News
SpaceX rolls out first new Starship prototype in nine months
For the first time in more than nine months, SpaceX has rolled a new Starship prototype to its Starbase, Texas launch facilities in the hopes of kicking off qualification testing in the near future.
The new activity exemplifies just how different – and more subdued – Starbase’s last year has been compared to the year prior. However, it also signals new hope for a significantly more eventful 2022 as SpaceX once again finds itself preparing for Starship’s first orbital launch attempt – albeit with an entirely different rocket.
The last time SpaceX rolled a new and functional Starship prototype from the factory to the test stand was on August 13th, 2021, when Starship S20 was transported back to the pad for the second time that month. On August 5th, the same unfinished Starship was stacked on top of Super Heavy booster B4, briefly assembling the largest rocket ever built. With the luxury of hindsight, it’s now clear that that particular milestone was more of a photo-op than a technical achievement. Nonetheless, Ship 20’s path was far more productive than Booster 4’s. The Starship returned to the Starbase factory for a few days of finishing touches before arriving back at the pad on August 13th. Only in the last week of September did Ship 20 finally begin its first significant tests, followed by its first Raptor static fire in mid-October. In mid-November, Ship 20 completed the first of several successful six-Raptor static fires.
Ultimately, by the time Ship 20 was retired in May 2022, the Starship was arguably fully ready to attempt to reach orbit or at least perform some kind of ambitious hypersonic test flight. However, Super Heavy Booster 4 never made it even a fraction of the way to a similar level of flight readiness and SpaceX never received the FAA environmental approval or launch license needed for an orbital launch attempt.
Only now, in May 2022, does it finally look likely that SpaceX will finally receive the necessary permissions for a limited orbital test flight campaign in the near future. While it’s hard to say if Booster 4 and Ship 20 could have supported some kind of launch campaign if permission had been granted months ago, what’s clear is that all aspects – flight hardware, pad hardware, and bureaucracy – have been chronically delayed to the point that Booster 4 and Ship 20 are now heavily outdated.
In their place, now, stand Super Heavy B7 and Starship S24 – the new ‘chosen ones’ assigned to Starship’s orbital launch debut. Both feature extensive design changes and account for an upgraded version of the Raptor engine and countless lessons learned over the better part of a year spent troubleshooting and testing their predecessors. While it did get off to a rocky start, Booster 7 has already completed several cryogenic proof tests and is in the middle of being outfitted with 33 new Raptor engines.
On the other hand, perhaps indicating SpaceX’s satisfaction with Ship 20’s performance, Starship S24 has been on the back burner in comparison. Only on May 26th, 2022 did SpaceX finally finish the prototype to the point that it was ready to begin qualification testing. Missing hundreds of TPS tiles and an aerocover cap, Ship 24 was quickly moved into position at a sort of drive-by test stand where it appears the prototype will first need to pass basic pressure and cryogenic proof tests.
If it passes those tests, SpaceX will then install Ship 24 on a suborbital launch and test stand (Suborbital Pad A) that has been significantly modified for qualification testing. Rather than leaping straight into static fires, SpaceX will minimize the risk of catastrophic failure by first using hydraulic rams to simulate the thrust of six Raptor V2 engines while Starship’s steel tanks and plumbing are chilled to cryogenic temperatures. Only after Ship 24 completes stress testing will SpaceX install new Raptor engines and prepare to replicate Ship 20’s success with several static fires.
Thanks to Raptor V2’s improvements, Ship 24 will likely need to withstand around 1400 tons (~3.1M lbf) of thrust at liftoff – almost 25% more than Ship 20 ever experienced. Beyond a sturdier thrust section, Ship 24 is also the first Starship SpaceX has outfitted with a next-generation nose; the first with a significant landing propellant (‘header’) tank redesign; and the first with a potentially functional payload bay and door.
Assuming Ship 24 passes all planned cryoproof and thrust simulation tests, it remains to be seen if SpaceX will return the Starship to Starbase factory facilities or – like with Ship 20 – install Raptors and finish its heat shield and thermal protection while sitting on the test stand. SpaceX has two test windows currently scheduled: one from 6am to 12pm CDT on Friday, May 27th and the other from 10am to 10pm CDT on Tuesday, May 31st.
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
