I was lucky and watched it live. I was flipping through Google news and saw "Watch Space X launch live". So I click on the Houston TV stream and it was 30 seconds from launch. How lucky was that!

There was no voice over, just 3 different views from on board. When the first engine shut down and then the second and things shook around i wondered If that was planned. With no voice over I had no idea.

And then the landing with the "Incredible work, team. Nice work."

I was left scratching my head.

pfft, big deal, my 930 leaves like that too !
Pretty amazing stuff actually

The plan was to shut them down at intervals.

At 1:49:54 the main engines start going a bit wonky, and one seems to cut out completely. Is that a feature, or a bug?

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1607631703.jpg

Something weird with the forums, my post above was a reply to rcooled.

I noticed that. The order of posts was changed

You are just psychic. You answered the question before it was asked. Damn impressive.

Now, if I could only do that with lotto numbers!

How much money does that guy have?

enough

Yeah, Musk has Dr. Evil-level money. Second only to Bezos (and on track to eclipse him soon I believe).

It made it all the way to the scene of the crash .....

Joe sixpack might be laughing but Roscosmos, Boeing, ULA and Arianespace certainly are not ....

I know the engines adjust for flight variances, but there was a view in the engine bay during the flight, and it looked like a couple thrusters/boosters broke loose? it forced the airframe sides ways, and i noticed the belly was getting mighty hot on it, the things boosters kicked back on to compensate for its failures, and Kabooom, no more rocket. Trip to mars anybody?

Nothing broke. Only thing that went bad is fuel tank not being to supply liquid during last 3 sec...
Everything else was right on time.

Engines were shut down on purpose, small "fire" was residual fuel (expected). Basically, everything except the landing went well.

Lots of 'maybes' on this flight.
Maybe they should have some parachutes to upright and slow the decent.
Maybe the engines didn't start up properly or early enough.
Maybe the fuel tanks didn't supply fuel properly to fire up the engines.
Maybe, maybe, maybe.

But the thing is, lessons are learned and more studies will be performed before the next test flight.

No maybes, they know exactly what happened. The header tanks did not have enough pressure. No need for parachutes, it is meant to land the same as the Falcon first stages.

I was being sarcastic with the maybes. Yes, they know what happened and what went wrong. That is why it is called a test flight. Stay tuned, they will get it right.

Sorry. Could not glean the sarcasm from your post.

I may get flamed here...flame suit on. I don't see what's the big deal about this? Didn't we do the same thing landing on a moon and taking from the moon over 50 years ago with almost non-existence computer power? I know that gravity is 1/6th on the moon as on earth but still they traveled a 'long' way there then back whereas in this test it was a really short trip and it did not end well except for correct orientation of its explosive landing!

It’s the biggest baddest rocket ever made and totally reusable. That’s the big wrinkle and a major technical complexity. This thing is intended for Mars, not the moon.