SpaceX Makes Progress on Second Test of Starship
The private sector space company overcame red tape and government delays to get to launch day.

On Saturday morning, SpaceX conducted its second test launch of Starship, the super heavy–lift rocket that could one day carry astronauts to the moon and Mars. The vehicle lifted off without incident from SpaceX's Starbase, on the southern tip of Texas, just after 7 a.m. local time. A new water-deluge system deflected the heat of the booster's 33 Raptor engines, preventing the kind of launchpad damage that occurred during the first launch last April—that test ended in self-detonation four minutes into flight, when the ship and the booster failed to separate. For the second run, SpaceX converted the rocket to a "hot staging" system, with the ship's six Raptor engines starting to fire, blasting the top of the booster, as the separation process began. This time, the uncoupling was successful. The booster broke apart shortly thereafter. The second stage carried on another five minutes, rising 90 miles skyward before exploding.
More than twice as powerful as the Apollo program's Saturn V—and designed to be reusable to boot—Starship is already a marvel of human planning and perseverance. But many more launches must occur before it can carry humans into space. It will be a challenge to establish that Starship is reliable, that it can refuel in orbit (a key part of the plan), and that it can safely land on, and take off from, the moon.
Yet all that might be the easy part. Everything depends on SpaceX's ability to jump through regulatory hoops, and the federal bureaucracy's ability to keep pace with a driven private company.
SpaceX was ready for the second test of Starship by early September. Two weeks later, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service acknowledged that it had yet to begin the environmental review needed for a launch license. "That is unacceptable," Elon Musk fumed on X. "It is absurd that SpaceX can build a giant rocket faster than they can shuffle paperwork!" Absurd, yes—but hardly unexpected.
The agency moved swiftly—by the standards of the federal government—issuing its review eight weeks later. The main revelation, in line with prior such reviews, is that the Starship program has remarkably little impact on the environment. The new deluge system is of a piece. Most of the more than 300,000 gallons of water emitted during a launch is vaporized by the booster's flame and floats harmlessly away. Most of the water that's left is collected in containment vats. The small quantity of remaining runoff would probably be safe to drink.
Reading these reports, you learn not that SpaceX poses a risk to the environment, but that over-the-top environmental regulations pose a risk to SpaceX. A firm devoted to building rockets finds itself counting birds, combing the beach for sea turtle eggs, trying to calculate the (obviously miniscule) odds that one of its projectiles will hit a whale, and measuring for vibrations near decrepit stone pilings. And woe unto SpaceX should one of its launches, or even one of its trucks, somehow kill one of the dozens of (not endangered) piping plovers known to inhabit the area. "I don't think the public is aware of the madness that goes on," Musk said during a recent interview. He claimed that, as part of an environmental review for launches on the West Coast, SpaceX had to kidnap a seal, strap it down, put headphones on it, and see if the sound of sonic booms made it upset. ("The amazing part," Musk reported, with a chuckle and a photograph, "is how calm the seal was.")
Even if SpaceX can keep the fish and wildlife regulators satisfied and moving—and litigious environmental activists at bay—it could still find itself thwarted by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). As Musk noted in 2021, the FAA has historically needed to issue licenses only "for a handful of expendable launches per year." Under the rules designed for that launch pattern, he complained, "humanity will never get to Mars." Although it has sought to improve its approval process, the agency is still struggling. In order to accelerate work on the second Starship launch, officials had to delay work on launches of SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket—at present the firm's crucial driver of revenue. The problem is set to get worse, as both SpaceX and its competitors step up their launch frequencies.
None of this might seem that important. Doesn't SpaceX dominate the launch market? Isn't the European space industry in shambles? Hasn't the Russian space program become an embarrassment? But as William Gerstenmaier, a SpaceX vice president, points out, the regulatory delays add up. "And eventually," he warns, "we will lose our lead and we will see China land on the moon before we do." The Chinese Communist Party wants, it seems, to seize exclusive control of the moon's water-rich south pole. Along the way, it will probably not slow down for the sake of a few members of a vulnerable bird species.
The United States can uphold rigorous safety standards, guard the environment, and beat China to the moon all the same. The latest Starship test launch shows as much. Unless, that is, it doesn't. Many things could go wrong. NASA could fail to do its part, for example, or Musk's impulsive social media posts could come to haunt SpaceX. But the biggest danger may be a toxic combination of too much red tape, too little state capacity, and a lack of political will to address either one.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Some members here want to one day travel to Uranus.
My member wanted to travel to Uranus, butt I put my foot down! No way, Jose! The LEAST of my objections is that Uranus smells bad!
My member isn’t the boss of me… I am! I am the Captain of this body of mine; I send fear into the enema lines!
(Uranus has been officially declared to be my enema, by the way! So butt and bad-butt-smells... OUT! Get thee BEHIND me, Uranus!)
Klingons are orbiting Uranus.
They are exploring it.
Why do Capitol officers arrest a violent J6 protestor, take him to a private hallway, uncuff him, and then fist bump him?
https://twitter.com/jeffcharlesjr/status/1725676222011543589
I guess he wasn’t going to DeStRoY oUr DeMoCrAcY.
I'm making $90 an hour working from home. I never imagined that it was honest to goodness yet my closest companion is earning 16,000 US dollars a month by working on the connection, that was truly astounding for me, she prescribed for me to attempt it simply. Everybody must try this job now by just using this website... http://www.Payathome9.com
Did he have a crew cut and an earpiece?
Motorcycle helmet.
With an FBI logo?
Eppscellent find
Joe uses wartime powers to justify regulating gas appliances. But at least he recognizes the constitution.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-invokes-wartime-powers-fund-electric-heaters-cracks-down-gas-appliances
"Anti-Semites in Space!!!"
But only Jews have space lasers.
I will believe the feds give a damn about the environment when they apply all environmental laws to the manufacture and use of those giant windmills, and to the mining of minerals for electric car batteries and solar panels.
Oh, yeah, and sanction Communist China for all those coal power plants.
Until then, shut up about rocket launches.
I woke up for the 5 o'clock my time (PST) launch. It was extremely exciting.
This time it went smoothly off the pad without destroying the fondag, so the new deluge system seems to work.
Then I was looking for the undercarriage to come into view to see if all 33 Raptors were firing this time, and sure enough they all were and the new electric gimbaling system looked to be working a treat.
The neat thing about the use of methane as a rocket fuel is that the exhaust isn't opaque like all the others.
This time everything went flawlessly until the new hot staging event (last time staging was supposed to occur with a flip maneuver). That seemed to have been too much for the booster, and it looks to me like control detonated it, and in the process tested the new detonation system.
No clue why the Starship stage blew though. It was pretty much out of view when that happened. I sure SpaceX telemetry does though.
Like I said two days ago, here, there was a 60% it was going to explode. SpaceX pushes all their test platforms to the limits as part of their iterative design philosophy.
They did the exact same thing with the Falcon 9 development, blowing up almost all their test vehicles during launches, and the result was the most prolific, most successful, safest and cheapest rocket platform in history.
Everything that went wrong last time didn't go wrong this time. I'm looking forward to the next test. They've already got the next four built and ready to fly, which will also explode in unique ways.
But when development is over, the finished machine will be amazing.
Unfortunately, it’s going to take more than 8 minutes to get to Mars.
Kind of makes you respect the Apollo slide rule guys even more. It's taking the US more than 10 years to get to the moon now, with supercomputers and simulations and advanced manufacturing techniques.
Kind of makes you respect the Apollo slide rule guys even more. It’s taking the US more than 10 years to get to the moon now, with supercomputers and simulations and advanced manufacturing techniques.
Peak funding for the slide rule guys was 4% of the entire federal budget, they were government so I doubt they had problems with the FAA, and the EPA didn’t yet exist.
It’s taking computer guys ten years because they’re privately funded (for the most part) and have to get permission from the government before they do anything.
The Apollo slide rule guys were fantastic, but they weren't trying to invent a fully reusable rocket, that flies three times a week, with a payload as big as the entire space shuttle, for one ten thousandth of the price per launch.
Musk is inventing the Model T of spacecraft.
Good points. But the Artemis mission still doesn't have even a functioning space suit.
The Apollo slide rule guys had the right stuff, like the SpaceX supercomputer guys. But they also had funding and clear, unambiguous and unwavering political support.
I like the euphemism used, " 'rapid unscheduled disassembly' ".
It will be great when it's fully operational. I forget how many times NASA's rockets blew up but it wasn't one or two.
As far as going to Mars is concerned I've not seen any good solution to the problem of radiation in space. Zubrin wrote about Mars extensively for a while but IIRC he just assumed the problem would be resolved.
A shield of water seven inches thick around the spaceship will stop all cosmic radiation, but I don't know how they'd do that.
Maybe a double shelled balloon around the ship or something.
Good luck getting all that water into space.
Then it’s incredible weight will need vast amounts of propellant to launch it towards Mars.
Don’t forget you can’t drink your radiation shield.
Then you will have to burn a phenomenal amount of fuel to get all that weight into Mars orbit.
I assume your manufacturer of amounts of fuel needed to launch all that water weight back to earth and then slow it down to achieve earths orbit.
Pick up a 5 gallon water jug and carry it around for a while
How about even lift it up a flight of stairs?
Those 7 inches of water shielding are an almost insurmountable problem
I also woke up to watch the launch from NM with friends in Portugal and Germany. Because we're all a bunch of godsdamned nerds.
Sad there wasn't a 100% success, glad there was an improvement.
This is basically what I would be doing with billions if I had them, so... I approve.
*
Too little state capacity? Too fucking little?
How does a so-called libertarian rag let that kind of crap through, let alone pay for it?
Checking to see if an initial blockquote tag still blockquotes the entire comment.
Yep. Thus the initial "*" in the first comment.
The FAA needs TEN TIMES ASS MANY paper-pushers ass they have already!!! Cutting BACK on the paperwork is too much to ask!
SpaceX big-wigs pretty much hewed to that line in testimony to Congress lately... Do NOT piss off the bureaucrats that wield power over YOU!
Baby steps is probably the best way to cut Government Almighty powers, though... Civil wars are entirely TOO bloody! Ballots, not bullets, please!
If they don't allow the ballot, the bullet is all that remains.
It was pretty clearly stating that the state doesn’t have the capacity to do what it claims it needs to do. If the state tells me I need a permit to do X and 10,000 people a year want that permit but it can only issue 100, it clearly has too little capacity to do what it is obligated to do. That’s just a matter of fact.
That isn’t saying it should have more capacity or power. It’s just pointing out the failure of the state to do what it says it needs to do. And pointing that out is clearly a libertarian position.
That isn’t a hard point to grasp.
Thanks Untermensch!!!
Haters will hate, though, no matter how much rational or data-driven facts or analysis you put in front of them. Reason.com is about the ONLY game in town for libertarian media (CATO and IJ have different main agendas other than just media), yet the Perfect People can ALWAYS find fault with Reason.com!
Yes, as you re-stated clearly… From the article, Reason said the same thing: “But the biggest danger may be a toxic combination of too much red tape, too little state capacity, and a lack of political will to address either one.”
Can the Reason-haters at least READ THE CONCLUDING SUMMARY, please?
I was planning to get my house re-roofed before the rainy season started. It should be a one or two day job. But the roofer told me he can't start until he gets the permit from the county. I asked "why do you need a permit if you're just fixing something, don't they want it to be better than before, and not leak?" And he said "because they're the government." And guess how long it takes to get a routine permit for a routine re-roof? 8 weeks.
My father hired a guy to put an addition onto his house. When the permit guy came over to inspect the place, he noticed the greenhouse that the previous owner had built. Problem was the previous owner didn't get permission. So before work could start on the addition, the greenhouse had to be completely demolished including the foundation. Because fuck you that's why.
The hard point to grasp seems to be that expanding state capacity is not a libertarian position.
The hard point to grasp seems to be that getting the states to TOTALLY drop the requirements for drivers on the roads (who inherently endanger others whenever they drive) to get drivers' licenses IS NOT GONNA HAPPEN!!!!
Given this REALITY, real and sensible libertarians will agitate, NOT for the elimination of drivers' licenses, but for the minimization of stupid and irrelevant laws ("no drivers' licenses for those who are behind in their child support payments", etc.), and for SUFFICIENT staffs of blood-sucking assholes at the DMV to actually GET us our fucking licenses, on a vaguely timely basis!!!
What part of this do you NOT understand? Or will ye cry endlessly for the Moon?
And who here, except in your fever dreams, was advocating for that? This was in the context of a piece calling for the exact opposite. To turn this piece into a call for government expansion is a special kind of stupid.
This.
Too little capacity to process through the red tape extends delays. Would you like the DMV to cut it's capacity by laying off half the employees? You might get through the line if you get there before breakfast.
More state capacity means you get permits faster, so red tape is less burdensome.
Getting rid of the red tape would be preferable, but that's unlikely to happen.
All that money spent on launching this thing into space when instead there are so many homeless people that Musk could have launched into space.
All of the many homeless people? You should invite them to Uranus!
(I'm not sure if Uranus passes the smell test for this idea, butt provide plenty of FREE DRUGS for the many drug-deprived-and-depraved, "access to drugs challenged" homeless people, and they will NOT care about the smell!)
SPACE OUT, far-out Uranus Dudes!!!
Lol.
https://twitter.com/EPoe187/status/1725893888492134755?t=p1uQE9ExF_giUakaU_kOGA&s=19
When a university spends millions on DEI, it isn't just wasting the money, but it is also paying the salaries of expensive bureaucrats who promote an anti-meritocratic and anti-white ideology. Burning the money in a dumpster would be preferable.
My university was proud to announce last year that they had hired 17 DEI deans, one for each school in the university. I imagine they are all making at least 150K. I'm not entirely sure what they hope to accomplish besides the job program, as the university already actively recruits a diverse student body and a diverse faculty.
When I was a student, the university got by with one ombudsman (you can't call it that now) to handle discrimination complaints and other matters. It was enough.
.
My first thought was “Corbin K. Barthhold is such a cowardly, paid-for, right-wing mouthpiece that he types ‘impulsive’ instead of ‘bigoted,’ ” but then I realized the most important point is that Corbin K. Barthold can type anything at all with his tongue so firmly affixed to Musk’s scrotum and his nose so far up Musk’s ass.
If this clinger has a family, I hope he washes his face after work and before he kisses his family members.
If you have a family, I hope you're disowned.
I would not expect clingers to like my family.
Every person has at least one advanced degree or is working on it. No superstitious slack-jaws. All residing in modern, educated, successful communities. No drawling bigots or registered Republicans.
The only thing your family has ever done is rape children, and I am sorry for your childhood. The donkeys you were forced to submit to, and are now desirous of are merely animals like your own pathetic mind.
How can this not be parody?
The rev hates successful people
The Rev hates everyone who isn't a sexually child-trained Great Dane. He misses being the star of his mother's home movies, and also the ruffle-butt panties.
"he types ‘impulsive’ instead of ‘bigoted,"
I hope Kirkland gets the Media Matters treatment for this post.
Over the four day Thanksgiving holiday, how many shootings do you think will happen in Chicago aka the “cultural center” of civilization?
I am reminded of the now ancient joke of a group of American bysinessmen who decide that they want to get into the space business, so they contact the great polymath John von Neumann and ask him how they should proceed. "Ah, everthing you need to know about how to build a rocket can be found in my 1953 paper, the "Rocket" paper".
They build the rocket, they launch it, and it promptly blows up. They go back to von Neumann and say, "we followed your paper and the rocket blew up!"
"Yes," replied von Neumann. "Everything you need to know about the blowing up can be found in my 1954 paper, the "Blow-Up" paper".
"humanity will never get to Mars."
Humanity is already on Mars gathering data with robots. What Mr. Musk means is that he will never get to Mars and I don't really care about that. The use of robots seems a far better return on value than putting people on Mars.
I do appreciate the frustration with environmental regulation, but not sure where the happy medium is to be found. What level of damage is acceptable for the progress made.
What level of damage are you willing to let China do to take the high ground?
What higher ground? Mars, as I noted we are already there. Do I care if the first person to step on Mars comes from China? No.
“Humanity is already on Mars gathering data with robots.”
No, humanity’s robots are already on Mars gathering data. Getting lifeforms across 33.9 – 140 million miles of a void full of deadly radiation to land on a frozen, poisonous wasteland is orders of magnitude more difficult.
The ignorant stupidity of your statement is alarming.
The robotic systems used for planetary exploration and for deep space exploration (JWST for example), are an extension of humanity. They are marvelous engineering feats. Behind every robotic system are groups of people to build, operate and use the data. You use a more limited view of humanity than me, but that does not mean I am wrong.
You are correct about the challenges for getting biological lifeforms to the moon and other planets. That is why I support robotic exploration as it is a better return of value on expense.
I would also note that there are many lifting systems that seem to be able to meet the needs to use space (for artificial satellites) and to explore space (robotic systems). It is unclear to me why there is a need for this heavy lifting system. It seems to be needed only for an unrealistic dream.
I wonder if it takes effort to be this dense. Musk has straight up said that he wants to put actual humans on Mars to try and ensure humanity has a back-up world if Earth gets toasted.
Crazy or not, he put together a space company and is doing exactly what he set out to do.
At this point, I don't think Musk has any real intention of going to Mars himself. Even if he does, it's his company so he can commit suicide along with the rest of the crew if he wants to do so. It is, after all, his rocket.
If he set out (as usual) to rake in large piles of government cash and subsidies, he is succeeding. Anything else is very speculative, at least so far.
I appreciate the work that Space X does. Its launch systems and crew capsules are amazing. Having said that I think this heavy lifting system is ahead of its time. Elon Musk is entitled to do what he wishes, but I don't think people are obligated to bend the rules to help him. I think that the idea of putting people on Mars is a pipe dream. Elon Musk can have his priorities but I suggest that people would be wiser to support more robotic systems.
Well, if Elon went back to supporting the Democratic initiative, he might get more government cooperation.
Piping plovers attract migratory paranoids that have persecuted fireworks enthusiasts as far down east from the Gulf Coast as Martha’s Vineyard, but nobody asked for a permit when Oak Bluffs shot off a ton or two to honor Obama’s first down-island Fourth of July.
Why doesn’t Musk buy Muskeget , the island east of Chappaquidick for his summer launches?