News
SpaceX reveals Starship “marine recovery” plans in new job postings
In a series of new job postings, SpaceX has hinted at an unexpected desire to develop “marine recovery systems for the Starship program.”
Since SpaceX first began bending metal for its steel Starship development program in late 2018, CEO Elon Musk, executives, and the company itself have long maintained that both Super Heavy boosters and Starship upper stages would perform what are known as return-to-launch-site (RTLS) landings. It’s no longer clear if those long-stated plans are set in stone.
Oddly, despite repeatedly revealing plans to develop “marine recovery” assets for Starship, SpaceX’s recent “marine engineer” and “naval architect” job postings never specifically mentioned the company’s well-established plans to convert retired oil rigs into vast floating Starship launch sites. Weighing several thousand tons and absolutely dwarfing the football-field-sized drone ships SpaceX recovers Falcon boosters with, it goes without saying that towing an entire oil rig hundreds of miles to and from port is not an efficient or economical solution for rocket recovery. It would also make very little sense for SpaceX to hire a dedicated naval architect without once mentioning that they’d be working on something as all-encompassing as the world’s largest floating launch pad.
That leaves three obvious explanations for the mentions. First, it might be possible that SpaceX is merely preparing for the potential recovery of debris or intact, floating ships or boosters after intentionally expending them on early orbital Starship test flights. Second, SpaceX might have plans to strip an oil rig or two – without fully converting them into launch pads – and then use those rigs as landing platforms designed to remain at sea indefinitely. Those platforms might then transfer landed ships or boosters to smaller support ships tasked with returning them to dry land. Third and arguably most likely, SpaceX might be exploring the possible benefits of landing Super Heavy boosters at sea.
Through its Falcon rockets, SpaceX has slowly but surely refined and perfected the recovery and reuse of orbital-class rocket boosters – 24 (out of 103) of which occurred back on land. Rather than coasting 500-1000 kilometers (300-600+ mi) downrange after stage separation and landing on a drone ship at sea, those 24 boosters flipped around, canceled out their substantial velocities, and boosted themselves a few hundred kilometers back to the Florida or California coast, where they finally touched down on basic concrete pads.
Unsurprisingly, canceling out around 1.5 kilometers per second of downrange velocity (equivalent to Mach ~4.5) and fully reversing that velocity back towards the launch site is an expensive maneuver, costing quite a lot of propellant. For example, the nominal 25-second reentry burn performed by almost all Falcon boosters likely costs about 20 tons (~40,000 lb) of propellant. The average ~35-second single-engine landing burn used by all Falcon boosters likely costs about 10 tons (~22,000 lb) of propellant. Normally, that’s all that’s needed for a drone ship booster landing.
For RTLS landings, Falcon boosters must also perform a large ~40-second boostback burn with three Merlin 1D engines, likely costing an extra 25-35 tons (55,000-80,000 lb) of propellant. In other words, an RTLS landing generally ends up costing at least twice as much propellant as a drone ship landing. Using the general rocketry rule of thumb that every 7 kilograms of booster mass reduces payload to orbit by 1 kilogram and assuming that each reusable Falcon booster requires about 3 tons of recovery-specific hardware (mostly legs and grid fins) a drone ship landing might reduce Falcon 9’s payload to low Earth orbit (LEO) by ~5 tons (from 22 tons to 17 tons). The extra propellant needed for an RTLS landing might reduce it by another 4-5 tons to 13 tons.
Likely less than coincidentally, a Falcon 9 with drone ship booster recovery has never launched more than ~16 tons to LEO. While SpaceX hasn’t provided NASA’s ELVPerf calculator with data for orbits lower than 400 kilometers (~250 mi), it generally agrees, indicating that Falcon 9 is capable of launching about 12t with an RTLS landing and 16t with a drone ship landing.
This is all to say that landing reusable boosters at sea will likely always be substantially more efficient. The reason that SpaceX has always held that Starship’s Super Heavy boosters will avoid maritime recovery is that landing and recovering giant rocket boosters at sea is inherently difficult, risky, time-consuming, and expensive. That makes rapid reuse (on the order of multiple times per day or week) almost impossible and inevitably adds the cost of recovery, which could actually be quite significant for a rocket that SpaceX wants to eventually cost just a few million dollars per launch. However, so long as at-sea recovery costs less than a few million dollars, there’s always a chance that certain launch profiles could be drastically simplified – and end up cheaper – by the occasional at-sea booster landing.
If the alternative is a second dedicated launch to partially refuel one Starship, it’s possible that a sea landing could give Starship the performance needed to accomplish the same mission in a single launch, lowering the total cost of launch services. If – like with Falcon 9 – a sea landing could boost Starship’s payload to LEO by a third or more, the regular sea recovery of Super Heavy boosters would also necessarily cut the number of launches SpaceX needs to fill up a Starship Moon lander by a third. Given that SpaceX and NASA have been planning for Starship tanker launches to occur ~12 days apart, recovering boosters at sea becomes even more feasible.
In theory, the Starship launch vehicle CEO Elon Musk has recently described could be capable of launching anywhere from 150 to 200+ tons to low Earth orbit with full reuse and RTLS booster recovery. With so much performance available, it may matter less than it does with Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy if an RTLS booster landing cuts payload to orbit by a third, a half, or even more. At the end of the day, “just” 100 tons to LEO may be more than enough to satisfy any realistic near-term performance requirements.
But until Starships and Super Heavy boosters are reusable enough to routinely launch multiple times per week (let alone per day) and marginal launch costs have been slashed to single-digit millions of dollars, it’s hard to imagine SpaceX willingly leaving so much performance on the table by forgoing at-sea recovery out of principle alone.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk says Tesla is developing a new vehicle: ‘Way cooler than a minivan’
It sounds as if Tesla could be considering a new vehicle to fit the mold of what a larger family would need, and as fans have been demanding it for several years and the company is phasing out the Model X, its only family-geared vehicle, it sounds as if it could be the perfect time.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk said the company is developing a new vehicle, and it will be “way cooler than a minivan.”
It sounds as if Tesla could be considering a new vehicle to fit the mold of what a larger family would need, and as fans have been demanding it for several years and the company is phasing out the Model X, its only family-geared vehicle, it sounds as if it could be the perfect time.
There are a handful of things Musk could be talking about, and as many Tesla owners have wanted a vehicle along the lines of a minivan for hauling around their family, speculation has persisted about what the company would do in terms of developing something for that exact use case.
There were several options, and some of them seemed to be already available. Musk posted on X yesterday that the Cybertruck has three sets of isofix attachments and could fit three child seats or three adults, and it seemed to be a way to deflect plans for a new, larger vehicle as a Model Y L appeared to be present at Giga Texas.
There is also the Robovan, the large people mover that Tesla unveiled at the “We, Robot” back in 2024.
Something way cooler than a minivan is coming
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 25, 2026
However, it seems Tesla could be developing something like a CyberSUV, something that is going to be large enough to haul around a car full of kids, but could be developed with the company’s aesthetic of the company’s most recent releases: this would likely include a light bar and a more sleek, futuristic look.
We’ve mocked up some potential looks for Tesla’s speculative vehicle in the past:
Tesla has teased the potential of a CyberSUV in the past, showing off clay models that it developed back in September in a teaser video called “Sustainable Abundance.”
Fans and owners have been calling for this development for a very long time, and it seems like Tesla might be ready to finally answer the call on a large SUV. With the segment being dominated by combustion engine vehicles, Tesla could truly disrupt the large SUVs that have been mainstays.
The Chevrolet Tahoe and GMC Yukon would feel some additional pressure, and it would be possible for Tesla to infiltrate some of those sales and pull consumers to electric powertrains.
As the Model S and Model X sunset process is truly hitting full swing, it might be time to consider Tesla’s next option in terms of vehicle development.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk’s $10 Trillion robot: Inside Tesla’s push to mass produce Optimus
Tesla’s surging Optimus job listings reveal a company sprinting from prototype to one million robot production.
Tesla is accelerating its push to bring the Optimus humanoid robot to high volume production, and its recent job listings tells the story as clearly as any earnings call.
With well over 100 Optimus related job openings now posted across its U.S. facilities, Tesla is signaling a critical pivot for the program, moving it from a captivating tech demo to a serious manufacturing endeavor. Roles span the full spectrum of the product lifecycle, from Robotics Software Engineers and Manufacturing Engineers to Mechanical Integration Engineers and AI Engineers focused on world modeling and video generation. One active listing for a Software Engineer on the Optimus team asks candidates to build scalable and reliable data pipelines for Optimus manufacturing lines and develop automation tools that accelerate analysis and visualization for mass manufacturing.
Tesla is racing toward a one million unit annual production target. The clearest signal yet that Tesla is treating Optimus as its primary business came on January 28, 2026, during the company’s Q4 2025 earnings call. Musk announced that Tesla is ending production of the Model S and Model X, and will repurpose those lines at its Fremont, California factory to build Optimus humanoid robots.
A production intent prototype of Optimus Version 3 is planned to be ready in early 2026, after which Tesla intends to build a one million unit production line with a targeted production start by the end of 2026. To support that ramp, Tesla broke ground on a massive new Optimus manufacturing facility at Gigafactory Texas in late 2025, with ambitions to eventually reach 10 million units per year.
Tesla Giga Texas to feature massive Optimus V4 production line
The business case for scaling this aggressively is rooted in labor economics. Musk has stated that “Optimus has the potential to be the biggest product of all time,” reasoning that if Tesla can produce capable humanoid robots at scale and reasonable cost, every task currently performed by human labor becomes a potential application. In a separate statement, Musk framed Optimus’s long term importance even more bluntly, saying it could surpass Tesla’s vehicle business in scale with the potential to generate $10 trillion in revenue.
The industries Tesla is targeting first are those most burdened by repetitive physical labor. Early applications include manufacturing assembly, material handling and quality inspection, as well as logistics tasks like loading, unloading, sorting, and transporting goods in warehouses and distribution centers. Longer term, Tesla’s vision is for Optimus to penetrate household, medical, and logistics scenarios at the scale of a smartphone rollout.
News
Tesla officially begins sunset of Model S and Model X
In the latest move to show Tesla is planning to eliminate the Model S and Model X from production, the company’s Korean arm has officially set a firm cutoff date of March 31, 2026, for new orders of both models.
Tesla has officially started its process of sunsetting the Model S and Model X just months after the company confirmed it would stop producing the two flagship vehicles in 2026.
This step marks the end of an era for the vehicles that helped establish not only Tesla’s prowess as an automaker but also its status as a disruptor in the entire car industry. While these two cars have done a tremendous amount for Tesla, the signal that it is time to wind down their production has evidently arrived.
In the latest move to show Tesla is planning to eliminate the Model S and Model X from production, the company’s Korean arm has officially set a firm cutoff date of March 31, 2026, for new orders of both models.
This is the first time Tesla has announced a hard global deadline for the Model S and X, as after that date, only existing inventory will be available in South Korea.
The move to bring closure to the Model S and Model X aligns with CEO Elon Musk’s plans for Tesla moving forward. During the Q4 2025 Earnings Call in January, Musk said the two cars deserved an “honorable discharge” for what they have done for the company.
The long-running programs are primarily being removed so that manufacturing lines can be repurposed for high-volume manufacturing of the Optimus humanoid robot. Tesla is targeting a production rate of up to one million units each year.
The Model S and Model X being removed from Tesla’s plans is a tough choice, but it was one that was written on the wall. Sales of these premium models have declined sharply in recent years, and even with Plaid configurations that are performance-forward, the company still has had trouble getting them sold.
In 2025, the Model S and Model X together accounted for roughly 3 percent of Tesla’s global deliveries, down significantly from prior periods as competition intensified in the luxury EV segment and buyers shifted toward more affordable options like the Model 3 and Model Y.
The Model S saw sales drop over 50 percent year-over-year in some quarters, while the Model X faced similar pressures from rivals, including the Rivian R1S and BMW iX.
Despite their dwindling volume, the Model S and Model X remain technological showcases. The Plaid variants deliver blistering acceleration, advanced Full Self-Driving capability, and luxurious interiors.
The phase-out paves the way for Tesla’s strategic pivot toward autonomy, robotics, and higher-volume vehicles.
Tesla brings closure to flagship ‘sentimental’ models, Musk confirms
Fremont will continue producing the refreshed Model 3 and Model Y, ensuring the factory remains a key automotive hub while expanding into robotics. Tesla has stated that the shift is not expected to result in job losses and could increase headcount as Optimus production ramps up.
For Tesla fans, the sunset represents a bittersweet moment. The Model S, introduced in 2012, proved EVs could compete with luxury sedans, while the Falcon-wing-door Model X set new standards for family haulers. Owners can expect continued software support and service for years to come.
Many fans have pushed for the Model X to hang around due to its appeal for families.
With the two cars heading out, Tesla’s priority now becomes its future products, especially that of the Optimus robot, which is the main reason for the S/X platform’s conclusion.
Elon Musk says Tesla is developing a new vehicle: ‘Way cooler than a minivan’
Elon Musk’s $10 Trillion robot: Inside Tesla’s push to mass produce Optimus
Tesla officially begins sunset of Model S and Model X
What is Digital Optimus? The new Tesla and xAI project explained
Elon Musk’s Boring Co. Tunnel Vision Challenge ends with a surprise for Louisiana, Maryland and Dallas
