Connect with us

News

SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket celebrates 4th launch debut anniversary

Published

on

On the fourth anniversary of SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy launch debut and after an unusual multi-year hiatus, the world’s most powerful operational rocket could be on the brink of an impressive salvo of launches.

Four years ago yesterday, on February 6th, 2018, Falcon Heavy lifted off from NASA’s historic Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Pad 39A launch complex, launched a truly esoteric payload into interplanetary space, and officially became the largest, heaviest, and most powerful active launch vehicle in the world. It also became the third most powerful liquid rocket ever launched, placing SpaceX squarely at the table alongside the likes of NASA’s Saturn V Moon rocket and the Soviet Union’s ill-fated N-1 and Energia.

14 months later, an upgraded “Block 5” version of Falcon Heavy aced two more back-to-back launches in April and June 2019, completing its first missions for paying customers and also aiding the US Air Force in its efforts to certify the capable rocket for high-value military launches. However, such an auspicious beginning made the years of inactivity that immediately followed Falcon Heavy’s third launch even more striking.

Since Falcon Heavy’s late-June 2019 launch of the USAF’s Space Test Program 2 (STP-2) mission, the rocket hasn’t launched once. That wasn’t supposed to be the case. As of June 2018, SpaceX was supposed to launch the US Air Force’s AFSPC-52 (now USSF-52) mission in September 2020. In June 2019, Spaceflight Now reported that USSF-44 – not USSF-52 – would be SpaceX’s next Falcon Heavy launch and was expected no earlier than (NET) “late 2020.” By September 2020, USSF-44 was expected to launch in February 2021. By February 2021, the US military stated that USSF-44 was scheduled to launch NET October 2021. By October 2021, the US military had once again delayed USSF-44 to early 2022 and USSF-52 to “Q2 2022.”

Advertisement

While the military has done little more than acknowledge each new date, it has vaguely implied that the spacecraft – not SpaceX – are to blame for the chronic, prolonged delays. Without even a hint of an explanation, it’s unclear if those delays are likely to end anytime soon, potentially delaying USSF-44 and USSF-52 into the second half or last quarter of 2022 and pushing USSF-67 into 2023. Thankfully, unreliable US military payloads aren’t the only Falcon Heavy missions scheduled this year.

At a minimum, SpaceX is contracted to launch the ViaSat’s first of three next-generation ViaSat-3 communications satellite directly to geostationary orbit (GEO). The launch was recently delayed from Q2 to the end of Q3 2022. SpaceX is also scheduled to launch NASA’s Psyche mission – a spacecraft designed to visit and study an asteroid made almost entirely out of metal – NET August 2022. While customer Inmarsat has yet to finalize or announce a contract decision, Falcon Heavy could potentially be tasked with launching the second Inmarsat-6 geostationary communications satellite sometime later this year.

All told, if every customer is able to stem each torrent of delays, Falcon Heavy could feasibly launch five or even six times in 2022. More conservatively, if USSF-67 and ViaSat-3 are delayed to 2023 and Inmarsat-6 F2 goes to Falcon 9, the world’s largest operational rocket could still launch three times in 2022 and still have up to three more launches scheduled next year.

For now, Falcon Heavy’s first launch in at least 33 months and fourth launch overall isn’t expected until March 2022 at the earliest.

Advertisement

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 Sweden appeals after grid company refuses to restore existing Supercharger due to union strike

The charging site was previously functioning before it was temporarily disconnected in April last year for electrical safety reasons.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla Charging

Tesla Sweden is seeking regulatory intervention after a Swedish power grid company refused to reconnect an already operational Supercharger station in Åre due to ongoing union sympathy actions.

The charging site was previously functioning before it was temporarily disconnected in April last year for electrical safety reasons. A temporary construction power cabinet supplying the station had fallen over, described by Tesla as occurring “under unclear circumstances.” The power was then cut at the request of Tesla’s installation contractor to allow safe repair work.

While the safety issue was resolved, the station has not been brought back online. Stefan Sedin, CEO of Jämtkraft elnät, told Dagens Arbete (DA) that power will not be restored to the existing Supercharger station as long as the electric vehicle maker’s union issues are ongoing. 

“One of our installers noticed that the construction power had been backed up and was on the ground. We asked Tesla to fix the system, and their installation company in turn asked us to cut the power so that they could do the work safely. 

Advertisement

“When everything was restored, the question arose: ‘Wait a minute, can we reconnect the station to the electricity grid? Or what does the notice actually say?’ We consulted with our employer organization, who were clear that as long as sympathy measures are in place, we cannot reconnect this facility,” Sedin said. 

The union’s sympathy actions, which began in March 2024, apply to work involving “planning, preparation, new connections, grid expansion, service, maintenance and repairs” of Tesla’s charging infrastructure in Sweden.

Tesla Sweden has argued that reconnecting an existing facility is not equivalent to establishing a new grid connection. In a filing to the Swedish Energy Market Inspectorate, the company stated that reconnecting the installation “is therefore not covered by the sympathy measures and cannot therefore constitute a reason for not reconnecting the facility to the electricity grid.”

Sedin, for his part, noted that Tesla’s issue with the Supercharger is quite unique. And while Jämtkraft elnät itself has no issue with Tesla, its actions are based on the unions’ sympathy measures against the electric vehicle maker. 

Advertisement

“This is absolutely the first time that I have been involved in matters relating to union conflicts or sympathy measures. That is why we have relied entirely on the assessment of our employer organization. This is not something that we have made any decisions about ourselves at all. 

“It is not that Jämtkraft elnät has a conflict with Tesla, but our actions are based on these sympathy measures. Should it turn out that we have made an incorrect assessment, we will correct ourselves. It is no more difficult than that for us,” the executive said. 

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Music City Loop could highlight The Boring Company’s real disruption

The real story behind the tunneling startup’s Nashville tunnel project is the company’s targeted $25 million per mile construction cost.

Published

on

boring-company-prufrock-1-2
Credit: The Boring Company/X

Recent commentary on social media has highlighted what could very well prove to be The Boring Company’s real disruption.

The analysis was shared by tech watcher Aakash Gupta on social media platform X, where he argued that the real story behind the tunneling startup’s Nashville tunnel project is the company’s targeted $25 million per mile construction cost.

According to Gupta’s breakdown, Nashville’s 2018 light rail proposal was priced at roughly $200 million per mile. New York’s East Side Access project reportedly cost about $3.5 billion per mile, while Los Angeles Metro expansion projects have approached $1 billion per mile.

By comparison, The Boring Company has stated it can construct 13 miles of twin tunnels in the Music City Loop for between $240 million and $300 million total. That implies a cost near $25 million per mile, or roughly a 95% reduction from industry averages cited in the post.

Advertisement

Several technical departures from conventional tunneling allow the Boring Company to lower its costs, from its smaller 12-foot diameter tunnels to its fully electric Prufrock machines that are designed to mine continuously with no personnel inside the tunnel and their capability to “porpoise” for easy launch and retrieval.

Tesla and Space CEO Elon Musk responded to the post on X, stating simply that “Tunnels are so underrated.”

The Boring Company has seen some momentum as of late, with the company recently signing a construction contract in Dubai and the Universal Orlando Loop progressing. Recent reports have also pointed to tunnels potentially being constructed to solve traffic congestion issues near the Giga Nevada area. 

While The Boring Company’s tunnels have so far been used for Loop systems publicly for now, Elon Musk recently noted that the tunneling startup’s underground passages would not be limited only to ride-hailing vehicles. 

Advertisement

In a reply to a post on X which discussed the specifications of the Music City Loop, Musk clarified that “any fully autonomous electric cars can use the tunnels.” This suggests that vehicles potentially running systems like FSD Supervised, even if they are not Teslas, could be used in systems like the Music City Loop in the future.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

SpaceX IPO could push Elon Musk’s net worth past $1 trillion: Polymarket

The estimates were shared by the official Polymarket Money account on social media platform X.

Published

on

Gage Skidmore, CC BY-SA 4.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

Recent projections have outlined how a potential $1.75 trillion SpaceX IPO could generate historic returns for early investors. The projections suggest the offering would not only become the largest IPO in history but could also result in unprecedented windfalls for some of the company’s key investors.

The estimates were shared by the official Polymarket Money account on social media platform X.

As noted in a Polymarket Money analysis, Elon Musk invested $100 million into SpaceX in 2002 and currently owns approximately 42% of the company. At a $1.75 trillion valuation following SpaceX’s potential $1.75 trillion IPO, that stake would be worth roughly $735 billion.

Such a figure would dramatically expand Musk’s net worth. When combined with his holdings in Tesla Inc. and other ventures, a public debut at that level could position him as the world’s first trillionaire, depending on market conditions at the time of listing.

Advertisement

The Bloomberg Billionaires Index currently lists Elon Musk with a net worth of $666 billion, though a notable portion of this is tied to his TSLA stock. Tesla currently holds a market cap of $1.51 trillion, and Elon Musk’s currently holds about 13% to 15% of the company’s outstanding common stock.

Founders Fund, co-founded by Peter Thiel, invested $20 million in SpaceX in 2008. Polymarket Money estimates the firm owns between 1.5% and 3% of the private space company. At a $1.75 trillion valuation, that range would translate to approximately $26.25 billion to $52.5 billion in value.

That return would represent one of the most significant venture capital outcomes in modern Silicon Valley history, with a growth of 131,150% to 262,400%.

Alphabet Inc., Google’s parent company, invested $900 million into SpaceX in 2015 and is estimated to hold between 6% and 7% of the private space firm. At the projected IPO valuation, that stake could be worth between $105 billion and $122.5 billion. That’s a growth of 11,566% to 14,455%.

Advertisement

Other major backers highlighted in the post include Fidelity Investments, Baillie Gifford, Valor Equity Partners, Bank of America, and Andreessen Horowitz, each potentially sitting on multibillion-dollar gains.

Continue Reading