News
SpaceX schedules Starship’s first triple-Raptor static fire test
A photo posted by CEO Elon Musk confirms that SpaceX has successfully installed three functional Raptors on Starship SN8 just hours before road closure notices revealed the company’s first triple-engine static fire schedule.
Technically, it’s incorrect to say that Starship serial number 8 (SN8) is the first prototype to receive three Raptor engines. Back in late-September 2019, in the lead-up to Musk’s promised Starship update event, the company installed three Raptors on the first full-scale prototype, known as Starship Mk1. The engines were only installed as an apparent fit test or even a photo opportunity, however – evidenced by the fact that they weren’t actually plumbed to the Starship’s propellant tanks.
Even then, in September 2019, Starship Mk1 was far from ready to make use of Raptor engines and was more than a month away from attempting its first pressure and cryogenic proof tests – tests it quickly failed. As such, Starship SN8 – having more or less successfully passed its ‘cryo proof’ by October 9th – is undoubtedly the first ship to have a shot at igniting multiple Raptor engines at once.
Curiously, SpaceX remained quiet for several days after Starship SN8 passed its first big test. Whereas with past Starship prototypes SpaceX has often filed test plans (appearing in the form of road closures) even before the current phase of testing is complete, the company waited until Tuesday, October 14th to file closure notices for “SN8 static fire” testing.
Same as Starships SN4, SN5, and SN6, all of which successfully graduated from cryo proof to static fire testing (and even flight tests for the latter two), SpaceX began Starship SN8’s test campaign with a cryo proof. It took three days and at least as many attempts but SN8 ultimately “passed cryo proof” according to Elon Musk, likely meaning that the ship reached sustained pressures of 7.5 bar (~110 psi) or more.
Cryo proof complete, SpaceX installed Starship SN8’s engines – the first time multiple Raptors have been fully integrated with a rocket or test stand – in preparation for another Raptor first: multi-engine static fires. While modern computation fluid dynamics (CFD) and modeling mean that the great unknowns of rocket propulsion are rarely as opaque as they used to be, the first test of multiple powerful engines in close proximity is still a guaranteed recipe for surprises.
Thanks to expertise hard-won from nearly 100 Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches, SpaceX is likely the world’s foremost expert in the challenges and dynamics of the proximity operation of more than two rocket engines. At the same time, though, Raptor is a dramatically different engine than Merlin 1D and while Starship will only have six engines at most, those six engines will produce thrust equivalent to almost two entire Falcon 9 boosters.
In other words, even with a (relatively) simple three-Raptor static fire, SpaceX will be treading new ground and will almost certainly end up learning one or several things about Raptor’s design and operation. More likely than not, SpaceX will begin Starship SN8’s static fire test campaign with a wet dress rehearsal (like a cryo proof but with real liquid methane and oxygen propellant) and transition into a Raptor spin prime (turbopump spin-up) or preburner test (a turbopump spin-up but with partial combustion) if the WDR goes smoothly. If all three Raptor engines appear healthy, SpaceX may recycle and attempt the first static fire just an hour or two later.
Starship SN8’s triple-Raptor static fire test window opened at 9pm CDT on October 14th and closes at 6am on the 15th, with an identical 9pm-6am backup on the 15th and another window from 8am to 4:30pm on the 16th. LabPadre (below) will continue to offer 24/7 views of Starship, including any static fire testing, while NASASpaceflight.com will likely provide live coverage once testing begins in earnest.
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
