Connect with us
Crew Dragon is lifted off the deck of SpaceX recovery vessel GO Searcher after safely arriving at Port Canaveral, March 10th. (NASA) Crew Dragon is lifted off the deck of SpaceX recovery vessel GO Searcher after safely arriving at Port Canaveral, March 10th. (NASA)

SpaceX

SpaceX CEO Elon Musk says Crew Dragon reusability a “major improvement”

Crew Dragon is lifted off the deck of SpaceX recovery vessel GO Searcher after safely arriving at Port Canaveral, March 10th. (NASA)

Published

on

SpaceX CEO Elon Musk says that the company’s next-generation Crew Dragon spacecraft is a “major improvement” over its Cargo Dragon (Dragon 1) predecessors after successfully demonstrating a number of reusability-focused upgrades during the vehicle’s launch and splashdown debut.

Even as SpaceX’s longer-term development groups aim to make the company’s Dragon spacecraft all but redundant with Starship and Super Heavy, the apparent success of Crew Dragon’s upgrades will be valuable for years to come. Ultimately, “major” improvements in reusability will allow SpaceX to reuse Dragon 2 far more efficiently, improving availability for both its Crew and Cargo programs and potentially cutting the operating cost and longevity of each spacecraft as the company begins to transition its workforce to BFR.

Although the question cuing Musk was non-specific, the SpaceX CEO immediately focused his reply on whether or not unspecified “upgrades” to Crew Dragon were able to keep sensitive hardware dry. SpaceX’s Cargo Dragon program has roughly seven years of experience with launching, recovering, and refurbishing orbital-class spacecraft after ocean landings and the subsequent seawater immersion. The fact that the Dragon 2 concept was almost immediately demonstrated with propulsive land-landing capabilities speaks to just how annoying a problem it was to try to keep an orbital spacecraft easily reusable while still relying upon water landing for recovery.

As it turns out, many of the engineering solutions best known to ensure structural and thermal integrity of a spacecraft on-orbit are often at ends with the separate task of ensuring that the same spacecraft remains thoroughly water-proof through launch, reentry, and splashdown. Many of these problems center around the materials that are best for each solution. The sorts of polymers (i.e. plastics) best known for their roles in sealing certain things off from other things are frequently very pliable, soft, and flexible. The orbital environment is extremely unfriendly to polymers like this, where constant and extreme thermal cycling couples with vacuum, radiation, and something known as atomic (or free radical) oxygen to rapidly turn pliable polymers brittle.

Different sealants and plastic or rubber gaskets are visible all over Crew Dragon, ranging from the red gasket around the nose cone area to white lines filling in gaps between the spacecraft’s dozens of different external panels.

A ‘brittle seal’, as many will know, is an oxymoron. Sealants that become brittle in space often scarcely behave like sealants at all after weeks (or months) in orbit, meaning that their ability to prevent moisture intrusion can be dramatically deteriorated. From an engineering perspective, Crew Dragon’s many seals and gaskets are first and foremost intended to protect the spacecraft from the elements while still on Earth, where static fire attempts and weather during launch windows could require it to weather extreme heat, cold, rainstorms, ice, and high winds. SpaceX engineers appear to have managed to solve the latter problem while also accounting for a need to protect the spacecraft after launch for the sake of easier refurbishment.

However, sealing the spacecraft from the elements – both before and after launch – is just one of many challenges for safe operations and efficient reusability. Up next, as Musk notes, is protecting Crew Dragon’s 16 Draco maneuvering thrusters and 8 SuperDraco abort thrusters from water damage, as well as sealing off vulnerable avionics for reuse. With respect to avionics, Musk is very likely referring to the electronics and sensing equipment housed under Dragon 2’s retractable nose cone, a new feature for SpaceX.

SpaceX's 'DragonFly' prototype was briefly used to test Dragon 2's propulsive landing capabilities before the program was cancelled. Most of the technology remains a part of Crew Dragon, however... (SpaceX)
Crew Dragon featured intriguing panels covering its Super Draco engine nozzles, presumably meant to prevent water from entering. (NASA)

Due to the fact that Crew Dragon’s SuperDraco abort thrusters are only meant to be used in a namesake abort scenario, SpaceX appears to have chosen to implement a more permanent solution for protecting them from water intrusion after splashdown. The challenge of panels like those covering the SuperDracos is that they need to be easily destructible to prevent a cascade of high-velocity debris from wreaking havoc in the event of ignition. They also need to survive the conditions on orbit, make it through the heat and buffeting of reentry and descent, and survive the initial impact with the ocean surface, all while keeping SuperDracos dry.

As such, it should come as no surprise to find CEO Elon Musk praising the engineering behind the presumably successful solutions to these complex problems, although credit is also due to the technicians that turned CAD files, test results, and aspirations into practical, functioning hardware.

An overview of the expected modifications needed to turn a Crew Dragon into a Cargo Dragon 2. (NASA OIG)

If Crew Dragon can achieve a similar level of success after spending more like half a year in space during operational crew transport missions, the spacecraft’s reusability improvements will end up benefiting both Crew Dragon and Cargo Dragon 2. The Cargo variant of Dragon 2 is designed as a relatively minor modification to flight-proven Crew Dragon capsules and slightly-upgraded trunks and could debut as early as mid-2020 after Cargo Dragon 1 enters retirement.

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

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

SpaceX tells the FCC that Starship Flight 14 is going to orbit

SpaceX filed with the FCC for Starship Flight 14, its first true orbital launch attempt.

Published

on

By

SpaceX has asked the Federal Communications Commission for permission to fly Starlink terminals during Starship’s fourteenth flight test, and the filing lays out a genuine trip to orbit, something the program has never attempted.

Every Starship flight so far, including Flight 13’s successful splashdown in the Indian Ocean on July 24, has flown a suborbital arc that ends with the ship reentering the atmosphere within the same hour it launches. The FCC paperwork describes a mission profile built around an actual orbital insertion instead.

The payload is the other half of the story. Flight 13 carried 20 production Starlink V3 satellites, but because that mission never reached orbit, the satellites reentered along with the ship rather than joining the constellation, something Teslarati covered in detail after SpaceX released footage shot from one of those satellites as it drifted away from Starship in space. Flight 14 is designed to close that gap. If the orbital insertion holds, the roughly 20 V3 satellites onboard would separate into an operational orbit and could eventually go into service, each one rated for about 1 terabit per second of downlink capacity by SpaceX’s own account.

SpaceX announces new Starbase for ‘thousands of Starship launches annually’

Elon Musk first flagged the orbital attempt during SpaceX’s August 4 earnings call, the company’s first as a public entity following its June IPO under the ticker SPCX. He also floated catching the ship with the Starbase tower on the same flight, an idea he walked back on August 20, saying the catch attempt would more likely come “in a few months,” as Teslarati reported at the time. Flight 14 will instead target a splashdown for the ship in the Indian Ocean, the same recovery method used since Flight 12.

Hardware has been catching up to the ambition. Booster 21 completed a full 33-engine static fire on August 28, and Ship 41 finished its own six-engine test the week before. An airspace briefing circulated to pilots on August 20 listed September 15 as the target date, later than the end of August window Musk mentioned on the earnings call, though SpaceX has not confirmed a launch date publicly and Starship schedules routinely slip while hardware and FAA paperwork line up.

The FCC filing itself does not guarantee a launch date. It covers communications authority, and not flight readiness, considering SpaceX still needs Ship 41 fully stacked and cleared by the FAA before Flight 14 can fly. But the filing is a real marker of intent and it puts a specific regulatory process behind what had so far only been Musk’s word on the earnings call.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

SpaceX would not exist if this crucial early launch failed, Musk says

Published

on

Credit: SpaceX

Elon Musk recently restated a fact that still defines SpaceX’s origin story: if Falcon 1’s fourth launch had failed, the company would not exist. The comment answered a reminder that after three consecutive losses, SpaceX had money for only one more attempt.

On X, Peter Diamandis said that the present-day acknowledgement of SpaceX’s success does not discount the rough start the company had. “Almost nobody remembers that Elon’s first rocket failed three times, and there was money for exactly only one more attempt.”

Musk said, “If the 4th launch had failed, SpaceX would not exist.”

In late 2008, the firm was nearly out of cash. Another failure would have ended payroll, closed the Hawthorne factory, and left the Falcon 9 and Dragon programs as unfinished drawings.

The first flight lifted off from Omelek Island on 24 March 2006. Thirty-three seconds later, a corroded aluminum fitting on a fuel line leaked. Kerosene ignited around the Merlin engine, control was lost, and the vehicle came apart. The small DARPA payload, FalconSAT-2, survived the short flight only to land on a storage shed near the pad. Investigators later traced the fitting to a materials mix-up that should never have reached the rocket.

Flight 2, on 21 March 2007, looked far better at first. The first stage burned cleanly and handed off to the Kestrel-powered upper stage. The vehicle crossed 100 kilometers and reached a peak of about 289 kilometers. Then propellant slosh in the second-stage tank started a circular coning motion that grew until the engine shut down. Telemetry faded as the stage tumbled, and SpaceX had reached space but not orbit. Over the next year, the team redesigned everything from the ground up, including tanks, baffles, and the new regeneratively cooled Merlin 1C.

That engine flew on Flight 3 on 2 August 2008. The first stage performed almost perfectly and reached 217 kilometers. After main-engine cutoff, leftover fuel in the cooling channels produced a faint residual thrust, roughly 10 pounds per square inch of chamber pressure. On a Texas test stand, the effect was invisible beneath ambient air pressure. In vacuum it was enough to push the spent first stage back into the second stage after separation. The stages collided, the upper stage spun, and the mission was lost. Musk later said a slightly longer delay before staging would have saved the flight.

Six weeks later, the team assembled Flight 4 from remaining parts and flew it on 28 September 2008 at 23:15 UTC. The payload was Ratsat, a 165-kilogram aluminum mass simulator built in-house. Staging was delayed so residual thrust could decay. The Kestrel ignited, the fairing split away, and nine and a half minutes after liftoff the vehicle was in orbit. After a coast, the second stage restarted, settling into a 621-by-643-kilometer path at 9.35 degrees inclination. Falcon 1 became the first privately developed liquid-fueled rocket to reach Earth orbit. Musk called the insertion “middle of the bull’s-eye.”

SpaceX restores a Falcon 1 rocket for 10th anniversary of first launch success

That success unlocked NASA’s Commercial Resupply Services award later that year. Without it, there would have been no Falcon 9, no reusable first stages, and no Dragon cargo or crew flights to the International Space Station. Launch prices would have remained far higher. Starlink’s constellation would not exist; broadband from low Earth orbit would still be a paper concept.

Ride-share markets, high launch cadence, and the current pace of lunar and Mars hardware would be years behind. Communications, Earth observation, and the cost of putting anything into space would look more like the 2000s than the 2020s.

One extra second of residual thrust in August 2008 would have written a different decade.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

OpenAI cites distrust of SpaceX in decision to drop Cursor partnership

OpenAI will cut SpaceX-owned Cursor’s model access in November, citing Musk’s history of broken contracts.

Published

on

By

OpenAI, the company behind ChatGPT, announced late Friday that it is ending its partnership with Cursor, cutting off the coding tool’s access to its models on November 12. The move comes two weeks after SpaceX completed its $60 billion acquisition of Cursor’s parent company, Anysphere, folding the popular AI coding assistant into Elon Musk’s growing SpaceXAI division.

In a post on its website, OpenAI said the decision came down to trust, not technology. “We cannot be confident that SpaceX will use our technology within our terms of service, based on our experience with Elon Musk’s companies violating contracts,” the company wrote. OpenAI pointed to two specific incidents: X, now part of SpaceX, allegedly breaking the terms of an existing OpenAI contract after Musk bought Twitter.

That lawsuit is the backdrop for all of this. Musk cofounded OpenAI in 2015, left the board in 2018, and sued Sam Altman and Greg Brockman in 2024, arguing they abandoned the company’s nonprofit mission for profit. A federal jury sided with OpenAI in May, finding Musk waited too long to sue rather than ruling on the merits of his claims. Musk said at the time he would appeal to the Ninth Circuit, calling the outcome a “calendar technicality” rather than a real judgment.

Elon Musk breaks silence on OpenAI trial decision

SpaceX’s interest in Cursor predates that verdict by weeks. The company first struck a deal with Cursor in April, securing an option to acquire it for $60 billion or pay $10 billion for joint development work instead. As Teslarati reported at the time, the logic was straightforward: Cursor was paying retail prices to Anthropic and OpenAI, two of its most direct competitors, every time a developer used its product, while SpaceX had idle capacity on its Colossus supercomputer, roughly the equivalent of a million Nvidia H100 GPUs, that Cursor could use to train its own models instead. SpaceX exercised the option in June, days after its own IPO, and the deal closed in mid-August.

Once it closed, Musk moved fast. On an all-hands call with more than 1,000 Cursor employees, he reportedly told staff that SpaceXAI’s Grok was playing catchup in the AI race, unlike Tesla and SpaceX in their own markets, and singled out Anthropic as the company to catch. Cursor CEO Michael Truell now reports directly to Musk inside SpaceXAI.

Elon Musk admits he was ‘clearly wrong’ about Anthropic

Losing OpenAI’s models leaves Cursor leaning harder on Anthropic’s Claude, which has its own compute agreement with SpaceX, and on Cursor’s in-house Composer model, the one SpaceX’s compute was supposed to accelerate in the first place. OpenAI framed the November deadline as maximum notice under its contract, and said it wants to “go above and beyond” to help developers through the transition. Whether Anthropic makes the same call is now the open question in AI coding.

Continue Reading