Starship News

[IXLR8]

Still no launch date, but Starship passed its fueling test today, getting loaded with 10 million pounds of liquid Methane and liquid Oxygen. It's getting closer.

 

[IXLR8]

The company posted on X this morning; tentative launch date March 14th @ 7:30am ET. Starship is ready, still waiting final FAA license sign-off.

 

[kevin37b]

WHY ?

 

[ultrarunner]

Here I thought this thread is about Jefferson Starship...

 

[sd455dan]

Here I thought this thread is about Jefferson Starship...

Well, some could play 'Light the sky on Fire' when a launch happens but I think that song is more about spending a night with a Hot woman.

 

[IXLR8]

Spaceflightnow.com launch schedule now shows a Starship OFT-3 launch date, it is showing, Not Earlier Than (NET) March 14.
Still don't see FAA launch license approval for this flight.

 

[sd455dan]

FAA Launch license 3 has been Granted.

Ship 28 and booster 10 should be launching very soon...

 

[IXLR8]

Now if the weather will cooperate. Last report I saw there was concern about fog at the 7:30/8:00am lift off time.

 

[riptides]

FAA Launch license 3 has been Granted.

Ship 28 and booster 10 should be launching very soon...

Not tonight...

 

[IXLR8]

Starlink launch was scrubbed last night, but Starship is still scheduled to launch this morning. T-0 at 7:30 CDT, although they have a 2 hr launch window.

 

[riptides]

Good for SpaceX. Looks like serious progress this AM.

 

[IXLR8]

Successful launch, successful separation, successful flight of Starship, successful open/close of payload doors, did not try in space relight of Raptor engines.
Failed return to earth as planned for both booster and Starship.

 

[BravoXray]

I'll bet that booster made a big splash when it hit the water going supersonic!
I hope one of the tracking planes got some video of it hitting.

 

[MossRoad]

I'll bet that booster made a big splash when it hit the water going supersonic!
I hope one of the tracking planes got some video of it hitting.

I don't think the booster was going very fast when it hit. As I recall watching it live yesterday, it got pretty low and slow before it splashed.

 

[MossRoad]

I don't think the booster was going very fast when it hit. As I recall watching it live yesterday, it got pretty low and slow before it splashed.

Whoops, I take that back. It was going about 680mph when it hit.

 

[MossRoad]

Advance to about 38 minutes to watch it again.

 

[DarkBlack]

Failed return to earth as planned for both booster and Starship.

Excuse my ignorance, but why was a return failure “planned “? Why not plan on a a successful return, and if it doesn’t work out, it becomes a failure?

 

[riptides]

Excuse my ignorance, but why was a return failure “planned “? Why not plan on a a successful return, and if it doesn’t work out, it becomes a failure?

You learn more from failures.

You don't input all the parameters and variables for success and you see what the model does.

 

[DarkBlack]

Not buying it. If you planned for it to crash into the ocean, instead of returning safely, then it successfully crashed into the ocean, as you planned

 

[riptides]

Not buying it. If you planned for it to crash into the ocean, instead of returning safely, then it successfully crashed into the ocean, as you planned

These were among the heaviest objects (two of them) to ever have controlled reentry back into the atmosphere. One of them did not execute a mission requirement with a recycle burn. From that point the mission objectives changed.

Schematics on returning safely I think. Both were not intended to be recovered - intact.
They returned to inside the atmosphere. I think the hope was to control the spacecrafts crash into the ocean.

Hey, it's SpaceX, they are different.