Connect with us

News

SpaceX Starship prototype charred but intact after catching fire [photos]

SpaceX employees inspect Starship SN4 for the first time some two days after the rocket finished its third Raptor engine test. (NASASpaceflight - bocachicagal)

Published

on

SpaceX teams have finally safed the fourth full-scale Starship prototype nearly two days after a Raptor engine test caught it on fire, an anomaly that left the massive rocket charred and damaged – but still intact.

While SN4’s survival is a welcome and unexpected outcome, the fire that broke out near the base of the rocket caused damage that will have to be repaired, while the fault that allowed that fire to occur in the first place will also need to be rectified. Had the same events transpired during the ship’s inaugural flight test, things could have gone even further south after the rocket lifted off, carrying it away from remotely-controlled water jets used to suppress unplanned fires on the pad.

Thankfully, SpaceX’s focus on testing, testing, and testing some more meant that Starship SN4’s minor self-immolation occurred on the ground when the stakes – while high – were much lower than they would have been with an airborne rocket. The problems uncovered will, of course, need to be fixed, inevitably delaying the ship’s first flight test, but odds are that SN4 now has a better shot at success thanks to those hiccups.

Starship SN4 has thankfully survived a ~48-hour ordeal that may have left the rocket partially uncontrolled. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

Thanks to the fact that Starships are constructed almost entirely out of steel, a little (or a lot of) fire shouldn’t theoretically be much of a problem. However, SpaceX has taken a rather freeform approach to its early Starship SNx prototypes, opting to bolt, weld, or tape on the vast majority of external hardware with little or no protection from the elements, including fires ignited by the ships themselves.

With SN4, it appears that the pressure jump experiences immediately after Raptor ignition (the ship’s third such test) shook some methane-related plumbing loose. Raptor continued to burn for another five or so seconds after that minor failure, shutting down as planned – but not before it ignited the methane the burst pipe was leaking. Additionally, after that new plume of boiling liquid methane caught fire, the fire it sustained proceeded to ignite insulation wrapped around the rocket’s launch. It burned vigorously, likely helping to damage wiring, ultimately causing SpaceX to partially lose control of the rocket and preventing attempts to inspect and fix the damage for two full days.

A May 8th view of the pipe (bottom right of Starship SN4) that failed on May 19th, starting a fire and damaging the rocket. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)
A large scorch mark and blackened cabling are the only signs on Starship that anything went wrong on May 19th. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)
Around the other side of the rocket, (apparently flammable) insulation haphazardly wrapped around part of the launch mount ~24 hours before testing caught fire and burned aggressively. The leftovers are pictured here on May 21st. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

It’s safe to say that SpaceX is probably going to prioritize avoiding the series of events that caused May 19th’s anomaly from here on out, considering that things could have easily gone much worse. Thankfully, whatever control SpaceX or the rocket itself retained after wire damage allowed it to safely offload its flammable propellant and vent expanding gases to prevent SN4’s tanks from bursting. Installing highly flammable insulation approximately 10 feet away from an active Raptor engine and giant controlled fire and explosion was also inadvisable and probably won’t be repeated.

(NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

Thankfully, the damage is clearly minimal and Starship SN4 survived the ordeal otherwise unscathed. With any luck, inspections and repairs will be quick and easy and SpaceX – as NASASpaceflight reporter Michael Baylor notes – will be able to complete an identical static fire test without starting a fire on Starship SN4. SpaceX has requested a new road closure (signifying planned testing) on May 28th with backup windows on May 29th and June 1st.

Thanks to Starship SN4’s unplanned delays, it now looks quite likely that SpaceX’s next full-scale Starship prototype (SN5) will be completed – or nearly so – by the time that its predecessor is cleared for flight. “Too many Starships” is certainly a welcome problem to have.

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

Elon Musk

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

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

News

Tesla surges Robotaxi fleet ahead of Cybercab launch event

Tesla’s unsupervised robotaxi fleet quietly grew sevenfold in three weeks just before Cybercab Day arrives.

Published

on

By

Tesla’s unsupervised Robotaxi fleet has grown far faster than the public numbers suggested, and the timing lines up with the company’s biggest autonomy showcase yet. According to data compiled by the crowdsourced Robotaxi Tracker, Tesla now has nearly 200 vehicles operating without a safety monitor across Austin, Dallas and Houston, yielding a roughly 7X increase in about three weeks.

The jump lands four days before this week’s Tesla Cybercab launch event in Austin, where the company plans to show off its purpose-built, two-seat robotaxi with no steering wheel or pedals in a live commercial setting for the first time. Stick with us on X and Facebook for live reporting from the event.

The strategic logic is straightforward. Tesla has spent the past year scaling Robotaxi in small, deliberate steps, first widening geofences, then extending operating hours, then quietly growing fleet size, usually with little advance notice. Ashok Elluswamy told investors on the Q2 earnings call that the program had logged more than 380,000 unsupervised miles with zero notable incidents, a safety record the company has leaned on to justify moving slowly. Critics have used the flip side of that caution, a fleet that appeared stuck around two dozen vehicles for months, as evidence that Tesla’s driverless ambitions were outrunning its actual deployment.

A fleet quietly scaling to nearly 200 vehicles right before Cybercab Day undercuts that argument without Tesla having to say anything about it directly. It also sets up the event to do double duty. Rather than simply introducing new hardware, Tesla can point to an operating base of unsupervised Model Ys already running at meaningful scale, then argue the Cybercab, which uses the same underlying Full Self-Driving stack according to earlier coverage of the fleet’s software upgrades, is a natural next steps. Tesla has separately been registering the two-seat Cybercabs with Texas regulators this week, with the count climbing from seven to 45 in a matter of days.

The two ramps, one in software-driven Model Y deployment and one in physical Cybercab registrations, are happening in parallel rather than in sequence. That suggests Tesla wants Thursday’s event to land as proof that the robotaxi business is already running at scale, not just a reveal of a new vehicle shape. Whether the unsupervised numbers hold up once Cybercabs start mixing into the same fleet is the detail worth watching once the event wraps.

Continue Reading

Cybertruck

Tesla Cybertruck windshield protection just got cheaper

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla is lowering the monthly price of its Cybertruck Windshield Protection Plan from $35 to $25. The new rate will apply to the first payment on or after October 1, 2026. Tesla has told subscribers that all other benefits stay the same.

The plan covers unlimited repairs for chips and minor cracks on the front windshield. It also includes one full replacement every 12 months at no extra charge. Additional replacements in the same year carry a $100 deductible. Service is performed with Tesla glass and camera calibration, which matters because Autopilot and Full Self-Driving rely on those lenses behind the windshield.

There is no long-term contract. Coverage applies only to the front glass and does not include collision, vandalism, or weather damage.

The Cybertruck’s large, complex windshield has been more expensive to replace than glass on Tesla’s cars, which is why the pickup started at a higher subscription price. The $10 monthly cut reduces the annual cost from $420 to $300. Tesla has not publicly explained the change. The timing coincides with a year of claims data after the plan was extended to the Cybertruck.

Tesla sells several related protection products as monthly subscriptions through the Tesla app. The Windshield Protection Plan is also offered on other models. Model 3 and Model Y currently cost $16 a month. Those passenger-car rates are unchanged in the latest Cybertruck notice.

The Wheel and Tire Protection Plan covers road-hazard damage such as potholes, nails, and debris. Repairs are unlimited. Each wheel or tire replacement appointment has a $25 deductible. Pricing varies by model and whether the vehicle is a Performance version. Tesla is raising some of those rates on the same October 1 date.

Reported examples include Model 3 Performance moving from $16 to $24 and Model Y Performance from $20 to $24. Cybertruck wheel-and-tire coverage has been listed at $20 a month for the standard configuration.

A separate Luxe Package bundles four years of windshield coverage, wheel-and-tire coverage, and recommended maintenance on certain new Model S, Model X, and Cyberbeast orders, although the Model S and X are now defunct.

Tesla also offers an Extended Service Agreement after the basic vehicle warranty ends. That product covers many Tesla-manufactured parts rather than glass or tires. Together, the plans give owners a menu of targeted, cancel-anytime coverage instead of relying only on auto insurance.

Continue Reading