/sci/ - Science & Math

>>12768232
Starlink 18 and 19 were using a new, very rough trajectory. I imagine with this one they'll ease off the throttle a bit.

>>12767465
wonder if they're still going to use the super demanding regime after the previous failure.

>>12711497
Yes, and as of last starlink launch they've become even more taxing: https://old.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/ldkz7c/starlink18_first_stage_telemetry_and_analysis/

they've been testing their luck lately in seeing how far they can push the F9. They may have just found their wall.

>>12711217
As of the previous Starlink mission (starlink 18) they did, in fact, change their trajectory to be more demanding. Shallower with a more difficult reentry: https://old.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/ldkz7c/starlink18_first_stage_telemetry_and_analysis/

Here is Starlink 18's entry burn: https://youtu.be/fe6HBw1y6bA?t=1223
The telemetry looks very similar to the one we just saw. 19's entry burn occurred perhaps at a very slightly lower altitude. Visually the current mission (19) had more plasma, specifically a large flare just before entry burn posted here >>12711207.

cool, so the last starlink launch was pretty brutal