News
SpaceX installs new Starship on static fire test stand
SpaceX may be focused on preparing Starship S24 and Super Heavy Booster 7 for their potentially imminent orbital launch debut, but the rest of the company’s Starship factory isn’t just sitting around.
The laser focus on carefully testing Ship 24 and Booster 7 may have limited the effectiveness of Starbase rocket production, but the factory has continued to produce new ships and boosters. SpaceX has even conducted some limiting testing of a pair of prototypes meant to follow in the footsteps of S24 and B7. In mid-January, that process entered a new and more active phase as SpaceX transported Starship S25 from the factory to the launch pad.
The trip is not Ship 25’s first. Starship S25 first headed to SpaceX’s South Texas launch and test facilities on October 19th, 2022, shortly after the vehicle was fully assembled. Around three weeks of testing followed, and now Ship 25 is back for more.
The update that's rolling out to the fleet makes full use of the front and rear steering travel to minimize turning circle. In this case a reduction of 1.6 feet just over the air— Wes (@wmorrill3) April 16, 2024
Ship 25
The first round of tests was thorough and put Ship 25 through a pneumatic proof test, multiple cryogenic proof tests, and likely a few simulated thrust tests using six hydraulic rams.
“Ship 25 was removed from SpaceX’s other Starship test stand on November 8th, it was rolled back to Starbase’s Starship factory. Ship 25 first rolled to the launch site on October 19th and has since completed four visible tests. On October 28th, Ship 25 survived a pneumatic proof test that showed that its tanks were leak-free and capable of surviving flight pressures (roughly 6-8.5 bar or 90-125 psi). Three cryogenic proof tests followed on November 1st, 2nd, and 7th. The first cryoproof was likely just that – a test that pressurized Ship 25’s tanks and filled them with cryogenic liquid nitrogen (LN2) or a combination of liquid oxygen and LN2.
The next two tests likely took advantage of the customized test stand, which has been semi-permanently outfitted with a set of hydraulic rams that allow SpaceX to simulate the thrust of six Raptor engines while Starship’s structures are chilled to cryogenic temperatures and loaded with roughly 1000 tons (~2.2M lb) of cryogenic fluids. If a Starship can survive those stresses on the ground, the assumption is that it will likely survive similar stresses in flight.”
Teslarati.com – October 20th, 2022
As usual, SpaceX didn’t comment on the development or indicate how that initial proof testing had gone, but Ship 25’s January 14th, 2023 return to the launch site all but guaranteed that that testing had gone more or less according to plan. On January 17th, SpaceX lifted Ship 25 onto Starbase’s only Starship static fire test stand, further confirming that Ship 25 proof testing went to plan.
Soon after its November 2022 return to Starbase’s build site, six Raptor engines were moved into the High Bay and installed on Ship 25. The Starship’s aft was then likely buttoned up with a heat shield before it headed to the test site to begin its static fire test campaign. That campaign could tell us a lot about the status of Starship prototypes. To date, only two Ships have completed full six-Raptor static fire tests, and both took days, weeks, or months to build up to those six-engine milestones with multiple smaller tests. If Ship 25 were to skip those preliminary tests and immediately conduct a six-engine static fire, it would be a sign that SpaceX is significantly more confident in the current Starship design.
Booster 9
Ship 25 is believed to be paired with Super Heavy Booster 9, which recently finished its own round of proof tests. About two months behind Ship 25, Booster 9 rolled out of its Starbase assembly bay and headed to the launch site on December 15th, 2022. The Super Heavy prototype ultimately completed two partial cryogenic proof tests on December 21st and 29th, during which it was likely loaded with around a thousand tons of liquid nitrogen to simulate explosive liquid oxygen and methane propellant. Booster 9 then returned to Starbase’s factory on January 10th, 2023.
Assuming those tests went well, Raptor engine installation could begin at any moment. However, thanks to significant design changes and upgrades present on Booster 9, outfitting and testing this Super Heavy could take longer than usual. Many smaller changes are present, but the most significant by far is the addition of an upgraded version of Raptor. The engine’s combustion-related hardware is likely the same as the Raptor V2 engines present on Booster 7, Ship 24, and Ship 25. But the hardware used to steer each engine – called thrust vector control (TVC) – has been completely changed.
Instead of using a complex web of plumbing and hydraulic power units bolted to the side of Super Heavy, Booster 9’s 13 central Raptors will be electrically steered. That has allowed SpaceX to remove those power units (streamlining Booster 9’s exterior) and reduce the already rats nest of plumbing required to fuel, control, power, and steer dozens of high-performance rocket engines on one booster. SpaceX has been testing electric Raptor TVC for months at its McGregor, Texas development facilities, but it’s unclear if the new technology has progressed to the point that 13 upgraded engines are ready to be installed on Booster 9. In the meantime, SpaceX may install Booster 9’s fixed outer ring of 20 Raptor V2 engines – none of which gimbal or need new electric TVC hardware.
Once all 33 engines are installed, it’s likely that Booster 9 will be thoroughly tested to ensure that all 13 electrically-steered engines work well together before, during, and after numerous static fire tests. SpaceX will also need to verify that the batteries likely powering those new systems function as expected. During the peak stresses they will likely experience, the electric TVC could need to rapidly redirect more than 3000 tons (~6.6 million lbf) of thrust multiple times per second. The peak power required from Super Heavy’s batteries will likely be immense as a result.
For now, the start of Super Heavy B9’s own static fire test campaign could be months away and will have to wait until Starbase’s only orbital launch mount – currently occupied by Booster 7, Ship 24, and Starship’s first orbital launch campaign – is vacated. With that orbital launch debut unlikely to happen before March 2023, Booster 9 has plenty of time to relax inside Starbase’s Wide Bay while Ship 25 begins static fire testing at a separate stand.
Tesla executive Sendil Palani confirmed in a post on social media platform X that Full Self-Driving, despite being the most robust driver assistance program in the United States, still isn’t garnering any interest from lagging competitors.
Tesla has said on several occasions in the past that it has had discussions with a competing carmaker to license its Full Self-Driving suite. While it never confirmed which company it was, many pointed toward Ford as the one Tesla was holding dialogue with.
At the time, Ford CEO Jim Farley and Tesla CEO Elon Musk had a very cordial relationship.
Despite Tesla’s confirmation, which occurred during both the Q2 2023 and Q1 2024 Earnings Calls, no deal was ever reached. Whichever “major OEM” Tesla had talked to did not see the benefit. Even now, Tesla has not found that dance partner, despite leading every company in the U.S. in self-driving efforts by a considerable margin.
Elon Musk says Tesla Robotaxi launch will force companies to license Full Self-Driving
Palani seemed to confirm that Tesla still has not found any company that is remotely interested in licensing FSD, as he said on X that “despite our best efforts to share the technology,” the company has found that it “has not been proven to be easy.”
Licensing FSD has not proven to be easy, despite our best efforts to share the technology. https://t.co/VGYBU7Aduw
— Sendil Palani (@sendilpalani) February 3, 2026
The question came just after one Tesla fan on X asked whether Tesla would continue manufacturing vehicles.
Because Tesla continues to expand its lineup of Model Y, it has plans to build the Cybercab, and there is still an immediate need for passenger vehicles, there is no question that the company plans to continue scaling its production.
However, Palani’s response is interesting, especially considering that it was in response to the question of whether Tesla would keep building cars.
Perhaps if Tesla could license Full Self-Driving to enough companies for the right price, it could simply sell the suite to car companies that are building vehicles, eliminating the need for Tesla to build its own.
While it seems like a reach because of Tesla’s considerable fan base, which is one of the most loyal in the automotive industry, the company could eventually bail on manufacturing and gain an incredible valuation by simply unlocking self-driving for other manufacturers.
The big question regarding why Tesla can’t find another company to license FSD is simply, “Why?”
Do they think they can solve it themselves? Do they not find FSD as valuable or effective? Many of these same companies didn’t bat an eye when Tesla started developing EVs, only to find themselves years behind. This could be a continuing trend.
Tesla executive Lars Moravy appeared today in front of the U.S. Senate Commerce Committee to highlight the importance of modernizing autonomy standards by establishing a federal framework that would reward innovation and keep the country on pace with foreign rivals.
Moravy, who is Tesla’s Vice President of Vehicle Engineering, strongly advocated for Congress to enact a national framework for autonomous vehicle development and deployment, replacing the current patchwork of state-by-state rules.
These rules have slowed progress and kept companies fighting tooth-and-nail with local legislators to operate self-driving projects in controlled areas.
Tesla already has a complete Robotaxi model, and it doesn’t depend on passenger count
Moravy said the new federal framework was essential for the U.S. to “maintain its position in global technological development and grow its advanced manufacturing capabilities.
He also said in a warning to the committee that outdated regulations and approval processes would “inhibit the industry’s ability to innovate,” which could potentially lead to falling behind China.
Being part of the company leading the charge in terms of autonomous vehicle development in the U.S., Moravy highlighted Tesla’s prowess through the development of the Full Self-Driving platform. Tesla vehicles with FSD engaged average 5.1 million miles before a major collision, which outpaces that of the human driver average of roughly 699,000 miles.
Moravy also highlighted the widely cited NHTSA statistic that states that roughly 94 percent of crashes stem from human error, positioning autonomous vehicles as a path to dramatically reduce fatalities and injuries.
🚨 Tesla VP of Vehicle Engineering, Lars Moravy, appeared today before the U.S. Senate Commerce Committee to discuss the importance of outlining an efficient framework for autonomous vehicles:
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) February 4, 2026
Skeptics sometimes point to cybersecurity concerns within self-driving vehicles, which was something that was highlighted during the Senate Commerce Committee hearing, but Moravy said, “No one has ever been able to take over control of our vehicles.”
This level of security is thanks to a core-embedded central layer, which is inaccessible from external connections. Additionally, Tesla utilizes a dual cryptographic signature from two separate individuals, keeping security high.
Moravy also dove into Tesla’s commitment to inclusive mobility by stating, “We are committed with our future products and Robotaxis to provide accessible transportation to everyone.” This has been a major point of optimism for AVs because it could help the disabled, physically incapable, the elderly, and the blind have consistent transportation.
Overall, Moravy’s testimony blended urgency about geopolitical competition, especially China, with concrete safety statistics and a vision of the advantages autonomy could bring for everyone, not only in the U.S., but around the world, as well.
Tesla launched a new configuration of the Model Y this week, bringing more complexity to its lineup of the vehicle and adding a new, lower entry point for those who require an All-Wheel-Drive car.
However, the broadening of the Model Y lineup in the United States could signal a somewhat uncomfortable reality for Tesla fans and car buyers, who have been vocal about their desire for a larger, full-size SUV.
Tesla has essentially moved in the opposite direction through its closure of the Model X and its continuing expansion of a vehicle that fits the bill for many, but not all.
Tesla brings closure to Model Y moniker with launch of new trim level
While CEO Elon Musk has said that there is the potential for the Model Y L, a longer wheelbase configuration of the vehicle, to enter the U.S. market late this year, it is not a guarantee.
Instead, Tesla has prioritized the need to develop vehicles and trim levels that cater to the future rollout of the Robotaxi ride-hailing service and a fully autonomous future.
But the company could be missing out on a massive opportunity, as SUVs are a widely popular body style in the U.S., especially for families, as the tighter confines of compact SUVs do not support the needs of a large family.
Although there are other companies out there that manufacture this body style, many are interested in sticking with Tesla because of the excellent self-driving platform, expansive charging infrastructure, and software performance the vehicles offer.
Additionally, the lack of variety from an aesthetic and feature standpoint has caused a bit of monotony throughout the Model Y lineup. Although Premium options are available, those three configurations only differ in terms of range and performance, at least for the most part, and the differences are not substantial.
Minor Expansions of the Model Y Fail to Address Family Needs for Space
Offering similar trim levels with slight differences to cater to each consumer’s needs is important. However, these vehicles keep a constant: cargo space and seating capacity.
Larger families need something that would compete with vehicles like the Chevrolet Tahoe, Ford Expedition, or Cadillac Escalade, and while the Model X was its largest offering, that is going away.
Tesla could fix this issue partially with the rollout of the Model Y L in the U.S., but only if it plans to continue offering various Model Y vehicles and expanding on its offerings with that car specifically. There have been hints toward a Cyber-inspired SUV in the past, but those hints do not seem to be a drastic focus of the company, given its autonomy mission.
Model Y Expansion Doesn’t Boost Performance, Value, or Space
You can throw all the different badges, powertrains, and range ratings on the same vehicle, it does not mean it’s going to sell better. The Model Y was already the best-selling vehicle in the world on several occasions. Adding more configurations seems to be milking it.
The true need of people, especially now that the Model X is going away, is going to be space. What vehicle fits the bill of a growing family, or one that has already outgrown the Model Y?
Not Expanding the Lineup with a New Vehicle Could Be a Missed Opportunity
The U.S. is the world’s largest market for three-row SUVs, yet Tesla’s focus on tweaking the existing Model Y ignores this. This could potentially result in the Osborne Effect, as sales of current models without capturing new customers who need more seating and versatility.
Expansions of the current Model Y offerings risk adding production complexity without addressing core demands, and given that the Model Y L is already being produced in China, it seems like it would be a reasonable decision to build a similar line in Texas.
Listening to consumers means introducing either the Model Y L here, or bringing a new, modern design to the lineup in the form of a full-size SUV.
Tesla confirms Full Self-Driving still isn’t garnering interest from lagging competitors
Tesla exec pleads for federal framework of autonomy to U.S. Senate Committee
