Connect with us

News

SpaceX’s orbital Starship launch pad tank farm comes to life for the first time

SpaceX's orbital Starship tank farm has begun venting for the first time in a sign that testing of the storage vessels has finally begun. (NASASpaceflight)

Published

on

Update: Two days after a bevy of tanker trucks began to arrive at SpaceX’s orbital Starship launch site with load upon load of cryogenic liquid nitrogen, the company’s custom-built tank farm appears to have taken its very first ‘breaths.’

In other words, at least one of seven massive propellant storage tanks – two of which appear to have been fully completed and insulated – began venting. For a tank like SpaceX’s ground support equipment (GSE) tanks, the level of venting observed can only mean one thing: pressure maintenance during operations with cryogenic fluids. As cryofluids are loaded into empty tanks, they inevitably come into contact with warm pipes and tank walls, rapidly warming a portion of the liquid that then boils into gas. Tanks then need to vent that excess gas to avoid bursting.

In the case of SpaceX’s two completed liquid oxygen GSE tanks and a spate of liquid nitrogen (LN2) deliveries this week, it’s clear that the company has begun the process of testing and activating part of its brand new orbital-class Starship tank farm – beginning with much less risky LN2 proof testing. Filling the two finished LOx tanks with LN2 should also serve the dual purpose of flushing and cleaning them of any debris or contaminants, ensuring that it’s safe to fill them with LOx when the time comes.

For the first time, SpaceX appears to have begun delivering large quantities of cryogenic fluids to Starship’s orbital launch pad – still under construction but fast approaching some level of initial operational capability.

Advertisement

Sometime in the morning on September 19th, a semi-truck carrying a cryogenic liquid nitrogen (LN2) transport trailer arrived at SpaceX’s Starbase launch facilities. Normally, that would be a completely mundane, uninteresting event: SpaceX has used and will continue to use liquid nitrogen to safely proof test Starship prototypes and supercool their liquid methane (LCH4) and oxygen (LOx) propellant for the indefinite future. However, up to now, 100% of all Starbase cryogen deliveries have gone to the suborbital launch site, where two “mounts” and a few concrete aprons have supported all Starship and Super Heavy tests and launches to date.

Instead, this particular LN2 tanker headed for Starbase’s first orbital tank farm and began to offload its cryogenic liquid cargo at a number of brand new fill stations specifically designed for the task.

Still well under construction and at least a few weeks or months from total complete, Starship’s orbital launch site tank farm will ultimately be a group of eight massive storage tanks surrounded by thousands of feet of insulated plumbing, industrial pumps, a small army of “cryocoolers,” a blockhouse filled with human-sized valves, and much more. Said tank farm has been under construction for the better part of 2021, beginning with work on its concrete foundation this January.

Nine months later, the orbital tank farm is nearly complete. A power distribution and communications blockhouse has been complete for weeks with virtually all the wiring and cabling needed for the orbital launch mount and tower already in place. Several hundred feet of concrete cable and plumbing conduit have been filled with thousands of feet of wires, cables, and pipes and been sealed and buried. The tank farm blockhouse – where a dozen or so massive valves control the flow of propellant to and from the orbital launch mount and tower – is complete save for some final plumbing.

Advertisement

Finally, seven of eight GSE (ground support equipment) tanks have been installed and partially plumbed. Built in the same factory, six are virtually identical to Starship and Super Heavy tanks and will store LOx (3x), LN2 (2x), LCH4 (2x), and around a million gallons of water. Save for one LCH4 tank, all have been installed at the farm and that last tank (known as GSE8) is nearly complete back at the build site. Additionally, to insulate those seven thin, steel storage tanks, SpaceX has contracted with a water/storage tank company to build seven “cryoshells” and said million-gallon water tank.

The water tank was installed months ago and all seven shells are completed and ready to go as of last month. Only two of those seven cryoshells have been installed – and, rather asymmetrically, both on LOx tanks. SpaceX recently rolled the first LN2 tank cryoshell to the farm and could install it soon but as of now, it will likely be weeks before the orbital tank farm will have sleeved, insulated LOx, LN2, and LCH4 tanks ready for testing.

SpaceX appeared to (partially) fill Starship’s orbital launch pad ‘tank farm’ with cryogenic fluid for the first time on Sunday. (Starship Gazer)

At the moment, that’s one of the biggest points of uncertainty standing between SpaceX and the ability to test Super Heavy or Starship at the orbital launch site. It’s entirely unclear if uninsulated GSE tanks can support any kind of substantial testing – like, say, the first full Super Heavy static fire test campaign – before their contents effectively boil off. As such, it’s a bit of mystery why SpaceX then had at least three tanker loads of liquid nitrogen – likely more than 70 tons (~150,000 lb) total – delivered to the orbital tank farm on September 19th.

By all appearances the first time that the farm’s actual main tanks have been filled with anything, that liquid nitrogen seems to have been loaded into one or both of the two insulated LOx tanks. There are two or three main explanations. First, SpaceX could simply be testing those more or less completed tanks with their first cryogenic fluids. Those partial ‘cryo proof’ tests would also help clean and flush out the interior of the LOx tanks, removing mundane debris or contamination that could become a major hazard when submerged in a high-density oxidizer. Given that both tanks can easily hold ~1300 tons (~2.9M lb) of liquid nitrogen, 70 tons is more of a tickle than a test, though, so a magnitude more would need to be delivered to perform even a half-decent bare-minimum cryoproof.

The other distinct possibility is that SpaceX plans to temporarily use one or both of the only two finished orbital pad tanks to store liquid nitrogen for Super Heavy Booster 4’s first cryogenic proof test. Either way, SpaceX has test windows scheduled every day this week, beginning with a six-hour window that opens at 5pm CDT today (Sept 20). Stay tuned to find out what exactly SpaceX plans to test and if the orbital tank farm and its first taste of liquid nitrogen are involved!

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

Tesla developing small, affordable SUV, report claims

This latest rumor deserves heavy scrutiny. Tesla has already walked away from a mass-market $25,000 EV once before.

Published

on

Credit: Tine Rusc

Tesla is developing a small, affordable SUV, a new report claims, speculating that the automaker is planning to add yet another vehicle to its lineup at a price point similar to the Model 3 and Model Y, but smaller and more compact.

But it does not make a whole lot of sense, especially considering a handful of things CEO Elon Musk said and the overall plan for Tesla’s future.

Reuters reported that Tesla is in the early stages of developing an all-new, smaller, cheaper electric SUV. Citing four sources familiar with the matter, the story claims the vehicle would be shorter than the Model Y, built in China, and represent a fresh platform rather than a variant of the Model 3 or Y.

Suppliers have reportedly been contacted to discuss details, though Tesla has not commented. The move appears aimed at broadening affordability amid slowing EV demand and intensifying competition, particularly from Chinese rivals.

This latest rumor deserves heavy scrutiny. Tesla has already walked away from a mass-market $25,000 EV once before.

In 2024, the company scrapped its long-teased “Redwood” project for a budget-friendly car. Elon Musk explained the decision bluntly during an earnings call: a conventional low-cost model would be “pointless” and “completely at odds with what we believe.”

In other words, chasing a bare-bones cheap EV runs counter to Tesla’s core mission of accelerating sustainable energy through cutting-edge technology and autonomy rather than volume-driven price wars.

Musk’s own recent statements reinforce skepticism about a compact SUV pivot. Just two weeks ago, on March 25, he responded to fan requests for a minivan by posting on X: “Something way cooler than a minivan is coming.”

Elon Musk says Tesla is developing a new vehicle: ‘Way cooler than a minivan’

The remark came in the context of family-hauling needs, with Musk highlighting the Cybertruck’s ability to seat multiple child seats. It signals Tesla’s focus is shifting toward more spacious, innovative people-movers—not shrinking its lineup.

U.S. demand data echoes this logic.

The long-wheelbase Model Y L—a six-seat, stretched variant offering extra room for families—has generated massive interest wherever offered. Fans in the U.S. have basically begged for the Model Y L to make its way to the States, or for the company to develop a full-size SUV.

The Model Y L is selling well in China, where it is manufactured.

Delivery wait times for the Model Y L stretched into February 2026 as orders poured in. Tesla recently expanded the trim to eight new Asian markets, yet it remains unavailable in the United States, where consumer appetite for a larger, more practical SUV is reportedly strong.

American buyers have consistently favored bigger vehicles; the Model Y already outsells most competitors precisely because it delivers crossover utility without compromise. A compact model shorter than today’s bestseller would likely miss this mark entirely.

Tesla’s product strategy has long emphasized differentiation through autonomy, range, and desirability rather than racing to the bottom on price. Stripped-down variants of the Model 3 and Y have already struggled to ignite broad demand.

A new compact SUV built in China might sound logical on paper for cost-sensitive buyers, but it risks repeating past missteps—diluting brand cachet while ignoring clear signals from Musk and the market.

History suggests Tesla talks about affordable cars more often than it delivers them. Whether this Reuters scoop evolves into metal or joins the $25k project on the scrap heap remains to be seen.

For now, the smart money is on Tesla doubling down on “way cooler” vehicles that actually fit American families—and Tesla’s ambitious vision—rather than a smaller SUV that feels like yesterday’s news.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla CEO Elon Musk says next FSD release is the one we’ve been waiting for

On Thursday, Musk teased the capabilities and next steps for Tesla’s Full Self-Driving software, focusing squarely on the incremental improvements of the current v14.3 suite, as well as the looming arrival of v15.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla CEO Elon Musk teased the capabilities of a future Full Self-Driving release, but it seems like we are getting what Yogi Berra once called “Déjà vu all over again.”

On Thursday, Musk teased the capabilities and next steps for Tesla’s Full Self-Driving software, focusing squarely on the incremental improvements of the current v14.3 suite, as well as the looming arrival of v15.

He confirmed that upcoming point releases of v14.3 will deliver additional polish to the current build, smoothing out remaining edges in an already capable system. These iterative updates, Musk noted, are designed to refine performance without requiring a full version overhaul.

Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.3: First Impressions

Yet the real headline was Musk’s forecast for v15.

“V15 will far exceed human levels of safety, even in completely unsupervised and complex situations,” he wrote.

He clarified that v15 will be powered by Tesla’s long-awaited large model, an AI architecture with roughly 10x the parameters of the smaller model currently in widespread use. The leap, Musk explained, stems from the unusually rapid progress of the compact model, which has advanced so quickly that the larger counterpart has yet to catch up in real-world deployment.

However, it is becoming a pattern that is, by now, familiar to anyone following Tesla’s autonomous driving roadmap.

Musk has consistently and repeatedly framed each successive major release as the one poised to deliver game-changing autonomy. Earlier versions were similarly positioned as a movement toward the final piece of the puzzle, only for attention to pivot to the next milestone once they arrived.

The refrain has become a recurring feature of FSD communication: current software is impressive, the point releases will sharpen it further, but the true breakthrough lies one major iteration ahead.

Musk’s latest comments fit squarely into that cadence. While v14.3 point releases are expected to tighten supervised driving behaviors in the coming weeks, v15 is cast as the version that finally crosses the threshold into unsupervised operation at human-or-better safety levels across demanding scenarios.

The 10x parameter scale of the underlying large model is presented as the key technical enabler, promising richer reasoning and more robust decision-making than anything deployed to date.

Whether v15 ultimately fulfills that promise remains to be seen. Tesla’s history shows that each new target generates fresh excitement—and occasional skepticism—about timelines.

Fans realize Musk’s timelines for FSD are exciting, but rarely met:

For now, Musk’s message is familiar: the immediate focus is polishing v14.3 through targeted point releases, while the 10x-parameter large model in v15 represents the next decisive step toward fully unsupervised, superhuman safety.

Hopefully, Tesla can come through, but we can only believe that once v15 gets here, v16 will be the next big step toward autonomy.

Drivers can expect continued refinement in the short term and a significantly more ambitious leap once the large model is ready. The cycle continues, but the stakes, Musk insists, keep rising.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Tesla Supercharger for Business exposes jaw-dropping ROI gap between best and worst locations

Tesla’s new Supercharger for Business calculator reveals an eye-opening all-in cost and location-based ROI projections.

Published

on

By

tesla v4 supercharger

Tesla has launched an online calculator for its Supercharger for Business program, giving property owners their first transparent look at what it really costs to install Superchargers on site and what kind of return they can expect.

The program itself launched in September 2025, allowing businesses to purchase and operate Supercharger hardware on their own property while Tesla handles installation, maintenance, software, and 24/7 driver support. As Teslarati reported at launch, hosts also get their logo placed on the chargers and their location integrated into Tesla’s in-car navigation, meaning drivers are actively routed there. The stalls are open to all EVs, not just Teslas.


The new online calculator, announced by Tesla on Wednesday with the note that “simplicity and transparency” have been a problem in the industry, lets any business enter a U.S. address and get a real cost and revenue model. A standard 8-stall V4 Supercharger site runs approximately $500,000 in hardware and $55,000 per post for installation, bringing an all-in price just shy of $1 million. Tesla charges a flat $0.10 per kWh fee to cover software, billing, and network operations. Businesses set their own retail price and keep the margin above that fee.

Tesla expands its branded ‘For Business’ Superchargers

 

Taking a look at Tesla’s Supercharger for Business online calculator, we can see that ROI is not uniform, and the gap between a strong location and a poor one can stretch the breakeven point by several years.

The biggest driver is foot traffic and how long people stay. A busy rest station, hotel, or outlet mall brings in repeat visitors who need to charge while they’re already stopped, pushing utilization numbers higher and shortening payback time.

Tesla Supercharger for Business ROI calculator

Tesla Supercharger for Business ROI calculator

Local electricity rates matter just as much on the cost side. Markets like California carry some of the highest commercial electricity rates in the country, which eats into the margin between what a host pays per kWh and what they charge drivers. At the same time, dense urban areas with high EV adoption tend to support higher retail charging prices, which can offset that cost if demand is strong enough. Weather also plays a role. Cold climates reduce battery efficiency and increase charging frequency, but they can also suppress utilization in winter months if drivers avoid stopping in exposed outdoor locations. Suburban and rural sites face a different problem: lower baseline EV traffic, which means a site with cheaper power and lower operating costs can still take longer to pay back simply because the stalls sit idle more often. Tesla’s calculator uses real fleet data to pre-fill utilization estimates by ZIP code, so businesses can run their specific address against these variables rather than relying on averages.

The program has seen real adoption. Wawa, already the largest host of Tesla Superchargers with over 2,100 stalls across 223 locations, opened its first fully owned and branded site in Alachua, Florida earlier this year. Francis Energy of Oklahoma and the city of Alpharetta, Georgia have also deployed branded stations through the program, as Teslarati covered in January.

Tesla now exceeds 80,000 Supercharger stalls worldwide, and the calculator makes the economic case for accelerating that number through private investment rather than company-owned sites alone.

Continue Reading