News
SpaceX’s first Super Heavy hardware is already being built at Florida Starship campus
Based on some basic analysis of recent photos of SpaceX’s East Coast Starship facility, situated in Cocoa, Florida, SpaceX has almost certainly begun fabricating and staging hardware that will eventually become part of the company’s first Super Heavy booster prototype.
This is by no means surprising but it does confirm the reasonable assumption that SpaceX is already working hard to ensure that the first Super Heavy booster(s) can be assembled as quickly as possible. Additionally, SpaceX appears to have started clearing brush in the process of preparing to transport the Florida orbital Starship prototype (“Mk2”) to SpaceX’s Pad 39A launch facilities, dozens of miles away.
Counting rings
The aforementioned “basic analysis” is more or less comprised of looking for and counting the massive steel rings that SpaceX has decided to build its Starships (and Super Heavy boosters) out of. By all appearances, SpaceX is doing nearly everything short of milling and preparing the raw materials (steel) internally. In Florida and Texas, giant rolls of stainless steel are delivered to the worksite by semi-truck, where SpaceX technicians prepare the rolls for sectioning (likely with a plasma torch or laser) and any necessary machining.
Intriguingly, SpaceX’s Texas and Florida teams are using different sizes of sheets – Florida has gone for taller segments while Texas uses rings that are a fair bit shorter ring, welding two rings together before installing each section on Starship. Florida’s rings are roughly 1.8m (6 ft; +/- 5%) tall.
In August alone, Cocoa has effectively doubled the height of the barrel section of its Mk2 orbital Starship prototype, jumping from 7-8 to 15 steel rings. The barrel section is now ~28m (90 ft) tall and Starship Mk2’s pointed nose section is still approximately 20-22m (65-70 ft) tall, adding up to a stacked height of 48-50m, approximately 10% shy of its final 55m (180 ft) height. Assuming that SpaceX hasn’t stretched Starship further since CEO Elon Musk’s September 2018 update, this leaves Starship Mk2 around 2-4 rings and a small nose cap shy of its full height (excluding legs).
Super Heavy rising
This brings us to even more recent views of SpaceX’s Cocoa Starship facility, taken on August 15th by local pilot Brian (Twitter: @flying_briann). A video from the flight offers an uninterrupted ~360-degree overview of the site, including glimpses of a surprising number of staged steel rings that have completed initial welding and are waiting for stacking and integration.
Two photos taken a bit less than two weeks ago provide a decent overview of SpaceX’s Cocoa facility. Of note, six staged rings are visible, as well as four additional rings in the form of two stacked sections of two rings. Those latter two sections (four rings) have since been stacked on Starship’s tank section, bringing it to its current 15-ring, ~28m height.
Despite the fact that Starship Mk2 appears to be just a few rings away from its final height, Brian’s August 15th overview revealed that no fewer than 11 additional rings (18m, 60 ft) are either staged or in the final stages of welding. Even if SpaceX has significantly stretched Starship over the last 10 or so months of design iteration, it seems exceedingly unlikely that Starship has grown by a full 10-12m (~20%).
Rather, these rings are probably the beginnings of SpaceX’s first Super Heavy booster prototype, a necessity before Starship can begin crucial orbital flight tests. Per the vehicle’s official 2018 specifications, Super Heavy will stand at least 63m (205 ft) tall before accounting for its landing legs/fins, requiring around 35 steel rings to complete its propellant tanks, interstage, and thrust structure.
According to CEO Elon Musk, Super Heavy will likely perform its first flight tests with approximately 20 Raptor engines, eventually arriving at a full 31-37 engines depending on the configuration. Musk also believes that Starship could be ready for its first orbital flight tests as early as December 2019, implying that SpaceX’s first Super Heavy prototype(s) could be fully assembled as few as 4-5 months from now.
In reality, 2020 is far more likely for both milestones, but Musk is not exactly well-known for his conservative schedule estimates.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
-
Elon Musk issued a second pointed warning to SpaceX short sellers on Tuesday, just hours before the company was set to release its first quarterly earnings as a publicly traded firm. Responding to a report highlighting elevated short interest, Musk wrote on X: “I try to warn them, but they just double down …”
The comment came as data from S3 Partners showed roughly 95 percent of available SPCX shares to borrow were on loan, translating to about 34 percent short interest as a percentage of the float. The stock has traded under pressure since its record-breaking IPO in June 2026, declining significantly from early peaks.
I try to warn them, but they just double down … 🤷♂️
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 4, 2026
This marks the second such message from Musk in under three weeks.
On July 17, amid post-IPO volatility, he stated: “The survival probability of firms who maintain a significant short position in SpaceX over time is very low.” At that time, SPCX had fallen roughly 30 percent from its peak above a $2.6 trillion valuation, with short sellers reportedly realizing gains of about $8.7 billion.
Musk’s warning aligned with optimistic analyses projecting that Starship-driven cost reductions could enable a multi-trillion-dollar space economy through applications such as orbital solar power, asteroid mining, data centers, and Mars-related projects, positioning SpaceX as critical infrastructure.
SpaceX is scheduled to report second-quarter results after the market close later today, followed by a webcast. Analysts anticipate revenue near $6.9 billion, reflecting growth in Starlink, launch services, and AI-related segments. The earnings release precedes a major lockup expiration on August 6 that could free hundreds of millions of insider shares.
Musk has a long track record of confronting short sellers, particularly regarding Tesla, where he has argued that persistent bearish positions underestimate transformative technologies. Critics view his optimism as overly ambitious given near-term stock fluctuations, while supporters see temporary dips as opportunities in a longer-term expansion of the space economy.
As SpaceX opens its books to public scrutiny for the first time, the high short interest and Musk’s repeated cautions set the stage for heightened market attention on the results and management’s commentary.
Tesla’s AI lead Ashok Elluswamy doubled down on the company’s strategy regarding Full Self-Driving’s speed settings, and owners are definitely confused.
Earlier versions of Full Self-Driving allowed owners to set a max speed that the vehicle could travel while operating under the semi-autonomous driver assistance platform. This allowed more customization for the driver, giving them the ability to experience FSD’s robust performance with their own personal preferences.
Speed is massively important for obvious reasons — it’s not only a question of keeping the vehicle occupants comfortable by traveling at a safe speed, but it’s also something that could contribute to a ticket or infraction from law enforcement.
With the release of FSD v14 last year, Tesla removed the ability to set a max speed and instead opted for five Speed Profiles, ranging from “Sloth,” the most conservative, to “Mad Max,” the most aggressive and spirited. These profiles not only control speed, but also how frequently the vehicle will execute passes, perform lane changes, and other contributing factors.
The removal of the Max Speed setting was a major complaint amongst the Tesla community because it left owners scrambling for a way to experience suitable behaviors while traveling at an appropriate speed. Most felt the driving profiles would be a good indicator of the behaviors, while speed would still be left up to the discretion of the driver.
Instead, Tesla’s Speed Profiles determine both, and the constant tinkering of how they behave has been a major bottleneck and point of confusion for both owners and the company. From update to update, the Speed Profiles will change, sometimes more drastically than others. Some owners have complained that the “Standard” profile is too fast, while others have experienced “Mad Max” traveling below the speed limit:
What has happened to Mad Max?
At one point it was going 32 in a 35. Traffic ahead had pulled away considerably https://t.co/bjKvaMVTNX pic.twitter.com/aaZSWmLu5v
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) January 24, 2026
These things change with each update, but the big complaint is that owners are on the hook for any tickets that come from FSD’s infractions; that’s the caveat of the suite being named FSD (Supervised). It ultimately means the driver is responsible, and the automaker has no liability when it comes to speeding tickets or general traffic infractions.
It is the driver’s responsibility to take over or adjust based on this.
Elluswamy essentially confirmed that there are no plans to bring back Max Speed control, because it is what he referred to as “an anti pattern.” He then echoed something that CEO Elon Musk has started to really push with FSD, and that’s the idea that Tesla is really honing in on the preferences of the driver.
Max speed control is an anti pattern.
We are working on better learning of user’s implied preferences.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) August 3, 2026
Owners were confused by Tesla’s decision, stating that there must be a better way, especially considering disengagements for incorrect speeds are common:
This…. is not the way
— Kyle Conner (@itskyleconner) August 4, 2026
😭 I appreciate this mentality ! But currently the no.1 reason I disengage in Australia is incorrect speed zones.
— Ryan’s Model Y (@ryanjaycowan) August 3, 2026
This is fine but you need to start accepting liability for speeding tickets then. https://t.co/lyCgdA83gQ
— Jeremy Judkins (@jeremyjudkins_) August 4, 2026
Okay https://t.co/nOvoXQkNg1 pic.twitter.com/jGRtF2xtox
— Chad Moran (@ChadMoran) August 3, 2026
From personal experience and using FSD for over 72 percent of my driving miles since v14 was released late last year, I make Speed Profile adjustments constantly. If FSD is traveling a tad too quickly, I will scale it back, and if it’s too conservative, I’ll make it more aggressive.
I don’t complain about making the Speed Profile changes too frequently, but it would certainly be nice to have it happen less frequently. There are far too many times I am concerned about getting a ticket, even in Standard mode.
The biggest issue for me, personally, which seems to be echoed throughout the community, is the fact that Tesla’s goal is to minimize disengagements. Many drivers are stating that speed is a major reason for disengagements.
However, Tesla is not willing to bring back this one level of input because it would technically be a regression.
Whether it’s right or wrong in your opinion, it is what Tesla is going with, and it seems like it has pivoted quite a bit from its other strategies for minimizing interventions by pushing its AI to behave in a way that would fit the occupant’s personal preferences.
Tesla is one of several automakers whose vehicles qualify for an awesome new first-time EV buyer incentive program in California.
The Golden State launched the MyFirstEV incentive program, which helps those buying an electric vehicle for the first time with a $3,500 incentive on new-inventory purchases of a Model 3 or Model Y.
First-time electric vehicle buyers in California can now get $3,500 off eligible Model 3 and Model Y new inventory vehicle purchases.
To be eligible, you must place your order on or after August 3, 2026 and take delivery while funds are still available. The incentive applies to… pic.twitter.com/yuXF00XA50
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) August 4, 2026
The incentive requires an order on or after August 3, and delivery must be taken while the program is still being funded. California has set aside $135.5 million to help strengthen its SEV market and support automotive innovation.
Incentives are offered at the point of sale, and used EVs are also available for a partial incentive of $1,750. Half of the $3,500 and $1,750 incentive amounts are covered by California, with the other half being covered by participating OEMs.
Additionally, rules apply for MSRP and how the vehicle will qualify for the incentive. Any vehicle from a non-California headquartered OEM must have an MSRP of $50,000 or less. Used vehicles must be priced at $25,000 or less and must be at least two model years older than the year of purchase.
The cars must also be purchased from manufacturers as certified pre-owned vehicles. Private dealerships are not eligible.
In total, California expects to incentivize over 73,000 ZEVs.
Participating Manufacturers
Fourteen total automakers are participating in California’s MyFirstEV program:
- Chevrolet – Launching August 2026
- Ford – Launching August 2026
- Honda – Launching September 2026
- Hyundai – Launching August 2026
- Kia – Launching August 2026
- Lexus – Launching September 2026
- Lucid – Launching August 2026
- Mitsubishi – Launching November 2026
- Nissan – Coming Soon
- Rivian – Coming Soon
- Subaru – Launching September 2026
- Tesla – Launching August 2026
- Toyota – Launching September 2026
- Volvo – Coming Soon
Elon Musk sends second warning to SpaceX shorts ahead of first earnings
Tesla’s AI lead doubles down on FSD’s speed strategy, and owners are confused
