It will be interesting to see if all the thermal tiles will survive launch this time. They are targeting a successful reentry, but it sounds like their current design cannot tolerate the loss of more than a few tiles.
I think about Starship way too much. My hot question is: how many Starship Tankers will SpaceX need to build to refuel the HLS for Artemis III?
a) No reuse, so no weight from tiles and fuel for landing, so 10 to 12 Tanker stages.
b) Some reuse, but turnaround takes weeks, so 6 to 8 Tanker stages.
c) Full rapid reuse, so 2 to 3 Tanker stages.
At this point, I am sad to say that a) seems like a possibility to me.
The next question is how many booster stages? Will rapid reuse for boosters be ready by Artemis III, chopsticks and all? I think this might be possible by then.
Artemis III is currently scheduled for no earlier than September 2026. There are factors other than Starship which may push it back, such as the Orion heat shield mini-debacle
Why would you care about the tankers? The engine costs around 2 million dollars rounded up, that means the upper stage won't cost significantly more than $20 million.
The only thing they have to reuse is the booster. That alone will get them the Artemis 6 contract. Once you have reused the booster, you can do as many reentry tests as you like, even if it is just for fun. For every saved booster, you can do three reentry test flights and still break even.
Makes sense - plasma sneaks through holes super fast.
I just wonder how attaching the tiles can be so hard. I would understand if it were the tiles themselves delaminating and the top layer falling off - high temperature ceramics aren't known for strength.
But it appears the tile complete with its steel mount is coming detached from the ship. Just weld it on better? Bolt it on? Design better clips? Use some thermite type reaction to weld it on behind the tile so it never comes off again?
Seems like there's a lot of options to try, so how come they've been having issues for so long?
People here are taking my comment a bit too seriously. I'm not mad, it's fine.
I do think it's a fun assignment with a lot of perks and minimal responsibility in the heat of the moment. They aren't going to micromanage SpaceX into an abort, they don't have enough immediate context to do that. They're there for a vibe-check and the afterparty. The real work is in the retro if the rocket explodes.
I think you're missing the point of why they are there. To continue the above sports reference – you could say the referee has nothing on the line as they can't win or lose the game, and they just get to sit there and enjoy the show, and enjoy the afterparty.
This is obviously incorrect. If something goes wrong, the FAA rep will be there to ensure the correct procedures are followed, to assess whether the SpaceX team met their licence obligations in how they handle mishaps, and to provide oversight in general. On the happy path, sure, they might not be doing a lot more than a "vibe check", but on the unhappy path they may be the difference between SpaceX getting a launch licence for Starship again in months or years.
> the correct procedures are followed, to assess whether the SpaceX team met their licence obligations in how they handle mishaps, and to provide oversight in general
The FAA rep is not going to do any of those things during launch proceedings. The umpire makes calls on the spot. This rep is just watching. They'll do all assessment during post-launch retros.
agree, can tell you meant the price of the seats are super high because it is such a big deal (while contrasted with the guy who's getting paid to watch).
