News
SpaceX CEO Elon Musk to present first Starship update since 2019 [webcast]
Barring surprises, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk remains on track to present the first major update on Starship’s development since September 2019 – almost two and a half years ago.
While it’s no longer clear that SpaceX will be able to stack Starship on top of Super Heavy in time for the fully-stacked rocket to serve as an imposing backdrop for the media event, Musk seemingly remains on track to update the world on the status of Starship development as early as 8pm CT (6pm PT, 9pm ET) on Thursday, February 10th (02:00 UTC 11 Feb). Assuming the event is similar to the SpaceX CEO’s first four major Starship presentations, it will be broadcast live to the world on the company’s YouTube channel.
Musk first revealed SpaceX’s detailed plans for a massive, fully-reusable Mars rocket in September 2016. At that point, the rocket – known as the Interplanetary Transport System (ITS) – was to be 12 meters (39 ft) in diameter, 122 meters (400 ft) tall, and made almost entirely out of carbon-fiber composites. In theory, it would have been able to launch up to 300 tons (660,000 lb) to low Earth orbit (LEO) – twice the payload of Saturn V, the next most capable rocket.
In 2017, SpaceX slightly pared back its ambition with a vehicle known as BFR, measuring 9m wide and 106m tall with about a third fewer Raptor engines and estimated performance of ~130 tons (285,000 lb) to LEO. In 2018, on top of announcing Japanese billionaire Yusaku Maezawa’s circumlunar DearMoon mission and BFR’s first real launch contract, SpaceX updated BFR’s design, stretching the booster 12 meters for a total height of 118m (390 ft) and hedging its performance figures with an estimate of 100 tons to LEO in a fully-reusable configuration.
Around the same time as Musk’s 2018 BFR presentation, though, the SpaceX CEO made the decision to entirely scrap the rocket’s composites-heavy design, renaming the rocket ‘Starship’ and replacing the material with stainless steel – effectively reverting structures development to the drawing board. The principles of the rocket, its general shape and layout, and the Raptor engine powering it remained the same. Thanks to steel’s extreme affordability relative to cutting-edge composites, SpaceX was able to make rapid progress and ultimately flew Starhopper – a steel water-tower-esque rocket powered by Raptor – less than a year later in July and August 2019.
Less than a year after Starhopper’s 150m (~500 ft) hop, SpaceX successfully hopped a far more mature Starship prototype known as SN5, which relied on far thinner steel and effectively amounted to a full prototype of the tank section of an orbital-class ship. Just a month later, in September 2020, SpaceX repeated the feat with an entirely different Starship prototype, demonstrating repeatability both in production and flight. Three months later, Starship SN8 – featuring flaps, a nosecone, header tanks, and two more Raptor engines – nearly aced its launch debut. In May 2021, after three more failed test flights, Starship SN15 stuck the landing and survived a 10 km launch, more or less fully demonstrating the rocket’s exotic skydiver-style descent and last-second flip for a vertical landing.
Visible progress has slowed and flight testing has halted since SpaceX began pushing for the first orbital Starship test flight in mid-2021. The company decided against reusing Starship SN15 and also chose not to attempt to replicate the ship’s successful landing with Starship SN16, which was ready for testing a matter of days after. Instead, SpaceX has focused on constructing the orbital launch site and slowly finished Starship S20 and Super Heavy B4 – a pair once expected to support the first orbital test flight. While slow compared to all previous Starship prototypes, Ship 20 has nonetheless made excellent progress and is effectively fully ready for a serious flight test. Booster 4, on the other hand, has barely completed cryogenic proof testing and has yet to perform even a partial wet dress rehearsal (with live propellant) or attempt a single static fire test in last five months.
In short, the status of Starship development – and, especially, Booster 4, Ship 20, and the first orbital test flight – has gotten quite a bit murkier over the last several months. February 9th and 10th marked a welcome change of pace, with SpaceX sailing through the very first attempt at stacking Starship hardware with Starbase’s ‘orbital integration tower’ (launch tower) and a trio of giant, robotic arms. Just a handful of hours after the first ‘arm lift’ began, Starship S20 was safely stacked atop Super Heavy Booster 4, assembling the largest rocket in the world for the second time this year.
With any luck, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk’s first presentation in two and a half years – scheduled no earlier than 8pm CST (02:00 UTC) – will shed further light on the company’s progress towards orbital test flights.


Elon Musk
SpaceX Board has set a Mars bonus for Elon Musk
SpaceX has given Elon Musk the goal to put one million people on Mars.
SpaceX’s board approved a compensation plan for Elon Musk that ties his pay directly to colonizing Mars and building data centers in outer space. The details surfaced this week after Reuters reviewed SpaceX’s confidential registration statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, making it one of the first concrete looks inside the company’s financials ahead of a public offering.
The pay package will reportedly award Musk 200 million super-voting restricted shares if the company hits a market valuation milestone, with the most ambitious targets going further. To unlock the full award, SpaceX would need to reach a $7.5 trillion valuation and help establish a permanent human settlement on Mars with at least one million residents. Additional incentives are tied to developing space-based computing infrastructure capable of delivering at least 100 terawatts of processing power.
SpaceX wins its first MARS contract but it comes with a catch
Long before SpaceX filed anything with the SEC, Elon Musk had already spent years framing Mars colonization as an insurance policy against human extinction. The philosophy traces back to at least 2001, when Musk first began researching Mars missions independently, before SpaceX even existed. By 2002 he had founded the company with Mars as the stated long-term goal.
In a 2017 presentation at the International Astronautical Congress, Musk outlined the specific vision that still underpins SpaceX’s architecture today. He described a self-sustaining city on Mars requiring roughly one million people to become viable, the same number now written into his compensation package.
SpaceX’s Starship, still in active development, was designed from the ground up to support the eventual colonization of Mars. Musk has stated publicly that getting the cost per ton to Mars below $100,000 is necessary to make mass migration economically feasible. Everything from Starship’s payload capacity to its full reusability targets flows from that single constraint. One can say that Musk’s latest compensation package has put a formal valuation on Mars for the first time.
SpaceX is targeting an IPO around June 28, Musk’s birthday, at a valuation of approximately $1.75 trillion. Between the Mars rover contract, the Golden Dome software group, Space Force satellite launches, and now a pay structure built around interplanetary colonization, SpaceX has become the single most consequential contractor in American space and defense. The IPO will put a public price tag on all of it for the first time.
News
Tesla’s biggest rivals fights charging wait times with a modern approach
Earlier this week, we wrote a story on how Tesla is launching a new Supercharging Queue system to mitigate problems between drivers when there is a wait to charge.
Rather than potentially having people end up in a physical conflict, Tesla’s approach is to determine who is next to charge based on geographic data.
Tesla launches solution to end Supercharger fights once and for all
But some companies, notably Tesla’s biggest rival in China, BYD, are taking a different approach, focusing on charging speeds rather than how they will manage delays.
BYD’s approach, especially with its tests of ultra-fast “Flash Charging” technology, is to eliminate the length of a charging session. At the heart of this strategy is BYD’s second-generation Blade Battery paired with 1,500-kW Flash Chargers.
Real-world FLASH Charging in action.
⚡ 10% → 70% in 5 minutes
⚡ 10% → 97% in 9 minutesIntroducing BYD’s 2nd Generation Blade Battery + FLASH Charging Technology.
20,000 stations will bring faster, safer, and smarter EV charging across China by the end of 2026. pic.twitter.com/uzQC8q1xGf
— BYD (@BYDCompany) March 9, 2026
Unveiled earlier this year, the system charges compatible vehicles from 10 percent to 70 percent state of charge in just five minutes and from 10 percent to 97 percent in nine minutes.
Real-world demonstrations on models like the Yangwang U7 and Denza Z9 GT have shown the tech delivering roughly 250 miles (400 kilometers) of range in just five minutes. This would essentially match or beat the time it takes to fill a gas tank.
Sometimes, gas pumps get congested, and there are lines. You rarely see conflicts at pumps because filling up a tank rarely takes more than five minutes.
Tesla’s fastest Supercharger build currently is the v4, which can deliver up to 325 kW for Cybertruck and 250 kW for other models, but there are “true” sites that are capable of up to 500 kW. This enables speeds of up to 1,000 miles per hour, or 1,400 miles for 350 kW-capable vehicles.
The breakthrough stems from BYD’s vertically integrated ecosystem: a new 1,000-volt architecture, 10C charging rates, and proprietary silicon-carbide chips that minimize internal resistance while protecting battery health.
The company plans to install 20,000 Flash Charging stations across China by the end of 2026, with thousands already operational and global expansion eyed for Europe and beyond later this year.
Early rollout targets popular models, including upgrades to high-volume sellers like the Seal and Sealion series, bringing five-minute charging to mainstream prices around 100,000 yuan (about $14,000).
This approach contrasts sharply with Tesla’s software solution. Tesla’s Virtual Queue uses geofencing and the app to assign turns at crowded sites, addressing driver disputes and idle time. It’s a clever fix for today’s network realities.
Yet, BYD’s philosophy is simpler: make charging so fast that waits barely exist. A five-minute stop becomes as convenient as a gas-station visit, reducing station dwell time, easing grid strain, and lowering range anxiety for long trips.
For consumers, the difference is potentially tangible. They’ll spend more time driving and less time parked. It is just another way Tesla and BYD are pushing one another to improve the overall experience of EV ownership.
News
Tesla wins big as NHTSA drops three-year, 120k unit probe against Model Y
In all, 120,089 Model Ys were impacted, but in two cases, drivers reported the complete detachment of the steering wheel from the steering column while the vehicle was in motion. NHTSA’s initial review revealed that the vehicles had been delivered without the critical retaining bolt that secures the steering wheel to the splined steering column.
A probe into over 120,000 2023 Tesla Model Y units has been closed by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). The probe ends without the agency requiring any action from Tesla.
The probe, designated PE23-003, opened in March 2023 and stemmed from just two consumer complaints involving low-mileage Model Y SUVs.
In all, 120,089 Model Ys were impacted, but in two cases, drivers reported the complete detachment of the steering wheel from the steering column while the vehicle was in motion. NHTSA’s initial review revealed that the vehicles had been delivered without the critical retaining bolt that secures the steering wheel to the splined steering column.
NHTSA has ended a probe into over 120,000 Tesla Model Y vehicles after claims that the steering wheel could detach from the steering column due to a missing retaining bolt
There is no action needed by Tesla pic.twitter.com/YpAO3bKugA
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 28, 2026
Factory records showed each car had undergone an “end-of-line” repair at Tesla’s facility, during which the steering wheel was removed and reinstalled. The bolt was apparently omitted after the repair, leaving only a friction fit between the wheel and column to hold it in place temporarily.
According to NHTSA documents, this friction fit maintained the connection during initial low-mileage driving until forces during normal operation caused the wheel to detach. Both vehicles that were impacted were repaired under warranty with no injuries reported, and no additional incidents surfaced during the agency’s three-year review.
After analyzing manufacturing processes, complaint data, and field reports, NHTSA concluded the issue was isolated to those two post-repair vehicles rather than indicative of a systemic defect in Tesla’s production or quality control.
The closure means the agency has determined no recall or further enforcement is warranted for this specific missing-bolt condition.
This outcome marks the second NHTSA investigation into Tesla closed without action this month, as a recent probe into the company’s “Actually Smart Summon” feature was also resolved in April.
The two resolutions provide some relief for Tesla amid the continuous and somewhat unfair regulatory scrutiny of its vehicles, including open inquiries into driver assistance systems.
Importantly, the closed probe does not involve or affect Tesla’s separate May 2023 voluntary recall of certain 2022-2023 Model Y vehicles. That recall addressed a different issue—steering-wheel fasteners that were installed but not torqued to specification—prompted by a service technician’s observation of a loose wheel during unrelated repairs.
Tesla identified a small number of related warranty claims and proactively addressed the matter without NHTSA mandate.
The Model Y remains one of the world’s best-selling vehicles, and Tesla continues to refine its lineup, including the recent “Juniper” refresh. While federal oversight of the electric vehicle pioneer remains intense, this decision underscores that isolated manufacturing anomalies do not always translate into broader safety defects requiring recalls.