As you know, every Starship test flight, from the first tests that launched the ship by itself from the ground up to 50,000 feet to Flight Test 14 last Monday (Sept. 28) that made Earth orbit for the first time, every single launch has been from Starbase in Texas. They've also been working to expand that to Florida for years now, targeting the lunar launch complex, LC-39A, to launch the world's largest rocket.
"Things are going super well at 39A," Julianna Scheiman, director of NASA science and Dragon programs at SpaceX, said during a briefing on Oct. 1 that primarily discussed that day's launch of the Crew-13 astronaut mission to the International Space Station.
The pad's new Starship launch tower is nearly complete, as is most other essential construction at the site, according to Scheiman.
"We've essentially done a lot of the initial build of the structures and the systems needed for launching Starship, and we're beginning to step into the sort of acceptance testing and operational testing prior to activation," she said. "So, we're kind of through the main construction and going into the proofing, testing — activation testing."
Looking back on things from far on the outside, SpaceX began working on the LC-39A Starship facilities in late 2021, and that was probably a bit too early because I understand that the tearing down and rebuilding that has been pretty evident at Starbase Texas has been repeated here as well. It's only logical that Starship, the biggest rocket in world history, would require special work that isn't needed for smaller vehicles. LC-39A has launched Falcon 9 missions, manned and not, as well as Falcon Heavy missions. Those are not only smaller than Starship and the SuperHeavy booster, they don't even run on the same fuel as Starships.
Falcon 9s - and the Heavy which is three Falcon 9s tied together - run Merlin engines which burn rocket-grade kerosene and liquid oxygen (or LOX). Starship runs Raptor engines, which burn liquid methane and LOX. That means the areas around the launch pad where the fuels are stored need to be able to hold lots of all them. That sounds like a Starship-friendly 39A needs a new tank farm.
And here's the wildcard statement.
SpaceX plans to launch at least one more Starship test flight from Starbase before flying the megarocket out of KSC, Scheiman said on Oct. 1 — meaning the first Florida Starship launch come come as soon as Flight 16.
The company has not yet announced target dates for upcoming Starship launches, but provisional planning documents identify Oct. 19 and Oct. 30 as possible "no earlier than" dates for Flight 15 and Flight 16, respectively.
It's probably best to consider those dates, both Oct. 19 for flight 15 and Oct. 30 for 16 as aspirational goals they're working to meet, not commitments to launching on those dates. Still, a Starship launch before the end of '26 is two months after Oct. 30 and is still pretty darned exciting.
I can't help but notice that there's a tie in between Starship and the Apollo missions. Pad 39A was the starting point for some of the most iconic Apollo flights, including Apollo 8 in December 1968 and Apollo 11 in July 1969.
This tradition will continue, if all goes according to plan: NASA picked Starship's Ship upper stage to be the first crewed lunar lander for its Artemis program, which aims to build a base near the moon's south pole over the next five years or so.
Ship is scheduled to fly for the Artemis program for the first time on Artemis III, a planned 2027 docking test in Earth orbit between the vehicle and NASA's Orion capsule. And that Ship liftoff will take place from Pad 39A, Scheiman said.
Did you hear that SpaceX has submitted a plan to the FAA for approval of launching 76 Starship-Super Heavy flights per year from Cape Canaveral. There are more details related to that number.
There's more pad work going on in Florida as well. Late last year, the U.S. Air Force gave SpaceX permission to fly Starship from two pads at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, which is next-door to KSC. Those two pads — SLC (Space Launch Complex)-37A and SLC-37B — could eventually host 76 Starship liftoffs per year between them.
Don't forget that huge tract of land in Louisiana that will be the site of more launch pads. The source article on Space.com pretty much doesn't expect any launches from Louisiana until 2030, but they're certainly building with the intent to launch a lot more. Once a day? Once an hour? It's something to watch.
Artist's concept showing two of SpaceX's Starship rockets at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station's Space Launch Complex-37. (Image credit: SpaceX)
I find it hard to get my head around SpeceX’s outrageous launch cadence predictions, and by outrageous, I mean in the exceptional sense! Before I retired, I worked in the consumer healthcare industry subject to all manner of regulatory and manufacturing rigour. As a result, launch timings of new product initiatives were more aspirational than precise. But the complexity of the SpaceX operation? Well, good luck with all that. But still, I’m optimistic that they’ll achieve most of what they aspire to and mostly within the time frames they consider achievable. Yes, yes, Elon has form for his over-optimistic timing predictions but his leadership and drive are unquestionable. Now with shareholders to answer to and barring regulatory impedance I believe he’ll achieve his goals close to the stated timeline. God speed, SpaceX.
ReplyDeleteOn the one hand, the goals are so far ahead of what the rest of the world can do it's like he's some sort of "strange visitor from another planet" (to borrow the old line from the Superman TV show) But on the other hand, SpaceX is already doing things the rest of the world hasn't caught up with. They've launched more than every country and every other launch company in the world combined.
DeleteSo while it all seems insanely optimistic, their track record says that if any company can do it, it's them.
I agree - they've been doing what others said was impossible for years.
DeleteI am curious how they are going to get, transport, store, and load that much fuel.
I suspect that either they are going to manufacture it themselves or do long term contracts with somebody to provide the volumes required.
They are, or should be, looking at a pipeline and/ or barge delivery, instead of trucks with those amounts.
I wonder how big SpaceX's maritime arm is? Moving rockets, handling landing barges, plus fuel and other materials, it would be wise for them to have their own shipping line.
Jonathan
Jonathon - I almost included in that post another story that ran in the local paper yesterday. It was saying SpaceX has applied for permissions to run a gas pipeline from a major pipeline in the center of Florida over to the KSC. I thought the post was getting too long. I've also read that they're doing a similar thing over at Starbase, Texas.
DeleteAs for the "maritime arm" I have no real idea of whether they're just a subcontractor they've hired or a branch or department or whatever of SpaceX itself.
How are they getting the ship and booster to launch site?
ReplyDeleteThe same way as they do in Texas. They'll be assembled near the pad, miles closer than the VAB, and carried to the launch pad. In Texas, and on the cape, Falcon 9s are "stacked" horizontally, but I'm pretty sure the Starships will be stacked vertically. The infrastructure on the pad is designed to lift the rocket vertically onto the pad. As well as catch the ship and the booster and put them aside, to prepare for the next flight.
DeleteThat makes sense, so they'll build a whole new factory right there! I thought it unlikely that they would barge or fly in assembled ships, although both ship and booster can do VTVL.
ReplyDeleteThey’re initially going to barge them into KSC from Starbase Texas
ReplyDeleteI haven't heard this elsewhere, but it's completely reasonable. Doing everything on the Cape is riskier than that. SpaceX could send some of the experienced folks from Boca Chica to the Cape temporarily and send some folks from the Cape over to Starbase, but they need to learn everything fast.
Delete