If it’s dust After SpaceX’s short, explosive test launch of Starship came to an agreement in April, both the company and the Federal Aviation Administration have delved into investigating the aftermath. The giant rocket’s flight lasted just four minutes before exploding near SpaceX’s Boca Chica launch site on the Texas coast. Images and news reports posted in the following days showed boulders of concrete and rebar shooting into the air during liftoff, and there were reports of particles raining down on nearby Port Isabel.
Today, both SpaceX and the FAA released statements about their joint “accident investigation,” which was led by the company and overseen by the FAA, with NASA and the National Transportation Safety Board acting as observers. The results had to be reviewed and approved by FAA officials, but neither the agency nor SpaceX released a full report, which would include proprietary data and US export control information.
Despite the CEO of SpaceX Elon Musk’s claim about X (formerly Twitter) on Sept. 5 that “Starship is ready to launch,” the FAA’s statement makes it clear that SpaceX has more work to do. “The closure of the accident investigation does not mean that starship launches at Boca Chica will resume immediately. SpaceX has to implement everything [63] corrective actions affecting public safety and requesting and receiving a license change from the FAA that meets all safety, environmental and other applicable legal requirements prior to the Starship’s next launch,” the statement read.
The FAA also today released an “accident closure letter” sent to SpaceX officials today, further outlining the agency’s safety and environmental concerns. “During takeoff, a structural failure of the launch pad foundation occurred, causing debris and sand to fly into the air,” the letter said. During takeoff, when the rocket deviated from its trajectory, the Autonomous Flight Safety System issued a destruct command, but there was an “unexpected delay” before it actually exploded, the letter continues.
The letter to SpaceX also summarizes what the FAA expects the company to address before it can get a new launch license. These actions include “redesigning vehicle hardware to prevent leaks and fires, redesigning the launch pad to increase its robustness, incorporating additional assessments into the design process, additional analysis and testing of safety-critical systems and components, including the Autonomous Flight Safety System ( AFSS) and the application of additional change control practices.”
A statement on the SpaceX website briefly describes the updates the company has made to the rocket and launch pad since April. These include a hot-stage separation system intended to use the second-stage engines to “push the ship away from the booster,” as well as a new thrust vector control system using electric motors, rather than hydraulic systems, the company says. “has fewer potential points of failure.”
Their statement also said that the company had strengthened the base of the launch pad. So is Musk tweeted this morning: “Thousands of upgrades to Starship & launchpad/Mechazilla”, referring to the launch tower.
The April launch wasn’t the first time SpaceX had tested (and crashed) a version of Starship, though previous launches had been of earlier prototypes, including only the upper-stage rocket. In April, engineers had attempted to test the fully stacked rocket and send it on its first near-orbital flight. After stage separation, the uncrewed upper stage was supposed to fly almost all the way around the Earth and crash into the Pacific Ocean near Hawaii 90 minutes later.
On launch day, Starship successfully lifted off the platform, but problems became apparent a few minutes later. During ascent, propellant leaked from the end of the Super Heavy booster and caused a fire, cutting communication with the primary flight computer, SpaceX’s statement said. That’s why the upper stage and booster couldn’t be separated, the company concluded. Engineers then lost control of the vehicle, the connected stack began to spin and tumble, and eventually exploded.
Another problem was the cratering on the launch pad caused by what Musk described Twitter spaces as a “rock tornado” generated by the launch. The launch pad notably lacked a flame deflector (or flood system) that most launch pads are built with. This is intended to disperse the sound, flames and energy produced by a launch. In today’s statement from SpaceX, the company says it has made upgrades “to prevent a repeat failure of the pad’s foundation,” and that includes “the addition of a flame deflectorwhich SpaceX has successfully tested several times.”
(SpaceX did not respond to WIRED’s request for comment.)
The stakes are high for Starship. At 400 feet tall, it’s taller than SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy or even NASA’s Space Launch System. With 33 Raptor engines and millions of pounds of thrust, it could become the most powerful rocket in the world. Musk is considering using Starship for Mars travel, and NASA plans to use it for the Artemis lunar missions, starting with the historic Artemis 3 flight scheduled for 2025, which will return astronauts to the lunar soil for the first time since 1972 to take. NASA has also awarded SpaceX a contract for the Artemis 4 landing scheduled for 2028. These plans will face setbacks if SpaceX can’t get its launch site and its massive new rocket up and running soon. A few weeks after the Starship explosion, SpaceX’s rival NASA Blue Origin awarded a lunar lander contract for the Artemis 5 mission scheduled for 2029, perhaps as protection in case SpaceX’s problems with Starship continue.