Connect with us

News

What’s causing SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy delays?

Published

on

Although uncertainty in the schedule remains, SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy rocket appears to be nearly ready for its first engine ignition test (called a ‘static fire’) sometime within the next week or so.

An attempt at 1 PM EST today, January 16, was canceled for unspecified reasons, although Kennedy Space Center reportedly maintained the usual roadblock to prevent vehicles from driving past, implying that SpaceX still intends to conduct propellant loading tests with Falcon Heavy. It was noted earlier this morning by spaceflight journalist Chris Bergin that things were “a bit too quiet” if a test was indeed planned for today, and his intuition appears to have been correct. It still remains the case that Falcon Heavy is an experimental and untested rocket to an extent, and these delays are to be expected as SpaceX works out the inevitable kinks and bugs that arise during the extensive testing big launch vehicle has been and is still being put through.

Advertisement

Due to range requirements in support of an upcoming launch of the United Launch Alliance’s (ULA) Atlas 5 rocket, currently NET Thursday, SpaceX has postponed the static fire of Falcon Heavy without a replacement date. It is unlikely that another attempt will occur before the upcoming weekend, but SpaceX should have at least a solid week of uninterrupted range support once ULA’s launch occurs, hopefully without delay. Godspeed to ULA, in the meantime.

The crazy complexity of rocketry

Most recently, and perhaps somewhat related to Falcon Heavy’s static fire delays, SpaceX completed as many as two complete wet dress rehearsals (WDRs), which saw Falcon Heavy topped off with full tanks of its cryogenic (super cool) liquid oxygen (LOX) and rocket-grade jet fuel (RP-1). In essence, the rocket became equivalent to several hundred tons of carefully stabilized explosive. Nominally, these rehearsals appear entirely uneventful to an outside observer, with little more than ice formation and the occasional bursts of propellant tank vents to suggest that something important is occurring. However, anomalies like the failure of Falcon 9 during the Amos-6 static fire provide a staggering demonstration of just how explosive and sensitive a rocket’s fuel is, and Falcon Heavy has approximately three times the fuel capacity of Falcon 9. Empty, Falcon 9’s mass has been estimated to be around 30 metric tons, a minuscule amount of structure in the face of the more than 500 metric tons of propellant the vehicle carries at liftoff.

These propellant loading tests can also be challenging for reasons aside from their highly explosive nature. Due to basic realities of the physical nature of metal, the predominate ingredient for Falcon 9’s load-bearing structures, metallic structures shrink under extreme cold (and expand under heating). In the case of Falcon 9’s massive 45 meters (150 foot) tall first stage, the scale of this contraction can be on the order of several inches or more, particularly given SpaceX’s predilection towards cooling their propellant as much as possible to increase its energy density. For Falcon 9, these issues (thermodynamic loads) are less severe. However, add in three relatively different first stage boosters linked together with several extremely strong supports at both their tops and bottoms and that dynamic loading can become a fickle beast. The expansion or compression of materials due to temperature changes can create absolutely astounding amounts of pressure – if you’ve ever forgotten a glass bottled drink in the freezer and discovered it violently exploded at some future point, you’ll have experienced this yourself.

Advertisement

With several inches of freedom and the possibility that each Falcon Heavy booster might contract or expand slightly differently, these forces could understandably wreak havoc with the high precision necessary for the huge rocket to properly connect with the launch pad’s ground systems that transmit propellant, fluids, and telemetry back and forth. Information from two reliable Kennedy Space Center sources experienced with the reality of operating rockets, as well as NASASpaceflight.com, suggested that issues with dynamic loads (such as those created by thermal contraction/expansion) are a likely explanation for the delays, further evidenced by their observations that much of the pad crew’s attention appeared to be focused at the base of Transporter/Erector/Launcher (TEL). The TEL base hosts the clamps that hold the rocket down during static fires and launches, as well as the Tail Service Masts (TSMs) that connect with the Falcon 9/Heavy to transport propellant and data to the first stage(s). These connection points are both relatively tiny, mechanically sensitive, and absolutely critical for the successful operation of the rocket, and thus are a logical point of failure in the event of off-nominal or unpredicted levels of dynamic stresses.

Test, launch, land, repeat.

All things considered, these difficulties demonstrate that even after months (even years) of relentless modeling, testing, remodeling, and retesting, rockets (and especially huge rockets like Falcon Heavy) are immensely complex, and even tiny mistakes can lead the vehicle to stray from its expected behavior. Quite simply, the reality of engineering only truly comes into play once hardware is fully in the loop, and it’s in this state that SpaceX has demonstrated again and again a distinct and elegant ability to learn from their hardware, rather than attempt to salve uncertainty with a neurotic and counterproductive level of statistical analysis, modelling, and documentation. The agile launch company still dabbles in those aspects when beneficial or necessary, but testing comes first in its importance.

The conclusion here, then, is that Falcon Heavy’s delays betray this aspect of SpaceX – a launch company that loves its fans, but also understands the need for cautious testing when it comes to new and untried rocket hardware. Whether Falcon Heavy succeeds or fails, SpaceX will learn from the proceedings, and they will be better off for it (although maybe less so financially…).

Follow along live as launch photographer Tom Cross and I cover these exciting proceedings as close to live as possible.

Advertisement

Teslarati   –   Instagram Twitter

Tom CrossInstagram

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 shows off mysterious vehicle at Giga Texas

The mysterious structure, partially unboxed amid construction materials, has sparked widespread speculation among Tesla enthusiasts and analysts. Many are convinced it is the long-rumored Model Y L, the extended-wheelbase variant already popular in China, now arriving in Texas for potential U.S. production.

Published

on

Credit: Joe Tegtmeyer | X

Tesla seemingly showed off a mysterious vehicle at Giga Texas, one that seems to be completely different than anything the company currently makes for the U.S. market.

The vehicle, which was spotted on the plant’s property, appears to be similar to the Model Y L that has not yet launched in North America, and is currently built at Gigafactory Shanghai in China.

Drone pilot Joe Tegtmeyer captured intriguing footage at Tesla’s Giga Texas on March 23, 2026, revealing what appears to be a large, blue plastic-wrapped vehicle body resting inside a wooden shipping crate outdoors.

The mysterious structure, partially unboxed amid construction materials, has sparked widespread speculation among Tesla enthusiasts and analysts. Many are convinced it is the long-rumored Model Y L, the extended-wheelbase variant already popular in China, now arriving in Texas for potential U.S. production.

The images show an elongated silhouette that stands out from standard Model Y bodies. Side-by-side comparisons shared in replies to Tegtmeyer’s post highlight key differences: the rear door extends farther over the wheel arch than on a regular Model Y, and the rear glass appears to run all the way to the spoiler lip without the metal trim seen on shorter versions.

One overlay analysis noted that the visible proportions align precisely with the Chinese-market Model Y L, which measures approximately 4.98 meters long with a 3.04-meter wheelbase, which is about seven inches longer overall than the standard Model Y sold in the U.S.

Advertisement

The vehicle is a bare “body-in-white” shell, typical of prototypes sent abroad for tooling validation and local manufacturing ramp-up. Tesla has already launched the six- and seven-seat Model Y L in China and other markets, where it offers roughly 10% more cargo space and greater family-friendly versatility.

This sighting fits Tesla’s broader strategy. Industry observers expect the company to localize Model Y L production at Giga Texas by mid-2026 to serve American families seeking extra room without stepping up to the larger Cybertruck or a future full-size SUV.

Advertisement

Bringing the design stateside could add tens of thousands of annual deliveries while leveraging existing Model Y lines. People have been adamant that they want the Model Y L in the U.S., especially as Tesla plans to fade the Model X, the company’s most ideal vehicle for large families, out of production in the near future.

Tesla Model Y lineup expansion signals an uncomfortable reality for consumers

While Tesla has made no official comment, the timing, amid Giga Texas expansion and steady Model Y output, suggests the mysterious crate is more than a random prototype.

If confirmed as the Model Y L, it marks another step in Tesla’s effort to refresh its bestselling SUV for global demand. The vehicle would perform exceptionally well in the U.S., and despite the company’s rather mute stance on bringing it to America, this might be the biggest hint to date that it could be on the way.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Cybertruck

Tesla Cybertruck just won a rare and elusive crash safety honor

Only the most outstanding of performances in crash tests can warrant an IIHS Top Safety Pick+ award, as vehicles listed with that ranking must achieve “Good” ratings in the small overlap front, updated side, and updated moderate overlap front tests, along with “Acceptable” or “Good” headlights standard on all trims.

Published

on

(Credit: Tesla)

Tesla Cybertruck landed a rare and elusive safety honor from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS). It was the only pickup truck in the U.S. market to do so.

The IIHS rewarded the Cybertruck with the Top Safety Pick+ honors, the highest marks a vehicle can receive from the agency.

Only the most outstanding of performances in crash tests can warrant an IIHS Top Safety Pick+ award, as vehicles listed with that ranking must achieve “Good” ratings in the small overlap front, updated side, and updated moderate overlap front tests, along with “Acceptable” or “Good” headlights standard on all trims.

Cybertruck was the only truck to also win an NHTSA Five-Star Safety rating, making it the only pickup available on the market to be recognized with top marks from both agencies.

Advertisement

There are a multitude of options for pickups in the U.S. market, as it is one of the most popular vehicle types for consumers in the country. Pickups are great vehicles for anyone who does any sort of hauling or is just looking for extra space for any variety of reasons.

Pickups are also inherently safer than other body types on the road, mostly because they are larger and heavier, making them more favorable against other vehicle types in the event of a collision. However, Tesla has a significant advantage in safety with its vehicles because it engineers them to not only be safer in collisions, but also easier to repair.

The Cybertruck managed to achieve “Good” ratings, the highest marks available by the IIHS, in all three Crashworthiness categories, as well as “Good” ratings in both Crash Avoidance and Mitigation assessments.

It also received “Good” ratings across all driver and pedestrian crash-test performance metrics, except for one, where it earned an “Acceptable” rating for rear passengers in the Chest category.

Advertisement

The Cybertruck’s outstanding crash test performance has won it this incredible mark as the pickup still tends to be one of the more polarizing vehicle designs on the market.

It is no secret that Tesla has struggled with demand of the Cybertruck due to pricing, but the recent rollout of a trim that was temporarily priced at just $59,990 showed plenty of people want the all-electric pickup.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk’s Boring Co. Tunnel Vision Challenge ends with a surprise for Louisiana, Maryland and Dallas

The Boring Company stunned three cities today, awarding New Orleans, Baltimore, and Dallas free underground Loop tunnels.

Published

on

By

Elon Musk’s The Boring Company (TBC) announced today that it is building free underground Loop tunnels in three American cities: New Orleans, Louisiana; Baltimore, Maryland; and Dallas, Texas. The company had promised one winner when it launched the Tunnel Vision Challenge in January. After receiving 487 submissions, it selected three, committing to fund and construct all of them pending a feasibility review, entirely at its own expense. For a company that has faced years of skepticism over the gap between its promises and its delivered projects, choosing to expand its commitment rather than narrow it is a notable shift in both scale and accountability.

All three projects will now enter a rigorous, fully funded diligence phase that includes meetings with elected officials, regulators, community and business leaders, geotechnical borings, and a complete investigation of subsurface utilities and infrastructure. TBC confirmed that all costs associated with this diligence process are 100% funded by the company. If all three projects pass feasibility, all three get built. If only one clears the bar, that one gets built. The company’s willingness to fund the due diligence regardless of outcome removes one of the most common early-stage barriers that kills promising infrastructure proposals before they leave a spreadsheet.

Beyond the three winners, TBC announced it will continue working with two additional entrants it found compelling enough to pursue independently: the Hendersonville Utility Tunnel in Hendersonville, Tennessee, and the Morgan’s Wonderland Tunnel in San Antonio, Texas, which would notably serve one of the nation’s premier theme parks built specifically for guests with special needs.

The challenge also coincides with TBC’s most active construction period to date. The company recently began drilling on the Music City Loop near the Tennessee State Capitol in Nashville, and in February it broke ground on a Loop in Dubai. Musk has long argued that the fundamental problem with urban infrastructure is cost and bureaucratic inertia, not engineering. “The key to solving traffic is making going 3D either up or down,” he said in 2018, a conviction now reflected in a company structure built to absorb the financial risk that typically stalls public projects for years.

Advertisement

Music City Loop could highlight The Boring Company’s real disruption

The Tunnel Vision Challenge’s most underappreciated element may be what it produced beyond three winners. Submissions came from individuals, companies, and governments across states including Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, Kansas, Louisiana, Maryland, New York, and Texas, as well as from international entrants. Musk captured the underlying logic years ago when he said, “Traffic is driving me nuts. I’m going to build a tunnel boring machine and just start digging.” Today, three American cities are counting on exactly that.

Advertisement
Continue Reading