Connect with us

News

SpaceX installs first ‘Mechazilla’ arm on Starship launch tower

SpaceX has installed the first arm on Starship's "Mechazilla" launch tower. (NASASpaceflight - bocachicagal)

Published

on

One month after SpaceX stacked Starship’s South Texas ‘launch tower’ to its full height, the company has installed the first arm on what amounts to the backbone of ‘Mechazilla.’

At the end of July, after less than four months of work, a team of SpaceX workers and contractors installed the final prefabricated section of a ~145m (~475 ft) tall tower meant to support orbital Starship launches. Above all else, SpaceX’s first custom-built ‘launch tower’ is a sort of backbone or anchor point for several massive, mechanical arms that will accomplish the actual tasks of servicing – and, perhaps, catching – Starships and Super Heavy boosters.

Work on all three of the arms expected to make up what SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has described as “Mechazilla” has been visibly underway since the last week of June as a small army of welders carefully assembled dozens of sections of heavy-duty steel pipe into house-sized frames. Almost exactly two months later, SpaceX has installed the first of those three arms on the exterior of Starship’s skyscraper-sized launch tower.

Known as the tower’s quick-disconnect or QD swing arm, the standalone structure is reportedly designed to accomplish a few different tasks. First, as its unofficial name might suggest, the QD arm will hold a quick-disconnect umbilical connector that will temporarily attach to the base of Starships to load them with fuel, oxidizer, and other consumables and link them to ground power and networking. For years, it appeared that SpaceX planned to fuel Starship upper stages through their Super Heavy boosters, which will themselves be connected to umbilical panels on a table-like launch mount that sits beside the tower.

Advertisement

However, once work began on Starship S20, the first potentially space-capable prototype, it was clear that SpaceX had foregone the umbilical plate normally installed at the base of Starship skirts and moved that connection to the ship’s lower back. Musk later confirmed as much in interviews and tweets, revealing that longstanding plans to dock Starships aft to aft for in-space refueling were also up in the air. As of late, aside from reiterating that the launch pad itself (“Stage Zero,” per Musk) is even more complex and difficult than Starship or Super Heavy, SpaceX’s CEO has also repeatedly stated a desire to offload as many systems as possible onto the launch pad – seemingly regardless of the complexity of the alternative.

To the left of the QD arm’s former assembly spot are the tower’s ‘chopstick’ catcher arms (left) and what’s believed to be the carriage (right) they’ll be installed on. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

Enter the building-sized robot informally known as Mechazilla. While the relatively simple swinging ‘QD arm’ that will fuel Starship and stabilize both stages of the rocket is a common feature of rockets and launch pads, the only experience SpaceX itself has with umbilical swing arms is the Crew Access Arm (CAA) that allows astronauts and cargo to board Dragon spacecraft after Falcon 9 goes vertical – a structure with near-zero umbilical utility. Technically, the transporter/erectors (T/Es) that cradle Falcon rockets, lift them vertical, and fuel them before launch have some similarities with swing arms but SpaceX has always used simpler and more reliable passive mechanisms whenever possible.

A step further, though, SpaceX has also seemingly foregone the installation of a basic crane on top of its Starship tower and Musk himself has developed an almost infamous aversion to the inclusion of something as seemingly simple as landing legs on Super Heavy boosters – and, eventually, perhaps even (some) Starship variants. Instead of adding rudimentary legs to Super Heavy prototypes, Musk has seemingly pushed SpaceX to turn Starship’s launch tower into a complex, vulnerable, and fragile rocket recovery system. Beyond the comparatively mundane QD arm, Musk says that SpaceX will ultimately install a pair of massive house-sized steel arms mounted on a sort of external elevator. Those arms will apparently be capable of actuating and moving up and down the tower with the speed, precision, and reliability needed to quite literally catch Super Heavy boosters – and, eventually, Starships – out of mid-air.

The team tasked with designing and building those rocket-catching arms have affectionately deemed them “chopsticks” – a nod towards the kind of nuanced actuation they’ll need to recover the world’s largest rocket boosters and upper stages without missing or destroying them. Having really only just perfected propulsive vertical landing with Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy boosters, SpaceX thus intends to throw a few extra points of failure into the mix.

To SpaceX and Musk’s credit, whether the company’s second attempt at catching rockets goes as well as the first, some version of the massive ‘chopstick’ arms SpaceX is working on was likely going to be necessary just to rapidly turn around boosters and Starships – and do so regardless (within reason) of weather conditions. By replacing a tower crane with giant arms, SpaceX will hopefully be able to stack Starship on Super Heavy (and Super Heavy on the launch mount) even in the high winds that are almost always present on the South Texas Gulf Coast. If SpaceX can also reliably catch boosters with those arms, it could be a significant upgrade for the operations side of Starship reusability. For now, though, only time will tell.

Advertisement

Eric Ralph is Teslarati's senior spaceflight reporter and has been covering the industry in some capacity for almost half a decade, largely spurred in 2016 by a trip to Mexico to watch Elon Musk reveal SpaceX's plans for Mars in person. Aside from spreading interest and excitement about spaceflight far and wide, his primary goal is to cover humanity's ongoing efforts to expand beyond Earth to the Moon, Mars, and elsewhere.

Advertisement
Comments

News

Tesla Cybercab gets crazy change as mass production begins

Tesla has officially kicked off mass production of its groundbreaking Cybercab robotaxi at Giga Texas, and the first units rolling off the line feature a striking transformation that’s turning heads across the EV community.

Published

on

Credit: TechOperator | X

Tesla Cybercab has evidently received a pretty crazy change from an aesthetic standpoint, as the company has made the decision to offer an additional finish on the vehicle as mass production is starting.

Tesla has officially kicked off mass production of its groundbreaking Cybercab robotaxi at Giga Texas, and the first units rolling off the line feature a striking transformation that’s turning heads across the EV community.

VIN Zero—the very first production Cybercab—showcases a vibrant champagne gold exterior with a high-gloss finish, a dramatic departure from the flat, matte-wrapped prototypes that debuted at the 2024 “We, Robot” event.

This glossy sheen is a pretty big pivot from what was initially shown by Tesla. The company has maintained a pretty flat tone in terms of anything related to custom colors or finishes.

A specialized clear coat or process delivers the deep, reflective gloss without conventional painting. The result is a premium, mirror-like shine, and it looks pretty good, and gives the compact two-seater a more luxurious and futuristic presence than the subdued matte prototypes.

Photos shared by Tesla community members reveal VIN Zero in a showroom-like setting at Giga Texas, highlighting refined panel gaps, large aero wheel covers, and the signature no-steering-wheel, no-pedals interior optimized for full autonomy.

The open frunk in some images offers a glimpse of practical storage, while the overall build quality appears more polished than that of test mules.

This glossy evolution aligns with Tesla’s broader production ramp. After the first unit in February 2026, the company has shifted to volume manufacturing, with dozens of units already spotted in outbound lots. CEO Elon Musk and the team aim for hundreds per week, paving the way for unsupervised FSD robotaxi networks that could slash ride costs to pennies per mile.

The Cybercab holds Tesla’s grand ambitions of operating a full-service ride-hailing service without any drivers in its grasp. Tesla has yet to solve autonomy, but is well on its way, and although its timelines are usually a bit off, improvements often come through the Over-the-Air updates to the Full Self-Driving suite.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla confirms Cybercab with no steering wheel enters production

Published

on

Tesla has confirmed today that its steering wheel-less and pedal-less Cybercab, the vehicle geared toward launching the company’s autonomous ride-hailing hopes, has officially entered production at its Giga Texas production facility outside of Austin.

The Cybercab is a sleek two-door, two-passenger coupe engineered from the ground up as an electric self-driving vehicle. It features no steering wheel or pedals, relying instead on Tesla’s advanced vision-only Full Self-Driving system powered by multiple cameras and artificial intelligence.

The minimalist cabin centers on a large display screen that serves as the primary interface for passengers, creating an open, futuristic space optimized for comfort during unsupervised rides. A compact 35-kilowatt-hour battery pack delivers exceptional efficiency at 5.5 miles per kilowatt-hour, providing an estimated 200-mile range.

Additional innovations include inductive charging compatibility and a lightweight design that enhances aerodynamics and performance.

Production at Giga Texas builds on earlier prototypes and initial units completed earlier in 2026. The facility, already a hub for Model Y and Cybertruck assembly, now ramps up dedicated lines for the Cybercab.

This shift to volume manufacturing reflects Tesla’s strategy to scale affordable autonomous vehicles rapidly.

By focusing on a dedicated platform rather than adapting existing models, the company aims to keep costs low while prioritizing safety and reliability through continuous AI improvements.

The Cybercab’s debut in production carries broad implications for urban mobility. As the cornerstone of Tesla’s Robotaxi network, it promises on-demand, driverless rides that could slash transportation expenses, reduce traffic accidents caused by human error, and lower emissions through its all-electric powertrain.

Accessibility features, such as space for service animals or assistive devices, further broaden its appeal. Regulators and cities worldwide will soon evaluate its deployment, but the vehicle’s design already addresses key hurdles in scaling unsupervised autonomy.

Challenges persist, including full regulatory clearance and building charging infrastructure. Yet this production launch signals momentum. With Cybercabs poised to roll out in increasing numbers, Tesla edges closer to a future where personal ownership meets shared fleets of intelligent vehicles.

The start of Cybercab production is more than just a new vehicle entering mass manufacturing for Tesla, as it’s a signal autonomy is near. Being developed without manual controls is such a massive sign by Tesla that it trusts its progress on Full Self-Driving.

While the development of that suite continues, Tesla is making a clear cut statement that it is prepared to get its fully autonomous vehicle out in public roads as it prepares to revolutionize passenger travel once and for all.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Summon got insanely good in FSD v14.3.2 — Navigation? Not so much

There were two new lines of improvements in the release notes: one addressing Actually Smart Summon (ASS), and another that now allows drivers to choose a reason for an intervention via a small menu during disengagement.

Published

on

(Photo: Hector Perez/YouTube)

Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.3.2 began rolling out to some owners earlier this week, and there are some notable improvements that came with this update.

There were two new lines of improvements in the release notes: one addressing Actually Smart Summon (ASS), and another that now allows drivers to choose a reason for an intervention via a small menu during disengagement.

Overall operation saw a handful of slight improvements, especially with parking performance, which has been the most notable difference with the arrival of FSD v14.3. However, there are still some very notable shortcomings, most notably with region-specific signage and navigation.

Tesla Assisted Smart Summon (ASS) improvements

There are noticeable improvements to ASS operation, which has definitely been inconsistent in terms of performance. Tesla wrote in the release notes for v14.3.2:

“Unified the model between Actually Smart Summon, FSD, and Robotaxi for more capable and reliable behavior.”
As recently as this month, I used Summon with no success. It had pulled around the parking lot I was in incorrectly, leaving the range at which Summon can be operated and losing a signal while moving in the middle of the lot.

This caused me to sprint across the lot to retrieve the vehicle:

Unfortunately, Summon was not dependable or accurate enough to use regularly. It appears Tesla might have bridged the gap needed to make it an effective feature, as two tests in parking lots proved that Summon was more responsive and faster to navigate to the location chosen.

It also did so without hesitation, confidently, and at a comfortable speed. I was able to test it twice at different distances:

I plan to test this more thoroughly and regularly through the next few weeks, and I avoided using it in a congested parking lot initially because I have not had overwhelming success with Summon in the past. I wanted to set a low baseline for it to see if it could simply pull up to the place I pinned in the Tesla app.

It was two for two, which is a big improvement because I don’t think I ever had successful Summon attempts back-to-back. It just seems more confident than ever before.

New Disengagement Categories

This is a really good idea from Tesla, but there are some issues with it. The categories you can select are Critical, Comfort, Preference, and Other.

I think the reasons why people choose to take over would be a better way to prompt drivers, like, “Traveling Too Fast,” “Incorrect Maneuver,” “Navigation Error,” would be more beneficial.

I say this because it seems that how we each categorize things might be different. For example, I shared a video of an intervention because the car had navigated to an exit to a parking lot and put its left blinker on, despite left turns not being allowed there.

I disengaged and chose Critical as the reason; it’s not a comfort issue, it’s not a preference, it’s quite literally an illegal turn, and it’s also dangerous because it cuts across several lanes of traffic and is 180 degrees.

Some said I should not have labeled this as Critical, but that’s the description I best characterized the disengagement as.

Categorizing interventions is a good thing, but it’s kind of hard to determine how to label them correctly.

Inconsistency with Regional Traffic Patterns

Tesla Full Self-Driving is pretty inconsistent with how it handles regional or local traffic patterns and road rules. The most frequent example I like to use is that of the “Except Right Turn” stop sign, which has become a notorious sighting on our social media platforms.

In the initial rollout of v14.3, my Model Y successfully navigated through one of these stop signs with no issues. However, testing at two of these stop signs yesterday proved it is still not sure how to read signs and navigate through them properly.

Off camera, I approached another one of these signs and felt the car coming to a stop, so I nudged it forward with the accelerator pedal pressed.

This helped the car go through the sign without stopping, but I could feel the bucking of the vehicle as the car really wanted to stop.

Musk said on the earnings call earlier this week that unsupervised FSD would probably be available in some regions before others, including a state-to-state basis in the U.S.

“It’s difficult to release this like to everyone everywhere all at once because we do want to make sure that they’re not unique situations in a city that particularly complex intersection or — actually, they tend to be places where people get into accidents a lot because they’re just — perhaps there’s — and like I said, an unsafe intersection or bad road markings or a lot of weather challenges. So I think we would release unsupervised gradually to the customer fleet as we feel like a particular geography is confirmed to be safe.”
This could be one of those examples that Tesla just has to figure out.

Highway Operation

Full Self-Driving is already pretty good at routine roadway navigation, so I don’t have too much to report here.

However, I was happy with FSD’s decision-making at several points, including its choice not to pass a slightly slower car and remain in the right lane as we approached the off-ramp:

Better Maneuvering at Stop Signs

Many FSD users report some strange operations at stop signs, especially four-way intersections where there is a stop sign and a line on the road, and they’re not even with one another.

I experienced this quite frequently and found that FSD would actually double stop: once at the stop sign and again at the line.

This created some interesting scenarios for me and I had many cars honk at me when the second stop would happen. Other vehicles that had waved me on to proceed through the intersection would become frustrated at the second stop.

FSD seems to have worked through this particular maneuver:

FSD should know to go to the more appropriate location (whichever provides better visibility), and proceed when it is the car’s turn to move. The double stop really ruined the flow of traffic at times and generally caused some frustration from other drivers.

Continue Reading