News
SpaceX’s first Starship booster a step closer as custom parts arrive
While SpaceX remains focused on Starship flight testing as the dust settles from SN8’s launch debut, the company continues to make slow but steady progress building the first Super Heavy booster prototype.
For the most part, SpaceX has learned from trial and error and developed a decent stainless steel rocket manufacturing process by building a dozen Starship prototypes over the last ~12 months, ranging from a lone nosecone tip to stout test tanks and Starship SN8, which launched to 12.5 km (~7.8 mi) earlier this month. Practically identical below the nose, Super Heavy directly benefits from that maturity and is more or less an extended Starship tank section with more engines and bigger legs.
In many ways, Super Heavy can be much simpler than Starship, as a suborbital booster has no need for header tanks, flaps, or a nosecone, and can be much stronger and heavier in all aspects. However, carrying three or more times as propellant as Starship (and carrying Starship itself), Super Heavy also needs to be stronger. All those changes – requiring new design work and new fabrication – take time. In a great sign that most of that work is complete, some of that custom hardware needed to strengthen and power Super Heavy has begun to arrive over the last several weeks.
SpaceX began stacking the first Super Heavy booster (BN1) on November 8th and appears to have more or less paused integration operations after joining eight rings. Production continued apace, however, and no less than five ring sections destined for Super Heavy appeared over the next several weeks. Why assembly slowed down is unclear but it’s reasonable to assume that SpaceX was trying to keep its focus primarily on Starship SN8’s launch debut and the preparation of several other full-scale ships, where early work on Super Heavy could ultimately be for naught if Starship flight tests uncover major design flaws.
Regardless of the reason, BN1 remains eight rings (14.5m/48ft) tall as of December 14th, representing one-fifth of Super Heavy’s full 70-meter (~230 ft) height.
On December 17th, one of the parts unique to Super Heavy unexpectedly appeared in SpaceX’s South Texas shipyard, labeled “B1 FWD PIPE DOME”. The dome was quickly sleeved with a stack of three steel rings with labels confirming that the assembly was Super Heavy BN1’s common tank dome – “common” because it’s shared by both booster propellant tanks. The new dome is unique to all previous Starship domes, featuring a smaller, more reinforced cutout – likely because Super Heavy doesn’t need header tanks.
It also appears to borrow from Starship’s forward dome design, using the same rougher steel normally used to cap off Starship methane tanks.
Unlike Starship common domes, which place a spherical methane header tank at the bottom, Super Heavy’s common dome will have a transfer tube welded directly to its nozzle-like opening. As it turns out, what could be the first Super Heavy methane transfer tube was delivered to Boca Chica late last month.
Unlike Starship transfer tubes, the new plumbing appeared to have a much wider diameter and was delivered in four sections, meshing well with the fact that Super Heavy tanks are roughly twice as tall as Starship’s. Able to support as many as 28 Raptors compared to Starship’s 6, Super Heavy transfer tubes will also need to pump more than five times as much methane per second at full thrust, which could explain the larger diameter.
Finally and perhaps most significantly, aerial photos from RGV Photography appeared to capture the first glimpse of what might be the hardest custom part required by Super Heavy – a thrust structure designed to support up to 28 Raptor engines. On December 10th, casually sitting between Starship Mk1’s remains (on the white concrete mount) and a tent, a flat ring with clear eightfold symmetry and a donut-like cutout large enough to fit a Starship thrust puck with room to spare was easily visible.
The hexagonal symmetry was the main giveaway, matching comments from CEO Elon Musk that Super Heavy’s thrust structure will feature a central ring of eight engines surrounded by an outer ring of up to 20 more Raptors. Assuming the first Super Heavy booster only flies with a few Raptor engines, that sole eight-engine ‘puck’ may be all that SpaceX needs to complete BN1.
Tesla has officially launched public Robotaxi rides in Austin, Texas, without a Safety Monitor in the vehicle, marking the first time the company has removed anyone from the vehicle other than the rider.
The Safety Monitor has been present in Tesla Robotaxis in Austin since its launch last June, maintaining safety for passengers and other vehicles, and was placed in the passenger’s seat.
Tesla planned to remove the Safety Monitor at the end of 2025, but it was not quite ready to do so. Now, in January, riders are officially reporting that they are able to hail a ride from a Model Y Robotaxi without anyone in the vehicle:
I am in a robotaxi without safety monitor pic.twitter.com/fzHu385oIb
— TSLA99T (@Tsla99T) January 22, 2026
Tesla started testing this internally late last year and had several employees show that they were riding in the vehicle without anyone else there to intervene in case of an emergency.
Tesla has now expanded that program to the public. It is not active in the entire fleet, but there are a “few unsupervised vehicles mixed in with the broader robotaxi fleet with safety monitors,” Ashok Elluswamy said:
Robotaxi rides without any safety monitors are now publicly available in Austin.
Starting with a few unsupervised vehicles mixed in with the broader robotaxi fleet with safety monitors, and the ratio will increase over time. https://t.co/ShMpZjefwB
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) January 22, 2026
Tesla Robotaxi goes driverless as Musk confirms Safety Monitor removal testing
The Robotaxi program also operates in the California Bay Area, where the fleet is much larger, but Safety Monitors are placed in the driver’s seat and utilize Full Self-Driving, so it is essentially the same as an Uber driver using a Tesla with FSD.
In Austin, the removal of Safety Monitors marks a substantial achievement for Tesla moving forward. Now that it has enough confidence to remove Safety Monitors from Robotaxis altogether, there are nearly unlimited options for the company in terms of expansion.
While it is hoping to launch the ride-hailing service in more cities across the U.S. this year, this is a much larger development than expansion, at least for now, as it is the first time it is performing driverless rides in Robotaxi anywhere in the world for the public to enjoy.
Tesla has scheduled its Earnings Call for Q4 and Full Year 2025 for next Wednesday, January 28, at 5:30 p.m. EST, and investors are already preparing to get some answers from executives regarding a wide variety of topics.
The company accepts several questions from retail investors through the platform Say, which then allows shareholders to vote on the best questions.
Tesla does not answer anything regarding future product releases, but they are willing to shed light on current timelines, progress of certain projects, and other plans.
There are five questions that range over a variety of topics, including SpaceX, Full Self-Driving, Robotaxi, and Optimus, which are currently in the lead to be asked and potentially answered by Elon Musk and other Tesla executives:
- You once said: Loyalty deserves loyalty. Will long-term Tesla shareholders still be prioritized if SpaceX does an IPO?
- Our Take – With a lot of speculation regarding an incoming SpaceX IPO, Tesla investors, especially long-term ones, should be able to benefit from an early opportunity to purchase shares. This has been discussed endlessly over the past year, and we must be getting close to it.
- When is FSD going to be 100% unsupervised?
- Our Take – Musk said today that this is essentially a solved problem, and it could be available in the U.S. by the end of this year.
- What is the current bottleneck to increase Robotaxi deployment & personal use unsupervised FSD? The safety/performance of the most recent models or people to monitor robots, robotaxis, in-car, or remotely? Or something else?
- Our Take – The bottleneck seems to be based on data, which Musk said Tesla needs 10 billion miles of data to achieve unsupervised FSD. Once that happens, regulatory issues will be what hold things up from moving forward.
- Regarding Optimus, could you share the current number of units deployed in Tesla factories and actively performing production tasks? What specific roles or operations are they handling, and how has their integration impacted factory efficiency or output?
- Our Take – Optimus is going to have a larger role in factories moving forward, and later this year, they will have larger responsibilities.
- Can you please tie purchased FSD to our owner accounts vs. locked to the car? This will help us enjoy it in any Tesla we drive/buy and reward us for hanging in so long, some of us since 2017.
- Our Take – This is a good one and should get us some additional information on the FSD transfer plans and Subscription-only model that Tesla will adopt soon.
Tesla will have its Earnings Call on Wednesday, January 28.
Elon Musk shared an incredible detail about Tesla Cybercab’s potential efficiency, as the company has hinted in the past that it could be one of the most affordable vehicles to operate from a per-mile basis.
ARK Invest released a report recently that shed some light on the potential incremental cost per mile of various Robotaxis that will be available on the market in the coming years.
The Cybercab, which is detailed for the year 2030, has an exceptionally low cost of operation, which is something Tesla revealed when it unveiled the vehicle a year and a half ago at the “We, Robot” event in Los Angeles.
Musk said on numerous occasions that Tesla plans to hit the $0.20 cents per mile mark with the Cybercab, describing a “clear path” to achieving that figure and emphasizing it is the “full considered” cost, which would include energy, maintenance, cleaning, depreciation, and insurance.
Probably true
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 22, 2026
ARK’s report showed that the Cybercab would be roughly half the cost of the Waymo 6th Gen Robotaxi in 2030, as that would come in at around $0.40 per mile all in. Cybercab, at scale, would be at $0.20.
Credit: ARK Invest
This would be a dramatic decrease in the cost of operation for Tesla, and the savings would then be passed on to customers who choose to utilize the ride-sharing service for their own transportation needs.
The U.S. average cost of new vehicle ownership is about $0.77 per mile, according to AAA. Meanwhile, Uber and Lyft rideshares often cost between $1 and $4 per mile, while Waymo can cost between $0.60 and $1 or more per mile, according to some estimates.
Tesla’s engineering has been the true driver of these cost efficiencies, and its focus on creating a vehicle that is as cost-effective to operate as possible is truly going to pay off as the vehicle begins to scale. Tesla wants to get the Cybercab to about 5.5-6 miles per kWh, which has been discussed with prototypes.
Additionally, fewer parts due to the umboxed manufacturing process, a lower initial cost, and eliminating the need to pay humans for their labor would also contribute to a cheaper operational cost overall. While aspirational, all of the ingredients for this to be a real goal are there.
It may take some time as Tesla needs to hammer the manufacturing processes, and Musk has said there will be growing pains early. This week, he said regarding the early production efforts:
“…initial production is always very slow and follows an S-curve. The speed of production ramp is inversely proportionate to how many new parts and steps there are. For Cybercab and Optimus, almost everything is new, so the early production rate will be agonizingly slow, but eventually end up being insanely fast.”
BREAKING: Tesla launches public Robotaxi rides in Austin with no Safety Monitor
Tesla Earnings Call: Top 5 questions investors are asking
