SLS In Big Trouble! NASA Just Declared This About SpaceX's Starship



SLS In Big Trouble! NASA Just Declared This About SpaceX’s Starship
===
00:00: Intro
00:35: Importance of Flight 5 to NASA
04:54: NASA systems’ problems
07:35: How has SpaceX helped NASA?
08:59: What does NASA need to do?
===
#greatspacex #elonmusk #spacex #nasa #sls
==
Advertisers who want to place ads on our channel, please contact the email manager: [email protected]
===
SpaceX Starship SN
Be the first to sponsor us Thank you.
https://www.patreon.com/GreatspaceX?fan_landing=true
===
SLS In Big Trouble! NASA Just Declared This About SpaceX’s Starship
Imagine what NASA would be now without SpaceX. SpaceX’s importance has been proven over the years with the Falcon rocket and Dragon. And now, Starship, with the success of Flight 5, especially successfully catching Super Heavy, has further increased SpaceX’s role for NASA, especially when this agency’s vehicles are showing many problems.
So how important are SpaceX and Flight 5 to NASA? Let’s find out on today’s episode of Great SpaceX.
SLS In Big Trouble! NASA Just Declared This About SpaceX’s Starship
Flight 5 really did not disappoint anyone who believed in and supported it with its unbelievable success, especially in the attempt to catch Super Heavy. For SpaceX, it will be an important step for them to reach the goal of full reusability, an essential factor for further goals. Achieving full reusability is a game-changer. This milestone is crucial for reducing the cost of space exploration and enabling faster turnaround times between launches. The ability to relaunch both the Super Heavy booster and Starship will drastically lower expenses, allowing NASA to conduct more frequent missions with less financial strain. Moreover, this breakthrough brings us closer to long-term goals like establishing a lunar base or conducting regular missions to Mars. Full reusability isn’t just a technical achievement—it’s the foundation for making human life multiplanetary.

—-
We use images and content in accordance with the YouTube Fair Use copyright guidelines: https://www.youtube.com/intl/en/about/copyright/fair-use/
Any questions about copyright please send us via Gmail: [email protected]
To be resolved, thank you.

source

29 thoughts on “SLS In Big Trouble! NASA Just Declared This About SpaceX's Starship”

  1. "Imagine what NASA would be now w/o SpaceX"… I didn't even think of it that way. Sometimes we take things for granted because we have been conditioned to be prejudiced against the things that make us great. (Hello YT, that is why you shadowban me)

    Reply
  2. Makes no sense to use SLS to go to the Moon and then wait for Starship to arrive and take them down to the surface, why not just do the whole trip in Starship it would save NASA billions that they could spend on other things.

    Reply
  3. 2:50 Fun fact: the 1970's sci-fi TV series "Space: 1999" starring Martin Landau had a "Moonbase Alpha" as well as the computer game, and the spaceship of that series a little resembles the current Starship.

    Reply
  4. Woe there. Starship has a long, long way to go. Right now, both the ship and the booster sustain substantial damage that render them unable to be rapidly reusable. We have yet to see 100 to 150 tones of anything transported to LEO. Usually, companies use mass simulators with new rocket designs. This is done to keep from burning up on the ascent to compensate for engine that cannot throttle deeply as does the raptor, and to prove the lift capability. The current ship makes it to low earth just shy of orbital velocity with now payload and just enough fuel for landing. A layman’s observation, this is with zero technical information provided such as fuel load and empty weight.
    Orbital refueling is something that the US has little experience with and will take many double launches to sort out.
    Landing legs for lunar gravity and Martian gravity must be tested at different mass levels.

    The US landed on the moon in eight years in the past. Yes it was a simpler system with limited goals, but in 8 years! SpaceX has been working on it for that long already and they seem to be about half way there. Remember the broke ground in Boca Chica 10 years ago. In 2018 when they were starting to build the 13m BFR from carbon fiber, they said they would be going to mars in 2022.
    It is easy to be critical in an armchair than productive, so I must tell you I wish them well. But the will need more support from the US government, Texas, Florida and California (don’t hold your breath for the last one) in the form of putting their hand away and let SpaceX work on their projects.

    Reply
  5. I'll say this, Nasa can't make rockets well anymore, but they can train astronaughts well enough, i haven't heard a thing about space X astronaught prep, apart from developing life support systems

    Reply
  6. Shows how stupid this all is just by still having issues with heat shield tiles after the whole shuttle program to already figure them out. Space X is already upgrading them, and Boeing is still trying to reinvent the wheel…. why?

    Reply
  7. I'm glad NASA doesn't build rockets. We would never leave Earth's gravity. All NASA does is to see who they can waste our money on that can't build rockets. Thank God for SpaceX. How they can make the dollar stretch is awesome. It's sad to see how advanced China is on the moon. Let's all thank FAA, Fish & Wildlife and what other environmental agencies that have MAJORLY cause our setbacks. BTW, there should not be any fines tacked on to SpaceX for your incompetence, FAA. 🤨

    Reply
  8. Bottom line … ULA/SLS Rockets are the model Ts of the 1920s and Space X and Rocket Lab Rockets are the muscle cars of the 1960s (given that we'd be further along if the liberal democrats hadn't wasted money on projects to stay in power).

    Reply
  9. SpaceX only has one thing to apologize to NASA for:

    From the time they agree on the price with NASA and make the contract…until the FAA gives them permission to take off…SpaceX has cut their prices in half.

    Reply
  10. Wouldn't surprise me if they scrap S31 and jump straight to S33 (they then will have to learn how to successfully fly, or should I say flip as the aerodynamics are different) but I still say catch attempt on flight 8 either way.
    NASA needs to stop with the "cost+" contacts as I think companies are deliberately taking the micky to cover other losses and stay afloat.

    Just my opinion.

    Reply
  11. Looks like a lot of anti-SpaceX trolls have infested this conversation as if orchestrated by,say, vested interests seeking to diminish them. Let me say this clearly, jumping into Musk is futile. The true power of SpaceX is Shotwell and her team. She has the organisation humming and other agencies can only look on in jealous lament. Foreign National agencies known for only copying (pathetically poor imitations) and stealing IP, continue to fail dismally to achieve anything near SpaceX standards. NASA know the true value of SpaceX and will soon cede the program and divest to be a management agency coordinating numerous private space industry giants to achieve their goals. It is happening and no crap misguided critiques from trolls and naysayers will change the march to success of these brilliant people.

    Reply
  12. I remember when all our launches of astronauts was from Russia on Russian Missiles. Then I remember rocket launches in this country, but with rockets with Russian engines. All this was very depressing when you think back to July 20, 1969. Humiliating actually.
    Now SpaceX has us proud again with every launch. And it just keeps getting better.
    I wonder is SpaceX working on a design of the Star ship that might be linked to serve as a replacement space station for the ISS? Just wondering.
    SpaceX definitely has me looking up again! I had kind of given up during the late 90s and early 2000s. Go SpaceX!

    Reply

Leave a Comment