The first test launch of a SpaceX rocket from Starship — the most powerful launch vehicle ever built — ended with an explosion over the Gulf of Mexico on Thursday. “Explosive” failure, inglorious development, an “expensive zero” were some of the characterizations written in traditional media and social media. But Space X spoke of success, and Elon Musk not only agreed, but sent his congratulations.
“With a test like this success comes from what we learn, and we learned a lot,” says a post about the launch on SpaceX’s website.
This is the attitude that the company has consistently maintained since its inception until today, explains CNN in its analysis. The explosions of the early “Grasshopper” test vehicles, the failed rocket landing attempts, and previous Starship test mishaps. All were necessary steps to achieve the goals.
So was Thursday’s explosion a success or a failure or some combination of both?
Within the space industry, Thursday’s Starship test mission was not considered an outright failure, according to Caleb Henry, director of research at space research firm Quilty Analytics.
“The expectation was just that – a test,” Henry said. “It is important to fail during the tests so that you have a better chance of success in the future,” he stressed.
Overall, he added, the wider space community had a very favorable reaction.
“The industry is pleased to see this program moving forward,” he added. “No one interprets this as something that will slow it down… I think everyone in space realizes that a test mission like this can never be a setback.”
That’s not to say all was well for Space X and Musk. There is always the impression factor. It doesn’t help a company’s reputation to be associated with public and explosive mistakes. Of course, the problem of impressions would not concern anyone if there was no risk of it turning into a funding problem, Dr. Garrett Raisman, a former NASA astronaut turned engineering professor and consultant to SpaceX, explains to CNN.
However, SpaceX enjoys a good reputation in the space industry. And there’s good reason: The reliability of SpaceX’s Falcon rockets and Dragon spacecraft — which have been flying for years and even carry NASA astronauts into orbit — has cemented the company’s position.
Money was certainly lost in the Starship explosion, although it is not clear how much. SpaceX remains a private company (not publicly traded) and is not required to disclose its development costs.
SpaceX CEO Elon Musk told CNN in 2019 that he believes Starship’s development costs will be “closer to two or three (billion) dollars than 10 (billion). NASA has also given SpaceX contracts worth up to $4 billion for two lunar landing missions, though that money is paid in stages as SpaceX hits specific milestones.
What happened last week?
The Starship vehicle consists of two parts: the Super Heavy rocket booster, a 69-meter-tall cylinder that houses 33 engines and delivers the first burst of power upon launch; The Starship spacecraft, which is 50 meters tall, rides on top of the rocket.
The vehicle lifted off from the launch pad near Brownsville, Texas, at the southernmost tip of the state. During ascent, some of the Super Heavy booster’s 33 engines shut down unexpectedly.
The Starship was scheduled to separate from the Super Heavy booster after the rocket expended most of its fuel, but that never happened.
A few minutes after takeoff, the vehicle began to fall tail-over-head. Then, about four minutes into the flight, the vehicle’s flight termination – or self-destruct – system was activated, blowing up the rocket to ensure it wouldn’t go off course.
Space X’s rocket building philosophy leads to accidents
The reason SpaceX embraces these explosive accidents lies in its approach to rocket development. In engineering terms, it’s called “spiral growth” and it’s not the same approach used by NASA.
SpaceX does not seek to build a single rocket, which will first test it hard on the ground to guarantee success on the first flight attempt. This is the traditional way of building rockets and how NASA developed the pace Launch System.
There isn’t just one Starship vehicle that has spent years in development. The company has assembled a fleet of vehicles, modifying each one as testing continues. Because the vehicles are cheap by space industry standards, it’s not a huge setback if one blows up. Instead, the explosion provides critical data that informs how the design will change and the project will move forward.
“If you look at anyone else, it takes a decade or more to develop a rocket,” says John Muratore, who spent 24 years with NASA at the Johnson Space Center in Houston, worked at SpaceX for a decade and is now a consulting engineer. “We have new versions and improvements all the time.”
What happens from here on out?
The engineers will analyze each data in detail. Many things were tried for the first time: Attempting to ignite 33 massive Raptor engines simultaneously for a flight test had never been done before. Using methane for fuel is also a new approach for SpaceX. And the vehicle was made of steel, while other rockets typically use lighter metals and carbon composites.
The company will then try to identify exactly what went wrong. Engineers will analyze data from the Raptor engines. Among the questions they will ask: How did the vibrations affect the flight? What temperatures developed inside the propulsion systems? What was the behavior of the vehicle?
The company will also assess damage to the launch pad and surrounding infrastructure and prepare for another flight.
Musk said in a tweet that the whole process could take “a few months” — though he’s been known to repeatedly give deadlines that aren’t met.
