Connect with us

News

SpaceX Starship hop debut aborted at the last second by Raptor engine

A SpaceX Starship prototype was forced to automatically abort a hop debut milliseconds before liftoff. (SpaceX)

Published

on

SpaceX’s full-scale Starship hop debut was aborted at the last second after an otherwise successful lead-up to the milestone, forcing the company to try again tomorrow.

Following a minor delay from August 2nd to August 3rd, SpaceX kicked off Starship SN5’s hop debut preparations relatively late into the 12-hour window, closing the highway and clearing the pad around 5pm CDT (22:00 UTC). The Starship SN5 tank section prototype was pressurized with ambient-temperature gas around the same time, while cryogenic liquid methane and oxygen propellant loading appeared to begin at roughly 6:20pm CDT (23:20 UTC).

Soon after, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk revealed that Starship was just 33 minutes away from launch, marching towards the first hop of a full-scale prototype at 6:56pm CDT. Unfortunately, possibly much less than a second before ignition, Starship SN5’s Raptor engine had different plans.

Musk says that one of Raptor engine SN27’s “spin start valves” failed to open moments before ignition, causing Starship to automatically abort the attempt. With more than an hour left in the window, SpaceX had time to briefly troubleshoot the bug and potentially turn the rocket around for a second attempt, but Musk announced some 50 minutes later that the company would stand down and try again tomorrow.

Advertisement

Musk’s description of the hop test abort sounds suspiciously similar to his description of the last abort of Starship SN5’s Raptor engine static fire test, in which a “fuel spin valve didn’t open.” If the root cause of both aborts is the same, there’s a good chance that SpaceX may need more time to properly investigate and fix the problem. A recurring issue is immediately much more concerning compared to a one-off bug, so there’s also a chance that SpaceX will go as far as replacing the Raptor engine currently installed on Starship SN5.

Raptor SN27 was installed on Starship SN5 around July 3rd or 4th. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

If things look more severe than SpaceX initially thought they were after the static fire abort and a replacement engine is necessary, Starship SN5 will have to complete another static fire test with the new Raptor before it can proceed to a second hop attempt.

Based on live views of the launch attempt from NASASpaceflight and LabPadre, Starship SN5 likely aborted a matter of milliseconds before Raptor SN27 ignition and perhaps just a second or two before liftoff. Just like SpaceX’s workhorse Falcon 9 and Heavy rockets, the vehicle’s flight computer is fully in control of the countdown a minute or two before liftoff and can automatically abort far faster than any human could possibly react. Held to the launch mount by hold-down clamps, Starship could have technically analyzed the engine’s performance after ignition and aborted the launch even later into the count.

Once hold-down clamp release is commanded, Starship SN5 will attempt to fly a roughly 150m-tall (500 ft) arc heading southeast of the launch mount. Perhaps 10 seconds prior to touchdown, Starship will attempt to deploy an array of six odd legs and gently land a few hundred feet from the pad. As of now, assuming Raptor’s finicky valve can be easily rectified, SpaceX will work towards a second Starship SN5 hop attempt sometime between 8am and 8pm CDT on Tuesday, August 4th.

Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.

Advertisement

Eric Ralph is Teslarati's senior spaceflight reporter and has been covering the industry in some capacity for almost half a decade, largely spurred in 2016 by a trip to Mexico to watch Elon Musk reveal SpaceX's plans for Mars in person. Aside from spreading interest and excitement about spaceflight far and wide, his primary goal is to cover humanity's ongoing efforts to expand beyond Earth to the Moon, Mars, and elsewhere.

Advertisement
Comments

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.

Published

on

By

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.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Lucid CEO dispels any rumors of bankruptcy: ‘So far from the facts’

Published

on

Credit: Lucid

Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.

The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.

The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.

Lucid denies rumors of bankruptcy after over 40% stock drop

Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”

Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”

Napoli said:

“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.

As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.

We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.

My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.

I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”

It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.

Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.

Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla responds to strange Supercharging pricing error with classy move

Published

on

(Credit: Tesla)

Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.

The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.

One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.

These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.

To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.

At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.

Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line

By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.

The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.

Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.

It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.

The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.

In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.

Continue Reading