.jpg) Booster 12 on final approach to the launch tower | |
| Mission type | Suborbitalflight test |
|---|---|
| Operator | SpaceX |
| Mission duration | 1 hour, 5 minutes, 40 seconds |
| Spacecraft properties | |
| Spacecraft | StarshipShip 30 |
| Spacecraft type | Starship |
| Manufacturer | SpaceX |
| Start of mission | |
| Launch date | October 13, 2024, 7:25 amCDT (12:25 UTC)[1] |
| Rocket | Super Heavy (B12) |
| Launch site | Starbase,OLP-1 |
| End of mission | |
| Landing date |
|
| Landing site |
|
| Orbital parameters | |
| Regime | Suborbital |
| Periapsis altitude | −15 km (−9.3 mi)[2] |
| Apoapsis altitude | 213 km (132 mi)[2] |
| Inclination | 26.2°[2] |
 Mission patch | |
Starship flight test 5 was the fifthflight test of aSpaceX Starship launch vehicle.SpaceX performed the flight test on October 13, 2024. Theprototype vehicles flown were theStarship Ship 30 upper stage andSuper Heavy Booster 12.
After launching and delivering theStarship upper stage into asuborbital trajectory heading toward asplashdown in theIndian Ocean, theSuper Heavy booster turned around and fired itsRaptor engines toreturn to the launch site. As the booster approached the launch pad, it slowed to a nearhover and did a horizontal slide maneuver to line itself up with two massive "chopstick" arms on thelaunch tower, called "Mechazilla". The arms then closed around the booster before the engines shut down.
The rocket launched on the morning of 13 October 2024, one day after theFederal Aviation Administration (FAA) issued a launch permit that had been delayed since early August and after weeks of increasingly public feuding between SpaceX and the FAA.
During a company all-hands in April 2024, SpaceX CEOElon Musk expanded briefly on the goals of flight test 5, stating that the first tower landing could occur, depending on B11's virtual landing performance during the fourth flight test.[3] In June, Musk stated the heatshield tiles on the flight 5 vehicle will be twice as strong along with a new ablative protection layer underneath.[4] The process of removing the old Thermal Protection System began on June 11.[5] Multiple tests occurred with the hydraulic arms on the launch tower in preparation for the booster catch.[6]
Static fire testing of Ship 30 occurred in early May in preparation for flight 5.[7] This was the last static fire conducted at the now-demolished Suborbital Pad B,[8] as all subsequent tests use thestatic fire stand atMassey's Test Site.[9] Booster 12 moved to the launch pad on July 9.[10] The booster performed a spin prime test on July 12; it was the first time a spin prime test was performed sinceBooster 9 in August 2023.[11] A static fire of Booster 12 was completed on July 15 and Ship 30 static fire was conducted on July 26.[12][13] On September 21, S30 was stacked onto B12, with SpaceX claiming that this stack was for Flight 5, "pending regulatory approval".[14]
On June 12, theFederal Aviation Administration (FAA) said that no mishap investigation would be required prior to the launch of flight 5.[15] In anticipation of the fifth flight, SpaceX applied for a communications license from theFederal Communications Commission (FCC), with a start date of July 19.[16] In early August, SpaceX claimed that both stages were ready to fly for flight test 5.[17]
In September, SpaceX communicated that the FAA had shifted their license approval timeframe from later that month to November, and wrote about issues with the FAA's licensing processes forStarship flight tests.[18][19] SpaceX claimed that government paperwork prevented it from flying Starship quickly to meet commitments to the Artemis program.[19] In a statement to journalists, the FAA reiterated that the license authorizingStarship test flight 4 also allowed for multiple flights of the same vehicle configuration and mission profile. However, because SpaceX chose to modify both in an attempt to "catch" the Super Heavy booster through areturn-to-launch-site maneuver, it triggered a more in-depth review because of the changed impact location of the hot stage ring and the sonic boom that would be generated.[20] The delay was described as being 60 days because of the required consultation with theUS Fish & Wildlife Service for the sonic boom effects and also 60 days of consultation with theNational Marine Fisheries Service for the impact on ocean wildlife. This was repeated by the FAA on October 2.[21] Despite this, the FAA issued a license for the launch on October 12, without offering any explanation as to what prompted the change.[22][23]
The mission profile for flight test 5 differed from the previous flight. While Ship 30 splashed down in the Indian Ocean, as Ship 29 did, B12 shut off its engines thirteen seconds earlier and returned to the launch site for a catch.[1]
After launching and delivering the Starship upper stage to an altitude of 69 kilometers (43 mi) on a trajectory heading toward space, theSuper Heavy booster flipped around and fired itsRaptor engines toreturn to the launch site. As the booster approached the launch pad, the launch mount reactivated its water deluge system to prevent destruction. The booster slowed to a nearhover and did a horizontal slide maneuver to line itself up with two massive "chopstick" arms on the launch tower, "Mechazilla". The arms then closed around the booster before the engines shut down.[24][2]
The upper-stageStarship spacecraft reached anapogee of 212 km (132 mi) before a controlledwater landing in theIndian Ocean. Video showed minor damage to thecontrol flaps duringre-entry, but despite this, it splashed down with high accuracy in the water near a pre-positionedbuoy that captured video of the splashdown. Ship 30, which was never intended to be recovered, erupted in a large fireball about 16 seconds after it hit the water.[2]
| Time | Event[1] | October 13, 2024 |
|---|---|---|
| −01:15:00 | Flight director conducts a poll and verifies go for propellant loading | Go for propellant loading |
| −00:49:50 | Starship fuel (liquid methane) load start | Success |
| −00:48:40 | Starship oxidizer (liquid oxygen) load start | Success |
| −00:40:40 | Super Heavy fuel (liquid methane) load start | Success |
| −00:34:03 | Super Heavy oxidizer (liquid oxygen) load start | Success |
| −00:19:40 | Super Heavy and Starship engine chill | Success |
| −00:03:20 | Starship propellant load complete | Success |
| −00:02:50 | Super Heavy propellant load complete | Success |
| −00:00:30 | Flight director verifies go for launch | Go for launch |
| −00:00:10 | Flame deflector activation | Success |
| −00:00:03 | Super Heavy engine ignition | Success |
| +00:00:02 | Liftoff | Success |
| +00:01:02 | Throttle down formaxq during ascent (moment of peak mechanical stress on the rocket) | Success |
| +00:02:35 | Super Heavy most engines cutoff (MECO) | Success |
| +00:02:40 | Starship engine ignition andstage separation (hot-staging) | Success |
| +00:02:45 | Super Heavy boostback burn start | Success |
| +00:03:41 | Super Heavy boostback burn shutdown | Success |
| +00:03:43 | Hot-stage jettison | Success |
| +00:06:08 | Super Heavy issupersonic | — |
| +00:06:30 | Super Heavy landing burn start | Success |
| +00:06:54 | Super Heavy landing burn shutdown and catch | Success |
| +00:08:27 | Starship engine cutoff (SECO) | Success |
| +00:48:03 | Starship atmospheric reentry | Success |
| +01:02:34 | Starship is transonic | — |
| +01:03:43 | Starship is subsonic | — |
| +01:05:15 | Starship landing flip | Success |
| +01:05:20 | Starship landing burn | Success |
| +01:05:40 | Starshipsplashdown | Success |
NASA AdministratorBill Nelson praised the flight stating "Congratulations to SpaceX on its successful booster catch and fifth Starship flight test today!".[25] Retired Canadian astronautChris Hadfield hailed the flight, declaring that "there was an enormous step forward in human capability today".[26]
Fellowaerospace manufacturers also congratulated SpaceX includingBlue Origin,[27]Stoke Space,[28] andRocket Factory Augsburg, with the latter commending the company's "incredible feat of engineering" and commenting that at its current pace, the European space industry has "no chance" of catching up to SpaceX.[29] André Loesekrug-Pietri, president of theJoint European Disruptive Initiative, made a similar statement, calling it "a huge slap in the face to the Europeans, who are leaving history".[30]
| Launch vehicles |
| ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Spacecraft |
| ||||||||
| Test vehicles |
| ||||||||
| Rocket engines | |||||||||
| Lists of missions | |||||||||
| Launch facilities | |||||||||
| Landing sites |
| ||||||||
| Other facilities | |||||||||
| Support |
| ||||||||
| Contracts | |||||||||
| R&D programs | |||||||||
| Key people |
| ||||||||
| Related | |||||||||
* denotes unflown vehicles or engines, and future missions or sites. † denotes failed missions, destroyed vehicles, and abandoned sites. | |||||||||
