News
SpaceX wins FCC approval to launch first polar Starlink satellites amidst rideshare chaos
In a sign of the regulatory agency’s growing confidence in SpaceX, the FCC has rapidly approved a request to add ten Starlink satellites to an imminent Falcon 9 rideshare launch.
Known as Transporter-1 and originally scheduled to launch as early as December 2020 or January 14th, SpaceX delayed its first dedicated Smallsat Program mission to January 21st for unknown reasons last week. While there is no confirmed cause, any one of several recent events could have easily contributed to or fully caused the delay. In a rare ground processing failure, DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) revealed that two “risk reduction” technology demonstrator satellites were damaged on January 4th when their deployment mechanism was accidentally triggered during processing.
In other words, the two spacecraft may have been shot out of their dispensers by their spring-loaded deployment mechanisms, falling onto a processing bench or even off of the much taller payload stack. Meanwhile, on the very same day, space tug startup Momentus Space announced that it was removing its first Vigoride tug from Transporter-1 “for additional time…to secure FAA approval of…payloads.” Finally, once more on January 4th, SpaceX filed a request with the FCC to manifest and launch its first polar Starlink satellites to better take advantage of Transporter-1’s full capacity.
If launched, the ten spacecraft would be the first of several hundred planned polar Starlink satellites necessary for SpaceX’s massive internet constellation to serve some of the most remote communities on Earth. Referring to an orbit centered more around Earth’s north and south poles than its equator, the polar Starlink launch opportunity is available because SpaceX’s Transporter-1 mission – set to carry several dozen small satellites – is headed for a nearly polar “sun-synchronous orbit” (SSO).
For Starlink, sun-synchronous and polar orbit satellites will allow the constellation to serve customers and communities in high northern latitudes – possibly up to and including the Arctic and Antarctic once fully deployed.
SpaceX supported the US East Coast’s first polar launch in more than half a century in August 2020, effectively opening the same polar corridor that’s now allowing the company to launch Transporter-1 – and polar Starlink satellites – from the same pads it launches almost every other mission. It remains to be seen if SpaceX will one day perform dedicated polar Starlink launches from its West Coast launch pad – reactivated in November 2020 after spending almost a year and a half mothballed.
Perhaps the most impressive aspect of Starlink’s imminent polar launch debut is just how quickly both SpaceX and the FCC acted to make it happen. When SpaceX requested permission on January 4th, then just 10 days from the launch date, the historical odds of the FCC responding at all – let alone approving the request – in time were practically zero. Instead, the agency got back to SpaceX with a lengthy conditional approval (PDF) four days later. Although the FCC has yet to approve a request to move almost all of SpaceX’s 4,408 Phase 1 Starlink satellites to much lower orbits, the agency was apparently chomping at the bit to allow a limited trial at those lower orbits.
Dropped from an orbital altitude of ~1200 km (~750 mi) to 560 km (~350 mi), the ten Starlink satellites SpaceX now has permission to launch on Transporter-1 likely represent less than 20% of one polar ‘plane’ of Starlink satellites. In simpler terms, those ten satellites will only be capable of supporting a very limited test of polar Starlink internet, likely resulting in intermittent, unreliable coverage that won’t be viable for civil use until the FCC permits SpaceX to launch one or several full planes. Still, receiving approval to launch any number of satellites mere days after filing a request suggests that full FCC approval is a now question of “when,” not “if.”
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
