Connect with us

News

SpaceX ramps Starship hiring as Elon Musk talks Texas rocket factory's "awesome" progress

An overview of SpaceX's rapidly-expanding South Texas Starship factory. (NASASpaceflight - bocachicagal)

Published

on

After several successful tests last month, Elon Musk says that SpaceX’s South Texas Starship team is looking to rapidly expand in order to aggressively ramp up Starship manufacturing in a sign that the nascent rocket factory is making excellent progress.

Almost immediately after SpaceX successfully wrapped up its first and second explosive Starship tank tests last month, the company’s Boca Chica, Texas presence started to take on a new atmosphere, reminiscent of the rapid progress made at a since-mothballed Florida Starship facility. Perhaps thanks to the fact that SpaceX’s Boca Chica Starship facilities are adjacent to a dedicated test and launch facility just a mile down the road, it’s looking much less likely that a similar fate will befall its Texas presence.

Instead, SpaceX’s successful Starship tank tests – intentionally destroying two massive propellant tanks – are a testament to the progress the next-generation rocket is making in Texas. In fact, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has effectively stated that after the most recent tank test, the company is now ready to shift gears and start building the first space-bound Starship prototypes, while the last week or two of SpaceX’s visible Texas activities make it clear that that shift is already well underway.

SpaceX is in the midst of rapidly expanding Starship’s Boca Chica, Texas production facilities. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

In simple terms, SpaceX now appears to be moving full speed ahead in a bid to manufacture, assemble, and test the first flightworthy, full-scale Starship prototypes. It’s worth noting that CEO Elon Musk has underestimated the challenge at hand several times in the last 18 or so months of Starship development, frequently suggesting that the first full-scale prototype of the spacecraft would be ready for a challenging flight test and maybe even its first orbital flights as early as 2019.

For a number of reasons, those ambitious targets were not met. To Musk’s credit, the executive is at least conscious of his tendency to be wildly optimistic when it comes to schedules and has effectively tacked on an asterisk that the schedules and deadlines he often publicizes tend more along the lines of “this time-frame is technically possible without breaking the laws of physics” than anything verging on pragmatism. With challenges as complex as those faced in spaceflight, let alone massive, fully-reusable rockets like Starship, it’s hard to be surprised that practical deadlines tend to be miles away from theoretically-possible minimums.

On November 20th, Starship Mk1 suffered a major structural failure during cryogenic proof testing. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)
SpaceX’s first Starship test tank was built primarily outside in the South Texas elements, just like Starship Mk1, but it did use improved welding techniques and a better dome design. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)
SpaceX’s second Starship ‘test tank’ is pictured here shortly before it was successfully pressurized to destruction. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

As such, it wouldn’t be unreasonable to feel a bit like the townspeople with a boy crying wolf, but there are arguably several reasons for optimism, this time around. Most importantly, as partially pictured above, SpaceX has completed four intentionally destructive tests with full-scale Starship hardware in just the last 2.5 months. Deemed unfit for flight, SpaceX pressurized Starship Mk1 with liquid nitrogen until it burst in November 2019, reaching an estimated 3-5 bar (45-75 psi).

SpaceX spent the following month upgrading both the methods and facilities used to build Starship prototypes in South Texas – a process that is still very much ongoing. However, two recent tests of Starship tanks built with some of those new methods and facilities have unequivocally proven that great progress is being made. The first ‘test tank’ managed 7.1 bar (105 psi) before it burst, while a second tank completed less than three weeks later reached 7.5 bar (110 psi) with water and 8.5 bar (125 psi) with liquid nitrogen on January 28th. Between those tests, Musk revealed that 6 bar was the bare minimum necessary for orbital Starship flights, while 8.5 bar would potentially offer the safety margins needed for crewed Starship flights.

In other words, SpaceX’s last two tank tests have effectively proved that – even with facilities and methods only partially upgraded – the company is ready to begin manufacturing the first truly flight-rated Starship prototypes. In response, Musk recently stated that he was going “max hardcore on” Starship design and production in Boca Chica and revealed that SpaceX would host a second South Texas jobs fair in three weeks to help rapidly staff its growing rocket factory.

Advertisement
-
In the last two weeks, SpaceX has aggressively ramped up steel ring production, stacked and welded together to form Starship tanks. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)
SpaceX is rapidly assembling what appears to be Starship SN01, expected to be the spacecraft’s first flightworthy full-scale prototype. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

Looking at the progress SpaceX has made in just the last week, it’s hard to fault Musk’s brimming enthusiasm. Now breaking in new semi-automated welding machines, upgraded production equipment, and two massive sprung structures (i.e. tents), SpaceX engineers and technicians are churning out improved steel rings, tank domes (bulkheads), smaller propellant tanks, and more at a breakneck pace relative to the last year of Starship work. Additionally, at least six of those new rings have been stacked together in two sections, likely representing the effective birth of the first flightworthy Starship – ‘SN01’.

With SpaceX’s new enclosed facilities, much of its South Texas work is now hidden. Still, from what’s visible, it’s safe to say that the company is well its way to completing the first flight – and possibly orbit – worthy Starship prototypes in the near future.

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

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

Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile are trying to shut Starlink out before FCC vote

AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile want 290 MHz cut from an FCC satellite plan before Thursday.

Published

on

By

Starlink D2D direct to device vs Verizon, AT&T (Concept render by Grok)

AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile are asking the Federal Communications Commission to pull nearly 300 MHz of spectrum out of a proposal that would let satellite companies like SpaceX offer cell service directly to ordinary phones. The request lands one day before the agency votes on it.

The FCC will vote Thursday, October 29, on a notice of proposed rulemaking that would make an additional 482 MHz available for direct to device service, expanding the number of eligible bands from five to 13, according to the FCC fact sheet. It would also scrap the rule requiring a satellite operator to lease spectrum from carriers, replacing it with a certification that the operator has coexistence agreements in place or holds the terrestrial license itself.

That second path matters for SpaceX. As Teslarati reported earlier this month, SpaceX agreed to buy Grain Management’s nationwide 800 MHz portfolio to turn Starlink Mobile into a full US carrier, adding to the spectrum it already bought from EchoStar.

The carriers want two bands removed, 2.5 GHz and 3.45 GHz, which make up 290 MHz of the 482 MHz on the table. Through industry group CTIA, they argued that about 300 million users depend on those bands and that satellite operations in them are not technically feasible. T-Mobile, which calls 2.5 GHz the foundation of its Ultra Capacity 5G network, said in its own filing that satellite interference could wipe out up to 96% of a cell site’s uplink coverage area and cut uplink speeds by 88% to 99%.

Executives from all three carriers met with FCC staff on October 20, and T-Mobile CEO Srini Gopalan met separately with FCC Chairman Brendan Carr. T-Mobile’s role stands out because it is still SpaceX’s US launch partner for Starlink Mobile. The three carriers have also teamed up on their own satellite joint venture to pool spectrum, a move widely seen as a response to Starlink.

Advertisement
-

SpaceX is asking for the opposite. In an October 23 filing after meetings with FCC staff and commissioners’ offices, the company asked regulators to add the 902 to 928 MHz band to the proposal. “Doing so now saves time later,” SpaceX wrote. The company also asked the FCC to modernize interference rules and align satellite deployment requirements with those for terrestrial cell networks, saying the goal is to let satellite and ground networks work together so Americans stay connected wherever they are.

The carriers have not been shy about how they view SpaceX as a competitor. On Verizon’s third quarter earnings call Monday, its chief executive said Starlink Mobile “just can’t compete with a terrestrial network” and estimated SpaceX would need four to six years and $300 billion to $500 billion to build a full US carrier network.

Thursday’s vote will not settle which bands survive. Adopting the notice opens a public comment period, with final rules to come later in the proceeding. The FCC already considered and rejected 2.5 GHz for satellite coverage once, in 2024. SpaceX also is not the only satellite player watching: the FCC approved Amazon’s $11.6 billion acquisition of Globalstar on October 27, giving its planned direct to device fleet its own mobile satellite spectrum.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Semi catches fire in California: what we know

Published

on

Credit: KTVU

A Tesla Semi caught fire in Hayward, California, which caused both directions of traffic to shut down for hours before being completely reopened early on Wednesday, the California Highway Patrol said.

The fire occurred just after 5:30 local time in Hayward on Tuesday, as the Semi caught fire in the southbound lanes of I-880 before CHP officials made the decision to shut down both lanes of traffic due to potential risks from hazardous chemical smoke.

There were no injuries reported.

The cause of the fire is currently unknown, as neither Tesla nor the CHP have not determined a cause.

However, some images taken before the Semi was completely destroyed by the fire seem to indicate this might have been an older unit, as it appears to be one of the designs that Tesla shipped as part of its pilot program, before revising it and starting mass production just a month ago.

At the time of publication, CHP had not returned our request for a comment for additional details, including the Semi involved and any potential collaboration on an investigation between the CHP and Tesla. We will update this story when we hear back from them.

The southbound lanes were reopened at 3:30 a.m. on Wednesday, with the northbound lanes opening last night a few hours after the fire began. The CHP did state that the lithium batteries were “incredibly difficult to extinguish,” according to NBC Bay Area.

The truck’s driver said that the Semi caught fire, but he did not have an explanation.

An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla’s ‘Emergency Drive Away’ function gets its first use in the real world

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla’s launch of the “Emergency Drive Away” function a few months back offered owners a safe option to evacuate an area if they were in reasonable danger. The function finally got its first use in the real world, but it appears it was by mistake.

A video shared by u/Joshalander in the r/TeslaLounge subreddit recorded the instance from his vehicle and said the incident took place in Austin this past weekend during the city’s F1 Race.

“Was charging around 6 AM this past Sunday in Austin before heading to the F1 race and heard a pop. Looked over and saw the new emergency drive-away feature in action. Genuinely felt bad for the dude when he got out and realized what happened, since he looked exhausted and only seemed to half-read the prompts.”

Emergency Drive Away unlatches the Supercharger connector from the vehicle, but still causes damage to both the car and the Supercharger. Tesla has said that it will cost up to $25,000 in repairs to have everything fixed back to normal.

Additionally, the company said that if it were not used in an emergency situation, the driver of the vehicle who activated the Emergency Drive Away feature would be responsible for all repair costs.

Tesla constitutes the following situations as reasonable justifications for activating the feature:

  • You face an immediate threat to your life or personal safety.
  • You must leave the area immediately.
  • Exiting the vehicle is unsafe.
  • Unplugging the charge connector would unreasonably delay your departure or expose you to a risk to your personal safety.

After using the feature, Tesla requires the driver to schedule Service so the car can be inspected.

Continue Reading