Connect with us

News

SpaceX separates Starship prototype’s nose and tail to install giant propellant tanks

The two halves of SpaceX's Starship prototype were separated on Tuesday, Jan 15 to allow for additional work. (NASASpaceflight - bocachicagal)

Published

on

After a handful of days as an impressive monolith stood along the coastal wetlands of Texas, SpaceX technicians have once again separated the nose and tail sections of the first Starship prototype to allow additional integration and assembly work to continue. The craft’s three Raptors were also removed and stored nearby, shown to be barebones facsimiles standing in for flightworthy hardware that could arrive in the next month or two.

Up next, three or four propellant tank domes – currently being assembled and welded together on-site – will likely be installed inside the steel hull of the giant Starship prototype’s aft barrel section. Known as bulkheads, the installation of those tank domes will bring SpaceX one step closer to performing hop tests of the simultaneously bizarre, confusing, and beautiful craft.

At this point in time, it appears that Starhopper is some odd combination of showmanship and actual hardware meant to test certain aspects of the first orbital Starship build, said to be complete as early as June 2019 by CEO Elon Musk. In the last week or so, SpaceX technicians attached and welded over Starhopper’s two sections – an aft barrel with legs and Raptors and a conical nose – and even did a sort of photoshoot, removing an on-site fence for a photo that Musk later shared while stating that the vehicle had “completed assembly”.

One could argue that assembly is not exactly complete if the given product has to be pulled in half to install significant new components. Regardless, the external skin, aft barrel section, and rough landing legs do appear to be more or less complete from a very basic structural perspective, although there is clearly much work still to be done if the vehicle’s tank bulkheads haven’t been installed. Aside from completing the liquid oxygen and methane tank structure, SpaceX engineers and technicians will additionally have to complete the vehicle’s aft section, a massive 9m/30ft-diameter thrust structure capable of supporting the thrust of three Raptor engines and the weight of the entire fueled rocket. After that, plumbing, avionics, sensors, attitude thrusters, and more will still need to be completed and integrated.

Advertisement

If Starhopper’s nose section is largely a nonfunctioning aerodynamic shroud and propellant tanks will be primarily located inside the aft section, the fuel and oxidizer capacities of the vehicle’s tanks can be roughly estimated. Assuming a 9m/30ft diameter, the aft barrel stands around 13m/43ft tall. Assuming that the upper tank dome will reach a meter or two above the steel cylinder and that the aft Raptor thrust structure is also roughly 1-2 meters deep, Starhopper would have a total tank volume around 830 m3 or almost 30,000 cubic feet (~225,000 gallons), potentially 1000 metric tons of fuel or more if fully loaded.

Perhaps less than coincidentally, SpaceX already has liquid methane and oxygen tanks on-site (one is pictured above) with more than enough capacity to meet Starhopper’s potential propellant needs. However, it’s worth noting that current plans (and permissions) only show Starhopper traveling as high as 5km on flights that will last no more than 6 minutes, and CEO Elon Musk has indicated in no uncertain terms that the prototype will remain distinctly suborbital and is primarily focused on fleshing out Starship’s vertical take-off or landing (VTOL) capabilities before SpaceX proceeds to much more aggressive tests.

While it would be safe to take his schedule with many dozens of grains of salt, Musk noted last week that the first orbit-ready Starship could be finished as early as June 2019, while he expects Starhopper tests to begin as early as February or March. Where exactly that orbital Starship and its Super Heavy booster partner will be built is now much less clear after SpaceX has reportedly canceled a berth lease and thus its plans to build a BFR factory in the Port of Los Angeles. Will SpaceX build a BFR factory in Texas or will it build the orbital Starship en plein air like its Starhopper predecessor? And Super Heavy? Where will all three conduct static fires, hops, or launches from?

Stay tuned as more details and photos continue to bubble up from beneath the surface.


Check out Teslarati’s newsletters for prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket launch and recovery processes!

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

Investor's Corner

Tesla (TSLA) Q4 and FY 2025 earnings results

Tesla’s Q4 and FY 2025 earnings come on the heels of a quarter where the company produced over 434,000 vehicles, delivered over 418,000 vehicles, and deployed 14.2 GWh of energy storage products.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla China

Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) has released its Q4 and FY 2025 earnings results in an update letter. The document was posted on the electric vehicle maker’s official Investor Relations website after markets closed today, January 28, 2025.

Tesla’s Q4 and FY 2025 earnings come on the heels of a quarter where the company produced over 434,000 vehicles, delivered over 418,000 vehicles, and deployed 14.2 GWh of energy storage products.

For the Full Year 2025, Tesla produced 1,654,667 and delivered 1,636,129 vehicles. The company also deployed a total of 46.7 GWh worth of energy storage products.

Tesla’s Q4 and FY 2025 results

As could be seen in Tesla’s Q4 and FY 2025 Update Letter, the company posted GAAP EPS of $0.24 and non-GAAP EPS of $0.50 per share in the fourth quarter. Tesla also posted total revenues of $24.901 billion. GAAP net income is also listed at $840 million in Q4.

Analyst consensus for Q4 has Tesla earnings per share falling 38% to $0.45 with revenue declining 4% to $24.74 billion, as per estimates from FactSet. In comparison, the consensus compiled by Tesla last week forecasted $0.44 per share on sales totaling $24.49 billion.

For FY 2025, Tesla posted GAAP EPS of $1.08 and non-GAAP EPS of $1.66 per share. Tesla also posted total revenues of $94.827 billion, which include $69.526 billion from automotive and $12.771 billion from the battery storage business. GAAP net income is also listed at $3.794 billion in FY 2025.

Below is Tesla’s Q4 and FY 2025 update letter.

TSLA-Q4-2025-Update by Simon Alvarez










Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Tesla rolls out new Supercharging safety feature in the U.S.

Published

on

tesla's nacs charging connector
Credit: Tesla

Tesla has rolled out a new Supercharging safety feature in the United States, one that will answer concerns that some owners may have if they need to leave in a pinch.

It is also a suitable alternative for non-Tesla chargers, like third-party options that feature J1772 or CCS to NACS adapters.

The feature has been available in Europe for some time, but it is now rolling out to Model 3 and Model Y owners in the U.S.

With Software Update 2026.2.3, Tesla is launching the Unlatching Charge Cable function, which will now utilize the left rear door handle to release the charging cable from the port. The release notes state:

“Charging can now be stopped and the charge cable released by pulling and holding the rear left door handle for three seconds, provided the vehicle is unlocked, and a recognized key is nearby. This is especially useful when the charge cable doesn’t have an unlatch button. You can still release the cable using the vehicle touchscreen or the Tesla app.”

The feature was first spotted by Not a Tesla App.

This is an especially nice feature for those who commonly charge at third-party locations that utilize plugs that are not NACS, which is the Tesla standard.

For example, after plugging into a J1772 charger, you will still be required to unlock the port through the touchscreen, which is a minor inconvenience, but an inconvenience nonetheless.

Additionally, it could be viewed as a safety feature, especially if you’re in need of unlocking the charger from your car in a pinch. Simply holding open the handle on the rear driver’s door will now unhatch the port from the car, allowing you to pull it out and place it back in its housing.

This feature is currently only available on the Model 3 and Model Y, so Model S, Model X, and Cybertruck owners will have to wait for a different solution to this particular feature.

Continue Reading

News

LG Energy Solution pursuing battery deal for Tesla Optimus, other humanoid robots: report

Optimus is expected to be one of Tesla’s most ambitious projects, with Elon Musk estimating that the humanoid robot could be the company’s most important product.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla Optimus/X

A recent report has suggested that LG Energy Solution is in discussions to supply batteries for Tesla’s Optimus humanoid robot.

Optimus is expected to be one of Tesla’s most ambitious projects, with Elon Musk estimating that the humanoid robot could be the company’s most important product.

Humanoid robot battery deals

LG Energy Solution shares jumped more than 11% on the 28th after a report from the Korea Economic Daily claimed that the company is pursuing battery supply and joint development agreements with several humanoid robot makers. These reportedly include Tesla, which is developing Optimus, as well as multiple Chinese robotics companies.

China is already home to several leading battery manufacturers, such as CATL and BYD, making the robot makers’ reported interest in LG Energy Solution quite interesting. Market participants interpreted the reported outreach as a signal that performance requirements for humanoid robots may favor battery chemistries developed by companies like LG.

LF Energy Solution vs rivals

According to the report, energy density is believed to be the primary reason humanoid robot developers are evaluating LG Energy Solution’s batteries. Unlike electric vehicles, humanoid robots have significantly less space available for battery packs while requiring substantial power to operate dozens of joint motors and onboard artificial intelligence processors.

LG Energy Solution’s ternary lithium batteries offer higher energy density compared with rivals’ lithium iron phosphate (LFP) batteries, which are widely used by Chinese EV manufacturers. That advantage could prove critical for humanoid robots, where runtime, weight, and compact packaging are key design constraints.

Continue Reading