

News
SpaceX Starship prototype ignites six engines, starts major brush fire
SpaceX has successfully ignited all six engines on its latest Starship prototype, taking a significant step towards ensuring that the upper stage will be ready for the rocket’s first orbital launch attempt.
Unfortunately, the same successful static fire of a Starship upper stage – potentially producing almost twice as much thrust as the booster of SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket – scattered superheated debris hundreds of meters away, igniting a major brush fire. It’s not the first major fire caused by Starship activities in South Texas, and it likely won’t be the last.
Starship S24 completed its first successful static fire on August 9th, igniting two Raptor engines. Several unsuccessful attempts to test more engines followed throughout the rest of the month, and SpaceX ultimately decided to replace one of Starship S24’s three Raptor Vacuum engines in early September before trying again. After workers installed the new engine and buttoned up Ship 24, the stars eventually aligned on September 8th.
Kicking off the test, SpaceX pumped several hundred tons of liquid oxygen (LOx) and a much smaller quantity of liquid methane (LCH4) fuel into Ship 24 in about 90 minutes, producing a crisp layer of frost wherever the cryogenic liquids touched the skin of the rocket’s uninsulated steel tanks. No frost formed on Starship’s upper methane tank, implying that SpaceX only loaded methane fuel into internal ‘header’ tanks meant to store propellant for landings. The hundreds of tons of liquid oxygen, then, were likely meant as ballast, reducing the maximum stress Starship could exert on the test stand holding it to the ground.
That potential stress is substantial. Outfitted with upgraded Raptor 2 engines, Starship S24 could have produced up to 1380 tons (~3M lbf) thrust when it ignited all six for the first time at 4:30 pm CDT. On top of smashing the record for most thrust produced during a Starbase rocket test, Ship 24’s engines burned for almost 8 seconds, making it one of the longest static fires ever performed on a Starship test stand.
Several brush fires were visible almost immediately after clouds of dust and steam cleared. More likely than not, the combination of the extreme force, heat, and burn duration likely obliterated the almost entirely unprotected concrete surface below Ship 24. Despite continuous evidence that all Starship static fire operations would be easier and safer with the systems, SpaceX still refuses to install serious water deluge or flame deflector systems at Starbase’s test stands and launch pads.
Instead, under its steel Starship test stands, SpaceX relies on a single middling deluge spray nozzle and high-temperature concrete (likely martyte) that probably wouldn’t pass muster for a rocket ten times less powerful than Starship. In multiple instances, Starships have shattered that feeble martyte layer, creating high-velocity ceramic shards that damage their undersides or Raptor engines, requiring repairs and creating risky situations. With essentially no attempt at all to tame the high-speed several-thousand-degree Raptor exhaust, static fire tests at Starbase thus almost always start small grass fires and cause minor damage, but those fires rarely spread.
Ship 24’s first six-engine test was not so lucky, although the Starship made it through seemingly unscathed. Most likely, eight long seconds of blast-furnace conditions melted the top layer of surrounding concrete and shot a hailstorm of tiny superheated globules in almost every direction. Indeed, in almost every direction there was something readily able to burn, a fire started. In several locations to the south and west, brush caught fire and began to burn unusually aggressively, quickly growing into walls of flames that sped across the terrain. To the east, debris even made it into a SpaceX dumpster, the contents of which easily caught fire and burned for hours.
Eventually, around 9pm CDT, firefighters were able to approach the safed launch pad and rocket, but the main fire had already spread south, out of reach. Instead, they started controlled burns near SpaceX’s roadblock, hoping to clear brush and prevent the fire (however unlikely) from proceeding towards SpaceX’s Starbase factory and Boca Chica Village homes and residents.
The nature of the estuary-like terrain and wetlands means that it’s very easy to stop fires at choke points, so the fire likely never posed any real threat to Boca Chica residents, SpaceX employees, or onlookers. It was also unlikely to damage SpaceX’s launch facilities or return to damage Starship S24 from the start, as both of are surrounded by a combination of concrete aprons, empty dirt fields, and a highway.
Still, the “brush” burned by the fire is a protected habitat located in a State Park and Wildlife Refuge. While fire is a natural and often necessary element of many habitats, including some of those in Boca Chica, this is the second major brush fire caused by Starship testing since 2019, which may be less than desirable. At a minimum, fighting fires around Starbase generally requires firefighters to walk or even drive on protected wetlands and salt flats, the impact of which could ultimately be as bad for wildlife and habitats as the fire itself.
SpaceX’s Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Programmatic Environmental Assessment (PEA), which fully greenlit the company’s existing Starbase Texas facilities and launch plans earlier this year, only discusses fire [PDF] a handful of times. Repairing and preventing future damage to wetlands, however, comes up dozens of times and is the subject of numerous conditions SpaceX must meet before the FAA will grant Starship an orbital launch license.
Ultimately, given that the FAA approved that PEA in full awareness of a 2019 brush fire caused by Starhopper (an early Starship prototype) that may have been as bad or worse than 2022’s, there’s a chance that it will play a small role in the ongoing launch licensing process, but the odds of it being a showstopper are close to zero. Still, it would likely benefit SpaceX at least as much as the surrounding Boca Chica wilderness if it can implement changes that prevent major brush fires from becoming a regular ‘accidental’ occurrence.

Elon Musk
Tesla rolls out Steer-by-Wire improvements to Cybertruck

Tesla is rolling out some improvements to the Steer-by-Wire system on Cybertruck, which is one of the features exclusive to the vehicle as it is not active on any other vehicle in the company’s all-electric lineup.
Steer-by-wire is a steering system that turns the direction of wheels mechanically. It differs from vehicles with typical electric power steering systems in the way that those rely on the steering wheel column to transfer steering torque to the wheels.
There are a handful of EVs that use steer-by-wire, including the Cybertruck, Hummer EV, and Silverado EV. The latter two use a traditional steering column and only have steer-by-wire on their rear wheels, so they differ from the system the Cybertruck uses.

Credit: Tesla
The system has made the massive Cybertruck have better steering, and although its size is large, it is one of the easier Tesla vehicles to steer through tight spaces — granted you have the room.
Tesla is making an improvement to the system, according to a new update that will roll out in the 2025.8.4 Software Update as the steering wheel is now going to give more realistic feedback by adapting to road surfaces, the company said (via Not a Tesla App):
“The steering wheel now gives you more realistic feedback, adapting to different road surfaces for a better driving experience.”
This feature will work alongside another improvement as the Cybertruck’s air suspension ride height is now adjustable through the Tesla App.
Tesla Cybertruck steer-by-wire system helps avoid potential collision
The changes from the update, in terms of the more realistic feedback, will improve the overall feel of the road for drivers, making for a better driving experience.
News
Rivian startup spinoff raises $105M in funding for micro EV production
Meet Also, Rivian’s micro EV spinoff, now a full-fledged startup with $105M in funding. It’s adapting Rivian’s tech for compact EVs.

Rivian’s skunkworks program has turned into a full-blown startup called Also. The new startup, which is separate from Rivian, raised $105 million from Eclipse Ventures. Also will focus on micromobility or the development of micro electric vehicles.
Also started within Rivian, aiming to figure out if the electric vehicle company’s technology could be condensed to fit smaller EVs, including vans, trucks, and SUVs. Eventually, the skunkworks program discovered it could, indeed, fit Rivian’s technology in smaller, more compact electric vehicles, but the project was bigger than Rivian.
“We’ve been taking the Rivian technology stack and adapting it to much smaller form factors and then coming up with some incredibly exciting embodiments of that technology in these very small form factors,” Rivian CEO RJ Scaringe told Reuters.
Rivian will always be part of Also. It holds a minority stake in Also and Rivian’s VP of future programs, Chris Yu, will be the startup’s president.
According to Scaringe, Also plans to debut its first vehicle designs later this year. One of the designs seems to be a bike, as Scringe described it having a seat, two wheels, and a screen with a few computers and a battery.
Also aims to start producing its flagship product by 2026 for customers in the United States and Europe. In addition, it plans to launch consumer and commercial vehicles made for Asia and South America.
Investor's Corner
Financial Times retracts report on Tesla’s alleged shady accounting
“Turns out FT can’t do finance,” Tesla CEO Elon Musk quipped on X.

The Financial Times has issued a retraction for an article it recently published that accused the electric vehicle maker of shady accounting practices.
The FT’s retraction has been appreciated by the electric vehicle community in social media, though many highlighted the fact that the publication’s initial erroneous allegations have already been spread across numerous other media outlets.
The Allegations
In an article published on March 19, the Financial Times pointed out that if one were to compare “Tesla’s capital expenditure in the last six months of 2024 to its valuation of the assets that money was spent on,” “$1.4 billion appears to have gone astray.”
The FT article highlighted that Tesla reported spending $6.3 billion on “purchases of property and equipment excluding finance leases, net of sales” in the second half of 2024. However, in that period, the company’s property, plant, and equipment only rose by $4.9 billion. As noted by members of the r/Accounting subreddit, this appeared to be the basis of the FT‘s article, which seemed careless at best.
Unfortunately, the publication’s allegations were quickly echoed by other news outlets, many of which proceeded to accuse Tesla of implementing shady accounting practices.
The Retraction
In its retraction, the Financial Times explained that Tesla’s payments for assets already purchased and the possible disposal of depreciated property could help explain the alleged discrepancy in the company’s numbers. With these in consideration, the publication noted that the “crack we’re left with at Tesla is now small enough — just under half a billion dollars — to be filled with some combination of foreign exchange movements, non-material asset write-offs, or the sale of machinery or equipment close to its not-fully depreciated value.”
“As we sound the Alphaville bugle while lowering this particular red flag, one unavoidable conclusion is that at a certain point it’s necessary to trust the auditor’s judgment,” the publication noted.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk has responded to the Financial Times‘ retraction, commenting, “Turns out FT can’t do finance” in a post on social media platform X.
-
Elon Musk1 week ago
Elon Musk roasts owners of this car brand after another Tesla vandalism incident
-
Elon Musk6 days ago
Elon Musk confirms two measures Tesla is taking to fight vandalism
-
News5 days ago
Tesla aiming to produce first “legion” of Optimus robots this 2025
-
News1 week ago
SpaceX rescue mission for stranded ISS astronauts nears end — Here’s when they’ll return home
-
News2 weeks ago
U.S. AG Pam Bondi: Tesla Molotov attack suspect facing up to 20 years in prison
-
News2 weeks ago
Rivian supports Tesla despite all the Elon Musk hate
-
Elon Musk1 week ago
Tesla owners doxxed by controversial anti-DOGE website in clear intimidation tactic
-
Elon Musk5 days ago
Elon Musk to file lawsuit against former US Rep Jamaal Bowman: “I’ve had enough”