News
SpaceX Starship prototype speeding towards launch pad for first Raptor engine tests
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.
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.
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.
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.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.
The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.
One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.
Correct pricing will be going live at midnight tonight. All fees since July 2nd 2026 will be waived.
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) July 13, 2026
These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.
To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.
At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.
Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line
By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.
The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.
Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.
The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.
In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
Elon Musk’s Texas ranch to showcase the lifelong work that changed the world
