LNG: TESLARATI

Does preheating your Tesla help when you have freezing rain? Another Tesla owner asked himself that question upon waking up to a completely frozen Model 3 in Ontario, Canada and documented why Tesla owners should preheat or defrost the car during snowy conditions.

Trevor Page, who runs the Tesla Owners Online YouTube channel, shared a video about his experience over the weekend when it rained all day in Toronto and temperatures dropped below zero overnight. He woke up to a Tesla Model 3 frozen charge port, frozen windows, frozen door handles, or practically — a completely frozen Model 3.

Page took the opportunity to put the preheat feature of Tesla in the spotlight. He set up a timelapse camera to see how it will defrost the vehicle. He checked on the car after half an hour but found out that the car’s charge port was still frozen, the windows started to defrost, and the windshield defrosted nicely. After an hour, the Model 3 owner found the car’s roof defrosted and he was also able to open the doors of the car. He was also able to pull out the charger and close the charge port.

“I know some of you are going straight to the comments and say stuff like ‘oh this is a Tesla problem’ and we’d never buy one… matter of fact, Tesla’s are fantastic in the winter but freezing rain is freezing rain. These kinds of problems can happen to any car,” Page said. “Do your pre-heat at least half an hour, maybe up to an hour and just use your phone app to heat it up. I will say that getting into a car that’s nice and warm and the windows defrosted is fantastic and the fact is you can do it in your garage without killing your family in the process.”

Tesla engineered its electric cars so they can be easily operated and remain efficient during the cold months. One can preheat a Tesla by switching on the preconditioning or defrost feature via the Tesla App to melt ice and snow on important surfaces. The system prioritizes specific parts of the car that are crucial to driving in icy conditions.

A previous report where a Tesla owner used a thermal camera showed which parts of the car are heated up. It revealed that the Autopilot camera, as well as the side and rear cameras, were heated to ensure the Tesla car and driver see the environment clearly regardless of the weather. The headlamps, wheels, steering wheel, and wipers were also brought to an optimal temperature.

Tesla also has some snow and ice tips such as repositioning wipers to service position to prevent icing and deactivating mirror auto-fold. The carmaker also reminds owners to make sure that important surfaces are not frozen or covered before heading out for a drive. During cold weather, Tesla recommends to leave the car plugged in so the battery will retain some heat. There’s also the option to use Scheduled Departure to warm the vehicle up.

Check out the video from Tesla Owners Online below and see how Tesla’s preheating or defrosting feature works:

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

SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has officially confirmed that the company’s next Falcon 9 launch will destroy the flight-proven booster and upper stage “in Dragon fire”, a cryptic reference to the ultimate purpose of the sacrifice.

Known as SpaceX’s In-Flight Abort (IFA) test, the mission is designed not to place any particular payload in orbit but to demonstrate that Crew Dragon – the company’s first human-rated spacecraft – can ensure astronaut safety even if faced with a worst-case scenario during launch. IFA will mark Crew Dragon’s second dedicated abort test and second launch on a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket, although the mission’s brand-new spacecraft will have to suffice with a suborbital jaunt before hopefully splashing down intact in the Atlantic Ocean.

If everything goes as planned, SpaceX has every intention of reusing the IFA Crew Dragon capsule on a future mission, although it’s unclear what that mission might look like. It’s unlikely that a reused SpaceX spacecraft will fly NASA astronauts anytime soon but it’s possible that the company will refurbish the vehicle for an entirely private astronaut launch or transform it into the first uncrewed launch of a next-generation Cargo Dragon (Dragon 2). Regardless, given the challenges posed by the In-Flight Abort, Crew Dragon’s survival is far from guaranteed.

Given that such an abort scenario is by definition a possibility, it’s likely the case that SpaceX’s engineers are almost certain that Crew Dragon should be able to survive such an ordeal, but the spacecraft will likely be pushed to its limits and it’s often much harder to ensure that everything works as intended at those limits.

In-Flight Abort by the numbers

Formerly scheduled to fly since-destroyed Crew Dragon capsule C201, SpaceX was forced to shuffle its spacecraft scheduling, reassigning Crew Dragon capsule C205 – originally expected to launch SpaceX’s first NASA astronaut mission – to support the In-Flight Abort. Featuring upgrades designed to prevent the failure mode that led to C201’s violent explosion, C205 will now have to survive a series of extremely challenging environments.

The IFA test is designed to prove that Crew Dragon can escape a failing Falcon 9 rocket during the most mechanically stressful point of launch. Occurring around 80-100 seconds after liftoff and known as Max Q, it’s the point where Falcon 9’s velocity and altitude combine to create the most friction and pressure the rocket’s windward parts will experience on their climb to orbit. For Crew Dragon, this means its SuperDraco abort engines will have to work fight upwards against air that is functionally (but not literally) much thicker than it is at other points during flight – a battle that will simultaneously put even more pressure (mechanical stress) on the spacecraft’s surfaces.

Purely from a numerical perspective, the pressure at Max Q is typically around 30-35 kPa (4.5-5 psi), which doesn’t sound like much but can easily become a force to be reckoned with when the surface area of the rocket or spacecraft being impacted is as large as Crew Dragon (let alone Starship). For reference, Crew Dragon capsules likely have a conical surface area on the order of 30,000 square inches (~19 m²), meaning that the spacecraft is subjected to a total mechanical load of 50-60 metric tons (~130,000 lbf) at Max Q.

Traveling as fast as Mach 2.5 (860 m/s) at an altitude of 28 kilometers (17 mi) at the point where Crew Dragon will ignite its abort thrusters and attempt to escape, that very act of escape will likely magnify the mechanical stresses on the capsule even further. During Crew Dragon’s 2015 Pad Abort, for example, the spacecraft went from a standstill to 155 m/s (345 mph) in 7 seconds – an average acceleration of about 2.3 Gs. Crew Dragon C205 could thus find itself traveling almost Mach 3 (more than a kilometer per second) just seconds after separating and may ultimately reach a peak altitude of almost 75 km (45 mi).

This is all to simply say that Crew Dragon is going to be subjected to an array of varying extremes in a very short period of time, during and after which it must still successfully control its orientation, avoid tumbling, detach its trunk section, and deploy a series of parachutes to achieve a fully-successful test. Additionally, the In-Flight Abort test will see Crew Dragon launch on an almost orbit-worthy Falcon 9 upper stage (lacking only a functional Merlin Vacuum engine) and thrice-flown booster B1046.

According to CEO Elon Musk, it simply is not going to be possible to prevent the historic booster – the first Falcon 9 Block 5 rocket ever launched – from being destroyed shortly after Crew Dragon attempts its escape. Once Dragon departs Falcon 9, the upper stage will likely be torn to shreds by the supersonic airstream suddenly buffeting it, ultimately exposing Falcon 9 B1046’s unchanged interstage – effectively a giant, open cylinder closed at its base.

Likely still travel supersonic, the results of the airstream entering Falcon 9’s interstage and finding no exit will likely be akin to a glass cup smashing mouth-first into a brick wall with a bowling ball taped to its bottom. Thankfully, Falcon 9 B1046 has already successfully supported three orbital-class launches since it debuted in May 2018, completing its third flight just seven months later. The booster will be missed and the opportunity cost (at least several more orbital-class launches) is definitely non-zero, but its sacrifice sill be for a good reason.

As Musk notes, if the In-Flight Abort goes as planned, it could pave the way for Crew Dragon’s first NASA astronaut launch – known as Demo-2 – as few as 6-8 weeks later. For now, Crew Dragon’s IFA test is scheduled to launch no earlier than (NET) January 18th, likely around 8 am EST (13:00 UTC).

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({});

Before dawn on January 10th, SpaceX technicians and engineers intentionally blew up a miniature Starship tank in order to test recently-upgraded manufacturing and assembly methods, likely to be used to build the first Starships bound for flight tests and orbit.

SpaceX CEO Elon Musk quickly weighed in on Twitter later the same day, revealing some crucial details about the Starship tank test and effectively confirming that it was a success. While somewhat unintuitive, this is the second time SpaceX has intentionally destroyed largely completed Starship hardware in order to determine the limits of the company’s current methods of production and assembly.

Most notably, on November 20th, SpaceX is believed to have intentionally overpressurized the Starship Mk1 prototype in a very similar – albeit larger-scale – test, destroying the vehicle and sending its top tank dome flying hundreds of feet into the air. It’s generally believed that SpaceX (or perhaps even just Musk) decided that Starship Mk1 was not fit to fly, leading the company to switch gears and deem the prototype a “manufacturing pathfinder” rather than the first Starship to fly – which Musk had explicitly stated just a few months prior.

Bopper (Baby StarPopper) this morning after the overpressure event at SpaceX Boca Chica. 🤩🚀@NASASpaceflight https://t.co/nCG7E9XtKM pic.twitter.com/PRTDQvvlRh

— Mary (@BocaChicaGal) January 10, 2020

Dome to barrel weld made it to 7.1 bar, which is pretty good as ~6 bar is needed for orbital flight. With more precise parts & better welding conditions, we should reach ~8.5 bar, which is the 1.4 factor of safety needed for crewed flight.

— Buff Mage (@elonmusk) January 10, 2020

Instead, Starship Mk1 suffered irreparable damage during its pressurization test and was rapidly scrapped in the weeks following, although several segments were thankfully salvaged – perhaps for use on future prototypes. Along those lines, it can arguably be said that the results from the mini Starship tank’s Jan. 10 pop test have paved the way for SpaceX to build the first truly flightworthy Starship prototypes – potentially all the way up to the first spaceworthy vehicles.

Hours after the test, Musk revealed that the Starship test tank failed almost exactly where and how SpaceX expected it would, bursting when the weld joining the upper dome and tank wall failed. Critically, the tank reached a maximum sustained pressure of 7.1 bar (103 psi), some 18% over the operating pressure (6 bar/87 psi) Musk says Starship prototypes will need to be declared fully capable of orbital test flights. In other words, given the tank’s size, it survived an incredible ~20,000 metric tons (45 million lbf) of force spread out over its surface area, equivalent to about 20% the weight of an entire US Navy aircraft carrier.

Musk also revealed that SpaceX will require Starships to survive a minimum of 140% of that operating pressure before the company will allow the spacecraft to launch humans.

Some have less than generously taken to smugly noting that several modern spaceflight and engineering standards require that launch vehicle tankage be rated to survive no less than 125% of their operating pressure, while this test tank would be rated for less than 118% under identical conditions. However, this ignores several significant points of interest. First and foremost, the Starship test tank intentionally destroyed on January 10th was assembled from almost nothing – going from first weld to a completed pressurization test – in less than three weeks (20 days).

Second, all visible welding and assembly work was performed outside in the South Texas elements with only a minor degree of protection from the coastal winds and environment. Although some obvious tweaks were made to the specific methods used to assembly the prototype tank, it also appears that most of the welding was done by hand. For the most part, in other words, the methods used to build this improved test article were largely unchanged compared to Starship Mk1, which is believed to have failed around 3-5 bar (40-75 psi).

Additionally, it appears that almost all aspects of this test tank have smaller structural margins, meaning that the tank walls and domes are likely using steel stock that is substantially thinner than what was used on Starship Mk1. Nevertheless, thanks to the addition of continuous (single-weld) steel rings, a tweaked dome layout, and slightly refined welding, this test tank has performed anywhere from 20% to 200+% better than Starship Mk1 – again, all while coming together from scratch in a period of less than three weeks.

As Musk notes, with relatively minor improvements to welding conditions and the manufacturing precision of Starship rings and domes, SpaceX can likely ensure that Starships (and thus Super Heavy boosters) will be able to survive pressures greater than 8.5 bar (125 psi), thus guaranteeing a safety margin of at least 40%. Even a minor improvement of ~6% would give vehicles a safety margin of 125%, enough – in the eyes of engineering standards committees – to reasonably certify Starships for orbital test flights.

All things considered, it’s safe to assume that SpaceX is going to begin building and assembling Starship SN01 (formerly Mk3) hardware almost immediately. Given that this test tank took just 20 days to assemble, it’s safe to say that the upgraded prototype’s tank section could be completed in just a handful of weeks. Stay tuned for progress reports.

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({});

As Tesla awaits to begin construction of its Gigafactory 4 in Brandenburg, the US electric car manufacturer made big strides in terms of making the automotive giants feel its presence. Tesla led all brands in terms of most new registrations of purely electric cars for 2019 in Germany.

Based on the data from Germany’s Federal Motor Transport Authority (KBA), Electrive reported that Tesla delivered 10,710 electric vehicles in 2019, edging Renault, which came in a far second with 9,431 units. BMW posted the third most EV registrations with 9,117 vehicles hitting the road.

The Tesla Model 3 was the leader of the pack in December with 926 new registrations followed by the Renault Zoe with 780 and the Volkwagen e-Golf with 764. New registrations of Model S and Model X were 114 and 89, respectively.

Likewise, KBA reported that Tesla is the king of imported brands in Germany. The Palo Alto, California-based carmaker registered a 462.3% increase in new vehicle registrations last year. Lexus posted a 29.7% increase while Ssangyong went up by 17.8%.

The latest numbers bode well for the future of Tesla in a country considered as the hub of automotive giants such as Daimler, BMW, and Volkswagen. But it’s not just Germany that experienced Tesla’s strong presence. In the Netherlands, Tesla crushed the competition to end 2019 with 30,882 new electric vehicle registrations last year. The Model 3 was also the best selling car for 2019 in Norway, posting an 11% market share.

It is an impressive achievement to see how Tesla’s vehicles compete as an imported brand in Europe and one can only be excited to think how things will be when Tesla begins production of the Model Y when Gigafactory 4 starts its operations.

It is also interesting to take note that more than half of new vehicle registrations in Germany were SUVs with a recorded increase of 21%. The Model Y’s entry into the market might just be perfectly timed to make the most of the demand in the segment, especially since Gigafactory 4 is expected to produce about 250,000 vehicles during its initial phase, ramping to about 500,000 units annually.

With such production goals, Tesla can saturate the local market that just happens to be switching to greener vehicles. Petrol and diesel units still dominated Germany’s December 2019 registrations but green vehicles gained the most impressive year-over-year gains. Electric cars posted gains of 49.8% compared to the same period in 2018, while hybrid vehicles recorded a 130.8% rise. PHEVs saw a 197.6% increase.

What Tesla is achieving in Germany now could help foretell what to expect in the biggest markets in Europe. Just like what Elon Musk is doing in China, Tesla will soon be a force to be reckoned with in the region. For a region that plans to dramatically cut down its CO2 emissions, Tesla may very well be the perfect car maker to support.

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

Tesla CEO Elon Musk teased that its electric vehicles will soon be able to “talk” and backed it up with video footage of a red Model 3 that was heard saying, “Don’t just stand there staring, hop in.”

According to Musk, Tesla cars will be able to talk to pedestrians but also to vandals through Sentry Mode for “some epic robber confusion.”

Teslas will soon talk to people if you want. This is real. pic.twitter.com/8AJdERX5qa

— Buff Mage (@elonmusk) January 12, 2020

It is not yet clear how the new feature will work or where the sound will come from. The sound bites might use the same speaker installed for the Model 3’s pedestrian noisemaker first seen last year, but the car on the footage has its windows rolled down and it’s not clear if the voice was coming from inside the vehicle. Nevertheless, hearing a Tesla talk adds to the fun factor of the vehicle. These can be sound bites played by from the car’s touchscreen or automatic voice prompts that can be set to warn nearby humans or just blurt out some phrases to make people laugh. Of course, the addition of voice warnings to the Sentry Mode of Teslas will help beef up the security of vehicles as the noise can warn owners or nearby humans that someone is about to rob or potentially vandal a Tesla.

With Elon Musk’s known interest in safe artificial intelligence, it will also be interesting to see if future Teslas will really be able to interact with its occupants or if such features can be integrated into the Autopilot and Full Self-Driving technologies of the Palo Alto, California-based car manufacturer.

Imagine a Tesla electric vehicle in the future that talks like Knight Rider’s KITT. This perfectly fits the picture of Tesla robotaxis with a butler-sounding voice prompt picking up passengers and earning money for their owners who might be busy. While these ideas are a long shot, they are not far fetched as Tesla has been working to perfect its Full Self-Driving technology and also making voice commands an integral part of its system.

Other features such as the mobile app with in-car search capabilities that the Tesla chief confirmed recently will also go well with talking Teslas.

As always, the light-hearted and funny side of Musk surfaced during the conversation about talking electric vehicles as he said the cars will also be able to fart a la Monty Python in the general direction of nearby pedestrians.

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

Tesla’s fleet pooling deal with Fiat-Chrysler Automobile’s (FCA) may generate enough for the electric car maker that it could end up funding Gigafactory 4 on its own, according to analysts at Baird.

Baird analyst Ben Kallo says the payments will augment Tesla’s profit margins and likely be enough to effectively pay for the purchase and initial construction of Gigafactory 4 near Berlin, Germany.

“While we acknowledge investors may want to strip out credits in evaluating operational execution, we do note the credits effectively fund Tesla’s European factory,” Kallo said in a report published on January 9.

The two automakers teamed up to create an alliance that would make it easier for Fiat to reach the European Union’s CO2 requirement of 95g per kilometer in 2020. The deal requires FCA to pay Tesla $2 billion through 2023, breaking down to around $150 million to $200 million payments for each quarter until the balance is paid off.

Without the agreement with Tesla last Spring, FCA would have struggled to meet the newly-adopted emissions limits and it could have been subject to large penalties that may have put the company in an awkward place financially. This is why the EU granted an “open-pool” option that allows multiple car manufacturers to pool their fleets together to meet the regulations.

The EU was forced to lay down the hammer when it came to emissions regulations following Volkswagen’s lengthy scandal known as “Dieselgate.” The German automaker was accused of planting cheat devices in several of its Turbocharged Direct Injection (TDI) vehicles so they would pass emissions testing. VW has paid around $33 billion in fines and penalties since 2015.

FCA announced a $10.5 billion dollar plan to expand its fleet to include electric vehicles in its lineup last Spring. The company also recently unveiled its all-electric Fiat 500, and Plug-In Hybrid variants of Jeep’s Compass, Renegade and Wrangler.

However, FCA is not fully committed to a future that works toward sustainability. California recently made the decision to stop purchasing vehicles from companies that do not support the state’s emissions standards and FCA was one of the manufacturers involved. Hopefully, the manufacturer will reconsider its stance and join the movement that will fight the global climate crisis.

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

On the heels of Tesla’s latest search-by-voice feature, CEO Elon Musk is considering an update that would extend onboard search capabilities to an owner’s Tesla mobile app. Having the ability to search vehicle-specific functions via a mobile app, instead of using Tesla’s native touchscreen or voice controls, isn’t a use-case that naturally comes to mind but there very well could be a good one.

As suggested by Tesla Owners Silicon Valley, there could be times when having access to search Netflix, YouTube and other streaming services directly from the back seat of the vehicle could come in handy. In a Tesla Model X, for instance, watching an in-car movie from the 2nd row provides a theater-like viewing experience, but without access to the vehicle’s touchscreen or steering wheel control for searching. “I was sitting in the middle row of my X and I wanted to change the youtube channel without opening the falcon door,” commented @teslaownersSV to Musk. To which Musk replied “Sure”, hinting at the possibility that a Tesla App feature to facilitate in-car search could become a reality.

Sure

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 10, 2020

With the rollout of the V10 update in September last year, Tesla practically turned the touchscreen into a movie machine with the Tesla Theater feature.

A search feature on the mobile app will also be convenient when one is on Camp Mode. Those who will be spending extended periods of time in their vehicles will be able to maximize the entertainment system, say while on a queen-sized mattress in their Model S or X.

Ultimately, search on the mobile app might come useful when Teslas are cruising on the road as robotaxis in the future. Passengers can be given access to the in-car entertainment system via mobile app and be able to watch their favorite movies or TV series on Netflix or Disney+.

We can only expect Tesla to constantly push new features that enhance the capabilities of the vehicle and further improve user experience as we’ve seen in the Holiday Software Update that included a good amount of new voice commands and visualizations, both steps that take the carmaker closer to its Full Self-Driving dream.

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

The Tesla Cybertruck may very well be a sign of things to come for the electric car maker, as it is a vehicle that embodies a completely different “technology orbit” compared to the company’s other cars. These findings were recently related by an ardent Tesla bull following a visit to the Fremont factory.

Global Equities Research analyst Trip Chowdhry shared some of his insights from his Fremont visit in an article on finance website StreetInsider. Outlining his thoughts, the analyst stated that the Cybertruck’s technology is something that is “exponentially over and beyond both Model S and Model X.” “(The) Cybertruck is completely in a different Technology Orbit,” Chowdhry wrote.

Explaining further, Chowdhry also noted that based on what he has seen, he would not be surprised if Tesla ends up creating a lineup of vehicles based on the Cybertruck. Propelled by the Model 3 and Model Y, the analyst stated that Tesla may very well launch a “CyberCar,” which would likely be more aggressively priced compared to the company’s current vehicles.

The Tesla Cybertruck is unlike any of the company’s other vehicles, being unashamedly huge and brutalist. It packs a lot of power and off-road capabilities that Tesla’s other vehicles are not readily capable of, mostly because it was engineered from the ground up to be as tough as possible. But inasmuch as the Cybertruck is radical for its design, it is also groundbreaking for its potential battery costs. The truck is heavy and will likely have a large battery pack, yet the vehicle will only cost slightly more than the Model Y crossover Tesla will start delivering this summer.

This implies several interesting scenarios. Based on the Cybertruck’s specs, estimated weight, size, and up to 500 miles of range, one can assume that it will require a fairly large battery pack. Yet the vehicle’s top-tier Tri-Motor AWD variant is priced below $70,000 before options, seemingly implying that Tesla has reduced its battery costs to a substantial degree.

This makes the Cybertruck a very compelling vehicle to purchase. For the price of a premium crossover SUV like the Jaguar I-PACE, buyers can acquire a 500-mile monster EV with full off-road capability, six seats, standard Autopilot, and enough acceleration to hit 60 mph in 2.9 seconds. That’s a difficult combination to beat.

Tesla has a trend of constantly improving, not just year-over-year, but quarter-over-quarter as well. Based on Chowdhry’s recent comments, it appears that the Cybertruck is the next step in Tesla’s evolution as a car manufacturer. And if more “cyber”-inspired vehicles are indeed in the pipeline, the massive electric pickup could very well be the start of a whole new breed of affordable, long-range, performance EVs.

The Cybertruck’s Dual and Tri-Motor variants cost $49,900 and $69,900 respectively will begin production in late 2021, with the $39,990 Single-Motor entering its initial building phase the following year. The vehicle was recently recognized as the Concept Car of the Year and has been the subject of many pieces of pop-culture since its unveiling in mid-November.

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

Over the last few weeks, SpaceX’s South Texas Starship team has been making progress at a pace unprecedented even for the famously agile rocket company and is moving full speed ahead to kick off a new series of explosive tests as early as this morning.

Ever since SpaceX’s original Starship Mk1 prototype spectacularly failed during a November 2019 pressure test, the company has been rapidly rearranging and modifying the development schedule for its next-generation full-reusable rocket. Be it a side effect or coincidence, SpaceX effectively began closing its Florida Starship factory a week after Mk1’s demise and even shipped some of its Florida-built Starship hardware to Texas in recent weeks. However, most of the Florida workforce (up to 80%) was reportedly redirected elsewhere in the company, avoiding layoffs.

Some portion may have even moved to Texas and joined SpaceX’s Starship Boca Chica facilities. Given just how aggressively SpaceX has been expanding its local facilities and preparing new hardware for the next round of improved Starship prototypes, it seems quite likely that the South Texas outpost did indeed receive an influx of skilled workers. Most recently, the company has demonstrated its rapidly growing expertise in the bizarre art of building steel rockets en plein air by fabricating and integrating new tank domes and steel rings and then shipping the curious contraption to its nearby launch site in a matter of weeks from start to finish.

Although it’s difficult to determine the chronology of every single part of the mysterious new tank, it’s fairly safe to say that work on its structure began less than a week before SpaceX CEO Elon Musk tweeted a surprise update, indicating on December 27th that he was in Boca Chica, Texas working all night on “Starship tank dome production”.

In simple terms, the business half of SpaceX’s next-generation Starship upper stage and Super Heavy boosters are comprised of three main parts, shared by almost all launch vehicles. Both are rocket stages that must be as light as physically possible while supporting thousands of tons worth of supercool liquid oxygen and methane propellant. The majority of a simple rocket is ultimately a duo of cylindrical tanks capped by tank domes – also known as bulkheads. The bottom bulkhead of boosters and upper stages also serves as a mounting point for an engine section, where the vehicle’s rocket engines are attached to the rocket body in order to transfer their thrust throughout the rest of the structure.

SpaceX CEO Elon Musk says that Starship tank domes have turned out to be “the most difficult part of [the rocket’s] primary structure” to manufacture, thus explaining why he was apparently assisting the Boca Chica team all night on December 27th.

Starship Mk1 exploded on November 20th, 2019 during a nonflammable propellant loading test, a failure that unofficial videos have compellingly linked to the weld joint connecting the rocket’s upper tank dome to its cylindrical tank. That section of the rocket began leaking cryogenic propellant moments before the entire upper dome tore off the rest of the vehicle and launched hundreds of feet into the air.

All hail Baby Tank

In an apparent response to the unsatisfactory results of Starship Mk1’s manufacturing methods, SpaceX has rapidly initiated an already-planned upgrade of its Starship facilities and manufacturing methods in South Texas, taking delivery of a wealth of new tools over the last several weeks. Most recently, SpaceX’s latest step towards demonstrating that it has substantially improved manufacturing quality arrived in the form of a single propellant tank – the same diameter as Starship Mk1 but much shorter than any possible flight hardware.

Quickly nicknamed Bopper (short for Baby Starhopper) by locals and close followers, the miniature Starship test article came together at a truly spectacular pace. Comprised of two single-weld steel rings and two brand new tank domes, it appears that all four of the components were nothing more than parts and steel stock less than three weeks ago. The first sign of activity came around December 19th, when technicians began placing pressed steel sections onto a bulkhead (dome) assembly jig – used to precisely hold the pieces in the right shape and place as they are welded together.

Incredibly, aside from taking less than three weeks to go from miscellaneous parts to an assembled Starship tank delivered to the test site, SpaceX technicians appeared to finish stacking and welding its two halves (each a ring and a dome) perhaps a handful of hours before it was lifted onto a transporter and driven to the launch pad.

Even for SpaceX, moving a prototype from factory to test site hours after its primary structure was welded together represents an almost unfathomably fast pace of work – truly unfathomable in traditional aerospace. Whether or not such a pace of work is smart, sustainable, or worth it remains to be seen, but SpaceX is nevertheless on track to pressure test its new mini Starship tank as early as this morning, potentially resulting in another spectacular overpressure event (i.e. explosion).

If the tank survives up to or beyond the pressures SpaceX has designed it to, it’s safe to say that the next full-scale Starship prototype could come together far sooner than almost anyone might have expected.

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({});