News
SpaceX to replicate Starbase, build multiple Starship launch pads in Florida
Less than two weeks after CEO Elon Musk revealed that SpaceX has restarted construction of a Starship launch site at Kennedy Space Center’s existing LC-39A pad, NASA has revealed the company’s plans for an entirely different Starship launch site just a few miles to the north.
Known as Launch Complex 49 (LC-49) and located where NASA once considered building LC-39C, a third Saturn-class pad to match 39A and 39B, NASA now says that SpaceX aims to develop the site into a dedicated Starship launch pad. The plot of land NASA deemed LC-49 as recently as 2017 sits about 1 mile (1.6 km) northwest of NASA’s LC-39B Space Launch System (SLS) pad and 3 miles (5 km) northwest of LC-39A, which SpaceX has leased since 2014 and launched out of since 2017. Unlike 39A, though, SpaceX has a huge amount of work – and major environmental reviews – ahead of it to turn LC-49 into a site capable of launching a rocket more than twice as powerful as Saturn V.
As of today, “LC-49” amounts to a mostly arbitrary dotted line on a map. Situated a few thousand feet south of the lovingly named Mosquito Lagoon Aquatic Preserve and Canaveral Seashore National Park, the site encompasses a variety of wild wetlands and is fully undeveloped. While substantially wetter, the land SpaceX hopes to develop is actually quite similar to the site that now hosts Starbase’s Starship launch facilities in Boca Chica, Texas. Prior to SpaceX’s arrival, the area was empty coastal mudflats.
To turn such a fragile and unstable area into an orbital launch site, SpaceX trucked in thousands of tons of soil, which then sat in a pile for three years ‘surcharging’ or compressing the ground beneath it. Ironically, while SpaceX did build a relatively small suborbital launch site where it surcharged, the company has built the site’s first orbital Starship launch pad a bit to the east, where no such preparations were made. That bodes well for the speed with which SpaceX could potentially build LC-49 from nothing, though it will likely be significantly more of a challenge.
Because NASA’s proposed LC-49 site is effectively swamp and marshland, SpaceX will have to create the ground any planned Starship launch site will stand on. It’s possible that soil surcharging will be required – and potentially on an even larger scale than what SpaceX did in Boca Chica. However, given that SpaceX ultimately didn’t even use that surcharged land to construct the orbital half of the pad, it’s possible that SpaceX will again be able to make do with less time-consuming construction methods. If SpaceX does more or less replicate an orbital launch site similar to Starbase’s, the pad could be ready to launch just 12-18 months later. NASA and SpaceX will have to complete environmental reviews along the way but given planning work that NASA’s already done over the decades, it’s possible that SpaceX will be able to start building LC-49 well before that process – which could take one or several years – is complete.
No less intriguing is NASA’s implication that SpaceX is simultaneously preparing to expand a facility it leases elsewhere at Kennedy Space Center. Currently used to process and store Falcon boosters, fairings, and upper stages, SpaceX has been clearing a lot beside that hangar that’s about the same size as the entirety of Starbase’s South Texas Starship factory. The obvious implication: SpaceX intends to both build and launch Starships out of multiple Florida launch pads.
Just a few miles south, CEO Elon Musk says that SpaceX has restarted work on a separate Starship launch pad situated on Pad 39A grounds after halting construction last year to focus on South Texas. SpaceX chose to entirely scrap the unfinished launch mount it had built, clearing the site for the construction of a new and improved version of Starbase’s orbital launch site. Altogether, SpaceX is now simultaneously constructing two orbital Starship launch pads (one at Starbase and one at 39A) and planning for the construction of two or three more (a second at Starbase and at least one or two at LC-49).
Tesla just raised Model Y prices for the first time in two years, with the largest increase being $1,000.
The move signals shifting dynamics in the competitive electric vehicle market as the company continues to work on balancing demand, profitability, and accessibility.
The new pricing affects premium trims while leaving entry-level options unchanged. The Model Y Premium Rear-Wheel Drive (RWD) now starts at $45,990, a $1,000 increase.
The Model Y Premium All-Wheel Drive (AWD)—previously referred to in the post as simply “Model Y AWD”—rises to $49,990, also up $1,000. The top-tier Model Y Performance sees a more modest $500 bump, bringing its starting price to $57,990.
Tesla Model Y prices just went up:
New prices:
🚗 Model Y Premium RWD: $45,990 – up $1,000
🚗 Model Y AWD: $49,990 – up $1,000
🚗 Model Y Performance: $57,990 – up $500 https://t.co/e4GhQ0tj4H pic.twitter.com/TCWqr3oqiV— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) May 16, 2026
Base models remain untouched to preserve affordability. The entry-level Model Y RWD holds steady at $39,990, and the base Model Y AWD stays at $41,990. This selective approach keeps the crossover accessible for budget-conscious buyers while extracting more revenue from higher-margin configurations.
After years of aggressive price cuts to stimulate volume amid slowing EV adoption and rising competition from rivals like BYD, Ford, and GM, Tesla appears confident in underlying demand. Recent lineup refreshes for the 2026 Model Y, including refreshed styling and efficiency gains, have helped maintain its status as America’s best-selling EV.
By protecting base prices, Tesla avoids alienating price-sensitive customers while improving margins on the more popular variants.
Tesla Model Y ownership review after six months: What I love and what I don’t
For consumers, the changes are relatively modest—under 3% on affected trims—and still position the Model Y competitively against gas-powered SUVs in the same class. Federal tax credits and potential state incentives may further offset costs for eligible buyers.
This marks a subtle but notable shift from the deep discounting era that defined much of 2024 and 2025. As the EV market matures into 2026, Tesla’s pricing strategy will be closely watched for clues about production ramps, new variants like the rumored longer-wheelbase Model Y, and broader profitability goals.
In short, today’s adjustment reflects a company that remains dominant yet pragmatic—willing to test higher pricing where demand supports it. It is unlikely to deter consumers from choosing other options.
Elon Musk cannot be fired from SpaceX, and there’s a reason for that.
In a blunt post on X on Friday, Elon Musk confirmed plans to structurally shield his leadership at SpaceX, ensuring he cannot be fired while tying a potential trillion-dollar compensation package to the company’s long-term goal of establishing a self-sustaining colony on Mars.
Yes, I need to make sure SpaceX stays focused on making life multiplanetary and extending consciousness to the stars, not pandering to someone’s bullshit quarterly earnings bonus!
Obviously, IF SpaceX succeeds in this absurdly difficult goal, it will be worth many orders of…
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) May 15, 2026
The revelation stems from a Financial Times report detailing SpaceX’s intention to restructure its governance and compensation framework. The moves are designed to protect Musk’s control and align his incentives with the company’s founding mission rather than short-term financial pressures. Musk’s reply left no ambiguity:
“Yes, I need to make sure SpaceX stays focused on making life multiplanetary and extending consciousness to the stars, not pandering to someone’s bullshit quarterly earnings bonus!”
He added that success in this “absurdly difficult goal” would generate value “many orders of magnitude more than the economy of Earth,” though he cautioned that the journey will not be smooth. “Don’t expect entirely smooth sailing along the way,” Musk wrote.
The strategy reflects Musk’s deep concerns about how public-market expectations could derail SpaceX’s core objective. Founded in 2002, SpaceX has repeatedly stated its purpose is to reduce the cost of space travel and ultimately make humanity a multiplanetary species.
Unlike Tesla, which went public in 2010 and has faced repeated battles over Musk’s compensation and board influence, SpaceX remains privately held. Musk has long resisted taking the rocket company public precisely to avoid the quarterly earnings treadmill that forces most CEOs to prioritize short-term stock performance over ambitious, high-risk projects.
By embedding protections against his removal and linking any outsized pay package to verifiable milestones—such as a functioning Mars colony—SpaceX aims to insulate its leadership from activist investors or board members who might demand faster profits or safer bets.
Musk has referenced past experiences, including his ouster from OpenAI and shareholder lawsuits at Tesla, as cautionary tales. In those cases, he argued, external pressures risked diluting the original vision.
Critics may view the arrangement as excessive, especially given Musk’s already substantial voting power and wealth. Supporters, however, argue it is a necessary safeguard for a company pursuing goals measured in decades rather than quarters. Achieving a Mars colony would require sustained investment in Starship development, orbital refueling, life-support systems, and in-situ resource utilization—technologies that may deliver no immediate financial return.
Musk’s post underscores a broader philosophical point: true breakthrough innovation often demands tolerance for volatility and a willingness to ignore conventional business wisdom. As SpaceX prepares for increasingly ambitious Starship test flights and eventual crewed missions, the new governance structure signals that the company’s North Star remains unchanged—humanity’s expansion beyond Earth.
Whether the trillion-dollar package materializes depends on execution, but Musk’s message is clear: SpaceX exists to reach the stars, not to chase the next earnings beat. For investors or employees who share that vision, the protections are not a perk—they are a prerequisite for success.
News
Tesla discloses two Robotaxi crashes to NHTSA
Newly unredacted data filed with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reveals the two incidents.
Tesla has disclosed information on two low-speed crashes that occurred in Austin with its Robotaxi platform. These incidents occurred with teleoperators steering the vehicle, and there were no passengers in the car at the time they happened.
Newly unredacted data filed with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reveals the two incidents.
The first crash took place in July 2025, shortly after Tesla launched its nascent Robotaxi network in Austin. The ADS reportedly struggled to move forward while stopped on a street. A teleoperator assumed control, gradually accelerating and turning left toward the roadside. The vehicle then mounted the curb and struck a metal fence.
In the second incident, in January 2026, the ADS was traveling straight when the safety monitor requested navigation support. The teleoperator took over from a stop, continued forward, and collided with a temporary construction barricade at approximately 9 mph, scraping the front-left fender and tire.
Tesla Robotaxi service in Austin achieves monumental new accomplishment
Tesla has previously told lawmakers that teleoperators are authorized to pilot vehicles remotely—but only at speeds below 10 mph, as the only maneuvers they were approved to perform were repositioning in awkward areas.
“This capability enables Tesla to promptly move a vehicle that may be in a compromising position, thereby mitigating the need to wait for a first responder or Tesla field representative to manually recover the vehicle,” the company stated in filings earlier this year.
Before this week, Tesla redacted the NHTSA reports, but they decided to reveal all 17 Robotaxi incidents recorded since the launch in Austin last Summer. Most of the other crashes involved the Tesla being struck by other road users and were not caused by the self-driving suite itself.
There were other incidents, including two additional self-caused accidents involving the ADS clipping side mirrors on parked cars. In September 2025, one Robotaxi struck a dog that darted into the roadway (the dog escaped unharmed), while another made an unprotected left turn into a parking lot and hit a metal chain.
Although Waymo and Zoox have reported more total crashes, Tesla operates at a far smaller scale. The cautious pace reflects the company’s broader safety concerns; it has been very slow with the Robotaxi rollout to ensure the suite is ready for operation.
Last month, CEO Elon Musk acknowledged that “making sure things are completely safe” remains the primary bottleneck to expanding the network, describing the company’s approach as “very cautious.”
The unredacted filings arrive amid heightened regulatory scrutiny of autonomous vehicles. NHTSA recently closed a separate probe into Tesla’s Full Self-Driving software repeatedly striking parking-lot obstacles such as bollards and chains—a problem that also prompted a recall at Waymo last year.
Tesla Robotaxi has been a widely successful program in its early days of operation, and the transparency Tesla brings here is greatly appreciated. Incidents will happen, of course, but the honesty gives customers and regulators a sense of where Tesla is in terms of developing its self-driving and fully autonomous ride-hailing suite.
Tesla Model Y prices just went up for the first time in two years
Elon Musk explains why he cannot be fired from SpaceX
