'If it had had a payload, it would have made it to orbit.' Elon Musk reveals cause of Starship explosion (video)

a massive rocket lifts off above a plume of fire
SpaceX's huge Starship rocket launches on its second-ever test flight, on Nov. 18, 2023. (Image credit: SpaceX)

SpaceX's giant Starship rocket apparently performed better on its second-ever test flight than its explosive end would suggest.

The mission launched from SpaceX's Starbase site in South Texas on Nov. 18 of last year. It ended about eight minutes after liftoff, when Starship's upper-stage spacecraft (called, somewhat confusingly, Starship), detonated high in the Texas sky.

But the vehicle was performing quite well until that point, and likely would have continued on that successful path had it been a normal, operational flight, according to SpaceX founder and CEO Elon Musk.

"So, Flight 2 actually almost made it to orbit," Musk said in a recent company update, which SpaceX posted on X on Jan. 12. The explosion was caused by a venting of liquid oxygen, he added — and there was liquid oxygen left to vent only because Starship wasn't hauling any satellites that day.

"We normally wouldn't have that liquid oxygen if we had a payload," Musk said in the update, which he gave at Starbase to a crowd of SpaceX employees. "So, ironically, if it had had a payload, it would have reached orbit."

Related: See stunning photos and video of Starship's 2nd launch

SpaceX is developing Starship to help humanity settle Mars and achieve other bold exploration feats. The vehicle consists of a first-stage booster called Super Heavy and the Starship upper stage, which is about 165 feet (50 meters) tall. Both of these elements are designed to be fully and rapidly reusable.

SpaceX has launched two Starship test flights to date, both of them from Starbase. The first, which lifted off on April 20 of last year, ended about four minutes into flight with a controlled detonation. SpaceX ordered that explosion because Starship suffered several serious problems, most notably the failure of its two stages to separate.

The Nov. 18 flight went much more smoothly, as Musk noted, giving him optimism for future missions.

"I think we've got a really good shot of reaching orbit with Flight 3, and then a rapid cadence to achieve full and rapid reusability," he said in the recent update. SpaceX plans to launch Flight 3 next month, provided the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration issues a license in time. (The FAA is currently overseeing an investigation into what happened on Flight 2.)

Musk hopes this anticipated rapid development leads to an operational capability soon; he said SpaceX aims to start launching its big, next-generation Starlink internet satellites aboard Starship by the end of the year.

NASA wants to see Starship get up and running soon as well; the agency selected the vehicle to be the first crewed lander for its Artemis program of moon exploration. Starship will put astronauts down on the lunar surface for the first time on the Artemis 3 mission, which is currently targeted to launch in September 2026.

Starship is already the biggest and most powerful rocket ever built. It stands about 400 feet (122 meters) tall and generates 16.7 million pounds of thrust at liftoff — nearly twice as much thrust as NASA's Space Launch System megarocket, a core part of the Artemis program.

But the current Starship is just a prototype. The final, operational version will be even bigger, Musk said in the recent update.

SpaceX is working on "a sort of a Version 2 ship that will be more reliable, better performance, [with better] endurance," he said. "We've got a Version 3 ship design that will stretch, that will be even taller — probably end up being, I don't know, 140 meters [459 feet] before it's all said and done, maybe 150 [492 feet] in the end, in length."

"So, it'll be even taller than it currently is," Musk added with a chuckle.

Editor's note: This story was corrected at 8:50 a.m. ET on Jan. 17 to state that Starship produces 16.7 million pounds, not tons, of thrust at liftoff.

Join our Space Forums to keep talking space on the latest missions, night sky and more! And if you have a news tip, correction or comment, let us know at: community@space.com.

Mike Wall
Senior Space Writer

Michael Wall is a Senior Space Writer with Space.com and joined the team in 2010. He primarily covers exoplanets, spaceflight and military space, but has been known to dabble in the space art beat. His book about the search for alien life, "Out There," was published on Nov. 13, 2018. Before becoming a science writer, Michael worked as a herpetologist and wildlife biologist. He has a Ph.D. in evolutionary biology from the University of Sydney, Australia, a bachelor's degree from the University of Arizona, and a graduate certificate in science writing from the University of California, Santa Cruz. To find out what his latest project is, you can follow Michael on Twitter.

  • DrRaviSharma
    January 17 2024

    Second Starship failure reason and explanation by Musk is not correct.

    Additional Cryogens happened on all Apollo Saturn Rockets and SIVB stages and were used for additional trajectories and vented safely especially after separation.

    Thus fact that STARSHIP second flight had extra Cryogenics is no excuse.

    They should include this as a normal safety measure to controllably vent.


    There is one more argument for controlling additional cryogenics safely, namely there will be variable Lunar Landing and cislunar trajectory consumptions of cryogenics in all future flights of Starships. This should be handled like the famous safety Motto of Apollo.

    I guess we do not or do not need to learn from past!

    For example, we used this extra fuel to impact the Moon using SIVB stage to read ALSEP seismometers deployed on Moon (LEM) by previous missions of Apollo 11 and beyond.
    Flight trajectory managers need not vent cryogenics prematurely and use predetermined options to manage spare cryogenic inventories.

    Thanks.

    Ravi
    (Dr. Ravi Sharma, Ph.D. USA)
    NASA Apollo Achievement Award
    ISRO Distinguished Service Awards
    Former MTS NASA HQ MSEB Apollo
    Former Scientific Secretary ISRO HQ
    Ontolog Board of Trustees
    Particle and Space Physics
    Senior Enterprise Architect

    SAE Fuel Cell Tech Committee voting member for 20 years.
    Reply
  • DrRaviSharma
    Further
    We are all anxious for vision of Elon and performance of Starship to be synchronous. Hence his team must also live the same vision and prepare for the following type of next steps
    Examples:
    Rendezvous with variety of platforms, not only SpaceX family orbiting platforms, Orions' or ISS but with NASA Lunar Gateways, future space tourism platforms, etc.
    Prove reliability of pre human lunar landing from Gateway multiple attempts to determine success rates before descending actual humans.
    Practice ingress-egress into various NASA, EU and other docking and transfers to be qualified for Lunar human landing capability with life support during lunar descent ascent orbits and at lunar surface..
    more later... BUT STARSHIP IS THE FUTURE LUNAR EXCURSION MODULE FOR ARTEMIS AS WAS LEM DURING APOLLO.OUR BEST WISHES TO NASA AND SPACEX FOR THIS Pathbreaking step and Elon's Vision.
    Ravi
    (Dr. Ravi Sharma, Ph.D. USA)
    NASA Apollo Achievement Award
    ISRO Distinguished Service Awards
    Former MTS NASA HQ MSEB Apollo
    Former Scientific Secretary ISRO HQ
    Ontolog Board of Trustees
    Particle and Space Physics
    Senior Enterprise Architect
    SAE Fuel Cell Tech Committee voting member for 20 years.
    Reply