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

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.
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.

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.
Elon Musk
Tesla nears closure of Full Self-Driving purchasing option
The move to bring FSD to this type of purchasing program comes after CEO Elon Musk noted in January that Tesla would move away from the outright purchase option.
Tesla is nearing the closure of its Full Self-Driving outright purchasing option, which will be removed on February 14, meaning Saturday will be the last time it can be bought as a non-subscription.
Tesla is aiming to move its Full Self-Driving suite to a subscription-only platform, a move that will enable people to only pay monthly for the semi-autonomous driving functionality.
The move to bring FSD to this type of purchasing program comes after CEO Elon Musk noted in January that Tesla would move away from the outright purchase option.
It is currently priced at $8,000 for the outright option to use Full Self-Driving, a substantial decrease compared to the $15,000 it was priced at one time. For the monthly subscription, it is just $99 per month, but that price will change, likely increasing as things get more advanced.
Tesla is overhauling its Full Self-Driving subscription for easier access
We say it will likely increase because there is no indication of how Tesla will price FSD. There has been some speculation that Tesla could utilize a tiered system to price FSD, which would potentially allow owners to pick and choose a set of features that would be most ideal for them.
This would potentially introduce an even more affordable option for FSD use, but this is unconfirmed. The reason many say this could be an option for Tesla is the fact that if the price goes up further, the take rate, which is currently around 12 percent at its most recent estimate, could be lower.
Musk needs 10 million active Full Self-Driving subscriptions to unlock one of the tranches of his newest compensation package.
The move to a subscription-only platform has its positives and negatives, and owners have been more than vocal about these since Musk confirmed the move.
Positives
- Lower barrier to entry and higher potential adoption
- Financially better for many users
- Easier transfers and brand loyalty
- Predictable recurring revenue for Tesla
- Access to the latest features
Negatives
- Higher long-term cost for loyal/long-term owners
- No true “ownership” or permanence
- Risk of future price hikes or even deactivation
- Perceived as of less value
- Impact on resale and used market
Overall, there is a split among the Tesla community in terms of what they see as the “right” way to handle this. Tesla is likely to shed more details on what its plans for the subscription-only platform will be, including pricing, in the coming weeks.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk’s Boring Company selected for Universal Orlando tunnel project
The underground transport tunnel is designed to address the persistent gridlock surrounding International Drive.
Elon Musk’s The Boring Company has been selected for a proposed underground transit system connecting Universal Orlando Resort and the newly opened Universal Epic Universe.
The underground transport tunnel is designed to address the persistent gridlock surrounding International Drive.
As noted in a blooloop report, Universal’s Shingle Creek Transit and Utility Community Development District approved a resolution showing its intent to designate The Boring Company as the contractor for the project.
The agreement covers the full scope of the project, from the tunnel’s design, construction, and maintenance. The project has also been described in public documents as a “point-to-point innovative transportation” initiative with a 25-year agreement.
The proposed Boring Company tunnels would directly link Universal’s existing parks with Epic Universe, which sits roughly three miles away from Universal Orlando Resort. Today, buses are the only direct connection between the two destinations.
Project requirements were quite stringent. Bidders were required to demonstrate at least $75 million in bonding capacity, have a minimum of seven years of operational experience, and show prior delivery of a comparable project valued at $25 million or more within the past 15 years. The Boring Company, thanks in no small part to the Vegas Loop, meets these requirements.
The Orlando selection adds to The Boring Company’s growing portfolio of Loop-style systems. In Las Vegas, the Las Vegas Convention Center Loop has transported more than two million passengers in Tesla vehicles through underground tunnels since 2021. The greater Vegas Loop system is also under construction.
For now, residents in the area seem enthusiastic about the upcoming project. In a comment to Fox35, residents noted that the tunnels could improve traffic in the area.
“We are very congested at certain times and certain hours and that would certainly help with people not having to budget their time,” Mary Walters-Clark, a resident, stated. Another resident, Scott Heinz, echoed similar sentiments. “I think it would be a new opportunity to lessen traffic load and good for visitors as well,” he said.
The tunneling startup has started bringing its Loop projects to international locations. It recently signed a memorandum of understanding with Dubai’s Roads and Transport Authority to explore the development of a 17-kilometer underground Loop network beneath Dubai.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk tops Forbes’ list of America’s 250 greatest innovators
The ranking places Musk at the top of modern American innovation.
Elon Musk has been ranked No. 1 on Forbes’ inaugural list of America’s 250 Greatest Innovators. The ranking places Musk at the top of modern American innovation as the publication kicks off a series celebrating the nation’s 250th anniversary.
Forbes described innovation as “the grease in the economic engine” and the force that transforms industries and creates new ones. The publication highlighted that its honorees are not just inventors, but business leaders who successfully bring breakthroughs to market.
Musk, 54, was ranked No. 1 in this year’s list. Forbes noted that he is “the only person in history to have founded (or grown from nearly nothing) five companies, each with multibillion-dollar valuations, each in a different industry.” Those companies include Tesla, SpaceX, Neuralink, xAI, and The Boring Company.
Forbes’ methodology began with nearly 1,000 nominees submitted by its reporters. A panel of judges, including venture capitalist Jim Breyer, journalist Kara Swisher, and strategy expert Rita McGrath, ranked candidates based on creativity, breadth, engagement, disruption, and commercial impact. Artificial intelligence tools, including ChatGPT and Gemini, were also used to assess candidates before editors finalized the rankings.
The publication noted that more than one-third of the list consists of women and people of color, reflecting shifts in innovation and entrepreneurship over time. All individuals listed are also American citizens, though many were born abroad, including Musk himself. Musk was born in Pretoria, South Africa.
Ranked No. 2 is Jeff Bezos, 61, who Forbes credited with upending America’s $7.4 trillion retail industry through Amazon before pioneering cloud computing with Amazon Web Services. The publication highlighted that Bezos now focuses on space exploration through Blue Origin and artificial intelligence manufacturing systems at Prometheus.
At No. 3 is Bill Gates, 70, who helped launch the personal computing revolution and built Microsoft into the dominant force in workplace software. Forbes also highlighted Gates’ reinvention at age 50 as a data-driven philanthropist, including his role in helping eradicate polio from India.