Connect with us

News

SpaceX’s Starship explosion explained by Elon Musk

The burning wreckage of Starship SN4, May 29th. (SPadre)

Published

on

Shortly after a briefing following SpaceX’s flawless astronaut launch debut, CEO Elon Musk casually revealed the best explanation yet for why a Starship prototype violently exploded during testing on May 29th.

On that fated Saturday, SpaceX successfully completed the fifth static fire of a Raptor engine installed on a full-scale Starship prototype, preceded by about an hour and a half of vehicle checks and propellant loading. Unfortunately, around a minute after Raptor shut down, what was quickly identified as liquid methane began spurting out of a specific section at the base of Starship, rapidly creating a massive cloud as the cryogenic propellant boiled and turned into gas. The specific source is unclear but moments later, something under Starship SN4 provided the shock or spark needed to ignite the expanding fire hazard, producing a spectacularly large and violent explosion.

Unsurprisingly, the accidental fuel-air explosion that was created obliterated Starship SN4 in the blink of an eye, shredding its lower (liquid oxygen) tank into steel confetti and immediately breaching the upper (liquid methane) tank, which fell to the ground and subsequently exploded again. The launch mount Starship was staged on was also damaged beyond repair and has been fully dismantled and scrapped in the two days since the anomaly. Thankfully, however, SpaceX already has replacement mounts and ships well on their way to carrying Starship SN4’s torch forward and Elon Musk already seems to understand what caused the prototype’s demise.

Shortly after a post-launch briefing celebrating and discussing SpaceX’s inaugural astronaut launch on May 30th, Reuters reporter Joey Roulette was able to ask Musk about Starship SN4’s spectacular demise the day prior. The SpaceX CEO was quoted saying that “what we thought was going to be a minor test of a quick disconnect ended up being a big problem”, confirming suspicions based on careful analysis of public views of the explosion that it was caused by issues with Starship’s ground support equipment (GSE).

Advertisement
Starhopper’s quick-disconnect umbilical panel is pictured here in May 2019. Starship SN4 used a similar mechanism, although the plumbing is now located inside the vehicle’s circumference. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

In Musk’s statement, “quick disconnect” (QD) refers to an umbilical port that connects a launch vehicle to GSE, enabling the loading and offloading of propellant and fluids, clamping down the rocket, and providing a wired telemetry and communications link for ground controllers. QDs must perform all those tasks while also being able to rapidly release and disconnect, allowing the rocket to lift off while still protecting its sensitive ports for ease of reuse.

In theory, Starship’s quick-disconnect umbilical panel is even more complex, as it will have to simultaneously enable the ship to be fueled and controlled while sitting on top of a Super Heavy booster and permit in-orbit docking and refueling. Given that Starships are currently being tested independently on spartan launch mounts, it’s unclear if the current generation of prototypes has been outfitted with advanced QD panels. More likely, Musk was referring to a test of a less advanced QD panel similar to the rough version used on Starhopper last year, and SpaceX simply wanted to test its ability to disconnect and reconnect to Starship on command.

SpaceX’s existing Starship launch mount was heavily damaged by SN4’s explosion and has since been fully dismantled. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)
Starship SN4’s remains have already been cleared from the pad. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

If that’s the case, the likeliest explanation for SN4’s explosion is that that quick disconnect was unable to fully reconnect after the test, resulting in a leak from the liquid methane port when SpaceX began to detank the rocket. Instead of the highly-pressurized fluid flowing smoothly back to ground storage tanks, the liquid methane sprayed wildly, akin to the effect one might observe when attempting to block off an active water source with an open palm.

Work on a second launch mount was already ongoing when Starship SN4 exploded on May 29th. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)
Starship SN5 and SN6 are simultaneously being assembled in SpaceX’s new vertical assembly building (VAB). (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

Compared to the many possible ways a fueled Starship could fail, a propellant leak started by a faulty umbilical panel is about as convenient as they come. Starship SN4 may have been violently destroyed as a result, turning a relatively small error into exceptionally painful lesson but SpaceX has already had some success building full-scale prototypes at an almost unbelievably low cost – likely less than $10M apiece. Starship SN5 appears to be just shy of ready to take SN4’s place on the launch mount, although SpaceX will have to build an entirely new launch mount before it can resume testing.

At the same time, Starship SN5’s successor – SN6 – is just one stacking event away from reaching a level of completion similar to SN4 and SN5. All told, Starship SN4’s demise is just another part of the process of developing a new kind of rocket by building and testing hardware – failure can be a valuable tool when managed properly. Based on past observations, SpaceX could be ready to continue testing (and hopefully flying) Starship prototypes before the end of the month.

Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.

Advertisement

Eric Ralph is Teslarati's senior spaceflight reporter and has been covering the industry in some capacity for almost half a decade, largely spurred in 2016 by a trip to Mexico to watch Elon Musk reveal SpaceX's plans for Mars in person. Aside from spreading interest and excitement about spaceflight far and wide, his primary goal is to cover humanity's ongoing efforts to expand beyond Earth to the Moon, Mars, and elsewhere.

Advertisement
Comments

Energy

Tesla Powerwall distribution expands in Australia

Inventory is expected to arrive in late February and official sales are expected to start mid-March 2026.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Supply Partners Group has secured a distribution agreement for the Tesla Powerwall in Australia, with inventory expected to arrive in late February and official sales beginning in mid-March 2026.

Under the new agreement, Supply Partners will distribute Tesla Powerwall units and related accessories across its national footprint, as noted in an ecogeneration report. The company said the addition strengthens its position as a distributor focused on premium, established brands.

“We are proud to officially welcome Tesla Powerwall into the Supply Partners portfolio,” Lliam Ricketts, Co-Founder and Director of Innovation at Supply Partners Group, stated.

“Tesla sets a high bar, and we’ve worked hard to earn the opportunity to represent a brand that customers actively ask for. This partnership reflects the strength of our logistics, technical services and customer experience, and it’s a win for installers who want premium options they can trust.”

Advertisement

Supply Partners noted that initial Tesla Powerwall stock will be warehoused locally before full commercial rollout in March. The distributor stated that the timing aligns with renewed growth momentum for the Powerwall, supported by competitive installer pricing, consumer rebates, and continued product and software updates.

“Powerwall is already a category-defining product, and what’s ahead makes it even more compelling,” Ricketts stated. “As pricing sharpens and capability expands, we see a clear runway for installers to confidently spec Powerwall for premium residential installs, backed by Supply Partners’ national distribution footprint and service model.”

Supply Partners noted that a joint go-to-market launch is planned, including Tesla-led training for its sales and technical teams to support installers during the home battery system’s domestic rollout.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Tesla Giga Berlin growth could stall if not “free from external influences”: Elon Musk

The comments were delivered in a pre-recorded video discussion.

Published

on

Credit: Andre Thierig/X

Tesla CEO Elon Musk has reportedly warned that future expansion of Gigafactory Berlin could be jeopardized if the site does not remain “free from external influences.”

Musk’s comments were delivered in a pre-recorded video discussion with employees and came at a sensitive moment for the facility, where union representation has been a recurring issue.

According to reports from Handelsblatt and Der Spiegel, citing participants at the event, Musk suggested that if Giga Berlin is no longer “free from external influences,” further expansion would become unlikely. He did not, however, hint that the plant would shut down.

While Musk did not name IG Metall directly, his remarks were widely interpreted as referencing the union, which is currently the largest faction on the works council but does not hold a majority, as noted in an electrive report. 

Advertisement

The video conversation was conducted between Musk in Austin and Grünheide plant manager André Thierig, then played back to the workforce in Germany. Works council elections are scheduled for early March, heightening the tension between management and organized labor.

The CEO has previously voiced concerns that stronger union influence could limit Tesla’s operational flexibility and long-term strategy in Germany.

Despite the warning on expansion, Musk praised the Giga Berlin site during the same address, describing it as one of the most advanced factories worldwide and highlighting its cleanliness and team culture.

The discussion also reportedly touched on battery cell production. According to attendees cited in German media, Musk indicated that Tesla has begun ramping cell production at the site. That would mark a notable shift from earlier expectations that large-scale cell manufacturing in Brandenburg would not begin until 2027.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Tesla Full Self-Driving’s newest behavior is the perfect answer to aggressive cars

According to a recent video, it now appears the suite will automatically pull over if there is a tailgater on your bumper, the most ideal solution for when a driver is riding your bumper.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla Full Self-Driving appears to have a new behavior that is the perfect answer to aggressive drivers.

According to a recent video, it now appears the suite will automatically pull over if there is a tailgater on your bumper, the most ideal solution for when a driver is riding your bumper.

With FSD’s constantly-changing Speed Profiles, it seems as if this solution could help eliminate the need to tinker with driving modes from the person in the driver’s seat. This tends to be one of my biggest complaints from FSD at times.

A video posted on X shows a Tesla on Full Self-Driving pulling over to the shoulder on windy, wet roads after another car seemed to be following it quite aggressively. The car looks to have automatically sensed that the vehicle behind it was in a bit of a hurry, so FSD determined that pulling over and letting it by was the best idea:

We can see from the clip that there was no human intervention to pull over to the side, as the driver’s hands are stationary and never interfere with the turn signal stalk.

This can be used to override some of the decisions FSD makes, and is a great way to get things back on track if the semi-autonomous functionality tries to do something that is either unneeded or not included in the routing on the in-car Nav.

FSD tends to move over for faster traffic on the interstate when there are multiple lanes. On two-lane highways, it will pass slower cars using the left lane. When faster traffic is behind a Tesla on FSD, the vehicle will move back over to the right lane, the correct behavior in a scenario like this.

Perhaps one of my biggest complaints at times with Full Self-Driving, especially from version to version, is how much tinkering Tesla does with Speed Profiles. One minute, they’re suitable for driving on local roads, the next, they’re either too fast or too slow.

When they are too slow, most of us just shift up into a faster setting, but at times, even that’s not enough, see below:

There are times when it feels like it would be suitable for the car to just pull over and let the vehicle that is traveling behind pass. This, at least up until this point, it appears, was something that required human intervention.

Now, it looks like Tesla is trying to get FSD to a point where it just knows that it should probably get out of the way.

Continue Reading