Connect with us

SpaceX

SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy to ignite all 27 Merlin engines in early morning test

Falcon Heavy ignites all 27 Merlin 1D engines for the first time prior to its inaugural launch, January 2018. (SpaceX)

Published

on

SpaceX is set to take another stab at the first integrated static fire test of Falcon Heavy Block 5 rocket, a milestone that will open the doors for its commercial launch debut just a handful of days later.

The window for the second Falcon Heavy’s static fire test will open at 10am EDT on Friday, April 5th and lasts until 7pm EDT (14:00-23:00 UTC), after which SpaceX engineers will likely spend a minimum of 24-48 hours analyzing the data produced and verifying the rocket’s health. Soon after, the rocket will be brought horizontal and rolled back into Pad 39A’s main hangar, where the payload fairing – containing the Arabsat 6A communications satellite – will be installed atop Falcon Heavy’s second stage before the rocket rolls back out to the pad for launch.

If all goes well during these relatively routine procedures, SpaceX can be expected to announce a date for Falcon Heavy’s second-ever launch, likely no sooner than 4-5 days after the static fire is completed. In other words, a flawless performance tomorrow could permit a launch date as early as April 9-10. Launching fewer than four days after completing static fire testing is rare even for Falcon 9, which has the luxury of far less complexity (and data produced) relative to Falcon Heavy, which has only flown once and is will attempt its second launch in a significantly different configuration.

Three months after Falcon Heavy’s February 2018 debut, SpaceX debuted Falcon 9 in its upgraded Block 5 configuration, featuring widespread changes to avionics, software, structures, thermal protection, and even uprated thrust for its Merlin engines. Falcon Heavy Flight 1 was comprised of Block 2 and Block 3 variants of the Falcon 9’s umbrella V1.2 Full Thrust configuration, which debuted in December 2015. Both side boosters – Block 2s – were flight-proven and had previously launched in 2016, while the rocket’s heavily modified center core was effectively a new version of Falcon 9 based on Block 3 hardware.

Falcon 9 B1046 returned to Port of Los Angeles on December 5 after the rocket's historic third launch and landing. (Pauline Acalin)
(Top) Falcon 9 B1046 – the first Block 5 booster completed – launched for the first time in May 2018. (Bottom) Almost exactly seven months later, Falcon 8 B1046 flew for the third time in a historic first for SpaceX rockets. (SpaceX/Pauline Acalin)

One of the biggest goals of Block 5 / Version 6 is ease of reusability. In principle we could re-fly Block 4 probably upwards of ten times, but with a fair amount of work between each flight. The key to Block 5 is that it’s designed to do ten or more flights with no refurbishment between each flight. Or at least no scheduled refurbishment between each flights. The only thing that needs to change is you reload propellant and fly again.

And we have
upgrades to all the avionics as well. So we have an upgraded flight computer, engine controllers, a … more advanced inertial measurement system. [Block 5 avionics are] lighter, more advanced, and also more fault-tolerant. So it can withstand a much greater array of faults than the old avionics system. [They’re] better in every way.

Block 5 has improved payload to orbit. Improved redundancy. Improved reliability. It’s really better in every way than Block 4. I’m really proud of the SpaceX team for the design.


– SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, May 2018

A different different rocket

Given just how extensive the changes made with Block 5 are, Falcon Heavy Flight 2 is drastically different than its sole predecessor, emphasized by the 13+ months SpaceX has taken to go from Flight 1 to Flight 2. Had SpaceX been able to successfully recover Falcon Heavy’s first center core (B1033) after launch, its quite likely that the company would have attempted to refly the rocket’s three landed boosters a bit sooner than April 2019, but the booster’s failed landing threw a bit of a wrench in the production plan.

After intentionally expending almost a dozen recoverable Block 3 and 4 Falcon 9 boosters in 2017 and 2018, SpaceX’s fleet of flightworthy cores had been reduced to a tiny handful. Interrupting Falcon 9 Block 5’s production ramp would have likely become a bottleneck for 2018’s launch cadence, and may well have contributed to SpaceX falling short from its planned 30 and then 24 launches last year with a still-impressive 21. Building an entirely new Falcon Heavy center core was simply not a priority as SpaceX required all production hands on deck to build enough Block 5 boosters to avoid major launch delays.

An overview of SpaceX’s Hawthorne factory floor in early 2018. (SpaceX)

As a result, SpaceX delayed the production of the first Falcon Heavy Block 5 center core by ~6 months and ~8 boosters, shipping the rocket – presumed to be B1055 – to McGregor, Texas for static fire acceptance testing in Q4 2018. The center core arrived in Florida in mid-February 2019, following both side cores and a payload fairing.

Ultimately, SpaceX is likely to conduct Falcon Heavy’s first commercial launch with about as much caution as could be observed during the unique launches of SSO-A (the first triple-reflight of a Falcon 9), Crew Dragon DM-1 (stringent NASA oversight), and GPS III SV01 (stringent USAF oversight), as well as Falcon Heavy’s original launch debut. All four missions took anywhere from one to three weeks to go from a successful static fire to launch. Falcon Heavy Flight 2 will likely be similar, although a much faster turnaround is undeniably within the realm of possibility. For Falcon 9 Block 5, SpaceX’s current record stands at three days, achieved twice in ten Block 5 launches.

Stay tuned for an official SpaceX confirmation of Falcon Heavy’s second integrated static fire, as well as new launch date.

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

Elon Musk tops Forbes’ list of America’s 250 greatest innovators

The ranking places Musk at the top of modern American innovation.

Published

on

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

Elon Musk has been ranked No. 1 on Forbes’ inaugural list of America’s 250 Greatest Innovators. The ranking places Musk at the top of modern American innovation as the publication kicks off a series celebrating the nation’s 250th anniversary.

Forbes described innovation as “the grease in the economic engine” and the force that transforms industries and creates new ones. The publication highlighted that its honorees are not just inventors, but business leaders who successfully bring breakthroughs to market.

Musk, 54, was ranked No. 1 in this year’s list. Forbes noted that he is “the only person in history to have founded (or grown from nearly nothing) five companies, each with multibillion-dollar valuations, each in a different industry.” Those companies include Tesla, SpaceX, Neuralink, xAI, and The Boring Company.

Forbes’ methodology began with nearly 1,000 nominees submitted by its reporters. A panel of judges, including venture capitalist Jim Breyer, journalist Kara Swisher, and strategy expert Rita McGrath, ranked candidates based on creativity, breadth, engagement, disruption, and commercial impact. Artificial intelligence tools, including ChatGPT and Gemini, were also used to assess candidates before editors finalized the rankings.

Advertisement

The publication noted that more than one-third of the list consists of women and people of color, reflecting shifts in innovation and entrepreneurship over time. All individuals listed are also American citizens, though many were born abroad, including Musk himself. Musk was born in Pretoria, South Africa.

Ranked No. 2 is Jeff Bezos, 61, who Forbes credited with upending America’s $7.4 trillion retail industry through Amazon before pioneering cloud computing with Amazon Web Services. The publication highlighted that Bezos now focuses on space exploration through Blue Origin and artificial intelligence manufacturing systems at Prometheus.

At No. 3 is Bill Gates, 70, who helped launch the personal computing revolution and built Microsoft into the dominant force in workplace software. Forbes also highlighted Gates’ reinvention at age 50 as a data-driven philanthropist, including his role in helping eradicate polio from India.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

SpaceX secures win as US labor board drops oversight case

The NLRB confirmed that it no longer has jurisdiction over SpaceX.

Published

on

Credit: SpaceX

SpaceX scored a legal victory after the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) decided to dismiss a case which accused the company of terminating engineers who were involved in an open letter against founder Elon Musk. 

The NLRB confirmed that it no longer has jurisdiction over SpaceX. The update was initially shared by Bloomberg News, which cited a letter about the matter it reportedly reviewed.

In a letter to the former employees’ lawyers, the labor board stated that the affected employees were under the jurisdiction of the National Mediation Board (NMB), not the NLRB. As a result, the labor board stated that it was dismissing the case.

As per Danielle Pierce, a regional director of the agency, “the National Labor Relations Board lacks jurisdiction over the Employer and, therefore, I am dismissing your charge.”

Advertisement

The NMB typically oversees airlines and railroads. The NLRB, on the other hand, covers most private-sector employers, as well as manufacturers such as Boeing. 

The former SpaceX engineers have argued that the private space company did not belong under the NMB’s jurisdiction because SpaceX only offers services to “hand-picked customers.” 

In an opinion, however, the NMB stated that SpaceX was under its jurisdiction because “space transport includes air travel” to get to outer space. The mediation board also noted that anyone can contact SpaceX to secure its services.

SpaceX had previously challenged the NLRB’s authority in court, arguing that the agency’s structure was unconstitutional. Jennifer Abruzzo, the NLRB general counsel under former United States President Joe Biden, rejected SpaceX’s claims. Following Abruzzo’s termination under the Trump administration, however, SpaceX asked the labor board to reconsider its arguments. 

Advertisement

SpaceX is not the only company that has challenged the constitutionality of the NLRB. Since SpaceX filed its legal challenge against the agency in 2024, other high-profile companies have followed suit. These include Amazon, which has filed similar cases that are now pending.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

SpaceX blocks unauthorized Starlink terminals used by Russian troops

Ukrainian officials confirmed that Starlink terminals believed to be used by Russian troops were disabled after coordination with SpaceX.

Published

on

Starlink-india-license-delay
(Credit: Starlink/X)

SpaceX has taken steps to block unauthorized use of its Starlink satellite internet network, a move Ukrainian officials stated is already disrupting Russian military communications. 

Russian units lose a key communications tool

As per a report from The Guardian, Ukrainian defense officials have confirmed that Starlink terminals believed to be used by Russian troops were recently disabled after coordination with SpaceX. The move reportedly affected frontline communications and drone operations, especially in areas where traditional military radios are unreliable or easily jammed.

For months, Russian units had relied on large numbers of illicitly obtained Starlink terminals to stay connected along the front. The satellite internet service allowed faster coordination and more precise drone use for Russian forces.

Several Russian military bloggers close to frontline units have acknowledged the impact of the Starlink shutdown, with some describing sudden connectivity problems in the satellite internet service.

Advertisement

Russia lacks comparable replacement

Russia does not have a satellite internet system that matches Starlink’s speed, coverage, and ease of deployment. Alternatives such as fiber-optic lines, short-range wireless links, and digital radio systems take longer to install and work inadequately for fast-moving units.

Russia does operate limited satellite communications through state-linked providers, but those systems rely mainly on geostationary satellites, which are notably slower. Coverage is uneven, and data capacity is far lower than Starlink’s low-Earth-orbit network.

For now, Ukraine has stated that it has introduced a verification system that allows only approved Starlink terminals to connect. Devices believed to be linked to Russian forces are blocked from the network. That being said, Ukrainian officials have also claimed Russian units are trying to work around the restrictions by asking civilians to register Starlink terminals in their names. 

Continue Reading