[bryanlarsen]

They're working off the same license they used for test 5, so they basically have to exactly the same thing they did for test 5. They did manage to add this:

"An additional objective for this flight will be attempting an in-space burn using a single Raptor engine, further demonstrating the capabilities required to conduct a ship deorbit burn prior to orbital missions."

[modeless]

I think that's the last thing they need to do before they can actually launch satellites. I'm surprised there was no attempt on the last launch. Glad to see it this time. The improved Starlink constellation that Starship will enable is going to be awesome.

[mnau]

I think they will want to deal with heatshield first. As of now, it hasn't survived deorbiting.

SpaceX can launch satellites using Falcon9 and do it routinely. Starship needs to be developed and reach milestones, so they can get paid by NASA. Having a payload is a complication (unless it's a fun payload, remember the roadster car :D)

[cwillu]

The next block of starship has altered flap geometry that should largely fix that.

[laverya]

I think they can probably do both at once - heatshield testing and pez dispenser testing shouldn't interfere with each other, so might as well use whatever spare upmass you have!

Yeah you might lose the payload, but SpaceX has the cheapest satellites in the business from what I understand.

[93po]

i hope the next dummy payload is a giant 2 story tall anime figurine, knowing musk it's not out of the question

[cryptonector]

That and flap sturdiness, if they want to be able to re-enter over land so they can catch the ship.

[modeless]

It's not required for launching satellites. But yeah, they need to figure out the heat shield for the flap hinges before they can recover the ship.

[cwillu]

The next block of starship has an altered geometry/location of the flaps for that reason; it's more or less a solved problem, but not worth scrapping the older ones they've already built. Iirc, the launch after this one will be SN7, which is block 2 with the new geometry.

[jltsiren]

It's not a solved problem. Surviving the re-entry in a condition that makes reuse economical was always the biggest challenge for the Starship. It's far from certain that they can achieve it without a fundamental change in the concept.

The feasibility of building big rockets was already demonstrated a long time ago. Given the reliability of the Falcon 9, it looked plausible that a big rocket could work with many engines. And SpaceX had already shown that they can reuse boosters economically. But reusing orbital spacecraft – the entire upper stage with engines, fuel tanks, and whatever – without expensive and time-consuming refits is something nobody has done before.

[Dylan16807]

They're saying that one specific part burning off is a solved problem, not the entire reuse process.

[scotty79]

That's cool PR move. If they managed to light one then it's great success. If they don't people will think they just got unlucky. But if they tried to light all and only one would work or none, or one would work but some other blew up whole rocket it would look terrible. That last eventuality is something they want to prevent by trying to light just one.

[cryptonector]

And they need to demo that the flaps hold up through re-entry with nominal, minimal damage, otherwise a permit for a plan involving re-entry over land (which is needed to catch the ship) would obviously not issue.

[bryanlarsen]

They've addressed that in Block 2. Test 6 still flies block 1, so we won't see any substantive improvements on that until test 7.