News
SpaceX to send retired Starship to local Texas airport, says Elon Musk
In a brief Twitter exchange, the Brownsville/South Padre Island International Airport (BRO) appears to have talked SpaceX CEO Elon Musk into turning a retired Starship prototype into a public exhibit.
Operational in some form since 2020, SpaceX’s ‘Starbase’ Starship factory is already a bit of a tourist destination for Brownsville, Texas and the local Rio Grande Valley – particularly for fans of spaceflight and rockets. The substantial factory and a trio of orbital and suborbital launch pads are both located directly beside a public highway, a tiny private housing development, and a public beach – maintaining access to all of which has been a consistent challenge for SpaceX for years.
However, the company has continued to work to coexist with locals while simultaneously generating tourism and bringing unprecedented economic growth and publicity to the relatively quiet region. It’s increasingly unclear if SpaceX will be able to realize its full ambitions for Starbase and South Texas but Elon Musk recently reiterated the company’s commitment to maintaining a strong presence in the region whether or not the US government gives it the permissions it needs for regular Starship launches.
Musk’s drop-of-a-pin willingness to donate an entire Starship prototype to a local organization certainly exemplifies that commitment. While Starbase is already a de facto tourist destination where people can get within a stone’s throw of several prototypes of the largest rockets ever built, the setup for visitors is very impromptu, inconvenient, and right beside an active highway and rocket factory. A dedicated Starship display at a less frenetic site with dedicated parking and no need to tiptoe around a highway would undoubtedly be an improvement.
Situating that public Starship display directly beside the largest local airport would also preclude the need for prospective visitors to drive half an hour out of their way, ensuring that far more people actually get to experience a Starship up close and learn about SpaceX’s presence in the region. Thankfully, increasingly unusual behavior means that SpaceX has no shortage of prototypes to choose from.
Starship SN15 is the first prototype of any kind to fly to a moderate altitude (~10 km), fall back to Earth like a skydiver, flip around at the last second, and survive a soft landing in May 2021. Musk once said that the historic prototype would be reused on a second flight test but the ship never did and has instead sat at Starbase’s ‘Rocket Garden’ ever since. Starship SN16 – almost identical to SN15 – was also supposed to fly but never got to perform a single test before it was retired to the same garden.
Up next, SpaceX mostly finished an entire Super Heavy booster – standing almost 70 meters (230 ft) tall – late last year but sent it (B5) directly to the ‘garden’ without even attempting to finish or test the rocket. Its sister booster, Super Heavy B4, was at one point supposed to support Starship’s first orbital launch attempt but has only completed a fraction of the necessary proof tests after spending almost half a year floating around the orbital launch site. It’s entirely possible that B4 will meet its end beside B5 later this year.
Finally, SpaceX most recently decided to assemble Starship S22 – very similar to Starship S20, the other half of the first orbital test flight pair of B4/S20 – and stacked the ship to its full height on February 14th, 2022. After installing its nosecone and the last two of four flaps, though, SpaceX immediately sent the unfinished Starship to the same graveyard of retired prototypes, strongly implying that it, too, will never be used.
While increasingly confusing from a programmatic standpoint, SpaceX’s ever-growing supply of retired or fully unused Starship and Super Heavy hardware gives the company plenty of options for donating one or even several prototypes. The only real barriers are the need for a concrete foundation to secure the display vehicles and the challenge of transporting vertical, building-sized rockets by road. To get a Starship all the way to the Brownsville International Airport, a number of power lines and traffic lights would likely need to be temporarily removed or rerouted, but that’s a relatively minor inconvenience with enough political will.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.
The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.
One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.
Correct pricing will be going live at midnight tonight. All fees since July 2nd 2026 will be waived.
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) July 13, 2026
These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.
To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.
At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.
Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line
By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.
The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.
Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.
The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.
In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
Elon Musk’s Texas ranch to showcase the lifelong work that changed the world
