News
SpaceX Starship stacked with ballast for hop test debut
SpaceX has installed a custom-built ballast atop its fourth full-scale Starship prototype, a sign that the company is rapidly approaching the ship’s first Starhopper-style hop test.
Although CEO Elon Musk officially “redirected” SpaceX’s resources away from Starship’s first flight and towards Crew Dragon’s NASA astronaut launch debut, the company continues to work around the clock to ready Starship SN4 for the program’s biggest test yet. Designed with the goal of creating a fully-reusable, ultra-capable launch vehicle that is unprecedentedly affordable, SpaceX’s Starship spacecraft and Super Heavy booster have made impressive progress over the last 12 or so months.
In July and August 2019, Starhopper – a low-fidelity testbed and proof of concept – successfully performed two untethered hop tests, ultimately flying more than 150m (~500 ft) above ground before safely touching down. Three months later, the first full-scale Starship prototype was destroyed almost immediately after its first pressure test began, a failure that lead SpaceX to expedite factory upgrades. Just six months later, SpaceX has completed multiple successful tests, including pressure tests that pushed beyond the pressures needed for safe human spaceflight, several full wet dress rehearsals (WDRs) with live propellant, and three Raptor engine static fires. In fewer words, Starship is ready for its next big test: flight.
However, Starship SN4 currently has just one Raptor engine installed and will remain in that configuration for its inaugural hop, expected to reach a maximum altitude identical to Starhopper (150m/500ft). The odd configuration means that the rocket will be propelled by asymmetric thrust, as Starship’s ‘thrust puck’ engine section is designed to hold three Raptor engines in a triangular formation. Raptor is capable of producing up to 200 metric tons (~440,000 lbf) of thrust with an unclear level of throttle control (likely mediocre according to comments made by Elon Musk).
Impressively, although it might seem reasonable to assume that Starship SN4 is about as heavy as the ~120 ton Starhopper, the clear and present need to install substantial ballast suggests otherwise. Combined with comments made during SN4’s April 2020 transport from factory to launch site, it appears that even SpaceX’s early Starship engine sections weigh just 50-60 metric tons (110,000-125,000 lb) empty. That weight doesn’t account for the flaps, heat shield, nose section, or many other heavy components that orbital Starships will eventually need but is still impressive.
That impressive weight reduction, Raptor’s inability to safely throttle low, and the FAA’s lack of interest in dozens (up to hundreds) of tons of explosive propellant flying above or around populated areas poses its own challenges for the first full-scale Starship flight. The addition of ballast helpfully solves (or at least alleviates) several of those issues. Notably, ballast can prevent SpaceX from having to fuel Starship SN4 with dozens of extra tons of explosive propellant to counteract the high thrust of its single engine and permit a safe launch and landing.
At the same time, if Starship SN4’s wet weight is reduced by carrying less propellant during its first flight, that actually exacerbates the problem of Raptor’s small throttle range, as a lighter ship would be much harder to manage as the engine rapidly burns propellant and thus loses mass. With ballast, Raptor won’t have to throttle as low as it would otherwise have to to ensure a gentle rate of deceleration. Built out of sheet steel and two spare rolls of the same steel used to form Starship rings, Starship SN4’s new ballast likely increases its dry mass by some 50% or more (25+ metric tons).
Pending Crew Dragon’s inaugural astronaut launch, now scheduled no earlier than 3:22 pm EDT (19:22 UTC), May 30th after weather delayed the first May 27th launch attempt, Starship SN4 has no testing periods on the calendar at the moment. Speaking around May 23rd, Musk stated that the ship was likely at least a “few weeks” away from its flight debut, suggesting that the ship will perform another static fire test to prepare for its first hop as early as next week. Stay tuned for updates as SpaceX’s works towards two very exciting Crew Dragon and Starship milestones.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
Tesla just gave what is perhaps its biggest signal yet that the launch of the Cybercab, its autonomous ride-hailing-geared car, is imminent.
The Cybercab has been spotted outside of Gigafactory Texas in massive numbers over the past few days, with hundreds of units being stored on property just days after the vehicle received a Certificate of Conformity from the EPA.
Today, things were a bit different.
Cybercabs spotted on Giga Texas property today had an addition: a Cybercab decal on the side, reminiscent of the “Robotaxi” ones that were placed on Model Ys just as the company launched its ride-sharing platform about a year ago.
Giga Texas drone operator Joe Tegtmeyer noticed the change today:
Tesla Cybercabs are now getting “Cybercab” logos on the side of them!
Tesla did the same with Model Ys that were given “Robotaxi” logos: https://t.co/DanANtw1m7 pic.twitter.com/FqOhH0S9Ks
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 19, 2026
Tesla could be signaling that the Cybercab is preparing to enter the Robotaxi fleet in the coming weeks or months with this move. It seems more symbolic than anything; Tesla is ready to throw Cybercabs in the ride-hailing platform just as it did with Model Ys last year.
The addition of the Certificate of Conformity awarded to the Cybercab is another major factor working to Tesla’s advantage. The company now has permission from the EPA to allow the vehicle to operate on public roads and enter the chain of commerce. It’s officially street legal.
Tesla Cybercab specs revealed: range, curb weight, range ratings, and more
The big question that remains is whether Tesla will be able to operate the car without a safety monitor, especially considering it plans to put the car out there without a steering wheel or pedals. With the Cybercab only having a seating capacity of two, it is hard to believe Tesla will even consider putting a Safety Monitor in the car.
It did recently self-certify as Level 4 and has the ability to operate driverless vehicles in the State of Texas under a law that took effect on May 28. You can read more about that here:
Tesla’s Robotaxi dreams just took a massive step toward reality
We’d imagine Cybercabs will be on the roads as soon as July, but August will likely be a better estimate of when the car will be entered into the Cybercab fleet. It all depends at where Tesla is, as they’ve truly prioritized safety with the rollout of the Robotaxi platform.
Elon Musk has publicly questioned Moody’s credit assessments following the rating agency’s decision to assign SpaceX a Baa1 investment-grade rating, two notches above Tesla’s Baa3. The comments came amid discussions comparing the two companies’ financial profiles.
SpaceX earned its first-time Baa1 rating with a stable outlook from Moody’s. The agency highlighted the company’s leadership in orbital launches, the growing recurring revenue from its Starlink satellite network, strong vertical integration, U.S. government contracts, and emerging opportunities in AI infrastructure.
These factors were cited as supporting robust cash flows, margin expansion, and financial flexibility.
Musk responded directly: “Tesla’s credit rating is ridiculously low tbh,” and added, “Yeah, makes no sense. Tesla has over $40B in cash, no debt, and is consistently profitable!” His remarks underscored Tesla’s balance sheet strength and profitability at a time when many traditional automakers continue to report losses in the shift to electric vehicles.
Yeah, makes no sense.
Tesla has over $40B in cash, no debt and is consistently profitable!
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 19, 2026
Tesla maintains a leading position in the global EV market, with diversification into energy and storage, battery technology, and robotics through projects like Optimus. Recent financial updates show the company generated positive free cash flow of $1.4 billion in Q1 2026, supported by operating cash flow of $3.9 billion. Cash and short-term investments stood at approximately $44.7 billion.
Moody’s has affirmed Tesla’s Baa3 issuer rating with a stable outlook in periodic reviews, acknowledging the company’s EV leadership, technology strengths, including AI for autonomous vehicles, solid profitability, and strong liquidity.
Tesla (TSLA) scores Baa3 Moody’s rating for ‘stable’ outlook
However, the agency has also noted challenges in the automotive segment and expectations for margin pressures.
Musk’s critique highlights a common debate about how traditional rating methodologies apply to high-growth, capital-intensive technology companies. SpaceX benefits from long-term government-backed contracts and diversified, recurring revenue streams, while Tesla’s valuation reflects heavy investment in future technologies such as autonomy and robotics.
Both ratings remain investment-grade, yet the one-notch difference has fueled online discussion about potential inconsistencies in evaluating innovative firms.
The exchange comes as SpaceX explores financing options following its recent valuation milestones, while Tesla continues executing on its multi-year roadmap. Musk’s pointed response serves as a reminder that credit ratings, though influential for borrowing costs, represent one lens through which markets assess corporate strength—and that company leaders often view their financial positions through the lens of long-term innovation and cash generation rather than short-term risk metrics alone.
A new report from Reuters claims that a transport authority in Sweden is pushing back against the approval of Tesla’s Full Self-Driving suite because it will travel over speed limits.
The report says the Swedish Transport Administration (TRV) recommends the European Union votes against FSD’s approval. TRV believes it should not be approved until Tesla disables FSD’s ability to speed.
TRV sent a letter to the European Union’s Technical Committee on Motor Vehicles (TCMV), which is set to meet on June 30 to discuss the potential approval of the Tesla FSD suite in the country. Tesla, which has received various approvals in Europe over the past two months, has not provided a comment.
Teslas operating on FSD do travel over the speed limit, depending on the Speed Profile that is chosen. Drivers have the ability to disengage FSD at any point; Tesla specifically states that those supervising the suite are responsible for its actions.
Let’s cut to the chase: humans operating any vehicle speed almost daily in the United States. Realistically, speed limits in the U.S. are more frequently treated as speed minimums. However, other countries are different, and driving behaviors are less aggressive.
TRV believes that “allowing automated systems to systematically exceed legal speed limits…risks undermining both the legal framework and the expected safety benefits of vehicle automation,” the report stated. It’s surprising that Tesla has not received this claim from other countries previously.
This could be a good argument to bring Max Speed back, the setting that previously allowed the driver to choose the absolute fastest the car would travel.
This would still put the responsibility of supervision in the hands of the driver. It would allow the driver to choose whether the car would travel over the speed limit or not, acknowledging that they set the speed, and if they get pulled over, there would be no ability to argue it.
However, it does not seem as if this is something Tesla will do, especially considering many U.S. drivers have requested the feature in an effort to eliminate speeding or at least tone it down. The company has not shown any interest in bringing it back.
Tesla has approvals for FSD in Europe in Estonia, Lithuania, Denmark, the Netherlands, and Belgium.
Tesla Cybercab launch is imminent after latest sighting at Giga Texas
Elon Musk says this part of Tesla ‘makes no sense’
