quote:Originally posted by Headshot: Perhaps NASA needs to get someone else to do the job... and soon.
Even that which feels routine now once was not. Remember this video?
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54637 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 03-07-2025 12:20 PM
quote:Originally posted by teopze: As if there was anyone else to do the job...
By NASA contract, there is: Blue Origin's Blue Moon lander is contracted to fly on Artemis V. The company is planning to fly a prototype of the lander to the moon as soon as later this year.
That said, I wouldn't count out SpaceX just yet.
dom Member
Posts: 1125 From: Registered: Aug 2001
posted 03-07-2025 01:18 PM
Whenever I watch this launched it reminds me of the Soviet N-1. Strangely, this test program is mirroring that rocket exactly.
issman1 Member
Posts: 1173 From: UK Registered: Apr 2005
posted 03-07-2025 02:53 PM
quote:Originally posted by denali414: Sabotage? By whom?
Rivals of SpaceX or somebody working at SpaceX resentful of Musk.
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54637 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 03-31-2025 02:37 PM
The FAA has closed its mishap investigation into Flight 7 on March 28, 2025 (the Flight 8 investigation remains open).
The FAA-required investigation of the SpaceX Starship Flight 7 mishap on Jan. 16 is closed. There were no public injuries and one confirmed report of minor vehicle damage in the Turks and Caicos Islands.
The FAA oversaw and accepted the findings of the SpaceX-led investigation. The final mishap report cites the probable root cause for the loss of the Starship vehicle was stronger than anticipated vibrations during flight led to increased stress on, and failure of, the hardware in the propulsion system. SpaceX identified 11 corrective actions to prevent a reoccurrence of the event. The FAA verified that SpaceX implemented corrective actions prior to Flight 8.
Headshot Member
Posts: 1411 From: Vancouver, WA, USA Registered: Feb 2012
posted 03-31-2025 04:45 PM
So SpaceX identified 11 corrective actions due to the mishaps on Super Heavy Test Flight 7 and implemented those corrective actions BEFORE Test Flight 8 occurred. However Test Flight 8's mishaps mirrored those of Test Flight 7. So in reality, either SpaceX did not thoroughly investigate the nature of the mishap, or they implemented the corrective actions incorrectly. Either way, this certainly puts a crimp in SpaceX's lunar lander program and the flight of Artemis III.
I did read, on another site, that as of mid-March there were 86 to 100 job open listings for engineers, specifically for Starship, on the SpaceX career's website.
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54637 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 03-31-2025 04:59 PM
Correlation does not imply causation.
While Starship was lost at around the same time on both tests, it does not necessarily mean that the two vehicles were lost for the same reason(s). SpaceX could have implemented all of the changes successfully between the two flights and still lost Flight 8 due to an entirely separate failure mode.
Without access to the data SpaceX has, it is really impossible to say what happened, other than the FAA was satisfied with SpaceX's actions after Flight 7 (and most likely will be the same after they close the investigation into Flight 8).
It should also be said that SpaceX said it was planning to push Starship to its limits on these test flights, so the configuration flying and the failures they experienced may have little to no bearing on the human landing system version of Starship, in so much that it will fly in a more conservative configuration.
Blackarrow Member
Posts: 3841 From: Belfast, United Kingdom Registered: Feb 2002
posted 03-31-2025 05:38 PM
quote:Originally posted by Robert Pearlman: ...Without access to the data SpaceX has, it is really impossible to say what happened.
Agreed. But as I recall watching live coverage of two VERY similar-looking losses, I can't help imagining SpaceX marching an army over a bridge which collapses due to sympathetic vibrations; then fixing the bridge and marching the army back over, only to see the bridge again collapsing.
I'm not sure how far I can push the analogy, but I seem to remember the solution to the bridge problem was not repairs to the bridge, but a command to troops to "break step" while marching over bridges.
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54637 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 03-31-2025 07:00 PM
The thing is, during this point of its test flight regiment, SpaceX may not mind losing the bridge so long as the data they collect shows them why.
Starship was not going to be recovered on Flight 7 or Flight 8 regardless the outcome, and the company has a lot of experience with propulsive landing approaches already. The real unknowns are in the transition to and from orbit. The losses may be teaching them more about the vehicle than were both flights to have flown all the way to soft landings in the Indian Ocean.
Blackarrow Member
Posts: 3841 From: Belfast, United Kingdom Registered: Feb 2002
posted 03-31-2025 09:06 PM
Again, agreed... but I just hope someone in SpaceX, after Flight 8, didn't say: "S**t! I was SURE we'd fixed that. What on Earth do we do now?"
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54637 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 04-03-2025 04:15 PM
Flight 9 will include the first reflight of a Super Heavy booster. From SpaceX:
This booster previously launched and returned on Flight 7 and 29 of its 33 Raptor engines are flight proven.
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54637 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 05-14-2025 08:35 AM
Starship completed a long duration six-engine static fire and is undergoing final preparations for the ninth flight test.
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54637 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 05-15-2025 06:30 PM
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) statement
FAA Statement on SpaceX Starship Flight 9 License Approval
The FAA approved license modifications for the SpaceX Starship Flight 9 mission. The approval includes final action allowing SpaceX to increase Starship operations from five up to 25 per year at Boca Chica, Texas.
However, SpaceX may not launch until the FAA either closes the Starship Flight 8 mishap investigation or makes a return to flight determination. The FAA is reviewing the mishap report SpaceX submitted on May 14.
For the Starship Flight 9 mission, the FAA is expanding the size of aircraft and maritime hazard areas both in the U.S. and other countries. This is a result of the FAA requiring SpaceX to revise the Flight Safety Analysis following the prior launch mishap and because SpaceX intends to reuse a previously launched Super Heavy booster rocket for the first time.
issman1 Member
Posts: 1173 From: UK Registered: Apr 2005
posted 05-17-2025 08:35 AM
There are now pleas for Musk to takeover at Starbase amid claims of low morale amongst SpaceX employees.
Even more alarming are rumours some have openly criticised Musk for his involvement with DOGE. Can Starship ever realise its potential?
ejectr Member
Posts: 2045 From: Killingly, CT Registered: Mar 2002
posted 05-17-2025 09:36 AM
Maybe he should stick to what he does best.
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54637 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 05-22-2025 10:36 AM
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) statement
FAA Approves SpaceX Starship Vehicle Return to Flight
The FAA conducted a comprehensive safety review of the SpaceX Starship Flight 8 mishap and determined that the company has satisfactorily addressed the causes of the mishap, and therefore, the Starship vehicle can return to flight. The FAA will verify SpaceX implements all corrective actions.
The FAA's determination of when a vehicle involved in a mishap can resume operations is based on public safety. When making this determination, the FAA considers several factors, including but not limited to, the nature of the mishap, the performance of vehicles safety-critical systems, and the generation of unplanned debris. Prior to making a return to flight determination, the FAA must find that any system, process, or procedure related to the mishap does not affect public safety or any other aspect of the operator's license.
With the Starship vehicle return to flight determination, Starship Flight 9 is authorized for launch. The FAA finds SpaceX meets all of the rigorous safety, environmental and other licensing requirements.
Blackarrow Member
Posts: 3841 From: Belfast, United Kingdom Registered: Feb 2002
posted 05-22-2025 08:57 PM
Does anyone outside SpaceX and the FAA know "the causes of the mishap"?
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54637 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 05-23-2025 10:11 AM
Starship Flight 9 is targeted for launch on Tuesday, May 27. The launch window will open at 7:30 p.m. EDT (2330 GMT).
The most probable root cause for the loss of Starship [on Flight 8] was identified as a hardware failure in one of the upper stage's center Raptor engines that resulted in inadvertent propellant mixing and ignition. Extensive ground testing has taken place since the flight test to better understand the failure, including more than 100 long-duration Raptor firings at SpaceX's McGregor test facility.
To address the issue on upcoming flights, engines on the Starship's upper stage will receive additional preload on key joints, a new nitrogen purge system, and improvements to the propellant drain system. Future upgrades to Starship will introduce the Raptor 3 engine which will include additional reliability improvements to address the failure mechanism.
While the failure manifested at a similar point in the flight timeline as Starship's seventh flight test, it is worth noting that the failures are distinctly different. The mitigations put in place after Starship's seventh flight test to address harmonic response and flammability of the ship's attic section worked as designed prior to the failure on Flight 8.
Blackarrow Member
Posts: 3841 From: Belfast, United Kingdom Registered: Feb 2002
posted 05-24-2025 10:45 AM
Thanks, Robert. I have already seen the SpaceX statement but it's helpful to have it here in black and white. I find it particularly interesting that SpaceX are saying that the failure modes on Flight 7 and Flight 8 were different.
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54637 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 05-27-2025 05:57 PM
Live webcast of Starship's ninth flight test:
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54637 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 05-27-2025 07:17 PM
Super Heavy flew its first re-flight (with one of its 33 engines flying for a third time). The booster was lost just as it was going to fire its landing burn. (No catch was planned for this flight.)
Starship entered space on a suborbital trajectory. Its payload bay door could not be fully opened, so the deployment of the mock Starlink satellites was cancelled. Leaks aboard Starship caused the vehicle to lose attitude control before SpaceX could conduct a planned Raptor engine relight test.
The vehicle was still on its suborbital trajectory, but tumbling and so didn't make it through reentry.
issman1 Member
Posts: 1173 From: UK Registered: Apr 2005
posted 05-27-2025 07:35 PM
Is spinning out of control a partial failure or partial success?
Either way, a Starship lunar landing seems many years away.
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54637 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 05-27-2025 07:47 PM
From SpaceX:
As if the flight test was not exciting enough, Starship experienced a rapid unscheduled disassembly. Teams will continue to review data and work toward our next flight test.
With a test like this, success comes from what we learn, and today's test will help us improve Starship's reliability as SpaceX seeks to make life multiplanetary.
From Elon Musk:
Starship made it to the scheduled ship engine cutoff, so big improvement over last flight! Also, no significant loss of heat shield tiles during ascent.
Leaks caused loss of main tank pressure during the coast and re-entry phase. Lot of good data to review.
Launch cadence for next three flights will be faster, at approximately one every three to four weeks.
denali414 Member
Posts: 902 From: Raleigh, NC Registered: Aug 2017
posted 05-28-2025 08:10 AM
Find it odd, Musk criticized Boeing for the leak on the Starliner, despite it making back to Earth safely, but finds a leak on Starship for third time and blowing up "good data and successful flight."
The unicorn and rainbow treatment getting tedious.
Jim Behling Member
Posts: 1990 From: Cape Canaveral, FL Registered: Mar 2010
posted 05-28-2025 06:47 PM
Starship is trying designed in reusabilty from the start. It is also using common propellants and fluids for thrust, attitude control, power, and such.
It looks like the booster is fine. If Starship were expended, it would have completed a full flight several launches ago.
Also, the vehicle is too large to do any ground testing so the flight testing is hardware rich. It is not like it is taxpayers' money.
denali414 Member
Posts: 902 From: Raleigh, NC Registered: Aug 2017
posted 05-30-2025 07:53 AM
Jim, not sure how Musk books government revenue, but according to DOGE several checks over last three months have gone to SpaceX:
$40 million- just says research (could be Starship?)
$110 million - research and flight
$50 million - no designation
I would not be to sure we aren't paying.
GACspaceguy Member
Posts: 3180 From: Guyton, GA Registered: Jan 2006
posted 05-30-2025 08:20 AM
Any data on the cost of a launch and vehicle?
Jim Behling Member
Posts: 1990 From: Cape Canaveral, FL Registered: Mar 2010
posted 05-30-2025 08:53 AM
quote:Originally posted by denali414: I would not be to sure we aren't paying.
Just since the beginning of the year, there have been nine Falcon launches for the US government, 19 going back one whole year. There was two crew and two cargo Dragon missions as part of the 19. These are payments for some of these launches. Also, there are dozens of future government launches on the books. They have progress payments due.
So, I would say we are not paying directly for Starship.
Robert Pearlman Editor
Posts: 54637 From: Houston, TX Registered: Nov 1999
posted 05-30-2025 09:03 AM
SpaceX and Musk have said funding for Starship's development comes from the company's Starlink sales.
quote:Originally posted by GACspaceguy: Any data on the cost of a launch and vehicle?
To my knowledge, SpaceX has not released any information about the cost of the Starship program. It is believed that each expendable launch costs the company between $90 million and $100 million. Once the entire vehicle is reusable, that price is expected to come down exponentially.
posted 03-07-2025 12:17 PM
advertisement