SpinLaunch Space Launcher Trails 1960s Artillery on Speed and Stress

Spinlaunch: BUSTED (Part 2) — Thunderf00t

Thunderf00t

SpinLaunch's $100 million centrifuge reproduces 1960s Project HARP artillery at inferior speeds and higher mechanical strain, while unpowered atmospheric deceleration leaves its liquid rocket engines starved of fuel.

AI-assisted summary of Spinlaunch: BUSTED (Part 2) — original source. Check the original for full context.

Source published:

Key ideas

  • Thunderf00t challenges SpinLaunch's launch physics, showing that unpowered atmospheric ascent forces liquid propellants away from engine feed lines without dedicated ullage motors to settle them. (0:00)
  • Rotational kinematics on SpinLaunch test footage reveal a tip speed of roughly 300 m/s (around Mach 1), directly contradicting claims of tests exceeding Mach 6. (2:53)
  • SpinLaunch's long-term targets of hurling 200 kg at 2,000 m/s fail to outperform the 1960s Project HARP supergun, which achieved the same velocity with lower peak acceleration and without subjecting payloads to an hour-long spin-up. (10:58)
  • Operational requirements such as an 8-hour vacuum pump-down make SpinLaunch drastically slower to refire and far more vulnerable to catastrophic structural failure than conventional or historical artillery. (4:33)

Detailed notes

## Background Published on YouTube by Thunderf00t on November 24, 2021, this video is the second installment in his series debunking the kinetic space launch startup SpinLaunch. The accompanying video description directs viewers to support his work via Patreon, browse his Amazon affiliate storefront, or visit his secondary channel.

## TL;DR Thunderf00t breaks down the severe engineering and physics shortcomings behind SpinLaunch's rotational orbital accelerator. He explains that an unpowered projectile decelerating through dense atmosphere pushes liquid propellant away from engine feed lines due to the lack of ullage thrusters, and he uses rotational kinematics to demonstrate that SpinLaunch's test centrifuge attained only roughly Mach 1 rather than the advertised Mach 6. Finally, he compares the concept to century-old naval guns and 1960s supergun initiatives like Project HARP, arguing that SpinLaunch is spending over $100 million to build a more fragile, slower-firing, and technically inferior version of technology proven over half a century ago.

## Atmosphere & style The presentation carries an acerbic, biting, and relentlessly sarcastic tone characteristic of Thunderf00t's debunking videos. Fast-paced mathematical calculations and frame-by-frame video dissections are paired with dry mockery of startup culture, Silicon Valley hype, and uncritical tech journalism. The viewing experience feels like a methodical intellectual dismantling, juxtaposing polished CGI marketing animations against the unyielding physical realities of fluid dynamics and heavy artillery history.

## Bulletin - [00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=0s) Thunderf00t challenges SpinLaunch's launch physics, showing that unpowered atmospheric ascent forces liquid propellants away from engine feed lines without dedicated ullage motors to settle them. - [02:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=173s) Rotational kinematics on SpinLaunch test footage reveal a tip speed of roughly 300 m/s (around Mach 1), directly contradicting claims of tests exceeding Mach 6. - [10:58](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=658s) SpinLaunch's long-term targets of hurling 200 kg at 2,000 m/s fail to outperform the 1960s Project HARP supergun, which achieved the same velocity with lower peak acceleration and without subjecting payloads to an hour-long spin-up. - [04:33](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=273s) Operational requirements such as an 8-hour vacuum pump-down make SpinLaunch drastically slower to refire and far more vulnerable to catastrophic structural failure than conventional or historical artillery.

## Key takeaways - [00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=0s) SpinLaunch relies on liquid-fueled engines, but unpowered ascent causes rapid deceleration that pushes propellant to the top of the tanks and starves the engines without ullage motors. - [02:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=173s) Video analysis of the 30-meter centrifuge test indicates roughly 3 revolutions per second, equating to ~300 m/s (Mach 1) rather than the claimed Mach 6 or 'thousands of miles per hour'. - [04:33](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=273s) Century-old 16-inch naval guns fired 1-ton shells at Mach 2.5 to 3.0 every 30 seconds, demonstrating roughly 50,000 times higher cumulative launch energy than SpinLaunch's subscale test. - [04:33](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=273s) SpinLaunch requires an estimated 8 hours to draw a vacuum to avoid catastrophic aerodynamic heating during spin-up, resulting in an extremely poor launch cadence. - [06:48](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=408s) While artillery impulses subject payloads to extreme g-forces for fractions of a second, SpinLaunch subjects electronics and mechanisms to sustained 10,000+ g acceleration for nearly an hour. - [06:48](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=408s) Historical systems like Cold War atomic artillery shells prove delicate guidance and timing electronics can survive short, high-g cannon launches. - [06:48](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=408s) Extended barrel designs, from the German WWII V-3 multi-chamber gun to Project HARP, demonstrate that prolonged barrel acceleration effectively manages peak g-forces. - [10:58](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=658s) In the 1960s, Project HARP fired 200 kg projectiles at ~2,000 m/s under 15,000 g's, matching or exceeding SpinLaunch's projected Mach 7 performance using low-cost welded battleship barrels. - [10:58](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=658s) SpinLaunch openly references Project HARP in its promotional materials, effectively advertising that it is attempting an inferior and costlier replica of 50-year-old technology. - [13:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=780s) Artillery engineer Gerald Bull adapted Project HARP concepts into Saddam Hussein's Project Babylon supergun before his assassination and the project's interception. - [14:20](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=860s) Centrifuges carry catastrophic failure risks where any imbalance or tether break at hypersonic speed destroys the entire facility, whereas gun barrels are inherently durable. - [15:37](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=937s) Thunderf00t concludes by previewing an upcoming debunk of a viral 'solid hydrogen at room temperature' energy startup claim.

## Detailed walkthrough ### [00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=0s) The SpinLaunch Concept and the Ullage Problem

Thunderf00t revisits SpinLaunch for a second debunking video after taking a step back and realizing foundational physics do not add up. He summarizes the company's origin story with heavy sarcasm: a founder with zero background in rocketry or satellites simply wondered how to revolutionize space launches, asked whether payloads could reach orbit without a traditional rocket, and arrived at the concept of a rotational accelerator. Thunderf00t quips that while one might expect breakthrough aerospace concepts to originate from seasoned engineers, this was just an everyday individual whose napkin idea suddenly became a $100 million startup—joking that had he adopted a deep voice, donned a black turtleneck, and claimed to be a Harvard dropout, it would have been a $9 billion startup like Theranos.

The sleek computer-generated imagery (CGI) portrays a seamless launch sequence: the machine spins like an enormous trebuchet, flings a projectile out of a sealed vacuum chamber, and the rocket engine kicks in to push it into orbit. But as Thunderf00t emphasizes, real physics breaks this fantasy immediately. The proposed vehicle utilizes liquid-fueled engines, visible by its fuel and propellant tanks. Liquid rocket engines require continuous settling pressure to force liquid propellant toward the bottom feed lines and pumps.

Because the flung projectile is unpowered during its initial ascent, it decelerates violently due to atmospheric drag. This deceleration forces the fuel upward against the front dome of the tank rather than toward the engine feed lines at the bottom. Standard rocketry solves this issue through ullage motors—small auxiliary thrusters fired briefly to generate forward acceleration, settling liquid propellant prior to main engine ignition. While SpinLaunch’s animation depicts a small motor to de-spin the projectile, it lacks any ullage motors entirely. Thunderf00t points out:

> “Except that's not how physics work 100 percent that's not how physics work you see you know these are liquid fed engines because you can see the fuel and the propellant tank so in order to actually pump the stuff out of there you need a force pushing it to the bottom of the tanks but wait this yiking machine is dumbfire these projectiles are unpowered which means they're always slowing down due to the atmospheric drag.”

```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: The Ullage Problem in Flung Liquid Rockets accDescr: Diagram contrasting fuel positions at rest on the ground versus during unpowered atmospheric ascent, highlighting engine starvation.

subgraph Ground["At Rest on Ground"] G1["Fuel sits at bottom of tank"] --> G2["Feeds normally into engine lines"] end

subgraph Ascent["Unpowered Ascent through Atmosphere"] A1["High atmospheric drag causes rapid deceleration"] --> A2["Fuel sloshes against front of tank"] A2 --> A3["Engines starved of propellant"] A3 -.->|"Required fix omitted by SpinLaunch"| A4["Ullage motors needed to settle fuel"] end ```

[02:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=173s) Debunking SpinLaunch's Velocity Claims

Thunderf00t addresses official claims regarding launch speeds. SpinLaunch’s website FAQ asserted that their orbital accelerator spins up to roughly 5,000 miles per hour prior to release and claimed to have conducted tests exceeding six times the speed of sound (Mach 6). CNBC similarly echoed these figures, reporting test velocities reaching "many thousands of miles per hour using approximately 20 percent of the accelerator's power capacity."

Thunderf00t verifies these claims using basic rotational kinematics on their test centrifuge footage: - The centrifuge chamber measures roughly 30 meters in diameter, giving a circumference of approximately 100 meters. - Audio from the test clip is accompanied by an artificial Doppler whoosh sound effect, despite the arm ostensibly spinning inside an evacuated vacuum chamber. - Frame-by-frame analysis with a timecode shows the arm takes approximately 0.33 seconds per full rotation (or roughly two complete rotations in 0.6 seconds), establishing a rotational rate of roughly 3 revolutions per second. - Multiplying a 100-meter circumference by 3 revolutions per second yields a linear tip speed of roughly 300 meters per second.

This puts the tested speed around Mach 1 (the speed of sound) or roughly 670–700 mph, completely contradicting claims of Mach 6 or "many thousands of miles per hour." Thunderf00t calls out the discrepancy plainly:

> “To date we've conducted tests at over six times the speed of sound this is straight out I mean you know the size of the centrifuge it's about 30 meters in diameter which means it's about 100 meters around the outside so let's count how many revolutions this thing's doing per second.”

[04:33](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=273s) SpinLaunch vs. Century-Old Battleship Cannons

Thunderf00t compares SpinLaunch's performance to century-old naval artillery technology: 16-inch heavy battleship guns. During their operational prime, battleship guns delivered pinpoint accuracy over horizons beyond 20 miles (even when deck observers could only see 14 miles), firing 1-ton explosive shells at standard muzzle velocities of Mach 2.5, or up to Mach 3 when heavily charged. By contrast, SpinLaunch releases its test projectile at roughly the speed of sound with dubious exit stability, visibly tipping around 30 degrees off-axis upon exiting the vacuum seal chimney.

Operational turnaround times highlight an even wider gap. The SpinLaunch chamber requires a near-complete vacuum before spinning up to prevent catastrophic aerodynamic drag and overheating on the tether arm, taking an estimated 8 hours to pump down between launches. A standard battleship gun fires two shells per minute per barrel (one every 30 seconds)—over 1,000 times faster.

| Metric | Century-Old Battleship Gun (16-Inch) | SpinLaunch Test / Projections | Advantage Factor | |:--- |:--- |:--- |:--- | | **Muzzle Velocity** | Mach 2.5 to 3.0 (~850–1000 m/s) | Mach 1 tested (~300 m/s) | Gun is ~3× faster | | **Projectile Mass** | ~1,000 kg (1 ton) | ~200 kg (proposed missile) | Gun is ~5× heavier | | **Kinetic Muzzle Energy** | Extreme ($E_k = \frac{1}{2}mv^2$) | Low compared to projectile weight | Gun is ~50× higher energy | | **Firing Cycle / Cadence** | 1 round every 30 seconds (2/min) | ~8 hours pump-down time | Gun is ~1,000× faster | | **Cumulative Capability** | Rapid-fire salvo capability | Single experimental release | Gun is ~50,000× superior overall |

Thunderf00t emphasizes how poorly SpinLaunch stacks up against century-old technology:

> “Now you stack all the irrelevant practice here and spin launch is some fifty thousand ish times worse than a regular battleship gun in terms of how much energy it can launch so you see already in the comparison to a gun not designed for this purpose spin launch has an awful lot of catching up to do.”

[06:48](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=408s) Sustained G-Forces, Gun-Launched Nukes, and the V-3 Cannon

Thunderf00t addresses the counterargument regarding peak acceleration: does firing electronics from a cannon destroy delicate components compared to a centrifuge? While both subject payloads to extreme peak loadings (often topping 10,000 g), a cannon impulse lasts only a fraction of a second during barrel travel. In contrast, SpinLaunch subjects delicate payload electronics and folded mechanisms to these crushing loads continuously over roughly an hour as the centrifuge slowly spins up to speed.

To illustrate how high-g gun launches can accommodate delicate hardware, he cites the US military's Cold War atomic artillery shells (such as the M65 atomic cannon). A nuclear weapon requires precise timing circuits and shaped explosive lenses to implode plutonium cores properly, yet engineers designed functional gun-fired nuclear shells.

Examining famous archival footage of the M65 atomic cannon test, Thunderf00t dissects the film's timing. Based on a muzzle velocity of Mach 2 (~600 m/s or 2 km every 3 seconds) firing toward a target roughly 10 kilometers away, the flight time must be around 15 seconds, followed by an additional 30 seconds for the blast's sound wave to travel back to the battery. In widely circulated documentary clips, the detonation appears only 7 seconds after firing, and smoke from the cannon vanishes abruptly due to an edit. Finding uncut historical footage, he reveals the narrator awkwardly stalling through an explanatory sentence across the 15-second flight gap before the fireball finally erupts on the horizon.

Thunderf00t notes that using extended propulsion inside a barrel to reduce peak g-forces dates back even further. During World War II, Germany deployed three *Vergeltungswaffen* (Vengeance weapons): - The V-1 flying bomb (powered by an atmospheric pulsejet engine) - The V-2 ballistic rocket - The V-3 supergun

Standard guns experience peak chamber pressure at initial ignition, which drops rapidly as the projectile travels down the barrel. The V-3 supergun was engineered as a multi-chamber accelerating gun, employing sequential propellant charges along the length of the barrel timed to detonate just behind the moving shell to sustain acceleration.

[10:58](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=658s) Project HARP and the $100M "Worse Copy"

Thunderf00t examines the physics of artillery and gun-based launch systems, noting that instead of detonating sequential secondary charges along a barrel, engineers can use slower-burning propellants that sustain pressure behind the shell. Under this design, final muzzle velocity is directly dictated by barrel length: the longer the barrel, the greater the acceleration. This principle was fully demonstrated in the 1960s by Project HARP (High Altitude Research Project). Thunderf00t points out the profound irony that SpinLaunch openly references Project HARP in their own promotional materials, calling the comparison a massive self-inflicted wound because it instantly exposes how unoriginal and inferior SpinLaunch’s core concept is.

When looking at the actual performance figures, SpinLaunch’s aspirational targets fail to improve upon a project carried out half a century earlier. SpinLaunch claims it will hurl a 200-kilogram projectile at roughly 5,000 miles per hour (around 2,000 meters per second, or Mach 7), subjecting the payload to peak forces of approximately 20,000 g’s. Decades ago, Project HARP accomplished virtually the exact same feat: firing a 200-kilogram shell at roughly 2,000 meters per second. However, HARP subjected its payload to a lower peak load of 15,000 g’s, and that acceleration took place for merely a fraction of a second inside a rigid tube, rather than forcing delicate space hardware to endure an hour of continuous mechanical stress inside a spinning centrifuge.

As Thunderf00t summarizes the comparison: “I mean you can imagine the second people look into this they find out that the entire sales pitch of spin launch is we're going to be 100 million dollar startup that is going to make a worse copy of something that was done 50 years ago.”

- **SpinLaunch targets:** ~200 kg projectile, ~5,000 mph (~2,000 m/s / Mach 7), ~20,000 g maximum load, accelerated over 60 minutes in a centrifuge. - **Project HARP achievements:** ~200 kg projectile, ~2,000 m/s, ~15,000 g load, accelerated over a fraction of a second inside a barrel.

[13:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=780s) The Iraqi Supergun, Gerard Bull, and Battleship Barrels

Unlike a massive vacuum centrifuge that takes an hour to spin up to launch speed, conventional gun systems can fire repeatedly as quickly as fresh rounds are loaded into the breech. Thunderf00t emphasizes that Project HARP was effectively a low-cost, "bargain basement" endeavor, constructed simply by welding two surplus 16-inch naval battleship gun barrels end-to-end to create a single ultra-long launch tube.

The supergun concept was famously pursued decades later by Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein under Project Babylon, designed by Canadian artillery engineer Dr. Gerald Bull—the very same engineer behind Project HARP. The Iraqi gun components were manufactured in the United Kingdom out of top-grade Sheffield steel, disguised as oversized petrochemical reactor pipes. Customs officials eventually intercepted the curiously straight, heavily over-engineered steel tubes because they lacked any standard petrochemical fittings, and Bull was subsequently assassinated in Brussels in 1990. While Hussein built a smaller prototype with range comparable to the German V-3 cannon and planned an orbital-class gun of virtually unlimited range, fixed superguns suffered from the fatal military flaw of being completely immobile and un-aimable, outside of modest aerodynamic steering surfaces on the projectile itself.

As Thunderf00t observes: “And the only people I know who seriously revisited the idea of the super gun since was Saddam Hussein with the Iraqi super gun made in Britain.”

[14:20](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=860s) Reality vs. Aspiration: Why SpinLaunch Fails Against 1960s Tech

Gun-launch technology capable of achieving hypersonic speeds has existed for over fifty years. Thunderf00t stresses that the SpinLaunch centrifuge attempts to duplicate the exact same operational profile, yet scores worse across every meaningful engineering metric. Crucially, Project HARP was a proven piece of hardware that actually operated in physical reality, whereas SpinLaunch’s published milestones are merely aspirational targets promoted by a startup founder without a background in the field. SpinLaunch’s sub-scale prototype tests have yet to even surpass the velocity of ordinary military artillery.

The operational drawbacks of a centrifuge system are severe. Achieving hypersonic speeds at sea level requires pumping down a massive chamber to a high vacuum so the tethered payload does not burn up from atmospheric friction during its hour-long spin-up, resulting in an abysmal refire rate. Furthermore, the structural risks are catastrophic: any mechanical failure, tether break, or unbalance at hypersonic velocity will instantly obliterate the entire centrifuge building. By contrast, Project HARP relied on an inherently rugged, low-cost piece of equipment: what Thunderf00t characterizes as nothing more complex than a "big thick metal straw."

As Thunderf00t puts it: “The centrifuge essentially does exactly the same thing but is worse on any comparable metrics with probably the most important one being is that project harp actually existed.”

| Metric / Feature | Project HARP (1960s) | SpinLaunch (Projected) | |:--- |:--- |:--- | | **Projectile Mass** | ~200 kg | ~200 kg | | **Launch Velocity** | ~2,000 m/s (~5,000 mph) | ~2,000 m/s (~5,000 mph) | | **Peak Acceleration** | ~15,000 g | ~20,000 g | | **Acceleration Duration** | Fraction of a second | ~60 minutes | | **Cycle / Refire Time** | Minutes (limited only by reloading) | Hours (vacuum pumpdown + 1 hr spin-up) | | **Core Architecture** | Two bolted 16-inch battleship barrels | Massive evacuated centrifuge chamber | | **Failure Vulnerability** | High structural barrel tolerance | Catastrophic facility destruction |

```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: SpinLaunch vs Project HARP Launch Cycle accDescr: Operational flowchart comparing the rapid, robust firing cycle of Project HARP to the slow, highly vulnerable centrifuge process of SpinLaunch.

subgraph HARP ["Project HARP (Supergun)"] H1["Load 200 kg projectile"] --> H2["Ignite propellant charge"] H2 --> H3["Hypersonic exit in fraction of a second"] H3 --> H4["Immediate reload and repeat"] end

subgraph SPIN ["SpinLaunch (Centrifuge)"] S1["Evacuate chamber to deep vacuum"] --> S2["Spin tethered rocket for ~1 hour"] S2 --> S3["Release through launch tunnel"] S3 --> S4["Slow chamber repressurization & pumpdown cycle"] S2 -.->|"High-speed mechanical failure"| S5["Total destruction of launch facility"] end ```

[15:37](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=937s) Teaser: The "Solid Hydrogen" Scam

Thunderf00t wraps up his analysis of SpinLaunch by tongue-in-cheek noting that, whatever its flaws, SpinLaunch at least never claimed its technology was suppressed by authorities. He previews his next debunking subject: a viral promotional video for an energy startup claiming to store hydrogen as a solid at ambient conditions, complete with the claim that the technology is "so good that it was actually banned."

Thunderf00t lambasts the premise as pure scientific illiteracy, emphasizing that solid hydrogen requires temperatures near absolute zero and noting that the concept makes SpinLaunch look like a well-reasoned enterprise by comparison. He urges viewers to subscribe and support the channel on Patreon to catch the upcoming debunking breakdown.

Regarding the upcoming target, Thunderf00t delivers a biting critique: “And spoiler this is one of the most scientifically illiterate videos that I've ever seen and I debunk creationists.”

## Mentioned Thunderf00t, SpinLaunch, Theranos, CNBC, M65 atomic cannon, V-1 flying bomb, V-2 rocket, V-3 supergun, Project HARP, Gerald Bull, Project Babylon, Saddam Hussein, Patreon

## Video description You can support this channel directly through patreon: https://patreon.com/Thunderf00t

or at my amazon affiliate store: https://www.amazon.com/shop/thunderf00t

or my other channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCUrdmVprSahXaPKqr04VfgQ

[Source](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE)

中文简报

SpinLaunch太空发射器在速度与应力方面落后于1960年代火炮 SpinLaunch耗资1亿美元的离心机重蹈了1960年代HARP项目火炮的技术，但速度更低且机械应力更高，而无动力的稠密大气减速阶段还会导致其液体火箭发动机失去燃料供应。 Thunderf00t深入剖析了SpinLaunch旋转轨道加速器背后严重的工程和物理缺陷。他指出，由于缺乏沉底发动机，无动力弹丸在穿过稠密大气层减速时，会将液体推进剂推离发动机进料管道；他还利用旋转运动学分析证明，SpinLaunch的测试离心机仅达到了约1马赫，而非宣传中的6马赫。最后，他将这一概念与百年前的舰炮以及1960年代类似HARP项目的超级大炮计划进行了对比，认为SpinLaunch花费超过1亿美元，造出的却是一个比半个多世纪前就已验证的技术更脆弱、射速更慢且技术上更落后的版本。 Thunderf00t质疑了SpinLaunch的发射物理机制，指出由于缺乏用于沉底的专用推力器，无动力的大气爬升阶段会迫使液体推进剂远离发动机进料管道。 (0:00) 针对SpinLaunch测试画面的旋转运动学分析显示，其末端线速度约为300米/秒（约1马赫），直接推翻了此前测试超过6马赫的说法。 (2:53) SpinLaunch将200公斤载荷以2000米/秒的速度掷出的长期目标，并未超越1960年代的HARP项目超级大炮；后者不仅达到了相同的速度，峰值加速度更低，且无需让有效载荷承受长达一小时的旋转加速过程。 (10:58) 长达8小时的真空抽气等运行要求，使得SpinLaunch的重复发射速度远远慢于传统或历史上的火炮，且更容易发生灾难性结构失效。 (4:33)

Detailed notes — zh

## Background 该视频由知名科普博主 Thunderf00t 于 2021 年 11 月 24 日在 YouTube 平台发布。视频时长近 17 分钟，播放量超过 47 万次，简介中主要包含了作者的 Patreon 赞助链接、亚马逊推广店铺及其副频道的推广信息。 ## TL;DR 本期节目是 Thunderf00t 针对初创航天公司 SpinLaunch 的第二期深度打假。他从物理学和工程学角度指出，SpinLaunch 抛射体在大气层减速时因缺乏沉底电动机（ullage motors）将导致液体燃料无法供油，且实测转速仅为 1 马赫左右，与官方吹嘘的 6 倍音速相去甚远。此外，他将该方案与百年前的战列舰火炮、冷战时期的原子炮、二战 V-3 巨炮以及 50 年前的高空研究计划（Project HARP）进行了详尽对比，证明 SpinLaunch 在发射能量、过载持续时间、发射周期和容错率等指标上全方位惨败，本质上只是一个用精美计算机渲染包装出来的硅谷式圈钱骗局。 ## Atmosphere & style 视频贯穿了 Thunderf00t 标志性的辛辣讽刺与无情揭露，语言犀利且充满英式冷幽默。整期节目节奏紧凑、逻辑严密，通过逐帧视频测速、硬核物理受力分析与历史档案影像的交叉比对，将 SpinLaunch 的宣传幻象层层剥离。观看时既能感受到严谨科学推理带来的豁然开朗，又充斥着对硅谷伪创新与跟风媒体不加辨别宣传的极度荒诞感。 ## Bulletin - [02:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=173s) SpinLaunch 宣称其抛射体测试速度已超过 6 倍音速，但逐帧分析显示其亚轨道离心机外缘线速度仅约 300 米/秒（1 马赫），存在严重的数据虚标。 - [00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=0s) 抛射体在大气层减速滑行时，内部液体燃料因惯性涌向储箱前端，而设计中完全缺失用于供油的沉底推进器（ullage motors），导致火箭发动机根本无法点火入轨。 - [10:58](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=658s) 半个世纪前的 Project HARP 超级大炮仅用二手战舰炮管便实现了 7 马赫初速并承受 15,000 G 瞬时过载，在初速、成本和发射周期上全面碾压 SpinLaunch 耗费上亿美元的离心机方案。 - [12:11](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=731s) 相比火炮仅几分之一秒的瞬时冲击，SpinLaunch 需要让精密弹体在离心机内承受长达一小时、高达 20,000 G 的极端持续离心应力，且真空室具备极高的灾难性单点故障风险。 ## Key takeaways - [00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=0s) SpinLaunch 创始人缺乏航天研发背景，其“甩物体进太空”的概念更像硅谷式靠渲染动画吸金上亿美元的创业泡沫。 - [00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=0s) 飞行器无动力穿越稠密大气层时会持续减速，液体燃料被推向储箱顶部，缺少沉底发动机将无法向发动机供油点火。 - [02:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=173s) 逐帧视频测算表明，其实测旋转线速度仅为每秒 300 米左右（约 1 马赫），远低于官方宣传与财经媒体宣称的 6 倍音速。 - [04:31](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=271s) 一百年前的 16 英寸传统战列舰主炮炮口初速达 2.5 至 3 马赫，在发射速度、弹体质量及姿态稳定性上均大幅领先 SpinLaunch 的实测状态。 - [04:31](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=271s) SpinLaunch 每次发射均需耗费约 8 小时抽真空以防过热，导致其综合能量投放率比战列舰主炮低了近 5 万倍。 - [06:48](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=408s) 火炮过载虽高但仅持续毫秒级，而离心机需持续施加近一小时的极限离心力，对弹内精密电子元器件的破坏性更为严酷。 - [06:48](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=408s) 美军冷战时期的 M65 原子炮试验证明，依靠火炮短时瞬时爆发，微秒级精密度的内爆式核弹头完全可以在高 G 载荷下生存并成功起爆。 - [10:58](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=658s) 长身管火炮利用慢速燃烧推进剂维持持续膛压，炮管越长则初速越高，该原理解构了 SpinLaunch 所谓的颠覆性创新。 - [10:58](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=658s) 50 年前的 Project HARP 计划已能将 200 公斤弹丸加速至 5,000 英里/小时（约 7 马赫），各项性能全面优于 SpinLaunch 的远期规划。 - [12:11](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=731s) HARP 方案成本极低，仅由退役战列舰舰炮焊接而成，而 SpinLaunch 耗费巨资打造的高速机械离心室容错率极低，稍有失衡即面临彻底摧毁。 - [13:16](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=796s) 杰拉德·布尔为伊拉克设计的巴比伦超级火炮进一步印证了高空火炮方案的现实可行性，反衬出 SpinLaunch 仍停留在电脑特效与概念炒作阶段。 ## Detailed walkthrough ### [00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=0s) 荒唐的初创神话与违背常理的物理漏洞 谈及为何要制作针对 SpinLaunch 的第二期打假视频，Thunderf00t 直言不讳地调侃道，有时看完某些东西后静下心一琢磨，就会意识到“等等，这根本讲不通”，而去查验数据后便会发现“果然完全不对”。SpinLaunch 创立的背景本身就充满戏剧色彩：一个完全没有火箭或卫星研发经验的人，某天突然萌生了“颠覆卫星发射行业”的念头，想要寻找一种“不用火箭进入太空”的方法。于是，一个靠旋转加速把物体甩入太空的点子应运而生。在 Thunderf00t 看来，这并不是正规航天工程师会采纳的想法，而更像是一出硅谷式的创业魔术——“如果他嗓音再低沉一点，套上一件黑色高领毛衣，再向外界宣称自己是哈佛辍学生，转眼就能催生一家估值 90 亿美元的独角兽企业”，但现实中这也是一家轻松吸金 1 亿美元的初创公司。 然而，在精美的计算机渲染动画（CGI）中看似完美的方案，一旦进入现实物理世界便千疮百孔。SpinLaunch 宣传的抛射体采用液体燃料发动机推进入轨，但该飞行器被甩出后属于无动力的纯惯性滑行（dumbfire）。由于穿越稠密大气层时承受着巨大的气动阻力，飞行器在升空过程中处于持续减速状态。在减速作用下，根据惯性，推进剂储箱内的液体燃料会被死死推向前盖顶部，完全偏离底部的吸油口与增压管路。航天工程中通常必须使用专门的小型“沉底火箭”（ullage motors）产生瞬时正向加速度，将燃料沉到底部才能正常点火。但 SpinLaunch 虽然给弹体设计了用于消除自旋的微型反冲机构，却对基本的液体发动机燃料沉底机制只字未提。Thunderf00t 讽刺道：“但是这家估值一亿美元的初创公司，显然连这种基础的火箭常识都完全没考虑过”，整个点火过程只存在于 CG 特效的幻想之中。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: SpinLaunch 液体燃料物理矛盾 accDescr: 展示抛射体在大气层减速时，由于缺乏沉底电动机导致燃料无法输送至发动机的物理缺陷。 subgraph Launch["离开发射机与大气减速阶段"] A["旋转加速器高速抛出"] --> B["无动力贯性滑行 (Dumbfire)"] B --> C["大气气动阻力引发强烈减速"] end subgraph PhysicsFailure["燃料动力学失效"] C --> D["液体燃料因惯性涌向储箱前端"] D --> E["储箱底部泵入口吸空"] E --> F["缺乏沉底电动机 (Ullage Motors)"] F --> G["液体火箭发动机无法正常启动"] end ``` - 核心缺陷：无动力弹体在大气层减速上升，缺乏沉底推进器（ullage motors），液体燃料聚集在储箱前端无法供油。 - 创业反讽：创始人缺乏航天经验，仅凭“旋转离心机甩卫星”的概念便拿到了 1 亿美元融资。 --- ### [02:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=173s) 虚夸六倍音速：实测转速的谎言戳破 除了概念设计上的硬伤，SpinLaunch 在官方宣传中给出的速度数据也存在严重虚标。在其官网的常见问题（FAQ）解答中，该公司声称其轨道加速器的旋转线速度约为每小时 5000 英里，并公开宣称“截至目前，我们的测试发射速度已超过六倍音速”。Thunderf00t 最初以为这只是媒体记者的误读或夸大，但在查阅官方记录后确认这就是 SpinLaunch 自己的宣传口径。为此，他对官方公布的测试发射塔离心运转视频进行了逐帧分析。 根据已知建造规格，该亚轨道离心测试机室的直径约为 30 米，外周长约 100 米。Thunderf00t 利用视频时间码记录旋转臂的转动周期：转完完整一圈耗时约三分之一秒（0.33 秒），转完两圈约 0.6 秒，折算下来旋转臂的实际转速约为每秒 3 转。这意味着外缘线速度仅为每秒 300 米左右，这仅仅相当于一倍音速（马赫数 1 左右，折合时速约 670 英里），根本不是宣传的六倍音速。Thunderf00t 严厉指出，所谓的超高马赫数完全是无稽之谈：“这纯粹是彻头彻尾的胡扯。”而主流财经媒体在报道时甚至不加求证地援引官方说法，声称初期测试是以约 20% 的功率就达到了“数千英里每小时”。 - 离心机实测数据：直径约 30 米，周长约 100 米。 - 实测转速与速度：每秒转动约 3 圈，线速度约 300 m/s（约 1 马赫 / 1000 km/h 水平）。 - 官方虚标差距：声称已实现“六倍音速”（> Mach 6），实际测试转速仅为音速级别。 --- ### [04:31](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=271s) 百年战列舰巨炮的全面碾压 为了更直观地衡量 SpinLaunch 的实际工程价值，Thunderf00t 将其与拥有一百年历史的传统重型战列舰舰炮进行了详尽的技术对比。20 世纪的一战、二战巨舰在没有现代复杂传感器的情况下，凭借精准的弹道火控，即便两舰相距 20 英里（远超肉眼地平线能见度的 14 英里），也能将 16 英寸重型高爆穿甲弹精准覆盖到目标上。战列舰主炮的标准炮口初速通常在 2.5 倍音速左右，极限强装药甚至可达 3 倍音速。反观 SpinLaunch，目前的实际速度仅在 1 倍音速上下，且发射姿态极其不稳定——慢动作画面显示弹体冲出真空气闸时甚至歪斜了大约 30 度角。 两者的发射效率和能量输出更是有着天壤之别。战列舰单门火炮每分钟可打出 2 发炮弹（即每 30 秒发射一次）；而 SpinLaunch 的旋转腔体为了避免空气剧烈摩擦产生超高温并降低驱动能耗，每次装填弹体后都必须重新抽真空。Thunderf00t 估算其现实的抽真空时间大约需要 8 个小时。在质量与动能方面，战列舰的一发实弹重达约 1 吨，而 SpinLaunch 规划发射的弹体重量仅为 200 公斤左右。综合速度差（3 倍速度差距带来近 10 倍能量差）、质量差（5 倍）与发射频率差（30 秒对 8 小时，相差近 1000 倍），传统战列舰舰炮的能量投放能力比 SpinLaunch 整整高出 5 万倍。Thunderf00t 总结道：“面对一件根本不是为了进入太空而设计的百年老古董火炮，SpinLaunch 想要赶超还有漫漫长路要走。” | 对比维度 | 传统战列舰 16 英寸火炮 | SpinLaunch 当前亚轨道加速器 | |:--- |:--- |:--- | | **投射物速度** | 2.5 ~ 3.0 马赫 | 约 1.0 马赫（实测 300 m/s） | | **弹体重量** | 约 1000 kg（1 吨） | 约 200 kg | | **单发炮口动能** | 极高（约 SpinLaunch 的 50 倍） | 极低 | | **发射间隔时间** | 30 秒（2 发/分钟） | 约 8 小时（需重新抽真空） | | **飞行姿态与精度** | 极高精度超视距弹道 | 抛出姿态倾斜约 30 度，极不稳定 | | **综合能量发射率** | 领先约 **50,000 倍** | 基线参考值 | --- ### [06:48](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=408s) 极端过载与火炮发射核弹的历史先例 针对许多人关于高载荷损坏精密仪器的担忧——“将装有精细电子元件与折叠太阳翼的卫星置于离心机内承受 10,000 个 G 的加速度，难道不会彻底散架吗？火炮发射难道不也一样致命吗？”Thunderf00t 分析了离心机与火炮在物理工况上的关键差异。两者的峰值过载（Peak G-loading）虽然都在上万个 G 的同一数量级，但火炮做功仅持续零点几秒的瞬间，而离心机在将弹体加速至额定转速的过程中，精密设备需要在长达近一个小时的时间里持续承受这种极限制导破坏性力矩，疲劳载荷远比瞬时冲击严苛得多。 为了证明精密设备在火炮瞬时冲击下的生存能力，Thunderf00t 举出了冷战时期美军研制核大炮（M65 原子炮）的历史事实。核弹头内部的内爆压缩结构与成型装药对起爆同步性的要求极其严苛，各引爆雷管的时间误差必须严格控制在微秒乃至纳秒级，属于结构极度脆弱敏感的精密工程装备。然而，美军当年成功开发出了可通过 280 毫米口径火炮发射的核炮弹（如 W9 核弹头），并在内华达试验场实弹试射成功。 在回溯这段历史时，Thunderf00t 敏锐地指出网络流传的原子炮试射短视频其实被剪辑造假了：炮弹初速约 2 倍音速（600 m/s），打到 10 公里外的爆炸点理论飞行时间约需 15 秒，但短视频为了节奏将后半段剪切掉，只过了 7 秒便爆炸，且炮口浓烟在剪辑点突然神秘消失，用于测量冲击波的火箭烟迹也未提前出现。Thunderf00t 找到了当年的军方完整实录档案，镜头真实还原了炮弹出膛后漫长而尴尬的 15 秒飞行静默，以及爆炸发生后又过了长达 30 秒冲击波巨响才传回炮位的物理声学延迟。随后，他谈及利用类似理念进行高速发射的历史探索：从二战德国的 V-1 脉冲喷气巡航导弹、V-2 液体弹道导弹，再到试图通过多节药室顺次点火来规避膛压下降问题的 V-3 超级多室加速火炮，证明通过长身管或外部推进提升速度的设想早已存在，绝非 SpinLaunch 所吹嘘的全新颠覆性突破。 - 加速度时效区别：火炮过载为毫秒级瞬时冲击；离心机加速则是在长达数十分钟至一小时内持续经受上万 G 离心力拉扯。 - 历史工程对照：冷战时期美军 280 毫米 M65 原子炮成功实现了将微秒级精度的内爆式核弹头发射至 10 公里外。 - 武器技术沿革：从纳粹德国的 V-1、V-2 到旨在克服膛压递减的多段加速式 V-3 巨炮，人类对非传统发射技术的尝试已探索了近一个世纪。 ### [10:58](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=658s) 巨炮技术演进与高空研究计划（Project HARP）的先例 在火炮物理学中，除了沿炮管设置多级装药来逐级加速弹丸外，另一种提升初速的方法是采用慢速燃烧推进剂以维持整个炮管内的膛压。在这种设计下，弹丸的最终出膛速度取决于炮管的长度；炮管造得越长，物体的加速时间就越充裕，速度也就越高。早在半个世纪前，高空研究计划（Project HARP, High Altitude Research Project）就已经完全实践了这一概念。讽刺的是，SpinLaunch 在宣传中居然主动引用了 HARP 计划，而这在 Thunderf00t 看来完全是一场灾难性的自我打脸。 Thunderf00t 援引了 SpinLaunch 创始人的原话，展示其如何在宣传中提及该前身：“So I looked at the whole problem. I came across Project HARP. They were closer than anybody else has ever come to actually building an alternative to rockets. They were able to accelerate a projectile out of a gun tube at speeds of excess of 5,000 miles per hour.” 然而，公众一旦深入调查这项历史对比，就会立刻发现荒谬的真相。Thunderf00t 直言：“You can imagine the second people look into this, they find out that the entire sales pitch of SpinLaunch is: we're going to be a $100 million startup that is going to make a worse copy of something that was done 50 years ago.” - **膛压与炮管设计**：慢速燃烧推进剂能在整个炮管行程中保持持续压力，使炮口初速直接与炮管长度正相关。 - **HARP 的指标达成**：HARP 巨炮在 50 年前就能以超过 5,000 英里/小时（约合 2,000 米/秒，接近 7 马赫）的速度发射弹丸，已完全实现了 SpinLaunch 设想的宏伟目标。 - **商业宣传的尴尬**：SpinLaunch 估值上亿美元，其实际兜售的概念在物理性能上却全方位劣于半个世纪前用廉价设备搭建的历史项目。 --- ### [12:11](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=731s) 离心机与超级大炮的性能对比 将 SpinLaunch 纸面宣称的最佳指标与 HARP 计划的实际数据进行横向比较，两者的差距显而易见。SpinLaunch 设想发射重约 200 公斤的弹丸，出膛初速约 5,000 英里/小时（约 2,000 米/秒，7 倍音速），过程中需要承受高达约 20,000 G 的峰值加速度。而 HARP 计划同样能够发射约 200 公斤的弹丸，初速同样达到约 2,000 米/秒，但它所产生的过载只有约 15,000 G，而且该过载只持续炮管内加速的那一瞬间，绝非像 SpinLaunch 那样在离心机里进行长达一小时的持续极限旋转。 发射周期和再装填能力更是两者云泥之别的体现。巨炮发射只需在炮膛装入下一发弹药即可快速连续击发；而 SpinLaunch 必须先花极长时间将巨大的离心室完全抽成高真空以防气动过热，再用电动机慢速驱动系留火箭旋转整整一个小时才能加速到预定速度，最终才由释放机构脱钩将其送入 35 度的发射导管。更有甚者，HARP 计划的成本极其低廉，炮管不过是将两根退役战列舰的巨型舰炮焊接在一起而已。 ```mermaid flowchart LR accTitle: Project HARP 与 SpinLaunch 加速机制对比 accDescr: 比较 HARP 巨炮短时高能推进与 SpinLaunch 离心机长时抽真空旋转加速的区别 subgraph HARP["Project HARP（超级大炮）"] H1["战列舰舰炮拼接炮管"] --> H2["化学推进剂瞬时爆发"] H2 --> H3["短时承受 15,000 G"] H3 --> H4["即刻再次装填发射"] end subgraph SL["SpinLaunch（离心机）"] S1["巨型真空室抽气"] --> S2["电动机旋转 1 小时"] S2 --> S3["持续承受 20,000 G"] S3 --> S4["脱钩飞入 35° 导管"] end ``` - **过载持续时间**：HARP 承受 15,000 G 仅有几分之一秒；SpinLaunch 不仅过载高达 20,000 G，还要在长达一小时的加速中经受极端且持续的离心应力。 - **发射循环效率**：大炮能以装填速度连续射击；离心机必须在每次发射后重新排气、抽真空并旋转一个小时，发射频率低下。 - **工程成本悬殊**：HARP 是用两根二手战列舰舰炮焊接而成的廉价“白菜价”原型，而 SpinLaunch 耗费数亿美元建造高精密机械真空室。 --- ### [13:16](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=796s) 从巴比伦超级大炮到虚假宣传的破灭 在 HARP 计划之后，唯一认真重新审视“超级大炮”概念的实例是萨达姆·侯赛因治下的伊拉克“巴比伦工程”（Project Babylon）。该计划的首席设计师正是主导 HARP 计划的加拿大火炮专家杰拉德·布尔（Gerald Bull），他后来在布鲁塞尔遭暗杀。该超级火炮计划采购了以品质闻名的英国谢菲尔德钢材，但零部件在海关被拦截查扣——海关官员怀疑所谓的“石化反应器”为何全是一根根尺寸过大、没有任何常规管件接头、却能完美螺栓拼接成巨型炮管的超厚钢管。萨达姆当时拥有射程堪比二战德国 V-3 巨炮的微缩试验版，而那门未完工的巨型全尺寸大炮理论上拥有惊人的射程。虽然由于无法随意调整仰角和方向，大炮作为常规武器存在明显局限（仅能依靠弹丸飞行中的气动舵面进行微幅修正），但这证明了高空弹丸发射已是一项存在了半个多世纪的成熟技术。 Thunderf00t 强调，两相对比之下，SpinLaunch 的所有指标都全方位惨败，而最致命的核心区别在于工程的现实性：“The centrifuge essentially does exactly the same thing but is worse on any comparable metrics with probably the most important one being is that Project HARP actually existed. It existed in reality, not as a computer simulation.” 现实中 SpinLaunch 甚至无法击败传统火炮的现有成果；即使拿它最理想的远期宣称指标去和 HARP 相比，依然一败涂地。此外，离心机的容错率为零：一旦运转中出现任何微小故障，整个超高速旋转的设施就会瞬间炸毁粉碎，只能全盘重建，而 HARP 巨炮的结构本质上不过是一根坚固无比的“大金属吸管”。 - **巴比伦工程与杰拉德·布尔**：伊拉克巨炮由 HARP 主设计师杰拉德·布尔操刀，伪装成石化设备向英国订购特种钢材，最终因设计特征暴露遭海关扣押，布尔本人随后遇刺。 - **现实硬件 vs 计算机渲染**：HARP 拥有真实的实测飞行纪录；SpinLaunch 仅凭缺乏相关航天军工背景的创始人提出的一堆电脑特效和宏伟愿景圈钱。 - **灾难性单点故障风险**：离心机内部蕴含极高的动能，一旦结构失效将造成整个发射场的灾难性粉碎；而厚壁炮管拥有无可比拟的结构强度与容错能力。 --- ### [15:36](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=936s) 结语与对“固态氢存储”骗局的预告 在视频的尾声，Thunderf00t 嘲弄道，SpinLaunch 唯一的优点大概是他们好歹没宣称这项技术“因为太优秀而被法律全面禁止”。接着，他播放了一段网络上热传的荒谬科技创业视频切片，该视频声称某初创公司发明了能廉价储存“固态氢”的颠覆性技术以加速能源转型，甚至打出“技术太强而被禁止”的营销噱头。 面对这种违背基础物理化学常识的狂妄论调，Thunderf00t 表达了彻底的震惊与鄙视：“Spoiler: this is one of the most scientifically illiterate videos that I've ever seen, and I debunk creationists.” 他向观众承诺，接下来的节目将彻底拆解这个让 SpinLaunch 看起来都显得合情合理的“固态氢”世纪骗局，并呼吁观众订阅频道并在 Patreon 上提供支持。 - **荒谬的营销修辞**：部分科技初创公司惯用“技术因过于颠覆而被封杀”的阴谋论包装伪科学。 - **固态氢骗局预告**：该项目展现出的科学素养低劣至极，其荒诞程度甚至超越了神创论者的言论，将成为频道下一个重点打假的对象。 ## Notable quotes > [04:31](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE&t=271s) 面对一件根本不是为了进入太空而设计的百年老古董火炮，SpinLaunch 想要赶超还有漫漫长路要走。 — Thunderf00t ## Mentioned SpinLaunch, Thunderf00t, 高空研究计划 (Project HARP), 巴比伦工程 (Project Babylon), 杰拉德·布尔 (Gerald Bull), M65 原子炮, W9 核弹头, V-1 巡航导弹, V-2 弹道导弹, V-3 超级大炮, 萨达姆·侯赛因 (Saddam Hussein), Patreon ## Video description You can support this channel directly through patreon: https://patreon.com/Thunderf00t or at my amazon affiliate store: https://www.amazon.com/shop/thunderf00t or my other channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCUrdmVprSahXaPKqr04VfgQ [Source](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibSJ_yy96iE)

Source quotes

[4:31] Thunderf00t: 面对一件根本不是为了进入太空而设计的百年老古董火炮，SpinLaunch 想要赶超还有漫漫长路要走。

Original transcript

[0:00] yes spin launch gets a second busting [0:03] video because sometimes you're sitting [0:05] there afterwards thinking [0:07] hang on [0:08] that can't be right and then you check [0:11] it and yeah that's not right so a quick [0:14] summary of the story behind spin launch [0:16] because it's amazing a guy with no [0:17] experience with rockets or satellites [0:20] was sitting there one day thinking i [0:22] wonder how i can revolutionize launching [0:24] satellites that was the inspiration for [0:26] spin launch we basically asked the [0:28] question is there a way to get to space [0:30] without a rocket [0:32] [Music] [0:33] i really took a look at it from just a [0:35] fresh perspective and that's when the [0:36] idea of a rotational accelerator came up [0:39] and he came up with the idea of spinning [0:41] the satellite into space amazing you [0:44] would have thought that such a great [0:45] idea would have come from the minds of [0:47] engineers but apparently no regular [0:49] entities don't think of these sorts of [0:51] things this was just a regular guy [0:53] sitting there one day and boom 100 [0:56] million dollar startup maybe if he had [0:58] just had a a deeper voice and a black [1:00] turtleneck sweater and told everyone he [1:02] was a harvard dropout boom nine billion [1:06] dollar startup [1:07] but it all worked so amazingly in the [1:10] computer generated graphics everything [1:12] was so clean in the computer generated [1:15] graphics you just spin it up like a [1:17] giant trebuchet [1:19] and hope it doesn't blow itself apart [1:21] and then you just lob something out and [1:23] the motor kicks in and takes it all the [1:25] way up into space [1:27] except that's not how physics work 100 [1:32] that's not how physics work you see you [1:35] know these are liquid fed engines [1:38] because you can see the fuel and the [1:40] propellant tank so in order to actually [1:43] pump the stuff out of there you need a [1:45] force pushing it to the bottom of the [1:47] tanks [1:48] but wait this yiking machine is dumbfire [1:52] these projectiles are unpowered which [1:55] means they're always slowing down due to [1:58] the atmospheric drag so imagine we've [2:00] got a projectile sat on the ground the [2:02] liquid sits in the fuel tank looks very [2:05] much like this then when we throw it [2:07] into the air of course now it's slowing [2:09] down due to the atmospheric drag which [2:12] means the fuel will be pushed against [2:13] the front of the fuel tank so you need a [2:15] way of getting the fuel to the bottom of [2:18] the fuel tank and the way this is [2:19] usually done is for things called oolage [2:21] motors so you fire out the oolage motors [2:24] for a little bit to accelerate the [2:26] rocket and that settles the fuel then [2:29] you can use the rocket to accelerate in [2:31] a normal fashion but apparently the 100 [2:33] million dollar startup company hasn't [2:36] quite thought of [2:37] basic rocket concepts like that sure [2:40] they have a little motor to de-rotate [2:42] the missile [2:43] but they have no ooulage motors on this [2:46] thing it just magically fires up somehow [2:49] which is something that happens a lot in [2:51] computer generated graphics now i had [2:53] seen claims that they were launching [2:55] things at six times the speed of sound [2:57] and i just assumed that the reporters [2:59] had got confused or something but no [3:02] apparently it's on their website from [3:04] the frequently asked questions on the [3:06] spin launch website the orbital [3:08] accelerator spins up to approximately 5 [3:10] 000 miles per hour prior to releasing [3:13] the launch vehicle to date we've [3:15] conducted tests at over six times the [3:18] speed of sound this is straight out [3:22] i mean you know the size of the [3:24] centrifuge it's about 30 meters in [3:26] diameter which means it's about 100 [3:28] meters around the outside so let's count [3:31] how many revolutions this thing's doing [3:33] per second [3:38] ah okay isn't this going to be in a [3:40] vacuum so why can i hear it going whoosh [3:42] whoosh whoosh doppler style [3:47] okay that's a bit fast let's try that [3:49] again with a time code so let's start [3:52] when the arm is over here [3:55] and [3:56] so there's one full revolution in about [3:59] a third of a second [4:00] there is two for all revolutions in [4:03] about 0.6 of a second and it's about [4:05] three revolutions per second [4:07] which puts their velocity at about 300 [4:09] meters per second which is about the [4:11] speed of sound not six times the speed [4:15] of sound about a thousand miles per hour [4:18] or as it was reported in cnbc [4:21] quoting spin launch their initial test [4:23] was accelerated to many thousands of [4:26] miles per hour using approximately 20 [4:29] percent of the accelerator's power [4:31] capacity then i got into the comparison [4:34] with the battleship cap you see yeah a [4:36] heavy battleship gun 100 year old [4:38] technology could launch a projectile [4:41] with very high accuracy even under ideal [4:43] circumstances you could see only about [4:46] 14 miles from the deck of a battleship [4:48] but with these ships 20 miles apart it's [4:51] possible to land a salvo of 16-inch [4:54] projectiles accurately on the target [4:57] now the typical muzzle velocity of a big [4:59] gun like this was about two and a half [5:00] times the speed of sound but if you were [5:03] brave you could charge them up to about [5:05] three times the speed of sound now spin [5:07] launch wants to do that by spinning [5:08] things up to [5:10] well currently the speed of sound and [5:12] can launch things with dubious accuracy [5:15] i mean you only have to look at how [5:17] crooked the projectile comes out of [5:18] their chamber it's it's at an angle of [5:21] about 30 degrees or something plus for [5:23] the chamber to be loaded it has to be [5:25] done in the vacuum because otherwise you [5:27] would generate too much frictional [5:28] heating and it would take too much power [5:31] so you have to evacuate the chamber [5:33] every time and realistic times of that [5:36] are probably in the eight hour region [5:38] well battleship guns of course slamming [5:40] into a target at the rate of two a [5:42] minute from each gun they can do plenty [5:45] of damage an outstanding case where it's [5:48] better to give than to receive [5:53] so currently our standard [5:55] hundred-year-old battleship gun our [5:57] classes spin launch by a factor of three [5:59] in velocity which is a factor of 10 in [6:02] energy and that would of course be [6:03] assuming they weighed the same they [6:05] don't functioning battleship shells [6:08] weighed about a ton whereas the proposed [6:11] spin launch missiles will weigh about [6:13] 200 kilos so it's more like a fracture [6:15] of 50 in muscle energy and of course the [6:18] battleship gun could fire every 30 [6:20] seconds versus eight or so hours for [6:23] spin launch so the battleship gun could [6:25] fire about a thousand times faster now [6:28] you stack all the irrelevant practice [6:30] here and spin launch is some fifty [6:32] thousand ish times worse than a regular [6:35] battleship gun in terms of how much [6:37] energy it can launch so you see already [6:40] in the comparison to a gun not designed [6:43] for this purpose [6:44] spin launch has an awful lot of catching [6:47] up to do [6:48] but what about the g-forces i hear you [6:50] ask doesn't shooting something out of a [6:52] gun cause incredible damage to sensitive [6:55] electronics well yeah sometimes for [6:57] certain if you're talking delicately [6:59] folded satellites subjecting them to [7:02] 10 000 hg in a centrifuge is going to be [7:06] harsh [7:07] but isn't that the same with a gun [7:09] well actually the peak loadings are [7:12] comparable with the exception that [7:13] firing a projectile like this takes a [7:15] fraction of a second whilst a centrifuge [7:18] is going to be spun up over the best [7:20] part of an hour so it's going to have a [7:22] prolonged time at these high g loadings [7:26] so for instance a lot of people would [7:27] consider a nuke a fairly precision piece [7:30] of engineering in that the shaped [7:32] explosive charges need to be triggered [7:34] with millisecond microsecond that sort [7:37] of thing timing in order for a plutonium [7:39] implosion device to function properly [7:41] fairly sensitive stuff [7:43] yet the us military devised a version of [7:46] him that could be fired from a cannon [7:58] now if your immediate thought was whoa [8:00] that has to be fake well [8:03] [Music] [8:04] kinda yeah [8:05] in the we know the muscle velocity here [8:08] is about two times the speed of sound [8:10] that's 600 meters per second or two [8:14] kilometers every three seconds and this [8:17] has to go about 10 kilometers away [8:19] before it's going to explode so we [8:21] expect the time of flight here to be [8:23] about 15 seconds so let's see what it [8:27] actually is so here we go one [8:30] two [8:31] three [8:32] four [8:33] five [8:34] six [8:35] seven [8:38] something's not right here and of course [8:40] you go through it and you take a look at [8:42] we'll just just watch the clip watch the [8:44] smoke here smoke here smoke here smoke [8:46] here smoke it oh and all of a sudden the [8:49] smoke vanishes [8:51] and also [8:52] uh you'll notice that after the [8:54] explosion [8:56] there are [8:57] smoke trails uh these are rockets that [8:59] they always put up by the way when they [9:01] were testing the nukes you can actually [9:03] see where the pressure wave is by it [9:06] moving the smoke trails on the rockets [9:08] so immediately prior to launch to [9:10] destinating the nuke they would fire [9:12] these rockets up and you'll notice that [9:15] oh they're not there yet they're not [9:16] there yet they're not there yet [9:18] so i went and took a look around to see [9:20] if i could find the actual original [9:22] footage and [9:25] [Music] [9:29] since no gun type assembly had been [9:31] detonated since the hiroshima bomb [9:33] the weapons development scientists had [9:35] on this shot their first opportunity to [9:38] study the nucleonic behavior and [9:40] fireball configuration of such a device [9:44] yes that awkward sentence that you have [9:47] between when you fire the nuke and [9:49] you've got 15 seconds to kill before [9:51] you've got something else to talk about [9:54] also fun to note is that while the shell [9:56] is travelling away from us as about two [9:58] times the speed of sound once the nuke [10:00] detonates the majority of the sound wave [10:02] coming back only travels at the speed of [10:05] sound so the shull takes roughly 15 [10:08] seconds to go out and it will be another [10:10] 30 seconds before you hear the bang from [10:13] the explosion yeah so uh not like this [10:19] and they weren't the only ones or the [10:21] first ones to think this way way back in [10:24] world war ii [10:25] germany had three v weapons the v1 [10:28] flying bomb with a pulse jet engine the [10:31] v2 a rocket and the v3 basically a giant [10:35] artillery piece well it was a little [10:37] more sophisticated than that it was [10:38] meant to be an accelerating gun which [10:41] gets over the fact that you know when [10:43] you basically fire a gun you have high [10:44] pressure in the cylinder at first which [10:46] very effectively accelerates the shell [10:49] but as it moves down the barrel the [10:51] pressure decreases so a way to get [10:53] around this is you have extra charges [10:56] that go off just after the shell has [10:58] passed it and therefore accelerate the [11:00] shell even more now there are other ways [11:02] around this that rather than setting up [11:04] extra charges you have slower burning [11:06] propellants which maintain the pressure [11:09] in the barrel now at that point the [11:11] final muzzle velocity depends on how [11:14] long the barrel is so obviously if you [11:17] can make the barrel longer you can [11:18] accelerate things faster [11:21] and this is what we've done with project [11:23] harp high altitude research project a [11:26] project does amazingly enough spin [11:29] launch make reference to because it [11:30] turns out to be a massive cell phone in [11:34] every conceivable way [11:36] so i looked at the whole problem i came [11:39] across project [11:40] harp they were closer than [11:44] anybody else has ever come to actually [11:46] building an alternative to rockets they [11:49] were able to accelerate a projectile out [11:51] of a gun tube at speeds of excess of [11:53] 5000 miles per hour i mean you can [11:55] imagine the second people look into this [11:58] they find out that the entire sales [12:00] pitch of spin launch is we're going to [12:02] be 100 million dollar startup that is [12:05] going to make a worse copy of something [12:08] that was done 50 years ago i mean you [12:11] know what spin launch is better though [12:12] it's meant to launch a projectile [12:14] wearing about 200 kilos at about 5 000 [12:17] miles per hour [12:19] 2 000 ish meters per second about 7 [12:21] times the speed of sound experiencing a [12:23] maximum g loading of about 20 000 g's [12:28] well project harp could launch a [12:29] projectile weighing somewhere [12:31] 200 kilos [12:33] about 2 000 meters per second [12:35] experiencing a lower g load of about 15 [12:39] 000 g's but of course for a fraction of [12:42] a second in the barrel rather than over [12:44] an extended period of time in a [12:45] centrifuge the centrifuge's electric [12:47] motor will spin the tethered rocket for [12:49] an hour to build up speed once the [12:51] rocket is ratcheted up to speed at over [12:53] 5000 miles per hour the release [12:55] mechanism will cut the vehicle loose and [12:57] let it fly through the 35 degree launch [12:59] tunnel [13:00] and of course the gun could be fired [13:03] quickly it could be fired as quickly as [13:05] you could reload the gun and project car [13:08] was really a bargain basement attempt at [13:11] this i mean you know what they used for [13:12] the barrel two battleship guns stuck [13:16] together and the only people i know who [13:17] seriously revisited the idea of the [13:19] super gun since was saddam hussein with [13:22] the iraqi super gun made in [13:25] britain [13:26] sheffield steel the second to none well [13:29] at least they would have been made in [13:30] britain had the parts not been [13:31] intercepted by customs who were [13:33] wondering why these are petrochemical [13:35] reactors which were curiously straight [13:37] tubes that could be bolted together to [13:39] make a gun were so massively over [13:41] designed and didn't have any other [13:44] fittings on them interestingly the [13:46] designer was the same guy who did [13:47] project harp one gerard bull who was [13:50] shortly afterwards assassinated in [13:53] brussels [13:54] yeah so saddam hussein had a baby [13:56] version with comparable range to the [13:59] german v3 and a bigger version which was [14:02] never completed which would have had [14:04] almost infinite range but of course it [14:06] couldn't really be aimed or moved which [14:10] made it of limited use as a weapon [14:13] well not entirely as the shell flies [14:15] through the air you can steer it [14:17] somewhat using aerodynamic forces that [14:19] sort of thing anyway the practical [14:20] upshot firing projectiles like this has [14:23] been technology for more than half a [14:26] century the centrifuge essentially does [14:28] exactly the same thing but is worse on [14:31] any comparable metrics with probably the [14:34] most important one being is that project [14:37] harp actually existed [14:40] it existed in reality not as a computer [14:44] simulation that is we're comparing the [14:46] results of a real super gun to the [14:49] aspirational goals to a startup by [14:51] someone who has no background in this [14:53] sort of thing i mean if we compare their [14:55] actual achievements they can't even [14:57] outclass artillery and even if we [15:00] compare their aspirational goals they [15:03] are worse on every metric compared to [15:06] project harp [15:08] the most notable one being its abysmal [15:10] re-fire time because you would have to [15:12] pump down the chamber to a vacuum so you [15:15] can spin something up to hypersonic [15:17] speeds for about an hour without it [15:19] overheating [15:20] and of course if the device malfunctions [15:23] in any way whatsoever well you're just [15:26] gonna have to build another facility [15:28] whilst project harp used something as [15:31] technologically advanced as a big thick [15:34] metal straw but i guess on the upside at [15:38] least spin launch didn't claim that it [15:40] was so good that it was actually banned [15:44] but what if we could store hydrogen as a [15:46] solid on the cheap [15:48] a startup may have a solid technology [15:50] that could speed up the energy [15:51] transition the spoiler it's so good that [15:54] it was actually banned and spoiler this [15:57] is one of the most scientifically [15:58] illiterate videos that i've ever seen [16:02] and i debunk creationists [16:04] and if you want to know why [16:06] solid hydrogen is a scam that makes spin [16:09] launch seem like a sane rational well [16:12] thought out idea well maybe consider [16:15] hitting the subscribe button now because [16:17] it's next on the busting block analyst [16:20] ever if you really like this video and [16:22] want to support this channel directly [16:24] you can do it through patreon and uh [16:27] thanks for watching [16:29] [Music] [16:59] you