raptor is an incredibly good mix of power and efficiency :) 15 Reply 4 replies @pigslefats 1 month ago Excellent explanation Reply @Pocketkid2 4 months ago This is a most excellent video! It is simple and visual and has enough detail that an engineer such as myself who appreciates science but does not know that much about rocket technology can appreciate what is going on at SpaceX! 5 Reply @Martin-ld3wn 3 months ago Worth mentioning that the main motivation for methane is that, unlike kerosene, you can produce it on Mars (using the Sebatier reaction) Reply @gamereditor59ner22 4 months ago Thank you for the information and keep it up! 4 Reply @doncney 1 month ago This is such an amazing video! THanks! Please don't use the shifting cutting transitions tho. It was quite distracting Reply @marcelomendonca2540 5 months ago Wait a moment. You've said that Raptor engines require external stuff on the launch pad to get started. However SpaceX has turned Starship booster engines off and on again on the fly by them own. How is that possible? 3 Reply The Space Race · 3 replies @desunistallerinc 1 month ago My eye started to twitch after seeing these broken transitions in the video Reply @tekteam26 2 months ago The Raptor engine was originally developed by NASA. SpaceX bought the license from NASA then further developed it into its current form. I learned this from a friend of mine who is a senior NASA engineer. 14 Reply @jamestregler1584 4 months ago Thanks this explains the new rocket's inner workings ; from old New Orleans 😇🇫🇷 1 Reply @domenicobarillari2046 4 months ago Hey SpaceX: kerosene is NOT the same as naphthalene, which is what you show at t~7:20 on the left. Perhaps you need a chemist on the team? 4 Reply @nickmiladinovic500 4 months ago Thank god the narrator is back Reply @Vermiliontea 4 months ago (edited) The Merlin 1D represents what could be done with the available time and money at the time, but that doesn't mean it didn't have a demanding and specific mission requirement. SpaceX rocket design starts with the goal of lowest possible cost of payload to low Earth orbit. This requirement trumps everything else. The consequence is that you find yourself with a set of artificial "musts", because otherwise there's no point in doing it at all. So the question is not so much if it's "possible", but how it can be possible. What enters into this process is that you must reuse as much of the rocket as possible. What eventually comes out of it, is a two-stage rocket, without solid-fuel boosters, a single rocket fuel that must be not hydrogen, and not hypergolic. A rather small rocket engine that need a very high thrust to weight ratio, must be throttleable, and must be a mass-production item. The Raptor is a product of the exact same process, only this time there are no compromises involving time and money. And it has to be the extremest thing possible, because otherwise it would not reach the required thrust to weight ratio with the methane fuel, nor would it reach the required thrust per nozzle area. Its thrust-performance for a first stage is a must, and reaching that with methane as fuel is not easy. Which is why ULA Vulcan is effectively a three-stage rocket with its solid-fuel boosters. 4 Reply 1 reply @karthikumarsambasivam8191 4 months ago (edited) At 03:00 the animation puts LOX and RP1 at the same time of arrival at the chamber, which will most likely end up with a detonation. LOX has to lead and RP1 comes a few milliseconds later. Incredible video though 2 Reply 2 replies @daveoatway6126 1 month ago I find it strange that NASA and the USSF depended on Russian engines for 20 years and never developed it's own engine. It took Elon to have that vision and effort. 3 Reply @paulwikstrom 3 months ago I would give this video a 9 on a 10-pt scale. Only one error: it’s rocket engineering! 😂😂😂 Okay, it’s a 10! Reply @muuubiee 5 months ago I don't think your explanation is correct. The pre-burners drives the turbo-pumps by cumbusting some fuel, yes, and the exhaust of the pre-burners is gas that enters the main chamber somewhere... But most of the fuel is still being pumped around the nozzle bell and into the main combustion chamber as liquids, not as a gas. The pre-burners will not be sending their exhausts through the same system as the main burner, the fuel rich likely going closer to the combustion chamber walls, and the oxygen rich more centered. 3 Reply The Space Race · 1 reply @CheOrwell 4 weeks ago Now I need to see the stats on methanol vs this intermix. Reply @TheQuietStorm6000 4 months ago This is one of the best explanations of the starship engine design process. Elon Musk reminds of Thomas Edison and Peter Weyland (the industrial fictionsn entrepreneur in the Alien and Promethius Movies). He is a genius. That said all men have their faults. That said the Cyber Truck is one if the stupidest vehicles on the road. I'm still trying to like it. 6 Reply 2 replies @aurtisanminer2827 4 months ago “Simple and cheap”. Sure sounds fitting! Reply @mihaischitcu1917 4 months ago Same as how Tesla reinvented the wheel! 3 Reply @adamchurvis1 1 month ago *DAMN* ! ! ! That was WONDERFUL! Subbed, liked. Keep up the excellent works, folks. Reply @yukon4511 4 months ago The Soviets pioneered closed cycle rocket engines in1967. 5 Reply 3 replies @ty2u 3 months ago Wow, we’ve come a long way from the humble beginnings of the black powder rockets of the ancient Chinese. Great video. Just enough technical information to tell the story without becoming “bogged down” in technical data. Keep up the good work! Reply @JohnBerry-q1h 3 months ago (edited) I look forward to seeing Falcon Heavy show-up intimately tied into the action of either an upcoming Mission Impossible movie or a James Bond movie. I'd like to see Tom Cruise cling to the outside of a Falcon Heavy while it hovered sideways over the rooftops of a neighborhood. 1 Reply @bazoo513 4 months ago 16:40 - The starship cannot "connect the solar system", when it needs dozens of (yet to be demonstrated) refuelings to even reach the Moon. Raptor is a great engine. However: - It is still woefully unreliable; improving its reliability will be a monumental challenge. - The design goal was, of course, not to design "the most complex engine", but the one with the greatest specific impulse, as small and light as possible. It was only possible through this complex cycle. -This is not the first time that full flow staged combustion cycle was tried (but it is the first such engine that actually flew.) - Other people use methane; there are at least two other methalox engines that already successfully launched actual payload into orbit - Making a video on SpaceX engine development and not even mentioning Tom Mueller is absurd. 4 Reply 6 replies @OhAwe 4 months ago Thank God Elon knows more about manufacturing than anyone currently alive on earth! 1 Reply @Axel_Andersen 4 months ago An other Musk fan boy video. Raptro maybe a great engine but principles and things attributed to Elon in this video are basic engineering stuff that is going on in every company everywhere. 3 Reply @dacnguyen1499 3 weeks ago (edited) I have a great idea to Build a Bay Sauser Shuttle to launch a likely UFO going to space. Reply @miscbits6399 3 months ago Putting the 1000 ships target in context: The Boeing 747's entire production run was 1574 aircraft Reply @aienthusiast618 4 months ago lets go the normal guy is back the lord is great Reply @edwardturner1282 4 months ago This was so beautifully explained. It felt good to be able to follow along and understand most of it. Well done. Kudos to the entire production team. I am subscribed and will visit DISPLATE. Magnetic wall mounts... pure genius. 1 Reply @AgradipMandal 1 month ago Yea Channel YouTube pe video nehi Documentary banata hain❤ Reply @davejoseph5615 4 months ago Yeah, let's build everything like this 12:21 so we can have lots of explosions just like a Michael Bay movie. 1 Reply @gavinchilunlam2476 2 months ago Scalable, easy manufacturing, replacement, maintenance. Elon is 10 steps ahead and if i could contribute, i would buy shares of spaceX to ensure mission accomplished. ❤😊 Reply @DimitrisKanakis 3 weeks ago After the throat the speed is reduced...the pressure is increased.. Bernoulli applied. Reply @ReasonablySane 1 month ago This is amazing. One thing I've always been aware of regarding rockets is the severe payload weight restrictions. Suddenly it's less of an issue. SIGNIFICANTLY less. No wonder he shot a car into space. 🙂 Reply @Skyesk 2 months ago Excellent video. Thank you. Reply @tonep3168 3 months ago It would have been nice for you to have covered the Raptor 3.0 Reply @LWDavis58 4 months ago The throat is responsible for the speed of the exhaust. It is why it is there. Reply @MusicBird-lt1gs 12 days ago If Tesla got one of these instead of lithium ion batteries. I guess koenigsegg would have found a competitor. Reply @davout5775 4 months ago SpaceX wants to make the N-1 only bigger, far more powerful and with the ability to return. But so far, they went a lot further than N-1 ever did. I really hope that they can make it Reply @spacedad1853 1 month ago Great video, very well/easy explanations. Can't wait to watch more of your videos. 👏👏 Reply @Dan-z7e 2 months ago Smart design, what's next? Reply @alejandroestebas1431 3 weeks ago What you're pointing out in the video as a high pressure point it's actually a low pressure point. Check out Bernouilli's principle Reply @HobbyNut-sy3lo 1 month ago In anything that flies it's all about the engine. When it come to rocket engines it's all about the pumps. 1 Reply @battlecruiserna 2 weeks ago you can have high precision or reliable endurance Reply @jesusbermudez1764 4 months ago The key to super-high pressure is the CLOSED system in which a portion of the high pressure combustion product goes back to drive the booster pumps. Not an open system. This technology came from the abandoned USSR rocket engines that Ellon used. Reply @Whittletonblood 5 months ago Your videos are that good that alien civilisations get their info about human advancements from ur videos 😂 2 Reply @uchechukwuekemezie 4 months ago Thank God!! The voice is back😊 Reply @octaviolavaselli293 1 month ago im a mech E and that was fcign inspiring Reply @jamesgeorge8915 3 months ago That boy is crazy! Reply @jeffalvich9434 3 months ago I've never seen such self-proclaimed achievement which they had little to no input on.... nor construction. 1 Reply @MattH-wg7ou 4 months ago FULL FLOW STAGED COMBUSTION!!! Reply @marpintado 4 months ago The Russian engineers invented this system but Space X doubled the concept!!! 2 Reply 1 reply @xiiguardian 1 month ago Watching this after raptor 3 came out is very interesting. Reply @xinzeng-iq7zv 3 months ago why can't all this be in a book, why have it scattered all over the internet Reply @RobEngland 4 months ago The environmental impact of 1000 Starships.... Reply @markell1882 7 days ago Great video 👍🏾 Reply @palindromic7873 5 months ago And then there was the wheel. 2 Reply @jimnichols2277 3 months ago The Raptor engine cycle concept was taken from an Air Force program started in the early 90’s. Which was adapted from Aerojet’s NASP tail rocket. Reply @hoodedcreeper2465 4 months ago The throat is actually where the gas hits supersonic speed. Normally a narrowing the opening like in jet engines would accelerate the gas because of Bernoulli's principal. However at supersonic speed that works backwards. 1 Reply @fx1_trader812 2 months ago This topic is as complex as rocket science. Reply @TheStandardJoe 3 weeks ago Instead of replacing flanged connections with welded ones, why not change the flange designs? just a thought. Welds on vibrating structures need extra attention. Love the Raptor - it’s an elegant design…following it closely. Reply @TheDude50447 1 month ago So Musk says its over 99% efficient but he also says the Model 3 will easily go 500km on one charge while youre lucky to get 350. Reply @dosmastrify 4 months ago 4:00 but based on what you just said, we should want the biggest nozzle possible even if that causes separation from the walls 1 Reply @maxborsoi6491 12 days ago Very nice video! Reply @agnelodsa788 3 weeks ago When you have unlimited funds, anything is possible! Reply @wizzyno1566 1 month ago The F1 produced 1500 tons of thrust, not the 460 you said. Reply @jswebbproductions9785 5 months ago wow, what a awesome video! very well designed and researched and the original voice IS BACK!! One of the best videos I've seen from this channel! And great job explaining how rocket engines work, I finally can begin to understand it! btw, much love to the voice of the last video, nothing personal against him, just prefer your voice!! congratulations on a job well done! 2 Reply The Space Race · 2 replies @jimmyfaherty8588 1 month ago Fascinating. Absolutely amazing. I hope i lve long enough to see Elon succeed at this. Reply @mtb5778 4 months ago excellent video and an advert that I am interested in. Reply @roqua 4 months ago 8:52 until the end of the segment (3-4 minutes later) is a great explanation for newbies who are excited to learn about rocketry, cycle types and Raptor's innovations, but who run into a proverbial brick wall with many dizzying attempts to describe these things elsewhere. Great work! 👍 1 Reply @pabloalonso9083 3 days ago Please do a raptor 3 video like this one ! Reply @AZcordzom 3 months ago Awesome work Reply @MrPooh18 1 month ago Current rocket engines are still based on generations old technology. If we ever want to explore the solar system or beyond, we need to move beyond rockets. Ion, fusion, plasma, nuclear or solar sails are interesting concepts Reply @mtstachowiak 4 months ago The voice is back, awesome :) Reply @ingridhohmann3523 1 month ago SpaceX 💙 Reply @Waywind420 3 months ago What a wonderful gift Elon has given to us all. He won at life then decided to gamble everything and won again. Legend. 1 Reply @wxb200 4 months ago The Raptor Engine. I want one... 1 Reply @keks_lx0 2 weeks ago Elon is an absolute genius Reply @johntomasik1555 3 months ago Interesting. Rockets are relatively simple compared to some propulsion sources. The solution of pre-burning isn't a new concept, either. What I found interesting was the change in fuel. The fuel selection made was the smartest thing they did for the whole system. Removing many issues (cleanliness, efficiency, availability) at the root of a design really opens up the opportunities for the design groups. Reply @markm8782 4 months ago You should credit Tim Dodd, the Everyday Astronaut for the footage you used. Reply @jaikaran6427 3 months ago Amazing explanation!! Reply @RawandCookedVegan 3 months ago Great video. Thanks Reply @wdwtx2.0 3 months ago Visionary. Reply @chrisb.travelin544 4 months ago Once again, outstanding content. Please keep it up. Others who post daily have a LOT of repeat "click bate". Cheers. Reply @svenlima 3 weeks ago When people speak about "rocket science" they mean that it's something very difficult. However, until recently rocket science was not really extremely difficult compared to many other scientific areas. Reply 1 reply @samuraishonan4706 4 months ago The only aliens visiting earth are not aliens. They are humans coming back in time to study, Earth, 101 Reply @jacobcomongore4180 2 months ago serious glazing going on here Reply @PiedFifer 1 month ago Okay. I’m impressed, now, WHO. IS. PAYING? This is a detail that should be advertised to inform every potentially helpful mind of the actual objectives of SpaceX. Reply @wolpumba4099 4 months ago SpaceX's Raptor Engine: A Rocket Engine Reinvented Here's a summary of the video's key points about the Raptor engine, including starting timestamps: * [0:02] From Merlin to Raptor: SpaceX began with the Merlin engine, designed for simplicity and cost-effectiveness. It was crucial for early successes, but needed to evolve. * [7:07] Raptor's fuel: Methane - A switch from kerosene to methane offers advantages: * Clean burning, leaving no residue. * Enables high reusability for Starship. * [9:03] Raptor's cycle: Full Flow Staged Combustion * Extremely complex but highly efficient. * Dual gas turbines compared to single turbines in previous engines. * Closed cycle, using all the pressure from gas generators. * Full flow, with both fuel and oxygen passing through pre-burners before the combustion chamber. * [12:36] Raptor's performance: * Delivers 230 metric tons of thrust at sea level. * Has an unmatched power-to-weight ratio. * Achieves high chamber pressure (300 bar). * [14:22] Future of Raptor: * Simplification and cost reduction through component integration and removing unnecessary parts. * Mass production for Starship's ambitious goals. * [15:53] Starship's impact: * Aims to become as commonplace as jetliners. * Will be used for travel between Earth and Mars, Earth and the Moon, and even point-to-point transportation on Earth. * Could be one of the most important vehicles ever created in human history. The video emphasizes SpaceX's innovative approach to rocket engine design, pushing the boundaries of what's possible. i used gemini 1.5 flash and pro to summarize the transcript 1 Reply @lonewolf36s 1 month ago We don't have enough methane (or hydrogen), for this to be feasible as a common commercial operation. And creating either costs significantly more than the value produced. I love all of this. I'm just not sure it will stand the test of time. Reply @chicomalo3654 4 months ago i can connect you to the universe without burning anything -LSD Reply @plumbr13 4 months ago At 2:35 there's an error in the subtitles. They say the boiling point of oxygen is 83 degrees, not negative 183 degrees. Reply @jayman488 4 months ago Nice video, but the Raptor is not the first engine to use two turbines. The space shuttle's RS-25 engines have two fuel rich preburners and turbines. The Raptor is, however, the first full flow staged combustion cycle engine to actually fly, although others have been tested. 1 Reply @cajampa 4 months ago I wish you had focused on the v3 instead. That is what I hoped to see when I clicked on the video. Reply @SiddharthSharma-c4s 4 days ago of there is one thing that sets space x apart from the competition is that .... i am paid for this video ... Reply @ValidatingUsername 3 weeks ago It would be pretty cool if they could get nitrogen to a solid state in space to transfer at the refueling station Reply @micheljauvin3536 4 months ago well done Reply @AmericanCrusader222 4 months ago Now we gotta do one on the new EVA suit!! Reply @ryherm 1 month ago I’m looking for flat earther comments about how this doesn’t work in a vacuum Reply @2kalubafak404 1 month ago A modern simplified V2 rocket engine. Reply @drakeallen3501 4 months ago hey- i LOVE this stuff! i could get behind this! (not LITERALLY, of course) Reply 1 reply @timothybrummer8476 3 weeks ago 9:15 big error. RS-25 engine has FOUR gas turbines. Not just two like Raptor. Reply @brianray2614 2 months ago Astounding! Reply @alexanderSydneyOz 1 month ago I am thinking that musk's alleged specifications for the raptor engine is a little bit romanticised. As we know his stated motivation for SpaceX, is to go to and colonise Mars. Once on Mars, it is only possible to produce one rocket fuel: methane. Therefore, it had to be methane, you're respective of the 'fuel no one has used before' bit Reply @Agora-yk5si 4 weeks ago and now we have v3 what is even better Reply @Nerdmom1701 5 months ago Great to hear your voice again!😂 👍🏻🙏🏻❤️ Reply @thetravelers28 3 months ago several typos in the intro about the rocket types with merlin Reply @BonnieLena 1 month ago Mary plays the piano. 1 Reply @harishmishra4648 3 months ago Awesome... Nothing else can be said.. Reply @averyjeromekelly5735 4 months ago Keep up the good deal and the way ;! Reply @pmdurand6765 3 weeks ago Metric tons are not a unit of force , they are a unit of mass Reply @overtinker1381 4 months ago shoutout to NASA’s FASTRAC engine which was used to initiate/accelerate the Merlin design Reply 1 reply @benhammond6717 3 months ago Very excellent video! Reply @foreverinteriors 1 month ago Before you go off thinking this is some sort of god like advancement that only the Demi gods at space X could have pulled off. Just take into account that you probably were not alive when they first designed the one it replaced. Reply @Dave-dh7rt 3 months ago I love elon musk. So many people hate on him and says he bought space X but he is a genius. Reply @jefffoutz4024 4 months ago Reinventing the mousetrap.... Brilliant Reply @deepumohandas8071 3 months ago Excellent Reply @FelixLetkemann 1 month ago 7:23 that molecule is NOT kerosene! Reply @kenxiong6830 4 months ago Great video. Awesome breakdown Reply @jayjayd_123 4 months ago If you ever need any music, pls hit me up bro🙌🏽 been watching your videos for a while Reply @countmorbid3187 3 months ago Now we need an explanation on how raptors restart. Because that would be impossible by how you explained it. Reply @Carstuff111 4 months ago I personally can not stand how Tesla is run, and I was not impressed with SpaceX initially. However, watching them reliably land their rockets and reusing them has been beyond epic! I just hope that they can get Starship to be even more reliable, since we are planning to send people to space on them. Reply @shaftomite007 4 months ago If we've learned anything from history it's this: don't ever trust a word Elon musk says 1 Reply @MATEMATICO1O 8 days ago Theory on the Use of Antimatter as Fuel The idea of using *antimatter* as fuel for advanced propulsion systems is based on its ability to release enormous amounts of energy through the process of annihilation, where antimatter particles collide with matter particles, converting all the involved mass directly into energy, as described by Einstein’s equation **E = mc²**. This process is, theoretically, the most efficient form of mass-to-energy conversion known to science. 1. Production and Storage of Antimatter Currently, antimatter can be produced in particle accelerators, such as the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), where high-energy collisions result in the creation of antiparticles. The major challenge is the minuscule quantities produced and the extremely high cost of the process. For example, only a few atoms of *antihydrogen* have been produced so far, and the estimated cost of producing one gram of antimatter would be in the trillions of dollars. To make the use of antimatter as fuel feasible, we would need to develop much more efficient technologies for mass production of antiparticles, such as antiprotons and positrons, possibly by exploring larger-scale collisions or yet-unknown processes in particle physics. Another significant challenge is *storing* antimatter. Any contact between antimatter and ordinary matter would result in immediate annihilation, releasing energy uncontrollably. Today, antiparticles can be stored in magnetic and electrostatic traps, known as **Penning traps**, where they float in a vacuum, avoiding contact with material walls. However, storing larger quantities of antimatter for space propulsion would require developing much more stable and efficient magnetic containers with powerful electromagnetic fields. 2. Antimatter-Based Propulsion The most promising application of antimatter as fuel would be in **space propulsion systems**, given its potential to release vast amounts of energy with a very small amount of fuel. Two application scenarios are considered: a. Direct Annihilation Propulsion In this theoretical model, the annihilation between antiprotons (antimatter particles) and protons (ordinary matter particles) would release high-energy particles, such as gamma photons, which could be directed to generate **thrust**. The efficiency would far surpass that of conventional chemical rocket systems, potentially reaching significant fractions of the speed of light, making interstellar travel more viable. The main limitation of this concept is how to channel the energy released by annihilation in a controlled manner, as gamma radiation is difficult to capture and convert into thrust. An advanced system of mirrors or radiation-resistant materials would be required to direct this energy. b. Hybrid Fusion-Antimatter Propulsion Another possibility is using small amounts of antimatter to initiate nuclear fusion reactions. Nuclear fusion, which is already being researched as an energy source, requires high temperatures for atomic nuclei to fuse. Antimatter, upon annihilating with matter, could provide the initial energy needed to trigger these reactions, creating a hybrid propulsion system. In this model, antimatter would not be the primary fuel but rather a catalyst, making nuclear fusion more efficient and controlled while reducing the amount of antimatter needed. 3. Technological Feasibility Although antimatter is, in theory, the most efficient fuel known, there are significant practical obstacles to overcome before it becomes a usable reality: - Cost of Production: Producing antimatter in viable quantities at an affordable cost would require revolutionary advances in particle physics and accelerator engineering. - Safe Storage: Storing significant amounts of antimatter without causing accidental annihilation requires creating incredibly precise and robust magnetic and electrostatic fields, an area still under development. - Energy Conversion: Even if we can control annihilation, converting the released energy into a usable form, whether electricity or propulsion, involves significant engineering challenges. Handling gamma radiation or other high-energy particles is a critical obstacle. 4. Future Applications In the future, if these technological barriers are overcome, antimatter could revolutionize areas such as: - Space Exploration: Interstellar travel could become possible with antimatter-powered spacecraft, reaching significant fractions of the speed of light, shortening trips to other star systems from centuries to decades. - Emergency Energy: Small antimatter reactors could serve as emergency power sources in isolated locations or scenarios where space and weight are limited. - Energy Weapons: On the other hand, the destructive potential of antimatter also represents a threat, capable of releasing immense amounts of energy in explosions. This raises ethical and control issues over the use of such technology. 5. Conclusion While antimatter holds the potential to revolutionize the future of energy and propulsion, it remains a distant technology from practical application. Developing viable methods for producing, storing, and using antimatter depends on significant advances in particle physics, materials engineering, and high-energy propulsion systems. Nevertheless, antimatter represents one of the most exciting frontiers in science, with profound implications for humanity’s future, especially in the realm of space exploration. Reply @greybuckleton 1 month ago (edited) I enjoyed the video, but have to point out a few glaring faults. The Raptor is not the first Methane/Oxygen rocket engine. There were a few before Raptor. I will just name two as it also relates to the rocket engine cycle, which is also not a first. The Soviet RD-270. This was a Full flow staged combustion engine built and fired in 1969. The Morpheus HD5 was a methane/oxygen rocket engine used in 2014. Reply @theheatshow8324 4 months ago Too sophisticated Reply @ophthojooeileyecirclehisha4917 4 months ago thank you Reply @RomoRooster 4 months ago Can you imagine climbing into a rocket for a 30 minute trip to london? Lol Reply @robinpettit7827 4 months ago I am waiting for the prototype to come out. Reply @LouisEmery 1 month ago I have an owners workshop manual for the Saturn V rocket from amazon. I hope for an edition of SpaceX rockets. Reply @pratyushpandit727 1 month ago & here comes the Raptor 3 with 190kg weight compared to 1600kg, ig biggest research of this century! Reply @bathidadecoco8711 2 months ago Hey I liked the video but you repeat at least two times that pressure is converted to velocity. This is correct but I feel like you draw a in complete picture with that since temperature (or rather heat) is also converted to velocity and temperature has the greater influence on performance / force. Of course temperature is bound to mixture ratio and propellants used so we can not chose it as freely as the camber pressure. Maybe thats why you focused on pressure. Reply @SavageMonkeyJizz 3 months ago (edited) "Whered you get this black coke, hits like rocket fuel?!" Ha well.... Funny story - some nasa bloke Reply @tjsuemnicht1337 4 months ago its funny you said you can park a jeep in an f1, I got a chance to see real size f1 and my first thought was that it was the bigger than my jeep Reply @SMBTech-u5r 5 months ago Yay! Favorite narrator is back! Reply @mrsimo7144 4 months ago Thanks for this. Much appreciated. Reply @Droobie03 2 months ago What if SpaceX implemented the rotational combustion that NASA recently made? would that make it better? Reply @apachetamizha 4 months ago Marvelous engineering 😊 Reply @exteriorized 3 weeks ago Elon provided incredible leadership to his team of engineers both at Space X and tesla to do and create things that have never been done (or will be done) in the history of mankind. Space X started in 2002 and no one would invest with him nor had the desired quality of rocket engines so he became a rocket scientist reading many books and putting theories to work. Elon is incomparable, literally on another level! Reply 1 reply @BaconGod. 13 days ago Your telling me a rocket engine is just a huge glorified carburetor Reply @numbernine888 1 month ago (edited) How much fuel can a single raptor carry to succesfully go into orbit and land safely back? Reply @EdeYOlorDSZs 3 months ago goosebumps Reply @certifiedartroom 4 months ago Elon needs to follow the same thinking for cyber truck. Reply @iamchillydogg 1 month ago V3 is out go look it up it's insanely simple. Reply @DileepaRanawake 4 months ago Struggle to believe Elon gave the team the objective of ‘build the complex engine’ this is completely the opposite of the ‘best part is no part’ philosophy Reply @nadahere 2 months ago At 4:00 , you, like all others, make a grave mistake in propagating the idea that it is the velocity of the exiting gases which provides thrust. It is actually the unbalanced pressure inside the combustion chamber [and partly in the expansion nozzle] that does this. The hot gas exiting from the combustion chamber creates this pressure imbalance. The gas exiting the expansion nozzle enables this pressure imbalance. If the expansion nozzle was blocked of, the pressure would equalize and the thrust would be zero. 1 Reply 1 reply @droidvhm7 3 months ago It's a cycle diesel engine, but in rocket way. Reply @ayra8977 1 month ago Bro is glazing so hard Reply @russellhays4982 4 months ago great simple breakdown and nice video Reply @clavo3352 4 months ago Grateful for this video! TY !!😊 Reply @aDifferentJT 3 months ago 9:15 this isn't actually true The SSME or RS-25 actually used two turbines, it's just that they were both fuel rich Reply @martinlastname8548 4 months ago Great video dude Reply @paulmaxwell8851 3 months ago At 15:20, Elon Musk's SpaceX is replacing bolted flanges WITH solid welds. The goal is to reduce the parts count and complexity of an engine. Reply @mikefiell8103 4 months ago Excellent video! Recommended watch! Reply @umair103pk 3 months ago I think Soviets first tried this closed cycle engines back in the 70s but complexity was not understood at that time very well. Reply @MrGaryng76 2 weeks ago If the launch pad is stage zero to initiate the engine, doesn’t this mean the rocket engine cannot be started in space after the engine is turned off? Or the engine is never turned off? Reply @chrissmith2114 1 month ago (edited) I would guess that a lot of NASA and Boeing rocket engineers went to Space-X, you don't go straight from high school to rocket making. This is an earlier post by @tekteam26 @tekteam26 3 weeks ago The Raptor engine was originally developed by NASA. SpaceX bought the license from NASA then further developed it into its current form. I learned this from a friend of mine who is a senior NASA engineer. Reply @Warley.Araujo 3 months ago Great Video!! Reply @StephenMattison66 4 months ago Great video, well done, ty! Reply @yougeo 4 months ago Good shirt excellent video with plenty of detail. Best one I have seen on the raptor engine. Reply @toddgillespie5198 4 months ago This was enjoyable to listen to, but the cuts were excruciating. Reply @russelllouw4997 4 months ago Look at that. It's a turbocharged rocket. Reply @leokimvideo 4 months ago I'm thinking the Russians had the most powerful engine. The F1 is not the most powerful Reply @cthjob1704 4 months ago as per bernoulli principle velocity is increased not pressure in the throttle Reply @crimsonninja6995 4 months ago IIRC Elon says that they're going to get the raptor 2 up to 330 bar combustion chamber pressure Reply @michaelmillar9796 3 months ago I’m disappointed that you didn’t mention the engineer who actually designed, built and tested these engines for Mush…SpaceX employee #1, Tom Mueller. Without Tom, there would not be a Merlin or Raptor or even SpaceX. Reply 1 reply @ikajakonia8009 4 months ago if you know the physics and options of Raptor Engine working, it is surely not complicated! it is like an open book and you just need to read it! Reply @nd6886 3 months ago It's rocket appliance. Reply @kevinoneil7532 3 months ago If you compress oxygen or methane into a pressure bottle or chamber at a high enough pressure, they will liquify. You don't have to "cryogenicly" freeze them. Liquid oxygen is what's in the other bottle in an acetylene cutting torch for instance. A bic lighter is full of liquid butane for instance. 2 Reply @martinstauce1946 1 month ago Love the space stuff and the cars, too bad about the boss. Pandering to DT = disaster. Reply @Mannicx 2 weeks ago Everyone knows Raptor engines are just NASA designs… with windows 10 😂😂😂 Reply @CheburashkaGenovna 1 month ago "Elon says...." 😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣 Reply @peterwiles1299 3 months ago Avoiding cavitation in the entrance to the turbo pumps is key and not straight forward given the immense flow rates and associated fluid velocities. Reply @michietn5391 3 months ago Ergo, our Solar System is reformed by Elon's Soul, a system. Reply @JP-xt6hl 4 months ago Nice video! Reply @RaulMAnderson101-pr6cj 3 months ago Elon is incredible. A rocket company, he's involved in the engineering aspect... A electric car company, and all the engineering that takes... And other lessor known companies he runs as well, not to mention twitter or 'X'... How does the man do it? He puts so many of us to shame who give ourselves excuses of why we can't do this or do that, and Elon just does it...and not cause he's rich. There are plenty of wealthy types like him, who don't have his brains or drive or foresight. I doubt me and him would get along in real life, personality and style differences, but that doesn't prevent me from admiring his drive and accomplishments, for sure. Reply @jameswoll 4 months ago Good one, dude! Reply @jean-baptisteallaire3153 3 months ago (edited) Great work, just a comment, I hope we are all questioning the need of flying rockets as frequently and casually as jet planes. Possible do not mean idéal. Let's hope we will prouve ourself wizer than that. Reply @johnkeck 4 months ago Cool video! I have a hard time not getting caught up in the excitement. Still, I have to ask: what are the problems with SpaceX and drawbacks to its engine designs? The technical explanations here are good, but still the positive tone sounds like it comes from a SpaceX press release. Reply @Johnnybananass-_ 4 months ago Are t these the things that keep blowing up ? 1 Reply 1 reply @TaranAadarsh 5 months ago I'd say, the issue with the other guy who was there for the previous episodes of Space Race and Tesla Space was that he came in without any previous information and his voice sounded a little too similar to the usual one. If we'd either been given a heads-up or the person had a voice different enough from the standard, it'd have felt fine. (Though I think the similarity in voices played a bigger role in the negative reviews...) Reply @ThomasButryn 4 months ago Great show!! Reply @MoesDavis 2 months ago That looks a lot like a Kuznetsov NK-33. Reply @epicon6 1 month ago 16:12 This is a joke right? No one is gonna casually start traveling to the moon or Mars for 200 years. Reply @pauljcampbell2997 4 months ago Great video! 1 Reply @keithsweat7513 4 months ago This is a good video, only thing, the full flow diagram could be simplified by not having that counter intuitive X configuration in the middle of the GG's for easier following of the fuel and oxidizer paths Reply @dewiz9596 2 months ago (edited) 9:02 And yet, for each of the Starship launches I’ve witnessed, I’ve seen evidence of soot in the exhaust stream Thank you for a great educational video. Reply @Star-Dude09 4 months ago Wow, didn't even realize that it was uploaded 4 hours ago, just thought it was a lesser viewed video Reply @mgman6851 4 months ago Great video. Thanks. Can u provide more detail in the raptor design in another video please ? Reply @cretium805 3 months ago 6:46 Most advanced would be a better way to put it. Complication is not a good thing and Elon wants to simplify it as much as possible for mass production and reliability. Going full-flow staged combustion is because a fully reusable system needs the performance and because it allows the turbines to run cooler. Reply @petarpetrovic2060 3 months ago Well, the narator is well payd and well guided to sell stocks :) Reply 1 reply @terdsie 4 months ago I, legitimately, fully expected this to be narrated by Simon Whistler. My disappointment is immeasurable, and my day is ruined. Reply @RiadAhmed-ce6qo 4 months ago (edited) Because it is a modular based cluster cell design . So even engine failed you can keep it operational by isolating damaged cells. in this case power out put will be reduced but by the percentage you can figure out list how many motors can provide you enough thrust to keep you safe during a malfunction. Star-link in future will orbit the moon as well. What is possible moon and the earth a satellite link chain like bicycle's chain which will continue and this link will provide communication and a trailing guide for moon ferry so people can go to the moon ,orbiting and back. which is the first steps of Star Track. Reply @lukedeehan2011 4 months ago Wait until this guy finds out about Raptor 3.. lol Reply @MitzvosGolem1 4 months ago Russia used closed cycle rocket motors captured Fuel pump exhaust energy long ago in 1970s. 1 Reply @anything.with.motors 4 months ago Elon musk : we can use the rocks on mars to feed starving people Reply @cramhead 1 month ago I wonder if there would be a benefit to making the a larger version of the Raptor instead of using so many on a single rocket Reply 1 reply @markxfarmer6830 4 months ago Upgraded, not reinvented. Wise up. 1 Reply @jackdoe7933 4 weeks ago It's a closed cycle engine produced by 3D printer which reduces the complexity of the engine. The principals of closed cycle engines was known before the USSR made a practical engines such as the RD180. Reply @ScatterlingOfA 4 months ago Well done!! Reply @Getmoreonlinereviews 3 months ago the left phalange. there's no phalange. oh, my God (Phoebe Buffay) Reply @pb1305 4 months ago You know the Chinese are watching this video and collecting info. Reply @jackdoe7933 4 months ago The Germans where the first to use methane as rocket fuel in 1930. The benefits of using methane in rocket engines has been known forever just as the idea of using a closed cycle engine which was perfected by the Soviets . Of course if you're using a oxy hydrogen engine then there is no coking ... water being the by product of combustion. 1 Reply @firefly4f4 3 months ago (edited) "unlike every previous engine that has used a single turbine, the raptor is the only engine with dual turbines" This is incorrect. The (tested but unflown) RD270 was the first full flow engine, and while not full flow the RS25 space shuttle main engines still used separate turbines to power their oxygen and hydrogen pumps. I also believe but have not confirmed that the RS68 from the Delta IV rockets also used dual turbines in an open cycle configuration. Also, the F1 is not the most powerful liquid rocket engine. It's the most powerful single chamber engine, but the RD170 on the Energia boosters with 4 chambers is the most powerful engine flown; it's one pump feeding all 4 chambers makes it a single engine. Reply @bgdavenport 4 months ago Interesting but, my real impression hinges on the question of when the commentator learned to speak words. Reply @En1Gm4A 4 months ago Awesome video Reply @octaviantarabuta3015 4 months ago wow! Reply @kamikariad 3 months ago I'll be impressed when they do this with baking soda and vinegar... Reply @virtualpilgrim8645 2 months ago Rocket engines burning fuel so fast Up into the night sky, they blast Through the universe, the engines whine Could it be the end of man and time? Back on earth, the flame of life burns low Everywhere is misery and woe Pollution kills the air, the land, and sea Man prepares to meet his destiny, yeah Rocket engines burning fuel so fast Up into the black sky, so vast Burning metal through the atmosphere Earth remains in worry, hate, and fear With the hateful battles raging on Rockets flying to the glowing sun Through the empires of eternal void Freedom from the final suicide Reply @mrxmry3264 3 months ago apart from the size of the bell, are there any differences between sea level raptors and vacuum raptors? Reply @mjbirdClavdivs 4 months ago Didn't Robert Goddard invent the open cycle rocket in1926? 1 Reply @PoppoFitz 4 months ago Raptor... I want one! How much for your Raptor??? Reply @traveler2370 3 months ago without a transwarp coil and a subspace field generator, your attemps at space travel are futile. Reply @CC-iq2pe 4 months ago One confusion I have after your video is, if the stage 0 is so imperative for ignition, then how can the booster/starship reignite the Raptor engines for re-entry? Reply 1 reply @44JohnDoe 4 months ago Great stuff, as always Reply @traveler2370 3 months ago without a transwarp coil and a subspace field generator, your attemps at space travel are futile. Reply @morganp7238 4 months ago good vid Reply @arunvedachalam4690 4 months ago ISRO is laughing in background 1 Reply @XYZH1234 4 months ago I did the same using LOX+Diesel fuels and stainless steal to build cheap rocket systems in the early 2000. But funding is hard to come by. Reply @Dodoskee 4 months ago The new and improved exploding, unreliable rocket engine! Kudos. @11:56 "Elon says that only God himself can possibly do a better job at combining molecules than the Raptor combustion chamber"... 🤦🏻‍♂ God complex.. anyone? Still has to prove it can re-ignite in space. Had a hard time re-igniting on the booster to bleed off speed...according to official data, the booster didn't crash at Mach1 but exploded when trying to re-ignite engines to slow down. For the time being the Raptor is a "work in progress" at best 1 Reply @alexandredaubricourt5741 1 month ago Do we have enough gas for a fleet of thousands ships in constant motion? Reply @jedwardzenio5989 4 months ago Nice vídeo! Reply @davidrools 4 months ago Great video. You touched on it briefly, but just as amazing as achieving 300+ bar full flow staged combustion is to build them for $1M each and 1 per day. Other, "simpler" rocket engines cost 10 to 100 times more in time and money. Reply @billthomas8994 4 months ago Excellent vid and explanations! Now it’s time to up your game and ditch the janky editing Reply @Bill_Woo 3 months ago Thank you, oh thank you. I've spent almost 60 years pursuing the verb form of the word Klingon and you have granted fulfillment. Click -> 7:50 Reply 4 months ago Nice but the real re-invention is air breathing "pre-cooled" rocket with horizontal start (huge saving on LOx - weight -> more payload or less fuel use) Reply @benzed1618 4 months ago METHANE=COMPRESSED OXYGEN=FUEL=METHANE=COMPRESSED OXYGEN=FUEL= METHANE=COMPRESSED OXYGEN=FUEL= METHANE=COMPRESSED OXYGEN=FUEL= 1 Reply @dieselfrk13 4 months ago Imagine point to point on earth with raptors.... Reply @claudiusconruton2720 4 months ago So the Raptor engine is a closed cycle engine like the Russian RD 180 engine that runs on Kerosene, good copying! Reply @edusszfx 1 month ago I loved the content, super interesting! But pleeeease stop using that glitch transition Reply @PNavidi 3 months ago Brute force thrust is not the solution to comabt gravity. In less than a century it will be remembered as, now, we remember carriage when driving cars !! Reply 1 reply @verttikoo2052 4 months ago Incredibly reliable engine 🎉 Oh wait 🤔🤣😂 Reply @jamesflake6601 4 months ago And Elon Musk will never go Reply @kamakaziozzie3038 4 months ago In the future when we are all long gone, Elon will be recognized as the most important person of the 21st Century 1 Reply @efone3553 1 month ago It's impossible for me to understand how so many democrats suddenly hate Elon musk. 1 Reply @nama5257 2 months ago If 1000 starships are to do the voyage, do we have enough fuel on Earth !? Disclosure: I am not rocket scientist !! Reply @PD55_ 1 month ago OK so if the fuel turbines are started by equipment integrated into the launch mount, I presume you could not reignite the Raptor engines on Mars. Does anyone know what the plan is for the return trip, or will they revert to Merlin designs? Reply @NicholasNerios 4 months ago Was there a landing / launcher pad planned for Mars and Moon missions? If the thrusters need the launch pad to windup wouldn't landing missions need a more autonomous launch pad for the thrusters? Reply 1 reply @richardminnich4249 3 months ago As advanced as the SpaceX engines may be, consider that the V2, the F1 and the SSME engines were designed by engineers using slide rules, and who didn’t have computers to create models that could be run for thousands of design iterations. If G.H.W. Bush hadn’t crashed the existing US rocket industrial base (buying Russian engines instead), we might have actually had some of these advances even earlier. Oh well! Reply @SamsungA04e-dp7kj 4 months ago ELEMEN MACHINE 3 : GEAR BOX Reply @gmeast 3 months ago You failed to mention the major challenge overcome in the evolution of the Full Flow Combustion Cycle Engine. It's the regenerative part of the cycle (part of the cycle to create hot gasses for combustion) that prevents the high pressure & super-hot engine components like the chamber and nozzle from melting. This is done by passing one of the cryogenic components around & through the components (like the nozzle). This video mentions "coking", but didn't detail the why coking is bad in this type of engine. If you want to reuse the engine, you can't use a hydrocarbon for regen. because of the coking. In their development of their RD series of engines, the Russians used Liquid Oxygen (single element), but at the temperatures and pressures, standard metals would simply burn. New metal alloys and construction principles had to be developed. The RS25 (Shuttle Orbiter) engine, a full flow design, uses Liquid Hydrogen in the regen. part of the cycle so there is no chance of the metal components burning. Reply @hagakure81 3 months ago So if the booster / Raptor engine needs the launchpad to (jokingly) crankstart the motor, how will Starship take off from the surface of mars? In what way are the Raptor and (is it Raptor Vacuum?) engines different? Reply @palindromic7873 2 weeks ago Next stop the wheel Reply @MarkPetersen-hg4ij 4 months ago Great video. All of the technical points were spot on, and best of all, simple enough for my 7 year old grandkids to grasp. However, the first time you said "merlin", I squirmed a bit in my seat, and the 7year old gave me a look that said "wait.... what?" The emphasis is on the last syllable, Not the first. It's "MERlin", not "merLIN". Reply @TheTabitosan 2 days ago Like many of the corrections others have made below, SpaceX has done a good (great even) job of improving existing tech. They didn't reinvent shit. Elon is a schill and the only good thing he's ever done was help fund SpaceX. Reply @johanson61 4 months ago (edited) This is a lie: "The raptor is the only engine with separate turbo pumps for fuel and oxygen". The space shuttle main engines had also separate gas turbine pumps and you know how old they are. Reply @WLF0X 3 months ago Elon Certified Ball KIsser™ Seal of Approval 😘💯 Reply @chiragarora2827 2 months ago Gas used in home is most propane not methane. Reply @TheDhauladhar 1 month ago 2:28 Gaseous, not Gasious Reply @davefield8100 4 months ago If the spin up of the turbines is external, how will the engines get started on the moon or Mars until launching facilities are constructed? Reply 1 reply @tulajashan 2 months ago 100%Sure China has watched this video😂 Reply @dannynaranjo4176 4 months ago Did u say cocaine? 😂😂 1 Reply @the496elcamino3 4 months ago Much better video, voice great. Reply @destineloathe2999 2 months ago Such powerful rocket engines are already buit by Soviet era! Reply @bernardedwards8461 4 months ago How does the Raptor resist the heat? Why doesn't it melt? Reply @1995TheDude 4 months ago Question: If they need a stage 0 to start the engines, how do they restart mid-flight for boost-backs and landing? Reply 1 reply @gehaofeiphpps8891 3 months ago nah, the liquid stuff cant just slosh around Reply @mohamedbaza9573 3 months ago I greet you Mr Elon musk. You are a very good sintist. Reply @anchalsharma 1 month ago The throat will not create thrust on its own. Just by fluid dynamics and laws of conservation this would do nothing except loosing some power. The only use i can think of is to allow more time for complete combustion to happen. Reply @JohnBerry-q1h 3 months ago Dr. Manhattan 11:59 Reply @RichKoziol 3 days ago I don't think that the Space X rocket engine is a real "reinvention" or a groundbreaking change in rocket engine design. The dual turbine pumps and full flow combustion chamber are an improvement of the fundamental F-1 rocket engine design from the Apollo program. Reply @yuriyyermilov7808 1 month ago (edited) What was once old (Soviet RD-270) is now new again... with more funding and less politics (due to private enterprise). Regardless, the RD-180 has over 100 consecutive launches and still counting, and since space does not forgive any mistakes, that's the most important 'tech' to be after. Reply @Roguescienceguy 4 months ago Raptor has under delivered so far. Even at plus 300 psi it performed significantly less than what it was supposed to. Also it's definitely not a re-invention. It's a combination of predominantly Russian rockettechnology and advances in metallurgy. Imho the simplest engine on the market these days is the one from rocketlab and proven to run after dipping in saltwater Reply @MartinMaynard 1 month ago If the base or stage zero is needed to start up the Raptor, how visit restarted on landing? Reply @ristube3319 4 months ago 2:48 SpaceX uses methane instead of RP1 Reply @danmance1870 4 months ago Gaseous Reply @AjFerguson13 3 weeks ago Merlin sounds like “mer-Lin” not like he is French Reply @anonym9323 4 months ago But what is not logical for me is that the speed is higher at the end then in the throat because it has to follow the rules of Bernoulli higher speed less pressure and the other way around.Or is it that vortexes will be created at the high speed? 1 Reply 4 replies @jamesdavies1070 4 weeks ago Hahaha you said fillanges (flanges) Reply @splicerbear6840 2 months ago It's a cool story and everything, but yeah, you know... Reply @Joa904 1 month ago skip to 7:09 and get to the point Reply @dunravin 2 months ago To be fair they didn't reinvent anything, they just removed parts from an existing engine, this may of reduced complexity, cost and weight at the price of reliability which has been evident in recent launches. There's not enough Tesla stock in the world you could give me to take a ride on SpaceX Reply 2 replies @joaodecarvalho7012 4 months ago They could sell Raotors to other companies. Reply @77space-vt8wi 4 days ago 9-29-24 Have Kamilla take over management of Boeing. Half of America thinks she qualified Reply @Bludscytheotx 3 months ago Needs a turbo Reply @unshapingtheearth7916 3 months ago Okay but why not make the raptor bigger and have 15 larger raptor engines on the first stage? Reply 1 reply @TyMoore95503 5 days ago (edited) So...the chemical process called "coking" is not related to soot...as it does not involve combustion. Coking in hydrocarbon fuels in regeneratively cooled rocket engines is related to a catalytic thermochemical decomposition of the hydrocarbon on the hot side of the tube walls in a regeneratively cooled rocket engine. The chemistry is complex, and not entirely understood...but at high temperatures, in the presence of copper and nickel (both are typically present) the sulfur in a kerosene type fuel can act to thermally depolymerize, or crack some of the chemical bonds between the carbons and sometimes the hydrogen as well. In a sense it kind ot inadvertently acts as a hydrocracker unit in a refinery, where larger, heavier molecules are broken to make lighter fractions...unfortunately this can result in the formation of a hard, carbon rich varnish, which as it overheats, bakes out the lighter fractions to become a substance like coke. This is why modern rocket kerosene tends to be ultra low sulfur (not for emission reasons, sorry!) Methane resists this "cracking," and if any carbon is deposited, tends to be scavanged by the methane to make heavier volatile fractions...soo, carbon tends not to be built up, nearly as well as a much more carbon rich hydrocarbon like kerosene. The other reason Elon Musk wants to do natural gas, is Methane can be synthesized from the Martian atmosphere (containing C02) and the water that is believed to be plentiful there. Anyways, my two cents worth! Great video otherwise! Reply @KamalaChameleon 4 months ago (edited) I still dont understand how raptors light the engines while in space or when the booster is trying to land.. why is stage 0 spin prime needed for launch but no other steps?? 1 Reply The Space Race · 2 replies @henningvisser1108 3 weeks ago It just takes one super human to change history. Reply @double-you5130 4 months ago is that why not all of them work each launch lol Reply @steves4659 4 months ago The cows had to be deaf Reply @FyniEinuppa-gi8lh 2 months ago This type of Money. Your welcome, feel Me 3 Queens? Just a little pee, frfr. 4 1 Reply @batmandeltaforce 4 months ago Elon did what NASA was incapable of doing... no surprise there:) Reply @HELLO-et6ko 5 months ago 🚀 1 Reply @sonny_wiess 5 months ago Out of curiosity not anger or anything, what was with the voice in the last video? Were you just feeling down and needed a replacement? Reply @thegameguru_ 2 months ago Made an entire video on Spacex rocket engines and never mentioned the actual lead designer, Tom Mueller, at all? Just credit it all to Elon? Thomas Mueller is the reason the Merlin and Raptor exist. Elon didn’t go to him with “make the most complex engine ever” - Tom Muller knew about the potential for a full flow design. Initial design was started in 2009. It wasn’t a new concept, but it had never been successfully flown before. He was hire number one. He left Spacex after 'completing' the raptor design - while it’s still being refined, he was responsible for engine design until it flew on Starhopper. In 2018 he said: “I’ve been working on Mars [Raptor] for the last four years, so I’m not going to take any credit for the Block 5 engine and all the upgrades that have happened,” he said. “I’ll take credit for developing the team that developed the Merlin 1D engine.” He started his own company focused on propulsion tech (no surprise there) - it's called Impulse Space. Reply @prollymunna 1 month ago Edit @ 2:29: gaseous oxygen, not gasious. Reply @DunnickFayuro 4 months ago If the OLM is stage 0 and is required to kickstart the engines, how do they fire up upon landing? Reply 1 reply @vast634 4 months ago The V2 did not use rocket fuel for powering the turbo pump. Its not really the same as an open cycle engine that uses the same fuel as the main thrust. Reply 1 reply @LeonAust 3 months ago 5 years many competitors will catch up and Starship isn't looking to good at the moment when one truly scrutinises it. Reply 1 reply @justinoff1 3 months ago RocketLabs engines are much more interesting Reply 1 reply @semorgh2854 4 months ago (edited) Rocket Engine Big problem ======================== Fuel . The Ideal engine is a Zero-Point-Energy Engine which uses the abundance magnetic field of the universe. What it means is that the spaceship has to have the characteristic of a Celestial entity like Earth, Sun or any other planet or Start. I do not remember when some body opened the gas tank of the Earth and put fuel in it so it can continue to rotate and also go around the sun. Once your space ship follows the characteristic of the Celestial entity then you can control its movement by control systems to control Mainly high power Electric motors for spinning the Plasma reactors (Zero-Point-Energy). In the near future you will be teaching the powers of REPEL and ATTRACTION through Magnetic field of the universe. Reply @wickertwm 4 months ago Wouldn't the throat have a low pressure (Bernoulli's principle). Reply @goofyrulez7914 4 months ago Go for LASR engines, try something new. Reply @KAPUSIJAPAN 4 months ago it's been many years. Who still comments like me on this video? Reply @Provocateur3 4 months ago If stage 0 spins the turbines up to start the engine, how is the engine restarted for descent & landing? Reply @squireson 4 months ago They didn't. There were incremental advances on a methane burning engine, most of the concepts had already been used in other engines and just saying otherwise doesn't make it so. The hype is just beyond belief. Reply @We-Do-NOT-Consent-303 3 weeks ago Why can't they just use the pressure from the tanks to spinstart the turbines? Reply @i-love-space390 4 months ago New Rocket engines are something that really benefits from modern technological developments in metallurgy and manufacturing. Up to the advent of SpaceX, the legacy rocket manufacturers had no incentive to invest in development of new engines and technology, since they had a monopoly on the market and government contracts. Publicly traded corporations that have to answer to stockholders are less likely to take any chances, and the executives were too lazy and risk averse to make the case for innovation and R & D investment. Whether or not you like all of Elon Musk's policy positions, one thing you can say is he is a dedicated zealot for advancing a Space Fairing society, and he doesn't answer to a Board of Directors when he makes a decision. Here is a case where Adam Smith's invisible hand works extremely slowly and needs an extraordinary individual to succeed where literally hundreds have failed to marshal the necessary capital support and inspire a cadre of engineering True Believers to make it all happen. 1 Reply @PramochanYaan 4 months ago Either its deja vu or have i seen a similar titled video from you?😊 Reply @lawrencefrost9063 4 months ago So how can Starship fire in space or Mars or the Moon if you need stage zero to begin the process? Reply @pcusack337 21 hours ago The third thing that makes space x I Elon musk. Period Reply @michaelreid2329 4 months ago How does Jeoff's engine compare? Reply @aggonzalezdc 4 months ago SpaceX didnt reinvent anything though. They made small incremental improvements that made a previously existing tehcnology more viable. Thats super impressive still! Its simple in concept, but simple isnt the same as easy! They did amazing stuff! You dont need to bend the truth to make it sound better. Reply @kl0wnkiller912 3 months ago (edited) I would rather sweep floors at SpaceX than be an engineer at NASA... I actually applied for a job when they started up the Texas facility but did not even get a reply. I am experienced in satellite communications and equipment maintenance. I would have thought there was something they could have used me for... oh well. Reply @samlazar1053 4 months ago (edited) SpaceX Has not invented or created anything. But they did take a special engine that the old Soviet union actually perfected and commercialise it. Reply @tomholroyd7519 4 months ago Why is the fuel above the LOX? Isn't it heavier? Reply @clems6989 3 months ago Godspeed Elon Musk ! Reply @robertmatch6550 4 months ago I'm not too sure about a voice that doesn't put the accent on the first syllable of Merlin. Reply @fakeaccount401 4 months ago "The best part is no part" is one of TRIZ principles. Reply @Danuxsy 4 months ago Starship is not a reality yet lol Reply @opcn18 4 months ago If you spin start the pumps from the launch mount doesn't that make it harder to launch from the surface of the moon or mars? Reply 1 reply @iamnormal8648 4 months ago 13:05 How big is that in Olympic-size pools? Reply @DairelFoleur 2 months ago The real success of SpaceX is Michael D. Griffin, a Musk associate who was later hired by NASA to issue contracts. Suddenly, SpaceX began receiving contracts. Musk, A Government-Created, US Taxpayer funded, Billionaire. Reply @SkyPilot54 1 month ago Smart comitted people Reply @BrightBlueJim 4 months ago I had to stop when he said every rocket engine uses oxygen. Dinitrogen tetroxide, anybody? Reply @benzed1618 4 months ago POWDER DESIGN OF ENGINE PARTS ON 3D PRINTING====POWDER DESIGN OF ENGINE PARTS ON 3D PRINTING POWDER DESIGN OF ENGINE PARTS ON 3D PRINTING POWDER DESIGN OF ENGINE PARTS ON 3D PRINTING 1 Reply @fredburley9512 5 months ago Wow!👍 Reply @nerdyengineer7943 3 months ago Bro, cool video, but I think SpaceX is being a tad dishonest with you here. 1) I can clearly see exhaust volutes for both turbos - so no, it's not full-flow-staged-combustion. Ducting the turbine exhaust into the nozzle via volute is how all the rockets from the 60s worked. 2) Space Shuttle Main Engines ran at about 5,000 psi chamber pressure (so higher than the Raptor), and the nozzle is bigger because of that higher pressure - making it more efficient (this is why the SSME exhaust plume necks down as it leaves the nozzle). This is largely possible by burning pure hydrogen, instead of methane, which is 75% carbon, which is why the SSME's have higher specific impulse than the Raptor. Musk is a salesman. SpaceX is doing amazing things at amazingly low costs. But let's not get carried away. Reply @LucasHsiang 2 months ago (edited) Simple answer is always the best solution. I have doubts on this engine design. It seemed to me way too complicated to get rocket under control. If somehow chip is malfunctioning then whole engine control system will collapse. I won’t bet it’s a safe trip rocket for human. Maybe it’s for large cargo😂 it’s too expensive to failure on the late stage. It doesn’t feel right to me. 0:01 Reply @FYI003 1 month ago So.....the private sector triumphs over the government in the same industry.....novel. Reply 1 reply @agnelodsa788 3 weeks ago The commentator looks like the brother of Elon musk. Reply @sameditz199 1 month ago Make a new video on space x new raptor engine Reply @garetmatsilele422 5 days ago Sound like Elon giving AI instructions Reply @pigslefats 1 month ago Hang on. If all the oxygen and methane passes through preburners then there will be nothing left to combust in the chamber. Are all molecules combusted in the preburners. If not how is that possible Reply @fryfrench9465 4 months ago Is this a repost? I feel like I listed to an identical video a few weeks ago... 1 Reply 1 reply @dyadyaboba 4 months ago The Starship monstrosity most certainly will not be what connects the Solar system. For that, it is too slow, too heavy, too inefficient. The Moon is its farthest practical destination. Most likely, it is an orbital delivery system. Only, what is the load? Reply @atoms1978 4 months ago Ja bih pokusao sa mesavinom vodonika helijuma i kiseonika. Reply @asantebacala3365 3 months ago Yep, you can't get any simple than Musk Reply @AerialWaviator 4 months ago One think I was left confused is how does SpaceX restart a Raptor in flight? For example when Starship did 10 km belly flip and landing, or for reentry from orbit. The comment regarding ground support and stage-zero at 10:15 seems to be overlooking something. Reply 2 replies @mikehall8204 3 months ago The closed system was a Russian design in the 60s Reply @areuaware6842 4 months ago Still just a rocket engine. Reply @javidturabor 4 months ago Its NOT only closed cycle engine Reply @Cameldactyl 4 months ago (edited) My favorite part about starships engines is that they dont all work during a flight and sometime catastrophic failures cause the whole thing to explode Reply @Obsidian-Nebula 4 months ago Hybridyze it. Put electric motor to jump start the first phase Reply 1 reply @TheGenericavatar 5 months ago Rocket Science is EASY --- It's just math and physics. Rocket Engineering is HARD --- It's math, physics, AND materials science + fabrication. Reply @illogicmath 4 months ago I'm sick of Elon's fanboys 1 Reply @markdoogan351 3 months ago Please don't refer to Musk as the "designer". He's not an engineer...just stick to using the words SpaceX (or find out the name of the team lead for these engines). Reply @dosmastrify 4 months ago 7:30 He didn't say he needed it to be a new fuel. He said he needed it to be methane which happened to be a new fuel. Not the same thing. It wasn't a hey figure something out. It's got to be new for the sake of new Reply @Ryan-lk4pu 4 months ago Good video. Another reason they chose methane is because you can produce it from the Martian atmosphere (if you have a water source). Reply 2 replies @o0oLukeo0o0o 1 day ago Elon is just a face not the designer/engineer 😂😂😂😂😂 Reply @atechphone 2 months ago why fit 33 small engines instead of 3 big engines or even 1 huge engine? Reply 1 reply @Space30MINUTES 4 months ago Wow, this video really expanded my understanding of rocket engine technology! I also had some profound thoughts about how space technology is developing, which I shared in the latest video on my channel. Maybe you'll see some interesting points from another perspective! Reply @bryanaveri6816 1 month ago (edited) That's the same pump system as the RS-25 SSME, this is not the first rocket engine of its kind !!!!! @9:28 Reply @65gtotrips 4 months ago (edited) They don’t yet know how to build a sustainable launch pad although they’re rebuilding the damaged one. You’d think they’d have know since their engines are what, 10X more powerful than Saturn-1. Plus they’re right in the Gulf of Mexico with all that water available. Reply 1 reply @TheNationalist-w9v 1 month ago American rocket man Reply @KM-wn3cf 4 months ago Wait I already saw this video. Is this a reupload? 1 Reply The Space Race · 2 replies @BinaryCloudChaser 2 days ago Nasa dont made any new Rockets in the last 40 years ? Reply @openspacespace-w7j 1 month ago Yeah right. Reply @eltonbritt1502 4 months ago Elon Musk has secured himself a place in world history. SpaceX, Tesla, Starlink, and who knows what's next 👍 Reply @woopsserg 4 months ago 10:20 What? Equipment on the launch mount to spin start the turbines? That's some 1st grade nonsense. The first problem with it is how you'd even do that, driveshafts under the rocket? The second is that engines are shut down and reignited during the fright. Not to say Raptors are used on Starship (2nd stage) too. Reply @HarryOttele 4 months ago The Raptor 4 will NOT be the engine to get humans to Mars. Elon needs to use Raptor "M", Microwave Beam decreasing fuel mix at 100% to 50f/50ox. Will operate at 66% to 75% power on standard CH4 & L/Oxy mix. Microwave beam will be like supercharger on a car motor. Nuclear has that highest thrust but the Microwave Bean will increase Methane Hydrogen to plasma getting the Thrust half way to that of a Nuclear engine without the radiation issue on HUMANS. This Idea needs to get to Elon and StarShip R&D. Reply @AbdulHafeez-cq6oo 3 weeks ago wow ELON MUSK IS LEGEND Reply @kurknielsen 5 months ago huh, seems pretty much just a rocket engine Reply @Kevin-p2l5b 3 months ago Okay Reply @zotfotpiq 5 months ago was this part of how they killed HLS for artemis 3 or...? Reply @HaHa-tb8bz 3 months ago (edited) Baby TeSla kingDom love 💚🙏💚 Baby kingDom Angkor Wat Hello 🙏 មនុស្សឆ្លាត Baby Hello មនុស្សឆ្លាតនៅ ក្រុមហ៊ុន SpaceX 💚💚💚💚💚💚😍💚💚💚💚💚💚 ជួយបង្រៀនចំណេះដឹងទាំងនឹង ទៅដល់ យុវជន របស់ ប្រទេសកម្ពុជា និងប្រទេសអេស្ប៉ាញ ផង ពូ Elon Musk ok 1 Reply @hilwaamanamankiyar-pp5bf 2 months ago CEO Reply @oakbellUK 4 months ago Question: Do I remember correctly that this pre-burn, which results in gases, rather than liquids, entering the combustion chamber was invented by the Soviets? Did/do the Soyuz engines have preburn (or equivalent gasification)? 1 Reply 2 replies @michaelwalters3970 1 month ago The closed loop engine was invented in the 1950's nothing new and making an engine with fewer parts is also been done by the pneumatic and hydraulic world with the use of manifolds. Elon hasn't invented anything worth mentioning he is just doing the same thing everyone else has been doing but just with a rocket engine. 3D printing parts to complicated for physical machining was first used in the automotive industry printing metal manifold parts. 1 Reply @dgrdixon 3 weeks ago Spell "gaseous" correctly, otherwise nice video. Reply The Space Race · 1 reply @janklaas6885 5 months ago (edited) 📍12:39 2📍6:24 Reply @MrHeathjones299 4 months ago The F-1 is not the most powerful rocket engine. That title goes to the RD-170. Reply @maxheadrom3088 4 months ago The revolution was the Soviet closed cycle engine ... the rest is fine tunning. BTW, your description of the pumping system is extremely oversymplified - a rocket engine is not a jet engine! I applaud Space-X efforts but when they arrived the technology was already there and it was developed by State funds (tax payer money) from the US and USSR. 1 Reply @ristube3319 4 months ago 4:43 the “German” V2 Rocket eh?! Yeah, they were German too I guess. Reply @fadli2108 2 months ago Why he failed to use hydrogen like shuttle? Hydrogen is clean fuel ⛽️ Reply 2 replies @nicolasblume1046 4 months ago How does the raptor get restarted in Orbit? Reply @mohamedbaza9573 1 month ago Have a nice day my dear friends. All my best wishes for you and USA Reply @_starfiend 4 months ago Go and watch Tim Dodd's explanation of these engines. Far more accurate and complete, and none of the BS. Reply @douglaswilkinson5700 4 months ago It still doesn't match the historic majesty of the Saturn V's F-1 engines. Reply @MuseumOfWonders 4 months ago Why does starship have many small engines rather than few larger ones? That is, why is the raptor the size it is and not larger? Reply 1 reply @bobl1769 4 months ago Very good but, surely, the robotic voice could be improved… Reply @evonrn2000 4 months ago Other than taking satellites to space...really there's no other use for space X. Ukraine's RD 180 has been doing just that! Reply @jasonkristian8457 4 months ago for decades NASA could not build this type of engine but then SpaceX go's and buy's 20 rocket engines from Russia. And then copy the design they bought as off the shelf, closed cycle engine that Russia built back in the 60's 1 Reply 3 replies @rcmrcm3370 2 weeks ago Nozzle does not convert pressure into thrust. It... Oh hell, look it up like you should have before making this video. Reply @amanichristopher719 4 months ago Thanks for returning this VOICE. Dont do that again 1 Reply @craigdeg1 4 months ago sounds to me like he's taken an old idea from henry ford.... Reply @AccordGTR 4 months ago Russia still builds the best rocket engines 1 Reply 1 reply @ronaldluning4010 4 months ago Cool, but when is someone going to go beyond rocket science. Reply @comrade171 2 months ago What I love about this is that Elon pays people to pretend that they developed it but obviously it was all Elon also NASA has nothing to do with any of this Elon came up with it by himself, all hail Elon 1 Reply 1 reply @koolmagicguy 3 months ago The jumpy editing kind of hurts my eyes. Good video content though. Reply @skateordie27xx 4 months ago 🤯 Reply @Geo_Knows_Things 3 months ago The narrator speaks funny. Is it AI? Reply @johnkidd1694 3 months ago The cows dont care. Reply @directorsontheset 1 month ago Yesterday's release 😅 +40k??😢 Reply @matthews4159 1 month ago this has a commercial 1m 30s ,,,, next they will be selling tooth paste Reply @wouldntyouliketoknow9891 4 months ago Elon doesnt DESIGN anything LMAO. 1 Reply @godagon97 4 months ago Yeap. Reply @MattCatt09 4 months ago I assume the narrator is the son of Tucker Carlson, because he sounds EXACTLY the same, including speech patterns, just slightly higher pitched. I dare anyone to disagree…. Reply @hilwaamanamankiyar-pp5bf 2 months ago FRI Reply @M_Jono 4 months ago But the fact 😂😂😂 Reply @Gukworks 4 months ago Musk, you did what few do.... Reply @patpatpat999 3 months ago Reinvent is an Oxymoron. Reply @jepah5287 3 weeks ago Marvel engineering 🎉 Reply @scottstewart5784 4 months ago Merlin does NOT rhyme with Berlin. Reply @savage5757 4 months ago 10:10 самый интересный момент Reply @rec0n3r 3 months ago hmm something needs to be done with the screen transitions. very very irritating as it flickers. Reply @Ayo22210 4 months ago (edited) I wanna be, I wanna be like Elon Reply @Donthaveacowbra 4 months ago Okay so some of the aspects of using starship for in earth transit is just absolutely asinine. Anyone giving that any Lee way doesn't understand physics, math or anything.... As for raptor being cool. It is. However maybe some of you should consider that even now, SpaceX largely uses merlin engines for all their stuff and it's proven reliable. Fundamentally making this massive rocket actually isn't what they should have done because fundamentally there isn't a market for it. However, if they have such powerful engines, it might mean something like falcon and falcon heavy become even more efficient. Albeit still about same price as Soviet era seats 😂 Reply @forgeteverythingyouknow5413 3 months ago Great content. Excellently Narrated. Beautiful. Thank you for not being one of these AI bastards. If you used AI, it wasn't obvious and therefore it's beautiful. Even if you did. Reply @possumface2425 4 months ago God one per cent better? Elon blinks. Reply @chihabbenabdelkrim-p7p 2 months ago 👍 Reply @AugustusLarch 4 months ago One detail wrong on the LOX. Gas oxygen is put under pressure until it liquefies. Not cooled until it turns into a liquid. Reply @donovanobrien5806 2 months ago How do I get past the add Reply @princedhiman958 1 month ago E54 where is Sunita Reply @MariaOrtiz-th4ne 1 month ago Elon que dios bendiga mucho tu paiz amor ❣️💋❣️😊 Reply @hankgrant6876 4 months ago Yep, improve the temper Reply @elftax 1 month ago What spacex has is the ability to fail without consequences, these achievements could have come from NASA if the agency could right off failures as a learning opportunity, but NASA is not allowed to fail, a rocket failure would mean immediate congressional hearings with ignorant members of Congress grandstanding. Also NASA has to present a budget showing value for money, unlike SpaceX it’s not given $billions to experiment and write of fails. Reply @MarkHonea-dx6mv 3 weeks ago Has anyone addressed the amount of methane needed to run elons dream fleet and the concurrent affect this would have on the already degrading atmosphere? Is his goal to poison this planet enough to necessitate a population on mars, even though that has not been proven viable with todays technology? Seems like we have the cart before the horse to me . Reply @stoveguy2133 2 weeks ago Spacex is our salvation? It really is the end. God help us all. Reply @andrejrockshox 4 months ago why not just use H2? Reply @mymysticalside2842 4 months ago You guys are so funny (and completely brainwashed). What do you think a rocket engine pushes against in empty space? Reply 5 replies @simbarasheruze9581 1 month ago emacs...elonmusk...❤ Reply @sakurakinomoto6195 5 months ago The last phrases of the text would have been decent if the starship has already successfully deploey a lot of payload into low earth orbit. But it has not yet. Reply @AllieDerrick-p4u 4 months ago Go space X THANK YOU FOR YOURN ENGAGEMENT..SHOUT OUT.!! ATT ELON MUSK QWENNY SHOT WELL. CREDITS TO THERE A TEAM. GO SPACE. X WE THANK YOU FROM THE STARS AN BACK WE WOULD NOT EXIST ALSO NOTE DOTDOTDOT WAT DOES WAR AN SPACE HAVE IN COMMON???? GO SPACE X.. Reply @Asterra2 4 months ago "Gasious," tho? Reply @bobbowie5334 4 months ago The Soviets produced a closed cycle engine in the 1960's. How is this a 'new' invention. Reply 1 reply @deeremeyer1749 4 months ago The COLDER the rocket fuel is the more DENSE it is and the more ENERGY IT CONTAINS. SUPER HOT FUEL AND OXIDIZER ARE THE WORST POSSIBLE WAY TO MAKE "MASSIVE THRUST" AND PERFECTLY EXPLAIN WHY ITS SUCH A "DELICATE DANCE" WITH THOSE PIECES OF SHIT AND WHY 30+ OF THEM CAN'T GET AN "EMPTY" BOOSTER WITH NO "PAYLOAD" INTO "SPACE" IN 5 MINUTES, LOL. Reply @carlosbaldrico2406 2 months ago Nasty Adds. Reply @faizramadhani9438 11 days ago Did he say cocaine? Reply @MariaOrtiz-th4ne 1 month ago Elon que dios te bendiga mucho amor ❣️💋❣️ de mi vida Reply @JohnBerry-q1h 3 months ago There is no 'i' in gaseous. Reply @zierim8537 5 days ago Please stop spamming that dramatic transition Reply @HarryOttele 4 months ago Raptor 4 will NOT be the engine to get humans to Mars. Elon needs to use Raptor "M", Microwave Beam decreasing fuel mix at 100% to 50f/50ox. Will operate at 66% to 75% power on standard CH4 & L/Oxy mix. Microwave beam will be like supercharger on a car motor. Nuclear has that highest thrust but the Microwave Bean will increase Methane Hydrogen to plasma getting the Thrust half way to that of a Nuclear engine without the radiation issue on HUMANS. Reply @kidznowadayz 2 days ago Paid video and bot comments 1 Reply @registrationaccount1034 4 months ago Tom Mueller refined it but nothing new. Rockets will never make us space faring anyway. It will take warping space time. 1 Reply @bricesuire5072 2 months ago The didn’t reinvent really. It was already understood just no one did it because it was complicated. Reply @tylerdurden4006 4 months ago Are those plans translated from Russian? Reply @rattywoof5259 4 months ago My only slight reservation about the Raptors is they burn lox/methane - that's O2 + CH4. The exhaust is pure CO2 - doesn't exactly help to combat climate change, does it? At least the Lox/H2 F1 produced mostly water vapour, much less damaging. Reply 2 replies @MariaOrtiz-th4ne 1 month ago Elon que la luz 🚦 de dios te ilumine siempre amor ❤❤❤❤de mi vida ❤ Reply @IameverywhereIameverywhere 3 months ago Where neculear rokcket Reply @ps3301 4 months ago Without nuclear rocket, space travel won't be fast enough Reply @greentriumph1643 4 months ago (edited) All of these engine ideas are know and various prototype and tested rockets have been built using these ideas. A college level rocket course discusses them with the associated advantages and disadvantages. To compare the latest Space X engine to an RS-25 space shuttle engine that first flow 43 years ago is a little disingenuous, don't you think? The phrase "standing on the shoulders of giants" ring a bell? 1 Reply @paulabbott9108 4 months ago Is it true that natural gas, which primarily consists of methane, is the cleanest burning fossil fuel? And when methane is produced from non-fossil sources such as food and green waste , it can literally take carbon out of the air? Reply @MediaLieDetector 2 days ago That’s why they don’t blow up anymore! 😂😂😂 Reply @kishfoo 4 months ago Mr. Musk should buy SpinLaunch and use it to chuck canisters of fuel and oxygen into space to refuel Starship in outerspace for a faster trip to Mars. SpinLaunch might not be feasible for satellites and other sensitive equipment, but for fuel, I think it could be much cheaper. Reply @KabirajBudha-o6g 1 month ago I made exactly 1k comment😂 Reply @law195 4 months ago Starting at 3:00, it goes to say the exhaust gases increase in speed as they go from the throat into the expansion nozzle. Other fluids slow down as the path expands. What part of rocket science am I missing here ? Reply @pakistandriving 4 months ago Nice but to get to mars rocket tech takes too long . new technology is needed . Reply @surajitmaity1942 1 month ago (edited) What is the output of the fuel 😂😂 why not 100% output. Tufan Acharyya . Reply @marioalfonso3214 4 months ago Reinvested??? But is just a copy from Russian prototypes from 50 s Lol 2 Reply 1 reply @gregniel 3 months ago It's all great. . . . . but Man cannot live outside of our atmosphere or gravity. . . . . so? Reply @motionsick 4 months ago All of your video transitions failed to render. Not sure how im the first to mention this. Reply @bigguy756 2 weeks ago bro spacex did not invent FFSCC Reply @johnsmith1474 3 months ago Space X used Russian designs for engines. Reply 2 replies @richardgshields 1 month ago I cant even figure out how to make an online business.. jeez Reply @angelsackson 5 months ago Re upload much? 1 Reply The Space Race · 1 reply @JohnKuurne 6 days ago 😅 Reply @0dbm 4 months ago Going green and space travel are both worthless to humans , . Food , water and infrastructure is where our money and effort should be going . Keep it real Reply @coolhand6669 2 months ago Well I look at SpaceX Rockets and I see Rockets big Rockets. That need lots of propulsion to move them with a load . I'm still a space shuttle person the shuttles that were built from plans that were 1970 plants and the shuttles were pretty darn good. But if we take what we learned from shuttle and spent some more money on a more flexible reusable heat shield that would make more sense. My father was head of the Space Shuttle for North American Aviation. They sold it basically to NASA that this thing would be going up every two weeks well it didn't because the tiles because it had five computers that were eight bit computers up until some of the fixes they went to a 32-bit computer finally but five of them cuz they had to still have a vote between 05 computers elon's SpaceX it's okay but it can't do what shuttle does it can't fly back with a satellite as big as Hubble can't do it. None of SpaceX Rockets can do anything like that. Maybe Elon in the Box Twitter and spent the money building a better shuttle like Pathfinder was going to be a great shuttle but it was never built it would have had a capability of flying to the Moon and back Reply @CurbyReeper 2 weeks ago glasses-purple-yellow-diamondbody-blue-raised-armstrophy-yellow-smilingcat-orange-whistling Reply @NuntawatGagner 4 weeks ago person-turqouise-wavingface-orange-frowningeyes-purple-cryingcat-orange-whistling Reply @alcenofolchini6971 4 months ago Since the Germans created it not much changed Reply @HarelAvital 5 months ago first but not last Reply @billraymond9972 1 month ago The presentation was a disappointment because it failed to deliver what was promised in the title - Musk’s comments on why Starliner failed. You need to do better. Reply @Soulprismatics 4 months ago The spaceship is the sailship of the future? That's not even a vision, and you have to agree in a second. Surface 2 space "rockets" necessarily deliver the worst weight to cargo ratio ever. Unlike sail-ships who carried more than they weighed in freight. This is just a workhorse for near-earth construction. The next workhorse is an orbit 2 orbit cargo ship which pretty assuredly uses totally different tech. Might be fueled by material found inside the moon's surface to benefit from a 1/10th g gravity well. Later on we might find hydrogen oxygen mining in the asteroid belt viable for that purpose. However to get things up into space there are either accelerators for raw materials, maybe using some sort of energizable, reusable accelleration shell or the infamous orbital lift realized with not yet discovered materials that withstand the collossal tearing forces. But. Not. This. Design. As genious level as it is. That's just step I. And as I stated elsewhere, mankind is not in a psychological growth cycle. We will carry all the crap in us up there. May god help us. Reply @ancogaming 4 months ago (edited) The one flaw I see with all this innovative and brilliantly designed technology from SpaceX is that its viabilitly and sustainability depends on fossil fuels, or more exactly in this case, natural gas, i.e. methane, as the only compatible propellant. It's simply damn idiotic to base any idea of humanity's space flight, even only in the near future, on a very finite, growingly sparse resource entirely, and one that is competitively sought after by other industries more important than yours, on top of it all. If this is going to work for the forseeable future, let alone in the long run, the Raptor Engine needs to run on something that we can sustainably produce and recycle in abundance as long as we see fit until we've developed and refined nuclear fusion as an energy source well enough for it to become reliable and scalable across the board. Something like methanol, for example, that is distilled (along with ethanol, i.e. alcohol) from stuff we can and will plant and regrow indefinitely, as we have more than one mutual interest in doing so. It's also a single-carbon molecule like methane and should burn equally clean, with water as the only waste product from complete oxidation, which the latter can be used for secondary cycles, like cooling, evaporation, solution, dilution and reduction within the same closed system. You could even sell your own branded space vodka then from overhead ethanol during production, of which there will be plenty. "Rocket Fuel - by Elon Musk, a SpaceX product." "A Vodka as pure as rocket scientists could make one if they had to. And well, ours kind of had to." "Support sustainable, environmentally sound and carbon-neutral space flight - Your Own Future - with your own choice of refreshment." Well, I'm sold already. So, Elon, if you read this: GET ON IT! The fuck you are waiting for? Fusion? Reply @pseudonym745 4 months ago The manchild did it t single handedly - and it's as reliable as the Cybertruck! Btw. Robo-taxi already made you rich? In your hyperloopi'n pod? 🤣🤣🤣 Reply @Petar120 1 month ago Simple, they didn't Reply @larryhoutz3213 4 months ago Too many advertisements Reply @urbevrankar 4 months ago LOL Reply @arec_c 6 days ago anyone have a counter for 'elon says' 🫠 Reply @michaelduffey5518 3 months ago Cow farts (: Reply @ericnickel3280 3 months ago NASA should be embarrassed Reply 1 reply @frederiquerijsdijk 4 months ago Damn dude, stop those transitions. Reply @ordenax 2 months ago Did they? Or they stole or copied from someone getting lse who wasnt given Credit? 1 Reply 1 reply @TWK_THD 4 months ago You showed a russian engine and called it space X 😂 Reply @Canigetanawwwwyyyyeeeah 3 weeks ago (edited) I felt sorry for those poor people stuck in the space station because of Boeing and then elons all…ah don’t worry we’ll see you next Tuesday, hang tight 😂 legend. Not only did he 2’s up Boeing, royally. He’s spelled out a profanity with (c)see (u)you (n)next (t)Tuesday 😂 mans a hero Reply 1 reply @MariaOrtiz-th4ne 1 month ago Elon que siga con mucho exsito más amor ❣️💋❣️❣️ Reply @Jeremy.Klakson 4 months ago Being honest, I don't really believe that the Starship will take us all the way to Mars. To the Moon? Yes, but to Mars? I think it can potentially serve the same as, let's say Energia, I mean, a very heavy rocket that takes very heavy payloads to LEO, but I'm no rocket scientist Reply 3 replies @James-zp5po 3 months ago Sry you can reinvent anything you want and rockets will never produce thrust in a vacuum which starts at 62 miles high so the rocket just falls back down at the 62 mile mark sry really really sry 1 Reply 3 replies @zandhoofd 2 months ago I heard cocaine Reply @kobusvanniekerk6276 1 month ago Kakamas Reply @wyattnoise 4 months ago Lol Reply @markissboi3583 4 months ago Beats me why no one made a better rocket in the usa for 50 years musk U called 1 Reply @curtisibarra1600 4 months ago Commercials Suck! I won't be back... Reply @stereolababy 2 weeks ago yeah he wants to be the henry ford of space blah blah Reply @icare7151 4 months ago My late PH.D. Father, a USA Citizen was trained under the great WWII German Chemist and my Father trained me. I have great technology that I should engineer for SpaceX has it hasn’t been used yet. I now realize how advanced the technology I have been trained in really is. I assumed it was already being used but it hasn’t been. Reply @asmelashgebremariam9272 2 months ago Kemey ke selam do asme Reply @zarratech 3 months ago I like your channel, but please get rid of that transition that shakes the entire screen. It's nauseating. Reply @grazynazambeanie5963 1 month ago Reinvented or copied ? Sure looks like the Russian engine , but what do those vodka drinking potato farmers know Reply @novelty_guy 1 month ago more efficient less reliable. Reply @Letmeusethis999 4 months ago Why are you acting like Elon designs this shit himself 😂😂 Reply @Anderson_Roger 1 month ago It was a good video until you started literally praying to him. Reply @bdeas 2 months ago This guy's way of switching between scenes by jerking the image back and forth is extremely annoying and disorienting on a TV Reply @riff2072 4 months ago (edited) 2:21 Is that backwards. Should not the fuel be on the bottom and the LOX be on the top. Keeping the heaver fuel tank at the bottom of the rocket. Reply @erichwtl 4 months ago Worst narration voice, also inaccuracies galore 1 Reply @seanshea8596 4 months ago What is it with Fascists and rockets? 1 Reply @stevecallagher9973 1 month ago this post is very badly researched and inaccurate. The USSR had closed cycle engines a long time ago, of course being commercially motivated SpaceX is effectively de-engineering their vehicles so that they resemble a generic big box item as opposed to anything more sophisticated. Their rocket motors don't even gimbal which makes pre launch footage veeeery boring lol! Reply @kylaeduli 2 months ago ❤❤❤❤xxx Reply @MrBenski81 4 months ago Elon, please tell me how you can only be outsmarted by God himself. I've been on speed for days and desperately need sleep. Reply @ClaytonMileto 4 months ago Wonderful tech. Too bad its associated with musk though. yuck Reply @PramochanYaan 4 months ago If anyone living under the rock, go and watch Elon Musk's Interview by Everyday Astronaut!!!! 1 Reply @darthnihilus511 4 months ago Do you think we really went to the moon? Reply @stefanbanev 1 month ago It is WW2 tech... nothing novel, a boring rocket engineering ... nuclear drive would be less trivial... Reply @christopher480 2 months ago wow you seem to make a lot of conclusions that are totally untrue........but I get it you are an Elon musk fanboy....... Reply @alphaomega1969 4 months ago They didn't reinvented anything, this all Chinese hard working engineer achievement outsourced by Elon lol 1 Reply @rodrigooliveiraborges4269 4 months ago The explanation is very interesting, but the ending is pure nonsense for the fan base. WE WILL NOT SEE THE COLONIZATION OF MARS IN THIS GENERATION, much less 1000 Starships.😂 1 Reply @ronnagy 4 months ago your jump cuts are terrible. Why, WHY all the motion? Its jarring for no reason. Too bad, otherwise seemed like good content. Reply @Dan-lt8vm 3 months ago The jump cuts and terrible panning/zooming make this video unwatchable. I like some of the content that you put out, but these changes along with the ever-present slide towards increasing click-baitiness has caused me to unsubscribe. You have gone the way of WAI. Reply @AlexNesh 4 months ago Russian design 😊 2 Reply @c0ldsh0w3r 4 months ago First that AI nonsense, and now Gasious? It's Gaseous mate. lol no biggie 1 Reply 1 reply @mirandela777 3 months ago (edited) High hope for this engine, but that DO NOT mean, is a proven, or reliable engine. The russians have the world best engines when it come to reliability and safety. The First Soyuz rocket flew in 1966 and to this day, have MORE than 1700 successfully launches, a record who crush any other country designs by a huge difference. US on the other hand, "reinvented" many times the rocket engine, Musk is nothing special here: Saturn V, Space Shuttle, Ares IX, ALL different designs, all "reinvented" designs. The Merlin engines are known for their efficiency, reusability, and reliability, playing a significant role in SpaceX's success in reducing the cost of space launches. On the other hand, Russian rocket engines, such as the RD-180 and RD-170 series developed by NPO Energomash, have been historically known for their advanced engineering and high performance. The RD-180 engine, for example, has been used on the American Atlas V rocket. Russian engines have a reputation for their high specific impulse, which is a measure of the efficiency of rocket engines.Clearly, SpaceX is following the Russian design philosophy. Yet, something folks reading this MUST remember, is the FACT, as we sit here today, the Russians have operational human rated rockets for many decades, uninterrupted, and the Americans do not, until recently, with Falcon 9. Musk has a long road ahead. Reply @vengatg8988 1 month ago Over explanation without spec Reply @EVChargers-d9z 4 months ago You're a bit dated.... there's already a Raptor 3 being tested.... Reply @frankkolmann4801 3 months ago I really wanted to watch this. But your raspy voice made it not possible. I have no idea why it is so. Reply @denisrabotay 1 month ago cocaine ? Reply @waynepetrevan 3 months ago you lost me at gasious..... Reply @julioperez-delgadojr2976 3 months ago (edited) Step 1, Buy russian rocket engines.. Step 2, reverse engineer and improve... now Step 3 is pretty hard, coming up with a rad name and then claim yourself a genious... Here's an idea, you people aren't gonna get to any planet on chemical energy so you might as well stop going down that path and figure out what other method you have left and actually invent something. Reply @godmeherbaba5607 10 days ago 💕💕😍😍❤❤ Reply @jlvandat69 2 weeks ago The Raptor engines also fail more frequently than most engines, so it's necessary to have many if you want a decent rate of launch success. Reply 7 replies @JohnDoe-ug7pf 4 months ago Well...i know all you rocket peeps think you deserve a medal and prize for a better rocket..all your energies and ideas have gone into the wrong tech..though..i want you to listen to what good tech sounds like..self running..fuelless turbine...inertial propulsion..no propellers on that..field propulsion...these things deserve medals and honors..technology that frees us..rocket technology enslaves us...i hope some of you catch on...to a better way..a free....way Reply @desmonddwyer 4 weeks ago Very similar to the Russians 🤔 Reply @SailingTerra 1 month ago I tell you how realy. It is cald try and error. Try again and again, again. Everthink tesla or any Elon company is make 1 learn from eat and start making new and new improvements after more errors. Reply @dandymcgee 2 months ago please stop using these awful 90's powerpoint transitions.. just cut to the next thing you wanna show. it's so distracting and confusing Reply @quixodian 1 month ago Watching this, I WISH Musk would stick to engineering and keep out of politics and current affairs. He’s plainly a genius engineer, but his politics are generally obnoxious. Reply 2 replies @CalidrisJZ 12 days ago Learn how to spell gaseous, for Pete's sake. Reply @saumyacow4435 4 weeks ago Does an otherwise interesting video really have to start with cringe SpaceX hagiography? Reply @ForeheadPushUps 4 months ago Connect the solar system 🤣the distances and useless of it. Let's please focus on the dumpster Earth were creating. Reply @bmozumder 3 months ago Sorry but those video transitions are horrible. I had to look away. Reply 1 month ago Junk. Bring back the F1. Reply @An-onymous 5 months ago First one here 1 Reply 3 replies @JMWexperience 3 months ago Your AI voice can’t pronounce “Merlin” properly! Reply @쉬누비 3 months ago He tried to copy soyuz.. but miserably failed.. Reply 5 replies @86hardluck 4 months ago Serious question: Is this an AI voice? Merlin is still being pronounced wrong. Throws me every time. 1 Reply The Space Race · 1 reply @RohitChauhan-bb9rx 4 months ago Hindi me bolo bhai Reply @Aisor98 4 months ago Only one "invention" i see from this video. "New" fuel. Thats all. 2 independent pump scheme... phuffff... whats new in it. Very pathetic, but expains so little. Reply @soheiladam7510 4 months ago Reinvented?!!!🤦 Reply @benoitmann57 3 months ago just blablabla thumbs down next Reply @augnkn93043 3 months ago Down voted because of the stupid transition effect. Reply @ianmccoll7907 1 month ago the voice put me off listening to more than 5 minutes. Reply @johnweerasinghe4139 4 months ago Seems like a propaganda piece for Musk. The NK33 was the engine that mastered the closed cycle. This was mastered by soviet engineering in the 70s or 80s. I always wondered if Musk purchased a NK33 from lockheed and then reveresed engineered it. The 33 engine layout was used on the N1 The USSRs moon rocket. This multiple layout was considered to be the main reason the N1 failed. However, Musk has more advanced computers so maybe the layout he copied from the N1 might work. We have a history of not crediting the Russians for anything we " borrow " from them. I think we learned that from the Nazis. We have this prevelant, inherent belief that because they were communists we don't have to give credit. An achievement is a fact irrespective of who did it. E.g. a communist was the first man in space. Deal with it. Reply 3 replies @cmaurand1 3 months ago Many small engines is Russian tech. Reply 2 replies @FernandoJamesFX 4 months ago Let See If Everyone Understand THIS: SPACEX Will Never Go to The Moon, Because Starship is Just Rubbish. Reply @tredogzs 2 days ago copied Reply @AnuwktootLee-yf9ff 4 months ago Anukeitii Damien boelagwr pate ahi oyra kartw huye hitw huye shin ahi eme sage humerus air anukeito rievrta Ursula brin deme lawns vokt euroeoa aki. Abokhwrd ae nasa univwrse se jewt jayenge Reply @jesusmares7171 4 months ago What a waste of time and money. Rockets not gone takes any were. Chinese just use rockets 5 k yrs ago. Reply @Brakiri 4 months ago Another Elon Musk shaftworker. This engine is nothing new. The Soviets used it 40 years ago and Elon needed a lot of tries to succeed in something the Soviets got right in less attempts, again 40 years ago. I really wonder what these fanbois get out of this. Misinforming other EM fanbois? Reply 1 reply @MozeyNJ 5 months ago First one here Reply @Zorro33313 4 months ago By copying russian RD lmao Reply @Trockenfurz 3 months ago space x is too dumb for aerodynamics & masscalculations they have rocket issues that i could solve AND EXPLAIN within 10min 🤣 Reply @jerrypolverino6025 1 month ago Russian design. Reply @chrisaguilera1564 4 months ago (edited) What if we did this? We can't do that. Why not? Because it's not how things are done. There is a process how we get things done. Exactly. The true test of innovation is asking why so many times that its broken down to the foundation and then restructure it. Elon always asked why. Reply @onyx666. 2 weeks ago That looks horrible..what a failure of engineering. Reply @williambrasky3891 4 months ago I want to thumbs down this video so bad, but I don’t want youtube to get the wrong idea. That it’s rockets I don’t like. I love rockets. What I don’t love is a 5 minute elementary school presentation on basic rocketry interspersed with 10+ minutes of some weird nerd gurgling Elon’s weird little balls. i.e. shit like: “The steps Elon follows when he’s designing something…” When Elon designs what? What does he design? His next racist twitter post? Seriously, what are you talking about? I don’t doubt that he’s had a hand in most of the ludicrous that define starship. (Human rated rocket w/ no means for a crew abort system, “rapid” reuse of a crewed rocket w/ 33 ultra complex closed cycle motors. Ditto w/ any motor expected to repeatedly cycle between 300 & 0 bar at extreme temperatures. {I’m getting metal fatigue just thinking about it}. The decision to go forward w/ a design that, if nothing goes wrong, uses 20 rockets to get 1 rocket to the moon. The idea that a 10 story building is about the right shape for a lunar lander, and before you ask, of course the only ingress/ egress is 9 stories up! The questionable reliability of such a necessarily complex relight procedure. The dubious aerodynamics of the sci-fi inspired shape & authority/ efficacy of the integral fins. The decision to launch starship 1 w/ out any sort of flame diverter. The choice to ignore launch 1’s implications for any potential vertical landing…or launch from somewhere similarly unprepared…like…the moon. I have a feeling Elon’s fingerprints are all over those design decisions. Still doesn’t mean he designed anything. Just that he told a bunch of actual engineers what they were allowed to design & never once did he considered their objections. And, “Elon claims the reaction is 99% efficient..” really? Did elon measure it himself? Did no one know how to calculate the stoichiometric ratio of methane & oxygen before Elon? It’s like saying, “Elon claims the steel used to construct starship is mostly iron.” What are you doing? Why don’t you put half the energy you put into stanning for an unremarkable bigot with too much money into actually learning about the shit Elon pretends to know about? It’s embarrassing. You should be embarrassed about falling for such a transparent grifter. You should also learn how to think critically so that it’s a whole lot less likely to happen to you again. 1 Reply @aerospace6631 4 months ago No matter what you say,this rockets technology is unseful for space exploration.Very slow,very heavy,may be for to get into the orbit,may be for moon exploration but nothing else.I dont inow why you spend your time talking about a primitive technology. Reply @feenstma 3 weeks ago Good video. I would call it great if it wasn't for the long and idiotic ad in the middle. Screw that and screw your videos. Reply @Mardilking 5 months ago we can do better then this fool he is offensive 1 Reply @chamocudno 5 months ago no views 1 minute bro fell off Reply @AtomGTT 1 month ago I just wish Elon wasn't such a misogynistic Reply 1 reply @russmartinez7988 1 month ago And they will never reach the moon. Reply 1 reply @EJAlexandra 4 months ago Asking the algorithm not to show me neo fascist musk fans like this. Sad. 😢 Reply @martyisabeliever 4 months ago "Space" such fools...