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!
Tesla’s Supercharger Diner in Los Angeles dominated the company’s global usage rankings after just one year, proving the concept is more than just a one-off novelty location that will fade away.
The performance could incite the company to build more locations, something that CEO Elon Musk has hinted at for some time.
Tesla’s Supercharger Diner delivered 21.2 GWh of energy in its first year of operation, the company’s head of Charging, Max de Zegher, revealed on X. Of the top 10 most utilized Supercharger locations in Tesla’s global infrastructure, the Diner in Los Angeles was the most used by drivers, and it wasn’t particularly close:
Tesla Diner opened exactly 1 year ago. Inspiring that futuristic places like this exist.
It’s our highest usage Supercharger in the world: 21.2 GWh delivered in a year, 1.6k sessions/day.
Top 10 Superchargers by energy delivered: https://t.co/9YvJ8lw696 pic.twitter.com/koB3AUJHws
— Max (@MdeZegher) July 21, 2026
On its launch day one year ago, nobody was too sure what the Tesla Diner would be about. It seemed like an interesting concept, and considering it had been in the works for years, it was a highly anticipated launch that many were looking forward to.
Based on its success, we could see additional Diners with Superchargers built throughout the United States, and potentially beyond. Musk has said on several occasions that the company would be willing to bring the Diner idea to more markets.
Tesla makes major change at Supercharger Diner amid epic demand
Of the markets that Musk has mentioned, both Palo Alto and Austin have come to be perceived as ideal selections. However, there are no concrete plans as of now to build new Supercharger Diners anywhere; the location on Santa Monica Boulevard will remain the exclusive spot to pick up Tesla-inspired eats, at least for the time being.
Tesla short sellers won big following the company’s massive fall on Wall Street after it reported subpar Earnings on Wednesday.
Tesla short sellers collected about $4.12 billion in single-day profits on Thursday, according to Bloomberg. Shares fell as much as 15 percent during Thursday’s session. It closed as one of the worst days for Tesla on Wall Street in the past three years.
Investors sold off the stock after Tesla said it would aggressively direct its spending toward AI and its Optimus robot project. The company had record revenues, which were driven by one of the strongest quarters in terms of vehicle deliveries in company history.
However, it missed EPS estimates by reporting just $0.33, a far cry from the $0.53 analysts expected.
S3 Partners reported that about 3 percent of Tesla’s outstanding stock is sold short. Managing Director at S3, Ihor Dusaniwsky, provided the short seller’s potential profit, as well as another figure: shorts have likely had paper gains of $8.92 billion this year, as Tesla shares are down 30 percent in 2026.
Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue
Tesla has burned short sellers many times in the past, but the company’s latest Earnings Call was a chance for those skeptics to taste some payback. Although the company gave some very transparent information regarding future projects, the rollout of Robotaxi, Optimus, and Semi, many investors took their profits on Thursday.
Notable short sellers like Michael Burry have been transparent about their skepticism around Tesla shares. Burry just revealed three weeks ago that he had opened up a new short on the stock, stating he shorted Tesla shares at $416.22. “Happy it jumped back to this level,” he said in a blog post.
At the time of publication, Tesla shares were down about 3 percent and the stock was trading at $309.92.
Tesla’s long-standing saga regarding its door handles and a manual release has entered its latest chapter, and as a result, a big change is coming.
On Friday, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) denied Tesla’s petition that was seeking a defect investigation into roughly 180,000 Model 3 vehicles for an issue involving the emergency mechanical door release.
🚨 The NHTSA denied a petition from Tesla that would have thrown out concerns regarding its door handles.
NHTSA said Tesla’s petition did not present evidence of a safety-related defect warranting an investigation. The agency said a rulemaking process would be a better strategy. pic.twitter.com/j6PzUBM1mT
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 24, 2026
NHTSA said that Tesla’s petition did not present evidence of a safety-related defect in the door handles or their emergency releases. Instead, the agency determined that it would rather solve the issue of the lack of labeling or location of emergency mechanical door releases and the federal safety rules that govern them.
Essentially, the NHTSA wants to create and enforce rules that would require automakers to make emergency door latch releases more clearly labeled in a car. Despite a Tesla having manual door releases on all four passenger doors, many people do not know they exist or how they work.
Tesla addresses door handle complaints with simple engineering fix
In recent times, Tesla has faced some criticism involving its door handles, specifically because some occupants have reported that they are unable to exit their vehicles after losing power. The door handles on a Tesla are electronically operated, but in the event that the 12V battery dies, there is a manual release that can be used.
The NHTSA only identified a single complaint involving the mechanical door releases: a 2022 Model 3 owner said the release was concealed and unlabeled after the vehicle lost power after a front-end collision. It has also already started to create a separate rulemaking process to make emergency door-egress systems more obvious.
It should be noted that all Teslas have mechanical emergency door releases, but they are placed in various locations as the vehicles have aged and been redesigned from year to year. Refer to the safety manual for your vehicle if you have any confusion about where the emergency releases are and how they work.
Tesla’s Supercharger Diner probably just secured more locations
Tesla short sellers win big after shares fall after earnings
