Connect with us

News

SpaceX Super Heavy booster returns to launch pad after major repairs

Booster 7 has returned to the orbital launch site after suffering damage a few weeks prior. (NASASpaceflight - bocachicagal)

Published

on

SpaceX has returned its newest Super Heavy to Starbase’s orbital launch site (OLS) after rapidly repairing damage the booster suffered during its first round of testing.

Super Heavy Booster 7 (B7) left the High Bay it was assembled in for the first time on March 31st and rolled a few miles down the road to nearby Starship launch and test facilities on a set of self-propelled mobile transporters (SPMTs). On April 2nd, the roughly 67-meter-tall (~220 ft; 69m w/ Raptors) rocket was installed on top of Starbase’s lone orbital launch mount (OLM), setting the stage for crucial qualification testing.

The start of that process was exceptionally successful. On April 4th, after a smooth launch mount installation, SpaceX quickly filled Booster 7’s propellant tanks with a relatively benign cryogenic fluid (liquid nitrogen, liquid oxygen, or both) to simulate the thermal and mechanical characteristics of real flammable propellant. Despite the fact that the test marked the first time SpaceX had fully filled a Super Heavy prototype’s tanks, Booster 7 sailed through the ‘cryoproof’ without any obvious issue.

On April 8th, SpaceX moved Super Heavy B7 from the orbital launch mount to a structural test stand that had been installed and modified just a few hundred feet away in the weeks prior. This is where Booster 7’s near-perfect start to qualification testing took a bit of a turn. Booster 7 is only the third full-size Super Heavy prototype SpaceX has tested since July 2021. Like Booster 3 and Booster 4 before it, Booster 7 features some major design changes that ultimately make the prototype a pathfinder, necessitating extensive qualification testing.

To name just a few of the changes, Super Heavy B7 is the first booster fitted with a 33-engine puck and the first finished Starship prototype of any kind designed to use new Raptor V2 engines. With all 33 engines installed and operating a full thrust, Booster 7’s entire structure – and its aft thrust section especially – would be subjected to around 40% more thrust and stress than Booster 4, which indirectly completed structural testing with the help of a sacrificial test tank. Beyond differences in thrust and mechanical stress, Booster 7 is also the first Super Heavy to reach the test stand with secondary ‘header’ tanks meant to store landing propellant.

Advertisement

It’s unclear if those header tanks were fully filled and drained during Booster 7’s cryoproof, but they would not be quite as cooperative during a different kind of cryogenic testing on the structural test stand. The stand SpaceX modified specifically for Super Heavy B7 was outfitted with 13 hydraulic rams to simulate the full thrust of the booster’s central Raptor V2 engines – up to almost 3000 tons (~6.6M lbf) compared to Booster 4’s ~1700 tons (~3.7M lbf) with a smaller cluster of nine engines.

Implosion at the Structural Test Stand

After a few false starts and minor tests on the stand, Booster 7 finally managed some significant testing on April 14th. Judging by the rhythmic shattering of ice that built up on Super Heavy’s tanks, the test stand was able to simulate the thrust of Raptors to some degree and subject the booster to major mechanical stress that was felt from tip to tail. Within a few days, Booster 7 was removed from the test stand and returned to the high bay on April 18th. Around April 21st or 22nd, an image was leaked showing extensive damage inside Booster 7, confirming that the Super Heavy’s test campaign had been forced to end prematurely.

A leaked image looking up inside B7’s LOx header tank after testing. Above, B7’s aft section and LOx header before the booster was fully assembled.

Right away, the damage shown in the photo hinted at an operational failure, meaning that mistakes made by the rocket’s operators may have been more to blame than a possible design flaw. The photo shows a short portion of B7’s liquid methane (LCH4) transfer tube that runs through the booster’s new liquid oxygen (LOx) header tank, which itself sits inside Super Heavy’s main LOx tank at the aft end of the rocket – a tube inside a small tank inside a large tank, in other words. Super Heavy’s LCH4 transfer tube generally does what it says, allowing methane to safely fly down through the main LOx tank and fuel up to 33 Raptor engines. At full thrust, that tube would need to supply around 20 tons (~45,000 lb) of methane per second.

However, on top of merely transferring methane through the oxygen tank, Booster 7 introduced a design change that allows some or all of that tube to change functions and become a header tank mid-flight. That would require a system of valves that could seal off the main LCH4 tank once it was emptied, turning the transfer tube into a sort of giant steel straw filled with enough LCH4 to fuel Super Heavy’s boost-back and landing burns.

The damaged transfer tube in the leaked photo of Booster 7 doesn’t look that unlike what one might expect to see if they sucked through one end of a straw while blocking the other end, collapsing the center. Translated to the scale of Super Heavy, after an otherwise successful day of structural testing, SpaceX operators may have accidentally closed or opened the wrong valves while draining the booster’s transfer tube of liquid oxygen or nitrogen. As the heavy liquid drained from the tube, a lack of pressure equalization could have quickly drawn a vacuum and caused the tube to implode.

The

On April 29th, a SpaceX fan turned analyst published an analysis that convincingly pinpointed the moment Booster 7’s transfer tube collapsed. Simultaneously, because it showed that the transfer tube likely imploded during detanking, the analysis more or less confirmed the above speculation that the failure had been caused by a degree of operator error or poor test design. Of course, it’s possible that a hardware or software design flaw contributed to or caused the anomaly or that something like a pressure differential in the LOx header tank and LCH4 header tube could also explain the damage, but the accidental formation of a vacuum during detanking is arguably the simplest (obvious) explanation.

Advertisement

After the image of the internal damage leaked, the immediate consensus among fans and close followers was that Booster 7 was beyond repair. Instead, SpaceX appears to have proven those assumptions wrong and somehow managed to repair the upgraded Super Heavy to the point that it was worth testing again less than three weeks after returning to the high bay. On May 6th, B7 was rolled back to the launch site and installed, for the second time, on the orbital launch mount.

Prior to the failure, the general expectation was that SpaceX would begin installing Raptor V2 engines as soon as Booster 7 passed structural testing. It remains to be seen if SpaceX wants to repeat Booster 7’s cryoproof or structural testing to ensure that its quick repairs did the job before proceeding into static fire testing as previously planned. Nonetheless, hope lives on for the Super Heavy prototype and new test windows have been scheduled from 10am to 10pm on May 9th, 10th, and 11th.

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

News

Starlink Direct to Cell to boost remote businesses in Chile

Entel teams up with Starlink Direct to Cell to power SMEs & industries in Chile’s remote regions. Remote businesses get a major tech upgrade.

Published

on

(Credit: SpaceX)

Entel will provide Starlink Direct to Cell services to businesses in Chile and Peru, boosting connectivity in underserved regions.

Entel is Chile’s leading telecommunications provider. Its strategic collaboration leverages Starlink’s Direct to Cell service by offering advanced internet solutions to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and large corporations.

The partnership targets industries like mining, agriculture, and forestry, which often face connectivity challenges in remote areas. By tapping into Starlink’s low-latency satellite constellation, Entel aims to bridge these gaps, driving innovation and competitiveness.

The collaboration with Entel follows Starlink’s April expansion in Brazil, where its internet was integrated into John Deere’s agricultural equipment. Through its mobile app, Starlink provided Brazilian farmers with live video feeds, sensor data, and real-time sharing.

Advertisement

Entel’s Starlink Direct to Cell service includes value-added features such as 24/7 network monitoring, proactive management, and dedicated technical support. An observability feature will allow businesses to track real-time connectivity performance through web or mobile applications, enhancing operational efficiency.

The service’s accessibility to SMEs is a key focus. Starlink Direct to Cell is expected to empower small businesses to engage in e-commerce, improve customer communication, and expand digital operations.

Starlink’s Direct to Cell expansion into Peru underscores Entel’s regional ambitions, positioning it as a leader in Latin America’s business connectivity landscape. While details of the Peruvian rollout remain forthcoming, the move aligns with the region’s post-COVID-19 economic recovery. Reliable internet is critical for businesses to adopt cloud-based technologies and access global markets.

Starlink’s growing influence in Latin America highlights its role in transforming connectivity for underserved areas. Entel’s partnership strengthens its portfolio and helps businesses navigate a digital economy. As industries in Chile and Peru leverage Starlink’s capabilities, the collaboration could set a precedent for regional telecom providers, fostering innovation and economic growth across diverse sectors.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Bill Gates estimates DOGE cuts will cost children’s lives, Elon Musk responds

Musk responded with choice words towards Gates.

Published

on

bill gates elon musk

During a recent interview with the New York Times, Microsoft cofounder Bill Gates shared a lot of criticism towards Tesla CEO Elon Musk and his work with the Trump administration’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Musk, for his part, responded with choice words towards Gates. 

Bill Gates on DOGE

In his NYT interview, Gates lamented the fact that funding has been cut for programs that are supposed to help children abroad. Referencing the DOGE cuts made to the money going to Gaza Province in Mozambique, Gates stated that the people doing the cutting are not the most knowledgeable. 

“They cut the money to Gaza Province in Mozambique. That is really for drugs, so mothers don’t give their babies H.I.V. But the people doing the cutting are so geographically illiterate, they think it’s Gaza and condoms. Will they go meet those babies who got H.I.V. because that money was cut? Probably not,” Gates noted, adding that there will be “millions of additional deaths of kids” because of the cuts.

The Microsoft cofounder also admitted that he was surprised at the cuts that the Trump administration has implemented through the guidance of DOGE. As per Gates, he expected U.S.A.I.D. to receive a cut of about 20%, but the administration cut far more. “The reductions to U.S.A.I.D. are stunning. I thought there’d be, like, a 20% cut. Instead, right now, it’s like an 80% cut. And yes, I did not expect that,” he said.

Gates and Musk

Considering the nature of the interview, it was no surprise that Elon Musk himself was brought up as a topic. When the Times noted that Musk was not giving much away to the needs of the world’s poor, Gates stated that the Tesla CEO was ultimately the one who pushed for the cuts on U.S.A.I.D.’s budget. These cuts, Gates argued, effectively involve Musk in the deaths of the world’s poorest children.

Advertisement

“Well, he’s the one who cut the U.S.A.I.D. budget. He put it in the wood chipper, because he didn’t go to a party that weekend… the world’s richest man has been involved in the deaths of the world’s poorest children,” Gates stated. Musk, in response, stated in a post on social media platform X that “Gates is a huge liar.”

Musk and Gates have not really gotten along, thanks in no small part to the Microsoft co-founder putting a $500 million short bet against Tesla. In Walter Isaacson’s Elon Musk biography, Gates stated that he was shocked that Elon Musk was super mean to him after the Tesla CEO found out that he shorted Tesla. “Once he heard I’d shorted the stock, he was super mean to me, but he’s super mean to so many people, so you can’t take it too personally,” Gates noted.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Full Self-Driving changes your perception of travel — long or short

Tesla Full Self-Driving will ruin controlling your vehicle manually.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla does not tell you what Full Self-Driving will do to your perception of travel. Whether your next trip is a two-minute ride up the street to the grocery store or a 1,500-mile trip across multiple states, you’ll never look at driving the same way.

This past weekend, I was lucky enough to have a new Tesla Model Y for the weekend. Equipped with the company’s Hardware 4 computer, the latest software version, and all of the new Model Y’s improvements from the legacy iteration, I knew much of my weekend would be spent testing FSD, as I have never had an extended experience with it.

By the time the weekend was over and it was time to pick up my non-Tesla car, I realized I was not ready to let go. Having the car drive me around from location to location all weekend was something I truly enjoyed, but it was more than just a convenience thing. I felt impressed, relaxed, and even, in some instances, safer.

What Tesla Full Self-Driving Did Well

Now, before I truly begin, I do want to say that I don’t think I’ll ever feel safer than when I’m in ultimate control of the vehicle. However, a lot of things that give me stress during a drive were handled with relative ease by the car — and I was happy I didn’t have to deal with it.

One instance was merging onto a busy highway with a very short merge lane. Full Self-Driving took a no-holds-barred approach, taking the space it was given and grabbing a spot in the right lane quickly.

It was not willing to be passive, but it was also not willing to sacrifice safety. It will not wait for others to pull the trigger and go at intersections or four-way stops. If there are a few seconds of stagnation from the car and another driver in that instance, it will go, of course, proceeding safely.

It even did a handful of things I didn’t expect it to do. It would stay in the right lane if multiple on-ramps were approaching. I took it on a stretch of highway where three on-ramps are all within a mile of one another.

It passed a tractor-trailer just before we made it to the first of those three on-ramps. It stayed in that left lane after overtaking the 18-wheeler, as Driver Visualization showed more cars approaching to merge. It was one of those moments that, even though I have written about this topic for several years, was unbelievably impressive.

It not only drives people safely, but it is also considerate of other drivers, which is very impressive.

I was incredibly surprised to see my Fiancè have so much ease when it was operating.

I figured, just because she is not as familiar with what Tesla does to make FSD better and how it works, that she would be very on edge during our rides. This was the opposite. She felt comfortable enough to look away from the road while in the passenger seat. Scrolling her phone or looking out at the blooming flowers was what she did in the car. It was no different from when I’m driving, and I think that was what was most impressive to me.

Driving after FSD

I found that picking up my car and driving manually back home truly brought me back to real life. Everyone with a Tesla and Full Self-Driving says that when you go back to another car, you feel like you’re stuck in the past.

I really did feel that way. Not only because of the aesthetic of the interior, but just because I was doing something that I just realized could be done for me with the right vehicle.

While I love the car I own now, I’m still deciding whether I love it enough to keep it. To be completely honest, I have hopped around with the idea of trading in my car for the new Model Y. Whether I will or not truly depends on the next few weeks and how I feel, but I know that I will be considering it for the next few months easily.

Continue Reading

Trending