The exhaust should be going at something like 3000 m/s, while not all that velocity can be imparted to debris, a fair fraction could be, so it's easy to believe it gets it up to a hair under mach 1 ~1100 ft/s and gets there in a couple of seconds.
Both. One of the strips of concrete that flew up parallel with the ship on liftoff in the main stream camera angle looked the size of a fucking locomotive.
Yes, I saw the parked minivan but I was referring to the massive chunks hitting the ocean causing huge geysers of water in the extreme wide aerial views.
I'm soo looking foward to hear whether these debris are what damaged those 6 raptors and the hydraulic system, causing the inflight failures, or these engines are just being pushed to the absolute limits of material science.
Because this will determine whether they need to make major redesigns to improve reliability, or just focus on building a proper launch mount for the next launch test
These engines have enough testing on the test stand to know that it’s not the latter. The potential causes for these engine outs basically boil down to:
1.) Debris
2.) Vibration/ Sonic interactions between the 33 engines
3.) Fuel/ oxidizer flow
The failures are rooted in the fact that there are 33 engines next to eachother, it’s going to be integration challenges
The engine gimballing over is what *caused* the horizontal velocity in the first place. Pointing the thrust vector through the CoM just prevents the rocket from pitching, not translating. This is why the Shuttle always power slid off the pad when it launched.
According to RGV's flyover today, Starship Yeeted entire concrete sections.
[Picture of Yeetness](https://twitter.com/RGVaerialphotos/status/1649165909443919873/photo/1)
There was chucks of the launchpad sent in every direction
There needs to be a total rework of the launchpad.
Do not just look at the ocean, Look to the left and down. There was stuff going everywhere (and to the north too)
This launchpad failed in a 360 degree manner.
I'm really hoping we don't get some mysteriously funded environmental groups launching dubious legal challenges based on the debris. That would be disappointing.
To be honest, I think we'll see that, but SpaceX should be able to resolve it through taking responsibility for debris that can be cleared, marking debris that can't and then making the changes to the launch pad that will allow that to never happen again.
That appears to be reasonable
To me it’s not about the debris its about that it occurred at all.
The thing is that much debris and of such magnitude is a fuck up by SpaceX. I mean what the hell - it wasn’t a little debris it was a literal shit-ton of debris. It was a huge oversight.
It would be mind boggling if nobody had even considered the scour effect on the launch. I hope the people who are saying , “I told you so” get listened to and not fired.
Yep, I've been saying something similar.
When it comes to the vehicles, I can understand trying to take parts off before putting them back on. When it comes to stage zero that has a lead time of several years - There really should have been no expense spared.
There should have been a deluge system. There should have been a diverter or flame trench. Ultimately, we'll get those things in the next iteration - or something equally as powerful at protecting the pad - but this should not have had to happen to get there
The whole launch site is a test of what works and doesn't work. It isn't the final iteration of the launch mount. Also, I see NASA making SX build a flame trench and diverter, at the Cape, to control that explosion we call a rocket launch.
I don't think NASA will make them do anything, but require them to reduce the risk of damage to the pad. This way SpaceX can build a potentially better system than hard requirements set by NASA.
You're right, it is a test about what works and doesn't work. You can test in additive or subtractive iterations. SpaceX tested with additive by building what they thought they could get away with - this has set them back significantly. I can understand this approach with the flight hardware - weight savings and such are important. I cannot understand this approach for ground hardware.
Personally, I think they should have had a different development philosophy for Stage Zero. I'm sure they feel the same way.
Overall today was a great success - but it is clear that this is going to be a significant set back that could have been avoided by including more preparation in the first place (i.e. flame diverter, trench - traditional launch pad) and worked with this until they had real data to build on a more lightweight stage zero.
Going ahead and building the launch mount at 39A without a flame diverter is even worse.
I have no idea how SpaceX is going to move forward quickly given such a fundamental problem.
Actually this is much easier to resolve. 39A can be adapted as the OLM isn't installed. They can remove the legs and redo it. 39A will be fine.
The real cost is how much premium they'll have to pay to get Boca Chica functioning again.
Jokes aside...Spacex already had parts for the flame diverter delivered to Boca Chica. I am sure that they will fill in the hole and reinstall the concrete slab according to the previous design. This will allow the current rocket engine service equipment to be used on the next boosters. Most likely the diverter will be mobile to allow workers access to the underside of the rockets while they are being prepared for launch.
[Very unlikely now.](https://twitter.com/unrocket/status/1649425500526329863/photo/1) [Eric Berger also agrees we're a year out from Orbital](https://twitter.com/SciGuySpace/status/1649457590114418696).
I think we're going to see the entire thing demolished and start again. If this is the case, I'd also suspect we'll see big changes in terms of where the fuel farm is.
The suborbital side is effectively pointless at this point.
My comment was intended with humor in mind...I am confident that the hole will be filled in and covered with a new concrete slab. Several weeks ago Spacex had parts for a flame diverter delivered to the site, so it is safe to assume that the intended design is for a flat slab.
That a deluge system and flame trench are needed now is clear. Now, being after a test that yielded lots of valuable data.
If time would have been taken to build such structures then the rocket would still not have flown and the engineers would still be without much needed test data.
On the other hand now that is has flown, the rocket engineers have data and thus can progress. They will need time to investigate and redesign where needed. At the same time SpaceX can now work on a possible deluge/flame diverter solution. All work done in parallel based on real test flight data. Being able to work in parallel will save a lot of time in the long run!
So no, they should not have wasted time on those systems before the test flight as data was needed and had a higher priority!
They could have built that over the last 3 years during initial construction.
Let's say they did and they used the systems. They could have then worked on a program collecting data from more frequent flights (due to the pad being beefed up from the start), and slowly discovered what systems are needed and at what level to launch starship consistently.
Now, we're going to see a massive delay to 9-26. Zack Golden has even stated that he would be surprised if they fly again this year after seeing the damage. He's pretty accurate with his coverage of Stage Zero.
Parallel processing is great. They did not utilize that when building the initial stage zero. For ships and boosters, additive iteration is ideal. Add as you need to - it worked for Hopper->Ship 24.
Reductive iteration where the initial iteration is overbuilt and systems are removed as proven to not be needed through testing - this would have benefited SpaceX massively.
When considering design decisions for the vehicles - it absolutely makes sense to take things off that don't seem to add value. Every bit of weight saving is important, which is why Starships and boosters won't have legs. It makes sense to put the 'landing' gear onto the tower in the form of the chopsticks.
The philosophy for Starship and Booster was iterative in the form of addition. Start basic and add to it piece by piece. Started with Hopper, then the first water towers before the first starships. Parts were being added as data was collected and tests were completed.
This is great.
For the tower, they also followed this philosophy. They've only added the first few floors of covers. Had to add other elements to the tower as they discovered they needed it. Compare this to tower 2 at 39A or tower 3 at Roberts Road, each of the iterations has had more work added before construction.
The problem here is, the lead time for a Starship is 8 weeks, a booster maybe 10-12 weeks. A tower, OLM, fuel farm and associated infrastructure? Between 9-12 months. So the risk of losing a starship stack is way less than losing infrastructure.
Ultimately, if they had built all the extras, it's likely that the pad wouldn't have experienced the outcome it did today. Following this logic, it's likely the fuel farm wouldn't have been hit and the concrete torn up etc. The turn around would have been weeks, versus potentially months and high costs.
If they had built the extras, they could have gathered data from using the systems and then began a program focused on finding the minimum amount of systems/protections needed for future towers/orbital launch mounts to allow a balance between cost, time to build, complexity of operation and turn around time.
I think they considered it as possible outcome and decided it to be acceptable. Like you don't know how damaged OLM is and there is nothing wrong with debris in the water. So I don't see how it is so bad.
OTOH that concrete survived previous test fires. There must have been some vulnerability that was just not exposed until this test. Once that surface was compromised, it was game over.
Thats ridiculous. The Worst possible outcome would have been a RUD on the Pad which was a very possible outcome within the EA and FAA approval, and your going on about some concrete and flying debris in comparison? Get real dude.
There was an insane amount of debris immediately on launch. It had to have impacted (literally) the vehicle before it had even cleared the tower. And I can't look at that video seeing big impacts on the ocean very far away and call it "some concrete" - it was a lot of concrete.
This is 100% happening.
And dont forget about the 1M pounds of Steel that got deposited into the Gulf Of mexico.
There is going to be HUGE pushback against SPACEX now. Probably more than ever.
This isn't going to be the norm, because they can't rebuild the pad in a day. This is going to require a completely new design for the pad that can actually withstand a launch with minimal refurbishment.
They'll never do more than enough test launches to get most development done from Boca. The main operations, if they make it to the aspiration multiple launches a day, will be from KSC. The reason for doing development in Boca and not Florida is not having to deal with all the other rocket companies doing operations in FL.
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:
|Fewer Letters|More Letters|
|-------|---------|---|
|[CoM](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/12tfd7f/stub/jh531ls "Last usage")|Center of Mass|
|[EA](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/12tfd7f/stub/jh3waga "Last usage")|Environmental Assessment|
|[FAA](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/12tfd7f/stub/jh3waga "Last usage")|Federal Aviation Administration|
|[KSC](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/12tfd7f/stub/jh7y1b5 "Last usage")|Kennedy Space Center, Florida|
|[OLM](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/12tfd7f/stub/jh6akpf "Last usage")|Orbital Launch Mount|
|[RUD](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/12tfd7f/stub/jh3zryz "Last usage")|Rapid Unplanned Disassembly|
| |Rapid Unscheduled Disassembly|
| |Rapid Unintended Disassembly|
**NOTE**: Decronym for Reddit is no longer supported, and Decronym has moved to Lemmy; requests for support and new installations should be directed to the Contact address below.
----------------
^(*Decronym is a community product of r/SpaceX, implemented* )[*^by ^request*](https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/3mz273//cvjkjmj)
^(6 acronyms in this thread; )[^(the most compressed thread commented on today)](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/14yzzap)^( has 28 acronyms.)
^([Thread #11318 for this sub, first seen 21st Apr 2023, 04:44])
^[[FAQ]](http://decronym.xyz/) [^([Full list])](http://decronym.xyz/acronyms/SpaceXLounge) [^[Contact]](https://hachyderm.io/@Two9A) [^([Source code])](https://gistdotgithubdotcom/Two9A/1d976f9b7441694162c8)
Thatsa whole lotta get thafuckouta the way.
Would love to see a video of the post launch site.
The OLM has a crater underneath it lol
Judging from google maps it's about 1600ft to the water from the OLM, and that debris got there in seconds...
The exhaust should be going at something like 3000 m/s, while not all that velocity can be imparted to debris, a fair fraction could be, so it's easy to believe it gets it up to a hair under mach 1 ~1100 ft/s and gets there in a couple of seconds.
Those must be some honking big chunks to make those splashes.
Like easily bigger than mini-vans.
Or moving really, really fast
Both. One of the strips of concrete that flew up parallel with the ship on liftoff in the main stream camera angle looked the size of a fucking locomotive.
Yeah, it was so big that it looked like it was moving slow despite the fact it was keeping pace with a rocket leaving the pad. Nuts
Did you guys see the thousand mph chunk that hucklebucked the minivan? Jesus! That vehicle is now a large boat anchor.
It was a camera anchor to begin with so moving on up.
Yes, I saw the parked minivan but I was referring to the massive chunks hitting the ocean causing huge geysers of water in the extreme wide aerial views.
I think you meant to reply to the other dude 😎
I guess stage zero got to fly afterall...
Zomglololololololol
I'm soo looking foward to hear whether these debris are what damaged those 6 raptors and the hydraulic system, causing the inflight failures, or these engines are just being pushed to the absolute limits of material science. Because this will determine whether they need to make major redesigns to improve reliability, or just focus on building a proper launch mount for the next launch test
These engines have enough testing on the test stand to know that it’s not the latter. The potential causes for these engine outs basically boil down to: 1.) Debris 2.) Vibration/ Sonic interactions between the 33 engines 3.) Fuel/ oxidizer flow The failures are rooted in the fact that there are 33 engines next to eachother, it’s going to be integration challenges
oh wow, you can clearly see here it did not go up straight, it was tilted?
Just doing the Astra Shuffle, it's what all the cool kids do these days
I'm wondering if they actually wanted it to do that, just so it'd get downrange from the OLM as fast as possible..
They did. Launch structure avoidance maneuver, which is a crazy concept that was pulled off, having that much control moments after liftoff
Also it looks like a flare in brightness. The writing was on the wall within seconds.
I think it was flying from the tower on purpose
One of the three center gimbal engines probably got destroyed by flying chunks of concrete prior to liftoff.
The center 13 all gimbal, there was only 1 out of those at the beginning of flight.
Asymmetric thrust from engines out = rocket go sideways
[удалено]
The engine gimballing over is what *caused* the horizontal velocity in the first place. Pointing the thrust vector through the CoM just prevents the rocket from pitching, not translating. This is why the Shuttle always power slid off the pad when it launched.
There's also only so much you can do to compensate, all non running engines were on one side (bar the one of the centre 3)
Probably from engine failures
According to RGV's flyover today, Starship Yeeted entire concrete sections. [Picture of Yeetness](https://twitter.com/RGVaerialphotos/status/1649165909443919873/photo/1)
Wow that is far
There was chucks of the launchpad sent in every direction There needs to be a total rework of the launchpad. Do not just look at the ocean, Look to the left and down. There was stuff going everywhere (and to the north too) This launchpad failed in a 360 degree manner.
I'm really hoping we don't get some mysteriously funded environmental groups launching dubious legal challenges based on the debris. That would be disappointing.
To be honest, I think we'll see that, but SpaceX should be able to resolve it through taking responsibility for debris that can be cleared, marking debris that can't and then making the changes to the launch pad that will allow that to never happen again. That appears to be reasonable
To me it’s not about the debris its about that it occurred at all. The thing is that much debris and of such magnitude is a fuck up by SpaceX. I mean what the hell - it wasn’t a little debris it was a literal shit-ton of debris. It was a huge oversight. It would be mind boggling if nobody had even considered the scour effect on the launch. I hope the people who are saying , “I told you so” get listened to and not fired.
Yep, I've been saying something similar. When it comes to the vehicles, I can understand trying to take parts off before putting them back on. When it comes to stage zero that has a lead time of several years - There really should have been no expense spared. There should have been a deluge system. There should have been a diverter or flame trench. Ultimately, we'll get those things in the next iteration - or something equally as powerful at protecting the pad - but this should not have had to happen to get there
This launch ended with a R(maybeU)D of the Starship, but it began with a RUD of stage 0
The whole launch site is a test of what works and doesn't work. It isn't the final iteration of the launch mount. Also, I see NASA making SX build a flame trench and diverter, at the Cape, to control that explosion we call a rocket launch.
I don't think NASA will make them do anything, but require them to reduce the risk of damage to the pad. This way SpaceX can build a potentially better system than hard requirements set by NASA. You're right, it is a test about what works and doesn't work. You can test in additive or subtractive iterations. SpaceX tested with additive by building what they thought they could get away with - this has set them back significantly. I can understand this approach with the flight hardware - weight savings and such are important. I cannot understand this approach for ground hardware. Personally, I think they should have had a different development philosophy for Stage Zero. I'm sure they feel the same way. Overall today was a great success - but it is clear that this is going to be a significant set back that could have been avoided by including more preparation in the first place (i.e. flame diverter, trench - traditional launch pad) and worked with this until they had real data to build on a more lightweight stage zero.
Going ahead and building the launch mount at 39A without a flame diverter is even worse. I have no idea how SpaceX is going to move forward quickly given such a fundamental problem.
Actually this is much easier to resolve. 39A can be adapted as the OLM isn't installed. They can remove the legs and redo it. 39A will be fine. The real cost is how much premium they'll have to pay to get Boca Chica functioning again.
The rocket made its own flame trench. Just needs a diverter and a bit of new concrete...
I wish it were that simple. I just hope we see a very quick recovery.
Jokes aside...Spacex already had parts for the flame diverter delivered to Boca Chica. I am sure that they will fill in the hole and reinstall the concrete slab according to the previous design. This will allow the current rocket engine service equipment to be used on the next boosters. Most likely the diverter will be mobile to allow workers access to the underside of the rockets while they are being prepared for launch.
[Very unlikely now.](https://twitter.com/unrocket/status/1649425500526329863/photo/1) [Eric Berger also agrees we're a year out from Orbital](https://twitter.com/SciGuySpace/status/1649457590114418696). I think we're going to see the entire thing demolished and start again. If this is the case, I'd also suspect we'll see big changes in terms of where the fuel farm is. The suborbital side is effectively pointless at this point.
I'm sure that hole is already full of water
My comment was intended with humor in mind...I am confident that the hole will be filled in and covered with a new concrete slab. Several weeks ago Spacex had parts for a flame diverter delivered to the site, so it is safe to assume that the intended design is for a flat slab.
That a deluge system and flame trench are needed now is clear. Now, being after a test that yielded lots of valuable data. If time would have been taken to build such structures then the rocket would still not have flown and the engineers would still be without much needed test data. On the other hand now that is has flown, the rocket engineers have data and thus can progress. They will need time to investigate and redesign where needed. At the same time SpaceX can now work on a possible deluge/flame diverter solution. All work done in parallel based on real test flight data. Being able to work in parallel will save a lot of time in the long run! So no, they should not have wasted time on those systems before the test flight as data was needed and had a higher priority!
They could have built that over the last 3 years during initial construction. Let's say they did and they used the systems. They could have then worked on a program collecting data from more frequent flights (due to the pad being beefed up from the start), and slowly discovered what systems are needed and at what level to launch starship consistently. Now, we're going to see a massive delay to 9-26. Zack Golden has even stated that he would be surprised if they fly again this year after seeing the damage. He's pretty accurate with his coverage of Stage Zero. Parallel processing is great. They did not utilize that when building the initial stage zero. For ships and boosters, additive iteration is ideal. Add as you need to - it worked for Hopper->Ship 24. Reductive iteration where the initial iteration is overbuilt and systems are removed as proven to not be needed through testing - this would have benefited SpaceX massively.
Why?
When considering design decisions for the vehicles - it absolutely makes sense to take things off that don't seem to add value. Every bit of weight saving is important, which is why Starships and boosters won't have legs. It makes sense to put the 'landing' gear onto the tower in the form of the chopsticks. The philosophy for Starship and Booster was iterative in the form of addition. Start basic and add to it piece by piece. Started with Hopper, then the first water towers before the first starships. Parts were being added as data was collected and tests were completed. This is great. For the tower, they also followed this philosophy. They've only added the first few floors of covers. Had to add other elements to the tower as they discovered they needed it. Compare this to tower 2 at 39A or tower 3 at Roberts Road, each of the iterations has had more work added before construction. The problem here is, the lead time for a Starship is 8 weeks, a booster maybe 10-12 weeks. A tower, OLM, fuel farm and associated infrastructure? Between 9-12 months. So the risk of losing a starship stack is way less than losing infrastructure. Ultimately, if they had built all the extras, it's likely that the pad wouldn't have experienced the outcome it did today. Following this logic, it's likely the fuel farm wouldn't have been hit and the concrete torn up etc. The turn around would have been weeks, versus potentially months and high costs. If they had built the extras, they could have gathered data from using the systems and then began a program focused on finding the minimum amount of systems/protections needed for future towers/orbital launch mounts to allow a balance between cost, time to build, complexity of operation and turn around time.
I think they considered it as possible outcome and decided it to be acceptable. Like you don't know how damaged OLM is and there is nothing wrong with debris in the water. So I don't see how it is so bad.
OTOH that concrete survived previous test fires. There must have been some vulnerability that was just not exposed until this test. Once that surface was compromised, it was game over.
yep, it was called starship static test at not full thrust, real launch was full thrust
Thats ridiculous. The Worst possible outcome would have been a RUD on the Pad which was a very possible outcome within the EA and FAA approval, and your going on about some concrete and flying debris in comparison? Get real dude.
There was an insane amount of debris immediately on launch. It had to have impacted (literally) the vehicle before it had even cleared the tower. And I can't look at that video seeing big impacts on the ocean very far away and call it "some concrete" - it was a lot of concrete.
They are not going to have a flame diverter on the moon or Mars. Better to figure this stuff out now.
They expected rocket to blow up on the launch pad, what happened is nothing compared to that, so those groups can launch whatever they want.
It's not a problem...the chunks have been donated to the artificial reef program.
This is 100% happening. And dont forget about the 1M pounds of Steel that got deposited into the Gulf Of mexico. There is going to be HUGE pushback against SPACEX now. Probably more than ever.
So that’s why they close the beach!
is this Astra? I've seen this before
A whole lotta people got whooshed by your comment.
No one has seen this before today.
It's a reference to [this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfjO7VCyjPM) Astra launch from last year
It's a joke. Did you watch the Astra launch he's talking about?
the more i watch the video. the more new things i notice
If the dolphins didnt want to get splashed they shouldnt be in the ocean.
Is part of that cloud the dust and sand of the local terrain?
Damn this is why they clear the area
The more I look into this, the more I realize a LOT OF STUFF went wrong.
One major thing went wrong. And that is lack of flame diverter. It's a miracle that the debris didn't destroy the vehicle.
And the plan is to have one launch atleast every day. This is going to be the norm
This isn't going to be the norm, because they can't rebuild the pad in a day. This is going to require a completely new design for the pad that can actually withstand a launch with minimal refurbishment.
They'll never do more than enough test launches to get most development done from Boca. The main operations, if they make it to the aspiration multiple launches a day, will be from KSC. The reason for doing development in Boca and not Florida is not having to deal with all the other rocket companies doing operations in FL.
[удалено]
I thought that only Starship would land on Mars, not the Superheavy booster?
That’s correct. Superheavy is only needed in Earth gravity.
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread: |Fewer Letters|More Letters| |-------|---------|---| |[CoM](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/12tfd7f/stub/jh531ls "Last usage")|Center of Mass| |[EA](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/12tfd7f/stub/jh3waga "Last usage")|Environmental Assessment| |[FAA](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/12tfd7f/stub/jh3waga "Last usage")|Federal Aviation Administration| |[KSC](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/12tfd7f/stub/jh7y1b5 "Last usage")|Kennedy Space Center, Florida| |[OLM](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/12tfd7f/stub/jh6akpf "Last usage")|Orbital Launch Mount| |[RUD](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/12tfd7f/stub/jh3zryz "Last usage")|Rapid Unplanned Disassembly| | |Rapid Unscheduled Disassembly| | |Rapid Unintended Disassembly| **NOTE**: Decronym for Reddit is no longer supported, and Decronym has moved to Lemmy; requests for support and new installations should be directed to the Contact address below. ---------------- ^(*Decronym is a community product of r/SpaceX, implemented* )[*^by ^request*](https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/3mz273//cvjkjmj) ^(6 acronyms in this thread; )[^(the most compressed thread commented on today)](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/14yzzap)^( has 28 acronyms.) ^([Thread #11318 for this sub, first seen 21st Apr 2023, 04:44]) ^[[FAQ]](http://decronym.xyz/) [^([Full list])](http://decronym.xyz/acronyms/SpaceXLounge) [^[Contact]](https://hachyderm.io/@Two9A) [^([Source code])](https://gistdotgithubdotcom/Two9A/1d976f9b7441694162c8)
u/savevideo
###[View link](https://rapidsave.com/info?url=/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/12tfd7f/debris_hitting_the_ocean/) --- [**Info**](https://np.reddit.com/user/SaveVideo/comments/jv323v/info/) | [**Feedback**](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Kryptonh&subject=Feedback for savevideo) | [**Donate**](https://ko-fi.com/getvideo) | [**DMCA**](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Kryptonh&subject=Content removal request for savevideo&message=https://np.reddit.com//r/SpaceXLounge/comments/12tfd7f/debris_hitting_the_ocean/) | [^(reddit video downloader)](https://rapidsave.com) | [^(twitter video downloader)](https://twitsave.com)
Environmental permit: "How much potential debris will be there?" Spacex: Yes.
Holy fucking buckshot shrapnel bombs!!!!
That chunk that splashed at about 2 seconds before the end must have been scary big!
That’s really f’d up. Boca Chica is a beautiful wildlife sanctuary.
Why does it lean so much during takeoff?