News
SpaceX Starship outfitted with Tesla battery packs and motors
Following in the footsteps of the late Mk1 vehicle, SpaceX’s latest Starship prototype has been outfitted with several Tesla battery packs and motors over the last few weeks.
CEO Elon Musk has confirmed in the past that SpaceX intends to try to use Tesla batteries to power Starship rockets and Tesla motors to drive the ships’ large aerodynamic control surfaces. By all appearances, a Tesla Model S motor’s appearance on the exterior of a Starship prototype recently moved to the launch pad is a first for SpaceX. However, in 2019, SpaceX at one point planned to use and even installed battery packs on Starship Mk1 components before the ship was prematurely destroyed during testing. The nosecone those battery packs were installed in still sits in the middle of SpaceX’s growing Boca Chica rocket factory.
For Starship SN3, the purpose of its ~200 kWh of battery power is rather self-explanatory. The purpose of the Tesla Model S motor recently installed on its side is much less clear.
SpaceX is in the midst of preparing Starship SN3 for its first tests after assembling the rocket from next to nothing in less than a month. SpaceX transported the building-sized prototype a mile down the road to its Boca Chica launch site on March 29th, where dozens of workers have been poring over it day and night ever since. SpaceX originally wanted to attempt the ship’s first two tests yesterday, April 1st, but the scheduled times have come and gone while work continues. Several backup windows are ready on April 2nd, beginning shortly before this article went live (1am CDT, 06:00 UTC).
Regardless, with any rocket prototype, test schedules can be extremely fluid and are always liable to change. While SpaceX relies heavily on agile development strategies, beginning with a minimum viable product and iterating to something approaching feature-complete, there is some value in not turning the “move fast and break stuff” dial to 100%. In the case of Starship, the equivalent of tens to hundreds of thousands of work hours and several million dollars of hardware go into each prototype – incredibly cheap on the scale of aerospace development norms but still a significant chunk of change and effort. A few days or weeks of delays are an annoyance that can be suffered if it better guarantees a successful test, versus the alternative of potentially rushing and cutting corners.
SpaceX is now up to roughly five days of delays while preparing Starship SN3 for testing. Originally scheduled as early as April 1st, SpaceX has moved a planned Raptor engine static fire test to no earlier than (NET) April 6th, to be followed no fewer than several days later by a 150m (500 ft) hop test. Of course, before it can safely attempt its first static fire (or hop), SpaceX needs to verify that Starship SN3 – finished just days ago – is up to the task.
Enter Tesla hardware. During ground testing, Starship will likely be continuously connected to ground power sources. It’s also possible that SpaceX has chosen to use its Tesla battery packs as the main power source to insulate it from local outages. Either way, if or when Starship SN3 makes it to flight tests, the battery packs would power the ship’s onboard avionics, landing legs, and any other necessary equipment. That latter category may be where Starship’s apparent Model S motor comes in.
While it could simply be an early implementation test of the Tesla motors SpaceX wants to use to actuate Starship flaps and fins, there are no signs that SN3 will be outfitted with updated flaps and aerodynamic control surfaces more generally. For low-velocity testing, they’re simply unnecessary. Instead, it’s more likely that this Tesla motor is somehow involved in Starship’s autogenous pressurization system, a method of pressurizing tanks with the liquids they contain. Autogenous pressurization relies on a small portion of propellant (liquid oxygen and methane for Starship) being siphoned off and heated until it turns to gas. That oxygen or methane gas is then fed back into the tank it came from, keeping it at the pressure needed to feed Starship’s Raptor engines.
Autogenous pressurization is significantly more complex than the far more common use of helium or nitrogen pressurization systems. An electric pump could potentially be useful at several points throughout the process. Pump mystery aside, tune in to LabPadre’s 24/7 livestream below to follow along as SpaceX prepares to put Starship SN3 to the test for the first time.
Elon Musk
ARK’s SpaceX IPO Guide makes a compelling case on why $1.75T may not be the ceiling
ARK Invest breaks down six reasons SpaceX’s $1.75 trillion IPO valuation may be justified.
ARK Invest, which holds SpaceX as its largest Venture Fund position at 17% of net assets, has published a detailed investor guide to why a SpaceX IPO may be grounded in a $1.75 trillion target valuation.
The financial case starts with Starlink, SpaceX’s satellite internet constellation, which has surpassed 10 million active subscribers globally as of early 2026, with 2026 revenue projected to exceed $20 billion. ARK’s research puts the total satellite connectivity market opportunity at roughly $160 billion annually at scale, and Starlink is adding customers faster than any telecom network in history. That growth alone would justify a substantial valuation.
Additionally, ARK notes that SpaceX has reduced the cost per kilogram to orbit from roughly $15,600 in 2008 to under $1,000 today through reusable Falcon 9 hardware. A fully operational Starship targeting sub-$100 per kilogram would represent a significant cost decline and open markets that do not currently exist. SpaceX executed a staggering 165 missions in 2025 and now accounts for approximately 85% of all global orbital launches. That infrastructure position took decades to build and would be nearly impossible to replicate at comparable cost.
SpaceX officially acquires xAI, merging rockets with AI expertise
The February 2026 merger with xAI added a layer to the valuation that straightforward financial models struggle to capture. ARK argues that at sub-$100 launch costs, orbital data centers could deliver compute roughly 25% cheaper than ground-based alternatives, without power grid delays, permitting friction, or land constraints. Musk has stated a goal of deploying 100 gigawatts of AI computing capacity per year from orbit.
The $1.75 trillion figure itself is not a conventional earnings multiple. At roughly 95x trailing revenue, it prices in Starlink’s adoption curve, Starship’s cost trajectory, and the orbital compute thesis together. The public S-1 prospectus, due at least 15 days before the June roadshow, will give investors their first complete look at the financials to test those assumptions. ARK’s position is that the track record earns the benefit of the doubt. Fully reusable rockets were considered unrealistic for years. Starlink was considered financially unviable. Both happened on timelines that surprised skeptics.
Elon Musk
Ford CEO Farley says Tesla is not who to look at for EV expertise
Interestingly, Farley has been one of the most hellbent CEOs in terms of a legacy automaker standpoint to push the EV effort. It did not go according to plan, as Ford took a $19.5 billion charge and retreated from its EV push in late 2025.
Ford CEO Jim Farley said in a recent podcast interview that Tesla is not who Americans should look at to beat Chinese carmakers.
The comments have sparked quite a bit of outrage from Tesla fans on X, the social media platform owned by Elon Musk.
Farley said that Chinese automakers are better examples of how to beat competitors. He said (via the Rapid Response Podcast):
“If you’re an American and you want us to beat the Chinese in the car business, you’re all going to want to pay attention, not necessarily to Tesla. Nothing against Tesla—they’ve been doing great—but they really don’t have an updated vehicle. The best in the business for us, cost-wise and competition-wise, supply chain, manufacturing expertise, and the I.P. in the vehicle, was really BYD. In this next cycle of EV customers in the U.S., they want pickups and utilities and all these different body styles. But they want them at $30,000, not $50,000. Like the first inning, they want them affordably.”
Despite Farley’s synopsis, it is worth mentioning that Tesla had the best-selling passenger vehicle in the world last year, and in China in March, as the Model Y continued its global dominance over other vehicles.
Musk responded to Farley’s comments by stating:
“This is before Supervised FSD is approved in China. Limiting factor is production output in Shanghai.”
This is before supervised FSD is approved in China. Limiting factor is production output in Shanghai.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) April 19, 2026
Interestingly, Farley has been one of the most hellbent CEOs in terms of a legacy automaker standpoint to push the EV effort. It did not go according to plan, as Ford took a $19.5 billion charge and retreated from its EV push in late 2025.
Ford cancels all-electric F-150 Lightning, announces $19.5 billion in charges
Instead, Ford is “doubling down on its affordable” EVs and said it would pivot from its previous plans.
Reaction from Tesla fans was pretty much how you would expect. Many said they have lost a lot of respect for Farley after his comments; others believe he is the last CEO anyone should be taking advice on EVs from.
Nevertheless, Farley’s plans are bold and brash; many consider Tesla the most ideal company to replicate EV efforts from. It will be interesting to see if Ford can rebound from this big adjustment, and hopefully, Farley’s plans to replicate efforts from BYD work out the way he hopes.
Elon Musk
SpaceX wins its first MARS contract but it comes with a catch
NASA awarded SpaceX a $175 million Mars rover contract while the White House proposes cutting the mission.
NASA just signed a $175.7 million contract with SpaceX to launch a Mars rover that the White House is simultaneously trying to defund. The contract, awarded on April 16, 2026, tasks SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy with launching the European Space Agency’s (ESA) Rosalind Franklin rover from Kennedy Space Center in Florida, no earlier than late 2028. It would mark the first time SpaceX has ever sent a payload to Mars.
Under NASA’s Rosalind Franklin Support and Augmentation project, known as ROSA, the agency is providing braking engines for the rover’s descent stage, radioisotope heater units that use decaying plutonium to keep the rover warm on the Martian surface, additional electronics, and a mass spectrometer instrument, as noted by SpaceNews.
Those nuclear heating units are the reason an American rocket was required at all. U.S. export controls on radioisotope technology mean any payload carrying them must launch on a domestic vehicle, which narrowed the field to SpaceX and United Launch Alliance. Falcon Heavy’s pricing made it the practical choice.
SpaceX is quietly becoming the U.S. Military’s only reliable rocket
Falcon Heavy debuted in February 2018 and has 11 launches to its record. The rocket has not flown since October 2024, when it sent NASA’s Europa Clipper toward Jupiter. The three-core design, built from modified Falcon 9 first stages, gives it the lift capacity needed for deep space planetary missions that a single Falcon 9 cannot reach.
The Rosalind Franklin rover has been sitting in storage in Europe for years. It was originally due to launch in 2022 as a joint mission with Russia, but Russia’s invasion of Ukraine ended that partnership, leaving the rover built but stranded without a launch vehicle or landing hardware. NASA stepped back in through a 2024 agreement with ESA to rescue the mission. The rover is designed to drill up to two meters below the Martian surface in search of evidence of past life, a science objective no previous mission has attempted at that depth.
The contradiction at the center of this story is hard to ignore. The White House’s fiscal year 2027 budget proposal included no funding for ROSA and did not mention the mission at all in the detailed congressional justification document released April 3.
Musk has long argued that reaching Mars is not optional. “We don’t want to be one of those single planet species, we want to be a multi-planet species.” Whether this particular mission survives Washington’s budget fight, the Falcon Heavy contract means SpaceX is now formally on record as the rocket that could get humanity’s next Mars science mission off the ground.
The timing of this contract carries extra weight given that SpaceX filed confidentially with the SEC in early April and is targeting an IPO roadshow in the week of June 8. It would be the largest public offering in history.
ARK’s SpaceX IPO Guide makes a compelling case on why $1.75T may not be the ceiling
Ford CEO Farley says Tesla is not who to look at for EV expertise
