Visit https://brilliant.org/MarcusHouse/ to get started learning STEM for free, and the first 200 people will get 20% off their annual premium subscription.
Today we are talking about the SpaceX Starship Mars landing. Will this work? SpaceX’s colossal Starship hurtling through the super thin Martian atmosphere and trying to slow enough to flip over and touch down successfully with the available propellant? It is a good question and one I’ve been curious about for quite some time. I think you are going to love this one.
You may also like this video about how Starship tank autogenous pressurization systems work
https://youtu.be/HXaJa6MdnDc
👕Like this shirt? Pick it up on any product you like here.
https://marcus-house.myspreadshop.com/mars+here+we+come+-+light?idea=60adc49896e7c070513a8931
Or in reverse
https://marcus-house.myspreadshop.com/mars+here+we+come+-+dark?idea=60adc4996ae5286c7eb437d5
🎁 Marcus House Merch – https://marcus-house.myspreadshop.com/
You can support me on:
Patreon – https://www.patreon.com/MarcusHouse
Join my Discord – https://discord.gg/dAMmbqj
Follow on Twitter – https://twitter.com/MarcusHouse
The production crew:
Brenton Myers, Brendan Lewis, GameplayReviewUK, TiagoCruz
Support from the below is always massively appreciated:
📷 NASASpaceFlight – https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCSUu1lih2RifWkKtDOJdsBA
📷 BocaChicaGal – https://twitter.com/BocaChicaGal
📷 RGVAerialPhotography – https://www.youtube.com/c/RGVAerialPhotography
📷 Greg Scott – https://twitter.com/GregScott_photo
📷 Starship Gazer – https://twitter.com/StarshipGazer
📷 Cosmic Perspective – https://twitter.com/considercosmos
📷 LabPadre – https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCFwMITSkc1Fms6PoJoh1OUQ
📷 Zack Golden – https://twitter.com/CSI_Starbase
3D artist magicians:
✨ Brendan Lewis – https://twitter.com/_brendan_lewis
✨ Erc X / smallstars – https://twitter.com/ErcXspace / https://twitter.com/smvllstvrs
✨ Tony Bela – https://twitter.com/InfographicTony
✨ Owe BL – https://twitter.com/Bl3D_Eccentric
✨ Corey – https://twitter.com/C_Bass3d
✨ Neopork – https://twitter.com/Neopork85
✨ Alexander Svanidze – https://twitter.com/AlexSvanArt
✨ DeepSpaceCourier – https://twitter.com/ds_courier
✨ SpaceXvision – https://twitter.com/SpacexVision
✨ Stanley Creative – https://twitter.com/Caspar_Stanley
✨ Ryan Hansen Space – https://twitter.com/RyanHansenSpace
✨ Matt Ryan – https://twitter.com/MattR5226
✨ TijnM_3DAnimations – https://twitter.com/m_tijn
✨ Christian Debney – https://twitter.com/ChristianDebney
✨ Evan Karen – https://www.youtube.com/c/EvanKaren
✨ 3D Daniel – https://twitter.com/3DDaniel1
#SpaceX #Starship #Starlink
source
👍
So much for the first class cabin.
Landing on Mars is one of the most difficult achievements in space exploration. Ask the Russians. More difficult than Earth landings.
The way Elon would solve this is just to refuel the main tanks. Have well more than enough for landing and don't worry about some boil off. Perhaps have twice as much as you need and lose some through boil off during the journey and maybe the ships for the journey won't even have header tanks and instead use the space for supplies and crew.
FYI, the engines on mars are going to have an ISP closer to that of vacuum, so go with the full ISP of 356 or whatever they are estimated at now.
Super interesting. Thanks Marcus. Re: new designs. I was always sceptical SpaceX could keep the same design for very different planets/missions. They soon required differences for the moon. I think you can only stick to the same design if the margins are large and it seems they are very tight
Still boggles my mind. Why not reduce entry velocity “in-orbit”, gravity takes over, and your already coming in significantly slower, which means you need less Delta V on landing.
We only need the header tanks to flip the craft around and induce acceleration to make the fuel/oxidizer in the large tanks to settle to the bottom. Many second/third stage (and Apollo) engines have tiny tanks for just such an issue. So, no the header tanks, don't need to change at all, but main tanks still need to stay cool.
when using mach as a unit of measurement in this case i would assume it was based on mach at sealevel on earth
If (or rather when) Starship passes all approvals, tests, orbital flighttests and finally is ready to get sent to Mars, I imagine the first ship to be unmanned, but sending an empty ship over seems also a bit of a waste. If the ultimate goal is to colonise the planet, surely sending something usefull (yet somewhat expendable, in worst case scenario) would be a good idea? What will be the first possible cargo, does anyone know?
OK —– Marcus: Once the Starship is turned upright using the SMALL header tanks, the engines will be powered by the fuel now at the bottom of the main tanks. Main Tanks that already have to be WELL INSULATED (beyond the entry heat tiles) for the main tanks to hold the MethaLox for the half a year+ it will take to make enough Methalox to return to Earth while on Mars… No Need to enlarge the existing Header Tanks… SORRY MARCUS… Stop trying to make up Problems that do not EXIST… Or did you forget that the main tanks are going to have to store the Methane and Lox for months before Starship can take off to return to Earth??? Second, Space X has repositioned and resized the fore and aft side fins to spend longer times in the lower thicker atmosphere bleeding off speed. (that could increase if the booster side strakes are added to the Starship for Methalox lines from the header tanks on one side and maybe even an external personnel elevator tube to the surface on the other?). Allowing the Starship to bleed off even more speed with a much slower terminal velocity than you have stated in the much denser lower altitudes… Why Starship landing sites are all in the lower surface levels of the planet to use that thicker atmosphere. Point 2 is that the demo used in this video was years old while the Starships Drag coefficient was changed many times since.. and most likely will again… Cutting the Delta-V needed to land Starship from 40 seconds to possibly less than 30 seconds to allow more cargo weight. But varying Delta-V numbers still do not change the fact that the Main tanks can hold as much Delta-V fuel as needed without increasing the header tank sizes… As the Liquid Oxygen will spend most of its time floating out in the middle of the tanks far from the hot insulated walls of the tanks… And by the way,,, Did you forget that Methane is stored at a much higher temp not needing to be kept super cold with a lot of insulation. With the biggest problem for methane being freezing into icebergs (tank heaters needed) and not boiling off??? That would be exacerbated with a common tank dome with the LOX header tank… Or Space X could decide to add a small storage tank in the main Lox tank just large enough for the extra Lox needed for the landing allowing the main tank to serve as a huge vacuum bottle keeping the propper ship's balance for entering the atmosphere…(but that would not address the boil-off issue while producing enough LOX for the HOME trip)
And finally… Did you not realize that with a hundred tons of Cargo in the nose of the ship that adding huge header tanks with empty main tanks would drastically make the Starship NOSE Heavy keeping it from belly-flopping, turning it into an ARROW that would quickly Slag off its bow and header tanks???!!! Opps,,,, no Methalox left for any Delta-V there!!!
K —– Tragically Now; after doing a few calculations thanks to you Marcus,,, Surprisingly; the Mars ship has to get rid of its Nose Header Tanks… As with a hundred tons of cargo when landing, the Mars ship will be drastically NOSE HEAVY…!!! The Starship is designed for returning to Earth without 100+ tons of Cargo, the reason for the HEADER TANKS disappear) This means that landing on Mars with 100+ tons of cargo, Space X must get rid of the Header Tanks in the NOSE, moving them to the bottom of the Lox tank…. Or redesigning Mars-ship and moving the Cargo section placement… Which is not a bad idea…!!!
K2 —- Let's flop or exchange ship sections, moving the cargo section to the bottom of the ship with the MethaLox tanks and engines above the Cargo decks with 6 smaller (higher pressure more efficient) vacuum engines and since Mars is 99% vacuum, getting rid of the 3 low atmosphere none vacuum engines leaving only the vacuum engines that were pointing straight down. The 6 throttleable vacuum engines are now pointing out to the sides like the Lunar Ship is being designed… This will lighten up the fuel tanks considerably into simple balloon tanks since they no longer need to support the Hundred+ tons of cargo decks above them during a high acceleration launch from Earth on top of one huge BOOSTER!!! (that just may need several jettisonable crutches from the top of the Earth Booster up past the Cargo decks to the bottom of the Mars-ship LOX tank that would reduce the Mars ship weight by a good 20 tons once the booster drops off). While the short 50-foot-tall Cargo section has to be strengthened only a little since it already had to be reinforced to support the 100-plus tons of cargo and 3+ test atmospheres to allow Humans without suits to work in the cargo hold decks. With the landing gear that is needed in either configuration using support braces reaching up past the cargo decks to the bottom of the Lox tank, taking up most of the needed extra reinforcement weight for both launch and landing. The distance of support structure of the landing gear up past the 30-foot tall engine section with the engine pointing down at the bottom of the ship with some ten feet of exhaust clearance above the ground on the original design to keep from digging large craters in the Martian surface: is about the same distance as the Cargo section moved to the bottom with the vacuum engines pointed down to the sides at 45-degree angles from around the bottom of the Lox tank eliminating digging any craters. But because the MethaLox tanks will be empty on landing, the support structure can be a fraction of the weight. Only having to support a full MethaLox load in a static tank while on Mars and under the low launch acceleration loads when taking off from Mars… Saving as much as 50 tons from the original Mars ship design…
—— While I favor a crew section in the tapered nose to keep them away from the Engines just above the cargo decks while landing and accelerating into Earth orbit and then into Mars Transfer orbit,,, I'd also love to be able to gaze out across the Martain landscape from a good vantage point,,, But there would be extra structure needed, some of which would be beneficial.. The bow crew decks would require a pressurized elevator tube (between the crew decks and cargo decks) that would be housed in a large strake on one side with an equal-sized downcomer strake on the other side for the Header tanks and control, power, lines running from the bow (or simply from the top of the Methane tank), that could now be huge single-use tanks for landing… With the Strakes running down the outside of the ship to the engine and Airlock deck just above the upper Cargo Deck that also reduces the terminal velocity when landing saving fuel. The elevator tube would allow the crew to access the cargo decks that are close enough to the ground to use a simple ramp from the lower hold deck and hatch for rovers to simply drive off onto the surface of Mars and back up into the ship when maintenance is needed or cargo loaded in the safety of a pressurized cargo hold… With an internal elevator between cargo decks. With the main EVA access airlock and Suite stations for personnel just above the Cargo decks gives the crew easy access to the surface. While the crew elevator tube access clean-room airlock keeps all the Mars dust and dirt out of the crew living decks a hundred feet above… The lightweight crew decks at the top of the ship also reduce the distance that extra heavy support structure would be needed between the cargo holds and the heavy engine and Lox tank support structure by 20 to 30 feet. Depending on the size of the crew… making for the lightest possible Mars-ship… With larger crews only needing a few light decks added to the bow instead of major heavy, expensive, ship structure design changing alterations to the lower decks.
K3—— Space X must realize that a Mars Ship like a Lunar Ship can never return to earth… (at least at this time without a lot of new technology) But that is beneficial to going and taking as much cargo to Mars as possible… As Mars is not Earth and a Starship that can go to Mars and land back on Earth starts with a HUGE Weight handicap as does a Starship that only needs to go to the Moon… Placing the Cargo decks at the bottom of the ship is extremely beneficial for both the Mars ship as well as the upcoming Lunar Ship that will be landing on the Moon long before we reach Mars…
Go Elon 😀go go go 🚀
A Mars starship would be a totally new designed layout. Many different designs.
Crewed and uncrewed would be totally different design, Fast and slow transit etc.
You don't even need fully reusable Why would you return a Starship.
If he flattens Starchip and makes the surface in contact with the atmosphere larger it will slow down more rapidly..
I like things like this its cool and interesting to me
Marcus thank you for the information. This makes the whole starship endeavor all the more incredible.
im curious how they exit the ship at such a height
Loved the episode Marcus ❤ Thanks to the entire team for putting it together 👍
From our current physical, phsycological and technical level of understanding, i cannot support any conclusion that it is possible without considerable harm to any participants.
Finding a landing site that would be level and solid enough may be difficult. If there is any slope or rocks, the ship could tip over, possibly destroying, or, at least, damaging it and injuring or killing those inside.
Send a crew to orbit Mars only to prove Man can just do that. Then I will believe whole hog. Please.
I'm surprised there is no consideration of the landing surface of Mars.Could be a wide range of soft sinking sandy to rocky surfaces. How will the Starship adjust for these variables? It would be a shame to go all the way to Mars only to stick a perfect landing and then to fall right over in a crash due to soft to hard surface differences.Maybe try it on Earth first see if you could land on any suface other than water effectively first.
I appreciate this content. You do go deep which is great for me. Also it has long life.
Would it help to enter Martian orbit before attempting landing from a slower velocity?
19000 Litres(671CuFeet) only? Don't seem a lot. 80m sec is 180MPh ! That's a lot of mass to slow down from.
refuel,refuel,
refuel -piddling about with marginal fuel availbaleis incredibly short sighted – need to think outside the box!
An extra 50 tons of propellant ? That’s half the so called payload
Starship as we know it will never go to Mars, or the moon. It will be used to launch payload to orbit around earth, re-enter the atmosphere, and land. Any other space mission using superheavy booster will use a 2nd stage similar to starship but different, and specific to its mission. (e.g. if it's not going to land on a planet/moon/object, and will never enter an atmosphere, the heat shields, a few of the thrusters, the wings, and header tanks, will not be needed.) Reducing mass increasing payload and completely changing the ship.
Marcus, you are a very smart person. Yes, I am impressed. You lost me about 2 minutes in. Look, shouldn't we get to the moon first? And let's see what works there. I am all for going to Mars, but we,{you and I} won't see it in our life time. If you do the math, all the the things that must happen here to get there, keeps extending the timeline further & further away. Launch widow appears every 6 months and there is nothing ready right now. Just production time alone adds 10 years to any launch date. then there's testing & approval, all the time looking at possible launch widows move back 6 months at a time. And wait, you must have fuel there to get back, so there's more time gone. In trying to add up all these numbers, it comes down to the fact that we will not be there in 30 years. China or India might be there well before us.
Looks like you guys have found The bone to chew on.
Excellent explanation and definitely something to think about and watch. Thanks Marcus!🖖
Could that fuel be enough for a return trajectory to earth, i.e. Apollo 13 like attempt? Forgetting fuel to land on Earth, but just to get it back to Earth/Moon orbit.
You kicked ass on this video, Marcus! Nice job!!
The most amazing achievement I am aware of is the Manhattan Project. The numbers around that are astounding. They literally built cities and factories in a couple of months.
I liked this one more than the others, because I like to know the latest tech about how are we getting to Mars.
I came here specifically for the legs!!!!! FFS
you talk toooo fast and it makes unpleasent to watch your videos. are you running away from someone? 🙂
You need to include some tankers on the journey.
Would Flat landing a VTOL type craft with 4 corner engines with a much lower center of gravity be any safer?
When landing here on Earth, the landing pad is a flat concrete pad. Most photos of Mars I have seen show a very uneven surface. Including many rocks. How will Starship land on an uneven surface like this?
Great video as always Marcus! So excited to watch this all playout for real.
ill go to the asteroid belt and bring water back to mars. then id set up bases at different locations in the belt to send water back to mars also set up refueling stations. but seriously id go to work on the base in the belt.
First tour guide tour of Mars…….this is the first crash site second crash site third crash site…………all proceeds to spacex
Millions of us had those same doubts from the get go.
I’d like to see a module with plasma rockets and fuel that could be carried up as Starship cargo and attached to a Mars mission starship. This would provide more efficient and faster transit to Mars. They could be discarded, or the module could detach and fly itself back to earth orbit for refueling and reuse. Starship would hit Mars atmosphere faster, but a reentry tile system that can handle a return trip to earth from the moon should be able to handle it.
I'm sure that Elon and SpaceX will have a viable solution for landing on Mars. Consider having attachable wings already waiting in Earth orbit for mounting on preinstalled mounting bolts. Then perhaps the ship could use aerobraking in the thin Martian atmosphere. It may take a number of loops around Mars to shed enough velocity to allow a rocket powered vertical landing. That's the way Robert Heinlein envisoned landing on other planets in the golden sci-fi days.
Why not go sideways and have parachutes on one side and balloons on the other
Here comes starship V2
The Apollo deadline was optimistic but they did manage to do it, space x will probably fail their deadline