Starship Flight 7: DEBUNKING Misconception with NEW Information

Written By KYNNMASTER 123

As you may have known, SpaceX launched Starship Flight 7 from Starbase in Texas, marking it as a significant test in the development of the Starship program. The mission was to test new hardware, including a Block 2 version of the Starship upper stage, and to attempt several ambitious objectives such as deploying dummy satellites and catching the Super Heavy booster by the launch tower's "chopsticks."

The flight saw a successful booster return and catch, but the upper stage, known as Ship 33, was lost due to a catastrophic failure during ascent. Initial reports suggested a fire in the ship's aft section led to its "rapid unscheduled disassembly," with debris observed over the Turks and Caicos Islands. After this flight, a lot of information came out, some from SpaceX and some plain theory. We will explain all of these and try to debunk some false information that came out about this flight.

NOTE: This event is a developing situation and new information may be released anytime soon. We will also only focus on the destruction of the Ship itself as we already have an article of the whole mission profile up on The Weekly Spaceman (click here)

I would also like to thank all the sources that clearly explained each part of this article so that we could continue debunking the common myths that occurred during this flight, all sources are placed at the end of this article!

New information from the SpaceX teams

  • According to SpaceX, the whole flight of Booster 14 was fully successful, aside from the one engine that shut off during the boost back phase, which was relatively fine later on as it was relit on the landing burn during the catch attempt, which was also successful for the second time.

  • As for Ship 33, here's where things don't go well. It separated successfully in hot-staging but later on slowly losing it's engines one by one. Telemetry was then lost at approximately eight minutes and a half since liftoff.

  • SpaceX indicated fire developed in the ship's aft section, leading to a rapid unscheduled disassembly (RUD).

  • Before that happened, Elon Musk also indicated that they might have had an oxygen/fuel leak in the cavity above the ship's engine firewall. Since that happened, pressure piled up and was too much for the vent capacity. Still, Elon has been optimistic so far that a launch will occur before past next month.

  • It's also noted that leaks like this on the Ship interface have been last present on Starship Flight 2 in a “similar way”. In that mission, a leak in the aft section of the spacecraft had developed when the liquid oxygen vent was initiated, which, started a combustion event and subsequent fires that led to a loss of communication between the spacecraft’s flight computers.

MYTH 1: The “late” aircraft diversions were VERY RISKY.

  • And so it goes, the Ship experienced a RUD in space and debris started falling all around. People captured footage of the event unfolding as Starship came back in pieces, burning up in the atmosphere. One of the footages that came back was from a plane flying “near” (it wasn't near) the re-entry site.

  • Aircraft were forced to divert or enter a holding point. People said this was dangerous which gave them a whole new opinion on whether test flights should occur like this. The question is, WAS IT DANGEROUS AS THESE PEOPLE THOUGHT IT IS?

The answer: It's NOT AS DANGEROUS as it may seem.

  • SpaceX has clarified that Starship flew within its designated launch corridor, as specified by the FAA's NOTAM. This ensures that all procedures are followed for a safe and successful flight. The “late” aircraft diversions are done on purpose to not disrupt the aircraft departure and landing rates, but it's to their disclosure already that if something may happen, they need to be ready to take precautionary measures.

  • Nonetheless, the altitude separation between the rocket and the aircraft below is so wide that they will have enough time to decide on their precautionary measures once an anomaly is detected.

A QUESTION FROM THE PEOPLE: But, why did all the aircraft need to divert or hold when it was safe? Was the NOTAM even in effect?

  • Well, it's ALL PART OF THE PROCEDURE! Aircraft were sent to divert or hold to make sure that no damage would happen. SpaceX informed the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in advance before the flight, and the FAA sent NOTAMs to the pilots in case something happened. And the FAA was in FULL COMMUNICATION if something happened.

  • YES, the NOTAM was in FULL EFFECT, but with a twist!

  • Shocking as it may seem, pilots COULD STILL OPERATE within the “warning zone” but had to FOLLOW STRICT PROTOCOLS. Pilots COULD CHOOSE TO PASS through the warning zone with the understanding that they MIGHT NEED TO DIVERT OF HOLD if necessary.

  • It’s because the purpose of this NOTAM was to WARN PILOTS about the POSSIBILITY OF DEBRIS and outline the precautionary measures, but it DID NOT CLOSE the airspace to all traffic. Instead, it allowed pilots to MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS (e.g., to plan extra fuel for holds or diversions if needed).

  • This happens because the trajectory has already been calculated in advance. Planes at the downrange distance of the rocket are so separated far away from it. Since Starship is in space already at that time, they can still have time to get out if something happens.

THEREFORE, we can all say that this flight FOLLOWED ALL SAFETY PROCEDURES, which also DEBUNKED the myth told earlier.

MYTH 2: The FAA needs to GET OUT of the way!

  • We all hate rockets taking a long time to relaunch once again because they are grounded after the anomaly, and that has led to people blaming the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) when it comes to these issues. But did you know that all the FAA has to do is review and sign the paperwork?

  • The truth is, the FAA is NOT A CULPRIT to rocket launches that take a long time (aside from the fact that they might have took a long time to review or sign the paperwork, which has been somewhat the case before, but not that much today.)

  • All the FAA has to do is oversee the investigations made by these space companies with their rockets experiencing anomalies here and there. And also, SpaceX is not the only one experiencing an investigation right now with the FAA. Even Blue Origin with their New Glenn rocket, which succeeded in its launch to orbit but failed its first landing attempt, has to give investigation data to the FAA and fix everything so that they can fly again.

  • Without the FAA, the management of all air and space traffic, especially with the recent anomaly that happened with Starship, the safety of everyone in air and space would not be possible.

MYTH 3: This explosion is an EXTREME ADDITION TO POLLUTION!

  • Pollution, pollution, pollution. Oh yeah, a common misconception that most people would love to use in each rocket launch. This RUD made the misconception even worse as it released “tons of debris” into our skies, oceans, and lands. Debris fell from the sky, most went into the oceans while some went on land, “polluting” our atmosphere, ozone layer, oceans, and lands as they say.

But, does it matter in a massive sense of scale?

  • Well, the answer is NO. Let's make this simple without the complicated numbers, rocket launches have only ramped up their cadence from approximately 5 years ago. Pollution has long existed before that, WE have been polluting more than that.

  • WE HAVE POLLUTED MORE of our planet than rocket launches itself, and it’s a fact that we must accept.

  • If we could shift our focus to the main character of this article, SpaceX has already done its part in lessening its pollution footprint on our planet. Its initiative to REUSE ROCKETS does not only HELP THEM FROM AN ECONOMIC STANDPOINT, but it helps them from an ENVIRONMENTAL one too!

  • While Starship may still be currently exploding from time to time and placing debris all around (a SMALL PERCENTAGE of the whole pollution issue), let's not remove the fact that the Falcon family of rockets has proven itself at this point already. It has also experienced that throughout its lifetime, exploding and exploding with each landing attempt it takes and placing more debris in each attempt it takes. Let SpaceX test and test until they get it right for this huge rocket as it's currently on a good path to success, making feats faster and better than the Falcon family of rockets has done before.

  • Until then, we can say that rocket launches barely add to the pollution that is currently present on our planet. Rather than making rocket launches come to a halt, which has played a huge part in observing our planet through the satellites it has launched into space, we should find ways to solve the big polluters first while rocket companies are making strides to make their rockets less pollutive to the environment.

This is KYNNMASTER 123 for The Weekly Spaceman, see you in the next one! 😊

KYNNMASTER 123
Previous

The Weekly Rocket Report
Next

What is Firefly Aerospace’s Blue Ghost Mission?