Too Fast: SpaceX Rapidly Stacking Starship Launch Tower at Florida | Nasa SpaceX new deal

Too Fast: SpaceX Rapidly Stacking Starship Launch Tower at Florida | Nasa SpaceX new deal
Greetings for the day, my friends! Welcome to our channel and we hope you are enjoying the day so far. First, we’ll start with an update as SpaceX adds a fourth tower segment on Florida Starship launch pad, and then we’ll move on to our second and final piece to provide an update on the SpaceX Falcon Heavy’s planned launch of NASA’s Roman Space Telescope.

Evan Karen:
Ryan Hansen Space:
Curious Droid:


Voiceover by Scott Leffler —

We use images and content in accordance with the YouTube Fair Use copyright guidelines:

Any questions about copyright please send us via Gmail: [email protected]
To be resolved, thank you.


  1. The field of view (FOV) of the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) is 100 times smaller than that of the Roman Space Telescope (RST) because the correction optics that the astronauts added to the HST caused the FOV to be severely reduced. If NASA and Perkin-Elmer had not screwed up the manufacture of the HST main mirror, HST would have had an FOV more nearly the same as that of the RST.

    Instead, that HST main mirror has a huge amount of spherical aberration that went undetected during the manufacturing process. That error was not discovered until the HST reached low earth orbit (LEO). Fortunately, that flaw could be corrected by addition of several small lenses and mirrors. It cost NASA about $1B to build and install those correction optics on the HST after it was launched to LEO.

    The HST main mirror was made from scratch by P-E, while the telescope optics for the RST were donated to NASA by the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO). Presumably, the NRO optics for the RST meet or exceed the NRO requirements and there will not be a repeat of the HST fiasco.

  2. No pit under? For water?? – We need NASA and SpaceX success! Chinese already have a powerful heavy-lifter. And we beg European and Russian rockets, stronger than ours. We built the strongest, F-1 to the moon. Then forgot it, only use smaller rockets after. Why? Why wait 15 years for Shuttle, 3/4th the size of Apollo but only lifts 1/6th the weight and only 250 miles, not the 250,000 miles of Apollo! Where is the strongest F-1? Apollo, lifted 6 times the weight, 250,000 miles! Fastest, farthest of any rocket EVER! Both Shuttle explosions, 14 people dead from external fuel tanks and solid fuel boosters would have been prevented using the Apollo F-1s to lift the Shuttle! Why did we silently retire the Apollo Saturn 5, 3-man F-1, strongest rocket ever built, after complete success of moon landings? We beg Russia for their less powerful rockets. No F-1 failures, 65 times proved, 13 flights. 100% successful, most weight lifted, most distance, 250,000 miles. All other rockets lift less and mostly to 250 miles. The F-1 was promised to take us to Mars by 1985. It was quietly retired, even the blueprints lost. After complete success and reliability to the moon! For 60 years, we use old Mercury (1-man) and Gemini (2-man) Titan and Atlas rockets, upgraded. The 1950s Apollo upper stage J-2 is the Centaur. And we beg the Russians for their old 1950s rockets stronger than the Gemini, but weaker than the Apollo F-1 that took us to the moon. All other 1960s rockets are still used in America and Russia. Strong Apollo F-1 forgotten! Why? We put a lot of mass into space. We need every good rocket we have. And the F-1 was our BEST! After silent 15 years wait replaced by the Shuttle. A weak hydrogen burning rocket with solid rocket boosters (SRBs). Half a generation wait. Why? We had fully developed in 7 years, the 100% reliable, proved, most powerful F-1 that could have lifted SIX TIMES the weight. The Shuttle, 75% the weight of Apollo, but could only lift 1/6th the weight and up only 250 miles (at 3 times the cost per launch). All F-1 blueprints are missing. Gone! I've worked a government office. They keep everything! In 5 copies! The 5th, last goes to a special place; it can NEVER be lost! F-1 rocket, strongest, telling the world our nuclear missiles stronger than the Russians. F-1 forgotten, blueprints gone! If an alien UFO landed we would take it apart and reverse engineer it. Why 60 years, we have not reverse engineered the perfect record, strongest ever F-1s still in museums? They are easily X-rayed and copied and are mostly plumbing. No. We beg Russians for their weaker than the F-1 rockets! Gus Grissom, 2 weeks before he died in Apollo 1 fire said the Lunar LEM was unsafe. "Staples and taped aluminum foil." NASA officially says the LEM was 3 sheets of kitchen aluminum foil thick. 12/1000th of an inch. Yet a 10,000 lb rocket did not tear it to pieces. Look closely at official hi-def pics of the LEM sitting on the moon. You can see admitted "Scotch tape" holding on external panels. NASA admits using Scotch tape! It saved weight. Temperatures of 250 heat on the moon, but Scotch taped. (Odysee com search Lunar lander or American Moon). Was the Apollo Lunar lander on the moon a time machine!? Some audio questions were answered in 0.9 of a second in official NASA tapes. That is 3 times the speed of light. 2.7 seconds to-from the moon is required (without time-travel). Some NASA questions were answered by moon astronauts 0.9, 1.0 and 1.1 seconds between question and answer. In official NASA tapes. Every country was given a moon rock. The Netherlands tested theirs, it was petrified wood. From earth. Von Braun, NAZI head of moon mission would leave at busiest times to collect meteorites in the Antarctic. Antarctica was once a forest, petrified wood "rocks" are found there to this day along with meteorites, visible in the white snow. The original tapes from the moon landings are gone! We keep the original Constitution and a bell that cracked in 1776 Philadelphia, but not record of America and human's historic first trip to the moon! Nor blueprints to the strongest rocket ever built. James Webb, the head of NASA resigned DAYS before the 1st mission to the moon. Why? Neil Armstrong resigned and was silent all his life. Why? He was shy? Who cares, that was his job! To be the triumphant first on the moon, voice of all of us. Armstrong fully trained, successful on the moon, why not go on another mission? No. Retired! His anniversary words, "Much that is left undone", "protected by truth's protective layers." Who talks that way? He's admitting they lied! He avoided all anniversary's after! Human eyes see flashes in space. Film does not work beyond earth orbit. Both eyes and film see spots and cloudy patches from X-rays, Cosmic rays and the massive radiation of the Van Allen belts. There was NO thick lead around the moon camera. Nor lead lens! Nor around the film, going through the Van Allen belts twice! The film from the moon is perfect, no spots! As though made in Hollywood. The camera on the moon was thin aluminum. No insulation! Aluminum near INSTANTLY transfers heat or cold! It had no electric heater. -250 temperatures would have cracked and broken the plastic film as it moved through the camera. If it could move in a frozen camera. In sunlight, +250 temperatures would have melted the plastic film inside. The LEM has bright red hypergolic fire and smoke. The same SpaceX uses and Soviet thrusters maneuvering toward the Space Station. Always the flames are visible! You've seen them. Also look at the test films showing massive billowing dark red clouds from it. But on rise from the moon, the video shows no exhaust fire or smoke, not deep red, none. And no LEM thrusters fire as it rotates and aligns to join with the command module above the moon. You must have thruster fire right when the LEM moves left, but none! LEM landing pads in pictures on the moon have no dust in them. There are not even scorch marks under any LEM in moon pics. No craters either. The massive 10,000 lb rocket exhaust would have thrown dust into the pads. And at least left fire scorch marks under it. The LEMs were noisy. The engine more powerful than a jet, inside the LEM with the 2 astronauts. Engine and astronauts separated by thin sheets of aluminum foil. NASA says it was so thin, "You could put your fingers through it." That engine roars and massively vibrates! They couldn't even hear themselves. Yet you never hear anything in their calm, quiet words "from the moon." 1969 was the PEAK sun activity of that 11 year cycle, that could kill people in space. The WORST time to send astronauts! (Protected by 3 sheets of aluminum foil). And one Apollo, the landing site was in the dark when they were scheduled to land. You can check the charts. The LEM cannot land in the dark! And their rules forbade it! Because it would crash in the dark, on rocks or into holes! NASA always checked these details and timed launches to be exactly correct for a landing in the light. Fra Mauro, the landing site was completely in the dark at the scheduled landing time of Apollo 13! They knew they could not land! Before the launch! The sun/moon charts don't lie! Check them. Apollo 13 was totally faked! Another moon trip, video inside Apollo, when supposedly near the moon showed a full big blue earth through the window. That video is labeled by NASA, "Not for Public Showing." But was released. No Apollo moon mission ever left earth orbit! Grandpa lied! Nixon. Nazi Von Braun. 1960s American government. Vietnam. JFK killed by a magic bullet. The moon landings. CIA bs around the world. And more! Youtube hides it, but O d y s e e. com shows much evidence. Search Lunar lander. Or, 'American Moon (English)'. And while we SIT, Communist Chinese with Russians may be the TRUE first human beings to walk on the moon.

  3. We live in a golden age for space exploration. Awsome and inspiring content, as usually great thanks.

  4. My vpn keeps droping on may android phone. I do like your channel but Gov Putin is flooding the Fl connections. Keep up the good work. I will try to get the VPN to work on my router next.

  5. Fortunately the two outer boosters of Falcon Heavy can be converted back-and-forth to/from individual Falcon 9 boosters. Delayed FH launches don't always mean the boosters stay on the ground.

  6. At the rate they're going Musk will be putting his crew to work on the SLS tower, for a fee..

  7. I don't understand how it is "The Super Heavy Booster, with roughly 33 methane fueled Raptor engines…" Not correct. It current _has_) 33 methane fueled Raptor engines.

  8. You make it sound like SpaceX is the problem when in fact it's another Government boondoggle!!!!

  9. Spek-tros’ke-pe
    …not spek-tro-skop’pe
    But otherwise a great video! I enjoyed it and found it informative.
    Also, I wasn’t sure I understood: the delays with Falcon Heavy launches are due to delays with the payloads, right?

  10. Too fast? Don’t you mean ‘very fast’? A native speaker of English needs to preview your title thumbnails which are a grammar disaster for what otherwise is an excellent website.

  11. You do informative videos. Thanks for not click baiting and repeating same info over and over. Just subscribed

  12. Awesome SpaceX, soon StarShip will fly from the cape. Go SpaceX StarShip 👍👍‼️‼️🇺🇸

  13. Why were the launches delayed? Were the 4 delays faults on the Falcon Heavy rockets? I only ask because you sound salty about SpaceX ☺

  14. Europa Clipper needs either Super-Heavy/Starship and a Centaur-style upper stage or SLS for trans-Jupiter injection. Falcon Heavy is too weak and forces an endless series of swing-by manoeuvres.

  15. Thank you for the update. How ironic that we have reached a technological high, capable of settling neighbouring planets and putting insanely powerful telescopes in LaGrange points, yet we are held back by viruses, conflicts, climate crises and cowardly politicians.

  16. The FED has lost it and the sad fact is, it's pretty obvious that we are headed for hyperinflation. I would advise you invest rightly because sooner things might get ugly.

  17. Alles sehr schön. Aber zuerst zusammen die Nummern 10 und 1. Eine warmthh.Online Brünette und eine anderew Blondine. Es wäre unfair, wenn ich 4 wählen würde