News
SpaceX, NASA batten down the hatches as another storm approaches Florida
SpaceX, NASA, and the rest of the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) and Cape Canaveral Space Force Station (CCSFS) are doing what they can to prepare for Tropical Storm Nicole’s imminent arrival.
The somewhat unexpected storm grew quickly in recent days and has become a system that could at least partially threaten the Space Coast and its tenants. After the likelihood of favorable weather conditions dropped to just 20% on November 7th, SpaceX announced later the same day that it would delay its next Falcon 9 launch from November 8th to no earlier than (NET) November 12th. Increasingly tight scheduling of one of SpaceX’s two Florida pads will likely trigger delays for at least two or three more November launches, magnifying the storm’s immediate impact.
In comparison, the situation facing NASA could become more serious. On November 4th, for the fourth time since April 2022, NASA rolled its first Space Launch System (SLS) rocket to KSC’s LC-39B pad for a third launch attempt. Due to a combination of the storm’s quick growth and the nature of the SLS rocket, the design of which was dictated more by political expediency than rational engineering, the agency was reluctant to roll the rocket back to shelter. By the time it was clear that Nicole would impact Cape Canaveral, it was too late for NASA to complete the multi-day rollback process.
In late September, Hurricane Ian created a similar situation. The threat of the tail-end of the storm bringing winds higher than the SLS rocket is rated to survive forced NASA to abandon a third launch attempt and instead roll SLS back to the Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB), which is rated to survive even a Category 5 hurricane. According to NASA, SLS is designed to withstand wind gusts as high as 137 km/h (85 mph). Even then, some senior officials were brazenly reluctant to stand down. Every round trip to and from the VAB guarantees weeks of delays before the next possible launch attempt. Additionally, while NASA has refused to offer more context, each crawler ride seemingly takes a toll on the SLS rocket, meaning that the vehicle can only handle a limited number of rollbacks before unspecified issues begin to arise.
As a result, even though high winds could apparently damage the first SLS rocket and orbit-capable Orion spacecraft, which represent 10-15 years of work and would cost a minimum of $4.1 billion to replace, NASA was nearly willing to play chicken with a hurricane. Ultimately, someone in the agency saw reason and took the threat seriously enough to return the rocket to the safety of the VAB. But just six weeks later, with no evidence that NASA seriously considered a rollback before it was too late, SLS is stuck at Pad 39B while an increasingly threatening tropical storm – verging on a Category 1 hurricane – approaches the Space Coast.
Because the rollback process (which takes about a day) requires days of preparation, NASA would have had to decide to return SLS to the VAB days in advance. Instead, even though NASA was already aware that a storm system was developing, the agency decided to roll the rocket out of the VAB to LC-39B late on November 3rd. Had NASA merely delayed rollout by a few days to allow forecasts of the storm system to become more confident, it’s unlikely that it would have moved forward with its rollout plans as the storm’s predicted impact worsened.
When Hurricane Ian threatened KSC, NASA decided to roll SLS back to the VAB after the odds of sustained hurricane-force winds grew to 6%. That makes NASA’s decision to roll SLS to the pad when it had a forecast showing a 4% chance of similar winds even stranger.
SLS will be forced to weather the storm while sitting unprotected at the launch pad. As of November 7th, NOAA models predicted a 7% chance of hurricane-force winds at Kennedy Space Center. The odds increased to 15% 12 hours later – briefly equivalent to Russian roulette. The latest forecast has dropped to a 10% chance of sustained wind speeds of 120 km/h (75 mph) or higher. It’s unclear what the SLS rocket’s tolerance for sustained winds is, but it’s likely lower than its tolerance for gusts of up to 85 mph.
With any luck, Nicole will fall on the right side of NASA’s gamble. In the meantime, to “provide sufficient logistical time to get back into launch status following the storm,” NASA has delayed its third SLS launch attempt from November 14th to November 16th. The bulk of Nicole’s impact will begin to be felt at KSC as early as November 9th and should last for several days.
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
