News
SpaceX’s Starship comes to life for the first time in lead-up to launch debut
For the first time ever, SpaceX has pressurized Starship Mk1’s building-sized propellant tanks, a critical test that culminated in the rocket prototype essentially taking its first ‘breaths’.
An anthropomorphization sometimes used to describe the venting launch vehicles often exhibit while during and after fueling, Starship Mk1’s so-called ‘breaths’ occurred around 5:59 pm CST (23:59 UTC). Those first vents came after roughly an hour or two spent performing several different pressurization cycles, observable due to the fact that Starship’s stainless steel tanks visibly smoothed out as pressure increased.
Due to the typical distances Starship is viewed from and the nature of the mirror-finished stainless steel SpaceX has chosen to build the next-generation launch vehicle out of, the exterior of Starship prototypes can produce a reflection that looks bumpy and disjointed. This has lead many a layperson to incorrectly assume that SpaceX’s Starship prototypes are thus shoddily built. In reality, viewed from afar, the tiniest hint of surface heterogeneity on a mirror can dramatically change what is reflected on its surface.
Even at the thinness of Starship Mk1’s liquid oxygen and methane tanks, stainless steel is still extremely strong, but pressurizing the vehicle’s tanks can clearly counteract a significant portion of the slight imperfections in their curvature.
Although it’s now clear that SpaceX did in fact perform some kind of pressurization test with Starship Mk1, it remains to be seen what exactly the nature of that testing was. First and foremost, SpaceX did establish significant roadblocks almost six hours before testing began, and company workers vacated the launch site several hours before visible Starship pressurization and venting. Fairly soon after that vent, workers returned to the pad and may or may not have been present during additional (but more subdued) venting activity.
Most importantly, November 18th’s testing featured a sum total of zero visible activity at SpaceX’s nearby flare stack, a mechanism used to burn waste methane gas to prevent dangerous buildups at worksites (or launch pads). This almost certainly means that methane (gaseous or liquid) played no role in pressurizing Starship Mk1’s propellant tanks.
Altogether, that likely means that Monday’s proof test was not a wet dress rehearsal (WDR), a term used to describe the process of testing a launch vehicle by fully fueling it and performing a countdown identical to a real launch – but without engine ignition or liftoff. Instead, SpaceX likely began the day’s testing by pressurizing Starship several times with a neutral gas like nitrogen or helium, while gaseous oxygen is also a possibility but is significantly less likely. Simply by using pressure sensors on Starship and knowing the volume of gas that is being loaded, SpaceX could likely determine whether the prototype has any leaks.
The major vent around 6 pm local time could have simply been Starship venting that pressurant gas, which would explain why there was just a single large, observable vent. When dealing with cryogenic liquid propellant, those supercool liquids gradually heat up, causing a portion to boil and turn into gas, gas that launch vehicles then vent intermittently to prevent overpressure events (i.e. explosions). Starship Mk1 only visibly vented once, although there may have also been some additional venting even after technicians returned to the launch site (another sign that the pressurant was neither toxic or combustible).
Oddly, shortly after SpaceX workers returned to the launch pad, they appeared to begin spraying down Starship Mk1 with a large volume of water or foam, producing clouds of mist as large as Starship itself. This came as a total surprise and why it’s being done is entirely unclear. Possible explanations include simply rinsing Starship (but why and why now?), checking its tanks for leaks, applying industrial quantities of WD40 (used to protect stainless steel from rust), or maybe even testing how Starship stands up to ice (extremely unlikely as it would need to be filled with a cryogenic liquid to be cold enough).
Perhaps the morning light will bring some answers. All things considered, as long as the mysterious spraying is not indicative of any serious issues or concerns with Starship Mk1, SpaceX may now be ready to put the prototype through a true propellant loading test, potentially filling its tanks with as much as 1200 metric tons (2.65 million pounds) of liquid oxygen and methane. If or when Starship passes that test, it’s next trial will be the very first triple-Raptor-engine static fire test. For now, we wait.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
Tesla plans to boost production at its Gigafactory Berlin plant in Germany following a sharp rebound in sales and demand in Europe after a softer 2025.
The plans put Tesla in a better position to compete with strengthening companies in Europe and potentially other markets; demand indicators show Tesla is much better off than in 2025.
Last year was a tough year for Tesla in terms of overall demand in Europe. The company produced over 200,000 vehicles at the German plant last year, a soft figure compared to the 375,000 vehicles Tesla lists as its current capacity at the factory.
🚨 Tesla said this morning it will ramp up production at Gigafactory Berlin to a volume of 7,500 vehicles per week.
This is a 20 percent boost in production. Tesla will hire 1,000 new employees to help with the increase.$TSLA pic.twitter.com/kravKfRO5n
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 25, 2026
Tesla’s overall European sales dropped significantly last year due to a variety of factors. However, sales are rebounding, and demand is strong once again, and only getting stronger. Tesla is now planning to bump production of Model Y vehicles at Giga Berlin upward by about 20 percent. It will also bring 1,000 new jobs to the plant.
Tesla confirmed the details of its planned production expansion in Germany this morning. It is a strategy to keep up with strengthening demand.
In Q1, Tesla saw a record 61,000 vehicles produced at Giga Berlin. European registrations rebounded sharply, with Model Y seeing 117 percent increases in March 2026 compared to last year. Germany alone saw stark increases, with a quadrupling in registrations to 9,252 units.
This trend continued in other key European markets, including France, Denmark and Sweden. Tesla registrations were up over 46 percent in some of these markets, and Model Y continued its trend as a top BEV in the market.
Demand has been recovering strongly in 2026, giving Tesla a reason to expand production efforts at the factory. These increases signal management’s confidence in sustained or growing European pull for Berlin-built vehicles.
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.
“Application of the accelerator pedal was found to be as high as 98.8 percent,” the NTSB said in their findings. The highest recorded speed in the five seconds leading up to the impact was 67 miles per hour. The area where the crash occurred is residential, and Texas State laws… pic.twitter.com/XGD97NHVZ2
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) March 18, 2026
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.
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 IIHS pedestrian front crash prevention tests, @Cybertruck avoided every single collision – daytime, nighttime & different angles
It was also the only pickup to earn Top Safety Pick+ (highest award) in 2026https://t.co/BNPqT9TbsW pic.twitter.com/M6nwDisBFK
— Tesla (@Tesla) June 24, 2026
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.
Tesla plans production boost at Giga Berlin following rebound in Europe
Tesla and driver sued by family of woman killed in Texas crash: what we know
