Connect with us

News

SpaceX Starship prototype speeding towards launch pad for first Raptor engine tests

SpaceX's Starship factory continues to churn out and assemble components, speeding the third full-scale prototype towards its first tests and flights. (NASASpaceflight - bocachicagal)

Published

on

SpaceX continues to build full-scale Starship hardware at a jaw-dropping pace, testing the limits of rocket production to complete the fifth full-scale prototype in three months and prepare the ship for its first Raptor engine ignition tests.

This time around, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk is fairly confident that the latest Starship prototype – known as serial number 3 (SN3) – has the best chance yet of becoming the first full-scale ship to pass acceptance tests and kick off a Raptor engine static fire campaign. A step further, if said static fires go according to plan, Starship SN3 could become the first full-scale vehicle of its kind to perform controlled flight tests.

Starship SN3 will thus attempt to follow in the footsteps of Starhopper and hopefully avoid an unintentional launch debut similar to the one that destroyed Starship SN1 earlier this month. A successful Starship flight test powered by three Raptor engines would be a major bode of confidence in the upgraded rocket factory SpaceX is building in South Texas. Musk recently made it clear that setting up the machine that builds the machine is currently just as important as individual Starship tests. Thankfully, given that SpaceX is already managing to build colossal rocket prototypes in a matter of weeks for what has to be pennies on the dollar, all with a team of just a few hundred people, the next Starship test campaign is likely just a week or two away.

SpaceX’s third Starship prototype is moving quickly towards test- and flight-readiness. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

On March 9th, Musk revealed that the Starship SN2 prototype – an incomplete tank repurposed for specific testing – had passed a proof test with flying colors. SN2’s brief test campaign managed to prove that SpaceX had already fixed the weak point believed to have destroyed Starship SN1 less than two weeks prior. Featuring a redesigned engine section and thrust structure (or “thrust puck,” per Musk), the Starship SN2 test tank survived pressure testing and even made it through engine thrust simulations with the help of an industrial-scale hydraulic jack.

Transformed into a test tank, Starship SN2 successfully passed its proof tests on March 8th, paving the way for SN3+ to aim higher. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

While the tank passed its tests looking no worse for wear, the last-second design changes SpaceX had to make to rapidly perform thrust structure verification testing made it impossible to repurpose for any alternative use. Starship SN2 has thus been relegated to the scrapyard, a technical necessity but also a sign of both the program’s high rate of progress and low prototype cost. SpaceX’s Boca Chica factory has already more or less completed a new engine section for Starship SN3 and is probably just a day or two away from integrating it with the rest of the steel vehicle.

Less than three days after SpaceX’s brand new vehicle assembly building (VAB) had a single, small Starship section sat inside it, two additional sections of Starship SN3’s tank section departed their fabrication tents and were stacked on March 18th. Less than a day later, the third segment of the rocket’s tank section capped off the two that were stacked the day before. Once those three stacked sections are fully welded together to form a single, cohesive piece of steel, it will need to be stacked atop the aft tank dome and thrust structure to effectively complete Starship SN3’s tank section.

Starship SN3’s forward (top) tank dome section is pictured inside a partially-finished vertical/vehicle assembly building (VAB) on March 16th. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)
Three of four main sections of Starship SN3’s tank are pictured here on March 18th shortly before the first tank section stacking. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)
Less than 24 hours after the first SN3 stacking, three of four of the Starship’s tank segments were stacked. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)
Starship SN3’s thrust structure and aft dome was flipped on March 18th and will likely be ready for installation just a day or two from now. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

After all four sections are joined, technicians will need to install a few internal parts, but most remaining work mainly involves running wiring and plumbing for power, communications, propellant management, and pressurization. More likely than not, SpaceX replicate its Starship Mk1 and SN1 testing strategy and bring Starship SN3’s tank section to the launch pad for proof testing as soon as outfitting is complete. If the rocket passes proof testing, SpaceX can – for the first time – install functional Raptor engines on a full-scale Starship prototype and begin a crucial wet dress rehearsal (WDR) and static fire test campaign.

At the current rate of progress, SpaceX could easily be ready to transport Starship SN3 to the pad within the next week, give or take. Stay tuned for updates as the company works to quickly finish SN3 integration and move onto the testing phase.

Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.

Advertisement
-

Eric Ralph is Teslarati's senior spaceflight reporter and has been covering the industry in some capacity for almost half a decade, largely spurred in 2016 by a trip to Mexico to watch Elon Musk reveal SpaceX's plans for Mars in person. Aside from spreading interest and excitement about spaceflight far and wide, his primary goal is to cover humanity's ongoing efforts to expand beyond Earth to the Moon, Mars, and elsewhere.

Advertisement
Comments

News

Tesla’s Cybercab battery design could make robotaxis even cheaper

Tesla built the Cybercab’s battery pack with spare room for a future switch to LFP.

Published

on

By

Tesla built the Cybercab’s battery pack with empty space inside it on purpose, and the reason points to a cheaper robotaxi down the road.

Robert Sumpf, Tesla’s director of mechanical design engineering for battery modules and packs, said the extra room beside and beneath the Cybercab’s modules was left there so the company can move to lithium iron phosphate cells later. “So, we protected this pack to go to an even lower energy dense chemistry as we scale and need to bring LFP into the platform,” Sumpf said in a Cybercab deep dive with Munro Live.

The Cybercab runs on Tesla’s own 4680 cells with a nickel chemistry today. LFP cells store less energy for their size, so a straight swap would cut range. The reserved space lets Tesla add more LFP cells to make up the difference. In return, Tesla would get cells that cost less, run cooler and survive more charge cycles. LFP became the most used EV battery chemistry in the world last year.

Not all of that room was planned for a chemistry change. Lars Moravy, Tesla’s Vice President of Vehicle Engineering, said part of it exists because “we didn’t need as many batteries as we thought we did.” Tesla told Sandy Munro in early 2025 that it was targeting a Cybercab pack under 50 kWh with close to 300 miles of range.

The pack also breaks from the structural design Tesla used in some Model Y and Cybertruck builds. Instead of potting hundreds of cells into one block, the Cybercab uses four separate, individually sealed modules, so a bad module can be replaced without scrapping the whole pack. Sumpf was blunt about the older approach, giving the Model Y structural battery “a grade D” because it was hard to build and nearly impossible to repair. He estimated a fully structural pack gains about 10% more cell volume, but said “the issue is the service cost.”

Advertisement
-

That cost matters more for a car that rarely sits parked. Cybercab chief engineer Eric Earley said replacing an entire pack “before half a million miles is a killer on cost,” which is why remanufacturing and serviceability were built into the design from the start.

The same Munro Live tour produced Moravy’s admission that the Cybercab line at Giga Texas is now outpacing Robotaxi deployments, along with a look at the robotaxi’s unorthodox paint process. Tesla is aiming to deliver the first Cybercabs to outside customers by the end of 2026, though Elon Musk has said the vast majority will stay owned by Tesla and run as a transport service.

Sumpf did not give a date for an LFP version, name a cell supplier or say how a chemistry change would affect range. For now, the 4680 cars keep piling up: Texas DMV records from Tuesday list 544 Cybercabs authorized for Tesla’s Robotaxi fleet, more than the 507 Model Ys on the same roster for the first time.

Continue Reading

News

Starlink is ‘biggest competitive advantage,’ but it’s temporary, United CEO says

Published

on

Credit: United Airlines

United Airlines CEO Scott Kirby said that SpaceX’s Starlink satellite internet is its leading competitive advantage in the U.S. airline industry. However, in recent comments, while he described the service as “the biggest competitive advantage” the carrier currently holds, he also acknowledged that the edge is temporary.

“…everybody eventually is going to have high-speed low earth orbit internet connectivity. It’s going to be a must-have. We are going to have a few years of being the only airline that has it at scale, and that’s our mission,” Kirby said. Until everyone has it, United aims to capitalize on its head start by converting trial users into long-term loyal customers.

United has moved faster than its rivals on Starlink installations. As of mid-to-late October 2026, the system was on roughly 43 percent of its fleet, with plans to reach 61 percent by year-end, 87 percent by June 2027, and full fleet coverage by the end of next year.

The airline already operates more Starlink-equipped flights than the rest of the U.S. industry combined. Los Angeles International Airport is scheduled to become United’s first 100 percent Starlink hub in the first half of 2027, and the carrier’s app will display the likelihood that any given flight has the service.

Kirby has pointed to early evidence that the offering influences booking decisions. Some passengers loyal to other airlines are already switching flights for Starlink connectivity, something the airline, along with American Airlines, has tried to leverage against competing airlines. Both companies used status-match programs, and some of those customers are pursuing company-specific credit cards, which signals an intent to stay.

Once onboard, these customers encounter the airline’s broader investments in aircraft, larger seat-back screens, oversized bins, connection tools, and a mobile app that Kirby says outperforms competitors. Wi-Fi satisfaction scores on Starlink-equipped planes have been reported to be nearly double those on aircraft with other systems.

Competitors are moving slowly to do the same. Southwest Airlines began installations in 2025 and expects to complete them soon. Delta is pursuing Amazon’s Leo system, while American expects to start Starlink work in early 2027 and has not yet detailed regional-fleet plans. This timeline gap gives United a multi-year window in which it remains the only major U.S. carrier offering Starlink at scale.

Kirby has framed the strategy as pressing that advantage while simultaneously widening gaps in other technology areas so that customers who try United for the Wi-Fi remain for the overall experience.

The approach reflects a calculated bet that superior in-flight connectivity can accelerate share gains and support longer-term financial targets, including a 10 percent pre-tax margin goal.

High-speed internet is particularly valued by premium and business travelers who can work or stream reliably. As low-Earth-orbit service becomes ubiquitous, the temporary nature of the pure connectivity edge means United’s retention will depend on whether its other product and operational improvements keep pace.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Cybercab’s unorthodox paint process explained

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla Cybercab skips the traditional paint shop entirely, marking an unorthodox process for coloring the fully autonomous vehicle. However, the decision was a smart one, as it slashed factory costs, floor space utilization, and complexity, since Tesla relied on specialized alloys and in-mold coloring.

Munro Live was given the opportunity to do a factory walkthrough with Tesla Vice President of Vehicle Engineering Lars Moravy, who explained and detailed how Cybercab production at Giga Texas eliminates one of the automotive manufacturing industry’s most expensive and space-hungry elements.

A conventional paint line can cost hundreds of millions of dollars and require a million man-hours to build. Moravy framed the choice around Tesla’s core rule: “Question the requirements: why do you need paint?”

The structural answer lies in material selection. The aluminum alloys used in Cybercab’s front and rear castings do not oxidize and lose strength over time, the way many common automotive aluminum alloys do. Only the side modules, built around hot-stamped boron-steel door rings, receive an anti-corrosion e-coat, or dip coat. Front and rear modules skip coating altogether.

Model Y and Model 3 bodies, by contrast, are fully coated and painted.

Exterior colors come from the plastics shop, which Tesla engineers described as “our paint shop” for the Cybercab. Body panels are produced via reaction injection molding, referred to as RIM. Color is then mixed into a polyurethane resin at the mix head immediately before injection, so the panel emerges already colored with a Class-A surface.

Robots trim overflow to control sink marks and flow lines. The process avoids conventional spray-paint defects like orange peel and paint bleed. Scratches can still be repaired with compatible coatings that behave “basically like paint.” Because color is integral rather than a surface layer, shallow scratches do not expose a contrasting undercoat.

The secret behind Tesla’s Cybercab Gold goes well beyond just the color

Tesla has also explored related approaches, including in-mold lamination and painted films on stamped panels.

The manufacturing payoff is substantial because removing the paint shop, combined with the “unboxed” modular process that builds and tests front, rear, side, and center modules in parallel before a short final assembly, cuts factory floor space per vehicle by about 50 percent.

Final assembly itself uses only about 25 automated stations, far fewer than the typical Model Y line, and the overall line runs at about 78 percent automation, Moravy said. The approach also eliminates volatile organic compound emissions associated with traditional spray painting for these panels and shortens the coloring cycle from hours to minutes.

Cybercab’s paint strategy is clearly less about aesthetics than about systematically deleting capital-intensive, energy-heavy, and space-consuming steps once material science and process design make them unnecessary. It is a concrete example of Tesla applying first-principles questioning to one of the auto industry’s most entrenched factory requirements.

Continue Reading