SpaceX Inspected Starship 36 Wreckage after explosion, Somehow Better than We Thought

SpaceX Inspected Starship 36 Wreckage after explosion, Somehow Better than We Thought

by

SpaceX Inspected Starship 36 Wreckage after explosion, Somehow Better than We Thought: What a turn of events! New close-up images of Ship 36 have just been released—and the damage is less severe than expected, offering a hopeful perspective on Starship’s recovery. In other news, Axiom 4 finally launched after multiple delays, and NASA just published a fascinating study on lunar dust’s unexpected effects.

Starship 36 Wreckage: Closer Look, Better News

Nose Cone Debris: Scorched but Surviving

One released image shows debris believed to be from the Ship 36 nose cone. The exterior is torn and scorched, likely from the COPV explosion in the payload section. Yet, amidst the damage, some areas remain impressively intact:

  • Windward vs. leeward sides show significant heat shielding loss where tiles were glued—prone to shock damage.
  • The Starlink Terminal area, despite proximity to the blast, has only a single missing tile, hinting at reinforced design.
  • The catching point shows only a surface crack; tiles remain firmly in place.

Withstanding an explosion potentially more powerful than atmospheric re-entry is a surprising testament to improved durability.

Payload Bay Tiles: Pinpointing Weak Spots

Another image highlights a section near the payload bay, where heat shield tiles and protective layers have peeled away, revealing bare structure.

This contrast between intact and damaged zones is invaluable—it helps SpaceX engineers identify and reinforce weak spots for future Starships.

Test Site Damage: What’s Broken and What Can Be Rebuilt

Quick Disconnect System: Warped Beyond Repair

Images reveal the Quick Disconnect (QD) system next to the test stand is heavily damaged:

  • Steel frames are warped, bent, and collapsed due to extreme heat.
  • Many support components appear twisted or leaning.
  • This unit will require a total rebuild before any operations can resume.

Fuel Pipeline Damage: A Major Overhaul Needed

Initial assessments indicate that the fuel piping network near the methane storage is also severely damaged and will require complete replacement before safe reuse.

Is Pad B SpaceX’s Backup Plan?

With Pad A under repair, attention turns to Pad B—an emerging option:

  • Pad B has installed final manifold systems and a flame trench with QD assembly, suggesting near readiness.
  • The major unknown: compatibility with Starship orbital launch stack.
  • Once operational, using multiple pads could increase launch cadence, enable upgrades to Pad A, and make the Starship program more resilient.

Axiom 4 Mission: Aqueous-4 Finally Launches

Launch Delays Resolved

After being delayed from June 11 due to a LOx leak, and again due to an ISS module issue, Ax-4 launched on June 25 at 2:31 a.m. EDT aboard Falcon 9 from LC‑39A timesofindia.indiatimes.com+3en.wikipedia.org+3economictimes.indiatimes.com+3indiatimes.com+4en.wikipedia.org+4ndtvprofit.com+4.

Crew Dragon “Grace”: A New Legacy

Historic, Multinational Crew

The crew represents India, the US, Poland, and Hungary, including Shubhanshu Shukla, who became the first Indian since 1984 to fly to space vijaykarnataka.com+12en.wikipedia.org+12news.abplive.com+12.

Science and Symbolism

Ax‑4 carries ~60 experiments from 31 nations, exploring muscle loss, immunology, microgravity effects, and more—further cementing Crew Dragon’s leadership in orbital science en.wikipedia.org+1news.abplive.com+1.

Supporters worldwide, including schools in India, watched the launch, celebrating the mission as a major STEM inspiration timesofindia.indiatimes.com+1timesofindia.indiatimes.com+1.

Lunar Dust Study: Health Implications for Artemis Missions

Origins of Concern

Apollo astronauts described lunar dust as causing “lunar hay fever”—leading to sneezing, eye irritation, and respiratory discomfort. Flight surgeons experienced similar issues—raising questions about long-term exposure risks en.wikipedia.org+11space.com+11smithsonianmag.com+11.

UTS Research Offers Reassurance

UTS PhD candidate Michaela B. Smith tested new lunar dust simulants on lung cell cultures, comparing effects to urban Sydney air pollution .

Her findings:

  • Lunar dust acts as a mechanical irritant, but does not cause the oxidative stress linked to chronic illnesses like silicosis.
  • Inflammatory response and cellular damage were significantly lower than from urban pollution indiatoday.in+5uts.edu.au+5scienmag.com+5.

Smith concluded:

“While lunar dust may cause some immediate irritation to the airways, it does not appear to pose a risk for chronic… diseases like silicosis.” biocompare.com+2uts.edu.au+2space.com+2

Implications for Artemis and Beyond

The results are promising for long-term lunar habitation:

What This Means for SpaceX and Space Exploration

  1. Resilience of Starship
    Key systems survived worse-than-expected forces—offering optimism for re-entry durability.
  2. Infrastructure Rebuild
    Damage to QD and pipelines will take time, but using Pad B can minimize mission delays.
  3. Commercial Crew Reliability
    Ax‑4’s success underscores Crew Dragon’s proven safety and role in multinational science.
  4. Health Insights for Lunar Missions
    NASA’s lunar dust study reduces health fears, yet highlights the need for robust mitigation systems.

Conclusion: A Mixed Bag… But Still Moving Forward

  • Starship 36 may have been destroyed, but the survival of vital components signals progress.
  • Axiom 4’s successful launch marks yet another triumph in Crew Dragon’s record.
  • Lunar dust health risk appears manageable—and less concerning than urban air pollution.

Taken together, these events reflect the resilience, innovation, and convergence of crewed, scientific, and commercial space efforts. Despite setbacks, the momentum in space exploration remains strong.

FAQs

1. What caused the explosion of Starship S36?

The explosion was likely triggered by the rupture of a composite overwrapped pressure vessel (COPV) in the payload section. The incident caused major damage to Ship 36 and its surrounding infrastructure at the Massie test site.

2. Was Starship 36 completely destroyed in the explosion?

Yes, Ship 36 was lost, but recent images show that key components like the Starlink Terminal and catching point survived, offering insights into improved structural resilience.

3. What is a COPV, and why is it important on Starship?

A Composite Overwrapped Pressure Vessel (COPV) is a lightweight tank used to store high-pressure gases like nitrogen or helium. It’s essential for pressurizing fuel systems and supporting engine startup.

4. What damage occurred at the Massie test site?

The Quick Disconnect system was severely warped and collapsed, and the fuel pipeline network likely requires a complete overhaul due to heat and structural impact from the blast.

5. Will SpaceX use Pad B instead of Massie for testing?

Possibly. Pad B is nearing operational readiness and could serve as a backup site to maintain Starship test cadence while Massie is being rebuilt.

6. What are the new findings from inspecting the Starship 36 wreckage?

Inspections revealed that while some areas were heavily damaged, vital systems held up better than expected. This suggests increased robustness in recent Starship designs.

7. When did Axiom 4 launch, and what was its mission goal?

Axiom 4 launched on June 25, 2025, from Kennedy Space Center. It carried four international astronauts to the ISS and included over 60 science experiments from 31 countries.

8. Who are the astronauts on Axiom 4?

The crew includes representatives from India, the U.S., Poland, and Hungary, making it one of the most diverse missions in commercial spaceflight history.

9. What spacecraft was used for Axiom 4?

A brand-new Crew Dragon capsule named Grace was used. Originally assigned to Crew-10, it was reassigned to Axiom 4 due to schedule shifts.

10. How did the Falcon 9 rocket perform during Axiom 4?

The Falcon 9 performed flawlessly, including a spectacular boostback burn and a precise landing of its first stage booster (B1094) at Landing Zone 1.

11. Is lunar dust dangerous to astronauts’ health?

Recent studies show lunar dust causes short-term irritation, but it is less toxic than urban air pollution. Long-term risks like silicosis appear minimal, which is promising for future moon missions.

12. Why is the lunar dust study important for Artemis missions?

As NASA plans long-term lunar habitation, understanding lunar dust risks helps design safer habitats and protocols. The study boosts confidence in the Artemis III mission scheduled for 2027.

Read More:

Leave a Comment