SpaceX ready for Starship Ship 40 Firing in Days —Progressing Fast Towards Launch!

[00:00:00]Ship 40 is no longer just a cold tank on a stand. It is moving into engine test territory, and that changes the flight 13 clock. At Starbase and Massey's, Ship 40 and Booster 20 have worked through cryogenic proof activity. The unglamorous part where stainless steel gets filled, chilled, pressurized, and judged. According to Starbase tracking on June 14th, Booster 20 had already returned from Massey's to the production site while flight 13 hardware continued its test campaign. Now, the open question is brutal. So, I'm going to call it continue on something. Now, that sounds simple. It is not. Engines, pad flow, the Federal Aviation Administration, range availability, weather, and physics all get a vote. So, is July real? Maybe. But, Ship 40 has to earn it first. Booster 20 has now cleared the cold part of its flight 13 audition. The sequence starts around June 5th when Booster 20 rolled from the production site to SpaceX's Massey's test facility. Tank watchers reported that after a lengthy rollout caused by self-propelled modular transporter issues, the booster arrived at Massey's for its preflight cryogenic campaign.

[00:00:54]That detail matters because this was not a ceremonial road trip. It was the booster being taken away from the build site and put into the place where SpaceX deliberately makes stainless steel uncomfortable. By June 6th, the vehicle was deep into the work. Ocean water ports tossed on clean certain tank watchers added that Booster 20 had, quote, a full tank of cryogenics and noted that the campaign could take multiple nights. Translated into plain English, SpaceX was checking whether the giant booster still behaves correctly when its tanks are chilled, pressurized, and loaded in flight-like conditions.

[00:01:21]The gas pressure work and liquid nitrogen style cold loading are not glamorous. They do not make fire. They make frost. But, they tell teams whether the tanks, valves, lines, welds, and plumbing are ready to survive the next step. Then, on June 10th, Starbase tracking reported that Booster 20 was on its way back to the production site following cryogenic proof testing at Massey's. Test Flight described the next phase as pre-static fire modifications and engine installation. That is the important shift. Tank integrity is no longer the main headline. Now, the pacing items become inspections, cleanup work, post-flight 12 changes, grid fin work, and the installation of a full set of 33 Raptor engines. And that is where the difficulty jumps. Ship 40's engine campaign involves six engines. Booster 20's meaningful static fire campaign needs 33. So, yes, Booster 20 looks healthy after the cold tests. But, SpaceX cannot launch a Super Heavy on tank tests alone. The 33 engine moment is still ahead. Meanwhile, Ship 40 is moving toward the loud part of its own campaign. This vehicle has already passed the cold gate. What about it?

[00:02:17]Felix Schlang reported on May 2nd that, quote, "Starship 40 has left the bay."

[00:02:21]And said it rolled out overnight to Massey's test site to begin cryogenic proof testing. That puts Ship 40 through the same basic logic as Booster 20, just on the upper stage side. Chill the tanks, load the structure, watch the plumbing, and see whether the stainless steel argues back. By early June, the story moved back inside Mega Bay 2.

[00:02:38]According to NASA Space Flight reporting, Ship 40 is the planned upper stage for Flight 13, and its next visible milestone is engine testing.

[00:02:44]Around June 5th and 6th, the six Raptor engines were being installed, giving the ship its full flight style engine set, three sea-level Raptors and three vacuum Raptors. That matters because Ship 40 is not just being prepared as a tank. It is being prepared as a flying second stage.

[00:02:58]And this is where the timeline gets interesting. Starbase Tracking reported on June 7th that the Flight 13 vehicles were continuing through their construction and testing campaign. One week later, on June 14th, Starbase Tracking said Flight 13 was, quote, "Slowly but surely approaching." While vehicle work continued at Starbase, at the same time, road closure chatter around June 14th and 15th pointed to a possible setup window for movement or testing. Treat that carefully. Road closures are clues, not confirmations.

[00:03:23]Starbase schedules are written in pencil and handed to weather, ground systems, and physics for editing. If Ship 40 rolls out next, the first fire may be conservative. SpaceX could start with a short ignition and health check, roughly around 10 seconds, to confirm startup timing, pressures, shutdown behavior, and basic engine response. That is the does everything wake up correctly test.

[00:03:41]Then comes the more valuable version, a longer six-engine firing. That can validate engine balance, gimbal response, thermal margins, feed system behavior, and how the vacuum Raptors behave while mounted on a real ship instead of living as beautiful plumbing diagrams. So, watch ship 40 closely. The question is not only whether SpaceX lights it, the question is whether they stop after one careful burn or quickly escalate into a full duration ship test.

[00:04:03]Flight 12 is why ship 40's next test is more than another dramatic cloud of fire at Massey's. On May 22nd, SpaceX flew the first Starship version 3 stack from pad 2. According to SpaceX's statement after the flight, Super Heavy ignited all 33 Raptor 3 engines, one booster engine shut down during ascent, hot staging worked, and ship 39 lit all six engines to continue toward space. Sawyer Merritt quoted SpaceX's summary that the upper stage continued after staging, while Joe Tegtmeyer noted on May 25th that ship 39 suffered a Raptor vacuum engine failure during ascent. That detail matters for flight 13. Ship 40 carries three sea level Raptors and three vacuum Raptors, and the vacuum engines are the ones that matter most once Starship is above the thick atmosphere. If SpaceX can light them cleanly on the ground, hold stable pressures, and shut them down on command, it reduces one of the biggest question marks left left by flight 12.

[00:04:51]Not eliminates, reduces. Rockets do not accept vibes as test data. There was also the thermal side. Flight 12 reports centered on a heat shield coolant leak, which is a very different problem from saying the whole vehicle needs to be redesigned. A leak points engineers toward plumbing, seals, routing, pressure behavior, and local heating.

[00:05:06]Those are targeted fixes. Still important, still unforgiving, but not a blank sheet crisis. Gwynne Shotwell also gave an important clue on CNBC on making on calm down or sell more to burn on 10.

[00:05:16]That explains the current posture.

[00:05:17]Flight 13 is expected to repeat the broad flight 12 style suborbital profile, while the bigger orbital injection ambitions are more likely aimed at flight 14. So, flight 13 is not just a rerun. It is a filter. It will test whether the vacuum engine issue is understood. It will test whether the thermal system behaves. It will add ascent and entry data with the version 3 vehicle flying again. And that is the tension around ship 40. SpaceX is not only proving Starship can fly. It is proving the fixes are boring enough to trust. Ship 40's static fire is the visible milestone, but it is not the finish line. If the firing happens cleanly at Massey's, SpaceX still has to turn that data into permission to fly.

[00:05:51]First comes inspection. Engineers will review engine performance, plumbing behavior, thrust structure loads, and anything that looks scorched in the wrong place. If one Raptor shows ugly data, SpaceX can swap it. That is annoying. It is not fatal. If several engines point to the same problem, the schedule suddenly needs a bigger wrench.

[00:06:07]Then comes the flight configuration.

[00:06:08]Ship 40 still needs any final payloads, experiments, or internal test hardware locked down. The flight termination system also has to be integrated and checked because the range does not care how shiny the rocket is. If the safety system is not ready, the vehicle does not fly. Meanwhile, Booster 20 is the other half of the July equation. NASA Spaceflight reported on June 13th that Booster 20 was back in Mega Bay 1 for installation of its 33 engines, while Ship 40 prepared for static fire testing. That is the correct order.

[00:06:35]Finish the engine set, roll to the pad, run whatever tanking, chill down, or spin prime style checks SpaceX chooses.

[00:06:41]Then fire the booster without creating a mystery. That last part matters. A clean 33 engine static fire can move the stack toward launch. A messy one can trigger inspections, engine removals, or a long search for a root cause. Rockets are very good at turning one suspicious sensor into a week of meetings. Finally, even two clean static fires do not guarantee July. The full stack still needs a wet dress rehearsal. That means loading propellant into both stages, running the countdown, watching the ground systems, and proving the abort rules work before ignition. Component tests can miss choreography problems. A wet dress rehearsal finds them with a giant stainless steel vehicle covered in frost. So, here is the measurable question. If Ship 40 fires cleanly, Booster 20 gets its engines, and both vehicles pass major testing in June, July stays plausible. If either vehicle gets messy, the calendar starts slipping fast. Which item do you think is the real schedule trap? The ship, the booster, or the wet dress rehearsal?

[00:07:31]June now has a name at Starbase, double fire month. According to NASA Spaceflight on June 13th, Booster 20 returned to Mega Bay 1 for installation of its 33 engines, while Ship 40 prepared for a roll-out to Massey's for static fire testing. One day later, NASA Spaceflight described the same flight 13 flow again. Booster 20 in the production site, ship 40 waiting for Massey's. That is the pattern to watch. The first fire would be ship 40 at the Massey's test site. That keeps the upper stage away from the orbital pad where a bad day can become expensive very quickly. The second fire would be booster 20 at the launch site with 33 Raptors turning the pad into a pressure washer made of flame. If both happen cleanly in the same month, flight 13 stops looking like parts moving around a factory and starts looking like a launch campaign. There is one helpful backdrop. The orbital launch infrastructure reportedly came through flight 12 in good condition. That matters because SpaceX does not need to rebuild its way back to readiness every time the rocket flies. But good condition is not the same as ready. Pad upgrades, inspections, deluge checks, propellant systems, quick disconnects, and software all still get a vote.

[00:08:31]Ground systems are the quiet characters in the story until they ruin the plot.

[00:08:34]This is where Starship is different from smaller rockets. A Falcon stage can be hot fired at McGregor, shipped to Florida, and treated like a known machine. Starship is still proving the vehicle, the pad, the heat shield, the Raptor fleet, and the part of P and the recovery plan at the same time. It is not one test campaign, it is five campaigns wearing the same stainless steel jacket. So, if June delivers both fires, that is the clearest flight 13 signal yet. And while SpaceX tries to make the world's largest rocket routine, Europe is trying to prove a much smaller rocket can become strategically important. Meanwhile, in Norway, Isar Aerospace is trying to turn a 30-second first flight into a serious second campaign. The mission is called onward and upward and the vehicle is Spectrum launching from Andøya Spaceport on Norway's Arctic coast. Isar's first Spectrum flight lifted off on March 30th, 2025, then ended roughly 30 seconds later after an unintended vent valve opening led to loss of attitude control. That was painful, but not useless. A first flight that clears the pad, starts real aerodynamic loading, and returns hard data is still a receipt from physics. Spectrum is not a giant rocket. It is about 28 m tall, 2 m wide, and uses liquid oxygen with liquid propane.

[00:09:40]The first stage flies on nine Aquila engines. The second stage uses one vacuum optimized Aquila engine. That makes it small compared with Starship, but strategically loud for Europe because every successful private launcher reduces dependence on American, Indian, and other non-European rides.

[00:09:54]The second campaign has already learned the old launch lesson. The rocket is only one vote. On March 25th, Isar aborted at T minus 3 seconds after a fishing vessel entered the safety zone.

[00:10:04]Space journalist Andrew Parsonson reported Isar later said the delay caused an increase in engine fuel temperature that could not be fixed before the window closed. Then, on April 9th, the company stood down while evaluating a suspected composite over-wrapped pressure vessel leak. Small rocket, very normal headaches. The payload side is what changes the tone.

[00:10:22]Exolaunch stated on February 16th that it had integrated five satellites with Spectrum ahead of the second flight.

[00:10:27]That means this is not just a company redemption lap with ballast and hope.

[00:10:30]Real customers are attached, real qualification data is expected, and insurers, satellite builders, and European agencies will be watching the telemetry like hawks with spreadsheets.

[00:10:39]So, while SpaceX is chasing rapid reuse in Texas, Isar is chasing something different in Norway, credible independent access to orbit. If Spectrum works, Europe gains another launch door.

[00:10:49]If it does not, the data still shapes the next vehicle. Either way, Andøya is no longer a quiet corner of the map. The customer list matters because it shows exactly where Spectrum is trying to fit.

[00:10:58]According to the European Space Agency's BOOST program, the payload stack for this flight includes five CubeSats.

[00:11:04]SaiBEEsat comes from Technical University Berlin. TriSat-1 comes from the University of Marburg. Platform 6 comes from EnduroSat. FramSat-1 comes from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology. SpaceTeam Sat-1 comes from the TU Wien Space Team. Also riding along is D-Orbit's non-separable Let It Go technology demonstration, which is attached to the vehicle rather than deployed like a normal satellite. That is not a heavy national flagship mission. It is a cluster of university, commercial, and and technology demonstration hardware. In other words, exactly the kind of payload class that often gets stuck waiting for the right shared ride. These are advertised as Spectrum at roughly 1,000 kg to low Earth orbit, or about 700 kg to sun-synchronous orbit. That puts it in a useful middle lane. Too small for Arianne 6 to be the obvious answer. Too specific to always enjoy waiting for a Falcon 9 ride share slot where the schedule, orbit, and deployment order may belong to somebody else. Arianne 6 still serves the big institutional and commercial payloads Europe cannot afford to outsource forever. Spectrum is chasing a different problem. Faster, more tailored access for small and medium missions. If a customer needs a dedicated orbit, a narrower launch campaign, or a European regulatory chain, a smaller launcher can be more than convenience. It can be strategic insurance. And this is the gap Europe has been trying to close. Not every satellite needs a giant rocket. Not every mission wants to be a passenger in the back of someone else's bus. Finally, that brings us from vehicles to the ground beneath them. Launch access is not only about rockets. It is also about pads. Finally, the next pad race is now moving to Vandenberg South Base.

[00:12:30]According to the United States Space Force request for information, Space Launch Complex 9 is not an active launch pad today. It is an undeveloped site the Space Force wants converted into a commercial vertical launch facility through an out-grant style arrangement.

[00:12:42]Translation, the government provides access to the real estate and the operator brings the money, design work, construction plan, and paperwork mountain. The target market is very specific. The request defines small launch as under 2,000 kg to orbit and medium launch as 2,000 to 20,000 kg.

[00:12:56]That fits polar orbits, sun-synchronous missions, Earth observation spacecraft, military payloads, technology demonstrations, and constellation replenishment from the West Coast. The obvious watchlist includes Firefly Aerospace with Alpha and future Eclipse, Stoke Space with reusable Nova, Relativity Space with Terran R, and Rocket Lab with Neutron. Blue Origin's New Glenn is no longer the clean SLC-9 comparison because its Vandenberg path is now tied elsewhere. The real question is not who wants the pad, it is who can finance it, build it, clear environmental review, pass range safety, and start flying in roughly 3 years.

[00:13:27]Physics demands receipts, regulators demand binders. Drop your pick in the comments, who wins SLC-9? And that brings us to the end of today's episode.

[00:13:34]Thank you so much for tuning in, and until next time, keep looking up. So, the pattern is clear. According to NASA Spaceflight, on June 13th, Booster 20 returned to Mega Bay 1 for its 33 engines, while Ship 40 prepared for static fire testing at Massey's. That is the July launch path in one sentence.

[00:13:48]Ship 40, Booster 20, wet dress rehearsal, range approval, weather, and the usual rocket gremlins all get a vote. SpaceX is stretching launch scale.

[00:13:56]Ezar is chasing European responsive access. Vandenberg is preparing new routes to orbit. Write your call below.

[00:14:01]Does June become double fire month? And that brings us to the end of today's episode. Thank you so much for tuning in, and until next time, keep looking up.