Posts: 54157 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 01-08-2025 12:39 PM
As I understand it, like Dragon, the escape system is the Starship spacecraft. If something were to go wrong with Super Heavy, then Starship has the ability to fire its engines and pull away from its booster and fly back to a soft water landing.
Unlike Dragon, Starship does not have parachutes, but Starship is designed to SpaceX's risk tolerances, not NASA or some other safety panel or agency.
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54157 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 01-08-2025 12:45 PM
SpaceX is now targeting Monday (Jan. 13) for the launch of Flight 7, pending the weather conditions. The launch window opens at 4:00 p.m. CDT (2200 GMT).
A live webcast of the flight test will begin about 35 minutes before the liftoff.
Blackarrow Member
Posts: 3814 From: Belfast, United Kingdom Registered: Feb 2002
posted 01-09-2025 12:37 PM
quote:Originally posted by Robert Pearlman: ...If something were to go wrong with Super Heavy, then Starship has the ability to fire its engines and pull away from its booster and fly back to a soft water landing...
That didn't work on the first flight, although I realise there was no hot-staging capability. As for a "soft water-landing" we have seen the explosive results of hot engines meeting cold water.
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54157 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 01-09-2025 01:01 PM
These videos show Starship making a soft landing in the Indian Ocean (albeit they cut off before seeing them tip over): 1 and 2.
Blackarrow Member
Posts: 3814 From: Belfast, United Kingdom Registered: Feb 2002
posted 01-09-2025 05:15 PM
We certainly saw (and I recorded) a big explosion just after the Flight 5 Starship "landed" in the Indian Ocean, and I'm pretty sure the same thing happened on Flight 6 after the TV feed was cut, in the same way that the Flight 6 booster blew up after touching down in the Gulf (seen on the live feed I was watching, but not on the feed supplied by SpaceX). It's almost as if they wanted to hide the explosions, which is stupid.
The pinpoint touchdowns were amazing achievements and in no way reduced by the explosions caused by hot engines meeting cold water. And that was my point: it's no help to future passengers in an aborted Starship mission if the Starship splashes down precisely, but then explodes, cracks open and sinks.
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54157 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 01-09-2025 05:30 PM
We we need to wait and see if SpaceX figures out how to bring the vehicle horizontal and negate the risks of explosion. Maybe they can install upright balloons, which keeps the vehicle bobbing vertically in the water.
The vehicle we have seen fly up to now has been Starship 1.0. Version 2 debuts with Flight 7. With each revision comes improvements, including (it would seem) setting up Starship to survive a water landing or have enough fuel reserves to fly back to land.
oly Member
Posts: 1487 From: Perth, Western Australia Registered: Apr 2015
posted 01-09-2025 06:42 PM
SpaceX is still learning how to make the thing fly, perform stage separation, fly back the first stage, get the second stage into orbit, and survive re-entry and landing, all in a condition suitable for rapid and reliable reuse.
There is no point in developing launch abort capability for a crewed design that may change several times before a suitable design is locked because they may just be doing more work for themselves than need be. The next Starship launch will see a lot of design changes from the previous iteration that will need to be evaluated. I don’t think that they have flown two of the same design yet.
The requirements of a crew system are well known, there are numerous standards that the FAA and any other interested parties will require to be built into the system as the design develops.
For the moon landing system SpaceX wants to develop, no launch from Earth escape system needs to be developed because it won't be launching crew. For a lunar launch, a design with a slightly better crew escape system than the Apollo design, i.e. none, should suffice, however, NASA and other interested parties will probably want some type of system unless they can sell a loss of crew during the lunar launch as an acceptable risk.
How far apart SpaceX is between the next Starship launch and the first crewed launch is probably further than most of us imagine it to be.
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54157 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 01-10-2025 05:32 PM
Flight 7 Starship and Super Heavy stacked on the launch pad at Starbase:
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54157 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 01-11-2025 09:59 PM
SpaceX is now targeting Wednesday (Jan. 15) for Flight 7. The launch window still opens at 4:00 p.m. CST (2200 GMT).
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54157 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 01-15-2025 12:27 PM
Due to weather, SpaceX is now targeting Thursday (Jan. 16) for Flight 7. The 60-minute launch window opens at 4 p.m. CST (2200 GMT).
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54157 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 01-16-2025 04:00 PM
SpaceX video
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54157 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 01-16-2025 04:19 PM
Flight 7's Super Heavy is launching for the first time with "flight proven" hardware — one of its engines was on Flight 5, which was caught in-flight back on the pad.
The engine number is 314, hence the slice of pi(e).
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54157 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 01-16-2025 04:50 PM
Successful booster catch (!) but SpaceX has lost communication with Starship...
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54157 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 01-16-2025 05:04 PM
At this point, we are assuming that the ship has been lost.
Videos are now being posted to X of Starship exploding and its debris falling over Turks and Caicos. See: 1 | 2 | 3
issman1 Member
Posts: 1156 From: UK Registered: Apr 2005
posted 01-16-2025 05:55 PM
Not good. Is a Starship lunar lander more or less likely?
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54157 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 01-16-2025 06:22 PM
This is a test program and losses are to be expected.
SpaceX was flying its first second-generation Starship. They will learn what went wrong, correct for it and fly again (pending a likely FAA investigation because the falling debris interrupted air traffic in the area).
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54157 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 01-16-2025 08:54 PM
From Elon Musk, SpaceX CEO:
Preliminary indication is that we had an oxygen/fuel leak in the cavity above the ship engine firewall that was large enough to build pressure in excess of the vent capacity.
Apart from obviously double-checking for leaks, we will add fire suppression to that volume and probably increase vent area. Nothing so far suggests pushing next launch past next month.
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54157 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 01-17-2025 07:43 PM
From SpaceX:
Starship flew within its designated launch corridor – as all U.S. launches do to safeguard the public both on the ground, on water and in the air. Any surviving pieces of debris would have fallen into the designated hazard area.
If you believe you have identified a piece of debris, please do not attempt to handle or retrieve the debris directly. Instead, please contact your local authorities or the SpaceX Debris Hotline at 1-866-623-0234 or at recovery@spacex.com.
FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) release
FAA Statement on SpaceX Starship Flight 7 Mishap
The FAA is requiring SpaceX to perform a mishap investigation into the loss of the Starship vehicle during launch operations on Jan. 16. There are no reports of public injury, and the FAA is working with SpaceX and appropriate authorities to confirm reports of public property damage on Turks and Caicos.
During the event, the FAA activated a Debris Response Area and briefly slowed aircraft outside the area where space vehicle debris was falling or stopped aircraft at their departure location. Several aircraft requested to divert due to low fuel levels while holding outside impacted areas.
Background
A mishap investigation is designed to enhance public safety, determine the root cause of the event, and identify corrective actions to avoid it from happening again. The FAA will be involved in every step of the SpaceX-led mishap investigation process and must approve SpaceX's final report, including any corrective actions. A return to flight is based on the FAA determining that any system, process, or procedure related to the mishap does not affect public safety.
A Debris Response Area is activated only if the space vehicle experiences an anomaly with debris falling outside of the identified closed aircraft hazard areas. It allows the FAA to direct aircraft to exit the area and prevent others from entering.
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54157 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 02-02-2025 06:54 PM
FAA update on the debris response area:
There are no reports of public injuries. The FAA confirmed one report of minor damage to a vehicle located in South Caicos. To date, there are no other reports of damage.
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54157 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 02-23-2025 09:12 PM
SpaceX will attempt Flight 8 on Friday (Feb. 28), according to social media.
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54157 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 02-27-2025 08:17 AM
Per SpaceX, Flight 8 is now targeted for no earlier than Monday, March 3. The launch window will open at 5:30 p.m. CST (2330 GMT).
Blackarrow Member
Posts: 3814 From: Belfast, United Kingdom Registered: Feb 2002
posted 02-27-2025 11:12 AM
It's easily said after the event, but I didn't think they would be ready to launch on Friday. For one thing, Elon Musk had a lot of government stuff going on in Washington. But that begs the question: does he still make all the calls in SpaceX or has he delegated the decision-making to others?
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54157 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 02-27-2025 12:10 PM
As I understand it, Musk continues to be CEO and chief engineer, but has not been involved in the day-to-day operations of the company (at Hawthorne or Starbase) for some time. Gwynne Shotwell and Kathy Lueders (among others) keep SpaceX running.
Blackarrow Member
Posts: 3814 From: Belfast, United Kingdom Registered: Feb 2002
posted 03-01-2025 05:34 PM
That's interesting. It's always a concern if a big organization relies solely on one individual.
posted 03-03-2025 09:32 AM
NASA Spaceflight webcast:
And 24/7 coverage of launch pad (including stacking and de-stacking):
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54157 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 03-03-2025 04:22 PM
Scrub due to a technical issue with Starship. Expecting a 24-hour turnaround, but it depends on how long it takes to resolve the problem.
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54157 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 03-04-2025 08:35 AM
SpaceX is now targeting Starship's eighth flight test for as soon as Wednesday (March 5). The launch window will open at 5:30 p.m. CST (2330 GMT).
Blackarrow Member
Posts: 3814 From: Belfast, United Kingdom Registered: Feb 2002
posted 03-04-2025 11:34 AM
A 48-hour turnaround (if it happens) suggests a fairly minor problem, but so far the only hint of an explanation for the scrub that I have seen was Elon Musk's reference to a low-pressure issue.
Would that be a failure to pressurize the Super Heavy fuel tanks sufficiently? Has anyone picked up any more detailed explanation?
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54157 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 03-04-2025 11:38 AM
Maybe they will discuss it once it is resolved during the next webcast.
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54157 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 03-05-2025 01:36 PM
Flight 8 is now targeted to launch no earlier than 5:30 p.m. CST on Thursday (March 6).
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54157 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 03-06-2025 02:42 PM
SpaceX live video
—
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54157 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 03-06-2025 04:09 PM
Successful flight and catch of Super Heavy, but SpaceX lost attitude control of Starship on its way into space and then lost contact.
The FAA halted flights at Miami, Fort Lauderdale, Palm Beach and Orlando airports for "space launch debris."
issman1 Member
Posts: 1156 From: UK Registered: Apr 2005
posted 03-06-2025 05:33 PM
Second RUD of Starship in a row. Musk needs to focus on this matter.
Even though this was a test flight, incompetence or sabotage should not be ruled out.
perineau Member
Posts: 413 From: FRANCE Registered: Jul 2007
posted 03-07-2025 12:57 AM
Does anyone know how much each Starship flight costs?
Ken Havekotte Member
Posts: 3954 From: Merritt Island, Florida, Brevard Registered: Mar 2001
posted 03-07-2025 02:44 AM
Cost of a Starship launch and mission is around $100 million, however, as flights progress in coming years SpaceX believes it can be lower than $10 million.
denali414 Member
Posts: 891 From: Raleigh, NC Registered: Aug 2017
posted 03-07-2025 07:34 AM
quote:Originally posted by issman1: ...sabotage should not be ruled out.
Sabotage? By whom? And what purpose? Not everything needs to be a conspiracy.
Falcon also had many failures. Nature of spaceflight.
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54157 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 03-07-2025 09:25 AM
From Don Pettit on the International Space Station (via X):
We saw the Starship 8 breakup in the upper atmosphere and fall back to earth from the ISS.
Blackarrow Member
Posts: 3814 From: Belfast, United Kingdom Registered: Feb 2002
posted 03-07-2025 11:09 AM
This looks like what happened on Flight 7. I know that "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing" but in the absence of a rocket scientist to question, I found myself thinking, "POGO?" After the Flight 7 failure, Elon Musk referred to "harmonics."
The Mk. 1 Starship flew successfully several times. It is the Mk. 2 vehicle which has now failed twice. The Mk. 2 is longer, with more fuel, than Mk. 1. Could it be that the increased dimensions have changed the natural frequencies in the overall structures of the Starship, allowing POGO to cause destructive vibrations leading to fuel leaks and vehicle loss?
Headshot Member
Posts: 1383 From: Vancouver, WA, USA Registered: Feb 2012
posted 03-07-2025 11:40 AM
Regardless of the cause, the bottom line is that after eight flights, Starship has not completed a fuel transfer demonstration nor has it even made one complete orbit of the Earth. Instead of progressing, SpaceX's Starship seems to be regressing. At least the Super Heavy booster seems to be working well.
NASA's decision to put our first new era moon lander vehicle into SpaceX's basket is not looking to be a very good choice from this vantage point in time.
Musk and SpaceX needs to step up, and step up NOW. Musk's glib comments about an "energetic event," indicates that he does not take these setbacks seriously, even though national pride is at stake. Perhaps NASA needs to get someone else to do the job... and soon.
teopze Member
Posts: 198 From: Ithaca, NY Registered: May 2008
posted 03-07-2025 11:48 AM
As if there was anyone else to do the job...
posted 01-08-2025 12:39 PM
advertisement