News
SpaceX shifts South Texas focus to Starship’s orbital launch pad
Highlighted by a Wednesday jam-packed with important milestones, SpaceX appears to be shifting its focus in South Texas to the completion of Starship’s first orbital launch pad.
Boca Chica will be the first time in its history that SpaceX has faced the challenge of (or had the opportunity to) build an orbital launch complex from scratch after gaining a great deal of expertise modifying, reactivating, and rebuilding two existing pads in Florida and one in California. SpaceX’s Boca Chica facilities must also support what will be the most powerful rocket ever built (or tested) and a planned flight rate and turnaround capability that drastically exceeds anything the company (or anyone else, really) has attempted.
As a result, the site looks almost nothing like SpaceX’s other launch facilities. On top of the already significant hurdles faced, SpaceX is also attempting to complete its from-scratch facility in record time and work on Starship’s orbital launch site (OLS) really only began in earnest around the start of 2021. That aggressive work schedule has begun to clearly bear fruit in the last few months and arguably reached a bit of a local peak on Wednesday, July 28th.
A Tower Is Born
Kicking off the day after an aborted attempt on Tuesday, SpaceX began what would turn out to be an extremely busy Wednesday around 5am CDT (UTC-5) with the installation of the Starship launch tower’s ninth and final prefabricated section, effectively completing the structure’s skeleton. Unlike all other SpaceX pads, save for Pad 39A’s single-purpose Dragon and Crew Access Arm, Starship’s first orbital launch pad will lean heavily on a massive steel tower.
By all appearances, Starship’s launch tower will host an elevator-like carriage outfitted with several large arms on its exterior and will use those arms to stabilize, stack, fuel, and maybe even catch Starships and Super Heavy boosters. The tower will be integral to routine Starship launch operations, in other words.
With the installation of one last steel segment, that tower grew to a height of ~145m (~440 ft) and isn’t expected to get any taller after a 10m/30ft lightning rod is eventually added. SpaceX’s pad team can now begin the process of finalizing tower construction, ranging from adding cladding on its rectangular exterior and welding all nine steel sections together to filling its four legs with concrete.
Tank and Table
Just a few hours after the start of Tower Section #9 installation, a fleet of SpaceX’s self-propelled modular transporters (SPMTs) left the build site with two major pieces of orbital pad hardware in tow. For the first time in three months, one of those payloads was an OLS propellant storage tank built by SpaceX itself out of parts almost identical to those found on Starship. Since the first two ground support equipment (GSE) tanks were rapidly installed in April, activity on that front has been curiously stagnant.
Since modifications of those tanks began in-situ over the last month or so, the general consensus has been that a fairly minor design flaw or oversight was discovered well after production began, requiring a significant pause to rework and redesign the crucial pad components. In the meantime, work on contractor-built GSE tank shells meant to eventually insulate SpaceX’s thin cryogenic storage tanks continued unabated and one water tank and six shells have already been more or less completed. With any luck, GSE tank #5’s delivery to the OLS means that SpaceX has removed the roadblock(s) and is ready to move into plumbing and tank farm activation.
Simultaneously, a far more significant part known as the Starship ‘launch table’ also left SpaceX’s Boca Chica build site after nearly six months of around-the-clock assembly and outfitting. Designed to secure, fuel, and launch orbital Starships, the launch table has to be able to withstand the ~5000 metric ton (~11 million lb) weight of a fully-fueled Starship, hold Super Heavy in place during static fires and prelaunch ignitions that could produce ~7500 metric tons of thrust, and survive the unspeakable fury of 33 Raptor engines operating simultaneously.
Unlike all other major orbital Starship launch pad parts, the custom launch mount and table’s successful and near-total completion is an absolute necessity for any kind of orbital test flight or full-up Super Heavy static fire. Only part of the tank farm is truly necessary and the vast majority of the tower’s intended tasks can be completed with workarounds if neither are fully ready. Without the launch mount, however, testing much beyond what SpaceX has already accomplished is mostly impossible in the near term.
Raptor Invasion
Finally, while less pressing, SpaceX also accepted delivery of four Raptor engines on top of three more that were delivered to Boca Chica on Tuesday. According to CEO Elon Musk, Starship’s first orbital test flight(s) will happen with a full complement of engines installed, meaning that SpaceX will need to build, qualify, and ship at least 35 new Raptors for a single flight.
SpaceX recently completed assembly of the 100th full-scale Raptor engine at its Hawthorne factory and HQ – an encouraging sign that the engines needed for Starship’s orbital launch debut will be ready for flight sooner than later.
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
