LandSpace is catching up to SpaceX

China's land space recently landed an orbital class booster going from first flight [music] to landed vehicle in about half the time it took SpaceX to accomplish the same thing. [music] Soda, there is a note there. Is China catching up to SpaceX or could China even possibly surpass SpaceX? And what does all of this mean for companies like United Launch Alliance who don't really have a reusability plan? Buckle up. Put your seat back and tray table in their upright and locked positions. Project Tomorrow Orbit 18 episode 23 is now departing. [music] [music] All right. I mean the the era of reusable rockets continues with Landspace landing their reusable rocket. Um, what do we expect this to have on the global space industry? Handing over to my panel, Titan, what do you what do you think is going to happen here? I mean, China just landed their first orbital class booster. What happens now? >> Well, they rinse and repeat hopefully. Uh, the Zuwin, which I found out means Chinese vermilion bird, which is hell of a lot easier to pronounce. Um, yeah. I mean there one thing about not being first is you get to watch the other guy make the mistakes and you learn from their mistakes. So obviously they're uh it makes sense that they were able to uh get achieve this goal very big goal uh quicker. Uh but the Chinese have proven that many times before they're very astute at watching and learning and innovating. >> Do you think that this I mean you mentioned that they're not first. Do do we think that um even though they're not first, is there going to be an impact here >> globally? Like is this going to push anyone else to move into reusable rockets or do you think everyone >> doesn't really care at this point? >> Well, if you're not talking reusability, if you're not designing re reusability, you're in a way in the back of the bus and you're not destined to be around for long. I know that's a a hot point for some people uh in the aerospace industry that some people live in the bubble, but the bubble's about to burst. >> Yeah, I think we'll talk about that bubble in just a moment because I don't think I disagree. Uh Ryan, what do you think? What do you think the impact on the global space community or if any of Landspace landing their orbital class booster? Um I'm gonna say successfully, right? because it it was it landed successfully for a minute. >> Yeah. Um since the landing, it has become evident thanks to some photos posted on social media that the booster did not survive for too long. It tipped over uh shortly after. I think a day or two afterwards. But this is a very similar thing to what's happened with numerous Falcon 9 over the years. It's still classed uh at least we still class it uh on next space flight as a successful landing because the booster did land successfully. The booster just happened to tip over afterwards uh due to one of its landing legs being weakened by a fire that broke out. But we've seen that on Falcon Heavy for example. I think it was Arabs 6A. They successfully landed the center core downrange on the drone ship. It then fell over. Uh it also happened with booster B1058. successful downrange recovery uh downrange landing recovery unsuccessful. So landing is not a synonym of recovery. Landing and recovery are two separate things. But uh obviously they've done a great job because the hard part is out of the way. land space of landed this booster and it just adds if if you ever needed verification that reusability uh was not only the future but the present day uh SpaceX themselves have launched over 600 times uh with reusable rockets then of course we've got new Glenn coming in then of course we had Chang Jung 10B last month and another Chinese rocket duch 3 landing this month I mean if you are not working on partial reusability at a bare minimum today then like Titan said you're not going to be around for long. Uh I mean I think the elephant in the room is of course United Launch Alliance. Where on earth are they going to go next? Because Vulcan is only could only possibly be propped up by government contracts now. Like there is the commercial industry is not going to pay more for a rocket that is going to cost so much more. I mean that simply cannot be economically feasible. >> Okay. I mean let's let's touch on that for a moment then, right? because uh United Launch Alliance did just finish a $ 1.5 billion fund private funding round. It's uh bonds to finance your launch infrastructure. Uh [gasps] I mean, okay, so we've got, hang on, let me read my notes. We've got SpaceX, Blue Rocket Lab, Landspace, Stoke, Relativity, PLLD, and Firefly all working on reusable rockets in United Launch Alliance. I I like what what do they do? I I I realize they're raising$ 1.5 billion dollars, but like even in the American market here, is can they survive? How do they survive? How do they survive? How do they survive? Ryan, I'll throw it back to you. How do they survive? >> Uh I don't know. [laughter] I simply I I think I think there is only one direction that they're going here. Unless they suddenly unveil a fully reusable rocket that they've been secretly working on in the background tomorrow. I mean, there is expendable rockets do not have a future. And we've been saying this for years on this show, for years and years and years. Expendable rockets do not have a future. And and yet they've still continued down this path. I do I just do not understand why they've continued down this path uh with Vulcan. I mean, they just they just, you know, I I don't I don't get it. Like I'm genuinely at a loss for words. I don't get it. I just don't get it at all. That's all I can say because it doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Yeah, it it doesn't make sense. And in the case of ULA, it's the years and decades of government contracts and body deal back room deals with the DoD and even NASA in some cases. Um, and they aren't out of that mindset. Remember, ULA is what Boeing and Loheed. That's the world they come from. They don't they don't see outside their own little bubble. Let's not forget ISSA. ISA has finally started studying reusability, which they were on my list of people not getting it for the longest time. So now that they're even studying it means they're paying attention, but they've got the bureaucracy and red tape that involves government run agencies. >> Feels like ISA is too little too late as well. Uh some interesting comments from the chat room from Joshua. Hey, let's be fair. United Launch Alliance has a bunch of low Earth orbit launches to do. Uh, okay. So, I mean, they've got a current manifest, but then then what, right? Uh, and then, uh, >> so did Virgin Orbit, they had loads of launches to do. >> Yeah. Uh, from ground umbilical carrier plate, at least United Launch Alliance Alliance has smart reuse. Okay. Uh, although [laughter] Aravail has a great followup to that, which is they're not even seriously pursuing smart at this point. >> [laughter] >> Smart was >> that was that was that was lip service a few years ago. They they had a one artist misconception of the of the engine block falling away from the Falcon uh with parachutes. That's what their reusability. That's as far as they've even mentioned reusability. >> Uh >> unless somebody else has heard something else and I haven't. >> No, I just felt like smart smart reuse was the dumbest version of reuse I've ever heard. Right. Like what what was it? They eject the the engine core and then try to capture it with a helicopter, which how many more launch providers need to how many more launch providers need to go, "Oh, we're going to capture it with a helicopter." And miserably fail at that before people realize that helicopter capturing is not going to work. It sounds great on paper. You can get most of the way there, but as soon as you try to actually execute on that in a real conops environment, it just doesn't work. Like I stop it, dear launch. >> It work in a Jame It worked in a James Bond movie, I think. [laughter] Didn't it? >> Yeah. Hey, you know what? Let's see. Let's see your company come up with an animation that makes it look so cool that people are going to throw a billion and a half dollars [laughter] at you. You know, how how you know, you got to you got to do something so that people who really aren't paying attention will actually give you the money that you need, right? How did they get $1.5 billion? I don't understand. [laughter] >> It doesn't It wasn't you, was it? You didn't give him 1.5 billion, did you? [laughter] >> Oh, Titan, you gave him 1.5 billion. >> Uh, Stan J says, uh, United Launch Alliance is a dinosaur praying they get to keep their military launches. I'm not even sure like you got fired. >> That's not true. >> That's not true. Yeah, Vulcan is basically a launch vehicle that at the moment is is I don't want to necessarily call it dead, but it's it's grounded. They they can't fly Vulcan at the moment because they keep having problems with their solid rocket boosters from North Grumman. So, the United States DoD has already shifted several missions from Vulcan to Falcon 9. So uh you know not even that not even the military is going to save you if you are not going to be delivering like you're supposed to be. Milit you know the United States DoD wants the United States DoD um doesn't want to give you money for your future. The United States DoD wants to give you money for what you do. And if you're not doing anything you're not going to get money. That's that's just the way it goes. United Launch Alliance used to be a reliable, you know, provider. Now with Vulcan with all of their solid rocket booster problems, it's very clearly at the moment not a reliable provider. And this has got United Launch Alliance in a position that it's not used to being in. So, so there's almost a push the panic button and get some money if we can. That's really what it looks a lot like to me is that this is that now we understand that we've got a little bit of a problematic launch vehicle here. We were expecting everything to go smooth sailing here. Now we need to do everything we can in order to consolidate and survive. So let's get some extra money in here and get this. >> Okay. >> And those payload >> I was just going to say those payload swaps have been going on for so long. I can't remember the specific mission, but you know, when uh the the DoD have, you know, moved a payload from Vulcan onto Falcon because it need it needed to launch sooner, they've then swapped a Falcon payload and put it on the manifest for Vulcan. These payload swaps have been going on for so long that a payload that was moved from Falcon to Vulcan as a result of a Vulcan payload going to Falcon has then gone back to Falcon in another set of swaps. So the the DoD are just pingponging payloads back and forth between Vulcan and Falcon. You know, not actually launching on Vulcan, of course, but putting it on UA's manifest. And how long is that going to go on for? Because Vulcan is not launching. It's it there's not a sustainable outcome. You know, I think I have to assume that the $1.5 billion they got invested or in the bonds had to have some promise of future technology. Um, if you're if you're out there looking to invest in aerospace and somebody says, "Hey, uh, ULA is looking for some money," you've got to say, "Well, what are you what are you planning?" Not just, "Here's some money." I maybe we'll hear something. >> Or, hear me out. Some investor saw the SpaceX IPO and said, "I want to get in on that. Who else is in rocket and legacy and they saw Boeing and Lockheed and like that seems like a safe bet." And did zero research and they gave him $1.5 billion. >> If that was the case, I want to know how they got those $1.5 billion in the first place. >> Boy, do I have a rocket company for you. [laughter] And I want to know who they are because I want to talk to them about this bridge I've got to sell them. [laughter] >> Exactly. >> Joshua see chat room says >> I don't know if they're aware. I've got some uh beachfront property near Mojave if [laughter] uh if they'd like some. And you know what? It's right on and it's right, you know, the the sands are beautiful. The rocket parts are littered all over the place out there. It's [laughter] just perfect. >> Yeah. Uh Joshua C135 says, "I was referring to all the Amazon Leo launches that they are contracted for." I I you know, this goes back towards >> if I'm Amazon, I want to get my LEO constellation up. Uh Project Kyper, right? Le the LEO constellation is basically their version of Starlink. I want to get that online as fast as possible and I want to spend the least amount of money I can to launch those satellites. So, that's going to be lowest cost provider, which I hate to tell you guys is going to be the reusable rockets. It's like how I don't see how Vulcan competes when you got to build a new one every time. >> They already have too. SpaceX has already launched at least one set, I believe. >> They've done Yeah, they've done three uh launches so far. They've got more on contract. But another interesting thing with Amazon Leo is that uh it's not just the the launching as many satellites as fast as possible is a big key in it, but they also did a massive batch order of Vulcan. So, one has to imagine they might have got a good a good price deal on those Vulcan launches, but they're also spreading out their launches on as many launch vehicles as possible. They've got Falcon, they've got Vulcan, they've got New Glenn, they've got Aran 6. They are putting these on as many launch vehicles as possible. And there was even a lawsuit from uh like a pension fund to Amazon Leo back when it was project Kyper because they said that they didn't put enough launches on Falcon. So that's why they had to do those three initial Falcon launches because they were literally sued by a pension fund saying, "Hey, you guys are saying you're distributing amongst the different launches. Why are you not using SpaceX? They're the most successful launch provider in recent times." So that's another consideration, another factor when you have to think about Amazon Leia. I wonder if there's something with United Launch Alliance that we're just not seeing. I know that this is a story about uh Landspace, but like I saw Landspace land and I was like, here here we go. Now the the promise of reusability is starting to unfold in in front of us, right? Uh I would argue that everyone is skating to where the puck is and not where it's going, right? The Wayne Gretzky Wayne Gretzky quote. It's hard to say. Um but like at least we're getting somewhere, you know, to Issa. I feel like it's too little too late, right? Like again that list is of people actively working on it right now. Not doing studies on it, like actively building reusable rockets. It is uh oh man, I lost my list. But uh oh, I'm sorry. It's SpaceX, Blue Origin, Rocket Lab, Land Space, Stoke, Relativity, PLLD, and Firefly. And like that's and the list is longer than that. Like those are people actively building reusable rockets. And issa's like, "Hey, we're going to think about it." And that list is longer too because there are so many organizations in China that are also working on it. It's very hard to keep up with them. But there are there are multiple subsidiaries of the government uh space agency working on this and private not really private commercial companies that are not a subsidiary of the government space program also working on this. I mean there are so many organizations doing this right now. I mean to to be fair we do have a a hopper uh which is currently at the Asrange Space Center in Sweden which is getting ready to hop and demonstrate that technology. So there is flight hardware. It's suborbital flight hardware but there is flight hardware and I do have to say that just to to put that on the record and there's also my space which is a subsidiary of the Aron Group which is the parent company of Aron Space who do the Aron 6 and they are working on kind of a similar vehicle to Falcon 9. So there is it's not just studies. There is hardware that exists and is being manufactured and is being put forwards. But I do agree with your point. It's not enough. We you know the European Space Agency should have been ahead of the game. You know SpaceX have clearly decimated and are far ahead of everybody. And it's frankly quite incredible how literally nobody else has managed to, you know, see where things were going all those years ago. >> Other great comments from the chat room. Once again, back to Aravail who says, "United Launch Alliance and Aron Spas are extremely lucky that Western satellites can't launch on Chinese satellites or Chinese rockets, sorry." Like, yeah, absolutely. >> Should be able to. >> Yeah, >> they used to be able to. And then um Dave Avery has a really great point. Just give the Department of War, just have the Department of War give United Launch Alliance a cost plus contract for a reusable launcher. I think you'll see [laughter] United Launch Alliance have a reusable rocket. Uh I would say quickly, but by quickly, I mean within 20 years, even on a cost plus contract, they'll just keep milking that that money machine for all it's worth. Just keep going and going and going. And that's the other thing that's like falling by the wayside is these cost plus contracts. I I just, >> you know, you see Boeing and Lockheed. Yeah. I It's good for us, the American taxpayers. Uh and then I guess it's good for Ryan somehow, too. It's good for us American taxpayers, but like [snorts] Boeing and Lockheed do not know how to work in a cost plus world. Exhibit A Starlininer, >> right? >> Yeah. >> Like >> Yeah. So I I don't know. I just don't see [laughter] >> I was going to say I don't know if Starlininer is the best uh best example to use because Starlininer feels very much >> Starlininer feels very much not just a uh we don't know how to operate in a cost plus world. Starlininer feels almost as if it's a we don't know how to operate a spacecraft period. [laughter] Um so shots fired. >> Yeah. Well, I'll fire another one. Um, Star, not only Starlininer, but Boeing as a as a as a company, the way they operate. I have some friends within the aerospace industry that are secondary and tertiary uh equipment suppliers. And they but they deal across the entire aerospace industry. They deal with all the different companies handling parts, um, flight hardware and so forth. And they say the paperwork coming back from Boeing is the most atrocious mess they have ever seen in their life. uh you know when you're talking about flight hardware which has to be documented to the inth degree the paperwork that comes back from Boeing on stuff is just uh it's not up to par. So I think that it's not just a single vehicle. I think the whole uh Boeing system has systemic problems. It's the culture. >> The ghost of McDonald Douglas strikes again. >> You know, I don't even think it's McDonald Douglas. I think it was it's letting MBAs run your company. Uh unfortunately when it come like that's it sounds great because you can do a short-term cash extraction and get a lot of money in in value and stock but that's going to help a few people at the top and it's going to absolutely destroy the company and destroy the culture in the company. And if you can turn it around good like it's going to take you years but the amount of damage you're going to do by throwing an NBA at the top is >> is unfathomable. And I hopefully we're starting to learn this lesson. Um I I'll say you know go ahead Jared. Yeah, [clears throat] I was, you know, I was just going to piggyback on that, which is that Boeing was, you know, very well known for the fact that they were a company that was run by engineers and not MBAs. Uh, and some of the finest a some of the finest aerospace work in the history of aerospace so far, uh, came out of Boeing during its its very long era of being run by the engineers and not the corporate offices. And then that switch over in the late 80s to early 90s to decide, you know, maybe engineers don't actually know how to engineer. We're going to leave it to the guys who went to Harvard Business School. You know, that >> you know, just look at where you're at now with Boeing. And uh yeah, there you go. You know, but hey, you know, we may have killed a couple hundred people, but you saw the value to shareholders we provided. Oh, it's >> Yeah. So, >> yeah. I mean, you're not wrong. You're not wrong. I was just watching a special on Boeing last night or the night before, I guess. And um it's it's it's crazy. Just don't put NBAs at the top of an engineering company or a creative company for that matter. I have gripes with Disney, too. Um Aravail just killing it in the chat room. Uh China almost keeps up with SpaceX without reusability. Imagine once they really get going, Starship is the only reason US will stay ahead. I'm not sure he's wrong, right? Like China is truly like the only one competing with SpaceX today. No one else is coming close other than China. And they're not even using reusability yet. Uh, ignore the cost advantage of reusability. One of the big things with reusability is that it gets you a cadence advantage, right? You can move much quicker because you've got you don't have to build another one, right? can just go launch launch launch la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la launch la la la la la la la la la la la la la launch launch man can can I mean to my my question earlier actually this leads brilliantly into the kind of one of the other points that I made in the cold open which is you know Lance Space launched their first liquid rocket on December 12th 2022 they then landed it on uh let's see here August 19th that is 1 136 64 days from first flight, which was not successful, to landing. Their second flight, by the way, was July 12th, 2023. So that's even a shorter time. But like, so 1,346 days. SpaceX from first flight of Falcon 9 to OG2, which was their first successful landing, was 2,26 days. It's not quite double the amount of time it took us China to do that. At this rate, at the launch cadence that they have currently with rebuilding rockets, at them being able to figure this stuff out faster than what SpaceX was able to do, do we foresee China catching up to SpaceX shortly here? I mean, maybe not this year, but like 2027, 2028. I'll hand that one to J. >> It's bound to happen. >> Oh, go ahead. Actually, I'll hand it to Ryan. What' you say? It's bound to happen. >> It's bound to happen. It's almost inevitable at this point. And let's be clear that first la those first launches from from landspace were with Guchet 2 a smaller vehicle a different vehicle. Lanspace was the first organization in the history of the world to put a fully methox field rocket into orbit successfully. They are you know they beat SpaceX, they beat blue, you know they got there first, right? Uh with the the fuel of the future as it's so called. But I mean, if you've been looking at Chinese space flight over the past few years, I mean, it's marching forward to this moment and it's going to continue on a linear path. You know, for better or for worse, I said it many times on this show before and I will say it again, Chinese space policy doesn't change every four years. It's been very consistent and you've got so many different organizations in China working on a very similar, if not the same goal. And they're all doing it at the roughly the same time and they're all doing it by themselves. And eventually you're going to have a launch market in China of multiple different organizations with multiple different reusable launch vehicles. It's going to be similar to the what we're going to have in the United States with SpaceX, with Blue, with Relativity, with Rocket Lab, reusable medium to heavy lift launch vehicles. The exact same thing is happening in China. And you know, I've got to say, China has two uh if we gloss over the fact that [clears throat] JJ 3 tipped over, they've got two vehicles which have been recovered uh in the past 2 months, and they've got more on the horizon. They've got Chang Jong 12A, which is coming up. Uh you've got a Chung Jong 12B, you've got the uh Tayangong 3, you've got uh all the other different vehicles that uh I I'm I'm not going to name now because there's too many to name, right? They they have got a huge fleet of companies and organizations, however you want to define it with with you know how commercial companies work in China, but different organizations working on a on similar technology to achieve a similar goal. And like the point that was made in chat last year, I pulled up the numbers. There are 165 successful launches of the Falcon family. There are 90 successful launches from China. They have to rebuild. They have to build a brand new rocket for every single one of those 90 launches. And just imagine where things can go if just a fraction of those vehicles can come back and and be refflown. >> Yeah. With the worldwide market for launchers um growing there, you know, they've been stuff in the media recently about the backlog of launches and that's going to be a you know, the pressure is on the launch providers and everybody's going to feel it. The day the Chinese launches are only launching Chinese rockets. I think they do some international launches but like India and other favored nations I guess. Um yeah they're and they're cranking them out as fast as they can. You're right. When they when spa when the Chinese rocket companies perfect the reusability there's no stopping them. >> Great comment from the chat room again. EA says China has a government that thinks space is important. Note that there are penny pinchers in China too. China has lots of problems. They love to show off tech, but they fail to spend on their own people. I, you [clears throat] know, I haven't been to China. I I can I can only assume you are correct based on just like data that we get from the side, but like who who knows what how how correct my data is. But like I I think you're right. China has created space a national priority and they've kind of instilled that in their in the pe in the citizens of China, citizens of China, whatever. and uh you know we don't really have as much of that over here. There isn't national pride on in space in the same way that they've got it over there. I think that does help, right? Like getting getting the support of people is a big deal. And you know what's wild too is that is that culturally um China will often point at what NASA is doing and the missions that NASA is doing and talk about those with the public in China in order to drum up support for what they're doing domestically. So like could you imagine that the United States like us in the United States were looking at like a Tanwen mission and we were drumming up support for some sort of asteroid sample return because China's doing an asteroid sample return. Like look at what they're doing over in China right now. Why aren't we doing that? Let's go ahead and get that kind of a thing going. That's literally what China is doing with what we do at NASA in the United States. You know, one of the big ones was the Mars Exploration Rovers. There were daily updates on the news in China for the Mars Exploration Rovers, and it was done very primarily as a means by which to drum up support to build up a robotic program within China's own space program. So, um you know, there's priorities in China and spaceflight is absolutely one of them. Um, and you know, here in the United States, spaceflight was a priority, but boy, uh, let me tell you, it and science as a whole, at least presently, it's a little difficult to be doing things like that. >> I do want to point out, this was brought up kind of in some of the lower banners, uh, from the chat room, uh, you know, they do have they do have third mover advantage, right? like SpaceX did have to figure out like I was I was talking about those dates where you know land space was able to do it in half the time of SpaceX but space no one had really done it like SpaceX had done it before. Now there were programs that SpaceX could lean on, right? DCX program and other I mean even shuttle right so for reusability but SpaceX really was the one that pioneered this and the pioneer requires more time generally speaking to figure out the technology and prove to the world that it will actually work and once the world sees oh this will work. It is. If you look at the if you look at the rocket, it feels very Falcon 9, right? It feels like, you know, it turns out is a really ideal shape physics wise for a reasonable launch vehicle. as myself has said on the internet the future 3 is like a better Falcon 9 because it takes good things out of Falcon 9 which is its size and form factor and it takes good things out of Starship which is manufacturing out of stainless steel putting the giants using fully methodologed and is in charge of SpaceX said that they made a better version of his rocket I mean surely he's to be be believed right >> we uh we we went to absolute garbage audio I'm So sorry, Ryan. I I hate to do this to you, but can you say all of that again? [laughter] >> Elon Musk himself has said online on social media that J3 is a better version of Falcon 9. He's taken good things from Falcon 9 and good things from Starship. It's got a Falcon 9 form factor. It's got stainless steel from Starship, the Chines fully methox vehicle. If the guy who founded and is in charge of SpaceX said that Guch 3 is a better version of Falcon 9 than Falcon 9, surely he's got to be believed. >> Oh yeah, 100%. Thank Thank you for the repeat cuz [laughter] you were unintelligible for a moment there. I'm sad that that issue is back. I thought I had that solved. Um, you know, one of the last like we'll finish this. Uh, Aravail has a really good comment in the chat room. Oh, once again, God, you're on fire today, Aravail. Um, China's still a good 10 years behind SpaceX. Long March 9 won't be fully reusable until the mid 2030s, but that the fact that they're still the closest besides Blue is sad. And I I don't, you know, SpaceX has shown us the way time and time and time again. And, you know, at first traditional aerospace laughed at SpaceX and then they kind of, you know, were like, "Okay, yeah, but it's ne it's never going to actually, you know, change the market." Like, "Yeah, cool. You can recover your rockets, but like we're still we still know how to fly rockets." And then SpaceX became the world leader. And now everyone's scrambling to catch up. And I do not understand why people are catching up to where SpaceX was, not where SpaceX is going. They've already shown where you need to be. Just listen to Elon. He has given It's It blows my mind. Elon tells everyone what to do to succeed and no one listens. And then they wait for SpaceX to show them without realizing that like this stuff is hard and you got to start R&D now. You got to start go because you can't just figure you can't just copy what they're doing. They don't actually tell you everything. They tell you what you need what you need to get to in the end result. They don't tell you how to get there. And it blows my mind that United Launch Alliance to a lesser extent Aron Spas like all of all of these providers aren't doing what China is doing which is copy machine of SpaceX and let's be blunt that's what they're doing right they're copy they are like you look at it and it's a fal again it's Falcon they're cop but like of course of course it's the only thing that makes sense all right >> don't need to reinvent >> don't need to reinvent the Well, like >> if it works, it works. >> Absolutely. Well, I would argue Starship doesn't work yet. Speaking of Starship, um, you know, [laughter] >> good good ideas are new. Great ideas are stolen. So, [laughter] >> well, I mean, that's very true. That's look at the gooey, right? Like, yeah, we we could go over that time and time again or with different examples. Uh, you know, flight 14 with Starship is right around the corner. Uh, it sounds like it's looking good for a September launch. Uh, Ryan, I do you have updates on that? Like what how are we feeling for a September flight 14 launch? Uh, feeling good. It was on track to be the 28th of August. Uh, but that has since slipped. Uh, our kind of earliest of early rumblings of a date is midepptember, you know, kind of around the 14th or that time frame or so. And we just had uh uh some good static fires from ship 41, the upper stage for Starship flight 14 this week conducted a single engine static fire, one of the sea level engines to demonstrate a de-orbit burn and of course the full six engine static fire to demonstrate that ascent burn. So looking good for flight 14. One of the big remaining questions though is what is actually going to happen? And um if I have my rundown memorized correctly, I believe we're about to talk about that next. Also, I appreciate that you went into NASA spaceflight announcer mode on that one. Like I could you've got like a particular [laughter] voice you use. You were just like boom, here are the things that we are doing. It was amazing. Um yeah, I mean uh do I don't know if you have your rundown memorized. Uh you know, Elon did tease a double catch. Um but then he also said, "Hey, we might be a couple months away from a double catch." So either that means we're not getting to double catch on flight 14 or flight 14 is delaying by a couple of months. I assume we're thinking that we're not getting to double catch on flight 14. >> Yeah. >> That's a bummer. >> Yeah. >> They've said that that it's regulatory wise they were there uh but they're not ready with the rest of the systems. Plus, there's still the whole um dealing with coming across inhabited parts of uh South Texas uh with a live rocket. >> Well, it's more than just South Texas, right? Cuz if uh in order to catch and South New Mexico and South Arizona and Southern California and Northern Mexico, but apart from that, it's fine. [laughter] >> Okay. Well, arguably that makes sense, right? Like you you got to be sure that you you don't want to have another Yeah. I I also saw that new northern trajectory that they're talking about using and that literally goes right above the city of Reno in Nevada. Like liter like if you're standing in Reno, you're going to be able to watch it just go right over the zenith of your sky. Like that's going to be absolutely mindblowing. So I'll tell you one thing. if if it's re-entering at night, I'm going to definitely go out into the desert somewhere and make a really big attempt to try to film that. Um, so, uh, and honestly, with as big as Starship is, it may be one of those things that even during the daytime, you could possibly be able, uh, to to see it super well. Um, but, you know, we'll we'll have to see. Um, um, either either, you know what, I don't care. I'm going to go out and I'm going to try to attempt to uh to [laughter] dystopian profit. I got to admit, having [laughter] been to Reno a couple times, it is a it is a a bit of a trashy town. Um, but it is also it is also a a charming kind of trashy and I'm just mostly saying that to not offend the sensibilities of Reno. Um, so yeah. So, we'll we'll we'll see. I you know my my big takeaway from this is that I'm I'm going to definitely try to go actually see it on entry. You know earlier this year um when crew 11 came back a whole bunch of us in Los Angeles like stepped out at midnight and watched that crew dragon come down and that was I I'm still speechless and astonished by by watching a vehicle re-enter. I just have never seen that before. That was amazing. Um, so now I want to see something even bigger than that uh coming in overhead and I uh yeah, I want I want to do I want to see it. So [laughter] >> So I Okay, so not landing stage two uh starship side does make sense, right? Like we want them to be sure before they're flying over population centers of stage two and like more data is probably better there. But they've captured stage one before super heavy, right? Like they've got the tower there. It's not going to fly over a population center. Are they do we think they're going to try a stage one landing or are they trying to protect their GS their ground support equipment? Like what why do we It sounds like they're not going to attempt a stage one landing. So, do we know why? Well, the last flight is pretty evident of why they failed to complete a full boost back burn and they failed to complete a good uh landing burn. And if you can't do a full boost back burn and a good landing burn, then you're not fit to come back and catch uh uh or attempt a landing of any type uh back at your designated landing zone. So instead, they're going to give it another go. Going to try and do another soft splash down on target in the Gulf. And you know, the they got further than they did on the uh previous mission. So flight 14 did get further than flight 13 with the booster uh uh return, but they still didn't get far enough. And SpaceX themselves have said that the boost back burn ended early and the landing burn did not light up as intended with only a few of the uh 13 engines that were meant to light. So fingers crossed they can they can nail that all off on this flight because the booster definitely seems to be strangely the booster seems to be behind the ship with uh with Starship V3. It was the other way around on Starship V2. But I mean technically despite what SpaceX wants to call it, this is booster v2. Uh they just kind of renamed booster v1 by scribbling off V1 and putting V2 and crayon on the side. Um so this is technically the second version of Super Heavy. So maybe the V2 curse is still in place on Super Heavy. Who knows? >> Is it or would we count the water tower is well booster? Wait, wait, wait. Yeah, it's fine. Uh you know, you you did you did kind of give me a nice transition point to my next uh question, which is how is flight 14 different than 13? because it sounds like they're not going to recover anything. Uh it's not Are they going to actually make an actual are they going to do another burn to get it into a circular orbit or are they just going to if they're not going to do that like what's different between 14 and 13? >> Great question. Um the details are scarce. We have had Elon and um I think it's Shauna Diaz on X um they have said and also SpaceX's own official account you know they've said that they are prepare like preparing for orbital missions as we get ready for orbital missions and things like that. It's it's pointing towards this upcoming mission being an orbital mission but it's also not definite for certain saying that the next flight is an orbital mission. like it's still obscure enough that they can hedge their bets and if it turns out this next flight is suborbital that it's just they were talking about future missions whenever those future missions may be. And this could be one of those things now that SpaceX is a publicly traded company. They don't want to say a definitive thing and then not meet that definitive thing and then get sued because they said they were going to do something that they didn't. So it's very up in the air still. I mean I think the expectation is that this will be an orbital flight. The expectation was also that the ship catch was possible. And now it seems like that's not possible. So, we're just going to have to wait and see what SpaceX says. And I would really, really, really like it if someone could just say something definitive, black and white. Yes, we're doing this. No, we're not doing this. Is it really that hard to ask for? Cuz it would be so useful for planning for this launch because we genuinely have no idea what's going to happen still. And it's really annoying. >> Yeah, you can thank the IPO for that. the IPR changed the way uh SpaceX plans, they can't be as as bold and straightforward. They have to protect the protect the share, protect the image. But I also heard they're talking about um if they do do orbital, they'll try to launch real realtor Starlinks because I guess that's what it's all about right at this point is getting getting uh getting Starship operational, get those Starlinks up, the version 3es especially. All right. So, we went robot again and we got you up until uh All good. We got you up until um get Starship operational. >> Yeah, just getting getting this uh Starship operational to get those version three Starlinks up. That's that's really what this is all about is getting payload to orbit and even if it's a test uh orbital flight, they can put satellites out, operational ones, which will help them in the big picture. I mean, okay, so that's a great transition into my next question, which, and I know I ask this pretty much every time we talk about Starship, but when are we moving out of experimental phase into operational phase? Meaning, when are we like they this is flight 14 of this system and it's still an experimental rocket and it still has not sent up I mean, it sent up some real payload kind of, but nothing that's actually real, right? Like I would argue that's all been disposable. When are they actually going to make this an operational rocket? I can't believe for a moment that they can just continue until the end of time keeping Starship in an experimental phase. It It has to switch over sometime. When do we think that's going to happen? Right. It has to start generating revenue someday. Yeah. >> Well, yeah. In fact, um Elon said something earlier, I think it was yesterday, uh about the Falcon 9 that they he basically said once the Starship goes online, they're going to be backing down on Falcon 9, which is of course everybody assumed was going to happen, but now he's saying it out loud. So now there's more pressure to get Starship operational. And even like I said, if if they can even get some payload out uh on the experimental sub orbital flights, that's that helps in the bigger picture. Um, but you know, SpaceX does with its SpaceX speed, so stand by. >> Uh, Alex says, "SpaceX bec mean timid after the IPO." I would argue this was this was before the IPO, too, right? Like so many experimental points, right? >> Yeah. I was I was going to say a lot of the uh uh you know SpaceX was so well known that for putting out video after video after video of everything and um now if you jump on their YouTube channel it's it's bare bones. Um >> you're not on their ex channel. You got to you got to view their ex channel. Jared >> just I'm I'm just saying you know some some people go to the more popular areas uh to actually check out where uh where where they're at. So, >> I tried. I got into shouting matches after that one. I What a stupid decision. I like how incredibly dumb was that decision. I can say that now. Like, oh my god. I was towing the line before. I don't have to tow that line anymore. That was >> hands down the dumbest decision they've ever made. Not getting on you, not staying on YouTube. Truly, stupid. >> Maybe they'll get Carrot Top to be their next uh PR person. I don't know. uh [laughter] >> you know that actually might be an improvement if you ask me >> especially when they're try they like this is preipo right like you want to get everyone excited about your company you want to use all of the tools available at your disposal and YouTube is such a great tool for that and they're just like nah we're not going to do that it's so dumb it's so dumb any yeah anyhow also >> the thing that technically makes Rocket Lab the most uh or the the the launch operator who launches most if If you only count people who broadcast on YouTube. [laughter] >> Wow. >> You know, it's funny when you Well, I mean, this is great for Ryan. It's great for NASA spaceflight because um what are the arguments I would make? This is a true >> argument. So, it's so bad that a SpaceX stream on X only. I'm so devastated by this this loss. It's so bad. >> It's truly it's hilarious. I don't think I've ever seen ever when you walk around and you just look like a crowd of peoples of rocket nerds, just people watching the SpaceX launch. I think it's like a 0% hit of uh people I see watching on X, they all watch NASA's space flight. Even uh Brian, just so you know, even the Space Bar, which is the hotel bar that's uh over in Titusville or Yeah, I think they're Titusville side. uh and it overlooks the launch site. They pump in, you know, video from the webcast. They they don't pump in the SpaceX official streams. They now they used to, but now they pump in NASA spaceflight because they can't get to uh you they can't get uh SpaceX on YouTube. Uh my parents when they watched launches, they would use NASA Spaceflight and they get super confused because they thought it was an official stream. Uh like I don't see anyone watching it on X. It's such a dumb decision, but hey, it's their decision to make. Like whatever. Um, absolutely. Also, you know, going back to the general, >> it's probably more a discussion for after dark, but something that's been happening this week is that, you know, now that SpaceX owns X, because SpaceX owns SpaceX, formerly XAI, which owns X Corporation, which runs X, the social media platform, very easy to get your head around. SpaceX have been taking down X posts, which feature imagery, close-up imagery of ship 40 off the coast of Christmas Island. So probably a discussion for after dark but uh very interesting that SpaceX taking down images up close images of their own launch vehicle. >> I wonder if that's for their reasons or for it ear cuz SpaceX is still like that'll be an interesting after dark >> itar this itar that I mean you can blame so many people blame ITAR when in reality it's just because they didn't like them sharing pictures of of Starship. It could be. But uh let's talk about that in After Dark. I think it's a good uh conversation. All right. So, uh let let's just move on uh before we go into our first uh Kaiten conundrum. Um I did want to talk about Swift in link. Um I mean it sounds like that ain't h like Jared give me an update because it sounds like it ain't happening. Slash it is but it isn't but it is but it isn't. >> Uh yeah, it's gonna it's how do we describe it? Once upon a time. Um so in case you don't know the uh Swift space observatory is a gammaray observatory. You cannot observe uh the gammaray uh uh you cannot observe gamma ray light here on the surface of the earth. You have to get above the earth's atmosphere in order to be able to do that. Uh and that means you have to have a space telescope uh for that. Swift was launched. It was expected to operate for two years. It ended up having quite literally a 20-year mission. Uh so very much went past its expected lifetime and then had to shut down uh there's no propellant on board uh in order to keep raising its uh altitude to stay in orbit. You know, even at a high high orbit, you still have atmospheric oxygen up at those altitudes from the Earth's atmosphere. So you're running through that you and when you're doing that going through there at orbital speeds like 8 km a second that will generate drag which will slow you down. So it's been happening to Swift. The idea uh from NASA was that they were basically going to work with a small company in order to do a extremely fast lowcost high-risk mission to try and save the Swift observatory. So they hooked up with a company called Catalyst Space which is developing spacecraft that uh are going to be able to go to spacecraft rendevous with them attach and dock with them and then activate electric thrusters in order to slowly raise orbits or to provide attitude control or other things like that. So they launched a spacecraft called link uh about uh oh my gosh what was that was at the start of July wasn't it? So uh almost two months ago. Um and looking good for a couple weeks. Um then all of the sudden we lost they lost attitude control of that. Um and then the attempts were made to try to bring attitude control back to link and it looks like it wasn't able to successfully occur to uh what NASA wanted. So now what's going to be happening is that link is going to rendevous with Swift and do some close proximity operations, but it's not going to dock and attach itself and then then reboost swift and bring it back up to operational status. So unfortunately uh we are officially official in that we will be losing the Swift Space Observatory by likely by the end of this year. uh usually around Octo they're they're expecting somewhere around October is when it's going to re-enter the Earth's atmosphere. >> Is there any chance that they can try a reboost, right? They have they exhausted all options here. Are they Cuz like um someone called JPL, get the laboratory on it. I feel like there's just some [laughter] kind of Here you go. Here's a crazy idea that might work, right? Like >> uh well, I don't know if JPL is the place that you would want to go to at the moment. there the the uh US government is uh had did a pretty large restructuring of JPL which also meant that a large number of people were uh released slashfired in the name of uh of of budget cutting and other things like that. Um, so there's been a, [laughter] if I'm going to be, uh, particularly honest here, uh, there has been a significant brain drain from JPL right now, which is going to be taking probably the better part of a decade, maybe two decades to rebuild on that knowledge. So, uh, so yeah, not and you know that was that was done that massacre was over a three-week period. So, you know, that was, uh, pretty tough. So, um, yeah. No, there's unfortunately this was a you got one shot and one shot at this just because of the timing. So, um yeah, that's it. There's there's just no way that that they can do it. So, >> well, they're still going to run. >> And one of the fact >> Go ahead. I was just just going to say one of the factors is also not only uh physically docking the two spacecraft together and reboosting, but also should something go wrong during that reboost process, not only have you now got two spacecraft uncontrollable in space, but you've now got two spacecraft at a much higher altitude uncontrollable in space, which means it will take even longer to de-orbit back and reenter Earth's atmosphere and break up upon re-entry. So should something go wrong in that reboost process were they to go ahead with it, it would just create a worse problem for everyone. So, you know, they've just kind of put their hands up and said the best case scenario, unfortunately, even if they could dock the spacecraft together, is just to let it reenter, uh, let both spacecraft reenter because they don't want to make the problem. They don't want to potentially make the problem worse than it already is. Yeah, the stewardship of low earth orbit and making sure that you don't make more debris uh is definitely taking precedence here over the the desire to continue a mission. And then also a lot of the attitude prevails from the fact that, you know, hey, this was a 2-year mission that we got a literal a literal order of nag out out, you know, two years out. So like dang, that was pretty darn good. So, you know, nobody's nobody's looking at this and saying, "Man, we didn't get our money's worth uh with us." So, we got some of that. We got it through the robot. We're going to have to get a little robot icon that just walks around the screen. You know, I I It is interesting. There was one change that was made for this show that I didn't think was impacting this, but it's uh it might be. So, I'll go back and uh we'll try that again and see what happens. Um all right. Hopefully, we're back to normal by now. uh you know we are doing the rendevous right so what what upsides can what what's the upside here like obviously this was low low cost low impact like they were just trying to get something out there just to see just to see if we could recover like do something it didn't work but like can we gather data here is there is there an upside to any of this >> oh oh yeah definitely uh data is gold and yeah this was a high-risk or you know high-risk uh mission and you Why not at this point take that risk? There was a they had the options. God bless them. They flew the last Pegasus. I didn't know that. I didn't think that was ever going to happen. Uh but yeah, I've been I've been rooting for Link for the whole time. Um but yeah, definitely they'll get some engineering data and hopefully some great hopefully some video, some stills and maybe uh we can watch um Swift on its re-entry. Who knows? >> Will this be able to help? Will this technology stack once they perfect it be able to help other observatories such as maybe Hubble like I don't know because like Hubble will probably need a different tech stack. I assume not James Web Space Telescope just cuz like how do you approach it but like you know >> like what else what else could Yeah, I know Jared's just shaking his head now. Uh but like what else could we use this technique? What else could we use? >> Not what James >> Yeah. Web's in a good place. So you don't need to mess with web. That's why they put it out there. >> Yeah. You also you also technically can't mess with web. If you approach web um web is so cold the the in the instrumentation side of web and the mirror side is so cold that any any gases that you release as a part of a thruster will immediately depose and solidify upon the instrumentation and the optic side of web. So you if you approach web you will literally ruin the vehicle just by being there. So, it is uh Yeah. No, you can't go to it. [laughter] >> Yeah. >> That will be that'll be that'll be true for Roman once it's out there. But, um yeah, hopefully they'll take this what they've learned from this uh and apply it to a robotic vehicle that can go help Hubble cuz, you know, Hubble's still working. uh the the the uh servicing side of it may be a separate thing, but they definitely can get a um a robot u satellite to connect to it and keep it up there and maybe even augment the the reaction wheels and so forth uh to make it Hubble last even longer. You know, it's wild uh is that during a a meeting I had um on our uh on our shuttle program at the at the Columbia Memorial Space Center, um we we were actually talking about this. We were we were saying like, you know, this, you know, this is very interesting that we're seeing a system, you know, that's in need of rescue here. And uh man, wouldn't it be great if you could have a vehicle that could uh carry people up there and it had maybe like a payload bay and a robotic arm and you could rendevous with the with that uh with that that space telescope and park it in the payload bay and then have people, you know, put put on some space suits and go out there and work on it. Like man, if only if if only there was a vehicle that was capable of doing something like that. So >> my my only [laughter] advice when you're building that vehicle is not to make it a sidemounted vehicle on ascent. Just just a technical note. Just a quick little technical. Whoever is designing this future vehicle, don't make a sidemounted vehicle. >> We were very much talking about that that very interesting graphic that we saw of a crew dragon sitting at the butt of Hubble. Um so, you know, we were like, you know, that that would be a pretty interesting way uh of doing that, too. And honestly, Aravail, you got it, baby. Call our friends, our neighbors to the north. We're happy to get another robotic arm out of them. We're Please give us give us give us. >> You know what would be really cool is if they just mounted it on the outside of Starship on both sides so there are these giant arms that can just like come up [laughter] and hug. Can you imagine that? Wouldn't that be awesome? That'd be awesome. >> Give Give Hubble a hug. Give Hubble a hug. >> All right. Uh we're diverging into chaos. I think it's time to continue the chaos with a Kaitton conundrum. Uh let's uh let's see if Ryan can stump us this week. Ryan, which one do you uh Yeah. All right, got it. [laughter] Okay, I think it worked. Is it Is it on both? I think so. Yes, people are voting. Look at this. This is incredible. Okay, so China has delayed the launch of China 7, which was their robotic Luna lander to the Luna South Pole. It was going to launch within the next week. Um, but due to weather, they've had to stand down and the next launch window does not open until next year. But how much does China 7 weigh? Is it 2,50 kilos, 4,100 kilos, 8,200 kilos, or 16,400 kilos? [laughter] This is my This is my answer. By the way, we redid this graphic and I I want you to appreciate that I [music] kept the crazy AI Ryan at the bottom [laughter] >> with the monle and like the watch and like the weird pen like feather pen. >> Yeah. >> Uh I don't know how to feel about it. I don't I don't think I like that version of Ryan very much. >> Oh, this is the only version of Ryan that I This is This is the version of Ryan. This is his true form. AI understands Ryan. Let's put let's put it that way. >> Okay. Chat seems kind of split. They're they're focusing on uh B and C. Jamie, you've gone with 4,100, >> which is Wait, what one is that one? Number two. B, I think. >> Okay, Jared, what are you going for? >> Uh, you know, I think if I remember right, in freedom units, it's 16400. So, I'm going to go I'm going to go with C. 8,200 kg. >> Okay. Uh Andrew, what you going for? >> B. >> Okay. And chat room has gone for B. And the correct answer is 8,200. Well done, Jared. You got it right here. >> Boo. >> Chat room. I was cheating. I was cheating off of you. How dare you let me down. I Cuz I know you [laughter] guys cheat, too. Oh, that makes me sad. Gh. Also, Aravail, you're not supposed to like Ryan. You're supposed to be confounded by him. That is true. It's very true. Also, I love that the banner just covers his face in that particular graphic. That's pretty great. All right, let's uh Oh, I I now I've done it by going back there. Uh let's get started with I have to stall. Uh [laughter] cool awkward TV. All right. Uh let's get started with comments from last uh the last show we had. So I apologize. I know we've had a bunch of like off shows. Uh I'm so sorry everyone. Like I'm trying to make it more more regular, but we we'll get there. We'll get there. It is, you know, it's a fun >> reusability. Reusability. We'll get there. >> It's a Yeah, we'll get there. Exactly. We we're we're kind of we're less like SpaceX. More like land uh land space. Right now we're just copying NASA space. They're the SpaceX. We're the land space. Look, look, at least we're not doing smart reuse on the show here. Whatever smart reuse [laughter] of the show may look like. >> That's true. Who Who would that be? No, let's not be mean. Let's not be mean. All right. Uh Marvin says, uh [laughter] from from the last show we did, Marvin says at version three or 13 really of a fundamentally flawed vehicle. Oo, shots fired. Marvin, WOO, COMING IN STRONG. Uh I worry there is something wrong with the design priorities. valve and ingestion problems have been obvious since flight 3. We're talking Starship at this point. Uh, and the main cause can be removed on the engine level, but was not over two generations despite a massive increase in stats. So, basically, there's a whole bunch of problems on Starship. They could have fixed it, and they fixed all the stats, but not the engines. I worry it's the same reason that there are 6,000 tons of Starlink on orbit and not one ton on Mars. I don't fully understand that last sentence. Anyone help me out? like the fact that we don't have any Starlinks that I I guess saying that we don't have any uh Starship hasn't moved anything to Mars. I mean, >> yeah, >> I you know, not to sound too terrible, but rockets are hard and like it is an experimental vehicle, right? And so I I'm SpaceX knows these issues, but there's also a manufacturing process here, right? So they know what their manufacturing line looks like and they're going to choose what data they want to gather off of their vehicles and when they want to gather it. So they may already have a solution for something and go, "Okay, well we know that that's a problem that's going to be fixed in the next version." Uh and like we're just going to continue to fly with this version so we can gather other data in different places, right? Like it when it's an experimental rocket, it's not like an operational rocket. You're going to expect failures like >> Yeah. Welcome to testing. This is how testing works. You push your vehicle, you find out where the limit is, and that often means that you're going to end up going over the limit, beyond the limit, and it's going to and it and it will your your vehicle will turn around and bite your hand. And that's that's the that's how it works. I'm sorry, but welcome to flight testing. Um, and in the case of SpaceX, they're doing what they do best, which is move fast and break stuff. And um obviously the way they've been breaking stuff here is definitely been some of the largest ways anyone in flight testing has ever broken stuff. And it's definitely uh it has been uh decidedly less than ideal in in the way things have broken. >> New Glenn has entered the chat room. >> Uh you know that too. You know, I was going to say New Glenn didn't like disrupt the entire Caribbean's airspace for several hours at a time. >> It only disrupted their own launch infrastructure for the rest of the year. [laughter] >> Yeah. >> And showed up on seismic meters. Like, come on now. >> Yeah. You know, look, hey, you know what? All I'm going to say is that if a 2.8 happened underneath my house, that might wake me up wake me up, but I'm not getting out of bed for it, okay? So like this whatever 2.8 that's weak sauce. I'll just it's I might even sleep through it. Um but [laughter] this is this as an experimental vehicle. It's very difficult. And then remember too like cuz the engines are being specified in this comment. These engines, the Raptor engines, they're full flow stage combustion. This is one of the first times anybody's ever actually tried to do it. And then even more and more they've decid here here. Let's set our rocket engineer period while we're doing one of the most complicated combustion cycles that nobody's really ever successfully done before. So screw it. Let's do it. Um so yeah, this is it's not easy stuff. So we GOT WE GOT SOME >> WE GOT some of it. I think we got enough of it. Basically full flow combustion. Uh, let's see here. Yeah, the best part is they're all on the same Zoom call. So, they can all hear each other because the issues in our control room. So, I can hear when it's robot. I can't hear when I'm robot. They can hear when I'm robot. Oh, yeah. It's all sorts of fun. Oh, no. >> Should I go back? Should I re my rant just now or? Okay. >> No. No. We got your rant. Uh, engines are hard. Experimental vehicles are hard. That's a particularly difficult engine. There you go. Right. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> And big boom. and big big bada boom big bada boom uh from from disturbed zero says first version three museum piece um and I think that's with regards to the recovered vehicle act which brings up a good point. What do we think we're that SpaceX cuz SpaceX did just get the vehicle back, right? They brought it back. >> Yeah, it's a Christmas Island. >> Yeah, >> define getting it back. They've towed it to Christmas Island. And you know, according to my calculations, Christmas Island is on the literal other side of the world to Starbase, Texas. So, uh, they have they've, as far as I'm aware, they've chartered in a massive semi-submersible ship, and they're going to be, uh, submer submersing semi the the semi-ubmersible ship, uh, to lift ship 40 out of the ocean and then sailing back to to Starbase, which is going to be a 40 plus day track. So, we're looking, you know, kind of October, November time frame, uh, getting ship 40 back to Starbase, depending on the route they go because they've got a few routes they can choose. Uh, they can go, uh, via the South China Sea and take Starship through Chinese territorial claimed waters. Uh, they can go via the Suez Canal and go through waters where Houthi rebels are, uh, which are, you know, US and Iran, not a great situation right now. or they can go literally back the way that ship 40 came through the ocean around South Africa and across the Atlantic Ocean, which is probably the way they're going to go. So, it's an interesting voyage for sure. So, what you're telling me is that ship 40 has gone around the world in 80 days. [laughter] >> Isn't it halfway around the world and back again? >> So, all right. Thank you. Thank you. I'll I'll be here for another 10 minutes. Thank you. >> Oh god, I hope not. [laughter] Uh so, uh what do we think they're going to do when they get Yeah. Oh, yeah. We're off the rails. Uh what do you think they're going to do with the uh with with this ship once once they do get like Are they going to make it a museum piece? I assume they're going to do some forensic analysis on it first, but then what's the longterm goal? >> Well, after they tear it apart and then look at stuff they've never been able to look at before. Yeah, definitely become a museum piece. Well, I'll put it in right now. Space Center or Houston's not going to get a shuttle. We'd love a Starship. [laughter] >> They don't deserve a shuttle because they didn't do the initial work to get a shuttle. And then they all threw it. >> They all threw a hissy and they didn't get a shuttle because they didn't do the work necessary for a shuttle. So, that's on them. That is on them. >> I look up the design. >> Yeah, I know. I I'll clarify. We have a shuttle mockup which is just fine. Uh people can walk around inside of it and look and see the hardware that they've flown hardware in the cockpit. Um unfortunately all the other flown shuttles are all kept away at safe ditches where you can't touch it and so forth because if you do touch it the oil in your skin will destroy the the yeah destroy the tiles and plus there's technically molecules of very hazardous material in there. So yeah, I would as a spa >> Yeah. Space space space uh as a Space Center Houston volunteer, I can put in my vote for Starship uh for that. >> Uh you know, when it comes to shuttles, I'll say wait do you see Endeavor? So >> Oh, yeah. Oh, I want to see that real bad. >> Oh, that opens up, doesn't it? Like October. >> Yep. That's that's about two months from now that they're going to open that up. And uh let me tell you, I've already I've already seen uh some of the stuff the public hasn't seen yet. And uh you think uh I was going to say when Atlantis and its and its stuff debuted at the Kennedy Space Center, uh that was very impressive. Um but just you wait. >> Okay, that's a [laughter] high bar. I will say the Atlantis reveal is a very high bar. For those who don't know, Space Shuttle Endeavor is at the California Science Museum or Yeah. >> And Science Center. Yeah. >> Science California Science Center. Yeah. And um they built this is all of the shuttles are in different configurations, right? That that that were So Atlantis is in a flight configuration kind of, you know, orbiting sort of whatever with it. I think his bay doors are open. Um >> y >> let's see here. >> Uh what other shuttle do we have? We uh Discovery >> has disco is land is landed, right? So it's it's full on on the ground and Endeavor is in flight like launch conditions. So it's vertical. It's the only shuttle that would be displayed fully vertical >> with and with a real external tank and real solids as well. >> Filled, by the way, fully fueled vehicle ready to go. [laughter] But >> I like the like the huge. >> And I want to point out they do have a gantry next to it as well which you can go up. >> So there are multiple levels. >> No spoilers. So, >> no, this is you could see this publicly now because the best part about it is they have a they at the top level they have a area that goes over Endeavor with a glass floor and you can look straight down at the vehicle. So, it's incredible stuff. >> The thing >> Yeah. The thing I I think for anyone who's not seen a launch vehicle up close before, specifically in its flight configuration, I I I'll speak for myself, my brain can never comprehend properly the size of these vehicles. And whenever I see them horizontally on the ground, I'm like, "Yeah, that's a big vehicle." And this includes Starship, Space Shuttle, all of them. And I don't know what it is. You walk up and it's horizontal, you're like, "Yeah, I mean, it's big, but like whatever." For whatever reason, when the vehicle goes vertical and you stand next to it and you look up at it, it breaks my brain. I'm like, my god, this thing is huge. And it happens every time. It's just it just changes how you view the vehicle. And I have no doubt that Space Shuttle Endeavor is going to change how you view the space shuttle when you see it in its full-on launch configuration. And I am very very very excited for this to finally open October. >> Uh November uh 13th. >> That's what I said. November 13th. I thought it was October. Maybe it's like the press or something in October. Um all right, moving along. Uh Attekland, who has been a subscriber for 9 years. So, thank you so much. Uh by the way, all of you can all y'all can subscribe to the channel for free, right? Like doesn't cost you anything. Just hit the subscribe, hit that thumbs up button, do all the youtuby things. I hate having to ask. It feels like cheesy and whatnot, but unfortunately like if I don't ask, you don't do it and I have to feed the algorithm one way or another and like it really truly does help. So please hit that thumbs up. Make create put a comment in the show. We clearly bring the comments back into the show and it continues the discussion. So do comments are great. Thumbs up are great. Subscriptions are great. Like please hit the buttons. All right. The difference between refurbishment and reuse when it comes to Starship probably isn't as stark as it's made out to be. Oh my, this comment just keeps going. Uh so uh even commercial airlines yeah yeah I'm just going to cover the first part of this even commercial airliners can get non-trivial maintenance done on them by engineers at the gate between flights. So what criteria should we use to declare ship Starship has reached airliner like reusability. I would argue no rockets to this day have reached airliner like reusability or really even come close. Um Jared, what do you think it would take to get airliner like reusable? Like what what do we set the criteria for? Cuz a rocket is different than a an airplane, right? And like what we're going to need to do to it will be very different. So like how do we how do we classify like oh it's reached airliner reusability status. >> Well, I think uh you have to look at how airliners operate, right? So airliner between flights usually has a a certain amount of checklists that are followed in terms of the ground crew looking over parts of the aircraft. Uh the the pilots may step outside and actually do a physical inspection as well with their own eyes. Um and yeah that's you know it is pointed out correctly in this comment um that indeed uh you can do certain types of major major maintenance um if you want to call it that um for uh an airplane on between flights on the ground. But also, there's things too with aircraft, right? Like if there's a seat that's not working correctly, like if you've got a seat belt that isn't working correctly on a seat, that could end up quite literally cancelling your flight or having you have to be transferred over to a different aircraft by the end of the day. So, um yeah, so that that rapid reuse, what does that look like to me? It looks like minimal tile changes. So, like you could do a very fast inspection of the heat shield tiles and say we're good to go. No engine changes, no swaps. Um, basically it to me it's what was in the videos that SpaceX has put out which is basically vehicle lands back at the pad is refueled and is then ready to go within a couple of hours. Because after all, that's what the that's what the video that SpaceX put out said. That's what the promise is. So, I'm just holding SpaceX to their own standard at it. So, well, >> yeah, same day reflight. Same day reflight. >> Same day reflight. Whether whether that's that's 30 minutes or 12 hours once you get same day reflight, I think I think you're at the point of where you could say air air airliner operations because then then you're talking about a a time frame that you would expect with aircraft in the 50s and 60s at the start of the jet age where you could where you could rapidly reuse them. And that was because you were moving an aircraft fast enough at a high enough speed that you could actually do multiple flights a day. You could do like you LA to New York, New York to LA in one day, you know. And uh that that to me is the ability uh of of that that to me is the benchmark for full rapid rapid reusability. Um as to whether that will happen, I don't know. Usually the manager starts talking. So let me know the robots are done. I just keep talking randomly. I just keep saying words and then when the robots finish, let me know when the robots finish. They're the robots are leaving. They come they come in little storms and then they leave. Then they leave. Um all right. Finally, uh this is from observer 77 who says, "Ship 40 unintentionally became a crash model. If they are able to recover it, uh there would be a lot of data for potentially a sea uh uh abort landing of a future failure mode. Yeah, absolutely. Like this is something that I hadn't really thought of, which is they didn't expect to get this ship back, right? They thought I think all of us thought it was going to explode. You could hear Dan Hwitt be like on the live webcast like uh it's still there. [laughter] Wow. Uh so but like yeah now it's like okay what happens if you uh if you like come down in the ocean and in like the computer auto ababorts landing on the chopsticks like what what happens what what does that look like? I don't know. Kind of interesting. You think useful data Jared? >> Oh yeah definitely you're getting a vehicle back. You know as Titan mentioned earlier they're going to tear that thing down um and look at every single piece and component that they possibly can. So honestly I would not be surprised if uh starting around starting about flight 15 that based on the data that they get back from ship 40 and integrating that into the next set of vehicles um beyond what's already been built right now. So maybe maybe flight 16 and even flight 17 um you're going to see I would imagine something that is significantly more successful some like locked in and absolutely solid at that point based on the data that you get from tearing down this vehicle. >> I also want to point out in the chat room that Mystic Wolf is going to Costco and wants to know if anyone wants to go with. So Mystic Wolf is taking a Costco order. So, everyone in the chat room, start dropping your Costco shopping list in the chat room for Mystic Wolf to go pick. >> I need to get that. Got to get that dog in me. So, if I could get one, please. >> All right. I think we should start another Kaitton conundrum uh and finish up this show. >> Yep. Let's uh let's see if it works. >> Oh, yeah. Good point. This usually the second one that fails, and this show has been super great with technology so far. I fought this show. Oh, we'll talk about that in After Dark, but I fought this show. I think it worked. Let's see. >> We'll find out. >> It says Discord and YouTube, but there have been no responses so far. Oh, we've got a response. >> All right, >> we got multiple. Yay, it's working. Let's go. We've got more than two responses, which is how we know that YouTube is working. Okay, so what was the 200th orbital flight of 2000 or orbital launch attempt of 2026? Was it Starling Group 1750, the Lightning God Defense, Starink Group 1039, or Starink Group 1520. I'm going to do this just because it's such a cool title. It's the Starlink titles are so boring. So, that is literally the entire reason I've chosen this. The thing [music] is because you put three Starlink groups in there. I'm pretty sure it's a Starlink one, but I'm choosing this [music] instead. >> Well, these are not picked at random. These are literally the last four launches like in order. >> Well, and it's amazing that of the last four launches, three of them were Starlings, right? But like I'm saying >> that's how life tends to be these days. But >> yeah. Yeah. I'm looking at the board. >> So Jamie goes with the with the Rocket Lab launch. Uh Jared, what are you saying? >> I'm going with the Lightning God defense as well. Like I, you know, I don't necessarily want to frame it this way, but how lame would it be if it was a Starlink? Like that's just a really cool name. Like come on. >> Yeah. Right. Like this is what I want it to be because the name is awesome. And Star uh SpaceX, if you want us to start picking your missions, name them better. >> Name them better. >> Arale is saying that that can you imagine if Starlink named every mission? >> Oh my god. Like it's just like how we wanted every individual SpaceX booster to have its own name as well. >> I think they should. I think Yeah, I know. I know. I think they should. >> What's this one? >> What's this one called? B1086. Oh, yeah. That's really inspiring. >> Inspires me to throw it in the trash. >> Yeah. >> So >> huge. Another huge onexnol. >> Oh yeah. Yeah. Lightning bolt. >> Yeah. >> Lightning bolt beat. Lightning bolt. >> Okay. And chat has also agreed. Uh and uh this leaves us in a peculiar situation where nobody got the answer correct. Uh the the correct answer, but I know which one it was. So >> the correct answer was Starling Group 1520, the most recent launch on the list. And that means that only one point was awarded for the entire show. And that point goes to Jared. [laughter] >> I don't like Well, that ought to make the build of that graphic easy, I guess. I don't know. >> Oh, I will say, so I'm using my iPad to do the uh to do all this stuff, but I will say Titan's ability to rip his answer. That's pretty epic. I'm a little bit jealous of that. I'm a little bit jealous. >> All right, Jamie, time for you to rip your iPad like a phone. [laughter] >> Uh that that's after dark. That's definitely after dark. All right, I'd like to thank [laughter] everyone so much for watching this week. I also want to thank all of the crew of tomorrow. And I realized after the fact that this is tomorrow members, which is the old way of doing it. But I want to thank all the crew of tomorrow for uh helping to contribute to the show week after week, month after month, year after year. Uh you can contribute as in addition to doing your uh you know, thumbs up and adding a comment and subscribing. All of those are free. They cost you nothing and they help the show a great deal. And if you don't want to contribute financially, that's awesome. Just if you could just do one of those things, that'd be great. But if you do want to also help the show week after week, month after month, contribute financially, then you also get access to after dark coming up right after this. Uh and we are going to be talking about uh taking down expost due to it. That was one of the topics that was coming up. And then also I think the pooping a pineapple that I did prior to this show of trying to get this thing online because oh my gosh uh wow was it difficult. That is our show this week. I'd like to thank everyone so much for watching [music] and we will see you next week. Bye-bye. [music]