News
SpaceX Starship launch pad upgraded as Elon Musk reveals rocket production milestone
SpaceX has begun to upgrade its South Texas Starship launch pad in anticipation of the completion of the next full-scale rocket prototype, photos of which CEO Elon Musk revealed just hours ago.
Working in parallel with efforts to repair damage caused by Starship serial number 1’s (SN1) violent February 28th test failure, SpaceX has managed to build, complete, and test an entirely separate ‘test tank’ and complete fabrication of a second full-scale Starship in a handful of weeks. Flexing the growing capabilities of the impressive Boca Chica, Texas Starship factory SpaceX has sprung up in just three months, the company is working around the clock to build not just one – but several – Starship prototypes simultaneously.
A successful March 9th tank test designed to prove a new thrust structure design managed to do just that less than two weeks after the same faulty part brought about Starship SN1’s demise. In the two weeks since that its test completion, SpaceX has been busy welding, stacking, welding, and stacking several separate sections of the next Starship prototype, known as SN3. Potentially a matter of days away from structural completion, focus has recently shifted to the launch pad the ship will be tested at. In the last few days, SpaceX technicians have begun to install a bizarre, new structural element on the mount Starship SN3 will be secured on top of, hinting at the goals of the rocket’s first test campaign.
Squeezing in alongside efforts to repair the propellant lines that run into the launch mount, upgrades began on March 24th as a SpaceX team worked to install what looked like an incredibly sturdy tripod (with four ‘legs’, of course). Thanks to familiar testing done with SpaceX’s most recent Starship tank prototype, the purpose of the launch mount’s newest appendage quickly became clear.
During the Starship SN2 tank’s thrust structure (‘thrust puck’, per Elon Musk) test campaign, SpaceX debuted the concurrent use of a beefy hydraulic jack to simulate the forces a Raptor engine static might produce. Capable of producing upwards of 200 metric tons (440,000 lbf) of thrust at full power, SpaceX will likely begin Starship static fire tests with a single Raptor engine. As soon as a Starship prototype completes one or several single-engine test fires, the plan is to install three sea level-optimized Raptor engines and repeat static fire tests.
Before that triple-engine static fire milestone, a first for the cutting-edge Raptor engine, SpaceX needs to verify that Starship’s thrust structure can stand up to the ~600 tons (~1.3M lbf) of force it will be subjected to during such a test. Sitting on a much smaller stand, Starship SN2 used a single hydraulic jack and temporary stand to simulate a single engine’s thrust. Starship SN3, sitting much higher above the ground, will need three jacks to simulate three Raptors.
As such, it looks likely that Starship SN3’s first cryogenic tank proof test – filling the vehicle with inert liquid nitrogen – will coincide with a second dedicated stress test of a Starship thrust structure, hopefully proving itself capable of surviving the force of three Raptor engines at full thrust. While orbital-class Starships will need three more vacuum-optimized Raptor engines, three sea-level engines are all SpaceX needs to begin flight tests with suborbital prototypes.
Based on an unofficial analysis of existing photos, it appears that every single major structural piece of Starship SN3 – excluding legs and fins – is nearing completion, even including the ship’s shiny nosecone. Likely to head to the launch pad for its first tests as soon as the tank section alone has been completed, just one stacking event remains before said tank section reaches its full height. Right now, both of those parts have been moved to a dedicated Vehicle/Vertical Assembly Building (VAB) and are probably no more than a day or two away from being joined*. Perhaps just a day or two after that milestone, SpaceX will likely transport the massive rocket to the launch pad to begin preparing for its first proof tests.
*Around 3am local time, SpaceX technicians stacked Starship SN3’s two main segments, completing its tank and engine section.
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
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’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.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
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.
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.
Correct pricing will be going live at midnight tonight. All fees since July 2nd 2026 will be waived.
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) July 13, 2026
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.
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
Elon Musk’s Texas ranch to showcase the lifelong work that changed the world
