Connect with us

News

SpaceX’s Starlink “VisorSat” launch plans revealed by Elon Musk

A totally real mockup of SpaceX's "VisorSat" Starlink upgrade. (SpaceX, edit by Teslarati)

Published

on

CEO Elon Musk has revealed more details about SpaceX’s plans to build and launch upgraded “VisorSat” Starlink satellites, part of the company’s work to ensure that the internet constellation can coexist with astronomy.

Back on April 22nd, Musk gave us the best glimpse yet of what he previously described as a sort of deployable sunshade for Starlink satellites. Designed to prevent orbital sunlight from reflecting off of each spacecraft’s shiny surfaces and disrupting ground-based astronomical observations, the SpaceX CEO said that the company’s very next Starlink launch – scheduled no earlier than “early May” – will carry one or several satellites with said sunshade installed, playfully nicknamed “VisorSat”.

Ultimately, Musk explained in significant detail the likely culprit of the spectacular visibility of Starlink satellites from the ground, discussed plans to reduce or wholly remove that flaring, and explicitly stated that SpaceX will do everything in its power to prevent its constellation from impacting science.

Advertisement

On April 22nd, Musk revealed that the sunshade he’d previously discussed would look “a lot like a car sun visor” and would be built out of dark, radio-transparent foam to avoid disrupting each satellite’s antennas while still preventing sunlight from reflecting off of their mirror-like surfaces.

During Musk’s surprise April 27th Astro2020 presentation, he revealed a conceptual render of the new VisorSat design. (SpaceX)

Days later, he revealed a rough render of VisorSat’s design, showing an extremely simple pair of rotating foam ‘visors’ explicitly shaped to block sunlight from Starlink satellite antennas and not much else. Given the use of foam and a deployment mechanism no more complex than four actuating hinges, it’s entirely believable that this solution – if it works – could be cheap and light enough to be almost irrelevant for the overall spacecraft.

If it works, SpaceX’s ad hoc visor would effectively be the best possible solution for brightness, fully solving the issue while having a near-zero impact on the cost or functionality of each internet satellite. Of course, SpaceX will do what it’s known for and flight-test the new VisorSat design before getting ahead of itself, but if those tests are successful, it would be unsurprising if every future Starlink satellite features a visor.

However, in the process of explaining why Starlink satellites can appear so bright, Musk also hinted at one of the reasons that a visor alone cannot fully solve all of the sources of Starlink’s ground astronomy impact. After launch, Starlink satellites must raise and circularize their orbits to reach an operational altitude, a process that has typically taken 2-4 weeks. During that orbit-raising phase, Musk revealed that Starlink satellites must orient themselves in such a way that the entirety of their front and rear faces – including the solar array – is angled perfectly to reflect sunlight back to Earth.

To alleviate that issue, Musk has said that SpaceX will tweak the orientation and operation of satellites during the orbit raising period, but it’s difficult to see a way to consistently prevent bright reflections without big changes. If SpaceX can’t immediately find a way around that “Open Book” orientation, there will likely be anywhere from 60-180+ Starlink satellites raising their orbits on any given day if the company truly plans to operate a constellation of ~4400 satellites, let alone ~12,000 or ~40,000.

Once orbit-raising is complete, Musk believes that visors will effectively make Starlink satellites invisible to the naked eye, but more work will have to be done if SpaceX wants to fully mitigate Starlink’s astronomy impact.

Advertisement

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

Lifestyle

NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story

The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.

Published

on

By

The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.

Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot

Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.

The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Lucid CEO dispels any rumors of bankruptcy: ‘So far from the facts’

Published

on

Credit: Lucid

Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.

The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.

The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.

Lucid denies rumors of bankruptcy after over 40% stock drop

Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”

Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”

Napoli said:

“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.

As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.

We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.

My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.

I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”

It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.

Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.

Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla responds to strange Supercharging pricing error with classy move

Published

on

(Credit: Tesla)

Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.

The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.

One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.

These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.

To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.

At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.

Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line

By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.

The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.

Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.

It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.

The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.

In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.

Continue Reading