Connect with us

News

SpaceX caps major Falcon 9 Block 5 reuse with spectacular Port of LA recovery

Falcon 9 B1046.3 is lifted off of drone ship Just Read The Instructions after arriving in Port of LA. (Pauline Acalin)

Published

on

SpaceX has completed what might be its most important Falcon 9 reuse yet after successfully launching and recovering booster B1046 for the third time in just six months. Prior to this launch, the company had never before flown a reused Falcon 9 booster more than once.

Making way for a probable fourth launch in the near future, B1046’s Port of Los Angeles return was marked by a stream of spectacular visuals as seasoned SpaceX recovery technicians transferred the booster from drone ship to land, performed initial inspections, and prepared it for transport back to Hawthorne, where it will undergo (hopefully minimal) refurbishment.

Advertisement

Displaying inspiring dedication, Teslarati photographer Pauline Acalin managed to stick with B1046 for a major portion of the six days it spent on the docks, despite a rare spate of rainy and downright stormy days in Los Angeles. Her patience was awarded with a number of beautiful photos documenting nearly every significant aspect of any given Falcon 9 booster recovery, ranging from the lift from drone ship to dockside and the removal of all four titanium grid fins to the rocket’s flip from a vertical to a horizontal orientation ahead of road transport back to SpaceX’s Hawthorne factory.

Above all else, the most noteworthy aspect of Falcon 9 B1046’s third return to port is just how unharmed the rocket appears, at least from an external perspective. The booster has grown a fairly healthy triple coating of kerosene soot from its three reentry and landing burns, thick enough that Falcon 9’s mirror-shiny white skin is barely visible on the lower (RP-1) propellant tank. At this point, it seems that SpaceX has concluded that any possible performance loss from those soot layers are small enough to be negligible.

 

In an operational sense, SpaceX’s Falcon 9 recovery procedures and the technicians that perform the actual task of recovery seem to be approaching the work with an attitude that fits better in the realm of commercial aviation than in what is perceived as modern rocketry (clean rooms, surgical precision, etc.). Both the procedures and technicians seem to have been refined into what now runs like a well-oiled machine, wrapping up the complex and pathfinding task of recovering a thrice-flown Falcon 9 booster in less than a week from its drone ship landing to Hawthorne arrival.

Advertisement

The condition of B1046 could well make or break the future of the Falcon 9 family, as any significant departure from Block 5’s design intentions could cut the operational lifetime of the ~10 boosters already produced by dozens of fleet-wide flights.

 

On the other hand, a rapid and relatively painless post-recovery inspection and a general bill of nominal health could – pending customer comfort and SpaceX pricing it right – open the floodgates for the company’s fleet of (optimally) reusable rocket boosters. Even if it turns on that Falcon 9 Block 5 boosters almost invariably demand $10M+ in extensive refurbishment after every launch and can only manage a max of 10 launches before heading to the scrapyard, SpaceX could quite literally become untouchable on the global launch market and remain so for a minimum of 5+ years.

So long as the company can preserve the Falcon family’s impressive and ever-growing heritage of reliability alongside industry-leading reusability, there isn’t a company or country in the world that could beat SpaceX’s business model if it ever came down to a contract competition death-match, so to speak, not for another 5-10 years. It may never come to that, but that capability will – at the bare minimum – give SpaceX a nearly unbeatable upper hand for launching its own global constellation of internet satellites, known as Starlink.


For prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket recovery fleet check out our brand new LaunchPad and LandingZone newsletters!

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

Elon Musk

Tesla owners explore potential FSD pricing options as uncertainty looms

We asked Tesla owners what the company should price Full Self-Driving moving forward, as now it’s going to be subscription-based. There were some interesting proposals.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla is starting the process of removing the ability to purchase the Full Self-Driving suite outright, as it pulled the purchase option in the United States over the weekend.

However, there has been some indication by CEO Elon Musk that the price of the subscription will increase as the suite becomes more robust. But Tesla finds itself in an interesting situation with this: the take rate for Full Self-Driving at $99 per month is about 12 percent, and Musk needs a significant increase in this rate to reach a tranche in his new compensation package.

This leaves Tesla and owners in their own respective limbos: Tesla needs to find a price that will incentivize consumers to use FSD, while owners need Tesla to offer something that is attractive price-wise.

We asked Tesla owners what the company should price Full Self-Driving moving forward, as now it’s going to be subscription-based. There were some interesting proposals.

Advertisement

Price Reduction

Although people are willing to pay the $99 per month for the FSD suite, it certainly is too high for some owners. Many suggested that if Tesla would back down the price to $49, or somewhere around that region, many owners would immediately subscribe.

Others suggested $69, which would make a lot of sense considering Musk’s obsession with that number.

Different Pricing for Supervised and Unsupervised

With the release of the Unsupervised version of Full Self-Driving, Tesla has a unique opportunity to offer pricing for different attention level requirements.

Unsupervised Full Self-Driving would be significantly more expensive, but not needed by everyone. Many people indicate they would still like to drive their cars manually from time to time, but others said they’d just simply be more than okay with only having Supervised FSD available in their cars.

Time-Based Pricing

Tesla could price FSD on a duration-based pricing model, including Daily, Weekly, Monthly, and Annual rates, which would incentivize longer durations with better pricing.

Annually, the rate could be $999 per year, while Monthly would stay at $99. However, a Daily pass of FSD would cost somewhere around $10, while a $30 per week cost seems to be ideal.

Advertisement

These all seem to be in line with what consumers might want. However, Tesla’s attitude with FSD is that it is the future of transportation, and with it offering only a Monthly option currently, it does not seem as if it will look as short-term as a Daily pass.

Tiered Pricing

This is perhaps the most popular option, according to what we’ve seen in comments and replies.

This would be a way to allow owners to pick and choose which FSD features they would like most and pay for them. The more features available to you, the more it costs.

For example, if someone only wanted Supervised driving and Autopark, it could be priced at $50 per month. Add in Summon, it could be $75.

Advertisement

This would allow people to pick only the features they would use daily.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla leaves a single loophole to purchase Full Self-Driving outright

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla has left a single loophole to purchase Full Self-Driving outright. On Sunday, the option officially disappeared from the Online Design Studio in the United States, as Tesla transitioned to a Subscription-only purchasing plan for the FSD suite.

However, there is still one way to get the Full Self-Driving suite in an outright manner, which would not require the vehicle owner to pay monthly for the driver assistance program — but you have to buy a Model S or Model X.

Months ago, Tesla launched a special “Luxe Package” for the Model S and Model X, which included Full Self-Driving for the life of the vehicle, as well as free Supercharging at over 75,000 locations, as well as free Premium Connectivity, and a Four-Year Premium Service package, which includes wheel and tire protection, windshiel protection, and recommended maintenance.

It would also be available through the purchase of a Cyberbeast, the top trim of the Cybertruck lineup.

This small loophole would allow owners to avoid the monthly payment, but there have been some changes in the fine print of the program, as Tesla has added that it will not be transferable to subsequent vehicle owners or to another vehicle.

Advertisement

This goes for the FSD and the Supercharging offers that come with the Luxe Package.

For now, Tesla still has the Full Self-Driving subscription priced at $99 per month. However, that price is expected to increase over the course of some time, especially as its capabilities improve. Tesla seems to be nearing Unsupervised FSD based on Musk’s estimates for the Cybercab program.

There is the potential that Tesla offers both Unsupervised and Supervised FSD for varying prices, but this is not confirmed.

In other countries, Tesla has pushed back the deadline to purchase the suite outright, as in Australia, it has been adjusted to March 31.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Tesla Sweden’s port deal sparks political clash in Trelleborg

The extension of Tesla’s lease has drawn criticism from the local Social Democratic opposition.

Published

on

Andrzej Otrębski, CC BY-SA 4.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

Tesla Sweden’s lease agreement at the Port of Trelleborg has triggered a political dispute, with local leaders divided over whether the municipally owned port should continue renting space to the electric vehicle maker amidst its ongoing conflict with the IF Metall union.

Tesla Sweden’s recently extended contract with the Port of Trelleborg has triggered calls for greater political oversight of future agreements.

Tesla has used the Port of Trelleborg to import vehicles into Sweden amid a blockade by the Transport Workers’ Union, as noted in a report from Dagens Arbete (DA). By routing cars via trucks on passenger ferries, the company has maintained deliveries despite the labor dispute. Vehicles have also been stored and prepared in facilities leased from the municipal port company.

The extension of Tesla’s lease has drawn criticism from the local Social Democratic opposition. Initially, the Port of Trelleborg hinted that it would not enter into new agreements with Tesla, but it eventually opted to renew its existing contract with the EV maker anyway.

Advertisement

Lennart Höckert, an opposition councilor, described the port’s decision as a “betrayal of the Swedish model,” arguing that a municipally owned entity should not appear to side with one party in an active labor dispute.

“If you want to protect the Swedish model, you shouldn’t get involved in a conflict and help one of the parties. When you as a company do this, it means that you are actually taking a position and making things worse in an already ongoing conflict,” Höckert said. 

He added that the party now wants politicians to review and approve future rental agreements involving municipal properties at the port.

The proposal has been sharply criticized by Mathias Andersson of the Sweden Democrats, who chairs the municipal board. In comments to local media, Andersson described the Social Democrats’ approach as “Kim Jong Un-style,” arguing that political leaders should not micromanage a company governed by its own board.

Advertisement

“I believe that the port should be run like any other business,” Andersson said. He also noted that operational decisions fall under the authority of the Port of Trelleborg’s board instead of elected officials.

Continue Reading