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

Investor's Corner

Tesla has a Cybercab problem nobody saw coming

Tesla’s Cybercab line now builds robotaxis faster than Tesla can deploy them, Lars Moravy says.

Published

on

By

Tesla’s Cybercab line in Texas can now build the two seat robotaxi faster than the company can put it into service, according to Lars Moravy, Tesla’s Vice President of Vehicle Engineering. “We don’t run every day because the line can run so fast. It’s currently outpacing our deployments,” Moravy said in a new Cybercab deep dive from Munro Live. “So, it’s a bit of a race right now. Who’s going to go faster? Right now the manufacturing line’s ahead.”

Tesla’s official Robotaxi account shared a Cybercab analysis video on X on Monday, calling it a “Cybercab engineering deep dive.” Moravy’s comments go further than what he told analysts on the Q3 earnings call last week, when he said the Cybercab line’s listed capacity of more than 125,000 units a year undersells what it can actually run.

The tour shows where that speed comes from. Tesla’s unboxed process splits the Cybercab into front, rear, side and center modules that are built and tested on their own before they meet on a short final line. That final line has just 25 fully automated stations, which Tesla’s team estimated is a fifth to a tenth of what a Model Y needs. The full line is about 78% automated, the framing line is already at 100%, and the layout uses roughly 50% less floor space per vehicle. The stated goal is “100% automation in 10 second cycle time,” or one finished Cybercab every 10 seconds.

Tesla also deleted the paint shop. Only the side modules are coated, and the exterior panels get their color inside the molding machine. Engineers said the car is designed to run at least 500,000 miles, which matters for a vehicle that will spend most of its day carrying riders.

The battery got the same treatment. The Cybercab uses an 88S6P pack of 4680 cells in a steel enclosure, a first for Tesla, with each module potted separately so a single failed module can be swapped instead of the whole pack. Wireless battery management boards replace a wiring harness, and new contactors are fast enough to drop the pyro fuse entirely. Tesla’s battery director graded the pack an A minus, compared with a D for the Model Y structural pack and a B minus for Cybertruck. Up front, the drive unit runs an 11:1 gear ratio versus roughly 9:1 on most Teslas, since the Cybercab does not need a high top speed.

Advertisement
-

The deployment side is now the bottleneck Moravy described. Tesla had more than 50 Cybercabs working the Formula 1 weekend in Austin, and Texas records show 463 Cybercabs registered. Tesla said on its earnings call that Cybercab service will launch in Dallas next month, and Moravy said the company is aiming to get Cybercabs to customers by the end of 2026. Every unit built so far has gone into Tesla’s own fleet since the line moved into volume production in April.

Munro Live also asked when it could get a Cybercab to tear down. Tesla’s answer: “Not yet.”

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

How SpaceX Is raising Raptor’s sea-level thrust while holding engine mass steady

Published

on

Credit: SpaceX

SpaceX’s Raptor engine family has steadily increased sea-level thrust while simultaneously reducing mass, turning iterative engineering gains into substantially higher performance for the Super Heavy booster. CEO Elon Musk shed more light on how powerful Raptor 4 will be, and it’s pretty crazy.

Raptor 1 delivered 185 metric tons of thrust at roughly 2,080 kilograms, while Raptor 2 raised that to 230 tons while cutting mass to about 1,630 kilograms. SpaceX data for Raptor 3 lists a target of 280 tons at 1,525 kilograms (with further reductions in associated vehicle hardware), while operational flight ratings have been cited near 250 tons.

This morning, Elon Musk stated that Raptor 4 is expected to reach 300 tons of sea-level thrust at roughly the same mass as Raptor 3. Across these versions, thrust has risen by more than 60 percent from the first engines while engine mass has fallen, producing a sharp improvement in thrust-to-weight ratio. This is a true testament to how great SpaceX engineering has been:

With 33 engines on SuperHeavy, the jump from earlier versions to a 300-ton Raptor 4 would produce roughly 9,900 metric tons of total liftoff thrust, nearly three times the Saturn V’s approximately 3,400 metric tons from its five F-1 engines.

This is not just a larger number on a data sheet, either, as sea-level thrust is the force available the moment the vehicle leaves the pad. This is when it is heaviest and still deep in Earth’s gravity well and dense atmosphere.

Higher levels of sea-level thrust directly improves the initial thrust-to-weight ratio of the full stack. A higher ratio produces faster acceleration off the pad, which shortens the time the rocket has to spend fighting gravity, and gravity losses during the first minute or two of the flight are a major drain on total available delta-v. Every second shaved off of that early climb preserves more propellant energy for reaching orbital velocity or for carrying extra payload.

Because Super Heavy’s engine count is constrained by vehicle diameter and packing density, increasing thrust per engine is the most straightforward way to raise total liftoff performance without redesigning the booster structure or design.

The same-mass target for Raptor 4 is equally important. Holding engine mass roughly constant while raising thrust improves the engine’s own thrust-to-weight ratio and reduces the structural and propellant mass fraction that must be carried solely to support the engines.

Earlier Raptor iterations also simplified or eliminated extensive vehicle-side hardware such as heat shields. These gains compound: more force for less installed mass leaves additional capacity for propellant, payload, or operational margins such as engine-out capability.

For Starship’s architecture, the practical effects are large. Greater liftoff thrust supports heavier vehicles, larger propellant loads, and higher payloads to low Earth orbit, figures SpaceX has targeted in the 100-plus-ton reusable range. That capacity underpins orbital refueling, lunar missions, and eventual Mars cargo and crew flights.

Continued growth in sea-level thrust therefore tightens the gap between theoretical rocket performance and the high flight rates and reusability needed to make large-scale space transport practical.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Assisted Driving expands to tenth EU country

Published

on

Tesla has expanded its Tesla Assisted Driving (TAD) suite to its tenth European country, as Latvia joined a growing list of European Union member states authorizing the company’s advanced driver assistance technology.

Tesla Europe announced this morning that the system is now approved in Latvia, with a software rollout to begin soon.

The approval and rollout follow recognition of a provisional European type approval originally granted by the Netherlands’ RDW authority on April 10.

Latvia’s Road Traffic Safety Directorate (CSDD) evaluated the Dutch documentation, coordinated with the other national authorities, and reviewed updates from Tesla. These included tightened limits on speed offsets, automatic resets of any manual speed adjustments after each trip, and stronger driver monitoring.

In Europe, the feature is marketed as Tesla Assisted Driving after a recent rule change that labeled the name “Full Self-Driving” as misleading.

Tesla starts showing how FSD will change lives in Europe

The system remains an SAE Level 2 driver assistance tool, not unsupervised autonomy. It can control speed, steering, braking, lane changes, and intersections while following a navigation route. Drivers need not keep their hands on the wheel at all times, yet they must continuously monitor the road and be prepared to intervene immediately.

The sequence of EU recognitions began with the Netherlands in April and continued through Lithuania, Estonia, Denmark, Belgium, Slovenia, Czechia, Croatia, and Slovakia. Most have relied on mutual recognition of the single Dutch provisional approval rather than independent national testing.

These national clearances do not yet constitute bloc-wide authorization. An EU-wide decision requires a qualified majority in the Technical Committee on Motor Vehicles: at least 15 of 27 member states representing 65 percent of the EU population. Larger markets, like Germany, France, and Italy, remain under review, and a vote is expected this December.

However, for Latvian Tesla owners with compatible vehicles and software, the imminent rollout expands access to the supervised system while underscoring that attentive human oversight remains essential.

Continue Reading