On June 18 Starship Ship 36 blew on the pad at Boca Chica. It was not nuclear, but it was a blast on the scale of dozens of MOABs. Boca Chica is no longer empty scrub. It is homes, schools, and a wildlife refuge. That reality sets the stage for what comes next.
Now SpaceX is lining up for Flight 10, the 10th integrated test of the Starship Super Heavy system. Ten flights in, with more failures than successes, the stakes are higher than ever. If it works, it is progress. If it fails at the launch pad or early ascent, it could become one of the largest non-nuclear blasts anyone has ever seen.
There is no question that SpaceX keeps pushing limits. Every test, even the ones that end in fireballs, adds to what they know. They build quickly, learn relentlessly, and are not afraid to strap a rocket back together and roll it out again. That kind of grit drives progress, and no one can take that away from them. For better or worse, no other company has matched the pace or the ambition.
But that pace comes with cracks. The FAA scrambles to keep up, putting out TFRs and NOTAMs to protect pilots, controllers, and operators, yet it is still a patchwork defense. Each launch shuts down wide corridors of airspace across the Gulf and south Texas. IFR traffic is rerouted, VFR flights pushed aside, and flow controls ripple across the NAS. One rocket launch can cause delays stretching far beyond Texas, with crews and dispatchers forced to adjust routes on the fly. On the ground, locals are left with roadblocks and shelter-in-place rumors. Safety, airspace, and people on both sides of the border keep carrying the risk.
And the risk is no small thing. If the worst happens it will not be just smoke and noise. These launches pack kilotons of TNT, like dozens of MOABs going off at once, right next to schools, neighborhoods, and a national refuge. Add the cross-border fallout and two countries could be rattled. At that point it is no longer an engineering problem, it is a public-safety gamble.
That is why Aug. 24 feels like a roll of the dice. Stakeholders will be watching. Will it be another step forward or a lesson from failure “that provided valuable data”?
And yes, it is well understood. SpaceX is chasing the future, but Boca Chica is the wrong place for a test site carrying this kind of blast radius. Offshore pads were once on the table. It is time to put them back.
This is an interesting perspective. When I used to work the aerospace trade shows, one of the vendors had a film loop of early NASA and USAF rocket launch failures to the “William Tell Overture”. It ran for a very long time
History is replete with disproportionately oversized footprints, some geographic, others less geographic but simply breathing more than their fair share of society’s oxygen. This footprint is both.
Horrible biased anti-Elon article. There are no schools in Boca Chica. The “neighborhoods” are no where near the launch site. There have been far more successes than failures in the test flights of Starship.
Hi Raf,
No bigger SpaceX fan boy than me. That said, can’t really disagree with you on this. Don’t know what drove the initial decision to crank up at Boca Chica instead of Cape Canaveral. Aside from other issues is the extremely limited launch azimuth available from BC. They’re finally ramping up operations now at Cape Canaveral but now they have this massive infrastructure at BC. I’ll be glued to my computer for flight 10. Hmm . . . if clear skies, might be able to see it looking south from here in Titusville.
What is the “extremely limited launch azimuth” issue?
Launch sites need to be as far south as possible to take advantage of the Earth’s rotational velocity. BC’s Latitude is almost 200 miles hundred miles further south than Cape Canaveral, so what azimuth issue do you see?
The launch azimuth limits reflect the need to not overfly inhabited areas when a failure will precipitate debris potentially harming people or structures. It’s why they don’t launch to the east out of Vandenberg.
For instance, launches out of Canaveral are limited to azimuths of 120 degrees or less (to avoid overflying Caribbean islands and south America) and more than 28 degrees (to avoid overflying the East Coast). There are also “cutouts” in the available launch azimuth due to the need to miss specific areas.
If you look at launches from Boca Chica in relation to the overall Gulf of Mexico, they have to “thread” their way between a lot of islands (how would Cuba react to a rocket crashing down on Havana?), and, of course the north coast of South America (an era traditionally called the ‘Spanish Main’).
What this means is tremendously restricted usability for any launches from Boca Chica if the mission is related to Earth-centered activity. Going to the Moon or Mars isn’t as limited, but if you hope to get commercial customers, you’ll need to launch out of Canaveral, Vandenberg, Kodiak, or any of the other established space ports.
“More than 28 degrees,” not “less’ as I mistyped. Hey AVBrief, we need an edit-post function. 🙂
BC is only for testing and development of the new vehicle, it was never intended to be used as an operational port. Facilities are already been constructed at Canaveral for it to launch from when it becomes operational.
I suspect the “launch azimuth” refers to the track over the ground which a rocket launched follows. If the rocket blows up during ascent, the debris could land along that track. Look east from Boca Chica, and you see Florida. Look south from that, and you see Cuba.There is a very narrow range of azimuths from Boca Chica which thread the gap between Florida and Cuba. That affects which orbital inclinations a rocket can achieve with a given energy budget. This NasaSpaceFlight forum post https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=59970.msg2634076#msg2634076 talks about the issue.
Thomas, thanks for the post. You’re right on the azimuth limits. From Boca Chica the safe slice is about 90°–120° east/southeast over the Gulf and Caribbean, threading between Florida, Cuba, and the islands. We’ve been on this rodeo before. The other option, 140°–160°, crosses the Yucatán Peninsula in Mexico, which makes it far less desirable. That’s why critics say it can’t match Cape Canaveral’s wider 35°–120° corridor, which avoids overflying land until well downrange.
Terribly biased “Sky is Falling” article. The Boca Chica launch site is about as remote a location one could find, in an area where very few people live, or fly either privately or commercially. The launch TFR’s are very small, much, much smaller than NASA Shuttle launches in FL, and they’re much more remote than Cape Canaveral. The launch corridors go due east out over the Gulf, completely away from people, and in an area of very few aircraft flight routes, and sea shipping routes. I live in South Texas, these launches go almost un-noticed by pilots, they’re in an area where very few people fly. A much bigger impact are all the drone flight areas monitoring the border, and all the military flight training areas. Open up SkyVector and click on the DROTAMs button. South Texas is covered with DROTAMs, numerous MOA’s, along with some Restricted areas.
Yes, there are risks; larger rockets do require more fuel, so the explosions from failures do get larger. But, do we keep trying to advance spaceflight, or just cease development, and decide we’re done?
Being the author thinks this such a terrible location, he should at least have the courtesy of identifying what he feels is a better, safer, more remote launch location, with fewer impacts, for comparisons. Or, is the author just trying to shut down ALL launches or kill SpaceX?
This is a totally ridiculous article, with an obviously hidden agenda.
After viewing the Starbase site on Google Maps, I’d have to agree that it really does appear to be quite remote and not likely to pose any more danger to neigboring populations than, say, the Cape Canveral launch site.
That said, I don’t see any indication that the author of the article wants to shut down Space X. In fact, he’s very complimenary of Space X’s many contributions to space technology and progress.
I have been to Boca Chica several times to see the growth of SpaceX. I have also been to Canaveral.
Looking at Google maps. In Florida, Jetty Point and Port Canaveral to LCH 46 is less than 5.5 miles. In Texas, From Starbase to Isla Blanca Beach on South Padre is 5.9 miles and to the Port of Brownsville which is way smaller than the Cruise Line terminal at Port Canaveral is 11 miles.
Overall, Boca Chica is much more remote and Star Base is a company town to house workers who are evcauated during tests so I don’t get the houses and schools comment. I do understand the impact on Beach access, but there are a lot of better beaches. Wildlife in Fl is much more plentiful than in Boca Chica as well. I think they are sited pretty well for what they are doing.
This is such a terrible take. And here I was looking forward to this website.
Guys, this article has “COMMENTARY” prominently highlighted under its title. That’s the problem with a website that prints articles written by humans instead of AI-produced promotional pablum: sometimes you read things you don’t agree with.
One would think that the “World’s Richest Man” could afford to site his Star Base on one of the Macapa islands, well away from all those annoying US citizens and federal oversight, however.
I think that Russ should use John Kliewer’s comment as the subhead to this piece.
Can the admins of this site please reconsider posting nonsense like this? Raf has a history of spouting nonsense on this topic. It is a serious discredit to this site.
Raf’s opinions have been a welcome addition to conversations of all sorts for many years. You don’t need to agree, but his take on Boca Chica is shared by many.
Well, I hope they pull it off on Sunday. Would hate to find Elon’s 9′ gold bust on Hwy 4 scattered into pieces or the murals of Musk’s face and the DOGE Shiba Inu plaster of two 30-foot concrete towers found destroyed at a dusty turnout on “Mars-a-Lago” road nearby.
Bad for morale. Especially considering “Musk has touted Starship for the colonization of Mars, and in a recent presentation, he suggested the craft could make multiple flights to the Red Planet as soon as 2026.”
As John referenced above, maybe better start saving some of that oxygen for the time waiting for a table at Mars 2112 restaurant on Tempe Terra, Mars. Time flies, don’tcha know.
“That’s the problem with a website that prints articles written by humans instead of AI-produced promotional pablum: sometimes you read things you don’t agree with.”
But, but but… writing something the average Elon Musk fanboi doesn’t like is now illegal and criminal and has to be cancelled.
Commentary/ Op Ed/ Opinion… doesn’t matter what you name it. If it goes against doctrine and groupthink – its criminal.
Opinion is sometimes unpopular. If you want it cancelled, head on over to AVweb. Content over there is sterilized by AI.
“…like dozens of MOABs going off at once, right next to schools…” The nearest school I could find is over 15 miles away.
Nor does a failing rocket explode like a bomb.
This site will eventually become sterile if it relies on overblown hyperbole like this.
Scaling, or risk modeling, matters. It’s how fuel becomes a real-world threat. It’s difficult to picture 3,400 tons of methane and oxygen in a blowup, but some of us have seen videos of a MOAB dropped in Afghanistan. That’s the point of comparison.
At 30% efficiency, a Max-Q failure still delivers over 5 kilotons of TNT—the equivalent of about 450 MOABs. Max-Q is where stress peaks. If the rocket breaks up there, the debris spreads fast, riding winds. A 10-knot wind can carry sharp, burning fragments miles beyond the launch path.
That’s why the FAA and Coast Guard drew a 12-nautical mile hazard radius, not out of caution, but based on real models and past failures.
As for the “remote” claim, the outskirts of Matamoros sit in the downrange arc. Schools, homes, and training centers lie in that zone. Rocket failures do not respect borders.
Matamoros is NOT downrange.
MOABs are not a valid comparison.
The Dunning-Kruger effect on full display here.
Here we go again. “We have met the enemy and he is us.”
For those who commented there are no schools near the launch pad are incorrect. There are schools between 6 and 8 miles from the Spacex launchpad. In fact, property owners of boca chica pay taxes to the Point Isabel School district and the students living in Boca Chica can be bused to the schools in Port Isabel.
Also, The prevailing winds are from the southeast, therefore, Port Isabel is in the path of noise and debris vs Matamoras to the southwest. It has been documented Port Isabel had debris in the form of concrete dust from a launch and everyone in the City of Port Isabel is subject to shock waves and sonic booms during a launch.
if you live in a metropolitan area, this area is remote. Remote is subjective. .I live in Port Isabel,
And do not consider Port Isabel as remote. So, on Sunday if there is a launch, my family including my dog will have to endure the noise, pollution and traffic and then , once again, inspect our home for broken windows and damage. You are fortunate your dog is not running around your home as our does during a launch.
I have been in my home for Years before Elon Musk discovered paradise. Thank you for your commentary.
Perhaps a noncombustible electric sattelite launcher would be the ticket…
SpinLaunch (www.spinlaunch.com) certainly thinks so.
The countdown is ticking. SpaceX is ready to launch Starship Flight 10 from Boca Chica, Texas, today, Sunday, August 24, 2025, at 6:30 p.m. CDT (weather permitting).
A little over a minute into flight, the rocket will reach Max Q at roughly 35,000 ft. Soon after, the Super Heavy booster will shut down, separate, and flip back for a controlled splashdown in the Gulf of Mexico about six minutes after liftoff.
From there, the Starship upper stage takes over. It will climb to orbit, open its payload bay, release eight test Starlink satellites, and attempt a Raptor engine restart in space. About 47 minutes after launch, Starship will re-enter Earth’s atmosphere, perform its flip maneuver, and target a splashdown in the Indian Ocean, more than 10,000 miles from Boca Chica.
Watch → spacex.com/launches/starship-flight-10
“There’s a fine line between a bomb and a rocket. The finer the line, the better the rocket….”
The entire solar system is waiting for someone to invent a means of propulsion that doesn’t depend on air or a barely-controlled explosion. *If* you had a propulsion system that could provide continuous 1/4 G acceleration, it’s take just four days to get to Mars.
I’ve had several “off nominal trajectories” in my life so I can sympathize with Spacex. Hope the launch goes well tomorrow or whenever. BTW, where’s the gulf of America?
The Gulf of America remains uncharted, primarily due to its erratic, progressive widening and expansion.
However, evidence of it can be occasionally heard and seen from the speech and actions of those who can no longer see any of its shores.
The wet one is mapped as the Gulf of Mexico…🌊
Given his propensity for slapping his name on anything he considers “his”, we got lucky …
Update: Reuters says Flight 10 was scrubbed for a ground systems issue; Express-News and Times of India (via Musk) confirm it was a LOX leak on the ground side. Sensors caught it in time. Historically these fixes take days to about a week, but maybe not for Spacex.
The next try for Starship Flight 10, the 400 feet tall and weighing around 11 million pounds, is set for today, Tuesday, August 26, 2025, at 5:30 PM MDT (6:30 PM CDT / 7:30 PM EDT). The first shot on Aug 24 was scrubbed for a ground-side LOX leak, and the second on Aug 25 got scrubbed for weather. Live stream on the SpaceX site → https://www.spacex.com/launches/starship-flight-10
11,000,000 pounds…
= 25 Statues of Liberty
= Big Brutus mining shovel
= about half of an average sized CB cloud
= I/1000 of the guilt weight of an average catholic
Which reminds me of my beloved Flash Gordon lunch box from those early school days, and SpaceX’s Mad Dreamer’s penchant for retro-sci-fi looking polished spaceships, and drone ships named ‘Of Course I Still Love You’
Safe travels to planet Mongo on Zarkov’s rocket ship. Think I’ll stay behind on this one and enjoy oxygen for my remaining years.
Starship Flight 10 is in the books. Booster 16 nailed it, Ship 37 made orbit, dropped payload, and came back down as planned. Ten flights in, the system’s proving itself. Mission accomplished, chapter closed, gateway open. Serious redemption for the program.
One hell of a successful launch and recovery. Who’da thunk it? These folks know they’re stuff and maybe are a glimmer of hope for EVERYONE. Moonbase first then perhaps the Mars thing. “Life” and Humanity needs a lifeboat before the big rock hits. See all them craters? that’s not sparkling wine (Champagne for Euros) bubbling up on planets or moons. That’s the big period at the end of the sentence.