9 ms·

Starship Flight 5 license issued by FAA

261 points by LorenDB 2y ago

_Microft 2y ago
"Starship's fifth flight test is targeted to launch on Sunday, October 13. The 30-minute launch window opens at 7 a.m. CT.", https://www.spacex.com/launches/mission/?missionId=starship-flight-5 https://www.spacex.com/launches/mission/?missionId=starship-... Edit: that's 12p.m. UTC, I think.
- dwaltrip 2y ago
  Tomorrow? It was issued only one day in advance?
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - bryanlarsen 2y ago
    SpaceX has claimed they'd been ready to fly since August. It's not a surprise they'll launch very quickly after receiving the license.
    - jdiez17 2y ago
      Take that with a BIG grain of salt. When SpaceX says they are ready and the FAA is holding them up, it is actually Elon saying they are ready. For example, take a look at the "Starships are meant to fly" post from September: https://www.spacex.com/updates/ https://www.spacex.com/updates/ As someone who has been following these developments for a while, I can 100% detect Elon's fingerprints all over this post. They are basically completely dismissing government oversight as "unnecessary obstacles to progress". Keep in mind, the area where SpaceX operates Starship is a wildlife sanctuary and was only chosen because it is one of the few undeveloped, southernmost points of the US, which matters because the closer you are to the equator, the more advantage you can take of the Earth's rotational velocity.
      - decremental 2y ago
        [dead]
      - bryanlarsen 2y ago
        Every launch pad in the US is a de jure or de facto wildlife sanctuary. Launch pads need a large human keep-out zone. Keeping out humans is great for wildlife. The site was chosen because it was it could launch East over water. The rotation of the earth gives a boost to easterly launches. Boca Chica isn't a great launch location because there's a fairly narrow window of directions it can launch in without overflying land, requiring expensive dog legs to hit different inclinations. They might have been better off with a piece of coastline in Maine, but try and find a piece of Eastern coastline in the US without any development in a 4 mile radius around the site...
        panick21_ 2y ago
        Being so far South is quite nice, gives you quite the performance boost, do you have any analysis on what the dog legs cost compared to more Northern launch sites? Would be interesting to consider. Clearly Florida was the right place to do this for the US in the 1960s.
        eastbound 2y ago
        Noob question: How comes hurricanes aren’t a problem?
        JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > How comes hurricanes aren’t a problem? They're slow and unsurprising. You don't launch in a hurricane.
        dylan604 2y ago
        You just launch the day before... https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/10/european-mission-departs-earth-to-investigate-an-asteroid-wrecked-by-nasa/ https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/10/european-mission-depar...
    - bewaretheirs 2y ago
      In August, they said the rocket was ready to fly .. but they were quite visibly still doing significant work to the catch mechanism on the launch tower.
      - dylan604 2y ago
        being ready to launch is one thing, being ready to catch/land is another. so technically, they weren't wrong
      - rpmisms 2y ago
        The perfect is the enemy of the good, and SpaceX lives by this. If they have time to spare, why not spend it improving nice-to-haves?
      - kortilla 2y ago
        SpaceX operates on a rapid iterative cycle where they will knowingly test with deficiencies to improve later. If they get delayed for a massive chunk of time, they are definitely going to use it to make all of the known improvements they can.
  - hughes 2y ago
    Flight 3 license was also issued only one day in advance.
  - bewaretheirs 2y ago
    Not much different from the prior flights. Flight 4 was licensed on June 4th, was originally scheduled to launch on June 5th, and actually launched on the 6th. Flight 3 received its license on March 13th and launched on March 14th. Flight 2 received its license on November 15th 2023, and launched on November 18th. Flight 1 received its license on April 14th; it launched on April 20th.
    - LorenDB 2y ago
      The main difference here is that up until just a few days ago, the FAA was saying that they didn't plan to issue a license until late November. https://www.space.com/spacex-starship-flight-five-late-november https://www.space.com/spacex-starship-flight-five-late-novem...
      - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > up until just a few days ago, the FAA was saying that they didn't plan to issue a license until late November This might be a case where the FAA's PR department should link to a press release instead of repeatig it contemporaneously.
      - dotnet00 2y ago
        There was a letter circulating around on X recently, showing that the FAA asked the Fish and Wildlife Service to do their thing faster. Assuming that was real, things got moving after the pressure from Congress.
    - mlindner 2y ago
      Should also be noted that Flight 1 was originally attempted to launch on April 17th.
  - BurningFrog 2y ago
    I think it's more that they launch as soon as they get the permit.
  - rvnx 2y ago
    SpaceX provided information about the flight profile and its impact only in mid-August to FAA. The FAA forwarded the requests to the related agencies and had to wait (for example, what happens to the polluted water). According to 50 CFR § 402.13, the other agencies have 60 days to give back their answers to the FAA. 15 August + 60 days = now. The FAA mentioned they positively collaborate with SpaceX despite "upper stage failure in July and unsuccessful landing in August". Quite exciting to see!
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > 15 August + 60 days = now Close enough. Sixty days is October 14. Today is the twelfth. Tomorrow, 13 October, is the launch.
      - TeMPOraL 2y ago
        "End of day" shenanigans?
    - dmix 2y ago
      Interesting how it took exactly the maximum limit they are alloted. I wonder if the people in these agencies treat it like school projects where you use deadlines as a framework for how long you can screw around before it's absolutely necessary to get started. Where it's not treated as a worst case upper maximum.
      - bandyaboot 2y ago
        Alternatively, one or more agency may not have responded at all and so the FAA was obligated to wait the 60 days. Just speculation.
      - tgsovlerkhgsel 2y ago
        Sounds like a great way to get politicians to give the agency 3 days next time, under the guise of optimization but with the actual intent and effect to completely neuter the agency...
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > It was issued only one day in advance? Officially, yes. Practically, I was hearing earlier this week that this was coming, as obviously was SpaceX given they're ready to attempt.
  - azernik 2y ago
    Other way around - with foreknowledge of how fast the FAA was working, SpaceX scheduled the launch last week to be one day after the expected license issue.
- zizee 2y ago
  As I write this comment, it is Oct 12, 3:30 pm Central time. So the launch window starts in 15 and a half hours. https://mytime.io/7am/CT https://mytime.io/7am/CT
  - justinclift 2y ago
    Hmmm, that mytime.io place doesn't seem super accurate. It's using the wrong time zone for my location anyway, and therefore the gives the wrong local time.
    - zizee 2y ago
      How frustrating. Hopefully my comment above didn't lead anyone to miss any part of that historic event yesterday. Mea culpa!
      - justinclift 2y ago
        Nah, I had already looked everything up some time before. The "timeanddate" meeting planner is my go-to these days for figuring out cross tz stuff: https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/meeting.html https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/meeting.html Not always super intuitive, but I have yet (heh!) seen it give wrong time info. :)
FL33TW00D 2y ago
First attempt at catching the 230ft tall booster!
genidoi 2y ago
This might be the first launch that tops the jaw-dropping excitement of the Falcon 9 LZ-1 landing way back in 2015. Godspeed starship and best of luck to all the SpaceX team.
- grecy 2y ago
  … and the dual landings from the first Falcon Heavy flight. Even today that footage looks like cgi
  - vmasto 2y ago
    The dual landings for me were far superior. It was straight out of science fiction.
    - glitchcrab 2y ago
      I only got to see the tail end of the shuttle launches (too young) but I imagine watching the first launch/landing felt something like I experienced watching those two boosters land together.
      - blowsand 2y ago
        Can confirm.
  - lucianbr 2y ago
    The live view of a Starship fin being attacked by plasma during reentry was pretty close too.
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > the dual landings from the first Falcon Heavy flight https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kyO-h59RO5g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kyO-h59RO5g
  - allenrb 2y ago
    Short of the moon landings that I never got to experience, the dual landing (especially that first one!) is the coolest thing I’ve ever seen in space flight. Could watch again and again.
DarmokJalad1701 2y ago
Excitement guaranteed!
ilkkao 2y ago
I like how SpaceX is willing to take risks. Their second launch tower is still months away from being finished, and now they're trying to catch the booster using the first one.
- bpodgursky 2y ago
  If they blow up the first tower, it will be 3+++ months to get FAA flight clearance again, so no great loss.
  - dmix 2y ago
    FAA is doing the testing, SpaceX is sitting around watching FAA
  - dotnet00 2y ago
    FAA doesn't care if they blow up the tower, as long as SpaceX can explain why it happened and show that it didn't cause undue risk to the public. People freaked out and said the same thing after IFT-1 dug up the concrete underneath the launch mount, and yet the investigation was closed within 6 months and SpaceX conducted IFT-2 2 months later.
    - chasd00 2y ago
      IFT-1 presented no danger to the public at all and it still took 6 months. That’s a long time to an actual technology company attempting to innovate. The FAA slow walks SpaceX because of Musk’s political views, it’s not even an “open secret” just a fact of life. Their only recourse is to shine a light on the FFA so the public can see the politics in display.
      - dotnet00 2y ago
        The time for the mishap report of IFT-1 was reasonable enough, they had a pretty serious issue in that the booster's FTS turned out to be insufficient. It also took them until the end of July to repair the pad and test the new deluge system. By mid-August they submitted their incident report to the FAA. The investigation was closed in early September. This was something even Elon admitted, saying that retesting the FTS would probably be the limiting factor for when IFT-2 could fly because it didn't destroy the vehicle as it was supposed to. The unreasonable delay you might be thinking of, was between the FAA's closing of the investigation in early September, to the IFT-2 launch in November. That was under pretty similar circumstances to now, Fish and Wildlife Services was taking forever to do its part of the job, SpaceX went to Congress, the resulting pressure forced them to get things done faster.
YuccaGloriosa 2y ago
It's going to be one helluva show. Which ever way it goes. Best of luck to SpaceX
- bun_terminator 2y ago
  I don't follow these things often: How is this different than the four before?
  - sjm-lbm 2y ago
    This is the first time they are going to attempt to catch the booster using their launchpad. Either you'll see one of the most impressive technical achievements in human history, or a very cool explosion.
    - Tuna-Fish 2y ago
      Their launch license requires them to initially aim at the water, and only shift to aiming at their tower if both the booster internally judges it's in perfect health, and they send the signal from their control system. I think there is a reasonable possibility that something goes wrong enough at some point for the booster to go in the drink. But if that happens, maybe it'll be close enough to the shore that we'll get some nice video of it?
      - jimrandomh 2y ago
        This is also standard procedure for Falcon 9 landings. They would do it this way even if the launch license didn't require it, because they know the probability of some sort of failure of the booster is high, and they don't want to destroy the launch tower if they can help it.
      - ttrei 2y ago
        At the moment of landing burn ignition the booster will already target the beach near the tower.
    - 2y ago
amichail 2y ago
Do you think more than a billion people will watch the catch attempt, either live or later, in this Starship flight test?
- stainablesteel 2y ago
  probably not live, i imagine that many people will hear news about it though
- 7thpower 2y ago
  If we’re talking about the near future? No, most people do not care. If it’s successful it will likely be in the history books, so maybe billions of martians will one day watch.
- edm0nd 2y ago
  Over how long of a time span are we giving this? I don't think so. https://www.youtube.com/@SpaceX/streams https://www.youtube.com/@SpaceX/streams = most popular live stream has 33M views https://www.youtube.com/@SpaceX/videos https://www.youtube.com/@SpaceX/videos = most popular video has 29M views I'm pretty sure this also includes embedded views from news articles that embed the videos. So to answer the question: In the short term, unlikely it seems. Over the span of hundreds of years? Likely so.
- whyenot 2y ago
  No, I don’t think one in every eight people on earth is going to see the catch attempt or even care about it. The launch and catch attempt is exciting but I don’t think it’s something that most of the planet is following. Even in the US, I doubt many people will watch it. It’s not the next moon landing.
- bloopernova 2y ago
  Honestly I don't even see a future Moon landing garnering that many people. Maybe a Mars landing would, but non-techie people just don't seem very interested in space.
bberenberg 2y ago
Watching us push forward in hard problems like this is important not only for the direct benefits, but the general belief in a better future it affords. I appreciate anything that helps reignite wonder and hope in all of us, and a rocket launch and recapture is just more visceral (not better) than others. Good luck to the team, I’ll be watching with bated breath.
modeless 2y ago
Someone made a game where you manually land the Super Heavy booster. It's fun! https://mechazilla.io/ https://mechazilla.io/ The real landing will be incredible. I'm also very excited to see Starship make it all the way through reentry fully intact. We got some amazing video last time. Anyone know if they plan to relight Starship's engines in space this time? I think the capability for a deorbit burn is the last thing they need to demonstrate before they can do orbital missions and deploy satellites. Looks like it's not on the mission timeline though.
- LorenDB 2y ago
  See also SpaceX's own official Starship game: https://starshipthegame.spacex.com https://starshipthegame.spacex.com
  - khaki54 2y ago
    Does it always just say pending regulatory approval and get stuck that way? Is that the joke?
    - philwelch 2y ago
      Mine finished loading, but it’s a good joke.
    - justinclift 2y ago
      Finishes loading and runs here, using Firefox on Linux if that helps.
- ordu 2y ago
  > Anyone know if they plan to relight Starship's engines in space this time? No. I don't know why, but their plan for second stage is the same as before, go suborbital, reenter, soft splashdown into the Indian Ocean. Hopefully now without flaps burned through.
  - russdill 2y ago
qwertox 2y ago
This will be so exciting to watch, maybe as much as the first booster landing, or even more than it, if it succeeds. What I wonder about is why they never tested catching boosters with the ones they've been using all along. They know these boosters inside out, so it would be a good platform to gain experience with.
- stainablesteel 2y ago
  as for why they haven't done it yet i imagine its because you can easily over optimize for something out of order, they had bigger priorities with making the launch work in 100 other ways so until those hurdles were cleared even attempting to worry about catching wasn't worth their time and manpower yet
- melodyogonna 2y ago
  They've been trying to launch and land the rocket at a precise point without explosion
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- xoa 2y ago
  >What I wonder about is why they never tested catching boosters with the ones they've been using all along. They know these boosters inside out, so it would be a good platform to gain experience with. The Falcon 9 is incapable of hovering, because given the number of Merlins and their limited ability to throttle it cannot achieve a thrust/weight ratio (TWR) of 1 even on a single engine throttled to the lowest it can go. Rockets are almost entirely fuel by weight at launch, when empty they are very light. Since it has a TWR >1 when near-empty, lighting up an engine means F9 will want to go up again. So with F9 SpaceX must do a "hoverslam" to land, wherein the computer lights the engine at just the right point such that it hits relative velocity of zero right at the altitude of the landing pad (be it on ship or on land). That won't do for catching one however. With Starship all of this was considered from the start. Raptor has better throttling capability (itself an amazing technical achievement), and of course on Super Heavy there are lots of them which is another advantage of the "many, smaller engines" approach. It means that they can effectively throttle it to just 1/33*min-throttle of max thrust. And SH is also just plain heavier construction, for good reason in an economics designed big rocket but also helpful here. Combined it is actually capable of hovering when near empty.
panick21_ 2y ago
The tower catch will be a highlight but technically just as important will be the second full reentry of the upper stage. Last time we had the amazing 'little flap that could' that was basically ripped apart put just valiantly continued to do its job. Musk said they had solutions for this in place, will be interesting to see how the hinge holds up. This could be a came changing flight test. Because the rocket goes back to launch sites, lots of people will have really good cameras set up, lots of views. We will see this catch attempt with a lot of detail.
- electronbeam 2y ago
  1st stage reusability matters more so they can reach a cost model similar to F9, second stage is really just bonus. If they never get the second stage working with reusability they could strip the design down to a simple S2
  - jjk166 2y ago
    If they struggle with first stage re-usability for a while, that merely adds cost. Further they probably want to iterate and scale anyways, so in the short term they're gonna be building a lot of first stages anyways. Second stage reentry is necessary for this thing to ever carry people, ostensibly the mission the ship was designed for. It is a hard requirement.
- zizee 2y ago
  I don't think the ship being launched has all of the planned improvements to the fins/hinge. This launch is S30, with the big improvements coming with S33. Newer versions of the ship have smaller flaps, hinging from points offcenter, so that they are protected by the body of the ship. Images probably demonstrate this better than words. Current: https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=61266.0;attach=2300649;image https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;... New: https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=61266.0;attach=2300651;image https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;...
  - 2y ago
whyenot 2y ago
I hope it is more successful than their previous launch. I also hope that it does less damage to the wildlife sanctuary near the launch pad than the previous attempt. They are going to spray huge amounts of water to try and avoid destroying the launch pad. There is some concern that the water may become contaminated with harmful combustion products from the launch and flow into protected areas nearby. They will be doing some testing after the launch to better understand how big a problem this might be.
- bewaretheirs 2y ago
  The water deluge system has been in operation for all launches save the first and has been functioning well, protecting the pad from damage. It uses drinking-quality water and outflow has been sampled after each launch, with negligible traces of contaminants detected. There was a disagreement between the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and the US EPA about the specific type of permit that SpaceX needed from TCEQ for the deluge system but that was a paperwork/documentation issue only. see: https://www.spacex.com/updates/#starships-fly https://www.spacex.com/updates/#starships-fly
- georgeburdell 2y ago
  The byproducts of this rocket’s combustion are CO2 and H2O
- mlindner 2y ago
  The previous launch was completely successful. No damage was significant done to the wildlife near the launch pad in any previous launch, at least no more than is done to the wildlife during any launch that happens anywhere in the world. They only destroyed the pad on the very first launch. The pad has taken no notable damage during any of the subsequent three launches between that one and this one (this is the 5th launch). The combustion products of Methane and Oxygen are Water and Carbon Dioxide so there is nothing to damage the nearby areas.
- ritcgab 2y ago
  > harmful combustion products Care to share what are they?
larkinrichards 2y ago
Based on the Oct 12 change log, "changed flight 4 to "starship super heavy" -- this reads that they can perform multiple flights with the same mission profile. So they can do a few quick test catches and avoid relicensing?
- madaxe_again 2y ago
  As I understand it, only if the test article is identical. Any modification, new permit required.
- slwvx 2y ago
  The previous license also allowed multiple launches, so this license allowing multiple launches would be consistent.
blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
I love that SpaceX has these amazing broadcasts that connect us to what’s happening. I’m surprised that the older rocket companies have no video or low res pixelated video.
- mncharity 2y ago
  And looking ahead, Deep Blue Aerospace does aerobatic chase drones.[1] Perhaps if someone in that space offered their services to SpaceX? For Starship on orbit... photo/inspection cubesats are hard, but perhaps an externally-mounted 360 wifi camera ejector pack? [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-g26Zt15lo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-g26Zt15lo
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
EcommerceFlow 2y ago
Note that this launch has been ready to go for weeks and the FAA were stalling SpaceX. Elon joked that it's easier to build self landing rockets than push papers through the FAA. I really hope if Trump wins he guts that regulatory body.
- Renaud 2y ago
  To quote user rvnx: > SpaceX provided information about the flight profile and its impact only in mid-August to FAA. [...] > According to 50 CFR § 402.13, the other agencies have 60 days to give back their answers to the FAA. > 15 August + 60 days = now. You don't send a rocket without some sort of due diligence in terms of impact. Nobody likes bureaucracy, but I don't see how we're going to make the world a better place for everyone by letting billionaires basically do whatever they want with their toys without checks.
  - sbuttgereit 2y ago
    Sure, but its just not "billionaires" that need to be checked. Sometimes the checkers need some checking as well... "California officials cite Elon Musk’s politics in rejecting SpaceX launches" (https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/10/california-reject-musk-spacex-0018337 https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/10/california-reject-m...) Whether you like Elon Musk or his politics... or not I hope you can see that these actions demonstrate the danger of an overly powerful regulatory body. California Costal Commission members acting in their regulatory capacity while citing Musk's politics is out of line, abusive of their power, and not consistent with guarantees of freedom of expression or the democratic process. You don't win against MAGA or Trump by becoming them... and if you try to beat Trump at his own game... you aren't any damn better.
    - philipwhiuk 2y ago
      1. It's not clear the California Costal Commission actually have veto over federal land. Federal land ultimately is not within the power of the state to regulate. So they might be powerless. 2. The federal land is aimed at launches for national defense. It's not clear how commercial Starlink missions to mostly server commercial interests fits into this mandate 3. They actually okay'd 36 just not the full 50 - still an increase. 4. There's a fit a proper test to run a company - at some point Musk is gonna get called on this at the current rate.
notfried 2y ago
This video explains how they plan to catch the booster with Mechazilla [1]. The team at SpaceX has some serious guts to be doing this! [1] https://youtu.be/ub6HdADut50 https://youtu.be/ub6HdADut50
- slowmovintarget 2y ago
  The actual video now that it's succeeded is even cooler.
foreverobama 2y ago
[dead]
2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago
Will it finally make it to orbit? Will there be any simulated load or is it empty again?
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > Will it finally make it to orbit? No. "Starship will fly a similar trajectory as the previous flight test" [1]. IFT-4 was a suborbital flight test [2]. [1] https://www.spacex.com/launches/mission/?missionId=starship-flight-5 https://www.spacex.com/launches/mission/?missionId=starship-... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starship_flight_test_4 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starship_flight_test_4
- kortilla 2y ago
  The previous one could have made it to orbit as well. They are intentionally not going there to derisk failed re-entry ignition since the focus of these tests is entirely behavior in atmosphere.
  - 2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago
    Will they do a simulated load?
chairmansteve 2y ago
They should call it Spruce Goose II.
mandeepj 2y ago
Worth a read https://www.npr.org/2024/10/10/nx-s1-5145776/spacex-texas-wetlands https://www.npr.org/2024/10/10/nx-s1-5145776/spacex-texas-we... Title: SpaceX wants to go to Mars. To get there, environmentalists say it’s trashing Texas
- concordDance 2y ago
  Doesn't seem like a very good article... a good journalist puts statements in the appropriate context and that seems to be lacking here. For instance, it mentions "high levels of potentially toxic chemicals like Zinc and hexavalent Chromium", but doesn't say what that means. What is "high"? E.g. the quoted Prof says he "wouldn't recommend drinking it", but would he recommend drinking regular rainwater discharge from this (industrial) area (or even regular city rainwater?) and would he say its worse than that? How many grams/tons of these materials are in the discharge? What is the likely concentration by the time it gets to any animals, how much would actually get inside them and how does that compare with the known levels that would be damaging to health? How does it compare with the concentrations from rain runoff? A good journalist should find an appropriate expert and ask these sorts of questions so they can include them in the article and give the reader context, otherwise the reader will often come away feeling informed when in fact they know nothing of substance because there is nothing to anchor these unquantified facts to.
  - threeseed 2y ago
    You seem to have a poor grasp for what makes a good journalist. The whole point of the story would get lost if at every step the author is embedding irrelevant minutiae e.g. how many parts per million of Zinc versus the baseline, what constitutes normal etc. Information that an ordinary reader would not be able to make use of. You need to make the story engaging, interesting and succinct whilst being factual.
    - teddyh 2y ago
      > You need to make the story engaging, interesting and succinct Yes, that is the job of a journalist. I.e. it’s why they get paid. > whilst being factual. IIUC, there is no such requirement. Approximately nobody cares if what is written is strictly true or not. There are no negative consequences if something untrue is written. (Except for libel and other special cases.)
jodleif 2y ago
Can anyone explain what the point of starship is? It won’t be human rated - are they just keeping launching them for keeping the funding rounds going?
- zizee 2y ago
  Falcon 9 (spacex's other rocket) wasn't human rated at first either. The point of starship is to reduce the cost of kg to orbit, by being a fully, and rapidly reusable launch system. The other long term and loftier) goal is to enable Mars colonization, a mission who's current main blocker is cost of kg to orbit. By reducing the cost of putting things to orbit, you can do a whole lot more. Starlink is a good example, but if starship works it will be a paradigm shift that will result in a whole new space economy.
  - jodleif 2y ago
    But falcon 9 is using a time tested approach and has safety systems. The starship has no backup if for some reason the engines fail to start…? (For the passenger angle) I don’t think the limiter to mars is cost to orbit: - Having a vessel where people can live for a couple of years - finding someone willing to take the (most likely) one-way ticket to mars - all the challenges of having a mars habitat. Radiation, dust, etc Reducing the cost: sure, starship has only been launched with no payload so far so the numbers are yet to be determined… and it’s only impressive (theoretical) numbers are to LEO.
    - zizee 2y ago
      The cost to orbit is the current limiter for a mars mission because no one will invest in solving all the other challenges until cost to orbit is solved. It's also a lot easier to solve the problems you raised when cost to orbit is lowered. Early variants of starship will not be human rated. That will only happen once Starship has a proven track record. The is also no reason a human rated starship variant could not be built using the same safety systems seen with the dragon capsule. It sounds like you are having trouble seeing merit in starship. Falcon 9, whilst great, is not going to the end of launch system development. SpaceX believes Starship will bring significant improvements/benefits. This process is no different to how Automobiles and aircraft have seen improvements to their capabilities over the years.
cryptoz 2y ago
I think the window opens in a few hours (?!?!) - that is, tomorrow morning 7am CT - for Flight 5, which should include an attempt to catch the booster with the tower. The discussion on r/spacex for the curious: https://old.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/1g24daz/faa_grants_spacex_starship_flight_5_license/ https://old.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/1g24daz/faa_grants_...
- ahazred8ta 2y ago
  "Catch a falling star and put it in your pocket, Never let it fade away"
pomian 2y ago
There is a great app, called: next spaceflight. it seems to work great. Android and Apple. Simple settings, non invasive. (Thanks to cryptoz.) Of course there is a website, but for once I see a reason to have a notification setting, one hour or ten minutes before any launch.
- ionwake 2y ago
  Fantastic app thank you
- 9dev 2y ago
  Thank you, that is something I’ve been looking for for a long time!
nukesinspace 2y ago
[flagged]
- Sysreq2 2y ago
  SpaceX and by extension Starship are critical for the entire western space industry. Last year SpaceX was responsible for something like 90% of the stuff sent up. Then China and then Russia. There is simply no one else in even in the market right now. SpaceX has lowered costs by an order of magnitude already and hopes Starship will drop it by another. If you don’t like Elon Musk that’s fine. But his companies get stuff done. Blue Origin has been around longer, has gotten more from the government (Yeah, really) and been getting a billion a year from Bezos with nothing to show for it. It’s insane how much SpaceX has done while everyone else has been doing nothing.
  - georgeg23 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - pests 2y ago
      Why is the project bad? Besides being a heritage foundation project?
      - ceejayoz 2y ago
        Having an effective counter to large numbers of nukes is likely to seriously risk Chinese and Russian escalations. MAD only works when it’s mutually assured.
      - orbisvicis 2y ago
        I have no idea the political shenanigans to which OP refers, but a missile defense shield destabilizes MAD and even if it works - which it won't - it'll be susceptible to jamming and maybe even EMPs since the satellites fly so low. Iron Dome is only effective against a limited number of slow unguided missiles, and too expensive to maintain. And SDI was a disaster. It seems like Israel is a test-bed for weapon systems. It would be interesting to see how Iron Beam influences second-generation systems.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
ETH_start 2y ago
Repeating a previous comment on the FAA: -- We need an administration that will greenlight Starship flights immediately, so that the pace of its development can increase. The FAA is currently far too conservative in approving launches, by overindexing on the local risks posed by launches relative to the global risks of delaying space expansion. -- I'll also add that the US could potentially massively benefit if regulatory agencies like the FAA switched from pre-market approval to post-market surveillance. This article explains the difference and singles out the FAA and how we could have had actual "flying cars" by now had its regulatory approach been like the Department of Transportation's (DOT): https://open.substack.com/pub/maximumprogress/p/how-the-faa-is-keeping-flying-cars https://open.substack.com/pub/maximumprogress/p/how-the-faa-...
sbuttgereit 2y ago
My official booster predictions for tomorrow: - 10% chance of an "FTS triggering event" on ascent. - 70% chance of an ocean landing, no catch attempted. - 5% chance of a successful catch (with leeway for after-catch problems). - 15% chance of a catch attempt resulting in all the windows on South Padre Island needing to be replaced. Ship I think has much more chance of being substantially more successful than IFT4.
tjpnz 2y ago
So many crypto scams masquerading as official SpaceX streams on YouTube right now. This has been going on for years.
- cubefox 2y ago
  YouTube is so slow to react that the scam is long done before they do anything.
cubefox 2y ago
And a "SpaceX" fake stream (probably a crypto scam) has currently 260.000 viewers on YouTube: https://youtube.com/watch?v=slu4rTF-Bz0 https://youtube.com/watch?v=slu4rTF-Bz0 I reported it hours ago, but YouTube doesn't seem to be very good at preventing scams.
- dotnet00 2y ago
  The viewer count isn't real people, it's mostly botted.
  - cubefox 2y ago
    Doubt it
- torginus 2y ago
  Omg, how is this the top result when searching for SpaceX on youtube? Also the AI clone of Musk is eerily good, you can tell today (not just because the brazenly scammy script), but will you able to a year from now? Especially if the guys running the scams get a bit more subtle?
- cubefox 2y ago
  After over 10 hours, the scam is still going. Something is really wrong at YouTube.
pastureofplenty 2y ago
Bad news for sensitive wetlands

261 points by LorenDB 2y ago

"Starship's fifth flight test is targeted to launch on Sunday, October 13. The 30-minute launch window opens at 7 a.m. CT.", https://www.spacex.com/launches/mission/?missionId=starship-flight-5 https://www.spacex.com/launches/mission/?missionId=starship-... Edit: that's 12p.m. UTC, I think.

dwaltrip 2y ago
Tomorrow? It was issued only one day in advance?
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- bryanlarsen 2y ago
  SpaceX has claimed they'd been ready to fly since August. It's not a surprise they'll launch very quickly after receiving the license.
  - jdiez17 2y ago
    Take that with a BIG grain of salt. When SpaceX says they are ready and the FAA is holding them up, it is actually Elon saying they are ready. For example, take a look at the "Starships are meant to fly" post from September: https://www.spacex.com/updates/ https://www.spacex.com/updates/ As someone who has been following these developments for a while, I can 100% detect Elon's fingerprints all over this post. They are basically completely dismissing government oversight as "unnecessary obstacles to progress". Keep in mind, the area where SpaceX operates Starship is a wildlife sanctuary and was only chosen because it is one of the few undeveloped, southernmost points of the US, which matters because the closer you are to the equator, the more advantage you can take of the Earth's rotational velocity.
    - decremental 2y ago
      [dead]
    - bryanlarsen 2y ago
      Every launch pad in the US is a de jure or de facto wildlife sanctuary. Launch pads need a large human keep-out zone. Keeping out humans is great for wildlife. The site was chosen because it was it could launch East over water. The rotation of the earth gives a boost to easterly launches. Boca Chica isn't a great launch location because there's a fairly narrow window of directions it can launch in without overflying land, requiring expensive dog legs to hit different inclinations. They might have been better off with a piece of coastline in Maine, but try and find a piece of Eastern coastline in the US without any development in a 4 mile radius around the site...
      - panick21_ 2y ago
        Being so far South is quite nice, gives you quite the performance boost, do you have any analysis on what the dog legs cost compared to more Northern launch sites? Would be interesting to consider. Clearly Florida was the right place to do this for the US in the 1960s.
        eastbound 2y ago
        Noob question: How comes hurricanes aren’t a problem?
        JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > How comes hurricanes aren’t a problem? They're slow and unsurprising. You don't launch in a hurricane.
        dylan604 2y ago
        You just launch the day before... https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/10/european-mission-departs-earth-to-investigate-an-asteroid-wrecked-by-nasa/ https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/10/european-mission-depar...
  - bewaretheirs 2y ago
    In August, they said the rocket was ready to fly .. but they were quite visibly still doing significant work to the catch mechanism on the launch tower.
    - dylan604 2y ago
      being ready to launch is one thing, being ready to catch/land is another. so technically, they weren't wrong
    - rpmisms 2y ago
      The perfect is the enemy of the good, and SpaceX lives by this. If they have time to spare, why not spend it improving nice-to-haves?
    - kortilla 2y ago
      SpaceX operates on a rapid iterative cycle where they will knowingly test with deficiencies to improve later. If they get delayed for a massive chunk of time, they are definitely going to use it to make all of the known improvements they can.
- hughes 2y ago
  Flight 3 license was also issued only one day in advance.
- bewaretheirs 2y ago
  Not much different from the prior flights. Flight 4 was licensed on June 4th, was originally scheduled to launch on June 5th, and actually launched on the 6th. Flight 3 received its license on March 13th and launched on March 14th. Flight 2 received its license on November 15th 2023, and launched on November 18th. Flight 1 received its license on April 14th; it launched on April 20th.
  - LorenDB 2y ago
    The main difference here is that up until just a few days ago, the FAA was saying that they didn't plan to issue a license until late November. https://www.space.com/spacex-starship-flight-five-late-november https://www.space.com/spacex-starship-flight-five-late-novem...
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > up until just a few days ago, the FAA was saying that they didn't plan to issue a license until late November This might be a case where the FAA's PR department should link to a press release instead of repeatig it contemporaneously.
    - dotnet00 2y ago
      There was a letter circulating around on X recently, showing that the FAA asked the Fish and Wildlife Service to do their thing faster. Assuming that was real, things got moving after the pressure from Congress.
  - mlindner 2y ago
    Should also be noted that Flight 1 was originally attempted to launch on April 17th.
- BurningFrog 2y ago
  I think it's more that they launch as soon as they get the permit.
- rvnx 2y ago
  SpaceX provided information about the flight profile and its impact only in mid-August to FAA. The FAA forwarded the requests to the related agencies and had to wait (for example, what happens to the polluted water). According to 50 CFR § 402.13, the other agencies have 60 days to give back their answers to the FAA. 15 August + 60 days = now. The FAA mentioned they positively collaborate with SpaceX despite "upper stage failure in July and unsuccessful landing in August". Quite exciting to see!
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > 15 August + 60 days = now Close enough. Sixty days is October 14. Today is the twelfth. Tomorrow, 13 October, is the launch.
    - TeMPOraL 2y ago
      "End of day" shenanigans?
  - dmix 2y ago
    Interesting how it took exactly the maximum limit they are alloted. I wonder if the people in these agencies treat it like school projects where you use deadlines as a framework for how long you can screw around before it's absolutely necessary to get started. Where it's not treated as a worst case upper maximum.
    - bandyaboot 2y ago
      Alternatively, one or more agency may not have responded at all and so the FAA was obligated to wait the 60 days. Just speculation.
    - tgsovlerkhgsel 2y ago
      Sounds like a great way to get politicians to give the agency 3 days next time, under the guise of optimization but with the actual intent and effect to completely neuter the agency...
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > It was issued only one day in advance? Officially, yes. Practically, I was hearing earlier this week that this was coming, as obviously was SpaceX given they're ready to attempt.
- azernik 2y ago
  Other way around - with foreknowledge of how fast the FAA was working, SpaceX scheduled the launch last week to be one day after the expected license issue.
zizee 2y ago
As I write this comment, it is Oct 12, 3:30 pm Central time. So the launch window starts in 15 and a half hours. https://mytime.io/7am/CT https://mytime.io/7am/CT
- justinclift 2y ago
  Hmmm, that mytime.io place doesn't seem super accurate. It's using the wrong time zone for my location anyway, and therefore the gives the wrong local time.
  - zizee 2y ago
    How frustrating. Hopefully my comment above didn't lead anyone to miss any part of that historic event yesterday. Mea culpa!
    - justinclift 2y ago
      Nah, I had already looked everything up some time before. The "timeanddate" meeting planner is my go-to these days for figuring out cross tz stuff: https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/meeting.html https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/meeting.html Not always super intuitive, but I have yet (heh!) seen it give wrong time info. :)

FL33TW00D 2y ago

First attempt at catching the 230ft tall booster!

genidoi 2y ago

This might be the first launch that tops the jaw-dropping excitement of the Falcon 9 LZ-1 landing way back in 2015. Godspeed starship and best of luck to all the SpaceX team.

grecy 2y ago
… and the dual landings from the first Falcon Heavy flight. Even today that footage looks like cgi
- vmasto 2y ago
  The dual landings for me were far superior. It was straight out of science fiction.
  - glitchcrab 2y ago
    I only got to see the tail end of the shuttle launches (too young) but I imagine watching the first launch/landing felt something like I experienced watching those two boosters land together.
    - blowsand 2y ago
      Can confirm.
- lucianbr 2y ago
  The live view of a Starship fin being attacked by plasma during reentry was pretty close too.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > the dual landings from the first Falcon Heavy flight https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kyO-h59RO5g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kyO-h59RO5g
- allenrb 2y ago
  Short of the moon landings that I never got to experience, the dual landing (especially that first one!) is the coolest thing I’ve ever seen in space flight. Could watch again and again.

DarmokJalad1701 2y ago

Excitement guaranteed!

ilkkao 2y ago

I like how SpaceX is willing to take risks. Their second launch tower is still months away from being finished, and now they're trying to catch the booster using the first one.

bpodgursky 2y ago
If they blow up the first tower, it will be 3+++ months to get FAA flight clearance again, so no great loss.
- dmix 2y ago
  FAA is doing the testing, SpaceX is sitting around watching FAA
- dotnet00 2y ago
  FAA doesn't care if they blow up the tower, as long as SpaceX can explain why it happened and show that it didn't cause undue risk to the public. People freaked out and said the same thing after IFT-1 dug up the concrete underneath the launch mount, and yet the investigation was closed within 6 months and SpaceX conducted IFT-2 2 months later.
  - chasd00 2y ago
    IFT-1 presented no danger to the public at all and it still took 6 months. That’s a long time to an actual technology company attempting to innovate. The FAA slow walks SpaceX because of Musk’s political views, it’s not even an “open secret” just a fact of life. Their only recourse is to shine a light on the FFA so the public can see the politics in display.
    - dotnet00 2y ago
      The time for the mishap report of IFT-1 was reasonable enough, they had a pretty serious issue in that the booster's FTS turned out to be insufficient. It also took them until the end of July to repair the pad and test the new deluge system. By mid-August they submitted their incident report to the FAA. The investigation was closed in early September. This was something even Elon admitted, saying that retesting the FTS would probably be the limiting factor for when IFT-2 could fly because it didn't destroy the vehicle as it was supposed to. The unreasonable delay you might be thinking of, was between the FAA's closing of the investigation in early September, to the IFT-2 launch in November. That was under pretty similar circumstances to now, Fish and Wildlife Services was taking forever to do its part of the job, SpaceX went to Congress, the resulting pressure forced them to get things done faster.

YuccaGloriosa 2y ago

It's going to be one helluva show. Which ever way it goes. Best of luck to SpaceX

bun_terminator 2y ago
I don't follow these things often: How is this different than the four before?
- sjm-lbm 2y ago
  This is the first time they are going to attempt to catch the booster using their launchpad. Either you'll see one of the most impressive technical achievements in human history, or a very cool explosion.
  - Tuna-Fish 2y ago
    Their launch license requires them to initially aim at the water, and only shift to aiming at their tower if both the booster internally judges it's in perfect health, and they send the signal from their control system. I think there is a reasonable possibility that something goes wrong enough at some point for the booster to go in the drink. But if that happens, maybe it'll be close enough to the shore that we'll get some nice video of it?
    - jimrandomh 2y ago
      This is also standard procedure for Falcon 9 landings. They would do it this way even if the launch license didn't require it, because they know the probability of some sort of failure of the booster is high, and they don't want to destroy the launch tower if they can help it.
    - ttrei 2y ago
      At the moment of landing burn ignition the booster will already target the beach near the tower.
  - 2y ago

amichail 2y ago

Do you think more than a billion people will watch the catch attempt, either live or later, in this Starship flight test?

stainablesteel 2y ago
probably not live, i imagine that many people will hear news about it though
7thpower 2y ago
If we’re talking about the near future? No, most people do not care. If it’s successful it will likely be in the history books, so maybe billions of martians will one day watch.
edm0nd 2y ago
Over how long of a time span are we giving this? I don't think so. https://www.youtube.com/@SpaceX/streams https://www.youtube.com/@SpaceX/streams = most popular live stream has 33M views https://www.youtube.com/@SpaceX/videos https://www.youtube.com/@SpaceX/videos = most popular video has 29M views I'm pretty sure this also includes embedded views from news articles that embed the videos. So to answer the question: In the short term, unlikely it seems. Over the span of hundreds of years? Likely so.
whyenot 2y ago
No, I don’t think one in every eight people on earth is going to see the catch attempt or even care about it. The launch and catch attempt is exciting but I don’t think it’s something that most of the planet is following. Even in the US, I doubt many people will watch it. It’s not the next moon landing.
bloopernova 2y ago
Honestly I don't even see a future Moon landing garnering that many people. Maybe a Mars landing would, but non-techie people just don't seem very interested in space.

bberenberg 2y ago

Watching us push forward in hard problems like this is important not only for the direct benefits, but the general belief in a better future it affords. I appreciate anything that helps reignite wonder and hope in all of us, and a rocket launch and recapture is just more visceral (not better) than others. Good luck to the team, I’ll be watching with bated breath.

modeless 2y ago

Someone made a game where you manually land the Super Heavy booster. It's fun! https://mechazilla.io/ https://mechazilla.io/ The real landing will be incredible. I'm also very excited to see Starship make it all the way through reentry fully intact. We got some amazing video last time. Anyone know if they plan to relight Starship's engines in space this time? I think the capability for a deorbit burn is the last thing they need to demonstrate before they can do orbital missions and deploy satellites. Looks like it's not on the mission timeline though.

LorenDB 2y ago
See also SpaceX's own official Starship game: https://starshipthegame.spacex.com https://starshipthegame.spacex.com
- khaki54 2y ago
  Does it always just say pending regulatory approval and get stuck that way? Is that the joke?
  - philwelch 2y ago
    Mine finished loading, but it’s a good joke.
  - justinclift 2y ago
    Finishes loading and runs here, using Firefox on Linux if that helps.
ordu 2y ago
> Anyone know if they plan to relight Starship's engines in space this time? No. I don't know why, but their plan for second stage is the same as before, go suborbital, reenter, soft splashdown into the Indian Ocean. Hopefully now without flaps burned through.
- russdill 2y ago

qwertox 2y ago

This will be so exciting to watch, maybe as much as the first booster landing, or even more than it, if it succeeds. What I wonder about is why they never tested catching boosters with the ones they've been using all along. They know these boosters inside out, so it would be a good platform to gain experience with.

stainablesteel 2y ago
as for why they haven't done it yet i imagine its because you can easily over optimize for something out of order, they had bigger priorities with making the launch work in 100 other ways so until those hurdles were cleared even attempting to worry about catching wasn't worth their time and manpower yet
melodyogonna 2y ago
They've been trying to launch and land the rocket at a precise point without explosion
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
xoa 2y ago
>What I wonder about is why they never tested catching boosters with the ones they've been using all along. They know these boosters inside out, so it would be a good platform to gain experience with. The Falcon 9 is incapable of hovering, because given the number of Merlins and their limited ability to throttle it cannot achieve a thrust/weight ratio (TWR) of 1 even on a single engine throttled to the lowest it can go. Rockets are almost entirely fuel by weight at launch, when empty they are very light. Since it has a TWR >1 when near-empty, lighting up an engine means F9 will want to go up again. So with F9 SpaceX must do a "hoverslam" to land, wherein the computer lights the engine at just the right point such that it hits relative velocity of zero right at the altitude of the landing pad (be it on ship or on land). That won't do for catching one however. With Starship all of this was considered from the start. Raptor has better throttling capability (itself an amazing technical achievement), and of course on Super Heavy there are lots of them which is another advantage of the "many, smaller engines" approach. It means that they can effectively throttle it to just 1/33*min-throttle of max thrust. And SH is also just plain heavier construction, for good reason in an economics designed big rocket but also helpful here. Combined it is actually capable of hovering when near empty.

panick21_ 2y ago

The tower catch will be a highlight but technically just as important will be the second full reentry of the upper stage. Last time we had the amazing 'little flap that could' that was basically ripped apart put just valiantly continued to do its job. Musk said they had solutions for this in place, will be interesting to see how the hinge holds up. This could be a came changing flight test. Because the rocket goes back to launch sites, lots of people will have really good cameras set up, lots of views. We will see this catch attempt with a lot of detail.

electronbeam 2y ago
1st stage reusability matters more so they can reach a cost model similar to F9, second stage is really just bonus. If they never get the second stage working with reusability they could strip the design down to a simple S2
- jjk166 2y ago
  If they struggle with first stage re-usability for a while, that merely adds cost. Further they probably want to iterate and scale anyways, so in the short term they're gonna be building a lot of first stages anyways. Second stage reentry is necessary for this thing to ever carry people, ostensibly the mission the ship was designed for. It is a hard requirement.
zizee 2y ago
I don't think the ship being launched has all of the planned improvements to the fins/hinge. This launch is S30, with the big improvements coming with S33. Newer versions of the ship have smaller flaps, hinging from points offcenter, so that they are protected by the body of the ship. Images probably demonstrate this better than words. Current: https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=61266.0;attach=2300649;image https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;... New: https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=61266.0;attach=2300651;image https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;...
- 2y ago

whyenot 2y ago

I hope it is more successful than their previous launch. I also hope that it does less damage to the wildlife sanctuary near the launch pad than the previous attempt. They are going to spray huge amounts of water to try and avoid destroying the launch pad. There is some concern that the water may become contaminated with harmful combustion products from the launch and flow into protected areas nearby. They will be doing some testing after the launch to better understand how big a problem this might be.

bewaretheirs 2y ago
The water deluge system has been in operation for all launches save the first and has been functioning well, protecting the pad from damage. It uses drinking-quality water and outflow has been sampled after each launch, with negligible traces of contaminants detected. There was a disagreement between the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and the US EPA about the specific type of permit that SpaceX needed from TCEQ for the deluge system but that was a paperwork/documentation issue only. see: https://www.spacex.com/updates/#starships-fly https://www.spacex.com/updates/#starships-fly
georgeburdell 2y ago
The byproducts of this rocket’s combustion are CO2 and H2O
mlindner 2y ago
The previous launch was completely successful. No damage was significant done to the wildlife near the launch pad in any previous launch, at least no more than is done to the wildlife during any launch that happens anywhere in the world. They only destroyed the pad on the very first launch. The pad has taken no notable damage during any of the subsequent three launches between that one and this one (this is the 5th launch). The combustion products of Methane and Oxygen are Water and Carbon Dioxide so there is nothing to damage the nearby areas.
ritcgab 2y ago
> harmful combustion products Care to share what are they?

larkinrichards 2y ago

Based on the Oct 12 change log, "changed flight 4 to "starship super heavy" -- this reads that they can perform multiple flights with the same mission profile. So they can do a few quick test catches and avoid relicensing?

madaxe_again 2y ago
As I understand it, only if the test article is identical. Any modification, new permit required.
slwvx 2y ago
The previous license also allowed multiple launches, so this license allowing multiple launches would be consistent.

blackeyeblitzar 2y ago

I love that SpaceX has these amazing broadcasts that connect us to what’s happening. I’m surprised that the older rocket companies have no video or low res pixelated video.

mncharity 2y ago
And looking ahead, Deep Blue Aerospace does aerobatic chase drones.[1] Perhaps if someone in that space offered their services to SpaceX? For Starship on orbit... photo/inspection cubesats are hard, but perhaps an externally-mounted 360 wifi camera ejector pack? [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-g26Zt15lo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-g26Zt15lo
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]

EcommerceFlow 2y ago

Note that this launch has been ready to go for weeks and the FAA were stalling SpaceX. Elon joked that it's easier to build self landing rockets than push papers through the FAA. I really hope if Trump wins he guts that regulatory body.

Renaud 2y ago
To quote user rvnx: > SpaceX provided information about the flight profile and its impact only in mid-August to FAA. [...] > According to 50 CFR § 402.13, the other agencies have 60 days to give back their answers to the FAA. > 15 August + 60 days = now. You don't send a rocket without some sort of due diligence in terms of impact. Nobody likes bureaucracy, but I don't see how we're going to make the world a better place for everyone by letting billionaires basically do whatever they want with their toys without checks.
- sbuttgereit 2y ago
  Sure, but its just not "billionaires" that need to be checked. Sometimes the checkers need some checking as well... "California officials cite Elon Musk’s politics in rejecting SpaceX launches" (https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/10/california-reject-musk-spacex-0018337 https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/10/california-reject-m...) Whether you like Elon Musk or his politics... or not I hope you can see that these actions demonstrate the danger of an overly powerful regulatory body. California Costal Commission members acting in their regulatory capacity while citing Musk's politics is out of line, abusive of their power, and not consistent with guarantees of freedom of expression or the democratic process. You don't win against MAGA or Trump by becoming them... and if you try to beat Trump at his own game... you aren't any damn better.
  - philipwhiuk 2y ago
    1. It's not clear the California Costal Commission actually have veto over federal land. Federal land ultimately is not within the power of the state to regulate. So they might be powerless. 2. The federal land is aimed at launches for national defense. It's not clear how commercial Starlink missions to mostly server commercial interests fits into this mandate 3. They actually okay'd 36 just not the full 50 - still an increase. 4. There's a fit a proper test to run a company - at some point Musk is gonna get called on this at the current rate.

notfried 2y ago

This video explains how they plan to catch the booster with Mechazilla [1]. The team at SpaceX has some serious guts to be doing this! [1] https://youtu.be/ub6HdADut50 https://youtu.be/ub6HdADut50

slowmovintarget 2y ago
The actual video now that it's succeeded is even cooler.

foreverobama 2y ago

[dead]

2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago

Will it finally make it to orbit? Will there be any simulated load or is it empty again?

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> Will it finally make it to orbit? No. "Starship will fly a similar trajectory as the previous flight test" [1]. IFT-4 was a suborbital flight test [2]. [1] https://www.spacex.com/launches/mission/?missionId=starship-flight-5 https://www.spacex.com/launches/mission/?missionId=starship-... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starship_flight_test_4 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starship_flight_test_4
kortilla 2y ago
The previous one could have made it to orbit as well. They are intentionally not going there to derisk failed re-entry ignition since the focus of these tests is entirely behavior in atmosphere.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago
  Will they do a simulated load?

chairmansteve 2y ago

They should call it Spruce Goose II.

mandeepj 2y ago

Worth a read https://www.npr.org/2024/10/10/nx-s1-5145776/spacex-texas-wetlands https://www.npr.org/2024/10/10/nx-s1-5145776/spacex-texas-we... Title: SpaceX wants to go to Mars. To get there, environmentalists say it’s trashing Texas

concordDance 2y ago
Doesn't seem like a very good article... a good journalist puts statements in the appropriate context and that seems to be lacking here. For instance, it mentions "high levels of potentially toxic chemicals like Zinc and hexavalent Chromium", but doesn't say what that means. What is "high"? E.g. the quoted Prof says he "wouldn't recommend drinking it", but would he recommend drinking regular rainwater discharge from this (industrial) area (or even regular city rainwater?) and would he say its worse than that? How many grams/tons of these materials are in the discharge? What is the likely concentration by the time it gets to any animals, how much would actually get inside them and how does that compare with the known levels that would be damaging to health? How does it compare with the concentrations from rain runoff? A good journalist should find an appropriate expert and ask these sorts of questions so they can include them in the article and give the reader context, otherwise the reader will often come away feeling informed when in fact they know nothing of substance because there is nothing to anchor these unquantified facts to.
- threeseed 2y ago
  You seem to have a poor grasp for what makes a good journalist. The whole point of the story would get lost if at every step the author is embedding irrelevant minutiae e.g. how many parts per million of Zinc versus the baseline, what constitutes normal etc. Information that an ordinary reader would not be able to make use of. You need to make the story engaging, interesting and succinct whilst being factual.
  - teddyh 2y ago
    > You need to make the story engaging, interesting and succinct Yes, that is the job of a journalist. I.e. it’s why they get paid. > whilst being factual. IIUC, there is no such requirement. Approximately nobody cares if what is written is strictly true or not. There are no negative consequences if something untrue is written. (Except for libel and other special cases.)

jodleif 2y ago

Can anyone explain what the point of starship is? It won’t be human rated - are they just keeping launching them for keeping the funding rounds going?

zizee 2y ago
Falcon 9 (spacex's other rocket) wasn't human rated at first either. The point of starship is to reduce the cost of kg to orbit, by being a fully, and rapidly reusable launch system. The other long term and loftier) goal is to enable Mars colonization, a mission who's current main blocker is cost of kg to orbit. By reducing the cost of putting things to orbit, you can do a whole lot more. Starlink is a good example, but if starship works it will be a paradigm shift that will result in a whole new space economy.
- jodleif 2y ago
  But falcon 9 is using a time tested approach and has safety systems. The starship has no backup if for some reason the engines fail to start…? (For the passenger angle) I don’t think the limiter to mars is cost to orbit: - Having a vessel where people can live for a couple of years - finding someone willing to take the (most likely) one-way ticket to mars - all the challenges of having a mars habitat. Radiation, dust, etc Reducing the cost: sure, starship has only been launched with no payload so far so the numbers are yet to be determined… and it’s only impressive (theoretical) numbers are to LEO.
  - zizee 2y ago
    The cost to orbit is the current limiter for a mars mission because no one will invest in solving all the other challenges until cost to orbit is solved. It's also a lot easier to solve the problems you raised when cost to orbit is lowered. Early variants of starship will not be human rated. That will only happen once Starship has a proven track record. The is also no reason a human rated starship variant could not be built using the same safety systems seen with the dragon capsule. It sounds like you are having trouble seeing merit in starship. Falcon 9, whilst great, is not going to the end of launch system development. SpaceX believes Starship will bring significant improvements/benefits. This process is no different to how Automobiles and aircraft have seen improvements to their capabilities over the years.

cryptoz 2y ago

I think the window opens in a few hours (?!?!) - that is, tomorrow morning 7am CT - for Flight 5, which should include an attempt to catch the booster with the tower. The discussion on r/spacex for the curious: https://old.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/1g24daz/faa_grants_spacex_starship_flight_5_license/ https://old.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/1g24daz/faa_grants_...

ahazred8ta 2y ago
"Catch a falling star and put it in your pocket, Never let it fade away"

pomian 2y ago

There is a great app, called: next spaceflight. it seems to work great. Android and Apple. Simple settings, non invasive. (Thanks to cryptoz.) Of course there is a website, but for once I see a reason to have a notification setting, one hour or ten minutes before any launch.

ionwake 2y ago
Fantastic app thank you
9dev 2y ago
Thank you, that is something I’ve been looking for for a long time!

nukesinspace 2y ago

[flagged]

Sysreq2 2y ago
SpaceX and by extension Starship are critical for the entire western space industry. Last year SpaceX was responsible for something like 90% of the stuff sent up. Then China and then Russia. There is simply no one else in even in the market right now. SpaceX has lowered costs by an order of magnitude already and hopes Starship will drop it by another. If you don’t like Elon Musk that’s fine. But his companies get stuff done. Blue Origin has been around longer, has gotten more from the government (Yeah, really) and been getting a billion a year from Bezos with nothing to show for it. It’s insane how much SpaceX has done while everyone else has been doing nothing.
- georgeg23 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - pests 2y ago
    Why is the project bad? Besides being a heritage foundation project?
    - ceejayoz 2y ago
      Having an effective counter to large numbers of nukes is likely to seriously risk Chinese and Russian escalations. MAD only works when it’s mutually assured.
    - orbisvicis 2y ago
      I have no idea the political shenanigans to which OP refers, but a missile defense shield destabilizes MAD and even if it works - which it won't - it'll be susceptible to jamming and maybe even EMPs since the satellites fly so low. Iron Dome is only effective against a limited number of slow unguided missiles, and too expensive to maintain. And SDI was a disaster. It seems like Israel is a test-bed for weapon systems. It would be interesting to see how Iron Beam influences second-generation systems.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

ETH_start 2y ago

Repeating a previous comment on the FAA: -- We need an administration that will greenlight Starship flights immediately, so that the pace of its development can increase. The FAA is currently far too conservative in approving launches, by overindexing on the local risks posed by launches relative to the global risks of delaying space expansion. -- I'll also add that the US could potentially massively benefit if regulatory agencies like the FAA switched from pre-market approval to post-market surveillance. This article explains the difference and singles out the FAA and how we could have had actual "flying cars" by now had its regulatory approach been like the Department of Transportation's (DOT): https://open.substack.com/pub/maximumprogress/p/how-the-faa-is-keeping-flying-cars https://open.substack.com/pub/maximumprogress/p/how-the-faa-...

sbuttgereit 2y ago

My official booster predictions for tomorrow: - 10% chance of an "FTS triggering event" on ascent. - 70% chance of an ocean landing, no catch attempted. - 5% chance of a successful catch (with leeway for after-catch problems). - 15% chance of a catch attempt resulting in all the windows on South Padre Island needing to be replaced. Ship I think has much more chance of being substantially more successful than IFT4.

tjpnz 2y ago

So many crypto scams masquerading as official SpaceX streams on YouTube right now. This has been going on for years.

cubefox 2y ago
YouTube is so slow to react that the scam is long done before they do anything.

cubefox 2y ago

And a "SpaceX" fake stream (probably a crypto scam) has currently 260.000 viewers on YouTube: https://youtube.com/watch?v=slu4rTF-Bz0 https://youtube.com/watch?v=slu4rTF-Bz0 I reported it hours ago, but YouTube doesn't seem to be very good at preventing scams.

dotnet00 2y ago
The viewer count isn't real people, it's mostly botted.
- cubefox 2y ago
  Doubt it
torginus 2y ago
Omg, how is this the top result when searching for SpaceX on youtube? Also the AI clone of Musk is eerily good, you can tell today (not just because the brazenly scammy script), but will you able to a year from now? Especially if the guys running the scams get a bit more subtle?
cubefox 2y ago
After over 10 hours, the scam is still going. Something is really wrong at YouTube.

pastureofplenty 2y ago

Bad news for sensitive wetlands