News
SpaceX begins huge dirt pile removal to pave way for BFR spaceship hop tests
After more than two years of silence, SpaceX has taken the first major tangible steps towards the construction of a dedicated South Texas rocket testing facility.
In anticipation of a full-scale BFR spaceship (BFS) hop test campaign that could begin as early as late 2019, local contractors and a smattering of SpaceX employees have begun to earnestly break down and repurpose a large quantity of dirt – known as a surcharge pile – to allow the construction of real facilities to begin.
Documented as of late by a handful of interested local observers and another subset of less local but equally interested followers, SpaceX’s prospective South Texas test and launch facilities have experienced a near-unprecedented burst of activity over the last two months, most notably including the arrival of a small fleet of heavy machinery and construction contractors at a site SpaceX has been working on for three years.
After ~36 months of dead silence, this activity correlates well with recent comments from SpaceX executives Elon Musk and Gwynne Shotwell indicating that the company is still targeting inaugural BFR spaceship hop tests sometime near the end of 2019.
Shotwell: think we’ll be “hopping” the second stage of BFR (the BFS) late next year. #DARPA60
— Jeff Foust (@jeff_foust) September 6, 2018
The infrastructure needed for those early tests could be quite sparse depending on the status of the BFR hardware to be ‘hopped’ – Falcon 9’s Grasshopper and F9R test campaigns, for example, operated off of a tiny concrete pad with extremely minimalist ground support equipment (GSE). Photos from a number of videos SpaceX posted during those crafts’ 2012-2014 series of hop tests demonstrate this minimum well, although chances are good that the company will build up Boca Chica a bit beyond the test pad used for Falcon 9 booster recovery R&D.
-
- F9R seen just before liftoff for a 2014 hop test at SpaceX’s McGregor, TX test facilities. (SpaceX)
-
- Just the bare necessities. (SpaceX)
SpaceX’s Grasshopper and F9R hop tests took place exclusively at the company’s well-established McGregor, Texas testing facilities, offering a range of large hangars, three operational Merlin 1D and Vacuum test bays, and dedicated stands for integrated first and second stage static-fire tests, among countless other rocketry-related amenities. The secluded South Texas coastal region where SpaceX wants to test – if not launch – integrated BFRs has none of McGregor’s preexisting infrastructure, however – anything SpaceX needs will have to be built from scratch on-site.
There is activity. pic.twitter.com/A8JYw6vdW6
— Nehkara (@Nehkara) October 13, 2018
Thus far, almost no real structures have been constructed, aside from a small-ish sheet metal shed that was literally built around a huge crane that arrived on SpaceX property a few months prior. Over the last two or so years, all activity at the South Texas site clustered specifically around a plot where two large radio dishes – and eventually cryogenic storage tanks – were delivered, installed, and/or stored. However, the actual site of the pad SpaceX originally planned to launch Falcon 9 and Heavy from is a mile or two East of that highly visible development, the same location where a flurry of activity has begun in the last month.
-
- A map showing several locations SpaceX planned (as of 2014) to develop.
-
- SpaceX’s proposed launch site (right) and the currently location of radar dishes, a large crane, and several propellant tanks. (Google)
In 2015, SpaceX trucked in several hundred thousand tons of dirt to be packed on top of the site where the company eventually planned to build a large Falcon integration hangar and then left for several years to crush the softer marshlands beneath it into firm submission. That time appears to be up, as the work now ongoing at that site is focused on removing that surcharging dirt now that the soil beneath it is stable enough to host heavy, long-term structures like a rocket launch pad.
Most of that massive dirt pile will likely remain at SpaceX’s South Texas property, to be used as a basic construction material as the company begins to build some semblance of the facility described in its approved 2014 environmental impact assessment. As it takes shape, it will become clear just how closely SpaceX is sticking to those original plans. BFR hop tests could begin by late 2019 if prototype spaceship construction – already in work at a tent in Port of Los Angeles – proceeds smoothly.
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!
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
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.
The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.
One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.
Correct pricing will be going live at midnight tonight. All fees since July 2nd 2026 will be waived.
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) July 13, 2026
These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.
To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.
At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.
Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line
By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.
The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.
Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.
The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.
In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
Elon Musk’s Texas ranch to showcase the lifelong work that changed the world
