News
SpaceX’s orbital Starship prototype gets frosty during first successful ‘cryoproof’
For the first time, SpaceX has put the first orbital-class Starship – a prototype known as Ship 20 (S20) – through a routine cryogenic proof test, filling the rocket with several hundred tons of liquid nitrogen to simulate its explosive propellant.
While it’s impossible to jump to conclusions before members of the public can return to the pad to take photos or CEO Elon Musk takes to Twitter to discuss the results, Ship 20’s first ‘cryoproof’ appears to have been largely successful [Edit: Musk has confirmed that the test went well]. Relative to the almost three-dozen cryoproofs SpaceX has completed with more than a dozen other Starship, booster, and test tank prototypes over the last two years, though, Ship 20’s first major test still has some oddities.
Historically, every cryoproof of a full Starship prototype has been visually unique and virtually impossible to predict. Without any direct insight from SpaceX or Elon on the objectives, plan, or timeline of tests, the process of watching tests (via unofficial webcams, of course) and attempting to interpret why certain things look the way they do or what’s going on at any given moment is a bit trying to interpret eroded hieroglyphics.
At the most basic level, cryogenic tanking tests – whether with Starship, Super Heavy, or test tanks and liquid oxygen (LOx)/methane (LCH4) propellant or neutral liquid nitrogen (LN2) – are fairly simple. The vehicle is attached to pad systems, powered on, and partially or fully loaded with cryogenic fluids. Once the desired test objectives are achieved or attempted, the vehicle is then detanked (drained of propellant or LN2).
Thanks to the fact that they’re incredibly cold (-160 to -200C; -260 to -330F), the LOx/LCH4 or LN2 Starships are filled with quickly chill the thin steel tanks containing them. With no insulation to speak of, that supercooled steel then freezes water vapor out of the humid South Texas air, creating a layer of frost/ice that generally follows the level of the cryogenic liquids in Starship’s tanks. Throughout that process, those cryogenic liquids inevitably come into contact with ambient-temperature Starship tanks and plumbing (white-hot in comparison) and warm up, boiling off into gas as a result.
A gaseous chemical is far less dense than its liquid form, meaning that the pressure inside Starship’s fixed tanks can rapidly become unmanageable after even a small amount of boiloff. To maintain the correct tank pressures, Starship – like all other rockets – occasionally vents off the gas that forms. And thus, the two main methods of interpreting the hieroglyphics that are cryoproof tests: frost levels and venting.
Compared to earlier prototypes, Starship S20’s first cryoproof has been… unusual. Most notably, SpaceX began loading the rocket with liquid nitrogen around 8pm CDT. Its LOx (bottom) and CH4 (top) tanks were then slowly filled to around 30-50% of their full volume over the next hour. However, rather than detanking, SpaceX then partially drained the methane tank but filled the LOx tank further before leaving the LOx tank more or less fully filled for more than two hours, occasionally topping it off with fresh liquid nitrogen.
Then, almost four hours after LN2 loading began, Starship performed several massive vents. Ordinarily, given the hours of testing prior, those vents would have assuredly been detank vents – effectively depressurizing Starship’s tanks as they’re drained of fluid. However, those vents instead coincided with the rapid loading of one or several hundred more tons of LN2, seemingly topping off Starship S20 in the process. Around that point, it’s possible that SpaceX began the pressure testing portion of Ship 20’s cryoproof, (mostly) closing the rocket’s vents and allowing the pressure to gradually increase to flight levels (and maybe even higher).
Many, many months ago, when SpaceX was deep into cryoproofing the first full-size Starship prototypes, Musk revealed an operating pressure goal of 6 bar (~90 psi). Ships were eventually successfully tested above 8 bar (~115 psi), giving Starship a healthy ~30% safety margin. As the first orbital-class Starship prototype, Ship 20 likely needs to hit those tank pressures more so than any ship before it to have a shot at surviving its orbital launch debut and orbital-velocity reentry attempt.
Beyond the basics of cryoproofing, Starship S20 also marked a crucial step forward on September 29th/30th, becoming the first ship to complete a cryoproof test with a full heat shield installed. While it’s impossible to judge exactly how well S20’s ~15,000-tile heat shield performed, views from public webcams showed no obvious signs of tiles shattering and falling off as Starship repeatedly cooled and warmed – contracting and expanding as a result. Additionally, still in contact with the air, the steel tank skin under a majority of Ship 20’s tiles would have likely covered itself in a layer of frost and ice, but the heat shield appeared to handle that invisible change without issue.
It’s possible that dozens or hundreds of tiles bumped together and chipped or cracked in a manner too subtle to be visible on LabPadre or NASASpaceflight webcasts, but that can only be confirmed or denied when the road reopens and local photographers can capture higher-resolution views of Starship. For now, it appears that Ship 20’s first cryoproof was highly successful, hopefully opening the door for Raptor installation and static fire testing in the near future. Stay tuned for more!
Update: As is almost tradition by now, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk didn’t take long to tweet about the results of Starship S20’s first cryoproof, confirming that the “proof was good!”
Tesla just gave what is perhaps its biggest signal yet that the launch of the Cybercab, its autonomous ride-hailing-geared car, is imminent.
The Cybercab has been spotted outside of Gigafactory Texas in massive numbers over the past few days, with hundreds of units being stored on property just days after the vehicle received a Certificate of Conformity from the EPA.
Today, things were a bit different.
Cybercabs spotted on Giga Texas property today had an addition: a Cybercab decal on the side, reminiscent of the “Robotaxi” ones that were placed on Model Ys just as the company launched its ride-sharing platform about a year ago.
Giga Texas drone operator Joe Tegtmeyer noticed the change today:
Tesla Cybercabs are now getting “Cybercab” logos on the side of them!
Tesla did the same with Model Ys that were given “Robotaxi” logos: https://t.co/DanANtw1m7 pic.twitter.com/FqOhH0S9Ks
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 19, 2026
Tesla could be signaling that the Cybercab is preparing to enter the Robotaxi fleet in the coming weeks or months with this move. It seems more symbolic than anything; Tesla is ready to throw Cybercabs in the ride-hailing platform just as it did with Model Ys last year.
The addition of the Certificate of Conformity awarded to the Cybercab is another major factor working to Tesla’s advantage. The company now has permission from the EPA to allow the vehicle to operate on public roads and enter the chain of commerce. It’s officially street legal.
Tesla Cybercab specs revealed: range, curb weight, range ratings, and more
The big question that remains is whether Tesla will be able to operate the car without a safety monitor, especially considering it plans to put the car out there without a steering wheel or pedals. With the Cybercab only having a seating capacity of two, it is hard to believe Tesla will even consider putting a Safety Monitor in the car.
It did recently self-certify as Level 4 and has the ability to operate driverless vehicles in the State of Texas under a law that took effect on May 28. You can read more about that here:
Tesla’s Robotaxi dreams just took a massive step toward reality
We’d imagine Cybercabs will be on the roads as soon as July, but August will likely be a better estimate of when the car will be entered into the Cybercab fleet. It all depends at where Tesla is, as they’ve truly prioritized safety with the rollout of the Robotaxi platform.
Elon Musk has publicly questioned Moody’s credit assessments following the rating agency’s decision to assign SpaceX a Baa1 investment-grade rating, two notches above Tesla’s Baa3. The comments came amid discussions comparing the two companies’ financial profiles.
SpaceX earned its first-time Baa1 rating with a stable outlook from Moody’s. The agency highlighted the company’s leadership in orbital launches, the growing recurring revenue from its Starlink satellite network, strong vertical integration, U.S. government contracts, and emerging opportunities in AI infrastructure.
These factors were cited as supporting robust cash flows, margin expansion, and financial flexibility.
Musk responded directly: “Tesla’s credit rating is ridiculously low tbh,” and added, “Yeah, makes no sense. Tesla has over $40B in cash, no debt, and is consistently profitable!” His remarks underscored Tesla’s balance sheet strength and profitability at a time when many traditional automakers continue to report losses in the shift to electric vehicles.
Yeah, makes no sense.
Tesla has over $40B in cash, no debt and is consistently profitable!
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 19, 2026
Tesla maintains a leading position in the global EV market, with diversification into energy and storage, battery technology, and robotics through projects like Optimus. Recent financial updates show the company generated positive free cash flow of $1.4 billion in Q1 2026, supported by operating cash flow of $3.9 billion. Cash and short-term investments stood at approximately $44.7 billion.
Moody’s has affirmed Tesla’s Baa3 issuer rating with a stable outlook in periodic reviews, acknowledging the company’s EV leadership, technology strengths, including AI for autonomous vehicles, solid profitability, and strong liquidity.
Tesla (TSLA) scores Baa3 Moody’s rating for ‘stable’ outlook
However, the agency has also noted challenges in the automotive segment and expectations for margin pressures.
Musk’s critique highlights a common debate about how traditional rating methodologies apply to high-growth, capital-intensive technology companies. SpaceX benefits from long-term government-backed contracts and diversified, recurring revenue streams, while Tesla’s valuation reflects heavy investment in future technologies such as autonomy and robotics.
Both ratings remain investment-grade, yet the one-notch difference has fueled online discussion about potential inconsistencies in evaluating innovative firms.
The exchange comes as SpaceX explores financing options following its recent valuation milestones, while Tesla continues executing on its multi-year roadmap. Musk’s pointed response serves as a reminder that credit ratings, though influential for borrowing costs, represent one lens through which markets assess corporate strength—and that company leaders often view their financial positions through the lens of long-term innovation and cash generation rather than short-term risk metrics alone.
A new report from Reuters claims that a transport authority in Sweden is pushing back against the approval of Tesla’s Full Self-Driving suite because it will travel over speed limits.
The report says the Swedish Transport Administration (TRV) recommends the European Union votes against FSD’s approval. TRV believes it should not be approved until Tesla disables FSD’s ability to speed.
TRV sent a letter to the European Union’s Technical Committee on Motor Vehicles (TCMV), which is set to meet on June 30 to discuss the potential approval of the Tesla FSD suite in the country. Tesla, which has received various approvals in Europe over the past two months, has not provided a comment.
Teslas operating on FSD do travel over the speed limit, depending on the Speed Profile that is chosen. Drivers have the ability to disengage FSD at any point; Tesla specifically states that those supervising the suite are responsible for its actions.
Let’s cut to the chase: humans operating any vehicle speed almost daily in the United States. Realistically, speed limits in the U.S. are more frequently treated as speed minimums. However, other countries are different, and driving behaviors are less aggressive.
TRV believes that “allowing automated systems to systematically exceed legal speed limits…risks undermining both the legal framework and the expected safety benefits of vehicle automation,” the report stated. It’s surprising that Tesla has not received this claim from other countries previously.
This could be a good argument to bring Max Speed back, the setting that previously allowed the driver to choose the absolute fastest the car would travel.
This would still put the responsibility of supervision in the hands of the driver. It would allow the driver to choose whether the car would travel over the speed limit or not, acknowledging that they set the speed, and if they get pulled over, there would be no ability to argue it.
However, it does not seem as if this is something Tesla will do, especially considering many U.S. drivers have requested the feature in an effort to eliminate speeding or at least tone it down. The company has not shown any interest in bringing it back.
Tesla has approvals for FSD in Europe in Estonia, Lithuania, Denmark, the Netherlands, and Belgium.
Tesla gives its biggest signal yet that Cybercab launch is imminent
Elon Musk challenges Tesla credit rating from Moody’s after SpaceX gets a higher one
