What FAA Announced about Starship B19 Explosion is UNUASUAL! Next Launch SOONER than Expected

Flight 12 has ended, but beneath all the excitement, there is a serious question now facing SpaceX. When will Starship fly again? Because while Flight 12 achieved major milestones, it also revealed some important problems. And whether SpaceX can move quickly toward Flight 13 may depend less on the engineers and more on the FAA. Interestingly enough, the FAA has already issued its first response, and surprisingly, it may be better news for SpaceX than many people expected. So how did the FAA react to Starship Flight 12? Will there be another investigation? And what exactly does SpaceX need to accomplish before the next launch? Let's find out on today's episode of Great SpaceX. Flight 12 ended with exactly the kind of chaos Starship fans have come to expect. Huge flames, massive power, explosive visuals, and overall, the results were very encouraging. But as always, the real question isn't just whether the flight succeeded, it's whether the system is ready to fly again soon. That's where the FAA enters the picture. Because no matter how fast SpaceX moves, the Federal Aviation Administration still controls the regulatory side of launch operations. And historically, FAA investigations have significantly delayed Starship flights, especially after incidents involving explosions or debris. So naturally, many people expected Flight 12 to trigger another lengthy review. But before we get into the FAA's response, let's quickly summarize the issues that occurred during the mission. Because yes, there were definitely problems. The first major issue involved Super Heavy. During ascent, one of the booster's engines failed, and unlike temporary shutdowns seen on earlier flights, this engine never recovered. At first glance, that may not sound catastrophic. After all, Super Heavy has 33 engines. Losing one engine is sort of like losing one chicken nugget from a 20-piece meal. Technically unfortunate, but survivable. However, the consequences appeared to extend beyond just the single engine. In an official update, SpaceX stated regarding the boostback burn, it was unable to light all planned engines and performed a partial boostback burn that ended early. That statement immediately raised eyebrows because the boostback burn looked very unusual during the livestream. Engine ignition timing appeared abnormal, and the booster's orientation changes differed noticeably from previous flights. At first, some viewers assumed SpaceX was intentionally testing a more aggressive maneuver, but later evidence suggested a more serious issue. The engine failure may have affected nearby engines or disrupted the booster's planned trajectory adjustments, and the problems continued during landing. SpaceX later confirmed Super Heavy attempted its landing burn before experiencing a hard splashdown in the Gulf, which is one of those extremely polite aerospace phases, because judging from the footage, the booster appeared to explode roughly 100 meters above the ocean. The livestream cut out almost immediately afterward. Meanwhile, ship suffered its own Raptor vacuum engine failure shortly after separation. Thankfully, unlike the booster issues, this did not significantly affect the mission. The ship continued on trajectory, deployed payloads successfully, and completed a remarkably stable reentry and splashdown. In fact, S39 looked excellent during landing compared to earlier flights, which naturally raised the next major question. Would the FAA intervene? Would Flight 13 require another formal mishap investigation? Surprisingly, at least for now, the answer appears to be no. The FAA released an official statement following the mission saying, The FAA is aware an anomaly occurred during the SpaceX Starship Flight 12 mission that launched from Starbase, Texas on the 22nd of May. The anomaly involved the Super Heavy booster during its flyback over the Gulf of America. There are no reports of public injury or damage to public property. That line is extremely important, because for the FAA, public safety is always the top priority, and despite the dramatic visuals, the incident remained contained within designated hazard zones. The FAA also stated, The FAA is assessing the operation. A mishap determination has not been made at this time. That wording matters, because it suggests the agency has not yet decided the event requires a formal mishap investigation, and if no investigation is opened, SpaceX could move toward another launch much faster than after previous incidents. The FAA also noted that debris remained within the hazard area, with only limited impacts to air traffic operations. Considering a massive rocket stage exploded over the Gulf, the outcome was surprisingly manageable. No injuries, no property damage, no aircraft diversions. From a regulatory standpoint, that is close to a best case scenario as you can get. Of course, the FAA is still evaluating the event, and additional findings could change the situation, but for now, the regulatory environment appears far more favorable for SpaceX than many expected, and timing matters enormously. Flight 12 followed more than 7 months of preparation, a very long turnaround for a company pursuing rapid reusability. Now, with 2026 already moving quickly, SpaceX needs momentum, which means flying again soon. Many observers now believe Flight 13 could launch in late June or early July, a timeline that is entirely plausible given SpaceX's previous turnaround pace. The focus has also shifted. Earlier flights prioritized booster recovery. Now, attention is increasingly centered on orbital operations and ship performance, especially because Flight 13 is expected to follow a true orbital mission profile. Fortunately for SpaceX, S39 performed extremely well overall. And while the world watched Flight 12 work on the next vehicles, continued quietly in the background. At this point, starbase production is becoming almost absurdly fast. Less rocket factory, more industrial caffeine addiction. So, let's start with S40. Construction began in late January when the payload dispenser section arrived at Megabay 2. By early February, the nosecone and payload sections followed. Then came the common dome, the aft section, and the aft flaps. By April, major structural production was effectively complete, and by the end of that month, movement activity started increasing noticeably. Then, on May 1st, S40 rolled out to Massey's for testing. At the time, many people barely noticed because all attention remained focused on Flight 12 preparations. At Massey's, S40 underwent cryogenic testing on May 3rd. Fuel loading and detanking reportedly proceeded smoothly, strongly suggesting the vehicle's structural systems performed as expected. By May 6th, S40 had already returned to the production site, implying several major validation milestones are now complete and engine installation may already be underway. With SpaceX gradually shifting away from Flight 12 analysis, Ship 40 will likely move quickly toward integrated testing. Another rollout is expected near the end of May or early June, including multiple static fires, most importantly, a full six-engine test. Those firings are critical because Flight 13 will likely be a true orbital mission requiring longer engine burns and more demanding in-space maneuvers. And after the Raptor vacuum issue on Flight 12, engine performance will face intense scrutiny, especially ignition reliability, thermal stability, and relight capability. If testing proceeds successfully, S40 would likely return to Megabay 2 for final inspections and launch integration. Right now, the schedule genuinely supports a late June or early July launch window. Now, let's talk about B20. Construction for B20 began in early February. By April, both the aft and forward sections had arrived at Megabay 1. By now, Booster 20 is likely nearing production completion. Its delayed rollout for cryogenic testing probably reflects SpaceX's heavy focus on Flight 12 operations. But with Flight 12 complete, activity should accelerate quickly. Many expect B20 to roll out by late May or early June, possibly alongside renewed testing for S40. Notably, SpaceX may already be implementing upgrades based on Flight 12 engine data, especially after an anomaly is observed during Super Heavy's boostback and landing phases. Once ready, B20 will likely undergo a full 33-engine static fire focused on validating complete system reliability, because Flight 12 reinforced an important lesson. Fortunately, the launch infrastructure appears to have survived Flight 12 in very good condition. Post-flight inspections suggest the orbital launch mount remains in solid condition. The hold-down clamps reportedly sustained only minor paint damage. And, importantly, the SQD system appeared to function smoothly after the mission. That marks a major improvement, especially after earlier scrub issues and launch damage concerns. The upgrades appear to be working, which means SpaceX may now have time for additional testing before Flight 13, including work involving the Chopsticks, BQD, Flame Trench, and other critical ground systems. If progress continues smoothly, B20 could complete static fire testing by mid to late June before returning for final inspections and flight termination system installation. At that point, launch integration could begin. So, yes, a late June launch remains possible, but early July probably feels more realistic. Even so, by Starship standards, that would still represent extremely rapid progress. Of course, SpaceX has also become more cautious recently, performing deeper inspections and additional integrated testing between milestones. So, delays remain possible, but the important point is this. Flight 13 no longer feels distant. It feels very close. Meanwhile, another major aerospace company is also navigating FAA reviews. Blue Origin. Following New Glenn's third mission, the FAA temporarily suspended operations pending investigation results. The flight produced mixed outcomes. The booster successfully landed on the droneship for the second time. A major milestone for Blue Origin, but the upper stage failed to reach its intended orbit, and the payload later re-entered the atmosphere. Now, after more than a month of review, the FAA has approved Blue Origin's corrective actions. Blue Origin stated on X, the FAA has approved our NG3 report and corrective measures have been implemented. Prior to our second GS2 burn, we experienced an off-nominal thermal condition, and as a result, one of the BE-3U engines didn't achieve full thrust to reach our target orbit. NG4 preparations continue. Updates coming soon. So, once again, thermal conditions appear to be haunting rocket engines across the entire industry. Blue Origin now appears to be preparing aggressively for New Glenn's fourth flight. Recent factory images show additional hardware already integrated. Many expect the next vehicle to reach LC-36 soon for white dress rehearsals and hot fire testing. Interestingly, NG4 may use a brand new booster rather than a previously flown one. The mission is also expected to carry Kuiper satellites for Amazon, meaning Jeff Bezos could soon launch his own internet satellites aboard his own rocket. The company needs success in booster recovery and upper stage performance to support future Blue Moon missions. So now the race becomes interesting. Which flies first, Starship Flight 13 or New Glenn NG4? The answer may depend entirely on testing progress over the next few weeks. Either way, Summer 2026 is shaping up to be packed with rocket activity. Excellent news for space fans, terrible news for sleep schedules. And that brings us to the end of today's episode. Thank you so much for tuning in. As always, this has been Kevin from GreatSpaceX. Until next time, keep looking up!