Here is an interesting article about future Starship flights.

spacenews.com/spacex-planning-rapid-turnaround-for-next-starship-flight/

"SpaceX hopes to conduct the next launch of its Starship vehicle as soon
as early May"

And

"However, Coleman said the agency wants to move to a process where the
license is valid for “portfolio of launches” rather than individual
ones. That is particularly important, he added, because SpaceX is
planning six to nine more Starship launches this year."

That could accelerate Starship development.

Alain Fournier

Alain Fournier pounded on thar keyboard to tell us
> Here is an interesting article about future Starship flights.
>
> spacenews.com/spacex-planning-rapid-turnaround-for-next-starship-flight/
>
> "SpaceX hopes to conduct the next launch of its Starship vehicle as soon as
> early May"
>
> And
>
> "However, Coleman said the agency wants to move to a process where the
> license is valid for “portfolio of launches” rather than individual ones.
> That is particularly important, he added, because SpaceX is planning six to
> nine more Starship launches this year."
>
> That could accelerate Starship development.
>
>
> Alain Fournier

Intriguing. Thanks for the link.

/dps

--
https://xkcd.com/2704

On 19/03/2024 14:13 Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> wrote:
> Here is an interesting article about future Starship flights.
>
> spacenews.com/spacex-planning-rapid-turnaround-for-next-starship-flight/
>
> "SpaceX hopes to conduct the next launch of its Starship vehicle as soon
> as early May"
>
> And
>
> "However, Coleman said the agency wants to move to a process where the
> license is valid for ?portfolio of launches? rather than individual
> ones. That is particularly important, he added, because SpaceX is
> planning six to nine more Starship launches this year."
>
> That could accelerate Starship development.
>
>
> Alain Fournier

First they need to identify the issues they had on the last flight and rectify them. That alone could cost two months or more and I assume the FAA license will take at least that amount of time.

IMHO he roll control issue shouldn't have been there in any case.

On 2024-03-20 2:58 a.m., The Running Man wrote:
> On 19/03/2024 14:13 Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> wrote:
>> Here is an interesting article about future Starship flights.
>>
>> spacenews.com/spacex-planning-rapid-turnaround-for-next-starship-flight/
>>
>> "SpaceX hopes to conduct the next launch of its Starship vehicle as soon
>> as early May"
>>
>> And
>>
>> "However, Coleman said the agency wants to move to a process where the
>> license is valid for ?portfolio of launches? rather than individual
>> ones. That is particularly important, he added, because SpaceX is
>> planning six to nine more Starship launches this year."
>>
>> That could accelerate Starship development.
>>
>>
>> Alain Fournier
>
> First they need to identify the issues they had on the last flight and rectify them. That alone could cost two months or more and I assume the FAA license will take at least that amount of time.

The FAA is concerned about whether the launch is safe for the public.
Not about whether the rocket will be reusable. The boosters can impact
the ocean at high speed, that isn't a problem for the FAA, only for
SpaceX. The ship disintegrating over the Indian ocean is only slightly
more problematic. SpaceX only has to show that the next launch is not
likely to be worse than the previous one to get FAA approval.

That being said. Of course SpaceX would want to figure out the problems
and rectify them before the next launch. Gwynne Shotwell seems to think
that it can be done for a May launch. She likely knows better than you
and I.

Alain Fournier

On 2024-03-20 10:14 a.m., Alain Fournier wrote:
> On 2024-03-20 2:58 a.m., The Running Man wrote:
>> On 19/03/2024 14:13 Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> wrote:
>>> Here is an interesting article about future Starship flights.
>>>
>>> spacenews.com/spacex-planning-rapid-turnaround-for-next-starship-flight/
>>>
>>> "SpaceX hopes to conduct the next launch of its Starship vehicle as soon
>>> as early May"
>>>
>>> And
>>>
>>> "However, Coleman said the agency wants to move to a process where the
>>> license is valid for ?portfolio of launches? rather than individual
>>> ones. That is particularly important, he added, because SpaceX is
>>> planning six to nine more Starship launches this year."
>>>
>>> That could accelerate Starship development.
>>>
>>>
>>> Alain Fournier
>>
>> First they need to identify the issues they had on the last flight and
>> rectify them. That alone could cost two months or more and I assume
>> the FAA license will take at least that amount of time.
>
> The FAA is concerned about whether the launch is safe for the public.
> Not about whether the rocket will be reusable. The boosters can impact
> the ocean at high speed, that isn't a problem for the FAA, only for
> SpaceX. The ship disintegrating over the Indian ocean is only slightly
> more problematic. SpaceX only has to show that the next launch is not
> likely to be worse than the previous one to get FAA approval.
>
> That being said. Of course SpaceX would want to figure out the problems
> and rectify them before the next launch. Gwynne Shotwell seems to think
> that it can be done for a May launch. She likely knows better than you
> and I.
>
>
> Alain Fournier

Note that the above mentioned early May for IFT-4 was suggested by
Gwynne Shotwell. Shotwell time is not like Elon time, it matches much
more closely normal time.

Alain Fournier

Alain Fournier pounded on thar keyboard to tell us
> Here is an interesting article about future Starship flights.
>
> spacenews.com/spacex-planning-rapid-turnaround-for-next-starship-flight/
>
> "SpaceX hopes to conduct the next launch of its Starship vehicle as soon as
> early May"
>
> And
>
> "However, Coleman said the agency wants to move to a process where the
> license is valid for “portfolio of launches” rather than individual ones.
> That is particularly important, he added, because SpaceX is planning six to
> nine more Starship launches this year."
>
> That could accelerate Starship development.
>
>
> Alain Fournier

Booster 11 static fired on April 5th. Appeared to be 33 engines for a
full duration of 6-8 seconds.

/dps

--
https://xkcd.com/2704

On 06/04/2024 03:22 Snidely <snidely.too@gmail.com> wrote:
> Alain Fournier pounded on thar keyboard to tell us
>> Here is an interesting article about future Starship flights.
>>
>> spacenews.com/spacex-planning-rapid-turnaround-for-next-starship-flight/
>>
>> "SpaceX hopes to conduct the next launch of its Starship vehicle as soon as
>> early May"
>>
>> And
>>
>> "However, Coleman said the agency wants to move to a process where the
>> license is valid for ?portfolio of launches? rather than individual ones.
>> That is particularly important, he added, because SpaceX is planning six to
>> nine more Starship launches this year."
>>
>> That could accelerate Starship development.
>>
>>
>> Alain Fournier
>
> Booster 11 static fired on April 5th. Appeared to be 33 engines for a
> full duration of 6-8 seconds.
>
> /dps
>
> --
> https://xkcd.com/2704

Elon wants to attempt a catching of the Super Heavy on the fifth attempt. He's really pushing things now since NASA is breathing up his neck,

<https://spacenews.com/musk-outlines-plans-to-increase-starship-launch-rate-and-performance/>

On 2024-04-07 7:04 a.m., The Running Man wrote:
> On 06/04/2024 03:22 Snidely <snidely.too@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Alain Fournier pounded on thar keyboard to tell us
>>> Here is an interesting article about future Starship flights.
>>>
>>> spacenews.com/spacex-planning-rapid-turnaround-for-next-starship-flight/
>>>
>>> "SpaceX hopes to conduct the next launch of its Starship vehicle as soon as
>>> early May"
>>>
>>> And
>>>
>>> "However, Coleman said the agency wants to move to a process where the
>>> license is valid for ?portfolio of launches? rather than individual ones.
>>> That is particularly important, he added, because SpaceX is planning six to
>>> nine more Starship launches this year."
>>>
>>> That could accelerate Starship development.
>>>
>>>
>>> Alain Fournier
>>
>> Booster 11 static fired on April 5th. Appeared to be 33 engines for a
>> full duration of 6-8 seconds.
>>
>> /dps
>>
>> --
>> https://xkcd.com/2704
>
> Elon wants to attempt a catching of the Super Heavy on the fifth attempt. He's really pushing things now since NASA is breathing up his neck,
>
> <https://spacenews.com/musk-outlines-plans-to-increase-starship-launch-rate-and-performance/>

Thanks for the link. What Musk said is that he wants to attempt catching
Super Heavy on the first flight after it has splashed down in a
controlled manner at the right spot. He hopes this successful splash
down will be on the next flight, therefore, as you said, on fifth flight
he would attempt to catch Super Heavy.

Note that catching Super Heavy is not important for NASA. It only serves
to bring down costs, therefore increasing profits for SpaceX.

For those interested, in the link provided by The Running Man, Musk
talks a lot about becoming a multi-planet civilisation and eventually
multi-star system civilisation.

Alain Fournier

On 07/04/2024 09:54 Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> wrote:
> On 2024-04-07 7:04 a.m., The Running Man wrote:
>> On 06/04/2024 03:22 Snidely <snidely.too@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Alain Fournier pounded on thar keyboard to tell us
>>>> Here is an interesting article about future Starship flights.
>>>>
>>>> spacenews.com/spacex-planning-rapid-turnaround-for-next-starship-flight/
>>>>
>>>> "SpaceX hopes to conduct the next launch of its Starship vehicle as soon as
>>>> early May"
>>>>
>>>> And
>>>>
>>>> "However, Coleman said the agency wants to move to a process where the
>>>> license is valid for ?portfolio of launches? rather than individual ones.
>>>> That is particularly important, he added, because SpaceX is planning six to
>>>> nine more Starship launches this year."
>>>>
>>>> That could accelerate Starship development.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Alain Fournier
>>>
>>> Booster 11 static fired on April 5th. Appeared to be 33 engines for a
>>> full duration of 6-8 seconds.
>>>
>>> /dps
>>>
>>> --
>>> https://xkcd.com/2704
>>
>> Elon wants to attempt a catching of the Super Heavy on the fifth attempt. He's really pushing things now since NASA is breathing up his neck,
>>
>> <https://spacenews.com/musk-outlines-plans-to-increase-starship-launch-rate-and-performance/>
>
> Thanks for the link. What Musk said is that he wants to attempt catching
> Super Heavy on the first flight after it has splashed down in a
> controlled manner at the right spot. He hopes this successful splash
> down will be on the next flight, therefore, as you said, on fifth flight
> he would attempt to catch Super Heavy.
>
> Note that catching Super Heavy is not important for NASA. It only serves
> to bring down costs, therefore increasing profits for SpaceX.
>
> For those interested, in the link provided by The Running Man, Musk
> talks a lot about becoming a multi-planet civilisation and eventually
> multi-star system civilisation.
>
>
> Alain Fournier
>

To me the catching of the Super Heavy could be a do or die proposition. If it fails SpaceX could be forced to rebuild the launch tower. And that could take months.

I didn't know he'd suggested doing this after the first successful suborbital flight. Seems risky to me.

On 2024-04-07 1:35 p.m., The Running Man wrote:

> To me the catching of the Super Heavy could be a do or die proposition. If it fails SpaceX could be forced to rebuild the launch tower. And that could take months.
>
> I didn't know he'd suggested doing this after the first successful suborbital flight. Seems risky to me.
>

Yes it is risky. That's why SpaceX will wait until after they have hit
the ocean in a precise and controlled manner before risking a launch tower.

SpaceX plans on having several launch towers. Two in Boca Chica Texas,
two at Cape Canaveral, and later some on sea platforms. I suspect this
is because they want to be ready when an accident will happen.

Alain Fournier

On 2024-04-07 20:35, The Running Man wrote:
> On 07/04/2024 09:54 Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> wrote:
>> On 2024-04-07 7:04 a.m., The Running Man wrote:

>>> Elon wants to attempt a catching of the Super Heavy on the fifth
>>> attempt. He's really pushing things now since NASA is breathing
>>> up his neck,
>>>
>>> <https://spacenews.com/musk-outlines-plans-to-increase-starship-launch-rate-and-performance/>

>> Thanks for the link. What Musk said is that he wants to attempt
>> catching Super Heavy on the first flight after it has splashed down
>> in a controlled manner at the right spot. He hopes this successful
>> splash down will be on the next flight, therefore, as you said, on
>> fifth flight he would attempt to catch Super Heavy.
>>
>> Note that catching Super Heavy is not important for NASA. It only
>> serves to bring down costs, therefore increasing profits for
>> SpaceX.

> To me the catching of the Super Heavy could be a do or die
> proposition. If it fails SpaceX could be forced to rebuild the
> launch tower. And that could take months.

The returning Super Heavy is mostly an empty shell, much lighter than
the propellant-filled launch stack, which the launch tower and launch
stand are designed to lift and support. It seems to me that the damage
that could be done by a botched catch is limited and not too difficult
to repair.

Perhaps the worst case would be a crash on the propellant farm with
perhaps also a methane-oxygen explosion.

Niklas Holsti suggested that ...
> On 2024-04-07 20:35, The Running Man wrote:
>> On 07/04/2024 09:54 Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> wrote:
>>> On 2024-04-07 7:04 a.m., The Running Man wrote:
>
>>>> Elon wants to attempt a catching of the Super Heavy on the fifth
>>>> attempt. He's really pushing things now since NASA is breathing
>>>> up his neck,
>>>>
>>>> <https://spacenews.com/musk-outlines-plans-to-increase-starship-launch-rate-and-performance/>
>
>>> Thanks for the link. What Musk said is that he wants to attempt
>>> catching Super Heavy on the first flight after it has splashed down
>>> in a controlled manner at the right spot. He hopes this successful splash
>>> down will be on the next flight, therefore, as you said, on fifth flight
>>> he would attempt to catch Super Heavy.
>>>
>>> Note that catching Super Heavy is not important for NASA. It only serves
>>> to bring down costs, therefore increasing profits for SpaceX.
>
>> To me the catching of the Super Heavy could be a do or die proposition. If
>> it fails SpaceX could be forced to rebuild the launch tower. And that
>> could take months.
>
> The returning Super Heavy is mostly an empty shell, much lighter than the
> propellant-filled launch stack, which the launch tower and launch stand are
> designed to lift and support. It seems to me that the damage that could be
> done by a botched catch is limited and not too difficult to repair.
>
> Perhaps the worst case would be a crash on the propellant farm with perhaps
> also a methane-oxygen explosion.

Compare the size of a drone ship to the area around the launch pad.
Also note that Falcon 9 landings don't target the drone ship until
after a successful relight. There is plenty of sea near the launch
pad.

The soft water landings will confirm that Booster's guidance works as
expected. We already have seen Ships hit the mark, even though from a
low altitude. If a successful reentry has the ship in the right place
for the landing burn, than catch should be a piece of cake ... remember
Booster and Ship have some hover time, unlike the F9.

/dps

--
"First thing in the morning, before I have coffee, I read the obits, If
I'm not in it, I'll have breakfast." -- Carl Reiner, to CBS News in
2015.

Snidely explained on 4/7/2024 :
> Niklas Holsti suggested that ...
>> On 2024-04-07 20:35, The Running Man wrote:
>>> On 07/04/2024 09:54 Alain Fournier <alain245@videotron.ca> wrote:
>>>> On 2024-04-07 7:04 a.m., The Running Man wrote:
>>
>>>>> Elon wants to attempt a catching of the Super Heavy on the fifth
>>>>> attempt. He's really pushing things now since NASA is breathing
>>>>> up his neck,
>>>>>
>>>>> <https://spacenews.com/musk-outlines-plans-to-increase-starship-launch-rate-and-performance/>
>>
>>>> Thanks for the link. What Musk said is that he wants to attempt
>>>> catching Super Heavy on the first flight after it has splashed down
>>>> in a controlled manner at the right spot. He hopes this successful splash
>>>> down will be on the next flight, therefore, as you said, on fifth flight
>>>> he would attempt to catch Super Heavy.
>>>>
>>>> Note that catching Super Heavy is not important for NASA. It only serves
>>>> to bring down costs, therefore increasing profits for SpaceX.
>>
>>> To me the catching of the Super Heavy could be a do or die proposition. If
>>> it fails SpaceX could be forced to rebuild the launch tower. And that
>>> could take months.
>>
>> The returning Super Heavy is mostly an empty shell, much lighter than the
>> propellant-filled launch stack, which the launch tower and launch stand are
>> designed to lift and support. It seems to me that the damage that could be
>> done by a botched catch is limited and not too difficult to repair.
>>
>> Perhaps the worst case would be a crash on the propellant farm with perhaps
>> also a methane-oxygen explosion.
>
> Compare the size of a drone ship to the area around the launch pad. Also
> note that Falcon 9 landings don't target the drone ship until after a
> successful relight. There is plenty of sea near the launch pad.
>
> The soft water landings will confirm that Booster's guidance works as
> expected. We already have seen Ships hit the mark, even though from a low
> altitude. If a successful reentry has the ship in the right place for the
> landing burn, than catch should be a piece of cake ... remember Booster and
> Ship have some hover time, unlike the F9.
>
> /dps

It seems that at a recent talk at Starbase, Elon has said that Booster
catch could be on Fight 5, Ship catch will take longer to confirm that
it is ready ... sometime in 2025.

Twixxers apparently can see the Musk talk on, um, Twix. I got the
realy through Ellie In Space's youtube.

/dps

--
Yes, I have had a cucumber soda. Why do you ask?