Connect with us

News

SpaceX is halfway done building the world’s largest rocket booster

Published

on

New photos of the SpaceX Starship program’s first Super Heavy confirm that the booster prototype – known as Booster Number 1 (BN1) and set to become the largest rocket booster ever built – is already halfway complete.

Set to be the world’s tallest, heaviest, and most powerful liquid rocket booster ever built, Super Heavy is expected to measure some 70 meters (~230 ft) tip to tail, weigh ~3700 metric tons fully fueled, and produce around 7500 metric tons (16.5 million lbf) of thrust at liftoff. Starship, the reusable upper stage and spacecraft SpaceX is busy prototyping and testing, is 40% shorter than Super Heavy and features less than a quarter as many Raptor engines, producing thrust roughly equivalent to Falcon 9’s first stage.

Aside from a three or four-ring engine section, every subsection of the first Super Heavy booster is complete and awaiting assembly. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

Super Heavy will be equivalent to almost ten Falcon 9s at full thrust and outclass every rocket ever built. However, the basic design of the booster is effectively the same as any other liquid-fueled rocket, opting for a tall and thin Falcon-style cylinder with a high aspect ratio and no exterior coating – just bare metal.

Super Heavy’s airframe is made up of two main propellant tanks joined by a “common dome” and capped at both ends with an interstage (the structure that mates the booster to Starship) and engine/skirt section (encloses the thrust dome, supports landing legs, and houses umbilical ports).

The Interplanetary Transport System (ITS), circa 2016. While heavily outdated, it still serves as a good representation of Super Heavy’s basic layout. (SpaceX)
Starship and Super Heavy, circa 2019. (SpaceX)

While Super Heavy is dramatically different from Starship by almost any measure, SpaceX has ensured that hardware commonality is as extensive as possible. Ultimately, with minor tweaks, that means that SpaceX can (in theory) build Super Heavy with the exact same tools and techniques it’s used to churn out Starship prototypes.

As of the end of this month, a flurry of public photos from local (and visiting) photographers have confirmed that Super Heavy booster BN1 is effectively halfway to completion and currently stands 18 steel rings tall. Aside from booster-specific layout changes, that 33-meter-tall (~105 ft) barrel section is virtually identical to a Starship’s 20-ring barrel section, lacking only conical nose section that caps them off.

The bulk of Super Heavy BN1’s liquid oxygen (LOx) tank is lifted beside Starship SN10. (NASASpaceflight)

The 18-ring stack also guarantees that the current assembly is Super Heavy BN1’s liquid oxygen (LOx) tank and confirms that like ITS, BFR, Falcon 9, and other SpaceX rockets, Super Heavy’s LOx tank will sit above its fuel (methane) tank. Likely either 38 or 39 rings tall overall, it also indicates that BN1 is a ring away from half of its full height, leaving the integration of its strengthened methane tank, custom engine section, and skirt as the last major tasks standing between SpaceX and its first Super Heavy prototype.

Bearing attachment points for four Raptor engines and unfinished cutouts for four more, the first Super Heavy thrust dome appears to be complete and awaiting its sleeve of steel rings. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)
Meanwhile, Super Heavy BN1’s common dome section appears to be ready to join the rest of its assembled LOx tank any day now. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

According to Elon Musk, SpaceX will likely hop BN1 if or when it passes initial cryogenic proof and static fire testing. If that goes according to plan, it’s unclear if BN1 can be converted for two-stage Starship launch attempts or if SpaceX will simply move on to BN2 (already under construction).

Advertisement
-->

Eric Ralph is Teslarati's senior spaceflight reporter and has been covering the industry in some capacity for almost half a decade, largely spurred in 2016 by a trip to Mexico to watch Elon Musk reveal SpaceX's plans for Mars in person. Aside from spreading interest and excitement about spaceflight far and wide, his primary goal is to cover humanity's ongoing efforts to expand beyond Earth to the Moon, Mars, and elsewhere.

Advertisement
Comments

News

Tesla tinkering with Speed Profiles on FSD v14.2.1 has gone too far

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla recently released Full Self-Driving (FSD) v14.2.1, its latest version, but the tinkering with Speed Profiles has perhaps gone too far.

We try to keep it as real as possible with Full Self-Driving operation, and we are well aware that with the new versions, some things get better, but others get worse. It is all part of the process with FSD, and refinements are usually available within a week or so.

However, the latest v14.2.1 update has brought out some major complaints with Speed Profiles, at least on my end. It seems the adjustments have gone a tad too far, and there is a sizeable gap between Profiles that are next to one another.

The gap is so large that changing between them presents a bit of an unwelcome and drastic reduction in speed, which is perhaps a tad too fast for my liking. Additionally, Speed Profiles seem to have a set Speed Limit offset, which makes it less functional in live traffic situations.

Before I go any further, I’d like to remind everyone reading this that what I am about to write is purely my opinion; it is not right or wrong, or how everyone might feel. I am well aware that driving behaviors are widely subjective; what is acceptable to one might be unacceptable to another.

Speed Profiles are ‘Set’ to a Speed

From what I’ve experienced on v14.2.1, Tesla has chosen to go with somewhat of a preset max speed for each Speed Profile. With ‘Hurry,’ it appears to be 10 MPH over the speed limit, and it will not go even a single MPH faster than that. In a 55 MPH zone, it will only travel 65 MPH. Meanwhile, ‘Standard’ seems to be fixed at between 4-5 MPH over.

This is sort of a tough thing to have fixed, in my opinion. The speed at which the car travels should not be fixed; it should be more dependent on how traffic around it is traveling.

It almost seems as if the Speed Profile chosen should be more of a Behavior Profile. Standard should perform passes only to traffic that is slower than the traffic. If traffic is traveling at 75 MPH in a 65 MPH zone, the car should travel at 75 MPH. It should pass traffic that travels slower than this.

Hurry should be more willing to overtake cars, travel more than 10 MPH over the limit, and act as if someone is in a hurry to get somewhere, hence the name. Setting strict limits on how fast it will travel seems to be a real damper on its capabilities. It did much better in previous versions.

Some Speed Profiles are Too Distant from Others

This is specifically about Hurry and Mad Max, which are neighbors in the Speed Profiles menu. Hurry will only go 10 MPH over the limit, but Mad Max will travel similarly to traffic around it. I’ve seen some people say Mad Max is too slow, but I have not had that opinion when using it.

In a 55 MPH zone during Black Friday and Small Business Saturday, it is not unusual for traffic around me to travel in the low to mid-80s. Mad Max was very suitable for some traffic situations yesterday, especially as cars were traveling very fast. However, sometimes it required me to “gear down” into Hurry, especially as, at times, it would try to pass slower traffic in the right lane, a move I’m not super fond of.

We had some readers also mention this to us:

After switching from Mad Max to Hurry, there is a very abrupt drop in speed. It is not violent by any means, but it does shift your body forward, and it seems as if it is a tad drastic and could be refined further.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla’s most affordable car is coming to the Netherlands

The trim is expected to launch at €36,990, making it the most affordable Model 3 the Dutch market has seen in years.

Published

on

Tesla is preparing to introduce the Model 3 Standard to the Netherlands this December, as per information obtained by AutoWeek. The trim is expected to launch at €36,990, making it the most affordable Model 3 the Dutch market has seen in years. 

While Tesla has not formally confirmed the vehicle’s arrival, pricing reportedly comes from a reliable source, the publication noted.

Model 3 Standard lands in NL

The U.S. version of the Model 3 Standard provides a clear preview of what Dutch buyers can expect, such as a no-frills configuration that maintains the recognizable Model 3 look without stripping the car down to a bare interior. The panoramic glass roof is still there, the exterior design is unchanged, and Tesla’s central touchscreen-driven cabin layout stays intact.

Cost reductions come from targeted equipment cuts. The American variant uses fewer speakers, lacks ventilated front seats and heated rear seats, and swaps premium materials for cloth and textile-heavy surfaces. Performance is modest compared with the Premium models, with a 0–100 km/h sprint of about six seconds and an estimated WLTP range near 550 kilometers. 

Despite the smaller battery and simpler suspension, the Standard maintains the long-distance capability drivers have come to expect in a Tesla.

Advertisement
-->

Pricing strategy aligns with Dutch EV demand and taxation shifts

At €36,990, the Model 3 Standard fits neatly into Tesla’s ongoing lineup reshuffle. The current Model 3 RWD has crept toward €42,000, creating space for a more competitive entry-level option, and positioning the new Model 3 Standard comfortably below the €39,990 Model Y Standard.

The timing aligns with rising Dutch demand for affordable EVs as subsidies like SEPP fade and tax advantages for electric cars continue to wind down, EVUpdate noted. Buyers seeking a no-frills EV with solid range are then likely to see the new trim as a compelling alternative.

With the U.S. variant long established and the Model Y Standard already available in the Netherlands, the appearance of an entry-level Model 3 in the Dutch configurator seems like a logical next step.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Model Y is still China’s best-selling premium EV through October

The premium-priced SUV outpaced rivals despite a competitive field, while the Model 3 also secured an impressive position.

Published

on

Credit: Grok Imagine

The Tesla Model Y led China’s top-selling pure electric vehicles in the 200,000–300,000 RMB segment through October 2025, as per Yiche data compiled from China Passenger Car Association (CPCA) figures.

The premium-priced SUV outpaced rivals despite a competitive field, while the Model 3 also secured an impressive position.

The Model Y is still unrivaled

The Model Y’s dominance shines in Yiche’s October report, topping the chart for vehicles priced between 200,000 and 300,000 RMB. With 312,331 units retailed from January through October, the all-electric crossover was China’s best-selling EV in the 200,000–300,000 RMB segment.

The Xiaomi SU7 is a strong challenger at No. 2 with 234,521 units, followed by the Tesla Model 3, which achieved 146,379 retail sales through October. The Model Y’s potentially biggest rival, the Xiaomi YU7, is currently at No. 4 with 80,855 retail units sold.

Efficiency kings

The Model 3 and Model Y recently claimed the top two spots in Autohome’s latest real-world energy-consumption test, outperforming a broad field of Chinese-market EVs under identical 120 km/h cruising conditions with 375 kg payload and fixed 24 °C cabin temperature. The Model 3 achieved 20.8 kWh/100 km while the Model Y recorded 21.8 kWh/100 km, reaffirming Tesla’s efficiency lead.

The results drew immediate attention from Xiaomi CEO Lei Jun, who publicly recognized Tesla’s advantage while pledging continued refinement for his brand’s lineup.

Advertisement
-->

“The Xiaomi SU7’s energy consumption performance is also very good; you can take a closer look. The fact that its test results are weaker than Tesla’s is partly due to objective reasons: the Xiaomi SU7 is a C-segment car, larger and with higher specifications, making it heavier and naturally increasing energy consumption. Of course, we will continue to learn from Tesla and further optimize its energy consumption performance!” Lei Jun wrote in a post on Weibo.

Continue Reading