News
SpaceX repairing upgraded Starship prototype after first test
SpaceX workers have been spotted repairing the company’s newest Starship prototype in the days after the rocket’s first partial test.
Starship S24 was transported to SpaceX’s Starbase, Texas orbital launch site (OLS) on May 26th after about two and a half months of assembly, marking the first time SpaceX transported a new Starship prototype to a test stand since August 2021. Less than 24 hours later, after attaching Ship 24 to a new test bay located beside the actual ‘orbital launch mount,’ the Starship prototype came to life and began its first proof test.
Unfortunately, while it’s impossible to judge with certainty without official confirmation, Ship 24 either failed to complete that test or did not make it through unscathed.
Known as an ambient or pneumatic proof test, the main goal is to pressurize a Starship or Super Heavy prototype with nonflammable, ambient-temperature nitrogen gas to ensure that the rocket and all its plumbing are structurally sound and working as expected. A successful test would likely require a prototype to reach and sustain flight pressures – up to 8.5 bar (~125 psi) as of 2020 – without exhibiting any significant leaks or problems.
For a while, Ship 24’s first ambient proof test went about as expected, with lots of small vents from its main liquid oxygen (LOx) and methane (LCH4) tanks. No activity was visible at the ship’s nose, where vents and plumbing attach to a pair of small landing (header) propellant tanks. Ship 24 is the first Starship with an upgraded version of those tanks after SpaceX decided to remove the methane header tank from the main methane tank and relocate it directly under the oxygen header tank, which takes up the tip of Starship’s nose.
After an hour or two of testing, a muffled bursting noise different from previous vents was heard, followed by a quieter ‘whoosh’ more akin to a long vent. At the same time as the loud noise was heard, a good dozen or so of S24’s thousands of heat shield tiles were knocked off the section of the hull between the Starship’s main tanks and nose cone. SpaceX depressurized Ship 24 soon after and within a few hours, workers could be seen extracting a pipe from the ship that appeared to have been bent almost in half.
Three days later, workers were spotted guiding apparent replacement pipes into Ship 24. Altogether, it appears that some small section of Ship 24’s internal piping failed catastrophically after it was pressurized during the vehicle’s first pneumatic proof test, knocking tiles loose and possibly damaging other adjacent plumbing. Given the location of that piping inside Ship 24’s nose section, there’s a nonzero chance that the failure occurred when SpaceX attempted to pressurize the Starship’s new header tanks, which would have started by pressurizing the propellant and gas lines leading to them. That would explain the first muffled burst, the subsequent venting sound that slowly faded to nothing, and the loss of heat shield tiles.
It would also explain why SpaceX decided to leave Starship in place and conduct repairs at the pad. Super Heavy Booster 7, which suffered a dramatic plumbing failure during an early proof test, was moved back to one of Starbase’s covered assembly bays for repairs. Had Ship 24’s incident been severe, it would have likely left the pad as well. The fact that Ship 24 did not move indicates that the failure was fairly minor and contained, only impacting some easily-replaceable plumbing.
-
Additionally, SpaceX appears to have moved Raptor heat shield components and a missing cover for one of Ship 24’s four flaps to the pad since the incident. On top of the team that has been working all weekend to repair the Starship, other sets of workers have set about closing out Ship 24’s ‘raceway’, which protects hundreds of feet of smaller plumbing and cables and a flight termination system that runs from the top to the bottom of the ship’s tanks; and some have begun preparing to fill gaps in Ship 24’s heat shield. Most of that work can be classified as ‘finishing touches’ and none of it would be prioritized if Ship 24 was not in decent shape.
Still, even minor damage is a setback. Ship 24’s next opportunity for redemption is a 10am to 10pm CDT window on Wednesday, June 1st, with backup windows available on Thursday and Friday.
-
Tesla’s AI lead Ashok Elluswamy doubled down on the company’s strategy regarding Full Self-Driving’s speed settings, and owners are definitely confused.
Earlier versions of Full Self-Driving allowed owners to set a max speed that the vehicle could travel while operating under the semi-autonomous driver assistance platform. This allowed more customization for the driver, giving them the ability to experience FSD’s robust performance with their own personal preferences.
Speed is massively important for obvious reasons — it’s not only a question of keeping the vehicle occupants comfortable by traveling at a safe speed, but it’s also something that could contribute to a ticket or infraction from law enforcement.
With the release of FSD v14 last year, Tesla removed the ability to set a max speed and instead opted for five Speed Profiles, ranging from “Sloth,” the most conservative, to “Mad Max,” the most aggressive and spirited. These profiles not only control speed, but also how frequently the vehicle will execute passes, perform lane changes, and other contributing factors.
The removal of the Max Speed setting was a major complaint amongst the Tesla community because it left owners scrambling for a way to experience suitable behaviors while traveling at an appropriate speed. Most felt the driving profiles would be a good indicator of the behaviors, while speed would still be left up to the discretion of the driver.
Instead, Tesla’s Speed Profiles determine both, and the constant tinkering of how they behave has been a major bottleneck and point of confusion for both owners and the company. From update to update, the Speed Profiles will change, sometimes more drastically than others. Some owners have complained that the “Standard” profile is too fast, while others have experienced “Mad Max” traveling below the speed limit:
What has happened to Mad Max?
At one point it was going 32 in a 35. Traffic ahead had pulled away considerably https://t.co/bjKvaMVTNX pic.twitter.com/aaZSWmLu5v
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) January 24, 2026
These things change with each update, but the big complaint is that owners are on the hook for any tickets that come from FSD’s infractions; that’s the caveat of the suite being named FSD (Supervised). It ultimately means the driver is responsible, and the automaker has no liability when it comes to speeding tickets or general traffic infractions.
It is the driver’s responsibility to take over or adjust based on this.
Elluswamy essentially confirmed that there are no plans to bring back Max Speed control, because it is what he referred to as “an anti pattern.” He then echoed something that CEO Elon Musk has started to really push with FSD, and that’s the idea that Tesla is really honing in on the preferences of the driver.
Max speed control is an anti pattern.
We are working on better learning of user’s implied preferences.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) August 3, 2026
Owners were confused by Tesla’s decision, stating that there must be a better way, especially considering disengagements for incorrect speeds are common:
This…. is not the way
— Kyle Conner (@itskyleconner) August 4, 2026
😭 I appreciate this mentality ! But currently the no.1 reason I disengage in Australia is incorrect speed zones.
— Ryan’s Model Y (@ryanjaycowan) August 3, 2026
This is fine but you need to start accepting liability for speeding tickets then. https://t.co/lyCgdA83gQ
— Jeremy Judkins (@jeremyjudkins_) August 4, 2026
Okay https://t.co/nOvoXQkNg1 pic.twitter.com/jGRtF2xtox
— Chad Moran (@ChadMoran) August 3, 2026
From personal experience and using FSD for over 72 percent of my driving miles since v14 was released late last year, I make Speed Profile adjustments constantly. If FSD is traveling a tad too quickly, I will scale it back, and if it’s too conservative, I’ll make it more aggressive.
I don’t complain about making the Speed Profile changes too frequently, but it would certainly be nice to have it happen less frequently. There are far too many times I am concerned about getting a ticket, even in Standard mode.
The biggest issue for me, personally, which seems to be echoed throughout the community, is the fact that Tesla’s goal is to minimize disengagements. Many drivers are stating that speed is a major reason for disengagements.
However, Tesla is not willing to bring back this one level of input because it would technically be a regression.
Whether it’s right or wrong in your opinion, it is what Tesla is going with, and it seems like it has pivoted quite a bit from its other strategies for minimizing interventions by pushing its AI to behave in a way that would fit the occupant’s personal preferences.
Tesla is one of several automakers whose vehicles qualify for an awesome new first-time EV buyer incentive program in California.
The Golden State launched the MyFirstEV incentive program, which helps those buying an electric vehicle for the first time with a $3,500 incentive on new-inventory purchases of a Model 3 or Model Y.
First-time electric vehicle buyers in California can now get $3,500 off eligible Model 3 and Model Y new inventory vehicle purchases.
To be eligible, you must place your order on or after August 3, 2026 and take delivery while funds are still available. The incentive applies to… pic.twitter.com/yuXF00XA50
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) August 4, 2026
The incentive requires an order on or after August 3, and delivery must be taken while the program is still being funded. California has set aside $135.5 million to help strengthen its SEV market and support automotive innovation.
Incentives are offered at the point of sale, and used EVs are also available for a partial incentive of $1,750. Half of the $3,500 and $1,750 incentive amounts are covered by California, with the other half being covered by participating OEMs.
Additionally, rules apply for MSRP and how the vehicle will qualify for the incentive. Any vehicle from a non-California headquartered OEM must have an MSRP of $50,000 or less. Used vehicles must be priced at $25,000 or less and must be at least two model years older than the year of purchase.
The cars must also be purchased from manufacturers as certified pre-owned vehicles. Private dealerships are not eligible.
In total, California expects to incentivize over 73,000 ZEVs.
Participating Manufacturers
Fourteen total automakers are participating in California’s MyFirstEV program:
- Chevrolet – Launching August 2026
- Ford – Launching August 2026
- Honda – Launching September 2026
- Hyundai – Launching August 2026
- Kia – Launching August 2026
- Lexus – Launching September 2026
- Lucid – Launching August 2026
- Mitsubishi – Launching November 2026
- Nissan – Coming Soon
- Rivian – Coming Soon
- Subaru – Launching September 2026
- Tesla – Launching August 2026
- Toyota – Launching September 2026
- Volvo – Coming Soon
Elon Musk’s space exploration company, SpaceX (NASDAQ: SPCX), is set to report its earnings for the second quarter today in what will be its first-ever earnings call since going public in July.
SpaceX is trading down roughly 25 percent from its IPO. These early stock signals are usually a bit tumultuous, and considering this is the first company actively launching rockets that is available on the stock exchange, investors might have a tendency to be a bit skittish.
However, there are going to be some details that investors will hear for the first time today on the earnings call. Here’s what to look for:
Wall Street Expectations
Revenue is expected to fall somewhere around $6.8 billion, and will be heavily driven by Starlink, which is SpaceX’s widely popular satellite internet platform that has been adopted by numerous airlines, cruise ships, and other maritime operations. It is also available for consumers at home or in their cars.
Earnings Per Share (EPS) expectations fall at a net loss of $0.23 per share. Wall Street sees this as a total net loss of roughly $1.9 billion.
EBITDA is expected to come in between $2 billion and $2.1 billion.
What Investors Want to Know
Tesla uses the Say platform to help work with both retail and institutional investors to answer relevant and quality questions that address concerns or questions that they might have.
However, SpaceX is doing things differently, as the company launched its own Investor Relations website where these questions are being fielded. Just like the Tesla questions, they seem to be less focused on the operational tasks and overall progress of the company, and more novelty.
Here are the top five:
- Has the team thought about what possibilities there are with your mascot Asteroid? Whether it’s starting additional foundations for kids in its name, helping kids learn about space, etc. Kids are our future, and Asteroid would be a fun and easy way to help.
- Baby Asteroid is already making a difference through charity around the world. Could SpaceX take it even further with programs that inspire kids to explore space?
- SpaceX has some legendary vehicle names. Would you ever allow the public to name a Starship, even knowing there is a 99% chance it becomes Shipy McShipface?
- When can we expect to see more footage of the Human Landing System?
- Will Asteroid (your mascot) go to Mars?
SpaceX will report its earnings today, August 4, at 4:30 P.M. EDT.
Tesla’s AI lead doubles down on FSD’s speed strategy, and owners are confused
Tesla qualifies for awesome new first-time EV buyer incentive in California
