LNG: TESLARATI

NASA has announced a series of awards as part of its 2024 Moon return ambitions, providing up to $45.5M for 11 companies to study lunar landers, spacecraft, and in-space refueling technologies.

Among those selected for studies are SpaceX, Blue Origin, Masten Space, and the Sierra Nevada Corporation, alongside usual suspects like Boeing and Lockheed Martin. The chances of NASA actually achieving a crewed return to the surface of the Moon by 2024 are admittedly minuscule. However, with the space agency’s relatively quick three-month turnaround from accepting proposals to awarding studies, those chances of success will at least be able to continue skirting the realm of impossibility for now. In fact, SpaceX believes its Moon lander could be ready for a lunar debut as early as 2023.

Do the OldSpace Limbo!

Almost exactly 90 days (three months) since NASA released its lunar lander request for proposal (RFP), the 11 US companies selected for awards can now begin mature their designs, concepts of operations, and even build prototypes in a select few cases. At least based on the volume of awards and prototypes funded, the bulk of the $45.5M available for these studies unsurprisingly appears to have gone to Boeing and Lockheed. The duo of military-industrial complex heavyweights have maintained a decades-old stranglehold over NASA’s human spaceflight procurement.

In the last 13 years, the companies – combined – have carefully extracted no less than $35B from NASA, all of which has thus far produced a single launch of a half-finished prototype spacecraft (Orion) on a contextually irrelevant rocket (Delta IV Heavy) in 2014. The SLS rocket and Orion spacecraft remain almost perpetually delayed and are unlikely to complete their uncrewed launch debut until 2021, if not later.

SpaceX enters the lunar lander fray

“SpaceX was founded with the goal of helping humanity become a spacefaring civilization. We are excited to extend our long-standing partnership with NASA to help return humans to the Moon, and ultimately to venture beyond.”

– SpaceX President and COO Gwynne Shotwell

SpaceX was one of the 11 companies to receive NASA funding for a lunar lander-related design study. By all appearances, the company has been analyzing this potential use-case for some time. What they offer is significantly more complex than what NASA’s press release described as “one descent element study”. First and foremost, however, it must be stressed that these NASA funded studies – particularly those relegated to design, with no prototype builds – are really just concepts on paper. The NASA funding will help motivate companies to at least analyze and flesh out their actual capabilities relative to the task and time frame at hand, but there is no guarantee that more than one or two of the 11 studies will translate into serious hardware contracts.

Regardless of the many qualifications, SpaceX’s proposed descent module (i.e. Moon lander) is undeniably impressive. If SpaceX were to win a development contract, the lander would be based on flight-proven Falcon 9 and Crew Dragon subsystems wherever possible, translating into a vehicle that would have significant flight heritage even before its first launch. That first Moon landing attempt could come as early as 2023 and would utilize the performance of SpaceX’s own Falcon Heavy, currently the most powerful rocket in operation.

No renders have been released at this stage but it’s safe to assume that a SpaceX Moon lander would be somewhat comparable to Blue Origin’s just-announced Blue Moon lander, capable of delivering ~6.5t (14,300 lb) to the lunar surface. Rather than hydrogen and oxygen, SpaceX would instead use either Crew Dragon’s NTO/MMH propulsion or base the lander on Falcon 9’s extremely mature liquid kerosene/oxygen upper stage and Merlin Vacuum (MVac) engine.

Impressively, the SpaceX lander would aim for nearly double Blue Moon’s 6.5t payload capability, delivering as much as 12t (26,500 lb) to the surface of the Moon. That payload could either enable an unprecedentedly large crew capsule/ascent vehicle or permit the delivery of truly massive robotic or cargo payloads. Additionally, SpaceX believes that a descent stage with the aforementioned capabilities could potentially double as an excellent orbital transfer stage, refueling tug, and more. The lander would also serve as a full-up testbed for all the advanced technologies SpaceX needs to enable its goals of sustainable, reliable, and affordable solar system colonization.

Time will tell if NASA is actually serious about upsetting the status quo and getting to the Moon quickly and affordably, or if they will instead fall back on well-worn habits shown to minimize results and maximize cost. The White House recently proposed an additional $1.6B be added to NASA’s FY2020 budget, inexplicably choosing to take those funds from the federal Pell Grant system, which helps more than five million underprivileged Americans afford higher education. Regardless of the sheer political ineptitude involved in the proposed funding increase, even $1.6B annually (the WH proposal is for one year only) would be a pittance in the face of the spectacular inefficiencies of usual contractors Boeing and Lockheed Martin.

The telltale sign of which direction NASA’s lunar ambitions are headed will come when the agency begins to award actual development and hardware production contracts to one or several of the proposals to be studied. Stay tuned!

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

During Tesla’s first-quarter earnings call, Elon Musk noted that the company would be offering a “compelling insurance product” for its vehicles. Musk even provided an estimated timeframe for the service’s launch, stating that Tesla’s insurance would be rolled out within a month.

While the idea of an in-house insurance program might seem like an unnecessary distraction for the electric car maker at this point, the service could very well become a critical factor in Tesla’s pursuit of sustained profitability. This is according to Eddie Yoon, a director at The Cambridge Group, a firm that specializes in growth strategy. According to Yoon, a well-rounded, properly-released insurance program could help make Tesla into one of the industry’s most influential brands.

In an article on the Harvard Business Review, Yoon notes that companies which become multi-billion-dollar mega-brands usually meet several critical success factors. The first of these involves picking the right first adjacency to enter. Since breaching an untried market is difficult, companies that succeed generally go for an adjacency that has a similar go-to-market model, or at least one where a strong partner could be leveraged. Tesla appears to be doing the latter by partnering with Markel to provide insurance to its customers.

The first adjacency must also have attractive economics that could be measured, among other things, by how it could improve the company’s core business. This is pertinent for Tesla, since the company’s vehicles are generally cheaper to run than an internal combustion car. If Tesla can reduce the price of its vehicles’ insurance through its own service, the company could make the idea of owning an electric car more attractive and practical to a wider spectrum of customers.

Coupled with Tesla’s continued optimizations in the production of its vehicles, a solid, reasonable insurance program could result in more electric car sales for the company. This, of course, gives Tesla a better chance at becoming profitable in the long-term.

If Tesla proves successful in rolling out its auto insurance service, the company could potentially expand the program to other areas of its business. Tesla is currently aiming to ramp its Energy business, with Elon Musk dubbing 2019 as the “Year of the Solar Roof and Powerwall.” Musk has also hinted at a “Tesla smart home” in the past. Perhaps these products could pave the way for a Tesla home insurance program in the future? Such a possibility is not too farfetched.

These ideas and initiatives could seem drastic in light of Tesla’s business today, but Yoon noted that other mega-brands are adopting similar strategies. Gerber baby foods, for example, generated $900 million in life insurance premiums in 2017. That’s equal to about 75% of its core baby food business during the year. With this in mind, it appears that Elon Musk’s idea for Tesla’s insurance service not be too farfetched at all.

DeepSpace is a weekly newsletter sent to Teslarati members, giving a break down of what’s happening in the space industry and what you need to watch.

This week, the only rational option for DeepSpace is to focus on SpaceX’s imminent Starlink milestone, a dedicated launch that will attempt to deliver an unprecedented 60 development satellites to low Earth orbit (LEO).

Assigned to the milestone launch is twice-flown Falcon 9 booster B1049, most recently launched in January 2019 on Iridium’s 8th and final NEXT mission. Around 10 pm EDT on May 13th, SpaceX successfully completed a static fire test of the flight-proven booster and fresh upper stage, additionally keeping the satellite payload (SpaceX’s own spacecraft) installed on the rocket for the first time in almost three years.

Although having the payload attached during a static fire adds risk, that risk is almost entirely SpaceX’s to do with as it sees fit. The attached payload also cuts down on a few dozen hours of processing. Known as Starlink v0.9, SpaceX’s first dedicated launch is thus scheduled for liftoff as early as 10:30 pm EDT (02:30 UTC), May 15th, a little over 48 hours after static fire.

Never miss an issue of our DeepSpace newsletter!

You’ll get special updates, exclusive content, and a preview of Teslarati’s membership program.

Like all SpaceX launches, Starlink v0.9 will include a live webcast hosted by SpaceX engineers. By all appearances, Wednesday’s webcast is likely to be quite the event, including a number of first-looks at SpaceX’s Starlink satellite hardware and factory, as well as official details on the company’s strategy, goals, and timelines.

Additionally, viewers may get a live view of what is bound to be a spectacular process of deploying 60 bizarrely flat satellites, stacked so efficiently that Starlink v0.9 will become the heaviest payload SpaceX has ever launched.

The second phase of Starlink testing – 60 advanced satellites – in a single fairing. (SpaceX)

Pictured here after its second launch and landing, Falcon 9 B1049 could be one of the boosters recently spotted in Florida. (Pauline Acalin)

Starlink v0.9 satellite deployment will apparently look nothing like the traditional method used with Tintin A/B. (SpaceX)

.teslarati-newsletter-box {background: #fff;border: 2px solid #a9d300;color: #a9d300;padding: 16px 16px 16px;position: relative;box-sizing: border-box;margin-bottom: 10px;}#text-area-box p {font-family: Montserrat;line-height: 120%;margin-bottom: 10px;font-weight: 500;}#text-area-box h3 {font-family: Montserrat;}.PicoSignupForm {box-sizing: border-box;text-decoration: inherit;vertical-align: inherit;font-family: inherit;font-size: inherit;font-style: inherit;line-height: inherit;width: 100%;}.teslarati-newsletter-box-header-icon {background: #fff;left: 50%;position: absolute;top: 2px;padding: 0 16px;transform: translate(-50%,-50%);}.teslarati-newsletter-box-header-icon img {width: 30px;max-height: 35px;position: relative;margin-bottom: 50%;}[data-pico-status=»registered»] {display: none;}[data-pico-status=»paying»] { display: none;}

A flyover of Tesla’s Gigafactory 3 site in Shanghai shows that work on the upcoming electric car factory is continuing at an incredibly rapid rate. Based on the progress of the facility’s construction so far, it appears that Gigafactory 3’s workforce has all but shifted to overdrive as they attempt to finish the initial buildout of the site’s Phase 1 area by the end of May.

Comparing the drone footage captured on May 13 to those captured the week before, it is easy to see how much progress the Gigafactory 3 site has achieved. External walls have been installed over most of the facility, and even areas such as the rumored stamping section are getting their roofing done. There are also fewer cranes on the site, suggesting that a significant portion of the work has shifted to the interior of the upcoming general assembly building.

Also notable in the recent drone flyover was footage of what appears to be dormitories for the upcoming electric car factory’s workers. The units are two stories high and seemingly modular, which would likely make them easy to expand at a later time. The dorms look well-built and refined as well, suggesting that the units might be built to last. Perhaps Tesla will be housing some of Gigafactory 3’s employees on the site? Such a strategy could benefit the company, especially if the factory operates 24/7.

One thing that is almost inevitable considering the speed of Gigafactory 3’s construction is the completion of the Phase 1 buildout, which includes a massive general assembly building for the Tesla Model 3 and Model Y. Shanghai official Chen Mingbo, who currently serves as the head of the city’s economic and information technology commission, announced during the annual parliamentary meeting back in March that the initial buildout of Gigafactory 3 should be done in May. That target date falls somewhere within the next couple of weeks.

If China’s workforce meets its target deadline for the completion of Gigafactory 3’s initial construction, it could accelerate the timeline for the electric car maker’s Model 3 trial production. During the facility’s groundbreaking event in January, Elon Musk stated that the first Model 3 could roll out of Gigafactory 3 by the end of the year. If China’s workforce completes the facility’s initial buildout this month, Model 3 trial production could start as early as September.

China is a country that specializes in rapid construction initiatives. But even among the impressively-quick buildouts that China has accomplished in the past, Gigafactory 3 could very well be on a completely different level. Chang Yan CY, Senior Editor of Tencent Auto, noted that China’s record for the fastest buildout of an industrial-grade facility like Gigafactory 3 had been 17 months. This is a record that Gigafactory 3 is on track of beating.

Watch Gigafactory 3’s progress as of May 13, 2019 in the video below.

Less than 24 hours before SpaceX’s first dedicated Starlink mission is scheduled to lift off, the company revealed a handful of new details about the design of the 60 satellites cocooned inside Falcon 9’s fairing.

The Falcon 9 booster assigned to launch the Starlink v0.9 mission – B1049 – has already flown twice before in September 2018 and January 2019 and will likely take part in many additional launches prior to retirement. In support of B1049’s hopeful future, drone ship Of Course I Still Love You (OCISLY) arrived at its recovery location on May 13th, an impressive 620 km (385 mi) downrange relative to the launch’s low target orbit (440 km, 270 mi).

(Extra) smallsats

The combination of a distant booster recovery and a low target orbit can only mean one thing: the Starlink v0.9’s satellite payload is extremely heavy. As it just so happens, that is exactly the case per details included in SpaceX’s official press kit (PDF).

“With a flat-panel design featuring multiple high-throughput antennas and a single solar array, each Starlink satellite weighs approximately 227kg, allowing SpaceX to maximize mass production and take full advantage of Falcon 9’s launch capabilities. To adjust position on orbit, maintain intended altitude, and deorbit, Starlink satellites feature Hall thrusters powered by krypton. Designed and built upon the heritage of Dragon, each spacecraft is equipped with a Startracker navigation system that allows SpaceX to point the satellites with precision. Importantly, Starlink satellites are capable of tracking on-orbit debris and autonomously avoiding collisions. Additionally, 95 percent of all components of this design will quickly burn [up] in Earth’s atmosphere at the end of each satellite’s lifecycle—exceeding all current safety standards—with future iterative designs moving to complete disintegration.”

First and foremost, an individual satellite mass of around 227 kg (500 lb) is an impressive achievement, nearly halving the mass of the Tintin A/B prototypes SpaceX launched back in February 2018. For context, OneWeb’s essentially finalized satellite design weighs ~150 kg (330 lb) each and relies on a ~1050 kg (2310 lb) adapter capable of carrying ~30 satellites. Accounting for the adapter, that translates to ~180 kg (400 lb) per OneWeb satellite, around 25% lighter than Starlink v0.9 spacecraft.

However, assuming SpaceX has effectively achieved its desired per-satellite throughput of ~20 gigabits per second (Gbps), Starlink v0.9 could provide more than twice the performance of OneWeb’s satellites (PDF). These are still development satellites, however, and don’t carry the laser interlinks that will be standard on the all future spacecraft, likely increasing their mass an additional ~10%.

Despite the technical unknowns, it can be definitively concluded that SpaceX’s Starlink satellite form factor and packing efficiency are far ahead of anything comparable. Relative to the rockets it competes with, Falcon 9’s fairing is actually on the smaller side, but SpaceX has still managed to fit an incredible 60 fairly high-performance spacecraft inside it with plenty of room to spare. Additionally, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk says that these “flat-panel” Starlink satellites have no real adapter or dispenser, relying instead on their own structure to support the full stack. How each satellite will deploy on orbit is to be determined but it will likely be no less unorthodox than their integrated Borg cube-esque appearance.

That efficiency also means that the Starlink v0.9 is massive. At ~227 kg per satellite, the minimum mass is about 13,800 kg (30,400 lb), easily making it the heaviest payload SpaceX has ever attempted to launch. It’s difficult to exaggerate how ambitious a start this is for the company’s internal satellite development program – Starlink has gone from two rough prototypes to 60 satellites and one of the heaviest communications satellite payloads ever in less than a year and a half.

[Insert Kryptonite joke here]

Beyond their lightweight and space-efficient flat-panel design, the next most notable feature of SpaceX’s Starlink v0.9 satellites is their propulsion system of choice. Not only has SpaceX designed, built, tested, and qualified its own Hall Effect thrusters (HETs) for Starlink, but it has based those thrusters on krypton instead of industry-standard xenon gas propellant.

Based on a cursory review of academic and industry research into the technology, krypton-based Hall effect thrusters can beat xenon’s ISP (chemical efficiency) by 10-15% but produce 15-25% less thrust per a given power input. Additionally, krypton thrusters are also 15-25% less efficient than xenon thrusters, meaning that krypton generally requires significantly more power to match xenon’s thrust. However, the likeliest explanation for SpaceX’s choice of krypton over less exotic options is simple: firm prices are hard to come by for such rare noble gases, but krypton costs at least 5-10 times less than xenon for a given mass.

At the costs SpaceX is targeting ($500k-$1M per satellite), the price of propellant alone (say 25-50 kg) could be a major barrier to satellite affordability – 50 kg of xenon costs at least $100,000, while 50 kg of krypton is more like $10,000-25,000. The more propellant each Starlink satellite can carry, the longer each spacecraft can safely operate, another way to lower the lifetime cost of a satellite megaconstellation.

SpaceX’s dedicated Starlink launch debut is set to lift off no earlier than 10:30pm EDT (02:30 UTC), May 15th. This is not a webcast you want to miss!

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

Reports from a local German news agency have noted that Mercedes-Benz is set to ramp the production of its first all-electric SUV, the EQC, at a rate of about 100 units per day. The German carmaker will reportedly increase its production capacity over the following months, with the company doubling its target output to 200 units per day in the coming year.

The update about the EQC’s production was provided by a manager working for Mercedes-Benz, according to news agency Automobilwoche. The carmaker opened the order books for the EQC a few days ago, but just like its competitor, the Audi e-tron, the initial production of the all-electric SUV is reportedly limited as well. While the German carmaker is reportedly not having issues with the supply of cells themselves, the complex design of the EQC’s battery, which is comprised of six packages with 384 cell modules, is becoming a factor in the vehicle’s limited rollout.

Mercedes-Benz opted to use pouch cells from LG Chem for the EQC, just like fellow veteran carmakers Audi and Jaguar, who also utilize the South Korean company’s cells for their respective electric cars. In contrast, electric car pioneer Tesla utilizes cells from Japanese firm Panasonic for its Model X SUV. Initial production of the EQC reportedly started last week, though only in very limited quantities.

While Mercedes-Benz is yet to issue an official statement about the EQC’s reported production difficulties, it should be noted that the company is not the only veteran carmaker that is finding it challenging to ramp the manufacturing of an all-electric vehicle. The Audi e-tron, for one, is reportedly seeing delays in production due to the limited supply of cells from LG Chem.  A report from The Brussels Times even noted that Audi’s e-tron facility is only operating 6 hours a day due to the limited supply of the SUV’s components.

Overall, the struggles reportedly being faced by Audi, and now Mercedes-Benz all but show that performing a production ramp of an electric vehicle is no joke. Electric car maker Tesla has received various criticisms over the years due to the company’s delays in producing its vehicles like the Model X and Model 3. These reports concerning the Mercedes-Benz EQC and the Audi e-tron’s production ramps prove that Tesla is not the only carmaker that feels challenges when manufacturing an all-electric vehicle.

The Mercedes-Benz EQC is equipped with an 80 kWh battery pack, which is estimated to give a range of over 200 miles per charge. Performance-wise, the all-electric SUV boasts some decent specs, with two electric motors that produce 402 hp and 564 lb-ft of torque giving the vehicle a 0-60 mph time of 4.9 seconds and a top speed of 112 mph. Once released, the EQC will be competing in the same segment as the veteran Tesla Model X, as well as other premium EVs like the Jaguar I-PACE and Audi e-tron.

SpaceX has successfully completed a Falcon 9 static fire ahead of Starlink’s first dedicated launch, breaking a practice that dates back to Falcon 9’s last catastrophic failure to date.

That failure occurred in September 2016 around nine minutes before a planned Falcon 9 static fire test, completely destroying the rocket and the Amos-6 communications satellite payload and severely damaging Launch Complex 40 (LC-40). Since that fateful failure, all 42 subsequent Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy satellite launches have been preceded by static fire tests without a payload fairing attached. This process typically adds 24-48 hours of work to launch operations, an admittedly tiny price to pay to reduce the chances of a rocket failure completely destroying valuable payloads. With Starlink v0.9, SpaceX is making different choices.

When supercool liquid oxygen ruptured a composite overwrapped pressure vessel (COPV) in Falcon 9’s upper stage, the resultant explosion and fire destroyed Falcon 9. Perhaps more importantly, the ~$200M Amos-6 satellite installed atop the rocket effectively ceased to exist, a loss that posed a serious threat to the livelihood of its owner, Spacecom. Posed with a question of whether saving a day or two of schedule was worth the potential destruction of customer payloads, both customers, SpaceX, and their insurers obviously concluded that static fires should be done without payloads aboard the rocket.

The only exceptions since Amos-6 are the launch debuts of Falcon Heavy – with a payload that was effectively disposable and SpaceX-built – and Crew Dragon DM-1, in which Falcon 9’s integration with Dragon’s launch abort system had to be tested as part of the static fire. Every other SpaceX rocket launch since September 2016 has excluded payloads during each routine pre-flight static fire.

SpaceX’s Spacecraft Emporium

Why the change of pace on this launch, then? The answer is simple: for the first time ever, SpaceX is both the sole payload/satellite stakeholder and launch provider, meaning that nearly all of the mission’s risk – and the consequences of failure – rest solely on SpaceX’s shoulders. In other words, SpaceX built and owns the Falcon 9 assigned to the mission, the 60 Starlink test satellites that make up its payload, and the launch complex supporting the mission.

Even then, if Falcon 9 were to fail during an internal SpaceX mission, customer launches could be seriously delayed by both the subsequent failure investigation failure and any potential damage to the launch complex. In short, although an internal mission does offer SpaceX some unique freedoms, it is still in the company’s best interest to treat the launch like any other, even if some customer-oriented corners are likely begging to be cut. Additionally, the loss of SpaceX’s first dedicated payload of 60 Starlink satellites could be a significant setback for the constellation, although it may be less significant than most would assume.

This is not to say that SpaceX won’t take advantage of some of the newfound freedom permitted by Starlink launches. In fact, CEO Elon Musk has stated that one of SpaceX’s 2019 Starlink missions will become the first to reuse a Falcon fairing. Additionally, SpaceX is free to do things that customers might be opposed to but that the company’s own engineers believe to be low-risk. Notably, Starlink missions will be an almost perfect opportunity for SpaceX to flight-prove reusability milestones without having to ask customers to tread outside of their comfort zones.

The sheer scale of SpaceX proposed Starlink constellation – two phases of ~4400 and ~12,000 satellites – means that the company will need all the latent launch capacity it can get over the next 5-10 years, at least until Starship/Super Heavy is able to support internal missions. Extraordinary packing density will help to minimize the number of launches needed, but the fact remains that even an absurd 120 satellites per launch (double Starlink v0.9’s 60) would still require an average of 12 launches per year to finish Starlink before 2030.

In the meantime, thoughts of a dozen or more annual Starlink launches are somewhat premature. SpaceX’s first dedicated Starlink launch (deemed Starlink v0.9) is scheduled to lift off no earlier than 10:30 pm EDT (02:30 UTC), May 15th, and is being treated as an advanced but still intermediary step between the Tintin prototypes and a finalized spacecraft design. Still, in an unprecedented step, SpaceX has built sixty Starlink satellites for the development-focused mission, in stark contrast to the six satellites (still a respectable achievement) competitor OneWeb launched in February 2019 as part of its own flight-test program.

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