News
SpaceX Starship factory aiming to build five megarockets in 2023
CEO Elon Musk says that SpaceX’s South Texas Starship aims to build up to five of the two-stage megarockets in 2023.
SpaceX’s Boca Chica, Texas hardware endeavors began in an empty field in late 2018, kicking off Starhopper testing in 2019. In late 2019 and early 2020, the company began building the bones of the factory that exists today, relying heavily on several giant tents (“sprung structures”) similar to those used by Tesla. SpaceX has already begun the process of replacing those tents with larger, permanent buildings, but two of the original tents continue to host crucial parts of the Starship manufacturing process.
In terms of useful output, that manufacturing slowed down a bit in 2022. That slowdown can likely be partially explained by the need to move equipment and processes into the first finished section of Starfactory. But in general, SpaceX was simply focused on finishing and testing Starship S24 and Super Heavy B7 – both stages of the latest vehicle meant to attempt Starship’s first orbital launch.
Only by late 2022 did Ship 24 more or less complete proof testing, and Booster 7 is still several major tests away from solidifying full confidence in its design. SpaceX has only conducted limited testing with fully-stacked Starships, further reducing the amount of confidence the company can have in the assembled rocket. Lacking the data needed to know with certainty whether the tweaked designs of Starship and Super Heavy are good enough for several orbital test flights, it’s thus unsurprising that SpaceX only produced a handful of usable ships and boosters in 2022.
The update that's rolling out to the fleet makes full use of the front and rear steering travel to minimize turning circle. In this case a reduction of 1.6 feet just over the air— Wes (@wmorrill3) April 16, 2024
But if CEO Elon Musk’s forecast is correct, the company has plans to increase Starbase’s useful output in 2023. According to Musk, SpaceX aims to build “about five full stacks” this year, translating to five flightworthy Starships and five Super Heavy boosters.
In 2022, SpaceX finished Booster 7 and built Booster 8, Booster 9, and most of Booster 10. Booster 8 was almost immediately relegated to the retirement yard. Booster 9, featuring some significant design changes, completed a limited amount of proof testing and returned to the factory in early January – likely for Raptor engine installation. The fate of Booster 10 is unclear, but it stands as a prime example of how fast SpaceX can actually build massive Starship hardware when conditions are right. SpaceX began stacking B10 in late October 2022 and the vehicle is just two stacks away from full height three months later.
In the same period, SpaceX finished and immediately retired Starship S22, finished and began testing Ship 24, finished and began testing Ship 25, and finished stacking Ship 26. Booster 9’s upgrades partially insulate it from the most disappointing possible scenario, retirement before flight. Even if Booster 7 fails during prelaunch testing or its launch attempt, revealing major design flaws, it’s possible that Booster 9’s changes have already addressed those weaknesses, allowing it to continue the flight test campaign. Ship 25’s fate is even more dependent on the fate of Ship 24.
In 2022, SpaceX ultimately produced two “full stacks,” with a third (S26/B10) likely to be completed – albeit with a less certain fate – in early 2023. Delivering five full stacks this year – meaning five ships and five boosters that make it far enough to be paired with another and fully stacked – would be a major improvement. However, as was the case in 2022, higher-volume production will remain a risky proposition until the designs of the vehicles being built have been fully qualified.
Given how long it’s taken SpaceX to partially qualify Super Heavy Booster 7, it appears that the largest source of uncertainty will remain for at least another month or two, if not well into mid-2023. Starship production has many uncertainties of its own, and all of them are complicated by not knowing if a Super Heavy booster will be available to launch each new ship in a timely fashion.
Ultimately, an entirely different constraint means that “five full stacks” may be all SpaceX needs to build for the next 12+ months. After a long and painful process, the FAA completed an environmental review of SpaceX’s Starbase, Texas facilities, permitting a maximum of five orbital (full-stack) Starship launches per year. Starship’s FAA orbital launch license, which has yet to be granted, could be even more restrictive. A second Starship pad under construction in Florida is unlikely to be cleared for orbital launches until Starship has proven itself to be moderately safe in South Texas, which could easily take 12-18 months, if not longer.
Combined with the fact that no super-heavy-lift rocket in history has flown five times in its first year of launch activity, a trend Starship seems unlikely to break, SpaceX could practically halt production entirely in 2023 and still have a full year of testing ahead of it while only using Ships 24-26 and Boosters 7, 9, and 10. Unintuitively, that bodes well for a busy 2023 of Starship test flights, as much of the hardware required for three flight tests is already close to completion or almost ready to begin preflight testing.
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
