News
SpaceX publishes dedicated Starship webpage after Elon Musk’s presentation
Shortly after CEO Elon Musk’s 2019 presentation, SpaceX has published a new webpage dedicated to the next-generation Starship launch vehicle and its Super Heavy booster, detailing the rocket and providing some excellent new images and renders.
Beyond the images of Raptor and renders of Starship and Super Heavy, the webpage discusses several possible use-cases in Earth orbit and throughout the solar system, showing off the latest iteration of a cargo-focused Starship and teasing possible missions to the Space Station.
Known informally as “Chomper” in the spaceflight community, a cargo-optimized Starship would replace the pressurized crew section with a vast cargo bay and actuating door, the source of its nickname. Similar to but slightly simpler than the Space Shuttle’s famous clamshell doors, such a nose could be extremely useful. Although it could obviously be used to place massive payloads in orbit, a sealable cargo section could also be used to grab similarly large items on orbit and then either return them to Earth or service/repair them in situ.
Of note, NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) – responsible for the proposed LUVOIR super-telescope – has already seriously begun considering a cargo-optimized Starship as one of a handful of possible launch options. In the event that LUVOIR is chosen for development by NASA, the massive space telescope could be ready for launch sometime in the 2030s, at which point GSFC believes there will be only three plausible options – NASA’s SLS, Blue Origin’s New Glenn, or SpaceX’s Starship.
According to LUVOIR’s extensively detailed “Final Report”, published less than a month ago, GSFC worked fairly closely with SpaceX to determine where exactly Starship might fit into the picture. Intriguingly, an April 2019 tweet from the Center revealed that SpaceX had verified that Starship would be able to launch LUVOIR-B, a smaller and simpler version of the telescope. The August 2019 report, however, reveals that Starship could also launch LUVOIR-A – the full-sized telescope – with just a few slight modifications to Starship’s payload section.
SpaceX acknowledged Starship’s already well-known potential for transporting cargo and crew to the Moon and Mars, but also noted that the massive spacecraft could be used to deliver cargo and crew to the International Space Station (ISS) or elsewhere in Earth orbit. The ISS is undeniably large but Starship is (relatively) even bigger, nominally featuring enough pressurized volume (~1000m3 vs ~910m3) to more than double the habitable capacity of the ISS upon arrival. CEO Elon Musk noted this in an offhand remark on September 28th, cognizant of the fact that a Starship on its own is effectively a reusable ISS-class space station that can be placed in orbit with a single launch.
If a given Starship can support a crew of astronauts over a multi-month interplanetary cruise, the same Starship can also – and probably even more easily so – serve as an all-in-one space station with months of longevity. Add in Starship-enabled resupply and refueling runs and SpaceX could likely sustain a fleet of autonomous space stations in Earth orbit with relative ease. Assuming SpaceX is interested, Starship launch prices are low enough, and a large enough market exists, Starship could almost instantly and singlehandedly take orbital tourism from a distant fantasy for billionaires to a serious market potentially accessible to hundreds of thousands or even millions of people.
Musk has noted in previous SpaceX presentations that the goal is to make Starship so reusable that the price of per-person tickets to Mars becomes comparable to buying a house ($500k to $1m). Assuming SpaceX gets close to that price target, the cost of a 100-person mission low Earth orbit – likely requiring just one launch – could potentially be comparable to buying a car (~$50,000).
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
