News
SpaceX rocket catch simulation raises more questions about concept
CEO Elon Musk has published the first official visualization of what SpaceX’s plans to catch Super Heavy boosters might look like in real life. However, the simulation he shared raises just as many questions as it answers.
Since at least late 2020, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has been floating the idea of catching Starships and Super Heavy boosters out of the sky as an alternative to having the several-dozen-ton steel rockets use basic legs to land on the ground. This would be a major departure from SpaceX’s highly successful Falcon family, which land on a relatively complex set of deployable legs that can be retracted after most landings. The flexible, lightweight structures have mostly been reliable and easily reusable but Falcon boosters occasionally have rough landings, which can use up disposable shock absorbers or even damage the legs and make boosters hard to safely recover and slower to reuse.
As a smaller rocket, Falcon boosters have to be extremely lightweight to ensure healthy payload margins and likely weigh about 25-30 tons empty and 450 tons fully fueled – an excellent mass ratio for a reusable rocket. While it’s still good to continue that practice of rigorous mass optimization with Starship, the vehicle is an entirely different story. Once plans to stretch the Starship upper stage’s tanks and add three more Raptors are realized, it’s quite possible that Starship will be capable of launching more than 200 tons (~440,000 lb) of payload to low Earth orbit (LEO) with ship and booster recovery.
One might think that SpaceX, with the most capable rocket ever built potentially on its hands, would want to take advantage of that unprecedented performance to make the rocket itself – also likely to be one of the most complex launch vehicles ever – simpler and more reliable early on in the development process. Generally speaking, that would involve sacrificing some of its payload capability and adding systems that are heavier but simpler and more robust. Once Starship is regularly flying to orbit and gathering extensive flight experience and data, SpaceX might then be able refine the rocket, gradually reducing its mass and improving payload to orbit by optimizing or fully replacing suboptimal systems and designs.
Instead, SpaceX appears to be trying to substantially optimize Starship before it’s attempted a single orbital launch. The biggest example is Elon Musk’s plan to catch Super Heavy boosters – and maybe Starships, too – for the sole purpose of, in his own words, “[saving] landing leg mass [and enabling] immediate reflight of [a giant, unwieldy rocket].” Musk, SpaceX executives, or both appear to be attempting to refine a rocket that has never flown. Further, based on a simulation of a Super Heavy “catch” Musk shared on January 20th, all that oddly timed effort may end up producing a solution that’s actually worse than what it’s trying to replace.
Based on the simulated telemetry shown in the visualization, Super Heavy’s descent to the landing zone appears to be considerably gentler than the ‘suicide burn’ SpaceX routinely uses on Falcon. By decelerating as quickly as possible and making landing burns as short as possible, Falcon saves a considerable amount of propellant during recovery – extra propellant that, if otherwise required, would effectively increase Falcon’s dry mass and decrease its payload to orbit. In the Super Heavy “catch” Musk shared, the booster actually appears to be landing – just on an incredibly small patch of steel on the tower’s ‘Mechazilla’ arms instead of a concrete pad on the ground.
Aside from a tiny bit of lateral motion, the arms appear motionless during the ‘catch,’ making it more of a landing. Further, Super Heavy is shown decelerating rather slowly throughout the simulation and appears to hover for almost 10 seconds near the end. That slow, cautious descent and even slower touchdown may be necessary because of how incredibly accurate Super Heavy has to be to land on a pair of hardpoints with inches of lateral margin for error and maybe a few square feet of usable surface area. The challenge is a bit like if SpaceX, for some reason, made Falcon boosters land on two elevated ledges about as wide as car tires. Aside from demanding accurate rotational control, even the slightest lateral deviation would cause the booster to topple off the pillars and – in the case of Super Heavy – fall about a hundred feet onto concrete, where it would obviously explode.
What that slow descent and final hover mean is that the Super Heavy landing shown would likely cost significantly more delta V (propellant) than a Falcon-style suicide burn. Propellant has mass, so Super Heavy would likely need to burn at least 5-10 tons more to carefully land on arms that aren’t actively matching the booster’s position and velocity. Ironically, SpaceX could probably quite easily add rudimentary, fixed legs – removing most of the bad aspects of Falcon legs – to Super Heavy with a mass budget of 10 tons. But even if SpaceX were to make those legs as simple, dumb, and reliable as physically possible and they wound up weighing 20 tons total, the inherent physics of rocketry mean that adding 20 tons to Super Heavy’s likely 200-ton dry mass would only reduce the rocket’s payload to orbit by about 3-5 tons or 1-3%.
Further, per Musk’s argument that landing on the arms would enhance the speed of reuse, it’s difficult to see how landing Super Heavy or Starship in the exact same corridor – but on the ground instead of on the arms – would change anything. If Super Heavy is accurate enough to land on a few square meters of steel, it must inherently be accurate enough to land within the far larger breadth of those arms. The only process landing on the arms would clearly remove is reattaching the arms to a landed booster or ship, which it’s impossible to imagine would save more than a handful of minutes or maybe an hour of work. SpaceX’s Falcon booster turnaround record is currently 27 days, so it’s even harder to imagine why SpaceX would be worrying about cutting minutes or a few hours off of the turnaround and reuse of a rocket that has never even performed a full static fire test – let alone attempted an orbital-class launch, reentry, or landing.
Put simply, while Starbase’s launch tower arms will undoubtedly be useful for quickly lifting and stacking Super Heavy and Starship, it’s looking more and more likely that using those arms as a landing platform will, at best, be an inferior alternative to basic Falcon-style landings. More importantly, even if everything works perfectly, the arms actually cooperate with boosters to catch them, and it’s possible for Super Heavy to avoid hovering and use a more efficient suicide burn, the apparent best-case outcome of all that effort is marginally faster reuse and perhaps a 5% increase in payload to orbit. Only time will tell if such a radical change proves to be worth such marginal benefits.
News
Tesla Roadster unveiling set for this month: what to expect
As Tesla finally edges toward production and an updated reveal, enthusiasts aren’t asking for compromises; they’re demanding the original vision be honored. Here are five clear expectations that will come with the vehicle’s unveiling, which is still set for later this month, hopefully.
The Tesla Roadster has been the ultimate carrot on a stick since its 2017 unveiling. Promised as the fastest production car ever made, with 0-60 mph in under two seconds and a top speed over 250 mph, it has endured years of delays.
As Tesla finally edges toward production and an updated reveal, enthusiasts aren’t asking for compromises; they’re demanding the original vision be honored. Here are five clear expectations that will come with the vehicle’s unveiling, which is still set for later this month, hopefully.
Performance and Safety Do Not Go Hand in Hand, and That’s the Point
The Roadster is not a family sedan or a daily commuter. It is a no-holds-barred supercar meant to embarrass six-figure exotics on track days. Tesla should resist the temptation to load it with every passive-safety nanny and electronic guardian that dulls the raw feedback drivers crave.
Owners want to feel the road, not be shielded from it. Strip away unnecessary electronic limits so the car can deliver the visceral thrill Elon Musk originally described. Safety ratings will still be strong because of Tesla’s structural excellence, but the Roadster’s mission is speed, not coddling.
He said late last year:
“This is not a…safety is not the main goal. If you buy a Ferrari, safety is not the number one goal. I say, if safety is your number one goal, do not buy the Roadster…We’ll aspire not to kill anyone in this car. It’ll be the best of the last of the human-driven cars. The best of the last.”
Musk was clear that this will not be a car that will be the safest in Tesla’s lineup, but that’s the point. It’s not made for anything other than pushing the limits.
Tesla Needs to Come Through on a HUGE Feature
The Roadster unveiling would be wildly disappointing if it were only capable of driving. Tesla has long teased the potential ability to float or hover, and they need to come through on something that is along those lines.
The SpaceX cold-gas thruster package was never a joke. Musk, at one time, explicitly said owners could opt for a set of thrusters capable of lifting the car off the ground for short hops or dramatic launches. That feature is what separates the Roadster from every other hypercar on the planet.
If the production version arrives without it—or with a watered-down “maybe later” version—enthusiasts will feel betrayed. Deliver the thrusters, make them functional, and let the Roadster literally hover above the competition.
An Updated Design Might Be Warranted
It’s been nine years since Tesla first rolled off the next-gen Roadster design and showed it to the world.
The 2017 concept still looks sharp, but eight years is an eternity in automotive styling. The sharp lines and aggressive stance now compete against the angular Cybertruck and the next-generation vehicles rolling out of Fremont and Austin.
Tesla Roadster patent hints at radical seat redesign ahead of reveal
A subtle refresh, maybe with sharper headlights, revised aero elements, and modern materials, would keep the Roadster feeling current without losing its identity. Fans don’t want a complete redesign, just enough evolution to prove Tesla still cares.
Self-Driving Isn’t a Necessity for the Tesla Roadster
Full Self-Driving hardware and software belong in the Model 3, Model Y, and the upcoming robotaxi—not in a two-seat rocket built for canyon carving. The Roadster’s entire appeal is the direct connection between driver, steering wheel, and asphalt.
Offering FSD as standard would dilute the purity that separates it from every other Tesla. Make autonomy an optional delete or simply omit it. Let the Roadster remain the purest driving machine in the lineup, because that’s what it is all about.
Tesla Needs to Come Through on the Unveiling Timeline
The last thing Tesla needs right now is another complaint about not hitting timelines or expectations. This unveiling has already been pushed back one time, from April 1 to “probably in late April.”
Repeated delays have tested even the most patient fans. Whatever date the company now sets for the next major reveal or start of production must be met. No more “next year” promises. The Roadster has waited long enough. When it finally arrives, it must feel worth every extra month.
If Tesla hits these five marks, the Roadster won’t just be another fast car—it will be the machine that redefines what a Tesla can be. The world is watching.
News
Tesla Cabin Camera gets an incredible new feature for added driver safety
The company quietly expanded the capabilities of its in-cabin camera with the rollout of Software Update 2026.8.6. Tesla hacker greentheonly revealed that coding for the software version provides details on now tracking the age of the driver.
Tesla’s interior Cabin-facing Camera just got a brand new feature that is an incredible addition, as it provides yet another layer of added safety.
The company quietly expanded the capabilities of its in-cabin camera with the rollout of Software Update 2026.8.6. Tesla hacker greentheonly revealed that coding for the software version provides details on now tracking the age of the driver.
The camera, which is positioned just above the rearview mirror, is now performing facial analysis to estimate the driver’s age. While not yet user-facing, the feature is the latest example of Tesla’s ongoing push to refine its driver monitoring system for both everyday safety and future Robotaxi operations.
Ha, interesting, cabin camera / driver monitor is now (2026.8.6) doing “driver age” checking.
I wonder if it’s going to filter out children or elderly too?
— green (@greentheonly) April 10, 2026
The cabin camera already processes images entirely onboard the vehicle for privacy, sharing data with Tesla only if owners enable it during safety-critical events.
Age estimation likely uses computer vision to classify facial features, similar to existing attention-tracking algorithms. Potential applications include preventing underage drivers from engaging Full Self-Driving (FSD) or shifting into drive, acting as a secondary safety lock.
It could also be linked to Robotaxi readiness: the upcoming Cybercab will need robust occupant verification to ensure children cannot hail or ride unsupervised.
In consumer vehicles, it could enable tailored FSD behaviors—more conservative acceleration and braking for elderly drivers, for instance—or simply block unauthorized use by minors.
Beyond age checks, the cabin camera powers Tesla’s comprehensive driver monitoring system, introduced years earlier and continuously improved. It first gained prominence for detecting inattentiveness. When Autopilot or FSD is active, the camera tracks eye gaze, head position, and steering inputs in real time.
If the driver looks away too long or fails to keep their hands ready, the system issues escalating visual and audible alerts before disengaging assistance. This has dramatically reduced misuse cases and helped Tesla meet stricter regulatory demands for hands-on supervision.
The camera also monitors for drowsiness. Activated above roughly 40 mph (65 km/h) after at least 10 minutes of manual driving, the Driver Drowsiness Warning analyzes facial cues—frequency of yawns and blinks—alongside driving patterns like lane drifting or erratic steering.
When fatigue is detected, a clear on-screen message and chime prompt the driver to pull over and rest, or even to activate Full Self-Driving. Tesla explicitly states this feature enhances active safety without relying on facial recognition for identity.
These layered capabilities create a robust safety net. Inattentiveness detection alone has curbed distracted driving during assisted operation. Drowsiness alerts address a leading cause of highway crashes by intervening before impairment escalates.
Adding age verification extends this protection: it could flag inexperienced young drivers for extra caution or restrict high-autonomy features, while preparing vehicles for a future where robotaxis must safely manage passengers of all ages.
With privacy safeguards intact and processing done locally, Tesla’s cabin camera continues evolving from a simple attention monitor into a sophisticated guardian—advancing safer roads today and autonomous mobility tomorrow.
Elon Musk
Tesla’s Semi truck factory is open with a detail that changes everything
Tesla’s dedicated Nevada Semi factory has opened, targeting 50,000 trucks per year as fleet adoptions accelerate nationwide.
Nearly nine years after Elon Musk unveiled the Tesla Semi in November 2017, the company is now opening a dedicated factory just outside of Reno, Nevada, and ramping toward mass production of 50,000 trucks per year.
Volume production began in March 2026 at the new Tesla Semi factory, with the competitive advantage not being the factory itself. Rather, it’s where Tesla built it. By constructing the 1.7 million square foot facility directly adjacent to Gigafactory Nevada in Sparks, Tesla closed the one supply chain loop that had delayed the Semi program for years. The 4680 battery cells that power the Semi are manufactured in the same complex, which significantly streamlines supply logistics. That single decision eliminates the bottleneck that forced Tesla to prioritize battery supply for passenger cars over the Semi throughout 2020, 2021, and 2022, which is precisely why the first deliveries slipped three years past the original target. Every other electric truck manufacturer sources its battery cells from a separate supplier, ships them to a separate factory, and absorbs the cost and delay that comes with that. Tesla built its Semi factory around its battery factory, and that vertical integration is what makes 50,000 trucks per year a realistic number rather than an aspirational one.
At the 2025 Annual Shareholder Meeting, Musk was direct about where things stood, stating “Starting next year, we will manufacture the Tesla Semi. We already have a lot of prototype Semis in operation – PepsiCo and other companies have been using them for some time. But in 2026, we’ll begin volume production at our Northern Nevada factory.” Full ramp to volume output is targeted before June 30, 2026.
🚨 Awesome new video showing the new Tesla Semi factory in Sparks, Nevada
The future of sustainable logistics is being built here: pic.twitter.com/dbiGV8FYn3
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 10, 2026
The first limited deliveries happened in December 2022 to PepsiCo, which eventually doubled its fleet to 50 trucks out of its California distribution facility. Since then the Semi has been showing up in more corporate fleets. As Teslarati noted in March, a Ralph’s Supermarkets branded Semi was spotted on a Los Angeles highway, confirming Kroger’s partnership with Tesla to deploy up to 500 electric Semis. Walmart, Costco, Sysco, US Foods, DHL, Hight Logistics and WattEV are among the companies actively running or receiving units. DHL logged real-world efficiency of 1.72 kWh per mile under a full 75,000 pound load over 388 miles, matching Tesla’s targets closely.
The 2026 production model arrives with meaningful upgrades over the original, with a 1,000 pound weight reduction, updated aerodynamics, and support for 1.2 MW Megacharger speeds that can restore 60% of range in around 30 minutes during a mandatory driver rest break. Tesla opened its first public Megacharger in Ontario, California in March, positioned near the I-10 and I-15 interchange serving the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. The company plans 37 Megacharger sites by end of 2026 and 66 total across 15 states by early 2027, with construction beginning at the nation’s largest truck stop operator in the first half of this year.
Tesla reveals various improvements to the Semi in new piece with Jay Leno
Musk has described the Semi’s economics as a straightforward case. “The Semi is a TCO no-brainer,” he said, noting the total cost of ownership is “much, much cheaper than any other transportation you could have.” At under $300,000, the truck costs roughly double a comparable diesel, but California’s $200,000 per vehicle subsidy has driven over 1,000 state orders alone. As Teslarati has tracked, the prototype fleet accumulated over 13.5 million miles with 95% fleet uptime before production ever scaled. The factory opening now turns that proof of concept into a production program.
Tesla Roadster unveiling set for this month: what to expect
Tesla Cabin Camera gets an incredible new feature for added driver safety
