News
SpaceX’s Florida Starship shown off in aerial footage as Texas prototype grows rapidly
Local amateur photographer and spaceflight fan Michael Tapes has graciously shared a new aerial view of SpaceX’s Florida Starship facility, where dozens of workers can be seen buzzing around what is hoped to become the first orbital-class prototype of the massive spaceship and upper stage.
Tapes’ aerial footage offers a unique look at the layout of SpaceX’s Florida site as of July 9th, illustrating just how active and expansive it is. Some workers can be seen building something (perhaps preparing a new worksite) under a large, white tent, while another group surveys two large Starship segments and a third works to prepare new stainless steel ring sections. Of note, those two large Starship segments appear to be bereft of any obvious activity, perhaps a consequence of a fire that caused about $100,000 in damage the day prior (July 8th).
In fact, the shipping container that took what looks like the entirety of fire-related damage is visible on the west side of the SpaceX facility’s main hangar. Workers could be seen heading inside the extremely scorched container, likely removing debris, cleaning up the site of the incident, and preparing to scrap the damaged container itself.
Thankfully, nobody was injured by the fire and ~$100K of damage is certainly an inconvenience but is definitely nothing more for a multibillion-dollar company like SpaceX. Given that dozens of vehicles are visible in the parking lot, it’s safe to say that tons of work is ongoing under the roofs of the site’s many covered buildings, potentially designing Starship/Super Heavy, working on the rocket’s first orbital-class thrust structures, building new steel ring segments, and much more. With any luck, work on orbital Starship assembly and integration has already resumed following the small July 8th fire.
Star(ship) Wars
Speaking of that work, prior to the last week or so of progress on SpaceX South Texas’ own orbital Starship prototype, both Florida and Texas appeared to be more or less tied with two large Starship segments each and various other 9m-diameter subsections spread around their respective facilities. Impressively, Boca Chica has been marked by a flurry of recent work as multiple in-process steel rings were stacked on top of the Texas Starship’s propulsion and tankage section.
In just the last two weeks of June, workers thus pushed through the brutal South Texas heat and humidity to stack three new sections of fuselage, literally doubling the height of Boca Chica’s (hopefully) orbital-class Starship prototype in a dozen or so days. The ship’s conical nose section continues to be polished, while some sort of additional work is likely going on inside, away from public view. It’s hard to get a good overhead view but it’s safe to assume that – in the large barrel sections both in Florida and Texas – technicians are working to install (or at least prepare for) stainless steel tank domes, one of the last major finishing touches for spacecraft’s tank sections.
A huge amount of work remains for both sites but the visible progress as new ship segments are stacked and welded together is undeniably cathartic and satisfying. Working 10-12 hour shifts exposed to the Texas and Florida summer sun, heat, and wildlife is in no uncertain terms bound to be a hellish experience, but at least the hard work is so obviously producing results.
The most exciting kind of grass-watching
Back in Florida, several additional Starship barrel sections are in various stages of work, at least two of which appear to be nearly ready for stacking atop the propellant tank section already being assembled. Meanwhile, propellant tank domes were spotted in different stages of fabrication inside the Florida facility’s main hangar-cum-production-line, awaiting their turn to leave the building and prepare for installation on Starship East.
All said and done, once those visible segments are installed, Starship East will (at least by appearances) be neck and neck with its Texas sibling once more. In reality, there is likely no actual race between the two sites and they are reportedly sharing any critical discoveries and lessons-learned. Nevertheless, humans are notoriously competitive and one can only begin to imagine the (hopefully friendly) rivalry forming between the geographically distinct teams.
At the same time, SpaceX’s Florida team has several home-field advantages, so to speak, owing to their proximity to the several hundred SpaceXers working at the company’s Florida launch facilities and recovery fleet. Additionally, Florida’s Starship facility is just a few dozen miles away from SpaceX’s Kennedy Space Center Pad 39A, the most likely site of Starship’s (and Super Heavy’s) first suborbital and orbital launch attempts.
At the end of the day, a little friendly internal competition and – more so – a literal Starship A/B test are bound to be a huge benefit for SpaceX’s next-gen launch vehicle program, significantly increasing the speed at which the company can make mistakes, solve problems, and get Starship ready for orbit.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
