Connect with us

News

SpaceX's main Starlink constellation competitor is running out of money

Published

on

OneWeb, the only pressing competitor facing SpaceX’s Starlink satellite internet constellation, has reportedly begun to consider filing for bankruptcy shortly before the London-based company completed its third dedicated launch.

Following the completion of its first full 34-satellite launch with a Russian Soyuz rocket on February 7th, OneWeb managed to complete a second launch on March 22nd just a few days after Bloomberg revealed its bankruptcy concerns. OneWeb now has 74 ~150-kg (330 lb) satellites in orbit – roughly 11% of its initial 650-satellite constellation. Like SpaceX, OneWeb’s goal is to manufacture and launch an unprecedented number of high-performance small satellites for a per-spacecraft cost that would have previously been inconceivable.

SpaceX’s Starlink, OneWeb, Telesat, Amazon Project Kuiper, and other prospective low Earth orbit (LEO) communications constellations all aim to provide high-speed, low-latency internet services to users almost anywhere on the surface of Earth. First and foremost, those constellations would seek to provide service to those who want broadband internet but have yet to be connected through traditional ground-based means by existing internet service providers (ISPs) that are either unable or unwilling to do so. Simply put, that is not an easy goal and OneWeb now appears to be heading towards sunset despite the wealth of resources it at one point possessed.

Requiring numerous revolutions in satellite manufacturing, antenna production, and launch vehicle affordability, as well as a vast and complex network of ground terminals, numerous companies have tried and failed to rise to the challenge over the decades. Original Globalstar, Teledesic, and Iridium constellations all raised more than $10 billion in the 1990s under the promise of blanketing the Earth with internet from space. All wound up bankrupt at one point or another.

Advertisement
-->

Globalstar eventually completed an operational constellation, as did Iridium. Piggybacking off of many painful lessons-learned, Iridium even managed to become profitable, stable, and sustainable enough to fund an entirely new replacement constellation, launched on eight SpaceX Falcon 9 missions and completed in January 2019.

Falcon 9 B1049 stands vertical at SLC-4E prior to the eighth and final Iridium NEXT mission. (SpaceX)
In another small twist of fate, SpaceX’s first successful Falcon 9 booster landing occurred minutes after launching 11 Orbcomm communications satellites for a constellation similar to Iridium’s. (SpaceX)

Short of a miracle, especially given the imminent economic catastrophe now facing much of the world, OneWeb appears to be close to becoming the latest body on a very tall pile. As if OneWeb learned nothing from the fates of those that came before, it has somehow managed to run out of money (or nearly so) despite having raised more than $3.4 billion in just four years. How OneWeb managed to turn $3.4 billion into a single factory and ~75 satellites in orbit is undoubtedly a mystery worth demystifying but for now, all that’s known is that the company is concerned about coronavirus impacts and anticipates imminent layoffs on top of future launch and production delays.

OneWeb’s first and second full launches were completed in February and March. It’s unclear if or when the next launches might occur. (Arianespace)

Ever the lone wolf, SpaceX forges ahead

Speaking earlier this month at the SATELLITE 2020 conference, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk frankly noted that Starlink – SpaceX’s exceptionally ambitious entrant to the LEO satellite internet race – was a work in progress with a real chance of failure. He made it clear that he was aware the constellation is now navigating a graveyard that has brought numerous companies with far more funding to their knees – now possibly including OneWeb. Nevertheless, SpaceX has shown no signs of slowing down. It’s possible – if not all but guaranteed – that the company’s Redmond, Washington-based has already been severely impacted by the coronovirus pandemic, given that the state is one of the US epicenters.

The company’s Los Angeles rocket factory is also likely to begin to experience major impacts as the city starts to take pandemic-related threats seriously. SpaceX’s Florida launch facilities and Texas Starship factory and development facilities are much less likely to be harmed in the interim. It’s another question entirely whether continuing to operate large factories and facilities is the right thing to do for SpaceX’s employees and the regions they reside in, whether states intervene or governments govern.

Nevertheless, thanks to the fact that SpaceX’s Washington factory has been building satellites 50% faster than it can launch them, it’s likely that at least one or two (if not several) launches worth of Starlink satellites are stockpiled and waiting to fly. The company’s next Starlink mission (Starlink L7 or V1 L6) is expected to launch no earlier than (NET) April 2020. The global pandemic could potentially create some open space in the company’s near-term manifest, but it could just as easily make SpaceX’s US launch activities next to impossible.

SpaceX has already delivered 360 Starlink satellites to orbit, 300 of which were launched in the last four months alone and all but ~10 of which are believed to still be operational. Barring increasingly likely delays from the growing pandemic, SpaceX anticipated it could have enough spacecraft in orbit (~500-600 satellites) to begin serving internet to customers in Canada and the northern US as early as this summer. For now, we’ll have to wait and see how things shake out in the coming weeks.

Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.

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 Full Self-Driving v14.2 – Full Review, the Good and the Bad

Published

on

Credit: Teslarati

Tesla rolled out Full Self-Driving version 14.2 yesterday to members of the Early Access Program (EAP). Expectations were high, and Tesla surely delivered.

With the rollout of Tesla FSD v14.2, there were major benchmarks for improvement from the v14.1 suite, which spanned across seven improvements. Our final experience with v14.1 was with v14.1.7, and to be honest, things were good, but it felt like there were a handful of regressions from previous iterations.

While there were improvements in brake stabbing and hesitation, we did experience a few small interventions related to navigation and just overall performance. It was nothing major; there were no critical takeovers that required any major publicity, as they were more or less subjective things that I was not particularly comfortable with. Other drivers might have been more relaxed.

With v14.2 hitting our cars yesterday, there were a handful of things we truly noticed in terms of improvement, most notably the lack of brake stabbing and hesitation, a major complaint with v14.1.x.

However, in a 62-minute drive that was fully recorded, there were a lot of positives, and only one true complaint, which was something we haven’t had issues with in the past.

The Good

Lack of Brake Stabbing and Hesitation

Perhaps the most notable and publicized issue with v14.1.x was the presence of brake stabbing and hesitation. Arriving at intersections was particularly nerve-racking on the previous version simply because of this. At four-way stops, the car would not be assertive enough to take its turn, especially when other vehicles at the same intersection would inch forward or start to move.

This was a major problem.

However, there were no instances of this yesterday on our lengthy drive. It was much more assertive when arriving at these types of scenarios, but was also more patient when FSD knew it was not the car’s turn to proceed.

This improvement was the most noticeable throughout the drive, along with fixes in overall smoothness.

Speed Profiles Seem to Be More Reasonable

There were a handful of FSD v14 users who felt as if the loss of a Max Speed setting was a negative. However, these complaints will, in our opinion, begin to subside, especially as things have seemed to be refined quite nicely with v14.2.

Freeway driving is where this is especially noticeable. If it’s traveling too slow, just switch to a faster profile. If it’s too fast, switch to a slower profile. However, the speeds seem to be much more defined with each Speed Profile, which is something that I really find to be a huge advantage. Previously, you could tell the difference in speeds, but not in driving styles. At times, Standard felt a lot like Hurry. Now, you can clearly tell the difference between the two.

It seems as if Tesla made a goal that drivers should be able to tell which Speed Profile is active if it was not shown on the screen. With v14.1.x, this was not necessarily something that could be done. With v14.2, if someone tested me on which Speed Profile was being used, I’m fairly certain I could pick each one.

Better Overall Operation

I felt, at times, especially with v14.1.7, there were some jerky movements. Nothing that was super alarming, but there were times when things just felt a little more finicky than others.

v14.2 feels much smoother overall, with really great decision-making, lane changes that feel second nature, and a great speed of travel. It was a very comfortable ride.

The Bad

Parking

It feels as if there was a slight regression in parking quality, as both times v14.2 pulled into parking spots, I would have felt compelled to adjust manually if I were staying at my destinations. For the sake of testing, at my first destination, I arrived, allowed the car to park, and then left. At the tail-end of testing, I walked inside the store that FSD v14.2 drove me to, so I had to adjust the parking manually.

This was pretty disappointing. Apart from parking at Superchargers, which is always flawless, parking performance is something that needs some attention. The release notes for v14.2. state that parking spot selection and parking quality will improve with future versions.

However, this was truly my only complaint about v14.2.

You can check out our full 62-minute ride-along below:

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

SpaceX issues statement on Starship V3 Booster 18 anomaly

The incident unfolded during gas-system pressure testing at the company’s Massey facility in Starbase, Texas. 

Published

on

Credit: SpaceX/X

SpaceX has issued an initial statement about Starship Booster 18’s anomaly early Friday. The incident unfolded during gas-system pressure testing at the company’s Massey facility in Starbase, Texas. 

SpaceX’s initial comment

As per SpaceX in a post on its official account on social media platform X, Booster 18 was undergoing gas system pressure tests when the anomaly happened. Despite the nature of the incident, the company emphasized that no propellant was loaded, no engines were installed, and personnel were kept at a safe distance from the booster, resulting in zero injuries.

“Booster 18 suffered an anomaly during gas system pressure testing that we were conducting in advance of structural proof testing. No propellant was on the vehicle, and engines were not yet installed. The teams need time to investigate before we are confident of the cause. No one was injured as we maintain a safe distance for personnel during this type of testing. The site remains clear and we are working plans to safely reenter the site,” SpaceX wrote in its post on X. 

Incident and aftermath

Livestream footage from LabPadre showed Booster 18’s lower half crumpling around the liquid oxygen tank area at approximately 4:04 a.m. CT. Subsequent images posted by on-site observers revealed extensive deformation across the booster’s lower structure. Needless to say, spaceflight observers have noted that Booster 18 would likely be a complete loss due to its anomaly.

Booster 18 had rolled out only a day earlier and was one of the first vehicles in the Starship V3 program. The V3 series incorporates structural reinforcements and reliability upgrades intended to prepare Starship for rapid-reuse testing and eventual tower-catch operations. Elon Musk has been optimistic about Starship V3, previously noting on X that the spacecraft might be able to complete initial missions to Mars.

Advertisement
-->
Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Tesla analyst maintains $500 PT, says FSD drives better than humans now

The team also met with Tesla leaders for more than an hour to discuss autonomy, chip development, and upcoming deployment plans.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) received fresh support from Piper Sandler this week after analysts toured the Fremont Factory and tested the company’s latest Full Self-Driving software. The firm reaffirmed its $500 price target, stating that FSD V14 delivered a notably smooth robotaxi demonstration and may already perform at levels comparable to, if not better than, average human drivers. 

The team also met with Tesla leaders for more than an hour to discuss autonomy, chip development, and upcoming deployment plans.

Analysts highlight autonomy progress

During more than 75 minutes of focused discussions, analysts reportedly focused on FSD v14’s updates. Piper Sandler’s team pointed to meaningful strides in perception, object handling, and overall ride smoothness during the robotaxi demo.

The visit also included discussions on updates to Tesla’s in-house chip initiatives, its Optimus program, and the growth of the company’s battery storage business. Analysts noted that Tesla continues refining cost structures and capital expenditure expectations, which are key elements in future margin recovery, as noted in a Yahoo Finance report. 

Analyst Alexander Potter noted that “we think FSD is a truly impressive product that is (probably) already better at driving than the average American.” This conclusion was strengthened by what he described as a “flawless robotaxi ride to the hotel.”

Advertisement
-->

Street targets diverge on TSLA

While Piper Sandler stands by its $500 target, it is not the highest estimate on the Street. Wedbush, for one, has a $600 per share price target for TSLA stock.

Other institutions have also weighed in on TSLA stock as of late. HSBC reiterated a Reduce rating with a $131 target, citing a gap between earnings fundamentals and the company’s market value. By contrast, TD Cowen maintained a Buy rating and a $509 target, pointing to strong autonomous driving demonstrations in Austin and the pace of software-driven improvements. 

Stifel analysts also lifted their price target for Tesla to $508 per share over the company’s ongoing robotaxi and FSD programs. 

Continue Reading