Connect with us

News

SpaceX wiggles Starhopper’s Raptor engine, tests parts ahead of hover test debut

Repeating a test conducted in June with Raptor SN04, SpaceX tested Starhopper and Raptor SN06's thrust vectoring capabilities on July 12th. (NASASpaceflight - bocachicagal)

Published

on

On the evening of July 12th, SpaceX technicians put Starhopper’s freshly-installed Raptor – serial number 06 (SN06) – through a simple but decidedly entertaining test, effectively wiggling the engine in circles.

Designed to verify that Raptor’s thrust vectoring capabilities are in order and ensure that Starhopper and the engine are properly communicating, the wiggle test is a small but critical part of pre-flight acceptance and a good indicator that the low-fidelity Starship prototype is nearing its first hover test(s). Roughly 48 hours after a successful series of wiggles, Starhopper and Raptor proceeded into the next stage of pre-flight acceptance, likely the final more step before a tethered static fire.

Routine for all Falcon rockets, SpaceX’s exceptionally rigorous practice of static firing all hardware at least once (and often several times) before launch has unsurprisingly held firm as the company proceeds towards integrated Starhopper and Starship flight tests. Despite the fact that Raptor SN06 completed a static fire as recently July 10th, SpaceX will very likely put Starhopper and its newly-installed Raptor through yet another pre-flight static fire, perhaps its fourth or fifth test this month.

Although it would undoubtedly be easier, cheaper, and faster to skip that post-delivery static fire, it will simultaneously lower the risk of Raptor failing mid-flight and verify that Starhopper itself is healthy and ready for untethered hovering. Although SpaceX could likely live without Starhopper in the event that it’s lost during flight-testing, any failure capable of destroying the vehicle itself is at least as capable of severely damaging or completely destroying the spartan but still expansive test and launch facilities the company built over the course of several months.

SpaceX has been hard at work gradually building, expanding, and upgrading its South Texas launch facilities since December 2018. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal, 04/27/2019)

Would you like some testing with your testing?

Follow July 12th’s nighttime Raptor wiggle test, July 13th was mainly quiet and filled with inspections of Starhopper, Raptor, and other various work. The day after, however, SpaceX proceeded through several hours of propellant loading, ending with what looked like less energetic versions of the Raptor preburner ignition tests Starhopper previously performed with Raptor SN02.

In a staged-combustion engine like Raptor, getting from the supercool liquid oxygen and methane propellant to 200+ tons of thrust is quite literally staged, meaning that the ignition doesn’t happen all at once. Rather, the preburners – essentially their own, unique combustion chambers – ignite an oxygen- or methane-rich mixture, the burning of which produces the gas and pressure that powers the turbines that bring fuel into the main combustion chamber. That fuel then ignites, producing thrust as they exit the engine’s bell-shaped nozzle.

The first obvious test occurred around 7:30pm CT, July 14th. (LabPadre)
The second obvious test followed around 8:50 pm CT. (LabPadre)

Although the fireworks are so subtle that they are easily missed, the conditions inside the preburner – hidden away from view – are actually far more intense than the iconic blue, purple, and pink flame that exists Raptor’s nozzle. This is because the preburners have to nurture the conditions necessary for the pumps they power to fuel the main combustion chamber. Much like hot water will cool while traveling through pipes, the superheated gaseous propellant that Raptor ignites to produce thrust will also cool (and thus lose pressure) as it travels from Raptor’s preburner to the main combustion chamber.

Thus, if the head pressure produced in the preburners is too low, Raptor’s thrust will be (roughly speaking) proportionally limited at best. At worst, low pressure in the preburners can completely prevent Raptor from starting and running stably and can even trigger a “hard start” or shutdown that could damage or destroy the engine. As such, to preburners fundamentally have to operate at higher chamber pressures (and thus higher temperatures) than the main combustion chamber (the big firey bit at the end). According to Elon Musk, Raptor’s oxygen preburner has the worst of it, operating at pressures as high or higher than 800 bar (11,600 psi, 80 megapascals).

Coincidentally, this is roughly equivalent to the pressure at the bottom of the Pacific Ocean.

Starhopper and Raptor seen on the afternoon of July 14th, preparing for an evening of testing. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

In short, preburner testing is no less critical than full-on static fire testing with an engine like Raptor. July 14th’s test was also made doubly efficient due to the fact that preburner testing requires liquid propellant, which effectively makes the whole test a wet dress rehearsal (WDR) even before any engine ignition or partial ignition is involved. Per SpaceX moving from propellant loading to preburner/turbine testing, Starhopper is almost certainly healthy and operating as expected, an excellent sign that the ungainly vessel may be ready for a static fire of Raptor as early as 2pm CT, July 15th.

The memes, oh, the memes.

Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.

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

Honda gives up on all-EV future: ‘Not realistic’

Mibe believes the demand for its gas vehicles is certainly strong enough and has changed “beyond expectations.” As many drivers went for EVs a few years back, hybrids are becoming more popular for consumers as they offer the best of both worlds.

Published

on

honda logo with red paint
Ivan Radic, CC BY 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

Honda has given up on a previous plan to completely changeover to EVs by 2040, a new report states. The company’s CEO, Toshihiro Mibe, said that the idea is “not realistic.”

Mibe believes the demand for its gas vehicles is certainly strong enough and has changed “beyond expectations.” As many drivers went for EVs a few years back, hybrids are becoming more popular for consumers as they offer the best of both worlds.

Mibe said (via Motor1):

“Because of the uncertainty in the business environment and also the customer demand, is changing beyond our expectation and, therefore, we have judged that it’ll be difficult to achieve. That ratio [100-percent electric in 2040] is not realistic as of now. We have withdrawn this target.”

Instead of going all-electric, Honda still wants to oblige by its hopes to be net carbon neutral by 2050. It will do this by focusing on those popular hybrid powertrains, planning to launch 15 of them by March 2030.

Honda will invest 4.4 trillion yen, or almost $28 billion, to build hybrid powertrains built around four and six-cylinder gas engines.

There are so many companies abandoning their all-electric ambitions or even slowing their roll on building them so quickly. Ford, General Motors, Mercedes, and Nissan have all retreated from aggressive EV targets by either cancelling, delaying, or pausing the development of electric models.

Hyundai’s 2030 targets rely on mixed offerings of electric, hybrid & hydrogen vehicles

Early-decade pledges from multiple brands proved overly ambitious as infrastructure lags, battery costs remain high in some markets, and many buyers prefer hybrids for their convenience and range. Toyota has long championed hybrids, while others have quietly extended internal-combustion timelines.

For Honda—historically known for reliable gasoline engines—this shift leverages its core strengths while buying time to refine electric technology. Whether the hybrid-heavy strategy will protect market share in an increasingly competitive landscape remains to be seen, but one thing is clear: the gas engine is far from dead at Honda, unfortunately.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Delta Airlines rejects Starlink, and the reason will probably shock you

In a pointed exchange on X, Elon Musk defended SpaceX’s uncompromising approach to Starlink’s in-flight internet service, explaining why Delta Air Lines walked away from a deal.

Published

on

Delta Airlines Airbus photographed April 2024 Delta-owned. No expiration date, unrestricted use.

SpaceX frontman Elon Musk explained on Wednesday why commercial airline Delta got cold feet over offering Starlink for stable internet on its flights — and the reason will probably shock you.

In a pointed exchange on X, Elon Musk defended SpaceX’s uncompromising approach to Starlink’s in-flight internet service, explaining why Delta Air Lines walked away from a deal.

Delta rejected Starlink because it insisted on routing all connectivity through its branded “Delta Sync” portal rather than allowing a simple Starlink experience.

Instead, the airline partnered with Amazon’s Project Kuiper—rebranded as Amazon Leo—for high-speed Wi-Fi on up to 500 aircraft, with rollout targeted for 2028. At the time of the announcement, Kuiper had roughly 300 satellites in orbit, while Starlink operated more than 10,400.

The use of the “Delta Sync” portal would not work for SpaceX, as Musk went on to say that:

“SpaceX requires that there be no annoying ‘portal’ to use Starlink. Starlink WiFi must just work effortlessly every time, as though you were at home. Delta wanted to make it painful, difficult and expensive for their customers. Hard to see how that is a winning strategy.”

Musk doubled down in a follow-up post:

“Yes, SpaceX deliberately accepted lower revenue deals with airlines in exchange for making Starlink super easy to use and available to all passengers.”

SpaceX has structured its airline agreements to prioritize zero-friction access—no captive portals, no SkyMiles logins, no paywalls or ads blocking basic connectivity.

While this means forgoing higher-margin deals that would let carriers monetize the service more aggressively, it ensures Starlink feels like home broadband at 35,000 feet. Passengers on partner airlines such as United, Qatar Airways, and Air France have already praised the service for enabling seamless video calls, streaming, and work mid-flight without interruptions.

Delta’s choice reflects a different philosophy. By keeping Wi-Fi behind its Delta Sync ecosystem, the airline aims to drive loyalty program engagement and control the digital passenger journey. Yet, critics argue this short-term control comes at the expense of immediate competitiveness.

Airlines already installing Starlink are pulling ahead in customer satisfaction surveys, while Delta passengers face years of reliance on slower, legacy systems until Leo launches.

SpaceX’s decision to trade revenue for simplicity will pay off in the longer term, as Starlink is already positioning itself as the default high-speed option for carriers that value passenger satisfaction over incremental fees.

Musk’s focus on creating not only a great service but also a reasonable user experience highlights SpaceX’s prowess with Starlink as it continues to expand across new partners and regions.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla gathers 93,000 FSD miles in a country where FSD isn’t approved – here’s how

Tesla has quietly logged an impressive 93,000 miles (roughly 150,000 km) of autonomous driving at its Giga Berlin factory—using Full Self-Driving (FSD) in a country where the technology remains unavailable to consumers on public roads.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla AI | X

Tesla has gathered 93,000 Full Self-Driving miles in a country where Full Self-Driving is not even approved. Here’s how.

Tesla has quietly logged an impressive 93,000 miles (roughly 150,000 km) of autonomous driving at its Giga Berlin factory—using Full Self-Driving (FSD) in a country where the technology remains unavailable to consumers on public roads.

The milestone, revealed alongside news that Giga Berlin has now built 750,000 Model Y vehicles, highlights how Tesla is putting its AI to work in one of the most controlled environments imaginable: it’s own factory floor.

Every Model Y that rolls off the final assembly line at Giga Berlin doesn’t need a human driver to reach the outbound lot. Instead, the freshly built vehicles engage FSD and navigate themselves across the factory campus.

The route—from the end of the production line through marked internal pathways to the staging area where cars await delivery or export—is entirely on private property. No public roads, no mixed traffic, and no regulatory hurdles for on-road autonomous operation.

It’s a closed-loop system: wide lanes, predictable layouts, minimal pedestrians, and consistent conditions that make it one of the simplest proving grounds for the software.

A short factory tour video shared by Tesla Manufacturing shows General Assembly team member Jan explaining the process. Gesturing beside a glossy black Model Y still wearing its protective wrap, he notes the cumulative distance the fleet has covered autonomously.

Tesla Giga Berlin seems to be using FSD Unsupervised to move Model Y units

The cars handle the short drive flawlessly, freeing up workers who would otherwise spend hours shuttling vehicles manually. For a high-volume plant like Giga Berlin, the time and labor savings add up quickly. Even small gains in cycle time per car can reclaim valuable space in the outbound lot and streamline logistics.

This internal deployment serves multiple purposes. First, it delivers zero-cost validation data. Each factory run exposes FSD to real-world physics—acceleration, steering precision, obstacle avoidance—in a repeatable setting far safer than public testing.

Second, it demonstrates the system’s readiness at scale. If FSD can reliably move thousands of brand-new cars without intervention inside a busy factory, it underscores the robustness of the vision-based, end-to-end neural network Tesla has been refining.

Critics often point to Europe’s cautious regulatory stance on unsupervised autonomy, yet Tesla has turned that limitation into an advantage. While owners in Germany still cannot activate consumer FSD on highways or city streets, the software is already proving its worth behind the factory gates.

The 93,000 miles represent not just internal efficiency gains but a subtle flex: the cars are manufactured ready to navigate autonomously, at least in the bounds of the factory. It’s a big feather in the cap of FSD, even if regulators have yet to green-light broader use.

As Giga Berlin continues ramping output, expect this autonomous logistics loop to grow. What began as a practical workaround for moving finished vehicles has quietly become one of the most compelling real-world showcases of FSD’s potential—right in the heart of regulated Europe. Tesla isn’t waiting for approval to perfect its autonomy; it’s already driving the future, one factory mile at a time.

Continue Reading