You could drive a pickup truck into that nozzle! Oh, wait....

- Ed

The bigger the nozzle, the greater the vacuum efficiency.

Starship Flight 10: Ship 36 is now full of cryos for its first test at Masseys.

Expecting Ship 35 to join it in the coming days for its Static Fire test ahead of Flight 9.

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....827b957429.png

​​​​​​​

Looks like the next flight might be indefinitely delayed….

S35 definitely had an engine explode during testing. After the bright flash, the exhaust can be seen turning an orange-brown. This typically is seen during engine RUDs. Here is a comparison of S35 static fire and a Raptor RUD at McGregor yesterday:

S35’s 6 Engine Static Fire Test tonight.

Replay footage from @NASASpaceflight shows an object flying out of the flame trench.

Hopefully it didn’t come off the ship!

I've got a bad feeling about S35's Raptors after viewing some closeup video captured by @StarshipGazer 👀

Looks like engine 5 (leeward RVac) might have let go with at least the other RVacs aborting shortly after. Unclear if the center engines aborted at the same time or if they aborted shortly after resulting in one of the visible flashes.

video

Next launch window now slipped to 9th-22nd May.

Window now narrowed to 13th-23rd.

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....0fde69c838.jpg

Wonder which starship they'll fly?

FAA playing ball
 

Looks like launch cadence can pick up dramatically if they sort their reliability 😎

https://arstechnica.com/space/2025/0...s-launch-site/

S35 back on the pad for another static fire before the next launch.

Engines replaced and, if it was a test to duplicate the inflight failure mode, hopefully a further successful test and launch.

Launch Tower B plus flame trench. You can see the 4 mounting pads for the launch mount to sit on top.

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....ac5203af4.jpeg

Launch mount for pad 2 is in the air!

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....95f749856f.png

OLM lift and installation plus successful 60 second Starship static fire burn.

That's one hell of a lift!

https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....914b2a45cc.png
​​​​​​​

This was issued today - obviously they have either close their report or made a determination overnight since their statement yesterday*. But it does mean the increased cadence to 25 flights a year is now approved and cleared........

The FAA has granted the launch license to SpaceX for Starship flight 9. Launch NET May 22.

https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....bc11bb2044.png

*
https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....61142a342e.png

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....6a0c346118.png
​​​​​​​

The first sight of that informative map immediately shouts to me, 'If these guys want to fire space-shots on a frequent basis" (as in dozens/scores per year, rather than three or four) "then they're simply in the wrong place."

Surely it just isn't workable (or fair) to disrupt that much commercial airspace and airways for hours on end on a frequent basis? The concentration of airways out of Miami and over the Caribbean is intense - and with the literally last-minute maybe-maybe not nature of space-shots sometimes extending over several hours commercial aviation surely can't be expected to suffer this level of interference for long?

If space launch danger zones have to be as extensive as this then maybe they need to happen much, much farther away from intense airway systems than the busy caribbean - ie mid Pacific perhaps (eg Diego Garcia?)
Or is this just a temporary 'abundance of caution' associated with a new and innovatory, unproven technology that will soon prove reliable enough to become a routine and percieved hazard-minimal event? (Good luck with that!)

May I suggest you first brush up on geography (Diego Garcia is in the Indian Ocean) and, if launching at least weekly, close to their supply of methane and LOX as well as their cargo - not the other side of the world.

It should be noted however that SpaceX are also constructing a major launch complex at Canaveral for east coast launches and Vandenberg for west.

​​​​​​​https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_facilities

VideoWell, the Booster Transport Stand is heading back to the launch site...

...that's not usually amazingly good news.