Connect with us

News

SpaceX’s odd Starbase propellant storage tank prototype passes first test

A prototype of SpaceX's custom-built Starbase propellant storage tanks appears to have passed its first test without issue. (NASASpaceflight - bocachicagal)

Published

on

Likely to the relief of many, SpaceX appears to have successfully tested a prototype of the custom-built Starbase propellant storage tanks that will eventually hold thousands of tons of fuel and oxidizer.

For reasons unknown, SpaceX’s built its first ground support equipment (GSE) ‘test tank’ – a subscale prototype designed to quickly verify basic production quality and design goals – months after it began mass-producing operational storage tanks. In fact, of the seven total GSE tanks expected to be built, SpaceX has already completed seven, installed five, and scrapped one. Known as GSE4, SpaceX actually used modified parts of that scrapped tank to assemble the GSE test tank that first rolled to Starbase’s launch (and test) facilities on August 23rd.

Two days later, SpaceX subjected the small tank to its first test.

Given that SpaceX appears to have almost retroactively assembled the GSE4 test tank after building the final products, the results from its testing were always going to be significantly more anxiety-inducing than any of the more than half-dozen other tanks the company has tested in the last year and a half. Having already fabricated, assembled, or even installed six of seven planned GSE tanks, the discovery of major issues during testing could potentially cause months of delays by forcing SpaceX to perform lengthy repairs or even fully scrap all six existing tanks and start over.

SpaceX has built itself a farm of propellant storage tanks that are almost identical to the tanks used on Starships and Super Heavy boosters. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

Thankfully, at least for the time being, it appears that SpaceX can write off those potential worst-case scenarios. On August 25th, SpaceX took advantage of a test window initially believed to be for Starship S20 and put the cobbled-together GSE4 tank through its paces for the first time. As with previous test tanks, all SpaceX can really do is fill the prototype with liquid nitrogen (LN2), a non-flammable alternative to liquid oxygen or methane propellant that is approximately as cold and heavy. As a storage tank prototype, though, GSE4 has no need for hydraulic ram setups used to simulate the thrust of Raptor engines on several previous prototypes.

As such, one or several cryogenic proof tests were all that were ever really in GSE4’s future. On GSE4’s first test, SpaceX performed a more or less normal cryogenic proof, completely filling the tank with LN2, closing its vents, and then allowing the natural process of LN2 boiloff to raise the tank to the desired test pressure. However, unlike other test tanks, GSE4 never actually appeared to reopen its main vents. In fact, SpaceX may have never actually drained liquid nitrogen from the test tank, instead simply letting it slowly warm up and boil off into gas that was seemingly managed and vented by ground systems instead of the tank itself.

Advertisement
-->
GSE4’s testing was more reminiscent of Starship test tank SN2 than anything.

As a result, GSE4 stayed frosty (indicating a significant amount of remaining liquid nitrogen) for more than eight hours, strongly implying that it was either very slowly drained or simply allowed to warm up naturally. Given that large cryogenic storage tanks really don’t have to be significantly pressurized to complete their job, it’s possible that GSE4’s first test was primarily meant to verify the basic structural integrity of a tank that’s slightly different than those on Starship and, more importantly, test a different method of pressure and fluid management where most of that work is done by external, permanent systems on the ground.

That’s exactly what one might expect of rocket tankage slightly modified to serve as ground storage tanks. SpaceX’s GSE tanks never have to act as self-contained units and can instead rely almost entirely on separate systems.

A GSE tank is ‘sleeved.’ (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

Aside from verifying that that slightly different method of tank operations works as expected, GSE4’s first test likely also allowed SpaceX to better characterize the thermal properties of the thin steel skin and domes that are Starship and GSE tanks. Unlike GSE4, operational GSE tanks will be enclosed inside 12m (~40 ft) wide ‘cryo shells’ designed to insulate their cryogenic contents, but the insulative properties of the inner tanks (or the lack there of, rather) will still determine how well that insulation works and how much is actually needed to reach the desired boiloff rates. A contractor hired by SpaceX has already completed all seven cryo shells, so any results gathered from GSE4 will obviously be more of a check than a developmental test, but data is still data.

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

Elon Musk’s Grok records lowest hallucination rate in AI reliability study

Grok achieved an 8% hallucination rate, 4.5 customer rating, 3.5 consistency, and 0.07% downtime, resulting in an overall risk score of just 6.

Published

on

UK Government, CC BY 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

A December 2025 study by casino games aggregator Relum has identified Elon Musk’s Grok as one of the most reliable AI chatbots for workplace use, boasting the lowest hallucination rate at just 8% among the 10 major models tested. 

In comparison, market leader ChatGPT registered one of the highest hallucination rates at 35%, just behind Google’s Gemini, which registered a high hallucination rate of 38%. The findings highlight Grok’s factual prowess despite the AI model’s lower market visibility.

Grok tops hallucination metric

The research evaluated chatbots on hallucination rate, customer ratings, response consistency, and downtime rate. The chatbots were then assigned a reliability risk score from 0 to 99, with higher scores indicating bigger problems.

Grok achieved an 8% hallucination rate, 4.5 customer rating, 3.5 consistency, and 0.07% downtime, resulting in an overall risk score of just 6. DeepSeek followed closely with 14% hallucinations and zero downtime for a stellar risk score of 4. ChatGPT’s high hallucination and downtime rates gave it the top risk score of 99, followed by Claude and Meta AI, which earned reliability risk scores of 75 and 70, respectively. 

Why low hallucinations matter

Relum Chief Product Officer Razvan-Lucian Haiduc shared his thoughts about the study’s findings. “About 65% of US companies now use AI chatbots in their daily work, and nearly 45% of employees admit they’ve shared sensitive company information with these tools. These numbers show well how important chatbots have become in everyday work. 

“Dependence on AI tools will likely increase even more, so companies should choose their chatbots based on how reliable and fit they are for their specific business needs. A chatbot that everyone uses isn’t necessarily the one that works best for your industry or gives accurate answers for your tasks.”

Advertisement
-->

In a way, the study reveals a notable gap between AI chatbots’ popularity and performance, with Grok’s low hallucination rate positioning it as a strong choice for accuracy-critical applications. This was despite the fact that Grok is not used as much by users, at least compared to more mainstream AI applications such as ChatGPT. 

Continue Reading

News

Tesla (TSLA) receives “Buy” rating and $551 PT from Canaccord Genuity

He also maintained a “Buy” rating for TSLA stock over the company’s improving long-term outlook, which is driven by autonomy and robotics.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla China

Canaccord Genuity analyst George Gianarikas raised his Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) price target from $482 to $551. He also maintained a “Buy” rating for TSLA stock over the company’s improving long-term outlook, which is driven by autonomy and robotics. 

The analyst’s updated note

Gianarikas lowered his 4Q25 delivery estimates but pointed to several positive factors in the Tesla story. He noted that EV adoption in emerging markets is gaining pace, and progress in FSD and the Robotaxi rollout in 2026 represent major upside drivers. Further progress in the Optimus program next year could also add more momentum for the electric vehicle maker. 

“Overall, yes, 4Q25 delivery expectations are being revised lower. However, the reset in the US EV market is laying the groundwork for a more durable and attractive long-term demand environment. 

“At the same time, EV penetration in emerging markets is accelerating, reinforcing Tesla’s potential multi‑year growth runway beyond the US. Global progress in FSD and the anticipated rollout of a larger robotaxi fleet in 2026 are increasingly important components of the Tesla equity story and could provide sentiment tailwinds,” the analyst wrote. 

Tesla’s busy 2026

The upcoming year would be a busy one for Tesla, considering the company’s plans and targets. The autonomous two-seat Cybercab has been confirmed to start production sometime in Q2 2026, as per Elon Musk during the 2025 Annual Shareholder Meeting.

Advertisement
-->

Apart from this, Tesla is also expected to unveil the next-generation Roadster on April 1, 2026. Tesla is also expected to start high-volume production of the Tesla Semi in Nevada next year. 

Apart from vehicle launches, Tesla has expressed its intentions to significantly ramp the rollout of FSD to several regions worldwide, such as Europe. Plans are also underway to launch more Robotaxi networks in several more key areas across the United States.

Continue Reading

News

Waymo sues Santa Monica over order to halt overnight charging sessions

In its complaint, Waymo argued that its self-driving cars’ operations do not constitute a public nuisance, and compliance with the city’s order would cause the company irreparable harm.

Published

on

Credit: Waymo

Waymo has filed a lawsuit against the City of Santa Monica in Los Angeles County Superior Court, seeking to block an order that requires the company to cease overnight charging at two facilities. 

In its complaint, Waymo argued that its self-driving cars’ operations do not constitute a public nuisance, and compliance with the city’s order would cause the company irreparable harm.

Nuisance claims

As noted in a report from the Los Angeles Times, Waymo’s two charging sites at Euclid Street and Broadway have operated for about a year, supporting the company’s growing fleet with round-the-clock activity. Unfortunately, this has also resulted in residents in the area reportedly being unable to sleep due to incessant beeping from self-driving taxis that are moving in and out of the charging stations around the clock. 

Frustrated residents have protested against the Waymos by blocking the vehicles’ paths, placing cones, and “stacking” cars to create backups. This has also resulted in multiple calls to the police.

Last month, the city issued an order to Waymo and its charging partner, Voltera, to cease overnight operations at the charging locations, stating that the self-driving vehicles’ activities at night were a public nuisance. A December 15 meeting yielded no agreement on mitigations like software rerouting. Waymo proposed changes, but the city reportedly insisted that nothing would satisfy the irate residents.

Advertisement
-->

“We are disappointed that the City has chosen an adversarial path over a collaborative one. The City’s position has been to insist that no actions taken or proposed by Waymo would satisfy the complaining neighbors and therefore must be deemed insufficient,” a Waymo spokesperson stated.

Waymo pushes back

In its legal complaint, Waymo stated that its “activities at the Broadway Facilities do not constitute a public nuisance.” The company also noted that it “faces imminent and irreparable harm to its operations, employees, and customers” from the city’s order. The suit also stated that the city was fully aware that the Voltera charging sites would be operating around the clock to support Waymo’s self-driving taxis.

The company highlighted over one million trips in Santa Monica since launch, with more than 50,000 rides starting or ending there in November alone. Waymo also criticized the city for adopting a contentious strategy against businesses. 

“The City of Santa Monica’s recent actions are inconsistent with its stated goal of attracting investment. At a time when the City faces a serious fiscal crisis, officials are choosing to obstruct properly permitted investment rather than fostering a ‘ready for business’ environment,” Waymo stated. 

Advertisement
-->
Continue Reading