News
SpaceX ramps Starship hiring as Elon Musk talks Texas rocket factory's "awesome" progress
After several successful tests last month, Elon Musk says that SpaceX’s South Texas Starship team is looking to rapidly expand in order to aggressively ramp up Starship manufacturing in a sign that the nascent rocket factory is making excellent progress.
Almost immediately after SpaceX successfully wrapped up its first and second explosive Starship tank tests last month, the company’s Boca Chica, Texas presence started to take on a new atmosphere, reminiscent of the rapid progress made at a since-mothballed Florida Starship facility. Perhaps thanks to the fact that SpaceX’s Boca Chica Starship facilities are adjacent to a dedicated test and launch facility just a mile down the road, it’s looking much less likely that a similar fate will befall its Texas presence.
Instead, SpaceX’s successful Starship tank tests – intentionally destroying two massive propellant tanks – are a testament to the progress the next-generation rocket is making in Texas. In fact, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has effectively stated that after the most recent tank test, the company is now ready to shift gears and start building the first space-bound Starship prototypes, while the last week or two of SpaceX’s visible Texas activities make it clear that that shift is already well underway.
In simple terms, SpaceX now appears to be moving full speed ahead in a bid to manufacture, assemble, and test the first flightworthy, full-scale Starship prototypes. It’s worth noting that CEO Elon Musk has underestimated the challenge at hand several times in the last 18 or so months of Starship development, frequently suggesting that the first full-scale prototype of the spacecraft would be ready for a challenging flight test and maybe even its first orbital flights as early as 2019.
For a number of reasons, those ambitious targets were not met. To Musk’s credit, the executive is at least conscious of his tendency to be wildly optimistic when it comes to schedules and has effectively tacked on an asterisk that the schedules and deadlines he often publicizes tend more along the lines of “this time-frame is technically possible without breaking the laws of physics” than anything verging on pragmatism. With challenges as complex as those faced in spaceflight, let alone massive, fully-reusable rockets like Starship, it’s hard to be surprised that practical deadlines tend to be miles away from theoretically-possible minimums.
As such, it wouldn’t be unreasonable to feel a bit like the townspeople with a boy crying wolf, but there are arguably several reasons for optimism, this time around. Most importantly, as partially pictured above, SpaceX has completed four intentionally destructive tests with full-scale Starship hardware in just the last 2.5 months. Deemed unfit for flight, SpaceX pressurized Starship Mk1 with liquid nitrogen until it burst in November 2019, reaching an estimated 3-5 bar (45-75 psi).
SpaceX spent the following month upgrading both the methods and facilities used to build Starship prototypes in South Texas – a process that is still very much ongoing. However, two recent tests of Starship tanks built with some of those new methods and facilities have unequivocally proven that great progress is being made. The first ‘test tank’ managed 7.1 bar (105 psi) before it burst, while a second tank completed less than three weeks later reached 7.5 bar (110 psi) with water and 8.5 bar (125 psi) with liquid nitrogen on January 28th. Between those tests, Musk revealed that 6 bar was the bare minimum necessary for orbital Starship flights, while 8.5 bar would potentially offer the safety margins needed for crewed Starship flights.
In other words, SpaceX’s last two tank tests have effectively proved that – even with facilities and methods only partially upgraded – the company is ready to begin manufacturing the first truly flight-rated Starship prototypes. In response, Musk recently stated that he was going “max hardcore on” Starship design and production in Boca Chica and revealed that SpaceX would host a second South Texas jobs fair in three weeks to help rapidly staff its growing rocket factory.
Looking at the progress SpaceX has made in just the last week, it’s hard to fault Musk’s brimming enthusiasm. Now breaking in new semi-automated welding machines, upgraded production equipment, and two massive sprung structures (i.e. tents), SpaceX engineers and technicians are churning out improved steel rings, tank domes (bulkheads), smaller propellant tanks, and more at a breakneck pace relative to the last year of Starship work. Additionally, at least six of those new rings have been stacked together in two sections, likely representing the effective birth of the first flightworthy Starship – ‘SN01’.
With SpaceX’s new enclosed facilities, much of its South Texas work is now hidden. Still, from what’s visible, it’s safe to say that the company is well its way to completing the first flight – and possibly orbit – worthy Starship prototypes in the near future.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
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.
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
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
