News
SpaceX’s Starhopper readies for more ambitious Raptor-powered flight tests
For the second time in two months, SpaceX technicians have begun to install a Raptor engine on Starhopper, a full-scale Starship testbed theoretically capable of low-velocity, moderate-altitude ‘hops’.
Back in late March, Raptor and Starhopper were joined for the first time, enabling a lengthy series of attempted tests that were followed by two engine ignitions and tethered hops before Raptor was removed for inspection. In the two months since that first round of integrated testing, SpaceX has significantly upgraded Starhopper and its spartan launch facilities, all focused on transforming the odd vehicle from a largely fixed test stand into a giant, mobile Grasshopper.
All the way back in 2012, SpaceX began testing Falcon 9 recovery and reusability concepts with a low-fidelity prototype known as Grasshopper – essentially a minimalist Falcon 9 first stage with ad hoc legs and a single Merlin engine. It supported a series of 8 major test flights – all successful and a source of valuable data – before the vehicle’s 2013 retirement. An upgraded Grasshopper – known instead as Falcon 9 Reusable Development Vehicle (F9R Dev1) – began testing around the same time and continued even higher altitude vertical takeoff/vertical landing (VTVL) tests until its untimely demise in August 2014.
Starhopper is quite similar, although it is also serving as a testbed for a far more varied range of technologies due to the fact that it has been developed before the inaugural launch of its namesake (Starship/Super Heavy). By the time SpaceX started Grasshopper/F9R tests, Falcon 9 had already completed several successful launches. With Starhopper, SpaceX is building and testing its first 9m-diameter ‘flight’ hardware, its first propellant tanks built out of steel, its first flight-capable rocket fueled by methane and oxygen, and its first mobile Raptor testbed, among numerous other things. The challenges are inherently much greater, but SpaceX has the luxury of taking the opposite approach it took towards Falcon 9 and building a launch vehicle entirely around its intended reusability, rather than trying to squeeze a method of reusability around an already-flying rocket.
Saurid Oddities
As noted by NASASpaceflight.com in a June 2nd article, SpaceX seems to be juggling its growing selection of newly-produced and tested Raptor engines in pursuit of Starhopper’s return to flight. According to the publication’s reliable sources,
“Up until recently, [SpaceX] was planning to utilize Raptor SN4 for [Starhopper’s first] untethered hops. However, the company has now decided to utilize this engine only for fit checks, and will instead perform the hops with SN5 – the latest Raptor to come out of SpaceX’s factory in Hawthorne, California.” – NASASpaceflight.com, June 2nd, 2019
This indicates that the Raptor engine delivered to Boca Chica on June 1st and currently in the process of being installed on Starhopper is actually more of a stand-in* for a future Raptor, SN05. The reasons behind this Raptor shuffle elude detection, but it’s possible that the simplest explanation – also posed by NASASpaceflight – is the correct one. By shipping a Raptor that may not be ready for flight tests, SpaceX could likely save anywhere from a few days up to a few weeks by doing everything short of lifting off under the powered of Raptor SN04.
*By all appearances, SN04 is a flight-grade Raptor that has completed assembly and likely been test-fired in McGregor, Texas. Why it may currently be resigned to a “stand-in” role is unknown.
It appears that the Raptor engine is not centered, could it be that they are going straight with the 3 engine test. (Idk honestly, I wonder why this is?) @elonmusk are things about to get epic?? pic.twitter.com/sne5v7SMhy— Austin Barnard? (@austinbarnard45) June 1, 2019
Very curiously, upon Raptor SN04’s South Texas arrival, it appears that SpaceX technicians have indeed rapidly installed the engine on Starhopper, but in a position that is decidedly off-center. Pictured above, the photo could have simply caught the engine while technicians were moving it to its actual installation spot, but it could also indicate that SpaceX is speeding towards Starhopper’s first triple-Raptor test flights.
Starhopper delays?
In line with the last-second switch from Raptor SN04 to Raptor SN05 as the engine-to-be for untethered hops, SpaceX has pushed the start of that test series from approximately May 31st to June 11th. More likely than not, the ~11-day delay is meant to allow time for Raptor SN05’s McGregor, Texas acceptance testing, given that – per CEO Elon Musk – the engine wasn’t even finished as of May 22nd.
On the other hand, with Raptor SN05 now scheduled to support Starhopper hop tests as early as mid-June, it begs the question of whether SpaceX is instead working towards expedited triple-Raptor testing. For unknown reasons, neither Raptor SN03 or SN04 are apparently ready to support flight operations, although both have been thoroughly hot-fired in McGregor. Perhaps each engine is a distinct prototype with a different level of experimental readiness, or perhaps SpaceX is just testing certain engines (like SN03) more extensively than others (SN05).
Regardless, SpaceX now seems to have 3-4 intact, functional Raptor engines (excluding SN01; destroyed during stress testing), 2-3 of which are actively testing or being worked on a day’s drive north of Boca Chica. SN02 – having successfully supported a brief duo of ignition tests with Starhopper – could still be intact and test-ready. SN03 is an unknown quantity, but SN04 is clearly in excellent shape and is probably close to flight-readiness if it isn’t already. This is to say that SpaceX likely already has three Raptors on hand that are capable of supporting multi-engine Starhopper testing, whether or not such a test regime would actually be valuable.
Musk has noted that both orbit-capable Starship prototypes will be far closer to finished products and will thus fly with “at least 3 engines” (3 sea level engines, as it would turn out) or even “all 6” (3 sea level, 3 vacuum-optimized). In the meantime, Starhopper stands with an off-centered Raptor, awaiting the arrival of a different Raptor to kick off a second hop test program. If nothing else, SpaceX’s Starship/Super Heavy development program is operating in a spectacularly hardware-rich fashion, lending itself to the breakneck-pace of iteration and improvement SpaceX is famous for.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
Tesla is being sued by the family of the woman who was killed in a Texas crash involving a Model 3. The driver, who is also being sued, claimed the vehicle was operating on Autopilot mode, but Tesla executives have come out challenging that claim, stating that the driver of the vehicle overrode the system.
The lawsuit was filed by 76-year-old Martha Avila’s daughter and her husband, who allege a “design defect” involving a Tesla and a failure to warn. The suit alleges negligence against Tesla and the driver, Michael Butler.
Butler “stated he was operating with an automated driving assistance system engaged at the time of the crash,” the Harris County Sheriff’s Office said in a statement. He showed no signs of intoxication and was cooperative, the Sheriff’s Office said, according to NBC News.
Just after reports of the crash and numerous headlines that immediately blamed Tesla’s Autopilot suite, both Tesla CEO Elon Musk and Head of AI Ashok Elluswamy challenged that. Musk said the crash made “no sense” given that Tesla Autopilot and Full Self-Driving do not travel at the speeds the door cameras captured the car traveling at, which Tesla says was 73 MPH.
Tesla finally clarifies fatal Texas crash, confirms driver manually overrode acceleration
Elluswamy also revealed that Tesla data showed Butler overrode the system by pressing the accelerator to 100%, and that the pedal was compressed fully even after the car had crashed. Tesla has not released this data to the public, likely because it is communicating with agencies like the NHTSA on an investigation.
The suit uses a Washington Post analysis of government data that “identified at least 17 fatal incidents linked to Tesla Autopilot.”
This is far from the first time an accident has been blamed on Autopilot. A fatal crash in Texas was blamed on Autopilot several years ago, but when Tesla released data to the NTSB, which was investigating the crash, Autopilot was not available where the crash occurred, and Autosteer was never enabled, meaning the car was manually controlled at the time of the accident.
“Application of the accelerator pedal was found to be as high as 98.8 percent,” the NTSB said in their findings. The highest recorded speed in the five seconds leading up to the impact was 67 miles per hour. The area where the crash occurred is residential, and Texas State laws… pic.twitter.com/XGD97NHVZ2
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) March 18, 2026
More information on the accident will be released as Tesla works with agencies to find the cause of the crash. From personal experience, it is hard to imagine Tesla Autopilot or FSD operating in this manner. It drives sometimes too cautiously in residential areas in parking lots, at least in my experience. Speeding happens, but at this rate in this type of area, it is hard to believe.
We look forward to more details being released with time.
The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) has awarded the 2025-2026 Tesla Cybertruck crew cab pickup its highest honor: Top Safety Pick+. This marks the Cybertruck as the only full-size pickup to achieve this distinction in recent evaluations.
The award applies specifically to vehicles built after April 2025, following structural upgrades including front underbody reinforcements and footwell modifications.
These changes enabled strong performance in updated crash tests. The Cybertruck earned “Good” ratings in the small overlap front (driver and passenger sides), updated moderate overlap front, and updated side tests—core requirements for the Top Safety Pick+ designation.
It also secured acceptable or good headlights across trims and a “Good” rating for its standard front crash prevention system in pedestrian scenarios, along with acceptable or good performance in vehicle-to-vehicle testing.
The Cybertruck avoided every single pedestrian collision, including:
- Daytime child crossing
- Nightitime adult crossing
- Night parallel adult
In IIHS pedestrian front crash prevention tests, @Cybertruck avoided every single collision – daytime, nighttime & different angles
It was also the only pickup to earn Top Safety Pick+ (highest award) in 2026https://t.co/BNPqT9TbsW pic.twitter.com/M6nwDisBFK
— Tesla (@Tesla) June 24, 2026
In the large pickup category, competitors such as the Toyota Tundra received only a standard Top Safety Pick, while the Ford F-150 and Ram 1500 did not qualify for either award. This positions the Cybertruck as a standout in occupant protection and crash avoidance among its peers.
Credit: IIHS
Ironically, the same vehicle celebrated for superior U.S. safety performance remains banned from public roads in the United Kingdom and much of Europe. Regulators there cite the Cybertruck’s sharp external edges and highly rigid stainless-steel construction as failing pedestrian-protection standards. European and UK rules require rounded surfaces on protruding parts to minimize injury risk in collisions with vulnerable road users.
Critics also point to the truck’s substantial weight and unyielding body structure, which some argue could transfer more force to other vehicles or pedestrians rather than absorbing it.
Tesla’s engineering philosophy underpins the Cybertruck’s strong IIHS results. The vehicle features a distinctive stainless-steel exoskeleton made from ultra-hard 30X cold-rolled stainless steel. This provides exceptional structural rigidity and a robust safety cage that resists deformation in side impacts and rollovers.
Engineers designed integrated load paths to channel crash forces away from the occupant compartment while allowing controlled energy absorption in key zones. Post-April 2025 refinements to the front underbody further optimized performance in overlap crashes.
Complementing the passive structure is Tesla’s advanced active safety suite, including the standard Collision Avoidance Assist system with automatic emergency braking. This contributed directly to the vehicle’s strong front crash prevention scores. The skateboard platform and low center of gravity also enhance stability and handling, reducing the likelihood of certain crashes.
The IIHS recognition highlights how Tesla’s combination of high-strength materials, structural innovation, and software-driven safety systems can deliver top-tier protection in rigorous testing. While global regulatory differences on design and pedestrian interaction continue to limit the Cybertruck’s availability outside North America, its U.S. safety credentials set a new benchmark for full-size pickups.
Elon Musk
SpaceX’s newest Starmind will make earth data centers obsolete
Elon Musk confirmed Starmind as SpaceX’s AI satellite constellation name, targeting one million orbital compute nodes.
Elon Musk confirmed that Starmind will be the official name of SpaceX’s planned AI satellite constellation, following a trademark filing by xAI that surfaced earlier this week. Starmind is what’s being described to the FCC as a constellation of up to one million AI satellites
It’s worth noting that SpaceX’s Starlink communication satellite and Starmind are built on the same orbital infrastructure concept but serve entirely different purposes. Starlink is a connectivity network, with satellites receiving and relaying data between points on Earth, and functioning as a high-speed internet backbone in space. The satellites themselves do not process or think, and move information from one place to another, the same function a fiber cable performs underground.
SpaceX just forced Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile to team up for the first time in history
Starmind, on the other hand, is something completely different, and tather than moving data, its satellites would compute data through artificial intelligence and directly in orbit using onboard processors powered by large solar arrays. Where a Starlink satellite is essentially a very fast pipe, a Starmind satellite is a server. The practical implication is that Starmind would allow AI models to run inference, process queries, and generate outputs from space, then beam results down to users anywhere on Earth within milliseconds, and without the data ever needing to travel to a terrestrial data center.
Starship will be able to carry 30 to 50 AI1 satellites per launch, delivering the equivalent of dozens of server racks per flight, with no land acquisition, no power grid approval, and no cooling infrastructure required on the ground.
SpaceX is pursuing this new technology as terrestrial data centers are running into hard limits such as lack of physical space, community opposition, and power and water consumption at a scale that is increasingly difficult to permit. Space has unlimited solar power, natural vacuum cooling, and no zoning boards. Musk said in a June 8 video presentation that he expects space to become the lowest-cost location to deploy AI compute within two to three years. Two AI1 prototypes are scheduled to launch in early 2027, with volume production targeted for the end of that year at a new facility called Gigasat.
The real world applications Starmind enables extend well beyond powering Grok. A constellation of orbiting AI processors could run inference workloads for any paying customer, anywhere on Earth, with latency measured in milliseconds rather than the seconds associated with ground-based cloud routing across continents. Starmind, if it scales as described, would make SpaceX the landlord of AI compute the same way Starlink made it the landlord of satellite internet.
Tesla and driver sued by family of woman killed in Texas crash: what we know
Tesla Cybertruck is officially the safest pickup, IIHS says
