Here are video reviews of the damage from the SpaceX April 20, 2023 Starship launch.
There was hundreds of tons of dirt and concrete thrown hundreds of feet. There was a lighter layer of dust that went miles.
The winds from the thrust were very powerful within a few thousand feet.
The SpaceX concrete launchpad was built with Fondag concrete. Fondag is formulated using specific alumina binders and synthetic aggregates. Fondag is the most reliable ready-to-use heavy-duty concrete on the market.
SpaceX thought that Fondag would be able to hold up to one 31-engine launch. The Fondag had done fine in the half power hold down test.
The Fondag cracked and then super heated gas went into the cracks and pressure built up rapidly to break more concrete.
Brian Wang is a Futurist Thought Leader and a popular Science blogger with 1 million readers per month. His blog Nextbigfuture.com is ranked #1 Science News Blog. It covers many disruptive technology and trends including Space, Robotics, Artificial Intelligence, Medicine, Anti-aging Biotechnology, and Nanotechnology.
Known for identifying cutting edge technologies, he is currently a Co-Founder of a startup and fundraiser for high potential early-stage companies. He is the Head of Research for Allocations for deep technology investments and an Angel Investor at Space Angels.
A frequent speaker at corporations, he has been a TEDx speaker, a Singularity University speaker and guest at numerous interviews for radio and podcasts. He is open to public speaking and advising engagements.
I have the knowledge but musk won’t give me a seat at the table
Just give me a seat
I’ll prove the rest
Starship reusable
Pad expendable
Few Teslas less and use those materials as some tons of steel for pad. But good test, now they know what is needed.
They could’ve figured out what they needed without causing this much damage. This test was a failure.
Chortle, Chortle, Chortle, ha ha ha, right on dudes, testing is a waste of time, without thorough analysis ahead of time to prepare for all contingencies, and thorough analysis of test results afterwards.
No testing is stagnation. There is theoretically only one perfect being in existence.
NASA leave some lesson better to use others ideas too
If they fail to move the energy of thrust away from the base area below the rocket it will find a path on it’s own.
By chance it has provided a picture of what to expect with minor damage to the launch stand. If they focus on a narrow scope of cause the unexpected will spin up and bite these gamblers who have dismissed the need to provide a clear evaluation of their miscalculation of a real danger to the rocket.
…”Clear evaluation of miscalculations” … .. you must be a genius.
Excellent big word salad. We are totally unimpressed and frankly have no idea what your point is.
Ok now, let’s just think about what you guys are saying. Steel melts at a certain temperature. You don’t think that the steel won’t melt? When it gets too hot, it starts to pop. So now you would rather have concrete or hot steel flying at you? Rich people need to stay here and suffer just like the rest of us.
Yessir, concrete for me, anytime
How about launch thru a tube over water sealed so the steam created would assist the take off by pushing it thru the tube like a blow gun
I Wonder How Many People Had Hurt Feelings When Starship Was Told To Put Its Self Down While Taking It To The Moon And The Sky Is The Limit
The sooner spacex realise that they have to build a proper launchpad the better, even 39a and b are too small for starship. Or at least have stage 0 much taller to take the flames out the engines higher. And still deluge and watercooled flame diveter. Im no expert or rocket scientist, but from the evidence and evidence of previous lauches going back to saturn 5, stage 0/lauchpad has always been important if that fails then the mission fails and thats the most reusable part of the setup.
I’m no Rocket launcher Scientist: I was however disheartened by the explosion. Some much work! I also wondered if the Starship had actually had a shearing stress as it left the pad. A local seismic event.? Now from the description of concrete disintegrating and exploding the critical fuel. Wow ! Couldn’t have imagined.
Thankfully no one was hurt. Godbless the SpaceX Team… Peter V Daniels.
Can you imagine the starship landing on the moon how much dust would they be?
A few facts about Moon landing:
1. The moon gravity is 1/6 then earth, so getting the same trust you need 1/6 power
2. The moon escape velocity is 1/5 then the earth
3. Low moon orbit speed (the speed need to remain in orbit around the moon) is 1/7.5 vs earth.
Starship will land and launch from the moon without the booster and with almost empty fuel tanks. For the final touch down and for initial 100 meter launch, they will use additional small engines located high on the Starship to avoid flying debris.
About the Dodge Caravan, “That’ll buff out.”
Launch on Mars and the Moon won’t require a booster, just a Starship. Star ship will be modified for lunar landings.
Surely 33 booster to leave earth’s atmosphere but less required to leave the moon or Mars.
Only starship land on moon and mars 😉
The reason the ASTM was started was because boilers kept blowing up. Isn’t putting a vessel filled with millions of gallons of water beneath 33 bunsen burners that rival the heat of the sun inviting disaster? A simple launchpad explosion is gated in so much that the methane and oxygen need to fully mix to achieve full stoichimetric explosion. Add an exploding pressure cooker beneath and those fuel tanks are going to instantly mix. Isn’t Cape Canaveral a wiser location to being doing these sorts of one off tests?
The cape is the least suitable place to test, the infustuctre their has to support ongoing missions, break it and its not just satellites in danger but the whole space programme.
Keep testing at boca, and when it winds down testing you have a spaceport.
The starship (top part) took off and landed with no problem at all. Even just with concrete. For the moon and mars, it should be fine. Just the super heavy needs extra ground protection.
Moon and Mars have less gravity, but anyway it could still be a problem. Will they make one giant crater after every take off? Less force will be needed(less gravity), but there won’t be any launchpad as I understand it and it would be hard to make on Moon, Mars.
the booster is only used on earth, on the moon and Mars it will use different propulsion systems, on the moon smaller thrusters near the top of the Starship (look at the nasa starship landing system) and on Mars just the Starship engines (not Superheavy aka the booster)
Remember that the booster will return to Earth. Only the Starship will go on to the moon or Mars. Starship will only takeoff with 3 Raptor engines vs 33 on the booster. However, debris could still be an issue for the engines. I hope it is thoroughly tested first.
Rapid Unscheduled Digging
There is also lot’s of steel re-bar sticking out of the concrete debris, which is even more damaging. It’s astounding the booster work as well as it did given the rebar laden concrete-nado, plus some engine outs and RUDs that may have been in addition to the stage zero RUD.
I think even a modest cover of steel plate over the concrete, suitably anchored, would probably have gotten them through this test, even if not water cooled. It would have prevented or at least delayed the cracking and penetration.
Well, hindsight is 20-20, but I don’t know of anybody who has torch welded over concrete, or worked in a foundry, who would have risked not having such a plate. Concrete explosions when exposed to high temperatures are too common an experience.
Well stated. An unforced error.
Absolutely dead on sir
Ok now, let’s just think about what you guys are saying. Steel melts at a certain temperature. You don’t think that the steel won’t melt? When it gets too hot, it starts to pop. So now you would rather have concrete or hot steel flying at you? Rich people need to stay here and suffer just like the rest of us.