SpaceX’s latest iteration of its Starship megarocket, “Version 3,” encountered structural issues during initial ground tests, raising questions about its readiness for upcoming flights and NASA’s lunar lander program. The first V3 booster, Booster 18, sustained significant damage to its liquid oxygen (LOX) tank section during pressure testing on Friday, November 21, just one day after testing began.
Structural Failure During Testing
The damage, as documented in images shared by spaceflight observers, shows the bottom portion of the booster collapsed inward, resembling a crushed container. SpaceX confirmed the anomaly in a post on X (formerly Twitter), stating that no propellant was loaded and no engines were installed at the time of the incident.
“Booster 18 suffered an anomaly during gas system pressure testing… No one was injured as we maintain a safe distance for personnel during this type of testing.”
The company is currently investigating the cause of the failure but has not yet provided a detailed explanation. The incident underscores the challenges of scaling up the massive Starship vehicle, which relies on stainless steel construction and experimental Raptor engines.
V3 Improvements and Setbacks
Version 3 represents an upgrade over the previous V2 Starship, which achieved two successful test flights in August and October 2024. The V3 booster is approximately 5 feet taller than V2 and features an integrated “hot stage” ring for improved stage separation. It is also designed to operate with SpaceX’s more powerful Raptor 3 engines and will utilize fewer, but larger, aerodynamic grid fins for descent control.
Despite the recent success of V2, this setback with V3 highlights the ongoing development pains inherent in SpaceX’s rapid prototyping approach. The incident will likely delay flight testing and could impact the timeline for NASA’s Artemis 3 mission, which relies on Starship as the lunar lander.
NASA’s Contingency Plans
NASA has contracted SpaceX to deliver astronauts to the moon by 2027, but internal SpaceX timelines suggest the mission may not occur until 2028. The recent damage to Booster 18 has prompted NASA to consider alternative moon lander options, given SpaceX’s delayed progress.
Former NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine recently criticized Starship’s design in a Senate hearing, citing the need for additional milestones, including in-orbit cryogenic fuel transfer and uncrewed lunar landings. These requirements, combined with the estimated dozen or more Starship launches needed to fuel a lunar lander in orbit, raise concerns about the feasibility of SpaceX’s current approach.
The failure of Booster 18 casts doubt on whether SpaceX can meet NASA’s timeline, leaving the agency to weigh its options as it prepares to return humans to the moon.
