News
SpaceX CEO Elon Musk talks Starship explosion: “We were too dumb”
Two days after a last-second failure caused Starship SN9 to smash into the ground and explode, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has returned to Twitter with some harsh preliminary reactions.
Right off the bat, in response to a question about why Starships SN8 and SN9 both attempted their unsuccessful landings with only two of three available Raptor engines, Musk frankly stated that “we were too dumb.” At face value, it’s a decent question, given that there are no obvious showstoppers to explain why Starships couldn’t make the most of the redundancy their three Raptor engines can offer.
After completing an otherwise flawless 6.5 minutes launch, ascent, and belly-flop descent, Starship SN9 began a critical ~120-degree flip maneuver, sequentially igniting two Raptor engines and using that thrust to flip from a belly-down attitude to a tail-first landing configuration. Unfortunately, though the first Raptor did fire up and put in a good effort, the second engine failed to ignite, leaving the building-sized rocket to impact the ground traveling far too quickly.
Ironically, more than three years ago, Musk himself revealed in a Reddit Ask Me Anything thread that he and his engineers had decided to modify Starship’s (then known as BFS) design by adding a third Raptor to its central cluster of two engines.
“Btw, we modified the [Starship] design since IAC [2017] to add a third medium-area-ratio Raptor engine partly for that reason (lose only 1/3 thrust in engine out) and allow landings with higher payload mass for the Earth to Earth transport function.”
Elon Musk – Reddit AMA – October 2017
Primarily meant to enable more efficient landings in Earth’s atmosphere, adding a third engine to that cluster would logically increase the chances of a successful (or at least survivable) landing in the event that one engine fails. Greater thrust and an improved thrust-to-weight ratio both during launch and landing would fundamentally improve the efficiency of Starship, likely making up for most or all of the added weight.
In retrospect, it’s not entirely surprising to learn that a three-engine landing burn is probably the most logical option if three landing-class engines have been included in the design. In SpaceX and Musk’s defense, however, there are also several good reasons to use as few Raptor engines as possible.
It was foolish of us not to start 3 engines & immediately shut down 1, as 2 are needed to land— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 4, 2021
Throttling high-performance rocket engines is exceptionally difficult and Raptor is not yet a fully mature engine, meaning that it’s throttle capabilities are likely less than optimal. That’s relevant because the higher a rocket’s thrust-to-weight ratio during landing, the more aggressive its landings have to be. SpaceX is apparently extremely conservative with Starship in this regard, prioritizing slow, gentle landings by only using two of three available engines.
Ironically, it’s possible that that attempt at risk reduction resulted in harder landings for both Starship SN8 and SN9, as three-engine landing burns could have potentially slowed them down significantly more before impact.
At the same time, though it may have mitigated the severity of both landing failures, three-engine landing burns would not have resolved the fundamental issues that caused them. In SN8’s case, low fuel header tank pressure doomed the Starship, while SN9 is more ambiguous. Aside from the clear Raptor ignition failure, which a three-engine burn could have resolved by downselecting to two healthier engines, the one Raptor that did ignite appeared to suffer some kind of uncontained failure seconds before landing.
Impressively, despite that apparent combustion chamber or preburner failure, the engine’s landing burn seemed to continued uninterrupted until the moment of impact. As such, it’s hard to say if that lone Raptor was still producing substantial thrust or if it was in the throes of a catastrophic failure. If it could have held on for another 5-10 seconds and the third Raptor (the engine that didn’t reignite) was able to restart and perform without issue, a three-engine landing burn could have easily made SN9’s demise less violent or even have enabled a soft landing.
While a three-engine burn all the way to touchdown appears to be extremely risky or impossible for present-day Starships, Musk implied that there was nothing preventing SpaceX from reigniting all three engines during the initial flip and landing burn and using that time to determine the health of all three engines. If all three were healthy, Starship would shut down one for a soft landing. If one engine failed to restart or lost thrust shortly after ignition, the other two would already be active and able to take over.
Musk says that Starship SN10, already at the launch pad and likely days away from its first tests, will attempt to adopt that approach on an upcoming test flight expected as few as 2-3 weeks from now.
Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) is being called “the biggest meme stock we’ve ever seen” by Yale School of Management Senior Associate Dean Jeff Sonnenfeld, who made the comments in a recent interview with CNBC.
Sonnenfeld’s comments echo those of many of the company’s skeptics, who argue that its price-to-earnings ratio is far too high when compared to other companies also in the tech industry. Tesla is often compared to companies like Apple, Nvidia, and Microsoft when these types of discussions come up.
Fundamentally, yes, Tesla does trade at a P/E level that is significantly above that of any comparable company.
However, it is worth mentioning that Tesla is not traded like a typical company, either.
Here’s what Sonnenfeld said regarding Tesla:
“This is the biggest meme stock we’ve ever seen. Even at its peak, Amazon was nowhere near this level. The PE on this, well above 200, is just crazy. When you’ve got stocks like Nvidia, the price-earnings ratio is around 25 or 30, and Apple is maybe 35 or 36, Microsoft around the same. I mean, this is way out of line to be at a 220 PE. It’s crazy, and they’ve, I think, put a little too much emphasis on the magic wand of Musk.”
Many analysts have admitted in the past that they believe Tesla is an untraditional stock in the sense that many analysts trade it based on narrative and not fundamentals. Ryan Brinkman of J.P. Morgan once said:
“Tesla shares continue to strike us as having become completely divorced from the fundamentals.”
Dan Nathan, another notorious skeptic of Tesla shares, recently turned bullish on the stock because of “technicals and sentiment.” He said just last week:
“I think from a trading perspective, it looks very interesting.”
Nathan said Tesla shares show signs of strength moving forward, including holding its 200-day moving average and holding against current resistance levels.
Sonnenfeld’s synopsis of Tesla shares points out that there might be “a little too much emphasis on the magic wand of Musk.”
Elon Musk just bought $1 billion in Tesla stock, his biggest purchase ever
This could refer to different things: perhaps his recent $1 billion stock buy, which sent the stock skyrocketing, or the fact that many Tesla investors are fans and owners who do not buy and sell on numbers, but rather on news that Musk might report himself.
Tesla is trading around $423.76 at the time of publication, as of 3:25 p.m. on the East Coast.
News
Tesla makes big change to Full Self-Driving doghouse that drivers will like
Now, it is changing the timeframe of which strikes will be removed, cutting it in half. The strikes will be removed every 3.5 days, as long as no strikes are received during the time period.
Tesla is making a big change to its Full Self-Driving doghouse that drivers will like.
The doghouse is a hypothetical term used to describe the penalty period that Tesla applies to drivers who receive too many infractions related to distracted driving.
Previously, Tesla implemented a seven-day ban on the use of Full Self-Driving for those who received five strikes in a vehicle equipped with a cabin camera and three strikes for those without a cabin camera.
It also forgave one strike per week of Full Self-Driving use, provided the driver did not receive any additional strikes during the seven-day period.
Now, it is changing the timeframe of which strikes will be removed, cutting it in half. The strikes will be removed every 3.5 days, as long as no strikes are received during the time period.
The change was found by Not a Tesla App, which noticed the adjustment in the Owner’s Manual for the 2025.32 Software Update.
The system undoubtedly helps improve safety as it helps keep drivers honest. However, there are definitely workarounds, which people are using and promoting for monetary gain, and you can find them on basically any online marketplace, including TikTok shop and Amazon:
🚨 Seeing more and more devices like this land on various online marketplaces including TikTok shop and Amazon
These devices are NOT to be used when operating Tesla Full Self-Driving and I’d love to see Tesla take action here.
These “creators” looking to make a quick buck are… pic.twitter.com/VnY25k2mPL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) September 17, 2025
People are marketing the product as an FSD cheat device, which the cabin-facing camera will not be able to detect, allowing you to watch something on a phone or look through the windshield at the road.
The safeguards implemented by Tesla are designed to protect drivers from distractions and also protect the company itself from liability. People are still using Full Self-Driving as if it were a fully autonomous product, and it is not.
Tesla even says that the driver must pay attention and be ready to take over in any scenario:
“Yes. Autopilot is a driver assistance system that is intended to be used only with a fully attentive driver. It does not turn a Tesla into a fully autonomous vehicle.
Before enabling Autopilot, you must agree to “keep your hands on the steering wheel at all times” and to always “maintain control and responsibility for your vehicle.” Once engaged, Autopilot will also deliver an escalating series of visual and audio warnings, reminding you to place your hands on the wheel if insufficient torque is applied or your vehicle otherwise detects you may not be attentive enough to the road ahead. If you repeatedly ignore these warnings, you will be locked out from using Autopilot during that trip.
You can override any of Autopilot’s features at any time by steering or applying the accelerator at any time.”
It is good that Tesla is rewarding those who learn from their mistakes with this shorter timeframe to lose the strikes. It won’t be needed forever, though, as eventually, the company will solve autonomy. The question is: when?
Elon Musk has once again teased the capabilities of the Tesla Roadster, fueling the anticipation that many have for the vehicle, despite it still having no public production or delivery date.
The Roadster is among the most anticipated vehicles in the automotive sector currently, and as Tesla has teased its capabilities, from a lightning-fast 1.1-second 0-60 MPH acceleration to potential hovering with cold-gas thrusters, people are eager to see it.
Although the design seemed to be finalized, there was still more work to be done. Earlier this year, as Tesla was showcasing some of the Roadster’s capabilities to Musk, he stated that it was capable of even more.
This pushed back its production date even further, much to the chagrin of those who have been waiting years for it.
Musk continues to tease us all, and as we sit here waiting hopelessly for it to be revealed, he said today that it is “something special beyond a car.”
The new Roadster is something special beyond a car
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 17, 2025
Musk’s words were in response to a video posted by Tesla China, showing the Roadster in a new promotional video created by a fan.
The Roadster was planned to be released in 2020, but here we are in 2025, and there is still no sign of the vehicle entering production. However, Tesla did say earlier this year that it would host a demo event for the Roadster, where the company would showcase its capabilities.
Lars Moravy said earlier this year:
“Roadster is definitely in development. We did talk about it last Sunday night. We are gearing up for a super cool demo. It’s going to be mind-blowing; We showed Elon some cool demos last week of the tech we’ve been working on, and he got a little excited.”
Tesla exec gives big update on Roadster, confirming recent rumor
The delays have been attributed to “radically increased design goals” for the vehicle, which have, without a doubt, improved its capabilities, but at the same time, we just want to know if it’s ever going to come.
Tesla can always make it “better,” but at what point do you say, “Okay, it’s time to show this thing off.” They could always build another, even more capable supercar in the next ten years.
Tesla called ‘biggest meme stock we’ve ever seen’ by Yale associate dean
Tesla makes big change to Full Self-Driving doghouse that drivers will like
Elon Musk teases the capabilities of the Tesla Roadster once again
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoTesla’s next-gen Optimus prototype with Grok revealed
-
News2 weeks agoTesla launches new Supercharger program that business owners will love
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoTesla Board takes firm stance on Elon Musk’s political involvement in pay package proxy
-
News2 weeks agoTesla deploys Unsupervised FSD in Europe for the first time—with a twist
-
News2 weeks agoTesla explains why Robotaxis now have safety monitors in the driver’s seat
-
News2 weeks agoTesla is already giving Robotaxi privileges hours after opening public app
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoElon Musk says Tesla will take Safety Drivers out of Robotaxi: here’s when
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoElon Musk is setting high expectations for Tesla AI5 and AI6 chips