Connect with us

News

SpaceX Starship website spotted ahead of Elon Musk’s June rocket update

An animation of 2017's iteration of Starship/Super Heavy, previously known as BFR. (SpaceX)

Published

on

It appears that SpaceX is preparing a dedicated website for its proposed Starship point-to-point transport system, potentially capable of transporting dozens of passengers anywhere on Earth in just 30-60 minutes.

Assuming this website is actually a prelude to a SpaceX reveal (it could be completely unrelated), it seems likely that Starship.com will go live sometime around CEO Elon Musk’s planned June 20th update on Starship and Super Heavy. Much like Starlink.com went live on the day of SpaceX’s first dedicated launch, the company may be ready to tease more substantial details and fleshed-out plans for its aspirational Starship airline.

Big Falcon Challenge

Regardless of the theoretical viability of SpaceX’s Earth-to-Earth transport aspirations or the company’s readiness to kick off the publicity for the service, the fact remains that maturing Starship/Super Heavy (formerly BFR) into a system with reliability approaching that of airliners will take at least 5-10 years, if not decades. The idea itself – using reusable rockets to transport customers anywhere on Earth in 30-60 minutes at a cost comparable to business class tickets – is undeniably alluring and theoretically achievable. However, the list of “iff” statements that must first be satisfied for is immense and full of an array of technological firsts, any one of which could be a showstopper.

The greatest challenge of affordable, reliable point-to-point transport relates directly to the need for affordability and reliability. Put simply, rockets are in many ways far more complex than modern airliners, requiring margins of design and error and that would make commercial aircraft engineers blush. Modern FAA regulations currently expect manufacturers and operators to design, build, and fly passenger aircraft such that the chances of catastrophic failure (generally a fatal crash and total hull loss) average one in one billion flight hours. That may sound downright unachievable, but modern airliners routinely reach levels of reliability measured in hundreds of millions of flight hours between loss-of-life failures.

The best records of rocket reliability are currently held by Ariane 5 and Atlas V, reaching success streaks without catastrophic failure of 86 launches and 81 launches, respectively. It’s difficult to compare airliners and rockets, as rockets feature multiple stages and are typically only active for 30-90 minutes. Under the generous and inaccurate assumption that the average Ariane 5 mission accounts for 90 minutes of “flight time”, the most statistically reliable launch vehicle ever built is roughly 1,000,000 to 10,000,000 times less safe than the FAA’s present-day certification requirements. It would be more accurate to compare the distance traveled per catastrophic failure, but that would still indicate that the proven safety record of launch vehicles is perhaps 20,000 to 200,000 times worse than that of modern passenger aircraft.

BFR’s 2017 variation is visualized during an Earth-to-Earth transport launch. (SpaceX)
BFR may have changed radically (and gained a new name) since its 2016 reveal, but SpaceX executives have continued to indicate that Earth-to-Earth transport remains a serious ambition for the company.

Extreme reusability: extreme reliability?

Additionally, most modern rockets are expended, although SpaceX is doing everything it can to flip that equation. The only conceivable way to sustain a real commercial market for suborbital, hypersonic passenger transportation – aside from guaranteeing that passengers are unlikely to die – is to implement a level of rapid reusability that is entirely unprecedented in spaceflight. As it turns out, regardless of any Earthbound spaceliner ambitions the company may have, SpaceX’s ultimate mission is to accomplish precisely that goal, albeit in order to colonize Mars in a practical timeframe.

What has never explicitly been a part of SpaceX’s goal, however, is achieving that level of extreme reusability simultaneously alongside airliner-class reliability. Accepting high levels of risk has always been front and center to Elon Musk’s presentations on SpaceX’s BFR-powered Mars ambitions, with the CEO often indicating that chances of death would be quite high on early missions to the Red Planet. Of course, surviving and building a colony on Mars is a fair bit riskier than anything specifically centered around Earth and suborbital flight regimes.

To make it to Mars, Starship will have to launch, refuel 3-10 times in Earth orbit, undergo a 3-6 month journey through deep space, put extreme stress on its heat shield during Mars aerobraking and reentry, and then land on another planet. For Earth-to-Earth missions, Starship would be subjected to comparatively gentle reentries of ~7.5 km/s, lower than orbital velocity. (SpaceX)

All of this is to say that SpaceX may or may not succeed in its ambition of developing a spacecraft/booster that is as extraordinarily reliable as it is reusable, just as SpaceX may or may not publish a website dedicated to Earth-to-Earth Starship transport sometime next month. Stay tuned to find out on the next episode!

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

Tesla dispels reports of ‘sales suspension’ in California

“This was a “consumer protection” order about the use of the term “Autopilot” in a case where not one single customer came forward to say there’s a problem.

Sales in California will continue uninterrupted.”

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla has dispelled reports that it is facing a thirty-day sales suspension in California after the state’s Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) issued a penalty to the company after a judge ruled it “misled consumers about its driver-assistance technology.”

On Tuesday, Bloomberg reported that the California DMV was planning to adopt the penalty but decided to put it on ice for ninety days, giving Tesla an opportunity to “come into compliance.”

Tesla enters interesting situation with Full Self-Driving in California

Tesla responded to the report on Tuesday evening, after it came out, stating that this was a “consumer protection” order that was brought up over its use of the term “Autopilot.”

The company said “not one single customer came forward to say there’s a problem,” yet a judge and the DMV determined it was, so they want to apply the penalty if Tesla doesn’t oblige.

However, Tesla said that its sales operations in California “will continue uninterrupted.”

It confirmed this in an X post on Tuesday night:

The report and the decision by the DMV and Judge involved sparked outrage from the Tesla community, who stated that it should do its best to get out of California.

One X post said California “didn’t deserve” what Tesla had done for it in terms of employment, engineering, and innovation.

Tesla has used Autopilot and Full Self-Driving for years, but it did add the term “(Supervised)” to the end of the FSD suite earlier this year, potentially aiming to protect itself from instances like this one.

This is the first primary dispute over the terminology of Full Self-Driving, but it has undergone some scrutiny at the federal level, as some government officials have claimed the suite has “deceptive” naming. Previous Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg was vocally critical of the use of the name “Full Self-Driving,” as well as “Autopilot.”

Continue Reading

News

New EV tax credit rule could impact many EV buyers

We confirmed with a Tesla Sales Advisor that any current orders that have the $7,500 tax credit applied to them must be completed by December 31, meaning delivery must take place by that date. However, it is unclear at this point whether someone could still claim the credit when filing their tax returns for 2025 as long as the order reflects an order date before September 30.

Published

on

tesla showroom
Credit: Tesla

Tesla owners could be impacted by a new EV tax credit rule, which seems to be a new hoop to jump through for those who benefited from the “extension,” which allowed orderers to take delivery after the loss of the $7,500 discount.

After the Trump Administration initiated the phase-out of the $7,500 EV tax credit, many were happy to see the rules had been changed slightly, as deliveries could occur after the September 30 cutoff as long as orders were placed before the end of that month.

However, there appears to be a new threshold that EV buyers will have to go through, and it will impact their ability to get the credit, at least at the Point of Sale, for now.

Delivery must be completed by the end of the year, and buyers must take possession of the car by December 31, 2025, or they will lose the tax credit. The U.S. government will be closing the tax credit portal, which allows people to claim the credit at the Point of Sale.

We confirmed with a Tesla Sales Advisor that any current orders that have the $7,500 tax credit applied to them must be completed by December 31, meaning delivery must take place by that date.

However, it is unclear at this point whether someone could still claim the credit when filing their tax returns for 2025 as long as the order reflects an order date before September 30.

If not, the order can still go through, but the buyer will not be able to claim the tax credit, meaning they will pay full price for the vehicle.

This puts some buyers in a strange limbo, especially if they placed an order for the Model Y Performance. Some deliveries have already taken place, and some are scheduled before the end of the month, but many others are not expecting deliveries until January.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk takes latest barb at Bill Gates over Tesla short position

Bill Gates placed a massive short bet against Tesla of ~1% of our total shares, which might have cost him over $10B by now

Published

on

Elon Musk took his latest barb at former Microsoft CEO Bill Gates over his short position against the company, which the two have had some tensions over for a number of years.

Gates admitted to Musk several years ago through a text message that he still held a short position against his sustainable car and energy company. Ironically, Gates had contacted Musk to explore philanthropic opportunities.

Elon Musk explains Bill Gates beef: He ‘placed a massive bet on Tesla dying’

Musk said he could not take the request seriously, especially as Gates was hoping to make money on the downfall of the one company taking EVs seriously.

The Tesla frontman has continued to take shots at Gates over the years from time to time, but the latest comment came as Musk’s net worth swelled to over $600 billion. He became the first person ever to reach that threshold earlier this week, when Tesla shares increased due to Robotaxi testing without any occupants.

Musk refreshed everyone’s memory with the recent post, stating that if Gates still has his short position against Tesla, he would have lost over $10 billion by now:

Just a month ago, in mid-November, Musk issued his final warning to Gates over the short position, speculating whether the former Microsoft frontman had still held the bet against Tesla.

“If Gates hasn’t fully closed out the crazy short position he has held against Tesla for ~8 years, he had better do so soon,” Musk said. This came in response to The Gates Foundation dumping 65 percent of its Microsoft position.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk sends final warning to Bill Gates over short position

Musk’s involvement in the U.S. government also drew criticism from Gates, as he said that the reductions proposed by DOGE against U.S.A.I.D. were “stunning” and could cause “millions of additional deaths of kids.”

“Gates is a huge liar,” Musk responded.

It is not known whether Gates still holds his Tesla short position.

Continue Reading