Connect with us

News

SpaceX wants to attempt Starship booster catch during first orbital launch

Published

3 years ago

on

An updated document submitted by SpaceX to the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has revealed details about the company’s plan for the first Starship booster ‘catch’ attempt.

The document follows a different batch submitted by SpaceX in June 2021, when the company detailed its plans for Starship’s orbital launch debut as background while requesting permission from the FCC to use Starlink dishes for in-flight telemetry. A month earlier, a different request focused on more standard telemetry antennas had already revealed that even if the mission went perfectly, Starship would not fully reach orbit on its first attempted spaceflight. It also confirmed that SpaceX had no intention of recovering the upper stage or Super Heavy booster assigned to Starship’s launch debut – a sort of implicit acknowledgment that success was (then) not expected on the first try.

Twelve months later, SpaceX has submitted an updated overview of Starship’s orbital launch debut in a new request for permission to use multiple Starlink dishes on both stages. While most of the document is the same, a few particular details have changed about Super Heavy’s role in the mission.

This time around, SpaceX says that the Super Heavy booster will “will separate[,] perform a partial return[,] and land in the Gulf of Mexico or return to Starbase and be caught by the launch tower.” Prior to this document, SpaceX’s best-case plans for the first Super Heavy booster to launch never strayed from a controlled splashdown in the Gulf of Mexico – potentially demonstrating that it would be safe to attempt booster recovery on the next launch but all but guaranteeing that the first booster would be lost at sea.

A year later, SpaceX appears to be a bit more confident and wants to leave itself the option to attempt to recover the first Super Heavy booster that launches. However, the company has dramatically complicated the process of testing early Super Heavy and Starship recovery (and thus reuse) by fully removing traditional and predictable landing legs and designing its latest prototypes such that the only way they can be recovered in one piece is with a giant mechanized ‘launch tower’ nicknamed Mechazilla.

Advertisement
Mechazilla stacks Starship on top of Super Heavy. (NASASpaceflight)

The launch tower and its three mobile arms will play a crucial role in all aspects of orbital Starship launches. The first arm swings out to brace Super Heavy for Starship installation and connect the upper stage to power, propellant supplies, and other launch pad utilities. A more exotic pair of arms nicknamed ‘chopsticks’ has a more complex job. On top of using the chopsticks to lift, stack, and demate Starships and Super Heavy boosters and almost any weather and wind conditions, SpaceX wants to use the arms as an incredibly complex and precarious rocket recovery system.

For a booster or Starship “catch,” the rocket will approach the tower, enter the gap between the splayed arms, hover in place while the arms close around it, and eventually come to rest on hardpoints that appear to offer about as much surface area as a coffee table. Based on a simulation of the process shown by Elon Musk, calling it a “catch” is a misnomer, as the arms will mainly move in one dimension (open/close) and can’t actually ‘grab’ the rocket in any real sense. As built and shown, they are closer to a tiny fixed landing platform capable of minor last-second positional adjustments.

Eventually, the chopsticks could shave a small amount of time off of post-recovery processing, removing the need for a crane (or the same arms) to attach to a landed booster or ship. They could also shave off the dry mass required for landing legs, though all interplanetary ships will still need legs. However, they will also inherently make proving their own efficacy a nightmare. By all appearances, the current recovery mechanisms on the arms and the landing hardpoints on ships and boosters mean that a ‘catch’ could fail if either stage is more than a foot or two from a perfect bullseye or rotated a few degrees in the wrong direction. With the method SpaceX has devised, even the tiniest error could easily end with a massive, pressurized, partially-fueled rocket destroying the chopsticks and plummeting a few hundred feet to the ground, guaranteeing an explosion that could damage surrounding infrastructure or start fires that might.

In the event of larger anomalies during a landing attempt, Starship or Super Heavy could accidentally impact the launch tower, damaging or even outright destroying the skyscraper-sized structure. Ultimately, the immense risk posed by any catch attempt means that unless SpaceX has miraculously gotten the design of everything involved nearly perfect on its first try, the company will have to be extraordinarily cautious and expend a large number of ships and boosters to avoid rendering its only Starship launch tower unusable.

At least to some extent, SpaceX likely knows this and Super Heavy would likely need to be in excellent health and perform perfectly during the ascent and boostback portions of its launch debut to be cleared for a catch attempt. Ultimately, Starship’s first orbital launch could end up being even more of a spectacle than it’s already guaranteed to be.

Advertisement
Related Topics:

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 opens up free Starlink service for those impacted by Hurricane Melissa

Published

2 hours ago

on

October 28, 2025

By

(Credit: Starlink | X)

SpaceX is opening up its internet service, Starlink, to those impacted by Hurricane Melissa, as it made landfall in Jamaica and the Bahamas as a Category 5 storm.

Hurricane Melissa is expected to reach wind speeds of over 165 MPH over the next few days as it extends out into the Atlantic Ocean by Thursday and Friday.

Citizens in Jamaica and the Bahamas have been preparing for the storm for the past week, getting necessary goods together and preparing for the massive storm to arrive. It finally did yesterday, and the first images and video of the storm are showing that it could destroy many parts of both countries.

Starlink is now being opened up for free until the end of November for those impacted by the storm in Jamaica and the Bahamas, SpaceX announced today:

It is a move similar to the one the company made last year as Hurricane Helene made its way through the United States, destroying homes and property across the East Coast. SpaceX offered free service for those impacted by the destruction caused by the storm.

The free Starlink service was available until the end of 2024.

Elon Musk’s companies have also made similar moves to help out those who are impacted by natural disasters. Tesla has offered Free Supercharging in the past, most notably during the California wildfires.

Tesla and SpaceX’s LA fire relief efforts: Cybertrucks, free Starlink and more

One major advantage of Starlink is that it is available for use in situations like this one, where power might be required to operate things like a modem and router.

Internet access is a crucial part of survival in these situations, especially as it can be the last leg some stand on to get in touch with emergency services or loved ones.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Tesla board chair reiterates widely unmentioned point of Musk comp plan

Published

3 hours ago

on

October 28, 2025

By

Credit: Tesla

Tesla Board Chair Robyn Denholm appeared on Bloomberg TV this morning to discuss the current status of CEO Elon Musk’s compensation plan, and used the opportunity to reiterate a widely unmentioned key point of the entire package.

Critics of the proposed pay package, which would pay Musk $1 trillion if he completes every tranche, routinely cite the sheer size of the payday.

Of course, many skeptics leave out the fact that he would only get that money if he were able to generate eight times the value the company currently has.

Tesla gains massive vote of confidence on compensation plan for Elon Musk

For Musk, it might have a little bit to do with money, but that is likely a very small percentage point of why the compensation package is being offered to him. He has reiterated that it is more about voting control and overall influence, especially as Tesla dives into robotics.

He said during the Q3 Earnings Call:

“My fundamental concern with regard to how much voting control I have at Tesla is if I go ahead and build this enormous robot army, can I just be ousted at some point in the future? That’s my biggest concern. That is really the only thing I’m trying to address with this. It’s called compensation, but it’s not like I’m going to go spend the money. It’s just, if we build this robot army, do I have at least a strong influence over that robot army, not current control, but a strong influence? That’s what it comes down to in a nutshell. I don’t feel comfortable wielding that robot army if I don’t have at least a strong influence.”

Tesla shares the idea that Musk is a crucial part of the company, and without him being awarded the voting control he feels he deserves, he could leave the company altogether.

The company is very obviously feeling the importance of the upcoming vote, as it has advertised and pushed heavily for the comp plan to be approved, mostly to retain Musk.

Tesla Board Chair Robyn Denholm said today to Bloomberg TV that it is crucial shareholders understand it is not about Musk’s potential wealth, but more about his influence on company decisions:

“So firstly, it is a performance package, so he gets nothing if he doesn’t perform against the pretty audacious milestones that are part of the performance criteria that’s been outlined by the board in the performance package. So, I think rather than compensation, it’s actually about the performance and the goals that we have for the company as we move forward. And so, for me, it really is about making sure that investors understand that they actually get paid if he hits the milestones before he will…Elon’s been very public, including on last week’s earnings call, about the fact that it’s around the voting influence that he could have in future shareholder meetings as opposed to the economic interests.”

Musk is not an incredibly flashy person. He does not have crazy cars or a massive house to go back to. He spends a lot of his time working and sometimes even sleeps at his office inside the factory.

He recently said he “only has what is needed” because “material possessions were making him weak.”

Continue Reading

News

The truth about Tesla ‘Mad Max’ mode from an actual user

Some people might see “Mad Max” as an extension of their daily driving.

For me, I did not see it that way. I saw it as a useful tool for certain situations, but it was certainly not something I could compare to my personal driving style.

But that does not mean that it’s wrong.

Published

4 hours ago

on

October 28, 2025

By

Credit: Teslarati

There have been many headlines about Tesla’s new “Mad Max” mode, but many of those writing about the “dangerous” and “controversial” mode have probably never used it.

As a writer, I write about topics I do not have firsthand experience with, but the job requires me to take a fair stance and report what is known. The problem is the nature of driving and driving modes, specifically, is subjective.

Some people might see “Mad Max” as an extension of their daily driving.

For me, I did not see it that way. I saw it as a useful tool for certain situations, but it was certainly not something I could compare to my personal driving style.

But that does not mean that it’s wrong.

NHTSA Probes Tesla Over “Mad Max”

Last week, the NHTSA launched a bit of a probe into Mad Max mode, requesting additional information on the Speed Profile and reiterating that the driver of the car is still required to be in ultimate control.

Tesla ‘Mad Max’ gets its first bit of regulatory attention

It’s important to keep the latter portion of that sentence in mind for the true thesis of this piece.

Now, it is no surprise to me that Mad Max garnered attention from regulatory agencies, as it is definitely a more spirited driving profile than the others.

Is Mad Max That Big of a Deal?

Regulatory agencies are responsible for keeping people safe, and it is important to note that their control is somewhat necessary. However, this type of drive mode is optional, requires the driver’s attention, and should be used responsibly for safe travel.

Playing Devil’s Advocate, how is Mad Max any different than the performance modes that some sports cars have? Because they require the driver to operate fully, and they are not semi-autonomous like Tesla can offer with Mad Max in Full Self-Driving (Supervised), are they safer?

The argument here really comes down to whether FSD is being used responsibly and correctly; any accelerated drive mode becomes more of a risk if the vehicle operator is not paying attention. This applies to any car company or drive mode they choose to use on their cars.

My Personal Experience with Mad Max

I have used Mad Max probably ten times since it rolled out to Early Access Program (EAP) members a few weeks ago.

I’ll admit: it did a lot of things I would never do driving a car manually. It passed people on the right. It was the fastest vehicle on the interstate, at least until I crossed into Maryland. Then, it seemed to be just another car on the road.

It drove quickly, and not so fast that I felt concerned for my safety, which I never feared for, but fast enough that, at certain points, I was concerned that a cop would pull me over. I never encountered that scenario, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it resulted in some tickets.

With that being said, I don’t particularly think I’d use Mad Max in more than a handful of applications: driving the Baltimore Beltway would be one instance, navigating traffic in Baltimore, Philadelphia, or Pittsburgh during heavy traffic, or cruising on I-95, where cars routinely are going 100 MPH, much faster than Mad Max would ever travel.

Is it too quick for me in residential settings? For me, yes. Is it faster than every human driving on those roads? Absolutely not. In my experience, it is quicker than some, slower than others, just like any other Speed Mode Tesla offers, even Sloth, which refuses to go over the posted speed limit.

I think it’s wrong to sit here and act as if Mad Max is some incredibly dangerous and life-threatening hazard. If a driver is uncomfortable with the maneuvers or speed, they do not have to use it. However, it is no different from how many other cars travel on the road; it is far from an anomaly.

Tesla FSD’s new Mad Max mode is getting rave reviews from users

With that being said, it will be interesting to see if the NHTSA does anything about Mad Max, whether it will require Tesla to “nerf” the Speed Profile, or remove it altogether. It’s also important to note that this is my personal experience with Mad Max, and what I’ve experienced might differ from others’.

I would love to hear your thoughts on how Mad Max has driven for you, or your impressions of it.

Continue Reading

Trending