And if – fingers crossed – SLS-Orion gets canceled during Trump’s second term, LC-39B at KSC will suddenly be “at liberty” for SpaceX to do the same sort of conversion job it did almost a decade ago at LC-39A. That could even include a matching Starship launch mount and tower.

You know, I had not given any thought to what becomes of LC-39B once SLS gets retired.

No question, SpaceX could stick at least 2, maybe more, Starship pads there, and would be glad of the opportunity. But presumably NASA would have to conduct an open lease bidding opportunity, even if it is not immediately obvious to me who else could use it. Would Blue Origin want a second pad? Possibly, but it is hard to make out what they might be doing 5, 10 years from now. A “clean” pad arrangement, like was being toyed with for LC-39A before the lease went to SpaceX, would enable it to be usable by more launchers, but that wouldn’t be compatible with Starship operations. It could get very political, very quickly.

My sense was that Shotwell’s 175 – 180 target number for 2025 was for just the Falcons.

And upon looking up exactly what Shotwell said, I find that….you are correct. It was Falcons only.

Well, SpaceX managed to do 16 Falcon launches in November. At that pace they *could* do 192 launches in a year. But that assumes no failures or acts of God. Falcon Heavy and Crew Dragon launches also tie up pads for longer periods of time. I think they’ll need that extra pad and that extra drone ship.

Build more Falcon 9 pads “just in case” of what? If the idea is to protect U.S. launch infrastructure from potential Russian or Chinese attack, building more Falcon pads seems less urgent than building some facilities near existing SpaceX pads and drone ship anchorages for THAAD, Patriot and/or SM-3/6 batteries.

In any case, a fourth Falcon pad is in the works at SLC-6 at Vandy. And if – fingers crossed – SLS-Orion gets canceled during Trump’s second term, LC-39B at KSC will suddenly be “at liberty” for SpaceX to do the same sort of conversion job it did almost a decade ago at LC-39A. That could even include a matching Starship launch mount and tower. Anti-air/missile batteries at Vandy, KSC-Canaveral, Wallops(MARS) and Starbase, TX are way overdue in any case. And protecting SpaceX’s infrastructure also protects most of the launch infrastructure of other U.S.-based launch providers as a side-effect.

Richard M,

My sense was that Shotwell’s 175 – 180 target number for 2025 was for just the Falcons. There is a separate aspirational target of 25 launches for Starship for 2025. That would mean that SpaceX, as a whole, is looking to do ca. 200 launches for the 2025 calendar year. That’s a tall order, but also one that is potentially doable even if it means our host here is going to be insanely busy just keeping track of launches.

According to comments made by the company’s CEO Gywnne Shotwell in mid-December, the company is planning 175 to 180 launches in 2025. This increase will likely come from two sources.

I think we need to add a third source!

In 2023, the Space Force awarded “Slick Six” (aka SLC-6) at Vandy to SpaceX, as ULA indicated it would no longer need the launch complex after its final Delta IV Heavy launched this last spring. SpaceX has previously indicated that it would commence Falcon 9 launches from SLC-6 in 2025 (no date given), and Falcon Heavy from the pad starting in 2026.
https://www.reuters.com/technology/space/spacex-wins-approval-add-fifth-us-rocket-launch-site-2023-04-25/

The Environmental Impact Statement being executed by the Space Force, due to be completed this fall, gives an idea of what SpaceX thinks having this second launch complex will do for them: “The EIS would also allow SpaceX to conduct up to 100 launches annually between SLC-6 and its existing launch pad at Vandenberg, SLC-4. That includes booster landings at both launch sites as well as droneships downrange.”
https://spacenews.com/study-to-examine-environmental-impacts-of-increased-spacex-launches-from-vandenberg/

(I don’t think they’ll get *that* many extra launches out of SLC-6 in 2025, especially if it does not come online before summer; but even a dozen would be a nice boost to get.)

So, add in an extra drone ship, a new launch pad, and a fistfuls of additional Starship launches (going to full orbit starting with Flight 8, apparently), and whatever additional efficiencies SpaceX thinks it can squeeze out of its launch teams, and 175-180 is what SpaceX thinks it can achieve. But I think the 2025 goal is a stretch goal just like 2024 and 2023 were; if they end up at (say) 165, that would still be a stunning feat: That would be more than the entire world did in any year before 2021.