Connect with us

News

Musk outlines cost-cutting plan for Boring Co: cheaper, faster tunnel digging

Published

on

One of the large reveals made by Tesla and SpaceX Chief Elon Musk at TED2017 was his plan to create a multi-layer high-speed tunnel infrastructure to support mobility by way of electric skates and Hyperloop tubes.

A key point that he drove home for the underground tunnel network was the integration of the system into cities.

“You have to be able to integrate the entrance and exit of the tunnel seamlessly into the fabric of the city. So, by having an elevator, sort of a car skate that is on an elevator, you can integrate the entrance and exits to the tunnel network just by using 2 parking spaces.”

Musk shared a video demonstrating how skate elevators would be integrated into city streets where they await vehicles looking to be transported through the underground labyrinth of tunnels. The serial tech entrepreneur envisions loading docks wherein vehicles would simply pull into the skate, get lowered into the tunnel network, and be sent along a slot car-like track at speeds of 200 km/h ( 124 mph). The Boring Company’s tunnel network won’t simply alleviate surface congestion, it will completely transform the way we move cars, people and freight, says Musk.

It is worth noting that The Boring Company and Tesla are under control of Musk, while the Hyperloop project has been open sourced, but with support from SpaceX.

Eliminating human drivers allows the skates to move at much faster speeds than human-controlled vehicles. Fixed routes within the tunnel network further improve safety beyond the dynamic nature of  human-determined driving routes. The tunnel network is also infinitely scalable. “You can alleviate any arbitrary level of open congestion with a 3D tunnel network.” and that “There’s no real limit to how many levels of tunnels you can have.”, says Musk from TED2017.

The key barrier to creating tunnels today is the exorbitant cost. The recent 2.5 mile expansion to the Los Angeles subway system came at a cost of nearly $1 billion per mile. Musk and team at the Boring Company hope to cut the cost of tunneling by a significant amount by streamlining the tunneling process and reinventing the machines that help facilitate the digging.

Advertisement
-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5V_VzRrSBI

Building Tunnels For Less

First, the team is looking to cut the diameter of the tunnels they dig, moving from the traditional tunnel diameter for passenger vehicles of 26 to 28-feet to a 12-foot standard diameter which would be sufficient for the Tesla skate. On the surface, this might not seem like a lot, but cutting the diameter by 50% cuts the cross sectional area by a factor of four. This is significant as the speed and cost of tunneling is largely driven by the amount of cross sectional area to dig. Being able to cut out 75% of the time associated with digging comes with enormous cost savings.

Second, the team plans to attack head-on the way tunneling machines currently dig. Traditional machines dig, slowly and incrementally, then stop to install reinforcements to support the newly exposed earthen walls. Musk and team are working to install the reinforcements continuously thus eliminating the need to pause operations. This integration is expected to increase the speed of the overall process by as much as 50%.

The Boring Company tunneling machine spotted in front of SpaceX in April, 2017

Finally, the team believes that current digging machines are nowhere near their power and thermal limits, and is looking to ‘jack up the power’ to the digging machines. Doing this, the team hopes to increase the speed by a factor of 4 or 5 on top of the other improvements being suggested by Musk.

Musk also revealed that The Boring Company has a pet snail named Gary who can currently travel at 14 times the speed of existing tunneling machines. While this is more a testament about how slow the boring process is than the amazing speed of Gary, it is a fun target for the team, to be able to build tunnels quicker than Gary can crawl, and continues the comedic spin on the new company.

These tunnels could be kept at or near a vacuum to reduce or eliminate air resistance for all the moving objects within it. Curiously, Musk shared that,

“To withstand the water table, you have to design a wall to be able to withstand 5 or 6 atmospheres. To go to vacuum, you only need to be able to withstand 1 atmosphere.”

It is clear that Musk is very excited about this new Boring Company. He indicated during his sit down at TED2017 that he spends 2-3% of his time on the project, noting that it’s essentially being run as not much more than an intern project with a used boring machine and a few people dedicating partial effort to it.

Advertisement
-

I'm passionate about clean technology, sustainability and life. I've worked in manufacturing, IT, project management and environmental...and enjoy unpacking complex topics in layman's terms. TSLA investor. Find more of my words on my website or follow me on Twitter for all the latest. Tesla Referral link: http://ts.la/kyle623

Advertisement
Comments

News

Why SpaceX is finishing another space-internet system that isn’t Starlink

SpaceX launched three final O3b mPower satellites Sunday, finishing a lesser known SES satellite network.

Published

on

By

SpaceX had an 87 minute window opening at 2:49 p.m. Eastern on Sunday to fly a Falcon 9 out of Cape Canaveral carrying the final three satellites for SES’s O3b mPower constellation, a project that has taken more than a decade to finish since Boeing and SES first signed SpaceX on for the work.

Unlike the thousands of Starlink satellites SpaceX has stacked into orbit over the years, O3b mPower flies in a different neighborhood entirely. The three new satellites, tagged F11, F12 and F13, are headed for medium Earth orbit at roughly 5,000 miles up, more than ten times higher than Starlink’s shell around 340 miles but still a small fraction of the 22,000 miles where old school geostationary satellites sit. That middle position is the whole point, because a satellite that far out needs far fewer siblings to blanket the globe than a low orbit constellation does. Essentially, SES only needed 13 satellites total to build a network offering quick, steady service that used to require thousands of spacecraft.

With most people having heard plenty about Starlink and almost nothing about O3b mPower, SES and SpaceX already blend the two networks for some customers. Both SpaceX and SES sell satellite broadband, but they’re aimed at different buyers. Starlink is built for volume, direct to consumers, RVs, homes, small businesses, plus a growing aviation and maritime business. O3b mPower skips consumers entirely and sells enterprise grade connectivity to airlines, cruise lines, offshore energy operators, telecoms needing backhaul, and governments, priced and provisioned more like a dedicated circuit.

A 2023 partnership lets cruise ships combine Starlink’s speed with O3b mPower’s steady capacity depending on what a ship needs at a given moment. Sunday’s completed 13 satellite constellation effectively finishes the medium orbit half of that pairing, years after.

Sunday’s mission was already a something on SpaceX’s manifest well before O3b mPower entered the picture. This flight marked its 29th trip to orbit, a history that includes two crewed Axiom missions, the European Space Agency’s Euclid telescope and 22 separate Starlink batches. SpaceX has landed boosters on the droneship A Shortfall of Gravitas so often that Sunday’s touchdown attempt, if it went as planned, was set to be the 661st successful Falcon booster landing to date.

For a company that pushed the Starlink constellation past 11,000 satellites back in August, almost entirely through bulk launches from California, Sunday’s flight was a reminder that SpaceX’s schedule still has room for someone else’s satellites too. SES gets a finished network built for a narrower set of customers, and Falcon 9 gets one more line on an already long resume.

Advertisement
-
Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Tesla gives the Roadster an official “Go for launch” demonstration date

Tesla teased an October 1 Roadster reveal, reviving years of delayed SpaceX thruster hover promises.

Published

on

By

Concept rendering of a Tesla Roadster with SpaceX Package via Grok
Concept rendering of a Tesla Roadster with SpaceX Package via Grok

Tesla teased an October 1 event date for its next generation Roadster, posting an image on X Saturday that shows the car lit up like it is sitting on a launch pad, with the date “10.01” stamped across the bottom and the caption “Go for launch.” A countdown clock on Tesla’s Roadster order page now points to the same date, which falls on a Thursday. The company has not said where the event will happen or whether it will be streamed at the moment. Stay with us @Teslarati for live updates.


Tesla has since sent formal invitations to reservation holders confirming the event will take place in Waco, Texas, about 90 minutes north of its Austin headquarters, based on a digital ticket shared on X by Sawyer Merritt. Tesla did not name the exact venue, though Waco sits close to SpaceX’s McGregor, Texas, rocket test site, previously reported as the planned location for a Roadster thruster demonstration. The invite sets the reveal for 8:30 p.m. Eastern on October 1, requires RSVPs by midnight on September 16, and limits entry to guests 21 and older. Invitations are non-transferable.

The tease follows nine years of a project defined by unimaginable specs along with slipped dates. Musk first showed the second generation Roadster in November 2017 as a surprise reveal at the end of the Tesla Semi event, promising a 0 to 60 mph time under two seconds, a top speed above 250 mph, 620 miles of range from a 200 kWh battery, and production starting in 2020. At last November’s shareholder meeting, Musk set an April 1 demo date and joked the choice gave him “deniability” if it slipped again, which it did, moving first to late April, then to “a month or so,” then to August.

Tesla Roadster SpaceX Package’s 1.1-second 0-60 mph launch visualized in concept video

Whatever Tesla shows on October 1 is expected to center on the SpaceX developed thruster package Musk has described since 2018. Internally code named A71, a nod to the Lockheed SR-71 Blackbird, the system reportedly uses cold gas thrusters fed by a composite overwrapped pressure vessel, the same tank design SpaceX uses on Falcon 9. Musk has said a thruster equipped Roadster could hit 60 mph in about 1.1 seconds under roughly 2.75 g of launch force, well past the 1.9 second figure quoted for the standard car. That version reportedly will not be street legal and has reportedly been discussed as a limited run sold through a track only program.

Advertisement
-

The standard Roadster is still expected to carry the original $200,000 base price and $250,000 Founders Series tier, both set when Tesla opened $50,000 and $250,000 reservations in 2017. Tesla VP of Vehicle Engineering Lars Moravy has confirmed production will happen at Gigafactory Texas, with Musk targeting 2027 or 2028, 12 to 18 months after whatever the company demonstrates next month.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla plans big safety improvements for Full Self-Driving v15

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla is planning to roll out some pretty significant safety and accident avoidance features with Full Self-Driving version 15, which will be the next major FSD deployment from the company.

Tesla AI lead Ashok Elluswamy used a near-miss this week to preview what the company says is the next leap in Full Self-Driving.

In response to a driver whose car had swerved away from another vehicle pulling out of a parking lot, Elluswamy wrote that he was glad the owner was safe and that “even earlier prediction of hazards, even faster reaction time and overall significantly better safety and collision avoidance” would arrive with FSD v15.

The comment landed as Tesla continues to treat software as the primary safety upgrade path. v15 is described internally as a larger architectural step, with a much bigger neural network and tighter coupling between prediction and control.

Advertisement
-

The company has already begun using early v15 software in some robotaxi operations while rolling out safety features such as Automatic Collision Evasion into current customer cars, allowing the driving stack to intervene even when the driver is in manual control.

Tesla is rolling out a new FSD version with a massive safety addition

Tesla’s published telemetry is the backbone of its safety argument. In recent North American Vehicle Safety Report data, vehicles with FSD (Supervised) engaged traveled roughly 5.1 million to 5.7 million miles between major collisions, defined as airbag-deployment events.

Tesla’s estimate of the U.S. average over the same period is about 699,000 miles per comparable crash. That is the comparison Tesla often frames as roughly seven times fewer major collisions.

A tighter comparison uses the same Tesla fleet. Cars driven manually with active safety features such as automatic emergency braking still recorded a major collision about every 2.1 million miles. Against that baseline, FSD’s advantage shrinks to roughly 2.4 to 2.7 times fewer severe crashes, which independent researchers argue is the more apples-to-apples figure.

European data released in 2026 pointed in the same direction: Tesla reported FSD as 3.5 times safer than manual driving in the Netherlands and 4.1 times fewer collisions than manually driven Teslas with active safety across more than 100 million kilometers in five approved countries.

Advertisement
-

Those numbers do not settle every debate. NHTSA’s Standing General Order still shows Tesla accounting for the large majority of U.S. Level 2 driver-assist crash reports, in part because the fleet logs far more assisted miles than rivals. Critics also note that Tesla’s “U.S. average” mixes crash definitions and driving mix.

Even so, Tesla’s own same-car comparisons, plus lower rates of automatic emergency braking and harsh maneuvers when FSD is engaged, are the evidence Elluswamy is pointing to when he says v15 will push prediction and collision avoidance further. The claim is not that software already eliminates risk. It is that each major version is meant to widen the gap between the system and an unaided human driver.

Continue Reading