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 begins probing owners on FSD’s navigation errors with small but mighty change
Previously lumped under “Other,” these incidents made it harder for Tesla’s AI team to isolate and prioritize map-related issues in their reinforcement learning models. There was a lot of disagreement on how certain interventions should be reported.
Tesla has started probing owners on how often its Full Self-Driving suite has Navigation errors with a small but mighty change last night.
In its latest Software Update, which is Version 2026.2.9.9 featuring Full Self-Driving (Supervised) v14.3.2, Tesla has introduced a targeted improvement to how owners will report interventions.
With the initial rollout of v14.3.2, Tesla introduced a new Intervention Menu that appears when a disengagement occurs. It allowed owners to choose from four different categories: Preference, Comfort, Critical, or Other.
Tesla has voided the Other option and replaced it with a new “Navigation” choice, which seems much more ideal given the complaints owners have had about navigation. This seemingly minor UI tweak, rolled out widely in recent days, marks another step in Tesla’s ongoing effort to refine its autonomous driving stack through precise, crowdsourced data.
“Other” has been replaced with “Navigation” in the Tesla Self-Driving intervention reasons menu pic.twitter.com/mBOi3uYs8C
— Whole Mars Catalog (@wholemars) April 28, 2026
Tesla made this change in direct response to longstanding community feedback. For years, FSD users have noted that navigation errors—such as incorrect speed limits, suboptimal routes, or directing the vehicle to a building’s rear entrance instead of the main one—frequently force interventions.
Previously lumped under “Other,” these incidents made it harder for Tesla’s AI team to isolate and prioritize map-related issues in their reinforcement learning models. There was a lot of disagreement on how certain interventions should be reported:
I chose to label this Navigation error as “Critical” while testing FSD v14.3.2
Here’s why:
✅ This intervention wasn’t “preference,” as the maneuver FSD routed was illegal
✅ If a police officer saw this maneuver, it would result in a ticket https://t.co/znhHb4haAo pic.twitter.com/bZOiLwWmQa— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 23, 2026
By adding a dedicated “Navigation” label, the company can now tag disengagements more accurately, feeding cleaner data into its neural networks. This supports faster iteration on routing algorithms, map accuracy, and intent-aware navigation.
Community consensus around Tesla’s navigation system has been consistent and candid. While the end-to-end AI driving behavior in v14.x earns widespread acclaim for smoothness and safety, navigation remains FSD’s clearest Achilles’ heel.
Owners frequently cite outdated map data, failure to learn from repeated corrections, and routing decisions that feel less intuitive than Google Maps or Apple Maps. Common complaints include phantom speed-limit changes, inefficient local roads, and poor point-of-interest handling.
Tesla Summon got insanely good in FSD v14.3.2 — Navigation? Not so much
Many drivers report intervening on navigation far more often than on core driving maneuvers, with some estimating it accounts for the majority of disengagements outside of edge cases.
Long-term users note that the same mapping glitches persist across years and software versions, despite thousands of collective miles of feedback. Yet the addition of the “Navigation” option has been met with optimism. It signals Tesla’s commitment to data-driven progress and suggests navigation improvements could arrive sooner.
For a community that already logs millions of FSD miles monthly, this small change could unlock meaningful gains in reliability and user trust—potentially accelerating the path to unsupervised autonomy.
News
Tesla expands Robotaxi in a way that was long anticipated
Instead, it has to do with the consumer base it offers Robotaxi to, because it has not offered it to everyone in the past.
Tesla has expanded Robotaxi in a way that was long anticipated, and it does not have to do with a new, larger geofence in a city where it already offered its partially autonomous ride-hailing suite, or a new city altogether.
Instead, it has to do with the consumer base it offers Robotaxi to, because it has not offered it to everyone in the past.
Tesla has taken a major step forward in its autonomous ride-hailing ambitions with the official launch of the Tesla Robotaxi app for Android users. Released on the Google Play Store on April 24. Titled simply “Tesla Robotaxi,” the app is now available to download directly from Tesla.
The @Tesla Robtoaxi App has just officially launched for Android users. Go get some rides y’all!
Download: https://t.co/D2jIONXc91 pic.twitter.com/rQ6TD14zkC
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) April 24, 2026
This rollout fulfills a long-anticipated expansion that opens the service to hundreds of millions of Android smartphone users who were previously unable to access it on iOS alone.
The app delivers a streamlined, driverless ride experience powered by Tesla’s automated driving technology.
Users sign in with a Tesla Account, view the current service area map within the app, enter a destination, and receive an estimated fare and arrival time before confirming the ride. When a Model Y from the Robotaxi fleet arrives, riders confirm the license plate, enter the vehicle, fasten their seatbelt, and tap “Start Ride” on either the app or the vehicle’s touchscreen.
During the trip, passengers have access to all the same controls that iOS users do, and can adjust climate settings, seat positions, and music while tracking progress on an in-app map. The interface also allows drop-off changes or support requests if needed. After the ride, users exit, close the doors, and submit feedback.
This Android availability directly broadens the rider base for Robotaxi in its initial service areas. Unfortunately, Android users are used to being subject to delayed launches of new features available to Tesla owners.
By removing the iOS-only barrier, Tesla instantly expands the addressable market, enabling far more people to summon and use the autonomous vehicles already operating on public roads.
The move is a foundational requirement for scaling ride volume and gathering the real-world data needed to refine the unsupervised Full Self-Driving system that powers every trip.
For the Robotaxi program itself, the launch signals steady operational progress. It prepares the service for higher utilization rates as the fleet grows and supports the transition from limited early deployments to a more robust network.
Tesla expands Unsupervised Robotaxi service to two new cities
Tesla has indicated that users outside current service areas can sign up at the company’s website for future notifications, pointing to a deliberate, phased geographic rollout.
Looking ahead, the company plans to incorporate Cybercab vehicles to increase fleet capacity and efficiency while continuing to expand service territories. With the Android app now live, Tesla has removed a key adoption hurdle and positioned Robotaxi for the next phase of growth in autonomous urban transportation.
The infrastructure is now in place to support significantly larger rider demand as production and deployment accelerate.
News
UPDATE: SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy that launched a Tesla into space is back on a mission
SpaceX Falcon Heavy returns after 18 months away to deliver a satellite that only it could carry.
UPDATE: 10:29 a.m. et: SpaceX is standing down from today’s Falcon Heavy launch of the ViaSat-3 F3 mission due to unfavorable weather. A new target date will be shared once confirmed.
After an 18-month absence, SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy is returning to mission on Monday morning when it’s scheduled to lift off from Launch Complex 39A at Kennedy Space Center at 10:21 a.m. EDT.
The mission is called ViaSat-3 F3, and the heavy satellite payload needs to reach geostationary orbit, sitting 22,236 miles above Earth where its speed matches the planet’s rotation. Getting a satellite that heavy to that altitude demands more thrust than a single-core Falcon 9 can deliver.
This marks the Falcon Heavy’s 12th flight overall since its debut in February 2018, and its first since NASA’s Europa Clipper mission in October 2024.
Arguably, the most exciting element for spectators will be watching the booster recoveries in action when the two side boosters, B1072 and B1075, will attempt simultaneous landings at Landing Zone 2 and the newer Landing Zone 40 at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, while the center core will be expended over the ocean.
SpaceX wins its first MARS contract but it comes with a catch
Following satellite deployment, expected roughly five hours after launch, ViaSat-3 F3 will spend several months traveling to its final orbital slot before undergoing in-orbit testing, with service entry expected by late summer 2026
As Teslarati reported, NASA awarded SpaceX a $175.7 million contract on April 16, 2026, to launch the ESA Rosalind Franklin Mars rover aboard a Falcon Heavy no earlier than late 2028, which would mark the first time SpaceX has ever sent a payload to Mars. That contract came on top of an already deep pipeline that includes the Roman Space Telescope, the Dragonfly Saturn mission, and multiple national security payloads.
SpaceX executed 165 missions in 2025 and now accounts for approximately 85% of all global orbital launches. With Starlink surpassing 10 million subscribers and an IPO targeting a $1.75 trillion valuation still ahead, Monday’s launch is one more data point in a company that has quietly become the backbone of both commercial and government space access worldwide.
Tesla begins probing owners on FSD’s navigation errors with small but mighty change
Tesla expands Robotaxi in a way that was long anticipated
