News
SpaceX seeks patent for custom-built Starlink internet satellite antenna design
Update: Readers on Reddit more familiar with patent processes have noted that the USPO filings written about herein were not patent grants but rather patent applications. While a patent grant is not guaranteed and will likely take many additional months to be completed, all other points made in this article still stand.
SpaceX has been granted domestic (U.S.) and international patents for a custom version of an antenna known as a phased array, in this case featuring significant upgrades in pursuit of greater energy efficiency, higher bandwidth, lower weight, and simplified manufacturing, all things that would be a boon for the realization of SpaceX’s global Starlink internet satellite constellation.
With a minimum of ~4400 satellites required for the first wave of global and continuous internet coverage, SpaceX will need to invent unprecedented methods of mass-producing efficient and reliable spacecraft on a scale that has never been attempted in the satellite manufacturing industry.
-
- Patent diagrams like this show various subcomponents of a sandwiched phased array antenna, comprised of multiple printed circuit boards. (SpaceX)
-
- SpaceX’s first two Starlink prototype satellites are pictured here before their inaugural Feb. 2018 launch, showing off a utilitarian design. (SpaceX)
While highly technical and difficult to parse, the granted patent and the dozen or so figures accompanying it offer at least a theoretical glimpse into the inner workings of SpaceX’s extremely secretive satellite internet constellation project, the hubs of which can be found in Seattle and Redmond, Washington. Currently employing at least 300 people dedicated to Starlink, the teams involved are pushing full speed ahead into a new phase of manufacturing design and development, evidenced in part by hiring patterns and even this patent, which itself places significant focus on manufacturability, a telltale sign that SpaceX is unlikely to let it sit around gathering intellectual property dust.
It’s entirely possible that SpaceX has chosen to file patents through individual employees or shell LLCs, but this phased array antenna patent – filed in February and granted in August 2018 – is by all appearances the third patent ever granted directly to SpaceX, alongside aluminum-honeycomb manufacturing and a critical component of its Merlin rocket engines. Perhaps this serves as some sort of indicator of how important Starlink actually is behind the veil, although it may also simply reflect the intense competition circling the prospects of a low Earth orbit satellite internet constellation.
-
- The technical term for this is “science rectangle.” In all seriousness, this is actually an extraordinary glimpse at custom silicon developed in-house at SpaceX, in this case a semiconductor die. (SpaceX)
-
- This hypnotic animation shows a phased array antenna in action, with the longer and wider ‘lobes’ indicating beams being intentionally created. (Wikipedia – Maxter315)
-
- A diagram in SpaceX’s phased array patent visualizes some of the benefits derived by their specific design, particularly eliminating or reducing the smaller protuberances (known as “side lobes”). (SpaceX)
Other companies like OneWeb and Telesat are also racing to field their own several-hundred or several-thousand satellite constellations, and OneWeb may well be the closest to actually serving customers with operational satellite launches potentially beginning as early as December 2018 to February 2019. Still, SpaceX’s own prospective Starlink constellation is exceptional due to the sheer amount of work that the company is attempting to do in-house, to the extent that senior leaders of the R&D team have recently implied that work not done in-house was generally outsourced only due to “lack of engineering bandwidth”.
Ultimately, this patent and many of the diagrams within suggest that SpaceX may actually be getting relatively close to mass-production of high-performance Starlink satellites. Of particular note, the integrated circuit CAD view offered in Figure 6A hints that an impressive amount of work has been put into designing, building, testing, and refining custom and application-optimized computational hardware, an entirely new and highly complex field for SpaceX to enter into.
For prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket recovery fleet check out our brand new LaunchPad and LandingZone newsletters
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.
The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.
One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.
Correct pricing will be going live at midnight tonight. All fees since July 2nd 2026 will be waived.
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) July 13, 2026
These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.
To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.
At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.
Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line
By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.
The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.
Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.
The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.
In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
Elon Musk’s Texas ranch to showcase the lifelong work that changed the world
