SpaceX’s plan to launch its monstrous two-stage Starship-Super Heavy tandem from NASA’s Kennedy Space Center has drawn the attention — and concern — of the two rival space companies, who are warning federal officials that the 1,500-foot-long rocket will be very untested. , very dangerous and very potentially destructive to the busiest space of the country and the surrounding environment.
United Launch Alliance and Blue Origin — both of which have significant footprints on the Space Coast and see SpaceX as direct competition — have submitted concerns in writing to the Federal Aviation Administration.
The FAA is preparing an environmental impact statement to assess the potential impacts of Starships departing up to 44 times a year from pad 39A at KSC. SpaceX is also looking at a possible second Starship launch pad at the Space Force Station adjacent to Cape Canaveral.
“As the largest missile in existence, 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 critical launch support equipment,” the officials wrote. of ULA in a 22 page. letter to the FAA.
ULA cited the April 2023 explosion of Starship at SpaceX’s private launch site in Boca Chica, Texas, that sent debris flying in a six-mile radius. At the Cape, ULA officials noted that their launch pad is only three miles from pad 39A, and other companies are located nearby.
“If a similar accident were to happen again, that debris would reach ULA’s operations and could injure people or damage property. And with the increased liftoff thrust planned for Starship, debris from a similar launch failure could reach larger, populated areas around KSC,” the ULA paper said.
Blue Origin employs more than 2,700 full-time workers in Brevard County and has invested more than $1 billion in developing the world’s first privately built heavy-lift launch complex for future New Glenn rocket launches.
Cape Canaveral:Is there a departure today? Next SpaceX, NASA, ULA rocket launch schedule in Florida
In a three-page letter to the FAA, Blue Origin officials proposed limiting the rate of Starship-Super Heavy launches and landings “to a number that has a minimal impact on the local environment, local operating personnel and the local community.”
And ULA asked the government to consider an alternative to allowing SpaceX to bring Starship to KSC: Keep the giant rocket in Boca Chica, where it is now.
SpaceX media officials did not return messages seeking comment for this story.
Space companies compete for contracts
In the days following those FAA comments from his competitors, SpaceX founder and CEO Elon Musk took to X to declare just two words: “Sue Origin.” Some media reports have characterized these Starship environmental study comments as a battle between billionaires, particularly Musk and Blue Origin founder Jeff Bezos.
However, Don Platt, director of the Florida Institute of Technology’s Spaceport Education Center in Titusville, said, “If a large company has the ability to complain about one of its competitors in an open public forum, then they probably they will do this.
“You have to consider the source. They won’t want to simply hand over the keys to the space industry to SpaceX. And now, it looks like that’s really what’s happening,” Platt said.
“And it’s not really because of anything the government is being unfair about, or anything like that. It’s just that SpaceX is just, they’re operating. They are doing their thing. They are successful. And Blue Origin and ULA are both struggling to keep up with that,” he said.
Potential Starship missions aside, SpaceX rockets have accounted for 46 of the Space Coast’s 49 orbital launches so far this year. ULA has scored the other three launches, while Blue Origin officials hope to begin launching New Glenn rockets by the end of the year.
All three space companies are competing for NASA contracts. The tension between SpaceX and Blue Origin unfolded after NASA chose Starship to land men on the moon with the Artemis program. Blue Origin filed a lawsuit against NASA, further stating that Starship is “extremely complex and high-risk.”
In 2023, NASA was able to add a second human landing system to Artemis. NASA chose Blue Origin’s Blue Moon to land astronauts on the Moon alongside the Starship during future missions.
Blue Origin, ULA warn of Starship dangers
The FAA is preparing the Starship environmental impact statement as part of its licensing process to authorize future releases from the KSC. Separately, the US Air Force is conducting an environmental study on SpaceX’s goal of bringing Starship-Super Heavy liftoffs to Launch Complex 37 at the Cape Canaveral Space Force Station by 2026.
In its letters to the FAA, Blue Origin and ULA warned of a number of risks associated with Starship. Among the concerns of companies:
- Starship-Super Heavy operations are expected to have a greater environmental impact than any launch system operating on the Space Coast, Blue Origin said, noting that the two-stage rocket “can carry up to an unprecedented 5,200 tons of liquid methane for pushing. “
- Landing boosters on Platform 39A, rather than using drone ships in the Atlantic Ocean, “shifts the risks of a system failure to the communities, businesses and environment surrounding KSC,” ULA said.
- Blue Origin expressed concerns about the safety of its employees and assets in the event of an anomaly, citing concerns about debris distribution, blast overpressure, sonic booms, explosion, fire, noise, air toxins and hazardous materials.
- Disruption to other launch providers. “SpaceX seeks to launch the largest rocket ever from two launch sites within a six-mile radius. Just one Starship launch site would likely disrupt other launch operations in the area and cause significant environmental impacts,” ULA said.
Locals also raise Starship’s environmental concerns
FAA officials accepted Starship’s public comments until June 24 and also heard from Brevard groups. The federal agency hosted public open houses in mid-June at the Raddison Resort in Port of Cape Canaveral and the KSC Visitor Complex. The project website is at faa.gov/space/stakeholder_engagement/spacex_starship_ksc
In a letter to the FAA, Merritt Island Wildlife Association President Charlie Venuto applauded the reuse of pad 39A for Starship — especially compared to the option of building a new launch complex on the undeveloped KSC property.
However, Titusville-based MIWA contends that the FAA’s environmental study should address a number of Starship environmental ramifications, such as:
- Stormwater management system quality to protect the ecologically endangered Indian River Lagoon.
- Effects of artificial lighting on nesting sea turtles, migratory and nesting birds, and nocturnal wildlife.
- Cumulative effects on air quality, stratospheric ozone depletion, habitat destruction, ability to practice conservation management techniques such as controlled burns and carbon emissions, considering Blue Origin’s future New Glenn rockets.
In a 10-page letter, Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge officials noted that the KSC and Cape Canaveral Space Force Station environmental studies “appear to be related actions being considered separately, making the two impact analyzes , including cumulative, less efficient impacts. and less comprehensive and requiring a substantial interplay between the two.”
The Southeastern Fisheries Association commented that it supports national defense and space exploration efforts. That said, the group wants the FAA study to include the physical, social and economic impacts of Starship on all stakeholders, including fishing families, local communities, businesses, restaurants, lodging facilities and Florida’s tourism industry.
UCF space expert: Multiple powerful space companies are key
Phil Metzger is director of the Stephen W. Hawking Center for Microgravity Research and Education at the University of Central Florida. In an email, he said he thinks ULA’s statement about Starship is fair because it requires the FAA to do its job by noting potential impacts on the environment, neighboring communities and the launch of other companies’ operations on the Cape.
“They noted that it is in the national interest to have multiple healthy launch companies for safe access to space, so that one company’s operations should not shut out its competitors. I think this is all legitimate and should be emphasized,” said Metzger.
However, he said he thinks Blue Origin made “a serious mistake” by suggesting a limit on the Starship’s launch rate.
“That would be the least creative and least helpful solution to the potential problems at the Cape,” Metzger said.
“Space is becoming much more important to the world, to national security, and to economic prosperity, and the U.S. must increase the rate of release — from all providers — not create restrictions that will ultimately harm every company and nation as a whole,” he said.
For the latest news from the Cape Canaveral Space Force Station and NASA’s Kennedy Space Center, visit floridatoday.com/space.
Brooke Edwards is a space reporter for Florida Today. Contact him at bedwards@floridatoday.com or at X: @brookeofstars.
Space is important to us, and that’s why we’re working to bring you the highest coverage of Florida’s industry and releases. Journalism like this takes time and resources. Please support him with a subscription here.