Recent Posts

11

Engineering / Re: Interesting stuff about SpaceX Starship (hate the name)

« Last post by Nemesis on August 20, 2026, 09:58:05 pm »

China has had another (different design) booster land.  Methalox engine this time.  The landing was down range not return to launch site but still on land.  Another which seems to be a Falcon 9 competitor. 

Since it lands on land the landing is a little easier and doesn't require the expense of a barge, but since it is down range it gets a cargo increase for a given orbit.  Diameter a little bigger but a little shorter than a Falcon 9.  How they will transport it back I don't know, truck or rail seem most likely. 

So they now have 2 successful Falcon 9 class booster landings, a kerolox and a methalox.  How long till they scale them up or go for a Falcon Heavy like design (or both?).

This appears to give them 2 different booster designs that could be able to launch a Starlink competitor at a similar cost to Starlinks own launch costs. 

The race heats up.

Edit 1: That landed booster?  Sometime after the landing it seems the landing gear failed and it fell over.  So partial success.

Edit 2: It was a stainless steel booster so heavier than Falcon 9 and resembling a mini Starship booster. 

12

Engineering / Re: Interesting stuff about SpaceX Starship (hate the name)

« Last post by Nemesis on August 14, 2026, 03:36:07 pm »

SpaceX has filed a communications application with the FCC for IFT 14.  The time frame for the permission starts August 28th, it also lists a booster catch AND a ship catch. 

The ship for next launch has had some heat tiles removed and replaced based on the experience with IFT 13.

Edit 1:  Plans to catch the ship on IFT 14 cancelled.  A catch of the ship apparently "months away".  So November at earliest?  Also it may be that the booster won't be caught either.

Edit 2: The previous unofficial IFT 14 launch on Aug 28th seems to be replaced with Sept 15th.  Plausible at least.

13

Engineering / Re: This really ticks me off

« Last post by Javora on August 06, 2026, 06:40:34 pm »

I don't want to go H&S, but in light of recent cyber attacks, I want to reiterate, STOP PUTTING THESE THINGS ONLINE!!!

I’ve been saying that here and everywhere else for over a decade and on Taldren before that.  At this point I think these people are too stupid to learn.  It’s going to take a lot of people dying at this point before anyone changes anything.

14

Engineering / Re: This really ticks me off

« Last post by Nemesis on August 06, 2026, 12:42:43 am »

Wasn't it Microsoft who at one point was pushing internet connected teddy bears and cameras in children's rooms?  What could possibly go wrong?

15

Engineering / Re: Interesting stuff about SpaceX Starship (hate the name)

« Last post by Nemesis on August 05, 2026, 10:53:21 pm »

Update on the New Glenn explosion.  Seems to be a fault on the main oxygen valve on one of the BE-4 engines.  But they are continuing to look for other faults.

This fault presumably will also apply to the BE-4 engines used on the ULA Vulcan and along with the SRB nozzle faults will keep Vulcan from flying till both are fixed. 

Amazon Leo is supposed to be launching on both New Glenn and Vulcan. 

16

Engineering / Re: This really ticks me off

« Last post by knightstorm on August 05, 2026, 05:48:28 pm »

I don't want to go H&S, but in light of recent cyber attacks, I want to reiterate, STOP PUTTING THESE THINGS ONLINE!!!

17

Engineering / Re: Interesting stuff about SpaceX Starship (hate the name)

« Last post by Nemesis on July 30, 2026, 10:57:12 pm »

Flight 14 Starship

Projected To Launch  September, 2026

Edit 1:  There are apparently filings that indicate a possible launch date as early as August 20th.

18

Engineering / Re: Interesting stuff about SpaceX Starship (hate the name)

« Last post by Nemesis on July 30, 2026, 05:13:33 pm »

Japan has been test flying something similar to Starhopper.  Whether they are targeting competing with Falcon or Starship I don't know.  Seems the French and maybe Germans are also involved.

I've been seeing from spacelaunchschedule.com conflicting information on Vulcan launches.  When looking a Vulcan launches it shows none till December at the earliest.  However when looking at ULA (owners of Vulcan) it shows 1 in September.  According to Scott Manley the SRBs can't be used till sometime next year and the September launches uses the maximum number of SRBs. 

19

Engineering / Re: Interesting stuff about SpaceX Starship (hate the name)

« Last post by Nemesis on July 19, 2026, 11:17:49 pm »

IFT 13 now has a new date (as always subject to delays)

Thu • Jul 23rd, 2026  6:45 PM - 8:15 PM EDT

Testing of the booster for IFT 14 has begun. 

There is speculation that soon the other launch platforms will need boosters for testing the platform equipment and a booster now under construction will be transferred there.  After that a Starship will be needed as well.  It is possible they will transfer both at the same time.

Once they start reusing boosters, they can reduce booster production and increase Starship production to increase cadence (until Starship reuse begins). 

Apparently only 29 engines ignited and since the launch criteria requires 30 an abort was automatic.  The 4 engines were in two pairs of adjacent engines in the middle ring.  There were 6 engines where the oxygen pumps didn't respond properly.  They think it was some water was in the pump from prior operations which froze preventing the pumps from working to spec and stopping 4 of the engines from igniting

Edit 1

Fri • Jul 24th, 2026   6:45 PM - 8:15 PM EDT

Flight 13:

About 45 minutes till the scheduled launch and I've been reminded of something that I don't think has been mentioned here.   Starship can be fuelled on the pad FASTER than the much smaller Falcon 9.

Launch successful all engines lit.  Hot staging successful with the engine relights on the booster all as planned and the booster tilting correctly by the burn.   During the descent the booster cameras showed the tower of "smoke" from the launch above the launch site. 

Final landing burn once again had engine relight issues with only 10 of the 13 engines lighting and though it was on target it was a hard impact.

They deployed 20 Starlink V3 satellites they are expected to survive and be tested for about 20 minutes.  A full load is apparently 50 satellites or about 100 tons.   Two of them had cameras (the last two) and some at least of the rest had "flashlights" to light up the ship for those cameras which apparently had a narrow focus and I didn't see what video they recorded which was supposed to be for tile inspections.

The Ship engine relight not only worked correctly but the test instead of being 4 or 5 seconds like earlier ones was 14 seconds. 

Ship landed AND after the engine cutout when it fell over it DID NOT explode.  There were flames around it as it floated intact in the water.  They even are getting views from the engine compartment camera which is submerged though most of the compartment is above water.  SpaceX ended their video at that point. 

On to Flight 14. 

Since the Booster landing didn't manage a fully successful ocean landing it won't likely do a catch.  But since it appears to be a fully successful Ship flight they might go orbital and if they go orbital there is a very small chance (my speculation but I've heard others say the same) that they might attempt a Ship catch instead.

Edit 2  Based on a Scott Manley video

Musk has apparently confirmed that if things go right on the next mission the Ship will be caught.  The booster will not attempt a catch as the V3 booster has yet to have a successful simulation.  This of course means that IFT 14 will be an orbital attempt.  Also it may set the stage for a reuse of the booster later in the year.  Will it take the full 50 starlink or will it take only 20 again? 

It seems in orbit they vented gases again.  This has previously been oxygen that was taken as "cargo", also has been fuel that they would have used when going to orbit with a full cargo. 

Interesting times.

Edit 3  Apparently the "boost back burn" with 33 engines after hot staging ended early.  Why not yet revealed. 

Edit 4 The Ship is still afloat and Musk IS talking of towing it back. 

No FAA investigation required.

Flight 14 (according to Ellie in Space you tube channel) around August 24th. 

Edit 5

The recovery is apparently running into problems.  Details are scarce.

20

Engineering / Re: Interesting stuff about SpaceX Starship (hate the name)

« Last post by Nemesis on July 19, 2026, 08:57:19 pm »

China just did their first successful landing of an orbital class booster.  A little less cargo capacity than Falcon 9 but in the same class.

Also looked like it needed more support infrastructure to land

This is a first try for them and It wouldn't surprise me if that is reduced in the future OR the rocket made larger.  Everything you leave behind increases your cargo.

Also over time Falcon has increased its cargo by being able to reduce the fuel they need to keep for landing.  Less fuel retained more cargo.  So don't be surprised if over the next year or two they increase its capacity.