Connect with us

News

SpaceX’s Crew Dragon preps for debut as race to return astronauts to US craft nears final stages

Published

on

After spending two weeks testing in a specialized NASA-run facility, SpaceX’s first flightworthy Crew Dragon spacecraft was shipped from Ohio to Florida, where it will now spend a number of months preparing for its first (uncrewed) launch into Earth orbit.

Known as Demonstration Mission 1 (DM-1), this critical milestone must be passed before the capsule will be certified to carry NASA astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS) sometime in 2019. While DM-1 will not sport a human crew, the spacecraft is nevertheless expected to demonstrate all life and mission-critical components, ranging from Crew Dragon’s complex array of avionics and ground/orbital communications equipment to craft’s ability to safely return passengers to Earth with a soft ocean landing.

SpaceX’s Crew Dragon spacecraft has been in the serious hardware development phase for approximately five years, although the concept itself dates back about as early as its Cargo Dragon predecessor – 2005 to 2006, publicly. Over the course of roughly two weeks of testing at NASA’s Plum Brook Station, Crew Dragon was likely subjected to a suite of environmental conditions the spacecraft will need to routinely survive to make it through initial launch and successfully operate under the rigors of microgravity and thermal vacuum conditions.

Given the DM-1 capsule and trunk’s fairly quick jaunt at the huge Plum Brook vacuum chamber and equally quick arrival in Florida, those test results were likely quite favorable. Still, a major amount of work lies ahead before the first full Crew Dragon is ready for its launch atop Falcon 9. Most significantly, the craft’s trunk did not follow its fellow capsule to Florida, but rather returned to SpaceX’s Hawthorne, CA factory to be outfitted with critical flight hardware, particularly radiators and solar arrays. Once that outfit is complete, the module will also be shipped to Florida before being integrated with the DM-1 Crew Dragon capsule.

Advertisement
-

Of note, the DM-1 capsule has been constructed from the start to support a plan to use the vehicle in an in-flight abort test meant to ensure that the craft can wrest its passengers from harm’s way even at the most intense point of launch, where aerodynamic pressures are at their peak. In order to properly support both the DM-1 orbital mission and the in-flight abort test to follow, the capsule has been outfitted with a fair amount (hundreds of pounds) of hardware that will be unique to the pathfinder spacecraft. This understandably adds its own complexity to the already intense program’s first orbital mission, although it will hopefully not translate into additional delays.

SpaceX competitor’s crewed spacecraft and rocket take shape

It’s worth noting that SpaceX is effectively operating at a distinct – albeit partially self-wrought – financial handicap when compared with Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft program, one of two vehicles funded by NASA to accomplish the same task of safely and reliably transporting astronauts to and from the ISS.

“NASA awarded firm-fixed-price contracts in 2014 to Boeing and Space Exploration Technologies Corporation (SpaceX) [of] up to $4.2 billion [for Boeing] and $2.6 billion [for SpaceX] for the development of crew transportation systems.” (GAO-18-476)

 

In other words, Boeing requested and received a full 60% more than SpaceX to – quite literally – accomplish an identical task. Alongside the storied and brutally expensive history of crewed American spaceflight, both contracts are an absolute steal for two modernized, crew-capable spacecraft, but a 60% premium is a 60% premium. Foreseeable but slight cost overruns caused, among other things, by additional contractual requirements from NASA have followed a similar trend, roughly proportional to each company’s slice of the original $6.8b Commercial Crew contract.

“As of April 2018, NASA requirement changes had increased the value of contract line item 001 for Boeing by approximately $191 million and for SpaceX by approximately $91 million.” (GAO-18-476)

Still, Boeing’s progress towards its own DM-1 and DM-2 demo flights and a pad-abort test are impressive, although it very likely is more of a demonstration of a different approach to public communications than of any actual step up on SpaceX. In the last few weeks, Boeing has released a number of photos showing off the progress made building its own Starliner capsules and service modules (trunks), three of which are currently in varied states of assembly and integration in the company’s Florida-based facility. Additionally, United Launch Alliance CEO Tory Bruno has shared off-and-on updates and photos of the launch contractor’s own progress assembling the rockets that will launch Boeing’s spacecraft.

Regardless, a huge amount of work lies ahead before both Boeing and SpaceX’s crewed spacecraft are able to conduct their first uncrewed and crewed launches into orbit. Now very outdated, NASA has stated several times recently that the presently available targets of NET August 31 will likely be updated later this month, pushing DM-1 debuts into NET Q4 2018 and the first commercial crewed demo missions to 2019.

Stay tuned, as the Block 5 Falcon 9 tasked with launching SpaceX’s own DM-1 Crew Dragon will likely be the next of a recent flood of finished rockets to leave the company’s Hawthorne factory, where it will head to McGregor, Texas to complete acceptance wet dress rehearsals and static fire tests before shipping to SpaceX’s Pad 39A in Florida.

Follow us for live updates, peeks behind the scenes, and photos from Teslarati’s East and West Coast photographers.

Teslarati   –   Instagram Twitter

Tom CrossTwitter

Advertisement
-

Pauline Acalin  Twitter

Eric Ralph Twitter

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

X changed how everyone gets paid, and this lawsuit shows why

X sued a Bitcoin account network over fake payouts as its creator pay model shifts

Published

on

By

Elon Musk’s X has taken a Bitcoin-focused engagement ring to court, and the case doubles as a receipt for how differently the platform pays creators today. The company filed suit in the High Court of England and Wales against Vivek Kumar Sen and Zamyang Sherpa, alleging the pair ran six accounts, including @Vivek4real_, @Bitcoin_Teddy and @TrendingBitcoin, as one coordinated operation to fake the kind of engagement that used to translate directly into money.

According to the filing, first reported by Gizmodo, the accounts posted near identical “BREAKING” crypto headlines seconds apart, in one case 11 seconds, then had three more handles like, reply to and repost the material to manufacture what X called “a false appearance of genuine, human communication and interaction.” X says the scheme pulled in at least £207,384, about $278,000, and pegs its own investigation and remediation costs at another £75,000. The accounts were suspended August 18. X general counsel James Burnham announced the case on X last weekend, writing that the company “will act forcefully to protect our platform and the earnings of genuine creators.” Musk’s own reaction, posted shortly after, was three words: “Don’t mess with 𝕏.”

The timing lines up with a a recent update to how X pays its creators. The program these accounts allegedly gamed, Creator Revenue Sharing, launched in mid 2023 and paid out based on how much a post got engaged with. Originality was never part of the formula, which is exactly how the platform ended up flooded with recycled clips, copy pasted “BREAKING” posts and replies engineered purely to farm reactions from paying subscribers.

X tried patching the model more than once, including an April cut to aggregator payouts and a March regional weighting change that Musk personally paused hours after it was announced. X retired Creator Revenue Sharing for good on September 7 and opened its replacement, Original Content Rewards, the next day.

Advertisement
-

The new math is stricter. Payouts now come only from qualified impressions, meaning unique Home Timeline views from Premium subscribers where at least half the post is visible, and replies no longer count toward eligibility at all. Copied posts, reuploaded media and reposts without meaningful changes are explicitly excluded. Allegra Jacchia, senior product manager for Creators at SpaceXAI, which now runs X’s product and AI work following xAI’s acquisition of the platform, put it bluntly, saying the goal is to reward creators who bring original ideas and perspective, “not those who have become best at gaming the system.”

Read that way, the lawsuit isn’t really about six crypto accounts. It’s X putting a dollar figure on what the old incentive structure cost, then suing to collect it right as the new one goes live. For live updates on how the case and the new rewards program shake out, follow @Teslarati on X.

Advertisement
-
Continue Reading

News

Did Tesla make the perfect car for families? Tesla Model Y L Full Review

Published

on

tesla model y l in cosmic grey
Credit: TESLARATI

Last week, Tesla sent me the Model Y L for five days to test, assess, and enjoy for journalistic purposes. It’s always a treat when I get any media vehicle, and I’ve had the pleasure of working with Tesla and Ford for hands-on reviews of their products.

This one was exceptionally exciting for a few reasons: first, because it is the car I own, but bigger, so I was really excited to see if that extra space was worth it; and second, because my Fiancée (we’re down to just 18 days ’til she’s officially my wife!!!) and I plan to fill a car up with kids in the near future, so it was really nice to have a trial with a car that would potentially be in our driveway in a few years.

I did a full 10-minute video review of the Model Y L, which I will post at the bottom of this more condensed written version. If you prefer to watch a review, go ahead and skip to the bottom for that.

For those who prefer the writing, I’ll break down the big things about the Model Y L that I noticed, focusing on the big addition/difference that this car has from the Model Y: the third row. Tesla also added small-but-mighty changes to the Y L that I really wish were on my Model Y Premium, so I’ll be sure to mention those as well.

What Makes It Different from the Model Y?

tesla model y l in cosmic grey

Credit: TESLARATI

The first thing to note is that the interior of this vehicle, from the front row, is generally the same. It truly does feel like you’re in the same exact car with a slightly different seating layout. Of course, Tesla interiors do feel this way, at least with the Model 3 and Model Y, but there are no drastic differences between the Model Y L and the Model Y from the front row.

This should be expected, so definitely do not go into it thinking you’ll know you’re in a different car. It is a very similar experience to the Model Y.

Tesla Model Y L: new features that make it better than the standard Model Y

Advertisement
-

The true differences come from the back two rows. The only true difference from the front is the addition of a new Dynamics Feature that falls under the “Ride & Handling Priority” menu, which now allows you to adjust the suspension damping to prioritize a comfortable ride for everyone or one that is noticeably better from the rear two rows. In terms of ride comfort, the front rows definitely feel the impact of this; it is a noticeable difference and much stiffer in the driver’s seat with this setting turned to prioritize the rear occupants.

There are also a series of small improvements, like the rear taillight is now up toward the spoiler, which must be a strategy for making the rear glass actually useful in the Y L compared to the regular Y.

Some other small changes are the addition of small magnets for the sub-trunk lid, which is a great addition and something I’d like to do in my Model Y; it sounds to me as if the Model Y L liftgate motor is less whiny than the one in my Model Y; and all three rows of climate are controllable from the front touchscreen.

I talk about them in a short video here:

Advertisement
-

Second and Third-Row Legroom

The major feature of the Model Y L is the third row, and Tesla did a great job of making it spacious enough for more than just your nine-year-old nephew. It actually does have a suitable amount of legroom for adults, but it is dependent on how tall the people are in the first- and second-row seats in front of you.

This is where I caught some slack from those who have also sat in the Model Y L and believe there is enough room for anyone of any height. I certainly believe that those who are not complainers could sit back there for a multiple-hour drive and not complain. I would enjoy sitting in the back row because I think it is comfortable; the vents for air are perfectly positioned on the C pillars for maximum comfort, and I found that there was enough room back there for me. I’m 5′ 8″, so I’m definitely not tall. However, I found that I had more than enough legroom:

Tesla Model Y L third-row legroom

Credit: TESLARATI

The picture above is where my Fiancèe could sit comfortably in the second row in front of me, and she is 5′ 1″. There is a lot of give and take with these seats, and I believe most groups could make it work. She was comfortable in the second-row seat in front in this position, and as you can see, I have plenty of room. She could easily come back a few inches, and I’d still be comfortable.

This is where I think people would truly benefit from seeing what the space in this car looks like for themselves. To me, I found it more than suitable for a group of friends to go out in and for everyone to be comfortable. There might be some strategy to it if you have some taller friends, but it’s definitely doable.

Overall, the space in the Y L in the back two rows is great: the second-row Captain’s Chairs have mechanical armrests that go down automatically when you exit the car, and come back up on their own when you return. The second row also has ventilated seats; you’ll only have the heat option in the third row.

tesla model y l interior from driver's seat

Credit: TESLARATI

Overall Thoughts

It was really a great five days with the Model Y L, and I do believe that this is a great car for families. I do not believe it is the perfect one. It is really an excellent option for those who can make do with what is truly a compact crossover stretched out to make way for a third row. However, I think that more families simply want something large, like Tahoe or Expedition large, and the Model Y L does not necessarily answer that call.

I think it is more than reasonable for a family of six to have this car and make it work. It is safe, it has Full Self-Driving, which I believe will be a non-negotiable for me moving forward in car buying; and it is relatively affordable, with the Launch Edition coming in at a price of $61,990 before options. Not going to a gas station for the past year has really been a lifesaver for me, especially with home charging saving us so much money.

Tesla will need to have an answer for the families that want something like a Cyber SUV or simply something that qualifies as a full-size SUV. I just truly do not think that every family will see this as enough space, and I think that’s understandable. If someone were to want to take an overnight trip with their four kids, I don’t know if it would be the easiest cargo situation because without that third row folded down, that trunk space is confined to just 14.8 cubic feet. I couldn’t take four kids and a wife to Ocean City for a week with using only the trunk space. We’d likely have to get creative, and I think that’s what many families want to avoid.

Advertisement
-

For comparison’s sake, a Tahoe offers 25.5 cubic feet of trunk space, which is still tight, but much more manageable and forgiving.

With all that being said, the Model Y L is still a great option and I’d be willing to see past the cargo issues because of FSD and the safety of Tesla vehicles overall. For our full review, check out the video below:

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Why automakers keep turning down Elon Musk’s Tesla Full Self-Driving offer

Elon Musk confirms no automaker has ever accepted Tesla’s offer to license Full Self-Driving software.

Published

on

By

Elon Musk gave a brief answer on X Monday that confirmed that Tesla’s standing offer to license Full Self-Driving to other automakers still has zero takers. Sawyer Merritt wrote that “Tesla has for years openly invited other automakers to license FSD. None of them have accepted,” responding to a prediction from Boom Supersonic founder Blake Scholl that Tesla would eventually open FSD the way it opened its Supercharger network to rival brands. Musk’s reply to Merritt was one word: “Exactly.”

It is not the first time Musk has made this point. He said something similar in November, when he called legacy automakers reluctance to adopt FSD “crazy,” and Tesla has floated the offer publicly since at least 2021. Scholl’s prediction touches on something real. Once NACS became the de facto charging standard, adoption from Ford, GM, Rivian and others followed within about a year. FSD licensing was supposed to work the same way once Tesla built enough of a lead that switching made sense for everyone.

The case for licensing now is stronger than it was two years ago. Waymo and Zoox are logging hundreds of thousands of unsupervised autonomous miles, along with Tesla’s own Robotaxi fleet. Every automaker still selling driver assist systems that lag FSD has given the robotaxi conversation to Tesla, Waymo and Zoox by default. Licensing FSD would let a GM or a Ford compete on the same field without spending a decade and billions of dollars building a stack from scratch, the same argument Tesla made when it opened the Supercharger network to bring more EVs onto its chargers.

But FSD is not a connector standard. As one reply to Musk’s post pointed out, licensing FSD is not a software license the way NACS was a plug spec. It requires adopting Tesla’s eight camera layout and its onboard compute architecture, meaning a licensee’s cars would effectively become Tesla hardware wearing someone else’s badge. That is the visible obstacle. The less visible one is data. A licensed FSD stack would report back the same telemetry Tesla collects from its own fleet, giving Tesla a continuous read on how a competitor’s cars are actually driven, where they struggle, and how often drivers intervene. For an automaker trying to build its own autonomy program, or simply trying to keep its build quality and safety record private, handing Tesla that visibility could be a bigger cost than the hardware bill. It is the reason the Supercharger comparison only goes so far. Opening a charging plug cost Tesla very little. Opening FSD would cost a rival something it cannot get back.

Advertisement
-
Continue Reading