Try, try again SpaceX test-fires Starship for an all-important next flight A notice to mariners suggests SpaceX's next Starship test flight could launch as soon as May 21. Stephen Clark – May 13, 2025 6:33 pm | 0 Starship's six Raptor engines fired for about 60 seconds Monday on a test stand in South Texas. Credit: SpaceX Starship's six Raptor engines fired for about 60 seconds Monday on a test stand in South Texas. Credit: SpaceX Story text Size Small Standard Large Width * Standard Wide Links Standard Orange * Subscribers only   Learn more SpaceX fired six Raptor engines on the company's next Starship rocket Monday, clearing a major hurdle on the path to launch later this month on a high-stakes test flight to get the private rocket program back on track. Starship ignited its Raptor engines Monday morning on a test stand near SpaceX's Starbase launch facility in South Texas. The engine ran for approximately 60 seconds, and SpaceX confirmed the test-firing in a post on X: "Starship completed a long duration six-engine static fire and is undergoing final preparations for the ninth flight test." SpaceX hasn't officially announced a target launch date, but maritime warnings along Starship's flight path over the Gulf of Mexico suggest the launch might happen as soon as next Wednesday, May 21. The launch window would open at 6:30 pm local time (7:30 pm EDT; 23:30 UTC). If everything goes according to plan, Starship is expected to soar into space and fly halfway around the world, targeting a reentry and controlled splashdown into the Indian Ocean. After Monday's successful static fire test, SpaceX is in the final stretch of preparations for Starship's ninth full-scale test flight. Last month, SpaceX test-fired the rocket's massive booster stage, known as Super Heavy. The Super Heavy booster assigned to the next Starship launch will become the first that SpaceX will reuse from a previous test flight. This, alone, is a significant step for the Starship program. SpaceX wants the Super Heavy booster and Starship upper stage to become rapidly reusable, eventually operating more like an airplane than a legacy rocket. The booster slated to launch on Flight 9 made its first flight in January, when it soared to the edge of space, released SpaceX's Starship upper stage, and returned to the launch pad, where it was caught in mid-air by heavy-duty mechanical arms. SpaceX will again try to catch the Super Heavy booster on Flight 9. Righting the ship While reusing the first stage is a noteworthy milestone, the next flight is important for another reason. SpaceX's last two Starship test flights ended prematurely when the rocket's upper stage lost power and spun out of control, dropping debris into the sea near the Bahamas and the Turks and Caicos Islands. With Flight 9, SpaceX hopes to get the Starship program back on track. The company aimed for as many as 25 Starship test flights this year, but will now likely fall short of that number. Near-term goals beyond Flight 9 include returning Starship from low-Earth orbit to the launch site, with a tower catch similar to the one SpaceX used to recover the Super Heavy booster. Then, SpaceX will begin flight experiments with an in-space refueling system to transfer super-cold liquid propellants between two Starships in orbit. This is an important milestone for NASA, which has a contract with SpaceX worth more than $4 billion to develop a version of Starship for landing humans on the Moon. To do that, SpaceX must launch around 10 Starship refueling tankers—the exact number remains unclear—to gas up the Moon-bound Starship lander before it can depart low-Earth orbit. SpaceX founder Elon Musk also wants Starship to fly to Mars, which will, likewise, require a mastery of in-space refueling. NASA may also soon rely on Starship and other massive commercial rockets to launch astronauts from Earth. The Trump administration has proposed canceling NASA's Space Launch System rocket after two more flights in favor of lower-cost commercial options. Starship's black heat shield tiles are visible here during the rocket's static fire test on Monday morning. Before any of this becomes possible, SpaceX must prove it has overcome the setbacks encountered on the two previous test flights. Both flights failed at roughly the same time—approximately eight minutes after liftoff—near the end of the ship's engine firing. SpaceX investigators, working under the oversight of the Federal Aviation Administration, determined the Starship test flight in January failed after propellant leaks led to fires in the rocket's aft compartment, or attic. This led to the early shutdown of the rocket's engines and eventual breakup. Engineers concluded the leaks were most likely caused by vibrations during the ship's climb into space. The vibrations were in resonance with the vehicle's natural frequency, intensifying the shaking beyond the levels SpaceX predicted. For the next test flight on March 6, SpaceX made changes to the ship's feed lines routing fuel to its Raptor engines, made adjustments to propellant temperatures, and flew the engines at a new throttle setting. But that didn't solve the problem. Once again, Starship's engines cut off too early, and the rocket broke apart before falling to Earth. SpaceX said "an energetic event" in the aft portion of Starship resulted in the loss of several Raptor engines, followed by a loss of attitude control and a loss of communications with the ship. The similarities between the two failures suggest a likely design issue with the upgraded "Block 2" version of Starship, which debuted in January and flew again in March. Starship Block 2 is slightly taller than the ship SpaceX used on the rocket's first six flights, with redesigned flaps, improved batteries and avionics, and notably, a new fuel feed line system for the ship's Raptor vacuum engines. SpaceX has not released the results of the investigation into the Flight 8 failure, and the FAA hasn't yet issued a launch license for Flight 9. Likewise, SpaceX hasn't released any information on the changes it made to Starship for next week's flight. What we do know about the Starship vehicle for Flight 9—designated Ship 35—is that it took a few tries to complete a full-duration test-firing. SpaceX completed a single-engine static fire on April 30, simulating the restart of a Raptor engine in space. Then, on May 1, SpaceX aborted a six-engine test-firing before reaching its planned 60-second duration. Videos captured by media observing the test showed a flash in the engine plume, and at least one piece of debris was seen careening out of the flame trench below the ship. SpaceX ground crews returned Ship 35 to the production site a couple of miles away, perhaps to replace a damaged engine, before rolling Starship back to the test stand over the weekend for Monday's successful engine firing. Now, the ship will head back to the Starbase build site, where technicians will make final preparations for Flight 9. These final tasks may include loading mock-up Starlink broadband satellites into the ship's payload bay and touchups to the rocket's heat shield. These are two elements of Starship that SpaceX engineers are eager to demonstrate on Flight 9, beyond just fixing the problems from the last two missions. Those failures prevented Starship from testing its satellite deployer and an upgraded heat shield designed to better withstand scorching temperatures up to 2,600° Fahrenheit (1,430° Celsius) during reentry. Stephen Clark Space Reporter Stephen Clark Space Reporter Stephen Clark is a space reporter at Ars Technica, covering private space companies and the world’s space agencies. Stephen writes about the nexus of technology, science, policy, and business on and off the planet. 0 Comments

Macworld Super-weird bugs in Messages are nothing new, but this latest one is a real head-scratcher: If you try to send an audio message with the phrase “Dave and Buster’s,” it won’t work. Why would that specific phrasing cause a problem? A coding expert has cracked the case. I won’t say “and the reason will shock you,” but if you’re anything like me, you’ll find it interesting. First, let me explain what happens when the bug triggers. At first, the audio message (“I’m off to eat lunch at Dave and Buster’s,” as an example) appears to send normally. It shows up in the Messages thread to the recipient, along with a transcript of the content. No problem is flagged. It’s at the recipient’s end that we spot the issue. Initially the recipient sees the ellipsis icon, indicating that something is being typed or sent… but this carries on, and carries on, and eventually disappears. And at this point there is no indication that anything has been sent at all: no message, no message transcript, no message failed notification. In fact, if the recipient didn’t happen to have the app open, or had it open but was in a different conversation thread, they never would have known something was supposed to be on the way. This bug is new to me, and the first time I heard about it was when it was discussed on Monday in the blog run by Guilherme Rambo, a coding and engineering expert. Rambo, in turn, heard about the bug on the Search Engine podcast, which devoted its May 9 episode to the subject. Rambo reproduced the bug, guessed the problem must be at the recipient end, then plugged that device into his Mac and started looking at logs. And from that point it doesn’t appear to have taken long for him to work out what was going on: iOS’s transcription engine was recognizing the name of the U.S. restaurant chain, changing it to the correct corporate branding (“Dave & Buster’s,” with an all-important ampersand), and then passing that into the XHTML code used to send a transcript with the audio message. The problem isn’t being caused by the words Dave and Buster’s, but by the ampersand character between them, which has a special purpose in coding and prevents the code from being parsed correctly. The phrase “Dave and Buster’s” doesn’t cause a problem in the U.K. because iOS doesn’t add an ampersand (or even an apostrophe).David Price / Foundry As you can see in the image at the top of this story, a seemingly successfully sent audio iMessage ending with the phrase “Dave & Buster’s” appears as sent but never actually appears on the recipient’s phone. After a while, the audio message disappeared from the sender’s phone, and the recipient was completely unaware that the message had ever been sent. With that in mind, it’s a short leap to recognize that other brands could cause the same issue—they just haven’t been spotted doing so up to now. Rambo notes that “M&Ms” will do the same thing. For U.K. iPhone owners, in fact, “Dave and Buster’s” doesn’t trigger the bug because that chain is evidently not well enough known here and doesn’t get its ampersand added by autocorrect. To reproduce the issue, I had to ask a friend to send me a message about the supermarket chain M&S. Sure enough, this caused the hanging ellipsis followed by an unsent message. At the time of writing, it seems almost certain that any phrase iOS would recognize as containing an ampersand would cause an audio message to fail, and when I put it like that, it’s surprising the bug hasn’t been more widely reported. But here’s what happens when a U.K. user tries to send a message about the supermarket chain M&S, complete with ampersand.Karen Haslam / Foundry On the plus side, one would imagine it’s a bug that should be easy to patch in an iOS update. The transcription feature in Messages simply needs to be told to “escape” special characters so they don’t mess up the parsing process. And as Rambo notes, this isn’t a bug with any security vulnerabilities; indeed, it shows Apple’s BlastDoor mechanism working correctly. “Many bad parsers would probably accept the incorrectly-formatted XHTML,” he writes, “but that sort of leniency when parsing data formats is often what ends up causing security issues. By being pedantic about the formatting, BlastDoor is protecting the recipient from an exploit that would abuse that type of issue.”