Gotta say I've been watching live space-feed since 1969; The Good Earth, Tranquility Base, Shuttle, the works. Every generation brings something new but, as of 2024, that is some of the most remarkable live TV I've ever seen.

If this adjusts the required margins it converts into a lot more payload.

Starship 1 has a payload of 100 tons, Starship 2 has 100+ tons and Starship 3 a planned 200 tons.

If they can swap fuel for payload, or burn for additional impulse, they're going to limited by volume, not weight....

The amount of residual fuel after landing is unreal! That is far more than I ever expected. Its gotta be at least 500 tons? Even more obvious by looking at the flexing on the arms.

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....1d21bba877.png
​​​​​​​

Doing rough calculations in 3D yields residual masses of 365 tons of LOX and 232 tons of LCH4. So ~600 tons of propellant residuals at landing. That is significantly more than I expected.

Here is the mockup used to compute the residual volume marked by the sharp ice lines that appeared shortly after landing. The residual propellant caused the surface of the steel to develop ice, clearly showing the fluid levels. This is separate from condensation.

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....159a1d7012.png

·

Guess they've not got it dialled in yet. Bit surprised to see so much residual in there that's not boiling off and being vented, though...

And how is this going to work on Moon and Mars?

Different designs.

Lunar HLS lander has legs and a reaction control system but no flaps - obviously. https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2021...dings-on-ramp/

Mars lander will probably resemble the HLS. Atmosphere is so thin flaps won’t help much, but reduced gravity means it will carry enough fuel for landing and take-off without flaps for additional aero braking.

An interesting point. It would seem they'd need to be quite certain of the bearing strength and flatness of the landing surface else Ship would tip over.
But with the brilliance of these guys I have little doubt they have a plan.
A more challenging point raised recently was the devastating effect of flying debris ejected by the exhaust plume which in no (lunar) or minor (Martian) atmosphere, and both in low gravity will fly unhindered at prodigious speeds hazarding infrastructure for many miles around.
Still, I have little doubt that they haven't figured that out too.

This must be one of the most, if not the most significant events since Apollo 11's landing. This surely signals the true beginning of genuinely practical space travel.

But oh, how I wish there was intelligent, informative technical reportage of all this instead of those two gormless gushing bimbos spouting belt-fed inarticulate platitudes at Disney level. Yes I know one or maybe even both are allegedly superb space engineers - then all the more shameful that that they talk down to us as if we are kindergarten with a ten second attention span. Where is there a feed for people with some level of intelligence?
PLEASE, with all that technology can't Elon re-incarnate James Burke?

Booster 12 lowered back onto the OLM.

Presumption is this is in order to drain out the remaining 600T of remaining fuel before moving for inspection.

It should be noted that’s is the first time, ever, a first stage booster has ever been available for strip down after a flight and should enable a detailed survey and redesign where necessary.

The booster doesn’t do a re-entry burn, all deceleration is done in the last few seconds before capture. The descent speed is obvious from the videos - this one illustrates the few seconds between going transonic and capture.

Look, we've been through this before.
Not everyone is as informed as you are. There will be thousands of people tuning in who have no clue what's going on. They need spoon feeding in easy to understand fashion.

Yup. There's a lot of very well informed content out there along side this; just pick your channel, same as you don't get your news from {Insert hated source here} and trust {Insert your usual here} instead.

Excellent synopsis from Scott Manley.

VideoSpaceX reconnecting the SuperHeavy booster to the Booster Quick disconnect, robotically, just hours after the flight, without ever removing it from on the launch tower, a demonstration of eventually doing multiple flights per day per booster.

From LabPadre.

Note SpaceX is able to do this without any personnel on site, potentially massively improving safety compared to how it’s normally done with SLS, etc.

Defuelled and inspection begun.

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....eecfc4fabe.png

One applauds the efforts of Elon Musk and his team! Genius is nothing; Persistence is all! One is proud to be human when witnessing such a feat of imagination.

- Ed

Nonsense. Firstly, it has nothing whatsoever to do with how 'informed' I am. The levels of understanding in 1969 were far less than they are today yet the Apollo programme commentaries were on a vastly more scientific and intelligent level. It is crazy to treat the entire audience as if they are dim twelve year olds and that they are incapable of understanding new concepts.
Frankly I'm rather shocked to find there really are some on this forum who appear happy with such trite, trivial and endlessly repetitive levels of reportage, let alone to snipe at those who aren't...

I did look briefly for decent alternative sites but found none, perhaps those in the know might be thoughtful enough to post alternatives for watching future launches live?

As for the extra weight, they sure as hell would have the fuel burn dialled in OK so I'd surmise the extra is to more realistically test the chopsticks and control systems at a weight more representative of future heavier boosters.

I do wonder what caused that chine damage. It certainly did not hit the tower. Could the hot stage ring have touched it after release? Or is that a silly thought...:ouch: It does not look like damage from the high speed airflow to me, but I could well be wrong.

Look at the videos just prior the catch. You can see parts of it flying away. It looks like a methan explosion within the chine when the landing burn started. Maybe some of it was trapped within and was ignited.

https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....d7e2f62c8e.png


skadi

In 1969 space news especially the Apollo program was huge news, everyone was talking about it. Kids like me were taken out of class to watch the live broadcasts of launch, landing, Eva's and splashdown. Nowadays most people have no idea that rockets are launching every day never mind the significance of reusable boosters.
Any 'sniping' as you put it is because you are happy to use words like 'bimbo' to describe intelligent, well educated and personalable people who have a job to do.
[/QUOTE]
I did look briefly for decent alternative sites but found none, perhaps those in the know might be thoughtful enough to post alternatives for watching future launches live?
[QUOTE]
We have, I would have thought someone as clever and informed would be able to scroll up a bit or use search engines, I won't post them again in case I'm accused of being repetitive! 🙄
​​​​​​​Now you're showing your own ignorance, they tested the chopstick arms with huge weights last week. Perhaps you should pay more attention to the informed and repetitive 'bimbos' in future.

Under those chines are the COPV Nitrogen bottles. I'm wondering if one of those let go or a pipe failed causing an over pressure in the void.
It could just be a manufacturing anomaly, fasteners not as secure as needed or a small gap in the fairing allowing airflow within.
It will all come out in the wash I'm sure.

The advantage of being the first in the world to have a flight tested first stage to inspect and tear down.

First reaction from Musk is that apart from a few distorted engine exhaust cones everything looks good.

Just inspected the Starship booster, which the arms have now placed back in its launch mount. Looks great!

A few outer engine nozzles are warped from heating & some other minor issues, but these are easily addressed.

Starship is designed to achieve reflight of its rocket booster ultimately within an hour after liftoff. The booster returns within ~5 minutes, so the remaining time is reloading propellant and placing a ship on top of the booster.

Why do you keep repeating that all the time? The Space Shuttle was the first reusable first stage, together with it's boosters. Next came Buran, then Falcon 1, then Falcon 9 then New Shepard and maybe Superheavy in sixth place if there are no other classified reusable first stages of which we know nothing.

Previously mentioned, but these guys ask the right questions and give decent analysis
Tim Dodd: https://everydayastronaut.com/
Scott Manley: [Edit: Forum really not liking links to YouTube channels - try https://x.com/DJSnM]

Booster 12 has been lifted from the launch mount this morning with an awesome view of the Raptor nozzles! Especially like Pi Raptor 314. lol

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....0f42184069.png

In presume this is because the current licence covers flights this year using the same profile as IFT5 - allowing up to two more.

Next year will, presumably, be a new licence covering Starship recovery.

This is a far bigger step than it seems. The booster launches over the Atlantic and then burns back to the launch site, having a footprint just over the ocean and launch site.

The Starship will be launched eastwards but will have to complete an orbit and re-enter, as did the Shuttle and as does Dragon, crossing over California, New Mexico and Texas to get back to the launch site - unless they build a catch site at Vandenburg (which would assume a future launch tower there as well launching to the east).

BREAKING: Elon Musk just announced that by early next year, SpaceX will attempt to catch the Starship itself, not just the Super Heavy booster.

Booster 12 dismounted and back in the production bay.

woukdnt it be great if they turned it around and launched it again on IFT6…

Thanks skadi and TURIN! That makes sense. I missed seeing those bits flying off when I watched the launch and recovery. I was too busy admiring the catch I guess....:)

The important difference is that Superheavy is designed to re-fly almost immediately.
The shuttle Orbiter, boosters, Buran, and Falcon have to undergo factory inspection and an element of refurbishment. New Shepherd doesn't count. It's a toy.
The Chinese have at least two new designs undergoing current flight testing. They're at the Falcon1 stage of development.

Not sure anyone could blame you on that.... what a freaking catch it was!!!

FINALLY! The clip we have all been waiting for! Ship 30's flip maneuver and landing burn.

The accuracy is incredible to be able to be in the exact position needed for the Buoy cam to capture this.

I only wish this was a few seconds longer to show the ship tipping over after touchdown.

VideoStarship flip maneuver and landing burn on its fifth flight test.

​​​​​​​Vehicle improvements ensured flaps were protected from high heating, resulting in a controlled entry and high accuracy splashdown at the targeted area in the Indian Ocean

This has the few more seconds of video at around 1:30.


It is easy to see why Musk left it out. Spoiler: IT BLEW UP!

Spoiler - the flight termination system will be designed to blow it up to prevent recovery and strip down by third parties…..

There was video from the bouy last week that showed it exploding.
Regarding the catch. If you look at the chopsticks during the manoeuvre they swing in quite early, with a Starship they won't be able to do this due to the aft flaps adding width.
When you consider that the interplanetary Starships will need some sort of landing gear, I wonder if they will go for an independent soft landing on a pad instead of a catch next? Especially if the second tower isn't ready.

Think they'll view having to have earth-gravity legs on a Starship as a failure. Moon (1/6th g) and Mars (shade over 1/3rd g) won't need something so beefy to support the static weight and will almost certainly be "Specials" for that role with breaking thrusters towards the nose according to some models I've seen.

Good point about the width, but it's a smaller vehicle with less inertia so I'd imagine that they'll be able to make it work - Can't believe they've not considered that. Could always bring it in 90 degrees off axis with pins at the 12/6 instead of 3/9, I guess.

I wonder if they will swing the aft flaps in. After the flip and when descending on rocket power, it would seem the aerodynamics are no longer a factor.

You are correct, the aft flaps move to the full retract position during the flip. Edit:In this clip.
https://www.facebook.com/share/r/rGgMw6GJszhAPACF/

Re: landing legs. The legs on Ship 30 etc were quite small and were capable of withstanding the landing forces, I think they were fitted with crushable feet though. So not exactly quick turnaround stuff.

VideoThis story of strangulation by over-regulation from @elonmusk about the government requiring @SpaceX to asses whether their rockets could potentially hit SHARKS and WHALES is side-splittingly hilarious.

I'm not sure whether I should be laughing or crying.

Super Heavy Booster 13 has rolled out of Megabay 1 this morning to head to the launch complex for testing ahead of upcoming Starship test flight 6.

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....7752b60ec.jpeg
​​​​​​​

Flat out amazing accomplishment. It's fun to watch this guy keep pushing boundaries forward. He needs to stay out of my brain though. (nueralink)

Raptor engine endurance testing - They just relit the same engine 5 times in a row…..

VideoVideoSCRAP THAT THEY JUST FIRED IT AGAIN BUT 34 TIMES IN A ROW!!! this video looks silly sped up ik 😆🔥