News
Elon Musk says SpaceX making good progress on Starship’s upgraded Raptor 2 engines
As is routine, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has taken to Twitter to offer a few details about the status of Starship, its Raptor engines, and a few upgrades planned for both.
In mid-December, Musk revealed even more ambitious plans to upgrade Starship by stretching its propellant tanks and adding another three Raptor engines, potentially boosting the ship’s maximum thrust by 50% and substantially improving payload performance. These latest details are focused on an upgraded version of the Raptor engine and on additional changes to Starship’s structural design and assembly process.
According to Musk, as SpaceX continues to ramp up ground testing of the upgraded engine variant, “Raptor 2 now operates routinely at 300 bar main chamber pressure.” For context, on February 10th, 2019, just days after SpaceX began testing the first full-scale Raptor prototype ever completed, the engine briefly reached a main combustion chamber pressure just shy of 269 bar (3900 psi). That narrowly beat records set by Russia’s RD-270 and RD-180 engines, the latter of which is used on ULA’s Atlas V.
It took 18 months before Musk revealed clear proof that at least one Raptor prototype sustained such high chamber pressures over a minute or more of steady-state operations. The same engine peaked at an impressive 330 bar (~4800 psi), briefly producing 225 tons (~500,000 lb) of thrust and soundly beating out Russia’s never flown RD-701 engine, which crested 290-300 bar in testing. Another ~18 months after that milestone, Raptor isn’t quite operational in the sense of supporting orbital-class launches but the engine isn’t far from its first and has since supported dozens of Starship static fires and seven flight tests – five of which occurred in a period of just six months.
Already, despite the fact that Raptor 1 or 1.5 engines have yet to even attempt an orbital-class launch, SpaceX has almost entirely moved on to a new and improved variant known as Raptor 2. According to Musk, all Raptor ground testing at the company’s McGregor, Texas development campus is now focused on the new hardware, which reportedly features much cleaner plumbing and wiring. The biggest change to Raptor 2, though, is an almost 25% increase in maximum nominal thrust over Raptor 1/1.5 – from around 185 to 230 tons (408,000-507,000 lbf). That’s partially enabled by widening the ‘throat’ of Raptor’s nozzle, which sacrifices a small amount of efficiency for more power density. However, Raptor 2 also contains design improvements throughout to enable sustained, reliable operation at chamber pressures up to 300 bar – 10% higher than Raptor 1.5.
On October 24th, Musk subtly live-tweeted one of the first Raptor 2 static fires, revealing that the engine reached a chamber pressure of 321 bar (~4650 psi) and briefly produced around 245 tons (~540,000 lbf) of thrust before destroying itself. Now, a little over two months later, Musk says that Raptor 2 prototypes are routinely operating at 300 bar without major issues, meaning that they can ignite and safely shut down after burning for several minutes at those pressures. In theory, given that 300 bar is Raptor 2’s targeted chamber pressure at max thrust, that means that the engine is now “routinely” operating at the level SpaceX wants and needs to take Starship to the next level.
It’s likely that one or several months of work remain before SpaceX can begin qualifying the first Raptor 2 engines (or, more importantly, hypothetical Raptor 2 Vacuum or Boost variants) for the first Starship or Super Heavy prototypes designed for the new engine. Nonetheless, the rapid progress SpaceX has made in the first few months of Raptor 2 testing is extremely encouraging.
Elon Musk
The Starship moon landing number NASA and Elon Musk can’t agree on
Musk disputes NASA estimate of 22 Starship launches for Moon landing, predicting 6 to 8.
Elon Musk is disputing a new NASA safety panel estimate of how many Starship launches it will take to put astronauts on the Moon, saying the real number will be less than half the panel’s figure.
On Thursday, NASA’s Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel held its quarterly public meeting. Panel member Charlie Precourt, a former NASA astronaut, flagged the fueling process for SpaceX’s lunar lander as a major risk for Artemis IV, the mission planned to land a crew on the Moon in 2028. “We need to keep our eyes on numerous required fuelings for the lander,” Precourt said, according to Ars Technica. “I think the last estimate is around 22 flights.”
Ars Technica’s Eric Berger posted the comment on X, and Musk replied. “That’s way too high,” Musk wrote. “Actual number will be more like 6 to 8.”
The disagreement comes down to a basic problem with sending a ship as large as Starship to the Moon. Starship burns nearly all of its propellant just reaching Earth orbit, so it cannot continue on to the Moon without stopping for a refill. SpaceX’s answer is a gas station in space. First, a Starship that works as a storage tank, called a depot, is launched into orbit. Then a series of tanker Starships launch one at a time, dock with the depot and pump their leftover propellant into it. Once the depot is full, the lunar lander version of Starship launches, docks, fills up and heads for the Moon.
Every tanker trip is its own full rocket launch, which is why the count matters. More launches mean more time, more cost and more chances for something to go wrong before astronauts ever leave Earth. Berger estimated that even if SpaceX reaches twice weekly Starship launches by the end of 2027, filling a depot at the panel’s number would still take roughly three months.
How many tankers are needed depends mostly on how much propellant each one can carry to orbit and how much is lost along the way. Starship’s fuel and oxygen are stored at extremely cold temperatures, and some of it slowly boils off while waiting in orbit. More is lost in each transfer. NASA appears to be working from what Starship can lift today, while Musk’s range assumes a more capable rocket.
Musk has pushed back on higher counts before. In 2021, after a government document suggested 16 launches, he called that “extremely unlikely” and said eight tankers would be the most required.
Much of the answer depends on hardware SpaceX has not finished flying. As Teslarati noted earlier this year, the company plans to carry out the refueling process with its upgraded V3 Starship, and Precourt described Artemis IV as carrying “a large number of firsts.” He also praised NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman’s team for working to clear obstacles for both SpaceX and Blue Origin, whose Blue Moon lander does not rely on orbital refueling for its first mission.
Elon Musk
Tesla’s secretive “Project Crystal Sun” gets a big green light in Texas
Fort Bend County approved four incentive agreements Thursday for Tesla’s proposed $10.1 billion solar factory.
Fort Bend County commissioners on Thursday approved a package of tax incentives for Tesla’s proposed $10.1 billion solar cell factory near Needville, Texas, giving the company one of the last local approvals it needs before it decides where to build. All four Tesla agreements passed 4 to 0.
The votes covered a property tax abatement inside Reinvestment Zone No. 34, a Chapter 381 economic development agreement, a foreign trade zone non-objection paired with payments in lieu of certain taxes, and a separate payment in lieu of taxes “true up” agreement, according to agenda notes from the Fort Bend Commissioners Court meeting.
The project, known internally as “Project Crystal Sun,” would make solar cells and finished modules on roughly 3,000 acres near FM 762 and FM 1994, south of the Brazos River. As Teslarati reported when the filing first surfaced in August, Tesla’s application under the state’s JETI Act splits the investment into $1.5 billion in real property and $8.6 billion in equipment, with 9,712 permanent jobs projected by 2033 and commercial operations targeted for the first quarter of 2029. The plant would handle the full chain from ingot and wafer production through cell testing.
Inside Tesla’s secretive $10 Billion “Project Crystal Sun” filing
Thursday’s approval does not lock in the site. Tesla has told the Texas Comptroller it is still weighing other locations, and site selection adviser David Dennison told Lamar Consolidated ISD trustees in September that the race had narrowed to Fort Bend and one out of state rival with a “very compelling package,” according to the Houston Chronicle. Tesla hopes to decide before the end of 2026, and the incentives still need sign off from the Comptroller and the Governor’s office.
Local officials have now done nearly everything within their control. Commissioners created the reinvestment zone in an August 24 special meeting, with Interim County Judge Daniel Wong formally withdrawing himself over his engineering firm’s past work with Tesla. Lamar CISD trustees voted 7 to 0 on September 15 to advance a JETI agreement that would tax Tesla’s qualifying property at 50 percent of its value for maintenance and operations from 2029 through 2038.
The plant lines up with a target Elon Musk set on Tesla’s Q4 2025 earnings call in January, when he said the company would “work toward getting 100 GW a year of solar cell production, integrating across the entire supply chain from raw materials all the way to finished solar panels.” In March, Tesla was reported to be negotiating a $2.9 billion purchase of Chinese solar manufacturing equipment bound for Texas. The Houston area already hosts Tesla’s Megafactory in Brookshire, where Megapack 3 production has started. Tesla said on its Q3 call that Megapack supply for 2027 is nearly sold out, and Musk wrote on X Thursday that the company is “increasing production of Megapacks as much as possible,” as demand from data centers climbs.
Tesla revealed plans to develop its own maps internally to fix Navigation issues and give owners more control over their routing.
On the company’s Q3 2026 Earnings Call, a question was asked about FSD Navigation issues, particularly speed limit recognition, parking, and routing. These are issues that surface from version to version and seem to be seriously challenging for Tesla’s AI team to resolve.
Tesla’s Head of AI, Ashok Elluswamy, said in response to the question:
“You’re totally right that we shouldn’t be depending on external people’s maps. So we are building our own maps, but not like the same way as OneMoreMap. We are building an entirely new architecture with essentially AI-based mapping and navigation.”
He continued:
“It’s going to be super awesome. It’s going to be integrated with voice. You can talk to it, ask for different routes. It’s going to learn your personalized preferences, plus the fleet preferences. The collective intelligence of all the cars is going to flow into making the maps and navigation super cool.”
Elluswamy said this issue should be confronted, and the mapping should be available for people by the time the v15 release starts deploying to customers.
“And over the next several months,” he added, “it’s just going to take over all of the navigation functions, parking, destination handling. And it will know you better than you know yourself in some regard for the driving task, and then handle it fully.”
Tesla Summon got insanely good in FSD v14.3.2 — Navigation? Not so much
Navigation is perhaps the most notable complaint with FSD, and although it has gotten better, it is still flawed. Much of the time, FSD will take people on routes that are not preferred by the driver, but Tesla tried to combat this with a routing feature in the Summer 2026 Update.
Tesla currently relies on Google for map data, but it is sort of counterintuitive to believe the company would rely on a third party for this. These improvements will be welcome, as routing and navigation have been such a pain point for so many owners for so long.
Quotes via Motley Fool
The Starship moon landing number NASA and Elon Musk can’t agree on
Tesla’s secretive “Project Crystal Sun” gets a big green light in Texas
