Wen Starship Flight 9?

[jongoff]

Hey guys, nobody else put up the new poll yet, so here you go. We don't have a ton of public details yet on what happened with Flight 8, other than that Starship failed in what looked like a pretty similar manner to Flight 7, and the FAA is again requiring a mishap investigation.

So when do you think SpaceX will have Flight 9 in the air? Will they take the time to do a significant redesign and more significant testing before this next flight? Or do you think they'll push to move quickly again, and just roll the dice on a tweak solving the problem?

Poll rules:
1- Date given is when you think Flight 9 physically leaves the pad.
2- Poll is open for 5 days (through Monday afternoon) -- yeah we don't have great data yet, that's why a poll is still worth doing.
3- As always, if you're willing to share the rationale for your vote, please do in the thread.

~Jon

[jongoff]

I'll go first. My guess is May 2025 -- I'm basically guessing that they won't go for major redesign and major retesting on the ground, but will roll the dice with another incremental tweak, and test it in flight. I don't necessarily think this is the approach that will maximize the probability-weighted time to getting Starship operational, but think this fits more with Elon's MO.

~Jon

[sdsds]

On March 20 6 2025 Musk predicted 4 to 6 weeks, i.e. 28 to 42 days. Applying the (days)^1.1 time stretch gets 39 to 61 days, or April 14 to May 6. Averaging those gives April 25, so I went with April.

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1897883255380029524

[jongoff]

On March 20 2025 Musk predicted 4 to 6 weeks, i.e. 28 to 42 days. Applying the (days)^1.1 time stretch gets 39 to 61 days, or April 14 to May 6. Averaging those gives April 25, so I went with April.

March 20 2025 is still a week out... is that a typo, or do you have a time machine?

~Jon

[sdsds]

On March 20 2025 Musk predicted 4 to 6 weeks, i.e. 28 to 42 days. Applying the (days)^1.1 time stretch gets 39 to 61 days, or April 14 to May 6. Averaging those gives April 25, so I went with April.

March 20 2025 is still a week out... is that a typo, or do you have a time machine?

~Jon

Oops! Thanks for catching that. I updated the post with the correct date and substantiating material.

[ZachS09]

Maybe I'm being pessimistic, but my guess is this July.

[deltaV]

I voted May 2025, which is 1.8-2.8 months from flight 8 on March 6. I voted this way because that's about the average for the Starship program so far and I don't yet see any compelling evidence that this flight will be different (either faster or slower).

[sdsds]

Four weeks ago Musk wrote, "The next ship will be ready in 4 to 6 weeks."

"Time keeps on slippin', slippin', slippin' into the future."

[Metalskin]

I'm really curious as to what is happening. I can only assume that they're still pondering the data from the last two flights, or considering what changes are required to address the data from the last two flights.

Personally, I think this is good. I know their approach is often compared to agile methodologies, but even in agile you still need architecture and design at a level to make sure you don't burn too many sprints constantly reworking/refactoring. Obviously there is some blurry line between waterfall and agile...

I s'pose it's kinda like driving, just because you're choosing paths that mean you're constantly moving, doesn't mean you get to your destination faster. I'm sure they're sensitive to whether a flight will provide useful benefit or not and are holding back until they can be sure that they will have a benefit with the next flight.

[sdsds]

Five weeks ago Musk wrote, "The next ship will be ready in 4 to 6 weeks."

We could use a liberal definition of 'ready' and say a ship was ready when it rolled out for a static fire (assuming the static fire was a success). What are the chances the next ship rolls out for a static fire sometime in the next 7 days?

[Vultur]

I wonder what is happening too. The booster static fire seemed like they were moving toward a flight fairly rapidly, but it seems like not much has happened since.

Are they making changes to the Ship itself?

[eric z]

 "WHEN,not wen". 

[r8ix]

I wonder what is happening too. The booster static fire seemed like they were moving toward a flight fairly rapidly, but it seems like not much has happened since.

Are they making changes to the Ship itself?

The presumption is that they are making major changes to the fuel distribution mechanism in the ship, since a) that changed between v1 and v2, and b) it is believed to have been the cause of the loss of flights 7 and 8, despite improvements made between the two flights.

[Vultur]

I wonder what is happening too. The booster static fire seemed like they were moving toward a flight fairly rapidly, but it seems like not much has happened since.

Are they making changes to the Ship itself?

The presumption is that they are making major changes to the fuel distribution mechanism in the ship, since a) that changed between v1 and v2, and b) it is believed to have been the cause of the loss of flights 7 and 8, despite improvements made between the two flights.

That would certainly make sense, but I haven't seen a lot on that on the update threads. Would that work be basically 'under cover' so the Starbase cameras wouldn't see it?

[jongoff]

"WHEN,not wen". 

It was a deliberate joke, referencing the old "Wen Hop?" memes I used to see when they were flying Starhopper.

~Jon

[r8ix]

That would certainly make sense, but I haven't seen a lot on that on the update threads. Would that work be basically 'under cover' so the Starbase cameras wouldn't see it?

Probably both indoors and inside the ship, so difficult to observe.

[etudiant]

I wonder what is happening too. The booster static fire seemed like they were moving toward a flight fairly rapidly, but it seems like not much has happened since.

Are they making changes to the Ship itself?

The presumption is that they are making major changes to the fuel distribution mechanism in the ship, since a) that changed between v1 and v2, and b) it is believed to have been the cause of the loss of flights 7 and 8, despite improvements made between the two flights.

That would certainly make sense, but I haven't seen a lot on that on the update threads. Would that work be basically 'under cover' so the Starbase cameras wouldn't see it?

Have we ever had any detail coverage of the interior arrangements of either the boosters or the Starships?
If there are extensive plumbing revisions, it might explain the apparent slippage, but there would be no external evidence of the changes.

[Skye]

Why don’t they just put back the engine shielding they removed for V2 until they can find a good alternative?

[lightleviathan]

I wonder what is happening too. The booster static fire seemed like they were moving toward a flight fairly rapidly, but it seems like not much has happened since.

Are they making changes to the Ship itself?

The presumption is that they are making major changes to the fuel distribution mechanism in the ship, since a) that changed between v1 and v2, and b) it is believed to have been the cause of the loss of flights 7 and 8, despite improvements made between the two flights.

That would certainly make sense, but I haven't seen a lot on that on the update threads. Would that work be basically 'under cover' so the Starbase cameras wouldn't see it?

Have we ever had any detail coverage of the interior arrangements of either the boosters or the Starships?
If there are extensive plumbing revisions, it might explain the apparent slippage, but there would be no external evidence of the changes.

Here are some helpful diagrams from the Ringwatchers:

Notice the three large angled downcomer pipes that go from the common dome to the RVacs, which were not on block 1

article link: https://ringwatchers.com/article/s33-tanks#part-vi-nbsppropellant-distribution

[r8ix]

Here are some helpful diagrams from the Ringwatchers:

Notice the three large angled downcomer pipes that go from the common dome to the RVacs, which were not on block 1

article link: https://ringwatchers.com/article/s33-tanks#part-vi-nbsppropellant-distribution

Right; those are the changes which are believed to have happened between v1 and v2, but the point is that it’s difficult to see what kinds of changes were made for Flight 8 and are currently being made for Flight 9.

[sdsds]

Six weeks ago Musk wrote, "The next ship will be ready in 4 to 6 weeks."

Today there was an unsuccessful attempt at a ship static fire. Congratulations to all whose poll vote indicates they've learned to seriously question Musk's estimates.

[Skye]

Wait whaaaaa? Btw, since S36 is cryo testing (prob done by the time you read this), do you think it’ll overtake S35? They seem to be having issues with it and moving to S36 may not be the worst idea.

[laszlo]

Makes no difference, it's just gonna blow up over Florida anyway 

[lightleviathan]

Wait whaaaaa? Btw, since S36 is cryo testing (prob done by the time you read this), do you think it’ll overtake S35? They seem to be having issues with it and moving to S36 may not be the worst idea.

Proper retrofits to a flawed design take time, especially now that they aren't rushing. Cryotesting 36 while there's a gap in the schedule makes sense, it's not an indication of a replacement.

[sdsds]

The static fire test for Ship 34 (S34) was conducted on February 11, 2025. The first launch attempt for Starship Flight Test 8 (IFT-8), which involved Ship 34, was scrubbed on March 3, 2025. The actual launch of IFT-8 took place on March 6, 2025. Therefore, the time between the static fire and the actual launch of IFT-8 was approximately 25 days.

25 days from today would put launch on May 26.

[litton4]

Might all depend on whether, from camera views, there was a problem with the 6-engine static fire, just conducted.

So, if confirmed, either they've had a new failure (bad)
or
They've had the same failure that doomed the last 2 flights. (bad short term, good medium term)

[Skye]

Date apparently set for May 13with backups till May 23!!!

(I’m scared!  )

Edit: Flight 9 is now NET May 19th

Edit edit: NET May 20th? It’s unclear now

Edit edit edit: May 21st, quite a few date changes

[shm6666]

I did take the very conservative guess of aug 2025. Knowing full well that they want to try way before. My feeling after seeing flight 7 and 8 is that they do probably have a serious design issue with V2. They can solve it in several ways and I think they will. But my feeling is that it will take time.

If the fly flight 9 now in May. I really do hope it is successful. A failure now will not be good. My thinking behind aug 2025 was that they would need to do a V2.5 and that would take some time. I want to see Starship fly. I want to see it with the same cadence as Falcon 9.

[Robotbeat]

Didn’t vote, but end of May or June seem likely.

I do think it’s funny when people are surprised when aerospace dates slip. That’s just the nature of this industry, nothing to do with Musk. Not a single firm is immune to it.

[jongoff]

I voted May when I setup the poll. I knew there was a chance they might try to move fast and roll the dice, and try for an earlier launch, but figured May was the most likely date if they were trying to split the difference between moving fast and trying to make sure it would work. Fingers crossed that they prove me right. :-)

More seriously, I hope they take the time necessary to have a good and successful flight. I want to see them go for a Starship catch this summer, and I'd also like to see them get into operational Starlink deployment flights.

~Jon

[sdsds]

I'm already predicting the number of days between Flights 9 and 10. This Weibull distribution models the time between flights, with a mode of 82 days and 90% of intervals being 123 days or less.

[catdlr]

Time to lock this and start "When 10"  (rhymes).