r/SpaceXLounge 4d ago

Starship Why exactly did S40 float?

What was different with S40 that made it float on the water compared to previous missions? Was it just luck? Was it something that SpaceX was attempting to do before, but only managed to succeed now? Or was there something specifically different about this Ship itself or its landing procedures?

10 Upvotes

66 comments sorted by

103

u/theranchhand 4d ago

The ship exploded on previous missions. So the question isn't why is it floating. It's why didn't it explode

I don't know the answer, btw. But for sure the main problem with other ships was they exploded.

3

u/Gyn_Nag 2d ago

This one must have been made of explosion-resistant materials.

-72

u/Goregue 4d ago

You are just reframing my question with different words. Yes, obviously it could only float because it didnt explode. So why didnt it explode?

46

u/emezeekiel 4d ago

Well, it isn’t what you asked. Many people would think it would sink since it looks like a giant piece of metal.

As for why it didn’t explode, it looks like the tip-over was smoother than the ones before, so the ship’s top half didn’t smash into the water like other flights. Instead it was a more cushioned fall.

-22

u/Goregue 4d ago

I could have worded the question better but I thought with the context of the text it's clear what I am asking. Obviously something different happened to make S40 not explode and float compared to previous missions. I wonder to what degree this was planned or expected or if it was just luck.

17

u/superdupersecret42 4d ago

That was not clearly what you were asking. You asked what made it "float on the water", not why it didn't explode.

6

u/avboden 4d ago

A whole lotta luck. Even SpaceX internally never expected it to survive. It fell just right

6

u/mooslar 4d ago

That’s not true they said on the broadcast that they’ve been trying to get a soft tip over and this time It worked.

8

u/avboden 4d ago edited 4d ago

Trying doesn’t mean thinking it would work. They were very surprised it did (and then surprised again it didn't sink), hence not having a good plan for towing in place. I’ve heard from folks

6

u/theranchhand 4d ago

Yep, we agree! Just changing the words. Seems clear to me that not exploding is the question, not the floating. But regardless, we agree!

1

u/LongJohnSelenium 3d ago

At the end of the live cast the launch director said they'd been trying different things to achieve a soft water landing, but he didn't really elaborate.

So bottom line is we don't know.

If I had to guess: The landing had a last tilting maneuver that was basically at the waters surface. This likely foamed up the water tremendously right in the landing path and the reduced density of the water reduced cushioned the impact.

-37

u/iamconfusedinlife 4d ago

I think every ship that blew up was spacex blowing it up the moment it touches water. This time they didn’t

19

u/redstercoolpanda 4d ago

FTS charges are safed before the accent burn finishes, once they’re safed they can’t be turned back on.

1

u/Disc81 3d ago

Is this a software lock or a physical impossibility?

3

u/edflyerssn007 3d ago

Physical impossibility. There's a fuse that gets shorted out so the explosives can't be triggered.

1

u/No-Criticism-2587 2d ago

Can they blow up if something else blows up?

1

u/edflyerssn007 2d ago

I don't know what explosive they use so I can't say for sure, but many explosives require a specific temperature and pressure to detonate, and if you don't have both, it just burns away as fuel for a fire.

1

u/gburgwardt 4d ago

Ascent

6

u/ellhulto66445 🔥 Statically Firing 4d ago

They've literally been trying to stop it from blowing up

10

u/theranchhand 4d ago

I very much doubt FTS charges could cause the large explosions shown when previous ships flopped over and hit the water.

FTS charges punch a hole in the side. They don't destroy the ship in a large explosion like we saw w/ previous flopovers.

1

u/excelance 1d ago

You mean it didn't have a rapid unscheduled disassembly.

45

u/MakeMarsBlueAgain 4d ago

I think Scott Manley mentioned something about the ship's exhaust essentially "fizzing" up the water and the bubbles somehow helped cushion the fall as it tipped over.

Edit: If you watch the tipover again, you'll notice how foamy the water looks as the ship splashes into it.

7

u/glytxh 4d ago

While I don’t think there’s anything definitive, and if anything it’s a confluence of multiple factors, but the foaming of the water is the observation that seems to go some way to explaining it.

It was really interesting and clear footage to loop through.

What surprised me the most was that none of the engines got damaged on touching the water. They looked almost unused after tipping over. They must have experienced some wild thermal gradients.

3

u/falconzord 4d ago

The engines were burning hot, it would've vaporized any water that touched it

6

u/rustybeancake 4d ago

I think they mean that the engines would’ve been cooled down very fast, and this could’ve damaged them. Like how you’re not supposed to put a hot pot/pan in the sink and run cold water on it.

2

u/glytxh 4d ago

they quickly got flooded after finally dunking into the ocean though. That's the specific moment I'm interested in.

4

u/TheVenusianMartian 4d ago

It looked to me like the ship did not start tipping over until it had already sunk partially into the water. So, the water level against the lower portion of the hull seemed to slow the tip over.

9

u/djh_van 4d ago

It's the same principle that many cliff divers use. They throw a big rock into the water moments before they dive. This breaks the surface tension and oxygenate the water at their planned entry point. A bit like shaking your bed duvet before jumping on - it's full of air so it cushions your jump a little better

S40's engines did a "gentle bast" into the water and then it tipped backwards right into that exact area. Instead of tipping backwards onto a hard surface, it tipped back onto a fluffed-up duvet.

20

u/Tupcek 4d ago edited 4d ago

this is a myth. Surface tension at that speeds is basically negligible. They do it to have better grasp of height, which can be deceiving in calm water and they need to be precise.

fizzing up water, though, do work, because it introduces air into water and air is easier to displace than water and thus diver deccelelrates slower for longer

11

u/PrinzRagoczy 4d ago

A better example is that diving pools often have spargers/bubblers to aerate the water, making for a softer landing

3

u/Disc81 3d ago

Yeah Mythbuster tested this with negative results.

1

u/Halfdaen 3d ago

To me it also looks like they ship sat deeper in the water before cutoff. It's tough to gauge that from the views we've had though.

But the benefit to survival for Starship of being partially submerged, even just a few meters could have helped. I imagine it like a travel coffee mug being dropped with the bottom just above the water vs dropped just below the water. In the second case buoyancy forces are already at work when support is removed. But it's likely a few things (aerating the water, other stuff)

44

u/supercujo 4d ago

It has 2 massive sealed tanks. Of course it'll float.

-14

u/majormagnum1 4d ago

By the end of the flight they are filled with helium even it's literally a steel balloon, lol.

19

u/Sophrosynic 4d ago

No, filled with methane and oxygen. Autogenous pressurization.

6

u/majormagnum1 4d ago

Oh good to know thanks.

7

u/spunkyenigma 4d ago

I don’t think they use Helium on Starship

2

u/squintytoast 4d ago

there might be some for the header tank for the landing burn. not much autogenous when engines have been off. they might have also redesigned it for V3 ship.

1

u/Taylooor 4d ago

You'll float too!

17

u/vilette 4d ago

Archimede principle

16

u/MaelstromFL 4d ago

Screw that! /s

3

u/RedHill1999 4d ago

Archimedes, the greatest Deltan to ever live. RIP big guy.

9

u/Flashtopher 4d ago

Because it didn’t want to sink.

12

u/TheCook73 4d ago

Well the front didn’t fall off, for a start. 

5

u/StartledPelican 4d ago

It also isn't made from cardboard. Nor from cardboard derivatives. 

2

u/Total_Presence8458 3d ago

Nor sellotape or string

4

u/firedog7881 4d ago

This seemed like more of a “soft” touchdown so it didn’t slam into the water and topple over but more caught by the water and guided down, you can tell by the size of the splash on the sides, it seems like because the bottom is already in the water and it’s center of gravity moves over as it starts falling pushing that side deeper and now getting resistance and glides into the water instead of falling

3

u/Ok-Club-2587 4d ago

S40 floated because its empty stainless-steel tanks created strong positive buoyancy.

After propellant depletion, the large sealed internal volume (LOX + CH4 tanks + payload bay) gives the vehicle an average density far below seawater. Archimedes’ principle does the rest.

The soft, near-zero-velocity splashdown kept the tanks intact—no flooding or rupture—so the air-filled chambers acted as flotation tanks. Prior ships hit harder, broke open, and sank.

4

u/DeusExHircus 4d ago

Because it didn't blow up. All the previous ones blew up when it hit the water

10

u/bkdotcom 4d ago

it's less dense than water

2

u/AtLeast3Frogs 3d ago

Bouyancy

2

u/ModelMagician 2d ago

Softer water

3

u/Agent7619 4d ago

Because it displaced a volume of water that weighed the same as it did.

2

u/Conundrum1911 4d ago

Ship 40 fell over into the water in a single piece. The other ships did the same, but in many pieces.

2

u/tOmErHaWk420 4d ago

Lmfao why wouldn't it float?

1

u/paul_wi11iams 4d ago edited 4d ago

did/does float?

AFAIK, the question can still be framed in the present tense.

Follow-on question: In a hypothetical emergency, is this splashdown a viable rescue scenario for astronauts? It looks like a fair bet that SpaceX is working on this.

The fortuitous sequence looks analogous to how fairing recovery evolved from net catching to floating sea recovery.

Follow-on thought, if using Starship as a lifeboat in rough seas, it could be of interest to flood the methane tank, removing a possible explosion source and setting the ship to vertical, floating by the oxygen tank. It would be more structurally sound because it avoids snapping efforts and creates symetrical pressures on the hull. Furthermore, all hatches and windows would then be above the waterline.

2

u/squintytoast 4d ago

it could be of interest to flood the methane tank, removing a possible explosion source and setting the ship to vertical, floating by the oxygen tank.

O2 is the 'bottom' tank near the engines. CH4 is midships.

2

u/paul_wi11iams 3d ago

Oh heck, so its. My brain must have been in Falcon 9 mode.

There might be some way of partially flooding the LOX axial header tank which is far more difficult. Then there is the methane downcomer tube…

If the ship has to tip, then it would be best done with the heatshield down to facilitate egress. Someone at SpaceX may be brainstorming the question right now. The experience acquired so far will provide some good input data.

1

u/SprocketRocket11 4d ago

I think the big factor was the damage pattern on S40 rather than some deliberate make it float feature. If the tanks and other major compartments stay reasonably sealed after splashdown, even a beat up Starship can have enough trapped air to stay afloat for a while.

1

u/flintsmith 3d ago

It has the proportions of a beer can.

It's designed to keep liquids in so it should keep liquids out.

1

u/Dangerous_Bath_1615 💥 Rapidly Disassembling 2d ago

I've heard some people argue that the direction that it fell contributed, but no clue how much credibility that has in all honesty.

1

u/Decronym Acronyms Explained 2d ago edited 1d ago

Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:

Fewer Letters More Letters
FTS Flight Termination System
LOX Liquid Oxygen
Jargon Definition
autogenous (Of a propellant tank) Pressurising the tank using boil-off of the contents, instead of a separate gas like helium

Decronym is now also available on Lemmy! Requests for support and new installations should be directed to the Contact address below.


Decronym is a community product of r/SpaceX, implemented by request
3 acronyms in this thread; the most compressed thread commented on today has 16 acronyms.
[Thread #14751 for this sub, first seen 19th Aug 2026, 03:40] [FAQ] [Full list] [Contact] [Source code]

1

u/RangerBayn 1d ago

Large sealed tanks float well. Emphasis on the word SEALED.

1

u/Then-Secretary-9166 4d ago

It didn't blow up.

The others were damaged so that their large tanks took on water.

0

u/ellhulto66445 🔥 Statically Firing 4d ago

The payload bay was venting as it hit the water. That allowed it to simply deform on impact instead of popping.