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.
News
Tesla expands Unsupervised Robotaxi service to two new cities
This expansion builds directly on Tesla’s existing operations. Robotaxi has been ramping unsupervised rides in Austin for months and maintains activity in the San Francisco Bay Area.
Tesla has taken a major step forward in its autonomous ride-hailing ambitions.
On April 18, the company’s official Robotaxi account announced that Robotaxi service is now rolling out in Dallas and Houston, Texas. The update signals the rapid scaling of unsupervised autonomous operations in the Lone Star State.
The announcement includes a compelling 14-second video captured from inside a Model Y. Shot from the passenger perspective, the footage shows the vehicle navigating suburban roads in both cities with zero driver intervention, with no Safety Monitor to be seen.
Robotaxi now rolling out in Dallas & Houston 🤠 pic.twitter.com/G3KFQwqGxB
— Tesla Robotaxi (@robotaxi) April 18, 2026
Tesla also shared geofence maps highlighting the initial service areas: a compact zone in Houston covering parts of Willowbrook and Jersey Village, and a similarly defined area in Dallas near Highland Park and central neighborhoods.
🚨 Tesla has expanded Robotaxi to two new cities: Houston and Dallas, joining Austin and the SF Bay Area as active Robotaxi areas https://t.co/S3Ck4EaGpR pic.twitter.com/N0qu0bcTyd
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 18, 2026
This expansion builds directly on Tesla’s existing operations. Robotaxi has been ramping unsupervised rides in Austin for months and maintains activity in the San Francisco Bay Area.
With Dallas and Houston now live, Texas hosts three active hubs—an impressive concentration that triples the company’s Lone Star footprint in just weeks. The move aligns with Tesla’s Q4 2025 earnings guidance, which outlined a broader H1 2026 rollout across seven U.S. cities, including Phoenix, Miami, Orlando, Tampa, and Las Vegas.
Texas offers favorable regulations, high ride-share demand, and relatively straightforward suburban-to-urban driving patterns ideal for early autonomous scaling. While initial geofences appear modest—roughly 25 square miles per city—Tesla has historically expanded these zones quickly as it gathers real-world data.
Tesla confirms Robotaxi expansion plans with new cities and aggressive timeline
Unsupervised operation marks a critical milestone: passengers can summon, ride, and exit without safety drivers, a leap beyond many competitors still requiring human oversight.
For Tesla, the implications are significant. Successful scaling in major metros could accelerate the transition to a fully driverless fleet, unlocking new revenue streams and validating years of Full Self-Driving investment.
Riders gain convenient, potentially lower-cost mobility, while the company edges closer to Elon Musk’s vision of Robotaxis transforming urban transport.
As Tesla pushes into more cities this year, today’s launch in Dallas and Houston underscores its momentum. Hopefully, Tesla will be able to expand unsupervised rides to another U.S. state soon, which will mark yet another chapter in this short-but-encouraging Robotaxi story.
News
Tesla is pushing Robotaxi features to owner cars with Spring Update
Tesla has quietly begun rolling out one of its most forward-looking Robotaxi-inspired features to existing customer vehicles.
Tesla is starting to push Robotaxi features to owner cars, and the first instances are coming as the Spring 2026 Update starts to roll out.
Tesla has quietly begun rolling out one of its most forward-looking Robotaxi-inspired features to existing customer vehicles.
With the 2026 Spring Update (version 2026.14+), the rear passenger display now features a fully interactive navigation map that works while the car is driving — a capability previously reserved for Tesla Robotaxi.
First look at Tesla’s v2026.14.1 Spring Update.
🧭Rear screen interactive map #teslaupdate #tesla #teslasrpingupdate pic.twitter.com/yH3T4U8qHp— Sergiu Mogan (@sergiumogan) April 17, 2026
Until now, Tesla’s rear displays have been largely limited to media controls, climate settings, and static route overviews. The new interactive map transforms the backseat into an active navigation hub, exactly the kind of passenger-first interface Tesla has been prototyping for its driverless fleet.
In a Robotaxi, where no one sits behind the wheel, every rider will need intuitive, real-time map access. By shipping this UI into thousands of owner cars months ahead of the Cybercab’s planned unveiling, Tesla is stress-testing the software in real-world conditions and giving loyal customers an early taste of the autonomous future.
The rollout is still in its early wave. Only a small number of vehicles have received 2026.14.1 so far, but the feature is expected to expand rapidly in the coming weeks. Owners of Model S, Model X, Model 3, Model Y, and Cybertruck are all eligible.
For buyers of the new Signature Edition Model S and X Plaid vehicles — whose deliveries begin in May — the update will likely arrive shortly after they take delivery, meaning the final chapter of Tesla’s flagship lineup will ship with cutting-edge Robotaxi preview tech baked in.
Elon Musk has long emphasized that Tesla ships supporting infrastructure well before new products launch. This rear-map rollout is a textbook example of that philosophy — quietly preparing both the software and the customer base for a world of fully driverless rides.
While the interactive map may seem like a modest convenience upgrade on the surface, its deeper purpose is unmistakable. Tesla is using its massive installed base of vehicles as a proving ground for the exact passenger experience that will define the Robotaxi era.
For current owners, it’s a free preview of tomorrow’s mobility; for the company, it’s invaluable data and real-world validation before the Cybercab hits the streets.
News
Tesla Cybertruck sales bolstered by bold Musk move, report claims
If accurate, that means nearly one in every five Cybertrucks registered in the quarter was transferred internally within Musk’s business empire. The purchases, valued at more than $100 million, have continued into 2026.
A new report from Bloomberg claims Tesla Cybertruck sales were inflated by internal buyers, meaning companies owned by CEO Elon Musk, and most notably, SpaceX.
According to a new registration data analysis, a significant portion of the fourth quarter’s Cybertruck sales came from Musk companies.
In the fourth quarter of 2025, 7,071 Cybertrucks were registered in the United States. SpaceX, Musk’s rocket and satellite company, accounted for 1,279 of those vehicles—more than 18 percent of the total. Musk’s additional ventures, including xAI, the Boring Company, and Neuralink, acquired another 60 trucks during the same period.
Tesla Cybertruck just won a rare and elusive crash safety honor
If accurate, that means nearly one in every five Cybertrucks registered in the quarter was transferred internally within Musk’s business empire. The purchases, valued at more than $100 million, have continued into 2026.
These internal sales supplemented the Cybertruck’s overall performance for the quarter, as without them, sales would have plunged 51 percent. The vehicle, which has repeatedly been called “the best product Tesla has ever made,” has fallen short of expectations due to pricing.
When first unveiled back in 2019, Tesla had a $39,990, $49,990, and $69,990 configuration for sale. Those prices inflated significantly as the truck was not released to customers until 2023. Those who had placed orders for affordable configurations were priced out.
Sam Fiorani, VP of Global Vehicle Forecasting at AutoForecast Solutions, said, “Tesla is running out of buyers for the Cybertruck.” In reality, there are probably a lot of buyers, but they simply cannot afford the truck at its current price point.
The Cybertruck was supposed to broaden Tesla’s appeal beyond its core lineup of sleek sedans and SUVs. While it has done a lot for brand notoriety, it has not lived up to its monumental expectations, and it’s simply because the truck has not been as available as most had thought.
The truck is still the best-selling electric pickup in the country, outpacing rivals like the Ford F-150 Lightning and Chevrolet Silverado EV. It is also not uncommon for companies to use their own vehicles for internal operations, like Ford using its own Transit van for Mobile Service.
However, this much inventory of Cybertrucks being purchased by Musk’s companies is not what you love to see as a fan or investor.
Tesla expands Unsupervised Robotaxi service to two new cities
Tesla is pushing Robotaxi features to owner cars with Spring Update
