Simultaneously, demonstrating just how far SpaceX is ahead of its competitors and the rest of the spacefaring world, the Starlink 6-1 launch culminated in the 100th consecutively successful landing of a Falcon rocket booster. As a result, SpaceX’s landing reliability now rivals the launch reliability of some of the most reliable rockets ever flown. That extraordinary feat bodes well for SpaceX’s next-generation Starship rocket, which is designed to propulsively land humans on the Earth, Moon, Mars, and beyond.

The update that's rolling out to the fleet makes full use of the front and rear steering travel to minimize turning circle. In this case a reduction of 1.6 feet just over the air

— Wes (@wmorrill3) April 16, 2024

SpaceX’s landing reliability milestone is made all the more impressive by the lack of immediate competition. More than seven years after SpaceX’s first successful Falcon 9 booster landing and six years after the company’s first successful Falcon booster reuse, Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy are still the only reusable orbital-class rockets in operation.

Blue Origin has had some success reusing the first stage of its suborbital New Shepard rocket. Rocket Lab has also recovered small Electron rocket boosters from the ocean, but it’s yet to catch a booster with a helicopter – a necessity for cost-effective reuse. Many other companies have announced or begun developing their own partially or fully-reusable rockets. But even in a best-case scenario, the most promising of those potentially competitive rockets are still a year or two from their first launch attempts, let alone their first successful recoveries and reuses.

SpaceX debuted the Falcon 9 rocket behind most of its successful booster recoveries and reuses in June 2010. SpaceX recovered a Falcon 9 booster for the first time in December 2015 and reused a (different) booster for the first time in March 2017. It completed nearly all of that risky development work during launches for paying customers.

Even after the first success, many unsuccessful landing attempts followed as SpaceX pushed the performance envelope and discovered new failure modes. Falcon’s most recent landing failure occurred during a Starlink launch in February 2021 and was caused by a hole in a flexible ‘skirt’ meant to keep Earth’s superheated atmosphere out of the flight-proven booster’s engine section.

However, every landing since Falcon 9’s Starlink-19 landing failure has been successful. On February 27th, 2023, almost exactly two years after that failure, Falcon 9 booster B1076 touched down on one of SpaceX’s three drone ships, marking the rocket family’s 100th consecutively successful landing. Starlink 6-1 was also the Falcon family’s 183rd consecutively successful launch, as a Falcon landing failure has never prevented the completion of a mission’s primary objective.

Launch-wise, Falcon 9 and the Falcon family have already become the most statistically reliable rockets in history. Very few rockets in history have managed 100 consecutively successful launches, let alone landings. For example, according to spaceflight reporter Alejandro Romera, the next most reliable American rocket – the McDonnell Douglas Delta II – narrowly achieved 100 consecutively successful launches before its retirement in 2018. The landing reliability of SpaceX’s Falcon rockets is thus tied with the launch reliability of the most reliable American rocket not built by SpaceX.

Additionally, SpaceX Falcon booster landings are now statistically more reliable than the launches of United Launch Alliance’s much-touted Atlas V rocket, which has (more or less) successfully launched 97 times.

Falcon’s landing reliability is an encouraging sign for SpaceX’s next-generation Starship rocket. For Starship to fully achieve SpaceX’s goals, it will eventually need to be able to propulsively land humans on Earth and at other destinations throughout the solar system. SpaceX currently has no plans no plans to develop an independent crew escape system for Starship, meaning that the rocket itself will instead have to demonstrate extraordinary overall reliability. SpaceX executives have stated that Starship will only be deemed safe enough to launch humans once it has completed “hundreds” of successful launches and, presumably, landings.

Falcon has managed 100 successful landings in a row despite large gaps in redundancy. Most landing burns are conducted with a single Merlin 1D engine. Any issue with that engine would likely result in a failed landing. Falcon boosters also have four landing legs and four grid fins powered by a single hydraulic pump. The failure of that pump or one of four legs have demonstrably doomed earlier landings.

Starship’s much larger size and excess performance could provide a larger margin for error and allow for more redundancy. But Falcon has demonstrated that that even a rocket with multiple glaring single-points-of-failure can achieve 100 consecutively successful landings.

The post SpaceX Falcon rocket aces 100th consecutive rocket landing appeared first on TESLARATI.

The new satellites are the future of SpaceX’s Starlink constellation, and the information the company revealed helps demonstrate why.

The update that's rolling out to the fleet makes full use of the front and rear steering travel to minimize turning circle. In this case a reduction of 1.6 feet just over the air

— Wes (@wmorrill3) April 16, 2024

SpaceX’s confusingly-named Starlink 6-1 mission will carry the first 21 Starlink V2 satellites into low Earth orbit (LEO) as early as 1:38 pm EST (18:38 UTC) on Monday, February 27th. The satellites will operate under SpaceX’s Starlink Gen2 FCC license, which currently allows the company to launch up to 7,500 of a nominal 29,998 satellites. At the same time as it continues to fill out its smaller 4,408-satellite Starlink Gen1 constellation with smaller V1.5 satellites, SpaceX has already begun launching the same smaller V1.5 satellites under the Gen2 license.

Eventually, those smaller and less capable satellites will likely be replaced with larger V2 satellites, but SpaceX appears to have decided that quickly adding suboptimal capacity is better than waiting for an optimal solution. In theory, that optimal solution is larger Starlink V2 satellites. As discussed in a previous FCC filing, SpaceX intends to operate up to three different types of Starlink satellites in its Starlink Gen2 constellation. The first variant is likely identical to the roughly 305-kilogram (~673 lb) Starlink V1.5 satellites that make up most of its Starlink Gen1 constellation.

Meanwhile, SpaceX has already built and delivered dozens of full-size Starlink V2 satellites to Starbase, Texas. Those more optimal spacecraft reportedly weigh anywhere from 1.25-2 tons (2750-4400 lb) each, offer almost 10 times more bandwidth than V1.5 satellites, and are so large and ungainly that they can only be launched by SpaceX’s next-generation Starship rocket. Starship is substantially delayed, however, so SpaceX chose to develop a third Starlink satellite variant combining many of the full-size V2 benefits into a package that can be launched by SpaceX’s existing Falcon 9 rocket.

Prior to SpaceX’s February 26th tweets, all that was known about those Starlink “V2 Mini” satellites were a few specifications included in a response to the FCC. The new information provided by SpaceX appears to confirm some of those specifications. For example, knowing that Falcon 9 will carry 21 V2 Mini satellites and that the rocket’s current payload record is 17.4 tons, each V2 Mini satellite likely weighs no more than 830 kilograms (~1830 lb). That’s very close to the 800-kilogram estimate provided in the October 2022 filing.

More importantly, SpaceX revealed that each Starlink V2 Mini satellite will have more powerful antennas and access to a new set of frequencies. Combined, each satellite will have up to “~4x more capacity…than earlier iterations” like Starlink V1. Compared to current V1.5 satellites, that means that Starlink V2 Mini could squeeze approximately 50% more network capacity out of each unit of satellite mass. As a result, even though the larger V2 Mini design has reduced the number of satellites Falcon 9 can launch almost threefold, the 21 V2 Mini satellites it can launch will add ~50% more bandwidth than the ~57 V1.5 satellites it would have otherwise launched.

The larger satellites mean that it will take three times as many Falcon 9 launches to expand Starlink V2 coverage, but the areas that are covered will have the capacity to serve several times more customers or deliver much higher bandwidth to the same number of customers.

SpaceX also announced that it has developed a new argon-fueled Hall effect thruster for Starlink V2 satellites. To avoid the high costs of xenon propellant, the most common choice of fuel for electric propulsion systems, SpaceX already developed a first-of-its-kind krypton Hall effect thruster for Starlink V1 and V1.5 satellites. Spread over the almost 4000 Starlink V1.x satellites SpaceX has launched since May 2019, the relatively low cost of krypton (roughly $500-1500/kg vs. $3000-10,000+/kg for xenon) has likely saved the company hundreds of millions of dollars.

The shift from krypton to argon could be similarly beneficial. Relative to krypton, the argon required to fuel Starlink V2 satellites will be practically free. 99.999%-pure argon can be purchased in low volumes for just $5 to $17 per kilogram, and each Starlink V2 Mini satellite will likely need less than 80 kilograms. SpaceX likely spent around $50 million (+/- $25M) on krypton for the almost 4000 Starlink V1 satellites it’s launched to date. As a result, even if every Starlink V2 satellite needs an excessive 200 kilograms of argon, fueling its next constellation of almost 30,000 V2 satellites could cost SpaceX less than fueling 4000 V1 satellites.

Tune in below around 1:30 pm EST (18:30 UTC) to watch SpaceX’s first Starlink V2 launch live.

The post SpaceX unveils next-gen Starlink V2 Mini satellites ahead of Monday launch appeared first on TESLARATI.

Speaking at the 2023 Space Mobility Conference, SpaceX Senior Director of National Security Space Solutions Gary Henry also indicated that Starship remains on track to launch as early as March 2023. Six weeks ago, CEO Elon Musk tweeted that SpaceX had “a real shot at [a] late February” Starship launch, adding that a “March launch attempt [appeared] highly likely.” February is now out of reach. But March may still be a viable target, according to Henry.

The update that's rolling out to the fleet makes full use of the front and rear steering travel to minimize turning circle. In this case a reduction of 1.6 feet just over the air

— Wes (@wmorrill3) April 16, 2024

SpaceX has made significant progress towards Starship’s first orbital launch attempt in early 2023. On January 23rd, Ship 24 and Super Heavy Booster 7 were filled with around 4800 tons (~10.6M lbs) of propellant and completed Starship’s first full wet dress rehearsal, simulating a launch attempt up to the moment before engine ignition.

Two and a half weeks later, SpaceX attempted to ignite all 33 of Booster 7’s Raptor 2 engines. 31 engines ignited as planned, producing 3580 tons (7.9M lbf) of thrust – the most powerful static fire test in the history of rocketry. SpaceX and CEO Elon Musk have been relatively quiet about the test, merely noting that Starship may have still been able to reach orbit if it had lifted off with 31 of 33 engines.

By all appearances, the test was a spectacular success for SpaceX. 94% of Super Heavy’s Raptors ignited on the first attempted 33-engine test. The booster – standing as tall as an entire two-stage Falcon 9 rocket with a payload fairing – then safely drained its tanks. Booster 7 suffered no apparent damage, and SpaceX hasn’t removed or replaced any of its Raptor engines, potentially indicating that all 33 are healthy enough to stay on the booster for Starship’s first orbital launch attempt. That in itself is a major achievement.

On February 21st, SpaceX’s Gary Henry confirmed that Super Heavy Booster 7 and the launch pad that supported its record-breaking static fire test are in “good shape.” Counter to virtually all other large rockets in history, Starship’s first orbital launch pad has no water deluge system, flame trench, or thrust diverter to suppress or redirect the incredible amount of energy the rocket’s engines can produce. Despite that ommittance, the flat concrete directly below the pad appeared to survive almost eight million pounds of thrust and brutal heat with only minor spalling and damage.

The concrete adjacent to the orbital launch mount fared less well, but may eventually be replaced with the same high-temperature Fondag concrete that was added under the mount. If the launch mount and its surroundings are in “good shape” after experiencing about half of Starship’s full thrust, it’s possible that SpaceX will be ready to launch in the near future.

In the meantime, SpaceX is already installing a water deluge system that will eventually make its South Texas Starship launch site much more capable of withstanding the stress of Starship tests and launches. Installing that system and building a sufficiently massive water supply will take months, however, and would likely preclude a March launch attempt, indicating that SpaceX’s first orbital Starship launch attempt will happen without it.

SpaceX has, however, begun installing a final layer of shielding on Starbase’s orbital launch mount. That task will likely need to be completed before the launch attempt and could take a couple weeks.

The strongest sign that Starship’s first orbital launch attempt is imminent will be Ship 24’s return to the pad and reinstallation atop Booster 7, as well as SpaceX’s receipt of an FAA launch license. With testing mostly behind SpaceX, that license to launch may now be the biggest source of uncertainty for Starship’s orbital-class debut. If, as Gary Henry and spaceflight journalist Christian Davenport have indicated, there are no major hurdles standing in the way of that FAA license, Starship could be ready to launch in a matter of weeks.

The post SpaceX close to securing FAA license for Starship launch debut appeared first on TESLARATI.

On February 13th, a NASASpaceflight.com forum member reported that a pair of oil rigs were scheduled to leave a Mississippi port for an unknown destination. At one point, those oil rigs – christened Deimos and Phobos after Mars’ moons – were owned by SpaceX. In mid-2020, SpaceX bought the former half-billion-dollar oil rigs for just $7 million. Around the same time, CEO Elon Musk tweeted that SpaceX was “building floating, superheavy-class spaceports for Mars, moon & hypersonic travel around Earth.”

SpaceX’s oil rig purchase was publicly uncovered in January 2021. Since then, however, the company has done very little to Phobos or Deimos. Phobos’ deck was half-cleared in fitful bursts of work, but Deimos was left almost untouched. Now, according to SpaceNews, SpaceX’s second in command says the company sold Phobos and Deimos and has paused work on offshore Starship launch platforms.

The update that's rolling out to the fleet makes full use of the front and rear steering travel to minimize turning circle. In this case a reduction of 1.6 feet just over the air

— Wes (@wmorrill3) April 16, 2024

In August 2021, Musk added some additional insight, revealing that the platforms were not a priority and that the only visible work done was the result of SpaceX hiring third parties to clear Phobos’ deck. Ultimately, the project may have been a false start. Speaking in February 2023, Shotwell told reporters that while SpaceX had sold the rigs, she was still confident that “sea-based [launch] platforms” would become a crucial asset in the future.

Perhaps even exceeding CEO Elon Musk’s infamously lofty ambitions, Shotwell said that SpaceX has “designed Starship to be as much like aircraft operations as we possibly can get” in the hopes of enabling “dozens of launches a day, if not hundreds of launches a day.” No rocket family in history has launched more than 61 times in one calendar year, making Shotwell’s Starship cadence target hundreds or even thousands of times more ambitious than a 1980s rocket record that’s still standing four decades later.

It’s unclear if the FAA’s stringent environmental reviews would ever allow SpaceX to get close to that kind of launch cadence using pads built on US soil. SpaceX fought long and hard to receive approval for up to five orbital Starship launches per year out of Boca Chica, Texas. SpaceX has also received approval [PDF] for up to 24 Starship launches per year out of a NASA Kennedy Space Center pad in Cape Canaveral, Florida. And SpaceX is permitted to launch [PDF] up to 70 much smaller Falcon rockets per year from its two existing Cape Canaveral pads.

“Dozens” to “hundreds” of Starship launches per day would be two or three orders of magnitude beyond the highest cadences the FAA has ever permitted. Shotwell’s continued interest in floating platforms is thus unsurprising, as they may be the only way SpaceX can realistically achieve airline-like Starship operations while still coexisting with US regulators.

According to SpaceNews, Shotwell said that SpaceX “really need[s] to fly [Starship] to understand it – to get to know this machine – and then we’ll figure out how we’re going to launch it.” That disciplined focus could be just the thing the Starship program needs. More than eighteen months after SpaceX first fully stacked a two-stage Starship, the rocket still hasn’t attempted an orbital launch. SpaceX has, nonetheless, put a vast amount of money and effort into building, expanding, and optimizing factories and launch facilities for Starship, an orbital rocket that has yet to even partially demonstrate itself.

In essence, SpaceX has made huge gambles on the assumption that a version of Starship mostly resembling what the company is building today will be highly successful, reusable, and reliable. SpaceX’s success with Falcon 9, Falcon Heavy, Dragon, and suborbital Starship testing suggests that it will ultimately be successful, in time. Nonetheless, Shotwell’s apparent desire to conduct orbital Starship launches and gather data before making major investments in new infrastructure (and, hopefully, big design changes and “optimizations”) is a welcome change of pace. Shotwell reportedly assumed oversight of Starbase and Starship in late 2022.

The post SpaceX prioritizes Starship test flights, pauses plans for floating launch pads appeared first on TESLARATI.

Beginning with its cone-tipped nose section, SpaceX started stacking Starship S26 in October 2022. By early January 2023, the prototype had been stacked to its full 50-meter (~165 ft) height and welded together. After about six more weeks of outfitting, Ship 26 left Starbase’s High Bay assembly facility and was transported to one of two stands formerly used for suborbital Starship test flights.

SpaceX lifted Ship 26 onto Suborbital Pad A on the morning of February 12th. Just a few hundred feet to the left, Starship prototype S25 watched from Suborbital Pad B while waiting for the start of its Raptor engine test campaign. Ship 26 is four months younger than Ship 25 and rolled out without Raptors installed, as it still needs to pass several simpler tests. That’s far from the only difference between the Starships.

The update that's rolling out to the fleet makes full use of the front and rear steering travel to minimize turning circle. In this case a reduction of 1.6 feet just over the air

— Wes (@wmorrill3) April 16, 2024

Starbullet

Aside from a range of smaller design changes, Ship 26 has three main differences relative to most prior Starships. First, it has zero heat shield tiles. Since the 2020-2021 period of suborbital Starship flight testing, all finished ships (S20, S21, S22, S24, S25) have been fitted with ~10,000 black, ceramic heat shield tiles. Eventually, those tiles will (theoretically) protect Starships from the intense heat created by reentering Earth’s atmosphere at orbital velocity.

Ship 26 also has no flaps. Since SpaceX first fully assembled a Starship in October 2020, every ship the company has completed (SN8, SN9, SN10, SN11, SN15, SN16, S20, S21, S22, S24, S25) has had four large flaps and form-fitting ‘aerocovers’ installed. Starships need flaps to steer and orient themselves during orbital reentries. They also need flaps to control themselves during exotic landing maneuvers, which require ships to free-fall belly-down (like a human skydiver) and aggressively flip into a vertical orientation for propulsive landings.

Finally, and most confusingly, Ship 26 has no payload bay of any kind. The end result is a smooth, featureless Starship that looks like a steel bullet, can’t return to Earth, and can’t deploy satellites. Combined, the fact it exists at all almost seems like an elaborate, multi-month mistake. But SpaceX clearly intended to build Ship 26 and is now preparing to qualify it for flight.

Depot, Moon lander, or something else?

In simpler terms, Ship 26 is an intentionally expendable Starship with no way to launch satellites. That raises the obvious question: why does it exist? There are a few obvious possibilities. SpaceX is developing at least four types of Starships. The Crew and Tanker Ships will have heat shields and flaps. The Starship Moon lander will have no flaps or heat shield and will be painted white and insulated. A Depot Ship with stretched tanks will stay in orbit permanently and store propellant for in-space refilling.

Based on low-resolution renders, the bullet-like Depot Ship is the most reminiscent of Ship 26. However, there’s no evidence that Ship 26 has “exterior optical properties [optimized] for long duration [propellant storage].” The prototype also lacks any of the hardware likely needed for docking or propellant transfer and has propellant tanks that are the same size as past ships. To survive in orbit for days or weeks, it would need some kind of power source – typically solar arrays – that isn’t present. And even if an expendable Starship like S26 can already achieve SpaceX’s reported target of 250 tons (~550,000 lb) to low Earth orbit, 250 tons is only a fifth of a full propellant load.

Ship 26 could also be used for miscellaneous systems testing or a longevity demonstration in orbit. However, it’s unclear why SpaceX couldn’t simply do that with Ship 24 and Ship 25. Both have had their payload bays permanently sealed, meaning that they are only useful as test articles. The same is true for a tank-to-tank propellant transfer test SpaceX received a NASA contract to conduct in 2020. During that test, Starship will transfer “10 metric tons” of cryogenic liquid oxygen (LOx) between its main LOx tank and a smaller header LOx tank used to store landing propellant. But all Starships built to date have header tanks and could be used for the same test.

Ship 26 could exist primarily to demonstrate that a Starship with no flaps or heat shield tiles is aerodynamically stable during launch. However, expending an entire Starship for what amounts to wind tunnel testing would be extravagant.

Preparing for flight

Regardless, Ship 26 is clearly destined for more than the scrapyard. The bullet-like prototype was installed on Suborbital Pad A, which SpaceX has modified for cryogenic proofing and structural testing. While coordinating with Ship 25, which needs to conduct static fire tests, Ship 26 will be pressurized and loaded with liquid nitrogen, liquid oxygen, or both to safely simulate the thermal and mechanical loads it will experience when filled with propellant. The stand is fitted with hydraulic rams that can simultaneously simulate the thrust of six Raptor engines (1380 tons / 3M lbf).

If it passes those tests, SpaceX will presumably return Ship 26 to the Starbase factory for Raptor installation. Strangely, the smooth Starship isn’t alone. It appears that Ship 27 will be more or less identical, with no heat shield or flaps. However, there’s evidence that Ship 27 will have the first working payload bay on a Starship and could be used to deploy full-size Starlink V2 satellites in addition to any other testing SpaceX wants to use it for.

The most exotic (and unlikeliest) explanation for Ship 26 and Ship 27 is that the pair is meant to support SpaceX’s first Starship docking and propellant transfer test. In October 2022, a NASA official indicated that SpaceX’s second Starship test flight would be a “Starship-to-Starship propellant transfer.”

For now, SpaceX’s priority is preparing Ship 24 and Super Heavy Booster 7 for Starship’s first orbital launch attempt, followed by preparing Ship 25 and Booster 9 for the second orbital test flight. Until then, Ship 26 and Ship 27 will likely remain a bit of a mystery.

The post SpaceX rolls naked Starship prototype to test site appeared first on TESLARATI.

According to CEO Elon Musk, Super Heavy Booster 7 (B7) ultimately ignited 31 of its 33 Raptor engines. One engine was manually disabled “just before” the static fire, while the other faulty engine automatically shut down while attempting to ignite. The other 31 Raptors, however, completed a “full duration” static fire that lasted about five seconds. Musk says that even with two engines disabled, those that remained were “still enough…to reach orbit” – an excellent result despite the static fire’s imperfections.

Most importantly, Super Heavy Booster 7 survived the test without catching fire, exploding, or popping its tanks. To partially counteract the thrust of its Raptor engines, the rocket’s tanks were filled with some 3000 tons (6.6M lbs) of liquid oxygen and methane propellant. The stool-like orbital launch mount (OLM), which also survived the test in one piece, held Starship down with 20 clamps to counteract any remaining thrust. From SpaceX’s perspective, the fact alone that its only orbital-class Starship launch site survived the ordeal is likely enough for it to consider the static fire a success. But the test was much more than that.

The update that's rolling out to the fleet makes full use of the front and rear steering travel to minimize turning circle. In this case a reduction of 1.6 feet just over the air

— Wes (@wmorrill3) April 16, 2024

Incinerating rocket records

Despite losing two Raptors, SpaceX still broke the all-time record for the number of rocket engines ignited simultaneously. That record was held by the Soviet N1 rocket, which launched four times with 30 NK-15 engines in the late 1960s and early 1970s. None of its test flights were successful, but N1 still set the record for the most thrust produced by a single rocket, generating up to 4500 tons (9.9M lbf) of thrust at liftoff.

Neither SpaceX nor CEO Elon Musk has confirmed it, reducing the odds that Super Heavy Booster 7 broke that historic thrust record. But it certainly could have. Each Raptor 2 engine can generate up to 230 tons (507,000 lbf) of thrust at sea level. Raptor is theoretically designed to throttle as low as 40%, or 92 tons (~200,000 lbf) of thrust. With 33 engines operating nominally at their minimum throttle setting, Super Heavy would have produced 3036 tons (~6.7M lbf) of thrust during today’s static fire – not a record.

For 31 Raptors to break N1’s thrust record, the average throttle setting would have had to be around 64% or higher – far from unreasonable. From a data-gathering perspective, a full-thrust static fire would be the most valuable 33-engine test SpaceX could attempt, but it would also be the riskiest and most stressful for the rocket and pad.

Former SpaceX executive Tom Mueller says that SpaceX broke N1’s record. Mueller is effectively the father of the Raptor engine, and likely still gets information straight from SpaceX engineers he used to work with. Still, one would expect SpaceX itself to proudly confirm as much if a rocket it built became the most powerful in history.

The most powerful rocket test in history?

Whether or not Starship became the most powerful rocket in history, it has likely become the most powerful rocket ever tested on the ground. The first stage of Saturn V produced around 3400 tons (7.5M lbf) of thrust during its first sea-level static fire in 1965. Likely contributing to its failure, N1’s booster was never static-fired. Other powerful rockets like the Space Shuttle and SLS use or used a combination of solid rocket boosters and liquid engines that cannot be tested together on the ground.

Unless SpaceX’s goal was a minimum-throttle static fire, Starship’s 31-Raptor static fire likely beat Saturn V’s record to become the most powerful ground test in the history of rocketry.

SpaceX’s next steps

While the 31 that did ignite appeared to perform about as well as SpaceX could have hoped, the two engines missing from February 9th’s historic Starship static fire have probably complicated the company’s next steps. To be fully confident in Starship’s ability to launch and fly a safe distance away from the launch site, SpaceX would likely need to complete a full 33-engine test. Meanwhile, Starship can’t fly until the Federal Aviation Administration approves a launch license, and the FAA could be stodgy enough to deny SpaceX a license without a perfect 33-engine static fire.

Alternatively, the FAA may accept that Starship could still safely launch and reach orbit while missing several Raptors. SpaceX could also guarantee that it will only allow Starship to lift off if all 33 engines are active, in which case a second 33-engine static fire attempt may not be necessary.

If SpaceX is happy with Booster 7’s 31-engine test results and isn’t too put off by any pad damage the test may or may not have caused, it will likely focus on finishing Starship 24. Ship 24 will then be transported back to the pad and reinstalled on top of Booster 7. SpaceX may choose to conduct another wet dress rehearsal or a static fire with the fully-stacked Starship, but it may also deem additional testing unnecessary.

Once all those tasks are completed, Ship 24 and Booster 7 will be ready to support Starship’s first orbital launch attempt. Prior to February 9th’s static fire, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk and COO/President Gwynne Shotwell agreed that Starship’s orbital launch debut could happen as early as March 2023. After today’s test, a March 2023 launch may be within reach.

Rewatch Super Heavy Booster 7’s historic static fire below.

The post SpaceX Starship booster survives record-breaking 31-engine static fire appeared first on TESLARATI.

The update is major news for a program that SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has stated should be considered a success if it merely avoids bankruptcy. Several companies have attempted to build businesses around the concept of a low Earth orbit (LEO) internet satellite constellation. All have failed or gone bankrupt. Motorola pursued a concept called Celestris in the 1990s but eventually gave up and invested in Teledesic. Teledesic eventually went bankrupt and shut down in 2003 after spending the equivalent of $1.85 billion in 2022 dollars. In 2020, OneWeb – the closest to a true Starlink competitor – filed for bankruptcy despite having raised $3.4 billion and begun launching satellites. It was only saved by a $1 billion bailout led by the British government.

Despite pursuing the largest and most ambitious LEO constellations ever proposed, only SpaceX’s Starlink program has managed to avoid bankruptcy. SpaceX began developing Starlink in earnest in the mid-2010s and launched its first satellite prototypes in March 2018 and May 2019. Operational launches followed in November 2019, and SpaceX has since launched an unprecedented ~3540 working satellites on 70 Falcon 9 rockets. More importantly, just two years after opening orders, SpaceX has secured more than a million Starlink internet subscribers.

Adding to its impressive list of achievements, Gwynne Shotwell – a SpaceX executive known for being an excellent manager and voice of reason – says that Starlink has already had its first cash-flow-positive quarter.

The update that's rolling out to the fleet makes full use of the front and rear steering travel to minimize turning circle. In this case a reduction of 1.6 feet just over the air

— Wes (@wmorrill3) April 16, 2024

According to Shotwell, that milestone happened sometime in 2022. Thanks to a productive 2021 and the accelerated launch of new Starlink satellites in 2022, continuously expanding network capacity, SpaceX’s subscriber count more than quadrupled between March and December. If Starlink truly did have a cash-flow-positive quarter last year, it likely happened in Q4. However, the nature of cash flow and the ambiguity in Shotwell’s statement are worth some amount of skepticism.

Crucially, cash flow should account for fundraising, which SpaceX does a lot of. In 2022, it closed a $1.7B venture round in May and a $250M private equity round in July, offering opportunities to negate otherwise negative cash flow in Q2 and Q3. If Shotwell means that Starlink had a positive cash flow quarter without accounting for fundraising, the achievement would be highly impressive and indicate that Starlink’s financial health is surprisingly good.

It’s also ambiguous if Shotwell meant that Starlink had a cash-flow-positive quarter in 2022 or if she was referring to the company as a whole. Earlier in her panel at the FAA’s annual Commercial Space Transportation Conference, Shotwell noted that SpaceX’s main product – Falcon rocket and Dragon spacecraft operations – “makes money.” She also said that “the cash flow from those operations basically pay for [Starlink and Starship] development.” External funds are then raised to supplement SpaceX’s profits from Falcon and Dragon.

The ambiguity leaves room for Shotwell’s statement to be interpreted a bit less positively. If SpaceX or Starlink’s cash-flow-positive quarter was contingent upon raising almost $2 billion in one calendar year, Starlink would arguably still be in a financially precarious position. A positive quarter in that context would be more indicative of decent accounting than good financial health.

However, Shotwell’s confident statement that “Starlink will make money” in 2023 was much less ambiguous and suggests that a positive interpretation of her “positive cash flow” comment could be more accurate. For Starlink to “make money” in 2023, the implication is that SpaceX expects annual revenue to exceed expenses – and possibly exceed expenses and external funding inputs.

Either outcome would be excellent. As long as Starlink’s revenue matches or exceeds expenses, the constellation could likely survive even if SpaceX’s access to external capital was partially or fully disrupted. It also bodes well for Starlink’s profit potential. If the Starlink Gen1 constellation is almost sustainable or profitable, the pending introduction of SpaceX’s next-gen Starship rocket and upgraded Gen2/V2.0 satellites could turn Starlink into a money printer.

In November 2021, CEO Elon Musk outright stated that SpaceX faced a “genuine risk of bankruptcy” if it couldn’t start launching Starship and Starlink V2.0 satellites “once every two weeks” by the end of 2022. Fifteen months later, Starship’s first launch is tracking towards March 2023, and there’s a nonzero chance the rocket won’t launch a single Starlink V2.0 satellite this year. Despite falling miles short of Musk’s target, Starlink is instead on the verge of becoming a sustainable business in the mind of SpaceX’s less hyperbolic leader.

The post SpaceX COO says Starlink had cash-flow-positive quarter in 2022 appeared first on TESLARATI.

Formed in October 2019, Stoke Space secured its first significant round of funding – $9.1 million – less than three years ago. At that time, CEO and co-founder Andy Lapsa says that the startup had just five employees, no permanent workspace, and a “barren field” for a test site. Within 18 months, Stoke Space had turned that empty field into an impressive test facility, conducted numerous component tests, and assembled its first full-scale rocket engine – an exotic UFO-like device unlike any seen before.

It also raised another $65 million – enough funding to begin earnestly developing a potentially revolutionary rocket capable of launching more than 1.65 tons (~3600 lb) into orbit for less than half a million dollars. To realize that extremely ambitious goal, Stoke Space has taken the even more ambitious step of attempting to make the first rocket it develops fully reusable. Simultaneously, the company has incorporated several exotic technologies into that rocket, recently culminating in a surprise announcement that it will attempt to develop one of the most difficult types of engines to power that rocket’s booster stage.

The update that's rolling out to the fleet makes full use of the front and rear steering travel to minimize turning circle. In this case a reduction of 1.6 feet just over the air

— Wes (@wmorrill3) April 16, 2024

Full-flow staged combustion

At the end of an extended interview and tour with YouTuber Tim Dodd (The Everyday Astronaut), CEO Andy Lapsa revealed that Stoke Space has decided to build a full-flow staged combustion (FFSC) engine for the first stage of its reusable rocket. FFSC is the most efficient type of combustion cycle available for a chemical bipropellant rocket engine, but it’s also the most difficult to develop.

A full-flow engine attempts to squeeze every possible ounce of performance out of the propellant it consumes. The most powerful and efficient chemical rocket engines must consume huge volumes of propellant in a short amount of time without destroying the launch vehicle they’re attached to. To create pressure and spin the pumps that are needed to feed that propellant into their main combustion chamber, engines often burn a small amount of propellant in a separate gas generator or preburner. Gas-generator engines vent that exhaust overboard, reducing efficiency but making for a much simpler design. Staged-combustion engines use preburners to create gas that pumps liquid propellant, and that exhaust gas is eventually injected into the main combustion chamber.

Full-flow staged combustion sets itself apart by having two separate pumps and preburners for oxidizer and fuel. Unlike simpler variants of staged combustion, FFSC engines turn all of their propellant into gas before injecting it into the combustion chamber. That hot gas increases the heat of combustion and the pressure inside the combustion chamber, ensuring that virtually all of the propellant that flows through the engine is combusted and turned into thrust as efficiently as possible. FFSC is exceptionally difficult because of the extra-high temperatures and pressures it requires, as well as the need for an oxygen-rich preburner and pump. In a high-pressure, hot-oxygen environment, virtually anything imaginable – including most metals – will spontaneously combust.

Only complex custom-designed alloys can survive those conditions. SpaceX’s Raptor, the only FFSC engine that has ever flown, is especially difficult because it’s meant to be highly reusable. To be successful, Raptor will have to survive those conditions dozens or even hundreds of times in a row with little to no maintenance in between.

The first booster engine Stoke Space ever attempts to build will be a reusable full-flow staged combustion engine powered by liquid methane and liquid oxygen – essentially a smaller version of SpaceX’s Raptor. Stoke’s booster is otherwise familiar and features deployable landing legs like SpaceX’s Falcon boosters. Lapsa says it will likely also have grid fins.

Reusing the upper stage

In some ways, the upper stage of Stoke’s first rocket is even more ambitious. Powered by hydrogen and oxygen propellant, Stoke has designed a conical capsule-like upper stage with an integral fairing. The upper stage’s propulsion is exotic and unique. A large pump will feed propellant to up to 30 combustion chambers distributed around the rim of its heat shield. The exhaust coming from those 30 chambers will expand and partially push against the upper stage’s equally exotic metallic, liquid-cooled heat shield. That expansion against the heat shield improves the efficiency of the upper stage and means that its engine will technically be an aerospike.

Stoke has already begun testing a full-scale version of the upper stage’s UFO-like rocket engine with 15 combustion chambers. Since testing began in the second half of 2022, Stoke has completed dozens of static fires. Everyday Astronaut’s tour also revealed that the startup has made significant progress fabricating and assembling its first full-scale upper stage prototype – tanks, nosecone, heat shield, engine, and all.

Reminiscent of SpaceX’s Grasshopper and Starhopper campaigns, Stoke plans to conduct hop tests with that prototype if it makes it through qualification testing. On February 7th, Stoke also revealed that it’s begun testing a crucial component of its full-flow booster engine. All told, Stoke Space is making progress at a remarkable pace and continues to tackle the hardest problems. The startup has also avoided widely publicizing any specific deadlines, instead choosing to let hardware and tangible results speak for themselves. Only time will tell if that approach pays off, but Stoke is off to an exceptionally impressive start in an industry full of impressive rocket startups.

The post Stoke Space to build SpaceX Raptor engine’s first real competitor appeared first on TESLARATI.

The mission kicks off a surge of geostationary satellite launches for SpaceX. It was also the company’s 16th Falcon rocket launch in nine weeks, demonstrating an extraordinary cadence just a hair away from CEO Elon Musk’s ambitious 2023 target.

The update that's rolling out to the fleet makes full use of the front and rear steering travel to minimize turning circle. In this case a reduction of 1.6 feet just over the air

— Wes (@wmorrill3) April 16, 2024

After several delays, SpaceX’s workhorse Falcon 9 rocket lifted off at 8:32 pm EST, three hours into a four-hour window. The 4.5-ton (~9,900 lb) Amazonas Nexus communications satellite was the only payload inside the rocket’s reusable carbon-composite payload fairing. Built by Thales Alenia Space, the communications satellite is destined for a geostationary orbit above the western hemisphere, where it will expand and improve HISPASAT’s coverage across Greenland, the Atlantic Ocean, and the Americas.

Amazonas Nexus won’t be SpaceX’s first launch for HISPASAT. In 2018, an older version of the Falcon 9 rocket successfully launched Hispasat 30W-6, the company’s next newest satellite. Amazonas Nexus is designed to operate for at least 15 years and is powered by a large 20-kilowatt solar array.

In addition to a primary payload for HISPASAT, the satellite will carry GreenSat, which will ensure that 100% of Greenland’s population has access to high-speed internet. It will also carry the Pathfinder 2 payload for the US Space Force, continuing a program created to “explore new contracting models to cover [US military] telecommunication service needs with commercial satellites.”

Ordered from Thales Alenia Space in January 2020, Amazonas Nexus was originally scheduled to launch in the second half of 2022, Q3 2022, late 2022, and January 2023. The satellite was finally made ready for launch by early February and lifted off on February 6th, 2023. Falcon 9 booster B1073 supported the mission without issue, completing its sixth orbital-class launch and successfully touching down 620 kilometers (386 mi) downrange on SpaceX drone ship Just Read The Instructions.

Falcon 9’s expendable upper stage first entered a parking orbit in low Earth orbit (LEO), and later conducted a second burn of its Merlin Vacuum engine, boosting Amazonas Nexus into a supersynchronous geosynchronous transfer orbit (GTO) measuring roughly 350 kilometers (~215 mi) by 60,000 kilometers (~37,150 mi). “Supersynchronous” refers to the fact that the apogee of the transfer orbit is significantly higher than a geosynchronous orbit (~35,800 km). Falcon 9’s performance surplus means that Amazonas Nexus will be able to reach its operational orbit faster and while using less of its own propellant, potentially extending its useful lifespan.

The mission was SpaceX’s ninth launch of 2023 and ninth launch in five weeks. If SpaceX can sustain that pace, it would translate to an average of almost 94 Falcon launches per year – just shy of Elon Musk’s goal of 100 SpaceX launches in 2023.

The post SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket launches Spanish Amazonas Nexus satellite appeared first on TESLARATI.

In the late 2010s, orders of large geostationary commsats plummeted. Formerly a mainstay of the commercial launch industry, western geostationary satellite launches became much rarer in 2019 and the early 2020s. That downturn was especially noticeable for SpaceX, where geostationary transfer orbit (GTO) launches were one of the most common missions performed by its Falcon 9 rockets from 2014 through 2018.

The update that's rolling out to the fleet makes full use of the front and rear steering travel to minimize turning circle. In this case a reduction of 1.6 feet just over the air

— Wes (@wmorrill3) April 16, 2024

In its first five years, SpaceX completed 28 GTO launches for commercial customers. That period culminated in 2018, when Falcon 9 conducted nine commercial GTO launches in one year. The sector then fell off a cliff as years of scarce satellite orders came to roost. From November 2018 to October 2022, SpaceX completed just 11 GTO launches. Only in late 2022 did its GTO launch activity begin to pick back up.

In the space of two months, SpaceX completed five commercial GTO launches, bringing its 2022 total to seven. SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy rocket also completed a pair of direct geosynchronous launches for the US military in November 2022 and January 2023. That resurgence of high Earth orbit launches is set to continue in 2023.

SpaceX has up to 11 commercial GTO or direct-to-GEO satellite launches scheduled in 2023. Including Space Norway’s Arctic Broadband Satellite Mission satellites, which are headed to an exotic high Earth orbit (GEO) instead of GTO, SpaceX has a dozen GEO/HEO satellite launches planned this year. A Falcon Heavy rocket launched the US military’s USSF-67 directly to geosynchronous orbit last month, and another Falcon Heavy is expected to launch the USSF-52 mission to GTO in the middle of the year.

Even if a few missions slip into 2024, 2023 could be the most prolific year of SpaceX geostationary satellite launches ever. Unofficial manifests indicate that SpaceX has another ten GTO launches scheduled in 2024, 2025, and beyond.

The post SpaceX preparing for surge of geostationary satellite launches appeared first on TESLARATI.