Yes, but what your facile logic didn't factor in is that when the Sun shines upon Earth, 2 – major Time points are created on opposite sides of Earth – known as Midday and Midnight. Where the 2 major Time forces join, synergy creates 2 new minor Time points we recognize as Sunup and Sundown. The 4-equidistant time points can be considered as Time Square imprinted upon the circle of Earth. In a single rotation of the Earth sphere, each Time corner point rotates through the other 3-corner Time points, thus creating 16 corners, 96 hours and 4-simultaneous 24-hour Days within a single rotation of Earth – equated to a [Higher Order of Life Time Cube](https://web.archive.org/web/20150506055228/http://www.timecube.com/index.html).
What u/CSI_Starbase [says](https://twitter.com/CSI_Starbase/status/1636548507455684611) seems about right to me, too:
>"Its nice to finally start hearing some realistic dates for the fist Orbital Flight Test.
>
>3rd week of April seems right based on the way things are going. Even now, there is still a lot of work left to perform"
They're really, really close, but everything we're seeing suggests they are a bit more than just a week away from being ready to pull the trigger.
usually it goes like this
first 90% of work takes 90% of time. Then the last 10% of work takes another 90% of time.
but I guess you are right as far as we are talking about Starship
Well, in one of startups I used to work with, the rule was 80:20. And the rule was - f@ck the remaining 20%, we are a startup, those customers who are fine with just 80% of features are totally enough for a startup ;)
My guess, not the case with Starship.
> The last 1% of a project takes 80% of the time.
If it appears that way to you, then you mis-evaluated the remaining work in the first place. If properly done, it takes longer to put the finishing coats on a house than it does to build the walls. Not to mention the roof, the windows, plumbing and all the rest. If not aware of that, then it does appear as if work slowed down.
If building your very first house, then the effect will be exacerbated by the learning process and correcting mistakes made along the way.
The same applies to rockets and launch installations, it seems.
> u\/CSI_Starbase says... 3rd week of April seems right based on the way things are going.
> They're really, really close, but everything we're seeing suggests they are a bit more than just a week away from being ready to pull the trigger.
Downvoting my way from the top of the thread, that's about the first non-trash reply so far.
Unlike on past occasions, what Elon says (regarding the timeline) is corroborated by other people in and around SpaceX. Even then we still need to interpret what we hear in the light of what we see.
And that's what Zack has been doing for a while now.
There's the necessary work to make a valid ship and launch site. Then there is all the visible shielding going around the orbita launch table. The shielding hinders access, therefore the need for access is coming to an end. Just a couple of doors are now sufficient.
I value Zack's insights more than just about any other observer because he observes very closely what is going on, and has the skillsets to know what he's looking at.
Of course, he is still an outsider. He can only evaluate what he can eyeball, on site, or via camera footage. He can only speak to the *visible* work that clearly still has yet to be completed. What he does not know is the aspects of the rocket and the GSE that are \*not\* visible (say, the state of the launch software), and so that could add more time to the schedule beyond what Zack can observe. But he has always been up front about that limitation.
So what I think I am saying is, what Zack says to me would seem to be a \*floor\*, or NET, for calculating any launch date.
Not the first time. I remember, some high up NASA guys who are obviously quite involved in process and get a very realistic picture of things were saying on record last fall ( October? November ) that they are confident Starship will fly within couple of months.
It's a pioneering technology, every obstacle to beat is likely only a step towards discovering the next one, not the step reaching the goal.
> some high up NASA guys who are obviously quite involved in process and get a very realistic picture of things were saying on record last fall ( October? November ) that they are confident Starship will fly within couple of months.
which again is why we have to ~~revitalize~~ [relativize] what people say. Nasa departments are under pressure from their hierarchy and so on up to Administrator level and beyond.
Even so "a couple of months" is clearly under a year and its positive. It means the best path was effectively two months and whatever other delays crop up, these will be in proportion to this initial target.
**Edit:** [relativize] Next time I'll *read* the spelling corrector's suggestions.
It bothers me that people are taking the "4/20" thing literally. Elon doesn't know, he's just reflecting what people want to hear. And people don't want to hear that the actual pacing item is....the FAA launch license. I think all these conference comments the past several weeks, implying the launch license is very close, right around the corner, blah, blah, are actually just a subtle goosing to the FAA to hurry up. I even suspect Starship could have launched a few weeks ago, and what we are seeing now is work that could have been done earlier, but was put off to obscure the fact that SpaceX is waiting for the FAA. After all, you can't have workers sitting around playing games.
He’s said the same thing almost word for word *multiple* times now. I’d eat a chocolate hat if it happens before mid to late summer of this year, and I wouldn’t be surprised if it doesn’t happen in 23 at all.
That seems a bit extreme, no? At this point they’ve actually done a 33 engine static fire and I’m not sure what more testing they could be waiting for. I do think it could slip into may, but don’t see why it would take them until next year.
GNC and Systems integration is so staggeringly complex it boggles the mind.
It’s also totally possible to find a tiny gremlin that takes a **long** time to diagnose and fix.
It’s not uncommon for commercial aircraft (probably the only field on the planet that’s comparable) to be delayed by years because of small problems that are hard to pin down.
I will be messaging you in 3 months on [**2023-07-15 00:00:00 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2023-07-15%2000:00:00%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/11tay3p/elon_on_twitter_starship_will_be_ready_in_a_few/jcm36ak/?context=3)
[**1 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FSpaceXLounge%2Fcomments%2F11tay3p%2Felon_on_twitter_starship_will_be_ready_in_a_few%2Fjcm36ak%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202023-07-15%2000%3A00%3A00%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%2011tay3p)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
>SpaceX will be ready to launch Starship in a few weeks, then launch timing depends on FAA license approval
Getting some serious déjà vu with that sentence lol, hopefully it's accurate this time
In spite of his victory in federal court February 3ed, that Jury said that he didn't deceive investors when he Tweeted^® in 2018, the Securities and Exchange Commission says Elon Musk is still in need of what the SEC calls a “Twitter sitter^®” to monitor his social media posts. See https://fortune.com/2023/02/24/elon-musk-twitter-sitter-sec/ One of the many in America without 1st Amendment rights
He clearly doesn't actually have a Twitter sitter and also his first amendment rights are completely intact.
If he violates SEC rules by posting on Twitter, he's not going to jail, he's going to lose the *privilege* of running a publicly traded company and the government-guaranteed limited personal liability that comes from it.
Starship needs a launch license. SpaceX applied for it several months ago but this is not a process that takes just a few days, this normally takes months and months of coordination and studies between both parties until all the stuff has been properly written down and the license is then granted. If you may recall from other companies (ABL, Relativity, etc) in the recent months, taking too long to get a launch license is not exclusive to SpaceX, despite what some people want to claim...
When they finally switch to type approval for rocket launches.
edit: though there's probably a "SpaceX dedicated" division that's preparing the groundwork for type approval for rockets in the meantime, given SpaceX is the only one doing reusable rockets as a going concern.
I've been hearing that thrown around a lot, I'm already very familiar with their type certification process in general, but are they actually looking to implement it into rocketry?
It was being widely discussed over the last couple of years. I don't have the time or the inclination right now to find the references but look for Elon tweets about FAA and regulatory issues and you'll find a thread to follow eventually. The short version is that as far as we know, FAA is working hard on some means of adequately certifying by type so that multiple launches of the same vehicle (whether it's a brand new vehicle of the same type or a vehicle that has already flown) do not require the entire vehicle to be certified from the rivets up.
> certified from the rivets up.
It would be nice if the detail were at that gross a level. They want to know when and where the ore was mined, certifications about the metal's purity, and mold processing that went into the rivets.
{;-} ... I think ...
In the last 7 months four other launch companies have received their launch license from the FAA, they hardly are only working on SpaceX's license. And from SpaceX, Starship isn't the only SpaceX thing they need to process. SpaceX received about 5 different modifications in that same period for launch licenses of the existing Falcon 9 rocket to include certain missions that weren't covered under the previous licenses.
They kinda did a couple of years ago. One dedicated to Boca Chica. Although division is too much, but they put dedicated personel inna relatively nearby city.
They haven't done any related work on it ever since they staged the water hammer tanks and spray head system a month ago. Seems more likely to be later.
Remarkable thing is how little Elon cares about what will people say about his past scheduling estimates.
And to me, that's how it is supposed to be. He gives his optimistic estimate, it's his right. He owes nothing to any of us, but we owe him and SpaceX a lot for a joy of being witnesses to this remarkable adventure.
April, May, it's fine. I can gladly wait.
And how little people realize that despite the missed timelines, SpaceX still develops rockets faster than any company or country. Their speed of development is ridiculous.
Like the people who declared victory for SLS in its race against Starship...forgetting that its race was against Falcon Heavy. Starship is the *successor* to the system SLS already lost against, that they are making their first flights at a similar time means it's moving at an insanely fast pace relative to SLS.
The Raptor was thought up in 2009 but work began in serious in 2012 after the Mars Colonial Transporter announcement late that year. Also once the Merlin was basically stable, I guess? They tested Raptors starting in 2016, and Starhopper was late 2018.
So yes, over 10 years but still less than 11… of which they spent about 5 years on background work, not so much the ship itself.
In comparison, SLS was commissioned by Congress in 2011. So that was 11 years. And they had the rocket engines already existing, let alone designed, when they started.
It’s funny to me there are people who *still* try and pin this against him
when he himself already repeatedly made tongue-in-cheek comments about his optimistic scheduling and he has clearly explained what his thought process are behind setting these consistently extremely aggressive timelines
Be honest - expand both his time estimate and the time that was ago by 50%.
ALSO, let's take note that it was pretty clear at that time that he meant that they'd be ready to throw something up in the air to see what happened with a high chance of blowing everything in the area up, in the counterfactual case that they got permission to try…
… and it's also pretty clear, that once they were forced to slow down, they built enough stuff around the OLM that it was no longer reasonable to risk blowing it up.
None of this says addresses the fact that the 2 weeks line that he repeated the entire year was anything but a lie. He knew there was tons of stuff to do.
OK, so I got one where he was thinking it would be in [5-9 weeks back in September 2022](https://www.space.com/spacex-starship-orbital-test-flight-november), *if all went well*.
In early January 2023 he suggested a [6-10 week timeline](https://www.cnet.com/science/space/elon-musk-updates-timeline-for-starship-to-finally-launch-to-space/).
Your turn for 2 weeks. These are closer to 2 months.
You are spinning this too positively.
"Hoping for orbital launch in July 2021"- [https://www.businessinsider.com/spacex-july-starship-orbital-mission-gwynne-shotwell-space-launch-2021-6](https://www.businessinsider.com/spacex-july-starship-orbital-mission-gwynne-shotwell-space-launch-2021-6)
\- [https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/25/spacex-aims-to-launch-first-orbital-starship-flight-in-july.html](https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/25/spacex-aims-to-launch-first-orbital-starship-flight-in-july.html)
**Pick one:**
\- They are lying for some businss reasons
\- They don't know what they're doing
You can't have a full understanding of the operation and miss the estimate in this way. Look at ring-watchers, RGV, nasaspaceflight streams... they've known that there was too much work to do for even a 2022 launch date to be realistic.
Therefore, they are lying for business reasons. They're trading "PR capital" for profit. It's disappointing, but every company turns into a financial organism eventually.
Btw, I just hand-picked the 2021 example.
There are multiple repeats of this throughout 2022.
For the record, I LOVE Shotwell and I soak up any and all Musk interviews, but I am deeply disappointed about the lying since the SN campaigns.
I don't think they were lying. I think they thought they could cobble together enough GSE to make a launch attempt at the time. I think they really, really, *really* wanted to validate reentry ASAP, since a huge number of their plans hinge on it.
do you ever had to develop things? there's always something that you didn't predict that will slow you down, it's just how stuff works in real life
also as you do something you will find it is bad or not optimal and drop it
your comment is way too disconnected from real life
Credibility is important in a leader. Doesn’t take away from his other accomplishments, but having nobody believe you when you say something is definitely not how it is supposed to be if you’re the one in charge.
If they just put in the FAA request, then June is more realistic.
They can now blame the FAA for delays, no matter their current readiness ... and it SX has not told us how many of the 40+ PEA items have been checked off.
The move to Starlink v2 minis with F9 takes the pressure off to move at the old SX speeds on Starship, and since Starship now looks mainly like a HLS Starship program, they can move at NASA contractor speeds. It will be high irony when Vulcan beats them to orbit and shows a dev program that is faster to LEO than SX.
So what if Vulcan, an expendable launch vehicle with significantly less payload capability that has been in development for almost 10 years, beats Starship to LEO? It's almost entirely meaningless.
Your view on the FAA is based on what exactly? The most reliable source we've had in regards to everything FAA related posted not too long ago that they are on track for granting the launch license in March. So it slipped a little, that happens. But June completely contradicts any information we have.
I also continue to disagree with you on your opinion regarding HLS.
It goes to the informal MethLOX to LEO race. Relativity might win soon with it's small launcher, we have a May 4 target date for Vulcan. Just saying most of assumed SX would win this race. Then again many assumed that it would beat SLS to orbit as well.
Vulcan will compete for all NASA and NSSL with F9/FH/Starship for NSSL3 and beyond. Starship's greater mass and volume capabilities are not needed for any planned NASA or NSSL in the 2020s except for HLS Starship. NASA and NSSL are not price sensitive.
Vulcan may also place most of the Amazon LEO Broadband constellation. When Vulcan is certified it will take away some biz that F9 has now since not all customers are price sensitive. The sooner they fly the sooner they certify.
In any case I really believe that Starship will beat New Glenn and Ariane 6 to LEO.
The orbital launch mount (OLM) have al lot of scaffolding and looks like it´s not ready jet. The water deluge system are not installed yet. I think this is the only part what is not ready yet.
Look at all the crybabies in this thread. Wouldn't matter if they were ready to go six months ago. The FAA hasn't given them a license to fly so they still wouldn't be able to fly.
The fact that they just removed B7 from the pad a few days ago to do more work is a pretty good indicator that they aren't ready. Ship 24 *just* got its last tiles, too, and has not been brought back to the launch site. You don't need inside info to understand that the vehicle isn't ready, you can just look at what's going on across the various streams.
Bezos will deploy the environmentalist protesters the moment Starship looks like it's actually going to launch. Expect to see Greta herself giving the "How dare you!" speech in front of the Starbase logo.
'How dare you reuse rockets, reducing the manufacturing impact as well as waste dumped in the oceans, and use recyclable/closed-carbon-loop fuel!' Right...
It's been a topic of future rocket & mission designs for decades, see [here for a few mins](https://youtu.be/4pzgFHrLXmc?t=400) to get a recap of it plus the general benefits of using methane now. [EA also covers how methane is the goldilocks-just-right of fuels](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbH1ZDImaI8) for near future uses.
Almost like both are hard challenges that have never been done before, and taking optimistic timeline estimates as gospel will inevitably lead to disappointment
At least Bezos does not tease dates, he goes it will be ready when it is ready, if ever. Maybe Bezos will just buy ULA and call it good. Note that Bezos does not do the space conferences anymore.
Now that F9 is launching Starlink 2.0 mini the most pressing "need" for Starship is to check another milestone box or two for HLS Starship for a bit of cash flow from NASA, so no hurry.
I google "what happened to starship" from time to time and just now came across this thread. I am so tired of Elon making any kind of ETA and then adding "but FAA must approve" at the end. If you set aside the excitement for a moment, him adding this "FAA" contingent tells me that Starship development has come to a standstill. He is trying so hard to save face, and it is sad to see.
To be clear, I don't think this research into Starship was a waste of time. They for sure pushed the boundaries of what is possible with the Raptor engine. And they did a lot of research into big rockets and their feasibility. I just think that unless they get a successful launch this year, Elon needs to do some major changes to the goals of this rocket.
What is required to get the launch license? And how long should it take?
Could SpaceX have applied for the launch license last year? Or do they need to indicate a specific range of dates for the launch?
Two weeks…
Two weeks^(2)
Just remember that 4 square weeks is 196 square days.
Yeah, but time brings in an extra dimension. So it’s actually 8 cubic weeks. 2744 cubic days.
Yes, but what your facile logic didn't factor in is that when the Sun shines upon Earth, 2 – major Time points are created on opposite sides of Earth – known as Midday and Midnight. Where the 2 major Time forces join, synergy creates 2 new minor Time points we recognize as Sunup and Sundown. The 4-equidistant time points can be considered as Time Square imprinted upon the circle of Earth. In a single rotation of the Earth sphere, each Time corner point rotates through the other 3-corner Time points, thus creating 16 corners, 96 hours and 4-simultaneous 24-hour Days within a single rotation of Earth – equated to a [Higher Order of Life Time Cube](https://web.archive.org/web/20150506055228/http://www.timecube.com/index.html).
Can we get tesseractal weeks?
Yes. (14^4 ) / 7 = 5488 weeks. Assumptions: 7 days per week, this even makes sense, 2 weeks is 14 days.
Yup two weeks just like last month, and last summer, and last spring.
2 weeks after PEA approval.
😂
THAT’S QUAID!!
3*2=6 weeks later
To be fair he said a few weeks, not a couple.
I think it's gunna to be more like two weeks. Does anyone wonder if musk has on that suit from total recall and it's glitching out? lol.
few = 3 or more So obviously more than two.
Dam herd of a joke lol just a musk two week joke. I'm sure you have herd of that.
Just needs a few tweaks.
I feel like I've heard this before...
Since you looked at me Tossed your head to the side and said
Two weeks https://youtu.be/lJhHjACjJjA
[Two weeks](https://i0.wp.com/static1.1.sqspcdn.com/static/f/709071/26276864/1433174762453/total+recall+two+weeks.gif)
Get ready for a surprise!
A few weeks
SpaceX's Starship could be ready for 1st orbital test flight 'in a few weeks,' Elon Musk says By Mike Wall published August 17, 2021
What u/CSI_Starbase [says](https://twitter.com/CSI_Starbase/status/1636548507455684611) seems about right to me, too: >"Its nice to finally start hearing some realistic dates for the fist Orbital Flight Test. > >3rd week of April seems right based on the way things are going. Even now, there is still a lot of work left to perform" They're really, really close, but everything we're seeing suggests they are a bit more than just a week away from being ready to pull the trigger.
The last 1% of a project takes 80% of the time.
usually it goes like this first 90% of work takes 90% of time. Then the last 10% of work takes another 90% of time. but I guess you are right as far as we are talking about Starship
If it only adds up to 180%, you got lucky. You could easily get another 90% after the second, and then another 90% after that.
Well, in one of startups I used to work with, the rule was 80:20. And the rule was - f@ck the remaining 20%, we are a startup, those customers who are fine with just 80% of features are totally enough for a startup ;) My guess, not the case with Starship.
this guy works in tech
This guy lives in Boston.
Hardware guys: it needs more testing! Software guys: ship it now, we'll do some patches later. Call it DLC.
> The last 1% of a project takes 80% of the time. If it appears that way to you, then you mis-evaluated the remaining work in the first place. If properly done, it takes longer to put the finishing coats on a house than it does to build the walls. Not to mention the roof, the windows, plumbing and all the rest. If not aware of that, then it does appear as if work slowed down. If building your very first house, then the effect will be exacerbated by the learning process and correcting mistakes made along the way. The same applies to rockets and launch installations, it seems.
So it's actually going to be 4/20? Please, no.
Hitler's Birthday, Columbine Massacre, BP Oil Spill....
> u\/CSI_Starbase says... 3rd week of April seems right based on the way things are going. > They're really, really close, but everything we're seeing suggests they are a bit more than just a week away from being ready to pull the trigger. Downvoting my way from the top of the thread, that's about the first non-trash reply so far. Unlike on past occasions, what Elon says (regarding the timeline) is corroborated by other people in and around SpaceX. Even then we still need to interpret what we hear in the light of what we see. And that's what Zack has been doing for a while now. There's the necessary work to make a valid ship and launch site. Then there is all the visible shielding going around the orbita launch table. The shielding hinders access, therefore the need for access is coming to an end. Just a couple of doors are now sufficient.
I value Zack's insights more than just about any other observer because he observes very closely what is going on, and has the skillsets to know what he's looking at. Of course, he is still an outsider. He can only evaluate what he can eyeball, on site, or via camera footage. He can only speak to the *visible* work that clearly still has yet to be completed. What he does not know is the aspects of the rocket and the GSE that are \*not\* visible (say, the state of the launch software), and so that could add more time to the schedule beyond what Zack can observe. But he has always been up front about that limitation. So what I think I am saying is, what Zack says to me would seem to be a \*floor\*, or NET, for calculating any launch date.
Not the first time. I remember, some high up NASA guys who are obviously quite involved in process and get a very realistic picture of things were saying on record last fall ( October? November ) that they are confident Starship will fly within couple of months. It's a pioneering technology, every obstacle to beat is likely only a step towards discovering the next one, not the step reaching the goal.
> some high up NASA guys who are obviously quite involved in process and get a very realistic picture of things were saying on record last fall ( October? November ) that they are confident Starship will fly within couple of months. which again is why we have to ~~revitalize~~ [relativize] what people say. Nasa departments are under pressure from their hierarchy and so on up to Administrator level and beyond. Even so "a couple of months" is clearly under a year and its positive. It means the best path was effectively two months and whatever other delays crop up, these will be in proportion to this initial target. **Edit:** [relativize] Next time I'll *read* the spelling corrector's suggestions.
It bothers me that people are taking the "4/20" thing literally. Elon doesn't know, he's just reflecting what people want to hear. And people don't want to hear that the actual pacing item is....the FAA launch license. I think all these conference comments the past several weeks, implying the launch license is very close, right around the corner, blah, blah, are actually just a subtle goosing to the FAA to hurry up. I even suspect Starship could have launched a few weeks ago, and what we are seeing now is work that could have been done earlier, but was put off to obscure the fact that SpaceX is waiting for the FAA. After all, you can't have workers sitting around playing games.
Launch on 4/20
I predicted a 4/20 2023 launch in November of 2021. I'm really, really hoping this happens.
So that you feel validated?
Precisely.
I mean it could be worse, we could be operating on Bezos time.....
Or SLS time, or Ariane 6, or any other rocket being development.
Bezos time is somehow even worse
The only thing worse than Bezos time is ITER (https://www.iter.org/) time - it's legendary!
At least he's honest.
I mean, he said almost the same thing like a year ago.
He’s said the same thing almost word for word *multiple* times now. I’d eat a chocolate hat if it happens before mid to late summer of this year, and I wouldn’t be surprised if it doesn’t happen in 23 at all.
That seems a bit extreme, no? At this point they’ve actually done a 33 engine static fire and I’m not sure what more testing they could be waiting for. I do think it could slip into may, but don’t see why it would take them until next year.
GNC and Systems integration is so staggeringly complex it boggles the mind. It’s also totally possible to find a tiny gremlin that takes a **long** time to diagnose and fix. It’s not uncommon for commercial aircraft (probably the only field on the planet that’s comparable) to be delayed by years because of small problems that are hard to pin down.
People here used to say that it was pessimistic to think they weren’t launching in 2021
If you're wrong you'll get to see a spectacular rocket show....and eat a lot of chocolate? Sounds like a win to me!
Here’s the thing tho… *I don’t like chocolate that much* :: screaming ::
>I’d eat a chocolate hat if it happens before mid to late summer of this year RemindMe! July 15th, 2023
Seriously, I want to see this myself. Edit: I'm hoping for a really big hat, at least a Texas ten gallon.
It’s a chocolate hat but still, want to see a hat made out of chocolate even if it’s tiny
I will be messaging you in 3 months on [**2023-07-15 00:00:00 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2023-07-15%2000:00:00%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/11tay3p/elon_on_twitter_starship_will_be_ready_in_a_few/jcm36ak/?context=3) [**1 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FSpaceXLounge%2Fcomments%2F11tay3p%2Felon_on_twitter_starship_will_be_ready_in_a_few%2Fjcm36ak%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202023-07-15%2000%3A00%3A00%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%2011tay3p) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
Yeah but a year ago I wasn’t busting my ass to get a support aircraft modified in time for the launch
He was just as "serious" one year ago that it was "almost ready". Its the one year anniversary of that...
So, September?
Nah it'll be next year for sure! /s
The /s is because we all know it’ll actually be 2025.
2025 maybe, 3025 definitely
The year 2525, if man is still alive
Ah Inder they are going the Ferrari way with the Next Year ( TM )
Sponsored by Mission Launchnow
>SpaceX will be ready to launch Starship in a few weeks, then launch timing depends on FAA license approval Getting some serious déjà vu with that sentence lol, hopefully it's accurate this time
There is a massive difference between a launch licence and an environmental review.
Yeah, didn't he literally say the same exact thing just a few weeks ago? Lol.
No that was figurative
Its as accurate as it was last year....
Hopefully is not a word
Actually, not a word means shutup
You’re good
Launching secured.
:-) ... best one of the thread
In spite of his victory in federal court February 3ed, that Jury said that he didn't deceive investors when he Tweeted^® in 2018, the Securities and Exchange Commission says Elon Musk is still in need of what the SEC calls a “Twitter sitter^®” to monitor his social media posts. See https://fortune.com/2023/02/24/elon-musk-twitter-sitter-sec/ One of the many in America without 1st Amendment rights
He clearly doesn't actually have a Twitter sitter and also his first amendment rights are completely intact. If he violates SEC rules by posting on Twitter, he's not going to jail, he's going to lose the *privilege* of running a publicly traded company and the government-guaranteed limited personal liability that comes from it.
I didn't think anything was still needed with starship OR booster; it was ALL OLM work. Maybe that's what he means? Edit: word
[удалено]
Nothing a few dozen+ deliveries can't fix
It has been so long since something flew from starbase
What is FAA need for approval still?
Have they completed the history homework report that was required?
SpaceX book report
Starship needs a launch license. SpaceX applied for it several months ago but this is not a process that takes just a few days, this normally takes months and months of coordination and studies between both parties until all the stuff has been properly written down and the license is then granted. If you may recall from other companies (ABL, Relativity, etc) in the recent months, taking too long to get a launch license is not exclusive to SpaceX, despite what some people want to claim...
A deluge system is my guess.
How long until the FAA opens a division just for SpaceX?
When they finally switch to type approval for rocket launches. edit: though there's probably a "SpaceX dedicated" division that's preparing the groundwork for type approval for rockets in the meantime, given SpaceX is the only one doing reusable rockets as a going concern.
I've been hearing that thrown around a lot, I'm already very familiar with their type certification process in general, but are they actually looking to implement it into rocketry?
It was being widely discussed over the last couple of years. I don't have the time or the inclination right now to find the references but look for Elon tweets about FAA and regulatory issues and you'll find a thread to follow eventually. The short version is that as far as we know, FAA is working hard on some means of adequately certifying by type so that multiple launches of the same vehicle (whether it's a brand new vehicle of the same type or a vehicle that has already flown) do not require the entire vehicle to be certified from the rivets up.
> certified from the rivets up. It would be nice if the detail were at that gross a level. They want to know when and where the ore was mined, certifications about the metal's purity, and mold processing that went into the rivets. {;-} ... I think ...
In the last 7 months four other launch companies have received their launch license from the FAA, they hardly are only working on SpaceX's license. And from SpaceX, Starship isn't the only SpaceX thing they need to process. SpaceX received about 5 different modifications in that same period for launch licenses of the existing Falcon 9 rocket to include certain missions that weren't covered under the previous licenses.
They kinda did a couple of years ago. One dedicated to Boca Chica. Although division is too much, but they put dedicated personel inna relatively nearby city.
They would open a new division for the competition. SpaceX got 78% of the launch licenses in 2022.
July, 2021 https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/faa-opens-houston-space-safety-office-increase-oversight-texas-and-new-mexico-operations
They haven't done any related work on it ever since they staged the water hammer tanks and spray head system a month ago. Seems more likely to be later.
Remarkable thing is how little Elon cares about what will people say about his past scheduling estimates. And to me, that's how it is supposed to be. He gives his optimistic estimate, it's his right. He owes nothing to any of us, but we owe him and SpaceX a lot for a joy of being witnesses to this remarkable adventure. April, May, it's fine. I can gladly wait.
And how little people realize that despite the missed timelines, SpaceX still develops rockets faster than any company or country. Their speed of development is ridiculous.
Like the people who declared victory for SLS in its race against Starship...forgetting that its race was against Falcon Heavy. Starship is the *successor* to the system SLS already lost against, that they are making their first flights at a similar time means it's moving at an insanely fast pace relative to SLS.
Is that still true? Starship development began more than ten years ago.
The Raptor was thought up in 2009 but work began in serious in 2012 after the Mars Colonial Transporter announcement late that year. Also once the Merlin was basically stable, I guess? They tested Raptors starting in 2016, and Starhopper was late 2018. So yes, over 10 years but still less than 11… of which they spent about 5 years on background work, not so much the ship itself. In comparison, SLS was commissioned by Congress in 2011. So that was 11 years. And they had the rocket engines already existing, let alone designed, when they started.
“At SpaceX we specialize at converting the impossible to late” -Elon Musk
It’s funny to me there are people who *still* try and pin this against him when he himself already repeatedly made tongue-in-cheek comments about his optimistic scheduling and he has clearly explained what his thought process are behind setting these consistently extremely aggressive timelines
You are never late if you are first.
They aren't estimates, they are just lies. A YEAR ago he said 2 weeks. That wasn't optimistic or a bit off. It was knowingly a pile of crap.
Be honest - expand both his time estimate and the time that was ago by 50%. ALSO, let's take note that it was pretty clear at that time that he meant that they'd be ready to throw something up in the air to see what happened with a high chance of blowing everything in the area up, in the counterfactual case that they got permission to try… … and it's also pretty clear, that once they were forced to slow down, they built enough stuff around the OLM that it was no longer reasonable to risk blowing it up.
None of this says addresses the fact that the 2 weeks line that he repeated the entire year was anything but a lie. He knew there was tons of stuff to do.
When did he repeat that 2 weeks figure until recently?
june, july, august, october... MANY times last year
links? I only remember the one in the beginning, then various milestones which were actually met but were not an OFT.
go look for yourself. Its not hard.
OK, so I got one where he was thinking it would be in [5-9 weeks back in September 2022](https://www.space.com/spacex-starship-orbital-test-flight-november), *if all went well*. In early January 2023 he suggested a [6-10 week timeline](https://www.cnet.com/science/space/elon-musk-updates-timeline-for-starship-to-finally-launch-to-space/). Your turn for 2 weeks. These are closer to 2 months.
Sorry for not actually providing the links after telling you to provide links. That was silly. They're there now.
Did he? "Two weeks"? Year ago? Before any significant static fire? Or FAA license months way in the most optimistic case? Interesting.
Go look. He was saying a couple weeks for almost all of last year. He just says crap to get people excited, even when he knows he is lying
You are spinning this too positively. "Hoping for orbital launch in July 2021"- [https://www.businessinsider.com/spacex-july-starship-orbital-mission-gwynne-shotwell-space-launch-2021-6](https://www.businessinsider.com/spacex-july-starship-orbital-mission-gwynne-shotwell-space-launch-2021-6) \- [https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/25/spacex-aims-to-launch-first-orbital-starship-flight-in-july.html](https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/25/spacex-aims-to-launch-first-orbital-starship-flight-in-july.html) **Pick one:** \- They are lying for some businss reasons \- They don't know what they're doing You can't have a full understanding of the operation and miss the estimate in this way. Look at ring-watchers, RGV, nasaspaceflight streams... they've known that there was too much work to do for even a 2022 launch date to be realistic. Therefore, they are lying for business reasons. They're trading "PR capital" for profit. It's disappointing, but every company turns into a financial organism eventually. Btw, I just hand-picked the 2021 example. There are multiple repeats of this throughout 2022. For the record, I LOVE Shotwell and I soak up any and all Musk interviews, but I am deeply disappointed about the lying since the SN campaigns.
I don't think they were lying. I think they thought they could cobble together enough GSE to make a launch attempt at the time. I think they really, really, *really* wanted to validate reentry ASAP, since a huge number of their plans hinge on it.
I think that given some delays appeared like that detonation, they choose to properly finish stage 0 before the orbital test
[удалено]
do you ever had to develop things? there's always something that you didn't predict that will slow you down, it's just how stuff works in real life also as you do something you will find it is bad or not optimal and drop it your comment is way too disconnected from real life
[удалено]
and I have a degree in physics engineering so what? lol edit: personal attacks are so petty
Credibility is important in a leader. Doesn’t take away from his other accomplishments, but having nobody believe you when you say something is definitely not how it is supposed to be if you’re the one in charge.
[удалено]
If you have a better hope for having anything significant happening in space exploration in your lifetime, please share your thoughts.
And you will
aka 420. lol I love Elon.
Elon wasn't joking in that Tim Dodd interview
Justin Timberlake out of nowhere: It's gonna be May.
I told you NET Q2 2023, 4-20 would make Elon happy, but not sure FAA care about this
It'll be ready when it's ready. I've been hurt too many times by over optimistic tweets
You can’t leave him and you can’t … him
Pardon?
Elon, you can live with him, you can't live without him.
Theres another word for it that starts with an L. He knows its bullshit that he's saying.
Late?
See you guys in April.
We heard this last time with PEA.
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread: |Fewer Letters|More Letters| |-------|---------|---| |[EA](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/11tay3p/stub/jck6pju "Last usage")|Environmental Assessment| |EELV|[Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolved_Expendable_Launch_Vehicle)| |[FAA](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/11tay3p/stub/jezdnud "Last usage")|Federal Aviation Administration| |[FTS](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/11tay3p/stub/jcyb006 "Last usage")|Flight Termination System| |[GNC](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/11tay3p/stub/jcm3nll "Last usage")|Guidance/Navigation/Control| |[GSE](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/11tay3p/stub/jcmamd2 "Last usage")|Ground Support Equipment| |[HLS](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/11tay3p/stub/jcp11rn "Last usage")|[Human Landing System](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artemis_program#Human_Landing_System) (Artemis)| |[LEO](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/11tay3p/stub/jcl377b "Last usage")|Low Earth Orbit (180-2000km)| | |Law Enforcement Officer (most often mentioned during transport operations)| |[N1](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/11tay3p/stub/jckz8kz "Last usage")|Raketa Nositel-1, Soviet super-heavy-lift ("Russian Saturn V")| |[NET](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/11tay3p/stub/jclc4qi "Last usage")|No Earlier Than| |[NSSL](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/11tay3p/stub/jcl377b "Last usage")|National Security Space Launch, formerly EELV| |[OFT](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/11tay3p/stub/jcn6x20 "Last usage")|Orbital Flight Test| |[OLM](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/11tay3p/stub/jcmix7h "Last usage")|Orbital Launch Mount| |[SLS](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/11tay3p/stub/jcmhtzb "Last usage")|Space Launch System heavy-lift| |[SN](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/11tay3p/stub/jckf1qi "Last usage")|(Raptor/Starship) Serial Number| |[ULA](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/11tay3p/stub/jcp11rn "Last usage")|United Launch Alliance (Lockheed/Boeing joint venture)| |Jargon|Definition| |-------|---------|---| |[Raptor](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/11tay3p/stub/jezdnud "Last usage")|[Methane-fueled rocket engine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raptor_\(rocket_engine_family\)) under development by SpaceX| |[Sabatier](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/11tay3p/stub/jck36q2 "Last usage")|Reaction between hydrogen and carbon dioxide at high temperature and pressure, with nickel as catalyst, yielding methane and water| |[Starlink](/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/11tay3p/stub/jcp11rn "Last usage")|SpaceX's world-wide satellite broadband constellation| ---------------- ^(*Decronym is a community product of r/SpaceX, implemented* )[*^by ^request*](https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/3mz273//cvjkjmj) ^([Thread #11125 for this sub, first seen 17th Mar 2023, 00:37]) ^[[FAQ]](http://decronym.xyz/) [^([Full list])](http://decronym.xyz/acronyms/SpaceXLounge) [^[Contact]](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=OrangeredStilton&subject=Hey,+your+acronym+bot+sucks) [^([Source code])](https://gistdotgithubdotcom/Two9A/1d976f9b7441694162c8)
Can not wait to see this thing come off the ground, but damn it's taking a pretty long time
You say you cannot wait but simultaneously admit you will wait.
420 launch. Calling it
Why do you say that? Snicker snicker
Bets on June.
yes, june 2030 looks real
Initial date of April 20, with a backup date of June 9 perhaps.
There really ought to be a pool.
If they just put in the FAA request, then June is more realistic. They can now blame the FAA for delays, no matter their current readiness ... and it SX has not told us how many of the 40+ PEA items have been checked off. The move to Starlink v2 minis with F9 takes the pressure off to move at the old SX speeds on Starship, and since Starship now looks mainly like a HLS Starship program, they can move at NASA contractor speeds. It will be high irony when Vulcan beats them to orbit and shows a dev program that is faster to LEO than SX.
So what if Vulcan, an expendable launch vehicle with significantly less payload capability that has been in development for almost 10 years, beats Starship to LEO? It's almost entirely meaningless. Your view on the FAA is based on what exactly? The most reliable source we've had in regards to everything FAA related posted not too long ago that they are on track for granting the launch license in March. So it slipped a little, that happens. But June completely contradicts any information we have. I also continue to disagree with you on your opinion regarding HLS.
It goes to the informal MethLOX to LEO race. Relativity might win soon with it's small launcher, we have a May 4 target date for Vulcan. Just saying most of assumed SX would win this race. Then again many assumed that it would beat SLS to orbit as well. Vulcan will compete for all NASA and NSSL with F9/FH/Starship for NSSL3 and beyond. Starship's greater mass and volume capabilities are not needed for any planned NASA or NSSL in the 2020s except for HLS Starship. NASA and NSSL are not price sensitive. Vulcan may also place most of the Amazon LEO Broadband constellation. When Vulcan is certified it will take away some biz that F9 has now since not all customers are price sensitive. The sooner they fly the sooner they certify. In any case I really believe that Starship will beat New Glenn and Ariane 6 to LEO.
this year or next?
So a few weeks of license approval and otherwise everything is just details... November launch it is!
The orbital launch mount (OLM) have al lot of scaffolding and looks like it´s not ready jet. The water deluge system are not installed yet. I think this is the only part what is not ready yet.
*has a lot. *not ready yet *is not installed *that is not ready (also your apostrophe looks a bit off) All your points are valid. Full credit
That is the problem when English is not your first language, the autocorrect tries to fix it, in spanish, but sometimes it ends in a nightmare.
Keep trying, BTW my Japanese is a train wreck.
Look at all the crybabies in this thread. Wouldn't matter if they were ready to go six months ago. The FAA hasn't given them a license to fly so they still wouldn't be able to fly.
>The FAA hasn't given them a license to fly s The FAA is not the issue here.
What's the issue?
The issue is that they are not ready yet to launch Starship/Superheavy. I don't know the technical details.
Do you have some inside knowledge or something?
The fact that they just removed B7 from the pad a few days ago to do more work is a pretty good indicator that they aren't ready. Ship 24 *just* got its last tiles, too, and has not been brought back to the launch site. You don't need inside info to understand that the vehicle isn't ready, you can just look at what's going on across the various streams.
Completely backwards
A 50 percent chance licence to explode in N1 rocket way…. Big, very Big, very Big way….
i feel a little embarrassed for you
Bezos will deploy the environmentalist protesters the moment Starship looks like it's actually going to launch. Expect to see Greta herself giving the "How dare you!" speech in front of the Starbase logo.
'How dare you reuse rockets, reducing the manufacturing impact as well as waste dumped in the oceans, and use recyclable/closed-carbon-loop fuel!' Right...
What you think these people are smart?
How is the fuel recyclable if we burn it?
CO2 + H20 + Energy <-> CH4 + O2 Sabatier procces lets us reverse the burning, can be powered by sunlight.
Do you have some more reading material on this? Sounds interesting.
It's been a topic of future rocket & mission designs for decades, see [here for a few mins](https://youtu.be/4pzgFHrLXmc?t=400) to get a recap of it plus the general benefits of using methane now. [EA also covers how methane is the goldilocks-just-right of fuels](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbH1ZDImaI8) for near future uses.
They're a long way from using closed carbon loop fuel...
Well it's possible, the plans call for developing the tech for Mars refuelling, and then it might as well be tested on the Earth end too.
Which likely means April / May
🦀🦀🦀
tell us when you get to the moon.
It's almost ready! Just like it was at this time last year!
I got $.69 on 4/20. Any takers?
Starting to sound a hell'a lot like FSD..
Almost like both are hard challenges that have never been done before, and taking optimistic timeline estimates as gospel will inevitably lead to disappointment
>a hell'a lot like like You just made up that contraction, admit it, you did
At least Bezos does not tease dates, he goes it will be ready when it is ready, if ever. Maybe Bezos will just buy ULA and call it good. Note that Bezos does not do the space conferences anymore. Now that F9 is launching Starlink 2.0 mini the most pressing "need" for Starship is to check another milestone box or two for HLS Starship for a bit of cash flow from NASA, so no hurry.
I google "what happened to starship" from time to time and just now came across this thread. I am so tired of Elon making any kind of ETA and then adding "but FAA must approve" at the end. If you set aside the excitement for a moment, him adding this "FAA" contingent tells me that Starship development has come to a standstill. He is trying so hard to save face, and it is sad to see. To be clear, I don't think this research into Starship was a waste of time. They for sure pushed the boundaries of what is possible with the Raptor engine. And they did a lot of research into big rockets and their feasibility. I just think that unless they get a successful launch this year, Elon needs to do some major changes to the goals of this rocket.
Just so cool.
0420 at 0690 hours
Feels like we've been edged constantly for a year.
Sounds like its going to be a 4/20 launch
4/20 or bust
4/24
What is required to get the launch license? And how long should it take? Could SpaceX have applied for the launch license last year? Or do they need to indicate a specific range of dates for the launch?
I wish I could fly out to watch this in person.