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.
In a new note to investors on Tuesday, Morgan Stanley analyst Andrew Percoco said that Tesla has one big financial question to answer for investors regarding its Robotaxi rollout, Full Self-Driving software, and Optimus.
Percoco said in the note that, for the most part, investors are still very positive about the direction the company is headed. However, there are some things the firm would like to see, and they have to do with financials.
Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue
Tesla bulls are more than convinced that the company’s Full Self-Driving software is proof it can develop physical AI. Financially, however, there are still some questions, especially on elevated spending, which CEO Elon Musk said would occur as the company works to roll out Robotaxi faster and continue developing its Optimus robot.
The latter two are where Tesla will have to prove progress to investors, as Percoco writes that both projects “will require clearer evidence that Robotaxi is scaling and more tangible Optimus proof points to support the ROI on elevated capex.”
Percoco said the second quarter earnings call did not change his long-term thesis of where Tesla is positioned in the AI race, which is out in front. However, there are concerns that weaker gross margins and higher R&D spend will stress financials, and that has “sharpened our (and investors’) focus on measurable progress across Robotaxi and Optimus.”
Additionally, Robotaxi still needs to be proven with more operation in existing cities while maintaining safety but improving how many rides it gives in any given time, he said. For Optimus, Percoco wrote that he is “still looking for evidence beyond commentary around SOP.”
Morgan Stanley put Percoco in charge of covering Tesla after long-time analyst Adam Jonas transitioned to the automotive side.
Currently, Morgan Stanley has a $415 price target on Tesla and a ‘Hold’ rating on the stock. It is trading at around $330 at the time of publication, which was 2:30 P.M. on the East Coast.
SpaceX’s massive investment in AI will make it a big winner, Argus Research said after the company’s successful earnings call last week.
The firm also upgraded shares to a Buy from Hold and set a $160 price target.
SpaceX (NASDAQ: SPCX) is currently recovering from its heavy AI infrastructure investments, as it spent nearly $16 billion in Q2 alone. The company did this primarily by monetizing high-demand GPU compute capacity at a much faster pace than traditional data center economics would suggest.
Company CFO Bret Johnsen said that SpaceX would be able to pay back anything on new deployments within a year.
There are plenty of ways the company can do this:
Leasing excess compute capacity through contracts
SpaceX has already built Colossus and Colossus II, largely for its own model training. However, much of that capacity is already rented out to third parties. It already has major deals with Anthropic, Google, and Reflection AI. These partnerships are adding billions per month to SpaceX’s spreadsheet.
High utilization driven by industry-wide scarcity
The demand for advanced AI training and inference capacity continues to exceed what is available for use. SpaceX can fill new racks quickly after they come online, so the capital deployed converts into revenue with minimal idle time.
Additionally, management and outside observers have described the new compute capital as behaving more like a cost-of-goods-sold than traditional multi-year capex, especially because of this rapid monetization pattern.
Capacity has already scaled from ~0.4 GW a year to 1.4 GW annually by the end of Q2. There are targets of more than 2 GW by year-end.
High incremental margins on the rental business once capacity is online
GPU cloud providers often operate at strong gross margins. SpaceX can monetize capacity that was already partially built or can be added efficiently. This means that incremental EBITDA margins on the rental revenue are usually high. This accelerates cash recovery relative to the gross capital outlay.
Parallel monetization of its own AI software and applications
Beyond pure infrastructure rental, SpaceX also generates revenue from Grok through subscriptions and usage, from X through ads, data, and other related services, enterprise APIs, and the planned integration of the Cursor coding tools acquisition.
These application layers ride on the same compute infrastructure and provide additional high-margin streams that could offset build-out costs. AI-segment revenue overall rose sharply to about $2.6 billion in Q2, according to Motley Fool. This was driven primarily by the infrastructure contracts, but the software side is also partially responsible.
Efficient, large-scale deployment and vertical integration advantages
SpaceX has emphasized the rapid construction of power and cooling infrastructure and favorable cost-per-megawatt economics relative to industry benchmarks in some disclosures.
Combined with its ability to scale capacity aggressively and the fact that many contracts start generating revenue within months of capacity coming online, the effective payback compresses dramatically compared with more conventional multi-year data-center projects.
SpaceX’s dominant near-term recovery path will turn the AI clusters into a hyperscale-style compute rental business for other leading AI companies while still using a portion for internal models.
Tesla headlights have caused a recall of over 20,000 of the company’s two most popular vehicles, the Model 3 and Model Y, due to the low-beam bulb exceeding the maximum allowed intensity according to federal standards.
Tesla initiated the recall with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) this morning, stating that the low-beam output “exceeds the maximum allowed intensity in the outer upper-right and outer upper-left areas of the 10U and 90U zone, as prescribed in FMVSS No. 108.”
Tesla sourced the impacted headlights from Marelli Automotive Lighting, a Mexico-based company. The recall impacts 2020-2023 Model Y vehicles and 2017-2023 Model 3 vehicles. It is estimated that every VIN in this recall is impacted by the defect.
🚨 Tesla is recalling 20,349 2020-23 Model Y vehicles and 2017-23 Model 3 vehicles due to an excessively bright headlamp low beam.
Currently, there is no remedy plan in place, as it is still being developed. pic.twitter.com/y34cIO2U0B
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 11, 2026
Typically, Tesla would remedy recalls of this nature through an Over-the-Air software update, which has been a major focus of criticism by the company and its supporters because the NHTSA still refers to it as a “recall,” even though it requires no action by the vehicle owner. The fix is shipped over the internet and downloaded to the car.
However, there appears to be a potentially different solution for this problem. Tesla has not developed a remedy for this issue, so it could potentially be on the way. The big issue appears to be the fact that these recalled lamps are out of production, and this is an old body style for both vehicles. The headlights and front-end designs are completely different.
Tesla switched to another supplier when the affected headlight design was discontinued. It plans to begin notifying owners of their remedy options by September 15.
Tesla filed a petition protesting the recall to fix the vehicles’ headlight issue, but the NHTSA denied it. Now, Tesla will come up with a solution to fix it.
Tesla has one big financial question to answer for investors: Morgan Stanley
SpaceX AI investment gamble will make it a big winner, firm says
