Connect with us

News

SpaceX’s South Texas Starship factory prepares for major upgrades

Starbase's Starship tent factory may be on its way out. (NASASpaceflight - bocachicagal)

Published

on

In what is probably a sign of things to come for SpaceX’s nascent Florida Starship factory, the company’s original Starbase facility in South Texas may be about to graduate from tents to more permanent buildings.

More than two years ago, in late 2019, SpaceX followed in the footsteps of Tesla and began constructing a surprisingly advanced factory out of a series of tents. Instead of Model 3s, though, SpaceX would be building and assembling sections of the largest and most powerful rocket ever built. Measuring approximately 120 meters (~390 ft) tall, 9 meters (~30 ft) wide, ~5000 tons (~11M lb) fully fueled, and capable of producing around 7500 tons (~16.5M lbf) of thrust at liftoff, Starship is a fully reusable rocket that aims to perfect what SpaceX has already achieved with partially reusable Falcon 9s and Heavies.

Nonetheless, Starship manufacturing represents a substantial departure from the methods SpaceX uses to build Falcon rockets.

The start of SpaceX’s tented Starship factory, December 2019. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

Instead of heavily leaning on horizontal integration (meaning that the rockets are primarily assembled in a horizontal orientation), Starship and its Super Heavy booster are almost exclusively assembled vertically. Excluding the machining of major loadbearing structures, Starship manufacturing generally begins with giant rolls of thin (3-4mm or ~0.15 in) stainless steel. SpaceX uses a custom tool to unspool the sheet metal, cuts off a roughly 28-meter (~92 ft) long strip, and then welds the ends of that strip together to produce a cylindrical barrel. Repeat that process 57 times and you end up with enough rings to assemble a full Super Heavy booster and most of a Starship.

However, using increasingly custom tools, SpaceX first stacks and welds those individual rings together to form sections of two, three, four, or five. Each section is then prepared for its specific role with a range of cutouts, plumbing, reinforcements (vertical stringers or circumferential stiffeners), thrust structures (the plates that Raptor engines attach to), and other add-ons. Most importantly, certain stacks of rings are mated with large steel domes – welded together out of prefabricated steel plates – to form forward, common, and aft dome sections. For Starship, SpaceX also assembles the ship’s conical nose section in a similar manner.

A field of various Starship and Super Heavy rings, December 6th, 2021. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)
Dome assembly, April 2020. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)
Nose assembly and outfitting. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

Virtually all ring, dome, and nose assembly work is conducted in one of three massive tents – each about 114m x 35m (375′ x 110′) – that form the backbone of Starbase’s Starship factory. Finally, SpaceX has built a series of massive open-air bays where, once fully outfitted, each ship and booster section is stacked in a specific order and welded together to complete the basic structures of Starship and Super Heavy.

While SpaceX continues to speed towards the completion of Starbase’s largest and tallest Starship assembly bay yet, the latest news centers around Starbase’s tents. After physically relocating a smaller but still substantial tent believed to be used basic metalwork (laser/water cutting, presses, etc.), SpaceX has rapidly broken ground and partially completed the foundation of a massive, new building believed to be the start of an upgraded Starship factory.

Advertisement

According to RGV Aerial Photography, SpaceX isn’t merely expanding the main three-tent factory with a fourth larger, permanent building. Instead, it reportedly aims to replace all of Starbase’s tents with a single 300,000-square-foot (~28,000 square meter) building that will be about 18 meters (60 ft) tall and likely measure around 800 feet (250m) long and 400 feet (120m) wide. Starbase’s tents are roughly the same height but their tented roofs mean that only a fraction of that height can be used for ring work and only a fraction of the floor space for taller nose work.

In comparison, a 300,000 square-foot building would have almost two and half times as much covered floor space as Starbase’s three tents – all of which can theoretically be used for ring and nose section assembly. In fact, with a mostly flat 18-meter roof, SpaceX could feasibly expand most ‘stacks’ by a ring or two, which would reduce the number of sections (and thus stacking operations) needed to assemble a ship or booster.

All told, while tents (“sprung structures”) can clearly be indefinite solutions for things like automotive manufacturing, Starship production is one case in which a more permanent flat-ceiling building is undeniably superior. With more than two years of experience and data to draw from, SpaceX may finally be confident enough in its present-day Starship production methods to commit to the construction of Starbase’s next evolution. Stay tuned to see where it leads.

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

xAI Colossus pollution concerns in Memphis continue

NAACP & SELC push back against xAI Colossus supercomputer. City tests say air is safe — but activists aren’t convinced.

Published

on

xAI-supercomputer-memphis-environment-pushback
(Credit: xAI)

Politicians in Memphis continue to debate about the pollution concerns arising from the xAI Colossus supercomputer.

The NAACP and the Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC) have already expressed interest in filing a lawsuit against xAI over concerns related to air pollution stemming from its gas-powered turbines. Environmental groups have now raised concerns about water pollutants.

On Tuesday, Memphis released third-party air quality test results from June 13 and 16. The tests were conducted in downtown Memphis, Whitehaven, and Boxtown, two miles from xAI’s site. The city claimed levels of 10 pollutants tested were safe.

However, SELC–which is representing the NAACP in a potential lawsuit against xAI–criticized the omission of a key pollutant called ozone from the air quality tests. SELC also noted that monitors were placed against buildings, contrary to EPA guidance, stating air sensors should be “at least six feet above ground level, rooftop, or other objects and away from obstructions, vegetation, or emissions sources that would interfere with the measurement.”

Local opposition intensified, with State Representative Justin J. Pearson asserting: “I stand firm that nothing matters if you cannot breathe clean air, drink clean water, and plant in clean soil.”

Advertisement

On Wednesday, concerns shifted to the Memphis aquifer, as the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation held a virtual meeting on xAI’s wastewater facility.

Activist Pamela Moses criticized xAI. “They are not coming here to uplift or invest in our community. They are here to exploit it. This a distressed and a historically neglected area, and instead of bringing opportunity, Colossal is bringing pollution…secrecy and broken promises,” she said.

xAI’s $80 million Grey Water facility aims to mitigate water concerns. The Colossus Water Recycle Facility, a collaboration between the Tennessee Valley Authority and Nucor Steel, aims to alleviate the strain on the aquifer.

“This project is a game changer in terms of it saving about 4.7 billion gallons of water projected, and about 4.7 billion gallons will remain in the aquifer every year,” said Bobby White of the Greater Memphis Chamber.

As xAI’s Memphis supercomputer continues to be the center of debates, the tension between economic benefits and environmental justice remains unresolved. With ongoing scrutiny and potential legal action, xAI’s efforts to address pollution and water concerns will shape its role in Memphis’ future.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Tesla Robotaxi’s biggest challenge seems to be this one thing

That big bright thing in the sky might be Tesla’s biggest challenge in terms of Robotaxi.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla Robotaxi launched just a few days ago to a limited number of riders in Austin, Texas, but its biggest challenge seems to be how the automaker will figure out one thing: the Sun.

Among the company’s unique strategies, its emphasis on using cameras for self-driving is perhaps the most interesting. No other company has adopted the same strategy, as others have relied on cameras with either sensors or LiDAR rigs to accomplish their self-driving deployments.

Tesla, on the other hand, has called LiDAR unnecessary. CEO Elon Musk once called it “a fool’s errand,” stating it was not needed to build an effective self-driving fleet of vehicles.

Musk compared cameras to eyes. Humans don’t need sensors or LiDAR to operate vehicles on the road, so why should cars? This brought up some questions, especially regarding sun glare. Musk said that Tesla would use direct photon counting to see directly into brigt sunlight or even in the darkest conditions at night.

His quote during a recent earnings call was:

“Actually, it does not blind the camera. We use an approach which is direct photon count. When you see a processed image, so the image that goes from the sort of photon counter — the silicon photon counter — that then goes through a digital signal processor or image signal processor, that’s normally what happens. And then the image that you see looks all washed out, because if you point the camera at the sun, the post-processing of the photon counting washes things out.”
So far, this strategy has yielded mixed results. We have seen examples of both:

The Good

We’ve had a handful of people state that they have had no issue using the Robotaxi when it is driving into direct sunlight.

There are plenty of examples:

The Bad

The Verdict

This is obviously a weird case, and it seems that this could be one of the challenges Tesla will face with the deployment of Robotaxi.

While it will get figured out, this is something that could ultimately push back Tesla’s goal of having no safety monitor in the vehicles. However, the instance will be learned and used to improve in the future through its Neural Nets.

The first intervention was captured yesterday, requiring the Tesla safety monitor to stop the vehicle manually on the car’s touchscreen.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla owners take stand as Stockholm insists on blocking FSD tests

Despite the Tesla owners’ efforts, city officials appear unwilling to budge.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla China

Tesla owners in Sweden are taking it upon themselves to lobby for the approval of FSD-style tests in the City of Stockholm. The owners’ efforts come amidst city officials’ continued refusal to allow Tesla to test its autonomous driving system in the capital.

In open letters and social media posts, Tesla owners have urged Stockholm to reconsider its stance, pointing to broader support for FSD trials across Europe. But despite their efforts, city officials appear unwilling to budge, reinforcing the capital’s hardline stance on the Elon Musk-led EV maker.

Public support shows brand loyalty

A group of Swedish Tesla owners recently sent an open letter to Stockholm leaders. Among them is Alexander Kristensen, who has written a letter to officials urging them to allow Tesla to test FSD in the region.

“Members of the Traffic Committee are politically appointed by the Stockholm City Council, whose mandate is determined by the popular vote. Your stance—continuing to block a conditional pilot of FSD— is thus a political decision and fully subject to the electorate’s judgment in the next municipal election.

“When the City prevents tests that could validate and refine the technology locally, it is perceived as hampering life-saving innovation,” the Tesla owners wrote.

Advertisement

The Swedish Transport Administration issued a response, acknowledging the Tesla owners’ feedback. The Transport Administration noted that it could proceed to grant a permit for Tesla to test FSD, but the company would still have to secure approval from local governments where the FSD-style tests will be conducted.

Stockholm remains firm

Despite this, Stockholm doubled down shortly after, stating that Tesla’s FSD software remains prohibited on city roads.

“Thank you for your comments and for taking an interest in traffic issues concerning the City of Stockholm. As previously stated, the City’s assessment of the current application remains unchanged and our position is set out in the opinion,” the City of Stockhom wrote.

In light of the city’s response, some Tesla owners have vowed to campaign against current officials in the next election.

The push for FSD testing comes as Tesla faces ongoing challenges in Sweden, including a labor dispute with unions over collective bargaining agreements. Since late 2023, the conflict has resulted in strikes, blockades, and legal battles, none of which appear close to resolution. Despite regulatory and labor headwinds, Tesla continues to expand in the region, including the recent installation of Superchargers in union-backed areas.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending