News
SpaceX CEO Elon Musk says “overdue” Starship update is coming soon
CEO Elon Musk says he may finally present the first cohesive update on SpaceX’s next-generation Starship rocket development program in more than two years.
While Musk routinely makes Starship-focused appearances and comments in public or by webcast every 3-6 months, there is a certain brand of update – along the lines of a high-profile tech product reveal – that the SpaceX CEO has only presented four times since Starship’s predecessor was first revealed in September 2016. Accompanied by a relatively detailed slide deck, the four main updates he’s given have provided a large amount of background on the status of Starship development and a variety of next steps – ranging from near-term plans to targets still a decade or more in the future.
Musk has not provided an explicit Starship update in 2020 or 2021. Generally speaking, in the more minor events he’s semi-regularly attended over the last two years, the SpaceX CEO will give a brief overview (sometimes clearly prepared; sometimes not) to a miscellaneous audience that usually isn’t the most familiar with Starship, usually resulting in a great deal of tried and true broad-strokes talking points with a few new details mixed in. Finally, the audience – while undoubtedly well-meaning – asks a number of questions, the vast majority of which have already been asked and answered or could be with Google and a few minutes of basic research.
As with Musk’s (un)prepared remarks, there are usually a few gems of new information left to be found in the rough. The end result: the only true Starship updates are those organized by SpaceX itself with an informed audience and a thoroughly prepared presentation and talking points.
Put a slightly different way, SpaceX has yet to provide a 2016-2019-style Starship presentation since the company actually began building and testing prototypes that approach the final orbital-class ship and booster designs. In those two years, SpaceX has made a truly surreal amount of progress, more or less completing a new prototype every month and flying one of those prototypes every 3-4 months. Most recently, SpaceX completed and static fired a Super Heavy booster prototype, completed and repeatedly static fired the first orbital-class Starship prototype, finished two more Super Heavy boosters, and is on the verge of preparing one of those boosters for the first thorough Super Heavy qualification testing.
If things move in SpaceX’s favor, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) could complete an environmental assessment later this month and approve a license for the first one or several orbital Starship launch attempts in early 2022. SpaceX has already begun rapidly building two more orbital-class Starship prototypes and will soon have as many as three ships and two boosters ready for proof testing and an imminent series of orbital test flights. After four successful static fires, one of which fired up all six Raptor engines for the first time, Starship S20 is effectively ready for flight whenever Super Heavy Booster 4 (B4) follows suit.
In short, there are a nearly limitless number of activities and plans that Musk could shed a great deal of light on in an official update presentation. Per Musk, the CEO wants to provide that update as early as December 2021 but no later than January 2022. It’s hard to say if he will actually follow through: more than a year ago, Musk promised a Starship update in October 2020, and that’s not the only time in the last two years that the CEO has stated that he’d present a new update soon. It’s possible that Musk is waiting on a specific Starbase hardware milestone before presenting his long-awaited update – perhaps the completion of Super Heavy B4 qualification testing or the next full-stack milestone, in which Starship S20 (now proofed and ready for flight) will be installed on top of the booster for the second time.
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.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
