519:
498:
755:
734:
2899:(if you've already replied over there just move your reply here) to this page and to the Falcon 9 boosters page changing how Starlink missions are handled. Instead of listing satellite version (on the boosters page) and satellite count, now they simply list the mission name with a link to the Starlink missions table. I think it's useful to have the number of satellites as part of the mission table entry as we've done that for other launches like OneWeb launches.
886:
765:
273:
630:
603:
374:
310:
529:
426:
405:
706:
870:
1104:
243:
640:
1036:
3339:
launching from for that to not matter, or the launch location was specifically chosen for that payload's destination orbit. Starlink is unique in that it launches from both sides of the country with but varying satellite count. Please restore those west coast/east coast references into the description.
1695:
The team worked overnight to make contact with the satellites in order to send early burn commands, but the satellites were left in an enormously high-drag environment only 135 km above the Earth (each pass through perigee removed 5+ km of altitude from the orbit’s apogee, or the highest point in the
1645:
Failure if they all reenter, as it's a complete loss of spacecraft caused by rocket failure. Partial if they can recover them. That would fit perfectly in line with the rest of spaceflight
Knowledge (XXG). Good example would be Mars-96 launch failure. Lower than planned isn't inherently full failure,
3316:
The problem with that is there's no real difference in the west coast and east coast
Starlink satellites. There's no, or at least very few, other launches where in the prose box where we call out that it was a west coast/east coast launch. We let the Cape Canaveral, Kennedy or Vandenberg launch site
3422:
Launch of ## Starlink v1.5 OR v2 mini satellites to a 530 km (330 mi) orbit at an inclination of 43° to expand internet constellation. This launch was to a lower than normal orbital inclination for a West Coast launch, as launches to 43° are normally conducted from the East Coast. Due to the unique
3418:
The only major difference in satellite counts I see are in just four launches: 5-7, 5-13, 6-15 and 6-20 when
Starlinks were being sent 43° from Vandenberg. That's not a typical inclination for Vandenberg launches (per the Falcon 9 user guide). For those four launches, we could include a description
3396:
I'm not quite sure what you're talking about there. The number of satellites per launch was very consistent. The number only changed when they figured out additional performance of the rocket. It was extremely consistent across west coast vs east coast and the destination launch inclination. That's
3375:
Sorry I didn’t see this earlier, but I still don’t see a great case with references establishing notability of East Coast vs. West Coast. Also, I’d also say that it would help to start by establishing that in prose… somewhere. Perhaps on this page, the
Starlink page or the Starlink launches page. I
1745:
A perigee of 140 km would mean they didn't get any thrust in the second burn. In that case SpaceX could stop trying to raise them... so maybe they did get a bit of thrust out of the engine. For now I think it makes sense to call it partial failure, once we know more about the fate of the satellites
3241:
in the main table of that launch it has
Starlink (21 satellites) and below it it also has type: Launch of ~21 Starlink v2 mini satellites, including 13 with direct-to-cell connectivity, to a 535 km (332 mi) orbit at an inclination of 53° to expand internet constellation. so as not to repeat saying
3208:
put the West coast launches from vandenderg and East coast from
Florida, v2 mini starlink satellites as it was before so the table is not repeated, the table says 21 starlinks and below in the description it also says 21 starlinks. I don't know who removed the east coast v2 mini starlink satellite
2346:
and not an emoji block, so I had hoped it was more common. I also figured out that it makes sense to switch over in 2018. In 2017, there are only a few reflown boosters. In 2018, they overtake new-built (13 to 10, counting Falcon Heavy as 3), and it becomes overwhelming after that. Anyway, can
2830:
I fully agree the differentiation should be done on the new boosters, as they are now the exception rather than the rule. I wouldn't care if it were left up to the .1 .2 3. etc., but the mint works quite well. However, I think that scheme should be consistent across all three articles, even if it
2815:
I'm also in favor of having some markings for differentiation (color makes it easier to see), however we've gotten to the point that reused boosters are the norm so I think we should invert what gets labeled. First booster launches should get some kind of color (maybe indicating the fact that its
2299:
I really think the "recycled booster" symbol is just clutter. While it may have made sense in the early days, nowadays it's just clutter, redundant with the booster launch number suffix. I propose to simply delete it (and the associated captions) from all tables. Although the improvement seems
2368:
I just experimented with U+267A RECYCLING SYMBOL FOR GENERIC MATERIALS ♺ and U+20E0 COMBINING ENCLOSING CIRCLE BACKSLASH ◌⃠ but the former seems too wide to combine well with the latter: ♺⃠ There's also U+1F3D7 BUILDING CONSTRUCTION 🏗, but it's hard to recognize at body text sizes and I'd
1931:
Disagree that precedent supports
Partial Failure. It's true that, in the past, we've called it a partial failure when a rocket places a satellite into a lower orbit than planned, but the satellite was able to boost itself into the correct orbit. What didn't happen in those cases is that 19 other
2109:
Seriously, what would be a launch failure? Did the rocket performed it's primary mission and deployed it's payload on the intended orbit? Not at all. Did it become a grounded rocket? Yes? Did the events triggered an mishap investigation? Yes. Not long ago I've seen a graph on
Twitter, only one
3338:
There's a difference in satellite counts between west coast and east coast because of the different DeltaV requirements. That's why removing it from the description is no good. It's not called out for other launches because those launches either have sufficint margin for the location they're
2311:
boosters, perhaps a symbol or a background tint, that might be interesting. I haven't found a good
Unicode symbol for the purpose (possibilities are the baby emoji 👶, the "sun" symbols ☀ or ☼, or "sparkles" ✨, but nothing's particularly clear), but there are a lot so maybe I'm missing one.
1696:
satellite orbit). At this level of drag, our maximum available thrust is unlikely to be enough to successfully raise the satellites. As such, the satellites will re-enter Earth’s atmosphere and fully demise. They do not pose a threat to other satellites in orbit or to public safety.
2954:
I think having the anchor links to the
Starlink satellite list page is a good idea and I'm definitely for keeping those. I just think it's better to be able to easily visually see the satellite counts of the launches, just as we have for other constellation-type launches.
1776:
says Since it was a pre-flight test, SpaceX does not count this scheduled attempt in their launch totals. Some sources do consider this planned flight into the counting schemes, and as a result, some sources might list launch totals after 2016 with one additional
352:
287:
2088:
I think you should read further up in the discussion about McDowell, he's the most reliable source there is, more reliable than the FAA. I agree that it's a failure (because all the satellites have likely re-entered), I disagree with how you're determining
2347:
you suggest anything? I've been thinking about the sun ☀ U+2600 and four-pointed star ✦ U+2726. (Both also come in outline versions, but I prefer the solid.) It was mostly the name "sparkles" that associated strongly with "shiny and new" in my mind.
1987:
The Federal Aviation Administration is now calling this a failure. “The incident involved the failure of the upper stage rocket while it was in space.” They are also requiring an investigation, which will suspend Falcon 9 launches until further notice.
2092:
News agencies _never_ call missions "partial failures" they just talk about the entire mission being failure or not. Those sources should not be considered reliable for this type of thing. You need professional sources to determine that, like McDowell.
2890:
I've also started a discussion on this on the boosters page, but I think this should probably be discussed here instead as there's more traffic. I won't revert it on this page here for the moment until we can get some discussion on it. Recently a
3151:
To me, that feels like a lot information to be attempting to place in the payload box. That could be presented as “SDA Tranche 0B (13 satellites)” in the payload box and use the prose area to expand on the different purposes of the satellites.
3491:
For a while the policy was to have the notable launches just on this page. Personally I think the notable launches section should just be trimmed down. Some launches were only notable at the time they launched and aren't really notable now.
153:
2387:
If accessibility is our concern, we would choose one of the symbols in the table below, as they are the only ones consistently parsed by screen readers. We could also go with a background tint like the mint green color used on the
715:
613:
1805:
We can wait and see what sources use as streak length. My personal preference would be to start at flight 29, i.e. after Amos, or give both. Amos doesn't need a flight number to interrupt a streak of successful missions.
3256:
An East Coast v2 mini Starlink launch to their Generation 2 network. Launch in Flórida and A West Coast v2 mini Starlink launch to their Generation 2 network. Including 13 satellites with direct-to-cell connectivity.
3379:
The prior descriptions were grammatically problematic, particularly around the East Coast/West Coast descriptions and didn’t actually explaining what the point of the launch was (to expand an internet constellation).
1932:
satellites were un-salvageable. One out of 20 is a 5% success, which would get you an F on a test where I'm from. Where's the cut off for success? I don't know and this doesn't seem like the time to litigate that.
2973:
page, which is already very large and space is at a premium, I really do think the satellite counts of the launches is unnecessary and adds bulk to a page that is focused on the boosters, and not on the launches.
2796:
I am interested to see what will happen once non-SpaceX launch vehicles start reusing their first stage, and how those editors might choose to highlight those boosters that are flying for the second or more time.
44:
2929:
The other (major) benefit to my change is that readers can also pull up additional details on the launch by clicking on the (Group #-#) link in the payload box which will take them to an anchored spot on the
2788:
Personally, I like the recycled symbol for reused boosters. It appears that only one or two of the many who frequently make edits on the pages with that symbol have a problem with it - which in my opinion is
3414:
If you look across Group 4, when shooting to 53°, SpaceX was regularly launching 52 or 53 satellites from the Cape and Vandenberg. No major differences. The same has been true with the heavier sats in Group
3615:
2816:
new/safety unknown) while the norm is no label at all. For older missions when there was few or no reuses, we can have two different colors with one for reuses and that same color for first flights.
1820:
Personally for the Falcon 9 I would have several "Success Streak" lists. These lists would include Launches, Missions, Landings, and Recoveries. The Starlink 9-3 mission ended the first two streaks.
2114:
147:
1045:
for the content in the destination pages and must not be deleted as long as the copies exist. For attribution and to access older versions of the copied text, please see the history links below.
3382:
Also, if we talk about the launch site as a variable for the number of satellites launched… that’s just one factor. Especially in the early days, the number of satellites launched varied widely.
3610:
3376:
went looking for some sort of explanation for its inclusion before removing. The closest I see is in the discussion of the record supposedly broken during Flight 234, the launch of Group 5-7.
2339:
2335:
1773:
1084:
1061:
3680:
230:
226:
1017:
1003:
989:
975:
947:
929:
911:
222:
218:
214:
210:
206:
202:
198:
194:
190:
795:
2742:
All those symbols seem too ambiguous; the dagger is best, but it's also used in genealogy to mark "death", which doesn't match the desired "birth". So I just now reinstated the edits (
3660:
2921:
It felt redundant to have it in the payload box (which is small) when its now also in the (much larger) prose box, where it can be presented in a more complete context. For example:
3320:
The "Generation 2" was also misleading because it has more to do with licensing than the sat type. In other words, the Generation 2 network has both v1.5 and v2 mini satellites.
3242:
that it is 21 satellites I prefer that you put as it was before east coast v2 mini starlink satellites or west coast v2 mini starlink satellites in case of launch in vandenderg.
2768:
I am okay with it, however it’s the inverse of the treatment on the List of Falcon 9 first-stage boosters article, so maybe make that your next edit to keep testing the waters.
812:
2924:
Launch of 21 Starlink v2 mini satellites, including 13 with direct-to-cell connectivity, to a 535 km (332 mi) orbit at an inclination of 53° to expand internet constellation.
316:
234:
848:
3530:
Slightly notable: engine failure. Only merlin failure during main ascent (I don't count 9-3's failure moment as being part of main ascent, as it was a second burn).
1917:
At this point, it looks like only one of the sats made it. Technically, precedent supports Partial Failure, as one did make it, though the orbit may not be usable.
696:
3675:
838:
802:
3411:
My mistake, I was just looking at the Starlink satellite numbers, I forgot that these early launches were doing rideshares, so that changed the payloads a lot.
79:
3655:
686:
585:
3685:
1723:
One of the sats made it to 191 km. So its still possible (if unlikely) that it'll make it to a usable orbit. We'll know what happens to it in a few days.
807:
1553:
1540:
1527:
1513:
1498:
1483:
1468:
1453:
1438:
1423:
1408:
1393:
1378:
1364:
1350:
1335:
1320:
1306:
1292:
1277:
1262:
1247:
1233:
1219:
1204:
1189:
1174:
1160:
1147:
1124:
1009:
995:
981:
967:
939:
917:
899:
168:
24:
1973:. The vehicle deployed only 25% of its payloads, and those it did deploy were into an orbit so low the company admits they are likely un-recoverable.
135:
3665:
3640:
1660:
This sounds like good criteria, since these are primary payloads. Jonathan McDowell's criteria would have it a 0.4 on the scoring scale (described at
575:
662:
480:
3670:
2931:
85:
1042:
1839:
3650:
3645:
2039:
If it was 100% up to sources, then IFT-1 would be a success, and IFT-2 would remain a failure, despite being far more successful than IFT-1.
778:
739:
551:
3625:
2970:
2389:
470:
1678:
Agreed. IMO, best thing for a discussion is to pause this topic for a few days, when the starlinks either have reentered or made it to LEO.
129:
2755:
2374:
2348:
2313:
30:
653:
608:
3635:
3630:
1638:) means the satellites are dead. Will probably list as a failure or perhaps a partial failure per the CRS-1 secondary payload in 2012.
2118:
1664:) if the orbits aren't raised; 0.75 if they are. A lot of 0.75s are listed as partial fails, most 0.4s are listed as failures on here.
446:
125:
2153:
790:
99:
542:
503:
104:
20:
1780:
When it is not in records how can we count it's next mission as start of success streak rather than the mission succeeding crs 7?
891:
This article has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination.
175:
786:
on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
2127:
It is likely going to be a failure, but should some of the payloads be able to enter a usable orbit, that is a partial failure.
1835:
74:
3620:
385:
442:
438:
433:
410:
292:
65:
2053:
Sigh. This again. This is the talk page for the Falcon 9, not Starship. Yes, other stuff exists. Please stay on topic. --
1646:
but it absolutely is if the satellites rapidly deorbit, without a doubt. Lets give it a few days & see what happens. --
2290:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
3397:
why it's just as notable as the inclination. Other wise the satellite count just appears to vary wildly without reason.
141:
282:
971:
903:
309:
3307:
3293:
3276:
3262:
3247:
3214:
3030:
242:
185:
109:
2399:
935:
253:
3123:
2759:
2378:
2352:
2343:
2317:
1840:
https://arstechnica.com/space/2024/07/the-unmatched-streak-of-perfection-with-spacexs-falcon-9-rocket-is-over/
1718:
518:
497:
391:
296:
2836:
2373:"no trash" symbol? The symbol isn't useful itself, but that might be a fruitful code block to look through.
1013:
3593:
3501:
3485:
3437:
3433:
3406:
3391:
3387:
3366:
3348:
3329:
3325:
3311:
3297:
3280:
3266:
3251:
3236:
3232:
3218:
3199:
3185:
3181:
3161:
3157:
3146:
3117:
3088:
3074:
3059:
3034:
3020:
2983:
2979:
2964:
2949:
2945:
2908:
2879:
2870:
They aren't invisible, and making them more visible would be disproportionally representing two anomalies.
2864:
2840:
2825:
2806:
2777:
2773:
2763:
2751:
2747:
2743:
2730:
2726:
2382:
2356:
2321:
2270:
2253:
2228:
2224:
2214:
2189:
2175:
2161:
2157:
2136:
2122:
2102:
2079:
2062:
2058:
2048:
2028:
2024:
2014:
1997:
1993:
1982:
1978:
1961:
1941:
1937:
1926:
1908:
1869:
1829:
1815:
1800:
1755:
1732:
1713:
1687:
1673:
1655:
1639:
1624:
1620:
999:
985:
921:
373:
272:
2501:
1890:
The vehicle deployed the payloads into the wrong orbit, but SpaceX is acting like they may be recoverable.
55:
3589:
3481:
3423:
orbital insertion, this launch carried fewer Starlink satellites than a typical launch, reducing weight.
3303:
3289:
3272:
3258:
3243:
3224:
3210:
3026:
3001:
2875:
2266:
2185:
2180:
The last info I have (which is 5 days old, admittedly) has one of the sats having made it (191 perigee)
2132:
2075:
2044:
2010:
1957:
1922:
1904:
1728:
1683:
661:
on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
550:
on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
70:
257:
3084:
2802:
2530:
1825:
1651:
770:
2113:
Ariane 6 at least performed it's primary mission. This doesn't. We can call it safely as a failure.
300:
3140:
3111:
3053:
2646:
2617:
2247:
2208:
1863:
1794:
161:
3429:
3383:
3354:
3335:
3321:
3286:
3228:
3205:
3177:
3153:
3094:
2975:
2941:
2896:
2832:
2769:
2737:
2722:
2363:
2329:
2220:
2054:
2020:
1989:
1974:
1933:
1616:
645:
258:
2342:
myself pending discussion. Yeah, I'm not very happy with that symbol, either. It's U+2728, in
1041:
Text has been copied to or from this article; see the list below. The source pages now serve to
754:
733:
2675:
2443:
51:
1836:
https://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/most-successful-commercial-rocket-launcher
3585:
3497:
3477:
3402:
3362:
3344:
3195:
3016:
2960:
2904:
2871:
2860:
2821:
2262:
2181:
2150:
2128:
2098:
2071:
2067:
Established precedent. Other stuff exists, and the precedent established by it impacts this.
2040:
2006:
1953:
1918:
1900:
1724:
1709:
1699:
1697:
1679:
1669:
255:
3097:
see SDA missions there different layers of different satellites are separately mentioned
3080:
3005:
2812:
2798:
2559:
2472:
1843:
1821:
1765:
1647:
534:
2304:, this is a large-scale edit on multiple pages, so it seems worth discussing here first.
957:
3130:
3101:
3043:
2997:
2993:
2855:
is it possible? or make some problems? last 2 failures are invisible in the statistics
2704:
2588:
2237:
2198:
1853:
1834:
Later i found official Guinness World Records starting from AMOS-6 so sticking to it.
1784:
1769:
629:
602:
1952:
Also, it now looks like two of the sats made it out of reentry, but they may be dead.
1661:
1635:
3604:
3070:
2171:
1811:
1751:
783:
3493:
3398:
3372:
3358:
3340:
3191:
3012:
2956:
2916:
2900:
2856:
2817:
2094:
1705:
1692:
I don't think there's a need to pause the thread when SpaceX communications say:
1665:
658:
760:
635:
524:
2219:
Yeah, only one is still listed on CelesTrak with a perigee height of 143 km.
3025:
I prefer to count starlink satellites in the table example 21 22 satellites
425:
404:
2754:) with a green background rather than the ugly emoji. How does that look?
1719:
https://celestrak.org/NORAD/elements/supplemental/table.php?INTDES=2024-129
782:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the
705:
3066:
3009:
2167:
1847:
1807:
1761:
1747:
3476:
Should Notable Launches from before 2023 be included in this article?
547:
3357:
Please restore the east vs west coast launches in the descriptions.
3064:
Same. We always list the number of satellites in that spot (if : -->
1949:
This is the part your incorrect on. The orbit only has to be usable.
2937:
So the information is still there, it's just presented differently.
2149:
This is clearly a failure at this point, given the statement here:
1704:
It's clear already that the satellites are not going to be raised.
2392:
article, or we could just let the .2, .3, .4, etc. tell the story.
1615:
The consensus is to list the Starlink 9-3 launch as a failure. --
3176:
Fair enough. I can add the count back into the payload boxes. --
2370:
2070:
Mentioning how that precedent impacts this event is on topic.
1098:
1030:
880:
864:
367:
259:
15:
2334:
Thanks for the feedback. I reverted two analogous edits to
1946:"satellite was able to boost itself into the correct orbit."
704:
3065:
1), don't see why Starlink shouldn't follow the pattern. --
2019:
When a reliable source calls it a failure, so should we.
445:, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the
2151:
https://www.spacex.com/launches/mission/?missionId=sl-9-3
1700:
https://www.spacex.com/launches/mission/?missionId=sl-9-3
3518:
Notable elements concern dragon. Not really notable, IMO
315:
This article appeared on Knowledge (XXG)'s Main Page as
3616:
Featured lists that have appeared on the main page once
2992:
Pinging some frequent page editors for their thoughts @
2892:
2369:
rather stay in the BMP. Is there a code point for the
1088:
1080:
1076:
1072:
1065:
1057:
1053:
1049:
345:
2340:
List of Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches (2010–2019)
2336:
List of Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches (2020–2022)
1774:
List of Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches (2010–2019)
1085:
List of Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches (2020–2021)
1062:
List of Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches (2010–2019)
160:
3209:
and an west coast v2 mini satellites on description.
2307:
If someone can propose a way to visually distinguish
1838:
either way they are all time industry Records as per
1608:
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
657:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
546:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
2694:
2665:
2636:
2607:
2578:
2549:
2520:
2491:
2462:
2433:
1662:
https://www.planet4589.org/space/jsr/notes/fail.txt
174:
3611:Featured lists that have appeared on the main page
3681:FL-Class United States articles of Low-importance
3548:Possibly most notable uncrewed launch in history.
3126:(11 Transport and 2 Tracking Layer satellites)"
33:for general discussion of the article's subject.
3536:. Semi-notable, was first soft landing attempt.
2295:Proposal: Eliminate the recycled booster symbol
2166:Looks like all satellites reentered quickly. --
1772:should we count streak from Amos 6 or crs 7 as
1746:and sources cover that we can re-visit that. --
3661:Timeline of spaceflight working group articles
3560:Not notable: issues were due to the satellite.
1409:Full-thrust version and first booster landings
1611:A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
8:
3524:Somewhat notable: first Falcon flight to ISS
437:, an attempt to structure and organize all
2886:Starlink satellite counts in table or not?
2831:makes the 2010-2019 one look a bit silly.
1634:Suffice it to say, perigee of <140 km (
1125:List of Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches
1121:
1110:
1073:List of Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches
1050:List of Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches
1034:
1010:List of Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches
996:List of Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches
982:List of Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches
968:List of Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches
940:List of Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches
918:List of Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches
900:List of Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches
728:
597:
492:
399:
324:
279:List of Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches
267:
25:List of Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches
3124:Transport and Tracking Layer (Tranche 0B)
823:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject United States
716:the timeline of spaceflight working group
2932:List of Starlink and Starshield launches
2403:
2002:That doesn't always mean launch failure.
441:. If you wish to help, please visit the
2115:2001:4C4C:146B:3200:DCD1:6857:571F:A148
963:
730:
671:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Spaceflight
599:
494:
401:
3578:Notable: first crewed Falcon 9 launch.
3512:Maybe notable? Not all that important.
3227:I'm not sure what you're asking here.
1895:(If they aren't, then this changes to
3676:Low-importance United States articles
3190:Thank you and sorry for the trouble.
2971:List of Falcon 9 first-stage boosters
2390:List of Falcon 9 first-stage boosters
2005:That only means an anomaly occurred.
371:
7:
3542:Very notable, given that it blew up.
2575:"right arrow" or "rightwards arrow"
2261:There's a good chance it deorbited.
2258:The data for that one is 6 days old.
2110:satellite's perigee is above 190 km.
1602:The following discussion is closed.
776:This article is within the scope of
651:This article is within the scope of
560:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Rocketry
540:This article is within the scope of
431:This article is within the scope of
3656:Mid-importance spaceflight articles
3419:similar to what's included on 5-7:
299:. If you can update or improve it,
23:for discussing improvements to the
3686:WikiProject United States articles
2633:"left arrow" or "leftwards arrow"
2604:"down arrow" or "downwards arrow"
826:Template:WikiProject United States
14:
455:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Lists
50:New to Knowledge (XXG)? Welcome!
3666:WikiProject Spaceflight articles
3641:Mid-importance Rocketry articles
2286:The discussion above is closed.
1484:Starlink 9-3 upper stage anomaly
1424:Loss of AMOS-6 on the launch pad
1102:
884:
868:
763:
753:
732:
674:Template:WikiProject Spaceflight
638:
628:
601:
527:
517:
496:
424:
403:
372:
308:
271:
241:
45:Click here to start a new topic.
3671:FL-Class United States articles
843:This article has been rated as
691:This article has been rated as
580:This article has been rated as
475:This article has been rated as
3594:18:33, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
3502:17:42, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
3486:02:48, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
3438:22:23, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
3407:14:06, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
3392:13:17, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
3367:06:25, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
3349:04:56, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
3330:18:12, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
3312:18:00, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
3298:17:59, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
3281:17:55, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
3267:17:55, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
3252:17:50, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
3237:17:37, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
3219:17:17, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
3200:22:49, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
3186:14:15, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
3162:15:04, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
3147:14:13, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
3118:14:11, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
3089:08:29, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
3075:07:08, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
3060:01:45, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
3035:00:49, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
2851:launch statistics in log-scale
2841:00:56, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
2793:a good reason to make changes.
2662:"up arrow" or "upwards arrow"
2405:Accessible symbols for tables
972:List of Falcon rocket launches
904:List of SpaceX rocket launches
390:It is of interest to multiple
1:
3651:FL-Class spaceflight articles
3646:WikiProject Rocketry articles
3021:23:38, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
2984:23:50, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
2965:23:40, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
2950:23:01, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
2909:22:55, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
2826:23:43, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
713:This article is supported by
665:and see a list of open tasks.
563:Template:WikiProject Rocketry
554:and see a list of open tasks.
439:list pages on Knowledge (XXG)
42:Put new text under old text.
3626:Low-importance List articles
3079:Agreed for the same reason.
2459:"dagger" or "single dagger"
3534:First Falcon 9 V1.10 flight
2880:13:05, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
2865:10:38, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
2807:21:10, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
2778:23:20, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
2764:03:41, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
2731:19:58, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
2383:21:20, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
2357:19:11, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
2322:14:16, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
1379:First flights and contracts
3702:
3636:FL-Class Rocketry articles
3631:WikiProject Lists articles
2969:On a related note, on the
849:project's importance scale
697:project's importance scale
586:project's importance scale
481:project's importance scale
458:Template:WikiProject Lists
285:, which means it has been
3564:Falcon Heavy test flight.
2421:
2418:
2415:
2412:
2409:
2400:Template:Asterism/Symbols
2271:18:17, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
2254:17:57, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
2229:17:54, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
2215:02:02, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
2190:13:07, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
2176:10:46, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
2162:18:02, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
2137:18:06, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
2123:17:41, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
2103:04:54, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
2080:18:20, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
2063:18:18, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
2049:18:07, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
2029:16:47, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
2015:16:46, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
1998:16:39, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
1983:14:46, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
1962:01:50, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
1942:18:04, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
1927:14:45, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
1909:11:53, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
1870:14:10, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
1830:13:19, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
1816:11:25, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
1801:09:54, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
1756:07:43, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
1733:21:01, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
1714:19:54, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
1688:15:33, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
1674:15:30, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
1656:06:22, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
1640:05:35, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
1625:18:52, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
936:List of Falcon 9 launches
879:
842:
779:WikiProject United States
748:
712:
690:
623:
579:
512:
474:
419:
398:
327:
323:
297:Knowledge (XXG) community
80:Be welcoming to newcomers
3317:listing tell that story.
3302:before it was like this
2344:Dingbats (Unicode block)
2288:Please do not modify it.
1605:Please do not modify it.
1499:Reuse of the first stage
1454:Falcon Heavy test flight
784:United States of America
2752:Special:Diff/1241239466
2748:Special:Diff/1241238150
2744:Special:Diff/1241236692
2517:"number" or "hash tag"
2194:All except 1 reentered
1014:List of Falcon Launches
1000:List of SpaceX launches
986:List of Falcon launches
922:List of Falcon launches
875:Other talk page banners
654:WikiProject Spaceflight
614:Timeline of spaceflight
353:Featured list candidate
3621:FL-Class List articles
3506:Alright, in that case:
2546:"degree" or "degrees"
2233:The 191 one deorbited
2033:In theory, this works.
1514:Other reuse milestones
829:United States articles
709:
380:This article is rated
75:avoid personal attacks
3271:launch in vandenderg
2893:large change was made
2430:"star" or "asterisk"
1394:Loss of CRS-7 mission
1175:Rocket configurations
1016:, 23 September 2016 (
708:
384:on Knowledge (XXG)'s
317:Today's featured list
235:Auto-archiving period
100:Neutral point of view
1594:Starlink 9-3 failure
1469:First crewed flights
910:, 11 February 2020 (
771:United States portal
677:spaceflight articles
543:WikiProject Rocketry
105:No original research
3546:Falcon 9 Flight 20.
2406:
1128:
1043:provide attribution
946:, 19 January 2015 (
928:, 28 August 2019 (
797:Articles Requested!
291:as one of the best
3522:Falcon 9 Flight 3.
3516:Falcon 9 Flight 2.
3510:Falcon 9 Flight 1.
2404:
2036:In practice... no.
1881:Same as Ariane 6:
1122:
1091:) on 28 March 2024
1002:, 25 August 2017 (
710:
646:Spaceflight portal
386:content assessment
328:Article milestones
319:on March 26, 2018.
86:dispute resolution
47:
2716:
2715:
1589:
1588:
1585:
1584:
1580:
1579:
1576:
1575:
1161:Launch statistics
1123:Section size for
1097:
1096:
1029:
1028:
863:
862:
859:
858:
855:
854:
727:
726:
723:
722:
596:
595:
592:
591:
566:Rocketry articles
491:
490:
487:
486:
434:WikiProject Lists
366:
365:
362:
361:
346:December 10, 2017
266:
265:
66:Assume good faith
43:
3693:
3472:Notable Launches
3304:Lazaro Fernandes
3290:Lazaro Fernandes
3273:Lazaro Fernandes
3259:Lazaro Fernandes
3244:Lazaro Fernandes
3225:Lazaro Fernandes
3211:Lazaro Fernandes
3145:
3137:
3134:
3116:
3108:
3105:
3058:
3050:
3047:
3027:Lazaro Fernandes
3002:Lazaro Fernandes
2920:
2741:
2709:
2703:
2698:
2697:
2680:
2674:
2669:
2668:
2651:
2645:
2640:
2639:
2622:
2616:
2611:
2610:
2593:
2587:
2582:
2581:
2564:
2558:
2553:
2552:
2535:
2529:
2524:
2523:
2506:
2500:
2495:
2494:
2488:"double dagger"
2477:
2471:
2466:
2465:
2448:
2442:
2437:
2436:
2407:
2367:
2333:
2252:
2244:
2241:
2213:
2205:
2202:
1868:
1860:
1857:
1799:
1791:
1788:
1607:
1516:
1501:
1486:
1471:
1456:
1441:
1426:
1411:
1396:
1381:
1365:Notable launches
1353:
1338:
1323:
1295:
1280:
1265:
1250:
1222:
1220:Booster landings
1207:
1192:
1177:
1129:
1111:
1106:
1105:
1099:
1068:) on 25 May 2022
1038:
1037:
1031:
988:, 1 March 2018 (
974:, 9 March 2018 (
888:
887:
881:
872:
871:
865:
831:
830:
827:
824:
821:
773:
768:
767:
766:
757:
750:
749:
744:
736:
729:
679:
678:
675:
672:
669:
648:
643:
642:
641:
632:
625:
624:
619:
616:
605:
598:
568:
567:
564:
561:
558:
537:
532:
531:
530:
521:
514:
513:
508:
500:
493:
463:
462:
459:
456:
453:
428:
421:
420:
415:
407:
400:
383:
377:
376:
368:
348:
325:
312:
295:produced by the
275:
268:
260:
246:
245:
236:
179:
178:
164:
95:Article policies
16:
3701:
3700:
3696:
3695:
3694:
3692:
3691:
3690:
3601:
3600:
3474:
3135:
3132:
3127:
3106:
3103:
3098:
3048:
3045:
3040:
2914:
2888:
2853:
2735:
2707:
2701:
2695:
2678:
2672:
2666:
2649:
2643:
2637:
2620:
2614:
2608:
2591:
2585:
2579:
2562:
2556:
2550:
2533:
2527:
2521:
2504:
2498:
2492:
2475:
2469:
2463:
2446:
2440:
2434:
2422:Template usage
2410:Unicode symbol
2361:
2327:
2297:
2292:
2291:
2242:
2239:
2234:
2203:
2200:
2195:
1971:List as Failure
1883:Partial Failure
1858:
1855:
1850:
1789:
1786:
1781:
1632:
1603:
1596:
1581:
1512:
1497:
1482:
1467:
1452:
1437:
1422:
1407:
1392:
1377:
1351:2026 and beyond
1349:
1334:
1319:
1307:Future launches
1291:
1276:
1261:
1246:
1218:
1205:Launch outcomes
1203:
1188:
1173:
1116:
1103:
1035:
1025:
962:
961:
885:
869:
828:
825:
822:
819:
818:
817:
803:Become a Member
769:
764:
762:
742:
676:
673:
670:
667:
666:
644:
639:
637:
617:
611:
565:
562:
559:
556:
555:
535:Rocketry portal
533:
528:
526:
506:
460:
457:
454:
451:
450:
413:
381:
344:
262:
261:
256:
233:
121:
116:
115:
114:
91:
61:
12:
11:
5:
3699:
3697:
3689:
3688:
3683:
3678:
3673:
3668:
3663:
3658:
3653:
3648:
3643:
3638:
3633:
3628:
3623:
3618:
3613:
3603:
3602:
3599:
3598:
3597:
3596:
3579:
3573:
3567:
3561:
3555:
3549:
3543:
3537:
3531:
3525:
3519:
3513:
3507:
3473:
3470:
3469:
3468:
3467:
3466:
3465:
3464:
3463:
3462:
3461:
3460:
3459:
3458:
3457:
3456:
3455:
3454:
3453:
3452:
3451:
3450:
3449:
3448:
3447:
3446:
3445:
3444:
3443:
3442:
3441:
3440:
3426:
3425:
3424:
3416:
3412:
3380:
3377:
3351:
3318:
3174:
3173:
3172:
3171:
3170:
3169:
3168:
3167:
3166:
3165:
3164:
3091:
2990:
2989:
2988:
2987:
2986:
2938:
2935:
2927:
2926:
2925:
2887:
2884:
2883:
2882:
2852:
2849:
2848:
2847:
2846:
2845:
2844:
2843:
2794:
2786:
2785:
2784:
2783:
2782:
2781:
2780:
2756:97.102.205.224
2714:
2713:
2710:
2699:
2692:
2689:
2685:
2684:
2681:
2670:
2663:
2660:
2656:
2655:
2652:
2641:
2634:
2631:
2627:
2626:
2623:
2612:
2605:
2602:
2598:
2597:
2594:
2583:
2576:
2573:
2569:
2568:
2565:
2554:
2547:
2544:
2540:
2539:
2536:
2525:
2518:
2515:
2511:
2510:
2507:
2496:
2489:
2486:
2482:
2481:
2478:
2467:
2460:
2457:
2453:
2452:
2449:
2438:
2431:
2428:
2424:
2423:
2420:
2419:Template name
2417:
2414:
2413:Pronounced as
2411:
2398:Details, see:
2396:
2395:
2394:
2393:
2375:97.102.205.224
2359:
2349:97.102.205.224
2314:97.102.205.224
2296:
2293:
2285:
2284:
2283:
2282:
2281:
2280:
2279:
2278:
2277:
2276:
2275:
2274:
2273:
2259:
2256:
2147:
2146:
2145:
2144:
2143:
2142:
2141:
2140:
2139:
2111:
2107:
2106:
2105:
2090:
2086:
2085:
2084:
2083:
2082:
2068:
2037:
2034:
2003:
1968:
1967:
1966:
1965:
1964:
1950:
1947:
1912:
1891:
1887:
1878:
1877:
1876:
1875:
1874:
1873:
1872:
1832:
1778:
1743:
1742:
1741:
1740:
1739:
1738:
1737:
1736:
1735:
1721:
1702:
1693:
1631:
1630:
1629:
1628:
1627:
1598:
1597:
1595:
1592:
1587:
1586:
1583:
1582:
1578:
1577:
1574:
1573:
1570:
1567:
1563:
1562:
1559:
1556:
1550:
1549:
1546:
1543:
1537:
1536:
1533:
1530:
1524:
1523:
1520:
1517:
1509:
1508:
1505:
1502:
1494:
1493:
1490:
1487:
1479:
1478:
1475:
1472:
1464:
1463:
1460:
1457:
1449:
1448:
1445:
1442:
1434:
1433:
1430:
1427:
1419:
1418:
1415:
1412:
1404:
1403:
1400:
1397:
1389:
1388:
1385:
1382:
1374:
1373:
1370:
1367:
1361:
1360:
1357:
1354:
1346:
1345:
1342:
1339:
1331:
1330:
1327:
1324:
1316:
1315:
1312:
1309:
1303:
1302:
1299:
1296:
1288:
1287:
1284:
1281:
1273:
1272:
1269:
1266:
1258:
1257:
1254:
1251:
1243:
1242:
1239:
1236:
1230:
1229:
1226:
1223:
1215:
1214:
1211:
1208:
1200:
1199:
1196:
1193:
1185:
1184:
1181:
1178:
1170:
1169:
1166:
1163:
1157:
1156:
1153:
1150:
1144:
1143:
1141:
1138:
1136:
1133:
1127:(29 sections)
1118:
1117:
1114:
1109:
1107:
1095:
1094:
1093:
1092:
1069:
1039:
1027:
1026:
1024:
1023:
1022:
1021:
1007:
993:
979:
958:Requested move
955:
954:
953:
952:
951:
933:
915:
889:
877:
876:
873:
861:
860:
857:
856:
853:
852:
845:Low-importance
841:
835:
834:
832:
816:
815:
810:
805:
800:
793:
791:Template Usage
787:
775:
774:
758:
746:
745:
743:Low‑importance
737:
725:
724:
721:
720:
711:
701:
700:
693:Mid-importance
689:
683:
682:
680:
663:the discussion
650:
649:
633:
621:
620:
618:Mid‑importance
606:
594:
593:
590:
589:
582:Mid-importance
578:
572:
571:
569:
552:the discussion
539:
538:
522:
510:
509:
507:Mid‑importance
501:
489:
488:
485:
484:
477:Low-importance
473:
467:
466:
464:
429:
417:
416:
414:Low‑importance
408:
396:
395:
389:
378:
364:
363:
360:
359:
356:
349:
341:
340:
337:
334:
330:
329:
321:
320:
313:
305:
304:
276:
264:
263:
254:
252:
251:
248:
247:
181:
180:
118:
117:
113:
112:
107:
102:
93:
92:
90:
89:
82:
77:
68:
62:
60:
59:
48:
39:
38:
35:
34:
28:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
3698:
3687:
3684:
3682:
3679:
3677:
3674:
3672:
3669:
3667:
3664:
3662:
3659:
3657:
3654:
3652:
3649:
3647:
3644:
3642:
3639:
3637:
3634:
3632:
3629:
3627:
3624:
3622:
3619:
3617:
3614:
3612:
3609:
3608:
3606:
3595:
3591:
3587:
3583:
3580:
3577:
3574:
3571:
3568:
3565:
3562:
3559:
3556:
3553:
3550:
3547:
3544:
3541:
3538:
3535:
3532:
3529:
3526:
3523:
3520:
3517:
3514:
3511:
3508:
3505:
3504:
3503:
3499:
3495:
3490:
3489:
3488:
3487:
3483:
3479:
3471:
3439:
3435:
3431:
3430:RickyCourtney
3427:
3421:
3420:
3417:
3413:
3410:
3409:
3408:
3404:
3400:
3395:
3394:
3393:
3389:
3385:
3384:RickyCourtney
3381:
3378:
3374:
3370:
3369:
3368:
3364:
3360:
3356:
3355:RickyCourtney
3352:
3350:
3346:
3342:
3337:
3336:RickyCourtney
3333:
3332:
3331:
3327:
3323:
3322:RickyCourtney
3319:
3315:
3314:
3313:
3309:
3305:
3301:
3300:
3299:
3295:
3291:
3288:
3287:RickyCourtney
3284:
3283:
3282:
3278:
3274:
3270:
3269:
3268:
3264:
3260:
3255:
3254:
3253:
3249:
3245:
3240:
3239:
3238:
3234:
3230:
3229:RickyCourtney
3226:
3222:
3221:
3220:
3216:
3212:
3207:
3206:RickyCourtney
3203:
3202:
3201:
3197:
3193:
3189:
3188:
3187:
3183:
3179:
3178:RickyCourtney
3175:
3163:
3159:
3155:
3154:RickyCourtney
3150:
3149:
3148:
3144:
3142:
3138:
3125:
3121:
3120:
3119:
3115:
3113:
3109:
3096:
3095:RickyCourtney
3092:
3090:
3086:
3082:
3078:
3077:
3076:
3072:
3068:
3063:
3062:
3061:
3057:
3055:
3051:
3038:
3037:
3036:
3032:
3028:
3024:
3023:
3022:
3018:
3014:
3011:
3007:
3003:
2999:
2995:
2991:
2985:
2981:
2977:
2976:RickyCourtney
2972:
2968:
2967:
2966:
2962:
2958:
2953:
2952:
2951:
2947:
2943:
2942:RickyCourtney
2939:
2936:
2933:
2928:
2923:
2922:
2918:
2913:
2912:
2911:
2910:
2906:
2902:
2898:
2897:RickyCourtney
2894:
2885:
2881:
2877:
2873:
2869:
2868:
2867:
2866:
2862:
2858:
2850:
2842:
2838:
2834:
2833:Narnianknight
2829:
2828:
2827:
2823:
2819:
2814:
2810:
2809:
2808:
2804:
2800:
2795:
2792:
2787:
2779:
2775:
2771:
2770:RickyCourtney
2767:
2766:
2765:
2761:
2757:
2753:
2749:
2745:
2739:
2738:RickyCourtney
2734:
2733:
2732:
2728:
2724:
2723:RickyCourtney
2720:
2719:
2718:
2717:
2712:transclusion
2711:
2706:
2700:
2693:
2690:
2687:
2686:
2683:substitution
2682:
2677:
2671:
2664:
2661:
2658:
2657:
2654:substitution
2653:
2648:
2642:
2635:
2632:
2629:
2628:
2625:substitution
2624:
2619:
2613:
2606:
2603:
2600:
2599:
2596:substitution
2595:
2590:
2584:
2577:
2574:
2571:
2570:
2567:substitution
2566:
2561:
2555:
2548:
2545:
2542:
2541:
2538:transclusion
2537:
2532:
2526:
2519:
2516:
2513:
2512:
2509:substitution
2508:
2503:
2502:double-dagger
2497:
2490:
2487:
2484:
2483:
2480:substitution
2479:
2474:
2468:
2461:
2458:
2455:
2454:
2451:transclusion
2450:
2445:
2439:
2432:
2429:
2426:
2425:
2408:
2402:
2401:
2391:
2386:
2385:
2384:
2380:
2376:
2372:
2365:
2364:RickyCourtney
2360:
2358:
2354:
2350:
2345:
2341:
2337:
2331:
2330:RickyCourtney
2326:
2325:
2324:
2323:
2319:
2315:
2310:
2305:
2303:
2294:
2289:
2272:
2268:
2264:
2260:
2257:
2255:
2251:
2249:
2245:
2232:
2231:
2230:
2226:
2222:
2221:RickyCourtney
2218:
2217:
2216:
2212:
2210:
2206:
2193:
2192:
2191:
2187:
2183:
2179:
2178:
2177:
2173:
2169:
2165:
2164:
2163:
2159:
2155:
2152:
2148:
2138:
2134:
2130:
2126:
2125:
2124:
2120:
2116:
2112:
2108:
2104:
2100:
2096:
2091:
2087:
2081:
2077:
2073:
2069:
2066:
2065:
2064:
2060:
2056:
2055:RickyCourtney
2052:
2051:
2050:
2046:
2042:
2038:
2035:
2032:
2031:
2030:
2026:
2022:
2021:RickyCourtney
2018:
2017:
2016:
2012:
2008:
2004:
2001:
2000:
1999:
1995:
1991:
1990:RickyCourtney
1986:
1985:
1984:
1980:
1976:
1975:RickyCourtney
1972:
1969:
1963:
1959:
1955:
1951:
1948:
1945:
1944:
1943:
1939:
1935:
1934:RickyCourtney
1930:
1929:
1928:
1924:
1920:
1916:
1913:
1911:
1910:
1906:
1902:
1898:
1893:
1892:
1889:
1886:
1884:
1879:
1871:
1867:
1865:
1861:
1849:
1845:
1841:
1837:
1833:
1831:
1827:
1823:
1819:
1818:
1817:
1813:
1809:
1804:
1803:
1802:
1798:
1796:
1792:
1779:
1775:
1771:
1767:
1763:
1759:
1758:
1757:
1753:
1749:
1744:
1734:
1730:
1726:
1722:
1720:
1717:
1716:
1715:
1711:
1707:
1703:
1701:
1698:
1694:
1691:
1690:
1689:
1685:
1681:
1677:
1676:
1675:
1671:
1667:
1663:
1659:
1658:
1657:
1653:
1649:
1644:
1643:
1642:
1641:
1637:
1626:
1622:
1618:
1617:RickyCourtney
1614:
1613:
1612:
1609:
1606:
1600:
1599:
1593:
1591:
1571:
1568:
1565:
1564:
1560:
1557:
1555:
1552:
1551:
1547:
1544:
1542:
1539:
1538:
1534:
1531:
1529:
1526:
1525:
1521:
1518:
1515:
1511:
1510:
1506:
1503:
1500:
1496:
1495:
1491:
1488:
1485:
1481:
1480:
1476:
1473:
1470:
1466:
1465:
1461:
1458:
1455:
1451:
1450:
1446:
1443:
1440:
1436:
1435:
1431:
1428:
1425:
1421:
1420:
1416:
1413:
1410:
1406:
1405:
1401:
1398:
1395:
1391:
1390:
1386:
1383:
1380:
1376:
1375:
1371:
1368:
1366:
1363:
1362:
1358:
1355:
1352:
1348:
1347:
1343:
1340:
1337:
1333:
1332:
1328:
1325:
1322:
1318:
1317:
1313:
1310:
1308:
1305:
1304:
1300:
1297:
1294:
1290:
1289:
1285:
1282:
1279:
1275:
1274:
1270:
1267:
1264:
1260:
1259:
1255:
1252:
1249:
1245:
1244:
1240:
1237:
1235:
1234:Past launches
1232:
1231:
1227:
1224:
1221:
1217:
1216:
1212:
1209:
1206:
1202:
1201:
1197:
1194:
1191:
1187:
1186:
1182:
1179:
1176:
1172:
1171:
1167:
1164:
1162:
1159:
1158:
1154:
1151:
1149:
1146:
1145:
1139:
1134:
1131:
1130:
1126:
1120:
1119:
1115:Section sizes
1113:
1112:
1108:
1101:
1100:
1090:
1086:
1082:
1078:
1074:
1070:
1067:
1063:
1059:
1055:
1051:
1047:
1046:
1044:
1040:
1033:
1032:
1019:
1015:
1011:
1008:
1005:
1001:
997:
994:
991:
987:
983:
980:
977:
973:
969:
966:
965:
964:
959:
949:
945:
941:
937:
934:
931:
927:
923:
919:
916:
913:
909:
905:
901:
898:
897:
896:
895:
894:Discussions:
890:
883:
882:
878:
874:
867:
866:
850:
846:
840:
837:
836:
833:
820:United States
814:
811:
809:
806:
804:
801:
799:
798:
794:
792:
789:
788:
785:
781:
780:
772:
761:
759:
756:
752:
751:
747:
741:
740:United States
738:
735:
731:
718:
717:
707:
703:
702:
698:
694:
688:
685:
684:
681:
664:
660:
656:
655:
647:
636:
634:
631:
627:
626:
622:
615:
610:
607:
604:
600:
587:
583:
577:
574:
573:
570:
553:
549:
545:
544:
536:
525:
523:
520:
516:
515:
511:
505:
502:
499:
495:
482:
478:
472:
469:
468:
465:
461:List articles
448:
444:
440:
436:
435:
430:
427:
423:
422:
418:
412:
409:
406:
402:
397:
393:
387:
379:
375:
370:
369:
357:
355:
354:
350:
347:
343:
342:
338:
335:
332:
331:
326:
322:
318:
314:
311:
307:
306:
302:
298:
294:
290:
289:
284:
283:featured list
280:
277:
274:
270:
269:
250:
249:
244:
240:
232:
228:
224:
220:
216:
212:
208:
204:
200:
196:
192:
189:
187:
183:
182:
177:
173:
170:
167:
163:
159:
155:
152:
149:
146:
143:
140:
137:
134:
131:
127:
124:
123:Find sources:
120:
119:
111:
110:Verifiability
108:
106:
103:
101:
98:
97:
96:
87:
83:
81:
78:
76:
72:
69:
67:
64:
63:
57:
53:
52:Learn to edit
49:
46:
41:
40:
37:
36:
32:
26:
22:
18:
17:
3581:
3575:
3572:Not notable.
3569:
3563:
3557:
3551:
3545:
3539:
3533:
3527:
3521:
3515:
3509:
3475:
3128:
3099:
3041:
2889:
2854:
2790:
2493:‡
2464:†
2416:HTML entity
2397:
2308:
2306:
2301:
2298:
2287:
2235:
2196:
2154:72.76.72.238
1970:
1914:
1896:
1894:
1888:
1882:
1880:
1851:
1782:
1636:per McDowell
1633:
1610:
1604:
1601:
1590:
1321:2024, future
1263:2020 to 2022
1248:2010 to 2019
1190:Launch sites
1132:Section name
943:
925:
907:
893:
892:
844:
808:Project Talk
796:
777:
714:
692:
652:
581:
541:
476:
443:project page
432:
392:WikiProjects
351:
301:please do so
286:
278:
238:
184:
171:
165:
157:
150:
144:
138:
132:
122:
94:
19:This is the
3586:Redacted II
3478:Redacted II
2872:Redacted II
2696:′
2531:number sign
2263:Redacted II
2182:Redacted II
2129:Redacted II
2072:Redacted II
2041:Redacted II
2007:Redacted II
1954:Redacted II
1919:Redacted II
1901:Redacted II
1725:Redacted II
1680:Redacted II
1439:Zuma launch
960:discussions
668:Spaceflight
659:spaceflight
609:Spaceflight
148:free images
31:not a forum
3605:Categories
3584:See CRS-7
3554:See CRS-7.
3081:AmigaClone
3006:AmigaClone
2813:AmigaClone
2799:AmigaClone
2667:↑
2647:left-arrow
2638:←
2618:down-arrow
2609:↓
2580:→
1844:AmigaClone
1822:AmigaClone
1766:Jrcraft Yt
1648:Jrcraft Yt
1554:References
1018:Discussion
1004:Discussion
990:Discussion
976:Discussion
948:Discussion
930:Discussion
912:Discussion
447:discussion
288:identified
3122:For eg. "
2998:RIP B1058
2994:C-randles
2551:°
2522:#
2435:*
1770:Osunpokeh
926:Not Moved
908:Not moved
88:if needed
71:Be polite
21:talk page
3566:Notable.
2691:"prime"
2676:up-arrow
2444:asterisk
2300:obvious
1572:463,864
1528:See also
1301:138,314
1286:168,837
1241:308,976
557:Rocketry
548:rocketry
504:Rocketry
382:FL-class
358:Promoted
186:Archives
56:get help
29:This is
27:article.
3576:Demo-2.
3570:Demo-1.
3552:Amos-6.
3039:Agreed
1915:Failure
1897:Failure
1777:launch.
1569:463,864
1372:39,659
1359:20,401
1344:36,376
1329:34,692
1314:95,778
1298:138,314
1283:168,837
1168:11,475
1140:Section
1081:history
1071:Copied
1058:history
1048:Copied
847:on the
695:on the
584:on the
479:on the
336:Process
239:60 days
154:WP refs
142:scholar
3540:CRS-7.
3528:CSR-1.
3494:Ergzay
3399:Ergzay
3373:Ergzay
3359:Ergzay
3341:Ergzay
3192:Ergzay
3013:Ergzay
2957:Ergzay
2917:Ergzay
2901:Ergzay
2857:Dwalin
2818:Ergzay
2560:degree
2473:dagger
2095:Ergzay
1706:Sub31k
1666:Sub31k
1522:1,174
1507:4,516
1492:3,278
1477:3,833
1462:3,060
1447:4,073
1432:1,423
1417:4,623
1402:4,562
1387:9,094
1356:20,401
1341:36,376
1326:34,692
1256:1,398
1228:1,349
1213:1,794
1183:1,943
1155:6,369
1142:total
813:Alerts
388:scale.
339:Result
126:Google
3558:Zuma.
3136:B1058
3107:B1058
3049:B1058
2934:page.
2705:prime
2589:arrow
2302:to me
2243:B1058
2204:B1058
1859:B1058
1790:B1058
1566:Total
1541:Notes
1519:1,174
1504:4,516
1489:3,278
1474:3,833
1459:3,060
1444:4,073
1429:1,423
1414:4,623
1399:4,562
1384:9,094
1311:4,309
1253:1,398
1225:1,349
1210:1,794
1180:1,943
1165:5,496
1152:6,369
1148:(Top)
1137:count
1077:oldid
1054:oldid
944:Moved
452:Lists
411:Lists
293:lists
281:is a
169:JSTOR
130:books
84:Seek
3590:talk
3582:9-3.
3498:talk
3482:talk
3434:talk
3403:talk
3388:talk
3363:talk
3345:talk
3326:talk
3308:talk
3294:talk
3277:talk
3263:talk
3248:talk
3233:talk
3215:talk
3196:talk
3182:talk
3158:talk
3141:TALK
3133:NΛSΛ
3112:TALK
3104:NΛSΛ
3085:talk
3071:talk
3054:TALK
3046:NΛSΛ
3031:talk
3017:talk
2980:talk
2961:talk
2946:talk
2905:talk
2895:by @
2876:talk
2861:talk
2837:talk
2822:talk
2803:talk
2774:talk
2760:talk
2727:talk
2379:talk
2371:WEEE
2353:talk
2338:and
2318:talk
2267:talk
2248:TALK
2240:NΛSΛ
2225:talk
2209:TALK
2201:NΛSΛ
2186:talk
2172:talk
2158:talk
2133:talk
2119:talk
2099:talk
2076:talk
2059:talk
2045:talk
2025:talk
2011:talk
1994:talk
1979:talk
1958:talk
1938:talk
1923:talk
1905:talk
1864:TALK
1856:NΛSΛ
1826:talk
1812:talk
1795:TALK
1787:NΛSΛ
1752:talk
1729:talk
1710:talk
1684:talk
1670:talk
1652:talk
1621:talk
1561:350
1548:943
1535:314
1336:2025
1293:2024
1278:2023
1271:406
1198:893
1135:Byte
1089:diff
1083:) →
1066:diff
1060:) →
956:Non-
333:Date
162:FENS
136:news
73:and
3428:--
3131:—🪦
3102:—🪦
3067:mfb
3044:—🪦
3010:Mfb
2940:--
2791:not
2721:--
2309:new
2238:—🪦
2199:—🪦
2168:mfb
2089:it.
1854:—🪦
1848:Mfb
1808:mfb
1785:—🪦
1762:Mfb
1748:mfb
1558:350
1545:943
1532:314
1268:406
1195:893
839:Low
687:Mid
576:Mid
471:Low
176:TWL
3607::
3592:)
3500:)
3484:)
3436:)
3415:8.
3405:)
3390:)
3365:)
3347:)
3328:)
3310:)
3296:)
3279:)
3265:)
3250:)
3235:)
3217:)
3198:)
3184:)
3160:)
3087:)
3073:)
3033:)
3019:)
2982:)
2963:)
2948:)
2907:)
2878:)
2863:)
2839:)
2824:)
2805:)
2776:)
2762:)
2750:,
2746:,
2729:)
2708:}}
2702:{{
2688:′
2679:}}
2673:{{
2659:↑
2650:}}
2644:{{
2630:←
2621:}}
2615:{{
2601:↓
2592:}}
2586:{{
2572:→
2563:}}
2557:{{
2543:°
2534:}}
2528:{{
2514:#
2505:}}
2499:{{
2485:‡
2476:}}
2470:{{
2456:†
2447:}}
2441:{{
2427:*
2381:)
2355:)
2320:)
2269:)
2227:)
2188:)
2174:)
2160:)
2135:)
2121:)
2101:)
2078:)
2061:)
2047:)
2027:)
2013:)
1996:)
1981:)
1960:)
1940:)
1925:)
1907:)
1899:)
1828:)
1814:)
1806:--
1754:)
1731:)
1712:)
1686:)
1672:)
1654:)
1623:)
1369:23
1238:21
1079:,
1056:,
1012:→
998:→
984:→
970:→
942:,
938:→
924:,
920:→
906:,
902:→
612::
237::
231:11
229:,
227:10
225:,
221:,
217:,
213:,
209:,
205:,
201:,
197:,
193:,
156:)
54:;
3588:(
3496:(
3480:(
3432:(
3401:(
3386:(
3371:@
3361:(
3353:@
3343:(
3334:@
3324:(
3306:(
3292:(
3285:@
3275:(
3261:(
3246:(
3231:(
3223:@
3213:(
3204:@
3194:(
3180:(
3156:(
3143:)
3139:(
3129:
3114:)
3110:(
3100:
3093:@
3083:(
3069:(
3056:)
3052:(
3042:
3029:(
3015:(
3008:@
3004:@
3000:@
2996:@
2978:(
2959:(
2944:(
2919::
2915:@
2903:(
2874:(
2859:(
2835:(
2820:(
2811:@
2801:(
2772:(
2758:(
2740::
2736:@
2725:(
2377:(
2366::
2362:@
2351:(
2332::
2328:@
2316:(
2265:(
2250:)
2246:(
2236:
2223:(
2211:)
2207:(
2197:
2184:(
2170:(
2156:(
2131:(
2117:(
2097:(
2074:(
2057:(
2043:(
2023:(
2009:(
1992:(
1977:(
1956:(
1936:(
1921:(
1903:(
1885:.
1866:)
1862:(
1852:
1846:@
1842:@
1824:(
1810:(
1797:)
1793:(
1783:
1768:@
1764:@
1760:@
1750:(
1727:(
1708:(
1682:(
1668:(
1650:(
1619:(
1087:(
1075:(
1064:(
1052:(
1020:)
1006:)
992:)
978:)
950:)
932:)
914:)
851:.
719:.
699:.
588:.
483:.
449:.
394:.
303:.
223:9
219:8
215:7
211:6
207:5
203:4
199:3
195:2
191:1
188::
172:·
166:·
158:·
151:·
145:·
139:·
133:·
128:(
58:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.