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

Investor's Corner

BNP Paribas Exane initiates Tesla coverage with “Underperform” rating

The firm’s projections for Tesla still include an estimated 525,000 active Robotaxis by 2030.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla China

Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) has received a bearish call from BNP Paribas Exane, which initiated coverage on the stock with an Underperform rating and a $307 price target, about 30% below current levels. 

The firm’s analysts argued that Tesla’s valuation is driven heavily by artificial intelligence ventures such as the Robotaxi and Optimus, which are both still not producing any sales today.

Tesla’s valuation

In its note, BNP Paribas Exane stated that Tesla’s two AI-led programs, the Robotaxi and Optimus robots, generate “zero sales today, yet inform ~75% of our ~$1.02 trillion price target.” The research firm’s model projected a maximum bull-case valuation of $2.7 trillion through 2040, but after discounting milestone probabilities, its base-case valuation remained at $1.02 trillion.

The analysts described their outlook as optimistic toward Tesla’s AI ventures but cautioned that the stock’s “unfavorable risk/reward is clear,” adding that consensus earnings expectations for 2026 remain too high. Tesla’s market cap currently stands around $1.44 trillion with a trailing twelve-month revenue of $92.7 billion, which BNP Paribas argued does not justify Tesla’s P/E ratio of 258.59, as noted in an Investing.com report.

Tesla and its peers

BNP Paribas Exane’s report also included a comparative study of the “Magnificent Seven,” finding Tesla’s current market valuation as rather aggressive. “Our unique comparative analysis of the ‘Mag 7’ reveals the extreme nature of TSLA’s valuation, as the market implicitly says TSLA’s 2035 earnings (~55% of which will be driven by Robotaxi & Optimus, w/ zero sales now) have the same level of risk & value-appropriation as the ‘Mag 6’s’ 2026 earnings,” the firm noted.

Advertisement

The firm’s projections for Tesla include an estimated 525,000 active Robotaxis by 2030, 17 million cumulative Optimus robot deliveries by 2040 priced above $20,000 each, and more than 11 million Full Self-Driving subscriptions by 2030. Interestingly enough, these seem to be rather optimistic projections for one of the electric vehicle maker’s more bearish estimates today.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla FSD’s new Mad Max mode is getting rave reviews from users

It does appear that Mad Max mode is destined to be one of the system’s biggest steps forward to date.

Published

on

Credit: Whole Mars Catalog/X

Tesla’s release notes for the newly released Mad Max mode for FSD (Supervised) V14.1.2 simply stated that the feature “comes with higher speeds and more frequent lane changes than Hurry.” But as per videos that have been posted online by FSD users who have tested the system, it does appear that Mad Max mode is destined to be one of the system’s biggest steps forward to date. 

It is then no surprise that the new capability is getting rave reviews from Tesla owners. 

Impressive tests

A look at posts on social media platform X would show that, similar to past FSD releases, numerous Tesla content creators immediately tested Mad Max mode on real-world streets after it was downloaded onto their vehicle. Considering that the update was released rather late, the first tests of Mad Max mode were done at night. Despite this, it was evident that Tesla worked very hard to make Mad Max mode into something that is very useful in real-world scenarios.

This could be seen in videos from longtime Tesla owner @BLKMDL3, who observed that Max Max mode was “amazing” and like “perfect for LA traffic” due to its cautious but assertive nature. Later on, the Tesla owner noted that after eight drives, it was evident that FSD (Supervised) V14.1.2 was impressive. 

Assertive but safe

Other testers such as Model Y owner Sawyer Merritt noted that Mad Max mode drives very quickly and confidently, with smoother acceleration that is still very safe. These were echoed by another longtime FSD tester, Dirty Tesla, who noted that Mad Max mode seems to be designed for heavy, aggressive traffic so users could fit in better. The FSD user did, however, observe that Mad Max mode does speed up a lot on open roads. 

Advertisement

Recent comments from Tesla AI Head Ashok Elluswamy have indicated that Mad Max mode was created to be a solution for daytime congested traffic, which is arguably one of the most soul-crushing experiences that drivers deal with on a daily basis. With this in mind, it does appear that FSD (Supervised) V14.1.2 could prove to be a notable step forward in Tesla’s push towards true autonomous driving.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk highlights the biggest flaw in X’s monetization program

Elon Musk also stated that YouTube manages creator payments “much better.”

Published

on

MINISTÉRIO DAS COMUNICAÇÕES, CC BY 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

Elon Musk has admitted that X’s creator payout system isn’t living up to expectations, and he has highlighted the current system’s biggest flaw. 

Amidst complaints about low and inconsistent payments, the platform’s owner acknowledged that X has been “underpaying and not allocating payment accurately enough.” Musk also stated that YouTube manages creator payments “much better.”

Musk acknowledges payout issues

Recent discussions about the social media platform’s payout issues began when X product head Nikita Bier stated that the company was developing new upgrades for “power users.” This prompted X user Peter Duan to raise ongoing concerns about being “consistently underpaid” compared to his peers. Bier responded candidly, suggesting that “creator payouts do more harm than good and we need to off-ramp to a different system.”

Musk then weighed in on the matter, contradicting Bier’s view. “No,” Musk wrote in his reply, “the issue is that we are underpaying and not allocating payment accurately enough. YouTube does a much better job.” The Tesla CEO’s comment immediately reignited debates about X’s monetization program, which some have criticized for its rather unpredictable nature.

X’s monetization challenges

Since X launched its ad revenue-sharing program in 2023, the system has promised to reward Premium subscribers who generate high engagement with verified accounts, as noted in a WION report. Creators, however, have argued that the company’s payout model has remained inconsistent, with revenue fluctuating even when view counts stay stable. Reports have noted that some users with millions of monthly impressions have received just a few hundred dollars.

Advertisement

By contrast, YouTube’s Partner Program, which takes a 45% cut of ad revenue, is known for more transparent and predictable payments. Musk’s admission that YouTube handles monetization more effectively could then hint at a potential shift towards a new monetization program for X, a platform that has become increasingly critical to social conversations over the years. 

Continue Reading

Trending