28
submitted 10 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) by threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.works to c/spacex@sh.itjust.works

SpaceX Starship page

Portions of this thread copied from the Starship Dev thread on r/SpaceX.

FAQ

  1. When next launch? IFT-3 is NET Feb 2024, and after completion of the IFT-2 mishap investigation. Candidate vehicles are Booster 10 and Ship 28.
  2. When previous launch? (IFT-2)? Booster 9 and Ship 25 launched on 2023-11-18.
  3. What was the result? Successful lift off with minimal pad damage. Successful booster operation with all engines to successful hot stage separation. Booster destroyed by AFTS after attempted boost-back. Ship fired all engines to near orbital speed then destroyed by AFTS. No re-entry attempt.
  4. Was IFT-2 a complete failure? No. As part of an iterative test programme, many milestones were achieved. Perfection is neither expected nor desired at this stage.

​---

Quick Links

RAPTOR ROOST | LAB CAM | SAPPHIRE CAM | SENTINEL CAM | ROVER CAM | ROVER 2.0 CAM | PLEX CAM | NSF STARBASE

Starship Dev 51 | Starship Dev 50 | Starship Dev 49 | Starship Dev 48

Official Starship Update


Status

Road Closures

Type Start (CDT) End (CDT) Status
Primary Date 2023-12-18 08:00 2023-12-18 20:00 Closure Revoked. HWY 4 and Boca Chica Beach will be open.
Alternative Date 2023-12-19 08:00 2023-12-19 20:00 Closure Revoked. HWY 4 and Boca Chica Beach will be open.
Alternative Date 2023-12-20 08:00 2023-12-20 20:00 Closure Concluded. HWY 4 and Boca Chica Beach now open.
Primary Date 2023-12-21 08:00 2023-12-21 20:00 Closure Concluded. HWY 4 and Boca Chica Beach now open.
Alternative Date 2023-12-22 08:00 2023-12-22 20:00 Closure Concluded. HWY 4 and Boca Chica Beach now open.
Primary Date 2023-12-27 08:00 2023-12-27 20:00 Closure Revoked. HWY 4 and Boca Chica Beach open.
Primary Date 2023-12-29 06:00 2023-12-29 16:00 Possible closure.
Alternate Date 2024-01-03 08:00 2024-01-03 18:00 Possible closure.
Alternate Date 2024-01-04 08:00 2024-01-04 18:00 Possible closure.

Up to date as of 2023-12-27

Vehicle Status

As of 2024-01-05

Follow Ring Watchers on Twitter and Discord for more.

Ship Location Status Comment
S24 Gulf of Mexico Destroyed April 20th (IFT-1): Destroyed by flight termination system after successful launch.
S25 Atlantic Ocean Destroyed Mostly successful launch and stage separation
S26 Rocket Garden Mysterious Static fire Oct. 20. No fins or heat shield, multiple mysterious changes. Completed 3 cryo tests, latest on Oct 10.
S28 Highbay Pre-flight prep Static fired Dec 29th
S29 Megabay 2 Pending engine install 3x cryo
S30 Massey's Cryo testing 2x cryo: Jan 3rd and Jan 5th
S31 High Bay Receiving aft flaps
S32 High Bay Under construction Stacking in progress.
S33-34 Build Site Parts spotted To be scrapped in preparation for Starship V2

 

Booster Location Status Comment
B7 Gulf of Mexico Destroyed Destroyed by flight termination system after successful launch.
B9 Gulf of Mexico Destroyed Successfully launched, destroyed during Boost back attempt.
B10 Megabay 1 Pre-flight prep Static fired Dec 29th.
B11 Megabay 1 Finalizing Completed 2 Cryo tests.
B12 Massey's Pending cryo testing
B13 Megabay 1 Stacking LOx tank stacked
B14 Build Site Assembly Assorted parts spotted
B15 Build Site Assembly Potential aft end spotted Jan 5th

Resources

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

These vertical "methane" tanks never ultimately held methane, did they? Just water and (maybe?) some LN2 or LOx?

I recall something about Texas regulations stipulating that the tanks were too close together to safely hold fuel...

[-] John_Hasler@lemmy.one 3 points 10 months ago

It's been asserted that they were used for water but I know of no evidence that they actually were.

Texas regulations require that the design for a methane storage system be done by a registered professional engineer certified to do methane storage systems in Texas and be submitted for approval before construction starts. Thus it's unlikely that they were "too close together". More likely they just didn't work right. Perhaps they had an excessive boiloff rate or too high a leakage rate.

Speculation: Perhaps they decided to build their own tanks because lead times for purchased tanks were too long. It worked out for LN2 and LOX.

I wonder why they have not recycled the suborbital tanks?

this post was submitted on 09 Dec 2023
28 points (93.8% liked)

SpaceX

1930 readers
39 users here now

A community for discussing SpaceX.

Related space communities:

Memes:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS