Connect with us

News

Rocket Lab assembling first reusable Neutron rocket hardware

Rocket Lab has begun assembly full-scale parts of its next-gen Neutron rocket. (Peter Beck)

Published

on

Rocket Lab appears to have made significant progress since revealing the state of hardware development for its next-generation Neutron rocket in a September 2022 investor update.

At the time, the company shared photos of early work on prototypes of smaller Neutron structural elements, as well as progress building the giant molds that will be used to ‘lay up’ the rocket’s carbon fiber composite tanks and airframe. Rocket Lab also showed off acquisitions of some of the supersized manufacturing equipment that will be used to build the giant rocket, as well as the beginnings of a dedicated Neutron factory in Virginia.

Four months later, photos shared by CEO Peter Beck show that Rocket Lab has progressed to full-scale carbon fiber hardware manufacturing. In December 2022, Beck shared a photo of a full-size Neutron tank dome in the middle of production. A month later, Beck shared a photo of work on both halves of a Neutron booster tank dome. Measuring around seven meters (23 ft) wide, the latter component is already on track to become one of the largest carbon fiber structures ever prepared for a rocket once the halves are joined. And once two more halves are built and assembled, Rocket Lab could soon be ready to start testing full-scale Neutron tank hardware – a crucial milestone for any new rocket.

In a September 2022 investor update, Rocket Lab shared glimpses of the first Neutron hardware.
Four months later, CEO Peter Beck has shared photos of far larger and more mature hardware.

Announced in March 2021 and properly unveiled in December 2021, Neutron is a partially-reusable two-stage rocket designed to launch up to 15 tons to Low Earth Orbit (LEO) using liquid methane and oxygen propellant. Neutron measures 42.8 meters (140.4 ft) tall and up to seven meters (23 ft) wide. Its stout, ballistically-optimized design means that it’s simultaneously 40% shorter and up to 190% wider than SpaceX’s workhorse Falcon 9 rocket.

Design differences aside, Neutron is the first rocket that has been obviously designed as an answer to Falcon 9, which has become one of the most prolific, cost-effective, and routinely reusable rockets in the world over the last five or so years. Depending on how much Rocket Lab can sell Neutron for while still breaking even, Neutron has the potential to give Falcon 9 a serious run for its money – or at least force SpaceX to lower its prices. Like Falcon 9, Neutron will have a reusable booster, a reusable payload fairing, and an expendable upper stage. Its booster will also have nine (Archimedes) engines and the upper stage will be powered by one engine. At liftoff, Neutron will produce up to 674 tons (1.49M lbf) of thrust to Falcon 9’s 770 tons (1.7M lbf).

Unlike Falcon 9, Neutron’s similarly-sized reusable fairing is integral, meaning that it will stay permanently attached to the booster. But despite the added mass of the integral fairing and the rocket’s significantly shorter layout, Rocket Lab says that Neutron will be able to launch up to 13 tons (~28,700 lb) to LEO if the booster lands on a barge downrange. Using the same approach with a deployable fairing, Falcon 9 has launched up to 16.7 tons (~36,800 lb) to LEO. That 23% performance gap may seem significant, but the reality is that only SpaceX’s own Starlink and Dragon missions have ever needed Falcon 9 to launch more than 13 tons to orbit.

If Neutron can consistently launch ~25% less payload than Falcon 9 to all Earth and near-Earth orbits, virtually every commercial launch contract that’s currently a SpaceX shoo-in could be within reach of Rocket Lab within several years. The challenge, of course, is building Neutron and making sure the ambitious rocket and its clean-sheet Archimedes engine work as expected and can be reused as easily as Falcon 9.

Advertisement
-

The company is attempting to get there with its far smaller Electron vehicle, but Rocket Lab has never reused a rocket. And five and a half years after Electron’s debut, the company has never launched more than nine times in one year. SpaceX is about to reuse a Falcon booster for the 140th time and launched 61 times in 2022 – a lead that may prove almost impossible to close. There’s also the fact that the size gap between Rocket Lab’s rockets is so extreme that Neutron could likely launch a fully-fueled Electron into orbit.

A list of Rocket Lab’s ambitious 2023 Neutron development goals.

But again, SpaceX serves as a demonstration that what Rocket Lab hopes to achieve is not impossible. SpaceX went directly from Falcon 1 (about twice as large as Electron) to Falcon 9 V1.0 (about 30% smaller than Neutron) after just two successful launches of the smaller rocket. Electron has successfully launched 29 times since May 2017 and Rocket Lab is already learning about reusability through the smaller rocket. The challenges facing Rocket Lab are huge, but Neutron still remains the most promising SpaceX competitor currently in development. Kicking off full-scale Neutron tank testing just 2-3 years after the rocket was revealed would only reiterate its strengths. Stay tuned to see how much Neutron progress Rocket Lab can make in 2023.

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 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

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