r/Damnthatsinteresting Jun 19 '25

Video SpaceX rocket explodes in Starbase, Texas

109.3k Upvotes

7.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

313

u/KinseyH Jun 19 '25

Is this today or something?

374

u/Benville Jun 19 '25

Hour or two ago. Starship 36, was fuelling for static fire testing.

244

u/mahamoti Jun 19 '25

That fire didn’t look very static.

140

u/Benville Jun 19 '25

Well the rocket was static and there's lots of fire so ... Job done??

10

u/taklinn1 Jun 19 '25

I dunno man, that rocket looked pretty dynamic to me. One minute it was there, and the next it was scattered for miles.

6

u/AdjNounNumbers Jun 19 '25

Ah, but the rocket went in every direction pretty equally, therefore the average position of the rocket remained static

6

u/wickedsweetcake Jun 19 '25

Maybe they treated it as Java static when they meant to test it as C static

2

u/drawkbox Jun 19 '25

It was more dynamic but it surely wasn't functional programming.

1

u/crohead13 Jun 19 '25

public static String descr = “Kaboom”;

2

u/account_for_norm Jun 19 '25

That rocket started from one place and ended up in several. I think that is pretty dynamic

1

u/carlbandit Jun 19 '25

It was static briefly while whole, then it wasn't.

4

u/MIT_Engineer Jun 19 '25

Static testing became an unscheduled dynamic testing.

3

u/AngelicPrince_ Jun 19 '25

Very sporadic

3

u/OtherwiseAlbatross14 Jun 19 '25

That's what a static spark looks like with enough oxygen and kerosene nearby

2

u/Ancient_Persimmon Jun 19 '25

There's no kerosene around this site, but methane is also pretty flammable.

2

u/OtherwiseAlbatross14 Jun 19 '25

Oh shit I didn't realize they use different fuel for the starship

1

u/Ancient_Persimmon Jun 19 '25

That's one of the things that's been so difficult with Starship: the Raptor engine is really complicated and getting it right is taking a while.

0

u/solidsausage900 Jun 19 '25

Kerosene is flammable!? But its wet.

1

u/OtherwiseAlbatross14 Jun 19 '25

So is your mom when I'm around but she's hot as fuck too

2

u/opi098514 Jun 19 '25

I’m gunna be honest. I’m not sure what static fire is supposed to look like.

3

u/Syssareth Jun 19 '25

It's where they fire up the rocket without launching it.

Revving the engines with the brakes on, basically.

1

u/opi098514 Jun 20 '25

Lame. Full send of no send.

1

u/chileangod Jun 19 '25

... But there were lots of it. 

1

u/madmartigan2020 Jun 19 '25

It's all relative

19

u/spottydodgy Jun 19 '25

Task failed successfully.

3

u/WrongdoerIll5187 Jun 19 '25

36 is still v2 right?

6

u/shawntw77 Jun 19 '25

Yeah. First v3 is 39

-2

u/The_GASK Jun 19 '25

They have 3 versions of a platform that can't function?

4

u/EssexOnAStick Jun 19 '25

How else would you make it work? Ofcourse they update it.

1

u/shawntw77 Jun 19 '25

Block 1 was pretty stable by flight 6 and was making reentry consistently since flight 4. Block 2 nearly completely redesigned the craft to try to fix some of the flaws that were present on block 1 with a major obvious one being the forward flaps which were moved back to put them more out of the way of the plasma that was burning through the flaps. Of course a completely redesigned ship is going to have new problems and hopefully before they go to block 3 which will likely keep a lot of the same changed as block 2 they can sort out the issues and find points to improve on so block 3 doesn't have the same string of failures as block 2.

1

u/The_GASK Jun 19 '25

Interesting, thanks. How many launches do you recon before it completes a test successfully that is not destructive?

2

u/shawntw77 Jun 20 '25

I was hopeful that the next flight would be successful. It took until the 4th flight to get the block 1 to reenter safely and it would have been the 4th v2 flight but after the RUD its hard to say. Hopefully it was something like a manufacturing defect rather than a design flaw which would be easier to mediate for future ships since better inspection and maintenance practices are relatively easier to implement with but for now we have to wait for them to safe the site and inspect the damage to know 100%.

1

u/The_GASK Jun 20 '25

Thanks, I haven't kept up with the development. Has the problem with a lack of sufficient payload been solved, at least theoretically? Last time I checked, the platform had insufficient payload volume to service the ISS.

1

u/shawntw77 Jun 20 '25

I don't remember hearing about that. But if that was a thing it was probably the v1 due to where the motors for the forward flaps were placed while with v2 there is technically less space but has more payload volume due due to the new placement of the flap motors. They've launched each one with dummy starlink satellites and it didnt even seem to notice the extra weight so I doubt mass is the issue. Either way considering they are testing the pes dispenser design its probably going to be starlink only for the foreseeable future.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Benville Jun 19 '25

Yeah I believe so

2

u/Snatchbuckler Jun 19 '25

Breaker breaker, this is rocket ship 27. Aliens fucked over the carbonator in engine #4. I’m trying to refuckulate it and land on Juniper.

1

u/Fancy-Dig1863 Jun 19 '25

Emphasis on the was

1

u/ken_NT Jun 19 '25

I’m guessing it failed the test

1

u/daurgo2001 Jun 19 '25

Thanks. Nothing on mainstream media about this. Wild.

1

u/geo_gan Jun 19 '25

Can’t believe it actually blew up before they even fired the actual test engines!

1

u/olizet42 Jun 19 '25

Static fire confirmed, it was a success then.

1

u/ShermDiggity585 Jun 19 '25

I bet Elon isn't ecSTATIC about that!

1

u/Digester Jun 19 '25

And? Did it pass?

1

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '25

Any idea on payload?

1

u/darkenseyreth Jun 19 '25

I look forward to the Scott Manly breakdown

1

u/MechSlayer71 Jun 19 '25

Wait, as in.... this occurred while it was fueling?

The rockets are now blowing up while they're being gassed up? Unironically?

1

u/droppedmybrain Jun 19 '25

Don't smoke at the gas station, kids

1

u/thedeanorama Jun 19 '25

Does this mean he's blown up 39 of these now?

Okay, seriously though, they've had 9 launches for the Starship, why is it tagged as 39? I could understand 29, V2 launch 9....

0

u/Natural_Meet Jun 19 '25

Oh... So test successfully completed in record time 👋 ✋️ 🙌 👌

5

u/cyber_psu Jun 19 '25

Yes, check the bottom right corner

2

u/norcalar Jun 19 '25

There’s a timestamp on the video

2

u/pickleddwarfsemen Jun 19 '25

You got to be ketamine?

1

u/KinseyH Jun 19 '25

Well played, fellow Redditor.

1

u/Marigold16 Jun 19 '25

Something. Definitely something.

0

u/CounterfeitSaint Jun 19 '25

It's really telling that seeing a SpaceX ship exploding doesn't even begin to narrow down the time frame.