Connect with us

News

SpaceX braces for Florida-bound Dorian as hurricane threatens local Starship facility

SpaceX's Cocoa, Florida Starship construction facility is seriously threatened by Hurricane Dorian, set for landfall on Monday, September 2nd. (NOAA & @flying_briann)

Published

on

Hurricane Dorian is currently growing into a potentially devastating Atlantic storm some 1,200mi (~2000km) off the Florida Coast and local spaceflight facilities – including SpaceX’s launch pads and Starship campus – are at high risk.

As of the latest storm advisories, Hurricane Dorian is likely to grow into a Category 3 or 4 storm prior to making landfall somewhere along the East Coast of Central Florida. Dorian’s ground track forecast is unusually uncertain just four days out from landfall, but the Space Coast’s Kennedy Space Center (KSC), Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS), and other local spaceflight facilities (including SpaceX’s) are at high risk and are preparing for a worst-case scenario.

HURCON V – I

As of 0800hrs Wednesday morning, Brigadier General Doug Schiess – Commander of the 45th Space Wing at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station and Director of the Eastern Range at Patrick Air Force Base – initiated HURCON V preparations across Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS) and surrounding areas.  This precaution is triggered when storm winds in excess of 50 knots (58mph) are measured fewer than 96 hours to landfall. While CCAFS hurricane operations begin 96h out from landfall, KSC’s preparations begin after HURCON IV, indicating that storm winds in excess of 50 knots (58mph) have been measured 72 hours out from landfall. All facilities then follow a HURCON IV – I warning system that defines a series of preparation events and personnel evacuation plans. 

A HURCON IV issuance will see all personnel report for duty as usual while specialized teams will begin implementing organization-specific checklists, vehicles are fueled, and storm Ride-Out Team (ROT) personnel will be identified. From there as the storm approaches non-essential personnel will be evacuated, facilities will be secured, and roads will be closed. ROT personnel will remain on-site and will begin the evaluation of the premises once the storm has passed. 

SpaceX follows KSC’s lead, battens down Starship hatches 

As SpaceX leases Launch Complex 39-A from KSC it is expected that they will follow all precautions initiated by KSC as they did almost two years ago amid launch preparations during HURCON III conditions while facing down Hurricane Irma. SpaceX has released an official statement confirming the obvious: the company is working closely with KSC and CCAFS to monitor weather conditions and plan to take all necessary precautions before, during, and after landfall.

Advertisement

SpaceX may not be new to preparing its Florida launch facilities for hurricanes and tropical storms, but Hurricane Dorian poses entirely new challenges due to the fact that the company has recently begun operating a fairly extensive Starship production facility in Cocoa, Florida. The vast majority of Cocoa’s work is done entirely out in the open, rarely protected by more than a spartan windbreak or temporary tent. According to local photographer Greg Scott, SpaceX has paused all Starship production work for the moment and is working all-out to secure its facilities as the potentially catastrophic Cat 4 Hurricane Dorian fast approaches.

The total lack of hurricane-rated protection puts SpaceX’s Starship facility at exceptionally high risk. The Cocoa production facility is thus facing many obstacles with hurricane preparedness as the majority of Starship production takes place outside and is completely vulnerable to the elements. Aerial photos depict what a daunting – if not utterly impossible – task it will be to secure all of the current production pieces of Starship Mk2. 

Along with the main section structures and the completed nose cone section of Starship, many smaller fabrication pieces including large steel rings, a large bulkhead, and an array of assembly tools will need to be secured. Luckily a newly constructed wind guard structure covered in a white canvas material seemingly just reached completion and may be used to house the largest section of Starship if teams can manage to move it inside before storm conditions arrive.

Although it is surely going to suffer some damage from hurricane-force winds, the tent structure should offer some limited protection for any hardware that can be moved inside it. While Starship is being fabricated to withstand the stresses of launch and re-entry conditions, it may not be able to stand against the fury of a hurricane in its current fragile state.

Advertisement

Been here before…

SpaceX has faced damage to Starship prototypes at the hand of wind before. The first prototype – now known as Starhopper – constructed at their testing facility in Boca Chica, TX originally featured a tall nose cone portion that was ultimately lost. A storm that brought 50mph (80 km/h) wind gusts blew through and knocked the fairing piece off of its concrete stand and resulted in a completely crumpled heap of steel mess. The loss of the nose cone ended up being purely aesthetic and caused little to no setback to Starhopper testing – delayed instead by issues with Raptor engines. 

RIP nose cone, 1/04/2019-1/22/2019

Any damage suffered in Cocoa as an effect of Hurricane Dorian will almost certainly cause setbacks for SpaceX. Even if SpaceX gets extremely lucky and suffers no direct damage from a glancing blow, disruption to local infrastructure (power, waste, water, industry) could significantly hamper production operations. In the event that Dorian makes landfall at or near Cape Canaveral, Starship Mk2 and the many Super Heavy-related steel rings and facilities situated around the Cocoa campus could easily be destroyed or damaged beyond salvage, owing to the fact that they are made out of relatively thin and lightweight metal and have expansive, sail-like surface areas.

On the plus side, if any of the above does occur, SpaceX is simultaneously building a second near-identical prototype – Starship Mk1 – at its Boca Chica, Texas facilities. Disruption is undesirable, but SpaceX and its Starship program will likely (and hopefully) be largely unharmed. Additionally, SpaceX’s next Falcon 9 launch out of Florida is an internal Starlink mission scheduled no earlier than late October, leaving at least 1.5-2 months for clean-up and any necessary repairs.

Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.

Space Reporter.

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke

Four Raptor engines failed to ignite at T-zero, forcing SpaceX to scrub Starship Flight 13 Thursday.

Published

on

By

SpaceX scrubbed the Starship Flight 13 launch attempt Thursday evening at the last possible moment, after four of the Super Heavy booster’s 33 Raptor 3 engines failed to ignite during the startup sequence. The 90-minute window had opened at 6:45 p.m. EDT from Starbase in Boca Chica, Texas, and the countdown had proceeded without issue all day, with more than 11.5 million pounds of liquid methane and liquid oxygen being fully loaded into the rocket before the automated abort triggered. SpaceX’s launch directors posted on X, “Standing down from today’s flight test attempt,” and shut down the livestream shortly after.

Musk confirmed the root cause within hours. “Some of the engines didn’t start, triggering an automatic launch abort,” he wrote on X. “To be confident of a good flight, 2 Raptors will be removed and replaced. Most probable launch timing is early next week.” SpaceX engineers began draining propellant tanks immediately and Booster 20 was rolled back to its hangar for inspection.

SpaceX comes with a slew of changes for Starship Flight 13

 

The timing adds a layer of significance that did not exist during any of the previous 12 Starship flights. This is the first time SpaceX has attempted to launch Starship since the company made its stock market debut in June, listing under ticker SPCX at $135 per share. Public investors are now watching every Starship outcome in real time, and a last-second abort carries more visibility than it would have six months ago.

Flight 13 was designed to be one of the most consequential tests in the program’s history. It was set to carry 20 Starlink V3 satellites, the first operational payload Starship has ever attempted to deploy. Six of those satellites carried external cameras to photograph Starship’s heat shield from the outside during flight, which would act as a self-inspection approach SpaceX has never attempted before. The mission also needed to complete a Raptor engine relight in space, a step SpaceX skipped on Flight 12 in May after losing an engine during ascent. That Flight 12 booster also flipped 90 degrees off course during its boostback burn when five engines failed to reignite.

SpaceX has not announced an official next launch date. Musk’s “early next week” window points to July 21 or 22 at the earliest, pending the engine swap and a return to the pad.

Continue Reading

News

Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future

Published

on

Gage Skidmore, CC BY-SA 4.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.

Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.

Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.

APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.

Elon Musk admits he was ‘clearly wrong’ about Anthropic

APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.

The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.

The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.

Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says

Published

on

tesla model 3 first generation headlight
Credit: Tesla Asia/Twitter

Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.

The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.

The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.

Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:

“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”

The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:

“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”

Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.

Continue Reading