News
SpaceX’s upgraded Starship passes first ‘cryoproof’ test after repairs
SpaceX CEO Elon Musk says an upgraded Starship prototype has passed its first cryogenic proof or ‘cryoproof’ test after undergoing a week of repairs.
Around noon, local sheriffs closed the road to Starbase’s orbital launch site (OLS) and SpaceX cleared the pad of all personnel, freeing up Starship S24 for the next stage of testing. A week prior, on May 27th, Ship 24 suffered some degree of internal damage during a simpler pneumatic proof test with ambient-temperature nitrogen gas. It’s now clear that most of that pneumatic proof test was successful, demonstrating that the Starship’s main propellant tanks and associated plumbing and valves were structurally sound and working as expected.
Still, for about a week after that first test, teams of SpaceX workers swarmed the Starship prototype 24/7 and were seen extracting damaged plumbing and carefully transporting replacement parts inside. Only on the morning of June 2nd was Ship 24 sealed up again.
Cryogenic fluid loading – liquid nitrogen or a combo of LN2 and liquid oxygen (LOx) – began shortly before 3pm CDT (UTC-5) and the Starship’s main tanks were fully filled about 70 minutes later. SpaceX then let those fluids naturally warm, causing a small portion to boil into gas and gradually raise the pressure inside Ship 24’s main tanks. As the pressure grew, sections of the layers of frost and ice that formed on the outside of its thin steel tanks occasionally sloughed off in sheets or broke off in fragments – the only evidence of stress aside from venting.
After about an hour fully filled, SpaceX began detanking and depressurizing Ship 24. The road and pad were reopened around 8:40 pm. All told, aside from an apparent leak on its liquid oxygen tank access hatch, a very common occurrence, Ship 24 exhibited no unusual behavior and made it through its first cryoproof without any obvious issue. More importantly, SpaceX did not appear to reattempt the pneumatic proof test the ship partially failed before the harder cryoproof test, implying that its first test was mostly successful. CEO Elon Musk later confirmed that the Starship had passed its first cryoproof test a few hours after.
Despite Musk’s positive comment, there was no evidence of activity in Ship 24’s nose section, where a number of crucial vents and secondary header tanks – meant to serve as attitude control thrusters and store landing propellant – are located. Ship 24 is the first Starship prototype with a new design that moved both header tanks into the tip of the nosecone. The nose itself is also the first with a number of other manufacturing and design upgrades to reach a test stand, so verifying that it works as expected is doubly important.
Given that the plumbing that failed in the first test may have been connected to Ship 24’s nose section and header tanks and that neither was obviously involved in the subsequent June 2nd cryoproof, it’s likely that the Starship prototype is not done with cryoproof testing just yet. Nonetheless, the ship’s survival and passage of its first cryoproof bodes well for the next steps.
In the near future, SpaceX is expected to move Ship 24 to a nearby ‘suborbital pad’ and test stand that has been significantly modified to simulate the thrust and mechanical stress of six Raptor 2 engines. If or when Ship 24 passes that test or tests, SpaceX will likely remove the stand’s hydraulic rams and begin installing Raptor engines and associated heat shielding. Then, Starship S24 can enter the final stages of qualification: wet dress rehearsal and static fire testing.
SpaceX has requested additional road closures for potential testing on June 6th, 7th, and 8th.
Elon Musk
ARK’s SpaceX IPO Guide makes a compelling case on why $1.75T may not be the ceiling
ARK Invest breaks down six reasons SpaceX’s $1.75 trillion IPO valuation may be justified.
ARK Invest, which holds SpaceX as its largest Venture Fund position at 17% of net assets, has published a detailed investor guide to why a SpaceX IPO may be grounded in a $1.75 trillion target valuation.
The financial case starts with Starlink, SpaceX’s satellite internet constellation, which has surpassed 10 million active subscribers globally as of early 2026, with 2026 revenue projected to exceed $20 billion. ARK’s research puts the total satellite connectivity market opportunity at roughly $160 billion annually at scale, and Starlink is adding customers faster than any telecom network in history. That growth alone would justify a substantial valuation.
Additionally, ARK notes that SpaceX has reduced the cost per kilogram to orbit from roughly $15,600 in 2008 to under $1,000 today through reusable Falcon 9 hardware. A fully operational Starship targeting sub-$100 per kilogram would represent a significant cost decline and open markets that do not currently exist. SpaceX executed a staggering 165 missions in 2025 and now accounts for approximately 85% of all global orbital launches. That infrastructure position took decades to build and would be nearly impossible to replicate at comparable cost.
SpaceX officially acquires xAI, merging rockets with AI expertise
The February 2026 merger with xAI added a layer to the valuation that straightforward financial models struggle to capture. ARK argues that at sub-$100 launch costs, orbital data centers could deliver compute roughly 25% cheaper than ground-based alternatives, without power grid delays, permitting friction, or land constraints. Musk has stated a goal of deploying 100 gigawatts of AI computing capacity per year from orbit.
The $1.75 trillion figure itself is not a conventional earnings multiple. At roughly 95x trailing revenue, it prices in Starlink’s adoption curve, Starship’s cost trajectory, and the orbital compute thesis together. The public S-1 prospectus, due at least 15 days before the June roadshow, will give investors their first complete look at the financials to test those assumptions. ARK’s position is that the track record earns the benefit of the doubt. Fully reusable rockets were considered unrealistic for years. Starlink was considered financially unviable. Both happened on timelines that surprised skeptics.
Elon Musk
Ford CEO Farley says Tesla is not who to look at for EV expertise
Interestingly, Farley has been one of the most hellbent CEOs in terms of a legacy automaker standpoint to push the EV effort. It did not go according to plan, as Ford took a $19.5 billion charge and retreated from its EV push in late 2025.
Ford CEO Jim Farley said in a recent podcast interview that Tesla is not who Americans should look at to beat Chinese carmakers.
The comments have sparked quite a bit of outrage from Tesla fans on X, the social media platform owned by Elon Musk.
Farley said that Chinese automakers are better examples of how to beat competitors. He said (via the Rapid Response Podcast):
“If you’re an American and you want us to beat the Chinese in the car business, you’re all going to want to pay attention, not necessarily to Tesla. Nothing against Tesla—they’ve been doing great—but they really don’t have an updated vehicle. The best in the business for us, cost-wise and competition-wise, supply chain, manufacturing expertise, and the I.P. in the vehicle, was really BYD. In this next cycle of EV customers in the U.S., they want pickups and utilities and all these different body styles. But they want them at $30,000, not $50,000. Like the first inning, they want them affordably.”
Despite Farley’s synopsis, it is worth mentioning that Tesla had the best-selling passenger vehicle in the world last year, and in China in March, as the Model Y continued its global dominance over other vehicles.
Musk responded to Farley’s comments by stating:
“This is before Supervised FSD is approved in China. Limiting factor is production output in Shanghai.”
This is before supervised FSD is approved in China. Limiting factor is production output in Shanghai.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) April 19, 2026
Interestingly, Farley has been one of the most hellbent CEOs in terms of a legacy automaker standpoint to push the EV effort. It did not go according to plan, as Ford took a $19.5 billion charge and retreated from its EV push in late 2025.
Ford cancels all-electric F-150 Lightning, announces $19.5 billion in charges
Instead, Ford is “doubling down on its affordable” EVs and said it would pivot from its previous plans.
Reaction from Tesla fans was pretty much how you would expect. Many said they have lost a lot of respect for Farley after his comments; others believe he is the last CEO anyone should be taking advice on EVs from.
Nevertheless, Farley’s plans are bold and brash; many consider Tesla the most ideal company to replicate EV efforts from. It will be interesting to see if Ford can rebound from this big adjustment, and hopefully, Farley’s plans to replicate efforts from BYD work out the way he hopes.
Elon Musk
SpaceX wins its first MARS contract but it comes with a catch
NASA awarded SpaceX a $175 million Mars rover contract while the White House proposes cutting the mission.
NASA just signed a $175.7 million contract with SpaceX to launch a Mars rover that the White House is simultaneously trying to defund. The contract, awarded on April 16, 2026, tasks SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy with launching the European Space Agency’s (ESA) Rosalind Franklin rover from Kennedy Space Center in Florida, no earlier than late 2028. It would mark the first time SpaceX has ever sent a payload to Mars.
Under NASA’s Rosalind Franklin Support and Augmentation project, known as ROSA, the agency is providing braking engines for the rover’s descent stage, radioisotope heater units that use decaying plutonium to keep the rover warm on the Martian surface, additional electronics, and a mass spectrometer instrument, as noted by SpaceNews.
Those nuclear heating units are the reason an American rocket was required at all. U.S. export controls on radioisotope technology mean any payload carrying them must launch on a domestic vehicle, which narrowed the field to SpaceX and United Launch Alliance. Falcon Heavy’s pricing made it the practical choice.
SpaceX is quietly becoming the U.S. Military’s only reliable rocket
Falcon Heavy debuted in February 2018 and has 11 launches to its record. The rocket has not flown since October 2024, when it sent NASA’s Europa Clipper toward Jupiter. The three-core design, built from modified Falcon 9 first stages, gives it the lift capacity needed for deep space planetary missions that a single Falcon 9 cannot reach.
The Rosalind Franklin rover has been sitting in storage in Europe for years. It was originally due to launch in 2022 as a joint mission with Russia, but Russia’s invasion of Ukraine ended that partnership, leaving the rover built but stranded without a launch vehicle or landing hardware. NASA stepped back in through a 2024 agreement with ESA to rescue the mission. The rover is designed to drill up to two meters below the Martian surface in search of evidence of past life, a science objective no previous mission has attempted at that depth.
The contradiction at the center of this story is hard to ignore. The White House’s fiscal year 2027 budget proposal included no funding for ROSA and did not mention the mission at all in the detailed congressional justification document released April 3.
Musk has long argued that reaching Mars is not optional. “We don’t want to be one of those single planet species, we want to be a multi-planet species.” Whether this particular mission survives Washington’s budget fight, the Falcon Heavy contract means SpaceX is now formally on record as the rocket that could get humanity’s next Mars science mission off the ground.
The timing of this contract carries extra weight given that SpaceX filed confidentially with the SEC in early April and is targeting an IPO roadshow in the week of June 8. It would be the largest public offering in history.
ARK’s SpaceX IPO Guide makes a compelling case on why $1.75T may not be the ceiling
Ford CEO Farley says Tesla is not who to look at for EV expertise
