News
SpaceX considers Florida launch pad for both Falcon and Mars vehicle launches
Following a highly informative discussion at the ISS R&D conference, Elon Musk revealed that the updated, leaner version of SpaceX’s Mars architecture would likely have a diameter of around 9 meters.
A 9m Interplanetary Transport System, while precisely 25% smaller than the 12m diameter version revealed last year, would have to either lose the outer ring of full scale Raptor engines, or pivot to a smaller version of Raptor in order to preserve the 42 engine configuration shown at the IAC. Given Musk’s adamant and harsh judgement of the complexity of 27 Merlin 1D engines simultaneously firing on Falcon Heavy, moving to a 21 engine first stage for SpaceX’s Mars vehicle is a fair bet, so long as the full scale Raptor engine is still planned. Extremely speculative calculations based on the limited information available suggest that this smaller ITS could launch a bit less than half the payload of the original, still almost double the capability of Saturn V.
- A Space Shuttle’s external tank makes its way through downtown Los Angeles in 2011. The ET had a diameter of 8.4m. (AP/Chris Carlson)
- The base of SpaceX’s ITS booster, circa 2016. Current plans make it likely that the outside ring of engines will be subtracted and the vehicle made leaner. (SpaceX)
Possibly the most significant information to come out of this tweet is the implication that SpaceX and Musk are now looking to utilize current manufacturing facilities for the construction of a smaller ITS. While it adds considerable expense, the transport of a Space Shuttle’s external fuel tank through the streets of Los Angeles in 2011 sets a precedent for it being possible for SpaceX to transport a 9m vehicle from its factory in Hawthorne, CA to a nearby port. If SpaceX is able to use the same facilities it currently has for developing its Mars vehicle, it would experience immense savings compared to the cost of developing entirely new factories and testing facilities. This matches up perfectly with Musk’s repeated statement that the updated ITS is focused on improving the economic case for the vehicle and making it significantly cheaper to develop.
A 9m diameter vehicle fits in our existing factories …
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 22, 2017
Possibly the most crucial keystone of this economical update relates to the launch pad or pads that will be necessary to launch a rocket as large as either ITS. An oft-overlooked feature of the current LC-39A launch pad SpaceX leases and operates in Florida is that it and its LC-39B sibling were developed with a far larger and more powerful version of Saturn V in mind, known as Nova at the time. SpaceX is well aware of this, and is also painfully aware of just how expensive the construction of launch pads can be after having to undertake deep repairs of LC-40.

Mockups of potential solutions for a dual vehicle setup at LC-39A. With this arrangement, SpaceX would be able to continue crewed and Falcon Heavy launches from the pad while conducting initial tests and launches of their ITS. (Jay Deshetler, in addition to Cameron Byers and John Archer, based on notes from KSC pad engineers)(NASASpaceflight)
Buried in a fascinating article by Chris Bergin of NASASpaceflight.com fame, Bergin has revealed that documents and rumblings behind the scenes indicate that SpaceX is seriously considering either co-launching from LC-39B or modifying LC-39A with a second launch mount. This would require considerably modifications to the venerable pad, but it would not require the costly and time-consuming construction of an entirely new launch pad. Speculative renders and mockups (above) created by the skilled forum members of NASASpaceflight demonstrate this nicely, showing the launch mount for ITS and Falcon side by side.
Combined with Musk’s past statements about this updated version of ITS, the future is looking increasingly bright for what was initially a somewhat crazy architecture. Easier transport, recycled development facilities, and co-location on an already-constructed launch pad show that SpaceX are completely serious about their ambitions for Mars and are willing to do what is necessary to get to the Moon, the Red Planet, and beyond.
News
The secret behind Tesla’s Cybercab Gold goes well beyond just the color
Tesla has spent years trying to engineer its way out of the automotive paint shop, one of the most expensive, space-consuming, and environmentally costly steps in vehicle manufacturing. With the Cybercab, Tesla confirmed on X this week that a new reaction injection molding process will embed color directly into the panel itself during production.
“Our new reaction injection molding (RIM) process shrinks Cybercab paint cycles from hours to minutes. This cuts those parts’ manufacturing and supply chain emissions by 35% and eliminating 100% of paint volatile organic compounds (VOCs) emitted in traditional paint methods.” noted Tesla.
While the RIM process isn’t necessarily new and has existed since the 1960s, what makes Tesla’s application notable is how it is being used specifically for exterior body panels that traditionally required a separate paint process after forming.
Tesla’s RIM approach integrates the color directly into the panel material during the molding process itself. The pigment is part of the polymer mix injected into the mold, meaning the panel comes out of the mold already colored, with no separate paint application required. The clear coat or protective layer can be applied at the mold stage or through a much faster post-process than traditional multi-stage painting. Tesla claims this compresses what was a multi-hour paint cycle into minutes per panel.
Tesla’s obsession with killing the paint shop is one of the most consistent threads running through the company’s manufacturing philosophy going back years. As far back as 2018, Musk was trimming paint color options to simplify production, tweeting at the time: “Moving 2 of 7 Tesla colors off menu on Wednesday to simplify manufacturing.” Two years later, in a 2020 Automotive News interview, Musk laid out his broader vision, saying he believed Tesla factories could one day be 1,000 times more efficient than conventional plants, and pointing to the paint shop as one of the biggest sources of waste, cost, and complexity. The Cybertruck was the most extreme expression of that thinking. Tesla chose an unpainted stainless steel exterior partly because it would eliminate the need for a $200 million paint facility at Gigafactory Texas. The stainless approach proved harder and more expensive than anticipated, but the underlying ambition never changed. The Cybercab is what happens when that same ambition meets a manufacturing process that delivers on it.
Lifestyle
Tesla app update makes Robotaxi ownership make a lot more sense
Tesla’s app now shows a live indicator when your car is actively driving itself.
A recent Tesla app update, released last week (4.58.5), gives visibility on whether a vehicle is navigating in its semi-autonomous mode or being drive by a human driver. The updated app now displays a live “Self-Driving” indicator in bright blue text directly beneath the vehicle’s speed readout whenever Full Self-Driving is actively engaged, along with the signature glowing blue navigation path that FSD users see on the main touchscreen. It is a small visual update with meaningful implications for how Tesla owners monitor their vehicles remotely.
The feature was first spotted in the wild by X user Jordan Camina, who shared video of a Hardware 3 Model S displaying the new animation through the app while driving. That detail is significant because it confirms the update is not limited to newer HW4 vehicles. It works across hardware generations, and Tesla confirmed it will eventually support all vehicles regardless of chip platform once both the app and vehicle software are updated. The vehicle side requires software version 2026.20.6.1, which has reached nearly 40% of the fleet so far, as monitored by NotaTeslaApp.
The feature makes the most practical sense when viewed through the lens of Tesla’s expanding robotaxi operation. In a robotaxi context, the owner of a vehicle generating ride revenue has a direct financial and safety interest in knowing whether their car is operating under autonomous control at any given moment. The app’s new FSD indicator gives fleet owners exactly that visibility, the same way a logistics company monitors whether a delivery driver is following the planned route. It also carries implications for Tesla’s insurance model. Tesla’s own insurance product prices premiums in part based on FSD engagement rates, and real-time visibility into when FSD is active creates a feedback loop that could eventually tie directly into policy pricing. For individual owners who have opted their personal vehicles into the robotaxi network, the update effectively turns the Tesla app into a fleet management dashboard, one that tells you whether your car is earning money, whether it is driving itself to do it, and whether everything is operating the way it should from wherever you happen to be.
Tesla expands Robotaxi to Florida, marking its third state for autonomy
As Teslarati has reported, Tesla launched unsupervised robotaxi rides in Miami this summer, a milestone that makes a remote FSD status indicator significantly more practical than a cosmetic feature. When a vehicle is operating as a robotaxi without a driver present, the owner or fleet operator needs a reliable way to confirm autonomy is engaged. The app now provides exactly that.
As noted by NotATeslaApp, The update also arrived alongside a hint buried in the same app version that Tesla plans to use the cabin camera to verify driver identity before FSD can be activated. Pairing identity verification with a live autonomy status indicator points toward the infrastructure Tesla is building for a fleet of driverless vehicles that owners can monitor the way you would track a package delivery.
Elon Musk
California snubs Tesla in its newly passed EV incentive that favors Rivian and Lucid
California passed a $135 million EV incentive that rewards Rivian and Lucid while sidelining Tesla
California just drew a line in the EV incentive sand to put Tesla on the wrong side of it. The state recently passed a $135 million program offering first-time electric vehicle buyers a direct incentive with no application required, but the rules were written in a way that leaves Tesla at a structural disadvantage compared to Rivian and Lucid.
The program caps eligible vehicles at $50,000 for new EVs and $25,000 for used ones. That pricing threshold rules out a significant portion of Tesla’s lineup, though some lower-priced Model 3 and Model Y configurations would still qualify. California-based automakers are exempt from the price cap entirely, regardless of what their vehicles cost. Rivian, headquartered in Irvine, and Lucid, based in the San Francisco Bay Area, both benefit from that exemption. Rivian’s R2 starts at roughly $45,000 but has versions above the cap. Lucid’s Air and Gravity start at $70,990 and $79,990 respectively, well above any threshold a non-California company would face.
California hits Tesla Cybercab and Robotaxi driverless cars with new law
Tesla built its reputation and a significant portion of its early market share in California, where EV adoption has consistently led the nation. The company operates its original factory in Fremont, California, and the state was home to Tesla’s headquarters for most of its existence. That changed in 2021 when Tesla moved its corporate headquarters to Austin, Texas. Since then, the relationship between the company and California Governor Gavin Newsom has been openly adversarial, with Musk and Newsom trading public criticism on multiple occasions.
California’s EV incentive landscape has shifted repeatedly in recent years, and Tesla has previously lost eligibility for state-level programs as its vehicles exceeded income-adjusted price thresholds. The federal $7,500 EV tax credit, which Tesla models have qualified for and lost depending on policy cycles, is no longer available after it expired without renewal, making state-level programs more meaningful to buyers than they have been in years.
The practical impact for buyers is more nuanced than the headline suggests. California residents purchasing a Tesla under $50,000 for the first time can still access the incentive. But the exemption written for California-based manufacturers is a structural advantage that rewards where a company plants its headquarters flag rather than where it builds its products, and Tesla moved that flag to Texas.

