Kenneth_2003 said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

will25u said:

---

I think the Falcon 9 reduction/no more flights was fake news. I posted about it in the last few pages.

---

I'm very surprised SpaceX hasn't denied it.

Falcon 9 launches are certainly trending down lately compared to prior years.

---

2023 -- 96 Total, 91 F9, 5 FH
2024 -- 134 Total, 132 F9, 2 FH
2025 -- 165 Total, 165 F9, 0 FH
2026 -- thru July 25: 88 Total, 87 F9, 1 FH
Estimating 140-145sih total

Lower than 2025, but I don't know if we can determine a real trend here.
SpaceX Starlink is still Falcon's biggest customer but they're only launching V2 mini as the V3 is too big and too heavy to carry on F9.

F9 will by necessity slow though with the conversion of 39A to Starship operations.

---

Yeah the launches are slowing for sure lately.

Centerpole90 said:

---

I would be curious if that window was framed into a building and rigid if it would have the same result. I'm not arguing that there is damage or danger done…. I'm just wondering if that window (and frame) sitting on the ground free to vibrate behaves any differently than if it was fixed into a rigid structure.

---

Yeah I had the same thought.

Still going. The data recovery is going to be incredible for SpaceX.

The Starship Recovery team has continued gathering imagery of the vehicle, which is still afloat in the Indian Ocean pic.twitter.com/ozCJYtxXGU

— SpaceX (@SpaceX) July 28, 2026

No mishap investigation with booster... Must have been pretty close to nominal. Hard to imagine when you're making a mushroom cloud that big. But that would happen even if everything worked correctly in the gulf.

I know this may be too early to ask, but do they have an estimate of the when the next launch will be? trying to get down there if they are going to try and catch the ship... that would be very cool, or will that be done on some type of vessel in the ocean?

According to Gwynne Shotwell (SpaceX CEO) they're targeting launching monthly after IFT-13. But that was before deciding to go for a Ship catch. That might require more planning and hurdles.

txags92 said:

---

Centerpole90 said:

---

I would be curious if that window was framed into a building and rigid if it would have the same result. I'm not arguing that there is damage or danger done…. I'm just wondering if that window (and frame) sitting on the ground free to vibrate behaves any differently than if it was fixed into a rigid structure.

---

Yeah, I saw lots of methodological issues with that video. The ones closest to the pad were shielded from direct sound energy by the blast walls at the pad and were only getting the sound/pressure waves indirectly.

---

Time to call these guys. I bet they could step it up a bit.

Decay said:

---

No mishap investigation with booster... Must have been pretty close to nominal. Hard to imagine when you're making a mushroom cloud that big. But that would happen even if everything worked correctly in the gulf.

---

The reason Flight 12 required a mishap investigation was because the booster ended up coming down somewhere other than the planned location due to the failed boostback burn. Flight 13 didn't have a perfect landing, but it was on course and came down at the planned location. It was just going faster than expected. That possibility was apparently within the flight parameters envisioned in the license, so no mishap investigation needed.

fullback44 said:

---

I know this may be too early to ask, but do they have an estimate of the when the next launch will be? trying to get down there if they are going to try and catch the ship... that would be very cool, or will that be done on some type of vessel in the ocean?

---

I have a feeling it will be around late August give or take a week.

Kiko Dontchev quote posted the recovery post above teasing "Deadliest catch meets Apollo 13 content coming soon."

The @SpaceX recovery team is 1/1. While the mariners and engineers offshore literally ride the wave, a hard charging group of leaders, operators, meteorologists, engineers and supply chain work 24/7 to feed them the data and support they need to continue the mission. Deadliest… https://t.co/cax7ViWKmm

— Kiko Dontchev (@TurkeyBeaver) July 28, 2026

We’re sending a ship out to recover Starship https://t.co/fUqUZTITO9

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 28, 2026

Don't tell Louisiana. They're good people but math might not be their thing. Cajun navy won't realize this one's over their head!

hph6203 said:

---

We’re sending a ship out to recover Starship https://t.co/fUqUZTITO9

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 28, 2026

---

Wonder if they are planning to tow it in or if they are sending some kind of heavy lift or drydock ship to lift it out of the water?

My guess would be something with a flat work deck they can lay it on... What's the lead time and availability of a semi-sub?

Granted there are marine salvage crews on global standby.

With the fins folded you're looking at what, 40-45 ft wide and 120 ft long?
edit... the forward fins do not widen the ship when folded and the aft fins can tuck 90* to the side of the vehicle so they only widen it by their thickness.... Guessing no more than 35ft wide at the aft fins.

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

My guess would be something with a flat written deck they can lay it on... What's the lead time and availability of a semi-sub?

Granted there are marine salvage crews on global standby.

With the fins folded you're looking at what, 40-45 ft wide and 120 ft long?

---

Dry dock ship would be ideal. Slide in under it submerged and then lift and drain. Then anchor it down so it won't roll.

Is the Glomar Explorer still around? If it could snatch a sub off the seafloor, it could bring Starship home.

ETA: It was scrapped in 2015.

Pretty cool .. thanks for posting that

txags92 said:

---

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

My guess would be something with a flat written deck they can lay it on... What's the lead time and availability of a semi-sub?

Granted there are marine salvage crews on global standby.

With the fins folded you're looking at what, 40-45 ft wide and 120 ft long?

---

Dry dock ship would be ideal. Slide in under it submerged and then lift and drain. Then anchor it down so it won't roll.

---

During WW2 the navy had modular portable drydocks that could be towed from harbor to harbor. Then there's semi-submersable ships like what brought the USS Cole home. Those are expensive and probably a longer lead.

First they need to get to to a port. I'm guessing the closest will be Western Australia. An open deck work boat would be spacious enough if they can lift it. Or get inflatable airbags and drag it onto the deck. Need to bring some rigid hull inflatables probably to get close and work on/around the ship.

Get it to a port, then will need a vessel with the range to cross the pacific and transit Panama. Or send engineers to the ship to evaluate it there

Some skepticism about the heat shield tiles.

Thinking about this for more than 5 minutes, it's obvious that:

1) SpaceX engineers took lessons from Shuttle to reduce maintenance time via modular tile shape
2) robotic inspection can automate what was formerly an intensive human process
3) eventually SpaceX will achieve high… https://t.co/NGmZJowTcU

— lizvstein (@lizvstein) July 29, 2026

Not sure that is really warranted.

Quote:

---

Clearly, Starship's heat shield was good enough for this vehicle to reenter Earth's atmosphere.
The problem is that, with the signs of damage, such a heat shield would appear to require a fair amount of inspection and refurbishment before another launch. In other words, SpaceX has a ways to go to reach "full and rapid" reuse of Starship. "Full" means reusing both the booster and the Starship upper stage, and "rapid" reuse means turning each Starship around in days or weeks, instead of months, at considerable expense.

SpaceX is aware of the challenges

We should stop here to point out that SpaceX is not oblivious to the magnitude of this heat shield challenge, nor blithely whistling past the graveyard.

On various podcasts and X social media postings, SpaceX founder Elon Musk has repeatedly stated that solving the reusable heat shield problem is one of the toughest problems the company faces. Back in February on a podcast with Dwarkesh Patel, Musk expounded on this, saying a reusable heat shield is "the biggest problem that remains" for Starship. "If you want to be able to land it, refill propellant, and fly again, you can't do this laborious inspection of 40,000 tiles type of thing," he said.

To address this challenge, the company has made substantial investments in new formulations for tile materials, standardizing shapes, and more. And it has been rigorously testing various approaches during Starship's experimental flight campaign.

The independent industry experts said they believe that SpaceX's approach to a modern thermal protection systems represents a good "incremental" step forward from the space shuttle's tiles but relies on the same fundamental solution.

As such, SpaceX's heat shield will likely be good enough to deploy a next-generation Starlink constellation. But the experts are concerned that it will be unable to hit the high flight rate neededseveral hundred to thousands of low-cost launches annuallyfor large settlements on the Moon and Mars, orbital data centers, or large-scale space-based solar power.

---

I mean I think it's pretty obvious that SpaceX flat out doesn't have answers for some of the biggest questions. They are going to continue to iterate and optimize and if a quantum leap in technology looks attainable then they'll go for it. In the meantime the heat tiles look dramatically better each time they fly.

The FAA is proposing changes for the commercial space industry that would streamline licensing for rocket launches. The change would allow the FAA “to waive unnecessary environmental laws and regulations that are slowing American innovation,” according to a new filing.

FAA: "FAA… pic.twitter.com/nMHb2iRZWW

— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) July 29, 2026

FAA: "FAA proposes to amend its commercial space licensing regulations to streamline the licensing process and reduce regulatory burden for applicants. Specifically, FAA proposes to invoke the Secretary of Transportation's statutory authority to waive requirements of laws of the U.S. for a license or permit, after consultation with the head of the appropriate executive agency, when the requirement is not necessary to protect the public health and safety, safety of property, and national security and foreign policy interests of the United States. FAA proposes waiving requirements under 13 laws for commercial space licenses and permits to operate a launch site, licenses to operate a reentry site, experimental permits, and licenses to operate a launch or reentry vehicle."

Decay said:

---

I mean I think it's pretty obvious that SpaceX flat out doesn't have answers for some of the biggest questions. They are going to continue to iterate and optimize and if a quantum leap in technology looks attainable then they'll go for it. In the meantime the heat tiles look dramatically better each time they fly.

---

It is also a bit disingenuous by some of the online pundits to take the position that because Spacex can't accomplish every one of their objectives with their current iteration of spacecraft that they are "failing" or "making fantastical claims about capability" like I have seen from some X posters. Even if the tiles require them to inspect and replace some and that takes a month to retrofit a ship before the next launch, that is still 12 times faster reuse than any of their competitors that are unable to launch faster than about once per year so far. Just because their launch lead says the pad was designed to handle a cadence of one launch per 60 minutes 24/7 doesn't mean Spacex is making the claim that they will be ready for that kind of cadence any time soon.

They are doing astounding things with their spacecraft that nobody else is even close to catching up to, and have made those same kinds of quantum leaps forward in capability regularly over the objections of the competitors and detractors. So when I see people doubting them online, I just laugh and wait for them to get schooled like Tory Bruno did by Gwen Shotwell after taking shots at the "partially assembled" Raptor engines.

I read that the other day and it has some issues.

"Dan Rasky, a former NASA engineer who studied heat shield materials for nearly four decades at NASA Ames Research Center, told Ars. Rasky is credible: He co-invented PICA, the material used for Crew Dragon's heat shield."

"The experts noted that NASA has not made substantial investments in thermal protection research for vehicles entering from low-Earth orbit (speeds of Mach 25) for three decades."

You're a qualified expert who has been working on this for 40 years at NASA and co-invented the most recent successful heat shield, or NASA hasn't worked on this meaningfully in 30 years. Which is it?

"This is an area where NASA could probably help."

Based on what recent experience? If NASA did start helping what suggests they'd provide any meaningful progress in the remainder of my lifetime (I'm 43) let alone in a commercially viable timeframe?

Also, when you have 100+ Starships available to launch, if it takes a week or two to inspect/replace the tiles on each ship you can still launch at a high rate. At least 5+ per day. That's a lot of mass to orbit.

txags92 said:

---

Decay said:

---

I mean I think it's pretty obvious that SpaceX flat out doesn't have answers for some of the biggest questions. They are going to continue to iterate and optimize and if a quantum leap in technology looks attainable then they'll go for it. In the meantime the heat tiles look dramatically better each time they fly.

---

It is also a bit disingenuous by some of the online pundits to take the position that because Spacex can't accomplish every one of their objectives with their current iteration of spacecraft that they are "failing" or "making fantastical claims about capability" like I have seen from some X posters. Even if the tiles require them to inspect and replace some and that takes a month to retrofit a ship before the next launch, that is still 12 times faster reuse than any of their competitors that are unable to launch faster than about once per year so far. Just because their launch lead says the pad was designed to handle a cadence of one launch per 60 minutes 24/7 doesn't mean Spacex is making the claim that they will be ready for that kind of cadence any time soon.

They are doing astounding things with their spacecraft that nobody else is even close to catching up to, and have made those same kinds of quantum leaps forward in capability regularly over the objections of the competitors and detractors. So when I see people doubting them online, I just laugh and wait for them to get schooled like Tory Bruno did by Gwen Shotwell after taking shots at the "partially assembled" Raptor engines.

---

Agree with everything you said.
I saw the "Dead End" headline pop up on my Google news/deadline notifications yesterday. I tapped the link with some curiosity but pretty quickly dismissed it as general Elon hate. That's a bold claim to state the heat shield is a supposed "Dead End" for rapid reuse when 1) SpaceX won't even attempt orbital flight until maybe the next flight and orbit, reentry, AND catch/land are required for ANY reuse, and 2) SpaceX is the ONLY company looking at any reuse in the SuperHeavy lift space and they're the ONLY company evaluating reuse of any orbital components outside of small crew vehicles.

China has caught 1 medium/heavy lift first stage
Blue Origin can catch their medium/heavy lift first stage, but they just blew up their only launch facility and at best will return to flight late this year, i think more likely early next year.

SpaceX has 4 orbital class launch locations and almost has 6 orbital class pads.
LC39A -- F9/FH pad (only doing FH launches now) & Starship pad & tower under construction
SLC40 -- F9
Vandenberg -- F9
Starbase -- Pad 2 is fully functional and Tower 1 is being upgraded

Like Txags92 said, ANY reuse of a complete orbital class upper stage is ahead of anything the competition is doing. Even if it takes a month... what was the fastest Shuttle turnaround? 54 days was the fastest... Shuttle Atlantis between STS 51J & 65B in 1985 (pre-Challenger and pre-Columbia)

There's a strong contingent within Nasa that entirely resents Musk, Isaacman, Trump etc. They believe 'all was going great' with SLS before Isaacman upset their apple cart, and are pissed at the privatizations/Block 1B cancellation etc. The 'institutionalists' are trying to hold out past 2028 and hope to regain their 'rightful' power/positions after Trump leaves office.

In general as with all democrats they lack any ability to self-reflect.

Yeah I think we try to be a little more levelheaded in this thread politically than most, but anti-Elon bias is undeniably going to be a headwind for SpaceX. It's nothing new, going back to criticism that the Space Race was just the public face of weapons research. But it's frustrating all the same to see the games being played.

Decay said:

---

Yeah I think we try to be a little more levelheaded in this thread politically than most, but anti-Elon bias is undeniably going to be a headwind for SpaceX. It's nothing new, going back to criticism that the Space Race was just the public face of weapons research. But it's frustrating all the same to see the games being played.

---

Supersonic transport was as well. Concord in Europe (well just France and Brittan) was effectively slapping 4 very loud and very fuel inefficient military engines on a plane and making it capable of flying fast; Mach 2. It was never economic. Boeing was working on the ST707 again at the behest of the federal government. But in American fashion we had to be bigger and faster so it was going to fly Mach 3. Meanwhile the Russians were doing their own work while simultaneously copying everything the West was doing.

When the costs became to high here we cut the funding then Congress outlawed civilian flight over continental US > Mach 1. We didn't outlaw sonic booms. We made speed illegal.

That's gotta be a career highlight photo right there. https://t.co/QHYhhMfrfn pic.twitter.com/cgDXvuZnPz

— Space Koala (@SpaceKoala) July 28, 2026

I'm amazed the Starship is still afloat after this many days, especially with the bay door facing down. It is a testament to how well the Starship frame held up to the forces of reentry and the landing tipover that there isn't even a small leak that would cause it to take on water and either sink or at least start riding lower in the water.

nortex97 said:

---

There's a strong contingent within Nasa that entirely resents Musk, Isaacman, Trump etc. They believe 'all was going great' with SLS before Isaacman upset their apple cart, and are pissed at the privatizations/Block 1B cancellation etc. The 'institutionalists' are trying to hold out past 2028 and hope to regain their 'rightful' power/positions after Trump leaves office.

In general as with all democrats they lack any ability to self-reflect.

---

Yeah there is definitely a subset within NASA and its associated formerly dominant contractors that resents the "young and inexperienced upstarts" coming in and breaking all the rules about how space flight was supposed to work and showing how it can be done better, faster, and WAYYYYY cheaper than NASA and its traditional contractors were able to do. So they take every opportunity to throw shade on whatever Elon says he will do and take perverse joy when one of the test flights has a mishap.

Ag87H2O said:

---

I'm amazed the Starship is still afloat after this many days, especially with the bay door facing down. It is a testament to how well the Starship frame held up to the forces of reentry and the landing tipover that there isn't even a small leak that would cause it to take on water and either sink or at least start riding lower in the water.

---

Cargo bay is probably wet, but the tanks are empty and the valves should be closed.

Saw one of Scott Manley's recent videos and he claimed that the batteries would start dying at 48 hours from the vehicle going on internal power. So they had plenty of time to vent the tanks then ensure all of the valves were closed. Since the camera's and such remained online and connected to the Starlink network it's presumable they maintained other communications as well.

nortex97 said:

---

Some skepticism about the heat shield tiles.

Thinking about this for more than 5 minutes, it's obvious that:

1) SpaceX engineers took lessons from Shuttle to reduce maintenance time via modular tile shape
2) robotic inspection can automate what was formerly an intensive human process
3) eventually SpaceX will achieve high… https://t.co/NGmZJowTcU

— lizvstein (@lizvstein) July 29, 2026

Not sure that is really warranted.

Quote:

---

Clearly, Starship's heat shield was good enough for this vehicle to reenter Earth's atmosphere.
The problem is that, with the signs of damage, such a heat shield would appear to require a fair amount of inspection and refurbishment before another launch. In other words, SpaceX has a ways to go to reach "full and rapid" reuse of Starship. "Full" means reusing both the booster and the Starship upper stage, and "rapid" reuse means turning each Starship around in days or weeks, instead of months, at considerable expense.

SpaceX is aware of the challenges

We should stop here to point out that SpaceX is not oblivious to the magnitude of this heat shield challenge, nor blithely whistling past the graveyard.

On various podcasts and X social media postings, SpaceX founder Elon Musk has repeatedly stated that solving the reusable heat shield problem is one of the toughest problems the company faces. Back in February on a podcast with Dwarkesh Patel, Musk expounded on this, saying a reusable heat shield is "the biggest problem that remains" for Starship. "If you want to be able to land it, refill propellant, and fly again, you can't do this laborious inspection of 40,000 tiles type of thing," he said.

To address this challenge, the company has made substantial investments in new formulations for tile materials, standardizing shapes, and more. And it has been rigorously testing various approaches during Starship's experimental flight campaign.

The independent industry experts said they believe that SpaceX's approach to a modern thermal protection systems represents a good "incremental" step forward from the space shuttle's tiles but relies on the same fundamental solution.

As such, SpaceX's heat shield will likely be good enough to deploy a next-generation Starlink constellation. But the experts are concerned that it will be unable to hit the high flight rate neededseveral hundred to thousands of low-cost launches annuallyfor large settlements on the Moon and Mars, orbital data centers, or large-scale space-based solar power.

---

---

Maybe it's time to explore a 'Starlite' derivative that can be sprayed on...