News
A SpaceX Starship rocket could take to the sky for the first time later this week
SpaceX has scrubbed its latest Starship static fire test for the third time since Friday but if another attempt succeeds within the next few days, a full-scale Starship prototype could lift off for the first time later this week.
SpaceX has attempted to perform a Starship static fire every day for the last three days without any luck, foiled by what must be mild technical issues and some extreme South Texas weather. That static fire – set to be Starship serial number 4’s (SN4) third – is required because SpaceX chose to replace the rocket’s installed Raptor engine (SN18) around 10 days ago after completing two successful tests on May 4th and 5th. Installed a few days after SN18 was removed, Starship and Raptor SN20 must now perform their own integrated static fire to ensure the complex systems are working properly.
Since SN4’s last test, SpaceX teams have been swarming the Starship prototype day and night, installing new COPVs (composite overwrapped pressure vessels; used to store high-pressure gas), new plumbing, and more. The specific purposes of all those in-situ changes can only be speculated at but what is clear is that SpaceX is preparing Starship SN4 for the first attempted flight test of a full-scale prototype, following in the footsteps of Starhopper’s bizarre but successful July and August 2019 hops. As SN4’s third Raptor static fire has slipped, though, so has that flight test. While the FAA has yet to officially publish a license for the 150m (~500 ft) Starship hop, NOTAMs (Notices to Airmen) filed recently suggest that that license and hop could come any day now.
Most recently, a NOTAM was filed on May 18th for what is likely Starship’s 150m hop test on Thursday, May 21st. Filed before SN4’s May 18th static fire test was aborted twice, that proposed May 21st hop test will almost certainly be delayed at least as long as the static fire that needs to precede it and is also dependent upon the FAA officially licensing the flight. The fact that NOTAMs are being filed for that flight strongly suggests that SpaceX and the FAA or in the late stages of hammering out a license, a process that can often involve a great deal of back-and-forth and compromise for experimental rocket launches.
Regardless, if or when Starship SN4 finally manages to fire up its new Raptor engine, it could be just a matter of days after that SpaceX attempts the first true Starship flight test. If everything goes according to plan, the ~30m (~100 ft) tall stainless steel rocket will lift off under the power of a single asymmetrically installed Raptor engine, capable of producing up to 200 metric tons (~450,000 lbf) of thrust with cryogenic liquid methane and oxygen propellant.
After lifting off from its ad-hoc South Texas launch mount, Starship SN4 will attempt to reach a peak altitude of 150m (~500 ft) and descend back down for a soft landing on an adjacent concrete pad, just like Starhopper did around nine months ago. A lot could go wrong: aside from using steel more than three times thinner than Starhopper’s, Starship SN4 will also be debuting an entirely new kind of landing leg, will be flying with asymmetric thrust, and will likely be using autogenous pressurization — all new challenges for SpaceX.
Nevertheless, there are also reasons for confidence. SpaceX has already successfully pressurized Starship SN4 all the way to 7.5 bar (~110 psi, sufficient for uncrewed orbital flight), performed multiple wet dress rehearsals and two Raptor static fire tests, and even tested what appears to be a new kind of cold gas thruster needed for roll control. Most importantly, even if Starship SN4 is destroyed during its next static fire or inaugural flight attempt, Starship SN5 is nearly at the same stage of completion and should be ready to take the reins almost immediately after the potential demise of its predecessor. With Crew Dragon’s inaugural NASA astronaut launch scheduled on May 27th, the rest of the month is set to be quite the event.
Elon Musk
ARK’s SpaceX IPO Guide makes a compelling case on why $1.75T may not be the ceiling
ARK Invest breaks down six reasons SpaceX’s $1.75 trillion IPO valuation may be justified.
ARK Invest, which holds SpaceX as its largest Venture Fund position at 17% of net assets, has published a detailed investor guide to why a SpaceX IPO may be grounded in a $1.75 trillion target valuation.
The financial case starts with Starlink, SpaceX’s satellite internet constellation, which has surpassed 10 million active subscribers globally as of early 2026, with 2026 revenue projected to exceed $20 billion. ARK’s research puts the total satellite connectivity market opportunity at roughly $160 billion annually at scale, and Starlink is adding customers faster than any telecom network in history. That growth alone would justify a substantial valuation.
Additionally, ARK notes that SpaceX has reduced the cost per kilogram to orbit from roughly $15,600 in 2008 to under $1,000 today through reusable Falcon 9 hardware. A fully operational Starship targeting sub-$100 per kilogram would represent a significant cost decline and open markets that do not currently exist. SpaceX executed a staggering 165 missions in 2025 and now accounts for approximately 85% of all global orbital launches. That infrastructure position took decades to build and would be nearly impossible to replicate at comparable cost.
SpaceX officially acquires xAI, merging rockets with AI expertise
The February 2026 merger with xAI added a layer to the valuation that straightforward financial models struggle to capture. ARK argues that at sub-$100 launch costs, orbital data centers could deliver compute roughly 25% cheaper than ground-based alternatives, without power grid delays, permitting friction, or land constraints. Musk has stated a goal of deploying 100 gigawatts of AI computing capacity per year from orbit.
The $1.75 trillion figure itself is not a conventional earnings multiple. At roughly 95x trailing revenue, it prices in Starlink’s adoption curve, Starship’s cost trajectory, and the orbital compute thesis together. The public S-1 prospectus, due at least 15 days before the June roadshow, will give investors their first complete look at the financials to test those assumptions. ARK’s position is that the track record earns the benefit of the doubt. Fully reusable rockets were considered unrealistic for years. Starlink was considered financially unviable. Both happened on timelines that surprised skeptics.
Elon Musk
Ford CEO Farley says Tesla is not who to look at for EV expertise
Interestingly, Farley has been one of the most hellbent CEOs in terms of a legacy automaker standpoint to push the EV effort. It did not go according to plan, as Ford took a $19.5 billion charge and retreated from its EV push in late 2025.
Ford CEO Jim Farley said in a recent podcast interview that Tesla is not who Americans should look at to beat Chinese carmakers.
The comments have sparked quite a bit of outrage from Tesla fans on X, the social media platform owned by Elon Musk.
Farley said that Chinese automakers are better examples of how to beat competitors. He said (via the Rapid Response Podcast):
“If you’re an American and you want us to beat the Chinese in the car business, you’re all going to want to pay attention, not necessarily to Tesla. Nothing against Tesla—they’ve been doing great—but they really don’t have an updated vehicle. The best in the business for us, cost-wise and competition-wise, supply chain, manufacturing expertise, and the I.P. in the vehicle, was really BYD. In this next cycle of EV customers in the U.S., they want pickups and utilities and all these different body styles. But they want them at $30,000, not $50,000. Like the first inning, they want them affordably.”
Despite Farley’s synopsis, it is worth mentioning that Tesla had the best-selling passenger vehicle in the world last year, and in China in March, as the Model Y continued its global dominance over other vehicles.
Musk responded to Farley’s comments by stating:
“This is before Supervised FSD is approved in China. Limiting factor is production output in Shanghai.”
This is before supervised FSD is approved in China. Limiting factor is production output in Shanghai.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) April 19, 2026
Interestingly, Farley has been one of the most hellbent CEOs in terms of a legacy automaker standpoint to push the EV effort. It did not go according to plan, as Ford took a $19.5 billion charge and retreated from its EV push in late 2025.
Ford cancels all-electric F-150 Lightning, announces $19.5 billion in charges
Instead, Ford is “doubling down on its affordable” EVs and said it would pivot from its previous plans.
Reaction from Tesla fans was pretty much how you would expect. Many said they have lost a lot of respect for Farley after his comments; others believe he is the last CEO anyone should be taking advice on EVs from.
Nevertheless, Farley’s plans are bold and brash; many consider Tesla the most ideal company to replicate EV efforts from. It will be interesting to see if Ford can rebound from this big adjustment, and hopefully, Farley’s plans to replicate efforts from BYD work out the way he hopes.
Elon Musk
SpaceX wins its first MARS contract but it comes with a catch
NASA awarded SpaceX a $175 million Mars rover contract while the White House proposes cutting the mission.
NASA just signed a $175.7 million contract with SpaceX to launch a Mars rover that the White House is simultaneously trying to defund. The contract, awarded on April 16, 2026, tasks SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy with launching the European Space Agency’s (ESA) Rosalind Franklin rover from Kennedy Space Center in Florida, no earlier than late 2028. It would mark the first time SpaceX has ever sent a payload to Mars.
Under NASA’s Rosalind Franklin Support and Augmentation project, known as ROSA, the agency is providing braking engines for the rover’s descent stage, radioisotope heater units that use decaying plutonium to keep the rover warm on the Martian surface, additional electronics, and a mass spectrometer instrument, as noted by SpaceNews.
Those nuclear heating units are the reason an American rocket was required at all. U.S. export controls on radioisotope technology mean any payload carrying them must launch on a domestic vehicle, which narrowed the field to SpaceX and United Launch Alliance. Falcon Heavy’s pricing made it the practical choice.
SpaceX is quietly becoming the U.S. Military’s only reliable rocket
Falcon Heavy debuted in February 2018 and has 11 launches to its record. The rocket has not flown since October 2024, when it sent NASA’s Europa Clipper toward Jupiter. The three-core design, built from modified Falcon 9 first stages, gives it the lift capacity needed for deep space planetary missions that a single Falcon 9 cannot reach.
The Rosalind Franklin rover has been sitting in storage in Europe for years. It was originally due to launch in 2022 as a joint mission with Russia, but Russia’s invasion of Ukraine ended that partnership, leaving the rover built but stranded without a launch vehicle or landing hardware. NASA stepped back in through a 2024 agreement with ESA to rescue the mission. The rover is designed to drill up to two meters below the Martian surface in search of evidence of past life, a science objective no previous mission has attempted at that depth.
The contradiction at the center of this story is hard to ignore. The White House’s fiscal year 2027 budget proposal included no funding for ROSA and did not mention the mission at all in the detailed congressional justification document released April 3.
Musk has long argued that reaching Mars is not optional. “We don’t want to be one of those single planet species, we want to be a multi-planet species.” Whether this particular mission survives Washington’s budget fight, the Falcon Heavy contract means SpaceX is now formally on record as the rocket that could get humanity’s next Mars science mission off the ground.
The timing of this contract carries extra weight given that SpaceX filed confidentially with the SEC in early April and is targeting an IPO roadshow in the week of June 8. It would be the largest public offering in history.
ARK’s SpaceX IPO Guide makes a compelling case on why $1.75T may not be the ceiling
Ford CEO Farley says Tesla is not who to look at for EV expertise
