News
SpaceX tests Starhopper’s maneuvering thrusters ahead of inaugural flight test
Late at night on July 22nd, SpaceX’s South Texas team of technicians and engineers were busy testing a small but critical component of Starhopper, a testbed and low-fidelity Starship prototype meant to attempt its first untethered flight test as early as July 24th.
Monday evening’s testing centered around Starhopper’s cold gas nitrogen thrusters, multi-nozzle assemblies that appear to have quite literally been taken off of flight-proven Falcon 9 boosters. For Starhopper, they will act in a similar – albeit significantly reduced – fashion, serving to control the giant steel prototype’s attitude and augment its lone Raptor engine’s own thrust vectoring (i.e. steering) capability.
Although SpaceX has never released official numbers for the thrust of the cold gas thrusters used on Falcon 9 boosters and upper stages, it’s safe to say from their performance that the low-efficiency nitrogen thrusters produce roughly 5 kN (~1100 lbf) of thrust, perhaps up to 10+ kN. For an almost empty Falcon 9 booster, this translates to extremely rapid (sub-10s) flip maneuvers during return-to-launch-site (RTLS) landings.
At the same time, Falcon boosters have two sizes of cold-gas thrusters, with much larger high-performance (>10 kN) pods – located on the larger of the booster’s two raceways – focused on settling the rocket’s propellant after recovery-related coast periods. A duo of smaller 3-axis pods situated on the outside of the interstage serve as true attitude control system (ACS) thrusters, precisely pointing, flipping, and orienting boosters during vacuum operations and partially augmenting grid fin control authority during the late stages of landings. Despite their much smaller size, they still pack an impressive punch and are famous for almost saving tipping Falcon boosters during early (failed) landing attempts.
Starhopper, meanwhile, is dramatically larger than the Falcon 9 and Heavy boosters its tacked-on ACS thruster pods were designed for. It’s hard to know for sure but safe estimates peg the testbed’s dry mass somewhere around 50-75 metric tons (110,000-165,000 lb) thanks to the thick steel it was constructed out of. In other words, Starhopper likely weighs at least twice as much as an empty Falcon 9 booster (~25 metric tons).
To alleviate this mismatch, SpaceX arrived at a hilariously simple and cheap solution: install double the number of grave-robbed Falcon 9 thruster pods on Starhopper and voila! It was that duo of thruster pod pairs that were tested on July 22nd, visibly producing four distinct jets of pressurized nitrogen gas. Whenever Starhopper gets to hopping, those ACS thrusters should help the rocket precisely control its rotation, attitude, and – to a lesser extent – translation, hopefully helping to ensure a successful inaugural hover and divert test.
Scheduled to occur no earlier than Wednesday, July 24th, SpaceX plans to deconflict Cargo Dragon’s CRS-18 launch and Starhopper’s hover test, meaning that they will not happen simultaneously. In the ~70%-likely event that bad Florida weather delays CRS-18 to Thursday, July 25th, the road before Starhopper will be clear for an attempted hover on the 24th. Additionally, also reported first by NASASpaceflight.com, the test is expected to involve a divert, meaning that Starhopper will lift off, hover roughly 20m (65 ft) off the ground, and then carefully travel a few hundred feet East to a recently-constructed concrete pad for a soft landing.
Note they will want to deconflict with CRS-18, so if that launch is still on (dodgy weather) then perhaps hours before, or after launch? OR, *personal wish!!* go from CRS-18 webcast and then pad cameras at Boca Chica on the SpaceX webcast! ?➡️?— Chris B – NSF (@NASASpaceflight) July 23, 2019
This divert was tacitly confirmed by the arrival of a robotic transport mechanism, already used once before to move Starhopper from its build site to the launch pad. If the divert goes as planned, the transport equipment will be used to return Starhopper to its spartan launch mount and ground support equipment (GSE) umbilicals.
If Starhopper survives and Raptor SN06 performs nominally, it’s all but certain that the testbed rocket will be put through a series of increasingly ambitious test flights over the coming months – at least before SpaceX’s first higher-fidelity “Mk 1” Starship prototypes begin their own flight tests. According to CEO Elon Musk, those Starship test hops and flights could begin as few as 2-3 months from now – September or October 2019.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
Elon Musk
The Starship moon landing number NASA and Elon Musk can’t agree on
Musk disputes NASA estimate of 22 Starship launches for Moon landing, predicting 6 to 8.
Elon Musk is disputing a new NASA safety panel estimate of how many Starship launches it will take to put astronauts on the Moon, saying the real number will be less than half the panel’s figure.
On Thursday, NASA’s Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel held its quarterly public meeting. Panel member Charlie Precourt, a former NASA astronaut, flagged the fueling process for SpaceX’s lunar lander as a major risk for Artemis IV, the mission planned to land a crew on the Moon in 2028. “We need to keep our eyes on numerous required fuelings for the lander,” Precourt said, according to Ars Technica. “I think the last estimate is around 22 flights.”
Ars Technica’s Eric Berger posted the comment on X, and Musk replied. “That’s way too high,” Musk wrote. “Actual number will be more like 6 to 8.”
The disagreement comes down to a basic problem with sending a ship as large as Starship to the Moon. Starship burns nearly all of its propellant just reaching Earth orbit, so it cannot continue on to the Moon without stopping for a refill. SpaceX’s answer is a gas station in space. First, a Starship that works as a storage tank, called a depot, is launched into orbit. Then a series of tanker Starships launch one at a time, dock with the depot and pump their leftover propellant into it. Once the depot is full, the lunar lander version of Starship launches, docks, fills up and heads for the Moon.
Every tanker trip is its own full rocket launch, which is why the count matters. More launches mean more time, more cost and more chances for something to go wrong before astronauts ever leave Earth. Berger estimated that even if SpaceX reaches twice weekly Starship launches by the end of 2027, filling a depot at the panel’s number would still take roughly three months.
How many tankers are needed depends mostly on how much propellant each one can carry to orbit and how much is lost along the way. Starship’s fuel and oxygen are stored at extremely cold temperatures, and some of it slowly boils off while waiting in orbit. More is lost in each transfer. NASA appears to be working from what Starship can lift today, while Musk’s range assumes a more capable rocket.
Musk has pushed back on higher counts before. In 2021, after a government document suggested 16 launches, he called that “extremely unlikely” and said eight tankers would be the most required.
Much of the answer depends on hardware SpaceX has not finished flying. As Teslarati noted earlier this year, the company plans to carry out the refueling process with its upgraded V3 Starship, and Precourt described Artemis IV as carrying “a large number of firsts.” He also praised NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman’s team for working to clear obstacles for both SpaceX and Blue Origin, whose Blue Moon lander does not rely on orbital refueling for its first mission.
Elon Musk
Tesla’s secretive “Project Crystal Sun” gets a big green light in Texas
Fort Bend County approved four incentive agreements Thursday for Tesla’s proposed $10.1 billion solar factory.
Fort Bend County commissioners on Thursday approved a package of tax incentives for Tesla’s proposed $10.1 billion solar cell factory near Needville, Texas, giving the company one of the last local approvals it needs before it decides where to build. All four Tesla agreements passed 4 to 0.
The votes covered a property tax abatement inside Reinvestment Zone No. 34, a Chapter 381 economic development agreement, a foreign trade zone non-objection paired with payments in lieu of certain taxes, and a separate payment in lieu of taxes “true up” agreement, according to agenda notes from the Fort Bend Commissioners Court meeting.
The project, known internally as “Project Crystal Sun,” would make solar cells and finished modules on roughly 3,000 acres near FM 762 and FM 1994, south of the Brazos River. As Teslarati reported when the filing first surfaced in August, Tesla’s application under the state’s JETI Act splits the investment into $1.5 billion in real property and $8.6 billion in equipment, with 9,712 permanent jobs projected by 2033 and commercial operations targeted for the first quarter of 2029. The plant would handle the full chain from ingot and wafer production through cell testing.
Inside Tesla’s secretive $10 Billion “Project Crystal Sun” filing
Thursday’s approval does not lock in the site. Tesla has told the Texas Comptroller it is still weighing other locations, and site selection adviser David Dennison told Lamar Consolidated ISD trustees in September that the race had narrowed to Fort Bend and one out of state rival with a “very compelling package,” according to the Houston Chronicle. Tesla hopes to decide before the end of 2026, and the incentives still need sign off from the Comptroller and the Governor’s office.
Local officials have now done nearly everything within their control. Commissioners created the reinvestment zone in an August 24 special meeting, with Interim County Judge Daniel Wong formally withdrawing himself over his engineering firm’s past work with Tesla. Lamar CISD trustees voted 7 to 0 on September 15 to advance a JETI agreement that would tax Tesla’s qualifying property at 50 percent of its value for maintenance and operations from 2029 through 2038.
The plant lines up with a target Elon Musk set on Tesla’s Q4 2025 earnings call in January, when he said the company would “work toward getting 100 GW a year of solar cell production, integrating across the entire supply chain from raw materials all the way to finished solar panels.” In March, Tesla was reported to be negotiating a $2.9 billion purchase of Chinese solar manufacturing equipment bound for Texas. The Houston area already hosts Tesla’s Megafactory in Brookshire, where Megapack 3 production has started. Tesla said on its Q3 call that Megapack supply for 2027 is nearly sold out, and Musk wrote on X Thursday that the company is “increasing production of Megapacks as much as possible,” as demand from data centers climbs.
Tesla revealed plans to develop its own maps internally to fix Navigation issues and give owners more control over their routing.
On the company’s Q3 2026 Earnings Call, a question was asked about FSD Navigation issues, particularly speed limit recognition, parking, and routing. These are issues that surface from version to version and seem to be seriously challenging for Tesla’s AI team to resolve.
Tesla’s Head of AI, Ashok Elluswamy, said in response to the question:
“You’re totally right that we shouldn’t be depending on external people’s maps. So we are building our own maps, but not like the same way as OneMoreMap. We are building an entirely new architecture with essentially AI-based mapping and navigation.”
He continued:
“It’s going to be super awesome. It’s going to be integrated with voice. You can talk to it, ask for different routes. It’s going to learn your personalized preferences, plus the fleet preferences. The collective intelligence of all the cars is going to flow into making the maps and navigation super cool.”
Elluswamy said this issue should be confronted, and the mapping should be available for people by the time the v15 release starts deploying to customers.
“And over the next several months,” he added, “it’s just going to take over all of the navigation functions, parking, destination handling. And it will know you better than you know yourself in some regard for the driving task, and then handle it fully.”
Tesla Summon got insanely good in FSD v14.3.2 — Navigation? Not so much
Navigation is perhaps the most notable complaint with FSD, and although it has gotten better, it is still flawed. Much of the time, FSD will take people on routes that are not preferred by the driver, but Tesla tried to combat this with a routing feature in the Summer 2026 Update.
Tesla currently relies on Google for map data, but it is sort of counterintuitive to believe the company would rely on a third party for this. These improvements will be welcome, as routing and navigation have been such a pain point for so many owners for so long.
Quotes via Motley Fool
The Starship moon landing number NASA and Elon Musk can’t agree on
Tesla’s secretive “Project Crystal Sun” gets a big green light in Texas
