New update on SpaceX’s preparations for future Starship/Superheavy test launches
Link here. Lots of progress described, all suggesting SpaceX continues to target late July for the next test orbital flight. Very much worth reading.
The article repeatedly suggests the work to prepare the launch tower at Boca Chica to catch a returning Superheavy means the next launch will attempt such a catch, but in truth there is no evidence such a thing is planned, other than a single tweet by Elon Musk. As the article finally admits in its next-to-last paragraph,
Starship can now fly missions that have very similar profiles to Flight 4 with the existing FAA license, but a license modification is needed for any catch attempt. If Flight 5 does indeed proceed with a catch attempt at the tower for Booster 12, additional paperwork will need to be filed for this license modification.
I continue to expect SpaceX to propose such a catch on a later flight. The tower work at Boca Chica could be the company doing the necessary work to prove to the FAA that a amended launch license process should be issued, but not for the next flight.
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 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
Link here. Lots of progress described, all suggesting SpaceX continues to target late July for the next test orbital flight. Very much worth reading.
The article repeatedly suggests the work to prepare the launch tower at Boca Chica to catch a returning Superheavy means the next launch will attempt such a catch, but in truth there is no evidence such a thing is planned, other than a single tweet by Elon Musk. As the article finally admits in its next-to-last paragraph,
Starship can now fly missions that have very similar profiles to Flight 4 with the existing FAA license, but a license modification is needed for any catch attempt. If Flight 5 does indeed proceed with a catch attempt at the tower for Booster 12, additional paperwork will need to be filed for this license modification.
I continue to expect SpaceX to propose such a catch on a later flight. The tower work at Boca Chica could be the company doing the necessary work to prove to the FAA that a amended launch license process should be issued, but not for the next flight.
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 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
I tend to agree that the higher priority now is more flights testing the TPS on the ship, and refining the accuracy of the landing of the booster. This can be accomplished faster (I assume) by using FAA’s existing flight approval for non-catch flights.
Elon would clearly LIKE to catch the booster on this flight.
But notice that in his interview with Tim Dodd, he was careful to say that it was something he would have to discuss with his team at Starbase after they had had a chance to go over the data; and that he very rarely actually imposes a decision against an engineering consensus.
I think they will try a “catch” in 2024, but I am much less sure it will happen on IFT-5.
Some have floated the idea of “catch-only” stands.
The engineering chutzpah to attempt such a feat is mighty indeed. Dropping a Booster on your only functioning launch tower and Stage 0 hardware is *deeply* insane. There is a very high probability of things going awry and getting all your fancy gizmos and priceless equipment smashed up and otherwise rendered useless. Not at all optimal!
I believe the best solution is still a water-based catch system, utilizing a big barge or mobile oil platform. While this does not allow for immediate turnaround, which Elon is desirous of, it avoids the distinct possibility of catastrophic damage to the only existing launch equipment on the planet capable of handling the Starship Stack. Yes, they are building a new Tower right next to the existing one, but if your Tank Farm is a mass of twisted, burning metal, then that extra Tower won’t do you much good now will it. That 24-48 hour turnaround for a Booster to be brought back to the Brownsville Channel, and transported back to the Launch Complex is not such a bad tradeoff given the potential RUD of Starbase.
Of course, with all that pointed out and prophesied, the catch will go off flawlessly…
Brewingfrog: As reasonable as your concerns sound, remember this: SpaceX has now landed its Falcon 9 first stages very precisely more than 200 times. That’s the same software they will use to bring Superheavy back.
SpaceX has also demonstrated it knows how to avoid larger damage on first stage returns. On one the last landing failures (almost two years ago), the stage sensed something was wrong and redirected itself so it landed (or crashed) in the ocean nearby. I suspect the same fault software will be installed in Superheavy, forcing it to drop down off shore in the Gulf should it sense an issue.
Just a minor point on the landing software – the trajectory is set up to end in the sea offshore by default, and only after the stage is deemed to be safely under control is it redirected to fly to the desired touchdown point, be it a landing pad in Florida or a tower in Texas.
This does not guarantee safety of course, but leaves the commitment to attempt a pad/tower landing to the last possible moment, and defers it by default. So far, at least one booster using this technique and experiencing control problems dropped into the sea at the Cape, instead of crashing in the vicinity of a pad.
Brewingfrog,
Keep in mind that most of the fuel and oxidizer will be expended, so a fireball would be limited in size and damage to the structure and surrounding hardware. The most likely cause of damage would be running out of one of the propellants before the catch can be completed, and if that happens, most of the damage would likely come from the 200-ish ton booster colliding with the mount and perhaps tipping into the gantry tower, all of which has been somewhat protected from the flame of the world’s largest blow torch, as Musk once called it. This may not be as insane as you think, but it certainly has risks. The consequence could be months of pad and tower repair. Since the reward is mere proof of concept, it may be prudent to do a second test offshore; but then, SpaceX is not known for being meek in its test regimen.
However, SpaceX did a recent test of the “chopsticks” with an old test unit to simulate the launch vehicle. They had some difficulty at the final few inches of closing, and the one arm that they were testing made contact with the side of the test unit, although I did not see damage. There was some vibration of the arm, too, because they have to move it fast and stop it quickly.
Super Heavy may be ready for a “chopstick” catch, but the chopsticks may not yet be so ready.
My understanding is that the second tower’s “chopsticks” will be shorter. This will give a better ability to stop fast (less momentum to overcome) and should result in less vibration of the arms.
I was being (ahem) a bit hyperbolic, but I still believe that dropping anything like that on one’s delicate and irreplaceable hardware is nuts. Like Jeff Wright notes above, a “catch only” tower would make more sense. They could easily lower it to a transporter and move it to refueling and staging in a jiffy, while not endangering launch gear.
While I am in agreement with you all in noting the feats that Elon and his Merry Band of Engineers have accomplished in the last decade, there are things about this operation that leave me wondering. To wit, the winds at Boca Chica are strong. As a pup, I surfed there and over at SPI fairly often. Those unpredictable winds are strong enough to blow sand across the highways and create drifts which block the roads. Dropping a monster booster into a precision slot while practically empty is going to call for minute control which I do not believe can be created with the limited information inputted and decision time required, given the seasonal variability of the winds. But, as I alluded to earlier, Elon’s bunch has overcome much and done what many considered impossible again and again. He employs young and talented engineers who (as an older fellow can say) don’t know they can’t do it. They may well prove this old naysayer wrong, as they have done before.
I know I will be down at Isla Blanca Park for the next launch!
How about a pored cement tower?
Even if the arms get ripped off they would be pretty much the only things to replace and an explosion would cause far less damage.
Three of those should keep launches running smooth.
As for the fuel tanks once your poring that much cement it wouldn’t be a problem to make blast walls around the tanks.
Brewingfrog,
You wrote: “I still believe that dropping anything like that on one’s delicate and irreplaceable hardware is nuts.”
I understand you point, however, it is not as much irreplaceable as it is obsolete. Several people have noted differences between the first tower and the second tower. The first launch mount is a kluge of patches to old problems from the first engine test to the fourth test launch.
“Like Jeff Wright notes above, a ‘catch only’ tower would make more sense.”
It makes more sense from whose point of view?
If SpaceX is to achieve a quick turnaround, the company needs to figure out how to land right next to the launch tower and to lift the returned booster back to the launch mount in a very short amount of time. Their solution is to catch it out of the sky, but a better solution would be to land right back onto the launch mount. The first option is much more achievable in the short rum. This last launch demonstrated that the booster can do its part. SpaceX just needs to get the tower to do its part.
“Those unpredictable winds are strong enough to blow sand across the highways and create drifts which block the roads. Dropping a monster booster into a precision slot while practically empty is going to call for minute control which I do not believe can be created with the limited information inputted and decision time required, given the seasonal variability of the winds.”
Don’t underestimate the ability to make rapid decisions. I worked on Gravity Probe-B. It had nice little spherical gyros that were only 0.001 inches less in diameter than the walls of their housings, and we were measuring the position of the gyros a million times a second and sending correction commands a thousand times a second.
The booster is a couple of hundred tons, and it is “landing” several feet away from the tower and well above the launch mount. It is near these features for only a few seconds before being caught. The variations in wind speed likely will not have a whole lot of time to push around the booster, and it will be able to make adjustments for the wind speed. I suspect that they will solve their positioning problem in much less time that we solved ours.
Launch does not happen when winds are too strong, and landings happen less than ten minutes later, so the winds are not likely to change from acceptable to too much in such a short period of time. It could happen, but sudden bursts of wind are uncommon when the air is relatively calm.
Doing crazy, or even insane, is a SpaceX specialty. It does not always work out, but at least they are willing to give it a try. I’m willing to let them try. Bold experimentation has given us some important advancements and some embarrassing lessons, and I see no reason for them to stop now.
Edward: Agreed.
Methinks that they won’t try a “catch” until they have the second tower and Stage 0 completed, or nearly so.
The first successful catch will be incredible, no matter who many failures there are before then.
After that the next huge thing will be a Moon landing and return of the second stage.