News
SpaceX’s Mr. Steven preparing for first Falcon 9 fairing catch attempt in months
SpaceX recovery vessel Mr. Steven has spent the last several weeks undergoing major refits – including a new net and arms – and testing the upgraded hardware in anticipation of the vessel’s first fairing catch attempt in more than four months.
Required after a mysterious anomaly saw Mr. Steven return to Port in February sans two arms and a net, the appearance of a new net and arms guarantees that SpaceX is still pursuing its current method of fairing recovery. Above all else, successfully closing the loop and catching fairings could help SpaceX dramatically ramp its launch cadence and lower costs, especially critical for the affordable launch of the company’s own Starlink satellite constellation.
The Saga of Steven
For a few months of 2019, it was entirely conceivable that SpaceX had all but given up on catching Falcon fairings, having spent the better part of 2018 without a single success during both post-launch and experimentally controlled catch attempts. Admittedly, a year may feel like a huge amount of time, but SpaceX has demonstrated just how hard the reliably successful recovery of orbital-class rocket hardware really is.
Depending on how one examines the history of Falcon 9, it took SpaceX anywhere from ~30 and ~70 months and either 7 or 9 failed recovery attempts before the first Falcon 9 booster successfully landed in December 2015. Excluding helicopter-based fairing drop tests, Mr. Steven and SpaceX’s fairing recovery team have made five attempts to catch fairings in the vessel’s net after Falcon 9 launches. All have been unsuccessful, with the closest miss reportedly landing in the Pacific Ocean just 50 meters away from Mr. Steven’s massive net.
In January 2019, Mr. Steven sailed ~8000 km (5000 mi) from Port of Los Angeles to Port Canaveral, passing through the Panama Canal. For unknown reasons, during a trip out to sea to catch a Falcon 9 fairing in February, Mr. Steven abruptly turned around early and arrived in port missing two of four arms, four of eight booms, and the entirety of its custom net. The remaining arms/booms were removed and the vessel spent roughly three months docked with just a handful of excursions.
In late May, technicians rapidly installed new arms and booms, as well as a new (and blue) net, bringing about the end of months of inactivity. Mr. Steven has yet to venture beyond the safety of Port Canaveral since its new ‘catcher’s mitt’ was installed, but SpaceX has been testing the new setup by repeatedly lowering a Falcon fairing half into the net. It’s too early to raise expectations but it seems plausible that the iconic recovery vessel will be ready to attempt its first fairing catch in ~4 months as part of Falcon Heavy’s next scheduled launch, currently NET June 22.
A challenger approaches…
Although Mr. Steven’s prospects look better than they have in months, SpaceX’s fairing recovery engineers and technicians have not been sitting on their hands. Begun as a check against the growing possibility that reliably catching fairings in a (relatively) small net is just too difficult to be worth it, SpaceX has been analyzing methods of reusing fairings without Mr. Steven. Most notably, despite the failure to catch fairings out of the air, the fairing halves themselves – relying on GPS-guided parafoils – have proven to be capable of reliably performing gentle landings on the ocean surface.
This consistently leaves the fairings intact and floating on the ocean but at the cost of partial saltwater immersion and exposure to surface-level sea spray and waves. At least in today’s era of highly complex large satellites, customers typically demand that payload fairings (like Falcon 9’s) offer a clean room-quality environment once the satellite is encapsulated inside. Sea water is full of salt, organic molecules, and water, all three of which do not get along well with extremely sensitive electronics. The whole purpose of recovering and reusing fairings is to make their reuse more efficient and less expensive than simply building a new fairing. The task of cleaning composite structures to clean room-standards after salt water exposure and immersion tends to be less than friendly to both aspirations.
According to SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, however, that challenge may be distinctly solvable and could even be easier than the Mr. Steven approach. After Falcon Heavy’s commercial Arabsat 6A launch debut in April 2019, Musk again confirmed that SpaceX would be ready to test that alternate method of fairing reuse very soon and plans to do so on an “internal” (i.e. Starlink) launch later this year. As noted below, this is helped by the fact that SpaceX’s internally-developed Starlink satellites apparently have no need for the acoustic insulation panels that normally protect sensitive spacecraft from the brutal acoustic environment produced by rockets while still in Earth’s atmosphere.
For fairing reusability, the lack of those panels is just one less thing to have to worry about cleaning or replacing. Intriguingly, it’s easy to imagine that – much like SpaceX has apparently designed Starlink satellites to be resistant to intense acoustic environments – the company could have also required that they be tough enough to tolerate a less-than-pristine fairing environment. With that approach, SpaceX could continue to build new fairings for every customer launch, entirely amortizing their production cost before transferring the ‘dirty’, flight-proven fairings to internal Starlink launches.
In essence, SpaceX’s customers would quite literally be paying the company to build the very Falcon 9 boosters and fairings it will ultimately use to launch its massive Starlink constellation, requiring hundreds of launches over the next decade. The faster and more efficiently SpaceX can build and launch Starlink, the faster it can develop Starship/Super Heavy and entirely transcend any concerns of salty fairings (let alone expendable upper stages). But in the meantime, Mr. Steven will return to his catching duties and SpaceX will continue to attempt to reuse payload fairings.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
Elon Musk
The Boring Company clears final Nashville hurdle: Music City loop is full speed ahead
The Boring Company has cleared its final Nashville hurdles, putting the Music City Loop on track for 2026.
The Boring Company has cleared one of its most significant regulatory milestones yet, securing a key easement from the Music City Center in Nashville just days ago, the latest in a series of approvals that have pushed the Music City Loop project firmly into construction reality.
On March 24, 2026, the Convention Center Authority voted to grant The Boring Company access to an easement along the west side of the Music City Center property, allowing tunneling beneath the privately owned venue. The move follows a unanimous 7-0 vote by the Metro Nashville Airport Authority on February 18, and a joint state and federal approval from the Tennessee Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration on February 25. Together, these green lights have cleared the path for a roughly 10-mile underground tunnel connecting downtown Nashville to Nashville International Airport, with potential extensions into midtown along West End Avenue.
Music City Loop could highlight The Boring Company’s real disruption
Nashville was selected by The Boring Company largely because of its rapid population growth and the strain that growth has placed on surface infrastructure. Traffic has become a persistent problem for residents, convention visitors, and airport travelers alike. The Music City Loop promises an approximately 8-minute underground transit time between downtown and the Nashville International Airport (BNA), removing thousands of vehicles from surface roads daily while operating as a fully electric, zero-emissions system at no cost to taxpayers.
The project fits squarely within a broader vision Musk has championed for years. In responding to a breakdown of the Loop’s construction costs, Musk posted on X: “Tunnels are so underrated.” The comment reflected a longstanding belief that underground transit represents one of the most cost-effective and scalable infrastructure solutions available. The Boring Company has claimed it can build 13 miles of twin tunnels in Nashville for between $240 million and $300 million total, a fraction of what comparable projects cost elsewhere in the country.
Image Credit: The Boring Company/Twitter
The Las Vegas Loop, The Boring Company’s first operational system, has served as a proof of concept. During the CONEXPO trade show in March 2026, the Vegas Loop transported approximately 82,000 passengers over five days at the Las Vegas Convention Center, demonstrating the system’s capacity during large-scale events. Nashville draws millions of convention visitors and tourists each year, and local business leaders have pointed to that same capacity as a major draw for supporting the project.
The Music City Loop was first announced in July 2025. Construction began within hours of the February 25 state approval, with The Boring Company’s Prufrock tunneling machine already in the ground the same evening. The first operational segment is targeted for late 2026, with the full route expected to be complete by 2029. The project represents one of the largest privately funded infrastructure efforts currently underway in the United States.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk demands Delaware Judge recuse herself after ‘support’ post celebrating $2B court loss
A banner on the post read “Katie McCormick supports this,” using LinkedIn’s heart-in-hand “support” icon, an endorsement stronger than a simple “like.” Musk’s lawyers argue the action creates “a perception of bias against Mr. Musk,” warranting immediate recusal to preserve judicial impartiality.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s legal team has filed a motion demanding that Delaware Chancellor Kathaleen McCormick disqualify herself from an ongoing high-stakes Tesla shareholder lawsuit.
The filing, submitted March 25, cites an apparent LinkedIn “support” reaction from McCormick’s account to a post celebrating a $2 billion jury verdict against Musk in a separate California securities-fraud case.
The move escalates long-simmering tensions between Musk, Tesla, and the Delaware judiciary, where McCormick previously presided over the landmark challenge to Musk’s record $56 billion 2018 compensation package.
Delaware Supreme Court reinstates Elon Musk’s 2018 Tesla CEO pay package
The LinkedIn post was written by Harry Plotkin, a Southern California jury consultant who assisted the plaintiffs who sued Musk over 2022 tweets about his Twitter acquisition. Plotkin praised the trial team for “standing up for the little guy against the richest man in the world.”
The New York Post initially reported the story.
A banner on the post read “Katie McCormick supports this,” using LinkedIn’s heart-in-hand “support” icon, an endorsement stronger than a simple “like.” Musk’s lawyers argue the action creates “a perception of bias against Mr. Musk,” warranting immediate recusal to preserve judicial impartiality.
This appears to be unequivocal proof she denied the pay package because of her own personal beliefs and not the law.
Corruption. https://t.co/8dvgcfYuvh
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) March 25, 2026
McCormick swiftly denied intentional endorsement. In a letter to attorneys, she stated she was unaware of the interaction until LinkedIn notified her. She wrote:
“I either did not click the ‘support’ icon at all, or I did so accidentally. I do not believe that I did it accidentally.”
The chancellor maintains the reaction was inadvertent, but critics, including Musk allies, call the explanation implausible given the platform’s deliberate interface.
McCormick’s central role in the Tesla pay-package litigation underscores the stakes. In Tornetta v. Musk, in January 2024, she ruled the 2018 performance-based stock-option grant, potentially worth $56 billion at the time and now valued far higher, was invalid.
The package consisted of 12 tranches of options, each vesting only after Tesla achieved ambitious market-cap and operational milestones. McCormick found Musk exercised “transaction-specific control” over Tesla as a controlling stockholder, the board lacked sufficient independence, and proxy disclosures to shareholders were materially deficient.
Applying the entire-fairness standard, she concluded defendants failed to prove the deal was fair in process or price and ordered full rescission, an “unfathomable” remedy she described as necessary to deter fiduciary breaches.
After the ruling, Tesla shareholders ratified the package a second time in June 2024. McCormick rejected that ratification in December 2024, holding that post-trial votes could not cure defects.
Tesla appealed. On December 19 of last year, the Delaware Supreme Court unanimously reversed the rescission remedy while largely leaving McCormick’s liability findings intact. The high court deemed total unwinding inequitable and impractical, restoring the package but awarding the plaintiff only nominal $1 damages plus reduced attorneys’ fees. Musk ultimately received the full award.
The current recusal motion arises in yet another Tesla derivative suit before McCormick. Legal observers say granting it could signal heightened scrutiny of judicial social-media activity; denial might reinforce perceptions of an insular Delaware bench.
Broader fallout includes accelerated corporate migration out of Delaware, Musk himself moved Tesla’s incorporation to Texas after the first ruling, and renewed debate over whether the state’s specialized courts remain the gold standard for corporate governance disputes.
A decision is expected soon; whichever way it lands, the episode highlights the fragile balance between judicial independence and public confidence in high-profile litigation.
News
Tesla Cybercab spotted next to Model Y shows size comparison
The Model Y is Tesla’s most-popular vehicle and has been atop the world’s best-selling rankings for the last three years. The Cybercab, while yet to be released, could potentially surpass the Model Y due to its planned accessible price, potential for passive income for owners, and focus on autonomy.
The Tesla Cybercab and Tesla Model Y are perhaps two of the company’s most-discussed vehicles, and although they are geared toward different things, a recent image of the two shows a side-by-side size comparison and how they stack up dimensionally.
The Model Y is Tesla’s most-popular vehicle and has been atop the world’s best-selling rankings for the last three years. The Cybercab, while yet to be released, could potentially surpass the Model Y due to its planned accessible price, potential for passive income for owners, and focus on autonomy.
Geared as a ride-sharing vehicle, it only has two seats. However, the car will be responsible for hauling two people around to various destinations completely autonomously. How they differ in terms of size is striking.
In a new aerial image shared by drone operator and Gigafactory Texas observer Joe Tegtmeyer, the two vehicles were seen side by side, offering perhaps the first clear look at how they differ in size.
Tesla Model Y vs. Tesla Cybercab:
✅ Overall Length:⁰Model Y: 188.7 inches (4,794 mm)⁰Cybercab: ~175 inches (≈4,445 mm)⁰→ Cybercab is about 13–14 inches shorter (roughly the length of a large suitcase).
✅ Overall Width (excluding mirrors):⁰Model Y: 75.6 inches (1,920 mm)… https://t.co/PsVwzhw1pe pic.twitter.com/58JQ5ssQIO
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) March 25, 2026
Dimensionally, the differences are striking. The Model Y stretches roughly 188 inches long, 75.6 inches wide, excluding its mirrors, and stands 64 inches tall on a 113.8-inch wheelbase. The Cybercab measures approximately 175 inches in length, about a foot shorter, and just 63 inches wide.
That narrower stance gives the Cybercab a dramatically more compact silhouette, making it easier to maneuver in tight urban environments and park in standard spaces that would feel cramped for the Model Y. Height is also lower on the Cybercab, contributing to its sleek, coupe-like profile versus the Model Y’s taller crossover shape.
Visually, the contrast is unmistakable. The Model Y presents as a family-friendly SUV with conventional doors, a prominent hood, and a spacious glass roof.
The Cybercab eliminates the steering wheel and pedals entirely, creating a clean, futuristic cabin that feels more lounge than cockpit.
Its doors open in a distinctive, wide-swinging motion, and the body features smoother, more aerodynamic lines optimized for autonomy. Parked beside a Model Y, the Cybercab appears almost toy-like in width and length, yet its low-slung stance and minimalist design emphasize agility over bulk.
🚨 We caught up with the Tesla Cybercab today in The Bay Area: pic.twitter.com/9awXiK26ue
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) March 24, 2026
Cargo capacity tells another part of the story. The Model Y offers generous real-world utility: 4.1 cubic feet in the front trunk and 30.2 cubic feet behind the rear seats, expanding to 72 cubic feet with the second row folded flat.
It comfortably swallows groceries, luggage, or sports equipment for five passengers. The Cybercab, designed for two riders, trades that volume for targeted efficiency.
It features a rear hatch with enough space for two carry-on suitcases and personal items, plenty for the typical robotaxi trip, while maintaining impressive legroom and headroom for its occupants.
In short, the Model Y prioritizes versatility and family hauling with its larger footprint and abundant storage. The Cybercab sacrifices size for simplicity, cost, and urban nimbleness.
At roughly 12 inches shorter and 12 inches narrower, it embodies Tesla’s vision for scalable, affordable autonomy: smaller on the outside, smarter inside, and ready to redefine how we move through cities.
The Cybercab and Model Y both will contribute to Tesla’s fully autonomous future. However, the size comparison gives a good look into how the vehicles are the same, and how they differ, and what riders should anticipate as the Cybercab enters production in the coming weeks.
The Boring Company clears final Nashville hurdle: Music City loop is full speed ahead
Elon Musk demands Delaware Judge recuse herself after ‘support’ post celebrating $2B court loss
Tesla Cybercab spotted next to Model Y shows size comparison
Elon Musk’s Boring Co. Tunnel Vision Challenge ends with a surprise for Louisiana, Maryland and Dallas
What is Digital Optimus? The new Tesla and xAI project explained
