Starship Faces Complications after Flight 7 Anomaly

On January 16th, 2025 SpaceX’s Starship-Super Heavy launched on its seventh flight test, in what aimed to be a test of block upgrades of the Starship upper stage. While IFT-7 looked fairly similar to previous test flights during the first few minutes of ascent, problems quickly developed, ultimately resulting in the dramatic loss of the Starship vehicle over the Caribbean Sea. Had the flight proceeded nominally, the core focus of this test flight was the debut of Starship V2, a lengthened version of the system’s upper stage with initial deployment capabilities for Starlink satellites – one of the primary payloads for the Starship-Super Heavy vehicle. However, the vehicle did not meet its key mission milestones, as the upper stage experienced a loss of telemetry and probable explosion onboard, resulting in debris from the launch falling over Turks and Caicos as well as the Dominican Republic. 

SpaceX’s seventh flight of the Starship-Super Heavy system was intended to debut the V2 version of Starship, featuring a redesigned heat shield and flap system. The vehicle also featured a prototype of the “Pez dispenser” system, planned for use with larger Starlink satellites currently in development. The redesigned flap and heat shield systems, alongside a stretch for roughly 25% more propellant, aim to increase payload capacity and ensure greater durability during the punishing entry, descent and landing phases for the vehicle.The vehicle lifted off from SpaceX’s Starbase in Boca Chica, Texas at 4:37 pm local time, having pushed back from its original projected liftoff time of 4:00. The first stage, Booster 14, carried out a nominal ascent profile, and successfully separated following hot staging – with the upper stage lighting its engines while still attached to the first stage. Following stage separation, the vehicle returned to the launch site, performing a landing on the launch tower’s twin catch arms, dubbed “Mechazilla” by the SpaceX team – repeating the success of Flight 5. 

Ship 33 continued on its trajectory, seemingly without incident until approximately 7 minutes and 40 seconds into flight, when the first vacuum optimized Raptor engine onboard the ship either lost telemetry or shut down. Two more engines were then lost at 8 minutes and 3 seconds, with a total loss of telemetry at 8 minutes and 27 seconds. SpaceX commentators were unsure of the vehicle’s position, altitude or status throughout the next several minutes of flight, before finally announcing later that the ship had been lost – ending the flight. It was not immediately clear what caused the explosion, however SpaceX CEO Elon Musk took to X to state: “Preliminary indication is that we had an oxygen/fuel leak in the cavity above the ship engine firewall that was large enough to build pressure in excess of the vent capacity. Apart from obviously double-checking for leaks, we will add fire suppression to that volume and probably increase vent area. Nothing so far suggests pushing next launch past next month.”  

Over the next several hours, eyewitness accounts began to emerge of debris falling over several Caribbean nations and international waters. The FAA activated an emergency Launch Hazard Area soon after SpaceX lost contact with the ship, which had deviated from its planned trajectory and began to reenter. Numerous commercial airliners were forced to divert around the debris field, which was visible from both the ground and the air. Even with the Launch Hazard Area active, at least one flight declared a Mayday as the instructed holding pattern resulted in low fuel levels – necessitating the emergency call. Iberia Airlines, the carrier which declared the mayday call, has not commented on the incident. Throughout the evening of January 16th, several large pieces of debris were found on the islands of Turks and Caicos. It is likely that further pieces of debris will continue to be found. 

UPDATE: The Turks and Caicos Islands Civil Aviation Authority and United Kingdom Civil Aviation Authority are now involved in the joint IFT-7 Investigation with the Federal Aviation Administration, as of January 18th, 2025.

On January 17th, the FAA issued a statement: “The FAA is requiring SpaceX to perform a mishap investigation into the loss of the Starship vehicle during launch operations on Jan. 16. There are no reports of public injury, and the FAA is working with SpaceX and appropriate authorities to confirm reports of public property damage on Turks and Caicos. During the event, the FAA activated a Debris Response Area and briefly slowed aircraft outside the area where space vehicle debris was falling or stopped aircraft at their departure location. Several aircraft requested to divert due to low fuel levels while holding outside impacted areas.” As of the time of writing, it is unclear what the schedule impacts the FAA’s required investigation will be on Starship’s test campaign. For now, however, the program will come to a halt to support the FAA in understanding what exactly went wrong.  

Starship has been incrementing on the basic launch and landing system for quite some time, with Flight 5 representing the first time that the system was able to demonstrate the pivotal “catch”, snagging the Super Heavy booster out of the air for refurbishment. As Starship prepares to enter its third year of test flights, the company has made progress in advancing the technological capabilities of the system – working through the intense ascent environment and delivering Starship to space. 2025, in theory, should be the year of operational capabilities coming online, but constraints remain on the system surrounding reusability. Both the Ship and Booster are yet to demonstrate a full system turnaround, something they must do in order to support SpaceX’s notional Mars plans, as well as NASA’s broad reaching Artemis Program. As SpaceX continues to iterate on the system’s design, they must soon begin to advance work on technologies required for the Human Landing System, the company’s contribution to the greater Artemis architecture. To do so, SpaceX must demonstrate the ability to launch multiple Starship vehicles in quick succession, demonstrate orbital refueling, and return the upper stage in a usable configuration. The destruction of the V2 Starship is a sobering reminder of the volatility of spaceflight, and presents considerable risk to the Artemis program as the company stares down the barrel of another investigation from the FAA.

With Flight 7 now behind them, SpaceX looks to a new policy environment in which Starship may find its footing, largely dependent on the relationship between Musk and President-elect Trump. The next several months will likely reveal the shape of changes for NASA under the new administration, and in turn what Starship’s role will be within the national space architecture. Musk has pushed Starship’s Mars-shot with greater fervor recently, going so far as to call the moon a “distraction.” Ultimately, NASA’s choice of destination will come down to the 119th Congress, which has so far demonstrated considerable bipartisan support for the continuation of the Artemis program with the Moon as the first stop on the way to Mars. However, SpaceX remains a powerful voice in the U.S aerospace sector, and could leverage this in their favor. Only time will tell what the new administration and ecosystem will bring to the Starship program, but the outcome of flight 7 provides very little clarity.

Edited by Beverly Casillas