• Forum
• SITREP
• Military
• WMD
• Intelligence
• Homeland Security

• Space

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• Public Eye

 

SpaceX Starship Flight 12

The Starbase team planned to have the next Super Heavy booster stacked in December 2025, which put it on pace with the test schedule planned for the first Starship V3 vehicle and associated ground systems. Starship’s twelfth flight test remained targeted for the first quarter of 2026. "Booster 18 suffered an anomaly during gas system pressure testing that we were conducting in advance of structural proof testing. No propellant was on the vehicle, and engines were not yet installed. The teams need time to investigate before we are confident of the cause. No one was injured as we maintain a safe distance for personnel during this type of testing. The site remains clear and we are working plans to safely reenter the site." SpaceX announced 21 November 2025.

The vehicle was undergoing gas system pressure testing, which is a standard procedure conducted ahead of a more rigorous structural proof test. At the time of the event, the booster was not loaded with any propellant, and its Raptor engines had not yet been installed, significantly reducing the potential risk of a more catastrophic event. The company confirmed that no personnel were injured, as safety protocols requiring a safe distance during such testing were in effect. Following the incident, the site was cleared, and teams are developing plans to safely re-enter the area to assess the full scope of the situation.

The immediate consequence for Booster 18 appeared to be severe. Visual evidence from the site suggests the vehicle sustained major damage, likely rendering it a complete loss. The teams now require time to investigate the cause of the anomaly before they can be confident in their findings. This involves a thorough analysis of the data collected during the test and a physical inspection of the hardware once the area is declared safe. Such investigations are standard procedure in aerospace development to understand the root cause of a failure and implement design or procedural changes to prevent a recurrence.

This incident with Booster 18 represented a notable setback for the aggressive development timeline of the Starship program. However, the Starbase team has demonstrated a rapid iteration approach, often building multiple vehicles in parallel. Their plans indicate that the next Super Heavy booster was already scheduled to be stacked in December. This parallel development strategy is designed to absorb the impact of individual test article losses without bringing the entire program to a halt.

The timing of this anomaly was particularly critical as it intersects with the planned test schedule for the first Starship V3 vehicle and its associated ground systems. The V3 represents an evolution of the Starship design, promising greater performance and payload capacity. The goal of stacking a new booster by December is intended to keep the program on pace with this ambitious V3 testing schedule. The ability to quickly recover from this setback will be a key test of SpaceX's operational tempo and manufacturing resilience.

Looking further ahead, the twelfth integrated flight test of the Starship system remained targeted for the first quarter of 2026. This timeline is contingent on the success of the upcoming ground tests and subsequent flight tests with earlier boosters and ships. While the loss of Booster 18 is a disruption, it is the kind of challenge SpaceX has encountered and overcome throughout the Starship development process. The data gathered from this anomaly, while costly, will ultimately inform improvements to the vehicle's design and testing procedures, contributing to the long-term goal of creating a fully reusable orbital launch system.

The Promise of Starship Version 3

The Version 3 Starship represents a significant architectural evolution designed to push the rocket toward realizing—and potentially exceeding—its 100-ton Low Earth Orbit (LEO) payload capacity. This new iteration boasts several critical upgrades compared to the previous model:

• Propulsion: The booster is equipped with 35 Raptor engines, an increase from the 33 engines used on Version 2.
• Staging: It features an integrated vented interstage designed to facilitate smoother hot staging.
• Aerodynamics & Weight: The design reduced the number of grid fins from four to three to achieve weight savings.
• Structure: The vehicle utilizes enhanced thermal protection and taller tank sections, allowing for increased propellant capacity.

On the evening of November 20th, Superheavy Booster 18 (B18) — the first of the Version 3 hardware — was moved from Mega Bay 1 to the Massey’s test site using a self-propelled modular transporter (SPMT). Upon arrival, teams began the initial setup, which included connecting tank venting lines and sensors. SpaceX publicly acknowledged the milestone via X (formerly Twitter), stating: "Booster 18, the first Superheavy V3, is beginning pre-launch testing. The first operations will test the booster's redesign propellant systems and its structural strength."

Liquid oxygen (LOX) loading operations commenced at 4:00 AM Central Time on November 21st. However, just four minutes later, at exactly 4:04 AM, the test suffered a catastrophic anomaly. Witnesses reported hearing a sharp bang followed immediately by venting flames, indicating a rapid overpressurization event or a seal failure within the LOX tank. In the moments following the initial bang, the lower section of the LOX tank failed structurally, crumpling inward in a violent implosive-explosive event. While flames and vapor clouds engulfed the base of the vehicle, the test stand itself appeared to sustain only minimal damage. Fortunately, per safety protocols, the site had been evacuated, and there were no injuries.

Following the incident, B18 was stabilized and returned to Mega Bay 1. The damage was deemed irreparable, and the booster is slated to be scrapped. Preliminary reports suggest the root cause was a propellant system anomaly—likely a faulty cryogenic valve or a weld imperfection in the LOX tank dome—which triggered uncontrolled pressure buildup during the chilldown phase. This issue was likely amplified by the aggressive specifications of the Version 3 design, which operates at a higher pressure of 6.2 bar, compared to the 5.2 bar limit of Version 2.

Unlike previous "Rapid Unscheduled Disassemblies" (RUDs), such as the explosive loss of Ship 29 in 2023, this was characterized as a "soft failure." There was no massive fireball, but rather severe structural deformation. SpaceX intends to use data from the embedded sensors to inform necessary fixes for the subsequent booster, B19.

While Elon Musk expressed confidence that B19 will succeed, this failure raises significant concerns. A full-scale booster cryo-failure has not been seen at the Massey’s site since the era of early prototypes, predating the current test facilities. The incident draws parallels to the Mk1 tank burst in 2019 or the SN3 implosion in 2020. The recurrence of such a failure on a Superheavy booster suggests the issue may be more than a simple component failure. With the increased propellant load and propulsion modifications, there is a fear that engineers may be underestimating the pressures the new booster must withstand, pointing toward a potential systemic design flaw rather than just a failed valve.

The failure will inevitably impact the immediate launch schedule. SpaceX is required to conduct a mishap investigation based on the sensor data, which must then be reviewed by the FAA for launch licensing. While the "rapid iteration" philosophy allows for quick fixes, historical data shows that ground anomalies can delay flights anywhere from one to ten months. A clearance hold of 4 to 8 weeks is the minimum expectation, pushing back IFT12—the debut flight of Starship V3—by weeks at least. The ripple effects of this anomaly pose a serious threat to the timeline SpaceX recently outlined in leaked documentation delivered to NASA. The current targets include:

• Summer 2026: A Low Earth Orbit propellant transfer (refueling) test.
• Mid-2027: An unmanned Starship landing test on the Moon.
• September 2028: A human-rated lunar landing.

An incident of this magnitude makes the 2026 refueling test a difficult prospect. Consequently, delays in that milestone will cascade, jeopardizing the 2027 unmanned landing and making the September 2028 human landing schedule—which was already incredibly difficult to achieve — practically impossible.

NASA's Artemis program aims to return humans to the Moon, relying heavily on private companies for key components. SpaceX, with its Starship vehicle designated as the Human Landing System (HLS) for the Artemis III mission, is central to this plan. However, the development of Starship has encountered hurdles, leading to concerns that SpaceX is falling behind the schedule needed to meet NASA's lunar goals.

Obviously a Major Malfunction

A core issue is a mismatch between NASA's public schedule and SpaceX's internal timeline.

• NASA's Official Target for Artemis III: The space agency is publicly targeting a crewed lunar landing for the mid-2027 timeframe [1].
• SpaceX's Leaked Internal Timeline: According to an internal SpaceX document from late 2025, the company is reportedly targeting:
  • June 2026 for the first orbital refueling demonstration.
  • June 2027 for an uncrewed lunar landing.
  • September 2028 for the first crewed lunar landing attempt.

This internal SpaceX schedule suggests the Artemis III mission could be delayed by over a year from NASA's target.

Several major technological hurdles contribute to the complex development path for Starship.

• Orbital Refueling: This is the single biggest challenge. Due to its size, Starship must be refueled in orbit to have enough propellant to reach the Moon. This process of transferring cryogenic propellants in space has never been done before on the scale required . Estimates suggest a single lunar landing could require anywhere from 10 to 40 successful refueling launches in rapid succession, a massive logistical undertaking.
• Test Flight Setbacks: While SpaceX has made progress with several test flights in 2025, the year also saw multiple failures, including three in-flight explosions and an anomaly during ground testing, highlighting the vehicle's developmental risks .
• Unproven Capabilities: Starship has yet to demonstrate several critical functions needed for Artemis III, including a successful orbital mission, long-duration flights, and a safe landing on the lunar surface.

The China Factor and Political Pressure

The technical delays are set against a backdrop of a new space race. China has a stated goal of landing astronauts on the Moon by 2030. NASA's acting administrator, Sean Duffy, has repeatedly emphasized that beating China to the lunar surface is a priority, calling it a "key point in the history of space exploration". This competitive pressure is a driving force behind NASA's search for backup options.

In response to the potential delays, NASA is actively exploring alternatives to ensure the US can meet its lunar goals. In October 2025, acting NASA Administrator Sean Duffy announced that the agency would solicit proposals from other companies for a lunar lander that could potentially be ready faster than Starship . He stated, "We're not going to wait for one company... We're going to push this forward and win the second space race against the Chinese".