Oh no! Starship/Superheavy is loud!
Superheavy after its October flight, safely captured at Boca Chica
Time for another Chicken Little report: A new study of the sound levels produced by SpaceX’s Superheavy booster during its fifth launch and landing at Boca Chica in October 2024 suggests that it produces more noise than predicted.
Overall … Gee et al. note that one of the most important conclusions from their data is the differences between Starship’s launch noise levels and those of SLS and Falcon 9. The team found that Starship produces significantly more noise at liftoff than both SLS and Falcon 9 in both A-weighted and Z-weighted (unweighted) noise metrics.
When compared to Falcon 9, the noise produced by a single Starship launch is equivalent to, at a minimum, 10 Falcon 9 launches. Despite SLS producing more than half of Starship’s overall thrust at liftoff, Starship is substantially louder than SLS. More specifically, one Starship launch is equivalent to that of four to six SLS launches regarding noise production. As has been hypothesized by numerous other studies into the noise produced by rockets, this significant difference in noise levels may be due to the configuration of first-stage engines on the rockets. For example, although the Saturn V produced less overall thrust than SLS, it produced two decibels more noise than SLS, which may be due to the clustered engine configuration on Saturn V’s first stage.
We’re all gonna die! Despite the doom-mongering of this study (which you can read here), the only issue noted by the paper from this noise was car alarms going off. And even here, the spread of the noise was asymmetrical, occurring in only one direction.
The concern about sonic booms has always been the annoyance they cause to residents near airports. In the case of Superheavy, it is very unlikely it will ever fly at a frequency to make its noise intolerable. More important, the nature of a spaceport versus an airport reduces the concern considerably, since a spaceport requires a much larger buffer area, and at both of SpaceX’s Starship launchsites in Florida and Texas almost everyone living close by works for the company or in the space business. They are not going to complain.
And while studying these noise issues is useful, we must not be naive about the real purpose of such studies. Underneath its high-minded science goals is a much more insidious one: finding a weapon for shutting down SpaceX. This concern of mine might be overstated, but remember, almost our entire academic community is rabidly leftist and made up of partisan Democrats. They hate Musk for his politics, and have been aggressively looking for ways to hurt him. This sound study is just another tool in that war.
Readers!
Please consider supporting my work here at Behind the Black. Your support allows me the freedom and ability to analyze objectively the ongoing renaissance in space, as well as the cultural changes -- for good or ill -- that are happening across America. Fourteen years ago I wrote that SLS and Orion were a bad ideas, a waste of money, would be years behind schedule, and better replaced by commercial private enterprise. Only now does it appear that Washington might finally recognize this reality.
In 2020 when the world panicked over COVID I wrote that the panic was unnecessary, that the virus was apparently simply a variation of the flu, that masks were not simply pointless but if worn incorrectly were a health threat, that the lockdowns were a disaster and did nothing to stop the spread of COVID. Only in the past year have some of our so-called experts in the health field have begun to recognize these facts.
Your help allows me to do this kind of intelligent analysis. I take no advertising or sponsors, so my reporting isn't influenced by donations by established space or drug companies. Instead, I rely entirely on donations and subscriptions from my readers, which gives me the freedom to write what I think, unencumbered by outside influences.
You can support me either by giving a one-time contribution or a regular subscription. There are four ways of doing so:
1. Zelle: This is the only internet method that charges no fees. All you have to do is use the Zelle link at your internet bank and give my name and email address (zimmerman at nasw dot org). What you donate is what I get.
2. Patreon: Go to my website there and pick one of five monthly subscription amounts, or by making a one-time donation.
3. A Paypal Donation or subscription:
4. Donate by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman and mailed to
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652
You can also support me by buying one of my books, as noted in the boxes interspersed throughout the webpage or shown in the menu above.
Superheavy after its October flight, safely captured at Boca Chica
Time for another Chicken Little report: A new study of the sound levels produced by SpaceX’s Superheavy booster during its fifth launch and landing at Boca Chica in October 2024 suggests that it produces more noise than predicted.
Overall … Gee et al. note that one of the most important conclusions from their data is the differences between Starship’s launch noise levels and those of SLS and Falcon 9. The team found that Starship produces significantly more noise at liftoff than both SLS and Falcon 9 in both A-weighted and Z-weighted (unweighted) noise metrics.
When compared to Falcon 9, the noise produced by a single Starship launch is equivalent to, at a minimum, 10 Falcon 9 launches. Despite SLS producing more than half of Starship’s overall thrust at liftoff, Starship is substantially louder than SLS. More specifically, one Starship launch is equivalent to that of four to six SLS launches regarding noise production. As has been hypothesized by numerous other studies into the noise produced by rockets, this significant difference in noise levels may be due to the configuration of first-stage engines on the rockets. For example, although the Saturn V produced less overall thrust than SLS, it produced two decibels more noise than SLS, which may be due to the clustered engine configuration on Saturn V’s first stage.
We’re all gonna die! Despite the doom-mongering of this study (which you can read here), the only issue noted by the paper from this noise was car alarms going off. And even here, the spread of the noise was asymmetrical, occurring in only one direction.
The concern about sonic booms has always been the annoyance they cause to residents near airports. In the case of Superheavy, it is very unlikely it will ever fly at a frequency to make its noise intolerable. More important, the nature of a spaceport versus an airport reduces the concern considerably, since a spaceport requires a much larger buffer area, and at both of SpaceX’s Starship launchsites in Florida and Texas almost everyone living close by works for the company or in the space business. They are not going to complain.
And while studying these noise issues is useful, we must not be naive about the real purpose of such studies. Underneath its high-minded science goals is a much more insidious one: finding a weapon for shutting down SpaceX. This concern of mine might be overstated, but remember, almost our entire academic community is rabidly leftist and made up of partisan Democrats. They hate Musk for his politics, and have been aggressively looking for ways to hurt him. This sound study is just another tool in that war.
Readers!
Please consider supporting my work here at Behind the Black. Your support allows me the freedom and ability to analyze objectively the ongoing renaissance in space, as well as the cultural changes -- for good or ill -- that are happening across America. Fourteen years ago I wrote that SLS and Orion were a bad ideas, a waste of money, would be years behind schedule, and better replaced by commercial private enterprise. Only now does it appear that Washington might finally recognize this reality.
In 2020 when the world panicked over COVID I wrote that the panic was unnecessary, that the virus was apparently simply a variation of the flu, that masks were not simply pointless but if worn incorrectly were a health threat, that the lockdowns were a disaster and did nothing to stop the spread of COVID. Only in the past year have some of our so-called experts in the health field have begun to recognize these facts.
Your help allows me to do this kind of intelligent analysis. I take no advertising or sponsors, so my reporting isn't influenced by donations by established space or drug companies. Instead, I rely entirely on donations and subscriptions from my readers, which gives me the freedom to write what I think, unencumbered by outside influences.
You can support me either by giving a one-time contribution or a regular subscription. There are four ways of doing so:
1. Zelle: This is the only internet method that charges no fees. All you have to do is use the Zelle link at your internet bank and give my name and email address (zimmerman at nasw dot org). What you donate is what I get.
2. Patreon: Go to my website there and pick one of five monthly subscription amounts, or by making a one-time donation.
3. A Paypal Donation or subscription:
4. Donate by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman and mailed to
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652
You can also support me by buying one of my books, as noted in the boxes interspersed throughout the webpage or shown in the menu above.
It’s amazing how the sensitivity of ears increased so greatly with the purchase AND REFORM of Twitter . . .
The political hate of Elon Musk is for real. Whenever you watch a Tesla review on YouTube lately, you’re going to hear things like, “It’s a great choice, as long as you can stomach the founder.” Driving a Tesla used to mark you as a lefty. The tables are now turning on that. I may just have to buy one to show support for Elon’s partnership with Trump.
Skunk Bucket:
Do it! Best automotive decision I ever made. Cheap cost of ownership, well built, near zero maintenance, insanely zippy, full of nifty little abilities and easter eggs. It has made travelling fun again! I no longer drive my car; my car drives me. And the best part is that every OTA update makes my car better and more capable.
If you can afford to buy FSD outright, do so. That will give you the ability to join the Robotaxi/Cybercab fleet next year when version 13 UnSupervised makes widespread appearance. Your car can make money for you when you aren’t using it.
Otherwise the subscription is a cheap alternative.
It does look like the $7,500 tax credit will be cancelled in Trump’s term, so if that matters to you, don’t wait very long. Also, you can use my referral for another $1k off before the end of the year. Email me at trentcast@gmail.com for the link.
Good luck!
With the solids, I would have thought SLS the loudest….
Robert wrote: “Despite the doom-mongering of this study (…), the only issue noted by the paper from this noise was car alarms going off.”
Well, if they are going to add in the car alarm noise, then of course it is the loudest, and of course it is the most annoying. Now we know why no one was allowed to park within three miles of the Saturns, the Shuttles, or the SLS.
Hello Jeff,
As it turns out….SLS launches ended up being much louder than expected, too.
From the paper “Space Launch System acoustics: Far-field noise measurements of the Artemis-I launch”:
https://pubs.aip.org/asa/jel/article/3/2/023601/2874351/Space-Launch-System-acoustics-Far-field-noise
The obvious objection here, to be fair, is that no private residence or business can be found within 18 kilometers of LC-39B at the Cape, whereas, as you can see at Bob’s linked article at NSF, there are such to be found a bit over 10km away at South Padre Island and Port Isabel. But so far, the effects described do not seem to be a danger to people or property – certainly not given that any structures (or windows) in these areas must be able to resist direct strikes from hurricanes of a certain strength!
There is, by the way, an interesting discussion of this paper at the SpaceXLounge subreddit, including comments by one of the paper authors. There’s discussion specifically of why SLS solid rocket boosters, while very loud, are not as loud as you might expect at distance, given plume interactions. (They are conducting more measurements at today’s Flight 6 launch, BTW.) https://www.reddit.com/r/SpaceXLounge/comments/1gts37d/new_study_reveals_starships_true_sound_levels/
Big rockets are loud. So what? Who cares? If the folks doing this study are receiving federal funding I’d say this is a place where Vivek and Elon can cut.
Vibrations/acoustics can harm both tower and rocket–you have to study them.
If anyone makes a stink about Starship contamination—even small tightly controlled labs cannot remain sterile
https://phys.org/news/2024-11-ryugu-asteroid-sample-rapidly-colonized.html