[00:02] Starbase to chase politics, he left the entire Starship program in the hands of SpaceX's powerhouse duo. Gwyn Shotwell, the most powerful woman at the company, and Mark Junkosa, its most brilliant engineer. But over time, even under
[00:18] their steady leadership, the Starship program slowly started to lose momentum. It was a clear sign that without Musk's relentless drive and bold vision, things weren't quite the same. So, how did this huge change impact the Starship program?
[00:33] And now that Musk is back at Starbase full-time, how will it change the game? Let's break it all down in today's episode of AlphaTech. Yeah, big congrats to SpaceX on their rapid progress. Less than 2 weeks after Flight 9 wrapped up,
[00:49] the company quickly completed booster 16 static fire test with a spectacular performance. But here's the catch. It wasn't always moving this fast. Especially after Elon Musk quietly stepped back from Starbase in May 2024
[01:04] and handed over the Starship program to trusted lieutenants like Gwyn Shotwell, Mark Jungosa, and Kathy Lutters. Progress actually slowed down. That's because Musk shifted his full attention to politics. By November 2024, he had
[01:20] already poured $288 million into supporting Donald Trump's campaign and founded America PAC, a political group aimed at pushing his agenda. After Trump's victory, Musk was even appointed to DOG, a new federal agency focused on
[01:36] cutting government waste. And during that whole period, he wasn't directly overseeing the launches, not seen at Starbase since October 2024. That means flights 6 through 8 all went ahead without his hands-on direction. At
[01:51] first, even with Musk gone, SpaceX didn't immediately slow down. The schedule stayed on track, and test flights continued every 2 to 3 months. Not every mission hit all its goals, but each one still delivered valuable data.
[02:05] leadership of Shotwell, Lutters, John Kosa, and Phil Alden, Starship is steadily pushing forward, no longer relying solely on Elon Musk's powerful drive to keep it on track. Among them, Gwyn Shotwell, SpaceX's COO and
[02:21] president, has played a particularly crucial role since Musk dove into politics in late 2024. She has been steering the Starship program with clear vision and ambition. In fact, at the 31st Baron Investment Conference in
[02:35] 31st Baron Investment Conference in November 2024, she openly predicted that Starship would be the most important part of SpaceX's future, setting bold goals like 400 flights over the next four years. Shotwell oversees operations
[02:48] at Starbase, manages day-to-day activities there, handles finances for things like fuel purchases through bids, raw material imports, labor costs, negotiates with customers, directly manages personnel, and keeps strong ties
[03:05] with government agencies, especially NASA and the Department of Defense. In short, she's basically carrying the weight of five senior managers all by herself. a top tier leader whose skills have helped SpaceX stay at the cutting
[03:19] edge of the industry. Martin Hallowell, former CTO of satellite company SES, who personally negotiated six contracts with Shotwell and now counts her as a friend, said, "I see Gwyn sometimes like the orchestrator inside the circus ring
[03:34] keeping all of the various different elements in equilibrium. Right behind Shotwell is Mark Junkosa, SpaceX's vice president of vehicle engineering. He's
[03:46] in charge of all the technical aspects of developing SpaceX's vehicles from of developing SpaceX's vehicles from Falcon 9 and Dragon to Starship. Junkosa seems to lead the design and development of Starship prototypes, covering systems
[03:58] like the Raptor engines, heat shields, and reusability features. His role includes making sure all technical parts meet the requirements for all test flights. According to sources, he played a key role in achieving major technical
[04:12] milestones, including the first successful booster catch on Flight 5, redesigning the hot staging ring, and handling the booster engine reignition system used in Flight 9. It seems without Junkosa's contributions,
[04:26] Starship wouldn't have reached today's milestones. Even though Shotwell and Junkosa handled Starship's development impressively for a few months after Musk left Starbase, things started slipping at the beginning of 2025. A clear sign
[04:40] that SpaceX needed its commander-in-chief back. Starship Flight 7 lifted off on January 16th without Musk. And at first, that wasn't really a problem. But then, ship 33 exploded mid-flight. Turns out a much stronger
[04:54] than expected harmonic response shook the rocket during ascent. something that hadn't shown up during ground testing. That led to fuel leaks and a sustained engine bay fire which took out the Raptors one by one until the whole ship
[05:07] blew up in a terrifying fireball high in the sky. Debris scattered near the Turks and Caos Islands, sparking safety concerns and disrupting air traffic. Gwyn Shotwell had to handle everything from dealing with the FAA investigation
[05:22] to managing debris cleanup completely on her own. After the crash, the mood among SpaceX engineers took a hit. They had poured their hearts, minds, and hard-earned knowledge into that ship, hoping all their efforts would lead to
[05:36] something truly rewarding. But instead, they were left disappointed. And that's when leadership matters most. Sometimes all it takes is a few words from someone like Musk to reignite the fire, to lift their spirits, and remind them why
[05:49] they're doing this. But instead of returning to Starbase, Musk shifted his focus to the national stage. He appeared at high-profile events, gave public speeches, and took on a flashy new role aimed at cutting government
[06:02] inefficiency. One controversial moment during a public appearance sparked backlash and stirred debate, drawing intense media attention. In midFebruary, he showed up at a major conference wielding a glittering chainsaw, a
[06:16] dramatic symbol of his new mission to streamline the system and shake things up in typical Musk fashion. At first, it seemed like this bold move might help Musk gain more influence for Tesla and SpaceX, maybe even shield them from
[06:30] mounting challenges. But instead, things started to spiral, and Tesla took the biggest hit. As Musk became more involved in public affairs, the company's image began to suffer. It grew increasingly polarizing and some
[06:43] longtime supporters started to pull away. Protests soon broke out in several countries. Some turned destructive. Showrooms were vandalized, charging stations damaged, and even a few vehicles set on fire. And the numbers
[06:57] vehicles set on fire. And the numbers reflected the fallout. Tesla's Q12025 reflected the fallout. Tesla's Q12025 profits plunged 71%, dropping from 1.4 4 billion the year before to just 409 million. Investors and analysts say
[07:10] Musk's focus on Doge and political activities made him neglect his core work. In a TV interview, Musk admitted he's been running Tesla, SpaceX, and X with a lot of difficulty because of his political role. This caused him to lose
[07:25] focus on key projects like Starship, Robo Taxi, and the humanoid robot Optimus, all expected to drive future growth. Of course, when we're all in the same boat, having a strong captain at the helm is crucial, seeing their
[07:39] leaders struggling both mentally and financially. The SpaceX team grew increasingly discouraged. Starship Flight 8 in March ran into the same issues as the previous flight. Another explosion occurred, leading to yet
[07:52] another delay as the FAA launched an investigation. All of this made one thing increasingly clear. If Musk didn't return soon, morale at SpaceX could keep slipping, and with it, the steady progress they had worked so hard to
[08:06] maintain. And this wasn't just about falling behind schedule. SpaceX was under a nearly $2.9 billion contract with NASA to build Starship HLS for Artemis 3. That mission was drawing closer by the day. They simply couldn't
[08:22] afford to keep sliding, especially when taxpayer money was on the line. The pressure was mounting, not just to succeed, but to prove they were still worthy of that trust. And finally, Musk agreed to return. He seemed pensive as
[08:36] he made the decision to go back to his natural habitat, far from the blinding lights of Trump's Washington. Once again, he took his place in the sweltering heat of South Texas, where SpaceX had turned a remote swamp into
[08:49] the world's most unlikely rocket launch site. You have to understand these engineers and Musk himself. How much this moment meant to them after such a long absence from Starbase. His return wasn't just symbolic. It lifted their
[09:03] spirits. It was like the whole company had been recharged, suddenly ready to do something big. All they needed was Musk back in command. And recently, a new conflict flared up between Trump and Musk. No one knows exactly how much it
[09:17] will affect things, but one thing's clear. It's also a big reason why Musk returned to sleep next to his rockets once again. The fallout began after Musk publicly opposed Trump's sweeping tax and spending bill called One Big
[09:30] Beautiful Bill, which passed the House on May 22nd, 2025. The bill, a whopping on May 22nd, 2025. The bill, a whopping 1,038 pages long, includes policies like eliminating income taxes on Social Security, TIPS, and overtime pay, but
[09:45] it's estimated to add $2.4 $4 trillion to the federal deficit over the next decade. Musk blasted it as a disgusting abomination, criticizing how it was rushed through without anyone even having time to read it. Then on June
[10:00] 5th, Trump fired back on Truth Social. He threatened to slash Musk's federal contracts and subsidies, calling it the easiest way to save billions and saying Musk was wearing thin and being asked to step away from the administration. Musk
[10:15] responded by threatening to halt SpaceX's Dragon program, a critical lifeline for NASA's astronauts and cargo missions to the ISS. But just hours later, he walked it back after a user on X advised him to cool down. Well, it's
[10:30] unclear how much this political tension will actually impact SpaceX's future. But for now, things seem to have cooled down. And maybe that's exactly what the space industry needs. Less noise, more progress. Now that Musk is back, one
[10:44] thing's for sure. SpaceX is gearing up for its biggest comeback yet. Right after Starship Flight 9, Musk didn't waste any time. He promised the next "Launch cadence for next three flights will be faster at approximately one
[10:59] every 3 to 4 weeks." That wasn't just talk. Like I mentioned at the beginning of the video, booster 16, a strong candidate for Starship flight 10, has already completed its static fire test right on the launchpad. On the evening
[11:13] of June 7th, it was rolled back to the Mega Bay for final inspections and any necessary fixes before being paired with ship 36. Speaking of ship 36, it started getting its heat shield tiles as early as late April. And just last Wednesday,
[11:28] it had both of its aft flaps fully installed and completed. We're probably just a week or two away from a static fire test, the final big step before Starship Flight 10, planned for sometime between the 20th and 25th of this month.
[11:42] This flight carries Elon Musk's personal stamp, meaning history is right around the corner. Maybe this time they'll finally nail a perfect satellite deployment, something ship 35 couldn't pull off last time because the payload
[11:55] bay door only opened partially thanks to a pesky internal glitch caused by a leak. Or maybe, just maybe, this will be the first time Starship truly reaches orbit. Whatever happens, one thing's certain, the excitement is real, and
[12:10] we're all on the edge of our seats. And the best part, booster 16 is set to be another chance to witness that jaw-dropping catch that never gets old. Elon Musk's comeback along with Flight 10 is SpaceX's shot at winning back
[12:26] trust from NASA, the FAA, their own team, and most importantly, the fans. If all doubts after those three back-to-back explosions. No matter the
[12:38] storms they've faced, SpaceX remains the pioneer. And with Musk leading the charge, nothing's impossible. After the Massie site was damaged, SpaceX was left with two main options to prepare for Starship flight 10. One, wait for Massie
[12:53] to be repaired and upgraded, then run a static fire test for ship 37. It's the safer route, but it could take 2 to 3 months. Or two, perform the static fire test directly on launchpad A, something they've never done with any Starship
[13:07] before. This would speed up the testing schedule significantly, but also comes with some serious challenges. But you know Elon Musk, he loves taking on tough problems. So he went with the second option. It all started when SpaceX
[13:21] posted a notice on their own Starbase City website warning residents about a 2-hour road delay starting at 11:59 p.m. on June 27th. But here's the strange part. There was no clear location mentioned. Even more confusing, the
[13:35] description simply read Ringwall Transport. What does that even mean? Turns out what they were actually transporting was a Starship transport stand heading straight to the launch complex. Now, that's something fans will
[13:49] definitely get excited about because I'm almost certain SpaceX plans to attach it to OM1 as a temporary setup for static fire testing the ship. Around 1:00 a.m. on June 28th, while most of us were asleep, things were still buzzing over
[14:04] at pad A. And then it all started to make sense. Right above the OM, steel frames and reinforced support beams began to appear. Very likely the foundation for a ring wall or test stand carefully designed to slot perfectly
[14:19] into the OM's mounting rails. More specifically, teams might be looking to weld the ship stand directly onto the OM by using several I-beams attached to the top deck plating. Part of this solution would involve extending the I-beams into
[14:33] the central opening of the OM since it's larger than the ship transport stand. However, this approach would require modifications to the OOLM platform itself and could affect future booster stacking and launch operations, which
[14:46] means it's very likely just a temporary setup, allowing SpaceX to carry out static tests for the remaining two block 2 Starships, ship 37 and ship 38 before
[14:58] eventually removing the stand. Everything needs to be precisely aligned so that when Starship is placed on top, there's no bending, no tilting, just a solid, stable setup for firing. This setup is considered pretty safe since
[15:12] the OM was originally built to handle the full weight of a stacked vehicle up to 5,000 tons along with the sheer force of all 33 Raptor engines firing at once. Starship stage on there for a static fire test, it's well within the systems
[15:29] limits. No problem at all. So, do you agree with SpaceX's decision to run a test for ship 37 on pad A? If yes, drop a one in the comments. If not, type two. I'm glad to hear your answer. At the current pace, it's expected to take
[15:44] anywhere from a few days to about a week to fully set up the test stand on the OOLM. However, there are still a few critical modifications needed before it's actually capable of supporting a static fire test. For example, the SQD
[15:58] is currently just installed like a robotic arm on the launch tower, while the BQD doesn't line up properly with Starship's propellant and data ports, both in terms of size and position. That means SpaceX might have to install a
[16:11] temporary SQD just for Starship to make this test work. But aside from that, the setup is already looking pretty solid. Pad A has a deluge system with powerful water flow and heat suppression, which means that if anything goes wrong, it'll
[16:26] be much easier to keep under control. On top of that, pad A already has a full tank farm, safety systems, remote control capabilities, and all the infrastructure needed to monitor and collect test data, arguably even more
[16:40] complete than what's available at the Massie site. This move by Musk isn't just bold. It's smart and it could seriously cut down the wait time for Starship flight 10 by around a month. So the big question is based on the current
[16:53] Starship road map, when will flight 10 launch? As I mentioned, this new approach could save SpaceX roughly a month. That means the new launch date could very well be in early August instead of October if they had waited
[17:06] for the Massie site to be fully rebuilt. All right, that covers the latest updates on SpaceX's new direction and launch timeline at pad A. But what about pad B? Is it ready to support a new Starship flight anytime soon? A lot of
[17:21] to the current status of pad B since it's now one of the most anticipated systems at Starbase, especially after the Massie incident. Pad B has quickly emerged as the leading candidate for Starship launches, while pad A shifts
[17:35] focus more toward testing. Last week at the launch site, we saw a notable update, the installation of manifold piping on the OOLM, likely intended to connect to the water deluge system and flame trench. More recently, a new set
[17:50] of propellant farm tanks was delivered. Eight hold down clamps also arrived this week and were transported to pad B for installation. The pad will eventually have 20 of these clamps, one for each outer ring engine on the Superheavy
[18:04] to keep the booster and ship upright during high winds and static fires, and they're released just before ignition at liftoff. At this pace, it's clear that the construction phase of pad B is nearly complete, just one or two months
[18:19] away, which lines up with earlier predictions that it would be ready by August or September. The next stage will likely involve initial system testing, followed by full-scale hardware integration. And if current momentum
[18:32] holds, one thing's for sure. SpaceX is gearing up for a surprise breakthrough by the end of this year. Well, it's not just SpaceX. NASA is also making moves of its own. But things don't seem to be going quite as smoothly on their side.
[18:46] After years of criticism over its high costs, the future of NASA's space launch system, or SLS, is finally becoming clearer. If the president's newly proposed budget cuts are approved, the SLS program could be cancelled right
[19:00] after Artemis 3. That would mean the Block 1B and Block 2 variants may never fly. However, despite the uncertain outlook, NASA doesn't seem ready to give up on its flagship rocket. Construction of Mobile Launcher 2 is still underway.
[19:14] And just recently, a key part of SLS's future configuration entered the testing phase. The new solid rocket booster known as bowl, short for booster obsolescence and life extension is being developed by Northrup Grman as an
[19:29] upgraded booster for SLS block 2. It's not expected to fly until at least Artemis 4. This new booster is a major part of the broader SLS upgrade road map, aiming to boost performance and replace aging components in the current
[19:43] replace aging components in the current system. On June 26th, NASA conducted a static fire test with the bowl booster. The demonstration motor one test was carried out at Northrep Grumman's facility in Promontory, Utah, simulating
[19:56] the 2-minute burn that would occur during an actual launch. This marked the first full-scale test of the upgraded booster system designed to extend service life and replace aging components in the current SRB
[20:09] configuration. However, just over 2 minutes into the test, about 10 seconds before the scheduled end, something went wrong. The plume, which had been stable up to that point, suddenly flared up violently. Moments later, a different
[20:23] camera angle revealed a large explosion with debris visibly shooting out from the rear of the booster. One of the test operators was heard reacting in surprise to the unexpected event. However, aside from that initial reaction, the anomaly
[20:37] was never acknowledged during the rest of the broadcast, and the test appeared of the broadcast, and the test appeared to conclude as planned. Jim Calberer, vice president of propulsion systems at Grumman, said in a statement, "We
[20:49] observed an anomaly near the end of the more than 2-minute burn. As a new design and the largest segmented solid rocket motor ever built, this test provides us with valuable data to iterate on our design for future developments. Although
[21:03] the anomaly didn't result in a catastrophic failure, the debris seen during the test suggests that the SLS booster system still requires further refinement. The development team must quickly investigate the root cause and
[21:16] propose an effective fix because in real missions, even minor irregularities can pose serious risks. The SLS solid rocket booster stands 47.5 m tall with a
[21:28] diameter of 3.8 m and a nozzle width of 4.4 m. It's built using carbon fiber composite materials and is designed to produce approximately 17.35
[21:40] million newtons of thrust or about 4 million pounds. Thanks to its improved performance, the SLS block 2 configuration is expected to deliver up to 5 tons more payload to low Earth orbit compared to the current Block 1B
[21:55] setup. However, whether the bold design will ever actually fly remains uncertain as NASA's proposed 2026 budget calls for cancelling the SLS program after Artemis 3. Many people actually support the new budget cuts, mainly because each SLS
[22:11] launch costs billions of dollars. The development, production, and maintenance of SLS hardware, the Orion spacecraft, ground systems like the mobile launcher, and now the new booster technology have only added to the cost. These are
[22:26] massive investments for a program that might not even continue beyond Artemis 3. Beyond the SLS, the Office of Management and Budget has also proposed major cuts to Artemis infrastructure, including scaling back the lunar
[22:39] gateway, cancelling planned upgrades to the Orion spacecraft, and reducing funding for mobile launcher, too. While NASA is still moving forward, these proposed cuts clearly point to declining political and financial support for the
[22:54] program. Let's start with cost. According to NASA's Office of Inspector General, each SLS launch costs around $2 billion. In contrast, Starship is designed to be fully reusable. While it's still in the testing phase, current
[23:09] launch costs range from $80 to $150 million, but once operational, SpaceX plans to bring that down to just $100 million or even less. This would allow
[23:21] NASA to save a massive amount of money on long-term missions and more importantly, it would prevent taxpayers money from being wasted on an outdated, money from being wasted on an outdated, unsustainable launch system. Secondly,
[23:34] Starship is designed to carry up to 150 tons to low Earth orbit and can transport both crew and cargo to the moon or even beyond. In comparison, SLS block one can lift only 95 tons to LEO, while block 1B and block 2 are expected
[23:51] while block 1B and block 2 are expected to carry 105 and 130 tons, respectively. With onorbit refueling capabilities, Starship can surpass the payload limitations of SLS. And thanks to its ability to land, it has the potential to
[24:05] combine the roles of SLS and Orion into a single integrated system. As SpaceX's full-scale partner and the holder of a $4 billion HLS contract, there's no way
[24:17] NASA could stay silent in a situation like this. Although no official statements were made, NASA leadership quickly arranged a secure call with SpaceX executives demanding an emergency briefing. The agency wanted full
[24:30] transparency on what happened and more importantly, clear proof that the Starship program wouldn't suffer major delays. Why? Because Artemis 3 still needs to launch on time. But here's the twist. NASA itself is facing its own
[24:45] internal struggles. The agency is currently being led by acting administrator Janet Petro after Jared Isaacman's nomination was withdrawn on May 31st, 2025 due to concerns over his ties to Elon
[25:00] Musk and political donations. At a NASA town hall on June 25th, officials hinted that a permanent administrator might not be appointed until December 2025. That kind of leadership vacuum could slow down critical decisions at a time
[25:15] when Congress is already debating budget cuts and high stakes programs like Artemis are in motion. Lawmakers have pushed for a fast nomination. But as of June 26th, no new candidate has been named. With leadership in limbo and
[25:29] Starship under pressure, the road ahead for NASA and SpaceX is anything but certain. That's exactly why NASA had to put pressure on its partner. Not out of hostility, but out of hope. Hope that America's bright future in space can
[25:43] still shine through. So, what is SpaceX doing next? Let's start with Massie, a critical area at Starbase. It's currently under review for repairs, aiming to support the current version of Starship Block 2 for ship 37's upcoming
[25:58] static fire test in preparation for flight 10. However, this decision isn't purely technical. It could significantly impact the development path of Starship Block 3 and SpaceX's long-term plans. Originally, Massie was only designed to
[26:13] accommodate Block 2 Starships. Now, SpaceX is considering upgrades to make it compatible with all versions of Starship. The idea is to build two static fire stands, allowing flexibility across different vehicle types. At the
[26:28] same time, they're planning to repair and expand the tank farm, upgrade propellant lines, and modify the quick disconnect systems to support both block 2 and block 3. The biggest advantage of this approach is the potential to
[26:42] increase the launch cadence over the next 12 months. a key move to accelerate the path toward making Starship a fully reusable vehicle for missions to the moon and Mars. Yesterday, SpaceX released a statement aiming to reassure
[26:55] the public regarding debris from ship 35 during flight 9, which reportedly landed across parts of Mexican territory. However, recovering those pieces hasn't been easy. According to Space X, these attempts have been hindered by
[27:09] unauthorized parties trespassing on private property. The statement came shortly after Mexico's president Claudia Shinebomb threatened legal action against Elon Musk's company over rocket debris and environmental fallout from
[27:23] the Starship Flight 9 explosion which reportedly crossed the US Mexico border. Speaking at a morning press conference, Shinbomb declared that the Mexican international laws may have been violated in order to pursue what she
[27:37] violated in order to pursue what she called a necessary lawsuit, citing real environmental contamination. It's still unclear how the case will play out, but with SpaceX already taking mitigation steps on the ground, legal experts say
[27:51] the balance could ultimately tip in Elon Musk's favor. Back at the Massie site, multiple rounds of cleanup have already taken place, and the area is starting to look much clearer. But clearing debris is just the beginning. Before SpaceX can
[28:05] resume cryogenic or static fire testing, they'll need to either refurbish or fully replace several critical systems. That includes the tank farm, propellant lines, test stand components, and the ship's quick disconnect arm. Only once
[28:19] those are fully restored can Massie return to action. That's the current situation at Massiey's. Now, let's shift our focus back to the launch site. As of our focus back to the launch site. As of June 5th, 2025, the second launchpad
[28:32] known as pad B has been fully assembled, standing 144.5 m tall. It mirrors the standing 144.5 m tall. It mirrors the design of OLET 1 at pad A. On May 6th, 2025, a newly upgraded orbital launch mount was delivered to pad B and
[28:49] installed on its support columns by May 12th, pushing the site one step closer to operational readiness. But pad B isn't just a copy. It comes with a major upgrade, a massive flame trench designed to improve safety and reduce
[29:03] infrastructure damage compared to pad A. Construction of the trench began in January 2025 and is still ongoing as of today. Once complete, pad B will play a key role in supporting future Starship launches, easing the load on pad A,
[29:19] increasing launch cadence, and even enabling upper stage catch attempts using the same giant mechanical arms currently used for Super Heavy. That's the moment we've all been waiting for. Next is Launchpad A. It was completed
[29:32] early and has already handled nine integrated test flights with Starship integrated test flights with Starship block one and two. But here's the catch. It can't support block 3 vehicles. That means booster 15, 16, 17 along with ship
[29:46] means booster 15, 16, 17 along with ship 37 and 38 and around 100 remaining Raptor 2 engines will likely be the last to fly from pad A in its current form. This opens up an opportunity. The major upgrades at the orbital tank farm,
[29:59] originally planned months later, could now begin 3 to four months ahead of schedule. And once those boosters are done flying, pad A itself could be torn down and rebuilt to match the block 3 standard, potentially giving SpaceX two
[30:12] fully operational pads several months earlier than expected if everything from part sourcing to Staractory tooling lines up. And there's another option, lines up. And there's another option, too. Instead of letting ship 37 and 38
[30:25] sit idle waiting for Massie, Spac X could just run static fires right here at pad A. With a quick rework of the test stand and QD arm, the infrastructure is more than capable. Tank farm, prop lines, everything's in
[30:39] won't throw off the schedule too much either because pad B is nearly ready and could be online by July or August, right in sync with Massie. With all this in mind, SpaceX now faces a critical decision in the days ahead. If the
[30:54] company is confident in its systems and believes the lessons from previous flights, including the ship 36 incident, have been fully addressed, then a bold move towards skipping static fire, might actually be on the table. The return to
[31:07] flight will depend entirely on how thoroughly SpaceX can tackle the issues identified over the past few months. But it wasn't just the changes at the launchpads. The detailed report SpaceX submitted just days after the explosion
[31:21] also left NASA speechless. Typically, when aerospace companies are asked to submit a failure report, it takes anywhere from 6 months to a year, depending on the complexity of the incident. That's just the industry norm.
[31:34] But SpaceX moves at a different pace. Take the Falcon 9 explosion at Cape Canaveral back in August 2016, for example. Also caused by a COPV failure. It took SpaceX about 4 months to complete a full investigation and
[31:49] deliver a detailed report to both the FAA and NASA. That report traced the cause to a flaw in the helium pressurization system, which led to major design and safety protocol changes. This time, SpaceX took just one
[32:03] day to release a public statement and only 3 days to submit a detailed internal report to NASA. And in that report, they revealed something that sent shock waves across the entire space industry. They officially announced a
[32:16] multi-billion dollar gamble, Starship Block 3. As you may know, ship 39 is the next gen version SpaceX has been working toward. It shares the same general size toward. It shares the same general size and profile as block 2, but block 3 is a
[32:30] whole different beast. This isn't just an upgrade. It's a complete reimagining of what Starship could be. And the numbers speak for themselves. Block two stands at 52 m tall. Block three a towering 61 m. But this isn't just about
[32:45] fundamentally better. The total propellant capacity of the entire propellant capacity of the entire system, Starship plus Superheavy, jumps system, Starship plus Superheavy, jumps from 5,000 tons to nearly 7,000 tons.
[32:58] That's enough with just a single orbital refueling to carry out deep space missions like a moon landing 226,000 mi away at its closest point. But size alone isn't the breakthrough here. The real gamecher is pressure management in
[33:13] Block 3's massive tanks. Unlike smaller tanks where high pressure demands nearperfect tolerances to avoid catastrophic failures like the one with ship 36, the larger tanks of Block 3 are built with advanced materials and an
[33:28] entirely new pressurization system. Force is distributed more evenly, drastically reducing the risk of rupture. Think of it like this. A race car engine has to be tuned precisely to avoid blowing up at high RPMs. But a
[33:41] modern nuclear reactor, it's designed with layers of redundant safety systems to keep pressure stable, even at a massive scale. That's what SpaceX is doing here. And here's the genius move. It's not just about size. It's about
[33:55] what's inside. Remember those six dark colored pressure vessels we saw inside ship 36's payload bay? The ones that likely triggered the chain reaction in block 3? They've been completely redesigned. Now they're housed deep
[34:09] inside the tank structure. surrounded by protective liners to shield them from impact and vibration caused by pressure surges across the ship's hull. All of this, the rapid reporting, the unveiling of the nextG Starship, and a clear path
[34:23] to solving the COPV failure only strengthen NASA's confidence in working with the world's leading private space company. To meet NASA's expectations, deeper inspections, tighten quality control, and make sure every subsystem
[34:39] from the engines to the fuel tanks to the KOPVS performs exactly as intended. Not to mention, it may also be time to revisit safety training and handling protocols for certain workers, especially temps and contractors. After
[34:54] all, SpaceX has faced lawsuits simply for refusing to hire undocumented immigrants. Here's the story. In August 2023, under the Biden administration, the DOJ sued SpaceX, accusing it of discriminating against asylum seekers
[35:09] discriminating against asylum seekers and refugees from 2018 to 2022. The claim that SpaceX discouraged them from applying and didn't fairly review their applications. They argued export laws like ITAR didn't justify the
[35:23] restrictions SpaceX used, calling it a violation of the Immigration and Nationality Act. Frankly, the accusation was absurd. SpaceX had clearly stated it could only hire US citizens or lawful residents due to it.
[35:38] These are national security level rocket jobs. Hiring just anyone was never an option. In the end, the DOJ quietly backed off, likely due to political pressure or a weak legal case. The lawsuit was dropped, a sign even the
[35:52] government knew it had overreached. Remember Musk's presentation right after Flight 9? Pay attention. I'll rewind it for you. Right at 25 minutes, do you see the changes in this latest
[36:05] design? Apart from the hot staging that we've discussed so much before, the grid fins of this new booster design also have an interesting difference. Look at it. There are only three grid fins right below the hot staging. Musk wasn't
[36:19] kidding. He put this idea into practice. There are now only three grid fins instead of four, and they are asymmetrically placed at 90, 90, and 180°. Also look at the top of the booster that was placed right next to
[36:34] presentation. The grid fins have likely been rearranged. In the old version, the been rearranged. In the old version, the four grid fins were arranged in a 120 60 120 60° layout. That means when looking at the front angle of a grid fin, we can
[36:49] see a 2/3 angle of the remaining grid fin. In this case, we can only see a means there will be two other grid fin installation positions hidden on the back. So why did SpaceX dare to change a design that is considered the gold
[37:05] standard for rocket control during rellanding? With the design on version one, it works well, if not excellently, precisely orienting the return to perform the three-time catch with the Mechazilla's wand arm, something that no
[37:18] other company or organization in the world can do. In previous flights, these grid fins acted like the rudders of an airplane. But instead of navigating thin air at low speeds, they had to control the direction of the booster's descent
[37:31] at supersonic speeds through the dense atmosphere. Thanks to grid fins, the booster can rotate precisely, keeping the correct trajectory back to the landing site to avoid flying off by hundreds of meters or even kilome,
[37:44] especially in strong winds at high altitudes. That is why from Falcon 9 to previous Starship launches, SpaceX has always maintained four grid fins arranged symmetrically to ensure stable navigation from all directions. However,
[37:59] with this heavy machine, four grid fins are not necessarily stable. Especially with the long-term orientation of Starship, the leader or in the role of a forced to suddenly announce this exclusion. Remove one grid fin. This was
[38:16] stated by him in a recent company discussion. Okay, let's get into the real reasons for this change. First, the grid fins of the Superheavy are huge and heavy, weighing 3 tons per wing, nearly 20 times the 140 kg of the Falcon 9.
[38:32] Removing a wing means a weight reduction of 3 tons. But it doesn't stop there because it also brings the potential to optimize other utilities of Starship. The thrusters will be subjected to more stress during flight, especially during
[38:45] thrust and lift during the landing of the booster. This also increases the reliability of the engines, reducing damage and adding more trouble to the maintenance process. Don't forget that Starship has demonstrated the ability to
[38:58] reuse 29 engines from booster 14 on the same booster. This is significant. A reduction of three tons means that Starship can carry three tons more payload. Enough for a lot of important supplies, sophisticated equipment, and
[39:13] even more crew members for deep space missions. On top of that, less fuel will be consumed, the booster can push the spacecraft further, and there will be more safety margins when performing complex orbits. Second is to improve the
[39:26] technical issues in operation. During the separation phase, when they were were subjected to a tremendous amount of heat from the Starship upper stage engine, which had exhaust temperatures of up to 3,000° during separation. The
[39:40] heat could cause structural damage to the structures that come into contact with it. And if the grid fins were not, they could warp, reducing their ability to steer on re-entry. Four fins may be a perfect balance, but we are not sure
[39:53] that four people can fly a vehicle. And with a rocket like Starship, it is even more of a conundrum. Is it really still controllable? On the ninth flight, SpaceX performed an active flip by directing the engine
[40:07] thrust through a specially designed hole in the hot staging disc. Removing a grid fin reduces mass, but also changes the aerodynamics, making the booster require less force to rotate, making the flip easier and more
[40:20] efficient. Asymmetric lift can also be generated immediately after the booster flip with the asymmetric fin design. This reduces the drag ratio during re-entry, allowing for more precise control of the descent trajectory and
[40:34] reducing the amount of fuel needed to correct the flight path. In addition, this new design also supports another tactic of landing at a higher angle of attack than the one SpaceX is testing. This approach helps spread the load
[40:47] during landing while improving the accuracy of recovery even when landing at a steeper angle than normal. The booster still has enough control. The booster will also have more space around the rocket body, making it easier to
[40:59] capture by Mechazilla. This can simplify alignment, reduce mechanical complexity, and make recovery operations faster and more reliable. Finally, the cost savings will be significant with only three grid fins on each booster. Starship's grid
[41:14] fins are made of stainless steel, which is cheaper than the Falcon 9's titanium grid fins, but they are more heatresistant. The price for a Falcon 9 titanium grid fin is equivalent to a Tesla supercar, approximately $200,000
[41:28] to $300,000. A stainless steel grid fin for Starship is estimated to cost approximately $25,000, much cheaper than the Falcon 9. With SpaceX's plan to produce 1,000 Starships
[41:42] per year at its Star Factory Star Base, Texas, SpaceX could save up to $25 million for each pair of ships produced. This is more than enough to carry out about 12 more Starship flights at an estimated future price of $2 million per
[41:58] estimated future price of $2 million per flight. In short, the removal of a grid fin is the clearest demonstration of SpaceX's style, a willingness to innovate boldly with carefully calculated risks in high techch, as well
[42:11] impossible possible that will guide future space technology. On the other hand, this change also has a directional meaning for the future of Starship space travel, especially the Aremis missions that NASA has high hopes for. The
[42:26] potential for reducing the payload is extremely beneficial for any transportation mission. Just adding room for a supporting research device can also reduce the time spent researching and exploring colonial areas. The
[42:39] streamlined design will help missions be faster and more continuous because the maintenance process has been significantly reduced. To reach the moon, the Starship human landing system or hls must launch about 14 Starship
[42:52] tankers to perform refueling operations for the hls along the way until reaching the moon, connecting with the Orion spacecraft to transfer astronauts and finally landing on the lunar surface. Being able to launch faster is an
[43:06] important factor in completing the mission quickly and accurately, as well as obtaining results faster. Going further, these small optimizations are the foundation for Starship to become the main vehicle to transport people and
[43:19] goods to Mars. Elon has always emphasized that the ultimate and most important purpose of Starship is to serve the colonization process on Mars. Every kilogram saved today will be room for more water, oxygen, and scientific
[43:34] equipment tomorrow. Thanks to that, eliminating a net is truly a revolutionary step to bring us closer to the goal of building a multilanet civilization. The dream not only of SpaceX, but of all humanity.
[43:48] On the production side, we suspect that booster 18 will likely be the first ship to launch with this three-bladed layout, meaning that we're only two missions away from version one of the booster before we actually see the design.
[44:02] SpaceX has always been fast-paced and based on regular updates at Starbase, B18 will be making its official debut at the production site very quickly. We first spotted B18 at Mega Bay 1 on May 14th with some of its components being
[44:17] 14th with some of its components being stacked a few days later on May 19th. This speculation is wellounded as booster 18 is believed to be the first prototype of the version 2 booster. Meanwhile, according to an update to all
[44:29] employees at Starbase last April, the new design will be applied to Starship versions two and three, including the zigzag hot staging design. Although Musk abandonment of a grid fin based on the evidence we have presented from what we
[44:44] saw in Musk's most recent presentation at Staractory as well as the fact that the version one booster is almost finished and cannot be applied anymore. Then surely with their always quick actions SpaceX is 99% likely to apply
[44:59] the new grid fin system design right on B18. Amazing right? Personally, we are looking forward to seeing the effectiveness of this design. If we look at the progress when SpaceX tested the new design of Starship version 2, upper
[45:14] new design of Starship version 2, upper stage, it was not very positive. S33, stage, it was not very positive. S33, S34 and S35 exploded in midair due to S34 and S35 exploded in midair due to engine failure, and S36 even exploded on
[45:26] the test stand at Massie. The fire was so large that the exhaust fumes were visible even from a distance. The preliminary cause of the S36 explosion was a COPV failure or composite overwrapped pressure vessel. A type of
[45:40] pressure vessel containing nitrogen gas in the bow area of the ship ruptured its pressure threshold causing a flow of nitrogen gas leading to structural collapse, fuel leakage, methane and liquid oxygen, and a large explosion. We
[45:56] only when the next test flight starts decision is a genius or a mistake that will slow down the settlement process on Mars. But compared to the state of the ship, booster has always achieved more
[46:10] stable test results. It has continuously broken the old definition of the aerospace industry, proving that things that seem impossible can come true. So sit tight and we will quickly update the latest developments for you, timely and
[46:26] accurate. Finally, although ship 36 exploded and caused regrets, the time to flight 10 has been delayed compared to the announcement of every 3 to 4 weeks for the next launch. But the latest update at Starbase has seen the
[46:39] update at Starbase has seen the readiness of S37, which will replace S36 flying on B16 on flight 10. The causes as well as solutions for the explosion of S36 have been updated by us before. If you missed it, please refer to our
[46:53] video catalog. After all, flight 10 is expected to launch in early August at the earliest. Then there will be only flight 11 left before we see the test flight 11 left before we see the test results of three grid fins on flight 12.
[47:36] humanity's journey to Mars is actually much closer to home, the moon. While Mars is the ultimate goal, the moon serves as a critical stepping stone in that journey, both technically and logistically. Launching directly from
[47:49] Earth to Mars presents significant challenges due to Earth's strong gravity. It requires enormous amounts of energy and fuel, making the transportation of large payloads into deep space extremely costly and complex.
[48:03] In contrast, the moon has only sixth of Earth's gravity, providing a far more energyefficient launch point for interplanetary missions. Recognizing this, NASA has prioritized establishing a sustainable presence on the moon
[48:16] through the Artemis program. Artemis is not just about landing astronauts on the lunar surface again, but also about developing the infrastructure, technologies, and experience needed to support longer duration missions farther
[48:30] into the solar system. Ultimately, the moon acts both as a testing ground and a launch pad, making it an essential part of the road map to Mars. While it may sound like a straightforward mission to Mars, NASA currently lacks a
[48:43] transportation system powerful enough to carry humans there. The SLS rocket and Orion spacecraft were once expected to handle such interplanetary missions. But due to high costs and challenges in hardware production, NASA has decided to
[48:57] limit SLS to Aremis missions to the moon only. Unlike that, SpaceX appears to have a concrete plan to establish a long-term presence on Mars. Centered around its superior launch vehicle, Starship, the largest and most powerful
[49:12] rocket ever built, SpaceX has established a mass production line for Starship at its Starbase facility, and continues to demonstrate an ability to innovate, embrace risk, and learn from failure to achieve success in human
[49:26] space flight. However, sending Starship directly to Mars would involve a long, complex journey. That's why NASA and SpaceX are strategic partners. Shortly, if everything proceeds smoothly, the Aremis program will mark a major
[49:40] milestone in that collaboration. Starship will become the primary lunar lander. If all goes according to plan, the first crude mission to Mars will be the first crude mission to Mars will be a perfect combination of NASA and SP X.
[49:53] Each bringing its own strengths to achieve a giant leap for humanity. Before humans set foot on Mars, at least one, possibly several resupply missions will be deployed to ensure everything necessary for astronaut survival and
[50:06] return to Earth is already prepared and waiting for them on the red planet. This process is expected to begin with the Aremis 10 mission. In addition to its lunar landing objectives, Artemis 10 will carry a special payload called Mars
[50:20] Cargo Phase 1, which will be deployed into lunar orbit. Following that, Artemis 11 will carry out a similar mission, including a moon landing and the deployment of Mars cargo phase 2. NASA has not yet revealed the exact
[50:34] design of these resupply spacecraft, but we can imagine them as fully equipped vessels ready for a future Mars landing. These pre-eployed shipments will include the necessary energy sources for the crew surface operations as well as
[50:47] mobile vehicles for exploration and transportation. Artemis 12 will mark a major milestone, the time when the crude Mars lander Mars 1 along with supporting surface systems and the Habmar transfer vehicle are delivered to the Gateway
[51:03] station. Assuming the station is not cancelled due to cost and delay problems in recent years, NASA plans to use gateway, a space station orbiting the moon as the launch point for the Mars mission. From here, the Hobar transfer
[51:17] vehicle carrying the Mars One lander will depart lunar orbit and head for the red planet with the capability to return to gateway once the mission is complete. official designs for the two main
[51:30] spacecraft involved in this mission and has no specific construction plans yet. Therefore, once again, we can imagine SpaceX's Starship stepping in to fulfill this role. In theory, Starship can travel to Mars and return to Earth with
[51:44] a single vehicle. However, NASA's approach might be more logical in terms of safety and redundancy. According to the plan, NASA would use two spacecraft, one optimized for transit and the other serving as both the lander and return
[51:58] vehicle. This is a safer approach because it provides a backup in case one vehicle experiences a failure. In this scenario, two astronauts would remain in mission, while the other two would descend to the Martian surface aboard a
[52:12] pressurized lander, which would serve as both their habitat and living space during 30 days of operations on Mars. The Mars surface habitat module will also function as a mobile rover, serving as the crew's home during their 30-day
[52:26] stay on the red planet. It will not only support daily living, but also act as a hub for scientific and exploration activities. Mobility is critical as after several months in a microgravity environment, the human body needs time
[52:40] to recover before astronauts can dawn space suits and step outside. Integrating a mobile habitat allows the crew to begin their exploration missions immediately without delays during the recovery period. However, this becomes
[52:54] more challenging if Starship is used as the lander due to its tall structure with the crew compartment located far from the surface. Still, with the technical capabilities of the Space X team, this challenge is likely solvable.
[53:07] just about descending from a tall crew cabin. It's about landing safely on Mars. As Starship approaches the red planet, it carries tremendous momentum and must slow down significantly to avoid a hard impact. In space, slowing
[53:22] down requires thrust burning fuel. But fuel is an extremely precious resource on space missions due to limited storage and the priority it must share with life support systems and crew equipment. Fortunately, there's another solution to
[53:36] aerodynamic drag. This is the force that helps slow a vehicle down without burning fuel. Although Mars has a very thin atmosphere, only about 1% of Earth's sea level air pressure, Starship can still use it to decelerate before
[53:49] performing a final engine burn for landing. The sequence would work as follows. First, the Starship will dive into the Martian atmosphere at a steep angle, flipping so that its heat shield faces up and the nose points downward.
[54:02] This orientation maximizes aerodynamic drag, helping the vehicle descend more rapidly. Then it transitions into a belly flop position, flying horizontally to further maximize drag. When it reaches the lower atmosphere where the
[54:16] air is densest, the Raptor engines will reignite in the final seconds for the landing burn, eliminating the remaining velocity and allowing the spacecraft to touch down gently on the Martian surface. Of course, you can't talk about
[54:29] going to Mars without mentioning Elon Musk, but in reality, there are other fascinating ideas for reaching Mars as well. One such idea is a Mars landing concept developed by a true American hero and one of the founding fathers of
[54:43] human space exploration, Dr. Buzz Aldrin. Buzz Aldrin's Mars Cycler is one of those ideas that sounds like science fiction until you realize it was dreamed up by a guy who walked on the moon and holds a doctorate in astronautics. The
[54:57] concept is surprisingly elegant. Instead of launching a new spacecraft every time we want to go to Mars, we build one big vessel, the Cycler, that loops continuously between Earth and Mars. It doesn't stop or land. It just swings by
[55:11] each planet in a fixed orbit. When it gets close, smaller taxi ships would launch to dock with it in deep space, fing supplies to and from the Cycler. The beauty of this system is its efficiency. Because the Cycler uses
[55:25] gravity assists and solar powered ion engines to stay in motion, it uses very little fuel, which means more space on board for crew and cargo. Travel time would be just 4 to 6 months, not bad, considering the long haul to Mars. But
[55:41] while the idea is brilliant on paper, it's a massive challenge in practice. First, the Cycler would have to be built in space, either in low Earth orbit or maybe even on the moon, and it would be enormous, big enough to house a crew of
[55:55] six plus all the supplies they'd need for the journey. Once built, it would slowly accelerate using its ion engine, and over time start its loop between the two planets. The catch, when it swings past Earth, it's not stopping. That's
[56:09] where the real tension comes in a high-speed, highstakes docking maneuver known as an elliptical rendevous. Miss it and the taxi ship doesn't have the fuel to turn around. It's a one-shot deal. There's also the scale to
[56:22] consider. Aluldren's vision was never about building a city on Mars. He imagined something more like a research outpost with around 60 people. So, while the Mars Cycler is an incredibly smart and sustainable way to get to Mars, it's
[56:35] not built for moving huge numbers of people. In the end, it's a plan rooted in precision and long-term thinking. A quieter, more calculated path to becoming a multilanet species. Now, shift gears because here comes Robert
[56:49] Zubran, a veteran Mars advocate with a much more hands-on approach and a few sharp critiques of Elon Musk's full-size Starship. Zubran agrees with the overall Mars mission goals, but he thinks Musk's spacecraft is just too big, especially
[57:03] for landing on Mars, where the thin atmosphere makes slowing down a giant vehicle incredibly difficult. So, his solution, the mini Starship. Here's the clever twist. Instead of sending a massive Starship all the way to Mars,
[57:17] Zubin proposes launching it into Earth orbit like usual, refueling it with only three tankers, a big improvement over the usual 8 to 10, and then having it deploy a smaller mini starship. This lighter craft undocks in orbit, fires up
[57:32] its own engine, and heads off to Mars. Why go through all this trouble just to go smaller? Well, Mars makes big landings hard. Its atmosphere is too thin to slow down a heavy ship with air resistance alone. And relying on
[57:45] high-speed arrow braing plus a dramatic engine burn as Musk's Starship would is a risky maneuver. A mini starship, on the other hand, could take a more controlled approach. Gently slow down in the upper atmosphere and then hover down
[57:59] using a single engine, similar to how past Mars landers like Curiosity and Perseverance made it to the surface. Coming back is another challenge. A full-size Starship would need 600 tons of fuel to return to Earth fuel that
[58:13] must be produced on Mars. That means installing 30,000 square meters of solar panels, about 6 football fields, and running the system for over a year. That's a huge infrastructure investment. But a mini starship, it would only need
[58:27] 116th of that fuel, which means just one football field of panels. Still big, but far more manageable. Sure, the mini Starship can't carry quite as much 50 metric tons versus the full Starship's 100, but that's still more than anything
[58:42] else we've got, and far more practical when you consider the realities of Martian infrastructure. So whether it's Aluldren's elegant orbital shuttle or Zubran's compact return vehicle, both ideas highlight a critical truth.
[58:56] There's no oneizefits-all solution for getting to Mars. It's going to take creativity, compromise, and a whole lot of problem solving. But with pioneers like Aluldren and Zubrin laying the groundwork, we're one step closer to
[59:09] groundwork, we're one step closer to making Mars more than just a dream.