Connect with us

SpaceX

SpaceX’s Starship prototype set for first serious test after Raptor engine installed

Starhopper conducts a propellant tank pressure regulation test on March 18th. (NASASpaceflight - bocachicagal)

Published

on

In concert with South Texas’ Cameron County, SpaceX has officially scheduled the first serious test – requiring temporary road closures – of its Starship prototype, unofficially nicknamed ‘Starhopper’ in light of its ultimate goal of performing low-altitude, low-velocity hop tests.

SpaceX technicians have already successfully completed a number of unspecified tanking tests – likely with chemically neutral liquid nitrogen – and completed acceptance and installation of Raptor serial number 02 (SN02), setting the stage for the giant testbed’s first flight-critical tests. Now set to occur between 10am and 4pm local time (8am2pm Pacific, 15:00-21:00 UTC), that test debut will likely see Starhopper topped to the brim with liquid methane and oxygen propellant for the first time, potentially transitioning into the first BFR-integrated Raptor static fire test.

Scarcely seven days after the engine’s arrival in Boca Chica, SpaceX technicians completed the first-ever installation of a flight-ready Raptor – SN02 – on a full-scale BFR prototype known as Starhopper. Aside from marking a major symbolic milestone for the company’s next-generation rocket development program, the installation of a functional rocket engine on the first partial-fidelity vehicle prototype means that SpaceX can now enter into a new and critical stage of development: integrated flight testing.

Assuming (hopefully) that SpaceX has yet to conduct actual fueling tests of the Starship prototype without establishing roadblocks and safety perimeters, something that would be an egregious threat to nearby locals, it’s likely that this first major test – much like SpaceX’s established Falcon 9 and Heavy test regime – will involve a process known as a Wet Dress Rehearsal (WDR). A WDR would see Starhopper loaded with liquid methane and oxygen propellant – potentially anywhere from the bare minimum needed to operate a single Raptor to completely filling its tanks – to verify that the prototype’s complex plumbing system and giant tanks are operating nicely together under flight conditions (i.e. cryogenic temperatures, thermal and mechanical stresses, chemical environments, etc.). Much like routine Falcon 9 static fire tests performed both at SpaceX’s McGregor, TX test site and the launch pad, data indicating that the rocket is behaving nominally during the WDR allows the operations team to transition smoothly from a WDR into a captive static fire test, in which the vehicle’s engine(s) are briefly ignited to simulate the first few seconds prior to liftoff.

It’s relatively rare but not unusual for planned Falcon 9 or Heavy static fire tests to end during the WDR phase in cases where the launch team observes data that appears to be less than nominal. SpaceX generally takes a “better safe than sorry” approach to these sorts of operations, swallowing the costs and risk of raising customers’ ire due to delays in order to ensure the highest probability of complete launch success.

For a vehicle as utterly new and alien as Starhopper is to both SpaceX and the aerospace industry as a whole, it’s safe to say that that tendency towards caution will be readily on display throughout these first several tests, at least until the company’s operations technicians and engineers are considerably more familiar with the prototype rocket’s behavior. On the other hand, given just how shoestring the budget of this beast likely is and how rapidly SpaceX managed to go from an empty dirt lot to a hop-test-ready, 30ft/9m-diameter Starship prototype, it’s equally likely that the company – particularly CEO Elon Musk – will accept the increased risk of catastrophic vehicle failures to keep the development program as agile as possible.

According to CEO Elon Musk, this large metal cylinder is actually one of the barrel sections of the first orbital Starship prototype. Workers are welding the sections together outside, rain or shine. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)
Starhopper makes its own clouds during tanking tests on March 14th. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

As Musk himself frequently and famously is known to say, it’s far better to push hardware to failure during early testing than it is to hold back and risk largely unplanned failures during nominal operations, a lesson that SpaceX itself has learned the hard way several times. One step further, while they are at best undeniably inconvenient and expensive, major vehicle failures during testing can actually be an invaluable source of data that ultimately improves the system as a whole. For BFR, a launch vehicle meant to safely, routinely, and reliably transport as many as 100+ people both around the Earth and solar system, all possible opportunities to learn and improve the system prior to risking the lives of passengers will be an absolute necessity if SpaceX wants to ensure that customers remain willing to trust the company and its spacecraft with their lives.

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

NASA taps SpaceX for more astronaut missions as Boeing Starliner remains grounded

NASA just gave SpaceX a $946 million contract for three more astronaut missions through 2030.

Published

on

By

NASA has awarded SpaceX a $946 million contract modification covering three more astronaut missions to the International Space Station, according to an announcement the agency published Friday. The award adds Crew-15, Crew-16, and Crew-17 to SpaceX’s existing Commercial Crew Transportation Capability contract, bringing the agreement’s total value to $5.92 billion across 17 flights.

SpaceX confirmed the award on X, writing that it was excited for Falcon 9 and Dragon to launch NASA’s Crew-15, 16, and 17 missions to the Space Station from Florida. The new missions cover ground, launch, in orbit, and return operations, along with cargo transport and a lifeboat capability while docked at the station, and the period of performance runs through 2030.

The award follows a notice of intent NASA issued in May, when the agency first signaled it would purchase up to six additional post certification missions from SpaceX. Teslarati covered that filing at the time, noting NASA cited technical issues and schedule delays encountered by Boeing as a driving factor. Friday’s contract modification locks in three of those six missions, with the remaining three left open for NASA to award later, potentially to Boeing if Starliner clears certification.

Boeing’s CST-100 Starliner has still not flown an operational crew rotation mission for NASA. The spacecraft’s most recent crewed test flight in 2024 ended without the astronauts returning aboard Starliner, and the company has spent the time since working through thruster problems. SpaceX President Gwynne Shotwell said this week that SpaceX is not retiring Crew Dragon today, for sure, while stopping short of committing to fly it past 2030.

Crew-12 is currently docked at the space station, and NASA has said Crew-13 is targeting a launch in the coming weeks. The newly awarded Crew-15 through Crew-17 missions extend SpaceX’s role as NASA’s primary way of getting astronauts to and from orbit well into the back half of the decade, regardless of what happens with Starliner or Starship in the meantime.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

New drone video shows Tesla’s Optimus Factory reaching a turning point

New drone footage shows Tesla’s dedicated Optimus factory steel frame nearing completion at Giga Texas.

Published

on

By

Tesla’s dedicated Optimus factory at Gigafactory Texas is closing in on a finished steel frame, according to drone footage posted Thursday afternoon by longtime site observer Joe Tegtmeyer. In the video, Tegtmeyer said structural steel assembly is now about five column grids away from reaching the building’s north perimeter beam, putting the primary skeleton in its final stretch roughly six months after Tesla broke ground on the North Campus site in late March.

Tegtmeyer’s footage shows concrete already going in on three upper floors while crews continue laying rebar and pouring grade beam footings at ground level. That kind of parallel work, steel rising at one end of the site while concrete sets at the other, is a scheduling approach Tesla used at the original Giga Texas building and appears to be repeating here to save time before the plant’s targeted 2027 production start.

Teslarati has tracked the building’s progress since Tesla confirmed construction was officially underway in May, when the first steel structure went up on what was then bare, reclaimed land. The facility is part of a more than 5.2 million square foot expansion of Giga Texas’s North Campus that Tesla has said will eventually run nearly the length of the existing vehicle factory, over 4,000 feet, while sitting somewhat narrower. Musk has pegged the long term output target at 10 million Optimus units a year once the line is running at full capacity, a volume that would dwarf the one million unit pilot line Tesla is standing up separately at its Fremont, California factory.

Tesla Giga Texas to feature massive Optimus V4 production line

The Texas facility sits alongside another major buildout on the same campus. Terafab, the joint Tesla and SpaceX chip fabrication plant that will eventually supply the silicon running Optimus units in the field. Housing robot assembly and chip production on the same grounds is a deliberate supply chain decision, cutting down on the shipping and lead time that would otherwise sit between the two.

Tesla has not given an updated timeline beyond its previously stated goal of bringing high volume Optimus production online at the site in the summer of 2027. Fremont’s smaller pilot line began mass producing the current Gen 3 robot in January, with that plant expected to build tens of thousands of units this year primarily to generate the real world data Tesla needs to refine the robot’s software before Giga Texas ramps up. Six months of visible construction progress, tracked almost entirely through Tegtmeyer’s recurring drone flights, gives the clearest outside look yet at how seriously Tesla is treating that 2027 deadline.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court

Tesla and SpaceX sue a small Illinois firm after cease and desist letters over Terafab.

Published

on

By

SpaceX Terafab rendering

Tesla and SpaceX are asking a federal judge to rule that their planned Terafab chip factory does not infringe a small Illinois company’s trademark, a request that arrives only after months of quiet negotiation broke down this summer.

The dispute traces to May 18, when Tesla filed three U.S. trademark applications for “Terafab” and “Tesla Terafab,” covering semiconductor chips and related chip making services. TERA-print LLC, a nanotechnology company that has held a federal trademark for “Tera-Fab” since 2021, responded five days later with a cease and desist letter. According to the lawsuit, first reported by Reuters, TERA-print argued that Tesla and SpaceX’s use of “Terafab” would confuse consumers familiar with its own trademark, which covers a desktop photolithography printer sold to researchers for sensor and bioengineering work.

What stands out in the filing is the timing of TERA-print’s own paperwork. One day before sending that cease and desist letter, on May 22, TERA-print applied to expand its existing registration to cover semiconductor materials, silicon chips, nanoelectronic devices and AI design services, categories it had not previously claimed. Tesla and SpaceX call that filing opportunistic in their complaint, noting it arrived two months after Tesla’s public Terafab announcement and just days after Tesla’s own trademark applications went in.

Elon Musk launches TERAFAB: The $25B Tesla-SpaceXAI chip factory that will rewire the AI industry

By June 10, TERA-print was threatening to sue for federal trademark infringement, false designation of origin and unfair competition, the complaint states. Rather than wait to be sued, Tesla, SpaceX and SpaceXAI met with TERA-print six separate times between June and August trying to resolve the dispute directly. Those talks collapsed, and the companies filed for declaratory judgment this week in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, asking a judge to find that “Terafab” does not infringe TERA-print’s mark before TERA-print can file a claim of its own.

TERA-print isn’t backing down. The company told PCMag it discussed a settlement with Tesla as recently as September 2 and feels misled by what it called Tesla’s professed interest in settling. Its CTO, Andrey Ivankin, said TERA-print holds a Defense Department contract to fabricate semiconductors and partially owns Mattiq Inc., an AI company built on TERA-print’s products, and that the company will vigorously defend its rights.

Tesla and SpaceX argue the overlap is superficial. Terafab is planned as a $16.8 billion complex spanning roughly 100 million square feet at the Grimes County site SpaceX confirmed last month, built to produce chips for Optimus robots, Tesla’s AI computing needs and SpaceX’s orbital data center ambitions, a scale and purpose the companies say no reasonable consumer would confuse with a tabletop lab printer. TERA-print’s product line has stayed focused on lithography tools for biological and sensor research since it registered its mark in 2021.

The trademark fight is the second legal dispute tied to the Terafab project in the past week, following a separate SpaceX suit aimed at keeping company records about the facility out of public view, as KBTX reported. Whether construction proceeds under the Terafab name now depends on a federal judge in Austin.

Continue Reading