News
SpaceX to shrink, tweak Starship’s forward flap design, says Elon Musk
SpaceX CEO Elon Musk says that there is a “slight error” with the current design of Starship’s forward flaps, necessitating a few small but visible changes on future prototypes of the spacecraft.
Measuring 9m (30 ft) wide and approximately 50m (~165 ft) from tip to tail, Starship is the combined upper stage, spacecraft, tanker, and lander of a two-stage, fully-reusable rocket with the same name. While SpaceX has a long ways to go to achieve it, the company’s ambition is for Starship and its Super Heavy booster to be the most easily and quickly reusable spacecraft and rocket booster ever built, nominally enabling the same-day reuse of both.
Beyond a Space Shuttle-style heat shield of blankets and ceramic tiles, the Starship upper stage is meant to achieve that reusability by descending through the atmosphere and landing unlike any other spacecraft, plane, or rocket ever flown. Instead of flying, gliding, or knifing through the atmosphere nose or tail-first, Starship freefalls perpendicular to the ground for the last few dozen kilometers (~10-20 mi) before aggressively flipping into a vertical orientation at the last second and landing propulsively on its tail. Now, according to Elon Musk, two of the four ‘flaps’ that largely make that exotic maneuver possible are set for a small but significant redesign.
Probably slightly further forward, smaller, more inward. No funny looking static aero at top, as static aero no longer directly in flow.— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 18, 2021
Over the course of five suborbital test flights of full-scale Starship prototypes completed between December 2020 and May 2021, SpaceX took that exotic landing concept from the drawing board and subscale wind tunnel testing to reality. Though four of those five tests ended in destruction, their respective Starship prototypes really only failed in the last 15-30 seconds of test flights that were more than six minutes long.
After reaching an apogee of 10-12.5 km (~6.2-7.8 mi) over the course of some four and a half minutes, all five Starship prototypes successfully shut down their Raptor engines, tipped over onto their bellies, and then used a combination of small pressurized gas thrusters and four large flaps to stably fall back to Earth. Much like a skydiver can tweak their body, arms, and legs to control their orientation and attitude, Starship uses two pairs of forward and aft flaps to achieve a very similar level of control.
Thanks to Starship’s significant surface area and relatively low mass shortly before landing, that unprecedented freefall-style descent naturally slows the rocket to just 100-200 mph (~50-100 m/s) while simultaneously allowing SpaceX to avoid the massive complexity and added mass of structural wings or fins like those on the Space Shuttle. Further, whereas the Shuttle used its wings to glide (albeit like a brick) and land on very long runways, Starship is designed to use three of its six Raptor engines to flip into a vertical orientation and land much like SpaceX’s own spectacularly successful Falcon boosters.
During the actual process of reentry, in which Starship uses a heat shield made up of ~15,000 ceramic tiles to slow from orbital (Mach 25 or ~7.5 km/s) to subsonic speeds, those same flaps also come in useful to control the vehicle’s angle of attack and thus the degree of extreme heating experienced. According to Musk, to improve the moment arm (i.e. leverage or, all else equal, torque) of Starship’s forward flaps and reduce or remove undesirable aerodynamic characteristics, SpaceX is going to shrink those forward flaps further, move them closer together and more towards the tip of Starship’s nose, and angle them toward the ship’s leeward side (back).
Apparently, those relatively minor changes mean that a portion of Starship’s forward flaps will no longer be directly subjected to reentry heating, potentially allowing SpaceX to entirely remove static “aerocovers” that wrap around the ship’s flaps to prevent superheated plasma and gas from reaching sensitive components. Ironically, SpaceX’s thermal protection team completed the installation of heat shield tiles on one of those forward flap aerocovers for the first time ever just a few days ago – a structure and portion of heat shield that will apparently no longer be needed on future Starships.
For now, though, it looks like Ship 20 will attempt Starship’s first orbital launch with its now-outdated forward flaps. Depending on how far along Ship 21 production is, the next prototype could feasibly sport that new flap design.
Tesla plans to boost production at its Gigafactory Berlin plant in Germany following a sharp rebound in sales and demand in Europe after a softer 2025.
The plans put Tesla in a better position to compete with strengthening companies in Europe and potentially other markets; demand indicators show Tesla is much better off than in 2025.
Last year was a tough year for Tesla in terms of overall demand in Europe. The company produced over 200,000 vehicles at the German plant last year, a soft figure compared to the 375,000 vehicles Tesla lists as its current capacity at the factory.
🚨 Tesla said this morning it will ramp up production at Gigafactory Berlin to a volume of 7,500 vehicles per week.
This is a 20 percent boost in production. Tesla will hire 1,000 new employees to help with the increase.$TSLA pic.twitter.com/kravKfRO5n
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 25, 2026
Tesla’s overall European sales dropped significantly last year due to a variety of factors. However, sales are rebounding, and demand is strong once again, and only getting stronger. Tesla is now planning to bump production of Model Y vehicles at Giga Berlin upward by about 20 percent. It will also bring 1,000 new jobs to the plant.
Tesla confirmed the details of its planned production expansion in Germany this morning. It is a strategy to keep up with strengthening demand.
In Q1, Tesla saw a record 61,000 vehicles produced at Giga Berlin. European registrations rebounded sharply, with Model Y seeing 117 percent increases in March 2026 compared to last year. Germany alone saw stark increases, with a quadrupling in registrations to 9,252 units.
This trend continued in other key European markets, including France, Denmark and Sweden. Tesla registrations were up over 46 percent in some of these markets, and Model Y continued its trend as a top BEV in the market.
Demand has been recovering strongly in 2026, giving Tesla a reason to expand production efforts at the factory. These increases signal management’s confidence in sustained or growing European pull for Berlin-built vehicles.
Tesla is being sued by the family of the woman who was killed in a Texas crash involving a Model 3. The driver, who is also being sued, claimed the vehicle was operating on Autopilot mode, but Tesla executives have come out challenging that claim, stating that the driver of the vehicle overrode the system.
The lawsuit was filed by 76-year-old Martha Avila’s daughter and her husband, who allege a “design defect” involving a Tesla and a failure to warn. The suit alleges negligence against Tesla and the driver, Michael Butler.
Butler “stated he was operating with an automated driving assistance system engaged at the time of the crash,” the Harris County Sheriff’s Office said in a statement. He showed no signs of intoxication and was cooperative, the Sheriff’s Office said, according to NBC News.
Just after reports of the crash and numerous headlines that immediately blamed Tesla’s Autopilot suite, both Tesla CEO Elon Musk and Head of AI Ashok Elluswamy challenged that. Musk said the crash made “no sense” given that Tesla Autopilot and Full Self-Driving do not travel at the speeds the door cameras captured the car traveling at, which Tesla says was 73 MPH.
Tesla finally clarifies fatal Texas crash, confirms driver manually overrode acceleration
Elluswamy also revealed that Tesla data showed Butler overrode the system by pressing the accelerator to 100%, and that the pedal was compressed fully even after the car had crashed. Tesla has not released this data to the public, likely because it is communicating with agencies like the NHTSA on an investigation.
The suit uses a Washington Post analysis of government data that “identified at least 17 fatal incidents linked to Tesla Autopilot.”
This is far from the first time an accident has been blamed on Autopilot. A fatal crash in Texas was blamed on Autopilot several years ago, but when Tesla released data to the NTSB, which was investigating the crash, Autopilot was not available where the crash occurred, and Autosteer was never enabled, meaning the car was manually controlled at the time of the accident.
“Application of the accelerator pedal was found to be as high as 98.8 percent,” the NTSB said in their findings. The highest recorded speed in the five seconds leading up to the impact was 67 miles per hour. The area where the crash occurred is residential, and Texas State laws… pic.twitter.com/XGD97NHVZ2
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) March 18, 2026
More information on the accident will be released as Tesla works with agencies to find the cause of the crash. From personal experience, it is hard to imagine Tesla Autopilot or FSD operating in this manner. It drives sometimes too cautiously in residential areas in parking lots, at least in my experience. Speeding happens, but at this rate in this type of area, it is hard to believe.
We look forward to more details being released with time.
The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) has awarded the 2025-2026 Tesla Cybertruck crew cab pickup its highest honor: Top Safety Pick+. This marks the Cybertruck as the only full-size pickup to achieve this distinction in recent evaluations.
The award applies specifically to vehicles built after April 2025, following structural upgrades including front underbody reinforcements and footwell modifications.
These changes enabled strong performance in updated crash tests. The Cybertruck earned “Good” ratings in the small overlap front (driver and passenger sides), updated moderate overlap front, and updated side tests—core requirements for the Top Safety Pick+ designation.
It also secured acceptable or good headlights across trims and a “Good” rating for its standard front crash prevention system in pedestrian scenarios, along with acceptable or good performance in vehicle-to-vehicle testing.
The Cybertruck avoided every single pedestrian collision, including:
- Daytime child crossing
- Nightitime adult crossing
- Night parallel adult
In IIHS pedestrian front crash prevention tests, @Cybertruck avoided every single collision – daytime, nighttime & different angles
It was also the only pickup to earn Top Safety Pick+ (highest award) in 2026https://t.co/BNPqT9TbsW pic.twitter.com/M6nwDisBFK
— Tesla (@Tesla) June 24, 2026
In the large pickup category, competitors such as the Toyota Tundra received only a standard Top Safety Pick, while the Ford F-150 and Ram 1500 did not qualify for either award. This positions the Cybertruck as a standout in occupant protection and crash avoidance among its peers.
Credit: IIHS
Ironically, the same vehicle celebrated for superior U.S. safety performance remains banned from public roads in the United Kingdom and much of Europe. Regulators there cite the Cybertruck’s sharp external edges and highly rigid stainless-steel construction as failing pedestrian-protection standards. European and UK rules require rounded surfaces on protruding parts to minimize injury risk in collisions with vulnerable road users.
Critics also point to the truck’s substantial weight and unyielding body structure, which some argue could transfer more force to other vehicles or pedestrians rather than absorbing it.
Tesla’s engineering philosophy underpins the Cybertruck’s strong IIHS results. The vehicle features a distinctive stainless-steel exoskeleton made from ultra-hard 30X cold-rolled stainless steel. This provides exceptional structural rigidity and a robust safety cage that resists deformation in side impacts and rollovers.
Engineers designed integrated load paths to channel crash forces away from the occupant compartment while allowing controlled energy absorption in key zones. Post-April 2025 refinements to the front underbody further optimized performance in overlap crashes.
Complementing the passive structure is Tesla’s advanced active safety suite, including the standard Collision Avoidance Assist system with automatic emergency braking. This contributed directly to the vehicle’s strong front crash prevention scores. The skateboard platform and low center of gravity also enhance stability and handling, reducing the likelihood of certain crashes.
The IIHS recognition highlights how Tesla’s combination of high-strength materials, structural innovation, and software-driven safety systems can deliver top-tier protection in rigorous testing. While global regulatory differences on design and pedestrian interaction continue to limit the Cybertruck’s availability outside North America, its U.S. safety credentials set a new benchmark for full-size pickups.
Tesla plans production boost at Giga Berlin following rebound in Europe
Tesla and driver sued by family of woman killed in Texas crash: what we know
