News
SpaceX Starbase construction takes priority as next orbital Starship, Super Heavy pair come together
As SpaceX teams slowly prepare the first orbital-class Starship and Super Heavy booster for the next-generation rocket’s first full-stack launch, the company has simultaneously begun assembling a second ship/booster pair. However, it’s clear that orbital pad construction remains a priority.
Known as Ship 20 and Booster 4, the two stages of the first orbital-class Starship first arrived at the launch site in early August. Only eight weeks later has Starship S20 finally become the first of the pair to attempt and complete one of two crucial proof tests, opening the door for one or several Raptor static fires in the coming week or two. Meanwhile, Booster 4 has had all 29 of its Raptor engines installed, uninstalled, and reinstalled and twice been placed on and removed from Starbase’s orbital launch mount in the same time frame but has yet to attempt any proof testing.
Despite the apparent delays and challenges slowing Ship 20 and Booster 4’s test debuts and two plodding FAA reviews that appear all but guaranteed to preclude an orbital launch attempt in 2021, though, SpaceX has recently begun assembling a second two-stage Starship.
Save for Starhopper back in 2019, no Starship or Super Heavy prototype has spent nearly as long at the launch site without a single test as Ship 20 and Booster 4 have. To an extent, there have likely been some technical delays while assembling, outfitting, and working with two first-of-their-kind prototypes. Still, the difference between past vehicles like Starship SN15 and Super Heavy Booster 3 are so stark that some portion of the testing delays almost has to be a conscious decision made by SpaceX.
To be able to fully proof and static fire test Super Heavy B4, SpaceX first needs to plumb, wire, and outfit Starbase’s orbital launch mount and complete a majority of the orbital pad’s massive tank farm. However, the orbital pad and its many unfinished systems are situated just a thousand (~300m) east of the suborbital launch site and Starship test facilities, which are complete and ready for testing. To test a Starship at those facilities, SpaceX has to entirely clear the pad of personnel – now several hundred people at the peak of construction – for 6-12+ hours.
The implication is that SpaceX management effectively chose to rip off the bandage now rather than later, sacrificing timely testing of Starship S20 to allow a near-total focus on orbital pad construction and activation over the last ~8 weeks. It’s hard to say if that’s paid off but the fact that SpaceX has chosen this particular moment to begin assembling the next orbital-class Starship and Super Heavy suggests that a clearer plan is starting to come together.
B4/S20, meet B5/S21
Parts of Starship S21 and Super Heavy B5 have been floating around Starbase’s build site for weeks. There was a multi-week period, for example, where the site’s massive high bay was effectively unused – clearly a conscious choice given SpaceX’s history of Starship prototype production earlier this year and late last. Parts of Super Heavy B5 were likely ready for assembly (i.e. stacking) by mid to late August. The ‘mid bay’ used for Starship tank section assembly has been similarly underutilized for even longer – only recently accepting its first Starship S21 section after supporting assembly of the orbital pad’s final storage tank.
Instead, Booster 5 stacking began around September 15th. At the current rate of assembly, which has slowed down considerably in the last week, SpaceX’s second flightworthy Super Heavy could reach its full 69m (~225 ft) height as early as mid-October. Starship S20 likely won’t be far behind. Further, thanks to SpaceX’s preferred style of continuous improvement, Booster 5 and Ship 21 production already appear well on track to outpace Booster 4 and Ship 20. With B5, rather than installing a range of external equipment (avionics, wiring, plumbing) after assembly is finished, SpaceX appears to be completing some of those subsystems during stacking, potentially speeding up final assembly by 1-2+ weeks. With S21, SpaceX has begun outfitting the Starship’s nose cone with heat shield tiles far earlier in the assembly process than it did with S20.
Given that it has taken SpaceX the better part of a month to finish and spot-fix Starship S20’s heat shield since the prototype’s second trip to the test site, taking those lessons learned to heart and getting Starship S21’s heat shield installation right on the first try could cut weeks from final assembly.
In the meantime, after completing Ship 20’s first cryoproof test on September 29th, SpaceX will hopefully be able to kick off the first six-engine Raptor static fire test campaign within the next week or so. With any luck, the start of B5/S21 assembly also means that the orbital launch pad is nearly ready to support Super Heavy B4’s first proof tests, even if static fires with anything close to a full set of 29 Raptors appear to be weeks away. Regardless, it looks like it won’t be long before SpaceX will be juggling two pairs of orbital-class Starships and Super Heavy boosters.
It is safe to say SpaceX won’t be going for electric rockets anytime soon.
In a characteristically blunt reply on X, SpaceX frontman Elon Musk stated, “Unfortunately, electric rockets are impossible,” following reports that MSCI had assigned SpaceX its lowest possible ESG rating of CCC.
The assessment, issued just this past week, coinciding closely with SpaceX’s public market debut, placed the company on par with nations like Russia in sustainability scoring and cited significant risks in environmental, social, and governance areas.
MSCI flagged SpaceX’s exposure to rocket emissions and other operational impacts, alongside governance concerns such as concentrated control by Musk and limited shareholder protections. Musk’s terse comment directly addressed the environmental pillar, underscoring a core physical constraint that ESG frameworks often overlook when evaluating high-thrust industries.
Unfortunately, electric rockets are impossible
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 21, 2026
Electric propulsion systems do exist and are widely used in space. Ion thrusters and Hall-effect thrusters accelerate ionized propellant, typically xenon or krypton, using electric fields, achieving very high specific impulse, often exceeding 3,000 seconds compared to roughly 300–450 seconds for chemical rockets.
This efficiency makes them ideal for satellite station-keeping, orbit raising, and deep-space missions where low thrust over long durations is sufficient. SpaceX’s own Starlink satellites employ electric propulsion for these purposes.
However, launching from Earth’s surface demands something entirely different: enormous thrust delivered rapidly to overcome gravity and atmospheric drag. A typical orbital-class booster must generate thrust far exceeding its weight, often in the millions of Newtons within seconds.
Chemical rockets achieve this through exothermic combustion of dense propellants, producing high-mass-flow, high-velocity exhaust. Electric systems, by contrast, expel very small amounts of mass at extremely high speeds. Generating equivalent thrust would require impractical onboard power levels, massive energy storage or generation systems, and prohibitive added mass, rendering the approach infeasible with current or near-term technology.
Musk has previously expressed a similar sentiment, noting a desire for electric orbital rockets while acknowledging the inescapable requirements of Newton’s third law and energy delivery. The distinction is clear: electric propulsion excels once a vehicle is already in space; it cannot replace the high-thrust chemical phase required to reach orbit from the ground.
The episode illustrates broader critiques of ESG ratings. Proponents argue they incentivize better risk management and long-term sustainability. Detractors, including Musk—who has previously called ESG a “scam”—contend that such metrics can penalize essential activities when no practical alternative exists, potentially discouraging innovation in sectors like space access.
Elon Musk dubs the S&P 500 ESG as “outrageous scam” after Tesla gets booted from index
SpaceX has sought to mitigate launch-related impacts through reusability: Falcon 9 boosters have flown more than 30 times in some cases, dramatically lowering the manufacturing and emissions burden per kilogram delivered to orbit. Starship’s design further emphasizes rapid reusability and methane propellant, which can theoretically be produced via sustainable pathways.
Ultimately, Musk’s remark serves as a reminder that certain engineering realities persist regardless of scoring systems. As humanity expands its presence in space for communications, science, and exploration, balancing genuine environmental progress with technological necessity remains a central challenge.
ESG frameworks may evolve, but the fundamental limits of electric launch propulsion are unlikely to change soon.
Tesla just trademarked ‘MEGAPOD’ with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), its latest move in what seems to be a hint that the company is incredibly focused on its AI efforts and storage needs as compute increases.
The application carries serial number 99893717 and lists the applicant as Tesla, Inc., located at 1 Tesla Road, Austin, Texas 78725.
The filing remains in ‘live pending’ status, and it is a new application waiting for assignment to an examining attorney. It has not yet been published or registered.
Tesla just trademarked MEGAPOD
Summary:
“Modular data center hardware systems for artificial intelligence computing, comprised of computer servers, computer hardware for artificial intelligence processing, computer networking hardware, electrical power distribution units, and… pic.twitter.com/3l85DsKadl— Robin (@xdNiBoR) June 19, 2026
According to the official goods and services description in the application, Tesla describes ‘MEGAPOD’ as:
“Modular data center hardware systems for artificial intelligence computing, comprised of computer servers, computer hardware for artificial intelligence processing, computer networking hardware, electrical power distribution units, and cooling systems, sold as a unit; self-contained modular computing hardware systems for artificial intelligence workloads; integrated computer hardware platforms for artificial intelligence computing, namely, enclosures containing computer hardware, power distribution hardware, and cooling hardware, sold as a unit; downloadable software for monitoring, managing, optimizing, and regulating modular artificial intelligence computing hardware systems.”
This description specifies complete, self-contained modular units that integrate servers and specialized AI processing hardware with networking components, power distribution, and cooling systems. It also includes associated downloadable software for oversight and optimization of these systems. The language emphasizes hardware sold “as a unit” and enclosures that combine the necessary elements for AI computing workloads.
Tesla has an established history of developing and commercializing modular hardware systems. Its Megapack product line, for example, consists of utility-scale battery energy storage systems designed as containerized units for grid applications. The MEGAPOD filing follows a similar pattern of protecting a name for modular, integrated hardware platforms, this time focused on artificial intelligence computing infrastructure.
This could be an early move, especially as Tesla did not have trademark rights to the word ‘Cybercab,’ the name of its self-driving, ride-hailing-focused vehicle.
Trademark applications of this type allow companies to secure priority rights to a name for defined categories of goods and services. The USPTO examines applications for compliance with legal requirements, including distinctiveness and absence of conflicts with prior marks. If the application proceeds successfully through examination, publication, and any opposition period, it could result in a federal trademark registration providing nationwide protection. This is what Tesla’s obvious intention is with ‘MEGAPOD.’
Public reports and analysis suggest MEGAPOD could represent modular, container-style AI computing pods designed for easy deployment. These would bundle servers, AI accelerators, power systems, and cooling into self-contained units suitable for distributed AI workloads. This approach aligns with Tesla’s announced AI compute strategy.
In March 2026, Elon Musk outlined plans for “Digital Optimus” (also referred to as Macrohard), a joint Tesla-xAI project for AI agents capable of handling complex digital tasks. The plans include running these agents on Tesla’s AI4 hardware in parked vehicles as well as dedicated compute units installed at Supercharger stations, which collectively offer substantial unused electrical capacity.
What is Digital Optimus? The new Tesla and xAI project explained
A modular hardware platform like the one described in the ‘MEGAPOD’ filing would support scalable, rapid deployment of such distributed compute resources. It could complement Tesla’s other AI infrastructure efforts, including the Dojo supercomputer used for training models and the development of AI systems for autonomous driving and robotics, by enabling edge or regional AI inference without reliance on traditional centralized data centers.
Investor's Corner
SpaceX is launching a secret spacecraft that could change how things are made in space
SpaceX’s secret disk-shaped Starfall capsule is targeting a market no reentry vehicle has cracked.
SpaceX is targeting Tuesday, June 23 for the first flight of Starfall, a reentry capsule the company has developed almost entirely in private. The Falcon 9 launch window opens at 6:43 a.m. ET from Space Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, with a backup window available the same time on June 24. SpaceX has made no public announcement about the vehicle, only providing launch details. Everything known about it has come through FAA and FCC regulatory filings.
What makes Starfall different starts with its shape. Rather than the traditional cone used by Dragon and every other cargo return capsule in operation, Starfall is a flat disk that measures roughly 10.2 feet (3.1 meters) wide and just 2.5 feet (0.75 meters) tall, and weighing 4,630 pounds (2,100 kg) and capable of returning up to 2,200 pounds (1,000 kilograms) of payload from orbit. The disk geometry maximizes structural efficiency and payload volume relative to mass, and the heat shield mechanically jettisons just before splashdown, allowing recovery teams to retrieve both the capsule and the shield separately from the Pacific Ocean.
The difference with Starfall from existing competitors, such as Varda Space Industries, which has largely built the orbital manufacturing market and returns heavy payloads per flight is that Starfall’s specification is roughly 30 times more per mission, and is designed to be mass-produced and launched on either Falcon 9 or Starship. That combination of volume and launch access is something no standalone startup can replicate, and it puts SpaceX in direct competition with the companies that currently pay it to reach orbit.
SpaceX to launch military missile tracking satellites through new Space Force contract
The intended market is orbital manufacturing: pharmaceuticals, protein crystals, semiconductors, and advanced optical fiber that physically cannot be produced in the presence of gravity. FAA documents describe Starfall’s long-term purpose as building a “self-sustaining commercial in-space manufacturing market” and as a potential successor to the industrial capabilities of the International Space Station, which is set to retire in the late 2020s. Military rapid global cargo delivery is a parallel application under active discussion with the Pentagon.
The reason some industries seek manufacturing in space comes down to gravity. On Earth, gravity causes materials to settle, separate, and deform during production. In microgravity, those constraints disappear.
SpaceX’s already controls launch access, which means it currently functions as the landlord for every competitor in the orbital manufacturing return space. Starfall converts that landlord position into vertical ownership, and it would no longer just carry other companies’ capsules to orbit, but rather operate the capsule, own the return logistics, and capture the service revenue directly. Viewed alongside Starlink, Colossus, and the xAI merger, Starfall fits a consistent pattern: SpaceX identifying infrastructure layers that others depend on and moving to own them outright. Orbital manufacturing return is the next layer on that list.
If Tuesday’s reentry, parachute sequence, and recovery demonstration goes as planned, the second FAA-approved test flight follows. A successful pair of demos would position SpaceX to begin offering Starfall as a commercial service, likely first to pharmaceutical and materials science customers before scaling toward the military and broader manufacturing segments.
Elon Musk responds to SpaceX’s ESG rating and says its rockets won’t go electric
Tesla just trademarked MEGAPOD: here’s what it is
