LNG: TESLARATI

A Tesla-inspired electric car startup in China recently launched its own ride-hailing service, seemingly taking a page once more from the playbook of the Elon Musk-led American carmaker. Xpeng Motors (Xiaopeng), the company behind the initiative, has opted to utilize its own electric vehicle fleet for the service.

The Chinese electric car maker stands as the latest company which jumped into the ride-hailing market in China, an industry that is dominated by giants such as Didi Chuxing. The Tesla-inspired electric car maker has not discussed its fleet size or the specifics of its newly-launched service, though it has noted to local news agencies that its ride-hailing initiatives are aimed at providing “value-added services” for its customers, among others.

Xpeng Motors has been pretty open about the inspiration it takes from the activities of Tesla, previously noting that it sees the American electric car maker as a “benchmark.” In an interview last year, Xpeng founder and serial entrepreneur He Xiaopeng specifically stated that one of the reasons he founded his electric car company “was because Elon Musk made Tesla’s patents available.” He also shares Elon Musk’s optimism on electric propulsion, describing the venture is “exciting.”

In a way, Xpeng’s move into the ride-hailing market is partly a way for the company to future-proof itself. Electric cars are set to become mainstream, and they are also well-poised to transition into the autonomous driving era, which is expected to hit the mainstream transportation industry in the coming years. Tesla is set to be a key player in this emerging market as well, with Elon Musk targeting ride-hailing giants such as Uber and Lyft through the Tesla Network’s Robotaxi service.

The Tesla Network has been in the works for years, with Elon Musk writing about the concept of an autonomous ride-hailing service in his Master Plan Part Deux. Musk envisioned the Telsa Network to allow electric car owners to deploy their vehicles for ride-hailing, essentially allowing the electric cars to earn for their owners. In an investor call, Musk proved optimistic about the service, stating that the Tesla Network could push the company towards a $500 billion valuation.

Musk expects Tesla’s vehicles to be capable of operating on their own by next year, though it remains to be seen if the company could meet the CEO’s aggressive timeline for the service’s rollout. 

After wind shear pushed SpaceX’s Starlink launch debut from May 15th to May 16th, issues with satellite software have forced the company to scrub the second attempt, delaying the launch another ~7 days.

For a mission as spectacularly ambitious as SpaceX’s 60-satellite Starlink launch, delays due to those satellites should come as little to no surprise. Given the sheer numbers involved and the fact that this is the first flight-hardware based on SpaceX’s radically redesigned Starlink satellite bus, this scrub is just a part of the process of developing new spacecraft.

For the time being, this scrub can effectively be considered indefinite. Troubleshooting 60 high-performance satellites – some with possible software or hardware faults – could understandably be a very time-consuming process, particularly if these specific spacecraft are closer to a beta-test than an actual final product. Based on comments made by CEO Elon Musk, that is likely the case. As such, troubleshooting hardware/software faults at the launch site while still mated to Falcon 9 will likely provide excellent experience for all involved.

When dealing with the number of satellites SpaceX will need to realize their Starlink constellation, the company will need to be able to handle the anomalies that will inevitably follow the preparation and launch of 1000 or more satellites annually. Starlink v0.9 is simply the first step – albeit a shockingly large one – in that direction.

Far more important and far less guaranteed is Falcon 9’s wholly unremarkable flow up to launch. Despite it being SpaceX’s third attempt at launching a Falcon 9 booster three times, Falcon 9 B1049 has remained ready to launch throughout the last ~60 hours of operations. Weather is weather and the first batch of dozens of advanced, custom-built communications satellites will inevitably experience bugs, but Falcon 9’s stoic performance is somewhat less guaranteed.

For Starlink to succeed, the launch component of the equation is going to be just as critical – if not more critical – than ensuring that every single satellite is perfect prior to launch, at least within reason. A failure to act as a good steward of the space debris environment could have major regulatory consequences. However, nothing will kill Starlink faster than unreliable, delay-ridden launches, seemingly an unlikely proposition in SpaceX’s current condition.

So long as Falcon 9 Block 5 remains as reliable and consistent as it has thus far proven to be, even fairly serious issues with aspects of the Starlink constellation itself should be more akin to roadblocks than showstoppers. If all goes well with SpaceX’s aforementioned software updates and triple-checks, Starlink v0.9 could be ready to launch around May 22-24. Stay tuned as SpaceX continues to provide updates.

Check out Teslarati’s newsletters for prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket launch and recovery processes

Japanese automaker Nissan Motor Co Ltd stated on Thursday that it would be using cameras and radar in the development of its full self-driving technologies. Seemingly siding with American electric car maker Tesla, Nissan argued that LiDAR, a key component in the autonomous driving systems of competitors such as GM and Ford, is too expensive for its capabilities.

Nissan’s announcement comes roughly a month after Tesla held its Autonomy Day, where Elon Musk dubbed LiDAR a “fool’s errand.” During the event, Musk predicted that companies relying on the light-based sensors would likely abandon the technology in the future. For his part, Tetsuya Iijima, general manager of advanced technology at Nissan, noted in a statement to reporters that LiDAR’s capabilities currently fail to match up to advanced camera and radar solutions.

“At the moment, LiDAR lacks the capabilities to exceed the capabilities of the latest technology in radar and cameras. It would be fantastic if LiDAR technology was at the level that we could use it in our systems, but it’s not. There’s an imbalance between its cost and its capabilities,” Iijima said.

Iijima’s statements about LiDAR are not just empty words from the Japanese carmaker, as Nissan has unveiled its own camera and radar-focused self-driving technology recently. Unlike Tesla’s current Autopilot system, which requires drivers to keep their hands on the steering wheel, Nissan’s system allows hands-free driving in single lanes on highways on predefined routes.

To enable this technology, Nissan utilizes cameras, radar, and sonar sensors to compile three-dimensional mapping data, enabling the company’s vehicles to “see” their surroundings accurately. The Japanese carmaker is also developing a “Tri-Cam” system that focuses on three points to the front and sides of a vehicle, allowing cars to capture a wide area of view.

Nissan plans to roll out its self-driving technology even to its lineup of affordable vehicles in the future. By doing so, the carmaker expects to see a boost in sales, enabling it to recover from a profit slump. Nissan’s earnings have been rough as of late, with the company noting during a recent report that it had hit “rock bottom” amidst the aftermath of a financial scandal related to its former chairman, Carlos Ghosn.

Tesla’s full self-driving strategy, which uses cameras and artificial intelligence, was explained by Sr. Director of AI Andrej Karpathy during the electric car maker’s Autonomy Day event last month. Karpathy likened Tesla’s full self-driving approach to the way humans operate a vehicle, even joking that the event’s attendees only used their biological cameras (eyes) and neural networks (brain) to drive to the event’s venue. “You all used your own neural network in your brains to get here. You didn’t shoot lasers from your eyes to drive,” Karpathy lightly said.

Upper-level wind shear has unfortunately scrubbed SpaceX’s first dedicated Starlink launch attempt, pushing Falcon 9 B1049’s third liftoff to no earlier than 10:30 pm EDT (02:30 UTC), May 16th.

A few hours prior to the launch attempt, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk hosted a conference call with members of the press and answered a number of questions about Starlink, providing the best look yet into the company’s newest endeavor. Topics included the advanced technologies on each Starlink satellite, their extremely unorthodox deployment method, SpaceX’s ultimate goals for the constellation, and even a few brief comments on funding.

Funding, secured

Perhaps the single most important thing Musk noted in the hour-long media briefing was his belief that SpaceX already has “sufficient capital to build an operational constellation.” It’s possible that that statement is heavily qualified, as Musk did not delve into greater detail, but it is still an incredible claim that could mean Starlink is far ahead of competing constellations and far more capital-efficient than OneWeb.

As previously discussed on Teslarati, in the last four years, OneWeb has raised $3.4B of funding, while SpaceX – a company primarily focused on building and launching rockets – has raised $2B, half of which is known to be dedicated to Starlink. OneWeb’s constellation (either 650 or 2650 satellites) cost estimate has grown quite a bit recently and stands at ~$5B. Assuming all $2B of the funding SpaceX has raised is dedicated to Starlink, that would translate to a per-satellite cost – including all infrastructure and launch – of $450,000 for the first phase (~4400 satellites).

Musk’s contextual definition of an “operational constellation” is probably more in line with the twelve 60-satellite launches he described as necessary to provide “significant [broadband] coverage”. It could also refer to the entire tranche of ~1600 Starlink satellites planned for the lower 550 km (340 mi) orbit this first batch of 60 is headed for, a number that Musk stated would offer “decent global coverage”. Either way, Starlink is almost certainly far more capital-efficient than OneWeb, LeoSat, Telesat, or any other satellite constellation with serious intentions.

The most obvious explanation for this – regardless of the satellites themselves – is simple: SpaceX owns its own closed-loop launch capability, including pads, integration facilities, an established cross-country transport network, and the rockets (Falcon) themselves. For any of the proposed satellite constellations to succeed, the manufacturers will almost invariably need to find build satellites so affordably that the cost of launch outweighs the cost of its payload. This ultimately means that launches alone could account for something like 50% of the cost of an entire satellite constellation.

Assuming Block 5 boosters can be reused at least 5-10 times each, the only real cost of an internal SpaceX launch is the hours worked, recovery fleet operations, and the expended upper stage and fairing – likely less than $30M altogether. As such, SpaceX may already be achieving its satellite cost targets on its first launch.

Deploying satellites “like spreading a deck of cards”

Meanwhile, Musk also offered some detail on the deeply unorthodox method SpaceX has chosen for spacecraft deployment once in orbit. Apparently, Starlink satellites will be deployed from Falcon 9’s upper stage by rotating the stage (presumably along its vertical axis) and simply letting go of the spacecraft. Musk used the analogy of spreading a deck of cards on a table, seemingly suggesting that they will either be released simultaneously (perhaps by stack) or with a stagger measured in milliseconds. This could create a fairly spectacular visual, forming an evenly-spaced spiral of satellites spreading out from the Falcon upper stage.

Above all else, Musk mainly seemed to be excited about Starlink, whether discussing the constellation’s long-term goals or the technology utilized on each individual satellite. Some miscellaneous facts and tidbits taken from the Q&A can be found below:

• Aside from Ka-band antennas and inter-satellite laser links, these 60 Starlink spacecraft are very close to the final spacecraft design.
• “It’s one of the hardest engineering projects that I’ve ever seen done.” – Elon Musk
• Starlink v0.9 is SpaceX’s heaviest payload ever by a huge margin, weighing in around 18,500 kg (40,800 lb). Crew Dragon is most likely in second-place, with a launch mass estimated to be around 13,500 kg.
• Combined, the solar arrays on the 60 Starlink spacecraft will produce up to 50% more power than the International Space Station’s football field-sized panels. This translates to ~180 kW, with each spacecraft thus producing around 3 kW total with an unusual single-panel array.
  • Two solar array deployment mechanisms will be tested on this mission.
• “We see this as a way to generate revenue to develop more advanced rockets and spaceships. Starlink is a key component for establishing a presence on the moon and Mars.” – Elon Musk
• SpaceX sided with krypton-fueled Hall effect thrusters due to krypton costing 5-10x less than more traditional xenon propellant. SpaceX’s internally-designed and built thrusters will have an ISP of ~1500s.
• “[SpaceX has built] the most advanced phased array antenna[s] that I am aware of.” – Elon Musk
• These first 60 satellites alone will have a combined bandwidth of 1 terabit per second (125 GB/s), averaging around 17 Gbps per satellite.

Check out Teslarati’s newsletters for prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket launch and recovery processes

The Boring Company’s planned 2-mile Las Vegas tunnel is seeing some opposition, with some members of the city’s Convention and Visitors Authority (LVCVA) expressing their reservations about the tunneling startup’s capability to deliver on the project.

Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority CEO Steve Hill has stated that a contract has been negotiated with The Boring Company to build a transport tunnel that could move people around the Las Vegas Convention Center. The cost of the project is estimated to be $52.5 million, far less than the cost of a conventional above-ground transit system. In the event that The Boring Company does not receive a certificate of occupancy for the tunnel system, the LVCVA will get back its entire investment.

While the Boring Company’s deal appears to be a cost-effective proposal that carries little financial risk to the LVCVA, some board members have expressed their reservations for the project nonetheless. Board members Michele Fiore and Carolyn Goodman, for one, recently spoke in favor of an alternative proposal from Austria-based Doppelmayr Garaventa Group, which involves the construction of an above-ground transit system.

This Monday, Goodman sent an email to her fellow board members urging them to support the proposal from the Austria-based company, according to a report from the Las Vegas Sun. In her message, Goodman cited Doppelmayr’s experience in the transport industry, comparing it favorably against The Boring Company’s inexperience.

“Doppelmayr has been in existence for 125 years. They already have projects here that are operating successfully. The Boring Co. is three years old and has yet to deliver a final package on anything. (The tourism and convention business) is a $60 billion industry that every part of this state relies on for dollars. This is really about deliverability — we can’t fail on this,” she wrote.

Doppelmayr’s initial proposal to the LVCVA involved the creation of an above-ground transit system that would cost an estimated $215 million to complete. In her letter to the LVCVA’s board, Goodman argued that the Austria-based company would have been able to build a transport system for as little as $85 million. The board member even invited Doppelmayr CEO Markus Schrentewein to give a presentation at a board meeting on Tuesday.

“During the bidding process, if we would have been given the chance to present and explain in more detail our proposal, I believe we would have come up with a more favorable project for the LVCVA campus,” the Doppelmayr CEO said.

Michele Fiore, who also works as a councilwoman in Las Vegas, also expressed her reservations over the Boring Company’s proposal. In a statement to local media, Fiore echoed Goodman’s sentiments about the Austria-based company’s experience. “The risk of the Boring Co. is quite high, while the risk with Doppelmayr is quite low. How do we justify not really looking at Doppelmayr as a solid and proven company? I’m not so sure the Boring Co. is the company to do this job,” she said.

Hill, for his part, noted that The Boring Company’s proposal was initially selected due to cost, timing, and scalability. At $52.5 million, the tunneling startup’s plan is cost-effective, and the project could be completed while the campuses’ expansion work is ongoing. The Boring Company’s transport tunnel could also be expanded to other areas of Las Vegas in the future. “It’s significantly less expensive than any of the alternatives that we reviewed. Frankly, for the funding capacity of the LVCVA, this is the system that we could go forward with. We’re going to bring a contract next week that will eliminate all financial risk from the LVCVA,” Hill said.

In a previous statement, Boring Company President Steve Davis described the Las Vegas project as an opportunity for both the tunneling startup and the city. “People will be excited. They will ride it, and if they like it, we’ll probably get more interest. Nevada looks for a responsible way to say yes. We think it offers a lot of opportunity. I think others see that as well. And we will put in that work to see if it’s the right choice for Las Vegas,” he said.

A Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority spokesperson has noted that the board will vote on the Boring Company’s proposal on May 22, when the board meets for a budget hearing.