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.
Elon Musk
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Four Raptor engines failed to ignite at T-zero, forcing SpaceX to scrub Starship Flight 13 Thursday.
SpaceX scrubbed the Starship Flight 13 launch attempt Thursday evening at the last possible moment, after four of the Super Heavy booster’s 33 Raptor 3 engines failed to ignite during the startup sequence. The 90-minute window had opened at 6:45 p.m. EDT from Starbase in Boca Chica, Texas, and the countdown had proceeded without issue all day, with more than 11.5 million pounds of liquid methane and liquid oxygen being fully loaded into the rocket before the automated abort triggered. SpaceX’s launch directors posted on X, “Standing down from today’s flight test attempt,” and shut down the livestream shortly after.
Musk confirmed the root cause within hours. “Some of the engines didn’t start, triggering an automatic launch abort,” he wrote on X. “To be confident of a good flight, 2 Raptors will be removed and replaced. Most probable launch timing is early next week.” SpaceX engineers began draining propellant tanks immediately and Booster 20 was rolled back to its hangar for inspection.
The timing adds a layer of significance that did not exist during any of the previous 12 Starship flights. This is the first time SpaceX has attempted to launch Starship since the company made its stock market debut in June, listing under ticker SPCX at $135 per share. Public investors are now watching every Starship outcome in real time, and a last-second abort carries more visibility than it would have six months ago.
Flight 13 was designed to be one of the most consequential tests in the program’s history. It was set to carry 20 Starlink V3 satellites, the first operational payload Starship has ever attempted to deploy. Six of those satellites carried external cameras to photograph Starship’s heat shield from the outside during flight, which would act as a self-inspection approach SpaceX has never attempted before. The mission also needed to complete a Raptor engine relight in space, a step SpaceX skipped on Flight 12 in May after losing an engine during ascent. That Flight 12 booster also flipped 90 degrees off course during its boostback burn when five engines failed to reignite.
SpaceX has not announced an official next launch date. Musk’s “early next week” window points to July 21 or 22 at the earliest, pending the engine swap and a return to the pad.
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
