Connect with us

News

SpaceX’s next two Starships close behind first high-altitude rocket

SpaceX's ninth and tenth full-scale Starship prototypes are close on the heels of Starship SN8, the first high-altitude ship. (NASASpaceflight - bocachicagal)

Published

on

SpaceX is in the midst of preparing Starship serial number 8 (SN8) for the first high-altitude launch of its kind – a test that could easily end in a fireball. To counter that risk, SpaceX is doing what it does best: building a fleet of prototypes as quickly as possible.

Currently sitting at the launch pad in anticipation of its first fully-integrated cryogenic proof and triple-Raptor static fire test(s), Starship SN8 was expected to begin that test campaign on Sunday, November 1st, followed by 9am to 11pm windows on Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday. With about three hours left in Monday’s window, SpaceX appears to have delayed Starship SN8’s next round of tests for unknown reasons, though new road closures on the 5th and 6th were requested as recently as today.

Given that Starship SN8 is the first full-scale prototype to have three Raptors and a functional (and plumbed) nose section installed, some slack is warranted. Crucially, though, as teams prepare SN8 for what could be an explosive flight debut, SpaceX’s Boca Chica factory continues to churn out replacement prototypes just a few miles down the road.

SpaceX installed Starship SN9’s aft flaps on October 31st. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

Most recently, Starship SN10’s tank and engine section was fully stacked on November 2nd, completing the cylindrical structure that functions as the rocket’s airframe, propellant tanks, and engine mounts. The only major work that remains is completing minor external and internal plumbing, fully installing avionics, and finally installing the ship’s ‘aero covers’ and flaps. Once completed, a nosecone – also fitted with two flaps – will be stacked on four or five steel rings and then installed on top of the rest of the rocket.

Starship SN10’s tank section was stacked to its full height on November 2nd. (NASASpaceflight – Nomadd)
A few hundred feet away, Starship SN9’s tank and propulsion section is nearly complete after aft flap installation. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

A few weeks ahead of SN10, Starship SN9 is crossing exactly those milestones. On October 31st, SpaceX moved the rocket’s completed tank section into the nearly completed high bay where Super Heavy boosters will soon be built. Large aft flaps were then lifted and installed on the side of the ship, essentially leave just two steps left before Starship SN8 will have a 1:1 replacement ready to go.

Now the only thing missing from SN9 is a nose section (and Raptors, technically). Work on that nose section is already partially complete, with a stack of five steel rings already more or less ready for its nosecone ‘hat’ as of November 1st.

Starship SN9’s nose rings await. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)
SN8’s nosecone is pictured here shortly before installation on SN8’s nose rings. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

An SN9-specific nosecone has yet to be spotted but may well be hiding – completed – just behind the closed doors of SpaceX’s nose production tent. Ultimately, pass or fail, SpaceX’s consistently hardware-rich and iterative approach to development means that Starship SN8’s launch debut will produce useful data and help point out any pressing upgrades or fixes in need of immediate implementation. At the moment, SN8’s launch date is completely up in the air but will likely solidify as the rocket (hopefully) proceeds through several upcoming tests.

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

Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile are trying to shut Starlink out before FCC vote

AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile want 290 MHz cut from an FCC satellite plan before Thursday.

Published

on

By

Starlink D2D direct to device vs Verizon, AT&T (Concept render by Grok)

AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile are asking the Federal Communications Commission to pull nearly 300 MHz of spectrum out of a proposal that would let satellite companies like SpaceX offer cell service directly to ordinary phones. The request lands one day before the agency votes on it.

The FCC will vote Thursday, October 29, on a notice of proposed rulemaking that would make an additional 482 MHz available for direct to device service, expanding the number of eligible bands from five to 13, according to the FCC fact sheet. It would also scrap the rule requiring a satellite operator to lease spectrum from carriers, replacing it with a certification that the operator has coexistence agreements in place or holds the terrestrial license itself.

That second path matters for SpaceX. As Teslarati reported earlier this month, SpaceX agreed to buy Grain Management’s nationwide 800 MHz portfolio to turn Starlink Mobile into a full US carrier, adding to the spectrum it already bought from EchoStar.

The carriers want two bands removed, 2.5 GHz and 3.45 GHz, which make up 290 MHz of the 482 MHz on the table. Through industry group CTIA, they argued that about 300 million users depend on those bands and that satellite operations in them are not technically feasible. T-Mobile, which calls 2.5 GHz the foundation of its Ultra Capacity 5G network, said in its own filing that satellite interference could wipe out up to 96% of a cell site’s uplink coverage area and cut uplink speeds by 88% to 99%.

Executives from all three carriers met with FCC staff on October 20, and T-Mobile CEO Srini Gopalan met separately with FCC Chairman Brendan Carr. T-Mobile’s role stands out because it is still SpaceX’s US launch partner for Starlink Mobile. The three carriers have also teamed up on their own satellite joint venture to pool spectrum, a move widely seen as a response to Starlink.

Advertisement
-

SpaceX is asking for the opposite. In an October 23 filing after meetings with FCC staff and commissioners’ offices, the company asked regulators to add the 902 to 928 MHz band to the proposal. “Doing so now saves time later,” SpaceX wrote. The company also asked the FCC to modernize interference rules and align satellite deployment requirements with those for terrestrial cell networks, saying the goal is to let satellite and ground networks work together so Americans stay connected wherever they are.

The carriers have not been shy about how they view SpaceX as a competitor. On Verizon’s third quarter earnings call Monday, its chief executive said Starlink Mobile “just can’t compete with a terrestrial network” and estimated SpaceX would need four to six years and $300 billion to $500 billion to build a full US carrier network.

Thursday’s vote will not settle which bands survive. Adopting the notice opens a public comment period, with final rules to come later in the proceeding. The FCC already considered and rejected 2.5 GHz for satellite coverage once, in 2024. SpaceX also is not the only satellite player watching: the FCC approved Amazon’s $11.6 billion acquisition of Globalstar on October 27, giving its planned direct to device fleet its own mobile satellite spectrum.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Semi catches fire in California: what we know

Published

on

Credit: KTVU

A Tesla Semi caught fire in Hayward, California, which caused both directions of traffic to shut down for hours before being completely reopened early on Wednesday, the California Highway Patrol said.

The fire occurred just after 5:30 local time in Hayward on Tuesday, as the Semi caught fire in the southbound lanes of I-880 before CHP officials made the decision to shut down both lanes of traffic due to potential risks from hazardous chemical smoke.

There were no injuries reported.

The cause of the fire is currently unknown, as neither Tesla nor the CHP have not determined a cause.

However, some images taken before the Semi was completely destroyed by the fire seem to indicate this might have been an older unit, as it appears to be one of the designs that Tesla shipped as part of its pilot program, before revising it and starting mass production just a month ago.

At the time of publication, CHP had not returned our request for a comment for additional details, including the Semi involved and any potential collaboration on an investigation between the CHP and Tesla. We will update this story when we hear back from them.

The southbound lanes were reopened at 3:30 a.m. on Wednesday, with the northbound lanes opening last night a few hours after the fire began. The CHP did state that the lithium batteries were “incredibly difficult to extinguish,” according to NBC Bay Area.

The truck’s driver said that the Semi caught fire, but he did not have an explanation.

An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla’s ‘Emergency Drive Away’ function gets its first use in the real world

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla’s launch of the “Emergency Drive Away” function a few months back offered owners a safe option to evacuate an area if they were in reasonable danger. The function finally got its first use in the real world, but it appears it was by mistake.

A video shared by u/Joshalander in the r/TeslaLounge subreddit recorded the instance from his vehicle and said the incident took place in Austin this past weekend during the city’s F1 Race.

“Was charging around 6 AM this past Sunday in Austin before heading to the F1 race and heard a pop. Looked over and saw the new emergency drive-away feature in action. Genuinely felt bad for the dude when he got out and realized what happened, since he looked exhausted and only seemed to half-read the prompts.”

Emergency Drive Away unlatches the Supercharger connector from the vehicle, but still causes damage to both the car and the Supercharger. Tesla has said that it will cost up to $25,000 in repairs to have everything fixed back to normal.

Additionally, the company said that if it were not used in an emergency situation, the driver of the vehicle who activated the Emergency Drive Away feature would be responsible for all repair costs.

Tesla constitutes the following situations as reasonable justifications for activating the feature:

  • You face an immediate threat to your life or personal safety.
  • You must leave the area immediately.
  • Exiting the vehicle is unsafe.
  • Unplugging the charge connector would unreasonably delay your departure or expose you to a risk to your personal safety.

After using the feature, Tesla requires the driver to schedule Service so the car can be inspected.

Continue Reading