With plans to launch from Florida, SpaceX's Starship makes it to space, but misses goals
After major setbacks during the past two Starship flights, SpaceX was counting on success this time as it launched the massive Starship on its ninth test flight from Texas — however the May 27 launch saw yet another dramatic ending.
From launch to loss of the ship, high-quality footage was sent to the live coverage via Starlink. The world watched as once again things did not go as hoped for the massive launch system, which will eventually launch from Florida. The May 27 flight was aimed at testing much more than what transpired.
After the past two test flights of the giant rocket ended in the loss of the ship under 10 minutes into the flight, most space observers were hoping for more of a significant comeback — or at least to see most of the flight goals met. While the ship coasted this time for close to 40 minutes and made it to the planned area of reentry, it ended up in a spin which caused it to break apart over the Indian Ocean.
SpaceX noted on the live coverage of the launch that no one was in danger, and the air spaces were cleared.
'Some may focus on the lows, but behind the efforts of Starship — and other programs like New Glenn, Neutron, Vulcan, Terran, Stoke, etc — is a massive space economy taking shape: tens of thousands of jobs, billions in private investment, all aimed at truly opening the last great frontier," Jared Isaacman, President Trump's nominee to be the next NASA administrator, said on X. "When these capabilities arrive, they will spearhead a new era of exploration and discovery —and the lows will become a chapter in a much longer story.'
SpaceX also put on a positive spin.
"With a test like this, success comes from what we learn, and today's test will help us improve Starship's reliability as SpaceX seeks to make life multiplanetary," the company wrote on X.
Earlier, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk had announced an update on the company's Mars ambitions would come over X on May 27 after the launch, yet Musk and SpaceX remained silent after the flight. SpaceX is counting on Starship to not only be the company's next workhouse rocket, but also to send humans to Mars.
NASA is also betting on Starship. It has Starship tapped to act as a human lander for its fast approaching Artemis III moon landing in 2027. The space agency also anticipates it will carry future missions to orbit and beyond, already having added it to the Launch Services Program.
A lot is riding on a massive rocket which is set to eventually launch from Florida but progress has been slow.
It wasn't a total loss for SpaceX, as there was a first.
Tuesday's nineth test flight from Texas was the first to reuse a Super Heavy booster (lower stage). While the past two test flights did not go as well as planned with the ship (upper stage), the Super Heavy booster returned to the launch tower during those flights — in an impressive show toward reusability which was once science fiction. This will allow SpaceX to rapidly reuse boosters and bring down the cost of launches.
For reference, it took SpaceX more than 30 flights to be able to reuse a Falcon 9 booster, which is now routine for the rocket as it lands on a drone ship or landing zone after every launch. It took Starship only nine flights to reuse a booster.
The hope is that future Starship Super Heavy boosters will be capable of multiple launches per day. However, the launch on May 27 was not supposed to see the booster return to the launch tower, as SpaceX stated the plan was to test abnormal scenarios. The plan was to instead safely splash down in the Gulf of America, formerly known as the Gulf of Mexico.
That didn't happen as the flight started to go wrong. The booster was lost upon decent, and footage of the return switched to high quality views of the ship coasting in space.
As the ship coasted, eight mockup Starlink satellites, known as simulators, were planned to be deployed from the ship. This didn't happen either, as the payload door did not open correctly.
As the ship coasted on its suborbital trajectory, the SpaceX team then attempted a relight a single Raptor engine. That had to be forgotten as it was apparent the ship was losing orientation and was now encountering serious issues.
The footage turned a glowing red as the ship held on before its eventual demise over the planned splashdown area in the Indian Ocean.
Despite the missed goals and destruction upon reentry, this ship was able to perform its long coast in space.
The past two test flights from Texas failed under 10 minutes into the flight, resulting in the ship giving dramatic pyrotechnic shows over the islands and waters south of Florida. The last incident on March 6 not only put a ground stop to Florida flights, but was even visible from Cape Canaveral, which is the future launch site of the massive launch system.
After the March 6 incident, SpaceX said it worked with the Bahamian government to organization clean-up efforts. It said that no hazardous material was released in the area, and water and marine life were not at risk from the debris. A launch date from 39A remains uncertain, yet SpaceX previously stated it is aiming for a Florida launch by the end of the year. It is nearing half way through the year, and Starship has yet to reach orbit.
The company also has eyes on Cape Canaveral Launch Complex 37 as a future Starship pad.
A massive Gigabay, a building that will be used to stack and finalize the 232-foot-tall Super Heavy boosters (lower-stages) before flight, is currently under construction by SpaceX's facility on Kennedy Space Center grounds.
The 380-foot-tall structure will rival NASA's Vehicle Assembly Building, which stands at 525-feet-tall. This will make the Gigabay a recognizable feature looming in the distance on approach to Cape Canaveral.
That is good news for the Florida space economy. The governor's office previously stated that brining SpaceX's Starship to Florida will include the addition of at least $1.8 billion of SpaceX capital investment and will bring an estimated 600 new full-time jobs to the area by 2030.
When is the next Florida rocket launch? Is there a launch today? Upcoming SpaceX, Axiom, ULA rocket launch schedule at Cape Canaveral
In future flights, the ship itself is also planned to be returned to the launch site.
'Developmental testing by definition is unpredictable. But by putting hardware in a flight environment as frequently as possible, we're able to quickly learn and execute design changes as we seek to bring Starship online as a fully and rapidly reusable vehicle,' the SpaceX website states.
During the May 27 coverage, SpaceX stated it has a goal of 25 Starship launches per year.
It's not just payloads and lunar landers that Starship will be utilized for. An uncrewed launch to Mars is also in the plans for late next year, when the planet will be close to Earth but Starship needs to make it past the testing phases in order for this to happen.
"With a test like this, success comes from what we learn, and today's test will help us improve Starship's reliability as SpaceX seeks to make life multiplanetary," SpaceX stated on X.
Brooke Edwards is a Space Reporter for Florida Today. Contact her at bedwards@floridatoday.com or on X: @brookeofstars.
This article originally appeared on Florida Today: SpaceX's Starship suffers loss as plans proceed for future Florida launch
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Feds seek to ditch settlement over alleged redlining with North Jersey bank
The Trump administration is asking a judge to drop a 2022 settlement the Justice Department had reached with North Jersey-based Lakeland Bank — which was later absorbed by Provident Bank — over allegations of redlining against Black and Hispanic customers. While Provident Bank said it will continue to provide low-cost mortgages to underserved communities, the motion by the U.S. Justice Department to abandon the settlement has drawn the ire of community advocates and legal experts, who say it would make it easier for banks to engage in redlining. 'It goes without saying it's a good thing when financial institutions are complying with those consent orders, but when you take away the teeth — the actual enforcement — who's to say that they will continue to comply,' said Leila Amirhamzeh, director of community reinvestment for New Jersey Citizen Action, a consumer advocacy four-page motion by the Justice Department, filed May 28 in U.S. District Court, seeks to terminate the consent order the Biden administration negotiated with what was then Lakeland Bank. In the initial complaint, the Justice Department said Lakeland violated the federal Fair Housing Act and Equal Credit Opportunity Act by deliberately avoiding banking with Black and Hispanic customers, particularly in and around Newark. The discrimination in question allegedly took place between 2015 and 2021, according to the Biden administration. To settle the complaint, Lakeland agreed to pay $12 million to subsidize mortgages, home improvement loans and home refinancing loans for Black and Hispanic residents and open two branches in underserved neighborhoods. Lakeland also had to provide $150,000 a year for advertising, outreach and consumer finance education in the Newark area. Newark Mayor and Democratic gubernatorial candidate Ras Baraka wanted one of those new branches to be in his city, and the Greater Toms River Chamber of Commerce also wanted a branch in its area. According to the Provident Bank website, there are currently four locations in Newark and three in Toms River. After acquiring Lakeland, Provident took ownership of the settlement and the mandate to open two branches in underserved areas of New Jersey. The Justice Department in its motion to terminate the order said Lakeland reached substantial commitment to comply with the consent agreement and it is committed to continuing its disbursement of the loan subsidy. Provident spokesperson Keith Buscio told and the USA TODAY Network New Jersey that the bank remains committed to the loan subsidy initiative. He said Provident is not a party to the litigation and referred other questions to the Justice Department. The Justice Department could not immediately be reached for comment. Baraka's office in Newark said it is planning to hold a press conference about the motion by the Justice Department on June 5. Court filings show two attorneys who helped file the initial complaint against Lakeland, Michael Campion and Susan Millenky, withdrew as counsel from the case. Campion was appointed in 2022 to lead the U.S. Attorney's Office's Civil Rights Division that was created to enforce federal civil rights laws in New Jersey. The Fair Housing Act was passed as part of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 to prohibit landlords and mortgage lenders from discriminating based on race, religion, national origin or sex. Nearly 60 years later, racial wealth disparity remains vast. In New Jersey, the median household wealth of white families is $322,500, compared with $17,700 for Black families and $26,100 for Hispanic families, the New Jersey Institute for Social Justice said. In New Jersey, 77.3% of white residents owned a home in 2020. By comparison, 42.8% of Black residents and 32.7% of Hispanic residents were homeowners, according to the Urban Institute, a research group. Critics said the Justice Department's motion to drop the Lakeland settlement is a step by the Trump administration's bid to reverse diversity, equity and inclusion programs. David Troutt, a professor at Rutgers Law School in Newark, said the motion by the Justice Department to terminate the consent decree is part of a larger campaign by the department to rescind investigations and agreements involving anti-Black racism, while beginning investigations into what it deems 'illegal DEI.' 'The Trump administration's withdrawal from a federal consent decree without justification is an extraordinary act of endorsing racist practices and housing market manipulation,' Troutt said. 'For the very government that successfully enforced those borrowers' civil rights to now repudiate them sends a message unlike any we've seen since the federal government first endorsed redlining in the 1930s,' Troutt said. Lakeland isn't the only New Jersey bank that faced scrutiny under the Biden administration. Toms River-based OceanFirst Financial Corp. agreed to pay $14 million to subsidize mortgages, helping settle a lawsuit that alleged the bank violated federal discrimination laws. Since then, it has improved the rating given by federal bank regulators who oversee investments in underserved communities to 'outstanding.' The Justice Department hasn't filed a motion seeking to terminate the consent order with OceanFirst. But two attorneys who represented the U.S. in the initial complaint, Millenky and Nathan Shulock, have filed motions to withdraw from the case, according to the court docket. A combined 22 Provident and Lakeland branches closed in 2024 following the $1.3 billion merger creating a 'super community bank.' Each branch that closed was within roughly three miles of a nearby branch. Activists and opponents warned that the merger would mean fewer banking services would be available for underserved communities, such as people of color, the elderly and disabled. New Jersey Citizen Action applauded Provident for its continued commitment to the terms of the consent order. But the group said the Justice Department should continue to enforce it. 'When you actually terminate these consent orders, there's no deterrence, and it's basically telling financial institutions that the Department of Justice is going to be taking a hands-off approach to fair lending issues, to redlining,' New Jersey Citizen Action's Amirhamzeh said. Daniel Munoz covers business, consumer affairs, labor and the economy for and The Record. Email: munozd@ Twitter:@danielmunoz100 and Facebook Michael L. Diamond is a business reporter for the Asbury Park Press. He has been writing about the New Jersey economy and health care industry since 1999. He can be reached at mdiamond@ This article originally appeared on Feds seek to drop Lakeland Bank settlement over alleged redlining
Los Angeles Times
26 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Trump formally asks Congress to claw back approved spending targeted by DOGE
WASHINGTON — The White House on Tuesday officially asked Congress to claw back $9.4 billion in already approved spending, taking funding away from programs targeted by Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency. It's a process known as 'rescission,' which requires President Donald Trump to get approval from Congress to return money that had previously been appropriated. Trump's aides say the funding cuts target programs that promote liberal ideologies. The request, if it passes the House and Senate, would formally enshrine many of the spending cuts and freezes sought by DOGE. It comes at a time when Musk is extremely unhappy with the tax cut and spending plan making its way through Congress, calling it on Tuesday a 'disgusting abomination' for increasing the federal deficit. White House budget director Russ Vought said more rescission packages and other efforts to cut spending could follow if the current effort succeeds. ' Here's what to know about the rescissions request: The request to Congress is unlikely to meaningfully change the troublesome increase in the U.S. national debt. Tax revenues have been insufficient to cover the growing costs of Social Security, Medicare and other programs. The Congressional Budget Office estimates the government is on track to spend roughly $7 trillion this year, with the rescission request equaling just 0.1% of that total. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters at Tuesday's briefing that Vought would continue to cut spending, hinting that there could be additional efforts to return funds. 'He has tools at his disposal to produce even more savings,' Leavitt said. Vought said he can send up additional rescissions at the end of the fiscal year in September 'and if Congress does not act on it, that funding expires.' 'It's one of the reasons why we are not putting all of our expectations in a typical rescissions process,' he added. A spokesperson for the White House Office of Management and Budget, speaking on condition of anonymity to preview some of the items that would lose funding, said that $8.3 billion was being cut from the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development. NPR and PBS would also lose federal funding, as would the U.S. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, also known as PEPFAR. The spokesperson listed specific programs that the Trump administration considered wasteful, including $750,000 to reduce xenophobia in Venezuela, $67,000 for feeding insect powder to children in Madagascar and $3 million for circumcision, vasectomies and condoms in Zambia. House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., complimented the planned cuts and pledged to pass them. 'This rescissions package reflects many of DOGE's findings and is one of the many legislative tools Republicans are using to restore fiscal sanity,' Johnson said. 'Congress will continue working closely with the White House to codify these recommendations, and the House will bring the package to the floor as quickly as possible.' Members of the House Freedom Caucus, among the chamber's most conservative lawmakers, said they would like to see additional rescission packages from the administration. 'We will support as many more rescissions packages the White House can send us in the coming weeks and months,' the group said in a press release. Sen. Susan Collins, chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, gave the package a less optimistic greeting. 'Despite this fast track, the Senate Appropriations Committee will carefully review the rescissions package and examine the potential consequences of these rescissions on global health, national security, emergency communications in rural communities, and public radio and television stations,' the Maine lawmaker said in a statement. Boak writes for the Associated Press.
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Citigroup reverses firearms policy after pressure from Trump administration on big banks
A month after the 2018 mass school shooting in Parkland, Florida, Citigroup enacted restrictions for its clients that sold firearms — the first major bank on Wall Street to do so. On Tuesday, the bank rolled back that policy. 'We also will no longer have a specific policy as it relates to firearms,' the company said in a statement Tuesday. 'The policy was intended to promote the adoption of best sales practices as prudent risk management and didn't address the manufacturing of firearms.' The decision comes as the Trump administration alleges that Wall Street is biased against conservatives — a right-wing talking point since more than a dozen state auditors accused Bank of America of 'politicized de-banking' in an open letter last year (de-banking is when a bank closes an account for a customer it deems high risk). At the time, Bank of America said it has 'no political litmus test.' On Tuesday, Citi said it was 'following regulatory developments, recent Executive Orders and federal legislation.' In 2018, Citi said it would ban banking services to businesses that sold firearms to those under 21, those who didn't pass a background check, or sold bump stocks (used by the gunman in the 2017 mass shooting in Las Vegas) or high-capacity magazines. The policy applied to small businesses, commercial and institutional clients, and credit card partners, but did not restrict how individual customers used their cards. Big banks have recently caught the ire of the president as well as the crypto industry. In January at the annual World Economic Forum, President Donald Trump scolded Brian Moynihan, the CEO of Bank of America. 'You've done a fantastic job, but I hope you start opening your bank to conservatives, because many conservatives complain that the banks are not allowing them to do business within the bank,' Trump said. 'You and Jamie and everybody… What you're doing is wrong,' referring to JPMorgan Chase head Jamie Dimon. Citigroup also announced on Tuesday that it will update its employee Code of Conduct and its external Global Financial Access Policy 'to clearly state that we do not discriminate on the basis of political affiliation in the same way we are clear that we do not discriminate on the basis of other traits such as race and religion.' Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
