News
SpaceX’s Starship rocket sails through first “flight-like” fueling test
SpaceX’s fully-assembled Starship rocket appears to have sailed through a major wet dress rehearsal test on the first attempt.
With the completion of that test, the next-generation SpaceX rocket has taken a big step toward its first orbital launch attempt. Starship measures around 120 meters (~394 ft) tall and 9 meters (~30 ft) wide, making it the largest rocket ever assembled. It’s designed to launch more than 100 metric tons (~220,000 lb) to low Earth orbit (LEO) in a fully-reusable configuration. At liftoff, Starship’s 33 Raptor engines will produce up to 7590 tons (16.7M lbf) of thrust, making it more powerful than any rocket in history by a large margin.
And on Monday, January 23rd, Starship likely became the heaviest rocket ever after SpaceX fully loaded the vehicle with propellant. Surprising most viewers, SpaceX also appeared to complete the complex test associated with that milestone without running into any major issues.
The update that's rolling out to the fleet makes full use of the front and rear steering travel to minimize turning circle. In this case a reduction of 1.6 feet just over the air— Wes (@wmorrill3) April 16, 2024
The apparent success is surprising because it simply hasn’t been SpaceX’s approach of choice while developing Starship. Since SpaceX began assembling Starhopper in an empty Texas field in 2018, the Starship program has been almost exclusively managed to prioritize speed and expect failures. The company almost always preferred to build, test, and learn from minimum-viable-product prototypes as quickly as possible, even if that meant that failures were guaranteed.
Because SpaceX expected failures, it learned from them and always had another prototype ready to carry the torch forward. Starship prototypes rarely completed ground or flight tests on the first try, as SpaceX was simultaneously learning – often catastrophically – how to test and operate those vehicles. The culmination of that failure-as-an-option strategy was a series of seven suborbital Starship tests – two short hops of identical prototypes and five launch and landing attempts of five more advanced prototypes between August 2020 and May 2021. On the fifth attempt, after four failures, a full-scale Starship successfully launched to 12.5 kilometers (~41,000 ft), shut off its engines, fell back to Earth, reignited its engines, flipped around, and landed in one piece.
By all appearances, the campaign was the ultimate corroboration of SpaceX’s development strategy. In the second half of 2022, however, SpaceX decided to dramatically change the Starship program’s approach to risk management and systems engineering. Starship testing has become exceptionally cautious over the last several months, as a result.
From fail-fast to slow-and-steady
There is a small chance SpaceX simply got lucky, but Starship’s first fully-assembled wet dress rehearsal test appears to indicate that that caution has paid off. Combined, both stages of the rocket – Ship 24 and Booster 7 – collectively completed dozens of separate proof tests and static fires since mid-2022. They also made it through several far more limited tests while stacked.
Having cautiously characterized each prototype about as well as it possibly could, SpaceX finally pulled the trigger on January 23rd. After hours of conditioning the Starbase, Texas orbital launch site’s giant tank farm, SpaceX opened the floodgates and loaded Ship 24 and Booster 7 with up to 4860 tons (~10.7M lbs) of cryogenic liquid oxygen and liquid methane propellant in about 90 minutes. Once fully loaded, the combined weight of the rocket and propellant likely exceeded 5000 tons (~11M lbs), making Starship the heaviest rocket in history. The next heaviest rockets ever built, Saturn V and N-1, weighed around 2800 tons (~6.2M lbs) fully loaded.
SpaceX was also able to drain Starship and return its propellant to the pad’s ground storage tanks about four hours after filling the rocket.
“Flight-like” testing
The company later confirmed that the test was a “full flight-like wet dress rehearsal,” as suspected, and noted that data gathered from it would “help verify a full launch countdown sequence, as well as the performance of Starship and the orbital pad for flight-like operations.” Parts of the test visible from unaffiliated webcasts like NASASpaceflight’s seemed to confirm as much. Shortly after Starship was fully loaded, for example, SpaceX activated the orbital launch mount’s fire extinguisher system, seemingly practicing the moments before the rocket would otherwise ignite its engines and take flight.
At no point during the wet dress rehearsal did SpaceX appear to enter any kind of hold or abort, indicating that the rocket’s systems were all working well enough together to smoothly complete it on the first try. The only mildly concerning behavior visible during the multi-hour test came shortly after Starship was topped off. Booster 7 opened one of its methane tank gas vents to relieve pressure and instead appeared to vent liquid methane, producing a flammable cloud thousands of feet long. More likely than not, the Super Heavy was slightly overfilled, and the liquid vent was an intentional response to that error. The cloud of methane thankfully did not find an ignition source, and Starship went on to finish the test as planned.
SpaceX has a lot of work left to prepare Ship 24 and Booster 7 for Starship’s first orbital launch attempt. Booster 7 must still complete one or several more static fires, during which it could become the most powerful rocket ever tested. To reduce risk, SpaceX will likely remove Ship 24 while testing Super Heavy, and reassemble the rocket only if Booster 7 passes its tests. SpaceX also needs to repair the pad after static fire testing and work with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to finalize Starship’s first orbital launch license.
But after many false positives, Starship’s successful completion of a wet dress rehearsal on the first try has confirmed that the rocket’s orbital launch debut is – for the first time – actually close at hand.
A Texas man has been arrested and charged with manslaughter after his Tesla crashed into a home last month, striking a woman inside and killing her. The driver, Michael Butler, claimed the vehicle was in self-driving mode, but information from Tesla shows that Butler overrode the system.
Butler was arrested on Wednesday and booked at the Harris County, Texas, jail. He remained in custody through Thursday and Friday; he did not enter a plea, and his next court hearing is scheduled for Monday.
Tesla finally clarifies fatal Texas crash, confirms driver manually overrode acceleration
There are a handful of new clues in the case that could clear Tesla of any wrongdoing, especially as the woman who was killed’s family, the Avilas, filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Tesla and Butler, seeking at least $1 million in damages.
Charging documents from the Harris County prosecutor now show that Butler, who was working DoorDash the evening of the accident, had been using Full Self-Driving mode without incident through the duration of multiple deliveries that evening.
In the moments leading up to the crash, while in FSD and approaching a left turn, Butler pressed the accelerator pedal, overriding FSD’s speed control, and continued to push it until it reached 100 percent. This caused rapid acceleration; the brake pedal was never pressed, and there is no data to show that Butler aimed to turn away from the curb or house.
The charging documents state:
“I noted that the brake pedal was never pressed in the final minute before the crash. I also did not see any data to indicate that the driver attempted to turn away from the curb that he eventually struck. Further, I observed that no mechanical error was detected or recorded by the vehicle before BUTLER and the Tesla struck the curb.”
Additionally, a forensic analysis of Butler’s phone showed that he searched Google around the time of the crash with queries questioning why FSD was “too timid,” “not aggressive enough,” and even searched, “FSD is not aggressive enough for city driving.”
The documents outlined this:
“Investigator Veal also informed me that he had received BUTLER’s cell phone from Deputy Amad and that HDAO digital forensics team had completed a data extraction and download of the phone. Multiple Google searches related to Tesla had been made from BUTLER’s phone in the months leading up the crash. I noted multiple searches in May of 2026 indicating an apparent frustration with Tesla’s FSD mode, including the following searches: “Tesla fsd not aggressive enough 2026 model,” “Tesla fsd not [sic) aggressive enough 2026,” “FSD is not aggressive enough for city driving,” and “tesla fsd too timid.”‘
Tesla had claimed just after the crash that its internal data showed Butler had overridden the system’s speed control and pressed the accelerator completely, causing the vehicle to travel at an excessive rate of speed. Eventually, the car slammed into Avila’s house, killing her.
Butler has now been formally charged with Manslaughter, a felony.
Tesla shocked with its quarterly delivery report yesterday by reporting it delivered 480,126 vehicles in the second quarter of 2026, a 25 percent year-over-year jump that crushed Wall Street estimates of roughly 400,000–408,000 units. Production reached 451,758, with Model 3 and Model Y accounting for the vast majority.
The result ended two years of annual delivery declines and drew down inventory, signaling demand that outpaced earlier production.
Tesla bears had long warned that the expiration of the U.S. federal EV tax credit would hammer demand. Without the $7,500 incentive, they argued, American buyers would balk at higher effective prices, leading to a sharp slowdown.
Will Tesla thrive without the EV tax credit? Five reasons why they might
That narrative has not played out as predicted. While U.S. EV sales faced broader headwinds, Tesla’s global numbers held firm, underscoring the company’s ability to offset domestic pressure through other levers.
There are several plausible factors that explain Tesla’s strength during this quarter. Let’s take a look at them:
Rising Gas Prices
Rising gas prices provided a powerful tailwind, especially in the U.S.
Geopolitical tensions tied to the Iran conflict pushed fuel costs higher earlier in the year, amplifying the lifetime savings of electric vehicles. Even as oil prices later moderated, the psychological and financial impact lingered, encouraging fleet operators and private buyers to accelerate EV purchases. European sales rebounded sharply, helping drive the quarter’s outperformance.
Full Self-Driving Adoption
Advances in Full Self-Driving (FSD) supervised software also appear to have boosted appeal. Tesla expanded FSD availability in select European markets and continued refining the system.
No complaints from me because I finally got to enjoy this drive on FSD; I usually like to manually drive down this mountain https://t.co/RBFniRPSR0 pic.twitter.com/XQ5sOpN1Yg
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 26, 2026
For tech-oriented buyers, the promise of future autonomy and enhanced driver-assistance features adds perceived value beyond the car itself. This differentiation helps Tesla stand out in a crowded market where competitors focus primarily on hardware and basic range.
Pricing Strategy, Affordable Configurations
Tesla’s offerings and its pricing strategy during Q2 further stimulated demand. Tesla introduced lower-cost versions of the Model 3 and Model Y, widening accessibility without sacrificing core margins.
These moves countered affordability concerns and attracted buyers who had been waiting on the sidelines. Combined with attractive financing and leasing options, the pricing strategy converted interest into actual orders more effectively than many analysts expected.
Broad European Recovery
Supported by government incentives, corporate fleet electrification, and easing political headwinds around CEO Elon Musk, Tesla was supplied additional momentum through stronger registration numbers throughout Europe.
Strong exports from the Shanghai Gigafactory and a production ramp at Giga Berlin ensured supply met this resurgent demand. Corporate buyers, in particular, accelerated transitions to EVs to meet sustainability targets, providing a steady volume base.
These elements created a virtuous cycle that delivered the strong deliveries report. While bears correctly flagged the loss of the U.S. tax credit as a risk, Tesla’s diversified playbook demonstrated that it could remain resilient against those headwinds. The Q2 beat suggests the company remains adept at navigating shifting market conditions, even as competition intensifies.
A Tesla Semi was involved in a fatal collision on U.S. Highway 50 in Dayton, Nevada, on Sunday, June 28, 2026, marking the first known fatal crash involving the electric Class 8 truck. The incident occurred around 7:20 a.m. at the intersection with Traditions Parkway, approximately 40 miles east of Reno and close to Tesla’s Gigafactory Nevada.
According to the Lyon County Sheriff’s Office and the Nevada State Police Highway Patrol, a semi-truck struck two passenger vehicles stopped at a traffic signal. The truck hit the vehicles from behind. Two people were pronounced dead at the scene, and a third person suffered life-threatening injuries and was flown to a hospital, Forbes reported.
Preliminary statements gathered at the scene by the Lyon County Sheriff’s Office suggested the truck driver may have fallen asleep at the wheel. However, the Nevada Highway Patrol, which is leading the investigation, stated that the official cause has not yet been determined.
Additional information is expected to be released early the following week. The truck was seized for evidence as part of the ongoing probe.
Responders at the scene included deputies from the Lyon County Sheriff’s Office, personnel from the Nevada Highway Patrol, Central Lyon County Fire Department, and the Nevada Department of Transportation. The crash led to the temporary closure of U.S. 50 in both directions.
The Tesla Semi is Tesla’s battery-electric heavy-duty truck, produced at the nearby Gigafactory in Nevada. Authorities initially described the vehicle as a semi-truck; its make was subsequently confirmed through reporting and scene identification; an interesting bit of information here, as the Semi is not yet available publicly and many do not know that Tesla builds electric trucks.
The investigation remains active, with no further official details on contributing factors or vehicle systems released as of early July 2026.
This incident highlights ongoing scrutiny of commercial vehicle safety on Nevada highways, particularly involving fatigue. Law enforcement continues to gather evidence and witness statements.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Tesla’s strong Q2 deliveries: Four key drivers behind the surprise
