Connect with us

News

SpaceX Starship engine test aborted twice in one day by hurricane damage and bugs

Starship SN5 was forced to abort a planned Raptor engine test twice in one day. (NASASpaceflight - bocachicagal)

Published

on

SpaceX has been unable to catch a break in the last few weeks and CEO Elon Musk says that a Starship Raptor engine test was delayed twice in one day by minor hardware bugs and damage caused by Hurricane Hanna.

Although it quickly devolved into a tropical storm and largely missed the southernmost tip of Texas, where SpaceX has built its Starship factory and test facilities, Hanna caused significant damage just a few dozen miles to the north. Above all else, the flooding caused by Hanna has by far been the worst part of the storm. Boca Chica managed to dodge the bulk of that element but was still hit by heavy rain that lasted for a day or two, drenching everything that wasn’t covered and nearly flooding the only access road.

According to Musk, an unspecified “connector” related to Starship SN5 or the pad supporting it was damaged by Hanna’s glancing encounter with SpaceX’s facilities. The connector was ultimately fixed around 7-8 pm CDT per unofficial webcasts showing technicians working around the rocket after they returned to the pad, but SpaceX’s test window technically closed at 8 pm CDT (01:00 UTC).

Nevertheless, SpaceX must have been able to work with local sheriffs to extend that road closure into the night, and – as promised by CEO Elon Musk – testing restarted around 9:30 pm CDT. About an hour and a half later, Starship SN5 appeared to make it all the way through a partial wet dress rehearsal before its Raptor engine test fire was aborted a second time. Based on four static fires completed by Starship SN4 in May 2020, the rocket could have been just a few minutes away from ignition.

Advertisement

According to Musk, Starship SN5’s fuel (methane) “spin valve” – presumably a valve that opens to allow methane gas to spin up Raptor’s fuel turbopump – failed to open when it was supposed to. To ensure Raptor’s health after three inactive weeks spent installed on Starship out in the elements, SpaceX likely planned what is known as a “spin prime” test directly prior to the static fire. If Raptor successfully spun up its turbopumps, SpaceX would proceed directly into static fire operations without having to detank Starship.

During SN5’s second July 27th static fire attempt, Raptor was unable to start that spin prime test, forcing SpaceX to stand down to diagnose and fix the problem. Musk says that SpaceX will attempt to static fire Starship SN5 again tomorrow (July 28th) – assuming the issue can be quickly rectified.

Raptor SN27 was installed on Starship SN5 around July 3rd or 4th. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)
Starship SN5 was forced to wait several weeks after its first cryogenic proof test to begin more challenging tests with a Raptor engine and real methane/oxygen propellant. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

Musk further noted that some “odd…behavior” was observed in the hydraulic pump powering Raptor SN27’s thrust vector control (TVC). Used to steer a rocket engine, Raptor doesn’t technically need functioning TVC to perform a static fire test on the ground, but it’s an issue that will have to be completely fixed before Starship SN5 is allowed to attempt its first flight test. If July 28th finally sees SN5 successfully ignite its Raptor engine, there’s a chance – however slim – that SpaceX will be able to turn the Starship around for its first hop just a few days later.

Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.

Advertisement

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

Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot

Published

on

A Texas man has been arrested and charged with manslaughter after his Tesla crashed into a home last month, striking a woman inside and killing her. The driver, Michael Butler, claimed the vehicle was in self-driving mode, but information from Tesla shows that Butler overrode the system.

Butler was arrested on Wednesday and booked at the Harris County, Texas, jail. He remained in custody through Thursday and Friday; he did not enter a plea, and his next court hearing is scheduled for Monday.

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

There are a handful of new clues in the case that could clear Tesla of any wrongdoing, especially as the woman who was killed’s family, the Avilas, filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Tesla and Butler, seeking at least $1 million in damages.

Charging documents from the Harris County prosecutor now show that Butler, who was working DoorDash the evening of the accident, had been using Full Self-Driving mode without incident through the duration of multiple deliveries that evening.

In the moments leading up to the crash, while in FSD and approaching a left turn, Butler pressed the accelerator pedal, overriding FSD’s speed control, and continued to push it until it reached 100 percent. This caused rapid acceleration; the brake pedal was never pressed, and there is no data to show that Butler aimed to turn away from the curb or house.

The charging documents state:

“I noted that the brake pedal was never pressed in the final minute before the crash. I also did not see any data to indicate that the driver attempted to turn away from the curb that he eventually struck. Further, I observed that no mechanical error was detected or recorded by the vehicle before BUTLER and the Tesla struck the curb.”

Additionally, a forensic analysis of Butler’s phone showed that he searched Google around the time of the crash with queries questioning why FSD was “too timid,” “not aggressive enough,” and even searched, “FSD is not aggressive enough for city driving.”

The documents outlined this:

“Investigator Veal also informed me that he had received BUTLER’s cell phone from Deputy Amad and that HDAO digital forensics team had completed a data extraction and download of the phone. Multiple Google searches related to Tesla had been made from BUTLER’s phone in the months leading up the crash. I noted multiple searches in May of 2026 indicating an apparent frustration with Tesla’s FSD mode, including the following searches: “Tesla fsd not aggressive enough 2026 model,” “Tesla fsd not [sic) aggressive enough 2026,” “FSD is not aggressive enough for city driving,” and “tesla fsd too timid.”‘

Tesla had claimed just after the crash that its internal data showed Butler had overridden the system’s speed control and pressed the accelerator completely, causing the vehicle to travel at an excessive rate of speed. Eventually, the car slammed into Avila’s house, killing her.

Butler has now been formally charged with Manslaughter, a felony.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla’s strong Q2 deliveries: Four key drivers behind the surprise

Published

on

(Credit: Tesla)

Tesla shocked with its quarterly delivery report yesterday by reporting it delivered 480,126 vehicles in the second quarter of 2026, a 25 percent year-over-year jump that crushed Wall Street estimates of roughly 400,000–408,000 units. Production reached 451,758, with Model 3 and Model Y accounting for the vast majority.

The result ended two years of annual delivery declines and drew down inventory, signaling demand that outpaced earlier production.

Tesla bears had long warned that the expiration of the U.S. federal EV tax credit would hammer demand. Without the $7,500 incentive, they argued, American buyers would balk at higher effective prices, leading to a sharp slowdown.

Will Tesla thrive without the EV tax credit? Five reasons why they might

That narrative has not played out as predicted. While U.S. EV sales faced broader headwinds, Tesla’s global numbers held firm, underscoring the company’s ability to offset domestic pressure through other levers.

There are several plausible factors that explain Tesla’s strength during this quarter. Let’s take a look at them:

Rising Gas Prices

Rising gas prices provided a powerful tailwind, especially in the U.S.

Geopolitical tensions tied to the Iran conflict pushed fuel costs higher earlier in the year, amplifying the lifetime savings of electric vehicles. Even as oil prices later moderated, the psychological and financial impact lingered, encouraging fleet operators and private buyers to accelerate EV purchases. European sales rebounded sharply, helping drive the quarter’s outperformance.

Full Self-Driving Adoption

Advances in Full Self-Driving (FSD) supervised software also appear to have boosted appeal. Tesla expanded FSD availability in select European markets and continued refining the system.

For tech-oriented buyers, the promise of future autonomy and enhanced driver-assistance features adds perceived value beyond the car itself. This differentiation helps Tesla stand out in a crowded market where competitors focus primarily on hardware and basic range.

Pricing Strategy, Affordable Configurations

Tesla’s offerings and its pricing strategy during Q2 further stimulated demand. Tesla introduced lower-cost versions of the Model 3 and Model Y, widening accessibility without sacrificing core margins.

These moves countered affordability concerns and attracted buyers who had been waiting on the sidelines. Combined with attractive financing and leasing options, the pricing strategy converted interest into actual orders more effectively than many analysts expected.

Broad European Recovery

Supported by government incentives, corporate fleet electrification, and easing political headwinds around CEO Elon Musk, Tesla was supplied additional momentum through stronger registration numbers throughout Europe.

Strong exports from the Shanghai Gigafactory and a production ramp at Giga Berlin ensured supply met this resurgent demand. Corporate buyers, in particular, accelerated transitions to EVs to meet sustainability targets, providing a steady volume base.

These elements created a virtuous cycle that delivered the strong deliveries report. While bears correctly flagged the loss of the U.S. tax credit as a risk, Tesla’s diversified playbook demonstrated that it could remain resilient against those headwinds. The Q2 beat suggests the company remains adept at navigating shifting market conditions, even as competition intensifies.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Semi involved in first known fatal crash in Nevada

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

A Tesla Semi was involved in a fatal collision on U.S. Highway 50 in Dayton, Nevada, on Sunday, June 28, 2026, marking the first known fatal crash involving the electric Class 8 truck. The incident occurred around 7:20 a.m. at the intersection with Traditions Parkway, approximately 40 miles east of Reno and close to Tesla’s Gigafactory Nevada.

According to the Lyon County Sheriff’s Office and the Nevada State Police Highway Patrol, a semi-truck struck two passenger vehicles stopped at a traffic signal. The truck hit the vehicles from behind. Two people were pronounced dead at the scene, and a third person suffered life-threatening injuries and was flown to a hospital, Forbes reported.

Preliminary statements gathered at the scene by the Lyon County Sheriff’s Office suggested the truck driver may have fallen asleep at the wheel. However, the Nevada Highway Patrol, which is leading the investigation, stated that the official cause has not yet been determined.

Additional information is expected to be released early the following week. The truck was seized for evidence as part of the ongoing probe.

Responders at the scene included deputies from the Lyon County Sheriff’s Office, personnel from the Nevada Highway Patrol, Central Lyon County Fire Department, and the Nevada Department of Transportation. The crash led to the temporary closure of U.S. 50 in both directions.

The Tesla Semi is Tesla’s battery-electric heavy-duty truck, produced at the nearby Gigafactory in Nevada. Authorities initially described the vehicle as a semi-truck; its make was subsequently confirmed through reporting and scene identification; an interesting bit of information here, as the Semi is not yet available publicly and many do not know that Tesla builds electric trucks.

The investigation remains active, with no further official details on contributing factors or vehicle systems released as of early July 2026.

This incident highlights ongoing scrutiny of commercial vehicle safety on Nevada highways, particularly involving fatigue. Law enforcement continues to gather evidence and witness statements.

Continue Reading