News
Elon Musk teases an update to SpaceX’s Mars architecture later this year
Elon Musk and SpaceX are aiming to provide a second update on the company’s Mars architecture plans in late September of this year, likely at the 2017 International Astronautical Congress (IAC) in Adelaide, Australia.
While 2017 has been extraordinarily busy and successful for SpaceX thus far, it has also been a somewhat quiet year for Mars and the technology being developed to colonize it affordably. There was a brief flurry of social media information focused on the testing of the ITS carbon composite test tank revealed at the 2016 IAC, with a few pictures and a video of its transport. This activity, as well as Elon Musk’s Ask Me Anything on /r/SpaceX, occurred a month or two after the 2016 IAC, in October and November.
https://www.instagram.com/p/BM4P6b_g2N9/?taken-by=spacex&hl=en
The only concrete information revealed about SpaceX’s Mars ambitions in 2017 have so far been distributed by Musk over Twitter and in an interview of SpaceX President and COO Gwynne Shotwell a few weeks ago. Musk offered tentative time frames for a possible update of the Mars architecture, stating that he believed it dealt with the far more crucial challenge of how to finance such a large endeavor’s significant R&D costs.
Maybe the upcoming IAC in Adelaide
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 11, 2017
During his 2016 reveal, Musk estimated that something like $10 billion would be required to complete development and initial construction of the Raptor engine and ITS test articles. While it is believed that SpaceX has at least several hundred million dollars of liquid capital available, growing several billion dollars of capital is a much greater challenge that will likely require a different methodology than those typically employed by Musk.
Shotewell also discussed SpaceX’s Mars ambitions off and on during an hour-long interview on The Space Show. Of general interest, she mentioned that the current team working on Mars-related research and development was “tiny”, but that it would become a drastically more resource-intensive priority as the company completes work on the fifth and somewhat final “Block” of Falcon 9 and finishes the work necessary to begin routinely conducting Commercial Crew missions. Shotwell gave a timeline of “soon” for the beginning of Block 4 flights and “end of year” for the introduction of Block 5, which is intended to significantly increase the reusability of Falcon 9 (titanium grid fins are a feature of this strategy). Barring delays or setbacks for SpaceX, this implies that SpaceX will begin aggressively pursuing the concrete development of their Mars architecture as soon as the latter months of 2018 or sometime in 2019.
SpaceX revealed this stunning photo of Raptor’s first (partial) hot-fire test the night before Musk’s talk at Guadalajara. (SpaceX)
More specifically, however, Shotwell said that the Raptor test article revealed at the Guadalajara IAC has since conducted “dozens” of tests and is now more seriously considering the engine’s potential utility aboard Falcon 9. The current subscale Raptor components are approximately half the size of the final, operational design, and the need to scale up by as little as a factor of 2 should make the realization of the final design considerably less difficult, and make the testing of the current Raptor far more demonstrative of the operational engine. The exploration of vacuum Raptor as the engine of an upgraded second stage for Falcon 9 would further allow for true on-orbit testing of Raptor, and increasing the performance of S2 would allow for greater flexibility in exploring second stage reuse. Musk and Shotwell have expressed interest in this, particularly given that the second stage is approximately 30% of the cost of every Falcon 9, thus capping any potential cost savings first stage (and fairing) reuse may bring. If SpaceX wishes to lower the cost of launches by a factor of 10 to 100 and bring to life any form of the Mars architecture revealed in Guadalajara, they will have to develop second stage reusability that it is both as rapid, functional, and complete as they soon hope to make first stage reuse.
A fully reusable Falcon 9 would offer the company more cost-effective ways to launch their own profit-driving internet constellation, and could also simply provide deeper profit margins for their main business of commercial launches. However, with Musk having already publicly acknowledged that reusability cost SpaceX approximately $1 billion to develop, SpaceX is certainly already considering the plausibly diminishing returns of diverting more funds and human resources into the continued development of Falcon 9. The most likely outcome is almost certainly some combination of the above goals, whereby SpaceX would delay their Mars exploration timeline by several years and concurrently pursue Falcon 9 second stage reuse and the initial test article development for their Mars architecture, as well as exploring the challenges and intricacies of human spaceflight and deep space exploration with Dragon v2.
-
- The carbon composite LOX tank test article before its first pressurization testing in northern Washington, mid-November 2016. (Reddit /u/ Death_Cog_Unit)
-
- SpaceX’s massive carbon fiber liquid oxygen tank seen testing in Northern Washington. BFR’s tankage will be 25% narrower, and thus easier to manufacture. (SpaceX)
-
- The test article before testing in early February 2017, during which it is believed to have lost structural integrity and failed. (Reddit /u/TeddyBear3238)
-
- The remains of the test article tank after suspected over-pressure testing. Divers were required to salvage the remains over the course of several days. (Reddit /u/ Death_Cog_Machine)
Of note, the only known major testing event in 2017 related to SpaceX’s Mars program was observed by a SpaceX fan in February of this year. After successful November 2016 tests of the carbon composite tank in northern Washington state, fans noted that the tank had made an outdoors appearance once more in early February 2017. SpaceX mentioned on Instagram that the following test, the one SpaceX was preparing for in February, was a full cryo test of the tank, meaning that it involved actual high-pressure, supercooled liquid oxygen. Another fan noted several days later that the barge SpaceX was testing the tank aboard returned to port empty, and later observed what looked like several large pieces of the tank test article that reportedly had to be recovered from the sound by divers. The logical conclusion is that the tank was destroyed during its second phase of testing, but the crucial and currently unknown fact of the matter is whether the failure was a result of intentionally destructive testing or defects in what was effectively an experimental engineering article. Further SpaceX talks later this year will likely reveal some level of detail as to what transpired in the testing of that prototype carbon composite tank.
Reasoned speculation aside, the latter months of 2017 have multiple talks, speeches, and hearings planned by SpaceX members like Elon Musk and Tim Hughes, and information on SpaceX’s Mars ambitions and other future prospects will almost certainly be offered. Hughes is to attend a hearing at 9am EST on July 13th for the U.S. Senate on commercial space and will be testifying on the subject as a representative and employee of SpaceX. Just under a week later, Elon Musk is scheduled to be the main keynote speaker at the 2017 ISS R&D Conference. His talk is set to begin at 12:30pm EST on July 19th. A handful of months after that, as mentioned above, Musk may also provide a detailed update on SpaceX’s Mars architecture at the 2017 International Astronautical Congress.
In other words, on top of an aggressive 12 possible launches between August and the end of December, SpaceX fans also can look forward to details, photos, and possibly even more about the company’s Mars efforts over the next several months.
Elon Musk
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Four Raptor engines failed to ignite at T-zero, forcing SpaceX to scrub Starship Flight 13 Thursday.
SpaceX scrubbed the Starship Flight 13 launch attempt Thursday evening at the last possible moment, after four of the Super Heavy booster’s 33 Raptor 3 engines failed to ignite during the startup sequence. The 90-minute window had opened at 6:45 p.m. EDT from Starbase in Boca Chica, Texas, and the countdown had proceeded without issue all day, with more than 11.5 million pounds of liquid methane and liquid oxygen being fully loaded into the rocket before the automated abort triggered. SpaceX’s launch directors posted on X, “Standing down from today’s flight test attempt,” and shut down the livestream shortly after.
Musk confirmed the root cause within hours. “Some of the engines didn’t start, triggering an automatic launch abort,” he wrote on X. “To be confident of a good flight, 2 Raptors will be removed and replaced. Most probable launch timing is early next week.” SpaceX engineers began draining propellant tanks immediately and Booster 20 was rolled back to its hangar for inspection.
The timing adds a layer of significance that did not exist during any of the previous 12 Starship flights. This is the first time SpaceX has attempted to launch Starship since the company made its stock market debut in June, listing under ticker SPCX at $135 per share. Public investors are now watching every Starship outcome in real time, and a last-second abort carries more visibility than it would have six months ago.
Flight 13 was designed to be one of the most consequential tests in the program’s history. It was set to carry 20 Starlink V3 satellites, the first operational payload Starship has ever attempted to deploy. Six of those satellites carried external cameras to photograph Starship’s heat shield from the outside during flight, which would act as a self-inspection approach SpaceX has never attempted before. The mission also needed to complete a Raptor engine relight in space, a step SpaceX skipped on Flight 12 in May after losing an engine during ascent. That Flight 12 booster also flipped 90 degrees off course during its boostback burn when five engines failed to reignite.
SpaceX has not announced an official next launch date. Musk’s “early next week” window points to July 21 or 22 at the earliest, pending the engine swap and a return to the pad.
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
