These forces are some uber-powerful sonic waves, playing havoc on the surfaces...

I agree! I noticed that wobble on an rs25 engine video I watched just a couple weeks ago. Had no idea what was going on. Really spectacular breakdown, as always 🎖️

Which is why they didn't go for cutting their pipes out, rather brazing them.

Yes, the RS-25 had to perform not only off the pad, but almost all the way to orbital insertion. Compromises had to be made in nozzle design for its use as a sustainer engine. 0-17,500mph! The Rap-Vac operates only in vacuum thus can be more optimized for that single operating environment. Man does it start quick! Pressure start vs. RS-25 Head start The new RS-25 nozzles will feature a new channel wall nozzle to replace the 1080 stainless steel hand laid furnace brazed tubes in the current RS-25 inventory. I wonder if they will flex as much during start for SLS? Core Stage greenrun at Stennis coming soon! All 4 RS-25 engines have been powered up and gimballed using the new TVC systems.

It looked so cool

And to think the Borg went back in time to prevent us ever discovering how to do it! ...wait, never mind, wrong century.

Warp speed, engage !

I want to know what frequency they are vibrating at.

@@Lachlan.Wright the footage Scott used is available in full on youtube (I forget what exactly to search for sorry, but it's a glorious slowmo of the whole shuttle launch) and the red numbers at the side are frame times, so I don't think it would be too difficult to work out with a calculator and a key for how to read the times

That's incredible, I've seen that slo-mo before of the flow separation but never noticed the engines vibrating. Wow.

that's your prototype destruction ratio, or pdr (not to be confused with a preliminary design review)

@@alexandresen247 I mean, it's just throwing money to accelerate development to breakneck speeds

@@prateekkarn9277 a small price to pay for salvation

@@merxellus1456_ *yes*_

gandu

11:32

Should have had a Kerbel standing next to him acting all "nothing out of the ordinary here".

@@JohnDlugosz Aka. That kerbal posing like "i'm the best" in front of a nuclear explosion

That is just Tim Dodd!!

And that's exactly what happened on Feb 2021 with sn9!!

I'd guess it's easier for SpaceX to just use the lower expansion ratio nozzle first and then test the larger nozze in space later. If Starship ends up with 3 vacuum and 3 ground level engines anyway, testing these by flying into orbit with the ground level engines and testing the higher expansion vacuum engines should be easier for them. And for launching cargo the performance of Starship would be overkill anyway, so the slight loss in performance wouldn't be that big of a deal. So I guess there is a good chance these nozzles will first be used after deploying some sort of payload.

@@diesistkeinname795 probably cheaper to fly a test article on an F9 to LEO to test it :D

@@MrSapps Well, I'm not sure if a vacuum raptor with an even larger nozzle than the tested one would fit into the fairings. Allthough a raptor powered upper stage for Falcon Heavy would probably increase payload capacity significantly, especialy in high energy trajectories as the regular upper stage is significantly undersized for FH. That could even be sufficient for an Apollo-style lander mission if they add active propellant cooling.

@@diesistkeinname795 It s unlikely we will ever see this. Their Falcon 9 and FH launch facilities aren't equipped to fuel a methane liquid methane upper stage. As well it would sort of defeat a huge part of what makes the Falcon 9 (and by extension the FH) such an effective launch vehicle. Rather than design totally custom systems for each stage they just took the same first stage hardware, modified it a bit, and created an upper stage as well as side boosters for the FH. This way they can reuse a lot of tooling and they can capitalize on an economy of scale with the common components. The two main priniciples behind the Falcon 9 (and the FH) are simplicity and modularity (at least thats what they appear to be based on their decisions up to this point).

Tullahoma - a plumber's wildest dream !

We can thank our fairer half.

@@sonnyburnett8725 what?

Amogh K. Umesh , The reason for FB and it’s success!.......

Go watch the final codec conversation of metal gear solid 2. It keeps getting more relevant each year.

great comment!

Funny how sounds overlap. Saw someone build and test a 1000 oscillator analogue synth. And since the tuning of each oscillator varies with frequency and they're all slightly different, when tuned to be in sync for a specific frequency, they're out of sync for others. So... He turns it on and slowly ramps up the frequency, and I swear the entire first 15 seconds or so is just this wall of noise that sounds like a jet engine spooling up. Then out of nowhere in the space of 1-2 seconds it all goes into tune and starts to make an actual note. XD I guess what that suggests is a jet engine sound is basically pink noise, but still. XD

@@KuraIthys Look Mum No Computer

Cost a touch more to run though XD

KuraIthys 🤣🤣 Crazy world lots of sounds 😂 it is crazy how similar things do sound. I mean those electric lawn mowers sound like drones somewhat then there’s the Tesla’s which can be like parrots 😂

Quiet Wanderer I mean we could brew the world a cup of Joe in the morning 🤣😂

Same lol.

Same, I had a launch break at work :D

Yeah, advanced might be a better word to use. :P

@@TechyBen Both are accurate. The RS-25 is a closed cycle hydrolox, the raptor is a full flow staged combustion cycle methalox, the only one of it's kind that has ever achieved full functionality.

But it is way more reusable & allot more powerful. Shuttle wasnt reusable as they would have hoped it ended up being referbishable which caused the cost to go way up from what they wanted.

@@theatom7264 the problem with shuttle wasn't the engines, the engines were the most reusable part. it was the falling heat shield, the freezing o-rings, the fragile aluminum structure, the extra weight from all the random crap congress wanted, the extra long wings, the duplicate 8-bit computers, the life-support systems, the requirement to have 7 crew at all times, the giant hydrolox tank, the fact that it was built and tested all across america, the toxic hypergolic fuels, the inability to properly improve the design, and the fact that they didn't even get enough funding to build spare parts. the flying brick was a disaster.

@@jesusmora9379 Awesome synthesis, for a generation, having the shuttle on the cover of the school science and technology book meant "this is the top thing of the world", how things change when information is properly analyzed.

Same!!

I believe he was referring to bright "beads" not "bands" which would make it the bright spots right at the edge of the nozzle which would be the flow separation.

Ooh, I hope Scott reads your comment and posts a detailed response.

Elon described it as flow separation: twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1309385646033842176?s=20

@@scottmanley Succinct. Nice.

@@scottmanley Yes, that is flow separation. I am talking about the bands up inside the divergent section.

I'm sure this wasthought about in the design but remember this isnt a final design vac Raptor. They'll likely go through a handfull of changes between now & when it starts leaving the atmosphere.

Merlin isn't disposable. It has been used for multiple flights, although it needed refurbishment

OP is talking about the vacuum optimized version on the second stage which burns up in the atmosphere when it's done.

@@chris-hayes Oh, got it. Thanks

Maybe they plan to reuse it in low pressure environments like moon and mars. so designing in that feature now, might be cheaper than making a disposable version and s special reusable one.

If it works, and you can still use the vast majority of the faring for future testing/use, then it's still a decent design. Even if it is a crude solution.

SpaceX doing development testing for Tesla.

Apollo used it on the Lunar Module. No reason not to use it.

@@RavemastaJ I prefer to call it brutal elegance instead of crude, because they're actually meant to telescope up in a wedging action, IMO. The crumpling happens because the one-engined tilted ship puts too much weight on the first couple of legs to make contact, and the ship's moving slightly sideways, not straight down. The leg telescopes to the limit, then crumples further.

rdfox76 that was a one time use vehicle though.

Not much, bigger nozzel, your welcome

Worse yet, they could be cubes

I think they're neat...

You're being rude man, not cool.

@@R3bel02 oh totally not my intention, just trying to be funny

Oh god, I just noticed that one is rotated 180° along it’s horizontal axis relative to the other

Do you not call those flappy things on penguins wings?

@@Vatsyayana87 An amusing thought. But... Well, evolution has turned tetrapod limbs/hands into feet, flippers, and three kinds of wings (pterosaur, bats, and birds). A penguin's wings and a seal's or porpoise's flippers were both feet at one time, if you go back far enough in their evolutionary line. What we're dealing with here is the vagaries of language and its many inconsistencies. These 3 animals' limbs serve the same function regardless of the name. But man-created wings on aircraft have specific ways they interact with airflow, and it's very different from how Starship's control surfaces work. No existing term is accurate, and all are actually misleading, especially wing. Some wish the innovative terms brakerons or elerons had been adopted, but Elon has settled on "body flaps" for now. OK, I went way overboard here...

Arjun Amin they really are stupid to do that

Well, do they have another option? It’s expensive to test a vac engine in an artificial vacuum. And you can’t just haul it into orbit. It is kinda dumb, to be fair.

@@gamingbelowzero542what you want them to just throw it up there and see what happens?

@@gamingbelowzero542 you're ignorant

@@gamingbelowzero542 the guys that you called stupid also responsible for the reusable rockets how about that? And what have you accomplished for besides becoming a keyboard warrior?

methane flames + the metal the engines are made of + various starting chemicals like TEB that burn green

Doug Golde Scott has a whole video on rocket exhausts.

blue: full combustion yellow, orange: incomplete combustion/fuel rich. This is the color of incandescent carbon. green: TEB boron

There's no TEB in raptor.

Thomas Row correct. Big spark plugs

Except USSR tested maybe 1 engine out of every 50 they tried to fly. That alone makes it black and white.

That’s what NASA did with the Saturn V.

USSR didn't had the powerful software modeling tools that SpaceX (and all other Space companies) nowadays use. And I have a feeling that SpaceX have a sizeable edge on the quality of their software, compared to the other players in the field...

Ain't it the truth, pal, ain't it the truth.

i'd rather not "so long and thanks for all the fish". we really need humans on other planets before the world ends (or we get dragged onto another dark age).

Either way, i really hope they build a landing pad FAR away from the main facility, currently the landing pad they used for the hops is a little bit too close to the fuel farm if it comes in fast and can't stop. Blowing that up would set them back quite a bit.

@@knealis76 Yeah, that would be way too Kerbal-ish...

I'd be fine with seeing a nice neat 'looks-easy' touchdown, on the order of the parallel landing of FH side boosters.