SpaceX's Starship explodes again ... while still on the ground
- Reference: 1750331171
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2025/06/19/spacexs_starship_explodes_again/
- Source link:
The latest setback happened just before a planned static fire this morning. The rocket was fueled ahead of a test firing of its Raptor engines, but abruptly exploded.
The explosion occurred on a test stand, and it is unclear how much damage the facility sustained. [1]According to SpaceX , "a safety clear area around the site was maintained throughout the operation and all personnel are safe and accounted for."
[2]
SpaceX boss Elon Musk [3]quipped : "Just a scratch" several minutes before The Reg published this. We can only presume he was referring to Starship, though his Grok chatbot managed to ignore its real-time X access to suggest the comment related "to his recent feud with President Trump, given the timing," adding: "No evidence suggests a literal injury or damage to Musk or his companies on that date." Ahem.
[4]
[5]
The vehicle was being prepared for the tenth test flight of the full Starship stack; the 33 Raptor engines of the Super Heavy Booster had already [6]performed a full-duration static fire on June 6.
SpaceX called the incident a "major anomaly." It has form. In 2016, a Falcon 9 abruptly [7]exploded during a test at Kennedy Space Center, resulting in the loss of the Amos 6 satellite.
[8]
From [9]video footage , the anomaly appeared to begin with a rupture or a venting event at the top of Starship before the entire vehicle exploded. SpaceX has yet to provide more details, and Musk has been unusually quiet on his social media platform, X. In May, he [10]suggested that Starships might land on Mars in 2026.
NASA also depends on the vehicle to return humans to the Moon on the Artemis III mission in 2027.
The explosion follows three unsuccessful test flights of the vehicle, two in which the Starship exploded during the launch phase, and the last in which the vehicle lost attitude control and was destroyed during reentry.
[11]
SpaceX appears to have cut to the chase this time and blown up a Starship without bothering with any of that launching nonsense.
The vehicle concerned was Ship 36, which [12]had already performed a single-engine static fire to demonstrate an in-space burn.
[13]NASA boss-to-be gets spaced as proposed budget cuts detailed
[14]SpaceX resets 'Days Since Last Starship Explosion' counter to zero, again
[15]FAA gives SpaceX the nod for Starship Flight 9 but doubles the danger zone
[16]FAA closes investigations into Blue Origin landing fail, Starship Flight 7 explosion
A US Federal Aviation Administration [17]advisory suggested that SpaceX aimed to launch the Starship stack on its tenth test flight on June 29, with a backup on June 30.
At this point, Starship is showing signs of going backward. After making steady progress, SpaceX has suffered a run of three in-flight failures and now a catastrophic explosion on the test stand. It will be interesting to see what the company has learned from this morning's loss-of-vehicle event. ®
Get our [18]Tech Resources
[1] https://x.com/SpaceX/status/1935572705941880971
[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2aFQ0FXQ0AUJ0cQtTbLfOEQAAAMw&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[3] https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1935638560276926914
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aFQ0FXQ0AUJ0cQtTbLfOEQAAAMw&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aFQ0FXQ0AUJ0cQtTbLfOEQAAAMw&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[6] https://x.com/SpaceX/status/1935572705941880971
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2016/09/01/space_xs_falcon_9_has_just_exploded/
[8] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aFQ0FXQ0AUJ0cQtTbLfOEQAAAMw&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[9] https://x.com/NASASpaceflight/status/1935548909805601020
[10] https://x.com/SpaceX/status/1928185351933239641
[11] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/science&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aFQ0FXQ0AUJ0cQtTbLfOEQAAAMw&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[12] https://x.com/SpaceX/status/1935016991858835827
[13] https://www.theregister.com/2025/06/02/nasa_isaacman_dropped/
[14] https://www.theregister.com/2025/05/28/starship_flight_9_crash/
[15] https://www.theregister.com/2025/05/23/faa_spacex_starship_9/
[16] https://www.theregister.com/2025/04/01/faa_closes_blue_origin_and/
[17] https://www.fly.faa.gov/adv/adv_spt.jsp
[18] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: “Starships might land on Mars in 2026”
It is not getting to Mars that is the issue, would you trust Space X to get you back home?
Re: “Starships might land on Mars in 2026”
So long as Musk is on the inaugural flight, I don't give a shit if it can get back again.
Re: “Starships might land on Mars in 2026”
No need to worry if they will bring you home when they can't even get off the planet.
(with Starship, Falcon 9 isn't sending anyone beyond orbit)
Re: “Starships might land on Mars in 2026”
In fairness, the bang was big enough to have sent some bits in the right direction for a touchdown on Mars. D'ya think he'll count that as a partial win?
/s
Re: “Starships might land on Mars in 2026”
This was not, I repeat NOT a Trump sponsored CIA operation involving a camouflaged paramilitary with suppressed .50 cal anti-material rifle from 3.7 kilometers away.
Just wanted to make that perfectly clear.
Re: Return Journey
According to Musk's lawyers no reasonable person would consider a Musk tweet to be a source of factual information. Let's suspend disbelief for a minute and take a look at what Musk statements would actually look like.
There is a pretty pork chop plot [1]here . To pick a launch date from Earth select a blue area in the top half of the picture. There is an opportunity in late 2025 but even if that were possible it would arrive at about the same time as a launch near the end of 2026 which is at least not complete fantasy. Follow the diagonal line down to find the arrival date for the earliest possible unmanned test mission: second half of 2027. That just misses an opportunity to return home (pale blue patch in the lower half of the picture). The next opportunity to return is mid 2028. That gives the robots a year to set up and operate the propellant factory needed to fuel up for the return journey. If that works first time (it won't) the robots will get to Earth (follow a diagonal line upwards) in the second half of 2029.
If there are humans brave enough to follow the robots on the next window then that could be late 2027 but the journey time is so long they might as well wait until the end of 2028 and see what progress the robots made. The most optimistic timeline possible would put the robots launching from Mars before humans launch from Earth. That would make the return journey untested. It is almost possible to test return before launching humans: a second robot team launches about the same time as the first, loops around Mars without landing and goes straight back to Earth. The timings are tight but it might just about work with no payload.
Humans launching in late 2028 should expect that the return journey will not be possible in the 2030 window and make plans accordingly.
[1] https://www.caseyhandmer.com/home/art/launchwindows
Re: Return Journey
Pack lots of Mars bars?
:)
Re: Return Journey
Why would they bring the robots back... a starship I can see the value of, but the robots can stay and carry on doing useful stuff...
Re: Return Journey
How big and heavy is this propellant factory? Has one been made and tested on earth?
Re: Return Journey
Since any human launched to Mars in 2028 will be dead of radiation sickness within a year, the return trip's timing probably isn't critical. On the upside, and are lighter than people and don't need to breathe.
What is it about Musk's fans that leads them to talk airily about returning whole humans from Mars soon when not even a gramme of rock has been brought back and when NASA's final proposal said it would take until 2040 and cost $11bn? Ok, NASA is expensive and inefficient, but four years from now?
Re: “Starships might land on Mars in 2026”
Who wants to go to MARS (Mainly A Real Shithole) anyway? It would be cheaper for them to blow things up on earth... oh wait...
Obviously, A Major Malfunction
The one consolation is that SpaceX is just immolating vehicles and launchpads, not teachers or astronauts. So that's progress. Sort of.
!banana
What a progress they're making ! May-be that " banana for scale " joke wasn't such a good idea by the PR department
Starship - a poem by Baldrick
BOOM BOOM BOOM BOOM
BOOM BOOM BOOM BOOM
BOOM BOOM BOOM BOOM...
Re: Starship - a poem by Baldrick
Ahh no, please. Not the Vengaboys ear worm.
Re: Starship - a poem by Baldrick
It is Hot, Hot, Hot and No longer going Up and Down - more like a Rocket To Uranus.
Re: Starship - a poem by Baldrick
Woah! We're going to Turks and Caicos
Woah! Back to the island
Woah! We're going to leave a wreckage
Woah! In the Atlantic sea
Re: Starship - a poem by Baldrick
BOOM BOOM BOOM
Re: Starship - a poem by Baldrick
How did you guess, sir?
Spawn of ... um, er, who was that again?
Of course, if this were Microsoft, exploding would be a feature that you paid extra for. Except, the entry-level (sic) Starship lacking this feature is no longer available.
This feels very familiar
This whole program is managing to capture my exact experience playing KSP.
Re: playing KSP.
If a Kerbal enthusiast, you might enjoy reading this:
"Large Language Models as Autonomous Spacecraft Operators in Kerbal Space Program", Carrasco etal.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.19896
SpaceX appears to have cut to the chase this time and blown up a Starship without bothering with any of that launching nonsense.
Erm, it's called rapid iteration.
The next one will come out of the factory already on fire.
Optimisation?
The next one will come out of the factory already on fire.
Ah, would that be the epitome of the agile development management process?
Re: Optimisation?
Ah, would that be the epitome of the agile development management process?
As in manglement running as fast as they can in the hope of avoiding the debris fallout.
Like his cars and Cybertrucks?
Ah, how not to be seen.... and now for something completelly different
AHH, the Chinese fire drill methodology!
"I'll put this fire over here next to the other fire"
'Jigsaw Puzzle'
All is not lost! Maybe good old British skills can help to put it back together again:
"Archaeologists have pieced together thousands of fragments of 2,000-year-old wall plaster to reveal remarkable frescoes that decorated a luxurious Roman villa.
The shattered plaster was discovered in 2021 at a site in central London that's being redeveloped, but it's taken until now to reconstruct this colossal jigsaw puzzle.
The frescoes are from at least 20 walls of the building, with beautifully painted details of musical instruments, birds, flowers and fruit."
From:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5y5w1ldz8do
Smiley Face icon, 'coz we need some good news once in a while.
Re: 'Jigsaw Puzzle'
Well, we do love a mystery. And a jigsaw puzzle... and amply practice in patience... and queueing.
FSD
Fast
Self
Destruct
OK, this repid unscheduled disassembly nonsense is getting rather old.
RSD
It's now the more reliable Rapid Scheduled Disassembly
Naming convention
Musk has a fondness for naming things after Iain Banks’ ships.
He should have chosen a different science fiction creator. Gerry Anderson’s Fireball XL5 might be more appropriate here.
"naming things after Iain Banks’ ships"
Yet another thing he took a name from but hasn't actually read. Unless you think he approves of the Culture, where people can transition gender at will and it's considered unusual to not try it at least once.
(The FAIL is his, of course, not yours.)
Re: Naming convention
There are still plenty of names he could use steal:
Bad For Business
Dramatic Exit
Funny, It Worked Last Time
Just Testing
Zero Credibility
Teething Problems
Re: Naming convention
Yes! I'm going to start calling him Zoony from now on.
How times have changed
I remember watching those early SpaceX videos of rocket recovery with excitement . . .
Now I just want them all to blow up on the pad ;)
What could possibly have happened in the interim?
AI
Commenting on what some chatbot said in error is really a new low in journalistic reporting, guys.
Stop it. If it was vaguely entertaining or funny, it might be relevant, but "seeing what Grok says" about a story is literally the bottom of the barrel in preference to actually writing another line or two.
Re: AI
It isn't some chatbot though it's Elon Musk's chatbot so it's quite funny theregister snark kind of way.
Re: AI
It makes sense to ask Musk's chatbot about events in Musk's companies. There is a chance it might come out with a plausible answer and that would be news.
Just now on X :
Musk - "just a scratch"
Me (not knowing what happened) - Ni! Ni! Ni! Ni! Ni! Ni!
Efficiency.
In a bid to be more efficient, wouldn't it save a lot of time and money if instead of bothering with all that tricky research and development stuff, they just took a match to a tank of rocket fuel?
Re: Efficiency.
As in: https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01pzqj3/wallace-gromit-a-grand-day-out
(About 7 minutes in) ?
Now that is rocket science !
Re: Efficiency.
and if that didn't work, I'm sure the next agile software patch would fix it!
It really was a very, very spectacular explosion though - musk is right when he calls these things entertaining!
Hmm, so no sightings of a fat orange guy in a maga hat leaving Massey's with a screwdriver in his tiny hands?:)
And it was likely only partly fuelled
The test was only a short(ish) static fire...
DOGE
Department Of Great Explosions
“Starships might land on Mars in 2026”
There, and there, and waaaaay over there!