News
SpaceX’s Elon Musk hints at “notable” Starship changes, explains static fire anomaly
CEO Elon Musk has offered an explanation for SpaceX’s recent Starship static fire anomaly and says that an overview of the next-generation rocket development program will be delayed to account for some “notable” design changes.
Over the last several months, Musk has promised to do one of his (thus far) usual annual Starship updates, either in the form of a presentation in South Texas, an article published on SpaceX’s website, or both. Originally expected in September or October, the CEO’s tentative schedules have come and gone several times. Simultaneously, however, SpaceX has been preparing Starship serial number 8 (SN8) for a range of crucial tests and Starship program firsts, recently culminating in a successful cryogenic proof test, multiple wet dress rehearsals (WDRs), nosecone installation, the first triple-Raptor static fire test, engine tests using smaller ‘header’ tanks, and more.
Unfortunately for SN8, the most recent Raptor engine header static fire – drawing propellant from two small internal tanks mainly used for landing burns – did not go according to plan, resulting in some kind of high-temperature fire and severing Starship’s hydraulic systems. For SpaceX test controllers, that meant a total loss of control of most vehicle valves and pressurization systems, essentially putting one of Starship SN8’s header tanks through an unplanned pressure and failsafe test. In the days since, what exactly caused that unfortunate failure has been the subject of a great deal of discussion – discussion that can finally be put to rest with new information from Musk himself.
In a surprise, SpaceX had apparently decided to add a failsafe to Starship SN8’s new nose section, installing what is known as a burst disk – effectively an automatic single-use valve. Once the upper (liquid oxygen) header tank reached dangerous pressures, the force of that pressure broke the seal, allowing the rocket to vent excess pressure and avoid what would have otherwise been a potentially catastrophic explosion.
The cause of that near-miss, according to Elon Musk, was as simple as debris kicked up during the Starship SN8 Raptor engine static fire directly prior. Producing up to 200 metric tons (~450,000 lbf) of thrust and an exhaust stream traveling some 3.3 kilometers per second (2 mi/s, Mach ~10), Musk says that Raptor tore apart a special ceramic coating covering the concrete directly beneath Starship SN8. Likely accelerated to extreme velocities in milliseconds, shards of that coating reportedly “severed [an] avionics cable, causing [a] bad [Raptor engine shutdown].”
Prior to Musk’s comments, SpaceX technicians had already removed on of SN8’s three Raptors – SN32 – on November 14th and replaced it with Raptor SN42 on November 16th, effectively confirming that any damage suffered by Starship’s engine section was easily repairable. It’s unclear how exactly a single severed cable could result in a Raptor engine seemingly dripping molten metal but regardless of the cause, the fix appears to have been a quick one.
In response to the anomaly, Musk says that Starship avionics cables will ultimately be routed inside steel pipes to shield them from debris, while “water-cooled steel pipes” will be added to the launch pad to help limit the damage Raptors can cause. Perhaps as a partial result of SN8’s troubles at the launch pad, Musk says that his Starship blog post will have to wait, as SpaceX “[may be] making some notable changes” to the launch vehicle.
Prior to Starship SN8’s failed November 12th Raptor test, SpaceX was expected to attempt three consecutive static fires before clearing the rocket for an ambitious 15 km (9.5 mi) flight test. One of those static fires had already been completed on November 10th and it’s unclear if SpaceX’s SN8 test plan has remained unchanged or if the static fire counter has been effectively reset. Either way, barring more surprises, there’s still a definite possibility that Starship SN8 will be ready for its launch debut by the end of November and an even better chance that it will launch some time between now and 2021. Stay tuned for updates!
Tesla has officially launched public Robotaxi rides in Austin, Texas, without a Safety Monitor in the vehicle, marking the first time the company has removed anyone from the vehicle other than the rider.
The Safety Monitor has been present in Tesla Robotaxis in Austin since its launch last June, maintaining safety for passengers and other vehicles, and was placed in the passenger’s seat.
Tesla planned to remove the Safety Monitor at the end of 2025, but it was not quite ready to do so. Now, in January, riders are officially reporting that they are able to hail a ride from a Model Y Robotaxi without anyone in the vehicle:
I am in a robotaxi without safety monitor pic.twitter.com/fzHu385oIb
— TSLA99T (@Tsla99T) January 22, 2026
Tesla started testing this internally late last year and had several employees show that they were riding in the vehicle without anyone else there to intervene in case of an emergency.
Tesla has now expanded that program to the public. It is not active in the entire fleet, but there are a “few unsupervised vehicles mixed in with the broader robotaxi fleet with safety monitors,” Ashok Elluswamy said:
Robotaxi rides without any safety monitors are now publicly available in Austin.
Starting with a few unsupervised vehicles mixed in with the broader robotaxi fleet with safety monitors, and the ratio will increase over time. https://t.co/ShMpZjefwB
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) January 22, 2026
Tesla Robotaxi goes driverless as Musk confirms Safety Monitor removal testing
The Robotaxi program also operates in the California Bay Area, where the fleet is much larger, but Safety Monitors are placed in the driver’s seat and utilize Full Self-Driving, so it is essentially the same as an Uber driver using a Tesla with FSD.
In Austin, the removal of Safety Monitors marks a substantial achievement for Tesla moving forward. Now that it has enough confidence to remove Safety Monitors from Robotaxis altogether, there are nearly unlimited options for the company in terms of expansion.
While it is hoping to launch the ride-hailing service in more cities across the U.S. this year, this is a much larger development than expansion, at least for now, as it is the first time it is performing driverless rides in Robotaxi anywhere in the world for the public to enjoy.
Tesla has scheduled its Earnings Call for Q4 and Full Year 2025 for next Wednesday, January 28, at 5:30 p.m. EST, and investors are already preparing to get some answers from executives regarding a wide variety of topics.
The company accepts several questions from retail investors through the platform Say, which then allows shareholders to vote on the best questions.
Tesla does not answer anything regarding future product releases, but they are willing to shed light on current timelines, progress of certain projects, and other plans.
There are five questions that range over a variety of topics, including SpaceX, Full Self-Driving, Robotaxi, and Optimus, which are currently in the lead to be asked and potentially answered by Elon Musk and other Tesla executives:
- You once said: Loyalty deserves loyalty. Will long-term Tesla shareholders still be prioritized if SpaceX does an IPO?
- Our Take – With a lot of speculation regarding an incoming SpaceX IPO, Tesla investors, especially long-term ones, should be able to benefit from an early opportunity to purchase shares. This has been discussed endlessly over the past year, and we must be getting close to it.
- When is FSD going to be 100% unsupervised?
- Our Take – Musk said today that this is essentially a solved problem, and it could be available in the U.S. by the end of this year.
- What is the current bottleneck to increase Robotaxi deployment & personal use unsupervised FSD? The safety/performance of the most recent models or people to monitor robots, robotaxis, in-car, or remotely? Or something else?
- Our Take – The bottleneck seems to be based on data, which Musk said Tesla needs 10 billion miles of data to achieve unsupervised FSD. Once that happens, regulatory issues will be what hold things up from moving forward.
- Regarding Optimus, could you share the current number of units deployed in Tesla factories and actively performing production tasks? What specific roles or operations are they handling, and how has their integration impacted factory efficiency or output?
- Our Take – Optimus is going to have a larger role in factories moving forward, and later this year, they will have larger responsibilities.
- Can you please tie purchased FSD to our owner accounts vs. locked to the car? This will help us enjoy it in any Tesla we drive/buy and reward us for hanging in so long, some of us since 2017.
- Our Take – This is a good one and should get us some additional information on the FSD transfer plans and Subscription-only model that Tesla will adopt soon.
Tesla will have its Earnings Call on Wednesday, January 28.
Elon Musk shared an incredible detail about Tesla Cybercab’s potential efficiency, as the company has hinted in the past that it could be one of the most affordable vehicles to operate from a per-mile basis.
ARK Invest released a report recently that shed some light on the potential incremental cost per mile of various Robotaxis that will be available on the market in the coming years.
The Cybercab, which is detailed for the year 2030, has an exceptionally low cost of operation, which is something Tesla revealed when it unveiled the vehicle a year and a half ago at the “We, Robot” event in Los Angeles.
Musk said on numerous occasions that Tesla plans to hit the $0.20 cents per mile mark with the Cybercab, describing a “clear path” to achieving that figure and emphasizing it is the “full considered” cost, which would include energy, maintenance, cleaning, depreciation, and insurance.
Probably true
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 22, 2026
ARK’s report showed that the Cybercab would be roughly half the cost of the Waymo 6th Gen Robotaxi in 2030, as that would come in at around $0.40 per mile all in. Cybercab, at scale, would be at $0.20.
Credit: ARK Invest
This would be a dramatic decrease in the cost of operation for Tesla, and the savings would then be passed on to customers who choose to utilize the ride-sharing service for their own transportation needs.
The U.S. average cost of new vehicle ownership is about $0.77 per mile, according to AAA. Meanwhile, Uber and Lyft rideshares often cost between $1 and $4 per mile, while Waymo can cost between $0.60 and $1 or more per mile, according to some estimates.
Tesla’s engineering has been the true driver of these cost efficiencies, and its focus on creating a vehicle that is as cost-effective to operate as possible is truly going to pay off as the vehicle begins to scale. Tesla wants to get the Cybercab to about 5.5-6 miles per kWh, which has been discussed with prototypes.
Additionally, fewer parts due to the umboxed manufacturing process, a lower initial cost, and eliminating the need to pay humans for their labor would also contribute to a cheaper operational cost overall. While aspirational, all of the ingredients for this to be a real goal are there.
It may take some time as Tesla needs to hammer the manufacturing processes, and Musk has said there will be growing pains early. This week, he said regarding the early production efforts:
“…initial production is always very slow and follows an S-curve. The speed of production ramp is inversely proportionate to how many new parts and steps there are. For Cybercab and Optimus, almost everything is new, so the early production rate will be agonizingly slow, but eventually end up being insanely fast.”
BREAKING: Tesla launches public Robotaxi rides in Austin with no Safety Monitor
Tesla Earnings Call: Top 5 questions investors are asking
