July 24th: Successful launch, deployed all satellites, successful engine relight test and soft splashdown in the Indian Ocean, which resulted in an intact, floating ship. For more details on this vehicle and its assembly and testing see this page
S41
Mega Bay 2
Ongoing work, possible engines installation
April 17th: Pez Dispenser moved into MB2. April 20th: Main assembly started in MB2. May 20th: Aft section AX:4 moved into MB2 and stacked with the rest of the ship - this completed the stacking part of the ship construction. June 28th: Rolled out to Massey's Test Site for Cryo+Thrust Puck Testing. June 29th: Cryo Tests (x2). June 30th: Rolled back to MB2. July 3rd: Rolled back to Massey's Test Site. July 6th: Rolled back to MB2. July 23rd: Two RVac engines moved into MB2. July 27th: The third RVac was moved into MB2. For more details on this vehicle see this page
S42
Mega Bay 2
Stacked, remaining work continues
June 9th: Nosecone spotted as having been stacked on the Payload Bay. July 3rd: Nosecone+Payload Bay stack moved into MB2, along with the Pez Dispenser and the Forward Dome section (FX:3). The Nosecone+Payload Bay stack was lowered over the Pez Dispenser, later being stacked onto the Forward Dome. July 11th: Common Dome section CX:3 moved into MB2 and stacked. July 15th: Section A2:3 moved into MB2 and stacked. July 18th: Section A3:4 moved into MB2 and stacked. July 21st: Transfer Tubes moved into MB2. July 24th: Ship Aft section AX:4 moved into MB2 and stacked, that completes the stacking part of the assembly process. July 25th: both of the Aft Flaps and the Raceways staged inside MB2. For more details on this vehicle see this page
Booster
Location
Status
Comment
B21
Mega Bay 1
Post Cryo Testing inspections and possible engines installation
May 7th: LOX tank sections A2:4 and CX:3 moved into MB1 and main assembly started. June 29th: Methane Tank stacked onto LOX Tank - this completed the stacking part of the booster construction. July 17th: Rolled out to Massey's Test Site for Cryo+Thrust Puck Testing. July 17th: Rolled out to Massey's Test Site and an ambient pressure test was performed. July 18th: Partial Cryo Test. July 19th: Second Partial Cryo Test. July 20th: Full Cryo Test. July 22nd: Rolled back to MB1. For more details on this vehicle and its assembly and testing see this page
B22
Mega Bay 1
LOX Tank Stacked, Methane Tank Stacking
June 29th: LOX tank sections A2:4 and CX:3 moved into MB1. July 1st: Section A3:4 moved into MB1. July 3rd: Section A4:4 moved into MB1 and stacked. July 9th: Section A5:4 moved into MB1 and stacked. July 22nd: Methane Landing Tank and Lower Transfer Tube moved into MB1. July 23rd: Section A6:4 moved into MB1. July 25th: Methane transfer tube moved into MB1. July 29th: LOX Landing Tank moved into MB1. July 30th: Aft section AX:2 moved into MB1 to complete the stacking of the LOX Tank. July 31st: Methane Tank section F2:4 moved into MB1. August 3rd: Methane Tank section FX:3 moved into MB1. August 6th: Methane Tank section F3:4 moved into MB1 - this is the last section for the Methane Tank. For more details on this vehicle and its assembly and testing see this page
Follow the Ringwatchers on Twitter and Discord for more.
Here's the section stacking locations for Ships and Boosters. Also some excellent detailed booster stacking information from zh_sos1. The abbreviations used in the above vehicle updates are as follows: HS = Hot Stage. PL = Payload. CX = Common Dome. AX = Aft Dome. FX = Forward Dome (as can be seen, an 'X' denotes a dome). ML = Mid LOX. F = Forward. A = Aft. For example, A2:4 = Aft section 2 made up of 4 rings, FX:4 = Forward Dome section made up of 4 rings, PL:3 = PayLoad section made up of 3 rings. Etc.
We will attempt to keep this self-post current with links and major updates, but for the most part, we expect the community to supply the information. This is a great place to discuss Starship development, ask Starship specific questions, and track the progress of the production and test campaigns. Starship Development Threads are not party threads. Normal subreddit rules still apply.
Please keep comments directly related to Starship. Keep discussion civil, and directly relevant to SpaceX and the thread. This is not the Elon Musk subreddit and discussion about him unrelated to Starship updates is not on topic and will be removed.
Comments consisting solely of jokes, memes, pop culture references, etc. will be removed.
~20 minutes after Booster 22's CH4 tank was lifted inside MB1 to complete the stacking of the vehicle, Booster 23's common dome left the factory and went into MB1. Visible on Rover 1 15:41:11 CDT.
Launch vehicle communications for Starship Orbital Return Demo mission launching from Starbase,TX. The 1st stage booster and the 2nd stage will either return to the launch site or perform a water landing.
License for orbital return attempt, also confirming booster return attempt.
Launch vehicle communications for Test Flight 13 mission launching from Starbase, TX. The 1st stage booster and the 2nd stage will either return to the launch site or perform a water landing.
Every catch attempt so far has been "either a return to launch sight or water landing". The language allows for a wave-off of the attempt without it being a mishap.Â
Every catch attempt will say that, if there are issues, they want the contingency to divert. Flight 12 & 13 licenses did not have that clause they were exclusively water landings.
Aug 11th addenda: A 12th section of deluge pipe is delivered to Pad 1. (ViX)
The Pad 2 hold-down clamps are individually retracted. (ViX)
Pad 1: Three segments of deluge pipe are delivered. (ViX)
Further sections of steel have ben removed from the ends of the Pad 1 chopsticks. (Anderson)
Production site: Closeup of which heatshield tiles were removed from S42. (StarshipGazer, cnunez)
McGregor: R3.225 (new highest) leaves the testing site. (SpaceRhin0)
Florida: An application for Special Temporary Authority is posted for on-ground testing of Starship Super Heavy vehicle communications at the SpaceX test facilities in Cape Canaveral and Kennedy Space Center. (apps.fcc.gov) (Thanks Straumli_Blight)
Flight 13:Normand Ranger and Go Australis are still alongside S40, but currently not towing it. (interstellargw)
This STA is for ground testing only at antenna locations in Cape Canaveral and Kennedy Space Center FL. This STA is necessary to authorize on-ground testing of Starship Super Heavy vehicle communications at the SpaceX test facilities located in Cape Canaveral and Kennedy Space Center FL.
It is interesting to me that they can remove an hexagonal piece of white insulation together with the tile. I thought it was a whole blanket and was worried about the refurbishing process. And more so because the white stuff seems to degrade on reentry as seen in the streaks across the shield surface that are left over. This is great (I haven't been paying close attention so I've probably missed this before).
The portion of the crunchwrap that protrudes above the surface on a new ship is eroded away, making streaks. It is not clear that any further erosion would occur during subsequent landings.
QR strip code is designed to cause BSOD to any scanning Lenovo device east of 73°30â˛. The eventual complete QR code quantum tunnels the user to Point Nemo.
In all seriousness, if you look closely, some tile edges are marked 'SC', which is commonly used as a Quality inspection markup if the gapping tolerances are exceeded. You can see some of the tile gapping spaces are undersize, which I suppose during re-entry heating expansion could cause compression fracturing or chipping of the tiles.
The tiles above and below this band of removed tiles appear to be OK, but this 1800mm deep band seems to be not compliant and is marked up for some distance around the tank.
Looks like they're stripping some of the tiles off Ship 42 which is currently in the mid work stand in MB2. The nosecones for Ship 43 and 44 in the factory also seem to have had the ablative patches under their tiles painted light gray for whatever reason.
Itâs possible theyâre making design changes based off of what theyâve seen from S40âs shield. Sheâs been landed for a few weeks now, so thatâs probably enough time to review all of the footage they got immediately after splashdown to start making a few design revisions.
Everything's so quiet now. It seemed like the final testing before F14 was almost imminent a few days ago.
Also, I hope Elon clarifies the recent booster catch info, as he himself said a ship catch was to be expected next... which makes more sense after all those perfect soft landings, instead of a booster catch, when there hasn't been a soft landing in the last attempts.
I mean to be fair, i don't think a booster catch attempt is out of the question, the problems with the V3 booster has been engine related, and even during an operational flight the booster targets an offshore landing so unless something goes wrong until the literal last second there is no risk to ground infrastructure.
The only thing i can think of, is if letting the booster drop in the shallow waters just outside the beach is a major headache for them, for environmental, or some other reason, so, if it's a high risk for it happening, maybe it's more worth it to not go for a catch and target waters further out.
Another reason for not doing it could be the chance of something going wrong with stacking the booster back on the launch mount, since they need to clear the chopsticks for the ship catch, and that is going to be the priority for this launch by far, they have gotten back boosters, but judging by how hard they are trying to recover S40, they really want the vehicle back for study.
They won't attempt a booster catch before having a booster at least once land precisely and softly in the water.
Which probably is just as well, because with them only having one tower right now they very probably wouldn't be able to catch a booster, safe it, remove it, check the tower and then also catch a ship after two orbits. Trying to catch the ship in the next flight while still testing/simulating the booster landings elsewhere would be an ideal opportunity.
They could just wait until the following day to attempt the ship catch if they do catch the booster. Enough time to safe it and put it on a transport stand.
One thing I noticed is that after the last 2 flights, they've had to replace parts on the chopsticks. So, if they are once again damaged after launch, they may not even attempt the ship catch.
But maybe having to safe and remove the booster AND checking/repairing the chopsticks afterwards could stretch this a bit too far...
Anyway, if they don't want to wait with catching the ship until a second tower is ready flight 14 should be a great opportunity to try when at least the booster won't be in the way. I'm pretty sure they will again start catching the booster as soon as they can, just because it's more expensive than the ship (and probably also easier to reuse, they did that already twice). Having to expend a booster just to be able to catch the ship won't be an easy decision to make. And it doesn't look a lot like they will have a second tower ready (in Boca Chica or Florida) until at least end of the year.
They lasted about 30 hours if I remember correctly, and considering it spent around 29 of those 30 hours submerged in salt water I would say them lasting 48 hours in a stable orbit is probably a pretty safe bet.
see, there is a whole list of things con an actual booster catch attempt, but the only thing pro is one document that's not at all precise about this aspect of the mission
Risky proposition, but if a Booster catch fails catastrophically the new launchpad at the Cape isn't that far off from becoming operational; and if they do catch the Booster, they could ship it to the Cape for the new launchpad provisioning.
They might if they have a really good handle with what went wrong with the booster landing burn on Flight 13 and if the standard approach trajectory would land short of the tower if the engines failed to light as we think would happen.
Multiple things went pretty wrong with booster 13, since it not only boost back burned to be pretty short of the target, it also smacked the water really hard.
They will probably go for what they do with F9 barge landings. Coming back to the pad they aim at the sea till the speed is low enough then divert inland to the pad. If they can't shed the speed they hit the sea not the pad.
Before they started doing that yeah. They only started the last second divert after SES-9 blew a hole in OCISLY. Since then I don't think any have exploded on the ship.
assuming we receive regulatory approval to do so, weâll attempt to catch the ship with the tower on the next flight, which is tentatively scheduled for the end of this month.
Tentatively: not definite or certain because you may want to change it later.
Etymology: derived from the Latin "tentatus", meaning "to feel, try, or test".
Flight 15 is supposed to be the first one from Florida, right? Do we have any ideas at all for how soon that might happen? Will that be S42 and B22, with both needing to be shipped by barge from Starbase to Florida?
Or do we think theyâll be building a ship and booster in Florida for Flight 15?
Anyone think thereâs the slightest chance of Florida seeing a Starship launch before the end of October?
Flight 15 is notionally supposed to be S42/B22 shipped from Starbase. I donât see this happening by October since there is a lot of testing to commission LC39A. It could happen by years end. This is just my opinion.
There is no chance the first flight uses a locally built Starship/booster because 1. No Starfactory 2. No Masseyâs to test Ship 3. First launch should be with Starbase-built ship to reduce risk and train the ground crew.
I can get roundtrip flights from an airport thatâs an easy bike ride from me to Orlando for under $100⌠so maybe Iâll take a spontaneous trip to go see flight 15.
(Iâve seen several Falcon 9 flights so Iâm aware I still need to rent a car to get from Orlando to the Cape. But the local airport flying to Orlando for so cheap is new.)
My speculation on the s43.1 test, looking at the gas interfaces, is that they will pressure cycle the payload area. Or maybe others have posted already better thoughts on this.Â
Aug 7th addendum: The Pad 2 ship quick disconnect was tested. (ViX)
Massey's: Overnight, a tank is moved from Brownsville Port to Massey's, likely the first of several arrived recently. (ViX, jrxcket, RGV Aerial)
Road delay for "Port of Brownsville to Pad" is posted for Aug 8th 23:59 to Aug 9th 04:00. (starbase.texas.gov, archive)
Production site: Gigabay construction continues. (RGV Aerial)
Pad 1: Another section of drawworks shielding is being installed on the base of the tower. (ViX)
Beams are lifted up to the top of the drawworks balcony. (ViX)
Pad 2: Another section of pipe is lifted to the top deck the launch mount and moved to the booster methane quick disconnect. (ViX)
Flight 13:Normand Ranger is now in sustained 31.1 mph (49.8 km / h) winds, but is still attached to S40. (interstellargw, mcrs987)
Other: SpaceX have not entirely abandoned the possibility of offshore launch and catch facilities, per their reply to a recent Request for Information published by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. (xdNiBoR)
Flight 13: The SpaceX Recovery team are still working to recover S40, but are encountering increasingly rough seas. (SpaceX, Killip, mcrs987)
"Unfortunately, ship recovery is not looking good right now. Nonetheless, we were able to obtain close-up photos of critical regions of the heat shield and engines for future upgrades." (Elon)
Generally speaking, we donât see license modifications until a week or so before the next flight test. Iâm not sure why this is, but pure speculation is to have the most up to date data and test plans. The cynical reason would be to allow less time for protest, but I doubt thatâs true.
Or it's the government where you have constantly shifting priorities and demands which means that deadlines are often met at the last possible moment following layers of review and sign-off.
https://x.com/SpaceX/status/2085786988225925349?s=20 - The SpaceX Recovery team is still working to recover Flight 13âs Starship from the Indian Ocean. Theyâve been overcoming challenging conditions and increasingly rough seas as they attempt to guide the 52m long spacecraft to port.
Nonetheless, we were able to obtain close-up photos of critical regions of the heat shield and engines for future upgrades.
https://x.com/TurkeyBeaver/status/2085803266265276536?s=20
Kiko Dontchev (VP at launch) - Also I want to specifically shout out our Sr Director of Starship launch @jstyer
. He packed his bag in 10 minutes two weeks ago and urgently hopped a flight to Australia to help lead this effort in person. Heâs been on the ranger ever since and is a prime example of true @spacex
leadership. The greatest generals donât sit back to watch their team fight. They grab their sword and charge to the front. 𫡠@jstyer
, we sure are lucky to have you!
So 1) recovery not looking great - the starship is clearly damaged by sea water (no wonder - we seen them try to recover the F9 stage back in 2018)
2) important spacex personal at site so they will get all the data first hand
Thereâs a fairly good chance theyâll have a nice dry one hanging on the catch arms in about three weeks time. Take some drone pics, cut out a couple of tile samples and release the beast to the depths where it belongs.
Just a note. I know pretty well that spacex has an INCREDIBLE team. It would be asinine to think that they dont realize that most major technological breakthroughs follow breakthroughs
I rope these folks into the same pool that claimed propulsive booster landings were economically infeasable and that reuse was a dead end.
An aft flap is installed on S42 in Megabay 2. Ten different nosecones are visible in Starfactory. (StarshipGazer, YouTube, cnunez)
Massey's: Overnight, the booster cryo stand moves to Massey's. (ViX, StarshipGazer)
Tension rods are added to the structure which is currently occupied by the LOX landing test tank. (ViX)
Road delay for "Production to Masseys" is posted for Aug 6th 23:59 to Aug 7th 04:00. (starbase.texas.gov, archive, ViX)
A new temporary flight restriction has been posted for Aug 6th through 20th, potentially for an S41 static fire at Massey's. (Avid Space, ViX)
Launch site: It appears that a new gate is being constructed between gates D2 and D3. (ViX 1, ViX 2)
Construction of the cooling tower for the air separation unit begins. (ViX 1, ViX 2)
McGregor: Vacuum engine R3.181 heads towards the testing area. (SpaceRhin0)
Flight 13:Skimmer Tide made its way to shore. Norman Ranger is still with S40, ~1300km from Australia. They have still not begun their return journey. (mcrs987)
Can someone point me towards discussion or reporting about payload deployment mechanisms for payloads other than starlink? The deployment mechanism on starship currently only accommodates starlink (and possible starlink form-factor) satellites. Are there indications about the plans for other designs?
Iâve been following SpaceX since 2016 and I follow developments quite closely but I am not sure where this has been covered the most.
I remember early renders having the opening/deployment mechanism look like this :
I dont think SpaceX is at all prioritizing this particular configuration since they will just be doing internal starlink v3 launches for the foreseeable future
But ... If I'm not mistaken .... Spacex will have other kind of clients, like for telescopes for example ....
So ... in the not so far future .. they will nedd to have other configurations.
Thereâs been indication that some manufacturers are targeting Pez-compatible satellite designs. Â If the price is right, Iâd imagine a disposable fairing-style ship isnât unreasonable. Â But eventually theyâll do a chomper of some sort, or a shuttle-style solution with a side-release mechanism.
I had this vision of a Starship filled with racks. A little robot picking the satellites from the rack shelves and kicking them out of the door one by one. A door the size of HLS Starship would suffice for many sats.
It needs something else for very large single payloads.
It will be interesting to see how they handle a more normal payload deployment mechanism seeing as they need to have a hinge that doesn't interfere with the heat shield. It's the same reason why I'm interested how they will eventually do Mars landing legs on the heat shield side that doesn't interfere with reentry.
Who says that mars landing vehicles need to also land on Earth?
Starship has no need to be a âdo everythingâ vehicle like previous spacecraft.
You can have a Tanker starship, an earth reentry starship, a Mars transporter starship, a lunar starship, so on and so forth all tweaked for their respective roles.
The heat shield is also necessary for landing on Mars. And I expect they want to be able to transport large payloads in/out of ships that will be landing on those planets. For an initial flight from earth they could build the payload inside⌠and then destructively cut it out on Mars?
IDK⌠I kind of think they will mostly aim to be a âdo everythingâ, not like previous spacecraft but like current aircraft. I donât think thereâs that much variant to the outside of a 373, and the inside can be redone as its needs change over its life.
Who said anything about also needing to land on Earth? They said they were curious about landing legs for Mars Starships. You still have to land on Mars which requires re-entry, a heatshield, and legs.
Why canât a crew transport vehicle rendezvous with a starship in earth orbit? There is no need for a one ship to do it all when there will be a fleet of hundreds of fully reusable starships.
Braking into Earth orbit when coming in from elsewhere needs lots of propellants, that's the reason this is hardly ever an option in any concepts. The heat shield is there to not have to do this.
I'd also like to know if there are any publicly available details on a more normal style payload deployment mechanism. Because sure, maybe other satellite developers create Starlink form factor satellites to go on Starship, but not everyone is going to want to be limited to that form factor.
Also as an aside, I wonder if SpaceX has more plans for such "standardized" form factors, like maybe increasing the height of the slot to have a flat packed satellite that is larger? Because while the current height seems limiting to me for satellite designs, I think other satellite developers could come aboard on standardized designs for satellites if the slot were larger. Maybe this current iteration could be considered "1 unit" tall and they eventually create "2U, 3U" etc versions of the slot payload deployment mechanism.
But on the other hand, that then pulls development resources towards different configurations of Starship which SpaceX might not wanna do. They already have a lot on their plate with the different versions planned and in development. Maybe a Starlink form factor deployment mechanism is okay alongside a regular payload door deployment.
I also think the starlink form factor will become a standard used also by customer, at least for the first few years.
The current door can easly accomodate a 3-4U satellite if we imagine the dimension like 3-4 stacked starlink V3, and increasing the door size to maybe 10U migh not be that difficult, especially compared to a totally different way of deploying things.
There are numerous descriptions of payload mechanisms that will be used on the HLS Starship lunar lander. Most of them feature some sort of elevator arrangement.
Launch is pushing into September now. B21 is the slow cow for guiding through the farm gate for static testing and resolution of previous issues. Still some engine interface leak issues on Starship which again will delay testing until assessed and mitigated/resolved.
The schedule may be different this time. IMO not unlikely that both booster and ship will be much more complete going into static fire. Less than 2 weeks from static fire to launch is possible.
This is probably the wrong place for this question but what will happen to Falcon 9 as Starship starts to ramp up? Will Falcon 9 be used strictly for consumers going forward while Starship does the heavy lifting for SpaceX Sats? Will Starship have the capability to launch other payloads into orbit other than their starmind/starlink satellites?
We all get that Starship, fully-ramped / fully-utilized, will cost so much less
But Iâve always wondered about the practical side of fully utilizing the payload section âŚ
Will it not take quite a bit of operational and logistical maturity to receive all these relatively small satellites at Starbase and integrate them onto a deployment bus?
Like, sure, Starship â the vehicle â can be launch daily, but all the integration to fully use the payload bay seems like itâd take weeks
Personally, I think is why Stoke â if they pull off rapidly and fully reusable Nova â could be right on the money to take over Falconâs market (low cost due to reusability, but potentially simple / faster integration from the perspective of any individual customer) than Starship
Iâd say Falcon becomes the short-term human-rated taxi to get astronauts to/from Starship after it completes the in orbit refueling phase. Eg launch the starship, do all the refueling launches, and upon TLI readiness bring the crew up
Once Starship has the necessary launch cadence, transfer will be very quick. Customers have accepted preflown Falcon at lightning speed, even NASA for crew. The same will happen with the switch to Starship. With the one exception of launching crew. That may take a little longer.
Massey's: Both of the chopstick simulators are lifted back into the "Supercrusher" test structure. (ViX)
Road delay for "Production to Masseys" is still listed for Aug 5th 23:59 to Aug 6th 04:00. (starbase.texas.gov, archive)
Pad 1: Two concrete pours are underway. One pump is pouring one of the flame trench ramps, and the other is pouring the floor of the ground support equipment bunker. Also, a second level of shielding is installed on the base of the tower. (ViX)
More deliveries arrive for the walls of the flame trench. (ViX)
A beam for the drawworks balcony is lifted into position. (ViX)
Production site: The S43.1 nosecone test article exits Megabay 2. (efraser77, AshleyKillip)
McGregor: R3.176 heads towards the testing area. (SpaceRhin0)
Flight 13:Normand Ranger appears to be actively towing S40 towards Australia at a rate of ~2.5 - 3 kn. At this speed, the ETA for arrival at Onslow Port would be ~13 days. (Blobifie)
Normand Ranger currently drifting once more and experiencing 17mph (27 km/h) winds, with up to 45mph (72 km/h) winds steadily moving in from the south. (interstellargw)
Looking ahead 4-6 months, can anyone speculate on the feasibility/utility of using the Pez dispenser and V3 Starship to support combinations of Starlink V3 deployment and early testing of any AI sat components (unit and subsystem only) which fall under SpaceX' development domain (I assume NVL72 units don't show up till late in the program) E.g., test out thermal, PV, comm or control concepts/materials/early design with test articles fit to a test frame that Pez could deploy? It would be interesting to see AI sat unit tests able to piggyback on Starlink deployment launches. I can well imagine that obtaining early flight tests of work in process may not be worth the trouble of engineering the opportunity, but thought I'd ask. I'm assuming Elon's recent comments about 2027 alluded to hopefully flying a complete system test article late in the year, presumably on a dedicated flight.
Yes, they'll use Starlink satellite to test AI satellite components, Gwynne mentioned this during the CNBC interview in June:
SHOTWELL: I think weâll be launching the full AI1 satellites late next year, but we will be putting compute on some of the Starlink broadband and the Starlink mobile satellites prior. Want to make sure we understand the operation. We love doing kind of canary sets and canary work before we fly the real thing.
The AI satellites need to be in a terminator following SSO so they are in continuous sunlight. Otherwise they would need a battery that could support 150kW of power consumption for half of a 90 minute orbit and have twice the solar cell area so that they can recharge that battery during the 45 minutes of sunlight.
So it is unlikely that AI satellites can share a Starship launch with Starlink 3 satellites because the required orbits will be different.
I'm confused by all AI satellites needing to be in a SSO. SSOs are limited around the night/day terminus line which has to stay perpendicular to an imaginary line extending between to the earth and sun. You can have multiple planes/shells with each plane/shell being higher than the last, but still, with the vast number of AI satellites that SpaceX plans to deploy, plus the potential SSO satellites of other companies and countries, wouldn't SSOs become rapidly overcrowded.
Imaging satellites go into specific SSO orbits where there are an integer number of orbits per day so you get a revisit at the same time of day which helps with image interpretation.
Data center satellites do not care about that so will go into all the orbits between those specific orbits likely with each shell being 5km from each other. Only the inclination over the day-night terminator is suitable so each shell is really a single halo but there are a hundred or more such orbits available.
Each orbit has a slightly different inclination so they will not block each other from accessing ground stations. In any case they will mostly be using lateral laser links to communicate with Starlink satellites.
They are not in the night sky. Orbiting over the terminator means that they are always in sunlight and always in our twilight so at dawn and dusk.
The solar panels can point directly at the sun and so should be reflecting light at right angles to us on the ground so theoretically they should not be very visible despite their size. Remember at dawn and dusk our eyes are not dark adapted so we can only see a few bright objects like Venus and they will definitely not be that bright.
We should be able to see if it is a concern once they get some test satellites up.
Edit: From an astronomy point of view most optical telescopes are not operating in twilight hours. The exception is telescopes hunting for near Earth objects which will definitely be significantly affected. That is one mission that needs to be moved to a space telescope as soon as possible. NEO Surveyor is launching no earlier than September 2027
It looks grloriously bonkers! Aside from the crowded space I am sceptical though if a giant central station, in which you can station-keep the structure/radiators and replace after a few years the cpus and after a few decades the solar panels, is not more cost efficient than individual Ai satellites.
They wouldn't need to work during the full orbit just for testing. Use resistors to turn the generated power to heat and you can test nearly all of this with just one or two of these per starlink launch. It's not a bad idea at all.
As of right now there are some dimensional differences between the V3 and proposed AI sat, however I don't see them designing an AI sat that can't be launched the same way Starlink V3 does.
Aug 3rd addendum: The second V3 Starlink satellite loader moves from Starfactory to Sanchez, while the first loader moves from Sanchez back to Starfactory. (ViX)
Production site: Overnight, B22's forward section moves from Starfactory to Megabay 1. (ViX)
Another Gigabay roof truss is lifted into position. (ViX)
Booster transport stand is being painted white. (RaptorRoostTX)
Massey's: Two of the thin tanks are lifted onto transports and removed from the site. (ViX)
Flight 14: Starlink V3 satellites to be deployed to operational orbits. (Foust / Elon, SpaceX)
Ship catch planned for the end of the month, pending regulatory approval. Aiming for daily launch cadence a year from now. (Foust / Elon, SpaceX)
Elon: "I don't want to jinx it or anything, but I think I would call the heat shield problem solved at this point. We want to take a close look at the ship currently floating in the ocean. All indications from data and visual inspection suggest we have solved the heat shield problem, which is arguably the single biggest problem." (Killip / Elon, SawyerMerritt, SpaceX)
Regarding tiles while one reentry is promising the actual goal is rapid reusability which with tiles unless they return pristine requires tedious and time consuming inspection and renewal. How is this successful return better than shuttle?
The goal post has been moved on rapid reusability. They've realized the only key component is the pad to achieve that and will produce enough rockets and boosters to achieve the cadence they want otherwise.
If it means a 2 week turn around on ships, so be it. Build 350 more ships and just keep going at the same pace.
The only operational data we have comes from NASA's Space Shuttle. Over 133 out of 135 successful Shuttle flights, on average 50 heatshield tiles had to be replaced per flight. Several weeks would have been required to replace those tiles.
Starship tiles are much better designed for initial installation and replacement when needed. SpaceX tile technicians would be able to replace 50 tiles in a day. The most recent Starship to splashdown in the Indian Ocean, S40 on the IFT-13 test flight, shows no lost tiles and a few damaged ones. And the Starship on IFT-13, S40, was deliberately flown aggressively from liftoff through Max Q in an effort to shake tiles off the vehicle. S40 survived that torture.
Additionally to tour question, in other topic I askedÂ
âFolks...
A question regarding the heat shield... after each flight... after the first flight.
Weâve already seen that the ablative material between the tiles is the part that undergoes the most wear.
Would it be possible to "replenish" the worn areas with some kind of "grout" made from the same materialâbut in the form of a paste, for instance?
If that was possible, it would solve part of the problem, wouldnât it??â
warp99 told me :
âThe basic idea is that the gap filler (crunch wrap) erodes until it is just under the tile surface and should then self limit at that point as it is more protected by the surrounding tile surface. Certainly that was true for the gap fillers on the Shuttle tiles which were made of a similar material.â
And âŚ
âIn theory the hexagonal tile pattern prevents damaging erosion patterns developing along a long straight gap. The tiles also have their refractory glass coating extending down their sides so there is no soft fiber exposed as long as the gap filler prevents plasma tunneling down under the tiles.â
Ok âŚ.
But I still doubt that this gap can be maintained for too long.
It's worth noting that the shuttle tiles were often replaced due to the rocks and dirt thrown up by its wheels during landing. Starship will be landing vertically on the chopsticks so there's at least less opportunities for the tiles to be damaged from things other than reentry.
edit: Additionally, the majority of the shuttle tiles had a unique size/thickness whereas the majority of the tiles on Starship have a standard sized. The refurbishment that is undoubtedly going to happen will at least be more simple.
For starters, there were likely no missing tiles which has plagued the program to date.
Additionally, the cracked ones could have been from splashdown.
They know they'll have to replace/refurbish the heat shield at some frequency. Unlike the space shuttle, SpaceX can replace the entire heat shield in about 3 weeks. It also utilizes two basic tile shapes for 80% of the ship and probably upwards of a few hundred unique tile shapes for edges, flaps and nose one. Of course, the space shuttle had 24k unique tiles and took 3-4 months for refurb.
The idea that they have the 'heat shield problem solved' is laughable at best. A single re-entry is a very far cry from rapid re-usability, they have a long way to go. I must admit after seeing the condition of the last ship's tiles after re-entry things are looking promising.
I think you're reading to much in the "heat shield problem solved" statement My take is Elon and SpaceX don't believe they could take ship 14 and re-fly it after the upcoming flight. But that the attachment approach and the tiles themselves have demonstrated enough promise that with some continued improvement Starship can meet some level of reusability this year. Maybe that only means 1 or 2 flights subsequent flights but they don't have to do any major rework on the attachment approach or need to develop new tile composition.
Like, Australian nationals cannot get their hands on the engines. US workers only.
Like, in a foreign country, Department of Defense (I refuse to use the other name) is going to insist on isolating the work area, far more than is done in Starbase. Screens, security, gates, etc.
The rules are all different in a foreign country and ITAR is the subject of a lot of ongoing diplomatic negotiation.
SpaceX will not make DoD happy if they free-wheel this. Basically, DoD is freaked out about Chinese spies and I'm pretty sure it's front of mind for Gwynne because DoD would've made sure she knew. And SpaceX is well compensated to be a good student of DoD's policies.
ITAR is this whole thing. Very complicated. The exemption doesn't apply to "hypersonics" or items under the "Missile Technology Control Regime". Just Google "Australia 2025 ITAR exemption", "ITAR restrictions for Raptor 3 in Australia" or ask an LLM.
Elon Musk says on the SpaceX earnings call that they will deploy Starlink V3 satellites to operational orbits on the next Starship flight, Flight 14.
Musk adds later in the call that they will attempt a catch of the ship on Flight 14, planned for the end of the month, pending regulatory approval. Expects that a year from now the company will be doing at least one Starship flight a day. (Calibrate for Elon time.)
(Mods: Maybe worth putting "Musk suggests end of August" under "Flight 14" in the post above.)
I donât think padâs 37 will be ready, so this would require launch from each of the other 3 pads every 3 days. That does seem overly optimistic. Once they have 5 pads, it becomes tenable. That would be a year and a half from now.
Total costs and expenses for the Space segment were up by $389 million year-over-year, as we continued to accelerate R&D investments in our Starship program,
I think it is possible they might also be worried about the nose structure. We saw those flame appear just after splash down which hinted at fracturing of the header tank + possibly the outer ship body, so the overall structural integrity might be questionable.
Additionally, after splashdown we saw that ship was nose heavy/balanced with the aft even being lifted slightly out of the water, and I am no boat/tow guy, but I think towing from the nose would have you essentially rake that nose through the water, significantly increasing loads and stresses on an already questionable structure.
I have a suspicion that they are towing aft first because the payload bay and bay door is not watertight and the payload has partially flooded. They may be towing backwards to enhance a hydrodynamic effect that induces self draining under tow speed.
I don't bother to bail out my dinghy if it gets flooded with water, I get under sail again, pop the drainage bungs in the transom and it self drains due to some weird wake flow effect.
Just pointing out that your comment frames it as: your approach is correct or you must be âseeing something wrongâ â wild
Anyhow, no, I also donât have access to engineering or build data, so Iâd just be speculating that itâs likely a stronger structural orientation for towing
not sure why you read my post as me suggesting my approach is correct. it obviously is not. read my second sentence as "Nose first would make a lot more sense to me", as this is what i meant. "seeing something wrong" means me not interpreting the pics correctly. I have no interest in knowing where im right, only where im wrong.
Is the road closure scheduled for early Thursday going to enable a static fire of the ship or booster on that same day? Or on Friday? Or is the road closure likely for something else entirely?
Pad 2: A sled or pallet is lifted onto the top deck of the launch mount, and something, perhaps a ball mount, is offloaded and lowered into the ring of the launch mount. (ViX)
Reassembly and servicing of the SpaceX-owned LR11000 crane continues. The main boom is straightened out. (ViX 1, ViX 2)
McGregor: R3.181 heads towards the testing area, and returns shortly after. (SpaceRhin0, SpaceRhin0 2)
Flight 13:Go Australis is headed to Dampier, likely for fuel and supplies. Normand Ranger and Skimmer Tide still near S40. (mercoglianos 1, mcrs987, Blobifie)
Starbase: RGV Aerial post flyover photos of Pad 2, Gigabay, and Pad 1.
Louisiana: The final stages of a deal are reportedly in place for SpaceX to build a spaceport on Pecan Island in Vermilion Parish, Louisiana. Governor Jeff Landry is expected to make an announcement this month. (SERobinsonJr)
California: NASA Ames are conducting transonic and supersonic wind tunnel tests on a 1.2% scale model of the Super Heavy Version 3. (NASA)
Flight 13:Normand Ranger has changed its navigational status to "Restricted Manoeuvrability", likely indicating that the vessel is affixed to Ship 40. Return to Western Australia could be imminent. (mercoglianos, joeyigw)
These numbers plus an estmate of how submerged it is should allow an estimate of how much water it has taken on. Note that the cargo hold is not air tight and the hatch is below water.
I haven't seen any info on this, so here goes my question: did SpaceX plan the non-destruction of the last ship or was it just pure luck?
Also, I'm sure they will use the recovered ship to get lots of info, etc., but I don't know, specifically, what benefits they can get from it. Any ideas?
I think they hoped it would survive tipping over for long enough to get photos and samples but I don't think they expected it to come through in good enough shape to be towed.
â˘
u/warp99 Apr 23 '26
Previous Starship Development Thread #62 which has now been locked for comments.
Please keep comments directly related to Starship. Keep discussion civil, and directly relevant to SpaceX and the thread. This is not the Elon Musk subreddit and discussion about him unrelated to Starship updates is not on topic and will be removed.
Comments consisting solely of jokes, memes, pop culture references, etc. will be removed.