Connect with us

News

SpaceX Starship prototype charred but intact after catching fire [photos]

SpaceX employees inspect Starship SN4 for the first time some two days after the rocket finished its third Raptor engine test. (NASASpaceflight - bocachicagal)

Published

on

SpaceX teams have finally safed the fourth full-scale Starship prototype nearly two days after a Raptor engine test caught it on fire, an anomaly that left the massive rocket charred and damaged – but still intact.

While SN4’s survival is a welcome and unexpected outcome, the fire that broke out near the base of the rocket caused damage that will have to be repaired, while the fault that allowed that fire to occur in the first place will also need to be rectified. Had the same events transpired during the ship’s inaugural flight test, things could have gone even further south after the rocket lifted off, carrying it away from remotely-controlled water jets used to suppress unplanned fires on the pad.

Thankfully, SpaceX’s focus on testing, testing, and testing some more meant that Starship SN4’s minor self-immolation occurred on the ground when the stakes – while high – were much lower than they would have been with an airborne rocket. The problems uncovered will, of course, need to be fixed, inevitably delaying the ship’s first flight test, but odds are that SN4 now has a better shot at success thanks to those hiccups.

Starship SN4 has thankfully survived a ~48-hour ordeal that may have left the rocket partially uncontrolled. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

Thanks to the fact that Starships are constructed almost entirely out of steel, a little (or a lot of) fire shouldn’t theoretically be much of a problem. However, SpaceX has taken a rather freeform approach to its early Starship SNx prototypes, opting to bolt, weld, or tape on the vast majority of external hardware with little or no protection from the elements, including fires ignited by the ships themselves.

With SN4, it appears that the pressure jump experiences immediately after Raptor ignition (the ship’s third such test) shook some methane-related plumbing loose. Raptor continued to burn for another five or so seconds after that minor failure, shutting down as planned – but not before it ignited the methane the burst pipe was leaking. Additionally, after that new plume of boiling liquid methane caught fire, the fire it sustained proceeded to ignite insulation wrapped around the rocket’s launch. It burned vigorously, likely helping to damage wiring, ultimately causing SpaceX to partially lose control of the rocket and preventing attempts to inspect and fix the damage for two full days.

Advertisement
A May 8th view of the pipe (bottom right of Starship SN4) that failed on May 19th, starting a fire and damaging the rocket. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)
A large scorch mark and blackened cabling are the only signs on Starship that anything went wrong on May 19th. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)
Around the other side of the rocket, (apparently flammable) insulation haphazardly wrapped around part of the launch mount ~24 hours before testing caught fire and burned aggressively. The leftovers are pictured here on May 21st. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

It’s safe to say that SpaceX is probably going to prioritize avoiding the series of events that caused May 19th’s anomaly from here on out, considering that things could have easily gone much worse. Thankfully, whatever control SpaceX or the rocket itself retained after wire damage allowed it to safely offload its flammable propellant and vent expanding gases to prevent SN4’s tanks from bursting. Installing highly flammable insulation approximately 10 feet away from an active Raptor engine and giant controlled fire and explosion was also inadvisable and probably won’t be repeated.

(NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

Thankfully, the damage is clearly minimal and Starship SN4 survived the ordeal otherwise unscathed. With any luck, inspections and repairs will be quick and easy and SpaceX – as NASASpaceflight reporter Michael Baylor notes – will be able to complete an identical static fire test without starting a fire on Starship SN4. SpaceX has requested a new road closure (signifying planned testing) on May 28th with backup windows on May 29th and June 1st.

Thanks to Starship SN4’s unplanned delays, it now looks quite likely that SpaceX’s next full-scale Starship prototype (SN5) will be completed – or nearly so – by the time that its predecessor is cleared for flight. “Too many Starships” is certainly a welcome problem to have.

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

News

Tesla and driver sued by family of woman killed in Texas crash: what we know

Published

on

Credit: CNBC

Tesla is being sued by the family of the woman who was killed in a Texas crash involving a Model 3. The driver, who is also being sued, claimed the vehicle was operating on Autopilot mode, but Tesla executives have come out challenging that claim, stating that the driver of the vehicle overrode the system.

The lawsuit was filed by 76-year-old Martha Avila’s daughter and her husband, who allege a “design defect” involving a Tesla and a failure to warn. The suit alleges negligence against Tesla and the driver, Michael Butler.

Butler “stated he was operating with an automated driving assistance system engaged at the time of the crash,” the Harris County Sheriff’s Office said in a statement. He showed no signs of intoxication and was cooperative, the Sheriff’s Office said, according to NBC News.

Just after reports of the crash and numerous headlines that immediately blamed Tesla’s Autopilot suite, both Tesla CEO Elon Musk and Head of AI Ashok Elluswamy challenged that. Musk said the crash made “no sense” given that Tesla Autopilot and Full Self-Driving do not travel at the speeds the door cameras captured the car traveling at, which Tesla says was 73 MPH.

Tesla finally clarifies fatal Texas crash, confirms driver manually overrode acceleration

Elluswamy also revealed that Tesla data showed Butler overrode the system by pressing the accelerator to 100%, and that the pedal was compressed fully even after the car had crashed. Tesla has not released this data to the public, likely because it is communicating with agencies like the NHTSA on an investigation.

The suit uses a Washington Post analysis of government data that “identified at least 17 fatal incidents linked to Tesla Autopilot.”

This is far from the first time an accident has been blamed on Autopilot. A fatal crash in Texas was blamed on Autopilot several years ago, but when Tesla released data to the NTSB, which was investigating the crash, Autopilot was not available where the crash occurred, and Autosteer was never enabled, meaning the car was manually controlled at the time of the accident.

More information on the accident will be released as Tesla works with agencies to find the cause of the crash. From personal experience, it is hard to imagine Tesla Autopilot or FSD operating in this manner. It drives sometimes too cautiously in residential areas in parking lots, at least in my experience. Speeding happens, but at this rate in this type of area, it is hard to believe.

We look forward to more details being released with time.

Continue Reading

Cybertruck

Tesla Cybertruck is officially the safest pickup, IIHS says

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) has awarded the 2025-2026 Tesla Cybertruck crew cab pickup its highest honor: Top Safety Pick+. This marks the Cybertruck as the only full-size pickup to achieve this distinction in recent evaluations.

The award applies specifically to vehicles built after April 2025, following structural upgrades including front underbody reinforcements and footwell modifications.

These changes enabled strong performance in updated crash tests. The Cybertruck earned “Good” ratings in the small overlap front (driver and passenger sides), updated moderate overlap front, and updated side tests—core requirements for the Top Safety Pick+ designation.

It also secured acceptable or good headlights across trims and a “Good” rating for its standard front crash prevention system in pedestrian scenarios, along with acceptable or good performance in vehicle-to-vehicle testing.

The Cybertruck avoided every single pedestrian collision, including:

  • Daytime child crossing
  • Nightitime adult crossing
  • Night parallel adult

In the large pickup category, competitors such as the Toyota Tundra received only a standard Top Safety Pick, while the Ford F-150 and Ram 1500 did not qualify for either award. This positions the Cybertruck as a standout in occupant protection and crash avoidance among its peers.

Credit: IIHS

Ironically, the same vehicle celebrated for superior U.S. safety performance remains banned from public roads in the United Kingdom and much of Europe. Regulators there cite the Cybertruck’s sharp external edges and highly rigid stainless-steel construction as failing pedestrian-protection standards. European and UK rules require rounded surfaces on protruding parts to minimize injury risk in collisions with vulnerable road users.

Critics also point to the truck’s substantial weight and unyielding body structure, which some argue could transfer more force to other vehicles or pedestrians rather than absorbing it.

Tesla’s engineering philosophy underpins the Cybertruck’s strong IIHS results. The vehicle features a distinctive stainless-steel exoskeleton made from ultra-hard 30X cold-rolled stainless steel. This provides exceptional structural rigidity and a robust safety cage that resists deformation in side impacts and rollovers.

Engineers designed integrated load paths to channel crash forces away from the occupant compartment while allowing controlled energy absorption in key zones. Post-April 2025 refinements to the front underbody further optimized performance in overlap crashes.

Complementing the passive structure is Tesla’s advanced active safety suite, including the standard Collision Avoidance Assist system with automatic emergency braking. This contributed directly to the vehicle’s strong front crash prevention scores. The skateboard platform and low center of gravity also enhance stability and handling, reducing the likelihood of certain crashes.

The IIHS recognition highlights how Tesla’s combination of high-strength materials, structural innovation, and software-driven safety systems can deliver top-tier protection in rigorous testing. While global regulatory differences on design and pedestrian interaction continue to limit the Cybertruck’s availability outside North America, its U.S. safety credentials set a new benchmark for full-size pickups.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

SpaceX’s newest Starmind will make earth data centers obsolete

Elon Musk confirmed Starmind as SpaceX’s AI satellite constellation name, targeting one million orbital compute nodes.

Published

on

By

Elon Musk confirmed that Starmind will be the official name of SpaceX’s planned AI satellite constellation, following a trademark filing by xAI that surfaced earlier this week. Starmind is what’s being described to the FCC as a constellation of up to one million AI satellites

It’s worth noting that SpaceX’s Starlink communication satellite and Starmind are built on the same orbital infrastructure concept but serve entirely different purposes. Starlink is a connectivity network, with satellites receiving and relaying data between points on Earth, and functioning as a high-speed internet backbone in space. The satellites themselves do not process or think, and move information from one place to another, the same function a fiber cable performs underground.

SpaceX just forced Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile to team up for the first time in history

Starmind, on the other hand, is something completely different, and tather than moving data, its satellites would compute data through artificial intelligence and directly in orbit using onboard processors powered by large solar arrays. Where a Starlink satellite is essentially a very fast pipe, a Starmind satellite is a server. The practical implication is that Starmind would allow AI models to run inference, process queries, and generate outputs from space, then beam results down to users anywhere on Earth within milliseconds, and without the data ever needing to travel to a terrestrial data center.

Starship will be able to carry 30 to 50 AI1 satellites per launch, delivering the equivalent of dozens of server racks per flight, with no land acquisition, no power grid approval, and no cooling infrastructure required on the ground.

SpaceX is pursuing this new technology as terrestrial data centers are running into hard limits such as lack of physical space, community opposition, and power and water consumption at a scale that is increasingly difficult to permit. Space has unlimited solar power, natural vacuum cooling, and no zoning boards. Musk said in a June 8 video presentation that he expects space to become the lowest-cost location to deploy AI compute within two to three years. Two AI1 prototypes are scheduled to launch in early 2027, with volume production targeted for the end of that year at a new facility called Gigasat.

The real world applications Starmind enables extend well beyond powering Grok. A constellation of orbiting AI processors could run inference workloads for any paying customer, anywhere on Earth, with latency measured in milliseconds rather than the seconds associated with ground-based cloud routing across continents. Starmind, if it scales as described, would make SpaceX the landlord of AI compute the same way Starlink made it the landlord of satellite internet.

Continue Reading