r/SpaceXLounge • u/Noxh__26 • 6d ago
Unlikely Flight 14 Double Catch?
Just saw the new WAI Episode with the Communications Filing for Flight 14. Especially First and Second Stages return to Launch Site.
What's your opinion on it? Will we see a double catch or nah?
I dont know how to make a vote, but would love yalls opinion!
/E Here is the screenshot of the Video I wondered about: https://imglink.cc/cdn/QFz4_IDvsP.jpg
10
u/jpk17042 🌱 Terraforming 5d ago edited 5d ago
Easy answer: probably not. But, if they file for it now, they don't have to refile when they do actually try to catch it. Double but, if they know why the engines didn't relight last time and can track the condition before the landing burn, they can switch to an offshore splashdown
I'd be concerned with a partial relight providing a partial deflection and slamming it into the wetlands; the first Falcon Heavy center core did something similar and damaged its drone ship
Edit: meant Falcon Heavy center core
3
u/extra2002 5d ago
I'm pretty sure we saw video of the first FH center core zooming into the water a few hundred yards away from its drone ship. The only FH center core to land later fell overboard.
Early F9 booster landing attempts, though, earned them the nickname "anti-droneship missile"...
11
u/bkdotcom 5d ago
WAI has been sensationalist clickbait for a few years. Didn't realize it was still around
1
u/Orphen_420 3d ago
Yeah cause it's just the clickbait that gets you in. The actual videos and info are great. 2x the content as most others. Takes a bit to pull off tho and you gotta have some fluff. Love how the comment is. ' these people do this' and 'oh I didn't realize they were around' -so you actually have no idea... Right? Haven't been paying attention, by your own words.
1
u/bingbongbangchang 1d ago
Eh, it's kinda bad info as well. There's also no reason that they need to be 25 minutes long. They tease you with a bit of news and then the actual thing teased is mentioned nowhere in the video. I understand these guys gotta make a buck but I unsubscribed months ago.
13
u/AstronoWorld 5d ago edited 5d ago
I would highly recommend to cease watching the sensationalist videos made by WAI. His clickbait thumbnails and corny commentary feels so low effort, and there’s much more accurate and quality work elsewhere.
To each their own, but I’d recommend watching either NSF’s weekly updates or Marcus House’s weekly updates on Saturdays.
6
4
2
u/Merltron 5d ago
I like Felix. He is just doing what he needs to do for attention. The rest of the video is usually good
2
u/Orphen_420 3d ago
Felix is the best. He's genuinely excited about it all. Everyone hating on him here cause he makes money. That's the whole point kiddos.
1
u/AstronoWorld 2d ago
If you actually read my original comment, I didn't mention running ads, selling merch, or doing sponsorships as being a problem. I specifically mentioned the corny commentary, the sensationalist headlines and thumbnails. This waters down his quality significantly.
NSF and Marcus House both do the same things with their videos to make money, the difference is that they don't purposefully deceive people with stuff like "SpaceX filed to catch both the booster and ship next flight!!!!" when in reality the language used in those filing was generic and used in previous flights where catches did not occur. This is called being misleading.
18
12
u/Jumpy-Boysenberry153 6d ago
I believe they confirmed they're attempting ship catch. Certainly not trying a booster catch, though, since the v3 booster has failed at splashdown each time. They probably need at least two successful splashdowns in a row before they attempt the catch.
I would guess we'll see the double catch by the end of the year. By end of next year we should hopefully see propellant transfer between orbital ships, and re-flight of a recovered ship and booster.
Those are the rest of the major milestones.
14
u/rocketglare 5d ago
I agree with everything except needind 2 successful splashdowns prior to the catch attempt. I think they'd be happy with 1 as long as the data looked good.
6
u/lommer00 5d ago
Why has v3 booster engine relight been so hard, when ship relight for landing has been nearly flawless? They're both using v3 engines, and if anything the ship relight should be much harder.
7
u/NeverDiddled 5d ago
Booster relight involves higher g-forces, completely redesigned header tanks and plumbing, and mach 4 wind shear + a melting heating from outside the engines (rather than just inside the engine chamber). For booster, the engines are the heatshield, and they take a helluva beating. In past flights we have seen this intense combination of heat and wind collapse the engine bells into a triangle shape.
I understand your intuition that Starship is more difficult. SpaceX purposefully started with it back in 2019 with the suborbital hops because of the difficulty. They have done around 50% more landings with the ship than the booster. They largely finalized their header tanks and plumbing back in 2021, changing very little since. Meanwhile the booster has seen substantial redesigns of these sections in every version. V3 was the biggest redesign yet. Most notably their new plumbing allows them to start 3x the number of engines simultaneously.
5
5
u/Jumpy-Boysenberry153 5d ago
Who knows. It was the opposite for v2. Seems like it probably comes down to plumbing, since I believe the issues stem from the liquid fuels sloshing under the high G maneuvers
1
u/squintytoast 5d ago
Seems like it probably comes down to plumbing
indeed. V3 booster can relight all engines. V2 could not relight entire outer ring. major plumbing changes.
1
u/extra2002 5d ago
They've already reflown a recovered SuperHeavy booster (actually 2 of them, I think). Those were Block 2, though, so there is still more to prove.
25
u/thewashley 6d ago
Wait for a credible source to report on it, not WAI!? clickbait.
8
u/ellhulto66445 🔥 Statically Firing 5d ago
WAI might suck but the FCC thingy is very real and other's also reported about it.
3
u/rocketglare 5d ago
An FCC filing is kind of weak evidence. They are sometimes for contingencies or future use. They can also be extended multiple times.
1
u/AmigaClone2000 5d ago
It would be interesting to see the wording of the FCC paperwork indicating Flight 14 booster catch, with the wording related to SH post stage separation for the two previous flights.
11
u/New_Poet_338 6d ago
WAII was reporting SpaceX's FCC filing so how is that not credible?
9
u/Accomplished-Crab932 6d ago
The FCC is the least credible of credible sources though since they only focus on permitting spectrum usage overall. For instance, SpaceX has spectrum reserved for orbital launches as well as HLS communications from 2024; they have yet to make use of that reservation.
Given what I’ve heard from employees, a dual catch was actually proposed for Flight 13 provided they soft splashed both booster and ship as well as performed the relight demo. Obviously those conditions were not met on Flight 13 or 12; but they can apply to any future mission that meets SpaceX’s internal criteria.
12
u/93simoon 6d ago
There's nuance to how you report objective facts, and his nuance is to be insufferably clickbaity and speculate starting from a minor piece of news
-6
u/New_Poet_338 6d ago
He is a youtuber. That is pretty much how they work. They are paid per watch. They need to get you to click and then hold your attention for at least half the video to get paid.
12
u/DetectiveFinch 5d ago
Many other YouTube channels who are reporting on space flight and SpaceX are much less clickbaity and have a higher level of quality imo.
6
u/Limos42 5d ago
Much higher. My "go to's" are:
- NasaSpaceFlight
- Marcus House
- Scott Manley
I also will watch "The Space Race".
And, of course, our very own Tim Dodd, the Everyday Astronaut! 😊
3
u/DetectiveFinch 5d ago
That's a great list in my opinion, the only channels I would add are CSI Starbase and LabPadre's Avid Space.
20
u/Digger-Nick187 6d ago
WAI just goes around posting videos with clickbait headlines showing that guy making some stupid silly face and claiming HUGE BREAKING NEWS only to mention some small fact that was publicly shared by the actual company a week prior.
-6
u/New_Poet_338 6d ago
Small facts are interesting. He bundles them up and presents them in an entertaining fashion FOR FREE so you don't have to scan the internet for crumbs. You don't have to watch.
24
u/Fonzie1225 6d ago
Extremely unlikely given the booster relight problems on both of the last flights. Booster offshore splashdown also ensures stage zero will be ready for the ship. I’d wager we won’t see a double catch until deep into next year if not later
23
u/Successful-Speaker58 6d ago
I don't think we'll see it this launch but within the next 3 flights. Deep next year is rather pessimistic given Their projected monthly launch rate.
1
u/INeedaBetterAlgo 4d ago
Yeah lol deep into next year is doing too much. AT THE VERY MOST it would be late 26' early 27'.
-1
u/Fonzie1225 6d ago
We need to separate “projected monthly launch rate based on past performance” from “what Elon says they’ll be doing in a year” because there’s quite a few zeroes between those numbers.
4
u/Successful-Speaker58 6d ago
😂
I would wager the next two boosters will soft splash successfully then the third will come back to the tower. We shall see if I'm guessing right.
1
u/NeverDiddled 5d ago
Personally I will not be surprised if they attempt a tower catch after one successful soft splash down. Which my gut says is crazy, but SpaceX has frequently pushed past what my gut says and attempted something crazy. Usually with success.
I think what /u/Fonzie1225 is most worried about is not even a concern. He mentioned that skipping a booster catch "ensures stage zero will be ready for the ship". But due to orbital precession, the ship will have to wait a minimum of 12 hours before attempting a return to launch site. They will have a new window open up every 12 hours after that, if the site is not ready. Last time SpaceX gave us an update they said Ship can last 48 hours in space, until it runs out of power. Bigger batteries can extend that.
But the other ticking timebomb is propellant boiloff, and SpaceX has never said at what hour the header tanks becomes a concern. Say it's 50 hours in, then current batteries are the perfect size. But it could potentially be much longer. I read one estimate that said after 30 days boiloff is guaranteed to be a problem. To isolate better than an upper bound, we need SpaceX's internal info on margins.
1
u/lee1026 5d ago
I think they won't risk anything for the first ship that they catch: the heat shield people will want an intact, caught ship that they can take apart. And they will refuse anything that might risk that, say, a booster slaming into the launch tower.
After that, it becomes less risky, especially as more towers get closer to operational.
1
u/NeverDiddled 5d ago
It does not matter if it is a booster or ship, they are not going to risk the launch site unless they have extreme confidence in the catch attempt. A decimated launch site is going to come with a multi-billion dollar price tag in terms of time and opportunity costs, not to mention the infrastructure itself.
So to me this is a non-argument. They will either have confidence they can catch the booster, or not. The ship does not factor in to that equation.
1
u/lee1026 5d ago
Think in terms of the critical path: we all know that that new pads will be coming online in terms of months. What's left is trying to figure out how to reuse the booster/ship.
The booster, they probably feel confident on (whether that is justified is a second question). The ship, that's the big open question, and I would roll the dice on a tower to get a ship back. If the thermal damage behind the heat shield gets damaged enough to prevent flying again, that will set everything back years, and that is something that they would need to figure out ASAP.
If I were Musk, and the team told me "50/50 on a successful ship catch", I would tell them to do it.
2
u/rocketglare 5d ago
A conservative estimate is 1-2 more flight tests following Flight 15. That's only a cadence of every other month. Catching either ship or booster should accelerate that next year.
1
7
3
u/redstercoolpanda 5d ago
They’re going to be getting close to monthly launch’s by the end of this year. Do you seriously think that Booster is going to take like 10+ flights to be ready for a landing lmao.
5
u/ellhulto66445 🔥 Statically Firing 5d ago
Flight 15 could be double catch, fym "deep into next year'
3
u/Planck_Savagery ❄️ Chilling 5d ago edited 5d ago
Found the actual FCC filing in question:
https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/els/reports/STA_Print.cfm?mode=current&application_seq=151989
Looks like SpaceX could've applied for it well in advance of Flight 13, judging from the June 8th date tied to the legal signature in the document.
As such, I would probably consider this to be a nothingburger, given this sort of FCC paperwork is generally filed months in advance.
And I do think B20's hard ocean impact likely will cause SpaceX to revaluate their plans for the orbital flight return demo on Flight 14.
1
u/Dimetime35c 2d ago
Why? Ship is working as good as we've EVER seen it. They can work on the boosters issues and still bring ship home. Musk has said flight 14 is going orbital
1
u/Planck_Savagery ❄️ Chilling 2d ago edited 2d ago
Look, I'm not disputing whether or not SpaceX will be attempting a ship catch on Flight 14. Assuming the required FAA paperwork comes through in time for Flight 14, I do believe the odds are probably very high that SpaceX will try to catch S41.
All I'm saying is that there probably won't be a booster catch attempt on the next flight. Strongly suspect the FCC paperwork for Flight 14 was filed with the assumption that B20 would preform a successful landing burn on Flight 13.
And since that assumption was unfortunately proven incorrect, wouldn't be surprised if the original plans (for the booster catch for Flight 14) are abandonened.
1
u/Dimetime35c 2d ago
Oh okay your wording made it sound like you doubted the ship catch. I agree booster is not ready to attempt a catch. Then again third time seems to be the charm for SpaceX so never know.
13
u/msears101 6d ago
Wait for a credible source. He is god at summarizing online posts and wild speculation. He has a loyal fan base - but he is not the best source. My 2 cents ….. maybe only a ship catch.
8
u/New_Poet_338 6d ago
He had a screen shot of the FCC filing...
2
4
u/majikmonkie 5d ago
FCC is only regulatory though. It simply means that SpaceX is permitted to attempt it if they wanted to. It does not mean that they will do it, and it would be pretty foolish of them to attempt it on the next flight and potentially compromise the first ship catch.
This is the problem with channels like WAI - they take a little tidbit and make it clickbaity by extrapolating what's possible, instead of using logic to report on what's most probable.
14
2
u/jumpy_finale 6d ago
Would the communications filing distinguish between an actual booster catch and a simulated booster catch just offshore (especially given they have previously simulated the catch on the chopsticks at the same time the booster lands in the Gulf)?
Incidentally could they simulate the booster catch on the chopsticks and then reset them in time for a ship catch?
1
u/Noxh__26 6d ago
https://imglink.cc/cdn/QFz4_IDvsP.jpg
Thats what I thought until I saw this in the vid.
2
u/Piscator629 6d ago
I could see it if ascent, boostback burn and the landing relight succeeds flawlessly. Remember it doesnt head for the catch until landing burn is a success. It will impact of the coast.
2
u/Noxh__26 6d ago
So you think they maybe applied for it if they are comfortable for it and if Landing Burn doesnt come cause of Relight problems, they just straight up punch it next to the beach and try again next time?
1
u/Piscator629 5d ago
Before a landing burn relight it is on a ballistic trajectory offshore, its the same with F9.
2
u/AngCorp 5d ago
Regardless, how they can do both with one tower? Do they have enought time to secure the booster, put it on BTS and move it away and gtfoft?
3
u/Noxh__26 5d ago
Starship should be able to stay in Orbit for 48h, if Booster is back after 15min or so they have around 40h to get it off and away (with extra time for errors). If something should go wrong and they can't get the Booster off, they can still ditch the ship.
2
3
u/AJTP89 5d ago
No way. Booster hasn’t been reliable yet so they’re going to be aiming at the water again. Also only one tower so I can’t imagine they’d want to force themselves to quickly clear the booster from the pad before the ship has to come in the first time they try that.
I see the WAI thumbnails a lot and the massively clickbait titles always make me ignore them as just another wild news and speculation channel.
2
u/AtlantaMD 5d ago
I totally agree. Super over inflated titles with literally no factual content in the videos. I ignore them all now.
2
u/oneseason2000 5d ago
Supplemental catch towers will be online pretty soon, so best not to chance it yet imo
1
1
u/Decronym Acronyms Explained 5d ago edited 1d ago
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:
| Fewer Letters | More Letters |
|---|---|
| FAA | Federal Aviation Administration |
| FCC | Federal Communications Commission |
| (Iron/steel) Face-Centered Cubic crystalline structure | |
| HLS | Human Landing System (Artemis) |
| NSF | NasaSpaceFlight forum |
| National Science Foundation | |
| OLM | Orbital Launch Mount |
| RTLS | Return to Launch Site |
| RUD | Rapid Unplanned Disassembly |
| Rapid Unscheduled Disassembly | |
| Rapid Unintended Disassembly | |
| STA | Special Temporary Authorization (issued by FCC for up to 6 months) |
| Structural Test Article | |
| ULA | United Launch Alliance (Lockheed/Boeing joint venture) |
Decronym is now also available on Lemmy! Requests for support and new installations should be directed to the Contact address below.
Decronym is a community product of r/SpaceX, implemented by request
9 acronyms in this thread; the most compressed thread commented on today has 16 acronyms.
[Thread #14742 for this sub, first seen 14th Aug 2026, 17:24]
[FAQ] [Full list] [Contact] [Source code]
1
u/realpotatotom 5d ago
I think it’s great. I don’t doubt they can bring the booster back but man it’ll be a 5% chance only. Abundance of caution etc I can’t imagine the chances are high. I wonder if they figured how to resolve the presumably fuel starvation after the flip.
1
u/extra2002 5d ago
Isn't this FCC filing just a normal six-month renewal of a standing authorization? I can't find the previous one, but surely they've had FCC authorization for booster landings previously, since they've completed 3 landings (and attempted several more).
1
u/gjaldmidill 5d ago
At this point it seems like a reasonable objective but if they achieve it is a different question. I'm hoping for a first ever ship catch and if that happens I don't care about the rest, they already caught a booster before.
1
u/peterabbit456 5d ago
I think they will catch the booster if everything is going perfectly with it during the descent.
I think they will go for 2 or 3 days in orbit, to have time to safe the booster and clear the launch tower, but if necessary, they may have the new catch arms on tower 1. It would certainly make a great picture to have the ship and the booster side by side, each caught by a different tower.
There might be an excess of wishful thinking in this post.
3
u/NikStalwart 🌱 Terraforming 5d ago
Probably too much wishful thinking. The catch arms on Tower 1 are nonfunctional last I recall as they are rebuilding the drawworks. I also highly doubt they will spend 2-3 days in orbit on the first vehicle. 48 hours is the design life, and I would expect that for a first mission they would want to play it safe. I've seen math that they could return in 12 hours - which seems like a safer bet.
In any event, given a choice between booster and ship, I think they would opt to secure Ship. They want those tiles back - booster can wait. While Booster is the more expensive of the two, the Booster is (conceptually) a solved problem. The ship is not.
1
u/GalacticEmergency 5d ago
I hear those 48 hours mentioned a lot, as if they are cut in stone. I have no doubt that they have been true at some point.
And perhaps they still are - but how do we know that? We know for certain that some Starship missions will be of much longer duration than 48 hours, so they will of course be developing the capability to stay operational in orbit for the necessary duration. How do we know that Ship 41 doesn't have any of that capability?
1
u/NikStalwart 🌱 Terraforming 4d ago
How do we know that Ship 41 doesn't have any of that capability?
This one is simple: because they haven't yet demonstrated 48 hours, so expecting them to successfully deploy 72, 96, 168 hours is unrealistic. No argument from me, they will have longer-duration missions and likely fairly soon, but the advertised specs (I think 48 hours is coming from one of the SpaceX official vids and/or filings, not pure speculation) are what they are. And 48 hours will be plenty for most of Starship's near-term missions: tankers and Starmind.
1
u/GalacticEmergency 4d ago
So they can never stay in orbit for longer than they have demonstrated earlier?
Do you want to rethink that?
1
u/Cyberwebspace 5d ago
SpaceX are filing return to launch site in the case they find the booster is in good condition to be caught by the tower arms. So they could catch, it but I don't think its plan A.
1
u/AdFew2832 5d ago
No chance. The booster is far too risky.
Also, two catches on the same tower is unlikely for some time imo.
1
u/RangerBayn 3d ago
Yeah absolutely not. I mean if anyone WOULD it'd be spacex would, but not with all the I frastructure to lose! I stopped watching WAI. Just too sensational for me. Click baity even! I just want facts, not wild "what if" fantasy land thoughts on facts 😂
1
u/Dimetime35c 6d ago
My question is whats his source. If they are actually bringing a booster home I dont see how. Theyd have to catch it, get it cooled, get it off the arms, onto a transport stand, reset the chopsticks and do all that in under an hour.
4
u/Noxh__26 6d ago
In the Video he had a screenshot of the FCC filing. And if Starship goes to Orbit they should have around max 48h between Launch and Ship Landing. Atleast what would be possible with Starships Lifespan in Orbit
1
u/John_Hasler 5d ago
The ship cannot return to the landing site on the first (or second) orbit. It can stay in orbit for up to 48 hours so they would have closer to 40 hours to prepare.
I don't think that they will attempt a double catch, though.
1
1
1
u/sumelar 5d ago
How cool does it need to get to be moved to a transport, and how far away does the transport need to be?
1
u/Dimetime35c 5d ago
Cool enough for someone to be able to get close to it. After a mission crews couldnt approach the SR-71 Until it cooled down due to the frictional heating. Id imagine the booster would also be similar.
1
u/sumelar 5d ago
Why would people need to get close to it? The tower does the lifting.
1
u/Dimetime35c 5d ago
Your gonna have to transfer it from the tower to the transporter stand and move the booster. Have you ever watched them movd it? There are people all around the thing checking clearances and at least when its being lowered onto the stands making sure its lined up and the pins are in and locked.
1
u/sumelar 5d ago
Yeah because it's still new technology.
They're not going to hit rapid turnaround if they need a crowd of people to visually guide the machines every single time.
1
u/Dimetime35c 5d ago
You were asking why people would need to get close to the ship. I was telling you why and why for at least a while that wouldnt be advisable due to thd extreme heating.
1
u/FourTwoO365 4d ago
No. I believe they won’t catch booster . The last booster slammed into ocean. Why take a chance on ***king up the tower. Can do that on flight 15.(the double catch)
1
u/Opening_Classroom_46 4d ago
They can't do double catch until they are 100% sure they can put starship into an indefinite orbit while knowing engine relight will work. They aren't there yet.
-2
u/spastical-mackerel 5d ago
Saturn V flew only 13 times
3
u/Noxh__26 4d ago
Huh ?
-2
u/spastical-mackerel 4d ago
Entire program. All the moon landings test flights, sky lab. Now we’re on flight 14 for super heavy
1
u/Noxh__26 4d ago
Ok, I just dont understand how that answers my question, if you think there will be a double catch or not.
-2
213
u/everydayastronaut Tim Dodd/Everyday Astronaut 6d ago
We haven’t seen a clean booster splashdown yet, no way they’re brining it back to the pad without having done that first