News
SpaceX preparing giant crane to assemble Starship’s first Florida launch tower
SpaceX has begun staging and assembling parts of a giant crane it will soon need to stack Starship’s first East Coast launch tower and install other major launch pad components.
The presence of the base of that crane at SpaceX’s NASA Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Launch Complex 39A was visually confirmed by NASASpaceflight.com photographers during a weekly aerial tour of the area on June 3rd. Four days later, Teslarati photographer Richard Angle observed more major crane components on their way to Pad 39A, including the crane’s cabin.
More likely than not, the crane SpaceX or its contractor has begun assembling at 39A is a Liebherr LR 11350, the same kind of crane the company used to assemble Starship’s first orbital launch site and tower in South Texas. In fact, given how few LR 11350s there are in existence, it’s entirely possible that it’s the exact same crane. Assembly of that crane began around April 2021 and took a month and a half, at which point it was finally ready to lift an extended boom long enough to assemble a tower almost 500 feet (~150 meters) tall.
Pad 39A’s Starship launch tower is expected to be very similar to Starbase’s, although it will undoubtedly carry over numerous design changes thanks to lessons learned while building and outfitting the first tower. In fact, SpaceX has already assembled five of the nine individual sections that will eventually be stacked to form that tower, and one such change is already obvious. Instead of stacking each tower section as soon as its barebones framework is complete, SpaceX is taking a more methodical approach to its second launch tower. In an apparent attempt to limit the amount of work that needs to be done at Pad 39A itself, each of those segments is being thoroughly outfitted with secondary structures (ladders, doors, walkways, frames, raceways, etc.) before stacking.
SpaceX may even pre-install most of the thousands of feet of plumbing needed to connect a Starship to ground systems located around 90 meters (~300 ft) below it. Once stacked, each section – including all those partial propellant and gas lines – will still need to be joined together, but that process should be far easier than fully installing all the systems the tower needs to do its job. Outfitting Starbase’s launch tower, for example, took SpaceX around half a year and, to some extent, is still ongoing 11 months after the final stack. That likely explains why Starship’s 39A tower section assembly appears to be taking more time. With any luck, partially combining the outfitting and section assembly stages will significantly expedite final assembly, as far less work will need to be done at extreme heights or require a skyscraper-sized crane.
Through Starbase, SpaceX has already demonstrated the ability to stack a Starship launch tower from its unoccupied concrete base to its final height of ~145 meters (~475 ft) in about two months flat. While SpaceX will have to slalom its way around Pad 39A’s busy launch manifest, there’s no reason to believe that Starship’s first Florida launch tower won’t be stacked at least as quickly.
Aside from the arrival of crane parts, SpaceX has also made great progress on the Starship launch site itself. In the last few weeks, the company appears to have completed several significant concrete pours on the tower base. SpaceX has also installed all six of the pedestal-like orbital launch mount’s legs after months of foundation work. Elsewhere at Cape Canaveral, a different team has made excellent progress assembling the massive donut-like platform that will sit on top of those legs. Due to its extreme weight (possibly around 300 metric tons, per Elon Musk’s comments on the Starbase mount), the same LR 11350 crane will also be needed for that major installation milestone.
Plenty of parts are still missing, of course. Four tower sections still need to be assembled. Starship’s first Florida launch tower will need its own set of two ‘chopstick’ arms for lifting and (maybe) catching Starship and Super Heavy, as well as a third swinging quick-disconnect arm to connect Starship to ground systems. Aside from delivering several new tanks, SpaceX has also made no apparent progress on adding a massive methane propellant farm to Pad 39A, and it’s possible that the pad’s oxygen farm will also need to be expanded. Propellant storage has proven to be a major headache for SpaceX at Starbase.
Nonetheless, SpaceX is making great progress on most of the most difficult parts of Starship’s first Florida launch site, and there’s a good chance that just like its launch mount, work on the pad’s tower arms is already underway somewhere offsite. A great deal of work remains to be done but SpaceX is still well on its way to launching Starships out of Kennedy Space Center in the not-too-distant future.
News
Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile are trying to shut Starlink out before FCC vote
AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile want 290 MHz cut from an FCC satellite plan before Thursday.
AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile are asking the Federal Communications Commission to pull nearly 300 MHz of spectrum out of a proposal that would let satellite companies like SpaceX offer cell service directly to ordinary phones. The request lands one day before the agency votes on it.
The FCC will vote Thursday, October 29, on a notice of proposed rulemaking that would make an additional 482 MHz available for direct to device service, expanding the number of eligible bands from five to 13, according to the FCC fact sheet. It would also scrap the rule requiring a satellite operator to lease spectrum from carriers, replacing it with a certification that the operator has coexistence agreements in place or holds the terrestrial license itself.
That second path matters for SpaceX. As Teslarati reported earlier this month, SpaceX agreed to buy Grain Management’s nationwide 800 MHz portfolio to turn Starlink Mobile into a full US carrier, adding to the spectrum it already bought from EchoStar.
The carriers want two bands removed, 2.5 GHz and 3.45 GHz, which make up 290 MHz of the 482 MHz on the table. Through industry group CTIA, they argued that about 300 million users depend on those bands and that satellite operations in them are not technically feasible. T-Mobile, which calls 2.5 GHz the foundation of its Ultra Capacity 5G network, said in its own filing that satellite interference could wipe out up to 96% of a cell site’s uplink coverage area and cut uplink speeds by 88% to 99%.
Executives from all three carriers met with FCC staff on October 20, and T-Mobile CEO Srini Gopalan met separately with FCC Chairman Brendan Carr. T-Mobile’s role stands out because it is still SpaceX’s US launch partner for Starlink Mobile. The three carriers have also teamed up on their own satellite joint venture to pool spectrum, a move widely seen as a response to Starlink.
SpaceX is asking for the opposite. In an October 23 filing after meetings with FCC staff and commissioners’ offices, the company asked regulators to add the 902 to 928 MHz band to the proposal. “Doing so now saves time later,” SpaceX wrote. The company also asked the FCC to modernize interference rules and align satellite deployment requirements with those for terrestrial cell networks, saying the goal is to let satellite and ground networks work together so Americans stay connected wherever they are.
The carriers have not been shy about how they view SpaceX as a competitor. On Verizon’s third quarter earnings call Monday, its chief executive said Starlink Mobile “just can’t compete with a terrestrial network” and estimated SpaceX would need four to six years and $300 billion to $500 billion to build a full US carrier network.
Thursday’s vote will not settle which bands survive. Adopting the notice opens a public comment period, with final rules to come later in the proceeding. The FCC already considered and rejected 2.5 GHz for satellite coverage once, in 2024. SpaceX also is not the only satellite player watching: the FCC approved Amazon’s $11.6 billion acquisition of Globalstar on October 27, giving its planned direct to device fleet its own mobile satellite spectrum.
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.
Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile are trying to shut Starlink out before FCC vote
Tesla Semi catches fire in California: what we know
