Ah yes, that would increase the separation quite quickly.

I guess they do the relight test after the simulator deploy because it is a higher risk activity - the pez dispenser is very unlikely to cause a RUD.

Apart from the spectator value of mounting a camera on one of the Starlink simulators, how much value would such a camera have to SpaceX in being able to monitor the re-entry? How long before the simulator was too far away / too hot to be able to continue transmitting useful images?

How will the transition from 5 to 3 engines on the Booster landing burn add additional redundancy? How is that different from going straight to 3 engines?

Previously the 3 engine landing burn was for about 16 seconds. If there was a 5 second burn with 5 engines then that would be followed by a 7 or 8 second burn with 3 engines, giving a total elapsed burn time of 13 seconds.

Is there a gap between the 5 engine burn and the 3 engine burn or will they just switch off two engines after 5 seconds. Does that mean that they can then choose which two to turn off and avoid the need to allow for the 0.2 seconds engine startup time that would be needed if there was a failure of one of the 3 engines. Is that the only benefit of a 5-3 landing burn?

Is there a visualization anywhere of the maneuver that is intended to mimic the approach path to the launch site? Will it come in over Mexico and then do some kind of wiggle? What population centers do they need to avoid?

Official SpaceX livestream on X: https://x.com/i/broadcasts/1OwxWYzDXjWGQ

Spaceflight Now and Space Devs links added. I’ve also fixed the dateful link. I think it might have been the & that was also messed up and may be resolved differently by different browser - anyway I hope it is fixed now.

Thanks. The date link was a bit wrong but seems to give the correct result: https://dateful.com/convert/utc?t=2011&d=2024-02-23T04:11

I didn’t notice the t=2011 argument and just appended T04:11 to the d argument. Seems to work ok for me.

OCISLY towed by Debra C is making 5.5 knots and currently about 60km (30 nautical miles) off the Mexican coast: https://www.vesselfinder.com/?mmsi=368351350 (MARMAC 304 is the original registered name of OCISLY)

Support ship Go Beyond is about 4 hours out of Long Beach on its way to “LZ :)” https://www.vesselfinder.com/?imo=9622655

Broadcast has started now.

SpaceX live streaming starts at 12:24 UTC here: https://twitter.com/i/broadcasts/1dRKZEWQvrXxB

The flight profile here https://www.spacex.com/launches/mission/?missionId=starship-flight-2 does not say there will be a flip. But concludes with “Excitement Guaranteed”. So anything could happen.

07:00 CT = 13:00 UTC

If it gets that far then I’d imagine that it would attempt to flip. Although I do think I recall something said about not doing a flip to ensure that there’s nothing that needs to be recovered. This would mean they don’t need recovery ships in the area.

From: https://www.faa.gov/space/compliance_enforcement_mishap

When does the vehicle-type involved in the mishap return to flight? A return to flight operations of the vehicle type involved in the mishap is ultimately based on public safety. The operator plays a significant role in the process to return to operations and is responsible for submitting a final mishap investigation report to the FAA for review and approval that details needed corrective actions. All required corrective actions must be implemented prior to the next flight unless otherwise approved. Based on the nature of the corrective actions, the operator may be required to submit either a license modification request or a new license application. These actions may occur concurrently. In summary, the FAA will not allow a return to flight operations until it determines that any system, process, or procedure related to the mishap does not affect public safety or any other aspect of the operator’s license. This is standard practice for all mishap investigations.

My take is that the ring may not survive. Stage separation may damage it beyond reuse. Having it be detachable means they can swap it out. It would be a shame to scrap a complete booster just because the top end got a little bent.

I don’t think Chuck has written that particular book yet, but it would seem to fit well into his “in the Butt” series. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Tingle there’s no indication here that Scott Tingle is related to Chuck.

Perhaps. What would the holes around the dome be for? And why would there be a pez dispenser? What role would such a slot in the fuel tank serve?

It must be a test article. But what kind of tests?

NASASpaceflight video of OLM Deluge plate installation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6PXHqOErvs