News
SpaceX’s Starhopper cleared by FAA for second and final flight test as locals urged to exit homes
After a full two weeks spent waiting for an FAA permit, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk and local South Texas authorities appear to be preparing Starhopper for a second major flight test as early as Monday, August 26th.
Assuming the FAA comes through with a permit, Starhopper is scheduled to lift off no earlier than 5pm EDT (21:00 UTC) on August 26th for a flight test expected to smash the low-fidelity Starship prototype’s previously altitude record of ~20m (65 ft). Confirming initial reports from NASASpaceflight.com, Musk also stated that Starhopper’s second flight will be its last, after which the steel rocket test-bed will be converted for stationary use at SpaceX’s South Texas facilities.
Prior to Musk tweeting that Starhopper may be nearing approval for its next flight, the SpaceX CEO revealed that delays were centered around the FAA’s apparent unwillingness to permit the vehicle’s next flight. Musk specifically stated that the FAA wanted more “hazard analysis”, meaning that the US aviation administration had concerns that Starhopper could pose a serious threat to local residents in a tiny housing development known as Boca Chica Village.
Technically speaking, Boca Chica Village is just 1.5 miles (2.4 km) away from SpaceX’s Starhopper launch facilities, where the vehicle is expected to reach a maximum altitude of no more than 200m (650 ft) as early as August 26th. FAA regulations tend to be prescriptive and extremely rigid, understandable given the breadth of US aviation-related activities the agency is tasked with regulating. However, a basic back-of-the-envelope analysis of Starhopper’s 200m hop suggests that the risk to local residents – even those as few as 1.5 miles away from the test – is minuscule.
Based on Starhopper’s inaugural flight, its lone Raptor engine – producing up to 200 tons (450,000 lbf) of thrust – is not exactly capable of rapidly moving the Starship prototype. For all accounts and purposes, Starhopper is a spectacularly heavy hunk of steel with the aerodynamics of a cylindrical brick – capable of flight solely through the brute-force application of a literal rocket engine. To make it even half of the distance from its launch site to the Village, Starhopper would have to remain in controlled flight while radically deviating from its planned trajectory, all while its flight termination system (FTS) – explosives meant to destroy the vehicle in a worst-case scenario – completely fails to activate.

As evidence of the apparent lack of perceived risk to local residents, Cameron County, Texas officials distributed flyers to Village residents advising – but not requiring – those choosing to remain at their homes during the test to go outside during Starhopper’s next flight. This is recommended to avoid flying glass in the event that the vehicle explodes, potentially shattering windows with the shockwave that could result, but clearly demonstrates the fact that county officials believe there is a near-zero chance of Starhopper actually impacting anywhere near the houses.
Ultimately, Starhopper’s limited flight tests clearly pose little to no actual risk to residents, but this chapter does raise a far more significant question: what happens once Starship Mk1 is ready and the flight tests SpaceX is pursuing involve distances and heights on the order of several, tens, or hundreds of kilometers? For now, answers will have to wait til a later date.
A Hop and a skip into retirement
Aside from the delays and apparent lack of consensus on the safety of Starhopper’s minor hop tests, Musk confirmed that the prototype’s second test flight ever will likely be its last, providing some interesting insight into SpaceX’s next steps. Most notably, the fact that SpaceX is willing and ready to fully retire Starhopper after such a limited test series serves as a fairly confident statement that orbital-class Starship Mk1 (Texas) and Mk2 (Florida) prototypes are extremely close to flight-readiness.
Roughly a month ago, Musk tweeted that those Starship prototypes could be ready for their first flights as early as mid-September to mid-October, “2 to 3 months” from mid-July. In additional comments made on August 20th, Musk stated that his planned Starship presentation would be delayed in light of Starhopper’s own delays, and is now instead expected to occur around a major Starship Mk1 integration milestone in “mid September”.
As previously discussed on Teslarati, Starhopper’s brief service life is entirely unsurprising, delayed by issues with Raptor engines to the point that SpaceX’s far more valuable Starship prototypes – having made relentless progress – are already nearing completion. Once those Starships are ready for almost any kind of integrated testing, Starhopper will be made entirely and immediately redundant.
“According to Musk, either or both of those orbital-class prototypes could be ready for their inaugural flight tests as early as mid-September, perhaps just 1-2 months from now. Given that Starships Mk1 and Mk2 are significantly higher fidelity than Starhopper, the ungainly testbed will likely become redundant the moment that its successors are ready for flight. In other words, Starhopper is fast approaching the end of its useful life, and SpaceX’s fight for a 200m hop-test permit could ultimately be a waste of time, effort, and money if said permit doesn’t also cover Starship Mk1.”
Teslarati.com, August 20th, 2019
On another positive note, CEO Elon Musk says that Starhopper won’t be ‘retired’ to the scrapyard and will instead be lightly modified to serve as an in-situ test stand for Raptor engines, a useful addition once SpaceX South Texas moves on to multi-engine Starship and Super Heavy testing.
With any luck, SpaceX will attempt to livestream Starhopper’s second attempted flight. Stay tuned for updates on the 5pm EDT, August 26th test.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
Elon Musk
Grok Bot users hit with weekly limits early, Elon Musk explains what happened
Elon Musk said weeks ago during SpaceX’s third-quarter earnings call that the company’s Grok Bot, its autonomous AI Agent platform, was showing “the fastest growth of a product” that he’d ever seen in his life.
Now, SpaceXSI is scaling back Grok Bot users’ weekly limits, much to the surprise of those who have relied on it to take away monotonous tasks in their lives.
Elon Musk’s terse November 1 reply on X captured a sharp tension in the early days of agentic AI. Responding to a user who asked for a Grok Bot usage reset after hitting 100 percent with four days still left on the weekly cycle, Musk wrote: “The cost of serving Grok Bot was unsustainably high relative to revenue.”
@DogecoinNorway The cost of serving Grok Bot was unsustainably high relative to revenue
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 1, 2026
The post arrived amid a wave of similar complaints from paying subscribers whose meters had jumped unexpectedly toward or to the limit, sometimes overnight and with little corresponding activity. It also stood in clear contrast to statements Musk had made only days and weeks earlier.
On the SpaceX third-quarter earnings call in mid-to-late October, Musk had described Grok Bot in almost the opposite terms. He called it “the fastest growth of a product that I’ve ever seen in my life” and said he had “never seen anything grow this fast.”
Company figures put paid weekly users at roughly 800,000 earlier in the month, more than doubling over the prior period. Daily active users had climbed from under 100,000 in early September to over 600,000 by late October.
Musk emphasized that the product has no free tier and that users appear to be getting real value beyond what they pay. In other remarks, he noted that usage per user was rising rather than declining, the opposite of the usual decay pattern for new software.
Grok Bot, launched around August, functions as an always-available agent with its own persistent cloud computer; it can schedule, research, shop, browse, and execute multi-step workflows even after the user steps away. Access is bundled into X subscription tiers (roughly $30, $100, and $200 per month) and certain Cursor plans, drawing from shared weekly usage pools whose exact sizes have not been publicly detailed.
The economics of that model are what Musk’s November 1 post put in the spotlight. Agentic systems burn far more compute than ordinary chatbot exchanges. Each task can trigger repeated model calls, tool use, web actions, and sustained background work.
When growth is as rapid as Musk celebrated, the absolute compute bill scales quickly even if average revenue per user stays fixed under flat monthly subscriptions. Industry observers noted the opportunity cost as well: the same GPUs can be rented to other AI labs at higher rates.
A simple back-of-the-envelope comparison circulating after the post illustrated the gap: if every reported daily user paid the top tier, annualized subscription revenue would still be modest relative to the scale of compute infrastructure SpaceX is building and leasing to companies like Anthropic.
Some users also reported possible dashboard anomalies around the same period, though Musk’s framing treated the underlying cost-revenue imbalance as the core issue rather than a pure metering glitch.
The juxtaposition is the core of this exchange. Within roughly two weeks of publicly framing Grok Bot as an unprecedented success with strong unit economics and no free tier, Musk acknowledged that serving the same product had become unsustainable relative to the revenue it generates.
For the broader industry, the episode underscores a structural challenge of the agent era: demand is real and growing faster than many expected, yet the cost of fulfilling that demand through always-on, multi-step agents can outrun subscription pricing before companies can adjust limits, introduce metered billing, or raise prices.
Musk’s reply did not promise an immediate reset or higher allowances; it simply stated the constraint. In doing so, it supplied a rare, explicit public data point on the unit economics of a high-profile AI agent just as adoption numbers were still being celebrated as the fastest in Musk’s experience.
The tension between rapid, paid growth and the compute required to deliver it is now on the record.
News
Tesla owners who tap Emergency Drive Away for fun are in for a surprise
Tapping Activate on Tesla’s Emergency Drive Away reportedly triggers a $539 service bill without moving.
Tesla owners who press Activate on Emergency Drive Away may be on the hook for a service bill even if their car never leaves the Supercharger stall.
Yaro, who posts about Tesla service cases on X as @Tutrifour, said a customer called after tapping Activate while still plugged into a Supercharger. The owner was about to pull away, remembered the cable was still connected and stopped. The car never moved, but the touchscreen showed a red alert reading “Emergency Drive Away has been activated” with “Service is required” underneath. A Service Mode screenshot showed the active alert BMS_a228_EmergencyDriveAwayServiceRequired, which Yaro said only Tesla Service can clear.
Here is a lesson to Tesla owners. Don’t press Activate on the new Emergency Drive Away feature on your Tesla because service charges $539 to inspect the charge port and to clear the alert. Yes, even if you didn’t move the car an inch. https://t.co/NZJENw4SQv
— Yaro (@Tutrifour) October 30, 2026
The cost of clearing it was the bigger surprise. “Don’t press Activate on the new Emergency Drive Away feature on your Tesla because service charges $539 to inspect the charge port and to clear the alert. Yes, even if you didn’t move the car an inch,” Yaro wrote. The $539 figure comes from that single case, and Tesla has not published a set price for the inspection or commented on the post. Yaro also noted that the car would still charge with the alert on screen.
Tesla launched Emergency Drive Away on October 1 with software update 2026.38.3, letting drivers pull away from a U.S. Supercharger with the cable still attached, as Teslarati reported. To use it, a driver shifts into Drive while connected, holds the brake and taps Activate. The prompt warns that driving with the cable connected will damage the vehicle and the Supercharger, and that short camera recordings will be shared with Tesla.
Tesla Charging has been clear about what follows a real activation. Repairs to a Supercharger stall can run up to $25,000 depending on the site, a service visit for the car’s charge port is mandatory, and deliberate misuse “will invoke additional penalties.” What the company had not spelled out is that the service requirement is triggered the moment Activate is pressed, not the moment the cable breaks away.
From an engineering standpoint, that is the cautious choice. Once Activate is pressed, the car cannot be sure the charge port latch was not stressed, so flagging it for inspection removes the guesswork. It also means the button carries a price on its own, which is a stronger deterrent against casual use than any warning screen.
Customer called because they have an active alert after tapping ACTIVATE on the new Emergency Drive Away feature. They didn’t actually drive away but were about to until they “remembered” they had the charge cable connected.
This alert can only be cleared by Tesla Service. https://t.co/SkHyJJPFwU
— Yaro (@Tutrifour) October 28, 2026
The report follows the feature’s first known real world use, when a driver in Austin during F1 weekend appeared to trigger it by accident and dragged the Supercharger cable along with the car. The Reddit user who filmed it said the driver seemed to have only half read the prompts.
For owners, the takeaway is to treat the red prompt as a stop sign. If it appears after shifting out of Park by mistake, shift back and unplug the normal way from the touchscreen, the Tesla app or the button on the charge handle. Activate is meant for moments when staying at the stall is the bigger risk, and Tesla is now pricing it that way.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk calls Earth’s data centers “peanuts” next to what SpaceX is planning in orbit
Elon Musk says SpaceX capex efficiency is underestimated as orbital data centers loom by 2028.
Elon Musk is pushing back on one of the biggest worries hanging over SpaceX stock. In a reply on X on Sunday, Musk said the company’s capital expenditure efficiency is severely underestimated. He was responding to a Milk Road Stocks post citing analyst Kyle Reidhead, who estimates SpaceX will need to spend roughly $470 billion over the next five quarters.
Reidhead built that figure around the target SpaceX set on its third quarter earnings call: 13 gigawatts or more of compute by the end of 2027. In his breakdown, Nvidia captures 83 to 89 percent of the spending. SpaceX ended the quarter with 1.7 GW of nameplate compute and guided to $35 billion to $40 billion in fourth quarter capex, as Teslarati reported.
Musk did not attach a number to his claim, but the earnings call shows the argument. CFO Bret Johnsen said new compute currently pays for itself in under a year at today’s pricing, and Musk said that window could shrink to six months next year. Using that pace, Reidhead argues about $230 billion of the $470 billion could come from operating cash flow and about $60 billion from SpaceX’s roughly $90 billion cash pile, leaving around $180 billion to borrow. Musk confirmed last week that SpaceX had already closed a new $40 billion debt raise to buy GPUs.
The ground buildout is not the end goal. It is what is meant to pay for the move to orbit. Replying on Friday to charts built from Sequoia partner Shaun Maguire’s SpaceX model, Musk wrote that “Terrestrial compute will be peanuts compared to orbital compute,” adding that orbital compute deployed per month “probably exceeds terrestrial around the end of 2028 and then far exceeds it in 2029.”
Maguire’s model shows how steep that path is. It has capex climbing from $88 billion this year to $290 billion in 2027 and $369 billion in 2028, with SpaceX burning $77.8 billion in cash this year and $122.6 billion next year before turning $114.9 billion cash positive in 2028. Musk’s response to the model was, “I think we can do better.”
The orbital half runs through Starmind. SpaceX plans to operate up to 1 million AI satellites flying in clusters of about 10, linked by roughly 10 terabits of bandwidth, with deployment of thousands of units starting as soon as late 2027 out of its Gigasat factory in Bastrop, Texas, according to SpaceX’s space safety page. Musk has said each Starmind spacecraft will carry more than 250 kW of solar power.
Getting there depends on launch volume. Maguire’s model assumes 250 Starship flights in 2028, up from two this year and 38 next year. The nearer test is financial: SpaceX guided to $33 billion to $37 billion in first quarter 2027 revenue, more than double the $14.58 billion it booked in Q3, and Musk reposted that guidance again on Sunday morning.