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 plans for largest Australian Supercharger yet
The company has a 20-stall site in the city of Goulburn in New South Wales, which is an ideal location for trips between Sydney and Canberra, two major cities.
Tesla is planning to build its largest Supercharger in Australia yet, expanding on the infrastructure the company has built for electric vehicles.
The company has a 20-stall site in the city of Goulburn in New South Wales, which is an ideal location for trips between Sydney and Canberra, two major cities.
However, according to The Driven, a new Australian Supercharger is on the way, and it is going to be the biggest in the country, accounting for more than 25 stalls total. They will likely be V4 Superchargers, Tesla’s fastest piles that enable some serious range for cars that will plug in.
@LudicrousFeed Before I forget, one for tonight. Highway service centre near Mackay with 25+ charging stalls!
Website has a couple of video renders too.https://t.co/WkuklxE7tk pic.twitter.com/BxKQ8bDUZ7— ⚡chuqtas (@chuqtas) March 11, 2026
Tesla is operating 148 active Supercharger sites in Australia, with 80 of those being available to non-Tesla EVs as a part of the company’s initiative to make things accessible for all electric vehicle owners.
The expansion of Tesla Superchargers is welcome for all EV owners, especially as there are so many automakers that have access to the network. It is widely reliable and extremely dependable; it is tough to find a Supercharger location that is completely out of service.
The opening of the stalls will be welcome for the Tesla owners of Australia, especially as the Model Y continues to be a major contributor to the company’s prowess in the market.
Tesla’s sales performance in Australia showed a mixed but challenging picture in 2025, with the company delivering 28,856 new vehicles, marking a significant 24.8% decline from 38,347 units in 2024.
This represented the brand’s largest annual drop on record and the second consecutive year of decline, amid intensifying competition from Chinese EV makers like BYD and shifting buyer preferences toward SUVs. The Tesla Model Y remained a standout performer and Australia’s best-selling electric vehicle, with 22,239 deliveries, up 4.6percent year-over-year, accounting for about 77 percent of Tesla’s total sales.
The mid-year launch of the updated “Juniper” Model Y helped sustain momentum in the popular mid-size SUV segment.
In contrast, the Model 3 sedan struggled sharply, plummeting 61.3 percent to just 6,617 units, as consumers favored SUVs and faced growing options in the sedan category.
Despite the overall dip, Tesla held onto leadership in the EV segment, capturing roughly 28 percent of the BEV market. Australia’s EV market grew robustly, surpassing 156,000 sales and reaching 13 percent market share, up 38.7 percent from 2024, highlighting strong broader adoption even as Tesla faced headwinds.
Early 2026 data suggests a rebound, with EV sales nearly doubling year-over-year in February and the Model Y showing strong gains, positioning Tesla for potential recovery amid ongoing competition.
News
Tesla Model Y L gets new entertainment feature
Beyond audio quality, Immersive Sound X aligns with Tesla’s ecosystem of over-the-air updates, potentially allowing future refinements.
Tesla is including a new entertainment feature in the Model Y L, improving the vehicle even further and making it what appears to be the best configuration of the all-electric crossover globally.
Unfortunately, we in the U.S. do not yet have access to the vehicle, and the plans for it to enter the market remain up in the air, as CEO Elon Musk has said it could appear late this year. However, there is nothing concrete at this time.
Tesla’s latest enhancement to the Model Y L is a new Immersive Sound X feature, exclusive to the Model Y L.
Model YL has new sound system setting. Immersive Sound X. This is NOT on the new Y and 3 pic.twitter.com/7OpJuzyoGf
— Electric Future (@electricfuture5) March 16, 2026
It aims to transform the in-car listening experience into something truly cinematic. First introduced by Tesla China in October 2025, this advanced audio mode is now rolling out to deliveries in Australia and New Zealand, highlighting Tesla’s approach to region-specific premium upgrades.
At its core, Immersive Sound X leverages real-time sound extraction technology to create a customizable 3D soundstage. Using advanced algorithms, it analyzes audio tracks to separate direct sounds, such as vocals or lead instruments, from ambient elements like echoes and reverb.
The system then positions direct sounds front and center while diffusing ambient sounds to the side and rear speakers, simulating an expansive virtual environment. This results in a heightened sense of depth and spatial awareness, making listeners feel as if they’re in a concert hall or studio.
What sets Immersive Sound X apart from the standard Immersive Sound found in other Tesla models is its hardware dependency and enhanced processing. The Model Y L boasts an 18-speaker system with a subwoofer, compared to the 15-speaker setup, plus a subwoofer, in the Model Y Long Range’s previous premium audio configuration.
This upgrade provides more “kick” and precision, enabling finer control over the soundstage. Unlike traditional surround sound, which requires multi-channel mixes like Dolby Atmos, Immersive Sound X works with any stereo source from platforms like Spotify or Apple Music, so every owner will be able to use it.
Tesla Model Y lineup expansion signals an uncomfortable reality for consumers
You can fine-tune the experience via an adjustable immersion slider, scaling the “size” of the virtual space to personal preferences. This caters to a more custom sound.
An Auto mode intelligently adapts based on media type, whether it’s music, podcasts, or videos, ensuring optimal immersion without manual tweaks. This feature is unavailable on standard Model Y variants (with 7 or 15 speakers) or Model 3 trims, underscoring Tesla’s strategy to differentiate higher trims through superior hardware and software integration.
Beyond audio quality, Immersive Sound X aligns with Tesla’s ecosystem of over-the-air updates, potentially allowing future refinements.
For audiophiles and casual listeners alike, it elevates mundane commutes into immersive journeys, proving Tesla’s commitment to blending cutting-edge tech with user-centric design.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk teases crazy outlook for xAI against its competitors
Musk’s response was vintage hyperbole, designed to rally supporters and dismiss doubters, something his responses on social media often do.
Elon Musk has never been one to shy away from crazy timelines, massive expectations, and outrageous outlooks. However, his recent plans for xAI and where he believes it will end up compared to its competitors are sure to stimulate conversation.
In a bold and characteristic response on X, Elon Musk fired back at a recent analysis that positioned his AI venture, xAI, as lagging behind industry frontrunners.
The post, from March 14, came as a direct reply to forecaster Peter Wildeford’s assessment, which drew from benchmarks and reporting to rank AI developers.
xAI will catch up this year and then exceed them all by such a long distance in 3 years that you will need the James Webb telescope to see who is in second place
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 14, 2026
Wildeford placed Anthropic, Google, and OpenAI in a virtual tie at the top, with xAI and Meta trailing by about seven months. Chinese players like Moonshot, Deepseek, zAI, and Alibaba were estimated to be nine months behind, while France’s Mistral lagged by about a year and a half.
Musk’s response was vintage hyperbole, designed to rally supporters and dismiss doubters, something his responses on social media often do.
He claimed xAI would “catch up this year,” meaning by the end of 2026, erasing that seven-month deficit against the leaders. But he didn’t stop there.
Musk escalated his vision to 2029, predicting xAI would “exceed them all by such a long distance” that observers would need the James Webb Space Telescope, NASA’s orbiting observatory stationed about 930,000 miles from Earth, to spot whoever lands in second place. This analogy underscores Musk’s confidence in xAI’s trajectory, implying an astronomical lead that could redefine the AI landscape.
Breaking down these claims reveals Musk’s strategic optimism. First, the short-term catch-up: xAI, launched in 2023, has already released models like Grok, but recent benchmarks, including those for Grok 4.2, have shown it falling short in capabilities compared to rivals.
Anthropic’s Claude series, Google’s Gemini, and OpenAI’s GPT models dominate in areas like reasoning, coding, and multimodal tasks. Musk’s assertion suggests aggressive scaling in compute, talent, or architecture, perhaps leveraging xAI’s ties to Tesla’s Dojo supercomputers or Musk’s vast resources, to close the gap swiftly.
The longer-term dominance by 2029 paints an even more audacious picture. Musk envisions xAI not just parity but supremacy, outpacing competitors in innovation speed and model sophistication.
This could involve breakthroughs in energy-efficient training, real-world integration, like Tesla’s robotics, or ethical AI alignment, aligning with Musk’s stated goal of “understanding the universe.”
Critics, however, point to parallels with Tesla’s Full Self-Driving delays; one reply highlighted Musk’s 2023 promise of FSD readiness. Musk has made this promise for many years, and although the system has been strong and improving, it is still a ways off from the completely autonomous operation that was expected by now.
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.2.2.5 might be the most confusing release ever
Musk’s comment highlights the intensifying U.S.-centric AI race, with xAI challenging the “three-way” dominance noted by Wharton professor Ethan Mollick, whom Wildeford quoted. As geopolitical tensions rise—evident in the Chinese firms’ lag—Musk’s tease could spur investment and talent wars.
Yet, it also invites scrutiny: Will xAI deliver, or is this another telescope-needed mirage? In an industry where timelines slip but stakes soar, Musk’s words keep the spotlight on xAI’s ambitious path forward.
Tesla plans for largest Australian Supercharger yet
Tesla Model Y L gets new entertainment feature
