Connect with us

News

SpaceX Starship stacked with ballast for hop test debut

Starship SN4 has been outfitted with a ballast weight to enable its inaugural flight test. (NASASpaceflight - bocachicagal)

Published

on

SpaceX has installed a custom-built ballast atop its fourth full-scale Starship prototype, a sign that the company is rapidly approaching the ship’s first Starhopper-style hop test.

Although CEO Elon Musk officially “redirected” SpaceX’s resources away from Starship’s first flight and towards Crew Dragon’s NASA astronaut launch debut, the company continues to work around the clock to ready Starship SN4 for the program’s biggest test yet. Designed with the goal of creating a fully-reusable, ultra-capable launch vehicle that is unprecedentedly affordable, SpaceX’s Starship spacecraft and Super Heavy booster have made impressive progress over the last 12 or so months.

In July and August 2019, Starhopper – a low-fidelity testbed and proof of concept – successfully performed two untethered hop tests, ultimately flying more than 150m (~500 ft) above ground before safely touching down. Three months later, the first full-scale Starship prototype was destroyed almost immediately after its first pressure test began, a failure that lead SpaceX to expedite factory upgrades. Just six months later, SpaceX has completed multiple successful tests, including pressure tests that pushed beyond the pressures needed for safe human spaceflight, several full wet dress rehearsals (WDRs) with live propellant, and three Raptor engine static fires. In fewer words, Starship is ready for its next big test: flight.

SpaceX technicians prepare to complete a jerryrigged ballast weight for Starship SN4. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

However, Starship SN4 currently has just one Raptor engine installed and will remain in that configuration for its inaugural hop, expected to reach a maximum altitude identical to Starhopper (150m/500ft). The odd configuration means that the rocket will be propelled by asymmetric thrust, as Starship’s ‘thrust puck’ engine section is designed to hold three Raptor engines in a triangular formation. Raptor is capable of producing up to 200 metric tons (~440,000 lbf) of thrust with an unclear level of throttle control (likely mediocre according to comments made by Elon Musk).

Impressively, although it might seem reasonable to assume that Starship SN4 is about as heavy as the ~120 ton Starhopper, the clear and present need to install substantial ballast suggests otherwise. Combined with comments made during SN4’s April 2020 transport from factory to launch site, it appears that even SpaceX’s early Starship engine sections weigh just 50-60 metric tons (110,000-125,000 lb) empty. That weight doesn’t account for the flaps, heat shield, nose section, or many other heavy components that orbital Starships will eventually need but is still impressive.

Starship SN4 was transported to the launch pad on April 23rd. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)
On May 27th, SpaceX installed a massive ballast weight on top of the Starship prototype. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

That impressive weight reduction, Raptor’s inability to safely throttle low, and the FAA’s lack of interest in dozens (up to hundreds) of tons of explosive propellant flying above or around populated areas poses its own challenges for the first full-scale Starship flight. The addition of ballast helpfully solves (or at least alleviates) several of those issues. Notably, ballast can prevent SpaceX from having to fuel Starship SN4 with dozens of extra tons of explosive propellant to counteract the high thrust of its single engine and permit a safe launch and landing.

At the same time, if Starship SN4’s wet weight is reduced by carrying less propellant during its first flight, that actually exacerbates the problem of Raptor’s small throttle range, as a lighter ship would be much harder to manage as the engine rapidly burns propellant and thus loses mass. With ballast, Raptor won’t have to throttle as low as it would otherwise have to to ensure a gentle rate of deceleration. Built out of sheet steel and two spare rolls of the same steel used to form Starship rings, Starship SN4’s new ballast likely increases its dry mass by some 50% or more (25+ metric tons).

(NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)
Starship SN4’s solid steel ballast. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

Pending Crew Dragon’s inaugural astronaut launch, now scheduled no earlier than 3:22 pm EDT (19:22 UTC), May 30th after weather delayed the first May 27th launch attempt, Starship SN4 has no testing periods on the calendar at the moment. Speaking around May 23rd, Musk stated that the ship was likely at least a “few weeks” away from its flight debut, suggesting that the ship will perform another static fire test to prepare for its first hop as early as next week. Stay tuned for updates as SpaceX’s works towards two very exciting Crew Dragon and Starship milestones.

Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.

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

News

SpaceX tells the FCC that Starship Flight 14 is going to orbit

SpaceX filed with the FCC for Starship Flight 14, its first true orbital launch attempt.

Published

on

By

SpaceX has asked the Federal Communications Commission for permission to fly Starlink terminals during Starship’s fourteenth flight test, and the filing lays out a genuine trip to orbit, something the program has never attempted.

Every Starship flight so far, including Flight 13’s successful splashdown in the Indian Ocean on July 24, has flown a suborbital arc that ends with the ship reentering the atmosphere within the same hour it launches. The FCC paperwork describes a mission profile built around an actual orbital insertion instead.

The payload is the other half of the story. Flight 13 carried 20 production Starlink V3 satellites, but because that mission never reached orbit, the satellites reentered along with the ship rather than joining the constellation, something Teslarati covered in detail after SpaceX released footage shot from one of those satellites as it drifted away from Starship in space. Flight 14 is designed to close that gap. If the orbital insertion holds, the roughly 20 V3 satellites onboard would separate into an operational orbit and could eventually go into service, each one rated for about 1 terabit per second of downlink capacity by SpaceX’s own account.

SpaceX announces new Starbase for ‘thousands of Starship launches annually’

Elon Musk first flagged the orbital attempt during SpaceX’s August 4 earnings call, the company’s first as a public entity following its June IPO under the ticker SPCX. He also floated catching the ship with the Starbase tower on the same flight, an idea he walked back on August 20, saying the catch attempt would more likely come “in a few months,” as Teslarati reported at the time. Flight 14 will instead target a splashdown for the ship in the Indian Ocean, the same recovery method used since Flight 12.

Hardware has been catching up to the ambition. Booster 21 completed a full 33-engine static fire on August 28, and Ship 41 finished its own six-engine test the week before. An airspace briefing circulated to pilots on August 20 listed September 15 as the target date, later than the end of August window Musk mentioned on the earnings call, though SpaceX has not confirmed a launch date publicly and Starship schedules routinely slip while hardware and FAA paperwork line up.

The FCC filing itself does not guarantee a launch date. It covers communications authority, and not flight readiness, considering SpaceX still needs Ship 41 fully stacked and cleared by the FAA before Flight 14 can fly. But the filing is a real marker of intent and it puts a specific regulatory process behind what had so far only been Musk’s word on the earnings call.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Cybercab Event: what to expect from Austin

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla is set to launch Cybercab on Thursday at an event in Austin, Texas, which will officially bring the company’s first steering wheel-less and pedal-less vehicle to a limited number of consumers for the first time.

The event, which is invite-only, is still thin on details: we’ll be there, and it seems the event will be held at Gigafactory Texas, but the launch of this vehicle truly relies on it being operational outside of the factory and on public roads.

Nevertheless, there are some big things to expect, and other things to temper expectations on. For what it’s worth, we believe this event could be perhaps the biggest indication that Tesla is ready to truly enter a new phase and chapter in its historic story.

Tesla Cybercab’s First Foray into the Public with Real-World Riders

Cybercab will likely hit the streets of Austin and the surrounding areas, likely in the established geofence that Tesla has expanded on for the past 14 months. Just yesterday, Tesla expanded it once again by 9 percent.

Tesla will put, for the first time, a vehicle without any manual controls on public roads, likely without any help from teleoperators. This is a truly groundbreaking development if it comes through in this fashion: it would be groundbreaking for Tesla to roll out a truly driverless ride-hailing vehicle.

Cybercab Has Already Been Unveiled

This is not an unveiling event. Cybercab has been released for nearly two years, as Tesla first showed it to the public on October 10, 2024.

FIRST LOOK: Tesla ‘Cybercab’ Robotaxi makes its global debut

While there is some small speculation that Tesla could release the Roadster at the event as a surprise, it seems more likely the focus will be on the Cybercab and the huge accomplishment that will come with releasing a vehicle with no manual controls.

There Will Be a Lot of Hype

What’s important to remember about the Cybercab event is that Tesla will continue to prioritize safety and the rollout will likely be slow, just as it has been with Robotaxi.

One of the biggest complaints about Robotaxi is vehicle population, and the fact that the wait for a ride, at least in some instances, has been longer than most want to admit.

Tesla Cybercab fleet grows in Austin ahead of launch event

It will take time for this project to truly scale. It will take time for Tesla to roll this out in a large fashion. The important thing to note is that they are doing it, and they’re doing it with a vehicle that is completely engineered and built internally. That’s something no other ride-hailing service can say.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

SpaceX would not exist if this crucial early launch failed, Musk says

Published

on

Credit: SpaceX

Elon Musk recently restated a fact that still defines SpaceX’s origin story: if Falcon 1’s fourth launch had failed, the company would not exist. The comment answered a reminder that after three consecutive losses, SpaceX had money for only one more attempt.

On X, Peter Diamandis said that the present-day acknowledgement of SpaceX’s success does not discount the rough start the company had. “Almost nobody remembers that Elon’s first rocket failed three times, and there was money for exactly only one more attempt.”

Musk said, “If the 4th launch had failed, SpaceX would not exist.”

In late 2008, the firm was nearly out of cash. Another failure would have ended payroll, closed the Hawthorne factory, and left the Falcon 9 and Dragon programs as unfinished drawings.

The first flight lifted off from Omelek Island on 24 March 2006. Thirty-three seconds later, a corroded aluminum fitting on a fuel line leaked. Kerosene ignited around the Merlin engine, control was lost, and the vehicle came apart. The small DARPA payload, FalconSAT-2, survived the short flight only to land on a storage shed near the pad. Investigators later traced the fitting to a materials mix-up that should never have reached the rocket.

Flight 2, on 21 March 2007, looked far better at first. The first stage burned cleanly and handed off to the Kestrel-powered upper stage. The vehicle crossed 100 kilometers and reached a peak of about 289 kilometers. Then propellant slosh in the second-stage tank started a circular coning motion that grew until the engine shut down. Telemetry faded as the stage tumbled, and SpaceX had reached space but not orbit. Over the next year, the team redesigned everything from the ground up, including tanks, baffles, and the new regeneratively cooled Merlin 1C.

That engine flew on Flight 3 on 2 August 2008. The first stage performed almost perfectly and reached 217 kilometers. After main-engine cutoff, leftover fuel in the cooling channels produced a faint residual thrust, roughly 10 pounds per square inch of chamber pressure. On a Texas test stand, the effect was invisible beneath ambient air pressure. In vacuum it was enough to push the spent first stage back into the second stage after separation. The stages collided, the upper stage spun, and the mission was lost. Musk later said a slightly longer delay before staging would have saved the flight.

Six weeks later, the team assembled Flight 4 from remaining parts and flew it on 28 September 2008 at 23:15 UTC. The payload was Ratsat, a 165-kilogram aluminum mass simulator built in-house. Staging was delayed so residual thrust could decay. The Kestrel ignited, the fairing split away, and nine and a half minutes after liftoff the vehicle was in orbit. After a coast, the second stage restarted, settling into a 621-by-643-kilometer path at 9.35 degrees inclination. Falcon 1 became the first privately developed liquid-fueled rocket to reach Earth orbit. Musk called the insertion “middle of the bull’s-eye.”

SpaceX restores a Falcon 1 rocket for 10th anniversary of first launch success

That success unlocked NASA’s Commercial Resupply Services award later that year. Without it, there would have been no Falcon 9, no reusable first stages, and no Dragon cargo or crew flights to the International Space Station. Launch prices would have remained far higher. Starlink’s constellation would not exist; broadband from low Earth orbit would still be a paper concept.

Ride-share markets, high launch cadence, and the current pace of lunar and Mars hardware would be years behind. Communications, Earth observation, and the cost of putting anything into space would look more like the 2000s than the 2020s.

One extra second of residual thrust in August 2008 would have written a different decade.

Continue Reading