News
SpaceX’s orbital Starship gains a nose as East Coast prototype makes progress
On May 20th, SpaceX technicians successfully stacked a nosecone on top of the company’s Boca Chica orbital Starship prototype. Simultaneously, a separate team of technicians and engineers have been hard at work building a second similar-but-different Starship prototype near Cape Canaveral, Florida.
Officially confirmed last week by Elon Musk, the SpaceX CEO revealed that the company was not only building two orbital Starship prototypes simultaneously – not news in itself – but that those prototypes were being built as a sort of internal competition between different teams and ideas. The competition is not cutthroat – knowledge is shared between Texas and Florida – but the strategy is fairly similar. In lieu of actual commercial competitors, SpaceX is attempting to compete with itself to more rapidly and effectively develop a brand new launch vehicle – the stainless steel Starship/Super Heavy.
A Starship rises in the East
In just the last week, both SpaceX groups have made major progress. On the East Coast, the general public saw the first photo of SpaceX’s Florida Starship build precisely seven days ago. It appears that SpaceX has more or less taken over a Cocoa, Florida facility known to be the prior home of Coastal Steel, a repeat NASA contractor known for steelwork.
It’s unclear if SpaceX has fully acquired Coastal Steel or is simply partnering with the small company in the early stages of its Florida Starship buildup. Regardless, even from perspectives quite a bit more distant than those available in Texas, it’s clear that the metal workmanship is at least on par with Boca Chica, if not giving them a run for their money.
Admittedly, the playing field is not exactly level. SpaceX’s South Texas team has been working just a few thousand feet away from the unobstructed Gulf of Mexico in conditions that would make for an excellent traditional-aerospace horror show. Aside from a lone tent, all welding, assembly, integration, and testing has been done while fully exposed to the elements. SpaceX’s Florida team appears to have the luxury of an established warehouse – previously used for steelwork – to use as a covered and partially insulated work and staging area. The Florida team effectively had everything they needed (give or take) on hand from the moment work began, while Texas had to quite literally build all of its facilities from nothing.
Be it the facility luxuries or Cape Canaveral’s far larger pool of local aerospace talent, it’s clear that SpaceX’s Florida team will be a competitive force to be reckoned with despite Texas’ apparent head start. In the seven days since the first photos of the Florida Starship were published, SpaceX technicians have almost doubled the height of the largest welded section, raising it from ~5.5m to ~9m (18-30 ft).
Meanwhile, those working inside the staging warehouse continue to crank out 2x9m subsections, already making way for what appears to be the first tapered nose section of the Florida Starship. At this rate, Florida could very well catch up to SpaceX’s Texas Starship just a month or two from now. It’s worth noting that the Florida team does not appear to be involved in any Starhopper activities. SpaceX Boca Chica, on the other hand, has spent a major portion of the last several months building out Starhopper and preparing the odd prototype for untethered hop tests.
The (slightly) Old(er) Guard
Despite Starship Florida’s rapid progress, Starship Texas has not exactly been standing around. In the last week or so, SpaceX technicians and engineers have been simultaneously working on major new integration, assembly, and test campaigns with both Starhopper and the first orbital Starship prototype. A dedicated Starhopper article will come later this week as SpaceX’s South Texas team nears Raptor reinstallation and an untethered hop test campaign, scheduled to begin as early as the end of May.
On the orbital Starship side of things, Boca Chica took a major symbolic step towards aeroshell completion by capping off the upper half of the prototype with a stainless steel nose section. Altogether, the Starship assembly now stands about 25m (80 ft) tall from tip to tail, roughly 60% as tall as a Falcon 9 booster (first stage). With the installation of the craft’s nose, SpaceX has also implicitly confirmed that most – if not all – of the Starship prototype’s tankage still needs to be built, unless a great deal of hardware is hiding inside Boca Chica’s on-site tent.
What could either be the orbital Starship’s seven-Raptor engine section or the start of its liquid oxygen or methane tank is also being built a few hundred feet distant. That mystery segment was recently lifted onto a second concrete jig for easier access, while SpaceX has also been hard at work building a dedicated integration facility similar to the warehouse being used in Florida.
Altogether, SpaceX’s South Texas team appears to be 30-40% away from completing a Starship-sized steel aeroshell. A huge amount of work remains to be done on the inside of the theoretically orbit-capable vehicle, including propellant tanks, a thrust structure capable of supporting seven Raptor engines, landing legs/fins, and a jungle of plumbing and avionics installation. Still, the amount of progress already visible is undeniably impressive, made even more intriguing by the existence of a separate Starship build effort to the east.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
Tesla Cybercab stands to gain from new rules that the Trump Administration is aiming to enforce on autonomous vehicles. On Thursday, NHTSA, under the Trump Administration’s U.S. Department of Transportation, commenced rulemaking on the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS).
This effort aims to eliminate the mandate for manual brake pedals in vehicles that are designed to be driven exclusively by automated driving systems. This would impact the Tesla Cybercab, which the company has stated would operate without a steering wheel or pedals.
Tesla Cybercab launch is imminent after latest sighting at Giga Texas
The Trump Administration is looking to revise FMVSS No. 135, which requires standard braking systems on light-duty vehicles.
Currently, the regulation requires light-duty cars to use traditional manual braking systems that allow operators to slow the vehicle. With the advent of self-driving in the U.S., these regulations need updating, and these are the changes that could come to FMVSS No. 135:
- Removes requirements for hand- or foot-operated brake controls for vehicles designed never to be operated by a human. Existing rules still apply to AVs that retain manual controls.
- All subject vehicles must still meet the same stopping distance performance criteria via alternative testing procedures.
- While this update ensures AVs can physically stop when commanded, NHTSA is separately developing safety performance requirements for AVs in real-world driving scenarios.
- NHTSA will continue to use its broad defect enforcement authority to investigate unsafe ADS behavior and oversee recalls.
As autonomy becomes a greater part of passenger travel, these types of rule adjustments will be more than reasonable. It will give manufacturers the ability to self-certify their vehicles and avoid any red tape that could ultimately delay the deployment of these vehicles.
Administrators are also incredibly excited about the opportunity to play a role in the advancement of self-driving vehicles.
“We are at the cusp of the greatest technological revolution in vehicle technology since the innovation of the Model T,” NHTSA Administrator Jonathan Morrison said. “If we want America to lead the way, we have to reimagine our regulatory framework. That’s why under Secretary Sean Duffy’s AV Framework, NHTSA is tearing down pointless barriers to innovative designs while strengthening the fundamental safety requirements that matter and holding AV developers accountable for safe performance.”
The Cybercab entered mass production at Gigafactory Texas in April. Tesla ultimately plans to push the vehicle into its Robotaxi fleet, potentially when frameworks like these are established.
Tesla plans to boost production at its Gigafactory Berlin plant in Germany following a sharp rebound in sales and demand in Europe after a softer 2025.
The plans put Tesla in a better position to compete with strengthening companies in Europe and potentially other markets; demand indicators show Tesla is much better off than in 2025.
Last year was a tough year for Tesla in terms of overall demand in Europe. The company produced over 200,000 vehicles at the German plant last year, a soft figure compared to the 375,000 vehicles Tesla lists as its current capacity at the factory.
🚨 Tesla said this morning it will ramp up production at Gigafactory Berlin to a volume of 7,500 vehicles per week.
This is a 20 percent boost in production. Tesla will hire 1,000 new employees to help with the increase.$TSLA pic.twitter.com/kravKfRO5n
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 25, 2026
Tesla’s overall European sales dropped significantly last year due to a variety of factors. However, sales are rebounding, and demand is strong once again, and only getting stronger. Tesla is now planning to bump production of Model Y vehicles at Giga Berlin upward by about 20 percent. It will also bring 1,000 new jobs to the plant.
Tesla confirmed the details of its planned production expansion in Germany this morning. It is a strategy to keep up with strengthening demand.
In Q1, Tesla saw a record 61,000 vehicles produced at Giga Berlin. European registrations rebounded sharply, with Model Y seeing 117 percent increases in March 2026 compared to last year. Germany alone saw stark increases, with a quadrupling in registrations to 9,252 units.
This trend continued in other key European markets, including France, Denmark and Sweden. Tesla registrations were up over 46 percent in some of these markets, and Model Y continued its trend as a top BEV in the market.
Demand has been recovering strongly in 2026, giving Tesla a reason to expand production efforts at the factory. These increases signal management’s confidence in sustained or growing European pull for Berlin-built vehicles.
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.
Tesla Cybercab stands to gain from new Trump autonomy rules
Tesla plans production boost at Giga Berlin following rebound in Europe
