SpaceX SpaceX Starship development: 7th flight January 10

[Haborix]

Why? Would they threaten to nationalize SpaceX? What could they really do if SpaceX moved launch operations to another country?

Oh, I don't know... Maybe, not award certain government contracts? Also, see here for a taste of the amount of regulations related to Cuba that already exist.

 

[bob012345]

Oh, I don't know... Maybe, not award certain government contracts? Also, see here for a taste of the amount of regulations related to Cuba that already exist.

SpaceX might refuse to shuttle crews to the ISS in return. NASA can crawl back to the Russians.

 

[Haborix]

Part of me would be very entertained to watch SpaceX try that, and Musk is crazy enough to try. But I like the work SpaceX does, so I hope they don't go down the path of self-annihilation.

 

[bob012345]

Part of me would be very entertained to watch SpaceX try that, and Musk is crazy enough to try. But I like the work SpaceX does, so I hope they don't go down the path of self-annihilation.

Cuba was meant as tongue in cheek but the U.S really should be more grateful to SpaceX rather than making things harder for them with nonsense regulations and holdups.

 

[Rive]

Would they threaten to nationalize SpaceX?

May happen.
With Starlink too.
It's unlikely that things would be at that point already - I think such inconveniences can be considered just as a mild warning at most: that things going smoothly is not a given.

Previously Musk had some quirky ideas about terms and services in politically and militarily sensitive situations, and I guess many important people is not really happy that 'critical infrastructure' can have ideas and personal agendas.

The matter contains many-many (forbidden) politics.

 

[Haborix]

There are no magic wands in the legal world. But for the government, being able to invoke national security comes awful close to a magic wand for doing anything they want to do.

 

[berkeman]

The FWS only gets involved when FAA asks it, which only happens for launches. SpaceX has already used the deluge system, both as a standalone test and as operational system for a static fire test. They can use the deluge system as often as they want without FWS having anything to say about it - as long as they don't release the holddown clamps on the rocket. If they do that then suddenly FWS needs to check if the water affects a fish. If they keep delaying a launch then it's likely SpaceX will keep doing ground tests, which means they might use the deluge system more often than they would if they could launch.

That's interesting. Is the deluge system used in the same way for the tests as for the launches? Does the water flow to the ocean in both cases in the same amount and with the same $\Delta T$? If so, that would mean there is plenty of data already to show whether it affects the ecosystem that the water is flowing into, no? So that should help (or hurt, depending on that data) the approvals for launches.

 

[mfb]

Previously Musk had some quirky ideas about terms and services in politically and militarily sensitive situations, and I guess many important people is not really happy that 'critical infrastructure' can have ideas and personal agendas.

If you think of Crimea: Ukraine asked SpaceX to do something that would almost certainly have violated US laws, SpaceX refused. Journalists made up all sort of nonsense about it.

Is the deluge system used in the same way for the tests as for the launches?

No official confirmation and of course we haven't seen it in a launch yet, but it's expected to be similar. It might be running a bit longer during an actual launch.

FWS employees have been at Starbase to look at the system, but the environmental impact is so small that it would be difficult to see anything. How do you verify experimentally that the risk to harm one fish is below 1% per use?

This 1% is not a random number, it's actually the level of impact the bureaucrats are measuring. Here is an evaluation for a Starship reentry near Hawaii for example. Among other things, FAA and SpaceX worked together to evaluate the sound levels for "permanent (hearing) threshold shift (PTS)" and "temporary (hearing) threshold shift (TTS)" for different species. Table 2 informs us that e.g. the expected number of affected loggerhead turtles is 0.001779 (PTS) and 0.007082 (TTS).

 

[.Scott]

That's interesting. Is the deluge system used in the same way for the tests as for the launches? Does the water flow to the ocean in both cases in the same amount and with the same $\Delta T$? If so, that would mean there is plenty of data already to show whether it affects the ecosystem that the water is flowing into, no? So that should help (or hurt, depending on that data) the approvals for launches.

Actually, there will be more water used in an actual launch. But we can still make things easy for the FWS.

During a launch, Elon expects to dump about 1 acre feet of fresh water in 40 seconds. A huge portion of that is expected to evaporate - but let's say it doesn't. Looking at video of the last launch, the diameter of the flame area (that quickly became engulfed in the sand/dust area) was about 800 feet. So the direct effect of those flames fully engulfs some of the fuel and oxygen pressure tanks that are positioned just beyond 200 feet of the launch tower (per Google Maps). From that 800 radius, we get about 3 acres that I think we can argue can't be of much concern to the FWS because it will suffer biologically annihilated on every launch.

So we are talking about putting about 4 inches of fresh water onto 3 acres. For Texas, and except for that meteorologically minuscule 3-acre area, this would be the equivalent of a heavy but quite common rain storm. Now certainly this "industrial waste water" will contain some contaminants - with all that super-efficient methane burning, it'll be a bit carbonated. But so is rainwater.

So I don't think the FWS has to look very far for relevant data on the effects the starship deluge will have on those parts of the ecosystem they are interested in.

 

[mfb]

"It happens naturally, too" is not enough to approve something.

No launch date yet but there are indications that it could come soon.
The safety review has concluded - covering the risk to humans and human properties, but not the environmental review.
A usually well-informed source says no earlier than a few days after November 6
Everyday Astronaut is traveling to Texas to prepare the stream.

Edit: FAA confirms SpaceX has implemented all corrective actions.

Edit2: Christian Davenport: "From what I’m hearing, a Nov. 6 SpaceX Starship launch date is off the table. But work continues and an attempt this month is still very much on the table as SpaceX and the FAA work closely together. The meeting with Elon and FAA officials last month was “cordial” and productive."

 

[.Scott]

"It happens naturally, too" is not enough to approve something.

It's not enough to approve, but it provides information about the environmental consequences. So it should help the FWS come to a quick decision.

 

[mfb]

Flight Termination System (FTS) explosives are installed

This is the last planned step of people working directly on the rocket. It only needs to be done a few days ahead of a launch attempt, and there is no reason to do it earlier. SpaceX must expect an imminent launch approval - likely this week or the latest next week.

Various notices to airplanes and ships have been issued for the 15th and the following days. That looks like the day for a first launch attempt.

 

[mfb]

First time SpaceX announced a date:

Starship preparing to launch as early as November 17, pending final regulatory approval → http://spacex.com/launches

With new video:

 

[.Scott]

The NASA SpaceFlight live video is now showing a countdown to the NET (No Earlier Than) launch time.
It is currently reading -139:21 (Friday morning).

It also reports "Launch license pending".

 

[mfb]

SpaceX on Twitter: Watch Starship's Second Flight Test
It's scheduled for Friday 12:29 UTC. The NSF countdown points to 13:00 UTC (5 days and 4:40 after this post). Half an hour of SpaceX coverage before the flight wouldn't surprise me so these times make sense.

In principle there is no lead time for the license - it has to come before takeoff, that is all. More realistically, we might see a license at some point from Monday to Thursday followed by a launch attempt Friday morning.

 

[PeroK]

The NASA SpaceFlight live video is now showing a countdown to the NET (No Earlier Than) launch time.
It is currently reading -139:21 (Friday morning).

It also reports "Launch license pending".

Note that, mathematically, NET corresponds to the half-open interval $[T, +\infty)$ for some time $T$, for the time until launch.

 

[.Scott]

Note that, mathematically, NET corresponds to the half-open interval $[T, +\infty)$ for some time $T$, for the time until launch.

Not precisely.
The full set is not any $(-\infty,+\infty)$ but, any $(-\infty,+\infty) \vee never$. So the specified "NET" set is better expressed as $\neg (-\infty,T)$ for some time $T$.

 

[mfb]

NOTAM (temporary flight restriction) has been issued
13:00 UTC to 15:39 UTC
That's starting 7 am local time, so we should get great sunrise pictures (6:47) as the rocket is getting prepared for launch.

There is also a larger time range in the flight plan, 13:00 to 17:20. Saturday and Sunday are backup dates, same time.

 

[.Scott]

The weather forecasts for Boca Chica on Friday is spectacular - with light winds, sunny skies, and moderate temperatures all day. So Friday appears to be in the hands (or pens) of the Fish and Wildlife Service.

 

[mfb]

FWS is done. Addendum to the October 2021 Biological Assessment for the SpaceX Starship-Super Heavy Launch Vehicle Program at the SpaceX Boca Chica Launch Site in Cameron County, Texas Addressing Operation of a Deluge System

No changes to the impact evaluation for any studied species, the tricolored bat was added with a low impact.

An average summertime thunderstorm at Boca Chica would deposit more water over the landscape than any single or all combined activations of the deluge system. Brownsville receives about 27 inches of rain a year on average. The operation of the deluge system and detonation suppression system combined at its maximum discharge amount might add the equivalent of 0.001 inches of rain over the 723-acre deluge impact area approximately two times per month on average.

The launch license could come at any time.

Edit: Looks like the link is broken now. It still worked when I posted the comment.

 

[.Scott]

Apparently, SpaceX was pretty confident about getting the FWS go-ahead very soon.
According to AWAI (6:30 into the video), SpaceX installed the Flight Termination System (FTS) on November 9. It was installed in a safe mode - but still, no one wants to handle explosive charges more often than need be.

 

[berkeman]

It was installed in a safe mode

Sorry, what does that mean? Just curious.

 

[.Scott]

Sorry, what does that mean? Just curious.

It means that, before launch, workers will still need to visit the device to arm it.
By visit, I mean they need to be at the device and physically modify it.

 

[berkeman]

Ah, pull the pin, effectively...

 

[mfb]

Launch license granted
Let's go.

The launch window opens in 1 day and 8 hours.

 

[berkeman]

Looks like it's bumped to Saturday? And sorry, I have trouble keeping up -- what is the payload for this launch? Thanks.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/16/world/starship-spacex-launch-scn/index.html

The megarocket — the most powerful launch vehicle ever built — was expected to lift off on Friday, but SpaceX CEO Elon Musk said in a social media post Thursday that the company would hold off until Saturday to allow for time to replace a small rocket part.

The company is targeting a 20-minute launch window that opens Saturday at 7 a.m. CT (8 a.m. ET), according to the SpaceX website.

Musk shared that the reason for the delay was the need to replace an actuator — or a mechanical component that allows movement — on one of the rocket’s grid fins. Grid fins are metal, mesh squares that line the top of Starship’s Super Heavy rocket booster, and they’re used to orient the booster as it heads in for a landing after flight.

Riding on Starship’s eventual success is the company’s hopes for human exploration of the moon and Mars.

 

[mfb]

Saturday, same time.
No payload, it's just a test flight.

On future flights, Ship 26 (no heat shield) might test propellant transfer inside the ship, Ship 28 or 29 might test deployment of Starlink satellites.

 

[.Scott]

On the good side, the delay was caused by the actuator for one of the grid fins. So we can expect that SpaceX will be attempting to crash the booster into some very specific random spot in the Gulf.

 

[.Scott]

It looks like they got the big pieces of the rocket back together at about 9:30 this morning CST. But they have been playing with the upper stage every since then.
Still scheduled for 7am CST Saturday (tomorrow).

 

[mfb]

The booster is expected to make a soft landing in the Gulf of Mexico, mimicking the return profile for reuse but staying away from the coast.

T-5:50:00 until the launch window opens.

For the April flight, they started cooling down propellant lines 3 hours before the launch, this was visible as some venting on the launch mount. The "go" for propellant load is expected to happen around 2 hours before the launch. Not sure if we'll see that, but we should see the actual propellant loading from T-1:37 on.

SpaceX timeline
More detailed unofficial timeline

Livestreams:
NASA Spaceflight (active)
Everyday Astronaut (only showing the rocket now)
SpaceX (might start half an hour before takeoff or so)

 

[mfb]

T-1:37 for the launch window. Propellant loading has started, will take ~1:30 and can end a few minutes before takeoff. SpaceX's webcast will start 35 minutes before takeoff, which should be an hour from now. The launch window is only 20 minutes long, SpaceX seems to target the start of the window.

 

[mfb]

2 minutes

Edit: Hold at -40 seconds
Can hold there for up to 15 minutes.
Edit: back to countdown

So much condensation:

 

[mfb]

Liftoff with all engines!

Successful hot staging.

Booster exploded during boostback burn afterwards. Ship is still flying.

Telemetry cut off towards the end of the ship burn. Looks like it exploded shortly before reaching orbital velocity.

No major damage to the launch pad, although one tank looks like it has a dent now (edit: this dent could still have been from the first flight, haven't seen before/after pictures). No engine failures. Successful hot staging and a long second-stage flight. A huge step up from the first test. I expect the third test to reach orbit.

 

[nsaspook]

 

[nsaspook]

 

[mfb]

Starship has beaten the record for the heaviest object in space by a factor ~2 or so.
~1000-1100 tonnes vs. ~500 tonnes for Saturn V and 450 tonnes for the ISS.

Hot staging looked amazing.

Tracking shots:

 

[Astronuc]

SpaceX’s Starship reaches space for first time but explodes moments later
https://www.theguardian.com/science...h-starship-rocket-after-second-launch-attempt

But about two and a half minutes into the flight, the two stages of the spacecraft broke apart. SpaceX shortly announced that it could not find a signal from the second stage, which it declared “lost”.

The company believes the rocket’s self-destruction mechanism was set off after it lost the signal.

SpaceX’s second flight is an improvement compared to its first test launch in April, when both stages ultimately exploded four minutes into its flight. The spacecraft’s first stage, nicknamed “Super Heavy” for its 33 engines, had failed, causing both stages to explode.

Starship's first liftoff toward space created the equivalent of a volcanic eruption in the launchpad, physicist finds​

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/tech...-in-the-launchpad-physicist-finds/ar-AA1k3Qmc

At least they didn't wreck the launch pad during the 2nd attempt.

 

[mfb]

The Guardian article is absurd.

Elon Musk’s next-generation craft reaches space but then explodes, similar to first flight in April

The April flight didn't reach space, or got anywhere close to what the second flight achieved.

But about two and a half minutes into the flight, the two stages of the spacecraft broke apart.

That's called stage separation and it worked exactly as planned. No "but" about it. The second stage ignited and started its flight.

SpaceX shortly announced that it could not find a signal from the second stage, which it declared “lost”.

That happened 5 minutes later, after the upper stage accelerated from 1.5 km/s to 6.5 km/s, just a bit short of the ~7.3 km/s target.

If you read the article you'd think Starship exploded just after stage separation, which is obviously not what happened.

 

[mfb]

Launch pad after the April launch (left) and after this launch (right).



View from the ground

Nothing official yet, and the accident investigation will take some time, but there are already useful speculations what might have happened:
* Propellant sloshing might have starved booster engines during the flip maneuver. Taking in gas instead of liquid can easily destroy the engines.
* Something caused the ship to lose liquid oxygen towards the end of its burn. If the ship decided that it can't reach the Pacific safely then it had to trigger its flight termination system to make the debris reenter over the Atlantic (as it did).

 

[.Scott]

Starship has beaten the record for the heaviest object in space by a factor ~2 or so.
~1000-1100 tonnes vs. ~500 tonnes for Saturn V and 450 tonnes for the ISS.

As if it isn't hard enough to build a skyscraper, they have made one that can launch itself into space.

Perhaps the most important point is that this launch appears to be very close to what the FAA and FWS expected in terms of safety and conservation. As best we know, everything at ground level happened as predicted - and as accepted by the FWS. And the crafts continued within their planned corridors until interrupted by the Flight Termination Systems - both of accomplished their tasks emphatically.

The FWS application was for a launch cadence of 12 per month.

As best we can tell at this point is that SpaceX will be cleared for another test as soon as they are ready.

Also, as best as I can tell, this re-review over the past eight months has pretty much addressed the main points of the civil actions that were taken by conservation groups last year against the FAA for certifying Starship flights. Of course, this isn't to say that those groups can't start afresh.

 

[nsaspook]

 

[pinball1970]

Just a short article over the weekend.

https://phys.org/news/2023-11-spacex-poised-mega-starship-rocket.html

"Its Super Heavy booster produces 16.7 million pounds (74.3 Meganewtons) of thrust, almost double that of the world's second most powerful rocket.."

Wow!

 

[Rive]

A huge step up from the first test. I expect the third test to reach orbit.

Quite decent progress.
Is it known whether the fuel was filled 'full', or just up to the amount required for the test?

 

[.Scott]

We got this tweet (or X) from Elon last night:

Starship Flight 3 hardware should be ready to fly in 3 to 4 weeks. There are three ships in final production in the high bay (as can be seen from the highway).

So converting from Elon time to approximate conventional time, the FAA has about 7 weeks to get their investigation wrapped up and get the paperwork out before Elon will go back to Congress and ask to double the FAA investigative staff again.

 

[mfb]

Quite decent progress.
Is it known whether the fuel was filled 'full', or just up to the amount required for the test?

Fuel is cheap, filling it up completely gives you larger margins. If Starship becomes as rapidly reusable as planned then maybe fuel cost becomes an important factor and we might see launches with less fuel.

Before the next flight, SpaceX needs to identify what went wrong with the two stages, find a way to fix that, start implementing that in the hardware and/or software for the third flight, write a report and send that to the FAA. Then the FAA needs to approve it. It's true that they have a booster and a ship almost ready to fly, but repeating the second flight with no changes makes no sense. There is some work to do, and at the moment the critical path is with SpaceX.

Predictions:
* SpaceX will submit its report at some point in January. FAA will approve it in February to March, with a flight quickly after approval.
* No major hardware changes as result of the booster explosion, updated software to improve the flip maneuver.
* Some oxygen leak on the ship, SpaceX will reinforce the system (might also affect the booster) or determine that ship 28 already has upgrades that eliminate this problem.
* Booster 10 will survive the flip and boostback burn and start a landing burn over the ocean (which might or might not be successful).
* Ship 28 will reach a transatmospheric orbit or a low Earth orbit depending on what is planned, but fail in the atmosphere on reentry.
* We will get news articles how Starship "explodes for the third time", despite all other rockets doing the same with their upper stages after reaching orbit.

 

[berkeman]

Fuel is cheap, filling it up completely gives you larger margins. If Starship becomes as rapidly reusable as planned then maybe fuel cost becomes an important factor and we might see launches with less fuel.

Plus it seems like they would want to launch with full weight to get that data.

Related question -- were they carrying a dummy payload to simulate the weight of anticipated payloads?

 

[mfb]

Haven't heard anything about a dummy payload. It doesn't make a big difference - you can just end the flight with some extra fuel in the rocket. Typically payloads are much heavier than the upper stage, so dummy masses are important, but Starship is about as massive as its payload capacity. Take into account that the prototypes are probably heavier than the final product and you have a lot of "dummy mass" already in the vehicle.

 

[berkeman]

Take into account that the prototypes are probably heavier than the final product and you have a lot of "dummy mass" already in the vehicle.

Ah, interesting. Good point.

 

[Rive]

Fuel is cheap, filling it up completely gives you larger margins.

That's nice, but if you suggest that for this occasion they well filled to the brim then those fuel indicator bars of the 'live' feed ran awful fast for a no-load launch just to the edge of space.

I hoped that if the amount of fuel they got is known then we might get some data about the capacity.

 

[nsaspook]

I've been waiting for this video series.

[4K Slow-Mo] Starship IFT-2 Supercut with clean audio and tracking!​