News
SpaceX CEO Elon Musk forecasts a dozen Starship launches next year
CEO Elon Musk has provided a small update on SpaceX’s next-generation Starship rocket in a brief statement to and Q&A with the board of the US National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine.
While it’s now been more than two years since Musk last gave a proper presentation on the Starship program, a number of excellent questions from board members still managed to extract a handful of new details about the fully reusable rocket, which the SpaceX CEO says aims to “be a generalized transport mechanism for the [entire] solar system.” According to Musk, though, the most pressing near-term issues facing SpaceX are more down to Earth.
Reiterated several times in his comments to the National Academies, Musk says that the current limiting factor for Starship is securing regulatory approvals from the FAA for the rocket’s first orbital test flights, which SpaceX and Musk initially hoped would begin as early as mid-2021. Targets from July to November 2021 have since come and gone, while SpaceX has only begun to make concerted progress towards Starship’s first orbital launch in the last two or so months. Almost two months after its first rollout, Starship S20 – the first orbital-class prototype – began integrated testing, completing ambient and cryogenic proof tests in late September and its first Raptor preburner and static fire tests in the second half of October.
Most recently, after almost a month spent inactive at SpaceX’s Starbase test facilities, Starship S20 fired up all six of its Raptor engines – the first test of its kind and a major milestone for the program. Save for the completion of some relatively simple closeout tasks, Starship S20 is now more or less qualified for flight after its successful static fire. That leaves Super Heavy Booster 4 (B4) – the first stage meant to carry Ship 20 into space – up next on SpaceX’s South Texas testing docket after almost four agonizing months spent sitting, untested, at various Starbase facilities.
Musk says that SpaceX preparing to complete “a bunch of tests in December” with the implication that those tests likely include the first full Super Heavy wet dress rehearsal (WDR) with thousands of tons of live propellant and the first several booster static fire tests. Recently refitted with 29 Raptor engines for the third time in four months, it appears that SpaceX is finally close to finishing Super Heavy B4 to a point that will allow the booster to begin integrated testing. Through Super Heavy B3, which completed testing this summer, SpaceX thankfully already knows that the basic booster design is a structurally sound pressure vessel with plumbing and systems capable of surviving a three-Raptor static fire.
Still, that’s barely more than 10% of the total number of engines Super Heavy will need operational to send Starship to orbit. After months at the pad, SpaceX is finally closing out Booster 4’s aft section and installing a basic heat shield around its 29 Raptor engines, which will produce up to ~5400 metric tons (~12M lbf) of thrust at liftoff – more than any other rocket in history. Following Starship S20’s recent success, SpaceX has now fired six Raptors simultaneously and in close proximity without issue. However, Super Heavy B4 will have to fire 29 engines packed into roughly the same amount of space. No other liquid rocket stage in history has a more densely-packed thrust section, averaging at least 85 tons of thrust per square meter (~125 psi) of available engine space.
It’s thus likely that SpaceX will split Super Heavy B4’s first static fire campaign into several different parts, possibly involving seperate tests of the center cluster of nine Raptor Center (RC) engines and outer ring of 20 Raptor Boost (RB) engines before firing up all 29 together. Even if that testing is completed without issue on the first attempts, SpaceX will still likely want to perform a full wet dress rehearsal – and possibly even another 29-engine static fire – with Ship 20 installed on top of Booster 4.
Musk also believes that Starbase’s first orbital launch site will be complete as early as “later this month” – essential for full booster testing. Once all testing is complete, Musk says Starship, Super Heavy, and Starbase should be ready for their first orbital launch attempt as early as January or February 2022. Of course, that launch is entirely contingent upon FAA environmental approval and launch licensing, the former still incomplete and the latter unable to proceed until the former is complete. If the FAA reaches a favorable conclusion, meets its recently-announced target of December 31st to complete Starbase’s environmental review, and grants SpaceX a new launch license just days or a few weeks later, a January-February launch isn’t out of the question.
Looking further into 2022, Musk also revealed that he hopes SpaceX will complete “a dozen [Starship] launches” next year – incredibly ambitious by any measure. There isn’t a rocket in history that’s achieved double-digit launches in the same year as its debut. More importantly, even if the FAA environmental review SpaceX is in the middle of ends with the best possible outcome for Starship, it limits the company to either 3, 5, or 8 (it’s somewhat ambiguous) orbital launch attempts per year. Still, even a ‘mere’ three orbital Starship launch attempts in 2022 would be an incredible acheivement for SpaceX – let alone five, or Musk’s forecast of a dozen.
Elon Musk
The Boring Company clears final Nashville hurdle: Music City loop is full speed ahead
The Boring Company has cleared its final Nashville hurdles, putting the Music City Loop on track for 2026.
The Boring Company has cleared one of its most significant regulatory milestones yet, securing a key easement from the Music City Center in Nashville just days ago, the latest in a series of approvals that have pushed the Music City Loop project firmly into construction reality.
On March 24, 2026, the Convention Center Authority voted to grant The Boring Company access to an easement along the west side of the Music City Center property, allowing tunneling beneath the privately owned venue. The move follows a unanimous 7-0 vote by the Metro Nashville Airport Authority on February 18, and a joint state and federal approval from the Tennessee Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration on February 25. Together, these green lights have cleared the path for a roughly 10-mile underground tunnel connecting downtown Nashville to Nashville International Airport, with potential extensions into midtown along West End Avenue.
Music City Loop could highlight The Boring Company’s real disruption
Nashville was selected by The Boring Company largely because of its rapid population growth and the strain that growth has placed on surface infrastructure. Traffic has become a persistent problem for residents, convention visitors, and airport travelers alike. The Music City Loop promises an approximately 8-minute underground transit time between downtown and the Nashville International Airport (BNA), removing thousands of vehicles from surface roads daily while operating as a fully electric, zero-emissions system at no cost to taxpayers.
The project fits squarely within a broader vision Musk has championed for years. In responding to a breakdown of the Loop’s construction costs, Musk posted on X: “Tunnels are so underrated.” The comment reflected a longstanding belief that underground transit represents one of the most cost-effective and scalable infrastructure solutions available. The Boring Company has claimed it can build 13 miles of twin tunnels in Nashville for between $240 million and $300 million total, a fraction of what comparable projects cost elsewhere in the country.
Image Credit: The Boring Company/Twitter
The Las Vegas Loop, The Boring Company’s first operational system, has served as a proof of concept. During the CONEXPO trade show in March 2026, the Vegas Loop transported approximately 82,000 passengers over five days at the Las Vegas Convention Center, demonstrating the system’s capacity during large-scale events. Nashville draws millions of convention visitors and tourists each year, and local business leaders have pointed to that same capacity as a major draw for supporting the project.
The Music City Loop was first announced in July 2025. Construction began within hours of the February 25 state approval, with The Boring Company’s Prufrock tunneling machine already in the ground the same evening. The first operational segment is targeted for late 2026, with the full route expected to be complete by 2029. The project represents one of the largest privately funded infrastructure efforts currently underway in the United States.
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.
The Boring Company clears final Nashville hurdle: Music City loop is full speed ahead
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’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
