News
SpaceX Starship prototype returns to factory after simulated Raptor testing
A SpaceX Starship prototype that could become the first to launch into space has returned to the company’s Starbase rocket factory after completing a series of thorough proof tests.
Starship S24’s test campaign got off to a rough start when the roughly nine-meter (30 ft) wide, 50-meter (~165 ft) tall rocket blew a high-pressure pipe during its very first test – a generally benign ‘pneumatic proof.’ While it appears that most of the ship passed the test, the burst pipe damaged a section of the heat shield and took several days of continuous work to repair and replace. With that hiccup behind it, however, Ship 24 appears to have performed excellently during the next two phases.
On June 1st, the ship fully passed pneumatic proof testing on the second try. On June 2nd, it completed its first cryogenic proof test, referring to the process of filling and pressurizing Starship’s tanks with liquid nitrogen – ultra-cold like its methane and oxygen propellant but without the risk of fire or explosion. Once the basics were out of the way, Ship 24 was cleared for installation on one of two of SpaceX’s suborbital Starship test and launch pads. Over the course of about two months, Pad A was significantly modified both to support Ship 24’s upgraded design and to put it to the test by using giant hydraulic rams to simulate the thrust of Raptor engines.
Ship 24 was installed on the modified mount on June 4th, just 12 hours after completing its first cryoproof. On June 6th and 7th, SpaceX then put the prototype through another pair of cryogenic proof tests, both of which appeared to be completed without issue on the first try. The first test even saw Ship 24 use its nose vents, suggesting that SpaceX may have filled and pressurized both its main tanks and a smaller pair of landing propellant or ‘header’ tanks.
At some point during either or both of the Pad A cryoproofs, it’s believed that the mount’s hydraulic rams were used to test Ship 24’s upgraded aft end by simulating the thrust of six Raptor engines. Like Ship 20, Ship 24 will eventually be outfitted with three smaller sea level-optimized Raptors and three larger vacuum-optimized Raptors. However, Ship 24 will be the first Starship to use new Raptor 2 engines, which are capable of generating almost 25% more thrust. At full throttle, Ship 24 could theoretically produce almost 1400 tons (~3.1M lbf) of thrust at sea level, just shy of twice the thrust of an entire Falcon 9 booster. Starship will be the most powerful orbital spacecraft in history.
First, though, the rocket needs engines. After completing all three cryoproof tests without apparent issue, SpaceX removed Ship 24 from Pad A and transported it back to the Starbase factory on June 9th. While it’s not actually clear if those tests were fully successful, the general assumption is that SpaceX returned the prototype to the factory to fill gaps in its heat shield; complete its aerocovers and raceway; and, most importantly, install six Raptor 2 engines.
If that is the case, Ship 24’s second trip to the launch site could be for wet dress rehearsal and static fire testing – a campaign that could ultimately qualify the ship for Starship’s first orbital launch attempt.
News
Tesla Sweden appeals after grid company refuses to restore existing Supercharger due to union strike
The charging site was previously functioning before it was temporarily disconnected in April last year for electrical safety reasons.
Tesla Sweden is seeking regulatory intervention after a Swedish power grid company refused to reconnect an already operational Supercharger station in Åre due to ongoing union sympathy actions.
The charging site was previously functioning before it was temporarily disconnected in April last year for electrical safety reasons. A temporary construction power cabinet supplying the station had fallen over, described by Tesla as occurring “under unclear circumstances.” The power was then cut at the request of Tesla’s installation contractor to allow safe repair work.
While the safety issue was resolved, the station has not been brought back online. Stefan Sedin, CEO of Jämtkraft elnät, told Dagens Arbete (DA) that power will not be restored to the existing Supercharger station as long as the electric vehicle maker’s union issues are ongoing.
“One of our installers noticed that the construction power had been backed up and was on the ground. We asked Tesla to fix the system, and their installation company in turn asked us to cut the power so that they could do the work safely.
“When everything was restored, the question arose: ‘Wait a minute, can we reconnect the station to the electricity grid? Or what does the notice actually say?’ We consulted with our employer organization, who were clear that as long as sympathy measures are in place, we cannot reconnect this facility,” Sedin said.
The union’s sympathy actions, which began in March 2024, apply to work involving “planning, preparation, new connections, grid expansion, service, maintenance and repairs” of Tesla’s charging infrastructure in Sweden.
Tesla Sweden has argued that reconnecting an existing facility is not equivalent to establishing a new grid connection. In a filing to the Swedish Energy Market Inspectorate, the company stated that reconnecting the installation “is therefore not covered by the sympathy measures and cannot therefore constitute a reason for not reconnecting the facility to the electricity grid.”
Sedin, for his part, noted that Tesla’s issue with the Supercharger is quite unique. And while Jämtkraft elnät itself has no issue with Tesla, its actions are based on the unions’ sympathy measures against the electric vehicle maker.
“This is absolutely the first time that I have been involved in matters relating to union conflicts or sympathy measures. That is why we have relied entirely on the assessment of our employer organization. This is not something that we have made any decisions about ourselves at all.
“It is not that Jämtkraft elnät has a conflict with Tesla, but our actions are based on these sympathy measures. Should it turn out that we have made an incorrect assessment, we will correct ourselves. It is no more difficult than that for us,” the executive said.
Elon Musk
Music City Loop could highlight The Boring Company’s real disruption
The real story behind the tunneling startup’s Nashville tunnel project is the company’s targeted $25 million per mile construction cost.
Recent commentary on social media has highlighted what could very well prove to be The Boring Company’s real disruption.
The analysis was shared by tech watcher Aakash Gupta on social media platform X, where he argued that the real story behind the tunneling startup’s Nashville tunnel project is the company’s targeted $25 million per mile construction cost.
According to Gupta’s breakdown, Nashville’s 2018 light rail proposal was priced at roughly $200 million per mile. New York’s East Side Access project reportedly cost about $3.5 billion per mile, while Los Angeles Metro expansion projects have approached $1 billion per mile.
By comparison, The Boring Company has stated it can construct 13 miles of twin tunnels in the Music City Loop for between $240 million and $300 million total. That implies a cost near $25 million per mile, or roughly a 95% reduction from industry averages cited in the post.
Several technical departures from conventional tunneling allow the Boring Company to lower its costs, from its smaller 12-foot diameter tunnels to its fully electric Prufrock machines that are designed to mine continuously with no personnel inside the tunnel and their capability to “porpoise” for easy launch and retrieval.
Tesla and Space CEO Elon Musk responded to the post on X, stating simply that “Tunnels are so underrated.”
The Boring Company has seen some momentum as of late, with the company recently signing a construction contract in Dubai and the Universal Orlando Loop progressing. Recent reports have also pointed to tunnels potentially being constructed to solve traffic congestion issues near the Giga Nevada area.
While The Boring Company’s tunnels have so far been used for Loop systems publicly for now, Elon Musk recently noted that the tunneling startup’s underground passages would not be limited only to ride-hailing vehicles.
In a reply to a post on X which discussed the specifications of the Music City Loop, Musk clarified that “any fully autonomous electric cars can use the tunnels.” This suggests that vehicles potentially running systems like FSD Supervised, even if they are not Teslas, could be used in systems like the Music City Loop in the future.
Elon Musk
SpaceX IPO could push Elon Musk’s net worth past $1 trillion: Polymarket
The estimates were shared by the official Polymarket Money account on social media platform X.
Recent projections have outlined how a potential $1.75 trillion SpaceX IPO could generate historic returns for early investors. The projections suggest the offering would not only become the largest IPO in history but could also result in unprecedented windfalls for some of the company’s key investors.
The estimates were shared by the official Polymarket Money account on social media platform X.
As noted in a Polymarket Money analysis, Elon Musk invested $100 million into SpaceX in 2002 and currently owns approximately 42% of the company. At a $1.75 trillion valuation following SpaceX’s potential $1.75 trillion IPO, that stake would be worth roughly $735 billion.
Such a figure would dramatically expand Musk’s net worth. When combined with his holdings in Tesla Inc. and other ventures, a public debut at that level could position him as the world’s first trillionaire, depending on market conditions at the time of listing.
The Bloomberg Billionaires Index currently lists Elon Musk with a net worth of $666 billion, though a notable portion of this is tied to his TSLA stock. Tesla currently holds a market cap of $1.51 trillion, and Elon Musk’s currently holds about 13% to 15% of the company’s outstanding common stock.
Founders Fund, co-founded by Peter Thiel, invested $20 million in SpaceX in 2008. Polymarket Money estimates the firm owns between 1.5% and 3% of the private space company. At a $1.75 trillion valuation, that range would translate to approximately $26.25 billion to $52.5 billion in value.
That return would represent one of the most significant venture capital outcomes in modern Silicon Valley history, with a growth of 131,150% to 262,400%.
Alphabet Inc., Google’s parent company, invested $900 million into SpaceX in 2015 and is estimated to hold between 6% and 7% of the private space firm. At the projected IPO valuation, that stake could be worth between $105 billion and $122.5 billion. That’s a growth of 11,566% to 14,455%.
Other major backers highlighted in the post include Fidelity Investments, Baillie Gifford, Valor Equity Partners, Bank of America, and Andreessen Horowitz, each potentially sitting on multibillion-dollar gains.
Tesla Sweden appeals after grid company refuses to restore existing Supercharger due to union strike
Music City Loop could highlight The Boring Company’s real disruption
