Connect with us

News

SpaceX Starship kicks off busy week of tests to prepare for flight debut

SpaceX technicians work on top of Starship SN5 ahead of the rocket's first static fire test. (NASASpaceflight - bocachicagal)

Published

on

After many delays, SpaceX’s fifth full-scale Starship prototype is almost ready for a busy week of crucial tests that will determine whether the rocket will become the first of its kind to take flight.

On June 24th, SpaceX lifted Starship serial number 5 (SN5) onto a robotic transporter and rolled the giant steel rocket about a mile down the road to the company’s nearby test facilities and launch pad. Already slowed down a number of weeks by Starship SN4’s explosive end a month prior, teams were in the middle of completing extensive pad repairs (and likely some upgrades, too). Nevertheless, about a week after arriving at the pad, SpaceX kicked off two important tests – both of which SN5 would need to pass to move on to bigger challenges.

Pass those tests Starship SN5 certainly did, completing an ambient temperature pressure test to check for leaks, immediately followed by a cryogenic proof test that proved the ship was structurally sound and ready for short hops. While significant, SpaceX has only tested SN5 (and its repaired pad systems) with benign liquid nitrogen – still extremely cold but chemically unreactive (i.e. nonexplosive). The pad repairs still need to be fully put through their paces with combustible liquid methane and oxygen propellant, as does Starship SN5. Enter today’s planned test.

Barring additional (rather likely) delays, SpaceX is scheduled to put Starship SN5 through its first fueling test(s) during a window stretching from 8am to 5pm CDT on Monday, July 20th. Assuming that the “fueling test” referred to in public road closure alerts is a routine wet dress rehearsal (WDR), the test will involve SpaceX loading Starship SN5 with a large volume of liquid oxygen and methane propellant – similar to but substantially riskier than a liquid nitrogen proof test. SpaceX actually appeared to briefly attempt such a test on July 17th but signs that Starship SN5 was pressurized quickly disappeared and the road closure was lifted, signaling an abort.

Advertisement

Two and a half days of tweaks later, SpaceX’s July 19th closure was cancelled but the July 20th instance remains in place. If successful, Starship SN5 is expected to attempt to static fire its lone Raptor engine perhaps just a few days later, although that obviously assumes that both SN5 and the new pad hardware function perfectly during their biggest test yet.

(NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

Much like SN4’s several successful Raptor static fires, Starship SN5’s one or several tests aren’t expected to be any different. If the first test is a perfect success, proving that the rocket and Raptor engine SN27 are healthy and operating as a cohesive unit, SpaceX’s next goal is the flight debut of a full-scale Starship. Thanks to a broad FAA launch license effectively permitting unlimited suborbital Starship flight tests, SpaceX technically no longer has to stick to the 150m (~500 ft) ceiling originally set for Starhopper, but chances are good that it will still be the general target.

Stay tuned for an unofficial NASASpaceflight.com livestream of today’s planned Starship SN5 fuel test, should it remain on schedule.

(NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.

Eric Ralph is Teslarati's senior spaceflight reporter and has been covering the industry in some capacity for almost half a decade, largely spurred in 2016 by a trip to Mexico to watch Elon Musk reveal SpaceX's plans for Mars in person. Aside from spreading interest and excitement about spaceflight far and wide, his primary goal is to cover humanity's ongoing efforts to expand beyond Earth to the Moon, Mars, and elsewhere.

Advertisement
Comments

Energy

Tesla Megapack Megafactory in Texas advances with major property sale

Stream Realty Partners announced the sale of Buildings 9 and 10 at the Empire West industrial park, which total 1,655,523 square feet.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla’s planned Megapack factory in Brookshire, Texas has taken a significant step forward, as two massive industrial buildings fully leased to the company were sold to an institutional investor.

In a press release, Stream Realty Partners announced the sale of Buildings 9 and 10 at the Empire West industrial park, which total 1,655,523 square feet. The properties are 100% leased to Tesla under a long-term agreement and were acquired by BGO on behalf of an institutional investor.

The two facilities, located at 100 Empire Boulevard in Brookshire, Texas, will serve as Tesla’s new Megafactory dedicated to manufacturing Megapack battery systems.

According to local filings previously reported, Tesla plans to invest nearly $200 million into the site. The investment includes approximately $44 million in facility upgrades such as electrical, utility, and HVAC improvements, along with roughly $150 million in manufacturing equipment.

Advertisement

Building 9, spanning roughly 1 million square feet, will function as the primary manufacturing floor where Megapacks are assembled. Building 10, covering approximately 600,000 square feet, will be dedicated to warehousing and logistics operations, supporting storage and distribution of completed battery systems.

Waller County Commissioners have approved a 10-year tax abatement agreement with Tesla, offering up to a 60% property-tax reduction if the company meets hiring and investment targets. Tesla has committed to employing at least 375 people by the end of 2026, increasing to 1,500 by the end of 2028, as noted in an Austin County News Online report.

The Brookshire Megafactory will complement Tesla’s Lathrop Megafactory in California and expand U.S. production capacity for the utility-scale energy storage unit. Megapacks are designed to support grid stabilization and renewable-energy integration, a segment that has become one of Tesla’s fastest-growing businesses.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Sweden strikers see tax issues over IF Metall union error

To address the issue, IF Metall is encouraging Tesla strikers to return the refunded tax amounts to the union.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla Europe

A tax correction is set to return two years of income tax payments to Tesla strikers in Sweden, after authorities determined that conflict compensation during a labor dispute should not have been taxed.

The issue is caused by a decision by IF Metall to treat strike compensation for Tesla workers as taxable income during the ongoing labor dispute with Tesla Sweden. That approach has now been reversed following guidance from the Swedish Tax Agency.

Strike compensation is typically tax-free under Sweden’s Income Tax Act, as noted in a report from Dagens Arbete (DA). However, two years ago, IF Metall’s board decided to classify payments to Tesla strikers as taxable.

“We did it to secure SGI, unemployment insurance and public pension. Those were the risks we saw when the strike had already dragged on,” Kent Bursjöö, financial manager at IF Metall, stated.

Advertisement

According to Bursjöö, the union wanted to ensure that members continued to register earned income with the tax agency, protecting benefits tied to income history. At the end of January, however, the Swedish Tax Agency informed the union that compensation during a labor dispute must be tax-free.

“Of course, we knew that it could be tax-free. But we clearly didn’t know that it couldn’t be taxable,” Bursjöö said.

Following discussions with auditors and tax authorities, IF Metall began correcting the payments. As a result, two years of paid income tax will now be credited back to the affected strikers’ tax accounts. The union will also recover previously paid employer contributions.

However, the correction creates secondary effects. Since the payments will now be treated as tax-free, pension contributions tied to those earnings will be withdrawn, potentially affecting state pension accrual and income-based benefits such as parental or sickness benefits.

Advertisement

To address this, IF Metall is encouraging members to return the refunded tax amounts to the union. In exchange, the union plans to pay 18.5% into occupational pensions on their behalf. “Otherwise, it will be a form of overcompensation when they get the tax paid back,” Bursjöö said.

That being said, the IF Metall officer acknowledged that the union’s legal ability to reclaim the funds from its improperly paid Tesla Sweden strikers is limited. “The legal possibilities are probably limited, from what we can see. But we assume that most people see the value of securing their pension,” Bursjöö said.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Tesla sues California DMV over Autopilot and FSD advertising ruling

The complaint seeks to remove the agency’s conclusion that Tesla falsely promoted the capabilities of Autopilot and Full Self-Driving.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla has filed a lawsuit against the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) in an effort to overturn a prior ruling that found the automaker engaged in false advertising related to its driver-assistance systems. 

The complaint seeks to remove the agency’s conclusion that Tesla misled customers about the capabilities of Autopilot and Full Self-Driving.

Tesla’s legal action follows a decision by California’s Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH), which concluded that Tesla’s earlier marketing of “Autopilot” and “Full Self-Driving” violated state law, as noted in a CNBC report. 

While the DMV opted not to suspend Tesla’s license after determining the company had updated its marketing language for its advanced driver-assistance systems, Tesla is asking the court to go further and reverse the agency’s conclusion.

Advertisement

In its Feb. 13 complaint, Tesla’s attorneys argued that the DMV “wrongfully and baselessly” labeled the company a “false advertiser” for its Autopilot and FSD systems. The filing argued that regulators failed to demonstrate that consumers were actually misled about the capabilities of Tesla’s systems.

According to Tesla’s complaint, the DMV “never proved consumers in the state had been confused about whether its cars were safe to drive without a human at the wheel.”

Tesla’s legal team further stated: “It was impossible to buy a Tesla equipped with either Autopilot or Full Self-Driving Capability, or to use any of their associated features, without seeing clear and repeated statements that they do not make the vehicle autonomous.”

Tesla now promotes its driver-assistance system as “Full Self-Driving (Supervised),” a name that overemphasizes the need for active driver attention.

Advertisement

Tesla’s autonomous driving program is a pivotal part of the company’s future, with CEO Elon Musk stating that self-driving technology will truly be the solution that will push Tesla into its full potential. The company is currently operating a Robotaxi pilot in Austin and the Bay Area, and the company recently announced that it has produced the first Cybercab from Giga Texas’ production line. 

Continue Reading