Connect with us

News

SpaceX sets dates for Starship static fire, high-altitude launch debut

Published

on

CEO Elon Musk says that SpaceX is set to attempt one final Raptor engine static fire test before putting Starship through its high-altitude launch debut later this week.

Liable to begin as soon as November 30th per public road closure notices, Musk says that Starship serial number 8’s (SN8) launch debut – both Starship’s first fully-assembled flight test and first high-altitude launch attempt – is now scheduled no earlier than (NET) 8 am to 5 pm CST (UTC-6) on Wednesday, December 2nd.

November 30th will instead host what is believed to be a unique kind of static fire test for Starship SN8, hopefully proving that the rocket has a decent shot at surviving its risky launch debut.

As previously discussed on Teslarati, SpaceX’s Starship development strategy means that SN8’s survival is far less important than it may seem.

Advertisement

“On November 25th, Starship SN9 (featuring “small improvements”) was stacked to its full 50-meter (~165 ft) height. If SN8 is destroyed during testing, SN9 will likely be ready to roll to the launch site almost as soon as the dust settles.

Meanwhile, Starship SN10 is likely just 7-10 days away from a similar nosecone stacking milestone, and Starship SN11’s tank section is just one stack away from completion, likely putting it less than two weeks behind SN10. In other words, insofar as speed is a priority and each prototype is anywhere close to as cheap as Starship’s majority-steel bill of materials might suggest, SpaceX is building Starships so quickly that it almost doesn’t make sense to spend more than a few weeks working through bugs on any single suborbital ship.”


Teslarati.com — November 25th, 2020

In fact, delaying SN8’s launch to try to refine the rocket in situ and better ensure success could actually be to the detriment of successive prototypes and the Starship program in general. If, for example, a fundamental design flaw is revealed in Starship SN8 only after the prototype’s first test flight, SpaceX could be forced to scrap a huge amount of work done on as many as six, seven, eight, or even more subsequent prototypes. In that since, while it may seem like caution maximizes the value any single Starship prototype can provide SpaceX, that’s only true as long as the Starship design is mature enough that new fundamental flaws are unlikely to arise.

Given how young SpaceX’s agile Starship development program is, it would make very little sense to hinge months of work and more than half a dozen rocket prototypes on the quality and success of a less mature prototype unless all the vehicles in question are more or less identical final products. SN8 through SN15+ are certainly not final products in the sense that Starship is meant to be the largest reusable orbital spacecraft ever built.

As such, the Starship program is probably better off if SpaceX pushes vehicles to failure as quickly as reasonably possible. Having now spent more than two months at the launch pad while no less than three full-scale prototypes rapidly approach a similar level of completion, Starship SN8’s test flow is likely an overcorrection from a haphazardly rushed schedule to extreme caution.

Advertisement

Along those lines, SpaceX is now hopefully set on launching Starship SN8 within the near future. First, though, the company apparently plans to attempt another Raptor engine static fire test on Monday, November 30th. Scheduled between 7 am and 9 pm CST, the test has been described as a “handoff” static fire, referring to the process of switching each Raptor engine’s propellant feed from Starship’s main tank to much smaller ‘header’ tanks reserved for landings.

To land, Starship SN8 will need to successfully switch from main to secondary propellant tanks and ignite one, two, or all three Raptor engines multiple times in close proximity. (Elon Musk)
Starship SN5’s common methane and oxygen tank dome (and spherical methane header tank) is pictured here on May 1st. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

What exactly that handoff refers to is unclear. It could mean that SN8 will switch from main tanks to header tanks during a Raptor static fire test, though it’s unclear why that capability would be necessary unless Starship’s current header tank design is too small. “Handoff” could also refer to the process of switching between main and header tanks between Raptor operations – far more likely. In other words, Starship SN8’s Monday testing might involve two back-to-back static fires, performed with no human intervention. If successful, such a handoff static fire would simultaneously test Starship’s ability switch propellant sources and perform multiple Raptor engine ignitions – both necessary for a launch and landing.

Starship SN9 was stacked to its full height on November 25th and should be structurally complete in a matter of days. (NASASpaceflight – bocachicagal)

Musk himself believes that Starship SN8 has a ~33% chance of successfully launching, reaching apogee, stably ‘skydiving’ ~14 km (~9 mi) back to Earth, reigniting Raptor engines, and landing in one piece. It’s unclear what will happen in the seemingly unlikely event that SN8 survives, but Starship SN9 is practically nipping at the relatively ancient prototype’s heels.

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 Cybercab stands to gain from new Trump autonomy rules

Published

on

Credit: Teslarati

Tesla Cybercab stands to gain from new rules that the Trump Administration is aiming to enforce on autonomous vehicles. On Thursday, NHTSA, under the Trump Administration’s U.S. Department of Transportation, commenced rulemaking on the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS).

This effort aims to eliminate the mandate for manual brake pedals in vehicles that are designed to be driven exclusively by automated driving systems. This would impact the Tesla Cybercab, which the company has stated would operate without a steering wheel or pedals.

Tesla Cybercab launch is imminent after latest sighting at Giga Texas

The Trump Administration is looking to revise FMVSS No. 135, which requires standard braking systems on light-duty vehicles.

Currently, the regulation requires light-duty cars to use traditional manual braking systems that allow operators to slow the vehicle. With the advent of self-driving in the U.S., these regulations need updating, and these are the changes that could come to FMVSS No. 135:

  • Removes requirements for hand- or foot-operated brake controls for vehicles designed never to be operated by a human. Existing rules still apply to AVs that retain manual controls.
  • All subject vehicles must still meet the same stopping distance performance criteria via alternative testing procedures.
  • While this update ensures AVs can physically stop when commanded, NHTSA is separately developing safety performance requirements for AVs in real-world driving scenarios.
  • NHTSA will continue to use its broad defect enforcement authority to investigate unsafe ADS behavior and oversee recalls.

As autonomy becomes a greater part of passenger travel, these types of rule adjustments will be more than reasonable. It will give manufacturers the ability to self-certify their vehicles and avoid any red tape that could ultimately delay the deployment of these vehicles.

Administrators are also incredibly excited about the opportunity to play a role in the advancement of self-driving vehicles.

“We are at the cusp of the greatest technological revolution in vehicle technology since the innovation of the Model T,” NHTSA Administrator Jonathan Morrison said. “If we want America to lead the way, we have to reimagine our regulatory framework. That’s why under Secretary Sean Duffy’s AV Framework, NHTSA is tearing down pointless barriers to innovative designs while strengthening the fundamental safety requirements that matter and holding AV developers accountable for safe performance.”

The Cybercab entered mass production at Gigafactory Texas in April. Tesla ultimately plans to push the vehicle into its Robotaxi fleet, potentially when frameworks like these are established.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla plans production boost at Giga Berlin following rebound in Europe

Published

on

Credit: Andre Thierig | X

Tesla plans to boost production at its Gigafactory Berlin plant in Germany following a sharp rebound in sales and demand in Europe after a softer 2025.

The plans put Tesla in a better position to compete with strengthening companies in Europe and potentially other markets; demand indicators show Tesla is much better off than in 2025.

Last year was a tough year for Tesla in terms of overall demand in Europe. The company produced over 200,000 vehicles at the German plant last year, a soft figure compared to the 375,000 vehicles Tesla lists as its current capacity at the factory.

Tesla’s overall European sales dropped significantly last year due to a variety of factors. However, sales are rebounding, and demand is strong once again, and only getting stronger. Tesla is now planning to bump production of Model Y vehicles at Giga Berlin upward by about 20 percent. It will also bring 1,000 new jobs to the plant.

Tesla confirmed the details of its planned production expansion in Germany this morning. It is a strategy to keep up with strengthening demand.

In Q1, Tesla saw a record 61,000 vehicles produced at Giga Berlin. European registrations rebounded sharply, with Model Y seeing 117 percent increases in March 2026 compared to last year. Germany alone saw stark increases, with a quadrupling in registrations to 9,252 units.

This trend continued in other key European markets, including France, Denmark and Sweden. Tesla registrations were up over 46 percent in some of these markets, and Model Y continued its trend as a top BEV in the market.

Demand has been recovering strongly in 2026, giving Tesla a reason to expand production efforts at the factory. These increases signal management’s confidence in sustained or growing European pull for Berlin-built vehicles.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla and driver sued by family of woman killed in Texas crash: what we know

Published

on

Credit: CNBC

Tesla is being sued by the family of the woman who was killed in a Texas crash involving a Model 3. The driver, who is also being sued, claimed the vehicle was operating on Autopilot mode, but Tesla executives have come out challenging that claim, stating that the driver of the vehicle overrode the system.

The lawsuit was filed by 76-year-old Martha Avila’s daughter and her husband, who allege a “design defect” involving a Tesla and a failure to warn. The suit alleges negligence against Tesla and the driver, Michael Butler.

Butler “stated he was operating with an automated driving assistance system engaged at the time of the crash,” the Harris County Sheriff’s Office said in a statement. He showed no signs of intoxication and was cooperative, the Sheriff’s Office said, according to NBC News.

Just after reports of the crash and numerous headlines that immediately blamed Tesla’s Autopilot suite, both Tesla CEO Elon Musk and Head of AI Ashok Elluswamy challenged that. Musk said the crash made “no sense” given that Tesla Autopilot and Full Self-Driving do not travel at the speeds the door cameras captured the car traveling at, which Tesla says was 73 MPH.

Tesla finally clarifies fatal Texas crash, confirms driver manually overrode acceleration

Elluswamy also revealed that Tesla data showed Butler overrode the system by pressing the accelerator to 100%, and that the pedal was compressed fully even after the car had crashed. Tesla has not released this data to the public, likely because it is communicating with agencies like the NHTSA on an investigation.

The suit uses a Washington Post analysis of government data that “identified at least 17 fatal incidents linked to Tesla Autopilot.”

This is far from the first time an accident has been blamed on Autopilot. A fatal crash in Texas was blamed on Autopilot several years ago, but when Tesla released data to the NTSB, which was investigating the crash, Autopilot was not available where the crash occurred, and Autosteer was never enabled, meaning the car was manually controlled at the time of the accident.

More information on the accident will be released as Tesla works with agencies to find the cause of the crash. From personal experience, it is hard to imagine Tesla Autopilot or FSD operating in this manner. It drives sometimes too cautiously in residential areas in parking lots, at least in my experience. Speeding happens, but at this rate in this type of area, it is hard to believe.

We look forward to more details being released with time.

Continue Reading