Connect with us

News

DeepSpace: Rocket Lab nails third Electron launch of 2019 as next rocket heads to launch pad

Rocket Lab's Electron rocket lifts off from Mahia Peninsula on June 29th for the company's third launch of 2019. (Rocket Lab)

Published

on

Welcome to the latest edition of DeepSpace! Each week, I’ll hand-craft this newsletter to give you a breakdown of what’s happening in the space industry and tell you what you need to know. 

On June 29th, startup Rocket Lab completed its third successful Electron rocket launch this year, placing roughly half a dozen small(ish) satellites in orbit as part of a dedicated mission for Seattle-based startup Spaceflight Industries.

Technically speaking, with three launches under its belt, Rocket Lab has now reached orbit more times this year than the United Launch Alliance’s (ULA) Atlas V and Delta IV rockets combined, despite the fact that the company conducted its first commercial launch just seven months ago. In other words, Rocket Lab is finding its stride with Electron at an unprecedented speed and may be able to complete its tenth successful orbital launch less than two years after the company first reached orbit (January 2018). June 29th’s launch is just the latest in a string of impressive successes for Rocket Lab and the company doesn’t appear to be slowing down any time soon.



Electron Flight 7: “Make It Rain”

  • A tongue-in-cheek reference to the stereotype that it rains constantly in Seattle, home of launch contractor Spaceflight Industries, Electron Flight 7 was a commercial rideshare mission that included six publicly manifested satellites and at least one classified payload.
    • Altogether, the payload mass was reported by Rocket Lab to be roughly 80 kg (175 lb). Aside from marking the orbital debut of Australia’s Melbourne Space Program, Flight 7’s main passenger – manifested via SpaceX – was BlackSky’s ~56 kg (125 lb), dishwasher-sized Global 3 satellite, the third of its kind to reach orbit.
    • BlackSky’s ultimate goal is to build a full constellation of at least 60 Global satellites, each capable of delivering >1000 images with an impressive resolution of ~1m/pixel. The first four (including Global 3) were actually built by Spaceflight itself, but the 60-satellite constellation is to be produced at LeoStella’s recently-inaugurated Seattle factory and replaced every few years.
 

Attached above black, rectangular cubesat dispensers is BlackSky’s minifridge-sized Global 3 satellite (top), encapsulated inside Electron’s carbon fiber fairing soon after (left). Electron lifted off (right) on June 28th (June 29th local time) and was greeted by a spectacular sunset-lit view of its launch site, located on New Zealand’s Mahia Peninsula. (Rocket Lab)

  • It can be all but guaranteed that BlackSky (or LeoStella) will return to Rocket Lab for future Global satellite launch contracts, perhaps flying 2-3 spacecraft at a time to expedite constellation completion and lower the overall cost of getting it into orbit.
  • Carrying a price tag of roughly $6M, Electron is capable of placing 150 kg (330 lb) into a 500 km (310 mi) sun-synchronous orbit (SSO). 3 Global satellites would likely push Electron to its limits, while 2 would leave plenty of space for additional copassenger spacecraft and thus opportunities to lower the overall cost to BlackSky.
  • Some 50 minutes after lifting off from New Zealand, Electron’s third stage – a “kick stage” powered by a custom-built Curie engine – ignited and burned for about 45 seconds, circularizing its orbit. A few minutes later, all 6-7+ spacecraft were successfully deployed, leaving the kick stage to once again lower its orbit to facilitate a quick and controlled reentry, minimizing space debris.

Onto the next one

  • Pictured at the bottom of the gallery above, Rocket Lab – much like SpaceX – completed a full static fire test of Flight 8’s Electron upper stage, the last major test milestone standing in the way of Electron’s next launch. Located in Auckland, NZ, the upper stage will now be shipped around 300 mi (500 km) south to Rocket Lab’s Mahia Peninsula-based Launch Complex 1 (LC-1).
  • According to Rocket Lab’s website, Electron Flight 8 is scheduled no earlier than (NET) August 2019, although the company’s Flight 7 webcast host indicated that it could happen as early as July.
    • Either way, it appears that Rocket Lab is well on its way to achieving a bimonthly average launch cadence this year.
    • The company’s goal is to reach a monthly launch cadence by the end of the year, roughly halving its current 2019 average of ~50 days between launches.
  • Ultimately, Rocket Lab’s future continues to look brighter month by month. As the only commercial smallsat launch operator currently serving customers, the company is essentially early to the party and has the market cornered by simply being first. Every launch will provide experience and get the company closer to profitability and even greater launch cadences, perhaps as high as 2-3x per month by the end of 2020.
Thanks for being a Teslarati Reader! Become a member today to receive an issue of DeepSpace in your inbox every Tuesday.

– Eric

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

Tesla’s Cybercab battery design could make robotaxis even cheaper

Tesla built the Cybercab’s battery pack with spare room for a future switch to LFP.

Published

on

By

Tesla built the Cybercab’s battery pack with empty space inside it on purpose, and the reason points to a cheaper robotaxi down the road.

Robert Sumpf, Tesla’s director of mechanical design engineering for battery modules and packs, said the extra room beside and beneath the Cybercab’s modules was left there so the company can move to lithium iron phosphate cells later. “So, we protected this pack to go to an even lower energy dense chemistry as we scale and need to bring LFP into the platform,” Sumpf said in a Cybercab deep dive with Munro Live.

The Cybercab runs on Tesla’s own 4680 cells with a nickel chemistry today. LFP cells store less energy for their size, so a straight swap would cut range. The reserved space lets Tesla add more LFP cells to make up the difference. In return, Tesla would get cells that cost less, run cooler and survive more charge cycles. LFP became the most used EV battery chemistry in the world last year.

Not all of that room was planned for a chemistry change. Lars Moravy, Tesla’s Vice President of Vehicle Engineering, said part of it exists because “we didn’t need as many batteries as we thought we did.” Tesla told Sandy Munro in early 2025 that it was targeting a Cybercab pack under 50 kWh with close to 300 miles of range.

The pack also breaks from the structural design Tesla used in some Model Y and Cybertruck builds. Instead of potting hundreds of cells into one block, the Cybercab uses four separate, individually sealed modules, so a bad module can be replaced without scrapping the whole pack. Sumpf was blunt about the older approach, giving the Model Y structural battery “a grade D” because it was hard to build and nearly impossible to repair. He estimated a fully structural pack gains about 10% more cell volume, but said “the issue is the service cost.”

Advertisement
-

That cost matters more for a car that rarely sits parked. Cybercab chief engineer Eric Earley said replacing an entire pack “before half a million miles is a killer on cost,” which is why remanufacturing and serviceability were built into the design from the start.

The same Munro Live tour produced Moravy’s admission that the Cybercab line at Giga Texas is now outpacing Robotaxi deployments, along with a look at the robotaxi’s unorthodox paint process. Tesla is aiming to deliver the first Cybercabs to outside customers by the end of 2026, though Elon Musk has said the vast majority will stay owned by Tesla and run as a transport service.

Sumpf did not give a date for an LFP version, name a cell supplier or say how a chemistry change would affect range. For now, the 4680 cars keep piling up: Texas DMV records from Tuesday list 544 Cybercabs authorized for Tesla’s Robotaxi fleet, more than the 507 Model Ys on the same roster for the first time.

Continue Reading

News

Starlink is ‘biggest competitive advantage,’ but it’s temporary, United CEO says

Published

on

Credit: United Airlines

United Airlines CEO Scott Kirby said that SpaceX’s Starlink satellite internet is its leading competitive advantage in the U.S. airline industry. However, in recent comments, while he described the service as “the biggest competitive advantage” the carrier currently holds, he also acknowledged that the edge is temporary.

“…everybody eventually is going to have high-speed low earth orbit internet connectivity. It’s going to be a must-have. We are going to have a few years of being the only airline that has it at scale, and that’s our mission,” Kirby said. Until everyone has it, United aims to capitalize on its head start by converting trial users into long-term loyal customers.

United has moved faster than its rivals on Starlink installations. As of mid-to-late October 2026, the system was on roughly 43 percent of its fleet, with plans to reach 61 percent by year-end, 87 percent by June 2027, and full fleet coverage by the end of next year.

The airline already operates more Starlink-equipped flights than the rest of the U.S. industry combined. Los Angeles International Airport is scheduled to become United’s first 100 percent Starlink hub in the first half of 2027, and the carrier’s app will display the likelihood that any given flight has the service.

Kirby has pointed to early evidence that the offering influences booking decisions. Some passengers loyal to other airlines are already switching flights for Starlink connectivity, something the airline, along with American Airlines, has tried to leverage against competing airlines. Both companies used status-match programs, and some of those customers are pursuing company-specific credit cards, which signals an intent to stay.

Once onboard, these customers encounter the airline’s broader investments in aircraft, larger seat-back screens, oversized bins, connection tools, and a mobile app that Kirby says outperforms competitors. Wi-Fi satisfaction scores on Starlink-equipped planes have been reported to be nearly double those on aircraft with other systems.

Competitors are moving slowly to do the same. Southwest Airlines began installations in 2025 and expects to complete them soon. Delta is pursuing Amazon’s Leo system, while American expects to start Starlink work in early 2027 and has not yet detailed regional-fleet plans. This timeline gap gives United a multi-year window in which it remains the only major U.S. carrier offering Starlink at scale.

Kirby has framed the strategy as pressing that advantage while simultaneously widening gaps in other technology areas so that customers who try United for the Wi-Fi remain for the overall experience.

The approach reflects a calculated bet that superior in-flight connectivity can accelerate share gains and support longer-term financial targets, including a 10 percent pre-tax margin goal.

High-speed internet is particularly valued by premium and business travelers who can work or stream reliably. As low-Earth-orbit service becomes ubiquitous, the temporary nature of the pure connectivity edge means United’s retention will depend on whether its other product and operational improvements keep pace.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Cybercab’s unorthodox paint process explained

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla Cybercab skips the traditional paint shop entirely, marking an unorthodox process for coloring the fully autonomous vehicle. However, the decision was a smart one, as it slashed factory costs, floor space utilization, and complexity, since Tesla relied on specialized alloys and in-mold coloring.

Munro Live was given the opportunity to do a factory walkthrough with Tesla Vice President of Vehicle Engineering Lars Moravy, who explained and detailed how Cybercab production at Giga Texas eliminates one of the automotive manufacturing industry’s most expensive and space-hungry elements.

A conventional paint line can cost hundreds of millions of dollars and require a million man-hours to build. Moravy framed the choice around Tesla’s core rule: “Question the requirements: why do you need paint?”

The structural answer lies in material selection. The aluminum alloys used in Cybercab’s front and rear castings do not oxidize and lose strength over time, the way many common automotive aluminum alloys do. Only the side modules, built around hot-stamped boron-steel door rings, receive an anti-corrosion e-coat, or dip coat. Front and rear modules skip coating altogether.

Model Y and Model 3 bodies, by contrast, are fully coated and painted.

Exterior colors come from the plastics shop, which Tesla engineers described as “our paint shop” for the Cybercab. Body panels are produced via reaction injection molding, referred to as RIM. Color is then mixed into a polyurethane resin at the mix head immediately before injection, so the panel emerges already colored with a Class-A surface.

Robots trim overflow to control sink marks and flow lines. The process avoids conventional spray-paint defects like orange peel and paint bleed. Scratches can still be repaired with compatible coatings that behave “basically like paint.” Because color is integral rather than a surface layer, shallow scratches do not expose a contrasting undercoat.

The secret behind Tesla’s Cybercab Gold goes well beyond just the color

Tesla has also explored related approaches, including in-mold lamination and painted films on stamped panels.

The manufacturing payoff is substantial because removing the paint shop, combined with the “unboxed” modular process that builds and tests front, rear, side, and center modules in parallel before a short final assembly, cuts factory floor space per vehicle by about 50 percent.

Final assembly itself uses only about 25 automated stations, far fewer than the typical Model Y line, and the overall line runs at about 78 percent automation, Moravy said. The approach also eliminates volatile organic compound emissions associated with traditional spray painting for these panels and shortens the coloring cycle from hours to minutes.

Cybercab’s paint strategy is clearly less about aesthetics than about systematically deleting capital-intensive, energy-heavy, and space-consuming steps once material science and process design make them unnecessary. It is a concrete example of Tesla applying first-principles questioning to one of the auto industry’s most entrenched factory requirements.

Continue Reading