Connect with us

News

SpaceX reveals Starship “marine recovery” plans in new job postings

Super Heavy on YOUR drone ship? It's more likely than you think! (Richard Angle/Teslarati/SpaceX)

Published

4 years ago

on

In a series of new job postings, SpaceX has hinted at an unexpected desire to develop “marine recovery systems for the Starship program.”

Since SpaceX first began bending metal for its steel Starship development program in late 2018, CEO Elon Musk, executives, and the company itself have long maintained that both Super Heavy boosters and Starship upper stages would perform what are known as return-to-launch-site (RTLS) landings. It’s no longer clear if those long-stated plans are set in stone.

Oddly, despite repeatedly revealing plans to develop “marine recovery” assets for Starship, SpaceX’s recent “marine engineer” and “naval architect” job postings never specifically mentioned the company’s well-established plans to convert retired oil rigs into vast floating Starship launch sites. Weighing several thousand tons and absolutely dwarfing the football-field-sized drone ships SpaceX recovers Falcon boosters with, it goes without saying that towing an entire oil rig hundreds of miles to and from port is not an efficient or economical solution for rocket recovery. It would also make very little sense for SpaceX to hire a dedicated naval architect without once mentioning that they’d be working on something as all-encompassing as the world’s largest floating launch pad.

That leaves three obvious explanations for the mentions. First, it might be possible that SpaceX is merely preparing for the potential recovery of debris or intact, floating ships or boosters after intentionally expending them on early orbital Starship test flights. Second, SpaceX might have plans to strip an oil rig or two – without fully converting them into launch pads – and then use those rigs as landing platforms designed to remain at sea indefinitely. Those platforms might then transfer landed ships or boosters to smaller support ships tasked with returning them to dry land. Third and arguably most likely, SpaceX might be exploring the possible benefits of landing Super Heavy boosters at sea.

Through its Falcon rockets, SpaceX has slowly but surely refined and perfected the recovery and reuse of orbital-class rocket boosters – 24 (out of 103) of which occurred back on land. Rather than coasting 500-1000 kilometers (300-600+ mi) downrange after stage separation and landing on a drone ship at sea, those 24 boosters flipped around, canceled out their substantial velocities, and boosted themselves a few hundred kilometers back to the Florida or California coast, where they finally touched down on basic concrete pads.

Advertisement

Unsurprisingly, canceling out around 1.5 kilometers per second of downrange velocity (equivalent to Mach ~4.5) and fully reversing that velocity back towards the launch site is an expensive maneuver, costing quite a lot of propellant. For example, the nominal 25-second reentry burn performed by almost all Falcon boosters likely costs about 20 tons (~40,000 lb) of propellant. The average ~35-second single-engine landing burn used by all Falcon boosters likely costs about 10 tons (~22,000 lb) of propellant. Normally, that’s all that’s needed for a drone ship booster landing.

For RTLS landings, Falcon boosters must also perform a large ~40-second boostback burn with three Merlin 1D engines, likely costing an extra 25-35 tons (55,000-80,000 lb) of propellant. In other words, an RTLS landing generally ends up costing at least twice as much propellant as a drone ship landing. Using the general rocketry rule of thumb that every 7 kilograms of booster mass reduces payload to orbit by 1 kilogram and assuming that each reusable Falcon booster requires about 3 tons of recovery-specific hardware (mostly legs and grid fins) a drone ship landing might reduce Falcon 9’s payload to low Earth orbit (LEO) by ~5 tons (from 22 tons to 17 tons). The extra propellant needed for an RTLS landing might reduce it by another 4-5 tons to 13 tons.

Likely less than coincidentally, a Falcon 9 with drone ship booster recovery has never launched more than ~16 tons to LEO. While SpaceX hasn’t provided NASA’s ELVPerf calculator with data for orbits lower than 400 kilometers (~250 mi), it generally agrees, indicating that Falcon 9 is capable of launching about 12t with an RTLS landing and 16t with a drone ship landing.

This is all to say that landing reusable boosters at sea will likely always be substantially more efficient. The reason that SpaceX has always held that Starship’s Super Heavy boosters will avoid maritime recovery is that landing and recovering giant rocket boosters at sea is inherently difficult, risky, time-consuming, and expensive. That makes rapid reuse (on the order of multiple times per day or week) almost impossible and inevitably adds the cost of recovery, which could actually be quite significant for a rocket that SpaceX wants to eventually cost just a few million dollars per launch. However, so long as at-sea recovery costs less than a few million dollars, there’s always a chance that certain launch profiles could be drastically simplified – and end up cheaper – by the occasional at-sea booster landing.

If the alternative is a second dedicated launch to partially refuel one Starship, it’s possible that a sea landing could give Starship the performance needed to accomplish the same mission in a single launch, lowering the total cost of launch services. If – like with Falcon 9 – a sea landing could boost Starship’s payload to LEO by a third or more, the regular sea recovery of Super Heavy boosters would also necessarily cut the number of launches SpaceX needs to fill up a Starship Moon lander by a third. Given that SpaceX and NASA have been planning for Starship tanker launches to occur ~12 days apart, recovering boosters at sea becomes even more feasible.

Advertisement

In theory, the Starship launch vehicle CEO Elon Musk has recently described could be capable of launching anywhere from 150 to 200+ tons to low Earth orbit with full reuse and RTLS booster recovery. With so much performance available, it may matter less than it does with Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy if an RTLS booster landing cuts payload to orbit by a third, a half, or even more. At the end of the day, “just” 100 tons to LEO may be more than enough to satisfy any realistic near-term performance requirements.

But until Starships and Super Heavy boosters are reusable enough to routinely launch multiple times per week (let alone per day) and marginal launch costs have been slashed to single-digit millions of dollars, it’s hard to imagine SpaceX willingly leaving so much performance on the table by forgoing at-sea recovery out of principle alone.

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.

Comments

News

Tesla owners propose interesting theory about Apple CarPlay and EV tax credit

“100%. It’s needed for sales because for many prospective buyers, CarPlay is a nonnegotiable must-have. If they knew how good the Tesla UI is, they wouldn’t think they need CarPlay,” one owner said.

Published

19 hours ago

on

November 14, 2025

By

apple-music-tesla-demo
Credit: Tesla Raj/YouTube

Tesla is reportedly bracing for the integration of Apple’s well-known iOS automotive platform, CarPlay, into its vehicles after the company had avoided it for years.

However, now that it’s here, owners are more than clear that they do not want it, and they have their theories about why it’s on its way. Some believe it might have to do with the EV tax credit, or rather, the loss of it.

Owners are more interested in why Tesla is doing this now, especially considering that so many have been outspoken about the fact that they would not use it in favor of the company’s user interface (UI), which is extremely well done.

After Bloomberg reported that Tesla was working on Apple CarPlay integration, the reactions immediately started pouring in. From my perspective, having used both Apple CarPlay in two previous vehicles and going to Tesla’s in-house UI in my Model Y, both platforms definitely have their advantages.

However, Tesla’s UI just works with its vehicles, as it is intuitive and well-engineered for its cars specifically. Apple CarPlay was always good, but it was buggy at times, which could be attributed to the vehicle and not the software, and not as user-friendly, but that is subjective.

Nevertheless, upon the release of Bloomberg’s report, people immediately challenged the need for it:

Some fans proposed an interesting point: What if Tesla is using CarPlay as a counter to losing the $7,500 EV tax credit? Perhaps it is an interesting way to attract customers who have not owned a Tesla before but are more interested in having a vehicle equipped with CarPlay?

“100%. It’s needed for sales because for many prospective buyers, CarPlay is a nonnegotiable must-have. If they knew how good the Tesla UI is, they wouldn’t think they need CarPlay,” one owner said.

Tesla has made a handful of moves to attract people to its cars after losing the tax credit. This could be a small but potentially mighty strategy that will pull some carbuyers to Tesla, especially now that the Apple CarPlay box is checked.

@teslarati :rotating_light: This is why you need to use off-peak rates at Tesla Superchargers! #tesla #evcharging #fyp ♬ Blue Moon – Muspace Lofi

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Ron Baron states Tesla and SpaceX are lifetime investments

Baron, one of Tesla’s longest-standing bulls, reiterated that his personal stake in the company remains fully intact even as volatility pressures the broader market.

Published

21 hours ago

on

November 14, 2025

By

Credit: @TeslaLarry/X

Billionaire investor Ron Baron says he isn’t touching a single share of his personal Tesla holdings despite the recent selloff in the tech sector. Baron, one of Tesla’s longest-standing bulls, reiterated that his personal stake in the company remains fully intact even as volatility pressures the broader market.

Baron doubles down on Tesla

Speaking on CNBC’s Squawk Box, Baron stated that he is largely unfazed by the market downturn, describing his approach during the selloff as simply “looking” for opportunities. He emphasized that Tesla remains the centerpiece of his long-term strategy, recalling that although Baron Funds once sold 30% of its Tesla position due to client pressure, he personally refused to trim any of his personal holdings.

“We sold 30% for clients. I did not sell personally a single share,” he said. Baron’s exposure highlighted this stance, stating that roughly 40% of his personal net worth is invested in Tesla alone. The legendary investor stated that he has already made about $8 billion from Tesla from an investment of $400 million when he started, and believes that figure could rise fivefold over the next decade as the company scales its technology, manufacturing, and autonomy roadmap.

A lifelong investment

Baron’s commitment extends beyond Tesla. He stated that he also holds about 25% of his personal wealth in SpaceX and another 35% in Baron mutual funds, creating a highly concentrated portfolio built around Elon Musk–led companies. During the interview, Baron revisited a decades-old promise he made to his fund’s board when he sought approval to invest in publicly traded companies.

“I told the board, ‘If you let me invest a certain amount of money, then I will promise that I won’t sell any of my stock. I will be the last person out of the stock,’” he said. “I will not sell a single share of my shares until my clients sold 100% of their shares. … And I don’t expect to sell in my lifetime Tesla or SpaceX.”

Advertisement

Watch Ron Baron’s CNBC interview below.

@teslarati :rotating_light: This is why you need to use off-peak rates at Tesla Superchargers! #tesla #evcharging #fyp ♬ Blue Moon – Muspace Lofi
Continue Reading

News

Tesla CEO Elon Musk responds to Waymo’s 2,500-fleet milestone

While Tesla’s Robotaxi network is not yet on Waymo’s scale, Elon Musk has announced a number of aggressive targets for the service.

Published

21 hours ago

on

November 14, 2025

By

Credit: Tesla

Elon Musk reacted sharply to Waymo’s latest milestone after the autonomous driving company revealed its fleet had grown to 2,500 robotaxis across five major U.S. regions. 

As per Musk, the milestone is notable, but the numbers could still be improved.

“Rookie numbers”

Waymo disclosed that its current robotaxi fleet includes 1,000 vehicles in the San Francisco Bay Area, 700 in Los Angeles, 500 in Phoenix, 200 in Austin, and 100 in Atlanta, bringing the total to 2,500 units. 

When industry watcher Sawyer Merritt shared the numbers on X, Musk replied with a two-word jab: “Rookie numbers,” he wrote in a post on X, highlighting Tesla’s intention to challenge and overtake Waymo’s scale with its own Robotaxi fleet.

While Tesla’s Robotaxi network is not yet on Waymo’s scale, Elon Musk has announced a number of aggressive targets for the service. During the third quarter earnings call, he confirmed that the company expects to remove safety drivers from large parts of Austin by year-end, marking the biggest operational step forward for Tesla’s autonomous program to date.

Advertisement

Tesla targets major Robotaxi expansions

Tesla’s Robotaxi pilot remains in its early phases, but Musk recently revealed that major deployments are coming soon. During his appearance on the All-In podcast, Musk said Tesla is pushing to scale its autonomous fleet to 1,000 cars in the Bay Area and 500 cars in Austin by the end of the year.

“We’re scaling up the number of cars to, what happens if you have a thousand cars? Probably we’ll have a thousand cars or more in the Bay Area by the end of this year, probably 500 or more in the greater Austin area,” Musk said.

With just two months left in Q4 2025, Tesla’s autonomous driving teams will face a compressed timeline to hit those targets. Musk, however, has maintained that Robotaxi growth is central to Tesla’s valuation and long-term competitiveness.

@teslarati :rotating_light: This is why you need to use off-peak rates at Tesla Superchargers! #tesla #evcharging #fyp ♬ Blue Moon – Muspace Lofi
Continue Reading

Trending