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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Delaying the approval of FSD in France will cost lives
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 22, 2026
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.
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 faces wrath of the Texas skies
Tesla stock tumbles after earnings, one of its sharpest single-day declines
