LNG: TESLARATI

SpaceX’s California Starship factory plans have been detailed in new documents published by the Los Angeles Board of Harbor Commissioners, one of the last big steps before a crucial permitting decision is made later this week.

First reported on February 1st, SpaceX has resurrected plans to build a Starship factory in Los Angeles, just 20 or so miles away from the company’s Hawthorne, California headquarters. SpaceX abandoned its lease of Port of Los Angeles Berth 240 in the spring of 2019, a decision made a handful of months after the company dramatically scrapped plans to build its next-generation rocket out of carbon-fiber composites. Now known as Starship and Super Heavy and radically redesigned to use steel for 99% of its structural elements, SpaceX has been building prototypes of the Starship upper stage for more than 14 months.

That work has been performed almost exclusively at Boca Chica, Texas facilities that have been in an almost continuous period of gradual expansion and upgrades since late-2018. Situated a few miles from the Mexican border on the southernmost tip of Texas’ Gulf Coast, Boca Chica is an exceptional location for orbital launches from the continental United States but is less than optimal when it comes to build (and more importantly) staffing a high-quality rocket factory. Since Starship prototype fabrication and integration was shifted almost entirely to Texas, SpaceX has had to send expert Hawthorne-based employees to Boca Chica for weeks at a time, often hitching a ride on CEO Elon Musk’s private jet. With a dedicated Port of LA Starship factory, life could be made much easier, cheaper, and – ultimately – better for everyone involved.

While its growth has been undeniably gradual, SpaceX is in the late stages of building an impressive manufacturing base around its Boca Chica launch facilities. As of Tuesday, February 17th, company contractors have effectively completed the shells of two massive ‘sprung structures’ (tents) that are already being used to house certain Starship fabrication, assembly, and integration operations.

Nearby, a separate group is in the late stages of constructing the primary structure of a ~50m (160 ft) tall Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) with an even taller building also in the pipeline, both of which should allow Starship and Super Heavy stacking, welding, and outfitting to be done in a sheltered, partially climate-controlled environment. Additionally, SpaceX has delivered hardware needed to build a dedicated on-site waterjet shop, giving its Boca Chica outpost the ability to precisely fabricate its own metal parts.

According to SpaceX’s updated 2020 Port of Los Angeles regulatory documents, the company has major ambitions for its resurrected California Starship factory. In simple terms, it really does want to build a true Starship factory instead of something smaller or more specialized. Specifically, SpaceX wants Berth 240 to be able to independently form Starship’s steel rings, stack and weld those rings together, outfit integrated barrel sections with all necessary access ports, plumbing, and flight-related hardware, and build any number of other Starship parts (likely fins, legs, noses, etc.).

This time around, SpaceX would refurbish and reuse five aging structures already present at Berth 240, avoiding the potential hassle, delays, and cost of building an entirely new factory (as was previously the plan). It’s likely that SpaceX would eventually erect similar sprung structures on Berth 240’s empty lot, and it looks like the modified permit applications would even allow the company to build the same factory it previously proposed in addition to the new plans to reuse existing structures.

Although reusing abandoned buildings built a century ago will almost bring its own challenges, SpaceX’s tweaked approach does make it likelier (even if still improbable) that the company will be able to realize its ambitious goal of kicking off Berth 240 Starship production just a month or two from now. While not discussed in the permit, SpaceX’s new plans would presumably also involve shipping fully-completed Starship subsections (meaning just a few stacked steel rings at a time) from California to Texas, where Boca Chica workers would ultimately integrate those segments to form finished ships and boosters that can then be acceptance-tested and launched.

For now, though, SpaceX still has to reacquire its old Berth 240 lease and environmental permits before it can begin repairing existing structures and building out its prospective Port of LA rocket factory. Up next, the Los Angeles Harbor Commission will meet on Thursday, February 20th to hear several permit appeals, SpaceX’s included.

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

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

A Tesla Model S was recently able to hit a peak charging rate of 181 kW during a Supercharging session. While the flagship sedan’s peak charge rate is still a bit behind the Model 3’s peak charge rate of 250 kW on a V3 Supercharger, it is nevertheless impressive, highlighting the fact that Tesla’s vehicles are in a constant state of improvement. 

Tesla owner-enthusiast Eli Burton of the My Tesla Adventure YouTube channel recently paid a visit to the Fremont factory on his Raven Model S Performance. The vehicle only had 5% of charge left on its 100 kWh battery pack, giving the flagship sedan the opportunity to experience a full charging session on one of the site’s V3 Superchargers. 

Based on the Tesla enthusiast’s video, the Raven Model S Performance took some time before its charge rate started picking up. But once it did, it climbed far beyond the 150 kW peak charge rate of Tesla’s V2 Superchargers. The Model S’s charge rate ultimately topped out at 181 kW, a notable improvement over the speed of the company’s previous chargers.

Quite interestingly, this seems to be among the first accounts of a Model S charging close to the 200 kW peak V3 rate that Tesla announced for the vehicle. When the V3 network was launched last year, tests by Tesla owners such as Dan from the What’s Inside? YouTube channel revealed that a car like a Model X would only receive just around 124 kW from a V3 Supercharger. 

Tesla has been rolling out improvements and optimizations to its vehicles and charging systems since then, of course, as evidenced by Burton’s recent charging experience. This ultimately bodes well for Tesla and its upcoming cars like the Model S and Model X Plaid, which are expected to be unveiled in the near future. Musk has previously stated that the Plaid Model S should be available later this year, and that vehicle will most definitely be optimized for V3 Supercharging like the Model 3. 

Amidst the Model 3 ramp, older flagship vehicles like the Model S and Model X were a bit left out when it comes to their charging speed. Fortunately, Tesla’s constant refinements to its vehicles ensure that its cars actually become better over time. The Model S may not be able to tap into the V3 Superchargers’ peak output yet, but one can be sure that Tesla will do what it can to optimize the vehicle’s charging to such a degree that it can recharge its battery as fast as it can within the limits of its safety. 

Watch the Model S Performance’s peak charging rate in the video below.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

SpaceX has successfully completed its fifth launch of 60 Starlink communications satellites but suffered a surprising landing failure, an exceedingly rare reminder of just how quickly the company has made Falcon rocket reusability feel routine.

As previously discussed, despite the booster’s apparent demise in the Atlantic Ocean, SpaceX did nevertheless break its internal turnaround record with Falcon 9 B1056, launching the booster twice in just 62 days. While unfortunate, it’s important to remember that today’s Starlink mission (Starlink V1 L4) was B1056’s fourth launch in 10 months – an extraordinarily productive career relative to any other orbital-class rocket in existence.

Still, the fact remains that even in a best-case scenario, B1056 has probably reached an early grave and is unlikely to support any future launches. The Falcon 9 booster’s missed landing is the first in almost 15 months and the second to fail because of inaccurate navigation. Based on an uninterrupted live feed provided by drone ship Of Course I Still Love You (OCISLY), there is even a chance that SpaceX’s last Falcon 9 landing failure will be precisely replicated, meaning that another booster could very well be stranded – intact – at sea.

Back in December 2018, Falcon 9 booster B1050 successfully completed the primary goal of its launch debut, sending SpaceX’s CRS-16 Cargo Dragon spacecraft and a Falcon upper stage on their way to orbit. Around seven minutes after liftoff, it became clear that something was wrong with the booster as it began to spin about in an unusually violent manner. About a minute later, still spinning, the Falcon 9 booster deployed its landing legs and performed a nearly flawless soft landing. The only problem: B1050’s soft landing occurred in the Atlantic Ocean instead of the actual target, one of SpaceX’s two Cape Canaveral landing pads (LZ-1/2).

As a result, the Block 5 booster found itself almost entirely intact and floating in the Atlantic Ocean. Because it was just a handful of miles away from Port Canaveral, SpaceX was able to rapidly dispatch a recovery team and eventually managed to bring the booster back into port and onto dry land a few days after its landing anomaly. While CEO Elon Musk indicated at the time that there was at least a chance B1050 could be refurbished for another flight, the booster has unsurprisingly not launched again and probably never will. Falcon 9 may be designed to tolerate extreme weather but “submersion in seawater” is undoubtedly a major stretch.

Still, the point is that there’s a good chance that Falcon 9 B1056 is more or less intact in the Atlantic Ocean after its inaccurate – but seemingly controlled – February 17th landing. Given that B1056, drone ship OCISLY, and support ship GO Quest are all some 630 km (390 mi) from Port Canaveral, there is almost no chance that SpaceX will go to the extraordinary effort of dragging a floating B1056 – even if perfectly intact – all the way back to Florida. It’s not an impossibility, however.

Based on the fact that B1056 kicked up visible sea spray just a few hundred feet from OCISLY’s deck, as well as the distinct lack of an obvious explosion, it looks likely that the Falcon 9 booster suffered some kind of navigational failure. It’s possible that it experienced the same hydraulic failure that disabled B1050’s four grid fins, but a new kind of failure – like anomalous GPS readings, a broken laser altimeter, failed Merlin 1D engine thrust vectoring, or something more complex – could be the ultimate source of the missed landing.

Regardless of whether parts or the entirety of the booster can be recovered, SpaceX will almost certainly learn a lesson (or several) from Falcon 9 B1056’s premature demise, hopefully allowing future rocket landings to avoid the same fate. Most importantly, today’s primary objective – placing 60 new Starlink satellites in orbit – was a flawless success, even if B1056’s loss is still a blow. SpaceX’s next Falcon 9 launch is currently scheduled no earlier than (NET) March 2nd and is unlikely to be delayed by today’s events.

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

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Tesla has found numerous areas surrounding Berlin where it will replace the trees that it will be cutting to make way for its European Gigafactory. The company found target regions in late January but has finalized several specific areas where it will begin planting replacement trees.

Tesla found space for trees in Brandenburg an der Havel (located 64 miles of Giga Berlin), Baruth/Mark (located 41.6 miles from Grünheide) and Bad Saarow (located 20.8 miles from the Giga Berlin site), according to both the Brandenberg Area Agency and local media outlet rbb24. 

Tesla enthusiast @gigafactory_4 shared a photograph of a map that highlighted confirmed areas where trees from the initial 90 hectares of land from Giga Berlin’s tree removal process would be replaced. The map shows around 30 different areas where new trees will be planted.

We should observe these areas at first: pic.twitter.com/Dfdb0NsUf8

— Giga Berlin / Gigafactory 4 (@gigafactory_4) February 13, 2020

Local agencies suggest that half of the trees be deciduous. The trees that currently take up the property where Giga Berlin will eventually stand are of “inferior quality,” according to Grünheide Mayor Arne Christiani. Upon the announcement of the tree removal, Tesla stated it would replant three times as many trees as it is forced to remove. The company has been looking for areas suitable for new tree growth.

Crews began removing small trees in early January, but the full-fledged felling of larger trees started on February 13. Teams worked non-stop for two days, removing a considerable chunk of the low-quality trees from the property.

Unfortunately, the clearing was forced to come to a halt on Sunday after a German court ruled in favor of a complaint from the Green League of Brandenburg, a local environmentalist group. The court states they issued an immediate stop in tree clearing because it would have taken only three more days to remove the rest of the 90 hectares of trees from the area.

Lawmakers from both the Christian Democrat and Free Democrat parties warn the German court that long legal battles with Tesla over Giga Berlin could do long-term damage to the country’s reputation as a good place to conduct business, especially since the electric car maker’s impact on the region’s auto market could prove beneficial to the country’s economy as a whole. German Federal Minister of Economics Peter Altmaier even stated: “If the plant does not come, it would be a damage for all of Germany.”

The German courts also warn that the complaint from the Green League is being taken seriously. “It should not be assumed that the motion seeking legal protection brought by the Green League lacks any chance of succeeding,” a statement from the court said.

Despite Tesla’s vocal plans to replace the trees three-fold and produce environmentally friendly cars in Germany, environmental groups have not let up.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Interestingly enough, after talking about consumers’ concerns about electric vehicle range, Gates mentioned that he recently purchased a Porsche Taycan. “It’s a premium-priced car, but yeah it is very, very cool,” he said. The Taycan is one of the more expensive electric vehicles on the market, with the top-of-the-line Turbo S trim starting at $185,000.

The vehicle, however, is not very efficient, offering 192 miles of range according to estimates from the EPA. While this number was low according to a recent test from automotive magazine Car and Driver, the range rating is still significantly less than the Tesla Model S.

Elon Musk tweeted in mid-February that the range of the Model S had officially eclipsed 390 miles, giving it over twice as much range as the Taycan Turbo S for $105,000 less. Granted, the vehicle is not as quick as the Taycan off the line, but when it comes to endurance driving, the Long Range Plus Model S may very well be the king for now.

Tesla Model S estimated EPA range is now above 390 miles or ~630 km https://t.co/sNFzIkuJpC

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 15, 2020

Gates is an obvious supporter of the electric vehicle movement and does his part to contribute to environmental support funds. His interview with Brownlee was a great indicator of what he feels electric car manufacturers must do to compete with gas-guzzlers in the long term. Though of course, he does seem to be a bit out of the loop when it comes to the rapid progress of lithium-ion battery tech that’s being pushed by innovative companies like Tesla.

The full interview with Marques Brownlee and Bill Gates can be viewed below.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

NASA has unambiguously confirmed that SpaceX – with its Crew Dragon spacecraft – will soon become the first private company in history to launch astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS), both an unexpected twist from the usually tight-lipped space agency and a major upset for Boeing.

Shortly after revealing that the first astronaut-rated Crew Dragon capsule had been completed and shipped eastward, SpaceX and NASA confirmed that the historic spacecraft arrived at SpaceX’s Florida processing facilities on Thursday, February 13th. With that milestone out of the way, it’s now believed that all the hardware needed for SpaceX’s ‘Demo-2’ astronaut launch debut – Falcon 9 booster B1058, a Falcon 9 upper stage, Crew Dragon capsule C206, and a Crew Dragon trunk – is finished, acceptance-tested, and preparing for flight in Cape Canaveral, Florida.

Extremely out of character for NASA given that Crew Dragon Demo-2 is expected to launch no earlier than two or three months from now, the space agency’s public statement that SpaceX will launch astronauts first simultaneously implies bad news for Boeing and its Starliner spacecraft. Contracted under the Commercial Crew Program in 2014, Boeing – awarded $5.1B – and SpaceX – awarded $3.1B – have been working to build two separate crew launch vehicles (Starliner and Crew Dragon) with the intention of ferrying NASA astronauts to and from the International Space Station (ISS). While both providers have had their own challenges, Boeing has been beset by numerous software failures born out during Starliner’s December 2019 orbital launch debut.

The Commercial Crew account has since deleted its tweet and NASA’s accompanying blog post – linked in said tweet – was tweaked to reflect a slightly different interpretation, but the original text unequivocally stated that “the SpaceX Crew Dragon spacecraft [assigned to] the first crew launch from American soil since 2011 has arrived at the launch site.” Given that both the tweet and blog post contained that exact same phrase, the fact that NASA retroactively censored and corrected itself strongly suggests that SpaceX will, in fact, become the first private company in history to launch astronauts into orbit.

NASA has a fairly notorious and years-long history of going well out of its way to avoid saying or implying anything that could be perceived as even slightly critical of Boeing. A prime contractor dating back to the first stage of the Saturn V rocket, Boeing has effectively secured billions of dollars of NASA’s annual budget and possesses deep political sway thanks in large part to the revolving doors between industry and government and the hundreds of millions of dollars it has spent on lobbying over the last two decades.

More recently, Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft suffered several major software-related failures during its December 2019 Orbital Flight Test, narrowly avoiding a second “catastrophic” failure mode solely because a separate software failure 48 hours prior forced the company to reexamine its code. In simple terms, both software failures probably should and could have been caught and fixed before launch if even a semblance of routine digital simulations and integrated vehicle testing had been performed by Boeing.

Unsurprisingly, NASA – at least after the fact – is now extremely concerned by the lack of such a basic and commonsense level of quality control in Boeing’s Starliner software pipeline. Even NASA, arguably, could and should have been attentive enough to catch some of Boeing’s shortcomings before Starliner’s launch debut. Adding to the embarrassment, NASA performed a “pretty invasive” $5M review of SpaceX’s safety practices and general engineering culture last year, triggered (not a joke) after CEO Elon Musk was seen very briefly smoking on a recorded interview. As part of regulations for the Commercial Crew Program, NASA was obligated to perform a similar review of Boeing’s safety culture, but the contractor demanded that NASA pay five times more – $25M – for the same thing.

NASA unsurprisingly balked at Boeing’s demands and wound up performing a more or less symbolic “paper” review that typically involves ‘auditing’ paperwork supplied by the company itself. Despite the fact that Boeing would soon find itself mired in two fatal 737 Max crashes, killing 346 people as a result of shoddy software, an unreliable design, and bad internal communication, NASA still never pursued a similar safety review with Boeing. Now, only after a nearly-catastrophic in-space failure, NASA has finally decided that that safety review is necessary, while both NASA and Boeing will also have to extensively review all Starliner software and fix the flawed practices used to create and qualify it.

Perhaps most importantly, NASA and Boeing need to determine whether Starliner’s software failures were a one-off fluke or something symptomatic of deeper problems. Due to that uncertainty and the massive amount of work that will be required to answer those questions, it’s almost certain that Boeing will have to perform a second uncrewed Starliner test flight for NASA to verify that its problems have been rectified. A second OFT would almost certainly delay Boeing’s astronaut launch debut by 6-12 months. SpaceX’s astronaut launch debut, for example, was delayed at least 9 months after a Crew Dragon capsule exploded during thruster testing after a flawless orbital launch and recovery.

As a result, even though SpaceX’s Crew Dragon ‘Demo-2’ astronaut launch debut is likely more than two months away, even some part of NASA – famous for incredibly neutral and conservative public statements – appears to be all but certain that SpaceX will launch astronauts first. As of February 13th, 2020, all Demo-2 Falcon 9 and Dragon hardware is likely finished and awaiting integration in Florida. If things go as planned over the next several weeks, Falcon 9 and Crew Dragon could launch astronauts Bob Behnken and Doug Hurley as early as late-April or May 2020.

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

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

There was once a time when it was a legitimate criticism to state that Tesla and its CEO, Elon Musk, are prone to being a bit too optimistic in presenting a grand vision of the future. But since unveiling the Model Y all-electric crossover, it appears that Tesla has entered a new era — one where Elon Musk is developing the art of underpromising and overdelivering. This is a pretty frightening topic for the company’s critics, especially those with financial stakes against Tesla. 

Despite all the hype surrounding its release, many, including myself, were quite underwhelmed when the Model Y was unveiled. Being heavily based on the Model 3 sedan, the Y was so similar that TSLA shorts actually accused the electric carmaker of fraud (no surprise there) for allegedly passing off a raised Model 3 as a new vehicle. This is a ridiculous accusation, of course, but it does give an idea about how understated the Model Y and its unveiling really was. 

But the Y seems destined to disappoint the anti-Tesla crowd without remorse. 

During its unveiling, Elon Musk stated that deliveries of the vehicle are expected to start in Fall 2020, a conservative date that was moved up to Summer 2020 in the company’s Q3 2019 Update Letter. During the fourth quarter earnings call, Tesla CFO Zachary Kirkhorn announced that first deliveries of the Model Y will actually be happening sometime later this quarter. That’s far earlier than what even most TSLA bulls have predicted.

This is also a very different strategy than what Tesla adopted for the Model 3. When the Model 3 kicked off its mass production with its first customer handovers, Elon Musk announced a hyper-aggressive delivery timeframe that ended up being delayed by six months. The company suffered as a result, from its share price in the markets to the fatigue of Tesla employees working to bring the Model 3 to its target production levels. With the Model Y, Tesla seems to have started with a conservative timeline that it knew it could easily beat, and it worked its way up from there.

Based on the updates to the Model Y’s delivery timeframes, it appears that Tesla may only be adjusting its targets once it knows it can actually meet them. This shows a degree of maturity on Tesla’s part that has not really been seen in the past, and it is something that should frighten those who actively bet against the company.  

This shows that Tesla is learning from its mistakes, and it is taking the lessons from the past and adapting it for the future. During the early days of the original Roadster and the Model S, it was imperative for the company to promote the vehicle’s maximum range potential to make them competitive against their petrol-powered rivals. Today, Tesla can actually afford to lowball its range. CARB filings for the Model Y initially suggested a range of over 300 miles for the vehicle’s performance variant, and this was confirmed in recent updates to Tesla’s order page. When the Model Y was unveiled, its Performance trim was listed with a range of 280. Now, the vehicle has a range of 315 miles per charge.

What is rather interesting is that Tesla is doing this while its competitors are still at a point where they are overpromising on their vehicles. Just look at the range portion of the Ford Mustang Mach-E’s presentation: the words “target range” are abounding. That means that Ford thinks it could reach the range it announced for the vehicle, but it is still working on it. It’s a strategy that’s a lot more cautious than Porsche’s with its early announcements of a 300-mile Taycan, but perhaps the American automaker learned its lesson from the Turbo S’ 192-mile range EPA rating. 

It takes an ambitious company to aim for hyper-aggressive targets that have a good chance of not being met, but it takes a mature company to publicly announce goals that it knows it can beat. Tesla appears to be in the latter camp with the Model Y, and that’s really good. Apple’s legendary CEO, Steve Jobs, made his mark in the tech sector with an underpromise and overdeliver strategy, and it ultimately helped the tech giant build enough momentum to make it the juggernaut that it is today. There’s no reason why Tesla and Elon Musk cannot do the same.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

One of SpaceX’s newest Falcon 9 rockets is just a day away from setting one of the most important rocket reusability records after successfully firing up its booster engines – the last major step before the third Starlink launch of 2020.

Delayed two days from its original February 15th target, Falcon 9 is now scheduled to lift off no earlier than (NET) 10:05 am EST (15:05 UTC) on February 17th, carrying SpaceX’s fourth batch of upgraded Starlink v1.0 satellites (Starlink V1 L4). The company’s fifth dedicated Starlink launch overall, Falcon 9 booster B1056 will launch for the fourth time in support of the Starlink V1 L4 mission, becoming the fourth SpaceX rocket to do so in barely three months. While still impressive and important, B1056’s fourth mission could be record-setting for an entirely different reason.

Designed to enable at least 10 flights per booster with minimal refurbishment in between, SpaceX’s latest Falcon 9 ‘Block 5’ upgrade debuted in May 2018 and has enabled a marked improvement in both reliability and reusability. One record set just a month after that debut – and, unintuitively by a pre-Block 5 booster – has nevertheless stubbornly held over the 20 months since then. Known as booster turnaround time, the measure effectively represents the practical limits of a given rocket’s reusability by measuring how long it takes any specific vehicle to launch, be recovered, and launch again. With a little luck, Falcon 9 B1056 could break SpaceX’s existing turnaround record by a healthy margin just a few hours from now.

In first place, Falcon 9 Block 4 booster B1045 holds SpaceX’s standing booster turnaround record after launching back-to-back NASA missions just 71 days apart in April and June 2018. In second place, two Falcon Heavy Block 5 boosters (B1052, B1053) and one Falcon 9 Block 5 booster (B1048) are tied, each having managed 74-day turnarounds.

Now, Falcon 9 booster B1056 could potentially break SpaceX’s 71-day record by almost 9 days (15%) in spite of the fact that it has already performed three orbital-class launches in the last 10 months. Additionally, its third and most recent launch was a high-energy satellite mission that put B1056 through a relatively fast and hot atmospheric reentry, whereas Falcon 9 B1052, B1053, and B1045 all set their turnaround records after comparatively gentle inaugural launches, reentries, and landings.

This is all to say that B1056 breaking SpaceX’s booster turnaround record makes it feel a bit like the company isn’t really trying to break any internal records and certainly isn’t close to pushing the Falcon Block 5 design to its reusability limits. Some 18 months ago, SpaceX President and COO Gwynne Shotwell revealed that Falcon 9 Block 5 boosters were already down to just four weeks of refurbishment a handful of months after the upgrade’s launch debut.

In the history of orbital-class reusable spacecraft and rockets, NASA’s Space Shuttle Atlantis – backed by an annual operations budget on the order of $1 billion and hundreds of dedicated refurbishment engineers and technicians – holds a global turnaround record of 54 days. By the time SpaceX breaks that record, Falcon booster reusability will almost certainly be one or even two magnitudes cheaper and simpler than the Space Shuttle.

In fact, if it manages to successfully launch and land later today, Falcon 9 B1056 could be poised to break its own turnaround record later this year, given that Starlink v1.0 launches enable slightly gentler recovery conditions relative to the booster’s previous Kacific-1 mission.

Falcon 9 B1056 is currently scheduled to lift off on its fourth orbital-class launch – carrying 60 Starlink v1.0 satellites – no earlier than (NET) 10:05 am EST (15:05 UTC), February 17th, and will attempt a routine landing aboard drone ship Of Course I Still Love You a bit less than nine minutes later. Some 30-45 minutes after launch, Falcon 9’s payload fairing halves – having reentered Earth’s atmosphere and deployed parafoils – will attempt their third simultaneous landing in the nets of twin recovery ships GO Ms. Tree (formerly Mr. Steven) and Ms. Chief. Tune in to SpaceX.com/webcast around 9:50 am EST (14:50 UTC) to catch Falcon 9’s Starlink V1 L4 launch live.

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

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Tesla’s flagship sedan is closing in on 400 miles of range per charge. With this update, Tesla has definitively extended its lead in the EV market, putting it far ahead — at least from a range perspective — against its biggest competitors. What’s rather interesting is that the Model S’ 390-mile range is just the tip of the iceberg. 

Being a constantly-innovating company, it’s difficult to put the finger on the generations of vehicles that Tesla releases. Yet one look at the company’s upcoming electric cars and one would know that its next vehicles will feature next-generation technology. The Model Y, for example, is built from the company’s experiences with the Model 3, and pictures of the all-electric crossover in the assembly line hint that its casting may be quite unique. Tesla will likely not experience as many challenges ramping the Model Y compared to its previous vehicles, and this is likely due to the company’s experience. 

There’s the Semi and the Cybertruck as well, both of which are large vehicles that would otherwise require a ton of batteries to get their estimated range. Yet in the case of the Cybertruck, the vehicle will be offering over 500 miles of range for less than $70,000. How Tesla will accomplish this remains to be seen, but Global Equities Research analyst Trip Chowdhry noted that the Cybertruck is on a “completely different technology orbit” after taking a test ride in the all-electric truck at Tesla’s Fremont factory. 

Some of these improvements are already coming soon. Later this year, Tesla is expected to release the Model S’ Plaid Powertrain variant, which will be track-capable and boast an insane amount of power with its tri-motor setup. Elon Musk noted recently on Twitter that the Plaid Model S has “absurd” performance, though the electric car maker will ensure that the vehicle still gets enough range. This comment may seem like a typical Elon Musk update, but it shows a lot about Tesla’s experience as a veteran electric car maker. 

Making an electric car is not easy. Making a great electric car is twice as difficult. This is something that veteran automakers are now learning, with each vehicle that they release. Premium EVs seem to be the ones learning this lesson the hardest, especially as otherwise great cars like the Audi e-tron and the Jaguar I-PACE end up being bogged down by issues such as range. Yet among carmakers and “Tesla Killers” that have come out, the Porsche Taycan seems to be the best example of this experience gap. 

The Porsche Taycan is a beautifully-designed electric sports car, and it works like one. It’s top-tier variant, the $185,000 Taycan Turbo S, is arguably the only vehicle that can beat a Raven Model S Performance on the drag strip fair and square. Yet for all its speed and power, the Taycan suffers from poor efficiency, as evidenced by the Turbo S’ 192-mile EPA rated range. Granted, tests from motoring publication Car and Driver suggest that the Taycan’s range is more tuned for Autobahn driving, but the gap between the vehicle and the Model S is very evident. This becomes even more notable when one considers that both cars’ battery packs are similarly-sized. 

The Model S’ Long Range Plus update means that through incremental improvements on electric car batteries, Tesla is now able to draw out 390 miles out of a 100 kWh pack. That’s just about 20 miles short of Rivian’s 400-mile trucks, and those vehicles are equipped with a 180 kWh battery pack. This matters a lot, and this is a benchmark that will probably take a few years to beat. 

During Porsche’s Annual Press Conference last year, the company’s executives focused a lot of their discussions on the Taycan, whose development represented a multi-billion-dollar initiative for the company. Following the main conference, I was fortunate enough to be part of a group of reporters who were able to get a brief Q&A session with Porsche Board Member for Sales and Marketing Detlev Von Platen. When it was my turn to ask a question, I inquired about Porsche’s strategy about the Taycan’s range, and how the company plans to prevent the vehicle from being the electric equivalent of a gas guzzler. 

The Board Member’s response did not directly address my inquiry, though he did emphasize that Porsche is no neophyte with battery tech due to its efforts with high-performance hybrid sports cars like the 918 Spyder. This is a fair point to make, of course, though looking at the Taycan’s range, it appears that the company still needs a few more iterations of its flagship electric car before it can expertly balance performance and range in a pure EV. The Tesla Model S Plaid is coming to establish itself as the undisputed king of consumer EVs, after all. If Elon Musk’s words are any indication, it would be a triple-motor monster with frighteningly quick acceleration and a range that’s still close to 400 miles. 

That’s going to be a far tougher rival than the Tesla Model S Performance. 

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Tesla is wasting no time in preparing land for its European Gigafactory in Berlin, Germany, with construction crews working around the clock since Thursday to clear 91 and a half of the 300 hectares of land that Tesla purchased in January.

On-site crews have cleared a significant portion of the “Tesla forest” in Gruenheide in the two days following Tesla’s preliminary approval for the initial phase of construction.

Tesla began removing small trees and overhanging branches in early January to make way for construction vehicles. Making quick and efficient progress while using a harvester and collector in the latest deforestation process, the large trees were removed in the location needed to facilitate planning for infrastructure and public roads in the area.

First trees have been felled. It is good to see that things are progressing. I am mega excited to see that future technology comes close to my city 😊 pic.twitter.com/1rdP5XncXS

— Emil Senkel (@EmilSenkel) February 14, 2020

Tesla plans to have crew work through the nights to complete the first phase of the project before the February 27th deadline, while being cautious to not interfere with native birds’ breeding season that begins in early March. Additionally, Tesla must adhere to mandates that would require construction noise to be kept below certain levels during the evening hours. This will reportedly be monitored by noise measurement devices put in place at nearby buildings.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk has promised that the trees taken from the area will be replaced three-fold in areas that surround Brandenburg. While there were some minor roadblocks when looking for land that was suitable for replacement trees, Tesla eventually found space in multiple areas with the help of a German environmental group called Brandenburg Area Agency. The company plans to plant more environmentally beneficial trees this time, instead of the “low quality” that they are removing from the Brandenburg property.

Credit: Emil Senkel

Credit: Emil Senkel

Credit: Emil Senkel

Credit: Emil Senkel

Credit: Emil Senkel

Tesla seems to be geared toward a quick construction process for its first European Gigafactory that mirrors the rapid turnaround for building its factory in China. The company took the same approach when building Gigafactory 3 in Shanghai that began producing the Model 3 just twelve months after Tesla broke ground on the construction process. Tesla plans to utilize the German production plant initially for the production of the Model Y crossover beginning in July 2021, but Elon Musk has stated the company will also produce batteries at the site.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});