SpaceX’s plans to launch its two-stage Starship–Super Heavy rocket 44 times a year from NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida have come under fire from its two main rivals: United Launch Alliance (ULA) and Blue Origin of Jeff Bezos.
of Starship the vehicle is the largest rocket in the world. Its two stages are SpaceX’s Super Heavy booster rocket and the upper stage spacecraft known somewhat confusingly as the Starship or “Ship,” on which a crew of up to 100 astronauts may one day fly.
After undergoing testing over the past few years, the Starship/Super Heavy design has undergone a number of improvements, with the latest resulting in a rocket that will be up to 492 feet (150 meters) tall. To put this into context, Saturn V was 363 feet (111 meters) long, while NASA’s new manned version Space Launch System it stands 322 feet 98 meters high. SpaceX’s rocket is big, and the plan is for it to carry astronauts MONDAY AND March.
Forward SpaceX you can get a license to start launches from launch pad 39A at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) in Florida, an environmental impact statement must be submitted detailing what effects SpaceX launches would have on the local environment and wildlife, as well as neighboring businesses and residents. This was done by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and is currently in the consultation phase, where local businesses, organizations and members of the public can have their say on the pros and cons of SpaceX’s plans. And, well, SpaceX’s rivals haven’t held back.
Blue origin submitted a 3 page letter to the FAA, in which they seek to impose a cap on the number of launches and landings, reducing the 44 planned launches to an unspecified amount “that has a minimal impact on the local environment, local operating personnel and the local community,” they wrote.
of Blue origin The objections also raise the point that Starship–Super Heavy will carry “an unprecedented” 5,200 metric tons of liquid methane fuel, which is highly flammable and, if something goes wrong, could create a devastating explosion on the launch pad. Blue Origin claims the safety margins are so wide that they overlap with the launch pads, hangars and offices of several other companies, including Blue Origin itself at Launch Pad 36, all leased from the Kennedy Space Center.
Criticism of ULA hit even harder at a Document of 22 pages that the company submitted as part of the consultation. They are not holding back, accusing SpaceX of producing their own environmental impact statement for their extravagantly named ‘Starbase’ at Boca Chica in Texas from where they have been testing the Starship until now.
In the letter, ULA points out that SpaceX’s environmental impact statement suggested that debris from any launch mishap would cover only one square mile (2.5 square km). In April 2023, during Starship’s first test flight, debris was scattered over a 6-mile (9.6 km) radius, endangering the surrounding area and showing how much SpaceX had underestimated the danger to their surroundings. The explosion led to environmental groups filing a lawsuit against SpaceX and the FAA, which was eventually dismissed in court. At Kennedy, ULA’s base is just 3 miles (4.8 km) from SpaceX’s launch pad 39A, which makes them understandably nervous.
“As the planned liftoff thrust for Starship increases, debris from a similar launch failure could reach larger and more populated areas around KSC,” said ULA, whose recommendation is that SpaceX launch Starship from Boca Chica .
“As the largest rocket in existence,” ULA wrote, “an accident would cause serious or even catastrophic damage, while normal launch operations would have a cumulative impact on structures, launch vehicle equipment, and other support equipment. launch critical.”
In turn, Blue Origin suggested that the Government build new launch pads further away from 39A for those companies such as those that could potentially be affected by SpaceX’s Starship operations.
There were also many concerns for the environment and local wildlife. To reach the goal of 44 launches per year, there should be at least 3 or 4 launches per month, resulting in the 39A launch pad being in use year-round. of Merritt Island Wildlife Association (Merritt Island is the peninsula on which the Kennedy Space Center is located) noted that the searchlights will be almost everywhere time in 39A that will disrupt the natural rhythms of wildlife, for example by driving migratory birds astray.
In the meantime, Wildlife Defenders The Florida-based organization says that near Boca Chica, nesting bird eggs were cracked by falling granular debris resulting from previous Starship test flights. The birds are known to nest near launch pad 39A, and more frequent releases would harm the bird population in the area. However, Defenders of Wildlife express their belief that using 39A is better than building brand new launch sites on undeveloped land near the Kennedy Space Center, as proposed by Blue Origin, which would also have an impact of great environmental.
An extensive New York Times investigation published on June 8 details the environmental damage that SpaceX’s operations at Boca Chica have caused, noting that the damage has sparked a debate “over how to balance technological and economic progress against the protection of delicate ecosystems and local communities.” While FAA leadership is aware of the environmental issues Starship is causing, the agency has also emphasized that the vehicle is vital to America. ROOM program.
“Blowing debris into state parks or onto national land is not what we described, but at the end of the day no one was hurt, no one was injured,” FAA associate administrator for Commercial Space Transportation Kelvin B told the New York Times. . Coleman. “We certainly don’t want people to feel like they’re being bulldozed. But it’s a really important operation that SpaceX is doing down there. It’s really important to our civilian space program.”
It’s not just wildlife that can be affected by the Starship. SpaceX’s water deluge system sprays one million gallons of water onto the pad during launch to protect it from damage during launch by absorbing most of the heat. While most of this water evaporates, the rest flows into collection ponds around the launch site. ULA asks if and how this water will be treated for any toxic or otherwise hazardous chemicals in it, and what will prevent it from leaching out into the general water supply.
SpaceX also has its sights set on a second launch pad, having inquired about using Launch Complex 37 from 2026 onwards at the neighboring Cape Canaveral Space Force Station. The US Air Force is conducting its own environmental study of this proposal before granting permission.
ULA also questions SpaceX’s decision to stop using drone ships offshore to land the Super Heavy booster and land them back on 39A, which they say “shifts the risks of a system failure in the communities, businesses and environment surrounding KSC.”
All three companies are competing for the same NASA contracts, and some observers may see these complaints as sour grapes from SpaceX’s rivals, who are struggling to keep up with them. SpaceX’s Elon Musk responded in a seemingly mocking manner to Blue Origin’s complaint on social media. posting “Sue Origin” on X (owning social media company) in the days after the company letter.
However, regardless of the motives behind the complaints, many of them relating to safety and environmental impact seem relevant. Even NASA has doubts; space agency officials have previously stated that an incident at the point of release can effectively shorten NASA away from their only means of reaching the International Space Stationwhich would leave the astronauts stranded.
Blue Origin and ULA’s objections to Starship operations at KSC come down to the two companies believing the rocket is too untested, too dangerous and too disruptive to fit into the ecosystem of other Kennedy Space Center users.
However, it will be up to the FAA to decide whether such concerns are valid and whether they are sufficient to prevent Elon Musk and SpaceX from fulfilling their Starship dreams.