SpaceX BFR Carbonfiber tank destructive test

TheMarcusGomez
TheMarcusGomez

Will this tank work for my paintball gun, hate filling up every time I go to paintball park. This should last me a few years.

Month ago
MeMad Max
MeMad Max

NASA was trying to do something like this for a new engine and a replacement shuttle like vehicle back in the late 90's early 2000's... Couldn't get it to work. Couldn't cope with a weird shape. So they kept on using steel.

4 months ago
Shreyas Malde
Shreyas Malde

MeMad Max Well 3D printing was invented then, so not much of a choice.

Month ago
unidentified physican
unidentified physican

No bad tank, you have to wait!

4 months ago
rdgk1se3019
rdgk1se3019

Sound volume sucks.

4 months ago
Diggnuts
Diggnuts

That is one eager "little" tank.. Can't wait to go up there!

5 months ago
C Lopez
C Lopez

He didn't say how far past the design pressure they went, probably means not as far as he wanted.

5 months ago
C Lopez
C Lopez

Abe, yes but in my opinion the reason he did not say how far was *probably* because it was not impressively noteworthy. So go S.a.D. pedant.

4 months ago
C Lopez
C Lopez

Marvin, that just supports my point. Retard.

4 months ago
Abe Eliason
Abe Eliason

"probably" is different from "possibly"

4 months ago
Marvin Kitfox
Marvin Kitfox

"Probably"? C lopez is "probably" a drug-shooting halfwit. See! Use the word "probably" and you can tack on any asinine observation to it....

4 months ago
C Lopez
C Lopez

Assume means you say it is something, I said "probably" and it seems obvious you would not build in excessive safety margins because that would just increase weight. But you got to use your 'assss-uma' idea so well done, fuckwit.

5 months ago
Dave Loomis
Dave Loomis

What was PSI at fail point? Anyone?

5 months ago
Can we get 5000 subscribers with no videos?
Can we get 5000 subscribers with no videos?

wasn't that tank built for the ITS not BFR

5 months ago
McyD
McyD

They made it smaller and called it BFR... seems a bit backwards...

4 months ago
Abdukahor Muzaffarzoda
Abdukahor Muzaffarzoda

Arrived No, the ITS was bigger. The BFR has quite a few difference and a huge one is it's size. The tank in this video was for the ITS but they refined the design a year later and made the rocket smaller and started calling BFR. The tank in video would not have fit for the BFR as it was designed for the larger ITS. You can think of BFR as Block 2 version of ITS.

4 months ago
Johnson 5mm
Johnson 5mm

The ITS is BFR Block 2

4 months ago
Ex Machina
Ex Machina

Check out what Elon said here starting at minute 3: https://youtu.be/sytrrdOPYzA?t=3m Basically, MCT and ITS were the previous names for BFR.

4 months ago
Can we get 5000 subscribers with no videos?
Can we get 5000 subscribers with no videos?

no it isn't, the ITS was the Interplanetary Transport System and the BFR is the Bif F****** Rocking, they are 2 different things and 2 different rockets

4 months ago
John Eriksson
John Eriksson

Where is the entire presentation?

5 months ago
Joseph Astier
Joseph Astier

We don't have the presentation. We're on a diplomatic mission to Mars.

5 months ago
Terry S
Terry S

John Eriksson YouTube "spacexchannel"

5 months ago
giovanni sabaini
giovanni sabaini

maaaars!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :DDD

6 months ago
I am James Webb
I am James Webb

xD

5 months ago
Guero Rodriguez
Guero Rodriguez

That's a good way to... Lose ones head..?

6 months ago
Ben Knefelkamp
Ben Knefelkamp

Failure point at valve. Tank don't even care

7 months ago
Terry S
Terry S

Definitely an example of "test to failure"

10 months ago
PaddyPatrone
PaddyPatrone

bfr is airborne.... seeeee

11 months ago

Next videos