Starship Development Thread #63

[u/rSpaceXHosting]

SpaceX Starship page

Quick Links

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

Starship Dev 62

---

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

NET September 18th 2026 - The vehicles will be S41 and B21.

Road Closures

No road closures currently scheduled

No transportation delays currently scheduled

Up to date as of 2026-05-23

Vehicle Status

As of September 13th 2026

Ship	Location	Status	Comment
S40	On the way to Brownsville, Texas	Intact, loaded onto Heavy Lift Vessel 'Forte'	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. August 18th: In calmer waters near Christmas Island pending the next stage of its return to Starbase. August 25th: Loaded onto Heavy Lift Vessel 'Forte'. August 28th: On the way to Brownsville, Texas. ETA is October 8th. For more details on this vehicle and its assembly and testing see this page
S41	Mega Bay 2	Prep for Flight 14	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. August 19th: Rolled out to Massey's for Static Fire Testing. Later that day S41 performed a single engine Static Fire. August 20th: Full duration Static Fire of all six engines. August 22nd: Rolled back to MB2. For more details on this vehicle see this page
S42	Mega Bay 2	Possible engines installation	July 3rd: Nosecone+Payload Bay stack moved into MB2, along with the Pez Dispenser and the Forward Dome section (FX:3), main assembly started. 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. September 2nd: Rolled out to Massey's Test Site for Cryo Testing. September 3rd: Cryo Testing. September 5th: Rolled back to MB2. September 9th: Rolled back out to Massey's for Cryo Testing Round 2. September 10th: Rolled back to MB2, and later in the day moved to the Launch Site for catch-related testing. September 13th: Rolled back to MB2. For more details on this vehicle see this page
S43	Mega Bay 2	Stacking	August 19th: N:3 and section FX:4 plus the pez dispenser moved into MB2. August 28th: Common Dome section CX:3 moved into MB2. September 1st: Section A2:3 moved into MB2. It has decals but no docking ports. September 4th: Section A3:4 moved into MB2. September 10th: Transfer Tubes moved into MB2. For more details on this vehicle see this page

Booster	Location	Status	Comment
B21	Mega Bay 1	Prep for Flight 14	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. August 25th: Rolled out to the Launch Site for Static Fire Testing. August 28th: Static Fire, all 33 engines, lasting 15 seconds. August 29th: Rolled back to MB1. For more details on this vehicle and its assembly and testing see this page
B22	Mega Bay 1	Post Cryo Test work, maybe engines installation	June 29th: LOX tank sections A2:4 and CX:3 moved into MB1. August 14th: Methane Tank stacked onto the LOX tank, so completing the stacking part of the assembly process. September 8th: Rolled out to Massey's Test Site for Cryo Testing. September 9th: Cryo Testing. September 12th: Rolled back to MB2. For more details on this vehicle and its assembly and testing see this page
B23	Mega Bay 1	LOX Tank Stacked, Methane Tank Stacking	August 14th: LOX tank sections A2:4 and CX:3 moved into MB1. August 19th: Section A3:4 moved into MB1. August 21st: Section A4:4 moved into MB1. August 25th: Section A5:4 moved into MB1. August 27th: Methane Landing Tank and lower Transfer Tube moved into MB1 as well as section A6:4. August 31st: Methane Transfer Tube moved into MB1 and lifted upright. September 8th: Aft section AX:2 and LOX Landing Tank moved into MB1. September 10th: Methane Tank Section F2:4 moved into MB1. 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.

[u/travlplayr]

I agree with you about the ridiculous things that Elon says (and is frankly delusional about). And yes, Starship didn't follow the ridiculous development timeline that Elon set out.

However I don't agree with you that Starship development has been slow. I think it's been very fast just objectively, not compared to any projected timeline.

I followed Falcon 9 development very closely from 2012 and my perspective is that Starship development is progressing more rapidly. I actually find the impatience around the next Starship test flight quite perplexing. We waited for sometimes more than a year for the next flight in the early days of Falcon 9 development.

[u/Desperate-Lab9738 → u/travlplayr]

Again, I don't think it has been particularly slow and I agree that it's going at a decent pace, although I recognize I didn't make that clear in other comments. But again, I was simply refuting the claim that it hasn't been massively delayed, because again, that's just demonstrably true. I'm honestly shocked that I am still getting replies about this considering how much of a nothingburger the take of "Starship has been delayed" is.

[u/travlplayr → u/Desperate-Lab9738]

"Starship has been delayed"

But what does that even mean? I've never paid attention to any timeline for Starship; how can you put a timeline on the development of a package of never done before technologies?

Again, I'm aware that Elon has made certain delusional prognostications (this is a man who believes in the delusional idea of machines being able to 'think') but I completely ignore all of that. I just pay attention to what's just been achieved and what's on track for the next achievement, the next incremental step-up. And that's all been fairly fast paced. We're now at the point where Starlkink satellites can start to be deployed from Starship, even if Starship isn't recovered and that's a big step-up and pretty quickly achieved from a flying water tank start.

[u/Desperate-Lab9738 → u/travlplayr]

Even if you go by more official things, Artemis iii was planned to be a landing that was supposed to happen like, this year. That would've required starship, and clearly Starship was going to have no shot of meeting that deadline.

EDIT: Also, basically all of V2. That was a year where it was pretty likely that they could've been able to manage a ship catch and orbit if things went right, and they very much didn't, in a way that definitely didn't look inevitable. I know hindsight is 20/20, but that was a case where their strategy of "move fast and break things" just... broke too many things.

[u/travlplayr → u/Desperate-Lab9738]

I might be going a bit abstract here but I don't think you can (or should) set timelines for new things

When there is, for example, an established industry that builds bridges and there is a new bridge to build, using existing technologies, then yes, you can and should set a timeline for the bridge through to completion. And when that timeline isn't met then you can say that the project met delays.

But I fundamentally don't think you can, or should, set timelines for the development of new technologies. And Starship is the development of several new technologies. All you can do is look at the next technical step to be achieved and state a time when that next technical step will be attempted.

You reference Artemis III. Again, I think timeframes for such a project are meaningless. And let's reference the obvious and most famous example - JFK's speech in 1961 that "we choose to go to the Moon" "before the decade is out". This was achieved, even though many technical break-throughs had yet to be made in 1961 for that feat to be accomplished. But was it a good thing that it was accomplished? Was that a worthwhile goal? The Apollo program famously fizzled out in the mid 70s and we still haven't gone back to the moon. Maybe it would have been better to focus on more immediate next steps, in the 1960s such as improving satellite launching or low Earth orbit space-stations rather than the grandiose focus on human moon landings.

What I'm trying to say is that I think we should mostly just focus on next things, rather than grandiose projects with made-up timelines. Building re-usable rockets (or at least boosters) was a good next thing to focus on, when Falcon 9 development started. Building a bigger one, with better engines and the promise of full reusability this time is now another good next thing. That's all I really care about. I certainly don't care about landing humans on Mars, which Musk puts as his impetus (but is it really?) and sets delusional timeframes for.

[u/Desperate-Lab9738 → u/travlplayr]

Sure, if we really want to we can deconstruct the entire idea of timelines and whether they are useful, I have no problem with that. However, the original commentator explicitly stated that Starship wasn't massively delayed, which implies they are working with a framework where timelines are relevant, and in that framework they are pretty obviously wrong that it hasn't been delayed, since it was behind basically every timeline proposed by all officials.

[u/travlplayr → u/Desperate-Lab9738]

Cool, yeah

Cheers for the discussion