Hi there, I didn’t expect to be back so soon. There I was yesterday, watching video analysis of Elon Musk’s 4/20 first launch of the integrated Starship, having a fun time being engaged with all the sharp people down in the comment threads, and thinking I’ll let this breathe before round two. Heck, I only just added the video analysis from Voice of Thunder to the diary this morning because it had so many fresh insights (remember that name in a minute here).
Then what’s this? I come to find a YouTube post of audio from a Twitter spaces chat Elon had with some Twitter Blue Checks? And in it, he basically just straight-up tells them the critical Flight Termination System (FTS) may need to be re-qualified because it did not function correctly and failed to terminate the flight?
Wait, what?
I’ve got this funny feeling this YouTube clip with audio of the post-mortem may vanish, so enjoy it while it lasts.
Now look, I don’t intend to mock anyone’s manner of speech, but in taking down Elon Musk quotes, the nine-month pregnant pauses and the parts where he’s grasping for a way to spin something are part of what he’s communicating, so I’ll leave that for you to judge. I swear I’m not trying to pick on him. If anything, I removed as many “um’s,” “er’s,” and ‘uh’s” as feasible while retaining the clarity and vibe.
Let’s start at the top of this thing as Elon joins late, making apologies for tardiness. Then the chief engineer of SpaceX launches into his presumably prepared-for post-mortem (:58 seconds into this recording).
“Basically the outcome was roughly, in the sort of, um… what I expected. And, uh, maybe slightly exceeding my expectations, but roughly what I expected, which — or hoped for, I should say, which was to get clear of the pad, with minimal damage to the pad, and I’m glad to report that the pad damage is actually quite small, and looks like will be repaired quickly.”
If I were to conduct a reading comprehension test after that word salad, I might ask a class a question like:
How did Elon Musk think his rocket performed in reality versus his expectations?
A) Roughly what he expected
B) Sort of what he expected
C) Maybe exceeded what he expected
D) What he hoped for
E) All of the above
Let’s just keep going while you think of your answer.
“...We would also get significant in-flight data, particularly with respect to the pressurizing of the tanks with the propellent liquids, which is called autogenous pressurization. Um, as opposed to, say, Falcon 9, which uses helium pressurization. But helium is in very short supply and extremely expensive, so it’s way better to, uh, or to essentially pressurize with the liquid form of the oxidizable fuel. Um, so that actually looks quite good.”
Starship relieved itself of oxygen like a Cubs fan during the 7th inning stretch, and “that actually looks quite good.” I love optimism.
Quick side note before we go on, but you owe it a moment to really take in the way he says “autogenous pressurization” here. Everything in his voice picks up with all the I know this part! energy of a lapsed caroler hitting “FIVE GOLD-EN RINGS!”
But this conversation about pressurization is quite interesting if you paid attention to what our friend Voice of Thunder was saying around the 5 minute mark of his analysis, which I will repost here:
In the video, he observes a stream of oxygen escaping the rocket, a data point presented in the SpaceX onscreen graphics:
“It starts at about the one-minute mark, and over the period of 10 seconds you lose 10% of your oxygen. Boom, gone. And it took me a while to even figure out a proposal of how the hell that can be. You can basically see it pissing out of one of the engines [in the video].”
He works out this can only tied to the helium and oxygen pressurization, something Musk appears to back up here. We’ll come back to this oxygen issue in a second, but let’s go on with the post-mortem:
“And we also went supersonic, which was... so, that was no problem at all. And, um… but the… so I’m obviously going through some good news items here.”
Look… with the giant space turtle that holds this world on its back as my witness, I’m not trying to mock his speech. I removed so many “um’s” in that one block alone. I’m getting to the important part.
“The vehicle structural margins appear to be better than we expected, as we can tell by the fact that the vehicle is actually doing somersaults towards the end and still staying intact. Um, so that’s also good.”
Breaking news: Simone Biles spotted at SpaceX, works with Super Heavy on tumbling.
“Um, and um… So yeah, overall I feel like, uh… that was a great flight, err… Um, SpaceX team did excellent work, we made a lot of progress, and I think from a technical… a rocket standpoint, and pad standpoint, we are probably ready to launch in, uh, six to eight weeks.”
Okay, so I guess that’s all for the good news. But at least you’re going to be up again, in... what was it again?
Here’s a report on Space.com, just today (SpaceX should be ready to launch Starship again in 6 to 8 weeks, Elon Musk says):
The billionaire entrepreneur went on to say that the launch pad and the next Starship vehicle should be ready to launch in six to eight weeks. The next mission will have the same basic goal as the first — get Starship's 165-foot-tall (50 meters) upper stage partway around Earth, and bring it down near Hawaii.
Technical readiness is only part of the picture, however. SpaceX will also have to secure another launch license from the U.S Federal Aviation Administration, which is currently investigating, along with SpaceX, exactly what happened on the April 20 launch.
That investigation is likely looking into Starship's FTS, because the system didn't work exactly as planned during the debut launch: A whopping 40 seconds elapsed between the issuing of the self-destruct command and the explosion high above the Gulf of Mexico, Musk said.
Wait, hold on. Did you catch that part?
Here’s Musk’s full comment during the post-mortem, skip to 3:05 (emphasis mine):
“The longest timeline on that is probably requalification of the Flight Termination System, um, because we did initiate the Flight Termination System, but it was not enough. It took way too long to rupture the tanks. So basically we need more detonation cord, uh, to, uh, light [unclear] up the tanks at altitude and ensure that they... Basically, the rocket explodes immediately if flight termination is necessary. So, requalification of the -- I’m just guessing here -- that requalification of the much longer detonating cord to ends of the rocket in a bad situation is probably the long-lead item.”
And there it is. Did you catch it? Musk is confirming what all of the high-res video in my diary yesterday strongly suggested, that the FTS failed to stop the rocket. Since Musk’s Flight Termination System did not Terminate Said Flight, then maybe he doesn’t really have an FTS at all.
And by “long-lead item,” he means time. Lots of time.
Speaking of the ticking clock, just how long was it between the attempt to terminate the flight and the actual termination? An eternity, when you’re an out of control rocket:
“It was pretty long. I think it was in the order of 40-seconds-ish. So quite long. Um, yeah.”
Again, FAA — what were you thinking here?
Let’s go back to the Voice of Thunder video and his explanation of the oxygen leak. In the video, he observes that SpaceX’s onscreen graphic indicated there was precious little oxygen remaining on Starship to cause the reaction necessary for detonation, due to the atmosphere.
This appears to get confirmed by Musk in the post-mortem:
So, the rocket was in a very low air-density situation, so the aerodynamic forces that it was experiencing were, it would be less than if it, uh, at a lower, you know lower down in the atmosphere and so the aerodynamic forces would have, I think at lower point in the atmosphere, uh, aided in the destruction of the vehicle, and in fact that’s what kind of what happened when the vehicle got to a lower enough altitude, the atmospheric density was enough to cause structural failure. Um, but... [he appears to gulp water here] This is obviously something we want to make super sure is solid before proceeding with the next flight."
Oh, I would say so, chief engineer!
Interestingly, Musk himself here appears to suggest it was only after the oxygen-starved rocket engines got a gulp of that sweet, sweet lower density air before they were able to finally blow up on their own. Of course, this means the FTS probably would have worked just fine if it detonated near the tank farm, so there’s that silver lining, I guess.
Musk then confirms several Raptor engines were deliberately shut down almost immediately (Gee, these suckers don’t seem to want to work well, do they?). When asked if the rocket was supposed to take off at a lean (towards the tank farm), Musk confirms that was definitely not part of the plan.
Let’s jump to 8:29, when a participant asks a very good question:
“What’s your best guess as to what the caused the initial engine issues — and I guess it cascaded after that. What do you think happened?”
Elon Musk: “Um… “
I clocked a six-Mississippi pause here. He continues:
“I think we don’t know with certainty, Obviously, the rocket stayed on the launch pad for a while, and we did generate quite the rock tornado at the base of the vehicle, and our first guess would have been that rock tornado would have caused potentially significant damage to the engines, but — at least — we don’t see obvious… we weirdly do not see evidence of the rock tornado actually damaging engines or heat shields in a material way. It may have happened, but we have not seen evidence of that.”
That is weird! But credit again to Voice of Thunder here in his analysis, as he dismissed the significance of this rock tornado fairly quickly. The problem is at the heart of Super Heavy, the Raptor 2 engines and their tendency to blow up.
But turns out, these were all bad engines headed for retirement anyway.
“The engines on Booster 7 were built over a long period of time, so each engine was a little bit of a unique item, whereas the engines on Booster 9, which are next, are much newer and consistent and really with significant reliability improvements over 7. So I think we’ll see a much more robust engine situation with Booster 9.”
Right, SpaceX fans? Booster 7 was the old stuff. These engines were weak, man. We need the new Glengarry Glen Raptors on Booster 9, and then everything will be TO THE MOON!
Side note, was really hoping that thumbnail image above would have been Jack Lemmon. Point remains.
All right, so the Booster 7 was a rocket of misfit engines. So why did we launch this again? I thought it was ready? Or wait, the steel plate wasn’t ready, but Starship was. Until the “valve froze” caused the delay to 4/20. Then it launched — and blew up, as predicted. But… for reasons?
“It was actually just good to get this off the ground, we made so many improvements with Booster 9 and beyond, that it really… we just really needed to fly this vehicle and move on to the much-improved Booster 9 and later ship designs.”
If I find out later they can use these lost engines as some kind of tax write-off, so help me, turtle.
Side note here, just for the serious engineering nerds -- you all can jump to 15:20 where he spends time talking about the water-jacketed steel sandwich that will be installed beneath the pad, which he describes as “a super-sized shower head pointed up.” I’ll leave that one to to explain by a smarter engineer than me, but it’s worth listening to his strange, shifting explanations for why they didn’t wait to use it.
I know we’re running very long here and you’re all tired, but there’s a few more bits of this conversation we really need to talk about.
At 25:05, we really get to the heart of the Elon Musk engineering philosophy, and what he plans to do with the billions in Federal tax dollars being granted to him to develop this space technology:
“The goal of these early missions is just information. Like, we don’t have any payload or anything. It’s just, ‘Let’s try to learn as much as possible.’ So you know, that’s why I would consider this to be a success, because the goal of the flight was to learn a lot, and we learned a lot. I would characterize it as a success — obviously not a complete success — but still, nonetheless successful.
That time I stepped on a rake was not entirely successful, but I did learn a valuable lesson about footwork on a farm field.
Elon then waxes nostalgic for his Soviet heroes:
“And you know, I always want to frame the difficulty of this with respect to the sort of Soviet Union-Warsaw Pact rocket developments of the past, for which I have a lot of respect. Back then, Russia and Ukraine were working together, they made great stuff in space, I have to say. [giggles] Maybe they can return to that, it’s much more productive.”
The lack of worker productivity in Ukraine’s rocket industry is the real crisis right now.
Watch here, as he dreams of the ideal Soviet workplace:
“So like the N1 program, I always recommend people read the history of the Soviet N1 program, which was the competitor rocket to the Saturn V moon rocket. And that’s a point you’re talking about late 60s, early 70s, where the Soviets were at their A-game. I mean they were really fantastic. So they have A+ players, that’s it’s fair to say their motivation was maximized.
Gee, where have I heard an out-of-touch delusional billionaire praising despotic, authoritarian regimes and their way of doing business? I can’t… quite… put… my finger… on it….
Then he giggles as he fantasizes about sending his SpaceX employees to the gulag:
“Um, like, you know, success means you’re a Hero of the Soviet Union. Failure? You’re probably going to the gulag. So A+ players, maximum motivation. And still the N1 failed. It never reached orbit. So you know, so that’s the team, for one, you really have to have a tremendous amount of respect for the N1 team and they did not succeed.
Pause to gag on how much stupid you just ingested. Continue, please:
“There were so many super smart people in that program, and they really knew what they’re doing with rockets, and with maximum motivation they did not succeed. So, it’s just worth bearing [in mind] that the N1 is the closest to Starship of any rocket that’s flown -- and a Starship is actually a bit more risky in some ways, in that we’ve got a cryogenic fuel, and the thing about a cryogenic fuel it can gasify and form sort of fuel-oxygen pockets, and that kind of thing.
“It’s always harder to deal with the gas with a cryogenic fuel than with a liquid that is at room temperature like kerosene, basically rocket-grade jet fuel, which is what Falcon and the N1 used. So we’re risking…”
Probably just a careless word choice here, as he quickly corrects “risking” to “running,” but Dr. Freud may want to add a thought.
“So we’re risking… we’re running a higher-chamber pressure engine that’s full-flow stage combustion, so it’s the most complex and difficult engine configuration, but the one with the highest efficiency.“
The complex and difficult engine configuration appears to be extremely efficient about exploding. Let’s revisit Voice of Thunder:
“So it all boils down to, from the very beginning Musk’s deal with the Raptor is, it was going to be the highest chamber pressure engine, blah blah blah. Lots of superlatives, but that’s basically made a rod for their own back. The engines blow up, they’re unreliable. Can’t make a rocket out of unreliable engines.”
Considering that the Soviet’s “test by flying” philosophy didn’t work — in four flights, the N1 never made it to orbit, never achieved stage separation — how will Musk succeed where the highly-motivated A+ Soviet players failed? And before you read this next quote, please remember he’s talking about the billions in Federal grants our government keeps giving this guy:
“We do have a production line that if it takes us 10 flights, we’ll do it, you know. They would have eventually have succeeded with the N1. They just decided that it was too expensive to continue, and they wanted to do other things. So after they had those failures, they… I guess it’s pretty embarrassing, International level, but I do think the Starship design…”
At this point Musk trails off, then shifts to spend some time discussing engine isolation, and preventing domino failures (as observed on 4/20). But then at 31:34, Elon Musk pencils in some goal posts:
“Hoping we can get four flights out this year, maybe five. And we should be... I would be surprised if we exit this year without getting to orbit. I’d say it’s not 100% probable, but we have an 80% probability of reaching orbit this year, and pretty — I don’t want to tempt fate here, don’t worry — I think a 100% chance of reaching orbit within 12 months. “
And when can we expect the whole “rapid reusable” part? At 41:55:
“It will probably take us a few more years to achieve reusability on a regular basis and bring the ship back. ... It’ll take a few years to get to where Falcon 9 is today, where it is now quite normal for the rocket to land. It’d be weird if it didn’t land these days.”
Fun fact! The Falcon, in fact, rarely lands. It’s only landed under 200 times out of thousands of launches. That’s because most of the time, the contracted payload they’re carrying has to get to an altitude so high, they can’t afford the weight of the fuel to re-land that sucker. The rockets get ditched at $65 million a mission. When they are re-used, it’s only $55 million per mission, so… yeah.
* Down in the comments, Never Better says my facts are confused here, and I’ll definitely defer this point to the Falcon fans at this time of night. Crossed out, shame me in the comments. Those costs are right, though.
All right, kids, you made it to the final part of this nightmare (and trust me, I didn’t want to spend my afternoon on Elon Musk, either). But we really need to hear from Elon on the environmental damages, for which the FAA is already being sued.
Let’s jump to a participant question at 42:55:
Participant: “There’s a lot of opposition from these environmental groups in the area over the debris, and I just wanted to get your reaction to that, since some didn’t except the debris to go as far as it seemed to go, and if there is a legal challenge in court, you know either against SpaceX or the FAA, how would SpaceX respond and what would it do to the timeline?”
Elon Musk: “Yeah, I think, you know if you say, like, for practical purposes… I think if you were to say, like, like, like at this point, like, you know, look at an aerial picture of the area, and apart from the area around the launch stand, tell me where things are damaged. It’s actually… you can’t even see it at this point. So it’s not like the rocket, you know, uses non-toxic propellants, um… And you know, so it discounted [sic] a lot of dust, but to the best of our knowledge there has not been any meaningful damaged environment... uh, that we’re aware of.”
FAA, are you listening? Hello?
Quick reminder that this guy claims we have plenty of water and that space radiation is not harmful.
Anyway, right after this, one of the participants in the chat chimes in to offer a learned, informed environmental assessment:
Participant: “And to be honest, I was out there at the pad two day after, there’s a huge storm on Saturday, like, 70-80 mph winds…”
Elon Musk “Yeah! That was intense!”
Participant: “I saw more debris coming off the shore from like people’s docks falling into the water and capzising boats.”
Elon Musk: “Yeah!”
Participant: “I mean, anything more than some bits of concrete which, you know… yeah.”
Elon Musk: “Yeah, to exceed the damage done by a hurricane is quite difficult. Hurricanes, the power of nature, is immense compared to [us]. We are still feeble compared to the power of nature. We’re really tiny. Look at Starship, and it’s like, ‘Wow, that seems so big to us humans.’ But if you zoomed out and were looking at Earth from a distance you wouldn’t even see Starship! It'd be like, ‘I think I see a tiny little dot jumping over the surface, maybe. We’re like microbes trying to get from one dust mode to another dust mode.
Tax Musk. Fund NASA. Get a different result.
Okay, I’m through. See you in the comments.
UPDATE — WEDNESDAY, MAY 3, 8am PT:
I’m adding this video from the Alpha Tech YouTube channel, as it does a really good job of juxtaposing Musk’s post-mortem with the launch footage and aftermath. Quick viewing note: as you watch, please note the SpaceX vaporware promotional video that’s sprinkled throughout and consider the enormous gulf between the artist renderings Musk loves to use to generate excitement and the actual physical reality.