SpaceX’s plan to launch its mammoth two-stage Starship-Super Heavy tandem from NASA’s Kennedy Space Center has drawn the attention — and concerns — of two rival space companies, who are warning federal officials that the 492-foot-tall rocket will be too untested. , too dangerous and too potentially disruptive to the nation’s busiest spaceport and surrounding environment.
United Launch Alliance and Blue Origin — both of which have significant footprints on the Space Coast and view SpaceX as direct competition — submitted written comments to the Federal Aviation Administration.
The FAA is preparing an environmental impact statement to evaluate the potential impacts of starship launches up to 44 times a year from pad 39A at KSC. SpaceX is also looking for a potential second Starship launch pad at the adjacent Cape Canaveral Space Force Station.
“As the largest rocket in existence, an accident would cause severe or even catastrophic damage, while normal launch operations would have a cumulative impact on structures, launch vehicle hardware and other critical launch support equipment,” ULA officials wrote in the 22-page document. FAA letter.
ULA cited the explosion of a starship in April 2023 at SpaceX’s private launch site in Boca Chica, Texas, which sent debris flying across a six-mile radius. At the Cape, ULA officials noted that their launch pad is only three miles from pad 39A, and other companies are found nearby.
“If a similar accident were to occur again, debris would enter ULA operations and could injure people or damage property. And with the increased liftoff thrust planned for Starship, debris from a similar launch failure could reach larger, populated areas around KSC,” the ULA letter said.
Blue Origin employs more than 2,700 full-time workers in Brevard County and has invested more than $1 billion to develop the world’s first privately built heavy-lift launch complex for future launches of New Glenn rockets.
Cape Canaveral:Is it launching today? SpaceX, NASA and ULA rocket launch schedule in Florida
In a three-page letter to the FAA, Blue Origin officials proposed limiting the number of Starship-Super Heavy launches and landings “to a number that has minimal impact on the local environment, local operating personnel and the local community.”
And ULA urged the government to consider an alternative to allowing SpaceX to bring Starship to KSC: Keep the giant rocket in Boca Chica, where it is now.
SpaceX media representatives did not return messages seeking comment for this story.
Space companies compete for contracts
In the days following the FAA’s comments from its competitors, SpaceX founder and CEO Elon Musk had only two words for X: “Sue Origin.” Some media reports have characterized these comments on the Starship environmental study as a battle between billionaires, particularly Musk and Blue Origin founder Jeff Bezos.
However, Don Platt, director of the Florida Institute of Technology’s Spaceport Education Center in Titusville, said, “If a large company has the opportunity to complain about one of its competitors in an open public forum, they probably will. .”
“You have to consider the source. They’re not going to just hand over the keys to the space industry to SpaceX. And right now it seems like it’s actually happening,” Platt said.
“And it’s not really because of anything that the government is being unfair about or anything like that. It’s just that SpaceX is just that, they work. They do their thing. They are successful. And both Blue Origin and ULA are struggling to keep up,” he said.
Potential starship missions aside, SpaceX rockets have accounted for 46 of the Space Coast’s 49 orbital launches so far this year. ULA has recorded three more launches, while Blue Origin officials hope to begin launching New Glenn rockets by the end of the year.
All three space companies are competitors for NASA contracts. Tensions between SpaceX and Blue Origin developed after NASA selected Starship to land humans on the moon with the Artemis program. Blue Origin filed a lawsuit against NASA, further stating that Starship is “extremely complex and high risk.”
By 2023, NASA was in a position to add a second human landing system for Artemis. Blue Moon Blue Origin has been selected by NASA to land astronauts on the moon alongside Starship on future missions.
Blue Origin, ULA Warn of Starship Dangers
The FAA is preparing an environmental impact statement for Starship as part of its licensing process to allow future launches from KSC. The U.S. Air Force is separately conducting an environmental study on SpaceX’s goal of bringing Starship-Super Heavy launches to Launch Complex 37 at the Cape Canaveral Space Force Station by 2026.
In their letters to the FAA, Blue Origin and ULA warned of a number of dangers associated with the starship. Among the companies’ concerns:
- Starship-Super Heavy operations are expected to have a greater environmental impact than any launch system operating on the Space Coast, Blue Origin said, adding that the two-stage rocket “can hold up to an unprecedented 5,200 metric tons of liquid methane for propulsion.” “
- Instead of using drone ships in the Atlantic Ocean, landing boosters on Pad 39A “shifts the risks of system failure to the communities, businesses and environment that surrounds KSC,” ULA said.
- Blue Origin has expressed concerns about the safety of its employees and property in the event of an anomaly, citing concerns about debris dispersion, blast overpressure, acoustic booms, explosion, fire, noise, air toxins and hazardous materials.
- Disruption of other launch providers. “SpaceX strives to frequently launch the largest rocket ever from two launch sites within a six-mile radius. Just one Starship launch site is likely to disrupt other launch operations in the area and cause a significant environmental impact,” ULA said.
Locals are also raising awareness about the Starship’s environment
FAA officials accepted public comments on Starship until June 24 and also heard from Brevard groups. The federal agency hosted public open houses in mid-June at the Raddison Resort at the Marina at Cape Canaveral and the KSC Visitor Complex. The project website is at faa.gov/space/stakeholder_engagement/spacex_starship_ksc
In a letter to the FAA, Merritt Island Wildlife Association President Charlie Venuto praised the conversion of pad 39A for Starship — especially compared to the option of building a new launch complex on undeveloped KSC land.
However, Titusville-based MIWA says the FAA’s environmental study should address a number of Starship’s environmental implications, such as:
- Quality of a stormwater management system to protect the ecologically endangered Indian River Lagoon.
- Effects of artificial lighting on nesting sea turtles, migratory and breeding birds, and nocturnal wildlife.
- Cumulative effects on air quality, stratospheric ozone depletion, habitat destruction, ability to practice conservation management techniques such as controlled burning, and carbon emissions, including Blue Origin’s upcoming New Glenn rockets.
In a 10-page letter, Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge officials noted that the KSC and Cape Canaveral Space Force Station environmental studies “appear to be linked actions that are being considered separately, making the two impact analyses, including cumulative impacts, less effective.” and less complex and requiring substantial cross-integration between the two.”
The Southeast Fisheries Association said it supports national defense and space exploration efforts. That said, the group wants the FAA study to include the physical, social and economic impacts of Starship on all stakeholders, including fishing families, local communities, businesses, restaurants, lodging facilities and Florida’s tourism industry.
UCF space expert: The key is a few robust space companies
Phil Metzger is director of the Stephen W. Hawking Center for Microgravity Research & Education at the University of Central Florida. He said in an email that he thinks ULA’s announcement about Starship is fair because it asks the FAA to do its job while being mindful of potential impacts on the environment, neighboring communities and other companies starting operations on the Cape.
“They noted that it is in the national interest to have multiple healthy launch companies for secure access to space, so that the operations of one company should not shut down its competitors. I think all of that is legitimate and should be highlighted,” Metzger said.
But he said he thinks Blue Origin made a “serious mistake” when it proposed limiting the speed of starship launches.
“That would be the least creative and least helpful solution to potential problems on the Cape,” Metzger said.
“Space is becoming more important to the world, to national security and to economic prosperity, and the US must increase launches – from all providers – not create limits that will ultimately harm every society and nation. whole,” he said.
For the latest news from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station and NASA’s Kennedy Space Center, visit floridatoday.com/space.
Brooke Edwards is a space reporter for Florida Today. Contact her at bedwards@floridatoday.com or X: @brookeofstars.
Space is important to us, and that’s why we work to bring you top-notch coverage of the industry and startups in Florida. Such journalism takes time and resources. Please support it by subscribing here.