A review of what happened and what’s next for Starship/Superheavy
Link here. This article is a very nice and thorough review of what happened during SpaceX’s 12th test flight of Starship/Superheavy last week. What I like about it most is that it outlines what happened with very little speculation. No one outside of SpaceX is in a position to do this properly, and some speculation has been I think over the top. The article at the link avoids this.
It also provides a quick and reasonable summary about what is likely to happen next:
Next up will be Booster 20 and Ship 40 for Flight 13. This mission may launch in the July-August timeframe, pending testing and any mitigation efforts relating to the issues found during Flight 12. The launch pad appears to be in good shape, removing it from being a potential bottleneck to Booster 20’s Static Fire test, although that is not expected for weeks.
The article also provided this added news item that SpaceX revealed during last week’s test flight that has mostly fallen under the radar among news outlets (including here):
SpaceX also revealed plans for a lunar Starlink constellation using laser-linked relay satellites and confirmed that Fram2 commander Chun Wang has signed up for Starship’s first crewed interplanetary mission — a two-year Mars flyby. Wang will first fly with Dennis and Akiko Tito on the previously contracted crewed lunar flyby, potentially as early as 2034.
That’s two Starship missions apparently paid for by Wang, one around the Moon followed by a Mars fly-by. With the lunar fly-by targeting 2034, the Mars fly-by is likely a decade away, at the earliest.
On Christmas Eve 1968 three Americans became the first humans to visit another world. What they did to celebrate was unexpected and profound, and will be remembered throughout all human history. Genesis: the Story of Apollo 8, Robert Zimmerman's classic history of humanity's first journey to another world, tells that story, and it is now available as both an ebook and an audiobook, both with a foreword by Valerie Anders and a new introduction by Robert Zimmerman.
The print edition can be purchased at Amazon or from any other book seller. If you want an autographed copy the price is $60 for the hardback and $45 for the paperback, plus $8 shipping for each. Go here for purchasing details. The ebook is available everywhere for $5.99 (before discount) at amazon, or direct from my ebook publisher, ebookit. If you buy it from ebookit you don't support the big tech companies and the author gets a bigger cut much sooner.
The audiobook is also available at all these vendors, and is also free with a 30-day trial membership to Audible.
"Not simply about one mission, [Genesis] is also the history of America's quest for the moon... Zimmerman has done a masterful job of tying disparate events together into a solid account of one of America's greatest human triumphs."--San Antonio Express-News
The NSF guys are usually just about the best at more technical coverage of the launch business, but yeah, this is one of the best writeups I have seen them do on Starship.
I’m glad they’re out there, doing what they do.
I wish the article gave more info or speculation as to why the engine exploded on the booster. And the booster ended up 480 km away from its target when it landed in the Gulf. That is interesting to me in that I have never seen an illustration of the flight path of a reusable booster.
Had an interesting conversation with Grok about the boost back burn. Grok says stage separation occurs when ship and booster are 50-70 km downrange. It says that if the booster engines are cutoff at that point the booster would end up over 1000 km downrange. The fact that it actually ended up 480 km away shows there was a significant burn.
This illustrates to me how useful AI is to people. And how incredible the technology is.
Steve Richter wrote, “I wish the article gave more info or speculation as to why the engine exploded on the booster. And the booster ended up 480 km away from its target when it landed in the Gulf.”
As I noted in the post, this is exactly the kind of speculation that is useless and counterproductive. No one outside of SpaceX can answer your questions with any reasonable reliability. The article told us exactly what is known, based on the video itself. Anything else would be an empty guess based on fantasy that accomplishes nothing. And if you wish to dwell on fantasy you won’t get far.
We will know soon enough if SpaceX has solved the engine problem. Based on its track record with Raptor-2, which it got fixed after one flight, I expect similar results now.
“… As I noted in the post, this is exactly the kind of speculation that is useless and counterproductive. …”
Bob,
In my case, the speculation helps me to pickup information and learn. The back and forth of asking AI what it knew of the flight 12 booster mishap helped me understand the boost back burn process. Grok told me that at the time of hot stage separation the booster engines are cutoff except for 3 which are themselves throttled down and then cutoff ( MECO ) The boost back burn then starts 6 seconds later. Which is when the engine exploded, with took out others. But the burn still lasted a full minute, which accounts for the booster ending up 480 km away instead of over 1000 if there had not been a burn.
Like I said, it is better for me to hear and read informed speculation. The NSF broadcast on YouTube had little to nothing to say about the booster mishap during the live broadcast. Really not complaining. Everyone has to make a living. But their article also did not help me learn much.
Steve Richter,
The point is that no one outside the company is informed enough to give you what you’re looking for.
FAA is investigating this booster model as a potential mishap
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGOwZV5-z8M
David Ross: See my latest post on BtB. This isn’t that big a deal. Though it is good others are making fun of the FAA anyway.