Connect with us

News

SpaceX CEO Elon Musk's latest Starship photos reveal surprise landing legs [confirmed]

First spotted by a local resident and photographer, photos from Elon Musk later confirmed that Starship SN3 already has six stubby landing legs installed. (NASASpaceflight - bocachicagal)

Published

on

Update: In a Twitter response to Teslarati’s report, Musk confirmed that SpaceX has already installed six telescoping landing legs on the Starship SN3 prototype.

CEO Elon Musk published new photos of a Starship prototype shortly after it was moved to SpaceX’s South Texas launch pad, revealing the surprise inclusion of already-installed landing legs and hinting at the growing maturity of the rocket’s design.

Published on March 30th and likely taken late on March 29th, Musk’s latest Starship photos offer the best look yet at the massive vehicle’s engine section, where Raptor engines may soon be installed for historic static fire and hop test attempts. First captured in photos taken by local photographer and resident Mary (bocachicagal) on March 28th, speculation about what appeared to be six odd legs immediately kicked off on spaceflight forums. Due to limited publicly-available perspectives and the appendages’ locations inside Starship’s cavernous engine section, there was some limited ambiguity as to whether the steel pieces were truly legs or something closer to general structural support.

Thankfully, Musk’s new photos all but confirmed the former theory, revealing a sextet of hinged legs with a curious stubby appearance and what appears to be a rather simple and elegant design. Most importantly, the unexpected presence of landing legs – while likely cheap to implement – suggests that SpaceX is growing increasingly confident in each subsequent Starship prototype, an encouraging sign for imminent static fire and hop test plans.

Shortly after technicians transported Starship SN3 to the launch pad, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk revealed that landing legs – barely visible here – were already installed on the rocket. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

In fact, SpaceX filed a Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on March 30th — the biggest confirmation yet that the company is seriously working to prepare Starship SN3 for a Raptor engine static fire test as early as April 1st. Backup dates on the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th are included, leaving a decent amount of breathing room for SpaceX’s Texas team to (hopefully) successfully complete the rocket’s proof test in the next few days.

Possibly preceded by a water pressure test to check for leaks and verify general structural integrity, Starship SN3’s proof test will see the rocket’s methane and oxygen tanks fully filled with cryogenic liquid nitrogen. The tank pressure would then be increased to around 6-8 bar (90-115 psi) to ensure that Starship can handle the thermal and pressure stresses it will experience during launches. Given SpaceX’s recent history, including a partially unintentional Starship Mk1 tank failure in November 2019, the intentional destruction of two Starship test tanks in January 2020, and Starship SN1’s unintentional February 2020 failure, success is still far from guaranteed for Starship SN3.

Starship SN3’s legs and engine section are pictured on March 28th as technicians lift it onto SpaceX’s Boca Chica, Texas launch mount. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)
SpaceX CEO Elon Musk’s March 30th photos captured four of Starship SN3’s six surprise landing legs, visible as the shiny, squarish appendages in the right-hand image. (Elon Musk/SpaceX)

Nevertheless, SpaceX seems more confident in Starship SN3 than it was in Starships Mk1 and SN1 – the only other full-scale prototypes to have reached the testing phase. It’s possible that including leg prototypes were cheap and easy enough to be worth installing regardless of SpaceX’s broader confidence in Starship SN3 as a whole. However, it would still be a clear waste of time and resources to install all six landing legs if the internal consensus was to expect a failure in the early phases of SN3 testing.

SpaceX, in other words, seems to believe that Starship SN3 will pass its imminent tank proof test without any major issues. Additionally, the company must be confident in the outcome of the Starship SN3 Raptor static fire(s) expected to immediately follow any successful proof test. SpaceX has successfully demonstrated Raptor several times on flight hardware with the help of the Starhopper development vehicle, but a full-scale Starship is arguably a different animal.

Advertisement
-
SpaceX is just a day or so away from Starship SN3’s critical tank proof test. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

Regardless, it’s now clearer than ever that SpaceX is confident enough to put a few eggs in the Starship SN3 basket. With landing legs installed, the massive rocket prototype could be ready for a Starhopper-style 150m (500 ft) hop test just a week or so from now. For now, though, Starship SN3 needs to pass a tank proof test, perform a wet dress rehearsal (WDR) with real propellant, and complete one or several Raptor static fires before a flight test will be in its cards. Stay tuned!

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

News

Tesla Semi catches fire in California: what we know

Published

on

Credit: KTVU

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.

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.

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.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla’s ‘Emergency Drive Away’ function gets its first use in the real world

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

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.”

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.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla’s Cybercab battery design could make robotaxis even cheaper

Tesla built the Cybercab’s battery pack with spare room for a future switch to LFP.

Published

on

By

Tesla built the Cybercab’s battery pack with empty space inside it on purpose, and the reason points to a cheaper robotaxi down the road.

Robert Sumpf, Tesla’s director of mechanical design engineering for battery modules and packs, said the extra room beside and beneath the Cybercab’s modules was left there so the company can move to lithium iron phosphate cells later. “So, we protected this pack to go to an even lower energy dense chemistry as we scale and need to bring LFP into the platform,” Sumpf said in a Cybercab deep dive with Munro Live.

The Cybercab runs on Tesla’s own 4680 cells with a nickel chemistry today. LFP cells store less energy for their size, so a straight swap would cut range. The reserved space lets Tesla add more LFP cells to make up the difference. In return, Tesla would get cells that cost less, run cooler and survive more charge cycles. LFP became the most used EV battery chemistry in the world last year.

Not all of that room was planned for a chemistry change. Lars Moravy, Tesla’s Vice President of Vehicle Engineering, said part of it exists because “we didn’t need as many batteries as we thought we did.” Tesla told Sandy Munro in early 2025 that it was targeting a Cybercab pack under 50 kWh with close to 300 miles of range.

The pack also breaks from the structural design Tesla used in some Model Y and Cybertruck builds. Instead of potting hundreds of cells into one block, the Cybercab uses four separate, individually sealed modules, so a bad module can be replaced without scrapping the whole pack. Sumpf was blunt about the older approach, giving the Model Y structural battery “a grade D” because it was hard to build and nearly impossible to repair. He estimated a fully structural pack gains about 10% more cell volume, but said “the issue is the service cost.”

Advertisement
-

That cost matters more for a car that rarely sits parked. Cybercab chief engineer Eric Earley said replacing an entire pack “before half a million miles is a killer on cost,” which is why remanufacturing and serviceability were built into the design from the start.

The same Munro Live tour produced Moravy’s admission that the Cybercab line at Giga Texas is now outpacing Robotaxi deployments, along with a look at the robotaxi’s unorthodox paint process. Tesla is aiming to deliver the first Cybercabs to outside customers by the end of 2026, though Elon Musk has said the vast majority will stay owned by Tesla and run as a transport service.

Sumpf did not give a date for an LFP version, name a cell supplier or say how a chemistry change would affect range. For now, the 4680 cars keep piling up: Texas DMV records from Tuesday list 544 Cybercabs authorized for Tesla’s Robotaxi fleet, more than the 507 Model Ys on the same roster for the first time.

Continue Reading