On June 18, 2025, SpaceX’s Starship Ship 36 exploded during a static-fire test at Starbase near Boca Chica, Texas, around 11:00 p.m. The blast destroyed key ground infrastructure, shook homes across the region and sparked fires that burned through the night. It wasn’t just another test—it was a major industrial failure with fallout that reached across the border.
Starbase is less than three miles from the Mexico–U.S. border and surrounded by sensitive ecosystems, working-class neighborhoods and international waterways. The explosion’s shockwave and debris extended into Mexican territory. Aluminum fragments, tanks and plastic panels marked with “SpaceX” have been found on Mexican beaches, including Playa Bagdad, where environmental groups are warning of harm to sea turtle nesting sites and coastal fisheries. On the U.S. side, towns like Port Isabel and Laguna Heights have reported damage and concerns, yet few safety protocols exist for either side.
This is not the first time. Starship tests have repeatedly ended in fireballs and debris showers. The problem isn’t just the risk—it’s the location. Starbase sits in one of the worst places imaginable for explosive testing. Close to homes, close to wildlife refuges and close to another sovereign nation. There are virtually no other sites in the world where heavy-lift test launches happen this close to civilians and an international border.
SpaceX calls it innovation. In reality, it’s risk offloading. Every failure leaves behind wreckage for others to deal with. No cross-border consultation. No evacuation plans. No acknowledgment of environmental damage. When a private company can toss wreckage into another country and the FAA continues to look the other way, that’s not just a policy gap—it’s a failure of duty.
People in aviation understand risk, but we also understand responsibility. This isn’t a minor concern. It’s time for regulators to take a hard look at Starbase. If the risk footprint includes Mexican towns and American communities alike, then the current model is unacceptable.
Unfortunate circumstances that emerging tech sectors have to answer for and deal with. Perhaps other sites may well deal with some of these potential situations and their potential upsides with more welcoming arms. Consider Northern Vancouver Island with it’s low population base, mild climate, road access and strategic location on Canada’s west coast. Port Hardy has a DND WW2 airfield, great harbour and ready access to the open waters of the central Pacific. Don’t forget that your dollar goes further up here as well!
I guess they’ll let anyone write in here!
Very informative, Raf. Agree it’s risk offloading. He wanted out of CA badly and took up in Texas knowing regulations and taxes (among other personal freedom disagreements) would be malleable by political influence and power to his favor.
Disgusting display of corporate irresponsibility on the incident you’ve described.
I don’t think the Invaders, or Martians as they’re often called have anything to worry about.
Companies should be empowered to innovate - but with the rights conferred come responsibilities. SpaceX should be allowed licenses alongside responsibilities to absorb ALL costs associated with damage to property, ecosystems, and any losses incurred by residents (both commercial and personal). That way, jeopardy is not offloaded, but will be the only thing that really means these “innovative” companies embed the real risks in their decision making.
It is unbelievable that local governments are so happy for their residents, let alone others living in adjacent countries are put at risk like this with no consequences.
Also, the impact of SpaceX’s reckless behaviour is not restricted to countries adjacent to the US border…
Oh, clutch my pearls! Delicate ecosystems!
Do you mean the ones on the beaches where the locals are allowed to drive their 4WDS on? What does that do to turtle habitats?
SpaceX organized Boca Chica back in 2012 and didn’t do anything for some years.
As for other locations, you need something with ocean to the east so Northern Vancouver Island is a non starter. California (VandenBerg) is only good for polar orbits and they are still launching there.
Was anybody hurt? No. BTW SpaceX actually try to get upper stages to reenter where they won’t cause harm, unlike the Chinese. Sometimes it goes wrong.
What a mean spirited article. Is the author a member of one of the very small groups of “environmental” loons who are against anything, anywhere, at any time?
I’m encouraged by the groups of Mexicans and others in the US who gather on sand spits to watch history being made. They will be able to tell their grandchildren that they were there when Starships began to fly!
Mike Borgelt
OMG … we better replace that bad Texas Governator in a wheelchair in Texas with one who will legislate against any rocket debris from failed tests from falling into Mexico. The President of Poland better do that, too. THAT’ll fix it. And while we’re at it, we better jail Elon. If he only woulda placed the nesting turtles into the turtle relocation program and sent 'em to … um … Cape Canaveral where rockets never fail and debris only falls in the ocean injuring wayward sharks. OH … Tom … rocket launch facilities are as far south for a reason … Vancouver island won’t do. Besides, the environmental nuts up there will be yelling if a bear is injured or one of those sasquatches that inhabit the area is killed.
When we were testing the early cruise missiles at Edwards AFB, a few of 'em turned left at the pass and attacked Lompoc, CA. So the USAF paid the locals to go to the theatre in Santa Maria. THAT’s what Elon oughta do, too … pay everyone to go to a show in San Antonio.
Problem fixed! EASY.
You’re better than this, Raf, much better.
Wow!!! I didn’t realize this too, was a bleeding, left wing, opinion site. I thought AvWeb was a aviation news site. Guess I was wrong!
News Flash: The government and its agencies are for sale. If you see something that you don’t like, just pay your money, carve it out, and wipe your backside with it. That freedom is available to all of us, subject to ability to pay, of course.
Nice to see that MSNBC now has a full time contributor at AVweb….
Crazy that some fragile folk on here go bananas when the subject of SpaceX cleaning up after themselves (or offering a modicum of accountability to neighbors or nature) is brought up. Did you guys let your teenagers leave crap all over your homes when they were growing up? If they destroyed your neighbor’s car playing with explosives would your neighbor be wrong to hold you accountable? Of course not. You’re being silly. SpaceX in Boca Chica is a runaway frat party. Get over yourselves.
RAF–I usually agree with your posts, but like The Fonz on “Happy Days”, you’ve “jumped the Shark” on this one–gone too far. Yes, “Things Happen”–but this IS “testing”–coming up with new technology. Without exploring what COULD go wrong (in a controlled environment) there is no way to PREVENT potential accidents. I’m old enough to recall the Explorer satellites of the beginning of the Space Age–rural U.S. residents in sparsely populated States “worried” about “what would happen if one of those things fell on my house?” It’s the “Chicken Little” fable–“but something COULD happen!” The REALITY–something DID happen during testing–but the testing happened in a chosen remote area, and nobody was injured–just the way it was planned.
Attacking the messenger…
Your long rant contains cowardly excuses for Melon
Why cowardly ?
Because it takes courage to defend the truth.
Easy to go alone with bullies.
As for the author, you might learn something from him if you have an open mind !!!
Come on guys… anyone who dares speak up about Great Elon and his bootlickers will be stoned to death. Same goes for saying mean things about King Trump.
Apparently Rafael took some time out from his part time job at CNN.
“No acknowledgment of environmental damage.” What damage? Tell us how a few pieces of rocket debris will harm sea turtle nesting sites and coastal fisheries.
“The explosion’s shockwave and debris extended into Mexican territory.” ….but not as far as the Mexican cartels extended into the US.
“When a private company can toss wreckage into another country….” That other country is the one that stood by allowing millions of people to cross illegally into the US.
Newsflash. A check on google reveals that there are ~12,000 active satellites in orbit (near 15K total), Of that, ~7,500 – over half – have been put up by SpaceX into LEO. This is the same company that backs down their stage I rockets to a pinpoint location and reuses them vs. throwing them in the ocean like NASA does. Falcon 9 booster B1058 has been reused 18 times! Why aren’t you writing about THAT? This is the same company that now backs 'em down and grabs them, too. This is the same company that is providing internet access to millions of people who otherwise would likely not have it. And this is the same company who rescued two astronauts stuck in space because NASA / Boeing couldn’t do it and we didn’t want to pay Russia to do it. And you’re bashing him for a test failure. You’re worried about a few damned turtles in Mexico. Give me / us here a break, Raf! I want the names of humans killed, injured or otherwise harmed by this incident. And, if private property was harmed, I’m sure SpaceX will handle that. If they don’t … write about THAT. It’s UNWORTHY of your time to be writing crap like this and wasting our time and riling me up! I agree with JimHanson … you’ve gone too far this time.
You are well aware that I spent nearly 3 decades on and around Edwards AFB involved in flight test. There are numerous streets and roads on that Base named after test people were killed when tests failed … starting with Capt. Glen Edwards in the YB-49 in 1948. THAT testing lead to the B-2 which just shined over the weekend. In the Antelope Valley of CA, Challenger Way is a major thoroughfare since the 80’s. TESTING involves risk … period. All you tree huggers want us to be clomping around behind and on horses that poop tons of the stuff all over the place, I guess? Elon Musk was your electric car save the planet ‘darling’ until he invented DOGE. Geesh !! NOW I’m mad!
You sounded mad from the start, no need for verification…
"
For less than half a penny of every tax dollar
NASA RETURNS EXCEPTIONAL VALUE
NASA’s unique mission provides benefits in big and small ways. Dollars spent for space exploration create jobs, jumpstart businesses, and grow the economy. Our innovations improve daily life, advance medical research, support disaster response, and more. We’re constantly evolving and finding new ways to add value.
NASA’s economic impact is nationwide, extending to all 50 states and the District of Columbia."
Did you know that ?
Yes … I’m well aware that NASA / Dryden cum Armstrong budgeted $40M for the X-57 Maxwell electric airplane, spent $87M with estimates that $64M MORE was needed to finish the project. It was mercifully (to taxpayers) ended at that point. The taxpayers didn’t even get the airplane, either. At Airventure 2023, I ATE the Program Manager in a forum embarrassing him in front of a forum full of people.
Worse, the X-59 “Quesst” Low Boom Demonstrator airplane – also being managed by NASA / Armstrong at Edwards AFB is YEARS behind schedule and enormously above budget and STILL hasn’t flown. It was supposed to have flown in 2022. It was supposed to cost $247M. We’re now 3 years behind schedule, nearly three times over budget with no end in sight OR first flight yet planned! AND the end project … to rewrite an FAA Reg on supersonic boom which President Trump just took care of with a stroke of his pen. QUESST no longer needed!
So NASA / Dryden cum Armstrong has spent 3/4 of a BILLION BUCKS – for TWO airplanes – and the taxpayers haven’t gotten either airplane. But – hey – lotsa NASA types in the desert are employed!
See:
THIS is why we needed Elon / DOGE and Raf ought to be writing about that!
“Exceptional Value” my … well … you know …
On Edwards AFB, NASA is a runaway train wreck that needs to be stopped ! They can’t rescue astronauts and they can’t get test airplanes into the air. Great job, NASA.
Good thing I don’t have a flight physical scheduled for this week !
What position did you hold during the your 30 years of employment there ?
NASA, AF, GSA …?
Thanks.
Mr. DOdGEy once admonished his people to fix problems properly instead of patching, his first rockets failed then improved, now he’s back to crash-patch-crash.
Fails the Capability Maturity Model test for aviation software which requires consistency to get to top levels.
Fifteen and 1/2 years (of my 21) – to the day – in uniform supporting flight test instrumentation (data collection) on all the test programs active during that time + more. The last four were as Sr. military of that group. Thereafter, 12 years on a program that was made famous over the weekend. My final seven years were spent supporting Navy flight test in Florida. NOW, I turn beer into urine 12 oz. at a time (millions of AvWeb readers will remember THAT one
) as a snowbird fighting lefties and tree huggers wherever I can find them after I lick Elon’s boots.
Well, I understand that Trump’s change simply removes the crude blanket prohibition but does NOT change the noise.
OTOH, Boom Supersonic’s testing with XB-1 showed conditions in which the ‘boom’ noise is negligible at ground level.
With the Concorde there was a noise concern around airports as it used afterburner to climb quickly, Boom Supersonic’s planned airliner will not use afterburner and has I understand a lot of thrust so perhaps will throttle back initially then increase power for climb to altitude where it will start supersonic cruise.
Larry S you ain’t no Snowbird unless you happen to be living in them thar N.E. Union states. Our sasquatches are doing well up here with remedial communication classes courtesy of the taxpayers. Please realize that Raf is right regardless of your concerns for the nesting sea turtles. As a possible future leader of the “Free” world consider that E.M. can trim government budgets and get us back to where we all want to be–a house in the “burbs” with a rusty Chev in the carport, a new dishwasher (the plug in kind) and cable T.V. with a thousand channels showing rewinds of “I luv Lucy”. Daybreeze? What daybreeze? Check your local subway or bus station. Take a look at vacation hotspots like “love canal” and the Cuyahoga river. I think Raf’s onto something here and this was a good editorial posting.
Thanks for answering my question, I was wondering if you were an engineer.
I knew someone who was bushing engineers, college graduates and hated everyone except himself.
I don’t know him any more…if you know what I mean.
Enjoy life to the fullest, it’s too short to hate anyone or anything we are all different because we just are. By the way, I’m a notorious tree lover, plant flower, and animal lover including people like you who are proud to “lick” dirty boots, but I will never spit or lick anyone’s boots.
“12 oz at a time” creates lots of methane gas, quit it and grow a garden like I do, you’ll be happy you did.
Cheers !!!
Chemical imbalance does that to a person, money is nothing it can’t buy happiness.
The billionaires are seeking power. Their objective is simple but cruel, they want others to suffer so they can get a kick out of it.
Cruelty makes them feel powerful…but they ain’t.
Keith, you’re only partially right about the QUESST. The reason the X-59 program SO peeps me off is because the testing was already done AT GOV’T EXPENSE! Google SSBD … SuperSonic Boom Demonstrator. I was a part of SSBD team in Florida in the early 2000’s over 20 years ago.
In the early 2000’s, a consortium of different Agencies – DARPA, NASA, Navy, and others – pooled money to highly modify a used up USMC F-5E Aggressor airplane to see if massive sculpting of the airframe might reduce the noise signature using theories already in place at the time. NASA Dryden was one of those Agencies. After we built the airframe in FL, it was flown to Edwards AFB where it was tested BY NASA with an unmodified F-5E under various conditions at nearly the same time. The theories WERE proved out … the noise signatures were substantially reduced. That airplane still exists and is at the Valiant Air Museum in Titusville, FL
See:
The QUESST airplane IS NOT proving any additional sculpting; it is built to fly over civilian populations to see if they object to the “thump” of a reduced boom … and NOTHING MORE. No passenger is going to want to ride in an airplane that looks like the X-59! Someone “stole” ~$650M (likely more, now?) to see if people can tolerate that thump, that’s all. As my previous link showed, even Forbes is questioning ROI on the Program … it’s not just me.
Every supersonic airplane / engine / conditions combo will be different. Boom’s XB-1, for example, is a scale model so there’s no guarantee that the full sized airplane will be quiet, or not.
WHO – in their right mind – would spend $650M to see if a neighbor objected to their loud car? See my consternation … we’ve already proven the noise reduction theories and now individual airframes will have to prove or disprove their individual abilities to reduce the noise. And IF their designs don’t reduce the noise, the President’s decree makes it ‘too bad’ if you don’t like it. I’m not saying that’s OK; just that it no longer matters either way. I admit that’s a late change in the situation.
The X-59 QUESST is nothing more than a NASA Armstrong boondoggle where the Program Managers somehow got a big pile of money for Lockheed Palmdale and they’re all having a great party in the desert. AND … one of the NASA test pilots is Jim “Clue” Less … a fitting call sign for one of the participants in the boondoggle. As I already said, the combo of X-57 and X-59 at NASA Armstrong is wasting 3/4 of a BILLION dollars. I challenged the project pilot at Airventure a few years ago; you shoulda seen him tap dancing. I SO wanted so sic the DOGE boys on those programs !! NASA Armstrong ought to be ashamed of itself; THAT is why I “ate” the Program Manager of the X-57 Maxwell at Airventure a couple of years ago after they finally cancelled it. I’m sure they laughed at me afterward? Both Programs are an insult to those of us ‘in the know.’
BTW, Keith. Stare at the longitudinal stripes on the picture of the SSBD airplane. They’re not there just for decoration. The RED stripe is the noise signature of the unmodified sister airplane and the blue stripe is the reduced noise signature of the SSBD sculpted airplane.
The X-59 WILL reduce the noise signature further … how could it not? It’s SO pointy that the pilot cannot even see out of it; it has to be flown with video cameras. It has zero relevance to what Boom, et al, may ultimately produce, try to certify and sell. THAT is why Boom built the XB-1 and tested it at Mojave … where I had a hangar for 17 years.
Getting back to the subject du jour, IMHO, TurboDoodle wins. His point IS pertinent here. Ya’ll go back and read his comment.
This isn’t anti-SpaceX or political . It’s about safety.
June 18, 2025: Starship #36 exploded on the pad during a static fire, carrying just 10% fuel. Debris landed on both sides of the U.S.–Mexico border. Texas is now installing alert systems. That’s telling.
Now scale it up: nearly 10 million pounds of cryogenic propellant.
If it blows at the pad or shortly after liftoff, it’s not going to be a test glitch, it’s going to be a major disaster.
Half of Starship test flights have failed—Boca Chica isn’t remote. Brownsville is growing. The Gulf coast is home to people, fisheries, and protected ecosystems. This isn’t a safe place for high-risk tests.
Also, this isn’t anti-SpaceX. Their work—Starlink, Mars, lunar missions—is outstanding. But innovation needs accountability. SpaceX knows this. They bought and later sold offshore rigs (Phobos and Deimos) in 2023, not because the idea was wrong, but because the platforms didn’t fit. FAA documents show an 18-mile offshore buffer was part of their own planning.
So the question is: When, not if.
Offshore launches are expensive. But the cost of an onshore failure is far worse.
Move high-risk launches offshore.
It’s common sense.
Sorry RAF you absolutely have Elon Derangement Syndrome. This comment is the first time I have ever seen you post something that wasn’t negative about Elon and Starship.
Please explain how offshore would be better for the environment when the debris would be underwater and much more difficult to cleanup.
Failure is never a good thing but this is experimental flight testing and NASA went through the exact same thing developing the space program with dozens of explosions on the pad and shortly after liftoff in an environmentally sensitive area.
Yes these failures are spectacular and I’m sure very frightening to people in the area but there are always costs associated with innovation. No one was hurt and hopefully much was learned to make the Starship safer for future flights. The Falcon 9 had its own developmental issues but its now the safest and most reliable launch platform in the world bar none.
Uh, Crispaileron…
Pennies add up to overload, just like weight added to aircraft.
Tom Warne:
But folks on VI don’t like Mr. DOdGEy.
Many did vote for politicians that would take a competent approach to reducing bureaucracy, but not enough did (not enough women for some reason).
Fine, what is the aerodynamic theory behind X-59’s longer nose which appears flattened?
Boom Supersonic uses synthetic vision to avoid lowering the nose as Concorde did, tested first with a light subsonic airplane with two pilots then on XB-1.
“Starbase is less than three miles from the Mexico–U.S. border and surrounded by sensitive ecosystems, working-class neighborhoods and international waterways”
Responsibility?
Mexican beach resort towns are riskier to both people and to sensitive beach eco-systems.
Speaking of verification, whence your quote?
No, if you were concerned about safety, you would focus on the to 10 causes of early death.
The chances of anyone being hurt/killed by an exploding booster at Boca Chica is almost nil.
Tell that to the first family that suffers a loss due to failure of oversight. Smugness is like billionaires seeking power.. It makes you look bad.
OMG, Raf! Elsewhere on AvWeb, some poor Stinson 108 pilot and one of his passengers died when he lifted a wheel on landing to miss a turtle. I think those turtles in Mexico musta been relocated to NC? They got their revenge didn’t they. (No disrespect to the deceased intended!)
AND … how’s come you’re not writing about the recent attack on the Brooklyn bridge by that Mexican sailing ship. Elon was just paying 'em back.
There were 41,000 fatalities on U.S roads last year.
There were over 500 recreational boating/swimming deaths last year.
There were 559 GA aircraft deaths in the USA last year.
There were zero deaths from SpaceX rocket explosions.
Only unhinged people would conclude that SpaceX is a danger to them.
AVweb grants a lot of freedom on these threads - the usual suspects tirelessly continue to hijack distasteful subjects and insert ignominious personal life lessons like:
" NOW, I turn beer into urine 12 oz. at a time…as a snowbird fighting lefties and tree huggers wherever I can find them after I lick Elon’s boots."
Or, stated another way, tilting at windmills in your head on your hands and knees with your tongue out…
"Sorry RAF you absolutely have Elon Derangement Syndrome. "
In other words, I couldn’t answer what was offered, so I’ll categorize you with my negative bias. So there!
The question was thoughtfully posed to simply consider if regulators, including the FAA, find their current policy with Starbase to be acceptable or not when considering the potential for harm to the surrounding area of people and environment with the newly added data from the recent explosion.
It’s an example to always question everything, as everything is in constant flux, and to hold those with power to the highest standards when others are vulnerable to their jurisdiction.
I think any company with such power, money and affect should always be scrutinized and held accountable, whether associated with FAA, state or federal regulations or having substantive political influence, as in this example.
Raf’s blog is simply another reminder of that needed vigilance in this rapidly changing, yet very divided society.
AVweb is Russ. Russ decides what kind of toxicity is allowed conduct in this sorry “forum”. But, these namecalling tantrums and the new tone is likely a good ad-revenue generator. If it wasn’t lucrative, it would be gone and history.
I wish it was that complicated, Jason. We do get a lot of page views from the comments but the truth of the matter is that I have a really high tolerance for stuff that some folks want to have kept away from them. I think it’s better to have these sentiments out in the open than having me vanquish them. I do take out name calling and outright nastiness and I hear a lot of complaints and even threats about suppressing free speech. The truth is I find the political views interesting and relevant to the topics that spawn them and the fact that people are talking about them means they warrant the limited exposure they get here.
Russ
So Raf wrote it so it’s therefore a valid premise, should not be questioned and that’s that, eh??
Quite a few people here don’t think so and have said so … in various ways.
Here … have some more … learn something, Dave:
Writing in a tongue-in-cheek style means using insincerity, irony, or whimsical exaggeration to convey a humorous or sarcastic tone, even if the words themselves appear serious. It’s a way of being playful and witty without being completely serious, often with an underlying hint of mockery or amusement.
Here are some key characteristics of tongue-in-cheek writing:
"The question was thoughtfully posed to simply consider if regulators, including the FAA, find their current policy with Starbase to be acceptable or not "
No, he went straight to calling it reckless and unacceptable; no discussion.
When opposing reasoned opinions are not welcomed then it’s time for lobbing tomatoes.
Is there a remote chance that some of you guys use the AVweb BLOG and news comments as a sort of cardiological exercise? I mean, holy Odin… wouldn’t it be sad to comment oneself into a heart attack or stroke?
A nice walk in the woods might help calm the nerves.
NASA website.
I have a book from way back from a NASA kiosk at an air show. It gives many details regarding their mission and benefits to the average citizen and businesses.
It ain’t their fault, that’s how the propaganda network ''fuckccc news" is preparing them to face real life problems. With a new kind of “humanity”…mad cow style.
All human activity has an impact on “the environment” but our air, water and overall environmental quality and protection is cleaner and better by far then at any time in over 100 years.
The economy of South Texas is booming due to SapceX and the billions of dollars it has generated in construction, support, tourism and direct employment. I saw the first StarShip launch along with thousands of others who wouldn’t have been there otherwise.
Then there is the incredible fact that SpaceX is responsible for 90% of all orbital space lift in the world, more than all other countries combined. The StarLink satellite internet system is revolutionary and all privately funded. SpaceX also rescued the astronauts stranded by NASA on the ISS. With Falcon 9 and 9 heavy SpaceX launches weather, research and national security satellites cheaper and more reliably than anyone.
As far as Mexico being impacted by SpaceX launches I could care less. Mexicos irredeemably corrupt government has allowed drug cartels to take over half the country and flood America with fentanyl killing hundreds of thousands of our citizens. They should be grateful we don’t establish a 50 mile militarized buffer zone extending across the border.
I applaud Elon Musk for his amazing innovation in space that has advanced Americas space industry to its once former pinnacle status and for spending billions of his own money to make humanity multi planetary.
Godspeed StarShip and SpaceX.
RAF, my only beef is you need a semicolon in the title, I think…
@anoldpilot
Richard, fair point on the punctuation. Also, maybe the title should’ve been:
“Guest Blog: Starbase Isn’t Isolated; It May Be Time to Move Offshore.”
Would’ve read cleaner and framed the intent better. Thanks!
UPDATE: June 26 (Reuters) - SpaceX said on Thursday its debris recovery efforts after last week’s Starship explosion have been hindered and it has sought cooperation from Mexico, whose president has raised the possibility of legal action against the company.