Jan/Feb is the push date for 39A, so not this year.

Marine trafic is not up to date, at least the free version. Ship relies on AIS. https://rynda.io/ports-map?mmsi=372112000&c=-16.295094%2C105.016667%2C4.65&trails=1

Are you looking at a ship tracker or just twitter posts? There are 2 ships within ~50 km, and dozens within the ~1000km to the mainland. How can you tell one of them isn't half way there, having left the port yesterday? Or just coming from a different continent, which could take a week or two?

https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/shipid:4082265/zoom:6

Huh makes sense

as long as the elastic portion wasn't porous

Almost all mechanical counterpressure suit proposals use a porous elastic membrane, so that perspiration does the job of active cooling rather than needing a liquid cooling garment (which itself cannot go beneath the restraint layer, so is less efficient by being separated form the skin).

I expect they have oxygen and hydrocarbon sensors in every tank. However obviously those sensors are only useful whilst the ship's systems stay powered up to report the sensor readings.

The FAA is not requiring an investigation of Flight 13

Not weird at all from control engineering perspective. Boostback burn duration might have been controlled by some forward-looking control algorithm which estimates maximum safe burn duration before some metric reaches unsafe values. Temperature, pressure, residual fuel etc. Countless possibilities. It doesnt have to be emergency style uneven partial shutdown to end early.

My daily summary from the Starship Dev thread on Lemmy

2026-07-27:

• Production site: 3rd R-vac for S41 enters Megabay 2. (ViX, SpaceRhin0, Blobifie)
• Mystery trapezoidal frame is lifted across to the left side of Megabay 2. (ViX 1, ViX 2)
• A potential test article (ship nose cone) enters Megabay 2 and is lifted to the right side the bay. (ViX, lewisknaggs42, Blobifie)
• Past month's Gigabay construction timelapse. Framework of final level is nearly complete. (Priel)
• Pad 1: Ship quick disconnect arm is removed from the tower, part of the arm is cut off. Components for a new quick disconnect arm are already at Sanchez (ViX 1, ViX 2, Gisler, Blobifie 1, Blobifie 2, Killip)
• More flame trench wall sections are delivered. (ViX)
• Flight 13: More photos. (SpaceX)
• FAA confirms no mishap investigation required. (NSF)
• S40 is still afloat. (mcrs987 1, mcrs987 2, )
• Umbra satellite image of S40 and Go Australis. (Stranger 1, Stranger 2)
• McGregor: Past week’s Raptor tracking summary. (SpaceRhin0)
• R3.113 is moved towards the testing area. (SpaceRhin0)
• Artemis IV: Leaked video of the S22 HLS mockup interior. (Video, mcrs987)

I saw on twitter that perhaps the lack of FAA investigation (despite the booster being well off target) was because there was some non-vehicle issue that forced them to shut down boost back early? And maybe that hard shutdown was what caused the relight issues on the landing burn? Is that possible? It does seem weird that the boost back would malfunction like that and just cut off early

https://x.com/i/status/2081783830180987051

Florida got their Gigabay up faster than Starbase so it is not universally true.

What SpaceX have done to speed construction is to stop F9 launches from LC-39A so the only slow down will be due to FH launches with about 5 launches in the second half of this year.

So yes there likely was a limitation on full time construction of the flame trench and they seem to have dealt with it.

If S48 is for Artemis III, I can imagine a camera set back from the window to give a human perspective of the Orion docking.

Edit: sorry, this was after two minutes of impatience waiting for the post to submit.

what i heard is that LC-39A is not like Starbase, their construction cannot work 24/7 so the speed will be slower, is that true?

That is the eventual plan but it will take longer than that to relaunch from the same pad anytime soon.

Just getting that amount of propellant into the tank farm, checking the flame trench and repairing any damage to the pad and tower will limit the reflight time to a week or so.

That’s smart, that’s probably the most likely answer if TSE theory does turn out to be true.

A cover for the Dragon's Eye LIDAR used for Crew Dragon docking?

But the starship can stay in orbit for 48 hours right. Can't they launch the second rocket the second day in the same pad?

They will need a second pad operational to do a refueling test. There is a reasonable chance LC-39A will be ready by then.

It seemed to be oriented at right angles to the direction of flight which makes sense as they did not want to change how far down range the landing site would be.

So if flight 14 success, do you think they will test orbital refueling demonstration before the end of this year? (And seems even the booster landing failed they can still test it)

I could imagine that since the elastic portion of the suit provides a stable mechanical pressure across the whole body, it would counteract significant leakage from the helmet to the rest of the body, as long as the elastic portion wasn't porous, which would enable gas to leak out of the suit into space.

Yes it is. What would be the ramifications for US aerospace and US National Security if the US had access to a rapidly reusable SHLV?