Connect with us

News

SpaceX tests extra-fast ocean landing, celebrates 50th launch

Published

on

The happy tragedy of 1044

SpaceX has successfully completed the 50th launch of Falcon 9 a bit less than eight years after its 2010 debut, and has done so in a fashion that almost perfectly captures the veritable tsunamis the company has begun to make throughout the global aerospace industry. After a duo of delays due to hardware issues and range conflicts, this evening’s launch successfully placed Hispasat 30W-6 into a geostationary transfer orbit (GTO), where the massive ~6100 kilogram communications satellite will now spend several months raising its orbit to around 36,000 km (22,000 miles) above Earth’s surface.

Aside from becoming the heaviest commsat the company has yet to launch into GTO, the mission’s anticipated landing attempt stirred up quite a bit of intrigue and uncertainty in the spaceflight fan community. Stormy Atlantic seas, partially connected to the chaotic weather recently seen on the East coast, proved to be far too dangerous for SpaceX’s eastern recovery fleet and its drone ship, OCISLY, and they returned to Port Canaveral around 48 hours ago, under the watchful eyes of many anxious SpaceX followers. Tragically, this means that the brand new Falcon 9 booster (B1044) – originally expected to attempt perhaps the most difficult landing yet – had to be expended. Although the booster went through its paces as if it were preparing to land, it found no drone ship beneath it once it reached sea level, and subsequently dunked into the stormy Atlantic seas.

However, due to the last-minute nature of SpaceX and Hispasat’s decision to expend the booster rather than delay for better recovery conditions, launch technicians at Pad 40 simply did not have time to remove the rocket’s iconic landing legs and valuable titanium grid fins – the first time their titanium iteration has been chosen for a Falcon 9 to resist extreme reentry heating. Due to massive swells, recovery of even pieces of the expended booster – theoretically following a soft landing – will not be possible, as no SpaceX recovery vessels remained at the planned point of touchdown 400 miles off the Florida coast. Notably, following the successful inaugural flight of Falcon Heavy, CEO Elon Musk stated that upgraded titanium grid fins were “super expensive” and unequivocally “the most important thing to recover.” SpaceX’s decision to expend Falcon 9 B1044 without even sparing the time to remove the booster’s recovery hardware and titanium fins demonstrates just how focused the company is on its customers’ needs. In the case of geostationary communications satellites like Hispasat 30W-6, launch delays on the order of a few days can cause millions of dollars of financial harm to the parent company – each day a satellite spends on the ground orbit is also a day with no revenue generation, a less-than-thrilling proposition to shareholders.

Advertisement
-->

B1044 sadly lost any hope at a second flight, but the data SpaceX gathered from its uniquely fast reentry and attempted soft-landing will hopefully pave the way for the recovery of Falcon 9 and Heavy boosters after all but the heaviest satellite launches. GovSat-1, a launch that saw its flight-proven booster famously survive a similarly hot landing in the ocean, was the first largely successful test of this new and experimental method of more efficiently recovering Falcons. By igniting three of its nine Merlin 1D engines instead of the usual single engine while landing, Falcon boosters can theoretically reduce the amount of fuel needed to safely land, fuel savings that can then be used to push its payloads higher and faster. However, the downsides of this approach are several. With three times as many engines igniting at landing, the margin of error for a successful landing becomes downright miniscule – the tiniest of problems with ignition, throttle control, or guidance could cause the rocket to smash into the drone ship at considerable speed. Additionally, triple the landing thrust would subject the booster to as much as 10Gs of acceleration (10 times the force of Earth’s gravity), forces that would almost instantaneously cause the average human (and even specially trained fighter pilots) to black out.

Regardless of 1044’s untimely demise, another successful mission for SpaceX is purely positive. Happy customers make for a happy company, and SpaceX has achieved an incredible consistency of success in the last year alone. The loss of a new, potentially-reusable Falcon 9 booster is sad, but it only serves to foreshadow the imminent introduction of Falcon 9 Block 5, an upgrade hoped to realize Elon Musk’s decade-old dream of rockets that can be reused as many as 10 times with minimal refurbishment, and 100 times with maintenance. That debut could occur as early as April, just a month away.

https://twitter.com/_TomCross_/status/970900892005359617

Advertisement
-->

Follow us for live updates, behind-the-scenes sneak peeks, and a sea of beautiful photos from our East and West coast photographers.

Teslarati   –   Instagram Twitter

Tom CrossTwitter

Pauline Acalin  Twitter

Eric Ralph Twitter

Advertisement
-->

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.

Advertisement
-->

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

It confirmed this in an X post on Tuesday night:

Advertisement
-->

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.”

Advertisement
-->
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.

Advertisement
-->

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.

Advertisement
-->

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.

Advertisement
-->

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.

Advertisement
-->
Continue Reading