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 has officially launched public Robotaxi rides in Austin, Texas, without a Safety Monitor in the vehicle, marking the first time the company has removed anyone from the vehicle other than the rider.
The Safety Monitor has been present in Tesla Robotaxis in Austin since its launch last June, maintaining safety for passengers and other vehicles, and was placed in the passenger’s seat.
Tesla planned to remove the Safety Monitor at the end of 2025, but it was not quite ready to do so. Now, in January, riders are officially reporting that they are able to hail a ride from a Model Y Robotaxi without anyone in the vehicle:
I am in a robotaxi without safety monitor pic.twitter.com/fzHu385oIb
— TSLA99T (@Tsla99T) January 22, 2026
Tesla started testing this internally late last year and had several employees show that they were riding in the vehicle without anyone else there to intervene in case of an emergency.
Tesla has now expanded that program to the public. It is not active in the entire fleet, but there are a “few unsupervised vehicles mixed in with the broader robotaxi fleet with safety monitors,” Ashok Elluswamy said:
Robotaxi rides without any safety monitors are now publicly available in Austin.
Starting with a few unsupervised vehicles mixed in with the broader robotaxi fleet with safety monitors, and the ratio will increase over time. https://t.co/ShMpZjefwB
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) January 22, 2026
Tesla Robotaxi goes driverless as Musk confirms Safety Monitor removal testing
The Robotaxi program also operates in the California Bay Area, where the fleet is much larger, but Safety Monitors are placed in the driver’s seat and utilize Full Self-Driving, so it is essentially the same as an Uber driver using a Tesla with FSD.
In Austin, the removal of Safety Monitors marks a substantial achievement for Tesla moving forward. Now that it has enough confidence to remove Safety Monitors from Robotaxis altogether, there are nearly unlimited options for the company in terms of expansion.
While it is hoping to launch the ride-hailing service in more cities across the U.S. this year, this is a much larger development than expansion, at least for now, as it is the first time it is performing driverless rides in Robotaxi anywhere in the world for the public to enjoy.
Tesla has scheduled its Earnings Call for Q4 and Full Year 2025 for next Wednesday, January 28, at 5:30 p.m. EST, and investors are already preparing to get some answers from executives regarding a wide variety of topics.
The company accepts several questions from retail investors through the platform Say, which then allows shareholders to vote on the best questions.
Tesla does not answer anything regarding future product releases, but they are willing to shed light on current timelines, progress of certain projects, and other plans.
There are five questions that range over a variety of topics, including SpaceX, Full Self-Driving, Robotaxi, and Optimus, which are currently in the lead to be asked and potentially answered by Elon Musk and other Tesla executives:
- You once said: Loyalty deserves loyalty. Will long-term Tesla shareholders still be prioritized if SpaceX does an IPO?
- Our Take – With a lot of speculation regarding an incoming SpaceX IPO, Tesla investors, especially long-term ones, should be able to benefit from an early opportunity to purchase shares. This has been discussed endlessly over the past year, and we must be getting close to it.
- When is FSD going to be 100% unsupervised?
- Our Take – Musk said today that this is essentially a solved problem, and it could be available in the U.S. by the end of this year.
- What is the current bottleneck to increase Robotaxi deployment & personal use unsupervised FSD? The safety/performance of the most recent models or people to monitor robots, robotaxis, in-car, or remotely? Or something else?
- Our Take – The bottleneck seems to be based on data, which Musk said Tesla needs 10 billion miles of data to achieve unsupervised FSD. Once that happens, regulatory issues will be what hold things up from moving forward.
- Regarding Optimus, could you share the current number of units deployed in Tesla factories and actively performing production tasks? What specific roles or operations are they handling, and how has their integration impacted factory efficiency or output?
- Our Take – Optimus is going to have a larger role in factories moving forward, and later this year, they will have larger responsibilities.
- Can you please tie purchased FSD to our owner accounts vs. locked to the car? This will help us enjoy it in any Tesla we drive/buy and reward us for hanging in so long, some of us since 2017.
- Our Take – This is a good one and should get us some additional information on the FSD transfer plans and Subscription-only model that Tesla will adopt soon.
Tesla will have its Earnings Call on Wednesday, January 28.
Elon Musk shared an incredible detail about Tesla Cybercab’s potential efficiency, as the company has hinted in the past that it could be one of the most affordable vehicles to operate from a per-mile basis.
ARK Invest released a report recently that shed some light on the potential incremental cost per mile of various Robotaxis that will be available on the market in the coming years.
The Cybercab, which is detailed for the year 2030, has an exceptionally low cost of operation, which is something Tesla revealed when it unveiled the vehicle a year and a half ago at the “We, Robot” event in Los Angeles.
Musk said on numerous occasions that Tesla plans to hit the $0.20 cents per mile mark with the Cybercab, describing a “clear path” to achieving that figure and emphasizing it is the “full considered” cost, which would include energy, maintenance, cleaning, depreciation, and insurance.
Probably true
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 22, 2026
ARK’s report showed that the Cybercab would be roughly half the cost of the Waymo 6th Gen Robotaxi in 2030, as that would come in at around $0.40 per mile all in. Cybercab, at scale, would be at $0.20.
Credit: ARK Invest
This would be a dramatic decrease in the cost of operation for Tesla, and the savings would then be passed on to customers who choose to utilize the ride-sharing service for their own transportation needs.
The U.S. average cost of new vehicle ownership is about $0.77 per mile, according to AAA. Meanwhile, Uber and Lyft rideshares often cost between $1 and $4 per mile, while Waymo can cost between $0.60 and $1 or more per mile, according to some estimates.
Tesla’s engineering has been the true driver of these cost efficiencies, and its focus on creating a vehicle that is as cost-effective to operate as possible is truly going to pay off as the vehicle begins to scale. Tesla wants to get the Cybercab to about 5.5-6 miles per kWh, which has been discussed with prototypes.
Additionally, fewer parts due to the umboxed manufacturing process, a lower initial cost, and eliminating the need to pay humans for their labor would also contribute to a cheaper operational cost overall. While aspirational, all of the ingredients for this to be a real goal are there.
It may take some time as Tesla needs to hammer the manufacturing processes, and Musk has said there will be growing pains early. This week, he said regarding the early production efforts:
“…initial production is always very slow and follows an S-curve. The speed of production ramp is inversely proportionate to how many new parts and steps there are. For Cybercab and Optimus, almost everything is new, so the early production rate will be agonizingly slow, but eventually end up being insanely fast.”
BREAKING: Tesla launches public Robotaxi rides in Austin with no Safety Monitor
Tesla Earnings Call: Top 5 questions investors are asking
