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 plans for largest Australian Supercharger yet
The company has a 20-stall site in the city of Goulburn in New South Wales, which is an ideal location for trips between Sydney and Canberra, two major cities.
Tesla is planning to build its largest Supercharger in Australia yet, expanding on the infrastructure the company has built for electric vehicles.
The company has a 20-stall site in the city of Goulburn in New South Wales, which is an ideal location for trips between Sydney and Canberra, two major cities.
However, according to The Driven, a new Australian Supercharger is on the way, and it is going to be the biggest in the country, accounting for more than 25 stalls total. They will likely be V4 Superchargers, Tesla’s fastest piles that enable some serious range for cars that will plug in.
@LudicrousFeed Before I forget, one for tonight. Highway service centre near Mackay with 25+ charging stalls!
Website has a couple of video renders too.https://t.co/WkuklxE7tk pic.twitter.com/BxKQ8bDUZ7— ⚡chuqtas (@chuqtas) March 11, 2026
Tesla is operating 148 active Supercharger sites in Australia, with 80 of those being available to non-Tesla EVs as a part of the company’s initiative to make things accessible for all electric vehicle owners.
The expansion of Tesla Superchargers is welcome for all EV owners, especially as there are so many automakers that have access to the network. It is widely reliable and extremely dependable; it is tough to find a Supercharger location that is completely out of service.
The opening of the stalls will be welcome for the Tesla owners of Australia, especially as the Model Y continues to be a major contributor to the company’s prowess in the market.
Tesla’s sales performance in Australia showed a mixed but challenging picture in 2025, with the company delivering 28,856 new vehicles, marking a significant 24.8% decline from 38,347 units in 2024.
This represented the brand’s largest annual drop on record and the second consecutive year of decline, amid intensifying competition from Chinese EV makers like BYD and shifting buyer preferences toward SUVs. The Tesla Model Y remained a standout performer and Australia’s best-selling electric vehicle, with 22,239 deliveries, up 4.6percent year-over-year, accounting for about 77 percent of Tesla’s total sales.
The mid-year launch of the updated “Juniper” Model Y helped sustain momentum in the popular mid-size SUV segment.
In contrast, the Model 3 sedan struggled sharply, plummeting 61.3 percent to just 6,617 units, as consumers favored SUVs and faced growing options in the sedan category.
Despite the overall dip, Tesla held onto leadership in the EV segment, capturing roughly 28 percent of the BEV market. Australia’s EV market grew robustly, surpassing 156,000 sales and reaching 13 percent market share, up 38.7 percent from 2024, highlighting strong broader adoption even as Tesla faced headwinds.
Early 2026 data suggests a rebound, with EV sales nearly doubling year-over-year in February and the Model Y showing strong gains, positioning Tesla for potential recovery amid ongoing competition.
News
Tesla Model Y L gets new entertainment feature
Beyond audio quality, Immersive Sound X aligns with Tesla’s ecosystem of over-the-air updates, potentially allowing future refinements.
Tesla is including a new entertainment feature in the Model Y L, improving the vehicle even further and making it what appears to be the best configuration of the all-electric crossover globally.
Unfortunately, we in the U.S. do not yet have access to the vehicle, and the plans for it to enter the market remain up in the air, as CEO Elon Musk has said it could appear late this year. However, there is nothing concrete at this time.
Tesla’s latest enhancement to the Model Y L is a new Immersive Sound X feature, exclusive to the Model Y L.
Model YL has new sound system setting. Immersive Sound X. This is NOT on the new Y and 3 pic.twitter.com/7OpJuzyoGf
— Electric Future (@electricfuture5) March 16, 2026
It aims to transform the in-car listening experience into something truly cinematic. First introduced by Tesla China in October 2025, this advanced audio mode is now rolling out to deliveries in Australia and New Zealand, highlighting Tesla’s approach to region-specific premium upgrades.
At its core, Immersive Sound X leverages real-time sound extraction technology to create a customizable 3D soundstage. Using advanced algorithms, it analyzes audio tracks to separate direct sounds, such as vocals or lead instruments, from ambient elements like echoes and reverb.
The system then positions direct sounds front and center while diffusing ambient sounds to the side and rear speakers, simulating an expansive virtual environment. This results in a heightened sense of depth and spatial awareness, making listeners feel as if they’re in a concert hall or studio.
What sets Immersive Sound X apart from the standard Immersive Sound found in other Tesla models is its hardware dependency and enhanced processing. The Model Y L boasts an 18-speaker system with a subwoofer, compared to the 15-speaker setup, plus a subwoofer, in the Model Y Long Range’s previous premium audio configuration.
This upgrade provides more “kick” and precision, enabling finer control over the soundstage. Unlike traditional surround sound, which requires multi-channel mixes like Dolby Atmos, Immersive Sound X works with any stereo source from platforms like Spotify or Apple Music, so every owner will be able to use it.
Tesla Model Y lineup expansion signals an uncomfortable reality for consumers
You can fine-tune the experience via an adjustable immersion slider, scaling the “size” of the virtual space to personal preferences. This caters to a more custom sound.
An Auto mode intelligently adapts based on media type, whether it’s music, podcasts, or videos, ensuring optimal immersion without manual tweaks. This feature is unavailable on standard Model Y variants (with 7 or 15 speakers) or Model 3 trims, underscoring Tesla’s strategy to differentiate higher trims through superior hardware and software integration.
Beyond audio quality, Immersive Sound X aligns with Tesla’s ecosystem of over-the-air updates, potentially allowing future refinements.
For audiophiles and casual listeners alike, it elevates mundane commutes into immersive journeys, proving Tesla’s commitment to blending cutting-edge tech with user-centric design.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk teases crazy outlook for xAI against its competitors
Musk’s response was vintage hyperbole, designed to rally supporters and dismiss doubters, something his responses on social media often do.
Elon Musk has never been one to shy away from crazy timelines, massive expectations, and outrageous outlooks. However, his recent plans for xAI and where he believes it will end up compared to its competitors are sure to stimulate conversation.
In a bold and characteristic response on X, Elon Musk fired back at a recent analysis that positioned his AI venture, xAI, as lagging behind industry frontrunners.
The post, from March 14, came as a direct reply to forecaster Peter Wildeford’s assessment, which drew from benchmarks and reporting to rank AI developers.
xAI will catch up this year and then exceed them all by such a long distance in 3 years that you will need the James Webb telescope to see who is in second place
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 14, 2026
Wildeford placed Anthropic, Google, and OpenAI in a virtual tie at the top, with xAI and Meta trailing by about seven months. Chinese players like Moonshot, Deepseek, zAI, and Alibaba were estimated to be nine months behind, while France’s Mistral lagged by about a year and a half.
Musk’s response was vintage hyperbole, designed to rally supporters and dismiss doubters, something his responses on social media often do.
He claimed xAI would “catch up this year,” meaning by the end of 2026, erasing that seven-month deficit against the leaders. But he didn’t stop there.
Musk escalated his vision to 2029, predicting xAI would “exceed them all by such a long distance” that observers would need the James Webb Space Telescope, NASA’s orbiting observatory stationed about 930,000 miles from Earth, to spot whoever lands in second place. This analogy underscores Musk’s confidence in xAI’s trajectory, implying an astronomical lead that could redefine the AI landscape.
Breaking down these claims reveals Musk’s strategic optimism. First, the short-term catch-up: xAI, launched in 2023, has already released models like Grok, but recent benchmarks, including those for Grok 4.2, have shown it falling short in capabilities compared to rivals.
Anthropic’s Claude series, Google’s Gemini, and OpenAI’s GPT models dominate in areas like reasoning, coding, and multimodal tasks. Musk’s assertion suggests aggressive scaling in compute, talent, or architecture, perhaps leveraging xAI’s ties to Tesla’s Dojo supercomputers or Musk’s vast resources, to close the gap swiftly.
The longer-term dominance by 2029 paints an even more audacious picture. Musk envisions xAI not just parity but supremacy, outpacing competitors in innovation speed and model sophistication.
This could involve breakthroughs in energy-efficient training, real-world integration, like Tesla’s robotics, or ethical AI alignment, aligning with Musk’s stated goal of “understanding the universe.”
Critics, however, point to parallels with Tesla’s Full Self-Driving delays; one reply highlighted Musk’s 2023 promise of FSD readiness. Musk has made this promise for many years, and although the system has been strong and improving, it is still a ways off from the completely autonomous operation that was expected by now.
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.2.2.5 might be the most confusing release ever
Musk’s comment highlights the intensifying U.S.-centric AI race, with xAI challenging the “three-way” dominance noted by Wharton professor Ethan Mollick, whom Wildeford quoted. As geopolitical tensions rise—evident in the Chinese firms’ lag—Musk’s tease could spur investment and talent wars.
Yet, it also invites scrutiny: Will xAI deliver, or is this another telescope-needed mirage? In an industry where timelines slip but stakes soar, Musk’s words keep the spotlight on xAI’s ambitious path forward.
Tesla plans for largest Australian Supercharger yet
Tesla Model Y L gets new entertainment feature
