Connect with us

News

SpaceX wins launch contracts for three more Launcher space tugs

Published

on

Startup ‘Launcher Space’ has chosen SpaceX to launch at least three more ‘Orbiter’ space tugs, meaning that the company will have a payload on every dedicated SpaceX rideshare launch planned from Q4 2022 to the end of 2023.

Following SpaceX’s third successful dedicated rideshare launch in January 2022, the company has another two missions – Transporter-4 and -5 – scheduled in the first half of the year. In October 2021, Launcher announced its Orbiter spacecraft program and plans to manifest the first vehicle on a SpaceX rideshare mission – likely Transporter-6 – scheduled to launch no earlier than (NET) October 2022.

Announced in the summer of 2019, SpaceX’s Smallsat Rideshare Program has offered one of the easiest and most affordable tickets to space for two and a half years. Following a handful of Starlink rideshare missions in 2020, SpaceX kicked off dedicated Transporter launches in January 2021 and has since delivered more than 320 customer satellites and payloads to orbit. By treating each Transporter mission a bit like public transit and also opening the door for third-party launch servicers, SpaceX has been able to somewhat simplify the tedious process of organizing large-scale rideshare missions.

Most importantly, thanks to the unprecedented affordability of its Falcon 9 rocket, SpaceX has allowed rideshare customers to reap a great deal of the benefits by charging just $1M per 200-kilogram (440 lb) ‘slot’ and a flat $5,000 for each additional kilogram. To anyone unfamiliar with the cost of spaceflight, that might seem obscene, but it’s extraordinarily affordable and far cheaper than every advertised alternative. Astra Space, the cheapest dedicated smallsat launch provider, sells a Rocket 3 vehicle capable of launching about 50 kilograms (110 lb) to a similar orbit for ~$3.5M – equivalent to $70,000 per kilogram. Rocket 3 has only completed one successful launch, however. Rocket Lab’s more accessible Electron rocket costs at least $7.5M for ~200 kilograms to sun-synchronous orbit (SSO) – a price of $37,500/kg.

Rocket Lab’s Electron and Astra’s Rocket offer small satellites a dedicated launch option – for a huge premium.

Nonetheless, the single most significant drawback of rideshares – a one-size-fits-all orbit – remains. Short of a much more complex, expensive trajectory that would require Falcon 9’s upper stage to reignite several times, every payload launched on Transporter missions ends up in the same initial orbit. To solve that problem, a not insignificant number of companies have been formed in recent years to develop competitive orbital transfer vehicles. In theory, propulsive space tugs could potentially give rideshare payloads the best of both worlds – ultra-cheap launch costs and, within reason, delivery to a specific orbit of choice.

Launcher’s Orbiter is perhaps the most promising of the lot. Scheduled to debut no earlier than (NET) October 2022, Orbiter will use pressure-fed 3D-printed thrusters fed by ethane and nitrous oxide propellant stored in 3D-printed tanks. The company has already begun printing and hot-fire testing multiple thrusters, has received the first set of Orbiter avionics and solar panels, and seemingly remains very confident about the schedule for that spacecraft’s launch debut.

Advertisement

Additionally, Launcher is actually publicizing pricing for the stage. Bought outright, each Orbiter will cost about $400,000. Using its full 400 kg (880 lb) payload margin, a Falcon 9 launch with Orbiter – enabling precise orbital targeting – would cost a prospective customer about $3.5M – less than $9,000/kg. For a 200 kg (440 lb) payload, a Falcon 9 + Orbiter launch might cost less than $7,000/kg (~$2.5M). For Orbiter rideshare missions, Launcher will charge between $8,000 and $25,000 per kilogram – multiple times cheaper than alternatives at the low end and still competitive at the high end.

Other companies like Spaceflight Industries, D-Orbit, Momentus, Exolaunch, and more are also developing – or already flight-testing – their own space tugs, though most are being cryptic about their prices and capabilities.

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 expands Robotaxi geofence, but not the garage

This has broadened its geofence to nearly three times the size of Waymo’s current service area, which is great from a comparative standpoint. However, there seems to be something that also needs to be expanded as the geofence gets larger: the size of the Robotaxi fleet.

Published

on

Credit: Joe Tegtmeyer | X

Tesla has expanded its Robotaxi geofence four times, once as recently as this week.

However, the company has seemingly kept its fleet size relatively small compared to the size of the service area, making some people — even pro-Tesla influencers — ask for more transparency and an expansion of the number of vehicles it has operating.

Over the past four months, Tesla has done an excellent job of maintaining growth with its service area in Austin as it continues to roll out the early stages of what is the Robotaxi platform.

The most recent expansion brought its size from 170 square miles (440.298 sq. km) to 243 square miles (629.367 sq. km).

Tesla sends clear message to Waymo with latest Austin Robotaxi move

This has broadened its geofence to nearly three times the size of Waymo’s current service area, which is great from a comparative standpoint. However, there seems to be something that also needs to be expanded as the geofence gets larger: the size of the Robotaxi fleet.

Tesla has never revealed exactly how many Model Y vehicles it is using in Austin for its partially driverless ride-hailing service (We say partial because the Safety Monitor moves to the driver’s seat for freeway routes).

When it first launched Robotaxi, Tesla said it would be a small fleet size, between 10 and 20 vehicles. In late August, after its second expansion of the service area, it then said it “also increased the number of cars available by 50 percent.”

Tesla reveals it has expanded its Robotaxi fleet in Austin

The problem is, nobody knows how many cars were in the fleet to begin with, so there’s no real concrete figure on how many Robotaxis were available.

This has caused some frustration for users, who have talked about the inability to get rides smoothly. As the geofence has gotten larger, there has only been one mentioned increase in the fleet.

Tesla did not reveal any new figures or expansion plans in terms of fleet size in the recent Q3 Earnings Call, but there is still a true frustration among many because the company will not reveal an exact figure.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla recalls 6,197 Cybertrucks for light bar adhesive issue

On October 20, Tesla issued a voluntary recall of the impacted vehicles and has identified 619 warranty claims and just a single field report that is related to the issue. 

Published

on

Credit: Francisco Garcia (via Greggertruck on X)

Tesla has recalled 6,197 Cybertrucks for a light bar adhesive issue that was utilized by Service to install the aftermarket part.

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), impacted vehicles may have had the light bar “inadvertently attached to the windshield using the incorrect surface primer.”

Tesla identified an issue with the light bar’s adhesion to glass back in February and worked for months to find a solution. In October, the company performed chemical testing as a part of an engineering study and determined the root cause as the BetaPrime primer it utilized, figuring out that it was not the right surface priming material to use for this specific application.

On October 20, Tesla issued a voluntary recall of the impacted vehicles and has identified 619 warranty claims and just a single field report that is related to the issue.

The component is manufactured by a Romanian company called Hella Romania S.R.L., but the issue is not the primer’s quality. Instead, it is simply the fact that it is not the correct adhesive for this specific type of application.

Tesla says there are no reports of injuries or deaths due to this issue, and it will be resolved. In the 473 report that the NHTSA released this morning, Tesla said:

“At no charge to customers, Tesla will inspect the service-installed optional off-road light bar accessory for delamination or damage and if either is present, replace the light bar with a new light bar adhered with tape and a positive mechanical attachment. If no delamination or damage is present, Tesla will retrofit the service-installed optional off-road light bar accessory with a positive mechanical attachment.”

This is the third recall applied to Cybertrucks this year, as one on March 18 highlighted the potential for exterior trim panels to detach while driving, and another earlier this month when the NHTSA said its front parking lights were too bright.

Tesla resolved the first with a free assembly replacement, while the headlight issue was fixed with an Over-the-Air software update earlier this week. Owners said there was a noticeable difference in the brightness of the lights now compared to previously.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Tesla investor Calpers opposes Elon Musk’s 2025 performance award

Musk’s 2025 pay plan will be decided at Tesla’s 2025 Annual Shareholder Meeting, which will be held on November 6 in Giga Texas.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla China

One of the United States’ largest pension funds, the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (Calpers), has stated that it will be voting against Elon Musk’s 2025 Tesla CEO performance award. 

Musk’s 2025 pay plan will be decided at Tesla’s 2025 Annual Shareholder Meeting, which will be held on November 6 in Giga Texas. Company executives have stated that the upcoming vote will decide Tesla’s fate in the years to come.

Why Calpers opposes Musk’s 2025 performance award

In a statement shared with Bloomberg News, a Calpers spokesperson criticized the scale of Musk’s proposed deal. Calpers currently holds about 5 million Tesla shares, giving its stance meaningful influence among institutional investors.

“The CEO pay package proposed by Tesla is larger than pay packages for CEOs in comparable companies by many orders of magnitude. It would also further concentrate power in a single shareholder,” the spokesperson stated.

This is not the first time Calpers has opposed a major Musk pay deal. The fund previously voted against a $56 billion package proposed for Musk and criticized the CEO’s 2018 performance-based plan, which was perceived as unrealistic due to its ambitious nature at the time. Musk’s 2018 pay plan was later struck down by a Delaware court, though Tesla is currently appealing the decision.

Advertisement

Musk’s 2025 CEO Performance Award

While Elon Musk’s 2025 performance award will result in him becoming a trillionaire, he would not be able to receive any compensation from Tesla unless aggressive operational and financial targets are met. For Musk to receive his full compensation, for example, he would have to grow Tesla’s market cap from today’s $1.1 trillion to $8.5 trillion, effectively making it the world’s most valuable company by a mile. 

Musk has also maintained that his 2025 performance award is not about compensation. It’s about his controlling stake at Tesla. “If I can just get kicked out in the future by activist shareholder advisory firms who don’t even own Tesla shares themselves, I’m not comfortable with that future,” Musk wrote in a post on X.

Continue Reading

Trending