News
SpaceX Starship prototype in limbo after engine test lights rocket on fire
The fate of SpaceX’s fourth full-scale Starship prototype appears to be in limbo after a third (seemingly successful) engine ignition test unintentionally caught the rocket on fire.
Now more than 12 hours after Starship SN4 fired up its new Raptor engine, the ~30m (~100 ft) tall, 9m (~30 ft) wide prototype is apparently trapped with one or both of its propellant tanks still partially filled with liquid (or gaseous) methane and/or oxygen. An initial road closure scheduled from noon to 6pm local quickly came and went and SpaceX and Cameron County Texas have since modified the paperwork, extending the closure a full 24 hours. In other words, SpaceX has reason to believe that Starship SN4 may continue to be unsafe (i.e. pressurized) as many as ~30 hours after it technically completed its third static fire test – extremely unusual, to say the least.
There’s only one obvious conclusion to draw. Whether it was something invisible to the public eye or damage related to the off-nominal fire that burned for some 15 minutes after Raptor shut down, SpaceX appears – to some extent – to have lost control of Starship SN4.
At the moment, it’s unclear what is wrong and what SpaceX is attempting to do to resolve the problem. Based on photos of Starship SN4 taken before the fire, there is good news and bad news from what can be publicly ascertained. Controlled from the ground by unprotected wires strung up and down the rocket and connected at its base, the uncontrolled fire that burned in at least two locations around Starship’s aft may have severed some or all of those critical connections.
That would render Starship – potentially perfectly healthy and operational – almost entirely uncontrollable, while also potentially removing SpaceX’s access to telemetry. In other words, the company may currently have no idea how pressurized all or part of Starship SN4 is and may also have little to no control of some or all of the rocket. For that to be true, Starship SN4 would, however, have to have less than fully redundant control hardware. To perform hops, for example, the ship would need both wired and radio links capable of sending telemetry and receiving commands to remain both on the ground and after liftoff.
It’s possible that Starship SN4 has the necessary hardware installed but that it wasn’t activated for the static fire test (think “Starship will never leave the ground, why would we need to enable wireless controls?”). It’s also possible that the blown pipe and methane leak that appeared to cause the secondary fire damaged crucial propellant management hardware (valves, pumps, etc.) or was just a symptom of an even worse overpressure event that damaged or destroyed multiple such systems.
Given that safety is almost certainly the priority, chances are that some combination of fairly mild hardware failure and telemetry/control loss has left SpaceX with just enough uncertainty that it can’t risk sending technicians to the launch site to inspect the damage and reestablish control. As a result, the only option left is to quite literally sit and wait until it’s once again safe to approach the rocket. Thankfully, at this point, the risk of the mystery problem actually destroying Starship SN4 is very low. If, as it appears, only its methane tank is affected, leaving some unknown quantity of latent liquid methane trapped inside, it’s possible that waiting will actually solve the problem and safe the rocket.
The fact that Starship hasn’t exploded yet strongly implies either that the amount of propellant trapped is minuscule or that the vast majority of SN4’s propellant management systems (including vents) remain functional. Assuming that’s the case, any remaining cryogenic propellant will eventually boil into gas, increasing the pressure inside Starship’s tanks, while those tanks will continue to vent to prevent an explosion or rupture. Eventually, Starship SN4 will be empty once again and SpaceX will be able to approach the rocket to regain control and begin inspections and repairs.
Regardless, after such an unintentionally eventful static fire test, it’s extremely unlikely that SN4 will be ready for its inaugural flight test within the next few days. Stay tuned for updates as SpaceX works to regain control over the fourth full-scale Starship prototype.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
News
Tesla Supercharger vandalized with frozen cables and anti-Musk imagery amid Sweden union dispute
The incident comes amid Tesla’s ongoing labor dispute with IF Metall.
Tesla’s Supercharger site in Vansbro, Sweden, was vandalized during peak winter travel weeks. Images shared to local media showed frozen charging cables and a banner reading “Go home Elon,” which was complete with a graphic of Musk’s controversial gesture.
The incident comes amid Tesla’s ongoing labor dispute with IF Metall, which has been striking against the company for more than two years over collective bargaining agreements, as noted in a report from Expressen.
Local resident Stefan Jakobsson said he arrived at the Vansbro charging station to find a board criticizing Elon Musk and accusing Tesla of strikebreaking. He also found the charging cables frozen after someone seemingly poured water over them.
“I laughed a little and it was pretty nicely drawn. But it was a bit unnecessary,” Jakobsson said. “They don’t have to do vandalism because they’re angry at Elon Musk.”
The site has seen heavy traffic during Sweden’s winter sports holidays, with travelers heading toward Sälen and other mountain destinations. Jakobsson said long lines formed last weekend, with roughly 50 Teslas and other EVs waiting to charge.
Tesla Superchargers in Sweden are typically open to other electric vehicle brands, making them a reliable option for all EV owners.
Tesla installed a generator at the location after sympathy strikes from other unions disrupted power supply to some stations. The generator itself was reportedly not working on the morning of the incident, though it is unclear whether that was connected to the protest.
The dispute between Tesla and IF Metall centers on the company’s refusal to sign a collective agreement covering Swedish workers. The strike has drawn support from other unions, including Seko, which has taken steps affecting electricity supply to certain Tesla facilities. Tesla Sweden, for its part, has insisted that its workers are already fairly compensated and it does not need a collective agreement,
Jesper Pettersson, press spokesperson for IF Metall, criticized Tesla’s use of generators to keep charging stations running. Still, IF Metall emphasized that it strongly distances itself from the vandalism incident at the Vansbro Supercharger.
“We think it is remarkable that instead of taking the easy route and signing a collective agreement for our members, they are choosing to use every possible means to get around the strike,” Pettersson said.
News
Tesla Cybertruck owner credits FSD for saving life after freeway medical emergency
The incident was shared by the Tesla owner on social media platform X, where it caught the attention of numerous users, including Tesla CEO Elon Musk.
A Tesla Cybertruck owner has credited Full Self-Driving (FSD) Supervised for saving his life after he experienced a medical emergency on the freeway.
The incident was shared by the Tesla owner on social media platform X, where it caught the attention of numerous users, including Tesla CEO Elon Musk.
In a post on X, Cybertruck owner Rishi Vohra wrote that he had unintentionally fasted for 17 hours, taken medication, and experienced what he described as a severe allergic reaction while driving.
“What started as a normal drive turned terrifying fast. My body shut down. I passed out while driving on the freeway, mid-conversation with my wife on the phone,” he wrote.
Vohra stated that his Tesla was operating with FSD Supervised engaged at the time. According to his account, the Cybertruck detected that he had lost consciousness using its driver monitoring system, slowed down, activated hazard lights, and safely pulled over to the shoulder.
“Thank God my Tesla had Full Self-Driving engaged. It detected I lost consciousness (thanks to the driver monitoring system), immediately slowed, activated hazards, and safely pulled over to the shoulder. No crash. No danger to anyone else on the road,” Vohra wrote.
The Cybertruck owner added that his wife used Life360 to alert emergency services after hearing him go silent during their call. He said responders located him within five minutes. After being attended to, Vohra stated that the vehicle then drove him to the emergency room after he refused to leave his truck on the freeway.
“So the Tesla autonomously drove me the rest of the way to the ER. I walked in, got admitted, and they stabilized me overnight,” he wrote.
He later posted that he was being discharged and thanked Tesla and Elon Musk. Musk replied to the post, writing, “Glad you’re ok!” The official Tesla X account also reposted Vohra’s story with a heart emoji.
Tesla recently published updated safety data of vehicles operating with FSD (Supervised) engaged. As per Tesla’s latest North America figures, vehicles operating with FSD (Supervised) engaged recorded one major collision every 5,300,676 miles. The U.S. average is one major collision every 660,164 miles.
Considering the experience of the Cybertruck owner, Tesla’s safety data does seem to hold a lot of water. A vehicle that is manually driven would have likely crashed or caused a pileup if its driver lost consciousness in the middle of the freeway, after all.
News
Tesla Cyberbeast price drops to less than $100k but loses Luxe package with FSD
The change adjusts the truck’s positioning in the high-performance premium EV pickup truck segment, where several rivals now command six-figure price tags.
Tesla has reduced the price of the Cyberbeast to below $99,990, but the update also removes a compelling feature set from the vehicle.
The change adjusts the truck’s positioning in the high-performance premium EV pickup truck segment, where several rivals now command six-figure price tags.
Prior to its price adjustment, the Cyberbeast was listed for $114,990. However, the vehicle’s prior configuration included a Luxe package that bundled features such as Full Self-Driving Supervised and other premium inclusions. That package is no longer listed as part of the Cyberbeast.
For its sub $100,000 price, the Cyberbeast offers 325 miles of estimated range, a 0-60 mph time of 2.6 seconds, a payload capacity of 2,271 lbs with the Cyber Wheel, and Powershare.
Interestingly enough, the Cyberbeast now undercuts some of its most powerful competitors with its updated price. The Rivian R1T Quad, for example, starts at $116,900, though the R1T has more range at 374 miles per charge, and it is also a bit faster with a 0-60 mph time of 2.5 seconds.
Other rivals include the GMC Hummer EV 3X Omega Edition Truck, which has a starting MSRP of approximately $148,000 before dealer markups, the Chevy Silverado EV LT Max Range, which starts at over $91,000 before dealer markups, and the GMC Sierra EV Denali Max, which starts at about $101,000.
Considering that rivals like the Rivian R1T Quad, Chevy Silverado EV LT Max Range, and GMC Sierra EV Denali Max outgun the Cyberbeast in raw range, the Cyberbeast’s competitiveness will likely rely on its Full Self Driving Supervised system, which allows it to navigate inner city streets and highways.
For $99 per month, the Cyberbeast practically becomes a self-driving vehicle, and that is something that its rivals cannot match, at least for now.
Tesla Supercharger vandalized with frozen cables and anti-Musk imagery amid Sweden union dispute
Tesla Cybertruck owner credits FSD for saving life after freeway medical emergency
