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.
Tesla is updating Cybertruck owners on its timeline of a massive feature that has yet to ship: Powershare with Powerwall.
Powershare is a bidirectional charging feature exclusive to Cybertruck, which allows the vehicle’s battery to act as a portable power source for homes, appliances, tools, other EVs, and more. It was announced in late 2023 as part of Tesla’s push into vehicle-to-everything energy sharing, and acting as a giant portable charger is the main advantage, as it can provide backup power during outages.
Cybertruck’s Powershare system supports both vehicle-to-load (V2L) and vehicle-to-home (V2H), making it flexible and well-rounded for a variety of applications.
However, even though the feature was promised with Cybertruck, it has yet to be shipped to vehicles. Tesla communicated with owners through email recently regarding Powershare with Powerwall, which essentially has the pickup act as an extended battery.
Powerwall discharge would be prioritized before tapping into the truck’s larger pack.
However, Tesla is still working on getting the feature out to owners, an email said:
“We’re writing to let you know that the Powershare with Powerwall feature is still in development and is now scheduled for release in mid-2026.
This new release date gives us additional time to design and test this feature, ensuring its ability to communicate and optimize energy sharing between your vehicle and many configurations and generations of Powerwall. We are also using this time to develop additional Powershare features that will help us continue to accelerate the world’s transition to sustainable energy.”
Owners have expressed some real disappointment in Tesla’s continuous delays in releasing the feature, as it was expected to be released by late 2024, but now has been pushed back several times to mid-2026, according to the email.
Foundation Series Cybertruck buyers paid extra, expecting the feature to be rolled out with their vehicle upon pickup.
Cybertruck’s Lead Engineer, Wes Morrill, even commented on the holdup:
As a Cybertruck owner who also has Powerwall, I empathize with the disappointed comments.
To their credit, the team has delivered powershare functionality to Cybertruck customers who otherwise have no backup with development of the powershare gateway. As well as those with solar…
— Wes (@wmorrill3) December 12, 2025
He said that “it turned out to be much harder than anticipated to make powershare work seamlessly with existing Powerwalls through existing wall connectors. Two grid-forming devices need to negotiate who will form and who will follow, depending on the state of charge of each, and they need to do this without a network and through multiple generations of hardware, and test and validate this process through rigorous certifications to ensure grid safety.”
It’s nice to see the transparency, but it is justified for some Cybertruck owners to feel like they’ve been bait-and-switched.
Tesla has opened its northernmost Supercharger in Fairbanks, Alaska, with eight V4 stalls located in one of the most frigid cities in the U.S.
Located just 196 miles from the Arctic Circle, Fairbanks’s average temperature for the week was around -12 degrees Fahrenheit. However, there are plenty of Tesla owners in Alaska who have been waiting for more charging options out in public.
There are only 36 total Supercharger stalls in Alaska, despite being the largest state in the U.S.
Eight Superchargers were added to Fairbanks, which will eventually be a 48-stall station. Tesla announced its activation today:
North America’s northernmost Supercharger Fairbanks, AK (8 stalls) opened to public. https://t.co/M4l04DZ6B5 pic.twitter.com/zyL6bDuA93
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) December 12, 2025
The base price per kWh is $0.43 at the Fairbanks Supercharger. Thanks to its V4 capabilities, it can charge at speeds up to 325 kW.
Despite being the northernmost Supercharger in North America, it is not even in the Top 5 northernmost Superchargers globally, because Alaska is south of Norway. The northernmost Supercharger is in Honningsvåg, Norway. All of the Top 5 are in the Scandanavian country.
Tesla’s Supercharger expansion in 2025 has been impressive, and although it experienced some early-quarter slowdowns due to V3-to-V4 hardware transitions, it has been the company’s strongest year for deployments.
🚨🚨 Tesla Supercharging had a HUGE year, and they deserve to be recognized.
🍔 Opened Tesla Diner, a drive-in movie theater with awesome, Chef-curated cuisine
🔌 Gave access to Superchargers to several EV makers, including Hyundai, Genesis, Mercedes-Benz, Kia, Lucid, Toyota,… pic.twitter.com/yYT2QEbqoW
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) December 10, 2025
Through the three quarters of 2025, the company has added 7,753 stations and 73,817 stalls across the world, a 16 percent increase in stations and an 18 percent increase in stalls compared to last year.
Tesla is on track to add over 12,000 stalls for the full year, achieving an average of one new stall every hour, an impressive statistic.
Recently, the company wrapped up construction at its Supercharger Oasis in Lost Hills, California, a 168-stall Supercharger that Tesla Solar Panels completely power. It is the largest Supercharger in the world.
News
Tesla shocks with latest Robotaxi testing move
Why Tesla has chosen to use a couple of Model S units must have a reason; the company is calculated in its engineering and data collection efforts, so this is definitely more than “we just felt like giving our drivers a change of scenery.”
Tesla Model S vehicles were spotted performing validation testing with LiDAR rigs in California today, a pretty big switch-up compared to what we are used to seeing on the roads.
Tesla utilizes the Model Y crossover for its Robotaxi fleet. It is adequately sized, the most popular vehicle in its lineup, and is suitable for a wide variety of applications. It provides enough luxury for a single rider, but enough room for several passengers, if needed.
However, the testing has seemingly expanded to one of Tesla’s premium flagship offerings, as the Model S was spotted with the validation equipment that is seen entirely with Model Y vehicles. We have written several articles on Robotaxi testing mules being spotted across the United States, but this is a first:
🚨 Tesla is using Model S vehicles fitted with LiDAR rigs to validate FSD and Robotaxi, differing from the Model Ys that it uses typically
Those Model Y vehicles have been on the East Coast for some time. These Model S cars were spotted in California https://t.co/CN9Bw5Wma8 pic.twitter.com/UE55hx5mdd
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) December 11, 2025
Why Tesla has chosen to use a couple of Model S units must have a reason; the company is calculated in its engineering and data collection efforts, so this is definitely more than “we just felt like giving our drivers a change of scenery.”
It seems to hint that Tesla could add a premium, more luxury offering to its Robotaxi platform eventually. Think about it: Uber has Uber Black, Lyft has Lyft Black. These vehicles and services are associated with a more premium cost as they combine luxury models with more catered transportation options.
Tesla could be testing the waters here, and it could be thinking of adding the Model S to its fleet of ride-hailing vehicles.
Reluctant to remove the Model S from its production plans completely despite its low volume contributions to the overall mission of transitioning the world to sustainable energy, the flagship sedan has always meant something. CEO Elon Musk referred to it, along with its sibling Model X, as continuing on production lines due to “sentimental reasons.”
However, its purpose might have been expanded to justify keeping it around, and why not? It is a cozy, premium offering, and it would be great for those who want a little more luxury and are willing to pay a few extra dollars.
Of course, none of this is even close to confirmed. However, it is reasonable to speculate that the Model S could be a potential addition to the Robotaxi fleet. It’s capable of all the same things the Model Y is, but with more luxuriousness, and it could be the perfect addition to the futuristic fleet.
Tesla updates Cybertruck owners about key Powershare feature
Tesla’s northernmost Supercharger in North America opens
