SpaceX has confirmed that the two large propellant tanks now present at its Boca Chica, Texas facilities will likely to be the last major ground tanks needed to enable the first test flights of the upper stage of its next-gen BFR rocket, known as the Big Falcon Spaceship (BFS).
Expected to begin as soon as late 2019, SpaceX executives have recently reiterated plans for a campaign of hop tests for the first full-scale spaceship prototype, in which the ship will follow in the footsteps of its Falcon 9-based Grasshopper and F9R predecessors.
https://twitter.com/krgv_mike/status/1055748966619537408
In a comment provided to a number of local outlets, SpaceX Communications Specialist Sean Pitt stated this about the recent arrival of a second large propellant storage tank at the company’s prospective South Texas test and launch facilities.
“The ongoing construction of our launch pad in South Texas is proceeding well. SpaceX has now received the final major ground system tank needed to support initial test flights of the Big Falcon Spaceship.” – Sean Pitt, SpaceX
While there may have been some slight uncertainty before, this official statement confirms beyond the shadow of a doubt that SpaceX is actively and rapidly preparing its South Texas property for a future of BFR-related tests, spaceship hops, and perhaps even launches.
Same dance, different hops
Unlike Falcon 9’s Grasshopper and F9R reusability development programs, SpaceX’s BFS hop test campaign is likely going to be much more aggressive in order to gather real flight-test data on new technologies ranging from unfamiliar aerodynamic control surfaces (wings & fins vs. grid fins), all-composite propellant tanks (Falcon uses aluminum-lithium), a 9m-diameter vehicle versus Falcon’s 3.7m, a massive tiled heat-shield likely to require new forms of thermal protection, and entirely new regimes of flight (falling like a skydiver rather than Falcon 9’s javelin-style attitude) – to name just a handful.
To fully prove out or at least demonstrate those new technologies, BFS hop testing is likely to be better described as “flight testing”, whereby the spaceship launches vertically but focused primarily on regimes where horizontal velocity is far more important than vertical velocity.
“But by ‘hopper test,’ I mean it’ll go up several miles and then come down. The ship will – the ship is capable of a single stage to orbit if you fully load the tanks. So we’ll do flights of increasing complexity. We really want to test the heat shield material. So I think we’ll fly out, turn around, accelerate back real hard and come in hot to test the heat shield because we want to have a highly reusable heat shield that’s capable of absorbing the heat from interplanetary entry velocities, which is really tricky.” – CEO Elon Musk, October 2017
Focusing on the important things (for fully-reusable rockets)
SpaceX does has significant familiarity with the general style of testing expected to be used to prove out its next-gen spaceship, a major department from anything the company has yet built or flown. Updated in September 2018 by CEO Elon Musk, the craft’s most recent design iteration is reportedly quite close to being finalized. That near-final design prominently features a trio of new aft fins (two able to actuate as control surfaces), two forward canards, and an updated layout of seven Raptor engines.
Critically, SpaceX has decided to commonize BFR’s main propulsion, choosing to skip the performance benefits of a vacuum-optimized Raptor variant for the simplicity and expediency of exclusively using sea level Raptors on both the booster and spaceship. This decision is ultimately strategic and well-placed: rather than concerning early-stage development with the inclusion of a second major branch of onboard propulsion, the company’s engineers and technicians can place their focus almost entirely on a one-size-fits-all version of BFR with plenty of room for upgrades down the road.
-
- BFS seen standing vertically on the pads of its tripod fins. (SpaceX)
-
- (SpaceX)
-
- A better view. (SpaceX)
-
- BFR’s booster and spaceship separate a few minutes after launch. (SpaceX)
With a rocket as large as BFR and a sea level engine already as efficient as Raptor, the performance downgrade wrought by the initial removal of Raptor Vacuum (RVac) is scarcely more than a theoretical diversion. The specific performance numbers remain to be seen but will likely be greater than 100 metric tons (~220,000 lbs) to low Earth orbit (LEO). Past a certain point, however, the actual performance to LEO and beyond is almost irrelevant, at least from a perspective of individual launches. The paradigm SpaceX is clearly already interrogating is one where the cost of individual launches is so low relative to today’s expendable launch pricing ($5,000-20,000/kg to LEO) that it will almost be anachronistic to design or work with a single-launch-limit in mind, a limit that is just shy of a natural law in the spaceflight industries of today.
Because SpaceX has already demonstrated expertise in vertically launching, landing, and generally controlling large rockets, the main challenges faced with BFR are more operational than purely technical. To be clear, the technical challenges are still immense, but successfully solving those challenges by no means guarantees that the aircraft-like operational efficiency needed for BFR to succeed can or will be fully realized.
-
- A gif of Raptor throttling over the course of a 90+ second static-fire test in McGregor, Texas. (SpaceX)
-
- SpaceX’s subscale Raptor engine has completed more than 1200 seconds of testing in less than two years. (SpaceX)
-
- A closeup of BFS’ nose section, featuring impressively varied tile-sizes, joining methods, and extremely precise curves on the interface between canard wings and the hull. (SpaceX)
In 2016, Musk pegged SpaceX’s cost goals for a BFR-style fully-reusable rocket at less than $1M per launch for booster and spaceship maintenance alone, or $3.3M per launch with amortization (paying for the debt/investment incurred to fund BFR’s development) and propellant estimates included. To realize those ambitious costs, SpaceX will effectively have to beat the expendable but similarly-sized Saturn V’s per-launch costs (~$700M) by a factor of 100 to 200 – more than two orders of magnitude – and SpaceX’s own Falcon 9 and Heavy launch costs (~$55M to $130M) by 20-50X.
To even approach those targets, SpaceX will need to learn how to launch Falcon and BFR near-autonomously with near-total and refurbishment-free reusability, while also developing and demonstrating orbital refueling capabilities that do not currently exist and rapidly maturing large-scale composite tankage and structures. None of those things require Raptor Vacuum.
For prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket recovery fleet check out our brand new LaunchPad and LandingZone newsletters!
Tesla has taken a huge step forward with its Cybercab project, as the vehicle has been spotted on the Fremont Test Track for the first time.
Typically, when cars are spotted on the Fremont Test Track, it means Tesla has begun advancing the development of that specific project. With Cybercab production slated for 2026, it seems Tesla is ready to get things moving.
The Cybercab was unveiled one year ago tomorrow, at the “We, Robot” event in Los Angeles.
Tesla Robotaxi Cybercab: Seats, price, special features, release date, and more
Tesla has been hoping to get Cybercab production started in early 2026. With a few months until then, the program has taken some leaps, including the recent start of crash testing of the vehicle at the Fremont Factory in Northern California.
Some of these units have made their way to Gigafactory Texas at Tesla’s crash testing facility:
The 1st @Tesla Cybercab at the Giga Texas crash testing facility. Hard to say for sure, but this may indicate the vehicle has completed most of the final engineering & production tests out at Fremont and what remains is now at Giga Texas.
If this follows how the @Cybertruck… pic.twitter.com/RHB2IjkL1L
— Joe Tegtmeyer 🚀 🤠🛸😎 (@JoeTegtmeyer) October 9, 2025
Now, it has taken another step as Tesla has officially started testing the vehicle at the Fremont Test Track:
Tesla spotted for the first time testing the Cybercab at their Fremont factory in California.
Full video: https://t.co/mXGIJXYCqY pic.twitter.com/oveOsXqiyg
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) October 9, 2025
Here’s when vehicles in Tesla’s lineup were first spotted on the Fremont Test Track and then launched:
|
Vehicle
|
First Spotted on Fremont Test Track
|
Launch Date (Production Start/First Deliveries)
|
|---|---|---|
|
Model Y
|
December 12, 2019
|
January 2020
|
|
Tesla Semi
|
March 8, 2021
|
December 1, 2022 (Limited to pilot program participants)
|
|
Cybertruck
|
December 10, 2021
|
November 2023
|
|
Cybercab
|
October 9, 2025
|
Early 2026
|
Timeframes for when Tesla vehicles hit the Fremont Test Track and when their production and deliveries begin certainly vary.
However, the Cybercab being spotted marks a significant step forward for Tesla, as it indicates the company is nearing a major milestone in production, whether for deliveries or on-road testing.
It does seem as if Tesla could employ the Cybercab for its Robotaxi program in Austin, Texas, and Northern California.
With more markets expected to launch Robotaxi rides soon, it could be a formidable challenge for the new vehicle, especially if Tesla can initiate rides without a Safety Monitor.
Chevy answered Tesla’s new Standard Model 3 and Model Y offerings with its second-generation Bolt EV, a car that actually appeals to those who were looking for affordability.
Earlier this week, Tesla unveiled the Model 3 and Model Y Standard, two stripped-down versions of the cars of the same name it already offers. The Long Range versions are now labeled as “Premium,” while the Performance configurations stand alone.
Tesla launches two new affordable models with ‘Standard’ Model 3, Y offerings
However, many people were sort of upset with what Tesla came to market with. For well over a year, it has been transparent that it was planning to develop affordable models, and this year, it was forced to take action to counter the loss of the $7,500 EV tax credit.
The Model 3 Standard starts at $36,990, while the Model Y Standard comes in at $39,990. While these are cheaper than the company’s Premium offerings, many fans said that Tesla missed the mark with the pricing, as these numbers are not necessarily “affordable.”
At the very least, they will likely miss the mark in helping Tesla regain annual growth rates for its deliveries. Tesla will likely rely on its “unboxed process,” which will be used to manufacture the Cybercab and potentially other affordable models in the future. These will be priced at below $30,000.
Other carmakers are making their moves and were able to undercut Tesla’s new Standard offerings, Chevrolet being one of them.
This week, the company launched its second-gen Bolt EV, which starts at just $28,995.
Here are the full specs:
- 65 kWh LFP battery
- 255 miles of range (EPA estimated)
- Native NACS port for Tesla Supercharger accessibility without an adapter
- Up to 150 kW charging speed
- Bidirectional power of 9.6 kW
- Front-Wheel-Drive
- 10-80% charging in just 26 minutes
- No Apple CarPlay or Android Auto
- SuperCruise capable
- 11.3″ touchscreen, 11″ digital gauge cluster
- 16 cubic feet of cargo capacity
- Other Trims
- RS – $32,000
- Base LT – $28,995
- Deliveries begin in early 2026
Let’s be frank: Tesla fans are unlikely to bat an eye at other OEM offerings. However, first-time EV buyers might be looking for something more price accessible, so vehicles under $30,000 are where they will look first, at least for most people.
If money isn’t an option, people will consider spending a minimum of $37,000 on a new vehicle, especially an EV, as a first-time owner.
The Bolt EV could be something that does well, especially considering its one of only a handful of EVs that are priced at around $30,000 brand new in the U.S.
The others are:
- Nissan Leaf S ($28,140)
- Mini Cooper SE ($30,900)
- Fiat 500e ($32,500)
While these cars are priced at around $30,000 and are affordable, they each offer minimal range ratings. The Nissan Leaf S and Fiat 500e have just 149 miles, while the Mini Cooper SE has 114 miles.
Tesla’s flagship sedan, the Model S, has officially been named one of TIME Magazine’s Best Inventions of the 2000s. It joins its sibling, the Model 3, which made the list in 2017.
The Model S is among the most crucial developments in the automotive industry in the last century.
Just as the Ford Model T made its mark on passenger transportation, becoming the first combustion engine vehicle to be successfully developed and marketed at a time when horse and buggy were the preferred mode of transportation, the Model S revolutionized things a step further.
Although it was not the first EV to be developed, the Tesla Model S was the EV that put EVs on the map. In 2012, TIME recognized the Model S as a piece of technology that could truly transform the car industry.
The publication wrote:
“This electric four-door sedan has the lines of a Jaguar, the ability to zip for 265 miles (426 km) on one charge—that’s the equivalent of 89 m.p.g. (2.6 L/100 km)—and touchscreen controls for everything from GPS navigation to adjusting the suspension.”
Looking back, TIME was right on. The Tesla Model S was truly a marvel for its time, and it, along with the OG 2008 Roadster, can be seen as the first two EVs to push electrification to the mainstream.
As TIME described this year, the Model S “proved to be a game-changing experience for electric vehicles,” and it ended up truly catalyzing things for not only the industry, but Tesla as well.
The Model S acted as a fundraiser of sorts for future vehicles, just as the Model X did. They paved the way for the Model 3 and Model Y to be developed and offered by Tesla at a price point that was more acceptable and accessible to the masses.
The Current State of the Tesla Model S
The Model S contributes to a very small percentage of Tesla sales. The company groups the Model S with the Model X and Cybertruck in its quarterly releases.
Last year, that grouping sold 85,133 total units, a small percentage of the 1.789 million cars it delivered to customers in 2024.
Things looked to be changing for the Model S and the Model X this year, as Tesla teased some improvements to the two cars with a refresh. However, it was very underwhelming and only included very minor changes.
Lucid CEO shades Tesla Model S: “Nothing has changed in 12 years now”
It appeared as if Tesla was planning to sunset the two cars, and while it has not taken that stance yet, it seems more likely that the company will begin taking any potential options to heart.
CEO Elon Musk said a few years ago that the two cars were only produced due to “sentimental reasons.”
Tesla takes huge step with Cybercab in new spotting
Chevy answers Tesla’s new ‘Standard’ offerings with an actually affordable EV
Tesla Model S makes TIME’s list of Best Inventions
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoTesla FSD V14 set for early wide release next week: Elon Musk
-
News2 weeks agoElon Musk gives update on Tesla Optimus progress
-
News2 weeks agoTesla has a new first with its Supercharger network
-
Investor's Corner2 weeks agoTesla gets new Street-high price target with high hopes for autonomy domination
-
Lifestyle2 weeks ago500-mile test proves why Tesla Model Y still humiliates rivals in Europe
-
News2 weeks agoTesla Giga Berlin’s water consumption has achieved the unthinkable
-
Lifestyle2 weeks agoTesla Model S Plaid battles China’s 1500 hp monster Nurburgring monster, with surprising results
-
News2 weeks agoTesla Model Y makes dramatic comeback in Sweden with 492% rise in registrations