Connect with us

News

SpaceX prepares Falcon 9 booster for eleventh launch and landing [webcast]

Published

on

SpaceX has confirmed that Falcon 9 is on track to launch another batch of Starlink satellites less than 48 hours after a successful United Launch Alliance Atlas V from a pad just two miles south.

Falcon 9 is now scheduled to launch Starlink 4-9 from Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Launch Complex 39A no earlier than (NET) 9:35 am EST (14:35 UTC) on Thursday, March 3rd. Oddly, unlike Starlink 4-8, which successfully launched 46 Starlink satellites into low Earth orbit (LEO) on February 21st, Starlink 4-9 – following a seemingly identical trajectory – will carry 47 satellites. The reason for the small difference is unclear.

Last month, SpaceX suffered a significant anomaly when a “geomagnetic storm” warmed Earth’s atmosphere, causing 38 of 49 just-launched Starlink 4-7 satellites to prematurely reenter and burn up. In response, while SpaceX hasn’t officially confirmed the change, it appears that all subsequent Starlink missions are being launched to slightly higher parking orbits. In comparison, Starlink 4-4 – a West Coast mission – launched 52 satellites into a 340 x 210 kilometer (210 x 130 mi) parking orbit in December 2021. Starlink 4-7, an East Coast mission, launched 49 satellites into a 336 x 210 km parking orbit on February 3rd, losing three satellites to account for extra performance needed to safely dodge the Bahamas.

Following Starlink 4-7’s space weather calamity, SpaceX – using an identical trajectory – launched 46 Starlink 4-8 satellites (three fewer than 4-7) from the East Coast into a higher 337 x 325 km parking orbit on February 21st. On February 25th, SpaceX also launched 50 Starlink 4-11 satellites (a reduction of two) from the West Coast into a higher 316 x 306 km parking orbit. In short, after Starlink 4-7, SpaceX appears to be sacrificing a few Starlink satellites to launch to parking orbits that are slightly higher and thus slightly more stable.

While doomed, Starlink 4-7 was still a beautiful launch. (Richard Angle)

In theory, this should entirely prevent a repeat of the Starlink 4-7 anomaly while only marginally increasing the amount of time it should take dead-on-arrival satellites to reenter. While doing so increases the number of satellites Falcon 9 can launch, the main reason SpaceX launches Starlink satellites to such low orbits is to ensure that any failed satellites reenter a matter of days to a few weeks after launch instead of the years it could take at their operational ~550 km (~340 mi) orbits.

Of course, that doesn’t explain why Starlink 4-9 is projected to launch one more Starlink satellite than Starlink 4-8. It’s possible that SpaceX is refining its new insertion orbit on the fly and that Starlink 4-9 is headed to a slightly lower destination after data gathered from 4-8 and 4-11. It’s also possible that SpaceX is tweaking some other aspect of Falcon 9’s mission profile or even modifying Starlink satellites (i.e. adding or subtracting mass) – neither of which would be out of the ordinary for the company.

Regardless, Starlink 4-9 is interesting for a few more reasons. First, it will mark drone ship Just Read The Instruction’s (JRTI) first recovery mission since a mistake made by its onboard Octagrabber rocket nearly lead to the loss of an entire Falcon 9 booster in December 2021. That implies that SpaceX has fully determined and rectified the cause of that anomaly and repaired both the drone ship and its robot. To reach its full launch cadence potential, SpaceX needs at least two operational drone ships on the East Coast. Otherwise, in lieu of rare low-performance missions that allow Falcon 9 boosters to fly back to land, SpaceX can only launch one East Coast Falcon 9 mission every 10 or so days and can’t support Falcon Heavy launches that require two at-sea booster landings.

Advertisement
-
Falcon 9 B1051. (Richard Angle)
Falcon 9 B1058. (Richard Angle)
Falcon 9 B1060. (Richard Angle)

Additionally, SpaceX has confirmed that Falcon 9 B1060 will launch Starlink 4-9. The mission will be its 11th launch and landing attempt, hopefully making it the third Falcon 9 booster to successfully support 11 orbital-class launches after B1051 and B1058. Together, that means that 3 (15%) of the 19 Falcon 9 Block 5 boosters SpaceX has debuted will have singlehandedly supported 33 (37%) of the 89 Falcon 9 launches the company has completed since May 2018. It’s difficult to imagine a more resounding affirmation of SpaceX’s work on reusability.

Tune in to SpaceX Starlink 4-9 webcast around 9:20 am EST (14:20 UTC) on Thursday, March 3rd to watch the launch live.

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

Tesla’s Cybercab battery design could make robotaxis even cheaper

Tesla built the Cybercab’s battery pack with spare room for a future switch to LFP.

Published

on

By

Tesla built the Cybercab’s battery pack with empty space inside it on purpose, and the reason points to a cheaper robotaxi down the road.

Robert Sumpf, Tesla’s director of mechanical design engineering for battery modules and packs, said the extra room beside and beneath the Cybercab’s modules was left there so the company can move to lithium iron phosphate cells later. “So, we protected this pack to go to an even lower energy dense chemistry as we scale and need to bring LFP into the platform,” Sumpf said in a Cybercab deep dive with Munro Live.

The Cybercab runs on Tesla’s own 4680 cells with a nickel chemistry today. LFP cells store less energy for their size, so a straight swap would cut range. The reserved space lets Tesla add more LFP cells to make up the difference. In return, Tesla would get cells that cost less, run cooler and survive more charge cycles. LFP became the most used EV battery chemistry in the world last year.

Not all of that room was planned for a chemistry change. Lars Moravy, Tesla’s Vice President of Vehicle Engineering, said part of it exists because “we didn’t need as many batteries as we thought we did.” Tesla told Sandy Munro in early 2025 that it was targeting a Cybercab pack under 50 kWh with close to 300 miles of range.

The pack also breaks from the structural design Tesla used in some Model Y and Cybertruck builds. Instead of potting hundreds of cells into one block, the Cybercab uses four separate, individually sealed modules, so a bad module can be replaced without scrapping the whole pack. Sumpf was blunt about the older approach, giving the Model Y structural battery “a grade D” because it was hard to build and nearly impossible to repair. He estimated a fully structural pack gains about 10% more cell volume, but said “the issue is the service cost.”

Advertisement
-

That cost matters more for a car that rarely sits parked. Cybercab chief engineer Eric Earley said replacing an entire pack “before half a million miles is a killer on cost,” which is why remanufacturing and serviceability were built into the design from the start.

The same Munro Live tour produced Moravy’s admission that the Cybercab line at Giga Texas is now outpacing Robotaxi deployments, along with a look at the robotaxi’s unorthodox paint process. Tesla is aiming to deliver the first Cybercabs to outside customers by the end of 2026, though Elon Musk has said the vast majority will stay owned by Tesla and run as a transport service.

Sumpf did not give a date for an LFP version, name a cell supplier or say how a chemistry change would affect range. For now, the 4680 cars keep piling up: Texas DMV records from Tuesday list 544 Cybercabs authorized for Tesla’s Robotaxi fleet, more than the 507 Model Ys on the same roster for the first time.

Continue Reading

News

Starlink is ‘biggest competitive advantage,’ but it’s temporary, United CEO says

Published

on

Credit: United Airlines

United Airlines CEO Scott Kirby said that SpaceX’s Starlink satellite internet is its leading competitive advantage in the U.S. airline industry. However, in recent comments, while he described the service as “the biggest competitive advantage” the carrier currently holds, he also acknowledged that the edge is temporary.

“…everybody eventually is going to have high-speed low earth orbit internet connectivity. It’s going to be a must-have. We are going to have a few years of being the only airline that has it at scale, and that’s our mission,” Kirby said. Until everyone has it, United aims to capitalize on its head start by converting trial users into long-term loyal customers.

United has moved faster than its rivals on Starlink installations. As of mid-to-late October 2026, the system was on roughly 43 percent of its fleet, with plans to reach 61 percent by year-end, 87 percent by June 2027, and full fleet coverage by the end of next year.

The airline already operates more Starlink-equipped flights than the rest of the U.S. industry combined. Los Angeles International Airport is scheduled to become United’s first 100 percent Starlink hub in the first half of 2027, and the carrier’s app will display the likelihood that any given flight has the service.

Kirby has pointed to early evidence that the offering influences booking decisions. Some passengers loyal to other airlines are already switching flights for Starlink connectivity, something the airline, along with American Airlines, has tried to leverage against competing airlines. Both companies used status-match programs, and some of those customers are pursuing company-specific credit cards, which signals an intent to stay.

Once onboard, these customers encounter the airline’s broader investments in aircraft, larger seat-back screens, oversized bins, connection tools, and a mobile app that Kirby says outperforms competitors. Wi-Fi satisfaction scores on Starlink-equipped planes have been reported to be nearly double those on aircraft with other systems.

Competitors are moving slowly to do the same. Southwest Airlines began installations in 2025 and expects to complete them soon. Delta is pursuing Amazon’s Leo system, while American expects to start Starlink work in early 2027 and has not yet detailed regional-fleet plans. This timeline gap gives United a multi-year window in which it remains the only major U.S. carrier offering Starlink at scale.

Kirby has framed the strategy as pressing that advantage while simultaneously widening gaps in other technology areas so that customers who try United for the Wi-Fi remain for the overall experience.

The approach reflects a calculated bet that superior in-flight connectivity can accelerate share gains and support longer-term financial targets, including a 10 percent pre-tax margin goal.

High-speed internet is particularly valued by premium and business travelers who can work or stream reliably. As low-Earth-orbit service becomes ubiquitous, the temporary nature of the pure connectivity edge means United’s retention will depend on whether its other product and operational improvements keep pace.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Cybercab’s unorthodox paint process explained

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla Cybercab skips the traditional paint shop entirely, marking an unorthodox process for coloring the fully autonomous vehicle. However, the decision was a smart one, as it slashed factory costs, floor space utilization, and complexity, since Tesla relied on specialized alloys and in-mold coloring.

Munro Live was given the opportunity to do a factory walkthrough with Tesla Vice President of Vehicle Engineering Lars Moravy, who explained and detailed how Cybercab production at Giga Texas eliminates one of the automotive manufacturing industry’s most expensive and space-hungry elements.

A conventional paint line can cost hundreds of millions of dollars and require a million man-hours to build. Moravy framed the choice around Tesla’s core rule: “Question the requirements: why do you need paint?”

The structural answer lies in material selection. The aluminum alloys used in Cybercab’s front and rear castings do not oxidize and lose strength over time, the way many common automotive aluminum alloys do. Only the side modules, built around hot-stamped boron-steel door rings, receive an anti-corrosion e-coat, or dip coat. Front and rear modules skip coating altogether.

Model Y and Model 3 bodies, by contrast, are fully coated and painted.

Exterior colors come from the plastics shop, which Tesla engineers described as “our paint shop” for the Cybercab. Body panels are produced via reaction injection molding, referred to as RIM. Color is then mixed into a polyurethane resin at the mix head immediately before injection, so the panel emerges already colored with a Class-A surface.

Robots trim overflow to control sink marks and flow lines. The process avoids conventional spray-paint defects like orange peel and paint bleed. Scratches can still be repaired with compatible coatings that behave “basically like paint.” Because color is integral rather than a surface layer, shallow scratches do not expose a contrasting undercoat.

The secret behind Tesla’s Cybercab Gold goes well beyond just the color

Tesla has also explored related approaches, including in-mold lamination and painted films on stamped panels.

The manufacturing payoff is substantial because removing the paint shop, combined with the “unboxed” modular process that builds and tests front, rear, side, and center modules in parallel before a short final assembly, cuts factory floor space per vehicle by about 50 percent.

Final assembly itself uses only about 25 automated stations, far fewer than the typical Model Y line, and the overall line runs at about 78 percent automation, Moravy said. The approach also eliminates volatile organic compound emissions associated with traditional spray painting for these panels and shortens the coloring cycle from hours to minutes.

Cybercab’s paint strategy is clearly less about aesthetics than about systematically deleting capital-intensive, energy-heavy, and space-consuming steps once material science and process design make them unnecessary. It is a concrete example of Tesla applying first-principles questioning to one of the auto industry’s most entrenched factory requirements.

Continue Reading