News
Renderings of SpaceX clawboat’s huge net upgrade is a taste of what’s to come
After several close-but-no-cigar attempts at snatching a Falcon 9 payload fairing out of the air, SpaceX’s iconic recovery vessel Mr Steven is currently laid up at the company’s newly-acquired Berth 240 dock space, roughly a week into the process of upgrading his arms to support a much larger net. CEO Elon Musk recently hinted that the boat’s net would be expanded by a factor of four, but what would such a dramatic growth look like?
To give a better idea of what to expect from Mr Steven’s arm and net upgrades, Teslarati’s Reese Wilson modeled and rendered the fairing recovery vessel with one such interpretation. The dimensions and aspect ratios may not be a mirror-image of the real-world Mr Steven, but the visual effect of the net upgrade is still fundamentally the same.
Mr Steven is currently laid up at Berth 240 in a sadly armless state. (Pauline Acalin)
With respect to these renders, the actual net growth is somewhat less than the full fourfold area upgrade mentioned by Musk in early June – the concept art’s net is closer to 2.5 or 3 times larger than Mr Steven’s original net. This slight inaccuracy may actually be serendipitous, as a true 4X net could be downright unwieldy without the addition of some sort of complex retraction mechanism, versus the simple but functional (and infinitely reliable) implementation of fixed steel arms at the current net’s scale.
-
- A side-by-side comparison of Mr Steven before (top) and after (bottom) installation of a net with roughly 2.5X greater catching area. (Reese Wilson)
-
- Incredibly, this artist rendering of a much larger net installed on Mr Steven was perhaps two or more times smaller than the solution now installed on the vessel. (Reese Wilson)
Dramatic modifications nevertheless are all but guaranteed, as Mr Steven appears to have had the entire arm apparatus – including the steel base attaching them to his cargo deck – completely removed and placed on the side of the dock, still less permanent than the apparent decision to plasma or torch cut each arm off of that base, one of which is visible dockside at Berth 240. It may be possible to re-weld those severed arms onto the base, but it’s arguably more likely that entirely new arms, an entirely new base, or both will be fabricated, and those larger arms will themselves require a much larger net.
Ultimately, the fairing recovery vessel has gotten as close as 50 meters to gently catching a parasailing rocket fairing minutes after launch, an extraordinarily tiny error compared to the broader scope of the task at hand. Upon separation from Falcon 9’s upper stage, each payload fairing half is routinely traveling at speeds of 1.5 to 2 kilometers per second and reach apogees anywhere from 100 to 130 kilometers, all while traveling the better part of a thousand miles (800 mi/1300 km for Iridium-6) to reach Mr Steven’s net. As such, “missing” by 50 meters is an extraordinary achievement.
-
- A fairing floats gently into the welcoming embrace of Mr Steven’s upgrade net and arms. (Reese Wilson)
-
- With any luck, viewers may get a live view of the vessel’s next recovery attempts. (Reese Wilson)
-
- Mr Steven is currently undergoing arm surgery (upgrades) at SpaceX’s future BFR factory lot, known as Berth 240. (Elon Musk)
A fairing floats gently into the welcoming embrace of Mr Steven’s upgrade net and arms. (Reese Wilson)
With the vessel’s current net roughly 30 meters or 100 feet square (Mr Steven is 60m/200ft bow to stern), give or take 25%, a full fourfold upgrade would double each dimension, which could singlehandedly cut the error margin required for fairing recovery (currently 50 meters) by more than 50% if it remains square. If SpaceX finds a way to functionally achieve something close to a fourfold increase in area with a more rectangular aspect ratio (assuming that the fairing’s present error is more a matter of glideslope inaccuracy than properly pointing the half at Mr Steven), a rectangular net with a width ~50% and length ~300% larger – say 40 meters by 80 meters – would completely close the error gap between reliably missing and reliably catching Falcon fairings. To compare, a common football (soccer for our American readers) field is typically 70 meters by 100 meters.
Time will tell, and we’ll find out soon whether those arm and net upgrades can be available for SpaceX’s next California launch, currently scheduled on the morning of July 20th.
One half of SpaceX’s Iridium-6/GRACE-FO just moments before touchdown on the Pacific Ocean. (SpaceX)
Follow us for live updates, peeks behind the scenes, and photos from Teslarati’s East and West Coast photographers.
Teslarati – Instagram – Twitter
Tom Cross – Twitter
Pauline Acalin – Twitter
Eric Ralph – Twitter
Elon Musk
The Starship moon landing number NASA and Elon Musk can’t agree on
Musk disputes NASA estimate of 22 Starship launches for Moon landing, predicting 6 to 8.
Elon Musk is disputing a new NASA safety panel estimate of how many Starship launches it will take to put astronauts on the Moon, saying the real number will be less than half the panel’s figure.
On Thursday, NASA’s Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel held its quarterly public meeting. Panel member Charlie Precourt, a former NASA astronaut, flagged the fueling process for SpaceX’s lunar lander as a major risk for Artemis IV, the mission planned to land a crew on the Moon in 2028. “We need to keep our eyes on numerous required fuelings for the lander,” Precourt said, according to Ars Technica. “I think the last estimate is around 22 flights.”
Ars Technica’s Eric Berger posted the comment on X, and Musk replied. “That’s way too high,” Musk wrote. “Actual number will be more like 6 to 8.”
The disagreement comes down to a basic problem with sending a ship as large as Starship to the Moon. Starship burns nearly all of its propellant just reaching Earth orbit, so it cannot continue on to the Moon without stopping for a refill. SpaceX’s answer is a gas station in space. First, a Starship that works as a storage tank, called a depot, is launched into orbit. Then a series of tanker Starships launch one at a time, dock with the depot and pump their leftover propellant into it. Once the depot is full, the lunar lander version of Starship launches, docks, fills up and heads for the Moon.
Every tanker trip is its own full rocket launch, which is why the count matters. More launches mean more time, more cost and more chances for something to go wrong before astronauts ever leave Earth. Berger estimated that even if SpaceX reaches twice weekly Starship launches by the end of 2027, filling a depot at the panel’s number would still take roughly three months.
How many tankers are needed depends mostly on how much propellant each one can carry to orbit and how much is lost along the way. Starship’s fuel and oxygen are stored at extremely cold temperatures, and some of it slowly boils off while waiting in orbit. More is lost in each transfer. NASA appears to be working from what Starship can lift today, while Musk’s range assumes a more capable rocket.
Musk has pushed back on higher counts before. In 2021, after a government document suggested 16 launches, he called that “extremely unlikely” and said eight tankers would be the most required.
Much of the answer depends on hardware SpaceX has not finished flying. As Teslarati noted earlier this year, the company plans to carry out the refueling process with its upgraded V3 Starship, and Precourt described Artemis IV as carrying “a large number of firsts.” He also praised NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman’s team for working to clear obstacles for both SpaceX and Blue Origin, whose Blue Moon lander does not rely on orbital refueling for its first mission.
Elon Musk
Tesla’s secretive “Project Crystal Sun” gets a big green light in Texas
Fort Bend County approved four incentive agreements Thursday for Tesla’s proposed $10.1 billion solar factory.
Fort Bend County commissioners on Thursday approved a package of tax incentives for Tesla’s proposed $10.1 billion solar cell factory near Needville, Texas, giving the company one of the last local approvals it needs before it decides where to build. All four Tesla agreements passed 4 to 0.
The votes covered a property tax abatement inside Reinvestment Zone No. 34, a Chapter 381 economic development agreement, a foreign trade zone non-objection paired with payments in lieu of certain taxes, and a separate payment in lieu of taxes “true up” agreement, according to agenda notes from the Fort Bend Commissioners Court meeting.
The project, known internally as “Project Crystal Sun,” would make solar cells and finished modules on roughly 3,000 acres near FM 762 and FM 1994, south of the Brazos River. As Teslarati reported when the filing first surfaced in August, Tesla’s application under the state’s JETI Act splits the investment into $1.5 billion in real property and $8.6 billion in equipment, with 9,712 permanent jobs projected by 2033 and commercial operations targeted for the first quarter of 2029. The plant would handle the full chain from ingot and wafer production through cell testing.
Inside Tesla’s secretive $10 Billion “Project Crystal Sun” filing
Thursday’s approval does not lock in the site. Tesla has told the Texas Comptroller it is still weighing other locations, and site selection adviser David Dennison told Lamar Consolidated ISD trustees in September that the race had narrowed to Fort Bend and one out of state rival with a “very compelling package,” according to the Houston Chronicle. Tesla hopes to decide before the end of 2026, and the incentives still need sign off from the Comptroller and the Governor’s office.
Local officials have now done nearly everything within their control. Commissioners created the reinvestment zone in an August 24 special meeting, with Interim County Judge Daniel Wong formally withdrawing himself over his engineering firm’s past work with Tesla. Lamar CISD trustees voted 7 to 0 on September 15 to advance a JETI agreement that would tax Tesla’s qualifying property at 50 percent of its value for maintenance and operations from 2029 through 2038.
The plant lines up with a target Elon Musk set on Tesla’s Q4 2025 earnings call in January, when he said the company would “work toward getting 100 GW a year of solar cell production, integrating across the entire supply chain from raw materials all the way to finished solar panels.” In March, Tesla was reported to be negotiating a $2.9 billion purchase of Chinese solar manufacturing equipment bound for Texas. The Houston area already hosts Tesla’s Megafactory in Brookshire, where Megapack 3 production has started. Tesla said on its Q3 call that Megapack supply for 2027 is nearly sold out, and Musk wrote on X Thursday that the company is “increasing production of Megapacks as much as possible,” as demand from data centers climbs.
Tesla revealed plans to develop its own maps internally to fix Navigation issues and give owners more control over their routing.
On the company’s Q3 2026 Earnings Call, a question was asked about FSD Navigation issues, particularly speed limit recognition, parking, and routing. These are issues that surface from version to version and seem to be seriously challenging for Tesla’s AI team to resolve.
Tesla’s Head of AI, Ashok Elluswamy, said in response to the question:
“You’re totally right that we shouldn’t be depending on external people’s maps. So we are building our own maps, but not like the same way as OneMoreMap. We are building an entirely new architecture with essentially AI-based mapping and navigation.”
He continued:
“It’s going to be super awesome. It’s going to be integrated with voice. You can talk to it, ask for different routes. It’s going to learn your personalized preferences, plus the fleet preferences. The collective intelligence of all the cars is going to flow into making the maps and navigation super cool.”
Elluswamy said this issue should be confronted, and the mapping should be available for people by the time the v15 release starts deploying to customers.
“And over the next several months,” he added, “it’s just going to take over all of the navigation functions, parking, destination handling. And it will know you better than you know yourself in some regard for the driving task, and then handle it fully.”
Tesla Summon got insanely good in FSD v14.3.2 — Navigation? Not so much
Navigation is perhaps the most notable complaint with FSD, and although it has gotten better, it is still flawed. Much of the time, FSD will take people on routes that are not preferred by the driver, but Tesla tried to combat this with a routing feature in the Summer 2026 Update.
Tesla currently relies on Google for map data, but it is sort of counterintuitive to believe the company would rely on a third party for this. These improvements will be welcome, as routing and navigation have been such a pain point for so many owners for so long.
Quotes via Motley Fool
The Starship moon landing number NASA and Elon Musk can’t agree on
Tesla’s secretive “Project Crystal Sun” gets a big green light in Texas
