Connect with us

News

SpaceX Starship’s Raptor engine test facilities are about to get a big upgrade, says Elon Musk

According to Elon Musk, SpaceX has plans to reactivate an old test stand in Texas to support vertical static fires of Starship's Raptor engines. (SpaceX)

Published

on

According to CEO Elon Musk, SpaceX’s Starship and Super Heavy rockets are about to get a new test stand that will enable additional and more useful static fire tests of their Raptor engines.

These modifications could reportedly lead to a simplified engine design and will generally expand SpaceX’s ability to rapidly acceptance-test a huge number of Raptors – a necessity given that each Starship/Super Heavy pair will need up to 43 engines.

Musk’s additional insight came by way of a tweet response to an article published today on NASASpaceflight.com, discussing SpaceX’s recently-unearthed plans to reactivate a test stand that hasn’t seen use in almost half a decade. Known as the tripod stand, the large concrete structure was originally built in the 1990s by Beal Aerospace, a now-defunct spaceflight startup, and came under SpaceX ownership when the company bought the McGregor, Texas facilities in 2003.

SpaceX repurposed the stand to static fire Falcon 9 boosters for a number of years, eventually replacing it with a ground-level installation in 2015 that has since been used to test more than 60 Falcon 9 (and Heavy) boosters. It’s not a huge surprise that SpaceX decided to make the change, given that the tripod stand necessarily placed Falcon boosters several hundred feet off the ground, making what was already a challenge even more arduous (and dangerous) for workers.

NASASpaceflight.com also notes that the stand produced far more noise pollution, encouraging SpaceX to move the replacement stand partially underground.

SpaceX replaced its tripod stand with a more functional ground-level test stand. (Teslarati/Aero Photo)

After four years of inactivity, NASASpaceflight.com photos show that SpaceX is well into the process of refurbishing McGregor’s tripod stand. This time, Musk says it will be modified to support vertical Raptor engine testing, likely requiring a new custom mount and new liquid methane and oxygen propellant farms.

By far the most interesting detail to come out of this development is Musk’s indication that moving Raptor static fires to a vertical stand could actually allow SpaceX to simplify the engine’s design by creating more flight-like test conditions (and thus better data). At the moment, all Raptor acceptance testing is done on a separate test stand located elsewhere at SpaceX’s McGregor facilities. Those stands are horizontal, an engineering decision likely motivated by their relatively cheap and fast construction thanks to sidestepping the need for large, water-cooled thrust diverters.

SpaceX’s horizontal Raptor test stand is pictured here in April 2018. A prototype Raptor can be seen in the center bay. (Aero Photo/Teslarati)

SpaceX does all of its Merlin Vacuum, Merlin 1D, Falcon 9 booster, and upper stage static fire testing on vertical stands at its McGregor facilities, with Raptor’s horizontal stands being the only exception to the rule. As such, it was likely just a matter of time before SpaceX replaced the horizontal Raptor facilities with vertical stands. Given that SpaceX plans to modify an entirely separate stand to support vertical testing, it’s likely that the company will modify the existing stands to support vertical testing as soon as the tripod stand is up and running.

SpaceX’s Merlin 1D (Vacuum and Sea Level) tests stands and an upper stage static fire mount are pictured here in April 2018. (April 17, Aero Photo)

For Falcon 9 and Heavy, SpaceX has relied on a total of five main engine/vehicle test stands: two for Merlin 1D, one for MVac, one for boosters, and one for upper stages. SpaceX builds engines and rockets in Hawthorne, tests every engine separately in Texas, returns them to Hawthorne, installs them on their respective booster/upper stage, and tests those stages in McGregor before they are shipped to their launch site.

Although that sounds undeniably arduous, the four stands pictured above (plus the F9 booster stand further up) have managed to support the entirety of SpaceX’s 82 launches. A new upper stage test stand is being built, but it has yet to be completed and is only necessary because Falcon 9 upper stages are expendable. According to SpaceX planning documents, Starship and Super Heavy will only perform static fire testing at the launch site. As such, something like the cluster of four Merlin stands above could very likely support the production and testing of 100-200+ Raptor engines annually, enough to build numerous boosters and ships.

SpaceX moves fast, so stay tuned for updates as work continues on the tripod stand and paves the way for even more significant changes at SpaceX’s McGregor, Texas test facilities.

Advertisement

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

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