News
SpaceX Starship go for nosecone installation after historic static fire
SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has confirmed that Starship and Raptor’s first triple-engine static fire was a success, opening the door for nosecone installation.
Around 3:13 am CDT, October 20th, Starship serial number 8 (SN8) successfully fired up three Raptor engines less than two hours after completing the first successful three-engine preburner test. With zero direct human intervention, SpaceX remotely detanked the rocket’s cryogenic liquid methane and oxygen propellant – the remnants now too warm to be used again in a controlled manner. In an hour or less, SpaceX engineers combed through the data produced and concluded that all three Raptor engines were healthy after their partial ignition test.
Effectively reset to a stable state, SpaceX once again proceeded to load Starship SN8’s propellant tanks with a small amount of supercooled LOx and LCH4, almost exactly mirroring the preburner test. Around 50 minutes after the recycle commenced and 25 minutes after propellant loading kicked off, Starship SN8 ignited three Raptors simultaneously – a major milestone for any rocket engine. Static fire now completed, Starship SN8 has been cleared to become the first operational prototype to reach its full 50m (~165 ft) height.
Shortly before Musk confirmed SN8’s static fire success, SpaceX canceled a preexisting October 20th static fire window and scheduled several new road closures on Wednesday, October 21st. Unlike the company’s recent static fire closures, all but one of which ran from 9pm to 6am, SpaceX’s new Wednesday closures are scheduled from 7am to noon and 3pm to 5pm local (CDT).
While a minor data point, in context with Starship SN8’s static fire success, the closures alone made it clear that SpaceX planned to begin installing Starship SN8’s nosecone on October 21st. Musk confirmed that assumption a few hours after those road closures were published.
It’s not entirely clear but most observers are assuming that Wednesday’s 7am-12pm window is needed to transport a large, new crane the ~2 miles between SpaceX’s Boca Chica factory and launch facilities. Starship SN8’s stacked nose section would then likely be installed on the same self-propelled mobile transporters (SPMT) and rolled to the launch pad from 3pm to 5pm, after which the nose would be lifted and stacked atop Starship SN8.
SpaceX has only fully stacked a Starship prototype once before when Mk1’s nose section was temporarily mated to its tank section to be the centerpiece of CEO Elon Musk’s October 2019 Starship event. It’s unclear why SpaceX wouldn’t simply use one of the mobile cranes its rented for Starship tank section operations (and stacking Mk1) in the past, so it remains to be seen what Wednesday’s road closures will actually be used for.
SpaceX’s road closure plans end with a wildcard, however. Once installed, the plan is to perform a second triple-Raptor static fire while only drawing propellant from SN8’s header tanks – small internal tanks designed to hold landing propellant, one of which is situated at the tip of Starship’s nosecone. On October 21st and 22nd, SpaceX still has two 9pm-6am closures scheduled for “SN8 static fire” testing. Filed early on October 20th, before SN8’s successful static fire, the most likely explanation is a simple clerical error or miscommunication, with Cameron County or SpaceX failing to properly communicate that those subsequent static fire test windows are no longer needed.
If retaining the static fire closures was intentional, it would mean that SpaceX – likely at Musk’s urging – intends to install Starship SN8’s nosecone in a matter of hours. It’s almost inconceivable that Starship SN8’s nosecone – outfitted with multiple gas thrusters, forward flaps powered by Tesla motors, a liquid oxygen header tank, vents, and plenty of plumbing – can be installed and made ready for testing in less than 12 hours. Barring a surprise method of mating SN8’s nose and tank sections, the nosecone will have to be welded to the rest of SN8 and the weld inspected – typically a multi-day process.
Regardless, given how quickly SpaceX moves and how dead-set CEO Elon Musk is at pushing limits and breaking barriers, it seems reasonable to assume that Starship SN8 may be fully integrated and ready for a second static fire test just a handful of days from now. Once completed, SN8 will be ready to attempt Starship’s first high-altitude flight test, launching to ~15 km (~9.3 mi) to attempt an untested skydiver-style descent and landing.
News
Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile are trying to shut Starlink out before FCC vote
AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile want 290 MHz cut from an FCC satellite plan before Thursday.
AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile are asking the Federal Communications Commission to pull nearly 300 MHz of spectrum out of a proposal that would let satellite companies like SpaceX offer cell service directly to ordinary phones. The request lands one day before the agency votes on it.
The FCC will vote Thursday, October 29, on a notice of proposed rulemaking that would make an additional 482 MHz available for direct to device service, expanding the number of eligible bands from five to 13, according to the FCC fact sheet. It would also scrap the rule requiring a satellite operator to lease spectrum from carriers, replacing it with a certification that the operator has coexistence agreements in place or holds the terrestrial license itself.
That second path matters for SpaceX. As Teslarati reported earlier this month, SpaceX agreed to buy Grain Management’s nationwide 800 MHz portfolio to turn Starlink Mobile into a full US carrier, adding to the spectrum it already bought from EchoStar.
The carriers want two bands removed, 2.5 GHz and 3.45 GHz, which make up 290 MHz of the 482 MHz on the table. Through industry group CTIA, they argued that about 300 million users depend on those bands and that satellite operations in them are not technically feasible. T-Mobile, which calls 2.5 GHz the foundation of its Ultra Capacity 5G network, said in its own filing that satellite interference could wipe out up to 96% of a cell site’s uplink coverage area and cut uplink speeds by 88% to 99%.
Executives from all three carriers met with FCC staff on October 20, and T-Mobile CEO Srini Gopalan met separately with FCC Chairman Brendan Carr. T-Mobile’s role stands out because it is still SpaceX’s US launch partner for Starlink Mobile. The three carriers have also teamed up on their own satellite joint venture to pool spectrum, a move widely seen as a response to Starlink.
SpaceX is asking for the opposite. In an October 23 filing after meetings with FCC staff and commissioners’ offices, the company asked regulators to add the 902 to 928 MHz band to the proposal. “Doing so now saves time later,” SpaceX wrote. The company also asked the FCC to modernize interference rules and align satellite deployment requirements with those for terrestrial cell networks, saying the goal is to let satellite and ground networks work together so Americans stay connected wherever they are.
The carriers have not been shy about how they view SpaceX as a competitor. On Verizon’s third quarter earnings call Monday, its chief executive said Starlink Mobile “just can’t compete with a terrestrial network” and estimated SpaceX would need four to six years and $300 billion to $500 billion to build a full US carrier network.
Thursday’s vote will not settle which bands survive. Adopting the notice opens a public comment period, with final rules to come later in the proceeding. The FCC already considered and rejected 2.5 GHz for satellite coverage once, in 2024. SpaceX also is not the only satellite player watching: the FCC approved Amazon’s $11.6 billion acquisition of Globalstar on October 27, giving its planned direct to device fleet its own mobile satellite spectrum.
A Tesla Semi caught fire in Hayward, California, which caused both directions of traffic to shut down for hours before being completely reopened early on Wednesday, the California Highway Patrol said.
The fire occurred just after 5:30 local time in Hayward on Tuesday, as the Semi caught fire in the southbound lanes of I-880 before CHP officials made the decision to shut down both lanes of traffic due to potential risks from hazardous chemical smoke.
There were no injuries reported.
🚨 A Tesla Semi reportedly caught fire, with California Highway Patrol confirming. The Semi was on I-880 SB
An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 28, 2026
The cause of the fire is currently unknown, as neither Tesla nor the CHP have not determined a cause.
However, some images taken before the Semi was completely destroyed by the fire seem to indicate this might have been an older unit, as it appears to be one of the designs that Tesla shipped as part of its pilot program, before revising it and starting mass production just a month ago.
@Tslachan From on of the videos looks like it’s an old Semi (not the refresh version that recently started production) https://t.co/KzwmR2kXow
— Area Under The Curve 🎗️ (@AreaUnderCurve) October 28, 2026
At the time of publication, CHP had not returned our request for a comment for additional details, including the Semi involved and any potential collaboration on an investigation between the CHP and Tesla. We will update this story when we hear back from them.
The southbound lanes were reopened at 3:30 a.m. on Wednesday, with the northbound lanes opening last night a few hours after the fire began. The CHP did state that the lithium batteries were “incredibly difficult to extinguish,” according to NBC Bay Area.
The truck’s driver said that the Semi caught fire, but he did not have an explanation.
An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year.
Tesla’s launch of the “Emergency Drive Away” function a few months back offered owners a safe option to evacuate an area if they were in reasonable danger. The function finally got its first use in the real world, but it appears it was by mistake.
A video shared by u/Joshalander in the r/TeslaLounge subreddit recorded the instance from his vehicle and said the incident took place in Austin this past weekend during the city’s F1 Race.
“Was charging around 6 AM this past Sunday in Austin before heading to the F1 race and heard a pop. Looked over and saw the new emergency drive-away feature in action. Genuinely felt bad for the dude when he got out and realized what happened, since he looked exhausted and only seemed to half-read the prompts.”
🚨 Here’s the first look at Tesla’s Emergency Drive Away function in action:
Apparently this driver accidentally enabled it and drove forward; you can see the Supercharger pull with the car.
Tesla said previously this would cost up to $25k if not used properly. https://t.co/B4qQRrsO6B
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 28, 2026
Emergency Drive Away unlatches the Supercharger connector from the vehicle, but still causes damage to both the car and the Supercharger. Tesla has said that it will cost up to $25,000 in repairs to have everything fixed back to normal.
Additionally, the company said that if it were not used in an emergency situation, the driver of the vehicle who activated the Emergency Drive Away feature would be responsible for all repair costs.
Tesla constitutes the following situations as reasonable justifications for activating the feature:
- You face an immediate threat to your life or personal safety.
- You must leave the area immediately.
- Exiting the vehicle is unsafe.
- Unplugging the charge connector would unreasonably delay your departure or expose you to a risk to your personal safety.
After using the feature, Tesla requires the driver to schedule Service so the car can be inspected.
Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile are trying to shut Starlink out before FCC vote
Tesla Semi catches fire in California: what we know
