Definitive Guide to Starship ROUGH DRAFT!!!

great work.... note:this friday VSS Unity will fly a mission for Virgin Galatic (Nov. 12, 2020)

Richard Shindle

Great video with excellent detailed info as always... I do have a question spawned by the vid but not answered (I think)... How does the first stage return back to the launch point? You mentioned it has to dissipate all the kinetic energy thru max belly contact with the atmosphere, but how does it reverse course back to the landing site? I assume it does so thru the Elonrons, and firing the rockets once it slows down to turn around and head back?

Tim, another super video. The way you organize the information and present it is impressive. I caught a couple of the things already pointed out in the Google doc, too. Once again I learned much. You deserve a great deal of credit for work and the obvious effort you put into it. Thanks.

Hello, Tim. As always, a complete and thoughtful overview of what is rapidly becoming a fascinating topic for the space-minded. Patreon is doing their usual great job with the edit. I found several small mistakes and while checking the list, found them already posted. I did have a thought though; what will the cargo version have for a hinge mechanism? Will it be hinged in the front to avoid premature opening? How will it be actuated? What additional reinforcement is contemplated to ensure hull integrity during events like max-Q and re-entry? I realize there is a finite amount of information you can put into these videos, but I suspect the cargo version will come along sooner rather than later as Starlink continues to add satellites, so a quick aside on this might be in order. Either that, or a separate video on just the variants. Looks great; I hope it excites much interest with space enthusiasts.

Great video, Tim. Starship could also double as a space station or temporary shelter. It may be possible to tether two of them together and spin them up to create artificial gravity.

Should name starship enterprise and troopers

Eric Sowder

I'm definitely in the "everyday" person category - very much enjoyed the video. Super educational and informative - yet again, I learned something from a Tim video. Thanks!

Hi Tim, thanks for Your work! It's hard to imagine how this big machine will land and start from the moon. It need to do insane times of refuellings in LLO or EML to do so. Every such refuelling must be multiplied by refuellings in LEO. Nosecone derived lander sounds so much better at least in the first phases of exploitation of starship. Also 100pax not seems to real at least for 9m diameter version. Starship also should be equipped with emergency options, for instance like possibility to survive during splashdown. Can't imagine how people will leave starship in multiple deck seating layout in such case.

Hi Tim, really nice video. Only things I spotted are that at 25:00 the starship graphic suddenly drops into the picture at the right side of the screen and it makes no sense for it to do that - the FH image in the middle should be next. Also at 25:16 the figures you are speaking for the Falcon Heavy don't match the numbers on screen.

Yes you are right - because most of the propellant mass has gone so its much lighter.

Tim, loved it. Can't wait to see the fully polished version! :)

Great stuff Man. I didn't read the script, or watch the read through (which wasn't an easy thing to do) because I didn't wanna spoil the experience (which was completely selfish) lol

fantastic summation of some very complex physics, but I wonder if simpler - more advanced technology- solutions might bear better results. EtM using fission or fusion drive, VLADIMR, or nuclear ion propulsion. Much shorter transit time, with constant 1 G acceleration, (better health) lower mass for cosmic and solar radiation shielding, and conservation of the principle of moment.

And cost of development

Good story from beginning to end, no boring moment, excellent! 10:55 One thing you need to SpaceX is... strange sentence. 46:00 An important factor here is the weight to surface area ratio, this might be interesting to mention. It is probably higher for Starship than for any reentering vessel before. 47:50 Heat shield maintenance, hmm... I miss a mention of the evaporative cooling option. I think this has larger safety margins than heatshield tiles, and allows for maintenance-less reentry, as it's just a very simple system. It will become sweat cooling again, I'm tellin' ya! Adding this to spreadsheet now.

But yup this is a very good video. I didn't see anything else in the video that wasn't already listed in the spreadsheet.

Not sure about 45:00 mark. To get the upper stage to orbit required a Superheavy. But the Superheavy was lifting itself as well and through the atmosphere. To slow down the Starship upper stage would not take as much energy since it would only be slowing itself down without the mass of the first stage and without atmospheric drag. It may still need a large 'retro rocket' (somewhat smaller than the Superheavy) and be unfeasible but I don't think your wording is correct. Maybe say something like what you did but talk about a 'retro rocket' or 'fuel tanks' which would make the whole stack on the ground way bigger and unfeasible.

“Rough draft” doesn’t do it justice this is an awesome video. Thanks!

robot0verlord

Best part is when you say that you'll be interviewing Elon soon .. cant wait for that. Awesome video. Again you have knocked it into LEO. cheers :)

Loved this! One question. It appears that both stages will land at the launch site. Why does it make sense to do this with starship when it does not with F9? My understanding is that it costs extra fuel to return to the launch site. Is there some reason this is economical for Starship but not F9?

@3:38 you mention the crewed version of starship with ~100 passengers. I'm pretty sure that was reaching even for the 12m back in 2016. I don't think that's possible with the 9m. it would be great to get clarification on that.

As a bit of background. I was one of the first digital engineers in the "world" and worked on the Apollo fight control system. That work was adding digital circuitry for self-testing of the avionics and was probably the only digital circuitry on the Apollo; and may have been a major part of getting Apollo 13 back from the moon. I went on to be part of the team that built the digital flight Control system... for Sweden as the good ole USA was not ready for fly by wire systems! In addition, we replaced the B52 flight systems which allowed these things to still be flying 50 years later, upgraded the SR71, U2, and built the first triple redundant system for the C5A.

WOW... Great presentation, Tim.

A major concern with moving to the use of the “Elonerons” for control during reentry (:48) is this is where peak aeroheating will occur. Heat flux for blunt bodies scales inversely with square root of nose radius. Sharp leading edges that combine good aerodynamic properties with acceptable heating rates will be critical to a successful landing pitch maneuver. Also Starship hinge point/ seal design departs from the body of knowledge from shuttle and other hypersonic vehicles. Combined this is one more potential failure mode for Starship. Yikes!

Third Issue: You don't mention the Starship's noisiness, which probably requires ocean-based launch. That too is qualitatively different from Falcon 9 & Falcon Heavy.

At 25:26, the numbers for Falcon Heavy on the graph do not match what you stated in the dialogue. Also, the Starship dropped into the picture quite a bit early.

Second Issue: Cost to launch: At @ 30:52 you say that because it is totally reusable, the cost of launch is the cost of fuel + the cost of personnel. You leave out the essential cost of construction divided by the average number of flights life-expectation (A#FLE) of the vehicle. Leaving out this third cost (A#FLE) dramatically underestimates actual cost and doesn't highlight the importance of getting A#FLE as high as possible.

Awesome and highly detailed, thanks 🙏 Didn't spot many other issues. You're missing a 'kg' off the Starship graphic (same graphic as others have said at ~25-26 mins) Really picky but CH4 should be CH₄ (subscript 4) at 12 mins and a bit later on 😃 (Sorry, can't get the spreadsheet to load on my phone)

Also, isn't in "on orbit" rather than "In orbit?" Might be nitpicking...

Bob Holt

Same issue @ about 25:12 you say "about 27,500kg" when graphic shows 38.000kg.

Been watching space since Mercury as a 2nd grader in gymnasium watching a little black and white. Now living just up the road from BC. Enjoying the ride and enjoyed your presentation!

Hi Tim, As usual the most rigorously scientific of all the channels tracking SpaceX. One problem issue: @ about 23:32, when discussing Falcon Heavy. You say it can take "about 9,500 kg to orbit" at the same time as your graphic pops 13,000 kg up on the screen. These two numbers are different... What gives?

Hi Tim, 25:30, you say 9,500 kilograms, but the chart shows 13,000

Robert Goldwein

the starship pops in before Falcon Heavy at 25:01.

Texas launches are incredibly hard to catch, Florida are way more routine and more often too. You can pretty easily catch one but trying to catch a Texas launch when it’s all prototypes is very very hard and stressful!

Everyday Astronaut

Awesome! Tim, if I live in Iowa, what should be my first launch watch experience? Should I go to Texas or Florida do you think?