News
SpaceX’s path to refueling Starships in space is clearer than it seems
Perhaps the single biggest mystery of SpaceX’s Starship program is how exactly the company plans to refuel the largest spacecraft ever built after they reach orbit.
First revealed in September 2016 as the Interplanetary Transport System (ITS), SpaceX has radically redesigned its next-generation rocket several times over the last half-decade. Several crucial aspects have nevertheless persisted. Five years later, Starship (formerly ITS and BFR) is still a two-stage rocket powered by Raptor engines that burn a fuel-rich mixture of liquid methane (LCH4) and liquid oxygen (LOx). Despite being significantly scaled back from ITS, Starship will be about the same height (120 m or 390 ft) and is still on track to be the tallest, heaviest, and most powerful rocket ever launched by a large margin.
Building off of years of growing expertise from dozens of Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches, the most important fundamental design goal of Starship is full and rapid reusability – propellant being the only thing intentionally ‘expended’ during launches. However, like BFR and ITS before it, the overarching purpose of Starship is to support SpaceX’s founding goal of making humanity multiplanetary and building a self-sustaining city on Mars. For Starship to have even a chance of accomplishing that monumental feat, SpaceX will not only have to build the most easily and rapidly reusable rocket and spacecraft in history, but it will also have to master orbital refueling.
The reuse/refuel equation
In the context of SpaceX’s goals of expanding humanity to Mars, a mastery of reusability and orbital refueling are mutually inclusive. Without both, neither alone will enable the creation of a sustainable city on Mars. A Starship launch system that can be fully reused on a weekly or even daily basis but can’t be rapidly and easily refueled in space simply doesn’t have the performance needed to affordably build, supply, and populate a city on another planet (or Moon). A Starship launch system that can be easily refueled but is not rapidly and fully reusable could allow for some degree of interplanetary transport and the creation of a minimal human outpost on Mars, but it would probably be one or two magnitudes more difficult, risky, and expensive to operate and would require a huge fleet of ships and boosters from the start.
The question of how SpaceX will make Starship the world’s most rapidly, fully, and cheaply reusable rocket is a hard one, but it’s not all that difficult to extrapolate from where the company is today. Currently, the turnaround record (time between two flights) for Falcon boosters is two launches in less than four weeks (27 days). SpaceX’s orbital-class reuse is also making strides and the company recently flew the same orbital Crew Dragon capsule twice in just 137 days (less than five months) – fast approaching turnarounds similar to NASA’s Space Shuttle average, the only other reusable orbital spacecraft in history.
While Dragon and Falcon 9 are far smaller than Starship and Super Heavy, Dragon is only partially reusable and requires significant refurbishment after recovery and Falcon 9 boosters are fairly complex. Starship, on the other hand, should effectively serve as a fully reusable all-in-one Falcon upper stage, Dragon capsule, Dragon trunk, and fairing, making it far more complex but potentially far more reusable. To an extent, Super Heavy should also be mechanically simpler than Falcon boosters (no deployable legs or fins; no structural composite-metal joints; no dedicated maneuvering thrusters) and its clean-burning Raptor engines should be easier to reuse than Falcon’s Merlins. Put simply, there are precedents set and evidence provided by Falcon rockets and NASA’s Space Shuttle that suggest SpaceX will be able to solve the reusability half of the equation.
What about refueling?
The other half of that equation, however, could not be more different. The sum total of SpaceX’s official discussions of orbital refueling can be summed up in a sentence included verbatim in CEO Elon Musk’s 2017, 2018, and 2019 Starship presentations: “propellant settled by milli G acceleration using control thrusters.”
On the face of it, that simple phrase doesn’t reveal much. However, with a few grains of salt, hints from what the company’s CEO has and hasn’t said, and context from the history of research into orbital propellant transfer, it’s possible to paint a fairly detailed picture of the exact mechanisms SpaceX will likely use to refill Starships in space. The cornerstone, somewhat ironically, is a 2006 paper – written by seven Lockheed Martin employees and a NASA engineer – titled “Settled Cryogenic Propellant Transfer.” Aside from the obvious corollaries just from the title alone, the paper focuses on what the authors argue is the simplest possible route to large-scale orbital propellant transfer.
In orbit, under microgravity conditions, the propellant inside a spacecraft’s tanks is effectively detached from the structure. If a spacecraft applies thrust, that propellant will stay still until it splashes against its tank walls – the most basic Newtonian principle that objects at rest tend to stay at rest. If, say, a spacecraft thrusts in one direction and opens a hatch or valve on the tank in the opposite direction of that thrust, the propellant inside it – attempting to stay at rest – will naturally escape out of that opening. Thus, if a spacecraft in need of fuel docks with a tanker, their tanks are connected and opened, and the tanker attempts to accelerate away from the receiving ship, the propellant in the tanker’s tanks will effectively be pushed into the second ship as it tries to stay at rest.
The principles behind such a ‘settled propellant transfer’ are fairly simple and intuitive. The crucial question is how much acceleration the process requires and how expensive that continuous acceleration ends up being. According to Kutter et al’s 2006 paper, the answer is surprising: assuming a 100 metric ton (~220,000 lb) spacecraft pair accelerates at 0.0001G (one ten-thousandth of Earth gravity) to transfer propellant, they would need to consume just 45 kg (100 lb) of hydrogen and oxygen propellant per hour to maintain that acceleration.
In the most extreme hypothetical refueling scenario (i.e. a completely full tanker refueling a ship with a full cargo bay), two docked Starships would weigh closer to 1600 tons (~3.5M lb) and the “Milli G” acceleration SpaceX has repeatedly mentioned in presentation slides would be ten times greater than the maximum acceleration analyzed by Kutter et al. Still, according to their paper, that propellant cost scales linearly both with the required acceleration and with the mass of the system. Roughly speaking, using the same assumptions, that means that the thrusting Starship would theoretically consume just over 7 tons (half a percent) of its methane and oxygen propellant per hour to maintain milli-G acceleration.
With large enough pipes (on the order of 20-50 cm or 8-20 in) connecting each Starship’s tanks, SpaceX should have no trouble transferring 1000+ tons of propellant in a handful of hours. Ultimately, that means that settled propellant transfer even at the scale of Starship should incur a performance ‘tax’ of no more than 20-50 tons of propellant per refueling. All transfers leading up to the worst-case 1600-ton scenario should also be substantially more efficient. Overall, that means that fully refueling an orbiting Starship or depot with ~1200 tons of propellant – requiring anywhere from 8 to 14+ tanker launches – should be surprisingly efficient, with perhaps 80% or more of the propellant launched remaining usable by the end of the process.
A step further, Kutter et al note the amount of acceleration required is so small that a hypothetical spacecraft could potentially use ullage gas vents to achieve it, meaning that custom-designed settling thrusters might not even be needed. Coincidentally or not, SpaceX (or CEO Elon Musk) has recently decided to use strategically located ullage vents to replace purpose-built maneuvering thrusters on Starship’s Super Heavy booster. If SpaceX adds similar capabilities to Starship, it’s quite possible that the combination of cryogenic propellant naturally boiling into gas as it warms and the ullage vents used to relieve that added pressure could produce enough thrust to transfer large volumes of propellant.
Last but not least, writing more than a decade and a half ago, the only technological barrier Kutter et al could foresee to large-scale settled propellant transfer wasn’t even related to refueling but, rather, to the ability to autonomously rendezvous and dock in orbit. In 2006, while Russia was already routinely using autonomous docking and rendezvous technology on its Soyuz and Progress spacecraft, the US had never demonstrated the technology on its own. Jump to today and SpaceX Dragon spacecraft have autonomously rendezvoused with the International Space Station twenty seven times in nine years and completed ten autonomous dockings – all without issue – since 2019.
Even though SpaceX and its executives have never detailed their approach to refueling (or refilling, per Musk’s preferred term) Starships in space, there is a clear path established by decades of NASA and industry research. What little evidence is available suggests that that path is the same one SpaceX has chosen to travel. Ultimately, the key takeaway from that research and SpaceX’s apparent use of it should be this: while a relatively inefficient process, SpaceX has effectively already solved the last remaining technical hurdle for settled propellant transfer and should be able to easily refuel Starships in orbit with little to no major development required.
There’s a good chance that minor to moderate problems will be discovered and need to be solved once SpaceX begins to test refueling in orbit but crucially, there are no obvious showstoppers standing between SpaceX and the start of those flight tests. Aside from the obvious (preparing a new rocket for its first flight tests), the only major refueling problem SpaceX arguably needs to solve is the umbilical ports and docking mechanisms that will enable propellant transfer. SpaceX will also need to settle on a location for those ports/mechanisms and decide whether to implement ullage vent ‘thrusters’, cold gas thrusters like those on Falcon and current Starship prototypes, or more efficient hot-gas thrusters derived from Raptors. At the end of the day, though, those are all solved problems and just a matter of complex but routine systems engineering that SpaceX is an expert at.
News
Tesla patent aims to make massive change to common automotive part
Detailed in US 2026/0110320 A1 and published on April 23, the patent re-engineers the humble trim clip—the small plastic fastener that secures interior panels to the vehicle’s body structure. Traditional clips are single-piece plastic parts designed for one-time installation.
A new Tesla patent aims to fix a common automotive item for a more peaceful ride, revolutionizing its design to remove vibrations and noise during normal operation.
Detailed in US 2026/0110320 A1 and published on April 23, the patent re-engineers the humble trim clip—the small plastic fastener that secures interior panels to the vehicle’s body structure. Traditional clips are single-piece plastic parts designed for one-time installation.
Over time, they loosen, rattle, and transmit road noise, suspension vibrations, and minor panel buzz directly into the passenger compartment. Tesla’s new design turns that ordinary item into a reusable, two-material vibration-damping system built for long-term silence.
A TESLA PATENT DETAILS THE TWO MATERIALS AND FOUR FORCES THAT MAKE A TRIM CLIP REUSABLE
Tesla published a single patent application on April 23 that describes how to make an interior trim clip reusable across multiple service cycles.
US 2026/0110320 A1 was filed in October 2024… https://t.co/02yOUKkar2 pic.twitter.com/pEJUCw46yc
— SETI Park (@seti_park) May 3, 2026
The clip consists of four components drawn from just two material families. The pin and grommet are molded from rigid glass-fiber-reinforced nylon, giving them the strength needed to hold panels firmly in place.
Not a Tesla App reported on the patent.
A soft thermoplastic elastomer (TPE) is then overmolded onto the assembly in a distinctive mushroom shape that flares outward beyond the pin shaft. This soft layer does the heavy lifting for comfort: it spreads mechanical loads over a wider area and actively damps oscillations before they can reach the interior trim.
The result is a measurable reduction in noise, vibration, and harshness (NVH)—the very factors that separate a merely quiet electric vehicle from one that feels genuinely serene.
Engineers used finite-element analysis to dial in four precise forces that make the system both secure and serviceable. It takes 31 newtons to insert the grommet into the body panel and 243 newtons to pull it back out, ensuring it stays anchored during normal driving. The pin, however, slides in with only 7 newtons and releases at 152 newtons, the patent says.
Because the grommet grips the sheet metal far more tightly than the pin grips the grommet, technicians can pop the trim panel off, service wiring or components behind it, and snap everything back together without disturbing the grommet or degrading the soft overmold.
The clip survives repeated service cycles with no measurable loss of damping performance.
For drivers, the payoff is a noticeably more peaceful ride. Road rumble, panel flutter, and high-frequency buzz that often sneak into luxury cabins are absorbed at the source rather than conducted through rigid plastic. Over the life of the vehicle, the reusable design also prevents the gradual loosening that causes rattles in conventional clips. Fewer replacements mean less cabin noise from degraded parts and lower long-term maintenance costs.
Tesla’s patent shows how even the smallest hardware decisions affect the overall driving experience. By giving a mundane trim clip two distinct personalities—rigid where strength is needed, soft where silence matters—the company is quietly engineering away one more source of distraction.
If the design reaches production, future Tesla owners could enjoy an even calmer, more refined interior without ever noticing the clever little clips holding it all together.
News
SpaceX and Google mull massive partnership on Musk’s orbital data dream: report
The two companies are currently in talks for a rocket launch deal to support the placement of data centers in orbit as part of their push into space-based computing.
SpaceX and Google are in the process of ironing out the details of a potential partnership, a new report from the Wall Street Journal says. The two companies are currently in talks for a rocket launch deal to support the placement of data centers in orbit as part of their push into space-based computing.
In a move that blends cutting-edge AI demands with the final frontier of space exploration, Google is in exclusive talks with Elon Musk’s SpaceX for a rocket launch deal to deploy data centers in orbit. The Wall Street Journal is now reporting today, May 12, that the discussions mark Google’s aggressive expansion into space-based computing, addressing the exploding energy needs of artificial intelligence that terrestrial infrastructure can no longer sustain.
Exclusive: Google is in talks with SpaceX for a rocket launch deal as the search giant expands its own efforts to put orbital data centers in space https://t.co/QUCD3cPjxi
— The Wall Street Journal (@WSJ) May 12, 2026
SpaceX, nor Google, have commented on the report.
The catalyst for a potential deal is clear: AI’s voracious appetite for electricity. Global data centers consumed about 415 terawatt-hours (TWh) of electricity in 2024—roughly 1.5 percent of worldwide usage—according to the International Energy Agency. That figure is projected to more than double to around 945 TWh by 2030, with AI-focused servers growing at 30 percent annually, outpacing overall electricity demand growth by more than four times.
Some forecasts peg data center consumption exceeding 1,000 TWh by 2026, equivalent to Japan’s entire national electricity use. A single large AI training facility can draw as much power as 100,000 homes. On Earth, this translates to grid overloads, skyrocketing costs, land shortages, and massive water demands for cooling—constraints that threaten to throttle AI progress.
Orbital data centers promise a radical workaround. In space, satellites can harness constant, unobstructed sunlight for power—solar panels generate roughly five times more energy in orbit than on the ground, with no night cycle or atmospheric interference.
Excess heat radiates harmlessly into the vacuum of space, eliminating energy-intensive cooling systems and water usage. No terrestrial land or power grid is required, freeing operations from regulatory and environmental bottlenecks.
Musk has long championed the concept, framing it as inevitable. “Space-based AI is obviously the only way to scale,” he wrote on SpaceX’s site following the xAI merger. “Global electricity demand for AI simply cannot be met with terrestrial solutions… In the long term, space-based AI is obviously the only way to scale.”
He has repeatedly highlighted solar advantages: “Space has the advantage that it’s always sunny,” and “any given solar panel is going to give you about five times more power in space than on the ground.”
Musk predicted in early 2026 that “in 36 months but probably closer to 30 months, the most economically compelling place to put AI will be space,” adding that within five years, annual space-launched AI compute could surpass Earth’s cumulative total. “SpaceX will be doing this,” he declared when discussing scaled-up Starlink satellites with high-speed laser links for orbital data transfer.
Meanwhile, Google has been quietly advancing a similar vision under Project Suncatcher, its internal “moonshot” initiative. CEO Sundar Pichai has described plans to launch two prototype satellites equipped with Tensor Processing Units (TPUs) by early 2027 for testing thermal management and reliability in orbit. In interviews, Pichai has called orbital computing a potential “normal way to build data centers” within a decade, enabled by launch cost reductions.
SpaceX is uniquely positioned to make this reality. The company recently filed with the FCC to launch up to one million satellites dedicated to orbital data centers at altitudes between 500 and 2,000 kilometers, projecting capacity for 100 gigawatts of AI compute.
These talks align with SpaceX’s broader ambitions, including a potential IPO where orbital infrastructure features prominently in investor pitches.
FCC accepts SpaceX filing for 1 million orbital data center plan
Challenges remain formidable, as is expected with a project with expectations so lofty. Radiation-hardened hardware, laser-based inter-satellite and Earth-downlink communications, launch economics, and orbital debris management are key hurdles.
Yet early movers like Starcloud (which trained the first large language model in orbit in late 2025) and Google’s prototypes signal accelerating momentum. Rivals, including Amazon and Blue Origin, are exploring similar paths, but SpaceX’s Starship and Starlink heritage give it a launch cadence edge.
This partnership could redefine AI infrastructure, turning the skies into the next data center frontier. As Earth’s power limits loom, Musk’s vision, combined with Google’s ambition, could position space not as sci-fi, but as the scalable solution for humanity’s computational future.
Investor's Corner
Legendary investor Ron Baron says Tesla and SpaceX stock buys will continue
In a wide-ranging appearance on CNBC’s Squawk Box on May 12, legendary investor Ron Baron, founder, CEO, and portfolio manager of Baron Capital, reaffirmed his deep conviction in Elon Musk’s two flagship companies.
Legendary investor Ron Baron says he will continue buying stock of both Tesla and SpaceX, as he continues his support behind CEO Elon Musk, who he says is a special person and “brilliant.”
In a wide-ranging appearance on CNBC’s Squawk Box on May 12, legendary investor Ron Baron, founder, CEO, and portfolio manager of Baron Capital, reaffirmed his deep conviction in Elon Musk’s two flagship companies.
With assets under management approaching $55–56 billion, Baron detailed his firm’s substantial holdings, outlined plans for the anticipated SpaceX IPO, and painted an exceptionally optimistic picture for both Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) and SpaceX, framing them as generational opportunities that will reshape industries and deliver extraordinary long-term returns.
Baron Capital’s position in SpaceX has grown dramatically since the firm began investing around 2017. What started as roughly $1.7 billion has ballooned to more than $15 billion, making it the firm’s largest holding.
Tesla ranks second, valued at approximately $5 billion in the portfolio. Together with stakes in xAI and related Musk-led ventures, these investments account for roughly one-third of Baron Capital’s $60 billion in lifetime profits since 1992. Baron emphasized that the growth stems from Musk’s singular ability to execute ambitious visions—from reusable rockets to global satellite internet and beyond.
The centerpiece of the discussion was SpaceX’s expected initial public offering, targeted for mid-2026 following a confidential S-1 filing. Baron announced plans to purchase an additional $1 billion in shares at the IPO.
Ron Baron said today that he plans on buying an additional $1 billion of SpaceX stock during the upcoming IPO:
“At the IPO price, I’ve got an order for $1 billion. I want to buy more stock at the IPO. I don’t know if we’re going to get filled, but we’re going to try. I believe… pic.twitter.com/KOv1HvYcZ0
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) May 12, 2026
He described the company’s trajectory in sweeping terms: “This is going to become the largest company on the planet.”
He highlighted Starlink’s expansion of high-speed internet to every corner of the globe, the revolutionary economics of reusable rockets, and Starship’s potential to enable massive space-based data centers and interplanetary infrastructure.
Baron sees SpaceX not merely as a rocket company but as a platform poised for exponential scaling once it goes public, with post-IPO appreciation potentially reaching 10- to 20- or even 30-times current levels over the next decade or more.
On Tesla, Baron struck an equally enthusiastic note, declaring that “now is Tesla’s moment.” He projected the stock could reach $2,000 to $2,500 per share within 10 years—implying a market capitalization near $8.3 trillion and roughly 5–6 times upside from recent levels. While Tesla remains a major holding, Baron’s optimism centers on its evolution beyond electric vehicles into an AI, robotics, autonomous-driving, and energy platform.
He pointed to robotaxis, Full Self-Driving (FSD) technology, Optimus humanoid robots, energy storage, and the vast real-world data advantage from Tesla’s global fleet as catalysts that will fundamentally alter the company’s revenue model and valuation multiples. Baron views these developments as transformative, shifting Tesla from a traditional automaker to a high-margin technology and infrastructure powerhouse.
Throughout the interview, Baron’s admiration for Musk was unmistakable. He has likened the entrepreneur to a modern Leonardo da Vinci for his artistic, multidisciplinary approach to solving humanity’s biggest challenges.
Baron’s personal commitment mirrors this confidence: he has repeatedly stated he does not expect to sell a single share of his own Tesla or SpaceX holdings in his lifetime, positioning himself as the “last one out” after his clients. This stance underscores a philosophy of patient, long-term ownership rather than short-term trading.
Baron’s comments arrive at a time of heightened anticipation around SpaceX’s public debut, which could rank among the largest IPOs in history and potentially value the company at $1.5–2 trillion or more at listing.
For investors, his message is clear: the Musk ecosystem—spanning electric vehicles, autonomy, robotics, satellite communications, and space exploration—represents one of the most compelling secular growth stories of the era. While short-term volatility in tech and EV stocks may persist, Baron sees these as buying opportunities for those who share his multi-decade horizon.
In summarizing his outlook, Baron reinforced that the combination of technological breakthroughs, massive addressable markets, and Musk’s leadership creates asymmetric upside that few other investments can match.
For Baron Capital’s clients and long-term Tesla and SpaceX shareholders alike, the investor’s latest CNBC remarks serve as both validation and a call to remain patient through the inevitable ups and downs. As Baron sees it, the best days for both companies—and the returns they can deliver—are still ahead.
Tesla patent aims to make massive change to common automotive part
SpaceX and Google mull massive partnership on Musk’s orbital data dream: report
