News
SpaceX scraps Starship SN8 wreckage, clears landing zone for next launch
In spite of tentative plans for preservation, SpaceX has fully scrapped the wreckage of the first high-altitude Starship prototype, clearing the landing zone it impacted for its successor’s imminent launch debut.
Known as serial number 8 or SN8, the Starship prototype was the first of any kind to fly beyond 150 meters (~500 ft), reaching an altitude of 12.5 km (~7.8 mi) on December 9th during its breathtaking launch debut. In an unexpected twist, SpaceX kept Starship SN8’s thrust to weight ratio as low as possible, stretching what could have been a two or three-minute test into an almost seven-minute ordeal with three consecutive Raptor engine cutoffs during the ascent.
At apogee, SN8 used cold gas thrusters to flip into a belly-down orientation and free-fell ~95% of the way back to Earth before igniting two of its three Raptor engines, performing a wild powered flip back into a vertical landing position and nearly securing a soft landing. Unfortunately, around 10-20 seconds before that planned landing, what Musk later described as low methane header tank pressure starved the Starship’s engines of fuel and more or less cut all appreciable thrust, causing SN8 to reach its landing zone traveling about 40 m/s (~90 mph) too fast. The rocket impacted the concrete pad, crumpled, and exploded.
By all accounts, success was one of the less likely outcomes SpaceX expected from SN8’s high-altitude debut, with Musk himself estimating the odds of total success to be just 33%. Additionally, Starship SN8 effectively made it all the way to a low-speed landing regime that Starships SN5 and SN6 all but flawlessly demonstrated with back-to-back 150m hops and landings in August and September 2020.
In other words, despite the explosive end, SN8’s high-altitude launch debut was a spectacular success for SpaceX’s Starship program – possibly even preferable to a perfect landing given that it uncovered an unexpected issue with fuel tank pressurization. Beyond the landing failure, the Starship checked every single box on SpaceX’s test flight list, successfully debuting multiple Raptors, demonstrating multiple in-flight engine shutdowns and engine relights; proving that an unprecedented ‘skydiver-style’ landing maneuver is possible and viable; and successfully testing Starship’s ability to control itself in that bellyflop orientation with thrusters and four massive flaps.
Speaking in a recent interview with Ars Technica, in the words of pragmatic SpaceX COO and President Gwynne Shotwell, SN8’s launch debut “de-risked [the Starship] program pretty massively.” According to Musk, SpaceX engineers were quickly able to determine why Starship SN8’s methane header tank was unable to maintain the fuel flow (pressure) needed for Raptor’s landing burn(s) and quickly implemented a solution.
Instead of pressurizing autogenously with methane gas, Starship SN9 will use helium to pressurize its fuel header tank, serving as a temporary fix while SpaceX determines what changes need to be made to get rid of that helium crutch. Landing pad now cleared of Starship remains and SN8’s impact crater more or less repaired, the only thing standing between Starship SN9 and its own 12.5 km launch debut is a triple-Raptor static fire test. Originally expected as early as January 4th, SpaceX never made it more than a few minutes into the attempt, while a backup window on January 5th was canceled later that evening. The test could now occur no earlier than (NET) Wednesday, January 6th.
Thankfully, although SpaceX was unable to save the entirety of Starship SN8’s wrecked nose section, the company did manage to extract a largely intact nose flap. The rest of the remains were scrapped on site and trucked away but it’s possible that certain significant components of SN8 – particularly the recovered flap – will eventually find themselves on display at one or more SpaceX facilities.
Tesla just gave what is perhaps its biggest signal yet that the launch of the Cybercab, its autonomous ride-hailing-geared car, is imminent.
The Cybercab has been spotted outside of Gigafactory Texas in massive numbers over the past few days, with hundreds of units being stored on property just days after the vehicle received a Certificate of Conformity from the EPA.
Today, things were a bit different.
Cybercabs spotted on Giga Texas property today had an addition: a Cybercab decal on the side, reminiscent of the “Robotaxi” ones that were placed on Model Ys just as the company launched its ride-sharing platform about a year ago.
Giga Texas drone operator Joe Tegtmeyer noticed the change today:
Tesla Cybercabs are now getting “Cybercab” logos on the side of them!
Tesla did the same with Model Ys that were given “Robotaxi” logos: https://t.co/DanANtw1m7 pic.twitter.com/FqOhH0S9Ks
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 19, 2026
Tesla could be signaling that the Cybercab is preparing to enter the Robotaxi fleet in the coming weeks or months with this move. It seems more symbolic than anything; Tesla is ready to throw Cybercabs in the ride-hailing platform just as it did with Model Ys last year.
The addition of the Certificate of Conformity awarded to the Cybercab is another major factor working to Tesla’s advantage. The company now has permission from the EPA to allow the vehicle to operate on public roads and enter the chain of commerce. It’s officially street legal.
Tesla Cybercab specs revealed: range, curb weight, range ratings, and more
The big question that remains is whether Tesla will be able to operate the car without a safety monitor, especially considering it plans to put the car out there without a steering wheel or pedals. With the Cybercab only having a seating capacity of two, it is hard to believe Tesla will even consider putting a Safety Monitor in the car.
It did recently self-certify as Level 4 and has the ability to operate driverless vehicles in the State of Texas under a law that took effect on May 28. You can read more about that here:
Tesla’s Robotaxi dreams just took a massive step toward reality
We’d imagine Cybercabs will be on the roads as soon as July, but August will likely be a better estimate of when the car will be entered into the Cybercab fleet. It all depends at where Tesla is, as they’ve truly prioritized safety with the rollout of the Robotaxi platform.
Elon Musk has publicly questioned Moody’s credit assessments following the rating agency’s decision to assign SpaceX a Baa1 investment-grade rating, two notches above Tesla’s Baa3. The comments came amid discussions comparing the two companies’ financial profiles.
SpaceX earned its first-time Baa1 rating with a stable outlook from Moody’s. The agency highlighted the company’s leadership in orbital launches, the growing recurring revenue from its Starlink satellite network, strong vertical integration, U.S. government contracts, and emerging opportunities in AI infrastructure.
These factors were cited as supporting robust cash flows, margin expansion, and financial flexibility.
Musk responded directly: “Tesla’s credit rating is ridiculously low tbh,” and added, “Yeah, makes no sense. Tesla has over $40B in cash, no debt, and is consistently profitable!” His remarks underscored Tesla’s balance sheet strength and profitability at a time when many traditional automakers continue to report losses in the shift to electric vehicles.
Yeah, makes no sense.
Tesla has over $40B in cash, no debt and is consistently profitable!
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 19, 2026
Tesla maintains a leading position in the global EV market, with diversification into energy and storage, battery technology, and robotics through projects like Optimus. Recent financial updates show the company generated positive free cash flow of $1.4 billion in Q1 2026, supported by operating cash flow of $3.9 billion. Cash and short-term investments stood at approximately $44.7 billion.
Moody’s has affirmed Tesla’s Baa3 issuer rating with a stable outlook in periodic reviews, acknowledging the company’s EV leadership, technology strengths, including AI for autonomous vehicles, solid profitability, and strong liquidity.
Tesla (TSLA) scores Baa3 Moody’s rating for ‘stable’ outlook
However, the agency has also noted challenges in the automotive segment and expectations for margin pressures.
Musk’s critique highlights a common debate about how traditional rating methodologies apply to high-growth, capital-intensive technology companies. SpaceX benefits from long-term government-backed contracts and diversified, recurring revenue streams, while Tesla’s valuation reflects heavy investment in future technologies such as autonomy and robotics.
Both ratings remain investment-grade, yet the one-notch difference has fueled online discussion about potential inconsistencies in evaluating innovative firms.
The exchange comes as SpaceX explores financing options following its recent valuation milestones, while Tesla continues executing on its multi-year roadmap. Musk’s pointed response serves as a reminder that credit ratings, though influential for borrowing costs, represent one lens through which markets assess corporate strength—and that company leaders often view their financial positions through the lens of long-term innovation and cash generation rather than short-term risk metrics alone.
A new report from Reuters claims that a transport authority in Sweden is pushing back against the approval of Tesla’s Full Self-Driving suite because it will travel over speed limits.
The report says the Swedish Transport Administration (TRV) recommends the European Union votes against FSD’s approval. TRV believes it should not be approved until Tesla disables FSD’s ability to speed.
TRV sent a letter to the European Union’s Technical Committee on Motor Vehicles (TCMV), which is set to meet on June 30 to discuss the potential approval of the Tesla FSD suite in the country. Tesla, which has received various approvals in Europe over the past two months, has not provided a comment.
Teslas operating on FSD do travel over the speed limit, depending on the Speed Profile that is chosen. Drivers have the ability to disengage FSD at any point; Tesla specifically states that those supervising the suite are responsible for its actions.
Let’s cut to the chase: humans operating any vehicle speed almost daily in the United States. Realistically, speed limits in the U.S. are more frequently treated as speed minimums. However, other countries are different, and driving behaviors are less aggressive.
TRV believes that “allowing automated systems to systematically exceed legal speed limits…risks undermining both the legal framework and the expected safety benefits of vehicle automation,” the report stated. It’s surprising that Tesla has not received this claim from other countries previously.
This could be a good argument to bring Max Speed back, the setting that previously allowed the driver to choose the absolute fastest the car would travel.
This would still put the responsibility of supervision in the hands of the driver. It would allow the driver to choose whether the car would travel over the speed limit or not, acknowledging that they set the speed, and if they get pulled over, there would be no ability to argue it.
However, it does not seem as if this is something Tesla will do, especially considering many U.S. drivers have requested the feature in an effort to eliminate speeding or at least tone it down. The company has not shown any interest in bringing it back.
Tesla has approvals for FSD in Europe in Estonia, Lithuania, Denmark, the Netherlands, and Belgium.
Tesla gives its biggest signal yet that Cybercab launch is imminent
Elon Musk challenges Tesla credit rating from Moody’s after SpaceX gets a higher one
