News
SpaceX’s orbital Starship launch pad tank farm comes to life for the first time
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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.
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.
🚨 A Tesla Semi reportedly caught fire, with California Highway Patrol confirming. The Semi was on I-880 SB
An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 28, 2026
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.
@Tslachan From on of the videos looks like it’s an old Semi (not the refresh version that recently started production) https://t.co/KzwmR2kXow
— Area Under The Curve 🎗️ (@AreaUnderCurve) October 28, 2026
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.
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.”
🚨 Here’s the first look at Tesla’s Emergency Drive Away function in action:
Apparently this driver accidentally enabled it and drove forward; you can see the Supercharger pull with the car.
Tesla said previously this would cost up to $25k if not used properly. https://t.co/B4qQRrsO6B
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 28, 2026
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.
Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile are trying to shut Starlink out before FCC vote
Tesla Semi catches fire in California: what we know
