Space Sunday: New Glenn – a Major Malfunction

The moment of total destruction: the complete New Glenn rocket “stack” is destroyed as 1,200 tonnes of propellant in the first stage tanks explode, send a mushroom fire cloud int the sky over the Florida Space Coast. Via: AP News

On Thursday, May 28th, 2026 the evening skies over Florida’s space coast were lit up by a massive explosion. Believed to be in the one kiloton of TNT range, visible from dozens of miles away and heard in Orlando, 90 kilometres from the coast, the detonation was that of a Blue Origin New Glenn launch vehicle. Not only did it vaporise parts of the rocket, it also dealt a significant blow to the company.

The New Glenn in question was a new vehicle, comprising a main engine system of 7 uprated BE-4 engines (currently the most powerful rocket motors in the world, rated at 2,844.5 kN of thrust each 100 kN more than the SpaceX Raptor 3) a new booster first stage called No, It’s Necessary (a reference to Christopher Nolan’s 2014 film Interstellar) and an upper stage and fairings, both without propellants or payload. It was undergoing a static fire test at Launch Complex 36 (LC-36), Canaveral Space Force Station, ahead of a planned launch scheduled for early June, New Glenn having been cleared to resume flights after being ground following the NG-3 mission in April, in which the rocket’s upper stage malfunctioned.

A static fire test is a routine in which a rocket is loaded with propellants, goes through a launch countdown and then very briefly fires its engines before shutting them down again. The intention is for the propellant systems and engines to “clear their throats” (so to speak), ready for the upcoming launch. To this end, the rocket was loaded with some 1,200 tonnes of liquid oxygen and liquid methane.

The vehicle explosion could be seen up and down Florida’s space coast, as was heard 90 km away in Orlando, Florida. Credit: various

The exact cause of the explosion has obviously yet to be determined. The first signs of trouble came as the static fire countdown reached its end. The water deluge sound suppression system was active, smothering the launch pad in hundreds of thousands of litres of water to prevent the acoustic vibrations generated by the seven BE-4 engines being deflected from the launch pad up onto the vehicle and damaging it. As a result, it is very difficult to see from the available video footage as to what happened next: whether the engines fired as expected with an explosion following, or whether the complete engine unit at the base of the rocket detonated on ignition.

What is clear is there was a destructive event at the base of the rocket giving rise to an initial fireball rolling flames up the sides of the vehicle. There was then a second explosion towards the top of the vehicle, roughly at, or just below, the bottom end of the upper stage – possibly an initial explosion of the liquid methane tank. However, both of these explosions were rapidly dwarfed by the vehicle’s entire first stage exploding, likely as a result of the liquid oxygen tank rupturing. This generated a mushroom fireball which rose into the evening sky with debris from the rocket being hurled up and outwards over considerable distances (so far in fact, that parts of the vehicle ended up scattered over the local beaches, caused fires in the coastal scrubland and came down off-shore, prompting several public safety warnings telling the public not to touch or move any debris they might find as it could be toxic).

The loss of a launch vehicle is obviously not an insignificant event – and fortunately, there was no loss of life. However, for Blue Origin, vehicle loss is somewhat secondary to the devastation wrought on LC-36.

This facility, leased from (at the time) the USAF in 2015, was completely rebuilt by Blue Origin at a cost of US $1 billion to be the only launch facility capable of handing New Glenn (a second launch facility planned for Vandenberg Space Force Base, California, has yet to break ground). With this explosion, much of LC-36 has been either completely destroyed or suffered significant damage, and until it is rebuilt New Glenn will not fly, no matter how quickly the cause of the explosion is identified and rectified (assuming it lies within the rocket).

Nor is this simply a matter of clearing the site and starting reconstruction. Rockets are nasty vehicles filled with things that can put a person in hospital – or worse – if not handled correctly. So before any reconstruction can begin, there will need to be a in-situ investigation across the site to clean it of any harmful materials whilst also looking for any clues as to what might have caused the explosion and recovering any surviving parts of the vehicle which might yield their own clues as to a possible cause. Such an investigation + clean-up is a non-trivial matter.

For example, in 2016, a SpaceX Falcon 9 exploded on LC-40 at Canaveral during a static fire test, completely destroying itself and its payload. It took over a year to get the pad back into operational order – the first 4+ months of which involved just such an investigation and clean-up. And that event was much smaller than the New Glenn explosion, with the pad and its infrastructure subjected to far less overall destruction.

Aftermath of destruction at LC-36: 1) the destroyed transporter-erector (TE); 2) the collapsed launch pad footing + elements of the water deluge system and the hydraulic actuators; 3) the collapsed 183-metre tall lightning conductor tower; 4 & 5) water deluge system feed pipes and other infrastructure stuck by the falling tower; 6) major damage or the corner support upright of the second, larger lightning tower (possibly requiring its demolition); 7) propellant tank farm – potential damage unknown; 8) water tower for deluge system, apparently undamaged; 9) (inset) a view of LC-36 as it looked sans the TE, before the explosion. Credit: Asher B.

By contrast and as shown above, the New Glenn explosion has completely wiped out the launch pad and its immediate infrastructure, brought down one of the two 183-metre tall lightning conductor towers and severely damaged the other, and utterly destroyed the transporter erector. The latter was the 1,800 tonne vehicle / platform used to move New Glenn rockets horizontally out of the vehicle and payload integration building a short distance from the launch pad and then, with the assistance of hydraulic actuators at the pad, raise itself, the rocket and the launch platform to a vertical position, and then act as the launch tower for the rocket.

In addition, it appears that the vehicle and payload integration facility close to the pad has suffered significant structural damage. Some reports state this damage extends to equipment and systems inside the building, including the twice-flown New Glenn first stage, Never Tell Me the Odds. However, this latter point was without formal confirmation at the time  of writing.

Given all of this, rebuilding and recommission LC-36 is liable to be a lengthy process. Frankly, if all of the statements on the extent of additional damage are correct, it’s hard to see the complex resuming launch operations before the end of 2027 at the earliest.

A wide view of Launch Complex 36, showing the (undamaged) pad and infrastructure to the right, and the vehicle and payload integration facility built by Blue Origin to the lower left. Reports indicate that the latter may have suffered extensive structural and internal damage. Credit: Blue Origin

Impacts

If LC-36 is out of commission for more than a year, then the overall impact is enormous for both Blue Origin and potentially for NASA’s Artemis programme. As it is, it has already put paid (for now, at least) to a pair of vital precursor missions related to Artemis Blue Origin was due to fly later in 2026 and early 2027.

These are the Blue Moon MK1 Pathfinder missions. They were both intended to deliver science payloads to the Moon – in the case of the second, NASA’s VIPER automated rover (which is the unluckiest lucky rover NASA has built, having lost its ride, was then practically cancelled, then resurrected and now is once more without a launch vehicle for the foreseeable future, and so could face cancellation again). More particularly, both missions would have allowed Blue Origin to check-out systems critical to both the Blue Moon MK1 cargo lander and its “big brother”, the Blue Moon MK2 crew lander (called the Human Landing System (HLS) by NASA).

Blue Moon MK1 and Blue Moon MK2 are set to be cornerstones of the Artemis programme, and by testing the systems common to both – the BE-7 engine system, the cryogenic fluid power and propulsion systems, avionics, continuous downlink communications, and precision landing system with an accuracy within 100 metres – during the Pathfinder mission, Blue Origin hoped validate their use aboard both landers and specifically move development the MK2 HLS vehicle significantly forward.

Blue Origin’s 8-metre tall Blue Moon MK1 cargo lander (foreground) and the 16-metre tall Blue Moon MK2 HLS share multiple common systems, which could have been tested on the two Blue Moon MK1 Pathfinder flights had the explosion at LC-36 not occurred. Credit: Blue Origin

A further mission now impacted by the New Glenn explosion – and somewhat linked to the Pathfinder missions – is that of Artemis 3.

Due to take place at the end of 2027, this is intended to provide NASA astronauts with the opportunity to test one or other (or preferably both) of the HLS systems being developed (the other being SpaceX’s Starship-derived vehicle) and evaluate their use and general fitness for purpose. Taken together, the Pathfinder missions (if successful) with their testing of the systems mentioned above, combined with a hands-on test of the actual Blue Moon MK2 HLS would likely provide NASA with a degree of confidence in the Blue Origin lander, possibly to the extend of selecting it over the SpaceX HLS for Artemis 4, the first mission to return astronauts to the surface of the Moon.

Clearly, with things now being what they are, neither of the Pathfinder missions will likely to take place within the next year (at least), and Blue Origin are unlikely to be able to participate in Artemis 3. The first of these points means that Blue Origin lose a possible advantage they hold over SpaceX when it comes to vehicle selection for Artemis 4. In terms of the latter, NASA face something of a quandary: do they keep things as is, and hope Blue Origin can somehow meet the current Artemis 3 schedule? Or they seek to push Artemis 3 back to 2028 in order to ensure they can properly evaluate both HLS vehicles from the relatively safe location of Earth orbit, or do they go ahead with testing only the SpaceX vehicle and introduce the Blue Origin vehicle without any on-orbit with Artemis 5 or Artemis 6?

The answer to these questions is far from clear – although one would hope common sense would lean NASA (political pressure allowing) towards delaying Artemis 3 until 2028 to give Blue Origin the opportunity to partake in the mission. Indeed, given doubts the agency has voiced about SpaceX’s overall ability to have a HLS system ready for Artemis 3 (which led to Artemis 3 being moved from mid- to late-2027), moving the mission back to 2028 might be seen beneficial overall. However, such a delay will impact on Artemis 4, and any attempt to slip this back into 2029 could meet with significant political resistance.

There is one other potential – but significant, if it happens – impact that might be felt with the loss of the NG-4 vehicle, and it lies not with Blue Origin or NASA, but with United Launch Alliance (ULA).

ULA uses two 2,460 kN “standard” BE-4 engines on the Vulcan-Centaur rocket’s first stage. As such, if the cause of the the loss of the NG-4 vehicle is found lie within the BE-4 (and not restricted to the uprated 2,844.5 kN version), the FAA could order a grounding of the ULA vehicle until such time that Blue origin has rectified whatever the issue might be. Time will very much tell on that.

A (Very) Small Consolation?

An info graphic on the in-development New Glenn 9×4, including a scale comparison with SpaceX Starship, the Saturn V and the Blue Moon 7×2. Credit: Graphic News

There is however, one potentially small consolation for Blue Origin after all this.

In November 2025, the company announced it was to develop a very significant upgrade to New Glenn: the 9×4, which it was planning to test fly some time in 2027 (a rather ambitious time frame even considering the commonality of hardware and software between it and the current New Glenn).

This new version of New Glenn (called the 9×4 on account that it will use 9 BE-7 engines on the first stage and 4 BE-3Us on the upper stage)is truly massive, as per the graphic to the right. What is particularly significant about this vehicle is the fact Blue Origin plan to have it capable  of delivering 14 tonnes of payload directly to geostationary orbit (GEO) or 20 tonnes to the Moon, both with the first stage reusable – capabilities beyond the reach of SpaceX’s Starship without it being “refuelled” in low Earth orbit.

And why is this a potential consolation for Blue Origin? Well, New Glenn 9×4 itself actually isn’t; it’s what comes with it that is.

In order to operate the new giant, the company needs to significantly upgrade LC-36 in several key areas – such as the pad itself and the infrastructure within / under it to deal with things like the vehicle’s increased mass, the significantly greater output from its engines at lift-off, the need for an enhanced deluge system to deal with higher acoustical issues, etc. This work would have had to be undertaken whilst the complex remained able to launch New Glenn 7×2 (with some 7 further flights originally planned for 2026, and another 4 in early 2027).

As a result of this incident, LC-36 can now be rebuilt from the ground up to fully support both 7×2 and 9×4 launches without having to juggle construction needs around launch schedules. True, it’s not that much of a consolation in the scheme of things; but at this point in time, I’m betting Blue Origin will take what small measures of comfort it can get.

2026 week #22: SL Open Source meeting: Chat Modernisation

Hippotropolis Theatre: home of the OSD/TPVD meeting
The following notes were taken from:

  • My chat log of the Open-Source Developer (OSD) meeting held on Friday, May 29th, 2026, together with my chat log of that meeting.
  • Pantera’s video of the meeting (embedded at the end of this article) – my thanks to her for providing it.
Table of Contents

Meeting Purpose

  • The OSD meeting is a combining of the former Third Party Viewer Developer meeting and the Open Source Development meeting. It is open discussion of Second Life development, including but not limited to open source contributions, third-party viewer development and policy, and current open source programs.
    • This meeting is generally held twice a month on a Friday, at 13:00 SLT at the Hippotropolis Theatre and is generally text chat only.
  • Dates and times of meetings are recorded in the SL Public Calendar.

Official Viewer Status

  • Default viewer: Flat UI – 26.2.0.25386466510,  -“flat” UI and font update, dated May.
  • Second Life Project Viewers – Lua Editor Alpha viewer 6.1.0.23768336784, April 29..

Viewer Notes

  • Per the above, 26.2 remains the release viewer.
  • 26.3.0 – performance improvements – work continues on this, but it is not ready to be issued as yet.
  • The order of progress for all other viewers currently available (Lua Editor) or in development (Graphics Care Package; maintenance release) remains fluid.

Chat Modernisation – IM Conversation Histories

We’ve been working on improving text chat, especially as we have moved from a desktop-only to a multi-platform product. We’re making important improvements to how text chat works behind the scenes. One of the biggest changes: We’re improving how conversations are maintained across devices.

– Grumpity Linden, May 29th, 2026

  • The Lab is working to make person-to-person IM chat histories persistent regardless as to how they are accessed – whether switching from one viewer to another or from a viewer to SL Mobile and vice-versa – so that up to the full history of a conversation can remain available, making it easier to pick up conversations wherever you log-in.
  • For clarity:
    • Nearby Chat history is not a part of the work, nor (for the foreseeable future) is Group chat (although this may change at some point).
    • The core functionality of messaging will remain unchanged: how live IMs are sent and received via UDP pathways is not changing.
    • Nearby chat logs will remain available just as they are at present.
    • It is only how (and how much of) IM histories are served to the viewer that is changing.
    • This work is in its early stages, and some of it might change in view of on-going feedback, etc.
  • Under this changes:
    • IM histories will be served encrypted over HTTPs, and the data store will have encryption at rest — allowing your data to stay completely private and secure.
    • For security reasons:
      • Only users opting-in to the Lab’s Multi-factor Authentication (MFA) will be able to access their complete IM histories.
      • Those who remain opted-out of MFA will only be able to see the last few days of chat histories.
      • This is to reduce risks of privacy breaches if a non-MFA account is hacked. Additionally, the number of days back and history fetch will go, will be determined by the server.
  • Partially because of the MFA dependence, LL is intending to expand options for using MFA (e.g. e-mail, SMS, etc.). However, these new options may not be available prior to the new chat history capability going live.
  • During the meeting there were numerous security concerns raised – particularly around store IM histories as Personal Identifying Information under regulatory requirements such as the EU’s GDPR, the degree of access LL might have to IM histories, even if encrypted.
    • Some of these were addressed to a degree (e.g. yes, histories would be deleted along with other PII data in response to a request under GDPR).
    • Some questions passed unanswered, potentially because they may require further internal discussion at LL.
  • As a semi-side note, it was indicated that one potential outcome of the overall Chat Modernisation work is that a some point in the future, it should become possible to have simultaneous log-ins from different devices.
    • So, for example, someone could be logged-in viewer their desktop but need to go AFK from their computer. They could then open SL Mobile on their mobile device and continue to follow a conversation without going through a log-out / log-in situation. They could then switch back from their mobile device to the desktop on their return.

Other Items

  • The legitimate use of bots for grid data gathering was again raised, together with what data may or may not be deemed acceptable for gathering, and guidelines on how such bots should be used in order to avoid sudden bans.
    • Geenz Linden noted that in terms of making aspects of region data available more readily to assist with things like 3D terrain (region) map creation, etc., there is interest in trying to implement an engineering-based ability. However, this is not something actively being developed at this point.
  • A brief discussion towards the end of the meeting on EEP bugs (which are likely to be addressed in viewer 26.3), with a note that PBR Sun / Moon will be part of the GCP viewer.

Next Meeting

Sienna’s “gap” at Nitroglobus in Second Life

Nitroglobus Roof Gallery Annex, May 2026: Sienna Dust – Lacuna

Now open through until the latter part of June within The Annex of Dido Haas’ Nitroglobus Roof Gallery, is a series of haunting monochrome studies by Sienna Dust. Entitled Lacuna (meaning “gap”) it follows on directly from Sienna’s April / May 2026 exhibition at Nitroglobus, Illicit Glimpse.

I did actually get the time to drop in on the latter during its run, but didn’t actually get to the point of writing about it at the time – shame on me. However, given that the one does somewhat follow-on from the other, a knowledge of Illicit Glimpse is not a requirement for appreciating what is offered here; it is approachable in an of itself. However, given their intertwinement in terms of themes, I’ll be mentioning both here.

Nitroglobus Roof Gallery Annex, May 2026: Sienna Dust – Lacuna

Illicit Glimpse offered a series of black-and-white avatar studies (Sienna’s avatar, I believe). Each piece, beautifully framed, sat as a study in sensuality and femininity which both invited the observer into them, but which also wrapped within them the idea that what the observer might be glimpsing is what the subject in each image wants to reveal; a mere glimpse of an idea or emotion, the rest remained veiled – or as Sienna describes it, withheld from the observer. In other words, there is something of a void, a gap between intent and response; between seeing and understanding.

With the images presented in Lacuna, it is this void, this gap, that we are invited to explore and debate with ourselves as to what is being revealed and what is being withheld; to look for what might hidden within shadow or etched in part in light, and what it might add to each image and what it might still yet withhold.

Nitroglobus Roof Gallery Annex, May 2026: Sienna Dust – Lacuna

In this, I’d suggest that another meaning of lacuna could be used when visiting this exhibition:  “deficiency”.  Not, I hasten to add, on the artist’s part, far from it; but within ourselves. For these are pieces which both artfully reveal and veil, that we are left wanting in our attempts to interpret; we can never quite hear the whispers of intent that lay within them.

A genuinely exquisite collection of images; one very much worth the time taken to see and consider them, whether one views them purely in the context of a series of avatar studies or within the wider context offered by Sienna.

Nitroglobus Roof Gallery Annex, May 2026: Sienna Dust – Lacuna

Slurl Details

May 2026 SL Mobile User Group meeting summary

Campwich Forest grounds: location for the Monthly Mobile User Group (MMUG)
The following notes were taken from the Thursday, April 30th 2026 Monthly Mobile User Group (MMUG) meeting. These notes should not be taken as a full transcript of the meeting, which was largely held in Voice, but rather a summary of the key topics discussed.

The meeting was recorded by Pantera, and her video is embedded at the end of this summary – my thanks, as always to her in providing it.

Table of Contents

Meeting Purpose

  • The Mobile User Group provides a platform to share insights on recent mobile updates and upcoming features, and to receive feedback directly from users.
  • These meetings are conducted (as a rule):
    • The last Thursday of every month at 12:00 noon SLT.
    • In Voice and text.
    • At Campwich Forest.
  • Meetings are open to anyone with a concern / interest in the above topics, and form one of a series of regular / semi-regular User Group meetings conducted by Linden Lab.
  • Dates and times of all current meetings can be found on the Second Life Public Calendar, and descriptions of meetings are defined on the SL wiki.

Core Mobile Team

The following are core (but not necessarily the only) members of the Mobile App team:

  • Bridie Linden; project manager.
  • Radix Linden: Mobile engineering manager. A new Linden, he has a strong Unity development background and his initial focus at LL is ensuring that Mobile is a smooth, seamless experience.
  • Adam Sinewave: lead developer.
  • Beanie Linden: QA.
  • Brad Linden: developer.
  • Stray Linden: back-end infrastructure engineer.

Resources

Current Release

Second Life Mobile 2026.5.194024, May 24 (iOS and Android) – bug fixes.

  • Under-the-hood code clean-up to make the app even more robust and easier to maintain going forward.
  • Visible fixes:
    • Menus should now all be translated to either French or Portuguese if either language is selected via Settings.
    • Specific characters in Chinese / Japanese, etc., should all now display correctly in Bubble Chat.
    • An issue where sculpted objects could appear stretched across the entire view has been corrected.
    • Numerous bugs on microphone use and permissions have also all been addressed.
  • Crash rates:
    • Fixing crash rates is important bot for the user experience and because high crash rates can reduce the visibility of an App in the various on-line stores where it is offered.
    • As noted in the April update, crashes rates on the Android version of SL Mobile have been brought down to be well within them. Several of the crashes that were resolved were due to multi-threading issues (neither Android nor Unity are particularly good on the multi-threading front, but the SL Mobile app is very reliant on multi-threading for performance).
    • Similar work has been carried out through May to bring down the iOS crash rates.
    • There are also issues where putting the app into the background on iOS or swiping up can cause the app to crash. Most of these should have been addressed, but if iOS users are still experiencing them, bug reports are requested.
      • In respect of the above, if a users crashes, then re-logs into the app, they are able to include the log details on the crash when filing a report through the app.
    • There are some additional iOS crashes still to be addressed, but the hope is to get the iOS version down to a same low rates as the Android version.

Work in Progress

  • Work is in progress to offer a complete chat history across both Desktop and SL Mobile, rather than conversation histories being split between the two (or saved locally between different desktop viewers).
  •  Work is starting on adding the ability to purchase Linden Dollar bunches (as found on the iOS version of SL Mobile) to the Android version.
  • Changes are being made to notifications in SL Mobile, so users can activate push notifications more easily than at present.

General Q&A

  • There was a report that some new users on SL Mobile are being directed towards using Senra avatars, which should not be the case (they should be directed to the Avatar Picker) LL have not seen this, so checks will be made. A request was made that any new users found to be on Senra when joining through the app are encouraged to file a bug report.
  • The question was asked about setting a minimum draw distance in the app.
    • Draw distance on Mobile is heavily hardware-dependent. Therefore the Lab do default to a specific limit.
    • Currently, the app will use progress DD when loading a scene (16m, then 30m, then 40m).
    • If a longer DD has been selected via Settings, the app will attempt to step up to these when loading has finished, hardware capabilities allowing.
    • It should be remembered that for every 10 metres added to the draw distance, memory footprint and load time are essentially tripled.
    • Also, the greater the DD, the greater the risk of hitting application memory limits and causing a crash.
  • A suggestion was made for Mobile to offer a list of rendering items people can opt to disable / enable to help people on older mobile device hardware to better control what their device can / cannot render.
    • Some of this can already be achieved via advanced settings.
    • The device itself might also adjust rendering capabilities in accordance with its capabilities (e.g. how much is rendered, the overall quality, etc.).
  • PBR on mobile:
    • PBR requires triple the number of textures in order to be supported in Mobile – Mobile doesn’t currently even support “full” Blinn-Phong.
    • Recent work with textures does mean that overall, memory use has vastly improved, making PBR more of a possibility.
    • Work in better optimising mesh rendering in SL Mobile could also help with a move to support PBR, but this work has yet to be undertaken.
    • Even so, bridging the “PBR gap” between Mobile and Desktop is a subject of discussion within LL.

Date of Next Meeting

2026 week #22: SUG meeting summary

Sojourn Spring, March 2026 – blog post

The following notes were taken from the Tuesday, May 26th, 2026 Simulator User Group (SUG) meeting. These notes form a summary of the items discussed, and are not intended to be a full transcript. They were taken from the video recording by Pantera, embedded at the end of this summary – my thanks to Pantera for providing it.

Meeting Overview

  • The Simulator User Group (also referred to by its older name of Server User Group) exists to provide an opportunity for discussion about simulator technology, bugs, and feature ideas is held every other Tuesday at 12:00 noon, SLT (holidays, etc., allowing), per the Second Life Public Calendar.
  • The “SUG Leviathan Hour” meetings are held on the Tuesdays which do not have a formal SUG meeting, and are chaired by Leviathan Linden. They are more brainstorming / general discussion sessions.
  • Meetings are held in text in-world, at this location.

Simulator Deployments

  • No planned deployments for the week, just restarts.
  • Loganberry is moving forward, and is currently being reviewed by the Lab’s QA team. This should have:
    • The updates to deal with missing attachments on avatars / having perpetually cloudy avatars.
    • Workaround for mesh face_count mismatch between server and client (this will also require a viewer-side update to fully correct).
    • Harold Linden’s serialisation fixes to ease some region crossing issues.
    • Fix for llListen triggering multiple times.
    • A fix for script parcel permissions being calculated incorrectly and an old issue about rezzing on meshes.

In Brief

  • Rider Linden is working on:
    • A publishing pipeline for the VSCode plugin to make pushing updated versions to the marketplace easier.
    • Some proof of concept work on is the ability to “publish” objects that are rezzed in world and having them show up in the VSCode workspace as directories.
    • Working on some of the helper tables for a few of the APIs.
  • Leviathan Linden is working with resident WolfGang Senizen on improvements to the game_control capability:
    • A clean-up of the game-control UI.
    • Support for full binding of game control to any regular control, and vice versa.
    • Adding some semantics constants to the LSL game-control channel names (e.g. AXIS_FWD_BACK, AXIS_STRAFE, etc., instead of just AXIS_0 – AXIS_5, etc.).
    • Leviathan is also once again looking at the “avatar slides for a few seconds when standing next to a small obstacle” bug.
  • Harold Linden is hoping to make a new version of the Lua simulator code available in the next few days.
  • During the course of the meeting it was noted that LL likely will not have Lua grid-wide in time for SL23B, but it will be fully available “probably soon after”.

General Discussion

Please refer to the video below for  more on the following.

  • llGetRegionWorldMapTile was raised again, with a suggestion that it could be merged with Update Map Service to use ‘actual’ screenshots.
    • Rider Linden indicated that there have been internal discussions about how to make the former work with the asset system, but no actual coding has commenced as yet.
  • A discussion on Land Impact and the value of individual prims (see: 1 prim should be 1 Li – Even when it has a PBR), encompassing the different accounting system, how certain changes can impact the “cost” of rendering a prim, etc. The ran through the meeting from around 20 minutes in to the meeting and bubbles for around 20 minutes.
  • The issue of Random Regions Not Sending Full HTTP Headers was raised again.
    • This is an issue going back to at least 2008.
    • LL appear to have been under the impression it has been addressed.
    • A request was made for those experiencing the problem to raise a Canny report and include the relevant viewer logs.
    • This conversation was threaded in with the “prim” discussion above.
  • Add REZ_REMOTE_SCRIPT_ACCESS_PIN to llRezObjectWithParams is apparently on a “short list” for implementation.

Date of Next Meetings

  • Leviathan Linden: Tuesday, June 2nd, 2026.
  • Formal SUG meeting: Tuesday, June 9th, 2026.

† The header images included in these summaries are not intended to represent anything discussed at the meetings; they are simply here to avoid a repeated image of a rooftop of people every week. They are taken from my list of region visits, with a link to the post for those interested.

2026 SL viewer release summaries week #21

Logos representative only and should not be seen as an endorsement / preference / recommendation

Updates from the week through to Sunday, May 24th, 2026

This summary is generally published every Monday, and is a list of SL viewer / client releases (official and TPV) made during the previous week. When reading it, please note:

  • It is based on my Current Viewer Releases Page, a list of all Second Life viewers and clients that are in popular use (and of which I am aware), and which are recognised as adhering to the TPV Policy.
  • This page includes comprehensive links to download pages, blog notes, release notes, etc., as well as links to any / all reviews of specific viewers / clients made within this blog.
  • By its nature, this summary presented here will always be in arrears, please refer to the Current Viewer Release Page for more up-to-date information.
  • Outside of the Official viewer, and as a rule, alpha / beta / nightly or release candidate viewer builds are not included; although on occasions, exceptions might be made.

Official LL Viewers

  • Default viewer  – One-Click Installer = 26.1.1.23806384790 – April 10 – No change.
  • Second Life Release Candidate (RC) viewer: Flat UI – 26.2.0.25386466510, May 14 -“flat” UI and font update – NEW.
  • Second Life Lua Editor Alpha viewer 6.1.0.23768336784, April 29 – No change.

LL Viewer Resources

Third-party Viewers

V7-style

  • Kirstens Viewer S24(7) Build 3400 (beta) – May 24 – release notes.
  • Kokua: 26.2.0.58527 (no RLV) and 26.2.0.62339 (RLV variants), May 24 – release notes.
  • Megaphit viewer version – 26.2.0.55049 – May 19 – changelog.

V1-style

  • No updates.

Mobile / Other Clients

  • Second Life Mobile 2026.5.194024, May  (iOS and Android) – bug fixes.

Additional TPV Resources

Related Links