News
SpaceX's Elon Musk works through holidays on Starship's "most difficult part"
SpaceX CEO Elon Musk says he has been working through the holidays at the company’s Boca Chica facilities to get Starship’s “most difficult part” ready for the next-generation spacecraft’s next prototype and flight tests.
Known as tank domes or bulkheads, Musk says that the hardware is the most difficult part of building and assembly Starship’s primary structure, referring to the steel engine section, tanks, and pointed nose that comprise most of the spaceship’s body. Starship’s primary structure must stand up to the rigors of all aspects of flight, including highly-pressurized propellant tanks, extreme G-forces during launches, orbital reentry, and more.
It was never officially determined whether the failure was intentional or not but during the first Starship prototype’s (Mk1) last test campaign, the vehicle experience an overpressure event while being filled with liquid oxygen or nitrogen. Localized to the weld connecting the upper tank dome to Starship’s cylindrical tank section, the dome essentially sheared off at the weld and launched hundreds of feet into the air, sending a shockwave through the vehicle that crumpled many of its steel structures as if they were aluminum foil.
It’s likely that Starship Mk1’s failure was an intentional overpressure event, meaning that SpaceX may have purposely pressed the vehicle’s tanks beyond their design limits to determine how structurally sound they were. What is less clear is whether the rocket burst before or after reaching its theoretical design limit.
For reference, SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket operates with its fuel and oxygen tanks pressurized to about 50 psi (3.5 atm) with localized pressures likely doubling or tripling near the bottom of both tanks during the first minute or two of launch. Some amateur back-of-the-envelope calculations from videos of Starship Mk1’s burst event suggest that it was pressurized to at least 60-75 psi (4-5 atm) at its upper tank dome, meaning that the pressure on its two lower domes and tank walls would have been even higher. If correct, those unofficial figures mean that Mk1 actually performed quite well considering the ramshackle facilities and unprecedentedly spartan methods used to fabricate and assemble it.
As such, Musk likely considers Starship’s tank domes the “most difficult part of [its] primary structure” in large part because of how difficult it is to make giant propellant tank domes simultaneously light and strong. Musk has previously implied that Starship Mk1 was more 200 tons (450,000 lb) empty while the ultimate goal for the spacecraft’s empty weight is closer to 120 tons, and a large portion of that weight savings will likely have to come from making its tank domes as light as possible.
In line with that educated speculation, the last month or so of SpaceX’s Starship work in Boca Chica, Texas has been marked by a distinct focus on building tank domes. In fact, Musk himself tweeted that he had worked all night with SpaceX engineers in Boca Chica in a bid to get dome production ready for Starship’s Mk3 prototype, the first Super Heavy hardware, and many more rockets to come.
Prior to Musk’s tweet, a Starship tank dome was actually shipped all the way from Florida to Texas and arrived earlier this month. Meanwhile, technicians have been briskly building up an additional dome using what appears to be a different method of integration involving new parts. SpaceX is currently attempting to weld Starship’s tank domes together from several dozen pre-formed sheets of stainless steel.
The sheets of steel assembled into the dome Musk showed on December 27th likely arrived in Boca Chica on December 13th, implying that SpaceX has managed to complete the majority of the first dome prototype – using a new process – in barely two weeks.
After SpaceX lifted the partially-completed dome off one of its custom assembly jigs, workers almost instantly began staging new sections of steel, beginning the process of integrating yet another tank dome – now likely the fourth on-site in Boca Chica. Meanwhile, at a nearby section of SpaceX’s Boca Chica production facilities, yet another dome was visible on the 28th. In short, SpaceX should soon have more than enough tank domes to complete the next Starship prototype – said to be a significantly improved and refined design compared to Mk1.
Known as Starship Mk3 (or Starship SN01), Musk says that the rocket – currently just a miscellaneous collection of separate parts – could (“hopefully”) be ready for its first flight as soon as February or March 2020.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
Elon Musk
Tesla owners explore potential FSD pricing options as uncertainty looms
We asked Tesla owners what the company should price Full Self-Driving moving forward, as now it’s going to be subscription-based. There were some interesting proposals.
Tesla is starting the process of removing the ability to purchase the Full Self-Driving suite outright, as it pulled the purchase option in the United States over the weekend.
However, there has been some indication by CEO Elon Musk that the price of the subscription will increase as the suite becomes more robust. But Tesla finds itself in an interesting situation with this: the take rate for Full Self-Driving at $99 per month is about 12 percent, and Musk needs a significant increase in this rate to reach a tranche in his new compensation package.
This leaves Tesla and owners in their own respective limbos: Tesla needs to find a price that will incentivize consumers to use FSD, while owners need Tesla to offer something that is attractive price-wise.
We asked Tesla owners what the company should price Full Self-Driving moving forward, as now it’s going to be subscription-based. There were some interesting proposals.
Price Reduction
Although people are willing to pay the $99 per month for the FSD suite, it certainly is too high for some owners. Many suggested that if Tesla would back down the price to $49, or somewhere around that region, many owners would immediately subscribe.
Others suggested $69, which would make a lot of sense considering Musk’s obsession with that number.
Different Pricing for Supervised and Unsupervised
With the release of the Unsupervised version of Full Self-Driving, Tesla has a unique opportunity to offer pricing for different attention level requirements.
$50/mo for supervised.
$300/mo for unsupervised including insurance.— pɦoɿɟ pᴉʌɒp (@CSUDavid) February 15, 2026
Unsupervised Full Self-Driving would be significantly more expensive, but not needed by everyone. Many people indicate they would still like to drive their cars manually from time to time, but others said they’d just simply be more than okay with only having Supervised FSD available in their cars.
Time-Based Pricing
Tesla could price FSD on a duration-based pricing model, including Daily, Weekly, Monthly, and Annual rates, which would incentivize longer durations with better pricing.
Annually, the rate could be $999 per year, while Monthly would stay at $99. However, a Daily pass of FSD would cost somewhere around $10, while a $30 per week cost seems to be ideal.
These all seem to be in line with what consumers might want. However, Tesla’s attitude with FSD is that it is the future of transportation, and with it offering only a Monthly option currently, it does not seem as if it will look as short-term as a Daily pass.
Tiered Pricing
This is perhaps the most popular option, according to what we’ve seen in comments and replies.
This would be a way to allow owners to pick and choose which FSD features they would like most and pay for them. The more features available to you, the more it costs.
For example, if someone only wanted Supervised driving and Autopark, it could be priced at $50 per month. Add in Summon, it could be $75.
This would allow people to pick only the features they would use daily.
Tesla has left a single loophole to purchase Full Self-Driving outright. On Sunday, the option officially disappeared from the Online Design Studio in the United States, as Tesla transitioned to a Subscription-only purchasing plan for the FSD suite.
However, there is still one way to get the Full Self-Driving suite in an outright manner, which would not require the vehicle owner to pay monthly for the driver assistance program — but you have to buy a Model S or Model X.
Months ago, Tesla launched a special “Luxe Package” for the Model S and Model X, which included Full Self-Driving for the life of the vehicle, as well as free Supercharging at over 75,000 locations, as well as free Premium Connectivity, and a Four-Year Premium Service package, which includes wheel and tire protection, windshiel protection, and recommended maintenance.
🚨 Tesla increased the price of both the Model S and Model X by $10,000, but both vehicles now include the “Luxe Package,” which includes:
-Full Self-Driving
-Four years of included maintenance, tire and wheel repairs, and windshield repairs/replacements
-Free lifetime… pic.twitter.com/LKv7rXruml— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 16, 2025
It would also be available through the purchase of a Cyberbeast, the top trim of the Cybertruck lineup.
This small loophole would allow owners to avoid the monthly payment, but there have been some changes in the fine print of the program, as Tesla has added that it will not be transferable to subsequent vehicle owners or to another vehicle.
This goes for the FSD and the Supercharging offers that come with the Luxe Package.
For now, Tesla still has the Full Self-Driving subscription priced at $99 per month. However, that price is expected to increase over the course of some time, especially as its capabilities improve. Tesla seems to be nearing Unsupervised FSD based on Musk’s estimates for the Cybercab program.
There is the potential that Tesla offers both Unsupervised and Supervised FSD for varying prices, but this is not confirmed.
In other countries, Tesla has pushed back the deadline to purchase the suite outright, as in Australia, it has been adjusted to March 31.
News
Tesla Sweden’s port deal sparks political clash in Trelleborg
The extension of Tesla’s lease has drawn criticism from the local Social Democratic opposition.
Tesla Sweden’s lease agreement at the Port of Trelleborg has triggered a political dispute, with local leaders divided over whether the municipally owned port should continue renting space to the electric vehicle maker amidst its ongoing conflict with the IF Metall union.
Tesla Sweden’s recently extended contract with the Port of Trelleborg has triggered calls for greater political oversight of future agreements.
Tesla has used the Port of Trelleborg to import vehicles into Sweden amid a blockade by the Transport Workers’ Union, as noted in a report from Dagens Arbete (DA). By routing cars via trucks on passenger ferries, the company has maintained deliveries despite the labor dispute. Vehicles have also been stored and prepared in facilities leased from the municipal port company.
The extension of Tesla’s lease has drawn criticism from the local Social Democratic opposition. Initially, the Port of Trelleborg hinted that it would not enter into new agreements with Tesla, but it eventually opted to renew its existing contract with the EV maker anyway.
Lennart Höckert, an opposition councilor, described the port’s decision as a “betrayal of the Swedish model,” arguing that a municipally owned entity should not appear to side with one party in an active labor dispute.
“If you want to protect the Swedish model, you shouldn’t get involved in a conflict and help one of the parties. When you as a company do this, it means that you are actually taking a position and making things worse in an already ongoing conflict,” Höckert said.
He added that the party now wants politicians to review and approve future rental agreements involving municipal properties at the port.
The proposal has been sharply criticized by Mathias Andersson of the Sweden Democrats, who chairs the municipal board. In comments to local media, Andersson described the Social Democrats’ approach as “Kim Jong Un-style,” arguing that political leaders should not micromanage a company governed by its own board.
“I believe that the port should be run like any other business,” Andersson said. He also noted that operational decisions fall under the authority of the Port of Trelleborg’s board instead of elected officials.
Tesla owners explore potential FSD pricing options as uncertainty looms
Tesla leaves a single loophole to purchase Full Self-Driving outright
