News
SpaceX’s first orbital Starship launch slips to March 2022 in NASA document
A NASA document discussing a group’s plans to document SpaceX’s first orbital-velocity Starship reentry appears to suggest that the next-generation rocket’s orbital launch debut has slipped several months into 2022.
In March 2021, CEO Elon Musk confirmed a report that SpaceX was working towards a target of July 2021 for Starship’s first orbital launch attempt. At the time, it seemed undeniably ambitious but far from impossible. Less than half a year prior, SpaceX had kicked off a series of suborbital Starship test flights to altitudes of 10-12.5 km (6.2-8 mi). Beginning in December 2020, SN8 – effectively the first structurally complete Starship prototype – nearly stuck a landing on its first try, only narrowly falling short due to an engine and pressurization issue.
Less than two months later, SpaceX completed and launched Starship SN9 – again with a nearly flawless six-minute flight capped off with an unsuccessful landing attempt. Starship SN10 followed less than a month later and became the first prototype to land in one piece – albeit only for a few minutes. It was two weeks after that near-success – SpaceX’s third launch in as many months – that Musk revealed a goal of July 2021 for Starship’s first orbital launch. At that point in time, it appeared all but inevitable that SpaceX would be technically ready for an orbital launch before the end of the year.
Two weeks after Musk’s comments and less than four weeks after SN10’s near-miss, Starship SN11 gave one of the worst performances yet, invisibly exploding inside a fogbank well above the ground. However, further stoking the fires of optimism, Starship SN15 debuted a number of upgrades and became the first prototype to successfully launch, land, and survive a ~10km test flight in early May. Put simply, SpaceX built five Starship prototypes practically from scratch in roughly eight months and then completed five test flights in less than five months – all of which were largely successful.
SpaceX considered reusing Starship SN15 or launching SN16 to gain more landing experience but ultimately decided to mothball the prototypes to avoid disrupting orbital launch site construction. Just three months after SN15’s successful landing, SpaceX rolled the first orbital-class Starship and Super Heavy to the orbital launch site and briefly stacked the pair (Ship 20 and Booster 4) to their full height, forming the tallest rocket ever assembled. Although largely a photo opportunity, SpaceX still installed a full 29 Raptors on Super Heavy B4 and six Raptors on Starship S20, further raising confidence that the company’s engine production was already up to the task of supplying the nearly three-dozen needed for a single orbital test flight.
However, for reasons that are less than clear, that August 6th full-stack milestone is about where SpaceX’s H1 2021 momentum appeared to run into a brick wall. Perhaps due to a desire to focus on orbital launch site construction even at the cost of avoiding road closures or testing that would require a clear pad, Starship S20 sat on a stand for the better part of two months before completing even a minor test – by far the longest any Starship prototype has waited.
Seemingly in the midst of its third round of Raptor engine removal, Super Heavy B4 has yet to attempt a single test and it’s unclear how close to ready the orbital pad is to support booster proof and static fire tests. Neither ship nor booster has attempted to static fire its Raptor engines, though S20 could potentially be ready for its first test as early as Monday, October 18th.
Combined with recent developments in the FAA’s Boca Chica environmental review process, the odds of SpaceX attempting the first orbital Starship launch by the end of 2021 have rapidly dropped from decent to near-zero. From a technical perspective, it seems likely that SpaceX could still be ready for an orbital launch attempt just a few months from now. From a regulatory perspective, though, it would be practically unprecedented for the FAA to complete a favorable environmental review and approve even a one-off orbital Starship launch license in ~10 weeks. Even the apparent March 2022 target revealed in a NASA poster focused on the agency’s plans to film an orbital Starship reentry via high-altitude jet assumes that the FAA’s review and licensing process will take ~7 months from August 2021 – still extremely optimistic.
Ultimately, after two months with next to no prototype testing, it’s beginning to look like SpaceX has decided to focus on finishing Starbase’s first orbital launch site, refining vehicle designs, and building new prototypes (B5, S21, S22) rather than pushing hard for rapid B4/S20 testing and an imminent launch attempt. As a result, it’s becoming increasingly unlikely that Booster 4 and Ship 20 will fly as new and improved prototypes like Super Heavy B5 and Starship S21 prepare to overtake them.
Elon Musk
SpaceX Board has set a Mars bonus for Elon Musk
SpaceX has given Elon Musk the goal to put one million people on Mars.
SpaceX’s board approved a compensation plan for Elon Musk that ties his pay directly to colonizing Mars and building data centers in outer space. The details surfaced this week after Reuters reviewed SpaceX’s confidential registration statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, making it one of the first concrete looks inside the company’s financials ahead of a public offering.
The pay package will reportedly award Musk 200 million super-voting restricted shares if the company hits a market valuation milestone, with the most ambitious targets going further. To unlock the full award, SpaceX would need to reach a $7.5 trillion valuation and help establish a permanent human settlement on Mars with at least one million residents. Additional incentives are tied to developing space-based computing infrastructure capable of delivering at least 100 terawatts of processing power.
SpaceX wins its first MARS contract but it comes with a catch
Long before SpaceX filed anything with the SEC, Elon Musk had already spent years framing Mars colonization as an insurance policy against human extinction. The philosophy traces back to at least 2001, when Musk first began researching Mars missions independently, before SpaceX even existed. By 2002 he had founded the company with Mars as the stated long-term goal.
In a 2017 presentation at the International Astronautical Congress, Musk outlined the specific vision that still underpins SpaceX’s architecture today. He described a self-sustaining city on Mars requiring roughly one million people to become viable, the same number now written into his compensation package.
SpaceX’s Starship, still in active development, was designed from the ground up to support the eventual colonization of Mars. Musk has stated publicly that getting the cost per ton to Mars below $100,000 is necessary to make mass migration economically feasible. Everything from Starship’s payload capacity to its full reusability targets flows from that single constraint. One can say that Musk’s latest compensation package has put a formal valuation on Mars for the first time.
SpaceX is targeting an IPO around June 28, Musk’s birthday, at a valuation of approximately $1.75 trillion. Between the Mars rover contract, the Golden Dome software group, Space Force satellite launches, and now a pay structure built around interplanetary colonization, SpaceX has become the single most consequential contractor in American space and defense. The IPO will put a public price tag on all of it for the first time.
Earlier this week, we wrote a story on how Tesla is launching a new Supercharging Queue system to mitigate problems between drivers when there is a wait to charge.
Rather than potentially having people end up in a physical conflict, Tesla’s approach is to determine who is next to charge based on geographic data.
Tesla launches solution to end Supercharger fights once and for all
But some companies, notably Tesla’s biggest rival in China, BYD, are taking a different approach, focusing on charging speeds rather than how they will manage delays.
BYD’s approach, especially with its tests of ultra-fast “Flash Charging” technology, is to eliminate the length of a charging session. At the heart of this strategy is BYD’s second-generation Blade Battery paired with 1,500-kW Flash Chargers.
Real-world FLASH Charging in action.
⚡ 10% → 70% in 5 minutes
⚡ 10% → 97% in 9 minutesIntroducing BYD’s 2nd Generation Blade Battery + FLASH Charging Technology.
20,000 stations will bring faster, safer, and smarter EV charging across China by the end of 2026. pic.twitter.com/uzQC8q1xGf
— BYD (@BYDCompany) March 9, 2026
Unveiled earlier this year, the system charges compatible vehicles from 10 percent to 70 percent state of charge in just five minutes and from 10 percent to 97 percent in nine minutes.
Real-world demonstrations on models like the Yangwang U7 and Denza Z9 GT have shown the tech delivering roughly 250 miles (400 kilometers) of range in just five minutes. This would essentially match or beat the time it takes to fill a gas tank.
Sometimes, gas pumps get congested, and there are lines. You rarely see conflicts at pumps because filling up a tank rarely takes more than five minutes.
Tesla’s fastest Supercharger build currently is the v4, which can deliver up to 325 kW for Cybertruck and 250 kW for other models, but there are “true” sites that are capable of up to 500 kW. This enables speeds of up to 1,000 miles per hour, or 1,400 miles for 350 kW-capable vehicles.
The breakthrough stems from BYD’s vertically integrated ecosystem: a new 1,000-volt architecture, 10C charging rates, and proprietary silicon-carbide chips that minimize internal resistance while protecting battery health.
The company plans to install 20,000 Flash Charging stations across China by the end of 2026, with thousands already operational and global expansion eyed for Europe and beyond later this year.
Early rollout targets popular models, including upgrades to high-volume sellers like the Seal and Sealion series, bringing five-minute charging to mainstream prices around 100,000 yuan (about $14,000).
This approach contrasts sharply with Tesla’s software solution. Tesla’s Virtual Queue uses geofencing and the app to assign turns at crowded sites, addressing driver disputes and idle time. It’s a clever fix for today’s network realities.
Yet, BYD’s philosophy is simpler: make charging so fast that waits barely exist. A five-minute stop becomes as convenient as a gas-station visit, reducing station dwell time, easing grid strain, and lowering range anxiety for long trips.
For consumers, the difference is potentially tangible. They’ll spend more time driving and less time parked. It is just another way Tesla and BYD are pushing one another to improve the overall experience of EV ownership.
News
Tesla wins big as NHTSA drops three-year, 120k unit probe against Model Y
In all, 120,089 Model Ys were impacted, but in two cases, drivers reported the complete detachment of the steering wheel from the steering column while the vehicle was in motion. NHTSA’s initial review revealed that the vehicles had been delivered without the critical retaining bolt that secures the steering wheel to the splined steering column.
A probe into over 120,000 2023 Tesla Model Y units has been closed by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). The probe ends without the agency requiring any action from Tesla.
The probe, designated PE23-003, opened in March 2023 and stemmed from just two consumer complaints involving low-mileage Model Y SUVs.
In all, 120,089 Model Ys were impacted, but in two cases, drivers reported the complete detachment of the steering wheel from the steering column while the vehicle was in motion. NHTSA’s initial review revealed that the vehicles had been delivered without the critical retaining bolt that secures the steering wheel to the splined steering column.
NHTSA has ended a probe into over 120,000 Tesla Model Y vehicles after claims that the steering wheel could detach from the steering column due to a missing retaining bolt
There is no action needed by Tesla pic.twitter.com/YpAO3bKugA
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 28, 2026
Factory records showed each car had undergone an “end-of-line” repair at Tesla’s facility, during which the steering wheel was removed and reinstalled. The bolt was apparently omitted after the repair, leaving only a friction fit between the wheel and column to hold it in place temporarily.
According to NHTSA documents, this friction fit maintained the connection during initial low-mileage driving until forces during normal operation caused the wheel to detach. Both vehicles that were impacted were repaired under warranty with no injuries reported, and no additional incidents surfaced during the agency’s three-year review.
After analyzing manufacturing processes, complaint data, and field reports, NHTSA concluded the issue was isolated to those two post-repair vehicles rather than indicative of a systemic defect in Tesla’s production or quality control.
The closure means the agency has determined no recall or further enforcement is warranted for this specific missing-bolt condition.
This outcome marks the second NHTSA investigation into Tesla closed without action this month, as a recent probe into the company’s “Actually Smart Summon” feature was also resolved in April.
The two resolutions provide some relief for Tesla amid the continuous and somewhat unfair regulatory scrutiny of its vehicles, including open inquiries into driver assistance systems.
Importantly, the closed probe does not involve or affect Tesla’s separate May 2023 voluntary recall of certain 2022-2023 Model Y vehicles. That recall addressed a different issue—steering-wheel fasteners that were installed but not torqued to specification—prompted by a service technician’s observation of a loose wheel during unrelated repairs.
Tesla identified a small number of related warranty claims and proactively addressed the matter without NHTSA mandate.
The Model Y remains one of the world’s best-selling vehicles, and Tesla continues to refine its lineup, including the recent “Juniper” refresh. While federal oversight of the electric vehicle pioneer remains intense, this decision underscores that isolated manufacturing anomalies do not always translate into broader safety defects requiring recalls.
SpaceX Board has set a Mars bonus for Elon Musk
Tesla’s biggest rivals fights charging wait times with a modern approach
