

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 ramps production of its ‘new’ models at Giga Texas
The vehicles are being built at Tesla Gigafactory Texas in Austin, and there are plenty of units being built at the factory, based on a recent flyover by drone operator and plant observer Joe Tegtmeyer.

Tesla is ramping up production of its ‘new’ Model Y Standard at Gigafactory Texas just over a week after it first announced the vehicle on October 7.
Earlier this month, Tesla launched the Tesla Model 3 and Model Y “Standard,” their release of what it calls its affordable models. They are priced under $40,000, and although there was some noise surrounding the skepticism that they’re actually “affordable,” it appears things have been moving in the right direction.
The vehicles are being built at Tesla Gigafactory Texas in Austin, and there are plenty of units being built at the factory, based on a recent flyover by drone operator and plant observer Joe Tegtmeyer:
News: the @Tesla Model Y Standard production is well underway at Giga Texas today!
This consistent with what I was told to expect during the unveiling day last week!
The outbound lot had many Premium Model Y’s and @cybertruck too!
More coming soon! pic.twitter.com/WU489QKPLB
— Joe Tegtmeyer 🚀 🤠🛸😎 (@JoeTegtmeyer) October 16, 2025
The new Standard Tesla models are technically the company’s response to losing the $7,500 EV tax credit, which significantly impacts any company manufacturing electric vehicles.
However, it seems the loss of the credit is impacting others much more than it is Tesla.
As General Motors and Ford are scaling back their EV efforts because it is beginning to hurt their checkbooks, Tesla is moving forward with its roadmap to catalyze annual growth from a delivery perspective. While GM, Ford, and Stellantis are all known for their vehicles, Tesla is known for its prowess as a car company, an AI company, and a Robotics entity.
Elon Musk was right all along about Tesla’s rivals and EV subsidies
Tesla should have other vehicles coming in the next few years, especially as the Cybercab is evidently moving along with its preliminary processes, like crash testing and overall operational assessment.
It has been spotted at the Fremont Factory several times over the past couple of weeks, hinting that the vehicle could begin production sometime next year.
News
Tesla set to be impacted greatly in one of its strongest markets

Tesla could be greatly impacted in one of its strongest markets as the government is ready to eliminate a main subsidy for electric vehicles over the next two years.
In Norway, EV concentrations are among the strongest in the world, with over 98 percent of all new cars sold in September being electric powertrains. This has been a long-standing trend in the Nordic region, as countries like Iceland and Sweden are also highly inclined to buy EVs.
However, the Norwegian government is ready to abandon a subsidy program it has in place, as it has effectively achieved what it set out to do: turn consumers to sustainability.
This week, Norway’s Finance Minister, Jens Stoltenberg, said it is time to consider phasing out the benefits that are given to those consumers who choose to buy an EV.
Stoltenberg said this week (via Reuters):
“We have had a goal that all new passenger cars should be electric by 2025, and … we can say that the goal has been achieved. Therefore, the time is ripe to phase out the benefits.”
EV subsidies in Norway include reduced value-added tax (VAT) on cheaper models, lower road and toll fees, and even free parking in some areas.
The government also launched programs that would reduce taxes for companies and fleets. Individuals are also exempt from the annual circulation tax and fuel-related taxes.
In 2026, changes will already be made. Norway will lower its EV tax exemption to any vehicle priced at over 300,000 crowns ($29,789.40), down from the current 500,000, which equates to about $49,500.
This would eliminate each of the Tesla Model Y’s trim levels from tax exemption status. In 2027, the VAT exemptions will be completely removed. Not a single EV on the market will be able to help owners escape from tax-exempt status.
There is some pushback on the potential loss of subsidies and benefits, and some groups believe that the loss of the programs will regress the progress EVs have made.
Christina Bu, head of the Norwegian EV Association, said:
“I worry that sudden and major changes will make more people choose fossil-fuel cars again, and I think everyone agrees that we don’t want to go back there.”
Elon Musk
Elon Musk was right all along about Tesla’s rivals and EV subsidies

With the loss of the $7,500 Electric Vehicle Tax Credit, it looks as if Tesla CEO Elon Musk was right all along.
As the tax credit’s loss starts to take effect, car companies that have long relied on the $7,500 credit to create sales for themselves are starting to adjust their strategies for sales and their overall transition to electrification.
On Tuesday, General Motors announced it would include a $1.6 billion charge in its upcoming quarterly earnings results from its EV investments.
Ford said in late September that it expects demand for its EVs to be cut in half. Stellantis is abandoning its plan to have only EVs being produced in Europe by 2030, and Chrysler, a brand under the Stellantis umbrella, is bailing on lofty EV sales targets here in the U.S.
How Tesla could benefit from the ‘Big Beautiful Bill’ that axes EV subsidies
The tax credit and EV subsidies have achieved what many of us believed they were doing: masking car companies from the truth about their EV demand. Simply put, their products are not priced attractively enough for what they offer, and there is no true advantage to buying EVs developed by legacy companies.
These tax credits have helped companies simply compete with Tesla, nothing more and nothing less. Without them, their products likely would not have done as well as they have. That’s why these companies are now suddenly backtracking.
It’s something Elon Musk has said all along.
Back in January, during the Q4 and Full Year 2024 Earnings Call, Musk said:
“I think it would be devastating for our competitors and for Tesla slightly. But, long term, it probably actually helps Tesla, that would be my guess.”
In July of last year, Musk said on X:
“Take away all the subsidies. It will only help Tesla.”
Take away the subsidies. It will only help Tesla.
Also, remove subsidies from all industries!
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 16, 2024
Over the past few years, Tesla has started to lose its market share in the U.S., mostly because more companies have entered the EV manufacturing market and more models are being offered.
Nobody has been able to make a sizeable dent in what Tesla has done, and although its market share has gotten smaller, it still holds nearly half of all EV sales in the U.S.
Tesla’s EV Market Share in the U.S. By Year
-
- 2020 – 79%
- 2021 – 72%
- 2022 – 62%
- 2023 – 55%
- 2024 – 49%
As others are adjusting to what they believe will be tempered demand for their EVs, Tesla has just reported its strongest quarter in company history, with just shy of half a million deliveries.
Will Tesla thrive without the EV tax credit? Five reasons why they might
Although Tesla benefited from the EV tax credit, particularly last quarter, some believe it will have a small impact since it has been lost. The company has many other focuses, with its main priority appearing to be autonomy and AI.
One thing is for sure: Musk was right.
-
News15 hours ago
Tesla exec hints at FSD Mad Max mode’s killer feature
-
News1 day ago
Tesla launches ‘Mad Max’ Full Self-Driving Speed Profile, its fastest yet
-
News1 day ago
Tesla just teased something crazy with the next Full Self-Driving update
-
Elon Musk7 hours ago
Elon Musk was right all along about Tesla’s rivals and EV subsidies
-
Elon Musk2 days ago
Starship’s next chapter: SpaceX eyes tower catch after flawless Flight 11
-
News2 days ago
Tesla reportedly places large order for robot parts, hinting that Optimus V3 design is all but finalized
-
News1 day ago
Tesla makes big move with its Insurance program
-
News9 hours ago
Tesla ownership without home charging: Here’s how it’s done