SpaceX Starship

Super Heavy booster

Starship spacecraft

Raptor engine

Raptor is a family of rocket engines developed by SpaceX for use in Starship and Super Heavy vehicles. It burns liquid oxygen and methane in an efficient and complex full-flow staged combustion power cycle. The Raptor engine uses methane as fuel rather than kerosene because methane gives higher performance and prevents the build-up of deposits in the engine from coking.[25] Methane can also be produced from carbon dioxide and water using the Sabatier reaction.[26] The engines are designed to be reused many times with little maintenance.[27]

Raptor operates with an oxygen-to-methane mixture ratio of about 3.6:1, lower than the stoichiometric mixture ratio of 4:1 necessary for complete combustion, since operating at higher temperatures would melt the engine.[28] The propellants leave the pre-burners and get injected into the main combustion chamber as hot gases instead of liquid droplets, enabling a higher power density as the propellants mix rapidly via diffusion.[25] The methane and oxygen are at high enough temperatures and pressures that they ignite on contact, eliminating the need for igniters in the main combustion chamber.[29] The engine structure itself is mostly aluminum, copper, and steel; oxidizer-side turbopumps and manifolds subject to corrosive oxygen-rich flames are made of an Inconel-like SX500 superalloy.[29] Some components are 3D printed.[30]

A Raptor 2 engine produces 2.3 MN at a specific impulse of 327 isp at sea level and 350 isp in a vacuum.[29] Raptor vacuum, used on the Starship upper stage, is modified with a regeneratively cooled nozzle extension made of brazed steel tubes, increasing its expansion ratio to about 90 and its specific impulse in vacuum to 380 isp.[28] The main combustion chamber operates at a pressure of 350 bar exceeding that of any prior operational rocket engine.[25] The Raptor's gimbaling range is 15°, higher than the RS-25's 12.5° and the Merlin's 5°. SpaceX has stated they aim to achieve a per unit production cost of US$250,000 upon starting mass production.[29]

Block 1

Block 1 was used after 2020–2021 flight tests, beginning with flight test 1 at the start of 2023, to flight tests 5 and 6, then retired.[33]

Block 2

Block 2 for both stages was used beginning with flight test 7 at the start of 2025.[34] Block 2 upper stage vehicles feature a thinner forward flap design, flaps that are positioned more leeward, a 25% increase in propellant capacity, integrated vented interstage, redesigned avionics,[35] two raceways,[36] and an increase in thrust.[37] The integrated vehicle is 3.1 m taller than the previous Block 1 vehicle and was planned to have a payload capacity of at least 100 tons to orbit when reused[37] (similar to the original design before the Block 2 rework), but was retired before an orbital flight, with the final estimate of 35 t of payload to orbit. Additionally, Block 2 vehicles were planned to use Raptor 3 engines, removing the need for secondary engine shielding.[38] However, the first Block 2 vehicle, S33, received upgraded Raptor 2 engines,[39] with an unknown increase in thrust.[40] The Block 2 ship and booster first flew on flight test 7.[41] A total of five block 2 vehicles were produced.[42] After flight test 11, Block 2 was retired.

Block 3

Block 3 ships have an improved tile design,[43] Raptor 3 engines,[44] as well as hardware for refueling operations LEO, such as docking ports and a redesigned quick disconnect.[44] The switch to Raptor 3 also enables the removal of most of the aft section's shielding.[44]

Block 3 boosters have an integrated vented interstage/forward dome, three grid fins instead of the prior four, as well as the use of the grid fins as tower catch points.[45] Like with the ship, the Block 3 boosters use Raptor 3 engines, allowing for the removal of the majority of the booster's engine shielding.[45] First test flights of Block 3 ships will take place in 2026.

Early design concepts (2012–2019)

In November 2005,[59] before SpaceX had launched its first rocket the Falcon 1,[60] CEO Elon Musk first mentioned a high-capacity rocket concept able to launch 100 MT to low Earth orbit, dubbed the BFR.[59] Later in 2012, Elon Musk first publicly announced plans to develop a rocket surpassing the capabilities of Space X's existing Falcon 9.[61] SpaceX called it the Mars Colonial Transporter, as the rocket was to transport humans to Mars and back. In 2016, the descriptor was changed to Interplanetary Transport System, as the rocket was planned to travel beyond Mars as well.[62] The conceptual design called for a carbon fiber structure,[63] a mass in excess of 10000 MT when fully fueled, a payload of 300 MT to low Earth orbit while being fully reusable.[63] By 2017, the concept was again re-dubbed the BFR.[64]

In December 2018, the structural material was changed from carbon composites[63] to stainless steel,[65] marking the transition from early design concepts of the Starship.[66] Musk cited numerous reasons for the change of material; low cost and ease of manufacture, increased strength of stainless steel at cryogenic temperatures, as well as its ability to withstand high heat.[66] In 2019, SpaceX began to refer to the entire vehicle as Starship, with the second stage also being called Starship, and the booster Super Heavy.[67] They also announced that Starship would use reusable heat-shield tiles similar to those of the Space Shuttle.[68] The second-stage design had also settled on six Raptor engines by 2019: three optimized for sea-level and three optimized for vacuum.[69] In 2019, SpaceX announced a change to the second stage's design, reducing the number of aft flaps from three to two to reduce weight.[70] In March 2020 SpaceX released a Starship Users Guide, in which they stated the payload of Starship to Low Earth Orbit (LEO) would be over 100 MT, with a payload to GTO of 21 MT.[24]

Low-altitude flight tests (2019–2021)

Starhopper to SN6

The first tests started with the construction of the first prototype in 2018, Starhopper, which performed several static fires and two successful low-altitude flights in 2019.[71] SpaceX began constructing the first full-size Starship MK1 and MK2 upper-stage prototypes before 2019, at the SpaceX facilities in Boca Chica, Texas, and Cocoa, Florida, respectively. Neither prototype flew: MK1 was destroyed in November 2019 during a pressure stress test and MK2's Florida facility was deconstructed throughout 2020.[72] Prototypes were built using 301 stainless steel.[73] This was noted for its corrosion resistance and lower cost compared to carbon fiber but faced some challenges, particularly with interlaminar toughness at cryogenic temperatures.

SpaceX then began naming its new Starship upper-stage prototypes with the prefix "SN", short for "serial number". No prototypes between SN1 and SN4 flew either—SN1 and SN3 collapsed during pressure stress tests, and SN4 exploded after its fifth engine firing.[74]

In June 2020, SpaceX started constructing a launch pad for orbital Starship flights. The first flight-capable prototype, SN5, was cylindrical as it had no flaps or nose cone: just one Raptor engine, fuel tanks, and a mass simulator.[75] On August 5, 2020, SN5 performed a 150 m high flight and successfully landed on a nearby pad.[76] On September 3, 2020, the similar-looking Starship SN6 repeated the hop;[77] later that month, a Raptor vacuum engine underwent its first full duration firing at McGregor, Texas.[78]

SN8 to SN15

Starship SN8 was the first full-sized upper-stage prototype, though it lacked a heat shield.[79] It underwent four preliminary static fire tests between October and November 2020.[74] On December 9, 2020, SN8 flew, slowly turning off its three engines one by one, and reached an altitude of 12.5 km. After SN8 dove back to the ground, its engines were hampered by low methane header tank pressure during the landing attempt, which led to a hard impact on the landing pad and subsequent explosion of the vehicle.[57] SN7 used 304L stainless steel, which is less brittle and more weldable.[80] Later vehicles used a proprietary alloy, 30X, whose composition is proprietary that costs slightly over €3.6/kg.[81]

Because SpaceX had violated its launch license and ignored warnings of worsening shock wave damage, the Federal Aviation Administration investigated the incident for two months.[82] During the SN8 launch, SpaceX ignored FAA warnings that the flight profile posed a risk of explosion.[82] FAA space division chief Wayne Monteith said SpaceX's violation was "inconsistent with a strong safety culture", and criticized the company for proceeding with the launch "based on 'impressions' and 'assumptions,' rather than procedural checks and positive affirmations".[82]

On February 2, 2021, Starship SN9 launched to 10 km in a flight path similar to SN8. The prototype crashed upon landing because one engine did not ignite properly.[83] A month later, on March 3, Starship SN10 launched on the same flight path as SN9.[84] The vehicle landed hard and crushed its landing legs, leaning to one side. A fire was seen at the vehicle's base and it exploded less than ten minutes later, potentially due to a propellant tank rupture.[85] On March 30, Starship SN11 flew into thick fog along the same flight path. The vehicle exploded during descent,[86] possibly due to excess propellant in a Raptor's methane turbopump.[87]

In March 2021, the company disclosed a public construction plan for two sub-orbital launch pads, two orbital launch pads, two landing pads, two test stands, and a large propellant tank farm.[88] The company soon proposed developing the surrounding Boca Chica Village, Texas, into a company town named Starbase.[88] Locals raised concerns about SpaceX's authority, power, and a potential threat for eviction through eminent domain.[89] In 2025, it was incorporated as Starbase, Texas.[90]

In early April, the orbital launch pad's fuel storage tanks began mounting. SN12 through SN14 were scrapped before completion; SN15 was selected to fly instead,[91] due to improved avionics, structure, and engines. On May 5, 2021, SN15 launched, completed the same maneuvers as older prototypes, and landed safely.[91] SN15 had a fire in the engine area after landing but it was extinguished. According to a later report by SpaceX, SN15 experienced several issues while landing, including the loss of tank pressure and an engine.[92]

Integrated flight tests (2023–)

In June 2022, the Federal Aviation Administration determined that SpaceX must address more than 75 issues identified in the preliminary environmental assessment before flight tests could start.[93]

First flight test

In July 2022, Booster 7 tested the liquid oxygen turbopumps on all 33 Raptor engines, resulting in an explosion at the vehicle's base, which destroyed a pressure pipe and caused minor damage to the launchpad.[94] By the end of November, Ship 24 had performed 2 static test fires,[95] while Booster 7 had performed 6 static test fires[96][95] and finally on February 9, 2023, a static fire with 31 engines at 50% throttle.[97] In January 2023, the whole Starship stack underwent a full wet dress rehearsal.[98]

After a launch attempt aborted on April 17, 2023,[99] Booster 7 and Ship 24 lifted off on April 20 at 13:33 UTC in the first orbital flight test.[100] Three engines were disabled during the launch sequence and several more failed during the flight.[101] The booster later lost thrust vectoring control of the Raptor engines, which led to the rocket spinning out of control.[101] The vehicle reached a maximum altitude of 39 km.[102] Approximately 3 minutes after lift-off the rocket's autonomous flight termination system was activated, though the vehicle tumbled for another 40 seconds before disintegrating.[103] The first flight test blasted large amounts of sand and soil in the air, reaching communities within a 10.7 km radius.[104] A brushfire on nearby state parkland also occurred, burning 3.5 acre of state parkland.[105]

Second flight test

After the first test flight, SpaceX began work on the launch mount to repair the damage it sustained during the test and to prevent future issues. The foundation of the launch tower was reinforced and a water-powered flame deflector was built under the launch mount.[106] Ship 25 and Booster 9 were rolled to the suborbital and orbital launch sites in May to undergo multiple tests.[107]

On November 18, 2023, Booster 9 and Ship 25 lifted off the pad.[108] All 33 engines continued to function until staging, where the second stage separated by pushing itself away from the first stage using a hot-staging technique.[109] Following separation, the Super Heavy booster completed its flip maneuver and initiated the boostback burn, but then experienced multiple successive engine failures and exploded.[110] Blockage in a liquid oxygen filter caused one of the engines to fail in a way that resulted in the destruction of the booster, which occurred three and a half minutes into the flight at an altitude of ~90 km over the Gulf of Mexico.[111]

The second stage continued until it reached an altitude of ~149 km, after over eight minutes of flight; before engine cutoff, telemetry was lost on the second stage.[109] SpaceX said that a safe command based on flight performance data triggered the flight termination system and destroyed the second stage,[109] before achieving its planned orbit or attempting re-entry.[112] It appeared to re-enter a few hundred miles north of the Virgin Islands, according to NOAA weather radar data.[113]

Third flight test

Following the second flight test (which saw the loss of both stages), significant changes were implemented, including upgrading Starship's thrust vector control system to electric thrust vector control (TVC)[114] and measures to delay liquid oxygen (LOX)[114] venting until after Starship engine cutoff (SECO) has taken place.

Flight 3 launched from the SpaceX Starbase facility along the South Texas coast around 8:25 a.m. CDT on March 14, 2024, coincidentally the 22nd anniversary of the founding of SpaceX.[115] Like flight 2, all 33 engines on the booster ignited and stage separation was successful.[116] B10 conducted a boostback burn, however, the planned landing in the Gulf of Mexico was not successful, as it exploded at 462 m above the surface.[117]

The Starship spacecraft itself, after reaching space and orbital velocity, conducted several tests after engine cutoff, including initiating a propellant transfer demo and payload dispenser test.[118] It attempted to re-enter the atmosphere,[119] and at an altitude of around 65 km, all telemetry from Ship 28 stopped, indicating a loss of the vehicle.[120] This flight test demonstrated a cryogenic propellant transfer, by transferring propellant from the Ship's header tanks into its main tanks while in space, a technology which is required for Starship HLS to exit Low Earth orbit (LEO). The result of this test was declared successful by NASA and SpaceX. Additional data analysis is occurring on the fluid dynamics such as slosh and boil-off of the propellant.[121]

Fourth flight test

The fourth flight test of the full Starship configuration launched on June 6, 2024, at 7:50 a.m. CDT.[122] The goals for the test flight were for the Super Heavy booster to land on a 'virtual tower' in the ocean, and for the Ship to survive peak heating during atmospheric reentry.[123] The flight test was successful in both regards, with Super Heavy achieving a soft splashdown and Ship surviving atmospheric reentry and a controlled splashdown.[124]

Fifth flight test

In April 2024, Musk stated one of the goals was to attempt a booster tower landing based on successful booster performance in flight 4. Vehicle testing commenced in May 2024.[125] SpaceX claimed that B12 and S30 were ready to launch in early August, in advance of regulatory approval.[126] SpaceX flew S30 and B12 on October 13, 2024, with B12 returning to the launch site for a successful catch for the first time, and S30 successfully splashing down in the Indian Ocean.[127]

Sixth flight test

Ship 31 completed a successful cryogenic test in July 2024 and a static fire in September.[128] Booster 13 completed similar tests in April and October.[129] Flight 6 was flown on November 19, 2024, with a water landing of the booster rather than a catch.[130] Flight 6 was the first to successfully conduct a Raptor engine relight in the vacuum of space, paving the way for payload deployments on future flights.[130] A stuffed toy banana served as the zero-g indicator, becoming Starship's first payload, though it remained within the vehicle for the duration of the flight.[130] Eric Berger claimed that due to the success of the in-space relight, Starship would likely be "cleared to travel into orbit".[131]

Seventh flight test

Ship 33 completed a successful cryogenic test in October 2024[132] and a static fire in late December.[133] Its counterpart, Booster 14, also underwent cryogenic testing in October.[134] Booster 14 rolled out to OLP-1 and conducted a successful spin prime test and static fire in early December.[135] Flight 7 was flown on January 16, 2025; the mission profile for flight test 7 was expected to be similar to the previous launch, targeting a splashdown in the Indian Ocean after attempting an in-space engine relight. Ship 33 was also expected to deploy ten Starlink "simulators," which were also expected to reenter over the Indian Ocean.[136] Contact with Ship 33 was lost shortly before its engines were scheduled to shut down.[137] Subsequently, Ship 33 was seen exploding as it flew over the Turks and Caicos Islands. The booster successfully returned to the launch site and was caught by the chopsticks on OLP-A.[137] As a result of the explosion, numerous commercial airline flights were diverted or delayed.[138]

Eighth flight test

On March 3, 2025, a launch attempt was aborted after multiple holds at T−40 seconds.[139] Shortly before the scheduled launch at 6:45 p.m. CDT, an issue caused a hold for more than five minutes. The hold was briefly lifted, but a new hold was put in place due to issues connected to the Super Heavy booster.[140] SpaceX called for a cancellation of the launch and set March 6 for the launch.[141] The eighth flight test was later launched on March 6, 2025, at 23:30 hours UTC. The Super Heavy booster was successfully caught by the launch tower. During Ship 34's initial burn, four of its six engines experienced premature shutdowns that resulted in a loss of attitude control followed by a total loss of telemetry. The vehicle's breakup was observed from Florida, Jamaica, and the Turks and Caicos Islands.[142] According to SpaceX, communications with the spacecraft ended 9 minutes and 30 seconds after liftoff.[143] The flight was the second of the Block 2 Ship, and attempted to repeat the previous flight's profile.[144] Due to the breakup of the vehicles, the Federal Aviation Administration briefly issued ground stop orders for multiple Florida airports.[145]

Ninth flight test

Starship's ninth flight test launched on May 27, 2025, with Booster 14, the program's first reused Super Heavy booster.[146] The booster completed its ascent, executed a boost-back and entry burn and re-entered at a higher angle of attack than previous flights, but was lost before its planned splashdown in the Gulf of Mexico.[147] Ship 35 reached engine cutoff, yet a propellant leak caused loss of attitude control preventing reignition of a raptor engine and the payload bay door failed to open preventing deployment of the dummy starlink satellites; the vehicle broke up during re-entry.[146]

Ship 36 explosion

On June 18, 2025, Ship 36, the Block 2 upper stage slated for the program's tenth flight test, exploded during a planned six-engine static-fire at SpaceX's Massey test stand near Starbase, Texas.[148] Preliminary analysis suggested the failure of a composite-overwrapped pressure vessel (COPV) in the nose section, which ruptured and ignited methane and liquid-oxygen propellants.[149] No personnel were injured, but SpaceX paused further testing to inspect Block 2 pressurization hardware and repair the damaged stand.[150]

Tenth flight test

Starship's tenth flight test was scheduled for August 24, 2025, but was scrubbed shortly before liftoff.[151] After a second aborted attempt on August 25, Flight 10 successfully launched on August 26. The booster completed the ascent, boostback, and landing burns despite losing an engine on ascent, and the ship deployed its payload, eight Starlink simulators. It then completed a relight of a single engine before reentry and successfully splashed down in the Indian Ocean within a few meters of its target.[152]

Eleventh flight test

Starship's eleventh flight test launched on October 13, 2025, mostly repeating the mission profile of the tenth flight, though with a different arrangement of intentionally missing tiles.[153] The second booster to be reused, Booster 15-2 completed its ascent, boostback, and landing burns with a single engine failure during boostback. The failed engine later relit for the landing burn. After SECO, Ship 38 began performing its experiments, deploying eight Starlink simulators and relighting one of its engines before reentering Earth's atmosphere.[153] During reentry, the ship conducted multiple banking maneuvers, including a simulated trajectory which will be used in future missions for ship catch. At approximately T+1:05:54, at an altitude of 1 km and descent speed of 338 km/h, the ship relit its three sea-level engines, flipped vertical, and softly splashed down before tipping over and exploding.[153] This was the final launch of the Block 2 configuration of Starship and Super Heavy.

Summary

Past launches

Future launches

Starlink

SpaceX plans to use Starship to launch the second generation of satellites for SpaceX's Starlink system, which currently delivers high-speed internet to over 70 countries.[166] An analyst at financial services company Morgan Stanley stated development of Starship and Starlink are intertwined, with Starship's planned launch capacity enabling cheaper Starlink launches, and Starlink's profits financing Starship's development costs.[167] In deficit from its inception until the end of 2022,[168] Starlink was first reported to be cash flow positive in the first quarter of 2023,[169] though Elon Musk said that Starlink had only reached "break-even cashflow" in 2023.[170] In December 2023, the FCC issued a final denial of a $885 million Starlink RDOF subsidy because of Starlink's "continuing inability to successfully launch on the Starship rocket".[171]

Artemis Program

Starship HLS was initially chosen by NASA as the sole lunar Human Landing System for the planned Artemis III and Artemis IV crewed missions, as part of the Artemis program.[172] Starship HLS is to be launched into a low Earth orbit, and refueled by multiple Starship tanker spacecraft.[173] Once fueled, it would perform a trans lunar injection burn and enter a near-rectilinear halo orbit[174] around the Moon, with a perilune of 1500 km occurring over the north pole and an apolune of 70000 km occurring over the south pole.[173] The Orion spacecraft would then dock with Starship HLS and two of its four crew would transfer into Starship HLS.[173] Starship HLS would then use its engines to make a powered descent and land near the lunar south pole.[173] After the crew performs the surface portion of its mission, the HLS would ascend with the crew.[173] The crew would then transfer into the Orion spacecraft and return to Earth.[173]

Astronomy

Astronomers have called to consider Starship's larger mass to orbit and wider cargo bay for proposed space telescopes such as LUVOIR, and to develop larger telescopes to take advantage of these capabilities. Starship's 9 m fairing width could hold an 8 m wide space telescope mirror in a single piece,[175] alleviating the need for complex unfolding such as that of the JWST's 6.5 m mirror, which added cost and delays.[176] Ariane 5 imposed a ~6,500 kg limit on the telescope's weight. Starship's low launch cost could also allow probes to use heavier, more common, cheaper materials, such as glass instead of beryllium for large telescope mirrors.[176] With a 5 MT mirror built using similar methods to the Hubble Space Telescope's mirror, the JWST would represent only 10% of the mass deliverable by a (refueled) Starship to the Sun–Earth L2 point, and therefore minimizing the weight of the telescope would not have been a dominant design consideration.[176]

The National Academies of Science's 2020 survey recommended the Habitable Worlds Observatory (HWO); the space observatory, requiring a super heavy lift launch vehicle, will search for signs of life on exoplanets.[177] The HWO's team hopes for the success of big launchers due to their critical importance to the HWO's mission.[177] Lee Feinberg, NASA HWO lead architect[177] and JWST manager,[178] stays in communication with SpaceX to track Starship's progress and has visited them in 2024 for that same purpose.[177] The NASA Habitable Worlds Observatory will have a 6–8 meter mirror for now, but its design should be flexible to leverage launchers with potentially double the mass and volume by the time it launches in the 2040s.[177] Former NASA JPL architect Casey Handmer believes the HWO to be far too conservative compared to what is possible with Starship.[177] Handmer argues that Starship enables telescopes to scale up to the point of surface-level exoplanet imaging, perhaps big enough to detect seasonal migration patterns.[177]

Rocket cargo

In January 2022, SpaceX was awarded a $102 million five-year contract to develop the Rocket Cargo program for the United States Space Force.[165] The five-year contract is intended to "determine exactly what a rocket can achieve when used for cargo transport",[179] and will see the Air Force Research Laboratory collect data during commercial launches of Starship.[179] The contract includes an eventual demonstration mission with the launch and landing of a cargo-laden Starship in a point-to-point flight.

The Department of Defense has planned a test with Starship as part of its program to demonstrate the ability to rapidly deploy up to 100 tons of cargo and supplies, a capability it calls point-to-point delivery (P2PD). The test is envisioned to take place in FY25 or FY26.[180]

Mars Sample Return

In 2024, the NASA-ESA Mars Sample Return project, one of NASA's highest priority flagship projects, suffered a setback when an independent review board assessing the project's feasibility concluded that the project could not be completed under its mission profile. In April 2024, the Administrator of NASA then announced that a new mission profile was needed for the project and that NASA would turn to industry for proposals, with responses due in fall 2024, and a high emphasis on lower total cost and lower risk.[181] Starship was proposed by some space journalists as a leading candidate to serve as a central component of the new mission profile architecture.[182]

Transportation

SpaceX has proposed using Starship for point-to-point flights (called "Earth to Earth" flights by SpaceX), traveling anywhere on Earth in under an hour.[183] Musk stated that SpaceX would complete hundreds of cargo flights before launching with human passengers.[184]

Space colonization

According to SpaceX, the design of Starship is driven by its requirement to be able to land crews on Mars,[185] though SpaceX has not published technical plans or designs about Starship's life support systems, radiation protection, docking system, or in-orbit refueling system for Mars.[186] The spacecraft would be launched to low Earth orbit and refueled in orbit before heading to Mars.[187] After landing on Mars, the Sabatier reaction could be used to synthesize liquid methane and liquid oxygen, Starship's fuel, in a power-to-gas plant.[188] The plant's raw resources would be Martian water and Martian carbon dioxide.[26] On Earth, similar technologies could be used to make carbon-neutral propellant for the rocket.[189] To date, there has been one proof of concept experiment (MOXIE) demonstrating the extraction of oxygen from Martian carbon dioxide, with George Dvorsky writing for Gizmodo commenting that we are not "remotely close" to turning this "into something practical".

SpaceX and Musk have stated their goal of colonizing Mars to ensure the long-term survival of humanity,[190] with an ambition of having sent one million people to Mars by 2050.[191] In March 2022, he estimated that the first crewed Mars landing could occur in 2029.[192] This timeline has been criticized as unrealistic by Kevin Olsen, a physicist at the University of Oxford, England, who has said that "colony needs to become a factory" to produce air, fuel and water as it is "fundamentally impossible to create a completely closed environment in space", and that the technology to do so is "far, far behind the technology of space flight and habitation construction".[193] Serkan Saydam, a mining engineering professor from the University of New South Wales, Australia, stated that humanity currently lacks the necessary technology to establish a Martian colony, and will likely lack the capacity to establish a Martian city with one million people by 2050.[193]

Other missions

One future payload is the Superbird-9 communication satellite, which was Starship's first contract for externally made commercial satellites.[194] Another planned payload is the Starlab space station, which Starship will launch in a single piece.[195]

In the future, the spacecraft's crewed version could be used for space tourism—for example, for the third flight of the Polaris program.[196]

Research conducted by Project Lyra determined that with refueling in LEO, a Starship could send a spacecraft to ʻOumuamua on a journey taking 20 years.[197] A gravity assist would be required at Jupiter.[197]

Testing and manufacturing

Starbase consists of a manufacturing facility and launch site,[198] and is located at Boca Chica, Texas. Both facilities operate 24 hours a day.[23] A maximum of 450 full-time employees may be onsite.[46] The site is planned to consist of two launch sites, one payload processing facility, one 7 acre solar farm, and other facilities.[46]

Raptor engines are tested at the Rocket Development facility in McGregor, Texas. The facility has two main test stands: one horizontal stand for both engine types and one vertical stand for sea-level-optimized rocket engines. In the future, a nearby factory, which as of September 2021 was under construction, will make the new generation of sea-level Raptors while SpaceX's headquarters in California will continue building the Raptor Vacuum and test new designs.[199]

At Florida, a facility at Cocoa purifies silica for Starship heat-shield tiles, producing a slurry that is then shipped to a facility at Cape Canaveral. In the past, workers constructed the Starship MK2 prototype in competition with Starbase's crews.[200] The Kennedy Space Center, also in Florida, is planned to host other Starship facilities, such as a Starship launch site at Launch Complex 39A and a production facility at Roberts Road. This production facility is being expanded from "Hangar X", the Falcon rocket boosters' storage and maintenance facility. It will include a 30000 m2 building, loading dock, and a place for constructing integration tower sections.[201] Adjacent to the Kennedy Space Center will be an additional launch site at Cape Canaveral Space Launch Complex 37, likely to service missions for the complex owner, the United States Space Force.

Launch sites

Starbase

Starbase is planned to host two launch sites, named Pad A and Pad B.[46] A launch site at Starbase has large facilities, such as a tank farm, an orbital launch mount, and an integration tower.[46] Smaller facilities are present at the launch site: tanks surrounding the area containing methane, oxygen, nitrogen, helium, hydraulic fluid, etc.;[46] subcoolers near the tank farm cool propellant using liquid nitrogen; and various pipes are installed at large facilities. Each tank farm consists of eight tanks, enough to support one orbital launch. The current launch mount on Pad A has a water-powered flame diverter, 20 clamps holding the booster, and a quick disconnect mount providing liquid fuel and electricity to the Super Heavy booster before it lifts off.

The integration tower or launch tower consists of steel truss sections, a lightning rod on top,[202] and a pair of mechanical arms that can lift, catch and recover the booster. The decision to catch the booster with the arms was made to reduce the rocket's mass and mechanical complexity by removing the need for landing legs, as well as enabling more rapid reuse by placing the rocket directly back on the launchpad.[92] The mechanical arms are attached to a carriage and controlled by a pulley at the top of the tower. The pulley is linked to a winch and spool at the base of the tower using a cable. Using the winch and the carriage, the mechanical arms can move vertically, with support from bearings attached at the sides of the carriage. A linear hydraulic actuator moves the arms horizontally. On top of the arms are tracks, which are used to position the booster or spacecraft. The tower is mounted with a quick disconnect arm extending to and contracting from the Starship spacecraft; its functions are similar to the quick disconnect mount that powers the booster.

Florida

SpaceX has been constructing a Starship launch pad at Kennedy Space Center Launch Complex 39A (LC-39A) since 2021. The site was leased to the company in 2014 and is used to launch Falcon 9 rockets.[201][203] A Finding of No Significant Impact was issued by SpaceX environmental impact statement (EIS), with NASA as the lead agency, earlier in September 2019 for the launch pad site.[204] In 2024, the Federal Aviation Administration began the process of preparing an EIS evaluating the potential impacts of the new infrastructure and a higher launch cadence of up to 44 per year at LC-39A.[205]

In June 2024, Blue Origin and United Launch Alliance (ULA) provided comments as part of the EIS process, both objecting to the impact that Starship launch operations may have on their own activities at the site.[206] Blue Origin suggested several mitigations, including allowing other operators to object to a Starship launch that would conflict with one of its own, limiting Starship operations to particular times, or expanding the number of launchpads in the area to reduce the impact of conflicting launches.[207] ULA suggested regulators prevent Starship from launching in Florida altogether because a fully fueled Starship would require an evacuation zone so large that it would prevent other operators from using their facilities, and the noise generated by repetitive launches could be injurious to those who live or work nearby.[208] Elon Musk suggested that the two companies' comments were disingenuous and that their true motivation was to impede SpaceX's progress by lawfare.[206]

The company has also proposed building another Starship launch pad at the nearby Cape Canaveral Space Launch Complex 37 (SLC-37) which became vacant in 2024 after the retirement of the Delta IV rocket. That year, the United States Space Force began the process of preparing an EIS evaluating the potential impacts of new infrastructure and a launch cadence of up to 76 times per year at SLC-37.[209] SpaceX and NASA have also worked on assessing LC-49 to the north of 39A.[210] The Kennedy Space Center's Master Plan One has stated that LC-49 could avoid overflight issues with pad 39B and minimize conflict with the Canaveral National Seashore.[211] On January 18, 2024, NASA does not have activities underway at LC-49.[212]

Both EIS processes must be complete before SpaceX will be cleared to launch Starship from Florida, which likely will not occur until late 2025.[206] The Playalinda Beach has been closed by KSC Police and the National Park Service for many launches from 39A and 39B.[212] The towers and mechanical arms at the sites should be similar to the ones at Starbase.[201]