LNG: TESLARATI

Being a crossover, the Tesla Model Y will likely serve as a people mover for most of its buyers. Tesla notes that the vehicle is pretty spacious inside, with ample headroom, a spacious 2nd row, a stunning glass roof, and seating for up to seven passengers. Yet, behind its people-moving characteristics, the Model Y seems to be optimized for utility and practicality as well. Very few have just noticed it. 

As posted by Tesla owner-enthusiast Erik Strait, the Model Y’s official webpage shows that the vehicle’s three second-row seats can be individually folded. This is quite different from the Model 3, which is equipped with a 60/40 split-folding rear seat. 

This slight change alone makes a lot of difference when it comes to the utility of the Model Y, particularly when it comes to hauling cargo. Since the Model Y’s three second-row seats can be folded down individually, it would be possible to simply drop the middle seat to carry long items such as skis, allowing the vehicle to carry a large amount of cargo. Doing so still leaves four comfortable seats on the vehicle. 

With this small optimization on the Model Y’s second-row seats, Tesla has pretty much turned its crossover into a vehicle that will be perfect for the occasional weekend family ski trip. Couple this with the support from the company’s ever-expanding Supercharger Network, and the Model Y becomes a very compelling long-trip vehicle. 

Tesla’s electric cars have always been champions of cargo space in their own right. The company’s flagship sedan, the Model S, has so much space that a literal double-sized mattress actually fits inside the cabin when the second-row seats are folded down. The Model Y is no exception, with the vehicle being equipped with 66 cu ft of cargo space. That’s enough to hold a lot of bags and luggage, and yes, even a few sets of skis. 

Tesla has already killed the myth of range anxiety, thanks in part to its vehicles’ industry-leading range as well as its Supercharger Network. It’s now up to the company’s vehicles to prove that they have what it takes to outdo practical champions like the Toyota RAV4 and the Honda CR-V, which are the go-to affordable mainstream crossovers for weekend adventures. The Model 3 is incredibly practical for its class, but it’s a sedan and is thus at a disadvantage when it comes to the general perception of conventional consumers. 

The Model Y, on the other hand, is perfectly positioned to compete against these mainstream veteran affordable crossovers. The vehicle is a premium EV, so its cost will be higher than conventional crossovers like the RAV4. Despite this, it’s far more affordable than other electric SUVs like the Model X or the Jaguar I-PACE. The Model Y requires very little maintenance and recharging it is very affordable thanks to the Supercharger Network, making it a viable alternative to cheaper petrol-powered rivals. The crossover segment is very competitive, more so than the sedan market, but the Model Y might have just the right goods to be a success.

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

Tesla vehicles were snubbed in favor of diesel cars by the Australian federal government’s COMCAR fleet earlier this week. The government agency has decided to opt for BMW’s powered by diesel fuel and Toyota Camry Hybrids.

The decision came from the Department of Finance, who initially had plans to include two separate models of Tesla vehicles in its fleet used to carry politicians, senior bureaucrats, and senior judges around Australian cities.

In the past, the fleet has been comprised of Australian-made Holden Caprice sedans. A decline in Holden’s production and manufacturing in Australia was the main influence behind the decision to seek out new vehicles from international manufacturers. Kia, BMW, Nissan, Hyundai, Mercedes, and Toyota were all among the potential candidates, according to The Driven.

The Tesla Model S and Model X were the two potential vehicles considered to comprise the new array of vehicles but ultimately did not make the final shortlist of the seven vehicles that were selected. The Model 3 was not considered as it was not yet available in the country when new vehicles were being tested.

The reasoning for not including sustainable electric vehicles in the fleet had to do with purpose due to available space for cargo. “COMCAR undertook a preliminary assessment of a wide range of vehicles, including a number of all-electric vehicles, which were not considered fit-for-purpose for COMCAR’s operations, due to their size and capacity,” a spokesperson said for the department said.

Interestingly enough, the Model X offers more cargo space than both the BMW 6 Series GT sedan and Toyota Camry Hybrid vehicles that the department chose to purchase. The Model X has a best-in-class 88 cubic feet of space, while the BMW and Toyota have 65 cubic feet and 15.1 cubic feet, respectively. While the Model S does not offer as much cargo room as the BMW, it does offer more than the Toyota with 28 cubic feet of space.

Price also seemed to be a factor in what vehicles were ultimately purchased. Both the Tesla Model S ($115,600) and Model X ($122,812) would have cost the Australian government back over $100,000 per vehicle. However, the 6 Series GT sedan from BMW also eclipses the six-figure mark at $102,900, making it ironic that they had chosen a diesel-powered vehicle over the electric options from Tesla that ultimately would have saved the government money through low operating costs.

Tesla has had a considerable presence in Australia as its Model 3 is the most popular electric car in the country. The government’s decision could have been because of the initial financial cost, but over time the Tesla vehicles would have been cheaper due to significantly less routine maintenance compared to gas and diesel-powered cars. Hopefully, Australia’s Department of Finance will reconsider when they update the fleet again in a few years and make a decision that will benefit both the environment and their pockets in the long run.

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

A new video out of China shows Tesla’s Giga Shanghai teeming with activity. The massive electric car production facility resumed its operations Monday following a government-mandated shutdown of businesses in the country due to the corona virus outbreak.

Tesla Model S owner and Twitter user @JayinShanghai posted a video showcasing Giga Shanghai’s facade, stamping workshop, welding line, paint shop, general assembly, car wash, and Supercharger stations juicing up Model 3s in the compound.

Tesla suppliers also resumed their operations in China. LG Chem returned to work on Monday with a provision to change its decision depending on the situation. Joyson Safety, which supplies parts for Tesla Model 3 and Model Y, also went online to help ensure that China-made Teslas will be delivered as soon as possible to customers.

Around the location of Giga Shanghai, about 330 businesses were also allowed to resume operations.

Exclusive Video: Tesla Giga Shanghai Officially Resumes Operation, let’s take a look inside the factory.

Full Video Here: https://t.co/1gMJiM8X9I#Tesla #TeslaChina #Gigafactory #GigaShanghai #ChinaMade #Model3 #特斯拉 #中国 $TSLA pic.twitter.com/A8pXnjStIc

— Jay in Shanghai 🇨🇳 (@JayinShanghai) February 10, 2020

Other car manufacturers in China have also started production. Ford started resuming work at several of its facilities in the country. GM, meanwhile, said that its return to operations in China will depend on the safety of their employees, inventory available in dealers, and parts availability. Toyota is also taking steps to resume operations this week.

About 40 shuttle buses brought employees to Giga Shanghai as it went online Monday after an extended pause in operation following the long holiday in celebration of the Chinese New Year and the outbreak of the coronavirus that has so far infected almost 43,000 people and has claimed more than 1,000 lives in the country, according to recent figures from CNN.

Over the weekend, the municipal government of Shanghai promised to coordinate and assist businesses, including Tesla, to resume operations. It also offered to ask banks to offer preferential rates for existing loans.

Tesla’s finance chief Zach Kirkhorn clarified during a recent earnings call that while there was an expected delay in the production of Made-in-China Model 3 due to the coronavirus public health scare, the carmaker is not expecting a big hit on its profits as the MIC Model 3 only represents a small fraction of Tesla’s quarterly profits.

The $2 billion Giga Shanghai factory is the first factory of Tesla outside of the United States. It has a current run rate of 3,000 units a week and an annual initial expected output of 150,000 vehicles.

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

From the surface, Mars may seem like a dry, desert-like world lacking water, but a closer look at the planet’s poles will some striking structures: massive polar ice caps.

At the north pole, the ruddy terrain peeks through the ice, like zebra stripes. In the south pole lurks a mystery, a massive deposit of frozen carbon dioxide and water ice. Scientists have spent decades trying to understand how it formed and how it’s linked to the amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the Martian atmosphere.

A pair of scientists in the 1960s came up with a plausible theory, and now, decades later, a new study published in Nature Astronomy may have confirmed their findings.

The massive deposit — measuring 3,280 feet (1 kilometer) thick — contains sheets of water ice and carbon dioxide arranged in alternating layers, like a cake. It’s topped off with a thin frosting of carbon dioxide ice, and scientists noticed something interesting: the massive ice deposit contains as much carbon dioxide as the entire Martian atmosphere.

Peter Buhler, a planetary scientist at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory led the new study. The team used computer simulations to map out the ice, and they were surprised at how closely their models matched with what Robert B. Leighton and Bruce Murray predicted decades ago.

“Usually, when you run a model, you don’t expect the results to match so closely to what you observe,” he said in a statement. “But the thickness of the layers, as determined by the model, matches beautifully with radar measurements from orbiting satellites.”

The ice cap puzzled researchers because according to science, it shouldn’t exist. That’s because water ice is more thermally stable and darker than carbon dioxide ice, which means that it should destabilize when layered between water ice.

However, the new model explains this behavior. Buhler and his team say there are three reasons why the frozen carbon dioxide exists. First, Mars wobbles as it orbits the sun, and when it does, the slight changing of the tilt alters the amount of sunlight that hits the ice. Second, each type of ice reflects the sun a bit differently. And lastly, because of the exposure to sunlight, the carbon dioxide sublimates–meaning it goes directly from a solid to a gas–which alters the atmospheric pressure.

As Mars wobbles, the amount of sunlight reaching the ice varies, causing the ice to form and then later sublimate. When the carbon dioxide ice was forming, water ice would’ve been trapped with it. But when that ice sublimated, the more stable water ice would have remained behind, forming the layers we now see at the south pole.

Mars’ climate, just like Earth’s, has changed over millions of years. To that end, not all of the carbon dioxide ice was lost; some were left behind to build up the varying layers we see—a process that has altered the red planet’s atmospheric pressure. 

This is what Leighton and Murray hypothesized back decades ago, and this is what Buhler’s new model shows.

“Our determination of the history of Mars’s large pressure swings is fundamental to understanding the evolution of Mars’s climate, including the history of liquid water stability and habitability near Mars’s surface,” Buhler said in a statement.

By understanding what processes formed the south polar ice cap, scientists can better understand more of what happened in Mars’ history.

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

Tesla submitted its initial application to the Brandenburg Investment Bank (ILB)  for subsidies that will fund the construction of Giga Berlin in Grunheide.

“The documents are now being successively completed,” ILB chief executive Tillmann Stenger told German publication Spiegel. The application also requires an investment plan and the documents will now be completed step by step.

According to government spokesperson Florian Engels, the electric car maker could get over 100 million euros (about $109 million). For companies investing up to 50 million euros, subsidies can be up to 20%.

Businesses investing 51 million to 100 million euros could get up to 10%, while those investing 100 million euros or more may get a subsidy of around 6.8%. German media estimated that Tesla’s investment will be around 4 billion euros (around $4.4 billion) for Giga Berlin.

The ILB will also have to notify the EU Commission in Berlin about the requested funding.

Federal Minister of Economics Peter Altmaier told German newspaper Welt am Sonntag that Tesla must meet certain criteria for the sustainability and performance of its products, particularly the vehicles’ batteries.

“In my conversations with Elon Musk, I always pointed out that there is no privilege, but there is also no discrimination,” said Altmaier.

Aside from these, the German government also requires research and development, among others, to increase the chances of receiving such funding. The German government wants to promote battery cell manufacturing in the country that will not only help push the shift to greener mobility options but also generate thousands of jobs in the country.

First heavy tree cutting machines arrived at the #GigaBerlin scene. None was used today.
As @tobilindh described machine action acurred in the west part (excavating). I will be back again tomorrow. pic.twitter.com/GilUpCiogV

— Giga Berlin / Gigafactory 4 (@gigafactory_4) February 10, 2020

Amid the news of Tesla’s grant application for Giga Berlin, heavy machines used for tree cutting and clearing were spotted in the forest where the car factory will be built.  Tesla aims to start construction on Giga Berlin’s first phase by mid-March and s begin vehicle production by July next year. Tesla plans produce 150,000 vehicles per year initially, then later ramp to an output of about 500,000 vehicles annually.

Tesla has also applied for federal subsidies for its Giga Berlin battery cell production. This fulfills the government requirement for a multi-million grant for the construction of Tesla’s Berlin-based factory and sets the stage for the quick ramp of Model 3 and Model Y production in Germany.

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

SpaceX is set to become the first private company to launch NASA astronauts as few as three months from now, all but guaranteed after Boeing’s competing Starliner spacecraft narrowly avoided a catastrophe in space on its orbital launch debut.

The ultimate purpose of NASA’s Commercial Crew Program (CCP) is to ensure that the US is once again able to launch its own astronauts into orbit and to the International Space Station (ISS) – a capability the country has not possessed since it prematurely canceled the Space Shuttle in 2011. In a logical step, NASA decided to fund two independent companies to ensure that astronaut launch capabilities would be insulated against any single failure, ultimately awarding contracts to Boeing and SpaceX in 2014. Boeing did actually try to have Congress snub SpaceX back in 2014 and solely award the contract to Starliner, but the company thankfully failed.

As a result, SpaceX beating Boeing on the (not-a-) race to launch NASA astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS) would represent an immense and deeply embarrassing upset in the traditional aerospace industry – essentially a case of David and Goliath. For the better part of a decade, Congress, most industry officials, and Boeing itself have argued ad nauseum the Starliner spacecraft was clearly a far safer bet than anything built by SpaceX – Boeing, obviously, has far more experience (“heritage”) in the spaceflight industry. However, multiple “catastrophic” failures during Boeing’s recent Starliner ‘Orbital Flight Test’ (OFT) paint a far uglier picture.

As its PR team and executives will constantly remind anyone within earshot, Boeing helped build the first stage of the Saturn V rocket, while a company it bought years after the fact (Rockwell) did technically buy the company (North American) that built the spacecraft (Apollo CSM) that carried NASA astronauts from the Earth to the Moon (and back). Rockwell (acquired by Boeing) also built all five of NASA’s Space Shuttle orbiters.

In the 1990s, Boeing – set to lose a competition to build an expendable rocket for the US military – acquired McDonnell Douglas at the last second, slapping a Boeing sticker on the Delta IV rocket – designed and built by MD. Boeing then conspired to steal trade secrets from Lockheed Martin (bidding Atlas V) and used that stolen info to mislead the USAF about the real cost of Delta IV, thus securing the more lucrative of two possible contracts. This is all to point out the simple fact that Boeing has far less real experience designing spacecraft than it tends to act like it does.

As such, it’s substantially less surprising than it might otherwise be that Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft has had such a rocky orbital launch debut. Preceded just a matter of weeks by a quality assurance failure that prevented one of Starliner’s four parachutes from deploying after an otherwise-successful pad abort test, a second Starliner spacecraft launched atop an Atlas V rocket on its orbital launch debut (OFT) on December 20th, 2019. Atlas V performed flawlessly but immediately after Starliner separated from the rocket, things went very wrong.

Bad software ultimately caused the spacecraft to perform thousands of uncommanded maneuvering thruster burns, depleting a majority of its propellant before Boeing was able to intervene. Starliner managed to place itself in low Earth orbit (LEO), but by then it had nowhere near enough propellant left to rendezvous and dock with the ISS – one of the most crucial purposes of the uncrewed flight test. Unable to complete that part of the mission, Boeing instead did a few small tests over the course of 48 hours in orbit before commanding the spacecraft’s reentry and landing on December 22nd.

But wait, there’s more!

As it turns out, although both NASA and Boeing inexplicably withheld the information from the public for more than two months, Boeing’s OFT Starliner spacecraft reportedly almost suffered a second major software failure just hours before reentry. According to NASA and Boeing comments in a press conference held only after news of that second failure broke after an advisory panel broached the issue in February 2020, a second Starliner software bug – caught only because the first failure forced Boeing to double-check its code – could have had far more catastrophic consequences.

NASA officials stated that had the second bug not been caught, some of Starliner’s thruster valves would have been frozen, either entirely preventing or severely hampering the spacecraft’s detached trunk from properly maneuvering in orbit. Apparently, that service module (carrying fuel, abort engines, a solar array, and more) could have crashed into the crew module shortly after detaching from it. Unsurprisingly, that ‘recontact’ could have severely damaged the Starliner crew capsule, potentially making reentry impossible (or even fatal) if its relatively fragile heat shield bore the brunt of that impact.

SpaceX has undeniably suffered its own significant failures, most notably when flight-proven Crew Dragon capsule C201 exploded moments before a static fire test, but the company has already proven that it fixed the source of the failure with the spacecraft’s second successful launch on a Falcon 9 rocket. Ultimately, it’s becoming nearly impossible to rationally argue that Boeing’s Starliner will be safer than SpaceX’s Crew Dragon – let alone worth the 40% premium Boeing is charging NASA and the US taxpayer.

According to Ars Technica’s Eric Berger, Crew Dragon’s inaugural astronaut launch is now tentatively scheduled as early as late-April to late-May 2020. Paperwork – not technical hurdles – is currently the source of that uncertainty, and all Demo-2 mission hardware (Falcon 9 and Crew Dragon) is either already in Florida or days away from arriving.

Due to the combination of similar software failures Starliner suffered during its first and only launch, Boeing now has to review the entirety of the spacecraft’s software – more than a million lines of code – before NASA will allow the company to launch again. There’s also a very good chance that Boeing will now have to repeat the Orbital Flight Test, potentially incurring major delays. In short, it would take nothing less than a miracle – or NASA making a public mockery of itself for Boeing’s benefit – for Starliner to launch astronauts before SpaceX.

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({});

SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has offered a new glimpse inside the company’s rapidly-expanding South Texas Starship factory, revealing the beginnings of the next-generation rocket’s first true assembly line — and a wealth of spacecraft hardware.

Situated two or so miles from the Gulf of Mexico (and Mexico itself) in Boca Chica, Texas, SpaceX has been seriously planning a presence in South Texas for more than five years. Originally meant to host the United States’ first private orbital launch complex for Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy rockets, only a small amount of work – known as soil surcharging – was done in the four years that followed SpaceX’s 2014 announcement. In late 2018, however, work began in earnest to build basic launch and manufacturing facilities.

Less than six months later, the first true Starship prototype – known as Starhopper and built from scratch out in the South Texas elements – ignited its Raptor engine for a brief static fire test, bringing the first to facilities and rocket to life less than half a year after they were little more than a pile of dirt and steel sheets. Now, barely nine months after Starhopper’s first static fire test, SpaceX is working around the clock to erect a full-scale rocket factory and build what could become the first orbital-class Starships. On February 9th, Elon Musk offered the best glimpse yet of the incredible progress SpaceX has made in a matter of weeks.

Barely a month ago, the rocket hardware pictured above did not exist, while the giant Tesla-inspired tent containing those Starship parts was a half-finished skeleton. Now, Elon Musk says that SpaceX has effectively completed three of the hardest parts of its first upgraded Starship prototype (SN01), while an additional two (of three) of those parts – known as propellant tank domes – are already in work for a second Starship (SN02).

Outside of the ‘sprung structure’ (i.e. tent) shown in Musk’s February 9th photo, SpaceX contractors appear to be just days away from completing the shell of a second identical tent, ultimately doubling the space available for enclosed manufacturing operations. At the same time as both Starship hardware and production facilities are rapidly coming together, SpaceX is also erecting what is presumed to be a Vehicle Assembly Building – a potentially massive structure that will protect vertical Starships and Super Heavy boosters from the elements while workers assemble them into finished rockets.

Inside the finished tent, SpaceX appears to have set up the first true Starship assembly line (of sorts), expanding from working on a single kind of prototype at a time to concurrent (serial) production of major components. Visible are three Starship bulkheads (tank domes) – two completed instances of which have already been transported outside and integrated with finished ring segments, forming two halves of Starship SN01’s complete liquid methane (LCH4) tank.

Near the back of the tent, work is also ongoing on several Starship SN01 tank rings. In the center, technicians are outfitting Starship SN01’s engine and ‘skirt’ section, where the bottommost tank dome will attach to three (up to six) Raptor engines. To the left, a stack of two rings appears to be stored off to the side, while – only slightly visible in Musk’s photo – another pair of rings is being welded together with the help of a rotating table.

Far from its full capacity and working out of a much smaller tent, SpaceX’s dedicated ringforming station – tasked with turning coils of steel into finished Starship rings – has finished no less than 34 steel rings since the January 1st. SpaceX is still clearly learning and at least third of those rings wound up being scrapped due to defects, but the material cost of all of those rings (~55 tons of steel) is probably less than $150,000. Additionally, those 34 completed segments would reach more than 60 meters (200 ft) tall if stacked, enough to build almost two Starship tank and engine sections – domes excluded.

In simple terms, SpaceX has pivoted away from the more boutique style of prototype fabrication used for Starhopper and Starship Mk1 and is now building Starship SNxx hardware extremely quickly. At the same time, the enclosed manufacturing space available to SpaceX is probably going to double before this week is out. Ultimately, SpaceX’s March 2020 Starship SN01 flight debut target is quickly becoming less and less crazy by the day.

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({});