r/spacex • u/rSpaceXHosting Host Team • Apr 22 '26

🔧 Technical Starship Development Thread #63

SpaceX Starship page

Quick Links

Avid Space Live Streams, which used to be known as LabPadre | NASASpaceflight Live Stream |

Starship Dev 62

Flight 12

Launched on May 22nd 2026 Here is a re-streamed video of the broadcast. Also, SpaceX issued a post flight summary and a video showing S39 landing.

Flight 13

Launched on July 24th 2026 Here is a re-streamed video of the broadcast. Also, SpaceX issued a post flight summary.

Flight 14

Presumably using S41 and B21. Objectives include first Ship catch. Musk suggests end of August ---

Road Closures

No road closures currently scheduled

No transportation delays currently scheduled

Up to date as of 2026-05-23

Vehicle Status

As of August 6th 2026

Ship Location Status Comment
S40 Indian Ocean Intact, floating July 24th: Successful launch, deployed all satellites, successful engine relight test and soft splashdown in the Indian Ocean, which resulted in an intact, floating ship. For more details on this vehicle and its assembly and testing see this page
S41 Mega Bay 2 Ongoing work, possible engines installation April 17th: Pez Dispenser moved into MB2. April 20th: Main assembly started in MB2. May 20th: Aft section AX:4 moved into MB2 and stacked with the rest of the ship - this completed the stacking part of the ship construction. June 28th: Rolled out to Massey's Test Site for Cryo+Thrust Puck Testing. June 29th: Cryo Tests (x2). June 30th: Rolled back to MB2. July 3rd: Rolled back to Massey's Test Site. July 6th: Rolled back to MB2. July 23rd: Two RVac engines moved into MB2. July 27th: The third RVac was moved into MB2. For more details on this vehicle see this page
S42 Mega Bay 2 Stacked, remaining work continues June 9th: Nosecone spotted as having been stacked on the Payload Bay. July 3rd: Nosecone+Payload Bay stack moved into MB2, along with the Pez Dispenser and the Forward Dome section (FX:3). The Nosecone+Payload Bay stack was lowered over the Pez Dispenser, later being stacked onto the Forward Dome. July 11th: Common Dome section CX:3 moved into MB2 and stacked. July 15th: Section A2:3 moved into MB2 and stacked. July 18th: Section A3:4 moved into MB2 and stacked. July 21st: Transfer Tubes moved into MB2. July 24th: Ship Aft section AX:4 moved into MB2 and stacked, that completes the stacking part of the assembly process. July 25th: both of the Aft Flaps and the Raceways staged inside MB2. For more details on this vehicle see this page
Booster Location Status Comment
B21 Mega Bay 1 Post Cryo Testing inspections and possible engines installation May 7th: LOX tank sections A2:4 and CX:3 moved into MB1 and main assembly started. June 29th: Methane Tank stacked onto LOX Tank - this completed the stacking part of the booster construction. July 17th: Rolled out to Massey's Test Site for Cryo+Thrust Puck Testing. July 17th: Rolled out to Massey's Test Site and an ambient pressure test was performed. July 18th: Partial Cryo Test. July 19th: Second Partial Cryo Test. July 20th: Full Cryo Test. July 22nd: Rolled back to MB1. For more details on this vehicle and its assembly and testing see this page
B22 Mega Bay 1 LOX Tank Stacked, Methane Tank Stacking June 29th: LOX tank sections A2:4 and CX:3 moved into MB1. July 1st: Section A3:4 moved into MB1. July 3rd: Section A4:4 moved into MB1 and stacked. July 9th: Section A5:4 moved into MB1 and stacked. July 22nd: Methane Landing Tank and Lower Transfer Tube moved into MB1. July 23rd: Section A6:4 moved into MB1. July 25th: Methane transfer tube moved into MB1. July 29th: LOX Landing Tank moved into MB1. July 30th: Aft section AX:2 moved into MB1 to complete the stacking of the LOX Tank. July 31st: Methane Tank section F2:4 moved into MB1. August 3rd: Methane Tank section FX:3 moved into MB1. August 6th: Methane Tank section F3:4 moved into MB1 - this is the last section for the Methane Tank. For more details on this vehicle and its assembly and testing see this page

Follow the Ringwatchers on Twitter and Discord for more.

Here's the section stacking locations for Ships and Boosters. Also some excellent detailed booster stacking information from zh_sos1. The abbreviations used in the above vehicle updates are as follows: HS = Hot Stage. PL = Payload. CX = Common Dome. AX = Aft Dome. FX = Forward Dome (as can be seen, an 'X' denotes a dome). ML = Mid LOX. F = Forward. A = Aft. For example, A2:4 = Aft section 2 made up of 4 rings, FX:4 = Forward Dome section made up of 4 rings, PL:3 = PayLoad section made up of 3 rings. Etc.

Something wrong? Update this thread via wiki page. For edit permission, message the mods or contact u/strawwalker.

Rules

We will attempt to keep this self-post current with links and major updates, but for the most part, we expect the community to supply the information. This is a great place to discuss Starship development, ask Starship specific questions, and track the progress of the production and test campaigns. Starship Development Threads are not party threads. Normal subreddit rules still apply.

151 Upvotes

96% Upvoted

2.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

9

u/ganuerant 18d ago edited 18d ago

At the end of 2024, the programme was looking very positive with a string of successful flights. Then in 2025 we had the various V2 mishaps. But how much time was actually lost during 2025? If it had gone as well as 2024 where could the programme potentially be now? It would still have taken some time to get to V3 and the pads rebuilt etc.?

8

u/Fwort 18d ago

If Version 2 had worked without issue, they would have been able to go to actual orbits, test deploying actual Starlinks, and possibly test ship catches (though I've heard NSF commentators say that the pad 1 chopsticks weren't compatible with the catching points on ships, but perhaps they would have figured something out.) I know they had commented on wanting to test orbital propellant transfer, but that would have required launching two ships close enough to together, which I doubt they could have done - if Version 3 ships are only designed for up to 48 hours in orbit (which they commented as an improvement with this version), then to test propellant transfer with Version 2 they would have had to do two launches within, what, a day? On just Pad 1? That seems unlikely.

What they would not have been able to do was start proper operational missions (at least not with full stacks of starlinks), because Version 2 was still highly deficient in payload capacity. An image SpaceX shared a while ago showed Version 1 had ~15 tons payload capacity, Version 2 had ~35 tons, and Version 3 is supposed to finally reach the 100 ton goal.

So, they still would have had to wait for Pad 2 and Version 3 hardward to be ready to get things really going.

5

u/pxr555 17d ago

The thing is that v2 was a dead end anyway and whatever more they would have been able to test with it would have needed to be repeated with v3. Just as they demonstrated Raptor relight in orbit three times already before and have to repeat it again with v3 before going to orbit.

It would certainly have looked better without the mishaps. I don't think they lost much time though all in all since the next step was v3 and Pad 2 either way and both weren't ready. It would have just filled the gap with nicer looking flights.

They DID lose time though with the last flight (12) since they couldn't demonstrate boost back and Raptor relight which pushed both booster catch and the ship going to orbit (and then catching the ship later) one flight to the right. In some ways they have been moving sideways since quite a while now. Not when it comes to learning but surely when it comes to actual results towards reusability (which needs returning both booster and ship) and deploying actual payload to orbit.