{"id":774300,"date":"2023-11-21T18:18:54","date_gmt":"2023-11-21T23:18:54","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/?p=774300"},"modified":"2023-11-21T18:18:54","modified_gmt":"2023-11-21T23:18:54","slug":"spacex-tested-its-starship-again-successful-launch-but-both-vehicles-were-destroyed","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/?p=774300","title":{"rendered":"SpaceX Tested Its Starship Again. Successful Launch But Both Vehicles Were Destroyed"},"content":{"rendered":"<p> <br \/>\n<\/p>\n<div>\n<p>After months of waiting, SpaceX made its second attempt at an orbital flight this past Saturday (November 18th). During their previous attempt, which occurred back in April, a fully-stacked <em>Starship <\/em>(SN24) and<em> Super Heavy<\/em> (BN7) prototypes managed to make it off the landing pad and reach an altitude of about 40 km (25 miles) above sea level. Unfortunately, the SN24 failed to separate from the BN7 booster a few minutes into the flight, causing the vehicle to fall into an uncontrolled tumble and forcing the ground teams to detonate the onboard charges. <\/p>\n<p>Things went better this time as the SN25 and BN9 prototypes took off at about 7:00 AM local time (8:00 AM EDT; 05:00 AM PDT) from the Starbase launch complex. The SN25 successfully separated from its booster two minutes and fifty seconds later \u2013 at an altitude of 70 km (43 mi) \u2013 and reached an altitude of about 148 kilometers (92 miles), just shy of SpaceX\u2019s goal of 150 km (~93 mi). However, the booster stage was lost about 30 seconds after separation, exploding over the Gulf of Mexico. The SN25 also exploded about eight minutes into the flight, reportedly because its flight termination system was activated. <\/p>\n<p><span id=\"more-164331\"\/><\/p>\n<p>Elon Musk chimed in on X after the launch, reposting the <a rel=\"nofollow\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/i\/broadcasts\/1dRKZEWQvrXxB\">company\u2019s live video<\/a> of the flight test (as well as a shorter <a rel=\"nofollow\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/elonmusk\/status\/1726425687299358872\">slow-motion closeup<\/a> video taken from the launch tower). Musk also posted pictures of the launch pad the day after the launch to confirm that there was no damage this time around. \u201cJust inspected the Starship launch pad and it is in great condition!\u201d he <a rel=\"nofollow\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/elonmusk\/status\/1726328010499051579\">shared on his X page<\/a>. \u201cNo refurbishment needed to the water-cooled steel plate for next launch. Congrats to <a rel=\"nofollow\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/SpaceX\">@Spacex<\/a> team &amp; contractors for engineering &amp; building such a robust system so rapidly!\u201d<\/p>\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\">\n<figure class=\"aligncenter size-full\"><figcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\"><em>Post-launch images of the landing pad at Boca Chica. Credit: SpaceX<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n<p>This is a big improvement over the first launch attempt, which caused significant damage to the landing pad and sent debris in all directions, causing collateral damage to the facility. This was avoided thanks to the water-cooled steel plate, a deluge system installed after the last test. This was one of dozens of corrective measures recommended by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), which engineers at Boca Chica have spent months integrating. This included the addition of a forward heat shield interstage to the Starship and expanding the Area of Potential Effects for cultural resources.<\/p>\n<p>Another improvement over the previous test flight was that all 33 of the booster\u2019s Raptor 2 engines ignited this time, whereas 31 ignited the last time. \u201cThe real topping on the cake today, that successful liftoff,\u201d said SpaceX commentator John Insprucker. The successful separation of the Starship from the Super Heavy was another major success, as was the altitude achieved, just two kilometers shy of the goal of 150 km (93 mi). \u201cWe got so much data, and that will all help us to improve for our next flight,\u201d added commentator Kate Tice. <\/p>\n<p>After the launch, the FAA released a statement about the test, saying that a \u201cmishap\u201d led to the loss of both the spacecraft and booster. \u201cThe anomaly resulted in a loss of the vehicle. No injuries or public property damage have been reported,\u201d they said. They also reported that an investigation was underway to determine what went wrong, which is standard procedure whenever a spacecraft is lost. Like the last test flight, SpaceX will not be cleared for more launch tests until the review is complete and corrective measures are taken. <\/p>\n<p>The <em>Starship <\/em>and <em>Super Heavy<\/em> is the biggest and most powerful launch system in the world, standing 121 meters (400 feet) tall, weighing 5 million kg (11 million lb), and capable of generating 75.9 meganewtons (MNs) or 17.1 million pounds thrust (lb<sub>f<\/sub>). This exceeds the three-stage <em>Saturn V<\/em> rocket that was the workhorse of the Apollo Program and (until recently) the most powerful rocket ever developed. It also exceeds NASA\u2019s <em>Space Launch System<\/em> (SLS) that will send the Artemis astronauts to the Moon in the coming years. <\/p>\n<figure class=\"wp-block-embed is-type-video is-provider-youtube wp-block-embed-youtube wp-embed-aspect-4-3 wp-has-aspect-ratio\">\n<p>\n<span class=\"embed-youtube\" style=\"text-align:center; display: block;\"><iframe loading=\"lazy\" title=\"Starbase Live: 24\/7 Starship &amp; Super Heavy Development From SpaceX&#039;s Boca Chica Facility\" width=\"1110\" height=\"833\" src=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/embed\/mhJRzQsLZGg?feature=oembed\" frameborder=\"0\" allow=\"accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share\" allowfullscreen><\/iframe><\/span>\n<\/p>\n<\/figure>\n<p>The launch vehicle will also play a vital role in the Artemis Program in the form of the Starship Human Landing System (HLS). In April 2021, NASA awarded SpaceX a $3 billion contract to develop the human landing system that will land astronauts on the Moon by 2025 as part of the <em>Artemis III<\/em> mission. This will consist of four astronauts in an Orion spacecraft launching atop an SLS and rendezvousing in lunar orbit with the Starship HLS \u2013 which will launch separately. Two astronauts will transfer to the Starship HLS and use it to descend to the surface, then return to orbit about a week later.<\/p>\n<p>Musk has also been clear that the ultimate aim of the <em>Starship <\/em>and <em>Super Heavy<\/em> is to conduct regular missions to Mars that will culminate in the creation of the first self-sustaining city there. Other objectives include sending crews and payloads to the Moon to assist NASA\u2019s plans for a \u201csustained program of lunar exploration and development\u201d and launching batches of Starlink 2.0 satellites to provide high-broadband internet access to the entire world. With this latest test, SpaceX has taken a significant step in that direction. <\/p>\n<p>On the downside, the booster and spacecraft were lost before the ground teams could attempt the all-important retrieval phase. This is vital for the \u201centirely reusable\u201d Starship and Super Heavy launch system and Musk\u2019s long-term vision for conducting regular flights to orbit, the Moon, and Mars. On the plus side, this test flight lasted twice as long as the first attempt, and the launch system managed to make it past the Karman Line: 100 km (62 mi) above sea level, the official boundary of \u201cspace.\u201d This essentially demonstrated that the <em>Starship <\/em>and <em>Super Heavy<\/em> are capable of orbiting flight.<\/p>\n<p>Granted, the rockets need to stop exploding first, but such has always been the way with SpaceX\u2019s rapid prototyping and testing approach. Every launch, even the ones that go \u201ckaboom\u201d \u2013 no, especially the ones that go \u201ckaboom\u201d \u2013 is another step towards success. <\/p>\n<p><em>Further Reading: Phys.org<\/em><\/p>\n<div class=\"sharedaddy sd-block sd-like jetpack-likes-widget-wrapper jetpack-likes-widget-unloaded\" id=\"like-post-wrapper-24000880-164331-655d396d2be62\" data-src=\"https:\/\/widgets.wp.com\/likes\/#blog_id=24000880&amp;post_id=164331&amp;origin=www.universetoday.com&amp;obj_id=24000880-164331-655d396d2be62\" data-name=\"like-post-frame-24000880-164331-655d396d2be62\" data-title=\"Like or Reblog\">\n<h3 class=\"sd-title\">Like this:<\/h3>\n<p><span class=\"button\"><span>Like<\/span><\/span> <span class=\"loading\">Loading&#8230;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"sd-text-color\"\/><a rel=\"nofollow\" class=\"sd-link-color\"\/><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<p><script async src=\"https:\/\/platform.twitter.com\/widgets.js\" charset=\"utf-8\"><\/script><br \/>\n<br \/><br \/>\n<br \/><a href=\"https:\/\/www.universetoday.com\/164331\/spacex-tested-its-starship-again-successful-launch-but-both-vehicles-were-destroyed\/?rand=772204\">Source link <\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>After months of waiting, SpaceX made its second attempt at an orbital flight this past Saturday (November 18th). During their previous attempt, which occurred back in April, a fully-stacked Starship&hellip; <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":774301,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-774300","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-genaero"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/774300","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=774300"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/774300\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/774301"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=774300"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=774300"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/spaceweekly.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=774300"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}