News
SpaceX to put custom Starship propellant storage tanks through first trial
In the latest twist in the saga of SpaceX’s custom-built Starship launch pad propellant storage tanks, the company appears to have retroactively decided to build small prototype meant solely for testing.
Known as a ‘test tank,’ the relatively small steel structure was fairly rapidly assembled from parts of an older Ground Support Equipment (GSE) tank scrapped in July over the last week or so. SpaceX completed the first Starship-derived propellant storage tank in April 2021 and rapidly rolled that tank (GSE1) and a second (GSE2) from the build site to the orbital launch pad just a few weeks apart. Less than a month after that, SpaceX also completed GSE tank #3, though things seemingly devolved into chaos immediately thereafter.
Only three months later would GSE3 finally be transported to – and installed on a concrete mount at – Starship’s first orbital launch site, and only after a number of structural modifications and in the footsteps of GSE tanks #5 and #6. Little is known about why SpaceX’s custom GSE tank production faltered so soon after it began, why none of the five Starship-sized tanks installed at the orbital pad have been fully plumbed or subjected to any kind of testing, or why structural modifications were seemingly required after the fact. However, it’s safe to say that SpaceX’s brand new GSE ‘test tank’ is now at the center of the mystery.
Thankfully, at minimum, the rapid appearance of SpaceX’s first GSE test tank returns some level of familiarity to the brief but chaotic history of Starship’s orbital launch pad propellant tanks. Test tanks are nothing new and have been an integral part of Starship development since Test Tank 1 first headed to SpaceX’s suborbital launch (and test) facilities in January 2020. In the 20 months since, SpaceX has built and tested seven small test tanks, several of which didn’t survive.
Whether intentionally destroyed or not, each test tank explicitly helped SpaceX qualify new manufacturing techniques, different materials, and different skin thickness and generally gather data more quickly and cheaply than full-scale prototypes would allow. Most recently, for example, SpaceX seemingly successfully tested a Super Heavy booster test tank, subjecting the prototype to cryogenic liquid nitrogen and using hydraulic rams to simulate the thrust of nine Raptor engines on an unproven disk-like thrust structure.
Now, almost as if SpaceX snapped out of a trance and remembered the utility of test tanks, the company has assembled a subscale GSE prototype presumably meant to verify that its custom-built propellant storage tanks can handle a set of conditions significantly different from the Starships they’re derived from. In this case, that GSE tank was quite literally built from scrapped sections of GSE tank #4. In fact, the top half (forward dome section) was quite literally cut off of GSE4 after the tank was scrapped last month for unknown reasons.
Over the last several months, while GSE tank production and installation took an unexpected hiatus, SpaceX workers slowly but surely welded steel rings (stiffeners) to the exterior of GSE1, GSE2, and GSE3. When GSE5 and GSE6 eventually headed to the pad, they left with those stiffeners already installed, implying that whatever tripped SpaceX up was likely structural. The GSE4 test tank also includes external stiffeners along each circumferential weld (where rings were stacked or domes joined).
At the same time as SpaceX was (or wasn’t, for several months) building its own GSE tanks, contractors normally tasked with assembling water towers and storage tanks in situ built eight massive 12m (~40 ft) wide tanks of their own. Deemed “cryo shells,” much like their name suggests, those tanks are meant to fully enclose SpaceX’s GSE tanks. SpaceX will use those shells to insulate their thin, single-walled steel propellant tanks, thus keeping their cryogenic contents cryogenic for as long as possible. How they’ll be insulated is unclear, though.
Based on the seemingly retroactive decision to strengthen the exterior of those GSE tanks, the general consensus as of late is that SpaceX wants to pull at least a partial vacuum in the gap between shell and tank. It’s also possible that SpaceX will do the opposite and pressurize that gap (as much as possible) with an insulative gas like nitrogen. Extra confusion comes from the fact that Starship tanks are technically designed to support a literal spacecraft (operating in a near-total vacuum) without the need for external stiffeners.
Additionally, it’s fairly clear that SpaceX hasn’t built a custom subscale cryoshell or concrete installation pad for its GSE4 test tank, meaning that it will really only be useful for testing some of the loads operational GSE tanks will experience inside their sleeves. Additionally, given that SpaceX has already completed six of the orbital pad’s seven GSE tanks and all seven of their cryosleeves, the discovery of any significant issues during GSE4 testing could easily trigger months of rework and delays. With any luck, though, GSE4 will sail through an imminent test campaign, clearing the way for SpaceX to finish plumbing, sleeving, and activating Starship’s first orbital launch site tank farm.
News
Tesla Model 3 and Model Y earn Euro NCAP Best in Class safety awards
“The company’s best-selling Model Y proved the gold standard for small SUVs,” Euro NCAP noted.
Tesla won dual categories in the Euro NCAP Best in Class awards, with the Model 3 being named the safest Large Family Car and the Model Y being recognized as the safest Small SUV.
The feat was highlighted by Tesla Europe & Middle East in a post on its official account on social media platform X.
Model 3 and Model Y lead their respective segments
As per a press release from the Euro NCAP, the organization’s Best in Class designation is based on a weighted assessment of four key areas: Adult Occupant, Child Occupant, Vulnerable Road User, and Safety Assist. Only vehicles that achieved a 5-star Euro NCAP rating and were evaluated with standard safety equipment are eligible for the award.
Euro NCAP noted that the updated Tesla Model 3 performed particularly well in Child Occupant protection, while its Safety Assist score reflected Tesla’s ongoing improvements to driver-assistance systems. The Model Y similarly stood out in Child Occupant protection and Safety Assist, reinforcing Tesla’s dual-category win.
“The company’s best-selling Model Y proved the gold standard for small SUVs,” Euro NCAP noted.
Euro NCAP leadership shares insights
Euro NCAP Secretary General Dr. Michiel van Ratingen said the organization’s Best in Class awards are designed to help consumers identify the safest vehicles over the past year.
Van Ratingen noted that 2025 was Euro NCAP’s busiest year to date, with more vehicles tested than ever before, amid a growing variety of electric cars and increasingly sophisticated safety systems. While the Mercedes-Benz CLA ultimately earned the title of Best Performer of 2025, he emphasized that Tesla finished only fractionally behind in the overall rankings.
“It was a close-run competition,” van Ratingen said. “Tesla was only fractionally behind, and new entrants like firefly and Leapmotor show how global competition continues to grow, which can only be a good thing for consumers who value safety as much as style, practicality, driving performance, and running costs from their next car.”
News
Tesla is shifting FSD to a subscription-only model, confirms Elon Musk
Tesla CEO Elon Musk confirmed the upcoming update in a post on social media platform X.
Tesla will be ending one-time purchases of its Full Self-Driving (FSD) system after Valentine’s Day, transitioning the feature to a monthly subscription-only model.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk confirmed the upcoming update in a post on social media platform X.
No more FSD one-time purchases
As per Elon Musk in his post on X, “Tesla will stop selling FSD after Feb 14. FSD will only be available as a monthly subscription thereafter.” This marks a shift in how Tesla monetizes its FSD system, which can now be purchased for a one-time fee or accessed through a monthly subscription.
FSD’s subscription model has been $99 per month in the United States, while its one-time purchase option is currently priced at $8,000. FSD’s one-time purchase price has swung wildly in recent years, reaching $15,000 in September 2022. At the time, FSD was proficient, but its performance was not on par with v14. This made its $15,000 upfront price a hard sell for consumers.
Tesla’s move to a subscription-only model could then streamline how the company sells FSD. It also lowers the entry price for the system, as even price-conscious drivers would likely be able to justify FSD’s $99 monthly subscription cost during periods when long-distance travel is prevalent, like the holidays.
Musk’s compensation plan and FSD subscription targets
Tesla’s shift to a subscription-only FSD model comes amidst Musk’s 2025 CEO Performance Award, which was approved by Tesla shareholders at the 2025 Annual Shareholders Meeting with roughly 75% support. Under the long-term compensation plan, Musk must achieve a series of ambitious operational milestones, including 10 million active FSD subscriptions, over the next decade for his stock awards to vest.
The 2025 CEO Performance Award’s structure ties Musk’s potential compensation to Tesla’s aggressive targets that span market capitalization, vehicle deliveries, robotics, and software adoption. Apart from his 10-million active FSD subscription target, Musk’s compensation is also tied to Tesla producing 20 million vehicles cumulatively, delivering 1 million Tesla bots, and having 1 million Robotaxis in operation. He must also lead Tesla to a market cap of $8.5 trillion.
If successful, Elon Musk’s 2025 CEO Performance Award could make him the world’s first trillionaire. It could also help Tesla become the world’s most valuable company by market cap by a notable margin.
Tesla is planning for a new 300+ stall Supercharger station that will be an expansion of an existing facility, and the company is planning to add a surprise for the Semi.
The Firebaugh, California Supercharger is currently 72 Superchargers, but Tesla filed for an expansion that will add 232 additional plugs for passenger vehicles, and it also plans to add 16 Semichargers.
This will be the biggest Supercharger station Tesla will have to date, just months after it finished the Supercharger Oasis in Lost Hills, California, which has 168 stalls. This will have 304 total Supercharger stalls, and then the additional 16 Megachargers.
🚨 This Supercharger station will have 304 total stalls and 16 Semichargers following this expansion
Absolutely INSANE size 🔥
This is located on I-5, so many semis will be traveling along this route https://t.co/hM9hdLcWwg
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) January 13, 2026
The Firebaugh Supercharger is located on I-5, which is a major reason for why Tesla has chosen the location for additional Megacharger plug-ins, as Tesla Semi Program Manager Dan Priestley said on X earlier today.
Lots of trucks to electrify on I-5
— Dan Priestley (@danWpriestley) January 13, 2026
The project was revealed by MarcoRP, a Supercharger tracker.
The expansion is a massive signal for charging demand, especially as Tesla’s Superchargers are opened to numerous automakers and are no longer exclusive to the company’s EVs. Additionally, the installation of Megachargers is a good sign to come for the Tesla Semi program, which aims to truly ramp up this year.
Tesla plans to launch production of the Semi later this year.
It could also mean Tesla is going to expand its footprint of large-scale Supercharger projects in the coming years, which would be a big boost as EV adoption continues to soar in the United States.
Tesla Model 3 and Model Y earn Euro NCAP Best in Class safety awards
Tesla is shifting FSD to a subscription-only model, confirms Elon Musk
