Excitement mixed with a hint of regret — that’s the lingering emotion after yesterday’s Starship flight. There’s no question SpaceX made real progress. Key systems performed better than in previous missions, and the overall execution showed major improvements. But despite those gains, the mission ended with a sense of incompleteness as both the Super Heavy booster and the upper stage failed to finish their journeys.
Now, all eyes are on what caused those unexpected failures — what went wrong, why did it happen, and how can SpaceX use this experience to improve?
In this article, we’ll walk through every major moment of the flight, break down the technical challenges, and analyze what these setbacks mean for Starship’s future. Stick with us as we dive into the mission’s critical lessons and what’s next on the path to space.
The Day of the Launch: Building Anticipation
The afternoon at Starbase was as breathtaking as ever. About half an hour before launch, the live stream kicked off, capturing mesmerizing scenes of venting and fuel loading as anticipation built across the world.
The countdown faced two brief holds, but those delays only heightened the suspense and made the moment even more thrilling. Then it happened — the moment we had all been waiting for nearly three months.
Starship lifted off.
All 33 Raptor engines ignited as expected, pushing the massive rocket off the pad with thunderous force.
Successful Ascent and Stage Separation
After successfully passing Max Q (the point of maximum aerodynamic pressure), the vehicle moved into the separation phase using the hot staging technique.
Main engine cutoff went exactly as planned, with all 30 outer and center ring engines on the Super Heavy booster shutting down precisely for stage separation. Simultaneously, six engines on the upper stage ignited flawlessly, sending both stages on their separate paths.
Booster 14’s Critical Test: Boost Back Burn
For Booster 14 (B14), this was the most critical test yet.
The boost-back burn, which had caused issues in flights seven and eight, went incredibly well. All 10 center engines ignited perfectly with no failures — a major step forward and a clear demonstration of SpaceX’s continuous improvements.
The booster then moved into the landing phase, shutting down its engines as the hot staging ring was successfully jettisoned.
A Disappointing End for Booster 14
Unfortunately, despite the promising performance up to that point, B14’s journey ended in disappointment as it approached splashdown.
The engines were supposed to reignite to decelerate and control the descent. But something went wrong — one of the center engines appeared to fail at a critical moment. Before there was time to analyze what had gone wrong, B14 exploded midair just before reaching the ocean, and its signal was lost.
Though the Gulf waters weren’t far away, B14 never made it.
SpaceX’s Response: Testing to the Limits
Shortly after the flight, SpaceX released a statement:
“First reflight of a Super Heavy booster. Today’s test objectives were designed to intentionally push Super Heavy to the limits, giving us real-world data about its performance that will directly feed into making the next-generation booster even more capable.”
Regarding safety, they reassured the public that the area in the Gulf containing the booster’s flight path was cleared prior to launch.
As for the cause of the explosion, no official details have been shared yet. However, it’s possible that the ambitious objectives SpaceX set for this flight played a role.
Specifically, B14 was tasked with testing a high angle of attack landing profile — a technique aiming to conserve fuel by descending more steeply and resisting drag head-on.
While this could optimize future landings, it also introduces greater aerodynamic pressure, and B14 may have exceeded its tolerances during that demanding maneuver.
The engine failure could also be related to ongoing issues with the igniter system — a known concern SpaceX has been actively working to improve.
The Significance of Booster 14’s Mission
While the loss of B14 is disappointing, it’s important to recognize the booster was never intended to return to the launch site. The C landing was always meant as a testing opportunity, and in that sense, the test was successful in gathering vital data.
Most importantly, this flight marked a major milestone — the first ever re-flight of a Super Heavy booster. Despite its fiery end, B14 demonstrated real progress in key areas, especially overcoming the persistent boost-back burn challenge.
Its contribution to the program — both past and present — cannot be understated.
Still, it’s hard not to feel a bit of regret. B14 had already proven itself in previous missions, and there was a collective hope that this reused booster would complete its journey with a more fitting finale.
But in the grand scheme of pushing the boundaries of reusability and rapid development, B14 served its purpose with honor.
So here’s to B14 — a booster that may not have had a perfect ending but one that helped pave the way for a more capable and resilient Starship system.
Ship 35’s Ascent: Major Improvements
Now let’s shift our focus to Space Flight 9’s upper stage — Ship 35.
Ship 35 brought major improvements, especially during the ascent phase. All six Raptor engines performed well, clearing a key hurdle that tripped up previous flights (notably flights seven and eight).
This smoother ascent marked a promising sign for the program’s technical progress.
A Fire and Payload Deployment Failure
However, not everything went according to plan.
During ascent, a brief fire appeared near one of the vacuum engines and its skirt. Though it didn’t immediately affect the mission, it raised concerns.
Around 8 minutes in, both vacuum and sea-level engines shut down cleanly, marking the second engine cutoff (SECO). Ship 35 then entered orbital coast at over 26,000 km/h.
Next came a critical milestone: payload deployment, expected around T+17 to T+18 minutes.
Unfortunately, this did not occur.
The issue seemed to involve the payload door, which may have failed to open. This mirrors Flight 3, when the payload bay door only partially opened — likely due to mechanical or structural concerns.
Once again, SpaceX will have to wait for a future test to validate in-space deployment.
Loss of Control During Re-entry
Things quickly escalated from there.
Around T+40 minutes, Ship 35 began to lose control during re-entry. Onboard footage and simulations showed the vehicle spinning violently.
Re-entry conditions were more extreme than ever, with Ship 35 enduring tremendous aerodynamic and thermal stress.
Despite the loss of control, SpaceX appeared to continue monitoring descent actively, possibly to keep the ship in a designated corridor or collect valuable re-entry data.
This effort may have also served to evaluate the performance of the new V2 Starship upgrades, including improved engines and revised flaps.
Severe Damage and Flight End
At T+46 minutes, after a brief blackout, the onboard camera came back to show severe damage to one of the aft flaps — roughly 25% had been burned through.
The flight ended shortly after.
Elon Musk’s Explanation: Tank Leak Caused Failure
Elon Musk later confirmed the primary cause of failure: a leak in the main propellant tank.
This caused a loss of pressure, preventing fuel from reaching the engines and leading to loss of control.
He stated leaks caused loss of main tank pressure during the coast and re-entry phase.
While the exact source of the leak remains unknown, it likely resulted from either harsh flight conditions or pre-launch system vulnerabilities.
Overall Flight 9 Summary: Breakthroughs and Setbacks
Despite the turbulent ending, SpaceX collected critical data.
One of the most encouraging outcomes was confirmation that the heat shield tiles remained intact during ascent — signaling progress on the thermal protection system.
Overall, this test flight was a mix of breakthroughs and missed targets.
SpaceX achieved:
- Clean ascent
- Stable orbital insertion
- Successful engine shutdowns
- Validated upgrades to heat shield
But missed mission goals included:
- Successful payload deployment
- Engine reignition in space
- Controlled splashdown of Super Heavy booster
- Stable re-entry and soft ocean landing of the upper stage
Still, each mission — success or failure — brings SpaceX closer to full orbital reusability.
The insights from Ship 35’s flight will directly inform refinements for future tests.
Looking Ahead: What’s Next for Starship?
With Flight 9 now complete, attention shifts toward the future of the Starship program.
Although both stages fell short of their final goals, the mission yielded valuable data and marked clear progress in SpaceX’s push for a fully reusable launch system.
SpaceX emphasized this in their post-flight statement:
“The teams will continue to review data and work toward the next flight test. With a test like this, success comes from what we learn.”
Elon Musk echoed the sentiment, stating:
“Lot of good data to review.”
Faster Flight Cadence Expected
Notably, Flight 9 appears to have aligned well with SpaceX’s internal objectives.
This could allow the company to bypass a formal FAA investigation — something that delayed earlier flights — and accelerate the pace of future launches.
Musk confirmed plans for a faster cadence, saying on X (formerly Twitter) that SpaceX is targeting one flight every 3 to 4 weeks for the next three Starship flights.
If this timeline holds, Flight 10 could launch by mid-June, with Flights 11 and 12 following before the summer’s end.
Flight 10 Expectations
Flight 10 will carry heightened expectations and is expected to attempt objectives Flight 9 nearly accomplished, such as:
- Payload deployments
- Reigniting engines in orbit
- Surviving re-entry
- Executing soft ocean landings
For now, SpaceX plans to stick with splashdowns rather than attempting to catch the stages with the tower’s mechanical arms — a goal reserved for later tests.
Building on Flight 9’s Successes
The next flights will build on Flight 9’s key successes, including the booster’s flawless boost-back burn and the ship’s stable performance during ascent and coast.
These achievements serve as foundational steps toward achieving full reusability and interplanetary mission capability.
The Growing Momentum of Starship Development
With the test cadence increasing, Starship development is gaining serious momentum.
By the time Flights 11 or 12 roll around — likely in July or August — we may see more complete mission profiles, including controlled landings and extended orbital operations.
Starship Supporters: Stay Engaged
In the meantime, Starship supporters are encouraged to stay engaged — leave a comment saying “Let’s try again” and keep the conversation going.
Every test brings us closer to the reality of multi-planetary life.
Meanwhile, Exciting Lunar Exploration from Japan
Last but definitely not least, shifting our attention from Starbase to the Moon, there’s another exciting development worth watching.
Japan’s lunar lander Resilience, operated by iSpace, has provided a stunning new view of the Moon’s south pole while waiting for its upcoming landing attempt.
Resilience sent back a striking photo taken on May 22nd, captured from lunar orbit, offering a close-up view of the rugged terrain surrounding the Moon’s southern region.
The Moon’s South Pole in Stunning Detail
In the photo, the lunar surface is shown in vivid contrast against the pitch-black void of space.
Countless craters dot the view, giving a sense of the immense geological complexity of the area.
According to iSpace, Resilience snapped this photo from lunar orbit, capturing the rough terrain of the many geological features of the lunar surface — which some say look like cheese from afar.
The company also noted that the image creates an interesting optical illusion: while the terrain consists of concave craters, some viewers may perceive them as convex bumps depending on their visual orientation.
What do you see — craters or bumps? they asked.
Resilience’s Journey and Mission Goals
Resilience launched on January 15th aboard a Falcon 9 rocket alongside the American Firefly Blue Ghost lander.
However, the two landers took very different routes.
While Blue Ghost made a more direct trip and landed on March 2nd, Resilience chose a longer, more energy-efficient path to the Moon, arriving in lunar orbit on May 6th.
The Japanese lander is currently preparing for a landing attempt in the Mare Frigoris region — a broad volcanic plain located in the Moon’s northern hemisphere.
Scientific Payloads and the Lunar Rover Tenacious
The mission includes five science and technology payloads, one of which is a compact lunar rover named Tenacious, built by iSpace’s European division.
Tenacious is designed to collect lunar regolith as part of a contract signed with NASA back in 2020.
Significance of Japan’s Lunar Mission
This mission is a significant step for Japan’s commercial space ambitions and could mark another milestone in the international push toward lunar exploration.
If successful, it would build on the global momentum of lunar return missions and demonstrate iSpace’s growing capabilities in deep space operations.
The Future of Space Exploration
As we wait to see whether Resilience completes its journey with a soft landing, one thing is clear:
The race to the Moon — and to Mars — is heating up.
Whether it’s SpaceX testing Starship or Japan delivering rovers to the lunar surface, each mission brings us closer to a new era of space exploration.
FAQs
1. What caused the explosion of Starship Flight 9?
Elon Musk revealed that a leak in the main propellant tank caused loss of pressure, which led to engine failure and ultimately the explosion.
2. Did the Super Heavy booster complete its landing successfully?
No, Booster 14 experienced an engine failure during its landing attempt and exploded just before reaching the ocean.
3. What improvements were seen in this Starship flight compared to previous ones?
Flight 9 demonstrated a successful boost-back burn with all center engines igniting perfectly, stable ascent, and clean engine shutdowns during stage separation.
4. Was the payload deployed successfully during Flight 9?
No, the payload deployment failed because the payload bay door likely did not open properly.
5. What is the significance of the first re-flight of a Super Heavy booster?
It showed progress in reusability, a key milestone for reducing launch costs and enabling more frequent missions.
6. Why did Starship lose control during re-entry?
Loss of tank pressure due to the leak led to engine shutdown and loss of control, causing violent spinning and structural damage.
7. What future flight cadence is SpaceX aiming for?
SpaceX plans to launch a Starship flight every 3 to 4 weeks for the next three flights.
8. Will SpaceX try to catch the booster with the launch tower soon?
Not immediately. They plan to continue splashdown landings for the near future before attempting tower catch maneuvers.
9. What did SpaceX learn from Flight 9?
The flight provided valuable data on heat shield performance, boost-back burns, and failure points to improve future Starship versions.
10. What is the current status of Japan’s lunar lander Resilience?
Resilience is currently in lunar orbit preparing for a landing attempt in the Mare Frigoris region.
11. What is the lunar rover Tenacious?
Tenacious is a compact rover onboard Resilience designed to collect lunar soil samples as part of NASA’s commercial lunar payload services program.
12. How does Flight 9 impact the future of Starship?
Despite setbacks, the flight advances technical knowledge and development, bringing SpaceX closer to fully reusable, rapid turnaround flights to orbit and beyond.
Read More:
- FAA’s Big Announcement to Starship’s Ninth Launch Explosion! No Launch until
- Tesla stock: Morgan Stanley says eVTOL is calling Elon Musk for new chapter
- Tesla bails on crucial piece of India production, aims to rely on imports
- Elon Musk responds to Tesla Supercharger shutdown on NJ Turnpike
- Tesla dominates in Norway with 213% sales jump from ’24