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!
Elon Musk
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Four Raptor engines failed to ignite at T-zero, forcing SpaceX to scrub Starship Flight 13 Thursday.
SpaceX scrubbed the Starship Flight 13 launch attempt Thursday evening at the last possible moment, after four of the Super Heavy booster’s 33 Raptor 3 engines failed to ignite during the startup sequence. The 90-minute window had opened at 6:45 p.m. EDT from Starbase in Boca Chica, Texas, and the countdown had proceeded without issue all day, with more than 11.5 million pounds of liquid methane and liquid oxygen being fully loaded into the rocket before the automated abort triggered. SpaceX’s launch directors posted on X, “Standing down from today’s flight test attempt,” and shut down the livestream shortly after.
Musk confirmed the root cause within hours. “Some of the engines didn’t start, triggering an automatic launch abort,” he wrote on X. “To be confident of a good flight, 2 Raptors will be removed and replaced. Most probable launch timing is early next week.” SpaceX engineers began draining propellant tanks immediately and Booster 20 was rolled back to its hangar for inspection.
The timing adds a layer of significance that did not exist during any of the previous 12 Starship flights. This is the first time SpaceX has attempted to launch Starship since the company made its stock market debut in June, listing under ticker SPCX at $135 per share. Public investors are now watching every Starship outcome in real time, and a last-second abort carries more visibility than it would have six months ago.
Flight 13 was designed to be one of the most consequential tests in the program’s history. It was set to carry 20 Starlink V3 satellites, the first operational payload Starship has ever attempted to deploy. Six of those satellites carried external cameras to photograph Starship’s heat shield from the outside during flight, which would act as a self-inspection approach SpaceX has never attempted before. The mission also needed to complete a Raptor engine relight in space, a step SpaceX skipped on Flight 12 in May after losing an engine during ascent. That Flight 12 booster also flipped 90 degrees off course during its boostback burn when five engines failed to reignite.
SpaceX has not announced an official next launch date. Musk’s “early next week” window points to July 21 or 22 at the earliest, pending the engine swap and a return to the pad.
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.
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
