SpaceX flight testing in South Texas
Joined: Aug 2023
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 77
Likes: 46
From: Texas
Another failure. Major explosion in the engine bay early in reentry, burn through on the flaps, and explosion on landing. Before anyone says it is suppose to explode; why do they have a boat at the landing “site” to tow it to shore?
Joined: Feb 2002
Aviation Qualifications: AME
Posts: 4,182
Likes: 1,116
From: UK
I think the 'major explosion' was a CO2 gas bottle. Caused a fair bit of damage but there is enough resilience in the structure for it to still work..
The aft flaps had burn through. The forward flaps looked pristine.
It's 30ft wide, about 150ft long and just soft landed in the Indian Ocean right on target next to a bouy that was able to film it. It then fell over as there was nothing to support it. Still loaded with residual propellant. Of course it was going to blow up.
Joined: Sep 2014
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 282
Likes: 108
From: Germany
Finally another bigger step forward, was about time. Quite impressive all test steps, I pull my hat. Despite the damages soft splash down right on target. Very tolerable structure but even more highly adaptable guidance and control systems. Got a huge amount of data for V3 fine tuning, I guess. And not to forget the booster, also all data home.
Whats up next? Return to Boca Chica, targeted splash down in the Gulf (of America, of Mexico, of Trump, of Elon, ...) - or Hawaii? Full orbit?
Very well done, team and thanks for the unmatched in this business transparency! It was worth an interrupted night
Whats up next? Return to Boca Chica, targeted splash down in the Gulf (of America, of Mexico, of Trump, of Elon, ...) - or Hawaii? Full orbit?
Very well done, team and thanks for the unmatched in this business transparency! It was worth an interrupted night
Tabs please!
Joined: Jun 2004
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 1,201
Likes: 1,098
From: Biffins Bridge
A most impressive flight, especially considering that the profiles flown were intended to place maximum stress on the structures. The first stage hover was superb. The after-landing explosions are intentional to ensure that everything sinks and poses no danger to shipping.
Whatever your views are on Musk's political affiliations, he is creating a world of engineering excellence.
Whatever your views are on Musk's political affiliations, he is creating a world of engineering excellence.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,679
Likes: 7,357
From: Peripatetic
More information and photos about the huge new Starbase launch complex expansion plan released today.
Last edited by ORAC; 29th August 2025 at 22:37.
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,067
Likes: 40
From: On the big blue planet
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,679
Likes: 7,357
From: Peripatetic
Super Heavy Booster 15-2 has rolled out of megabay 1 this evening for a move to the Starbase launch complex later tonight for static fire testing scheduled for Sunday September 7th between 7 am and 12 pm.
Booster 15-2 will be the booster for upcoming Starship test flight 11 and was first flown and caught on flight 8.
Booster 15-2 will be the booster for upcoming Starship test flight 11 and was first flown and caught on flight 8.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,679
Likes: 7,357
From: Peripatetic
VideoStarship Flight 11: Booster 15-2 rolling down Highway 4 at the opening of the road closure window (a very punctual Super Heavy).
Joined: Feb 2002
Aviation Qualifications: AME
Posts: 4,182
Likes: 1,116
From: UK
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,679
Likes: 7,357
From: Peripatetic
Video
Super heavy booster 15-2 performed a static fire test today. It is now expected to roll back to megabay 1 for engine inspections and final pre-launch preparations for upcoming Starship test flight 11.
This was the final static fire test of a Version 2 Booster.
This was the final static fire test of a Version 2 Booster.
https://x.com/vickicocks15/status/19...147089097?s=61
Joined: Oct 2004
Aviation Qualifications: Military (Retired)
Posts: 454
Likes: 134
From: Norfolk, UK
Quite a nice summary and explanation of the orange stains from Ars Technica
https://share.google/urgjQqinq8mJXn65s
https://share.google/urgjQqinq8mJXn65s
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,679
Likes: 7,357
From: Peripatetic
A lot of other good stuff in the article as well relating to future flights and basic research. Worth reading in full.
e.g.
Gerstenmaier also briefly mentioned the results of experiments with Starship's Super Heavy booster on the most recent test flight.
On this flight, the booster splashed down in the Gulf of Mexico just off the Texas coastline after propelling Starship toward space. SpaceX used the flight to put the booster through higher stresses as it came back to Earth, guiding the rocket to a water landing in the Gulf instead of returning it to the launch pad for a catch by the tower's mechanical arms.
"What we were doing there is we're looking at the angle of attack and looking at how well the booster could fly itself to understand how much ability we had to get it back to the tower in the future," Gerstenmaier said.
SpaceX engineers noticed the booster's performance on descent in flight doesn't match predictions from computer models or wind tunnel tests. In ground experiments, the booster encounters unstable buffeting as it slows below the speed of sound.
Based on those results, "[we] should not be able to do what we do with our maneuver coming back with a booster, but we've been able to essentially show through flight that we have more stability than either CFD (Computational Fluid Dynamics) or the wind tunnels show that we have," Gerstenmaier said.
"So, the big question to the research community is, why are we seeing these differences?" he asked. "We had an inkling that it would be there, but we weren't 100 percent sure, and we were able to do that extremely well."
Gerstenmaier suggested that's a question best posed to universities and government labs. Companies like SpaceX innovate fast, but once they find a workable solution, they move on to something else.
"I get what I call a minimum viable solution," Gerstenmaier said. "I don't really understand why it works, but somehow it works, so we're going to use it, we're going to monetize it, we're going to make it work. You have the chance to help me understand why it works... And you may find out, hey, there's another approach that actually lets it work even better."
e.g.
"For Flight 11, Starship will fly on a suborbital trajectory similar to the flight profile the ship has flown on all of its missions to date. The next flight could happen in October and will prepare SpaceX for the debut of an upgraded Starship/Super Heavy rocket next year.......
"Next year, we step up to another version of both ship and booster, called V3 (Version 3)," Gerstenmaier said in response to a question from Ars. "It also has a new Raptor engine underneath, with more performance than the previous ones. So we'll fly V3 (suborbital) first, and then if that's successful, then we'll probably go orbital after that with the next V3."
That would mean an orbital flight no sooner than Flight 13. This matches a recent comment by Musk, who said SpaceX will likely attempt to catch and recover Starship back at Starbase somewhere around Flight 13 to 15, depending on the outcomes of the next couple of test flights.
"Next year, we step up to another version of both ship and booster, called V3 (Version 3)," Gerstenmaier said in response to a question from Ars. "It also has a new Raptor engine underneath, with more performance than the previous ones. So we'll fly V3 (suborbital) first, and then if that's successful, then we'll probably go orbital after that with the next V3."
That would mean an orbital flight no sooner than Flight 13. This matches a recent comment by Musk, who said SpaceX will likely attempt to catch and recover Starship back at Starbase somewhere around Flight 13 to 15, depending on the outcomes of the next couple of test flights.
Gerstenmaier also briefly mentioned the results of experiments with Starship's Super Heavy booster on the most recent test flight.
On this flight, the booster splashed down in the Gulf of Mexico just off the Texas coastline after propelling Starship toward space. SpaceX used the flight to put the booster through higher stresses as it came back to Earth, guiding the rocket to a water landing in the Gulf instead of returning it to the launch pad for a catch by the tower's mechanical arms.
"What we were doing there is we're looking at the angle of attack and looking at how well the booster could fly itself to understand how much ability we had to get it back to the tower in the future," Gerstenmaier said.
SpaceX engineers noticed the booster's performance on descent in flight doesn't match predictions from computer models or wind tunnel tests. In ground experiments, the booster encounters unstable buffeting as it slows below the speed of sound.
Based on those results, "[we] should not be able to do what we do with our maneuver coming back with a booster, but we've been able to essentially show through flight that we have more stability than either CFD (Computational Fluid Dynamics) or the wind tunnels show that we have," Gerstenmaier said.
"So, the big question to the research community is, why are we seeing these differences?" he asked. "We had an inkling that it would be there, but we weren't 100 percent sure, and we were able to do that extremely well."
Gerstenmaier suggested that's a question best posed to universities and government labs. Companies like SpaceX innovate fast, but once they find a workable solution, they move on to something else.
"I get what I call a minimum viable solution," Gerstenmaier said. "I don't really understand why it works, but somehow it works, so we're going to use it, we're going to monetize it, we're going to make it work. You have the chance to help me understand why it works... And you may find out, hey, there's another approach that actually lets it work even better."
Joined: Jul 2013
Aviation Qualifications: Non-Aircrew
Posts: 5,679
Likes: 3,341
From: Everett, WA
SpaceX simply continues to amaze me with what they are doing - while they are not approaching the reusability aspect the way I thought it would happen (I expected the booster to be more 'aircraft/air-breathing' based), they are showing the entire world how it can be done.
Too bad NASA no longer has this type of imagination and "can do" attitude towards things.
Too bad NASA no longer has this type of imagination and "can do" attitude towards things.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,679
Likes: 7,357
From: Peripatetic
SpaceX has requested FAA approval for new Starship launch and landing trajectories from Starbase, TX.
https://www.pprune.org/newreply.php?...e=1&p=11944445
https://www.pprune.org/newreply.php?...e=1&p=11944445