Connect with us

News

SpaceX rocket catch simulation raises more questions about concept

Published

on

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.

Advertisement

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%.

Advertisement

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.

Eric Ralph is Teslarati's senior spaceflight reporter and has been covering the industry in some capacity for almost half a decade, largely spurred in 2016 by a trip to Mexico to watch Elon Musk reveal SpaceX's plans for Mars in person. Aside from spreading interest and excitement about spaceflight far and wide, his primary goal is to cover humanity's ongoing efforts to expand beyond Earth to the Moon, Mars, and elsewhere.

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

The Starship V3 static fire everyone was waiting for just happened

SpaceX fired all 33 Raptor 3 engines on Starship V3 today clearing the path for Flight 12.

Published

on

By

SpaceX Starship V3 from Starbase, Texas on April 14, 2026

SpaceX is that much closer to launching their next-gen Starship after completing today’s full duration static fire of all 33 Raptor 3 engines out of Starbase, Texas. This marks the most powerful rocket engine test ever conducted and a direct signal that Flight 12, the maiden voyage of Starship V3, is imminent. SpaceX confirmed the test on X, posting that the full duration firing was completed ahead of the vehicle’s next flight test.

The road to today started on March 16, when Booster 19 completed a shorter 10-engine static fire, also at the newly constructed Pad 2. That test ended early due to a ground systems issue but confirmed all installed Raptor 3 engines started cleanly. Booster 19 returned to the Mega Bay, received its remaining 23 engines for a full complement of 33, and rolled back out this week for the complete test campaign. Musk confirmed earlier this month that Flight 12 is now 4 to 6 weeks away.

Countdown: America is going back to the Moon and SpaceX holds the key to what comes after

The numbers behind today’s test are genuinely hard to put in context. Each Raptor 3 engine produces roughly 280 tons of thrust, and with all 33 firing simultaneously, this generates approximately 9,240 tons of combined thrust, more than any rocket in history. For context, that’s enough thrust to lift the entire Empire State Building, and then some. V3 stands 408 feet tall and can carry over 100 tons to low Earth orbit in a fully reusable configuration. The V2 generation topped out at around 35 tons.

Historically, a successful full-duration static fire is the last major ground milestone before launch. SpaceX has followed this pattern with every Starship iteration since the program began in 2023.  Musk has been direct about the ambition behind all of it. “I am highly confident that the V3 design will achieve full reusability,” he wrote on X earlier this year. Full reusability of both stages is the foundation of SpaceX’s plan to make regular flights to the Moon and Mars economically viable. Today’s test brings that goal one significant step closer.


Starship V3 delivers on two most critical promises of full reusability and in-orbit refueling. The reusability case is straightforward, and one we have seen with Falcon 9 wherein the rocket can fly again within a day rather than building a new one for every mission. It’s the only economic model that makes frequent lunar cargo runs viable. The in-orbit refueling piece is less obvious but equally essential. To reach the Moon with enough payload, Starship requires roughly ten dedicated tanker flights to fuel up a propellant depot in low Earth orbit before it can even begin its journey to the lunar surface. That capability has never been demonstrated at scale, and Flight 12 is the first step toward proving it works. As Teslarati reported, NASA’s Artemis II crew completed a historic lunar flyby earlier this month, the first humans to travel beyond low Earth orbit since 1972, but getting astronauts to actually land and eventually supply a permanent Moon base requires a cargo pipeline that only a fully reusable, refuelable Starship V3 can deliver at the volume and cost NASA’s plans demand.

SpaceX Starship full duration static fire on April 14, 2026 from Starbase, Texas (Credit: SpaceX)

SpaceX Starship full duration static fire on April 14, 2026 from Starbase, Texas (Credit: SpaceX)

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Full Self-Driving shows stunning maneuver in Europe to silence skeptics

In a striking demonstration of autonomous driving prowess, Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) system recently showcased its capabilities on the narrow rural roads of the Netherlands. Captured in two in-car videos, the system encountered scenarios that would challenge even the most experienced human drivers.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla Full Self-Driving, fresh on the heels of its approval for operation on European roads for the first time, showed off a stunning maneuver that will certainly silence any skeptics on the continent.

Fresh off its approval in the Netherlands, Full Self-Driving is working toward a significant expansion into more parts of Europe.

In a striking demonstration of autonomous driving prowess, Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) system recently showcased its capabilities on the narrow rural roads of the Netherlands. Captured in two in-car videos, the system encountered scenarios that would challenge even the most experienced human drivers.

In the first clip, a wide tractor occupied more than half the lane on a tight two-way road. Rather than braking abruptly or forcing a collision risk, FSD smoothly edged the vehicle onto the adjacent bike path—using the extra space with precision—before seamlessly returning to the lane once clear.

The second clip was equally demanding: while overtaking a group of cyclists, an oncoming car approached at speed.

FSD maintained a safe, minimal buffer to the cyclists while timing the pass perfectly, avoiding any swerve or hesitation that could unsettle passengers or other road users.

This maneuver highlights FSD’s advanced spatial reasoning and predictive planning. On roads often under three meters wide, with no room for error, the system calculated available clearance in real time, incorporated shoulder and path geometry, and executed a controlled deviation without compromising safety.

It treated the bike path as a legitimate extension of navigable space, something many drivers might hesitate to do, while respecting Dutch road norms and cyclist priority.

Such feats align closely with a growing library of impressive FSD maneuvers documented on camera worldwide.

In urban Amsterdam, for instance, FSD has navigated the world’s densest cyclist environments, weaving through hundreds of unpredictable bike movements on canal-side streets with tram tracks and pedestrians.

One uncut drive showed it yielding smoothly at crossings, overtaking where needed, and even handling a near-perfect auto-park in a tight residential spot, demonstrating the same low-speed precision seen in the rural clips.

Teslas using FSD have tackled turbo roundabouts in the Netherlands, complex multi-lane circles notorious for geometry challenges, merging confidently while yielding to traffic. Similar clips depict smooth handling of construction zones, emergency vehicle pull-overs, and gated parking barriers, where the car stops precisely, waits for clearance, and proceeds without driver input.

Collectively, these examples illustrate FSD’s evolution toward handling the unpredictable.

The rural Netherlands maneuvers aren’t isolated. Instead, they reflect a pattern of spatial awareness, cyclist deference, and traffic anticipation seen from city streets to highways.

As FSD continues refining through real-world data, videos like this one are certainly building a compelling case for its readiness on Europe’s varied roads.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla utilizes its ‘Rave Cave’ for new awesome safety feature

Part of the massive interior overhaul of both the Model 3 “Highland” and Model Y “Juniper” was the addition of interior accent lighting to help bring out the mood of the vehicle, increase the customization of the interior, and to create a unique listening experience.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla | X

Tesla is utilizing its ‘Rave Cave’ for an awesome new safety feature that will arrive with the upcoming Spring Update for 2026.

Part of the massive interior overhaul of both the Model 3 “Highland” and Model Y “Juniper” was the addition of interior accent lighting to help bring out the mood of the vehicle, increase the customization of the interior, and to create a unique listening experience.

Tesla added a Sync Lights feature that will strobe the accent strips with the beat of the music.

It is one of the most unique and one of the coolest non-functional features of a Tesla, as it does not improve the driving of the vehicle, but makes it a cool and personal addition to the interior.

However, Tesla is going to take it one step further, as the Rave Cave lights will now be used for blind spot recognition. This feature will be added as the Spring 2026 Update starts to roll out.

Tesla writes:

“Accent lights now turn red when an object is in your blind spot and your turn signal is engaged, or when an approaching object is detected while parked.”

This neat new safety feature will now increase the likelihood of a driver, who is operating their Tesla manually, of seeing the blind spot warnings that are currently available on the A pillar and on the center touchscreen.

These new alerts will now warn drivers of cross traffic as they back out of a parking space with little to no visibility of what is coming. It is a great new addition that will only increase the safety of the vehicles, while also utilizing something that is already installed in these specific Model 3 and Model Y units.

The Model 3 and Model Y were the central focus of the Spring 2026 Update, especially considering the fact that the Model S and Model X are basically gone, with only a few hundred units left. Additionally, Tesla included new Immersive Sound and Car Visualization for the Model 3 and Model Y specifically in this new update.

Continue Reading