Connect with us

News

SpaceX braces for Florida-bound Dorian as hurricane threatens local Starship facility

SpaceX's Cocoa, Florida Starship construction facility is seriously threatened by Hurricane Dorian, set for landfall on Monday, September 2nd. (NOAA & @flying_briann)

Published

on

Hurricane Dorian is currently growing into a potentially devastating Atlantic storm some 1,200mi (~2000km) off the Florida Coast and local spaceflight facilities – including SpaceX’s launch pads and Starship campus – are at high risk.

As of the latest storm advisories, Hurricane Dorian is likely to grow into a Category 3 or 4 storm prior to making landfall somewhere along the East Coast of Central Florida. Dorian’s ground track forecast is unusually uncertain just four days out from landfall, but the Space Coast’s Kennedy Space Center (KSC), Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS), and other local spaceflight facilities (including SpaceX’s) are at high risk and are preparing for a worst-case scenario.

HURCON V – I

As of 0800hrs Wednesday morning, Brigadier General Doug Schiess – Commander of the 45th Space Wing at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station and Director of the Eastern Range at Patrick Air Force Base – initiated HURCON V preparations across Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS) and surrounding areas.  This precaution is triggered when storm winds in excess of 50 knots (58mph) are measured fewer than 96 hours to landfall. While CCAFS hurricane operations begin 96h out from landfall, KSC’s preparations begin after HURCON IV, indicating that storm winds in excess of 50 knots (58mph) have been measured 72 hours out from landfall. All facilities then follow a HURCON IV – I warning system that defines a series of preparation events and personnel evacuation plans. 

A HURCON IV issuance will see all personnel report for duty as usual while specialized teams will begin implementing organization-specific checklists, vehicles are fueled, and storm Ride-Out Team (ROT) personnel will be identified. From there as the storm approaches non-essential personnel will be evacuated, facilities will be secured, and roads will be closed. ROT personnel will remain on-site and will begin the evaluation of the premises once the storm has passed. 

SpaceX follows KSC’s lead, battens down Starship hatches 

As SpaceX leases Launch Complex 39-A from KSC it is expected that they will follow all precautions initiated by KSC as they did almost two years ago amid launch preparations during HURCON III conditions while facing down Hurricane Irma. SpaceX has released an official statement confirming the obvious: the company is working closely with KSC and CCAFS to monitor weather conditions and plan to take all necessary precautions before, during, and after landfall.

Advertisement

SpaceX may not be new to preparing its Florida launch facilities for hurricanes and tropical storms, but Hurricane Dorian poses entirely new challenges due to the fact that the company has recently begun operating a fairly extensive Starship production facility in Cocoa, Florida. The vast majority of Cocoa’s work is done entirely out in the open, rarely protected by more than a spartan windbreak or temporary tent. According to local photographer Greg Scott, SpaceX has paused all Starship production work for the moment and is working all-out to secure its facilities as the potentially catastrophic Cat 4 Hurricane Dorian fast approaches.

The total lack of hurricane-rated protection puts SpaceX’s Starship facility at exceptionally high risk. The Cocoa production facility is thus facing many obstacles with hurricane preparedness as the majority of Starship production takes place outside and is completely vulnerable to the elements. Aerial photos depict what a daunting – if not utterly impossible – task it will be to secure all of the current production pieces of Starship Mk2. 

Along with the main section structures and the completed nose cone section of Starship, many smaller fabrication pieces including large steel rings, a large bulkhead, and an array of assembly tools will need to be secured. Luckily a newly constructed wind guard structure covered in a white canvas material seemingly just reached completion and may be used to house the largest section of Starship if teams can manage to move it inside before storm conditions arrive.

Although it is surely going to suffer some damage from hurricane-force winds, the tent structure should offer some limited protection for any hardware that can be moved inside it. While Starship is being fabricated to withstand the stresses of launch and re-entry conditions, it may not be able to stand against the fury of a hurricane in its current fragile state.

Advertisement

Been here before…

SpaceX has faced damage to Starship prototypes at the hand of wind before. The first prototype – now known as Starhopper – constructed at their testing facility in Boca Chica, TX originally featured a tall nose cone portion that was ultimately lost. A storm that brought 50mph (80 km/h) wind gusts blew through and knocked the fairing piece off of its concrete stand and resulted in a completely crumpled heap of steel mess. The loss of the nose cone ended up being purely aesthetic and caused little to no setback to Starhopper testing – delayed instead by issues with Raptor engines. 

RIP nose cone, 1/04/2019-1/22/2019

Any damage suffered in Cocoa as an effect of Hurricane Dorian will almost certainly cause setbacks for SpaceX. Even if SpaceX gets extremely lucky and suffers no direct damage from a glancing blow, disruption to local infrastructure (power, waste, water, industry) could significantly hamper production operations. In the event that Dorian makes landfall at or near Cape Canaveral, Starship Mk2 and the many Super Heavy-related steel rings and facilities situated around the Cocoa campus could easily be destroyed or damaged beyond salvage, owing to the fact that they are made out of relatively thin and lightweight metal and have expansive, sail-like surface areas.

On the plus side, if any of the above does occur, SpaceX is simultaneously building a second near-identical prototype – Starship Mk1 – at its Boca Chica, Texas facilities. Disruption is undesirable, but SpaceX and its Starship program will likely (and hopefully) be largely unharmed. Additionally, SpaceX’s next Falcon 9 launch out of Florida is an internal Starlink mission scheduled no earlier than late October, leaving at least 1.5-2 months for clean-up and any necessary repairs.

Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.

Space Reporter.

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

The Boring Company clears final Nashville hurdle: Music City loop is full speed ahead

The Boring Company has cleared its final Nashville hurdles, putting the Music City Loop on track for 2026.

Published

on

By

The Boring Company has cleared one of its most significant regulatory milestones yet, securing a key easement from the Music City Center in Nashville just days ago, the latest in a series of approvals that have pushed the Music City Loop project firmly into construction reality.

On March 24, 2026, the Convention Center Authority voted to grant The Boring Company access to an easement along the west side of the Music City Center property, allowing tunneling beneath the privately owned venue. The move follows a unanimous 7-0 vote by the Metro Nashville Airport Authority on February 18, and a joint state and federal approval from the Tennessee Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration on February 25. Together, these green lights have cleared the path for a roughly 10-mile underground tunnel connecting downtown Nashville to Nashville International Airport, with potential extensions into midtown along West End Avenue.

Music City Loop could highlight The Boring Company’s real disruption

Nashville was selected by The Boring Company largely because of its rapid population growth and the strain that growth has placed on surface infrastructure. Traffic has become a persistent problem for residents, convention visitors, and airport travelers alike. The Music City Loop promises an approximately 8-minute underground transit time between downtown and the Nashville International Airport (BNA), removing thousands of vehicles from surface roads daily while operating as a fully electric, zero-emissions system at no cost to taxpayers.

The project fits squarely within a broader vision Musk has championed for years. In responding to a breakdown of the Loop’s construction costs, Musk posted on X: “Tunnels are so underrated.” The comment reflected a longstanding belief that underground transit represents one of the most cost-effective and scalable infrastructure solutions available. The Boring Company has claimed it can build 13 miles of twin tunnels in Nashville for between $240 million and $300 million total, a fraction of what comparable projects cost elsewhere in the country.

The Las Vegas Loop, The Boring Company’s first operational system, has served as a proof of concept. During the CONEXPO trade show in March 2026, the Vegas Loop transported approximately 82,000 passengers over five days at the Las Vegas Convention Center, demonstrating the system’s capacity during large-scale events. Nashville draws millions of convention visitors and tourists each year, and local business leaders have pointed to that same capacity as a major draw for supporting the project.

The Music City Loop was first announced in July 2025. Construction began within hours of the February 25 state approval, with The Boring Company’s Prufrock tunneling machine already in the ground the same evening. The first operational segment is targeted for late 2026, with the full route expected to be complete by 2029. The project represents one of the largest privately funded infrastructure efforts currently underway in the United States.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk demands Delaware Judge recuse herself after ‘support’ post celebrating $2B court loss

A banner on the post read “Katie McCormick supports this,” using LinkedIn’s heart-in-hand “support” icon, an endorsement stronger than a simple “like.” Musk’s lawyers argue the action creates “a perception of bias against Mr. Musk,” warranting immediate recusal to preserve judicial impartiality.

Published

on

elon musk
Ministério Das Comunicações, CC BY 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s legal team has filed a motion demanding that Delaware Chancellor Kathaleen McCormick disqualify herself from an ongoing high-stakes Tesla shareholder lawsuit.

The filing, submitted March 25, cites an apparent LinkedIn “support” reaction from McCormick’s account to a post celebrating a $2 billion jury verdict against Musk in a separate California securities-fraud case.

The move escalates long-simmering tensions between Musk, Tesla, and the Delaware judiciary, where McCormick previously presided over the landmark challenge to Musk’s record $56 billion 2018 compensation package.

Delaware Supreme Court reinstates Elon Musk’s 2018 Tesla CEO pay package

The LinkedIn post was written by Harry Plotkin, a Southern California jury consultant who assisted the plaintiffs who sued Musk over 2022 tweets about his Twitter acquisition. Plotkin praised the trial team for “standing up for the little guy against the richest man in the world.”

The New York Post initially reported the story.

A banner on the post read “Katie McCormick supports this,” using LinkedIn’s heart-in-hand “support” icon, an endorsement stronger than a simple “like.” Musk’s lawyers argue the action creates “a perception of bias against Mr. Musk,” warranting immediate recusal to preserve judicial impartiality.

McCormick swiftly denied intentional endorsement. In a letter to attorneys, she stated she was unaware of the interaction until LinkedIn notified her. She wrote:

“I either did not click the ‘support’ icon at all, or I did so accidentally. I do not believe that I did it accidentally.”

The chancellor maintains the reaction was inadvertent, but critics, including Musk allies, call the explanation implausible given the platform’s deliberate interface.

McCormick’s central role in the Tesla pay-package litigation underscores the stakes. In Tornetta v. Musk, in January 2024, she ruled the 2018 performance-based stock-option grant, potentially worth $56 billion at the time and now valued far higher, was invalid.

The package consisted of 12 tranches of options, each vesting only after Tesla achieved ambitious market-cap and operational milestones. McCormick found Musk exercised “transaction-specific control” over Tesla as a controlling stockholder, the board lacked sufficient independence, and proxy disclosures to shareholders were materially deficient.

Applying the entire-fairness standard, she concluded defendants failed to prove the deal was fair in process or price and ordered full rescission, an “unfathomable” remedy she described as necessary to deter fiduciary breaches.

After the ruling, Tesla shareholders ratified the package a second time in June 2024. McCormick rejected that ratification in December 2024, holding that post-trial votes could not cure defects.

Tesla appealed. On December 19 of last year, the Delaware Supreme Court unanimously reversed the rescission remedy while largely leaving McCormick’s liability findings intact. The high court deemed total unwinding inequitable and impractical, restoring the package but awarding the plaintiff only nominal $1 damages plus reduced attorneys’ fees. Musk ultimately received the full award.

The current recusal motion arises in yet another Tesla derivative suit before McCormick. Legal observers say granting it could signal heightened scrutiny of judicial social-media activity; denial might reinforce perceptions of an insular Delaware bench.

Broader fallout includes accelerated corporate migration out of Delaware, Musk himself moved Tesla’s incorporation to Texas after the first ruling, and renewed debate over whether the state’s specialized courts remain the gold standard for corporate governance disputes.

A decision is expected soon; whichever way it lands, the episode highlights the fragile balance between judicial independence and public confidence in high-profile litigation.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Cybercab spotted next to Model Y shows size comparison

The Model Y is Tesla’s most-popular vehicle and has been atop the world’s best-selling rankings for the last three years. The Cybercab, while yet to be released, could potentially surpass the Model Y due to its planned accessible price, potential for passive income for owners, and focus on autonomy.

Published

on

Credit: Joe Tegtmeyer | X

The Tesla Cybercab and Tesla Model Y are perhaps two of the company’s most-discussed vehicles, and although they are geared toward different things, a recent image of the two shows a side-by-side size comparison and how they stack up dimensionally.

The Model Y is Tesla’s most-popular vehicle and has been atop the world’s best-selling rankings for the last three years. The Cybercab, while yet to be released, could potentially surpass the Model Y due to its planned accessible price, potential for passive income for owners, and focus on autonomy.

Geared as a ride-sharing vehicle, it only has two seats. However, the car will be responsible for hauling two people around to various destinations completely autonomously. How they differ in terms of size is striking.

Tesla Cybercab includes this small but significant feature

In a new aerial image shared by drone operator and Gigafactory Texas observer Joe Tegtmeyer, the two vehicles were seen side by side, offering perhaps the first clear look at how they differ in size.

Dimensionally, the differences are striking. The Model Y stretches roughly 188 inches long, 75.6 inches wide, excluding its mirrors, and stands 64 inches tall on a 113.8-inch wheelbase. The Cybercab measures approximately 175 inches in length, about a foot shorter, and just 63 inches wide.

That narrower stance gives the Cybercab a dramatically more compact silhouette, making it easier to maneuver in tight urban environments and park in standard spaces that would feel cramped for the Model Y. Height is also lower on the Cybercab, contributing to its sleek, coupe-like profile versus the Model Y’s taller crossover shape.

Visually, the contrast is unmistakable. The Model Y presents as a family-friendly SUV with conventional doors, a prominent hood, and a spacious glass roof.

The Cybercab eliminates the steering wheel and pedals entirely, creating a clean, futuristic cabin that feels more lounge than cockpit.

Its doors open in a distinctive, wide-swinging motion, and the body features smoother, more aerodynamic lines optimized for autonomy. Parked beside a Model Y, the Cybercab appears almost toy-like in width and length, yet its low-slung stance and minimalist design emphasize agility over bulk.

Cargo capacity tells another part of the story. The Model Y offers generous real-world utility: 4.1 cubic feet in the front trunk and 30.2 cubic feet behind the rear seats, expanding to 72 cubic feet with the second row folded flat.

It comfortably swallows groceries, luggage, or sports equipment for five passengers. The Cybercab, designed for two riders, trades that volume for targeted efficiency.

It features a rear hatch with enough space for two carry-on suitcases and personal items, plenty for the typical robotaxi trip, while maintaining impressive legroom and headroom for its occupants.

In short, the Model Y prioritizes versatility and family hauling with its larger footprint and abundant storage. The Cybercab sacrifices size for simplicity, cost, and urban nimbleness.

At roughly 12 inches shorter and 12 inches narrower, it embodies Tesla’s vision for scalable, affordable autonomy: smaller on the outside, smarter inside, and ready to redefine how we move through cities.

The Cybercab and Model Y both will contribute to Tesla’s fully autonomous future. However, the size comparison gives a good look into how the vehicles are the same, and how they differ, and what riders should anticipate as the Cybercab enters production in the coming weeks.

Continue Reading