Connect with us

SpaceX

SpaceX CEO Elon Musk says that BFR could cost less to build than Falcon 9

SpaceX continues to build the first Starship prototype in South Texas. (NASASpaceflight - bocachicagal - 01/27/19)

Published

on

SpaceX CEO Elon Musk believes that there may be a path for the company to ultimately build the massive Starship spacecraft and Super Heavy booster (formerly BFR) for less than Falcon 9/Falcon Heavy, a rocket 3-9 times smaller than BFR.

While it certainly ranks high on the list of wild and wacky things the CEO has said over the years, there may be a few ways – albeit with healthy qualifications – that Starship/Super Heavy production costs could ultimately compare favorably with SpaceX’s Falcon family of launch vehicles. Nevertheless, there are at least as many ways in which the next-gen rocket can (or should) never be able to beat the production cost of what is effectively a far simpler rocket.

Advertisement

Dirty boosters done dirt cheap

On the one hand, Musk might not necessarily be wrong, especially if one throws the CEO several bones in the interpretation of his brief tweet. BFR at its simplest is going to require a full 38 main rocket engines to achieve its nominal performance goals, 7 on Starship and 31 on Super Heavy. As a dramatically more advanced, larger, and far more complex engine, Raptor will (with very little doubt) cost far more per engine than the relatively simple Merlin 1D. BFR avionics (flight computers, electronics, wiring, harnesses) are likely to be more of a known quantity, meaning that costs will probably be comparable or even lower than Falcon 9’s when measured as a proportion of overall vehicle cost. Assuming that BFR can use the exact same cold gas thruster assemblies currently flying on Falcon 9, that cost should only grow proportionally with vehicle size. Finally, Starship will not require a deployable payload fairing (~10% of Falcon 9’s production cost).

All of those things mean that Starship/Super Heavy will probably be starting off with far better cost efficiency than Falcon 9 was able to, thanks to almost a decade of interim experience both building, flying, and refurbishing the rocket since its 2010 debut. Still, BFR will have to account for entirely new structures like six large tripod fins/wings and their actuators, wholly new thrust structures (akin to Falcon 9’s octaweb) for both stages, and more. Considering Starship on its own, the production of a human-rated spacecraft capable of safely housing dozens of people in space for weeks or months will almost without a doubt rival the cost of airliner production, where a 737 – with almost half a century of production and flight heritage – still holds a price tag of $100-130+ million.

 

Adding one more assumption, the most lenient interpretation of Musk’s tweet assumes that he is really only subjecting the overall structure (sans engines and any crew-relevant hardware) of BFR relative to Falcon 9. In other words, could a ~300-ton stainless steel rocket structure (BFR) cost the same amount or less to fabricate than a ~30-ton aluminum-lithium alloy rocket structure (Falcon 9/Heavy)? From the very roughest of numerical comparisons, Musk estimated the cost of the stainless steel alloys (300-series) to be used for BFR at around $3 per pound ($6.60/kg), while aluminum-lithium alloys used in aerospace (and on Falcon 9) are sold for around $20/lb ($44/kg)*. As such, simply buying the materials to build the basic structures of BFR and Falcon 9 would cost around and $7.5M and $5M, respectively.

Advertisement

Assuming that the process of assembling, welding, and integrating Starship and Super Heavy structures is somehow 5-10 times cheaper, easier, and less labor-intensive, it’s actually not inconceivable that the cost of building BFR’s structure could ultimately compete with Falcon 9 after production has stabilized after the new rocket’s prototyping phase is over and manufacturing processes are mature.

*Very rough estimate, difficult to find a public cost per unit mass from modern Al-Li suppliers

A rough visualization of the size of Starhopper, Starship, and Super Heavy. (Austin Barnard, Teslarati)

Costs vs. benefits

On the opposite hand, stainless steel rockets do not have a history of being uniquely cost-effective relative to vehicles using alternative materials. The only orbital-class launch vehicles to use stainless steel (and balloon) tanks are the Atlas booster and the Centaur upper stage, with Atlas dating back to the late 1950s and Centaur beginning launches in the early ’60s. Stainless steel Atlas launches ended in 2005 with the final Atlas III mission, while multiple forms of Centaur continue to fly regularly on ULA’s Atlas V and Delta IV.

Based on a 1966 contract between NASA and General Dynamics placed shortly after Centaur’s tortured development had largely been completed, Centaur upper stages were priced around $25M apiece (2018 USD). In 1980, the hardware for a dedicated Atlas-Centaur launch of a ~1500 kg Comstar I satellite to GTO cost the US the 2018 equivalent of a bit less than $40M ($71M including miscellaneous administrative costs) – $22.4M for Centaur and $17.6M for Atlas. For Atlas, the rocket’s airframe (tanks and general structure) was purchased for around $8.5M. That version of Atlas-Centaur (Atlas-SLV3D Centaur-D1A) was capable of lifting around 5100 kg (11,250 lb) into Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and 1800 kg (~4000 lb) to geostationary transfer orbit (GTO), while it stood around 40m (130 ft) tall, had a tank diameter of 3.05m (10 ft), and weighed ~150t (330,000 lb) fully fueled.

 

Advertisement

In a very loose sense, that particular stainless steel Atlas variant was about half as large and half as capable as the first flight-worthy version of Falcon 9 at roughly the same price at launch ($60-70M). What does this jaunt through the history books tell us about the prospects of a stainless steel Starship and Super Heavy? Well, not much. The problem with trying to understand and pick apart official claims about SpaceX’s next-generation launch architecture is quite simple: only one family of rockets in the history of the industry (Atlas) regularly flew with stainless steel propellant tanks, a half-century lineage that completed its final launch in 2005.

Generally speaking, an industrial sample size of more or less one makes it far from easy to come to any particular conclusions about a given technology or practice, and SpaceX – according to CEO Elon Musk – fully intends to push past the state of the art of stainless steel rocket tankage with BFR. Ultimately, American Marietta/Martin Marietta/Lockheed Martin was never able to produce launch vehicle variants of the stainless steel Atlas family at a cost more than marginally competitive with Falcon 9, despite the latter rocket’s use of a far more expensive metal alloy throughout its primary tanks and structure.

Advertisement

At some point, it’s even worth asking whether the per-unit cost of Starship and Super Heavy should be relevant at all to their design and construction, at least within reason. If the goal of BFR is to drastically lower the cost of launch by radically improving the ease of reuse, it would be truly bizarre (and utterly unintuitive) if those goals could somehow be achieved without dramatically raising the cost of initial hardware procurement. Perhaps the best close comparison to BFR’s goals, modern airliners are eyewateringly expensive ($100-500M apiece) as a consequence of the extraordinary reliability, performance, efficiency, and longevity customers and regulatory agencies demand from them, although those costs are admittedly not the absolute lowest they could be in a perfect manufacturing scenario.

At the end of the day, it appears that Musk is increasingly of the opinion that the pivot to stainless steel could ultimately make BFR simultaneously “better, faster, [&] cheaper”. However improbable that may be, if it does turn out to be the case, Starship and Super Heavy could be an unfathomable leap ahead for reliable and affordable access to space. It could also be another case of Musk’s excitement and optimism getting the better of him and hyping a given product well beyond what it ultimately is able to achieve. Time will tell!


Check out Teslarati’s newsletters for prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket launch and recovery processes!

Advertisement

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

Elon Musk

Elon Musk’s Texas ranch to showcase the lifelong work that changed the world

Elon Musk is building a product gallery at his Texas ranch spanning his lifelong inventions.

Published

on

By

Concept art of Elon Musk Texas Ranch as rendered via Grok

Elon Musk took to X earlier today, noting “Am putting together a product gallery at my ranch in Texas.” in response to a resurfaced famous quote from JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon’s wherein he draw parallels of the Tesla CEO to legendary physicist Albert Einstein.

Dimon made the remark at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland back in January 2025, telling CNBC at the time, “SpaceX, Tesla, Neuralink, I mean, the guy is our Einstein.” The remark seemingly ended a long-time feud between the two high profile execs.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk has “hugged it out” with JP Morgan CEO

While details are thin about the exact location of Elon Musk’s Texas ranch and any pending projects that would serve as a gallery and homage to his portfolio of  revolutionary product inventions spanning from 1984 to 2025, land acquisition records point to roughly a location of several thousand acres in Bastrop County, east of Austin near the Colorado River and held through an LLC called Horse Ranch LLC that’s managed by Musk’s longtime personal friend and family wealth manager Jared Birchall. Birchall also serves as the CEO of Neuralink.

Advertisement

Tesla’s “ecological paradise” in Giga Texas may be larger than expected

 

The broader Bastrop County footprint surrounding the ranch has grown significantly. Entities tied to Musk have accumulated approximately 2,000 acres in Bastrop County as of mid-2026, up from 700 acres earlier in the year, with possibly as much as 6,000 acres acquired in total across Bastrop and Travis counties based on deed records.

No completion date for the gallery has been announced and Musk has not confirmed whether it will be open to the public. As Teslarati has reported, SpaceX just completed the largest IPO in history raising $75 billion, a milestone that makes this particular moment in Musk’s career a natural inflection point for looking back at what he has built through the years.

Advertisement


Starting with Blastar, a simple space shooter game Musk coded at 12 years old and sold to a South African magazine for $500. From there the timeline moves through a commercial career that started with Zip2 in 1995, a city guide software company sold to Compaq for roughly $300 million in 1999. That was followed by X.com in 1999, which merged with Confinity to become PayPal, acquired by eBay in 2002 for $1.5 billion. SpaceX came in 2002, Tesla in 2003, SolarCity in 2006, the Supercharger network in 2012, Neuralink in 2016, The Boring Company in 2016, OpenAI co-founded in 2015, X acquired in 2022, xAI in 2023, Optimus in 2024, the Cybercab in 2026, and most recently SpaceXAI following the SpaceX and xAI merger. The gallery will also likely include items that blur the line between product and cultural artifact, among them The Boring Company’s Not-a-Flamethrower from 2018, Tesla Short Shorts from 2020, and Burnt Hair perfume released under X in 2022.

Continue Reading

News

SpaceX unveils Starlink next-gen V5 kit: here’s what’s new

Published

on

Credit: Starlink

SpaceX’s Starlink has launched its latest residential hardware kit: the V5. Designed for reliable high-speed internet, the new terminal represents a significant leap forward in user equipment.

Advertisement

The new V5 Starlink kit features a dramatically smaller and lighter form factor, measuring approximately 384 mm x 306 mm x 34 mm and weighing just 1.1 kg, which is less than half the weight of the previous V4 model, which was 2.9 kg.

This compact design makes installation easier and more versatile, whether mounted on a roof, pole, or even integrated with a pipe adapter. An integrated LED light aids setup in low-light conditions.

Power efficiency sees major gains too. The V5 draws only 35-50W, reducing energy consumption and making it ideal for off-grid or solar-powered setups. Despite its smaller size, performance remains robust. Starlink claims peak speeds of 375+ Mbps, supported by a new Wi-Fi 6 Router Mini that covers up to 2,200 square feet and connects up to 235 devices simultaneously.

The kit maintains strong signal reliability in diverse environments, from urban rooftops to remote rural areas, as demonstrated in the promo footage released by SpaceX, showing seamless operation under cloudy skies.

Advertisement

These improvements expand suitable applications considerably. Households can enjoy lag-free 4K streaming, smooth video conferencing, online gaming, and smart home device management without interruption. The V5’s efficiency and portability also benefit RVs, small businesses, and temporary installations in disaster-recovery zones where quick deployment is critical. Its lightweight build lowers shipping costs and simplifies user handling compared to bulkier predecessors.

Starlink’s Broader Impact on Global Internet Connectivity

Since SpaceX began launching Starlink satellites in 2019, the constellation has grown rapidly. By mid-2026, over 10,400 satellites orbit Earth, with thousands more deployed annually. This massive low-Earth-orbit network delivers broadband to approximately 160 countries and territories, reaching millions of users who previously lacked reliable internet access.

Starlink plays a vital role in bridging the digital divide. It provides essential connectivity to remote communities, maritime vessels, airlines, and regions affected by natural disasters or infrastructure gaps. By combining advanced satellite technology with iterative hardware upgrades like the V5 kit, SpaceX continues to push the boundaries of global internet access, fostering education, economic opportunity, and emergency response capabilities worldwide.

As production ramps up, the V5 promises to make high-performance internet even more accessible to users everywhere.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Elon Musk

SpaceX comes with a slew of changes for Starship Flight 13

Published

on

Credit: SpaceX

SpaceX is gearing up for the 13th Starship integrated flight test, which is currently scheduled for Thursday, July 16, with the launch window opening up at 6:30 PM E.T. from Starbase in South Texas.

This mission, the second with the V3 Starship and Super Heavy vehicles, builds directly on the foundation of Flight 12 while introducing ambitious new objectives, including the debut deployment of next-generation Starlink V3 satellites.

The rapid iteration between flights underscores SpaceX’s “fail fast, learn faster” philosophy, with engineers addressing specific anomalies from the previous test to push reusability and payload capabilities further.

Flight 12 occurred earlier in 2026 and encountered notable challenges that became catalysts for Flight 13’s improvements. Issues included booster course deviations during the flip maneuver after stage separation, reusability problems with Super Heavy’s Raptor engine relights for the boostback burn, and an engine-out event on the Starship upper stage during its propulsion phase.

These hiccups, while they did not prevent overall mission success, highlighted areas needing refinement for more consistent performance and higher safety margins in future operational flights.

Elon Musk called it Epic: The full story of SpaceX’s Starship Flight 12

Advertisement

In response, SpaceX implemented a comprehensive suite of both hardware and software upgrades.

For the booster, engineers developed a more robust stage separation flip sequence to maintain stable orientation and prevent off-course rotation. Hardware modifications have enhanced Raptor re-light reliability during the boostback burn, complemented by updated engine alarms and abort logic tailored for multi-engine operations. On the Starship side, propulsion system changes directly tackle the Flight 12 engine-out scenario, improving redundancy and operational resilience.

Another major focus of SpaceX for Flight 13 was the advancements in the heat shield. New tile designs and attachment mechanisms, including tests of aft flaps and skirts, aim to boost durability.

Load-sensing tiles will measure real-time stresses during atmospheric entry, while white-painted tiles simulate missing ones as imaging targets. Six of the 20 Starlink V3 satellites carried aboard will feature specialized cameras to scan and transmit heat shield imagery back to ground teams, providing critical data for future return-to-launch-site attempts.

Advertisement

The mission profile also includes a higher dynamic pressure ascent to stress-test the thermal protection system and increase payload potential, alongside a planned in-space Raptor engine relight demonstration.

The V3 Starlink satellites themselves mark a leap forward, equipped with laser links, deployable solar arrays, and improved antennas to expand network capacity and speeds.

The company wrote:

“For the first time, Starship will carry V3 Starlink satellites to space, which aim to greatly expand the network’s capacity and user speeds. As part of this initial test, Starship is planned to deploy 20 satellites which will extend solar arrays and antennas and will attempt to connect with ground stations in South Africa and the larger Starlink constellation via high-capacity lasers. Six of the satellites have been modified with a suite of cameras to scan Starship’s heat shield and transmit imagery down to operators to continue testing methods of analyzing Starship’s heat shield readiness for return to launch site on future missions. Several tiles on Starship have been painted white to simulate missing tiles and serve as imaging targets in the test.”

Advertisement

This dual-purpose flight tests both vehicle reliability and satellite tech in one integrated operation.

These iterative changes, catalyzed by Flight 12’s data, position Starship closer to rapid reusability goals essential for ambitious programs like Artemis lunar missions and global Starlink coverage.

As SpaceX continues its aggressive test cadence, Flight 13 exemplifies how targeted engineering responses to real-flight anomalies accelerate progress toward fully operational, high-cadence launches. Success here could mark another milestone in the Starship program for SpaceX.

Advertisement
Continue Reading