Science SPACEX "Starship" explodes shortly after launch

  • 🔧 Actively working on site again.

SPACEX​

"Starship" explodes shortly after launch​

The unmanned "Starship" giant rocket of the US space company SpaceX has exploded during its first test flight. The largest and most powerful rocket ever built took off on Thursday from the SpaceX spaceport Starbase in Boca Chica in the US state of Texas. However, just over three minutes after launch, the rocket detonated, live footage showed.​
Online since today, 3:41 p.m. (Update: 3:57 p.m.)

At that point, the first booster stage called "Super Heavy" should have separated from the "Starship" space shuttle. SpaceX spoke on Twitter of a "rapid unplanned breakup prior to stage separation." "Teams will continue to evaluate data and work toward our next flight test," tech billionaire Elon Musk's company added. The launch was delayed by a few minutes: the countdown had been briefly interrupted to check some more details. Afterwards, the launch was released after all. Actually, the "Starship" of the private space company SpaceX of tech billionaire Elon Musk should have already taken off on Monday for a first short test flight. But that was postponed shortly before the planned launch because of a problem with a valve.

Enormous setback
The "Starship" rocket system - consisting of the roughly 70-meter-long "Super Heavy" booster and the roughly 50-meter-long upper stage, also called "Starship" - is intended to enable manned missions to the moon and Mars in the future. The "Starship" system is in itself designed so that the spacecraft and rocket can be reused after returning to Earth. The explosion, however, is an enormous setback for the initiative. The U.S. space agency NASA has selected "Starship" to fly humans to the moon for the first time in more than 50 years in the Artemis 3 mission at the end of 2025. Even flights to Mars should be possible with the rocket.

First attempt briefly halted
The launch of the 120-meter-high rocket from SpaceX's Starbase spaceport in Boca Chica was stopped on Monday less than ten minutes before the planned ignition. As a kind of dress rehearsal, however, the countdown continued until ten seconds before the originally planned launch time. The reason given for the abort was a technical problem with the pressure equalization on the most powerful space rocket ever built. Musk wrote on Twitter, apparently a valve had frozen. However, he said SpaceX had "learned a lot" from the launch attempt. It was only in February that almost all of the rocket's first stage engines had successfully ignited for the first time during a test in Boca Chica. Musk then declared that the 31 engines ignited in the test were "enough to reach orbit".

Explosion after first landing
Apart from the size and the associated possibility of transporting large loads, the reusability of all rocket components pursued by SpaceX is another central element of the "Starship" program. The declared goal is to significantly reduce the cost of operating spacecraft. SpaceX reported the first successful landing of a prototype in May 2021. Shortly thereafter, the explosion of the rocket made headlines. It was the third explosion within a few months - yet Musk remained convinced that the "Starship" rocket would soon be "safe enough" to transport people.

Youtube Video

Private moon orbit with billionaire and artists
Since last year, SpaceX has been trying to launch its spacecraft into orbit for the first time. At the beginning of the year, Musk had initially set a launch date of February or March - but at the same time made this dependent on the further course of testing. The schedule will be missed by at least a few weeks. A first private space mission is also planned for this year. The Japanese billionaire Yusaku Maezawa recently announced his intention to circumnavigate the moon in a "starship" together with eight artists. The moon will then also be the destination of a mission pursued jointly with NASA.

Central role for NASA moon program

NASA is currently planning to use "Starship" as a landing module in its Artemis program in 2025 at the earliest. The rocket is significantly larger and more powerful than NASA's SLS rocket, which the space agency plans to use to put astronauts into orbit around the moon from 2024.​
1681999822370.png
After several weeks in space, the unmanned "Orion" capsule of NASA's Artemis 1 lunar mission returned to Earth in December

According to NASA plans, the "Starship" mission is dependent on the progress of the Artemis-2 mission. After the Artemis-1 mission, which ended in December with the return of an unmanned Orion space capsule to Earth, a manned orbit of the moon is now on the agenda. The next step will be to bring astronauts to the moon again with the "Starship". NASA put the last humans on the moon in 1972 with the Apollo 17 mission. The USA was the only country to put twelve astronauts on the moon with the Apollo missions between 1969 and 1972.

Space suits ready
Artemis 3 will be much more complex, according to NASA, combining the SLS "Orion" system with spacecraft built and flown by SpaceX. The NASA plan calls for a four-person "Orion" crew to dock in space with a SpaceX lander that will carry two astronauts to the lunar surface for nearly a week.

Twitter | Archive

According to NASA, an orbital fuel depot and a space tanker are required in addition to the Starship. The new space suits developed for the mission in collaboration with Axiom Space were unveiled by NASA in mid-March. In the "Starship" program, the moon is only the first stopover on the first manned mission to Mars, which Musk has already announced for 2029.
red, ORF.at/Agencies

Source (German)
 
Very bright engine flames are "consistent with [fuel]-rich exhaust" (he says "engine rich", but I don't think that is correct),
It is correct, "engine rich" means the metal of the engine itself is burning/evaporating/disintegrating/a combination of all three. Things that can't normally burn can in the malfunctioning oxidizer of a rocket engine.
 
(he says "engine rich", but I don't think that is correct)
Burning "engine rich" is an inside joke for rocketry. It can mean one of two things: your rocket's engine has too much oxidizer (hot oxygen atoms) and is literally burning itself apart, which typically looks like green or red flames shooting out the ass of the rocket, OR the guts of the engine can't handle the stresses and you see a deluge of steel spill out of the rocket exhaust as the engines explode.

There's this funny duality of failure modes, fewer engines simplify things so you don't have to worry about so many parts, but if one of them fails you're mega-fucked.
More engines introduce more possibilities of failure, but adding EVEN MORE engines swings the pendulum in the reverse direction: each individual failure matters less and less.
You can see this in starships launch; individual engines keep shitting their guts out but it doesn't matter, the rocket keeps trucking along (at least until separation fails and they decide to blow it).
 
Lot of damage at the launch pad. The booster chewed at that spot for a while and it almost looked like it wasn't going to leave the tower.
View attachment 5076695
Well a good chuck of the excavation needed for a flame diverter is done. Hope it doesn't delay the next launch too long. There is some tank farm damage that needs a lot of work too.
I think they were betting a little too hard on that special concrete they laid down. Of course it would have been really cool if it worked, but it just seemed to make the debris chunks bigger.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Le Pew and Toolbox
I think they were betting a little too hard on that special concrete they laid down. Of course it would have been really cool if it worked, but it just seemed to make the debris chunks bigger.
I'm hearing their main point for the simplicity of the launchpad is due to them legitimately wanting to build the same design on mars when (in their dreams) they establish a base there. Not the most insane idea to try and simplify the design in that case but it was wishful thinking.
 
I'm hearing their main point for the simplicity of the launchpad is due to them legitimately wanting to build the same design on mars when (in their dreams) they establish a base there. Not the most insane idea to try and simplify the design in that case but it was wishful thinking.
That does make some sense, but I'm not sure fondag is entirely off the table for a Mars or Lunar launch site. I think it might just require a bit of tweaking for those environments. Elon seems excited about using a steel plate that's cooled now and that has worked for other rockets, but such a solution might be difficult for extraterrestrial sites to implement.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Toolbox
Mars is a fucking meme yeah, terraforming an entire planet instead of building modular O'Neill cylinders is a gargantuan waste of resources. Getting in and out of orbit is expensive, so I don't understand the apprehension behind getting into orbit and staying there—a proper ISRU infrastructure makes space industry as cheap or cheaper than terrestrial construction and manufacturing.

Terraforming should be a long-term goal, sealed lunar, martian and other cities, and O'Neill (or gundam) cylinders should be the main one once we get infrastructure and people out in space. Which should be humanities top propriety. Especially for people who feel we are running out of resources and particularly for those who worry about speeding up the transformation of the 3rd world into 2nd and 1st.
 
BFR is the name that Starship was going to go by.
He should have kept it.
1st tests don't always go as hoped. Still, this is one of the most import things that humanity is currently doing.
It actually went a hell of a lot better than hoped since the expectation was that it would spontaneously blow up just past the tower, not 30km away from a separation failure. One of the reasons everything was so readily destroyed was because they were expecting it to be destroyed anyways via immediate post-launch catastrophic failure, which considering this is a rocket full of fuel means boom. Big boom. Bada boom.
 
Their biggest "fingers crossed" item today was not destroying their launch pad.

The second rocket is already mostly built. It can launch on schedule now because they don't have to rebuild everything.

Main engine separation appears to have got them, and the first stage is supposed to spin out of the way, which seems to have worked, but it took the rest of the rocket with when it did.

SpaceX has a neat pic from below showing 6 main engines didn't fire and it still got up.

View attachment 5073048
That's.... Not good. It's engines were failing on launch.

Starship has way too many uncomfortable similarities to the Soviet N-1 rocket for my liking.

Plus zero ways to get the people out of it, so IMHO it should just be an unmanned cargo vehicle. Which is just fine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pedophobe
I think they were betting a little too hard on that special concrete they laid down. Of course it would have been really cool if it worked, but it just seemed to make the debris chunks bigger.
Before the launch various observers talked about SpaceX preparing to install a water deluge system at Boca Chica to prevent this sort of thing. Doesn't seem like that happened yet. It's almost as if SpaceX thought they could get away with trashing the site this time and then maybe upgrading it as part of the re-build. But then the FOD might actually have been what killed their rocket whoops...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meth Kennedy
That's.... Not good. It's engines were failing on launch.

Starship has way too many uncomfortable similarities to the Soviet N-1 rocket for my liking.

Plus zero ways to get the people out of it, so IMHO it should just be an unmanned cargo vehicle. Which is just fine.
More engines and fewer failures than N-1, so they're already well-ahead of the curve there.
 
Before the launch various observers talked about SpaceX preparing to install a water deluge system at Boca Chica to prevent this sort of thing. Doesn't seem like that happened yet. It's almost as if SpaceX thought they could get away with trashing the site this time and then maybe upgrading it as part of the re-build. But then the FOD might actually have been what killed their rocket whoops...
Elon s desire to break rules bit him hard.

the thing elon wants is speed. if not having a trench and water system is an issue we can add one later.

whats interesting is they keep building shit and then build another one etc.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Pedophobe
There was an article posted today about the investigation of it. (Archive)

Disastrous SpaceX launch under federal investigation after raining potentially hazardous debris on homes and beaches​


The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is investigating the April 20 launch of SpaceX’s Starship amid claims the launch smashed windows and rained ash on the habitats of endangered animals.

1682479641945.png
SpaceX's Starship moments before exploding.

SpaceX's Starship has been grounded by the U.S. government following claims that the rocket's explosive first launch spread plumes of potentially hazardous debris over homes and the habitats of endangered animals.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) — the U.S. civil aviation regulator — has stopped SpaceX from conducting any further launches until it has concluded a "mishap investigation" into Starship's April 20 test launch. The massive rocket’s dramatic flight began by punching a crater into the concrete beneath the launchpad and ended when the giant rocket exploded in mid-air around 4 minutes later.

Dust and debris from the test reportedly rained down on residents in Port Isabel, Texas — a town roughly 6 miles (10 kilometers) from the launchpad — and across Boca Chica's beaches, which are nesting grounds for endangered animals, including birds and sea turtles.

Dave Cortez, a chapter director for the Sierra Club environmental advocacy group, said that Port Isabel residents reported broken windows in their businesses and ash-like particles covering their homes and schools.

SpaceX's launchpad was also left with extensive damage that includes charred, twisted metal and shattered concrete. The force from the rocket's engines blew a hole in the launchpad and created a crater beneath it. "Concrete shot out into the ocean," Cortez told CNBC, creating shrapnel that "risked hitting the fuel storage tanks which are these silos adjacent to the launch pad."

1682479732806.png
Debris surrounding Starship's launch pad at Boca Chica, Texas.

Unlike other launch sites for large rockets, SpaceX’s Boca Chica site lacks both a deluge system, which floods pads with shockwave-suppressing water or foam, and a flame trench to safely channel burning exhaust away.

"Aspiring to have no flame diverter in Boca, but this could turn out to be a mistake," SpaceX founder Elon Musk wrote in an October 2020 tweet.

The FAA's mishap investigation is standard practice when rockets go astray. The FAA’s investigation will need to conclude that Starship does not affect public safety before it can launch again. As debris spread far further than anticipated, the FAA's "anomaly response plan" has also come into force, meaning SpaceX must complete extra "environmental mitigations" before reapplying for its launch license.

Musk wrote on Twitter that SpaceX began work on "a massive water-cooled, steel plate to go under the launch mount" three months prior to the launch, but it wasn't ready in time.

"Looks like we can be ready to launch again in 1 to 2 months," he added.

Standing at 394 feet (120 meters) tall and propelled by a record-breaking 16.5 million pounds (7.5 million kilograms) of thrust, SpaceX's Starship is the largest and most powerful rocket ever built. Able to carry 10 times the payload of SpaceX's current Falcon 9 rockets, Starship was designed to transport crew members, spacecraft, satellites and cargo to locations in the solar system.

After blasting off from its launchpad at Boca Chica, Starship climbed to a maximum altitude of 24 miles (39 km) before problems with as many as eight of the rocket's 33 Raptor 2 engines caused Starship to flip and roll, leading SpaceX to order the rocket to self-destruct.

Despite the rocket's unexpectedly messy takeoff and fiery demise, SpaceX and Musk have hailed the test as a success that enabled engineers to gather essential data for the next launch. On April 16, four days before the test, Musk lowered expectations, warning in a Twitter discussion that if any of the rocket's engines went wrong "it's like having a box of grenades, really big grenades."

"This is really kind of the sort of first step in a very long journey that will require many, many flights," Musk said. "For those that have followed the history of Falcon 9, and Falcon 1 actually, and our attempts at reusability, I think it might have been close to 20 attempts before we actually recovered a stage. And then it took many more flights before we had reusability that was meaningful, where we didn't have to rebuild the whole rocket."
 
Here we fucking go... political games once again. And fuck the "Sierra Club" as well. Everything claimed should be doubted as much as the current governments.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wright
That's.... Not good. It's engines were failing on launch.
Raptor is a well-tested and proven design, though. The likelihood is they were hit by chunks of concrete kicked up by the launch (of which there were many), as opposed to the N1 engines, which failed due to poor design and construction rather than anything external.
 
Before the launch various observers talked about SpaceX preparing to install a water deluge system at Boca Chica to prevent this sort of thing. Doesn't seem like that happened yet. It's almost as if SpaceX thought they could get away with trashing the site this time and then maybe upgrading it as part of the re-build. But then the FOD might actually have been what killed their rocket whoops...
A deluge system wouldn't have done anything to prevent this from happening, it was a failure of the pad material. I will say that the amount of concrete dust that was kicked up may have been mitigated by a sufficiently powerful deluge system, but the EPA would still be on their asses because this is adjacent to a sanctuary.
 
Was pretty exciting to see. Very weird seeing it kind of just spinning in place. Sure wouldn't want to get on one, probably ever, since there's really no abort method possible with it.

Saw this thing bitching, really hates Elon..

View attachment 5072919
>you cannot bullshit people forever
Says you John
 
Back