SpaceX just cleared a major hurdle for bringing Starship to Cape Canaveral.
The Department of the Air Force has officially signed off on a plan that lets SpaceX redevelop Space Launch Complex 37 for Starship and Super Heavy operations.
Their Record of Decision lays out how the company can rebuild the pad, transport hardware, and eventually fly and land the massive booster and ship right here on the Space Coast.
The approval covers everything from construction work to vehicle processing to road upgrades. Phillips Parkway and Old A1A inside Cape Canaveral Space Force Station will be widened so Starship hardware can move between the Cape and Kennedy Space Center.
The Air Force says there is no practical alternative to building at SLC-37, but it requires a long list of safeguards. Environmental controls were the most prominent conditions, including dust control, flood and hurricane resilience, noise-reduction systems, wildlife protections, historic-site monitoring, stormwater controls, and plans for wetlands and habitat restoration.
SpaceX must also cover the costs of any permanent habitat loss and follow strict rules for species such as the southeastern beach mouse, the Florida scrub-jay, and the gopher tortoise.
Practical Effects
Residents can expect traffic controls during construction and high-profile launches, continued public notifications for loud events and sonic booms, and a dedicated process for handling damage claims. The document also outlines how SpaceX and the Space Force will coordinate with the Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge, Cape Canaveral National Seashore, and nearby agencies to minimize disruptions.
With the decision signed on November 20, 2025, the path is now open for SpaceX to add Starship to Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy on the Eastern Range, marking another major expansion of launch activity on the Space Coast. The final lease agreement, pad construction and last but not least, Starship completing its development phase still remain, of course, so it will be a while before Starship launches here…but it won’t be a very long while.
On November 18, 2025, Blue Origin filed a request to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) to allow water discharges into the Indian River Lagoon, an environmentally sensitive area that is in a poor state after years of being polluted by industrial, governmental and even domestic sources.
Much has been made of this request in social media, but it seems like very few people have actually read the documents to see what is being asked.
That document is below, along with a factual summary of the information contained inside.
The Notification
DEP issued a Notice of Draft Permit (published Nov. 18, 2025) for Blue Origin to operate an industrial wastewater treatment facility at its Blue Origin OLS Manufacturing Complex located on Space Commerce Way on Merritt Island.
The draft permit (file FL0A00007-002-IW7A) would authorize up to 0.49 million gallons per day (MGD) of treatment, with planned discharges of 0.467 MGD of process wastewater and 0.015 MGD of non-process wastewater into a large onsite stormwater pond (about 402,981 sq ft), which then flows to the Indian River.
The DEP document summarizes the wastewater treatment as:
Blue Origin’s site uses a centralized purified-water system to support component testing and cleaning operations across multiple buildings. Soft water from Building A is further treated in Building D’s Water Room using carbon filtration and reverse osmosis, then pumped to points of use in Buildings D, B, and G.
After use (mainly for tank proofing and rinsing), wastewater from Buildings D and G is routed back to Building D’s discharge manifold and then to the storm sewer system and an onsite stormwater pond; Building G returns via a dedicated wet well/pump system, while Building B has no return flow path.
The project proposes adding a continuous flow meter and an integrated, flow-proportional sampler (IW-1) at Building D’s discharge manifold to continuously measure discharge and collect representative samples before the water reaches the retention pond and ultimately the Ransom Road Ditch.
A major intermittent discharge source is periodic carbon-filter rinsing, storage tank dumps, and line purges done for preventative maintenance to reduce bacterial growth—also routed through IW-1.
Separately, Building A’s chiller plant cooling towers periodically “blow down” mineral-laden water to control solids buildup from evaporation. That cooling-tower blowdown would be discharged for surface-water disposal (IW-2) to the retention pond and then to the outfall toward the Ransom Road Ditch, rather than to the sanitary sewer.
The facility would discharge treated/conditioned wastewater to an existing large onsite retention pond (about 402,981 square feet) to provide dilution before the water ultimately flows to the Ransom Road Ditch, classified as Class II waters.
D-001 (existing outfall): permitted for up to 0.467 MGD daily maximum flow; the ditch segment described is about 48 feet long, with discharge at approximately 0 feet depth; location near 28°30’42″N, 80°40’51″W.
D-002 (new outfall): permitted for up to 0.015 MGD daily maximum flow; the ditch segment described is about 4 feet long, also discharging at approximately 0 feet depth; location near 28°30’36″N, 80°40’42″W.
Paraphrasal of FL0A00007-002-IW7A
Also contained in the document are prohibitions:
Discharge Requirements
The discharge shall not contain components that, alone or in combination with other substances or in combination with other components of the discharge:
Item
Prohibited Condition
a.
Settle to form putrescent deposits or otherwise create a nuisance
b.
Float as debris, scum, oil, or other matter in such amounts as to form nuisances
c.
Produce color, odor, taste, turbidity, or other conditions in such degree as to create a nuisance
d.
Are acutely toxic
e.
Are present in concentrations which are carcinogenic, mutagenic, or teratogenic to human beings or to significant, locally occurring, wildlife or aquatic species, unless specific standards are established for such components in subsection 62-302.500(2) or Rule 62-302.530, F.A.C.
f.
Pose a serious danger to the public health, safety, or welfare
Reference: Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.)
Limitations and Monitoring
The document calls for the following limits and monitoring activities:
Effluent Limitations Table
Parameter
Units
Effluent Limitations
Monitoring Requirements
Max./Min.
Limit
Statistical Basis
Frequency of Analysis
Sample Type
Flow
MGD
Max Max
0.49 Report
Daily Maximum Annual Average
Daily, when discharging
Meter
pH
s.u.
Min Max
6 9
Monthly Average Monthly Average
Daily, when discharging
Grab
Oil and Grease
mg/L
Max
5.0
Daily Maximum
Daily, when discharging
8-hr FPC
Nitrogen, Total
mg/L
Max
3.0
Annual Average
Quarterly
8-hr FPC
Phosphorus, Total (as P)
mg/L
Max
1.0
Annual Average
Quarterly
8-hr FPC
Units: MGD = Million Gallons per Day | s.u. = Standard Units (pH scale) | mg/L = Milligrams per Liter | 8-hr FPC = 8-Hour Flow Proportional Composite
Public Input
DEP says it intends to issue the permit unless public comments lead to changes. The application and supporting materials can be reviewed at DEP’s Central District Office in Orlando during business hours.
Anyone interested may submit written comments or request a public meeting (with specific required information) to the DEP contact listed in the notice. For most people, the deadline to comment or request a meeting is within 30 days of publication (i.e., Dec. 18, 2025, 30 days from Nov. 18, 2025), and if a public meeting is held, the comment period runs until the meeting closes.
The Department of the Air Force has issued a positive Final Environmental Impact Statement for SpaceX Starship at LC-37 at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station. This SpaceX rendering shows what the area could look like when complete. Credit: SpaceX
The proposal would turn the old Delta IV pad into a fully rebuilt launch site capable of hosting up to 76 Starship flights a year. Each mission would include a booster landing just minutes after liftoff and a Starship landing hours—or in some cases years—after launch. In short, the skies above the Space Coast are going to be very busy.
The review concludes that the project would bring no major environmental obstacles across most categories.
Still, two issues stand out: air quality and noise.
The EIS points to significant community annoyance from Starship’s noise and sonic booms, especially during nighttime launches. While the report says structural damage is unlikely, the sound levels will be noticeable across the Space Coast on launch days. SpaceX plans to use heavy sound-suppression systems and coordinate public notifications in advance. Sonic booms from returning boosters and Starship itself will be endemic, day or night.
Level at which sustained exposure may result in hearing loss
80-90
City Traffic
85
Many household appliances
80
Chamber music, in a small auditorium
75-85
Vacuum cleaner
75
Normal conversation
60-70
Business Office
60-65
Household refrigerator
55
Suburban area at night
40
Whisper
25
Quiet natural area with no wind
20
Threshold of hearing
0
Sustained Exposure Hearing Loss: the common benchmark for this threshold is an 8-hour time-weighted average exposure to 85 dBA on a repeated basis. The time exposure for a Starship launch will be measured in minutes.
During operations, the rocket’s emissions are expected to exceed federal insignificance thresholds for nitrogen oxides. The Air Force and SpaceX plan to use an adaptive management strategy, reviewing new data as operations ramp up.
Minimal Impacts Across Other Categories
The review found:
Environmental Impact Summary
Starship/Superheavy Environmental Impact Summary
Category
Assessment
Traffic
Increases during construction and launch days are manageable.
Local Wildlife
Southeastern beach mouse and Florida scrub-jay will be protected through relocation and habitat restoration plans.
Water Resources
Wetlands will see construction impacts, but all fall under federal permitting and mitigation requirements.
Historic Sites
Expected to remain unaffected, with ongoing monitoring for potential noise-related impacts.
Marine Areas
No long-term closures; only short safety zones during launches.
Overall, the report concludes that the project can proceed without causing significant long-term environmental harm, provided mitigation measures remain in place.
What Comes Next
The Air Force must still issue its Record of Decision, and the FAA will release its own determination before any Starship launches or landings take place at the site. Airspace-closure details are still being finalized, with additional FAA analysis expected. At the same time, this was one of the major hurdles the SpaceX project had to clear on its way to becoming a reality.
When approved, the redevelopment of SLC-37 would position Cape Canaveral as a major operational hub for Starship activity, supporting national security missions, commercial flights, and NASA needs. SpaceX’s Boca Chica facility will work in tandem with the SpaceX Eastern Range facility to support the giant spacecraft.
As a company, SpaceX moves quickly. Once approved, it is unlikely the company will delay construction at LC-37, and once started, the work will proceed rapidly until the facility is ready for its initial use. In Boca Chica, SpaceX has constructed Starship launch and landing facilities in months, as opposed to the multi-year efforts NASA has had with SLS. It is reasonable to expect much the same here in Florida.
Oddly, SLC-37 may not be the first Starship pad to enter service on the Space Coast. Given its construction lead, that distinction is likely to go to LC-39A at Kennedy Space Center. The FAA is still finalizing its Environmental Impact Study for that facility, but SpaceX has been steadily constructing its Starship launch pad on the KSC site.
The sun rising behind the New Glenn booster ‘Never Tell Me The Odds’ as it prepared to enter Port Canaveral this morning. Photo: Charles Boyer / Talk of Titusville
Blue Origin’s New Glenn first stage “Never Tell Me The Odds” made a happy return to Port Canaveral this morning, marking the first time that Blue Origin returned with a New Glenn booster after a successful flight and landing.
Hundreds of spectators gathered early this morning along the shoreline and on the docks at Port Canaveral. Many arrived before dawn, cameras and phones in hand, eager to capture the moment when the 188 foot-tall booster appeared on Blue Origin’s landing ship ‘Jacklyn’ under two of ‘Harvey Stone’, Blue’s support ship. According to observers, the mood was electric — cheers, applause and shouts of “welcome home” greeted the vessel as it pulled into berth.
Entering PortThe last mileWhere it started, where it finished.
The New Glenn booster previously launched successfully on November 13, carrying NASA’s twin ESCAPADE spacecraft toward Mars and achieving the rocket’s first successful booster landing at sea. Built here on Merritt Island, many of the spectators were undoubtedly Blue Origin employees celebrating the return of their handiwork.
Now that the booster is at its home port, it will be transported to Blue Origin’s refurbishment facility, where it will be inspected, refurbished and prepared for another flight. The timing of that flight has not been announced as yet.
This also marked the first time two companies had different boosters on the wharf awaiting return to their respective facilities for refurbishment. That pairing may be eclipsed at some point in the midterm future — Stoke Space and Relativity are also planning to use the Eastern Range for launch operations, and they also plan to reuse boosters in their own right. It’s fair to say this morning was a visible sign of a new era at the Cape, one with frequent launches by multiple providers, with hardware regularly recycled and reused.
New Glenn booster ‘Never Tell Me The Odds’ standing tall aboard ‘Jacklyn’ today. Photo: Charles Boyer, Talk of Titusville
United Launch Alliance provided this photo of Viasat 3 being stacked for launch in Cape Canaveral.
United Launch Alliance is set to fly their last commercial payload on an Atlas V (* other than Project Kuiper) this week from Launch Complex 41 at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station. The payload is ViaSat-3 — or VS-3 F2 in ViaSat parlance — is a telecommunications satellite that the company expects to more than double the bandwidth capacity of their entire existing fleet. The launch is currently scheduled for 10:24 PM EST on Wednesday, November 5th.
Spaceport Canaveral Is Quite Busy
SpaceX also has a Starlink launch scheduled for Wednesday, but will likely yield the Eastern Range to ULA for their launch if ULA is ready to proceed. Stay tuned — it sounds like Wednesday will have a rocket launch of some kind, whether it be a Falcon 9 or an Atlas V.
Meanwhile, south of ULA and SpaceX’s launch complexes, Blue Origin continues to prepare New Glenn for its planned launch next week. It’s hard to recall a time when this many different rockets from different companies are all heading to the pad to launch in the space of only a few days.
At A Glance
Atlas V 551 | ViaSat-3 F2 (ViaSat-3 EMEA)
Organization
United Launch Alliance
Location
Cape Canaveral SFS, FL, USA
Rocket
Atlas V 551
Pad
Space Launch Complex 41
Status
Go for Launch
Status Info
Current T-0 confirmed by official or reliable sources.
Window Opens
Wednesday, 11 / 05 / 2025 10:24 PM
Window Closes
Wednesday, 11 / 05 / 2025 11:08 PM
Destination
Geostationary Transfer Orbit
Mission Description
The ViaSat-3 is a series of three Ka-band satellites expected to deliver >1 Tbps of network capacity with flexible, dynamically directed service to where customers are located.
As of 10:30 AM ET Monday November 3, 2025. Launch assignments and times are subject to change or cancellation at any time. Consult
ULA for updates.
Weather
The 45th Weather Squadron of Space Launch Delta 45 has released their official Launch Mission Execution Forecast: 95% GO throughout the launch window:
Trajectory
The target orbit for the ViaSat-3 mission is believed to be ~11,700 × 23,600 km, with an inclination of ~6.0 °. After payload separation, the satellite will move to its final operational position in a sun-synchronous orbit under its own power.
Launch Viewing: In Person
Given that this is a launch from Cape Canaveral’s SLC-41, Jetty Park, The Banana River Bridge and southern Titusville Parks are your best bets.
Cocoa Beach and the northern Titusville parks will have an excellent view as well.
For official updates regarding launch times, the ULA mission page is the best source of information: ViaSat-3 Launch times change from time to time, and the company generally updates their website within minutes of the decision to change the launch time. This is very handy if none of the streaming options on YouTube have started their broadcasts.
Speaking of streaming, if possible, watch one of the YouTube streams for the latest/greatest information. Things change pretty fast as the countdown heads towards zero, and the dulcet tones of Will Robinson-Smith on Spaceflight Now or the announcers on ULA’s live stream will keep you up to date.
Remember that there is a delay between a launch stream and the actual countdown clock. That is simply because of physics: it takes time for the signal to travel from the launch site, through the Internet, and back down to your phone, resulting in a five to fifteen-second delay.
Next Space Flight an app for iOS and Android phones, has a real-time countdown clock that is accurate to a second, give or take. The app is free. Search the App Store or Google Play. They are also on the web: nextspaceflight.com.
Best Public Viewing Spots for SpaceX Launches from SLC-40 (Cape Canaveral)
Starship Flight 11 hardware on the launch mount in Texas as the sun rises over the Gulf of Mexico. Photo: Chris Leymarie, Florida Media Now
SpaceX is set to launch Starship Flight 11 today from its Boca Chica, Texas, facility, on a test flight that potentially carries major implications for Florida’s Space Coast. As the company eyes future Starship operations from Cape Canaveral, today’s test flight will help validate critical systems—like heat shield performance, engine performance and stability, as well as booster recovery—all systems that must be fully qualified and fully dependable prior to the system entering an operational state.
As SpaceX prepares for the next Starship test flight from Texas, attention is shifting to Florida, where the company is laying the groundwork for future launches. SpaceX is preparing infrastructure at Kennedy Space Center and Cape Canaveral, potentially bringing economic growth, tourism surges, and job creation. At the same time, concerns about airspace closures, beach access restrictions, and environmental impacts are mounting locally.
Starship To Boost The Local Economy
The economic implications of Starship for the Space Coast region are significant. Experts believe that regular Starship launches could revive the kind of tourism once seen during the Space Shuttle era, drawing thousands of visitors and pumping millions into local businesses. Spending on hotels, restaurants, transportation, and entertainment could surge, while local hiring and infrastructure development could follow suit. If Florida becomes a key hub for Starship activity, the benefits could extend from tourism to long-term aerospace investment.
After 30 years and 135 missions, residents and visitors to Florida’s Space Coast crowd the new A. Max Brewer Bridge in Titusville to see the rocket’s red glare of NASA’s Space Shuttle Program soar for the last time. NASA / Frank Michaux
Others point to jobs that will be created both during construction and also during the ongoing operation of Starship from the Eastern Range. The Starship expansion in Florida is expected to create approximately 600 new full-time jobs on the Space Coast by 2030, along with a $1.8 billion infrastructure investment, according to a Reuters report.
Those are the direct jobs, and other indirect positions are likely to be created as well — payload processing, infrastructure support at The Cape and others come to mind. In short, it’s fair to say that Starship will bring jobs, local spending, increased tax revenues, and a lot of other positives for the Space Coast economy.
The Price Of Progress
But with those opportunities come challenges. Previous Starship launches have already caused ripple effects in Florida’s airspace. During Flight 8, the FAA grounded commercial flights at major airports across the state, including Miami, Orlando, and Palm Beach, due to debris concerns from failed flights. While those flight failures can fairly be attributed to the company’s efforts to develop and determine the limits of Starship hardware, the incidents also portend delays SpaceX ramps up operations here. Similar disruptions for ongoing normal operations could become more common, affecting both travelers and airlines across the region.
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has warned that airline passengers could be delayed by up to 2 hours per flight, with an average interruption of 40 minutes per event. That will not only inconvenience passengers, it will also create logistics issues for air carriers and their destinations. All of that has a price, and airlines are resisting paying it.
Starship Flight 11 on the launch pad on October 13, 2025 Photo: Chris Leymarie, Florida Media Now
Environmental and community concerns are also growing. The FAA’s draft environmental review proposes closing Playalinda for around 60 days a year to create safety zones during launches and tests. That’s before Florida’s notoriously fickle launch weather is taken into account.
In the past 30 years of missions lifting off from the Kennedy Space Center or Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, about 48 percent of launch scrubs were because of weather violations. Each of those weather violations will result in additional closures at Playalinda and other nearby areas, inconveniencing not only tourists but also local businesses in the Titusville area that depend on them.
Local residents and advocacy groups are voicing concerns about the impact of frequent launches on wildlife, natural habitats, and noise levels. Researchers are also examining how the intense force of Starship liftoffs may spread particulate matter from the pad into surrounding areas. Whether that makes any difference to NASA, the US Fish and Wildlife Service or other government agency has yet to be seen.
Tonight’s Mission
Flight 11 will launch from Starbase in Boca Chica, Texas, using Booster 15 and Ship 38. Booster 15 will reuse a number of Raptor engines for its flight, proving the reusability of SpaceX’s new powerplants. After liftoff, the Super Heavy booster is expected to complete a full-duration ascent burn, separate cleanly from the Starship upper stage, and perform a controlled boostback and landing burn over the Gulf of Mexico. Unlike earlier tests that attempted landings on water, this booster will not be recovered, but the descent performance and engine burns will be closely monitored.
The Starship upper stage, once separated, will ignite its engines to reach near-orbital velocity and coast across the globe on a suborbital trajectory. The vehicle is expected to reenter Earth’s atmosphere over the Indian Ocean, targeting a controlled splashdown. During this phase, SpaceX will be evaluating critical thermal protection systems, particularly the performance of its heat shield tiles. This will help validate Starship’s reentry capabilities under conditions that simulate the return from orbital missions. The flight path has been carefully chosen to minimize risk to populated areas and optimize data collection.
Remote cameras set up, the press and spectators await t-0 and liftoff from Boca Chica for Starship Flight 11. Photo: Chris Leymarie, Florida Media Now
Success for Flight 11 doesn’t depend on full recovery or reuse but on hitting key engineering milestones. SpaceX is focused on clean stage separation, stable engine performance, successful ignition and shutdown sequences, and accurate reentry tracking. It also aims to test refinements in flight software, telemetry, and structural resilience. If the heat shield performs as intended and the booster’s descent proceeds according to plan, the flight will mark a step forward in proving Starship’s viability for future orbital missions, including satellite deployment, lunar landings, and eventually Mars transport.
Flight 11 is also a proving ground for operational procedures and systems integration that will feed into future missions from Florida and beyond. Every sensor reading, pressure fluctuation, and engine plume will inform hardware tweaks and software updates for the next generation of test flights. While the vehicle won’t carry payloads or astronauts this time, the stakes are high: SpaceX is racing to mature Starship into a reliable workhorse for NASA’s Artemis program.
No matter the outcome of tonight’s flight, Starship in Florida will remain a hot topic, at least until the Department of the Air Force and the FAA release their findings from the ongoing environmental studies, which are now in their final rounds with the public. Those decisions are due late this year or early in 2026.
Starship Flight 10 Rising: initial ascent from the Texas coast went exactly as planned. Photo: Chris Leymarie, Florida Media Now
NASA astronaut and Expedition 63 Commander Chris Cassidy conducts a spacewalk in a Collins Aerospace EMU to set up the Tranquility module for the future installation of a NanoRacks airlock that will enable public and commercial research on the outside of the International Space Station. Cassidy has completed 10 spacewalks throughout his career for a total of 54 hours and 51 minutes spacewalking time. Photo: NASA
Collins Aerospace, a North Carolina-based major aerospace contractor with deep roots in Brevard County, is under scrutiny following a critical NASA Inspector General report that highlights serious performance issues with the company’s management of the spacesuits used on the International Space Station.
Collins is a unit of RTX (formerly Raytheon Technologies) and it employs thousands in Brevard County and plays a pivotal role in Florida’s aerospace ecosystem. The company supports not only the ISS program but also numerous spaceflight systems through partnerships with NASA’s Kennedy Space Center and commercial space providers operating along the Space Coast.
With over 110 missions and nearly 300 spacewalks to its credit, the Collins Extra Vehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) is an integral part of the ISS and a key component of the American space program. Spacecraft in their own right, these complex systems allow human extracurricular activities outside of ISS where the crew can perform repair, insulation, experiment retrieval and other vital activities for the ongoing functionality of the orbiting outpost. Simply put, they are critical items, even if the general public often takes them for granted.
The Report
You can read the report for yourself below, or download it to read in Acrobat Reader or a similar PDF viewer.
18 EMU suits were originally manufactured, and the last time a number was reported — in 2017 — the number of functioning EMUs had dropped to 11, and conventional wisdom in the space industry holds that there are fewer than the eight-year old 2017 count still working.
Overview of the EMU Graphic: NASA
While the EMU is a venerable piece of hardware that has served NASA for decades, it is close to its end of life. Now, a NASA audit, released this week by NASA’s Office of Inspector General (OIG), paints a troubling picture of Collins’ work under the $1.5 billion Extravehicular Activity Space Operations Contract (ESOC).
Collins was originally awarded in 2010 for $324 million, the contract has ballooned in size and scope as the ISS mission has been extended through 2030, presumably the same year ISS will be deorbited.
NASA Findings
The report cites repeated delays in delivering life support components, including the fan pump separator and carbon dioxide sensors, which are essential to astronaut safety. In some cases, components originally due in 2020 and 2022 have still not been delivered.
Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) With Water in Helmet During Post-EVA 23 Screening Test. S–2013–199–00005 Photo: NASA
Summary of Deficiencies cited by NASA
Category
Deficiency
Danger
Water Intrusion in Helmets
NASA documented multiple incidents where water leaked into astronauts’ helmets during spacewalks, including a 2013 event and another in 2022.
These events pose severe risks of asphyxiation, vision impairment, and communication failure during extravehicular activities.
Thermal Regulation Failures
Malfunctions in cooling systems, especially the sublimator units, have caused problems regulating suit temperature.
Uncontrolled temperatures can lead to overheating or hypothermia, endangering astronaut health and limiting operational capability.
Injuries from Suit Fit and Design Limitations
The bulky and rigid design has led to physical injuries, particularly in the shoulders and hands, due to poor fit and restricted mobility.
These injuries can impair astronaut performance and require medical attention, possibly compromising mission objectives.
Delayed Delivery of Critical Components
Collins has experienced years-long delays in delivering essential life support components, such as fan pump separators and carbon dioxide sensors.
These delays reduce the number of available functioning suits, increasing the risk of suit failure and EVA cancellations.
Obsolescence of Replacement Parts
Many suit components are no longer manufactured, and suppliers have exited the market, making replacements difficult.
Continued use of obsolete or expired parts increases the likelihood of system failure during missions.
Quality Control Failures
Instances were reported where expired, incorrectly built, or inadequately tested components were installed or shipped, including a component that remained on the ISS two decades past expiration.
These failures compromise suit integrity and astronaut safety, raising the risk of malfunctions in space.
Inadequate Management of EVA Anomalies
Collins and NASA experienced delays in identifying and resolving anomalies, such as the 2024 umbilical unit water leak that led to a spacewalk cancellation.
Slow responses to real-time issues increase the risk of loss of life support functions and mission failure.
Cost Overruns and Schedule Failures
Over the past three fiscal years, Collins exceeded planned costs by an appreciable amount.
These financial and schedule inefficiencies strain NASA’s resources and delay the availability of safe, functioning suits.
Inflated Contractor Performance Ratings
Despite repeated failures, Collins received high performance scores and a majority of available award fees, which the Inspector General deemed inconsistent with actual results.
Overly generous evaluations reduce accountability and hinder meaningful performance improvement.
NASA’s own evaluations, according to the report, appear to inflate Collins’ performance scores, particularly in technical management and safety compliance, despite “persistent schedule, cost, and quality problems.” In 2023, NASA took the unusual step of sending a formal letter to Collins leadership expressing dissatisfaction across multiple contracts — including ESOC.
NASA management concurred with most of the report’s recommendations and committed to updating evaluation criteria and reassessing award fee practices by the end of 2025. However, they defended the current scores as fair within the broader context of the contract’s scope.
For its part, Collins says it has been troubled by supply chain issues, schedule delays, cost overruns. These problems have threatened NASA’s ability to conduct safe and timely spacewalks, a critical function for ISS maintenance and research.
As of the time of this writing, the company has not responded publicly to the NASA OIG report.
Collins Dropped Out Of Next-Gen Spacesuit Development
In 2019, NASA’s Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel strongly recommended a complete EMU replacement due to the aging technology in the long-running program. In 2022, NASA selected Collins and Axiom Space to develop the next-generation spacesuit systems needed for the Artemis Project and for ISS. Collins was tasked with building the ISS suit, Axiom with the lunar suit.
Things seemed to be going well for Collins in their efforts as they developed and tested their new systems.
A Collins Aerospace rendering of their lunar suit. Graphic: Collins Aerospace
In 2024, however, Collins dropped out of the program. It was said that NASA and Collins felt that the development timeline would not support the space station’s schedule and NASA’s mission objectives, and thus the contract with Collins was mutually descoped.
Industry chatter suggested at the time that Collins’s program was encountering cost overruns and technical challenges, and that under a fixed-price or tightly constrained contract environment, continuing the program would have risked further losses.
Whether or not that conjecture was true is immaterial: Collins was out, Axiom Space and the AxEMU were the only game in town. Until Axiom’s suit was ready to take over Artemis and ISS use, Collins would continue to support the current EMU. That work is under scrutiny from the NASA OIG Report.
The Next Generation Suit – On The Way And Apparently On Track
AxEMU Suit Photo: Axiom Space
As mentioned above, Axiom Space is the sole vendor preparing the next generation of spacesuits for NASA and presumably for other customers.
Axiom describes their ISS version of the suit: “Similar to the Artemis III spacesuit, the Axiom Space ISS suit will be built to accommodate a wide range of crew members … provide increased flexibility … life support systems, pressure garments, and power avionics and communication.”
SpaceX
While SpaceX and the Polaris Dawn flight made a lot of noise in 2024 with its EVA, it should be noted that the SpaceX suit tested was not even the old EMU’s equal in terms of environmental control, autonomy, duration, robustness, and task flexibility. The SpaceX suits were intermediate or developmental EVA-capable suits, not yet the full “go-anywhere, high-complexity” spacesuit used by NASA for ISS or lunar EVAs. Theirs is a program still in development.
Currently the AxEMU is undergoing testing and development, focusing on preparation for NASA’s Artemis missions. Recently, for the first time, two AxEMU suits were tested at the same time in the in the Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory at NASA Sonny Carter Training Facility in Houston. Last month astronaut Walter Villadei took part in an integral test of the AxEMU using lunar-task tools, to evaluate stowage, deployment, and usability of tools under realistic constraints.
Two AxEMU suits being tested underwater in the Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory in Houston. Photo: NASA
No specific date for testing the new AxEMU suit in space has been given, but multiple sources say that the company is shooting for a Critical Design Review late in 2025 or early 2026. Following the resolution of any action items, the AxEMU may be tested in orbit on ISS prior to being put to work on the lunar surface as part of the Artemis landings.
What’s better than one suit? TWO suits! 🧑🚀🧑🚀@NASA and @Axiom_Space teams held the first dual spacesuit run at the Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory with NASA astronauts wearing Axiom Space’s lunar spacesuit. This was the final integration test, proving both the spacesuit and… pic.twitter.com/8P04fyCXu3
File photo of a Falcon 9 launching from SLC-40 in 2024. Photo: Charles Boyer
A final environmental assessment approved by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) clears the path for SpaceX to build and operate a Falcon 9 rocket landing zone at Space Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station.
NOTE: this is not either one of the two Starship EA currently underway for the Eastern Range.
The assessment also supports an increase in the number of annual Falcon 9 launches from SLC-40, raising the cap from 50 to 120 per year. The FAA’s decision, finalized in August 2025, comes after months of federal coordination, public comment, and technical review.
FAA Approval Enables New Landing Zone, Expanded Launch Schedule
The FAA, acting as the lead federal agency, reviewed SpaceX’s proposal to both increase the number of Falcon 9 launches and construct a 400-foot-diameter concrete landing pad east of the SLC-40 pad. According to the final Environmental Assessment (EA), the FAA concluded that the project would not cause significant adverse environmental impacts.
With this approval, SpaceX may now move forward in seeking:
A modification to its current launch license (LLO 18-105),
A potential new launch license under 14 CFR Part 450, and
Airspace closure approvals for each launch and landing.
The FAA emphasized that environmental clearance does not automatically guarantee license approval but does permit further steps toward that end.
Construction of the new landing zone will occur within a 10-acre lease boundary adjacent to the existing launch site. The landing zone includes a concrete pad, gravel apron, nitrogen gas line, processing pedestal, and associated infrastructure.
Falcon 9 Operations at SLC-40 Figure 2-5. Proposed Landing Zone Final Environmental Assessment 2-7 August 2025
Environmental Effects
Water & Wetlands
Florida Scrub Jay in MINWR. Photo: Charles Boyer
The final EA identified that the construction and operation of the new landing site will affect several protected habitats and species, notably the Florida scrub-jay and Southeastern beach mouse. In consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, a Biological Opinion concluded the project “is not likely to jeopardize” listed species or critical habitats, provided mitigation measures are followed. Those measures include habitat compensation and best management practices during construction.
Noise and Sonic Booms
Noise impacts—especially those resulting from rocket landings—were analyzed in detail. Falcon 9 landings at Cape Canaveral generate sonic booms, but the FAA determined that their frequency and intensity fall within previously analyzed limits. Up to 34 landings annually are expected to take place at the new SLC-40 site. Downrange ocean landings using drone ships will continue for the remainder.
The EA also confirmed that sonic boom pressure levels from the new landing zone would be comparable to existing operations at LZ-1 and LZ-2. Noise levels would be highest during landings but occur infrequently enough that they do not trigger significant regulatory thresholds under federal guidance.
From Appendix B “Final Environmental Assessment Falcon 9 Operations at SLC-40” via the FAA
Public Input
The FAA received more than 4,000 public comments during the review period for the draft EA. Public engagement included virtual meetings, local newspaper notices, and hard copies of the document being distributed to several Brevard County libraries.
According the FAA, most comments expressed support or posed technical questions, with at least one requesting that the FAA produce a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), citing concerns about cumulative effects and development intensity. The FAA opted to finalize the EA instead, citing that the expected impacts did not reach the threshold requiring a more extensive EIS process.
No substantial objections were raised by local municipalities or regulatory agencies. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection, for instance, found the project consistent with the Florida Coastal Management Program.
With the EA finalized and a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) likely, the next phase will involve regulatory and operational coordination:
FAA Licensing – SpaceX must receive formal approval to modify its current launch license or obtain a new one under updated regulations.
Property Agreement – The Department of the Air Force must execute a real property agreement allowing SpaceX to lease and develop the LZ.
Permitting – SpaceX will need a modified Environmental Resource Permit (ERP) from the state and a stormwater permit under the federal National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES).
Construction and Testing – Once approved, construction is expected to begin ahead of the LZ-1/2 license expiration in early 2026.
Airspace Coordination – FAA will continue issuing Notices to Airmen (NOTAMs), while the Coast Guard will support maritime safety operations during launches and landings.
SpaceX’s Starship Tower under construction at LC-39A at Kennedy Space Center Photo: Charles Boyer / ToT
The FAA is holding the first two of its give public meetings for Starship at LC-39A at Kennedy Space Center this afternoon and this evening at the KSC Visitors Center. You will not need to pay admission or parking to attend.
Information provided by the FAA:
IMPORTANT: Print this parking pass for KSCVC. You may download it here or below. It is on Page 3 of the document.
Best we can tell, is that SpaceX and NASA are not permanently closing Playalinda Beach, but proposed launch‑related safety protocols could result in lockdowns of the area for 60–85 days yearly, raising resident concerns over tourism and the local economy. That is in the EIS Draft provided by the FAA, but nowhere in that document does it say that beach access will be permanently ended.
Still, effectively, the public could be shut out of Playalinda for 20-25% of the year once you figure in the inevitable weather scrubs that come with Florida launches.
That will have some effect on Titusville businesses and also its residents. How much remains to be seen.
What Are The Anticipated Closure Areas?
Map of closure areas on page 16 of DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT SPACEX STARSHIP-SUPER HEAVY LAUNCH VEHICLE AT LAUNCH COMPLEX 39A at the Kennedy Space Center, Merritt Island, Florida
From the DRAFT EIS, Page 17 of 410:
Access restricted areas are cleared and any necessary roadblocks are established around 3 hours prior to launch/landing and dropped after the event concludes. In the event of a scrub, cleared areas and roadblocks remain until propellant is offloaded, with the duration variable depending on the percentage of propellant loaded; however, the maximum duration would be about 1 hour. Not all attempts load propellant before scrubbing and roadblocks are often dropped early.
The restricted areas shown are estimated and provide only a representative depiction; exact restricted areas would be determined prior to pre-launch activities and launch/landing. For planning purposes to support this EIS, SpaceX and NASA used conservative assumptions to develop these restricted areas. Ultimately, each restricted area is mission specific and will be determined by Range Safety and the FAA through the FAA license or license modification process.
After receiving license or license modification materials, the FAA will determine the appropriate restricted areas to protect public safety and compare those areas to the assumptions provided in the EIS. The FAA would address any discrepancies or gaps, if found, in the environmental analysis.
Static fire tests would result in restricted access to areas not currently accessible to the public and would last approximately 3 hours each time; these would mostly affect land management and mission-related activities on MINWR and KSC. Restricted access associated with launches and landings would be expanded to also affect the northern portion of CCSFS, which would include Space Launch Complex (SLC)-41 (leased to United Launch Alliance) and SLC-40, and publicly accessible areas in the southern portion of MINWR and CANA that includes Playalinda Beach. Restricted areas in areas accessible to the public would be closed to the public during the identified operations due to safety concerns. All closures, whether dictated by public safety concerns (i.e., the Range or the FAA require the closure) or by the NPS due to visitor volumes exceeding capacity, would be temporary.
While restricted access requirements are limited to the duration that the access restricted area is in effect (i.e., between 3 and 3.5 hours), the actual duration of a closure associated with publicly accessible areas may be longer due to logistical aspects. Based on information provided by the NPS, duration of closures for portions of CANA and Playalinda Beach is affected by the time of day/night that the test or launch occurs. Due to logistics of closures (e.g., NPS personnel clearing the park of visitors, etc.), midday (or later) launches or tests could result in the need to close portions of the park for the entire day; tests or launches occurring very early in the morning may result in the park being closed for a portion of the day.
Based on information provided by NPS, it is estimated that there could be between 33 and 44 (using the most conservative estimate) full-day closures and up to 33 half-day closures, which equates to up to 60.5 total “closure days” per year (44 full days + 33 half days = 60.5 “full days”). Launch scrubs and weather delays could affect the length and/or number of closures; however, the extent of these occurrences cannot be quantified at this time. Table ES-1 provides a summary of pre-launch and closure-related activities and notional closure times/durations. As mentioned previously, it is anticipated that, similar to other launch vehicles like Falcon, associated closure areas would reduce in size and duration as the program matures, more data is available, and the reliability of the vehicle improves.
Playalinda’s Role In The Titusville Economy
Playalinda and Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge are a critical component of Titusville’s economy:
Playalinda draws approximately 1.16 million of Canaveral National Seashore 2.1 million annual visitors, contributing significantly to businesses and jobs in jobs in Titusville. Visitor spending in the area totaled $62.5 million, supporting over 800 jobs and channeling an $83 million economic benefit to gateway communities like Titusville, according to numbers compiled by the National Park Service.
Talk of Titusville reached out to NASA’s Public Affairs Office for a definitive statement concerning Playalinda access, but they have not responded by press time. SpaceX has also not responded by press time either.
Congressman Mike Haridopolos of Florida’s Distric 8, which represents Titusville posted recently, “You can’t be No. 1 on Earth if you’re No. 2 in space. This executive order cuts red tape to speed up launch permits and infrastructure development for our commercial space industry,” the Indian Harbour Beach Republican said. “President Trump is cementing America’s dominance in commercial space exploration.”
Local Opposition Mounting
Local residents have been increasingly vocal about Starship, with their chief complaints being noise, sonic booms and reduced access to MINWR and Playalinda. There are numerous online chats, threads and even groups on social media — Facebook, Reddit and others where people normally gather — raising their concerns.
A new Change.org Petition started by Robyn Memphis lists their concerns about Playalinda’s future, namely that in Texas, where SpaceX is testing Starship, there is a smaller area of exclusion than the one being planned for LC-39A and Playalinda thereby.
In the petition, they take the FAA’s chart and illustrate their point:
The petition asks for the same safety exclusion distances as those used in Texas, as they have proved to be safe and effective and if matched in Florida, Playalinda access would be preserved.
“AA safety radius is 3.11 miles, yet Playalinda is outside of this radius from LC-39A and still targeted for closure, while some sites inside the hazard zone remain open. This is for convenience versus safety,” says the Petition’s authors.
Whether the opposition is a large percentage of locals is hard to say without completing a scientific poll, but simply judging by online activity, the group seems to capture a substantial portion of the local population.
Have Your Say!
No matter how you feel about the planned Starship program, Talk of Titusville urges you to make your voice heard in the final official public meetings before the Final Decision being issued.
Here are the details for the final‐draft public hearings on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for SpaceX’s Starship‑Super Heavy operations at LC‑39A:
You must be logged in to post a comment.