Connect with us

News

SpaceX Starship briefly becomes largest rocket in history – now what’s next?

For a brief moment on August 6th, Starship became the largest rocket in history. (SpaceX)

Published

on

On August 6th, after a great deal of anticipation, SpaceX stacked a Starship on top of a Super Heavy booster for the first time ever, very briefly assembling the largest rocket in history.

However, barely an hour after the two stages were integrated and (presumably) latched together, SpaceX lifted Starship (S20) off the booster, returned it to its transport stand, and rolled the ship back to the build site later that day. Though an extreme sensitivity to wind conditions has delayed the procedure, Super Heavy Booster 4 (B4) also appears to be on track to be removed from the orbital launch mount and sent either back to the factory or to a suborbital launch mount that’s been modified for booster testing.

For those that followed the process closely in the days and weeks prior, the fact that Starship’s first full assembly was just a fit check (and, really, more like 50:50 between fit check and photo op) came as no surprise. In the lead-up, it became clear through several reports that CEO Elon Musk had challenged SpaceX to stack Ship 20 and Booster 4 by August 5th and flown in several hundred employees normally stationed elsewhere to accomplish the feat.

Ignoring weather delays that prevented stacking on August 5th, SpaceX met Musk’s challenge in all but the literal sense, assembling the world’s largest rocket into one integrated stack for the first time ever. Even more significantly, despite the fact that SpaceX could have easily decided to stack two not-for-flight prototypes to sort of achieve the same feat, both stages – Ship 20 and Booster 4 – involved in the August 6th milestone are nominally destined for flight.

Barring surprises, the same exact pair is scheduled to support Starship’s first orbital test flight as early as this year. Before they can be cleared for flight, however, a great deal of work must still be completed – work that in some cases is unprecedented in the history of the Starship program.

Advertisement

Not long after the stacking milestone, Musk himself sketched out a few of the tasks still in front of the rocket. Namely, Musk says that SpaceX must still complete Starship S20’s partially-finished heat shield, install some form of heat shield(s) to protect Super Heavy Booster 4’s 29 naked Raptor engines; finish installing, plumbing, and activating 4-7 massive custom propellant storage tanks; and assemble, install, and activate a giant mechanical umbilical arm on the launch tower to fuel and power Starship.

All are undoubtedly crucial and Starship is unlikely to launch before any of them are more or less complete. However, the booster and ship themselves are arguably far more of a pressure point. Before they can be deemed ready for flight, both the ship and booster must complete unprecedented test campaigns on the ground.

Ship 20 will need to complete cryogenic proof testing to verify that the first Starship with six Raptor engine mounts is structurally sound. SpaceX has already modified one of its two suborbital Starship launch mounts for that purpose. Once cryo proof and hydraulic ram testing is complete, those six rams will likely be removed and six Raptor engines will be installed in their place, potentially setting up Ship 20 to become the first Starship prototype to static fire six engines – and any number of Raptor Vacuum engines.

Super Heavy Booster 4 will be faced with an even more ambitious static fire test campaign as SpaceX likely gradually installs more and more engines. Depending on how focused SpaceX is on speed over thoroughness, that process could involve gradually adding 2-5 engines after every static fire or could result in SpaceX starting with 4-9 engines and then immediately jumping from 9 to a full 29-Raptor static fire.

Only after completing those crucial qualification tests is SpaceX likely to stack Ship 20 and Booster 4 for a second time and enter the first true full-stack Starship launch flow – hopefully culminating in the first orbital launch attempt later this year, but only as soon as the FAA completes an environmental review and approves the rocket’s launch license. Technically, FAA approval could come next month or it could take the agency a year or more – it’s almost impossible to predict without official information. However, given SpaceX’s track record with Starship prototypes and Booster B3, it’s likely that a flightworthy Starship and Super Heavy will be stacked on the pad and ready to launch just a few months from now.

Advertisement

Stay tuned for updates on that potential standoff in the making and Starship’s progress towards its first orbital test flight.

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

SpaceX Starship Flight 13 faces wrath of the Texas skies

SpaceX pushed Starship Flight 13 to Friday, blaming weather instead of the previous engine issues.

Published

on

By

SpaceX called off Thursday’s launch attempt of Starship Flight 13, pushing the mission to Friday because of weather tied to Tropical Storm Bertha. The company confirmed the delay on X, noting “Now targeting Friday, July 24 for Starship’s thirteenth flight test, due to weather. A key objective for the flight test is to get clear imagery from the ground of Starship’s heatshield as it flies at a higher dynamic pressure during ascent, which won’t be possible with today’s weather conditions.”

This is the second delay for Flight 13 in two weeks. SpaceX first tried to launch the mission on July 16, but the countdown ended in an automated abort at T-0 when four of Super Heavy Booster 20’s 33 Raptor engines failed to ignite. Musk said at the time that two Raptors would need to be removed and replaced, as Teslarati reported. The company spent the following week destacking Ship 40 and Booster 20, swapping engines, and running leak checks before restacking the vehicle on Pad 2 Wednesday night, according to Spaceflight Now’s live coverage.

Elon Musk debunks $52 billion SpaceX-NVIDIA GPU deal

 

Unlike the engine problem, Thursday’s delay has nothing to do with the hardware. SpaceX wants clean footage of Starship’s heat shield captured from the ground as the vehicle flies through max dynamic pressure, something the storm’s cloud cover over South Texas would not allow. The company said visibility should improve for Friday’s attempt, with the same 90 minute window opening at 5:45 p.m. CT.

Flight 13 will be the second outing for the V3 versions of Starship and Super Heavy, following their debut on Flight 12 in May. The mission carries 20 production Starlink V3 satellites, the first time SpaceX has flown operational satellites rather than mass simulators on Starship. Six of those satellites are fitted with cameras to inspect the heat shield from a different angle during ascent, giving engineers a second data source beyond the ground imagery the weather is currently blocking.

Booster 20 will attempt a boostback burn and a splashdown landing burn in the Gulf of America, while Ship 40 follows a suborbital trajectory toward a landing in the Indian Ocean. The flight plan largely mirrors Flight 12, though the booster will run a more aggressive ascent burn after max Q this time, and the ship’s heat shield includes load sensing tiles meant to measure stress at the higher dynamic pressure SpaceX is targeting.

If Friday’s attempt succeeds, Flight 13 could be the last suborbital test in the program. SpaceX is already looking to push for an orbital flight on Flight 14.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Tesla stock tumbles after earnings, one of its sharpest single-day declines

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla stock (NASDAQ: TSLA) endured one of its sharpest single-day declines in years on July 23, tumbling approximately 14.5 percent and closing near $320 after opening the session around $374. The drop erased more than $140 billion in market value amid heavy trading volume and left the shares at multi-week lows.

The sell-off followed the company’s second-quarter 2026 results, released the previous evening. Tesla reported record revenue of $28.2 billion, up 26 percent year over year, driven by a Q2-record 480,126 vehicle deliveries. Energy storage deployments also rose strongly.

Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue

Yet profitability disappointed sharply. Operating income fell 57 percent to $398 million, compressing the operating margin to just 1.4 percent. Non-GAAP earnings per share came in at $0.33, well below the roughly $0.53 analysts had expected. Free cash flow turned negative by $1.1 billion as capital expenditures surged 142 percent to $5.8 billion, largely tied to accelerated spending on artificial intelligence, robotics, and autonomous systems.

The losses on capex were expected, as Tesla said it would be spending heavily in 2026.

Investors also reacted to lingering uncertainty surrounding key product timelines. During the Earnings Call, management reiterated ambitions for Robotaxi deployment and the Optimus humanoid robot, but offered limited new concrete milestones, renewing questions about execution pace that have long accompanied Tesla’s ambitious roadmap.

The magnitude of the decline places it among Tesla’s more severe one-day percentage losses since its 2010 initial public offering. Historically, the two largest single-day drops (split-adjusted) remain September 8, 2020, when shares fell 21.1 percent amid broader market volatility and valuation concerns, and January 13, 2012, with a 19.3 percent plunge during the company’s early growth struggles.

Other notable declines include an 18.6 percent drop on March 16, 2020, at the onset of pandemic-related market turmoil. Thursday’s move ranks roughly ninth on the all-time list but stands out as the steepest in more than a year.

Despite the short-term pain, Tesla’s long-term trajectory has repeatedly recovered from such volatility. The latest results underscore both the strength of its core automotive and energy businesses and the near-term costs of heavy investment in next-generation technologies.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk is not happy about this Tesla Full Self-Driving approval delay

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Elon Musk clapped back at France’s decision to withhold the approval for Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) Supervised system, projecting a clear and blunt message to French Transport Minister Phillippe Tabarot, after he publicly rejected the technology in its current form.

Tabarot outlines several concerns with Tesla Full Self-Driving in a detailed video statement, where he said, “The safety trade-offs are not yet sufficient to authorize it as it currently stands,” he said. He emphasized that FSD is not a true self-driving system and that the driver remains fully responsible.

Key issues Tabarot also brought up included allowing speeding when surrounding traffic exceeds limits and what he believes are insufficient guarantees of driver attention during complex urban maneuvers such as lane changes, intersections, and roundabouts.

While acknowledging technological progress and France’s support for autonomous innovation, Tabarot stressed that deployment must prioritize road safety. He noted ongoing technical discussions with Tesla, the Netherlands, and other European partners, with further ecosystem meetings planned for the fall.

Musk’s rebuke highlights the human cost of regulatory caution. Tesla’s latest safety reports provide compelling data supporting accelerated adoption. In the most recent 12-month period, vehicles using FSD (Supervised) recorded one major collision per approximately 5.1 million miles driven, dramatically better than the U.S. national average of one crash per 698,000 miles.

Even Tesla vehicles driven manually with active safety features outperform the average by a wide margin. These figures come from billions of real-world miles of telemetry, showing FSD vehicles involved in far fewer incidents than both manual Teslas and the broader U.S. fleet.

Critics argue Tesla’s comparisons require careful scrutiny regarding reporting thresholds and fleet demographics, yet the data consistently positions FSD as a potential lifesaver. With road fatalities remaining a leading cause of death worldwide, Musk contends that proven safer technology should not face prolonged bureaucratic hurdles.

France’s measured approach reflects the broader European regulatory caution, which many, especially Musk, have been critical of in the past. However, as autonomous systems from Tesla and competitors like Waymo demonstrate superior safety in independent studies, pressure is mounting for harmonized approvals.

Musk’s warning carries the belief that every month of delay may equate to avoidable tragedies on European roads.

Continue Reading