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.
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
