Over the last few weeks, SpaceX’s Florida Starship launch pad construction has made some major progress and the structure that will one day support the first East Coast Starship and Super Heavy flight tests have grown several stories tall and show no signs of slowing down.
In a bid to make what could otherwise be an extremely expensive and time-consuming ordeal much faster and cheaper, SpaceX’s Starship/Super Heavy launch pads will be quite a bit different from the company’s several existing launch pads. This includes Kennedy Space Center’s LC-39A pad, leased and operated by SpaceX for Falcon Heavy and Crew Dragon missions and formerly used for dozens of Space Shuttle launches and all Saturn V Apollo Moon missions.
In a very on-brand move, SpaceX has decided to build Starship’s East Coast orbital pad within the bounds of Pad 39A but without using the pad’s existing launch mount or concrete flame trench. Instead, SpaceX is building a separate steel mount and water-cooled thruster diverter designed to stand up to the fury of a Super Heavy booster without allowing the rocket’s plume to dig a crater in the ground after ever ignition.
While choosing to pursue a dramatically different launch pad design for Starship may at first glance seem risky, SpaceX actually has more than a decade of experience building and operating similar mount and flame diverter setups at its McGregor, Texas rocket development and test facilities. A step further, NASA itself once heavily relied on similar technologies and strategies to rapidly build, test, and fly rockets larger than anything that came before them.
Most notably, the Saturn I rocket that preceded the massive Saturn V used a launch mount and flame diverter that looks quite similar to a conceptual setup SpaceX recently showed off in an updated Starship launch render.
SpaceX’s Starship mount is substantially taller, has gone with steel instead of reinforced concrete, and will have a fixed flame deflector, but the similarities are otherwise significant. Conceptually, both mounts are topped with a flat surface with numerous support arms and a large cutout for the rocket to sit atop and its exhaust to exit through. Similar to Falcon 9, the single-core Super Heavy booster mount shown in SpaceX renders will likely have four hold-down clamps and two tail service masts (TSMs), umbilical connections that supply the rocket with propellant, electricity, connectivity, and any other required fluids.
As described and pictured above, Starship’s Pad 39A launch mount has rapidly grown from a few metal beams into a major structure in just the last few weeks. By rough estimate, the existing mount is already 20 or so meters (70+ ft) tall and has large mounts for the installation of additional structures on top of it, while the conceptual mount shown in SpaceX renders appears to be about 25-30 m (80-100 ft) tall.
In the last few days, technicians have begun installing the first framework of the flame diverter SpaceX will use to prevent Starship from damaging itself or its surroundings during static fires and launches. Given the fact that Starship’s Super Heavy booster – as currently described – will be the single most powerful launch vehicle in history, such a vast amount of energy is not easy to dissipate. To accomplish that task, SpaceX revealed in August 2019 planning documents that the 39A diverter would be water-cooled.
The largest thrust diverter SpaceX has built supports the company’s McGregor, Texas booster test stand and has supported dozens upon dozens of integrated static fire tests. Originally designed to enable integrated triple-booster Falcon Heavy testing, SpaceX ultimately decided not to use that capability but the diverter is still immense, likely measuring at least 15m (50 ft) tall and 10m (33 ft) wide. By building dozens of pipes into the surface and structure of the diverter and filling those pipes with recirculating water, it can survive several minutes of hot rocket exhaust without suffering catastrophic erosion or outright melting.
It’s safe to say that Super Heavy will require a diverter that is far larger still to survive thrust equivalent to more than three Falcon Heavy rockets, but that very diverter and launch mount are already well on their way to completion at SpaceX’s Kennedy Space Center launch pad.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
News
Tesla Cybertruck explosion probe ends with federal involvement and new questions
The 78-page document detailed a planned attack by former Green Beret Matthew Livelsberger, who died by suicide before the blast that injured six people.
The Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (LVMPD) has released its final investigative report into the New Year’s Day Cybertruck explosion outside the Trump International Hotel. But instead of bringing clarity, the findings have only raised more questions.
The 78-page document detailed a planned attack by former Green Beret Matthew Livelsberger, who died by suicide before the blast that injured six people.
The perpetrator’s manifesto
According to a Fox News report, Livelsberger rented the all-electric pickup through Turo while on leave from his Special Forces unit. He filled the rented Cybertruck with fireworks, gas cans, and camping fuel before driving it to the hotel shortly after 8:40 a.m. on January 1. Surveillance footage showed him pouring accelerant into the truck bed moments before detonation, confirming premeditation.
Livelsberger left a manifesto on his phone, which was later deemed classified by the Department of War. This case was then handed over to federal authorities. Still, the LVMPD and federal investigators noted in their report that the incident was a “vehicle-borne improvised explosive device” (VBIED) attack “with the potential to cause mass casualties and extensive structural damage.” Officials, however, stopped short of labeling it terrorism.
In digital notes, Livelsberger wrote that his act was not terror-related but intended as “a wake-up call,” criticizing what he called America’s “feckless leadership.” He wrote, “Americans only pay attention to spectacles and violence. What better way to get my point across than a stunt with fireworks and explosives.”
The incident ironically showcased the Cybertruck’s durability
Tesla CEO Elon Musk was among the first to respond publicly after the blast, confirming through X that the company’s senior team was investigating the incident. He later stated that vehicle telemetry showed no malfunction and that the explosion was caused by “very large fireworks and/or a bomb” placed in the Cybertruck’s bed.
Ironically, footage of the incident in the Cybertruck’s bed showed that the vehicle’s durable construction actually helped contain the explosion by directing the blast upwards. The bed remained largely intact after the explosion as well. Even more surprisingly, the Cybertruck’s battery did not catch fire despite the blast.
Months later, the same Cybertruck appeared on the online auction platform IAA, marked as “not ready for sale.” The listing has stirred debate among Tesla fans about why the historic vehicle wasn’t reclaimed by the company. The vehicle, after all, could serve as a symbol of the Cybertruck’s resilience, even in extreme circumstances.
Elon Musk
Norway’s $2 trillion sovereign wealth fund votes against Elon Musk’s 2025 performance award
The fund is managed by Norges Bank Investment Management (NBIM), and it holds a 1.14% stake in Tesla valued at about $11.6 billion.
Norway’s $2 trillion sovereign wealth fund has voted against Elon Musk’s 2025 performance award, which will be ultimately decided at Tesla’s upcoming annual shareholder meeting.
The fund is managed by Norges Bank Investment Management (NBIM), and it holds a 1.14% stake in Tesla valued at about $11.6 billion.
NBIM’s opposition
NBIM confirmed it had already cast its vote against Musk’s pay package, citing concerns over its total size, dilution, and lack of mitigation of key person risk, as noted in a CNBC report. The fund acknowledged Musk’s leadership of the EV maker, and it stated that it will continue to seek dialogue with Tesla about its concerns.
“While we appreciate the significant value created under Mr. Musk’s visionary role, we are concerned about the total size of the award, dilution, and lack of mitigation of key person risk- consistent with our views on executive compensation. We will continue to seek constructive dialogue with Tesla on this and other topics,” NBIM noted.
The upcoming Tesla annual shareholder meeting will decide whether Musk should receive his proposed 2025 performance award, which would grant him large stock options over the next decade if Tesla hits several ambitious milestones, such as a market cap of $8.5 trillion. The 2025 performance award will also increase Musk’s stake in Tesla to 25%.
Elon Musk and NBIM
Elon Musk’s proposed 2025 CEO performance award has proven polarizing, with large investors split on whether the executive should be given a pay package that, if fully completed, would make him a trillionaire.
Institutional Shareholder Services and Glass Lewis have recommended that shareholders vote against the deal, and initiatives such as the “Take Back Tesla” campaign have rallied investors to oppose the proposed performance award. On the other hand, other large investors such as ARK Invest and the State Board of Administration of Florida (SBA) have urged shareholders to approve the compensation plan.
Interestingly enough, this is not the first time that Musk and NBIM have found themselves on opposing sides. Last year, NBIM voted against reinstating Musk’s 2018 performance award, which had already been fully accomplished but was rescinded by a Delaware judge.
Later reports shared text messages between Musk and NBIM Chief Executive Nicolai Tangen, who was inviting the CEO to a dinner in Oslo. Musk declined the invitation, writing, “When I ask you for a favor, which I very rarely do, and you decline, then you should not ask me for one until you’ve done something to make amends. Friends are as friends do.”
Elon Musk
Tesla begins production of new Model Y trim at Giga Berlin
Tesla announced on Monday that its Model Y Standard configuration was officially being built at Giga Berlin, less than one month after the company officially announced the configuration early last month.
Tesla has begun production of the new Model Y trim at Gigafactory Berlin, the company’s production plant in Germany.
Tesla announced on Monday that its Model Y Standard configuration was officially being built at Giga Berlin, less than one month after the company officially announced the configuration early last month.
On October 7, Tesla announced the launch of the Model 3 and Model Y Standard trim levels, its answer to the call for affordable EVs within its lineup and its response to the loss of the $7,500 electric vehicle tax credit.
On October 3, Tesla started production of the vehicles in Germany:
Model Y Standard says „Hello World“ – Production at Giga Berlin has started today! pic.twitter.com/p37JIfJDIB
— Tesla Manufacturing (@gigafactories) November 3, 2025
The Standard iteration of the Model Y is void of many of the more premium features that are available in the Rear-Wheel-Drive, All-Wheel-Drive, and Performance trims of the vehicle are equipped with.
A few of the features of the Model Y Standard are:
- Single Motor configuration
- No rear touchscreen
- Textile seats with vegan leather, instead of all vegan leather
- 320-mile range
- No glass roof
The launch of the Model Y Standard was truly a move to help Tesla get vehicles into the sub-$40,000 price point, and although many consumers were hoping to see the company get closer to $30,000 with these cars, this is a great starting point.
Deliveries in the United States have already started, and it seems it will be a vehicle that will do one of two things: either push some consumers to finally make the jump to Tesla, or it will give car buyers another reason to buy the Premium trims, as they may feel the lack of features is not a good enough deal.
This is something we saw with the Cybertruck’s Rear-Wheel-Drive configuration, which launched last year and ended up being more of the latter option listed above.
The Tesla Model Y Standard is actually a great deal in Europe
It was only a $10,000 discount from the All-Wheel-Drive Cybertruck, but it also did not have adaptive air suspension, premium interiors, or the powered tonneau cover, which many people felt was too much of a sacrifice.
The Rear-Wheel-Drive Cybertruck was discontinued only a few months later.
It does not seem as if this is the case with the Model Y Standard, which already seems to be an attractive option to some buyers.
Tesla Cybertruck explosion probe ends with federal involvement and new questions
Norway’s $2 trillion sovereign wealth fund votes against Elon Musk’s 2025 performance award
Tesla begins production of new Model Y trim at Giga Berlin
-
News2 weeks agoTesla rolled out a new feature with FSD v14 to fix a major complaint
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoElon Musk hits back at former Tesla employee who disagrees with pay package
-
News2 weeks agoTesla just made Service even easier and more convenient
-
News2 weeks agoTesla Full Self-Driving’s new version officially gets a wider rollout
-
News2 weeks agoTesla makes crazy move to spur short-term demand in the U.S.
-
News2 weeks agoTesla rivals are lagging behind alarmingly in this crucial EV necessity
-
News2 weeks agoTesla Sweden faced with fresh strike from elevator company
-
News2 weeks agoKia and Tesla top list in Swedish study of strongest EV batteries