News
SpaceX’s massive Falcon Heavy rocket aims for December 29 inaugural launch
Based on information released by NASASpaceflight.com, a highly reliable source of insider details, SpaceX’s first Falcon Heavy rocket could roll out to the LC-39A launch pad before the end of November, less than a month away. While the first roll-out (or two) will be dedicated solely to “Wet Dress Rehearsals” (WDR), this will be the first time the iconic vehicle makes it to the pad, and will be a historic event regardless of what follows.
No earlier than (NET) “late-November”, the first WDR will see Falcon Heavy go through the usual motions of propellant loading while also conducting an array of systems checks and validations to verify that things are proceeding as expected. This first test will not culminate in any sort of hot-fire, and is more intended to verify that the massive rocket is playing well with the modifications made to the launch pad and the Transporter/Erector/Launcher (TEL) that carries it from the integration facilities to the pad. If major issues come up, they will be dealt with and followed by a second identical WDR. If there are no issues with the first WDR, the second rehearsal could smoothly morph into the first static fire of the integrated vehicle.
As Chris Gebhardt of NSF discusses in some detail, the first Falcon Heavy static fire(s) conducted at LC-39A will be of groundbreaking importance, as SpaceX is currently unable to test fully-integrated Falcon Heavy vehicles at its McGregor, Texas facilities due to the rocket’s sheer power. A lot, thus, rests on these first static fires, currently scheduled to begin around December 15th.
Falcon Heavy and Dragon 2 could one day enable circumlunar space tourism. (SpaceX)
Given the distinctly experimental nature of Falcon Heavy’s inaugural launch, specific dates are best taken as general placemarkers, and the actual dates of the first flow depend entirely upon the tests that precede each subsequent step. Nevertheless, the dates provided by NASASpaceflight point to Falcon Heavy’s first static fire on December 15th, followed two weeks later by a tentative launch date of December 29th.
Staying focused on Mars: Is Falcon Heavy necessary?
Even an uncertain launch date of that specificity is still a historic event for Falcon Heavy, long lampooned and straw-manned as an example of SpaceX’s silly pie-in-the-sky claims and Elon Musk’s oversimplification of complex engineering tasks. There is a grain of truth to such contentions, but they tend to miss the point by huge margins. The actual market for mid-level heavy-lift launch vehicles like Falcon Heavy is quite simply too small to be a major motivator for a commercial launch company like SpaceX. One must remember that SpaceX was not founded to be a run-of-the-mill launch provider. The company’s goal, as has been reiterated ad infinitum, is “enabling human life on Mars”, something that has explicitly prefaced every single job posting on the company’s website for more than half a decade.
For a time, it appeared that Falcon Heavy might eventually be used to enable SpaceX’s Red Dragon program, intended to field-test the technologies needed for month-long cruises in deep space and landing large payloads on Mars. However, the program was cancelled earlier this year, in favor of what Musk called “vastly bigger ships”. Indeed, updated Mars plans unveiled on September 29th showed that SpaceX was forging ahead with an updated BFR and BFS, and hopes to fly its first missions to Mars in 2022.
SpaceX’s massive BFR, intended to create and support a human colony on Mars, is visualized taking to the sky. Experience from operating Falcon Heavy will likely benefit BFR once it eventually begins hot-fire testing. (SpaceX)
Falcon Heavy will admittedly become the most powerful operational launch vehicle when it first lifts off in approximately two months, and it will likely retain that title well into 2020, when NASA’s Space Launch System may conduct its first launch. However, regardless of the impressive technological accomplishments it will embody, Falcon Heavy simply is not powerful or affordable enough to ever realistically enable a sustained human presence on Mars. SpaceX does have a small number of customers actively waiting with payloads for Falcon Heavy – its second mission is currently penciled in for June 2018 – and it is reasonable to assume that some or all of those missions will be completed simply out of due diligence. SpaceX may also be motivated to continue the Falcon Heavy program as a possible entrant in a recently-announced USAF competition meant to partially fund the development of multiple US-built heavy-lift launch vehicles.
More simply still, experience derived from igniting and simultaneously operating Falcon Heavy’s 27 Merlin 1D rocket engines will to some extent benefit BFR’s development and operations, as the conceptual vehicle is currently expected to host 31 Raptor engines on its first stage.
-
- Taken on October 9th by Ted Meyer, this airborne shot shows that LZ-1’s second pad (on the left) is close to completion. (tedwardmeyer/Instagram)
-
- LZ-1’s operational landing pad has seen hosted multiple successful landings from 2016-2017. (SpaceX)
-
- The base of the TEL now sports multiple additional launch clamps (large grey protrusions) that will be needed for Falcon Heavy’s three first stage cores. (SpaceX)
Whether Falcon Heavy is to remain a development or production priority for SpaceX after its first several launches is unclear, but the vehicle’s inaugural launch and all subsequent launches are bound to be spectacles to behold. The company’s second Florida-based launch pad, intended to support two simultaneous landings of Falcon Heavy’s side boosters, appears to be nearly complete. At LC-39A, the facility’s TEL already sports major visible modifications necessary for it to operate with Falcon Heavy. All three of the first Heavy’s first stage cores have already completed hot-fire testings in Texas and are now located at Cape Canaveral, awaiting their first integrated tests later this month. Delays to the December 29th launch date are probable, but the various components needed for Falcon Heavy’s first launch have truly come together, and the vehicle’s launch is now simply a matter of “when”. Place your bets!
Elon Musk
The Starship moon landing number NASA and Elon Musk can’t agree on
Musk disputes NASA estimate of 22 Starship launches for Moon landing, predicting 6 to 8.
Elon Musk is disputing a new NASA safety panel estimate of how many Starship launches it will take to put astronauts on the Moon, saying the real number will be less than half the panel’s figure.
On Thursday, NASA’s Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel held its quarterly public meeting. Panel member Charlie Precourt, a former NASA astronaut, flagged the fueling process for SpaceX’s lunar lander as a major risk for Artemis IV, the mission planned to land a crew on the Moon in 2028. “We need to keep our eyes on numerous required fuelings for the lander,” Precourt said, according to Ars Technica. “I think the last estimate is around 22 flights.”
Ars Technica’s Eric Berger posted the comment on X, and Musk replied. “That’s way too high,” Musk wrote. “Actual number will be more like 6 to 8.”
The disagreement comes down to a basic problem with sending a ship as large as Starship to the Moon. Starship burns nearly all of its propellant just reaching Earth orbit, so it cannot continue on to the Moon without stopping for a refill. SpaceX’s answer is a gas station in space. First, a Starship that works as a storage tank, called a depot, is launched into orbit. Then a series of tanker Starships launch one at a time, dock with the depot and pump their leftover propellant into it. Once the depot is full, the lunar lander version of Starship launches, docks, fills up and heads for the Moon.
Every tanker trip is its own full rocket launch, which is why the count matters. More launches mean more time, more cost and more chances for something to go wrong before astronauts ever leave Earth. Berger estimated that even if SpaceX reaches twice weekly Starship launches by the end of 2027, filling a depot at the panel’s number would still take roughly three months.
How many tankers are needed depends mostly on how much propellant each one can carry to orbit and how much is lost along the way. Starship’s fuel and oxygen are stored at extremely cold temperatures, and some of it slowly boils off while waiting in orbit. More is lost in each transfer. NASA appears to be working from what Starship can lift today, while Musk’s range assumes a more capable rocket.
Musk has pushed back on higher counts before. In 2021, after a government document suggested 16 launches, he called that “extremely unlikely” and said eight tankers would be the most required.
Much of the answer depends on hardware SpaceX has not finished flying. As Teslarati noted earlier this year, the company plans to carry out the refueling process with its upgraded V3 Starship, and Precourt described Artemis IV as carrying “a large number of firsts.” He also praised NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman’s team for working to clear obstacles for both SpaceX and Blue Origin, whose Blue Moon lander does not rely on orbital refueling for its first mission.
Elon Musk
Tesla’s secretive “Project Crystal Sun” gets a big green light in Texas
Fort Bend County approved four incentive agreements Thursday for Tesla’s proposed $10.1 billion solar factory.
Fort Bend County commissioners on Thursday approved a package of tax incentives for Tesla’s proposed $10.1 billion solar cell factory near Needville, Texas, giving the company one of the last local approvals it needs before it decides where to build. All four Tesla agreements passed 4 to 0.
The votes covered a property tax abatement inside Reinvestment Zone No. 34, a Chapter 381 economic development agreement, a foreign trade zone non-objection paired with payments in lieu of certain taxes, and a separate payment in lieu of taxes “true up” agreement, according to agenda notes from the Fort Bend Commissioners Court meeting.
The project, known internally as “Project Crystal Sun,” would make solar cells and finished modules on roughly 3,000 acres near FM 762 and FM 1994, south of the Brazos River. As Teslarati reported when the filing first surfaced in August, Tesla’s application under the state’s JETI Act splits the investment into $1.5 billion in real property and $8.6 billion in equipment, with 9,712 permanent jobs projected by 2033 and commercial operations targeted for the first quarter of 2029. The plant would handle the full chain from ingot and wafer production through cell testing.
Inside Tesla’s secretive $10 Billion “Project Crystal Sun” filing
Thursday’s approval does not lock in the site. Tesla has told the Texas Comptroller it is still weighing other locations, and site selection adviser David Dennison told Lamar Consolidated ISD trustees in September that the race had narrowed to Fort Bend and one out of state rival with a “very compelling package,” according to the Houston Chronicle. Tesla hopes to decide before the end of 2026, and the incentives still need sign off from the Comptroller and the Governor’s office.
Local officials have now done nearly everything within their control. Commissioners created the reinvestment zone in an August 24 special meeting, with Interim County Judge Daniel Wong formally withdrawing himself over his engineering firm’s past work with Tesla. Lamar CISD trustees voted 7 to 0 on September 15 to advance a JETI agreement that would tax Tesla’s qualifying property at 50 percent of its value for maintenance and operations from 2029 through 2038.
The plant lines up with a target Elon Musk set on Tesla’s Q4 2025 earnings call in January, when he said the company would “work toward getting 100 GW a year of solar cell production, integrating across the entire supply chain from raw materials all the way to finished solar panels.” In March, Tesla was reported to be negotiating a $2.9 billion purchase of Chinese solar manufacturing equipment bound for Texas. The Houston area already hosts Tesla’s Megafactory in Brookshire, where Megapack 3 production has started. Tesla said on its Q3 call that Megapack supply for 2027 is nearly sold out, and Musk wrote on X Thursday that the company is “increasing production of Megapacks as much as possible,” as demand from data centers climbs.
Tesla revealed plans to develop its own maps internally to fix Navigation issues and give owners more control over their routing.
On the company’s Q3 2026 Earnings Call, a question was asked about FSD Navigation issues, particularly speed limit recognition, parking, and routing. These are issues that surface from version to version and seem to be seriously challenging for Tesla’s AI team to resolve.
Tesla’s Head of AI, Ashok Elluswamy, said in response to the question:
“You’re totally right that we shouldn’t be depending on external people’s maps. So we are building our own maps, but not like the same way as OneMoreMap. We are building an entirely new architecture with essentially AI-based mapping and navigation.”
He continued:
“It’s going to be super awesome. It’s going to be integrated with voice. You can talk to it, ask for different routes. It’s going to learn your personalized preferences, plus the fleet preferences. The collective intelligence of all the cars is going to flow into making the maps and navigation super cool.”
Elluswamy said this issue should be confronted, and the mapping should be available for people by the time the v15 release starts deploying to customers.
“And over the next several months,” he added, “it’s just going to take over all of the navigation functions, parking, destination handling. And it will know you better than you know yourself in some regard for the driving task, and then handle it fully.”
Tesla Summon got insanely good in FSD v14.3.2 — Navigation? Not so much
Navigation is perhaps the most notable complaint with FSD, and although it has gotten better, it is still flawed. Much of the time, FSD will take people on routes that are not preferred by the driver, but Tesla tried to combat this with a routing feature in the Summer 2026 Update.
Tesla currently relies on Google for map data, but it is sort of counterintuitive to believe the company would rely on a third party for this. These improvements will be welcome, as routing and navigation have been such a pain point for so many owners for so long.
Quotes via Motley Fool
The Starship moon landing number NASA and Elon Musk can’t agree on
Tesla’s secretive “Project Crystal Sun” gets a big green light in Texas
