News
SpaceX’s first high-flying, triple-Raptor Starship is almost finished
SpaceX’s first high-flying, triple-engine Starship prototype is rapidly approaching completion at the same time as the company is preparing for the rocket’s predecessor to lift off on its inaugural test flight.
Known as serial number 5 (SN5), it will be the fifth full-scale Starship prototype completed by SpaceX since November 2019 and the fourth since late-January 2020. Following in the footsteps of Mk1, SN1, SN3, and SN4, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has recently stated that Starship SN5 will be the first prototype to have three Raptor engines and a nosecone installed and could be the first to be outfitted with new and improved aerodynamic control surfaces.
In the meantime, Starship SN4 is perhaps less than 30 hours away from performing a third Raptor static fire test, potentially paving the way for the biggest challenge yet for a full-scale Starship prototype: powered flight. Scheduled no earlier than 9am CDT (14:00 UTC), May 13th, Starship SN4’s next static fire is meant to ensure that a replacement Raptor engine is functioning properly. If successful, the building-sized rocket will effectively be ready to attempt its first launch – also a first for the Starship program overall – pending FAA approval.
As illustrated in the unofficial diagram above, nearly all of the individual sections that will make up Starship SN5 appear to be more or less complete, excluding some ambiguity added by the interchangeable nature of some of the steel rings all Starships are built out of. For the current design and assembly strategy, Starships are comprised of eight separate sections, themselves made up of stacks of 2-4 steel rings. Altogether, excluding the conical nose section, a single Starship requires approximately 20 of those ~1.8m (6 ft) tall steel rings to reach its full height.
Currently, SpaceX has been focused on testing just the tank section of Starship prototypes, representing the vast majority of the technical challenges that must be solved to fully realize the next-generation launch vehicle’s ambitions. Excluding a smaller secondary liquid oxygen tank situated in the tip of Starship nosecones, the nose section is effectively irrelevant – putting the cart before the horse – until Starship tank sections are more of a known quantity.
When that would be the case was entirely up in the air until just the last week or so, when Starship SN4 became the first full-scale prototype to pass a cryogenic proof test, perform a wet dress rehearsal (WDR) with real propellant, complete static fire(s) with a Raptor engine installed, and – finally – pass a more challenging cryogenic pressure test in quick succession. With those milestones passed for the first time ever, SpaceX has effectively proven that it’s solved the what is arguably the most unprecedented aspect of its Starship program: building orbital-class pressure vessels for pennies on the dollar on the South Texas coast.
Of course, doing it once with Starship SN4 is not the same as fully confirming that SpaceX’s extremely exotic South Texas rocket factory is capable of producing repeatable results with future rockets. While incredibly improbable, Starship SN4’s multiple successes could be a fluke. Additionally, as Musk has noted, the goal is to complete two entire Starships every week once the factory is fully optimized. SpaceX has already achieved a monthly production rate for its current line of prototypes, an extremely encouraging sign for the practicality of Musk’s stretch goal.
In the prototype stage, that speed of production has been incredibly useful, enabling SpaceX to move at a pace of launch vehicle development almost unheard of since NASA’s Apollo Program. At the moment, Starship SN4 has passed all tests thrown at it so far and will soon be attempting the riskiest Starship test yet with its inaugural hop attempt. If the ship were to be destroyed, one would traditionally expect a bare minimum of a few months of program delay. Instead, Starship SN5 could be more or less complete even before SN4 receives FAA permission for its first flight, meaning that a replacement will already be ready to roll to the launch pad if or when SN4 is destroyed.
In a best-case scenario, if Starship SN4 continues to pass the tests thrown at it, including one or several hops, SpaceX will instead be entering a new phase indicative of what’s to come: the concurrent testing and operation of a fleet of Starships. A step further, if Starship SN4 succeeds, Starship SN5 appears to be on track to become the first prototype to have a full three Raptor engines and a nosecone installed, as well as the first to attempt a high-altitude (20 km/12 mi) flight test.
A Tesla Semi caught fire in Hayward, California, which caused both directions of traffic to shut down for hours before being completely reopened early on Wednesday, the California Highway Patrol said.
The fire occurred just after 5:30 local time in Hayward on Tuesday, as the Semi caught fire in the southbound lanes of I-880 before CHP officials made the decision to shut down both lanes of traffic due to potential risks from hazardous chemical smoke.
There were no injuries reported.
🚨 A Tesla Semi reportedly caught fire, with California Highway Patrol confirming. The Semi was on I-880 SB
An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 28, 2026
The cause of the fire is currently unknown, as neither Tesla nor the CHP have not determined a cause.
However, some images taken before the Semi was completely destroyed by the fire seem to indicate this might have been an older unit, as it appears to be one of the designs that Tesla shipped as part of its pilot program, before revising it and starting mass production just a month ago.
@Tslachan From on of the videos looks like it’s an old Semi (not the refresh version that recently started production) https://t.co/KzwmR2kXow
— Area Under The Curve 🎗️ (@AreaUnderCurve) October 28, 2026
At the time of publication, CHP had not returned our request for a comment for additional details, including the Semi involved and any potential collaboration on an investigation between the CHP and Tesla. We will update this story when we hear back from them.
The southbound lanes were reopened at 3:30 a.m. on Wednesday, with the northbound lanes opening last night a few hours after the fire began. The CHP did state that the lithium batteries were “incredibly difficult to extinguish,” according to NBC Bay Area.
The truck’s driver said that the Semi caught fire, but he did not have an explanation.
An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year.
Tesla’s launch of the “Emergency Drive Away” function a few months back offered owners a safe option to evacuate an area if they were in reasonable danger. The function finally got its first use in the real world, but it appears it was by mistake.
A video shared by u/Joshalander in the r/TeslaLounge subreddit recorded the instance from his vehicle and said the incident took place in Austin this past weekend during the city’s F1 Race.
“Was charging around 6 AM this past Sunday in Austin before heading to the F1 race and heard a pop. Looked over and saw the new emergency drive-away feature in action. Genuinely felt bad for the dude when he got out and realized what happened, since he looked exhausted and only seemed to half-read the prompts.”
🚨 Here’s the first look at Tesla’s Emergency Drive Away function in action:
Apparently this driver accidentally enabled it and drove forward; you can see the Supercharger pull with the car.
Tesla said previously this would cost up to $25k if not used properly. https://t.co/B4qQRrsO6B
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 28, 2026
Emergency Drive Away unlatches the Supercharger connector from the vehicle, but still causes damage to both the car and the Supercharger. Tesla has said that it will cost up to $25,000 in repairs to have everything fixed back to normal.
Additionally, the company said that if it were not used in an emergency situation, the driver of the vehicle who activated the Emergency Drive Away feature would be responsible for all repair costs.
Tesla constitutes the following situations as reasonable justifications for activating the feature:
- You face an immediate threat to your life or personal safety.
- You must leave the area immediately.
- Exiting the vehicle is unsafe.
- Unplugging the charge connector would unreasonably delay your departure or expose you to a risk to your personal safety.
After using the feature, Tesla requires the driver to schedule Service so the car can be inspected.
News
Tesla’s Cybercab battery design could make robotaxis even cheaper
Tesla built the Cybercab’s battery pack with spare room for a future switch to LFP.
Tesla built the Cybercab’s battery pack with empty space inside it on purpose, and the reason points to a cheaper robotaxi down the road.
Robert Sumpf, Tesla’s director of mechanical design engineering for battery modules and packs, said the extra room beside and beneath the Cybercab’s modules was left there so the company can move to lithium iron phosphate cells later. “So, we protected this pack to go to an even lower energy dense chemistry as we scale and need to bring LFP into the platform,” Sumpf said in a Cybercab deep dive with Munro Live.
The Cybercab runs on Tesla’s own 4680 cells with a nickel chemistry today. LFP cells store less energy for their size, so a straight swap would cut range. The reserved space lets Tesla add more LFP cells to make up the difference. In return, Tesla would get cells that cost less, run cooler and survive more charge cycles. LFP became the most used EV battery chemistry in the world last year.
Not all of that room was planned for a chemistry change. Lars Moravy, Tesla’s Vice President of Vehicle Engineering, said part of it exists because “we didn’t need as many batteries as we thought we did.” Tesla told Sandy Munro in early 2025 that it was targeting a Cybercab pack under 50 kWh with close to 300 miles of range.
The pack also breaks from the structural design Tesla used in some Model Y and Cybertruck builds. Instead of potting hundreds of cells into one block, the Cybercab uses four separate, individually sealed modules, so a bad module can be replaced without scrapping the whole pack. Sumpf was blunt about the older approach, giving the Model Y structural battery “a grade D” because it was hard to build and nearly impossible to repair. He estimated a fully structural pack gains about 10% more cell volume, but said “the issue is the service cost.”
That cost matters more for a car that rarely sits parked. Cybercab chief engineer Eric Earley said replacing an entire pack “before half a million miles is a killer on cost,” which is why remanufacturing and serviceability were built into the design from the start.
The same Munro Live tour produced Moravy’s admission that the Cybercab line at Giga Texas is now outpacing Robotaxi deployments, along with a look at the robotaxi’s unorthodox paint process. Tesla is aiming to deliver the first Cybercabs to outside customers by the end of 2026, though Elon Musk has said the vast majority will stay owned by Tesla and run as a transport service.
Sumpf did not give a date for an LFP version, name a cell supplier or say how a chemistry change would affect range. For now, the 4680 cars keep piling up: Texas DMV records from Tuesday list 544 Cybercabs authorized for Tesla’s Robotaxi fleet, more than the 507 Model Ys on the same roster for the first time.
Tesla Semi catches fire in California: what we know
Tesla’s ‘Emergency Drive Away’ function gets its first use in the real world
