News
SpaceX CEO Elon Musk kills mini BFR spaceship 12 days after announcing it
Less than two weeks after SpaceX CEO Elon Musk announced that Falcon 9’s “second stage [would] be upgraded…like a mini-BFR Ship” to prove lightweight heatshield and hypersonic control surface technologies, Musk took to Twitter to assert that the mini BFR spaceship project was dead, despite having stated that SpaceX was working to launch that test article into orbit as early as June 2019 just 12 days prior.
From a public perspective, the status of SpaceX’s next-gen rocket program (known as BFR) is effectively up in the air after several cryptic and seemingly contradictory statements from the company’s CEO and chief engineer.
No, we’re just going to accelerate BFR
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 20, 2018
On Nov. 17, Musk tweeted that BFR – last updated in September 2018 alongside a statement that “this is [likely] the the final iteration [of BFR] in terms of broad architectural decisions” – had already been redesigned, going so far as to describe it as a “radical change”. What that radical design change might be is almost entirely unclear, although Musk has now twice stated that the purpose of these changes (and the whiplash-inducing cancellation of the mini-spaceship) is to “accelerate BFR”.
Radical change
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 17, 2018
As of now, SpaceX appears to have just completed a massive 9-meter diameter composite tank dome in the company’s temporary Port of Los Angeles tent, where a small but growing team of engineers and technicians are working to realize some version of the company’s next-generation rocket. That group has been working in near-silence for the better part of a year and has accepted delivery of and set up a wide range of custom-built tooling for carbon composite fabrication, and has even managed to get that tooling producing massive composite parts that are expected to eventually make up the structure of a spaceship prototype.
That prototype would eventually be shipped to South Texas, where SpaceX is constructing an entirely new facility from scratch to test the design, technology, and operation of the first full-scale BFR spaceship (BFS). As of a few months ago, the plan was to begin those hop tests before the end of 2019, but it’s no longer clear if SpaceX still intends to build a prototype spaceship to conduct hops and high-speed, high-altitude test flights.
-
- BFR’s spaceship design, as of 2018. (SpaceX)
-
- A BFS attempts a Mars landing in this official updated render. (SpaceX)
-
- SpaceX’s huge Port of LA-based BFR tent, September 18th. (Pauline Acalin)
-
- SpaceX’s first BFR spaceship prototype is coming together piece by piece. (SpaceX/Pauline Acalin)
Responsibly building giant rockets
One can only hope that the SpaceX employees tasked with bringing an already monumentally difficult idea from concept to reality are learning about these earth-shaking, “radical” decisions and changes through a medium other than Twitter. If those senior engineers and technicians are not extensively forewarned and given some say in these major system-wide decisions, it’s hard to exaggerate the amount of time, effort, and resources potentially being wasted (or at least misdirected).
There is undoubtedly something to be said for getting complex and difficult things as right as possible on the first serious try, especially when the sheer expense of the task at hand might mean that there is only one real chance to try. Still, it’s not particularly encouraging when a three-year-old hardware development program marked by several major design iterations is still experiencing anything close to “radical change”. After multiple years of concerted effort, BFR still appears to be in some sort of design limbo, where a constant and haphazard stream of on-paper changes act as a near-insurmountable hurdle standing in the way of a completed “good enough” blueprint that can begin to be made real.
Ultimately, even if some of the worst-case scenarios described above turn out to be true, there are still many, many reasons to remain positive about SpaceX’s BFR program on the whole. The next-gen rocket’s propulsion system of choice – an advanced engine known as Raptor – is quite mature at this point and may already be nearing initial flight readiness. Regardless of any future changes to BFR’s overall spaceship and booster structures, SpaceX technicians, engineers, and material scientists have likely gained invaluable experience in pursuit of an unprecedented 9-meter diameter rocket built almost entirely out of carbon fiber composites.
Further, it appears that quite a bit of progress has been made over the course of R&D programs related to methane-oxygen RCS thrusters (Falcon uses nitrogen), autogenous tank pressurization with gaseous methane and oxygen (Falcon uses helium), and perhaps even in-situ resource utilization (ISRU) that will be an absolute necessity to generate water, oxygen, and methane that will keep prospective Mars colonists alive and refuel spaceships for the voyage back to Earth.
-
- SpaceX’s horizontal Raptor test stand is pictured here in April 2018. A prototype Raptor can be seen in the center bay. (Aero Photo/Teslarati)
-
- A new rocket test-stand takes shape at SpaceX’s McGregor, TX facilities. As of just a few months ago, this site was effectively barren of activity. (April 17, Aero Photo)
-
- SpaceX’s Boca Chica facilities now sport two massive propellant tanks, meant to support BFR spaceship hop tests. (NSF /u/ bocachicagal, SpaceX)
For prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket recovery fleet check out our brand new LaunchPad and LandingZone newsletters!
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.
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.
This appears to be unequivocal proof she denied the pay package because of her own personal beliefs and not the law.
Corruption. https://t.co/8dvgcfYuvh
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) March 25, 2026
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.
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.
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.
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.
Tesla Model Y vs. Tesla Cybercab:
✅ Overall Length:⁰Model Y: 188.7 inches (4,794 mm)⁰Cybercab: ~175 inches (≈4,445 mm)⁰→ Cybercab is about 13–14 inches shorter (roughly the length of a large suitcase).
✅ Overall Width (excluding mirrors):⁰Model Y: 75.6 inches (1,920 mm)… https://t.co/PsVwzhw1pe pic.twitter.com/58JQ5ssQIO
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) March 25, 2026
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.
🚨 We caught up with the Tesla Cybercab today in The Bay Area: pic.twitter.com/9awXiK26ue
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) March 24, 2026
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.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk says Tesla is developing a new vehicle: ‘Way cooler than a minivan’
It sounds as if Tesla could be considering a new vehicle to fit the mold of what a larger family would need, and as fans have been demanding it for several years and the company is phasing out the Model X, its only family-geared vehicle, it sounds as if it could be the perfect time.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk said the company is developing a new vehicle, and it will be “way cooler than a minivan.”
It sounds as if Tesla could be considering a new vehicle to fit the mold of what a larger family would need, and as fans have been demanding it for several years and the company is phasing out the Model X, its only family-geared vehicle, it sounds as if it could be the perfect time.
There are a handful of things Musk could be talking about, and as many Tesla owners have wanted a vehicle along the lines of a minivan for hauling around their family, speculation has persisted about what the company would do in terms of developing something for that exact use case.
There were several options, and some of them seemed to be already available. Musk posted on X yesterday that the Cybertruck has three sets of isofix attachments and could fit three child seats or three adults, and it seemed to be a way to deflect plans for a new, larger vehicle as a Model Y L appeared to be present at Giga Texas.
There is also the Robovan, the large people mover that Tesla unveiled at the “We, Robot” back in 2024.
Something way cooler than a minivan is coming
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 25, 2026
However, it seems Tesla could be developing something like a CyberSUV, something that is going to be large enough to haul around a car full of kids, but could be developed with the company’s aesthetic of the company’s most recent releases: this would likely include a light bar and a more sleek, futuristic look.
We’ve mocked up some potential looks for Tesla’s speculative vehicle in the past:
Tesla has teased the potential of a CyberSUV in the past, showing off clay models that it developed back in September in a teaser video called “Sustainable Abundance.”
Fans and owners have been calling for this development for a very long time, and it seems like Tesla might be ready to finally answer the call on a large SUV. With the segment being dominated by combustion engine vehicles, Tesla could truly disrupt the large SUVs that have been mainstays.
The Chevrolet Tahoe and GMC Yukon would feel some additional pressure, and it would be possible for Tesla to infiltrate some of those sales and pull consumers to electric powertrains.
As the Model S and Model X sunset process is truly hitting full swing, it might be time to consider Tesla’s next option in terms of vehicle development.
Elon Musk demands Delaware Judge recuse herself after ‘support’ post celebrating $2B court loss
Tesla Cybercab spotted next to Model Y shows size comparison
Elon Musk says Tesla is developing a new vehicle: ‘Way cooler than a minivan’
Elon Musk’s Boring Co. Tunnel Vision Challenge ends with a surprise for Louisiana, Maryland and Dallas
What is Digital Optimus? The new Tesla and xAI project explained
