News
SpaceX is installing Tesla battery packs on its Starship MK1 rocket prototype
First noticed by NASASpaceflight.com forum member “exilon”, SpaceX appears to have selected off-the-shelf Tesla battery packs as the power storage method of choice for its Starship Mk1 prototype, currently in the midst of a busy period of integration
Potentially taken directly from Tesla Model S/X powertrains otherwise headed for recycling, SpaceX technicians have spent the last 24 or so hours attaching numerous battery packs to part of a Starship subsystem known as header tanks. This is the latest addition to SpaceX and Tesla’s relatively close relationship – the two have begun to work together to solve challenges with materials science, batteries, and more within the last 12-24 months.
While initially surprising, the appearance of battery packs quite literally taken from Tesla Model S/X vehicles or their Gigafactory assembly line actually makes a lot of sense. By using prepackaged, off-the-shelf battery systems with industry-leading power management capabilities, SpaceX is probably saving a huge amount of time, money, and effort. If the battery packs were already nearing the end of their useful automotive lives, the net cost could very well approach zero, aside from what looks like a minimal mounting brace. It’s possible that SpaceX has even pursued modifying and certifying large Tesla-derived battery packs for use on orbital Starship missions.
These battery packs were spotted by an eagle-eyed forum user who was first to recognize the hardware for what it likely was. Per the above photo, SpaceX appears to have joined two self-contained Tesla battery packs into single units that were then installed on a header tank. Knowing that the highest capacity Tesla offers is ~100 kWh, the 2×2 packs could store up to 400 kWh and offer instantaneous power output (ignoring thermal limitations) well into the megawatt (MW) range. It’s unclear if the first header tank also had batteries attached but SpaceX technicians began installing that tank inside Starship’s nose cone on the evening September 22nd. Tank #2 will likely follow in the next 24 hours per Musk’s indication that Starship Mk1 would be stacked to its full height on Wednesday.
For unknown reasons, SpaceX is choosing to mount the ~1000 kg (2200 lb) battery pack pairs directly onto the outside of one of Starship Mk1’s two header tanks. These tanks compliment the rocket prototype’s main propellant tanks and are meant to serve as small reserves of fuel (methane) and oxidizer (oxygen) that can be pressurized independently. During dramatic in-space and in-atmosphere maneuvers, the g-forces exerted on Starship could easily find the vehicle’s propellant pushed away from the ‘bottom’ of its main tanks, creating bubbles or voids that can damage and destroy rocket engines if ingested.
Pressurizing the entirety of the main tanks (a cylinder measuring 9m by ~40m or 30×130 ft) is extremely impractical – hence the need for much smaller header tanks. Falcon 9 boosters are able to sidestep this issue because they are small and light enough (relatively speaking) that cold gas thrusters can efficiently generate the positive Gs needed to safely ignite its engines for recovery and landing maneuvers. Empty, Starship alone will likely weigh no less than 4-6 times as much as a Falcon 9 booster (~25 tons, 55,000 lb).
According to CEO Elon Musk, SpaceX has decided to install those header tanks in the very tip of Starship Mk1’s conical nose to help balance out the vehicle’s center of mass. As a side-effect, SpaceX will have to install feed lines that run the entire length of the spacecraft and protect them with steel aero-covers. It’s unclear if this design choice is necessitated by Starship’s early, prototypical form or if – once outfitted with crew quarters or a functional cargo bay – it’s possible that that added mass will serve as enough of a counterbalance to preclude the need for ballast in the nose.
Musk posted a view inside an adjacent SpaceX fabrication facility in Boca Chica on September 23rd, showing a large row of staged steel sheets that will eventually be formed into aerodynamic shrouds for Starship Mk1’s raceways, fins, and wings.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
Elon Musk
SpaceX Board has set a Mars bonus for Elon Musk
SpaceX has given Elon Musk the goal to put one million people on Mars.
SpaceX’s board approved a compensation plan for Elon Musk that ties his pay directly to colonizing Mars and building data centers in outer space. The details surfaced this week after Reuters reviewed SpaceX’s confidential registration statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, making it one of the first concrete looks inside the company’s financials ahead of a public offering.
The pay package will reportedly award Musk 200 million super-voting restricted shares if the company hits a market valuation milestone, with the most ambitious targets going further. To unlock the full award, SpaceX would need to reach a $7.5 trillion valuation and help establish a permanent human settlement on Mars with at least one million residents. Additional incentives are tied to developing space-based computing infrastructure capable of delivering at least 100 terawatts of processing power.
SpaceX wins its first MARS contract but it comes with a catch
Long before SpaceX filed anything with the SEC, Elon Musk had already spent years framing Mars colonization as an insurance policy against human extinction. The philosophy traces back to at least 2001, when Musk first began researching Mars missions independently, before SpaceX even existed. By 2002 he had founded the company with Mars as the stated long-term goal.
In a 2017 presentation at the International Astronautical Congress, Musk outlined the specific vision that still underpins SpaceX’s architecture today. He described a self-sustaining city on Mars requiring roughly one million people to become viable, the same number now written into his compensation package.
SpaceX’s Starship, still in active development, was designed from the ground up to support the eventual colonization of Mars. Musk has stated publicly that getting the cost per ton to Mars below $100,000 is necessary to make mass migration economically feasible. Everything from Starship’s payload capacity to its full reusability targets flows from that single constraint. One can say that Musk’s latest compensation package has put a formal valuation on Mars for the first time.
SpaceX is targeting an IPO around June 28, Musk’s birthday, at a valuation of approximately $1.75 trillion. Between the Mars rover contract, the Golden Dome software group, Space Force satellite launches, and now a pay structure built around interplanetary colonization, SpaceX has become the single most consequential contractor in American space and defense. The IPO will put a public price tag on all of it for the first time.
Earlier this week, we wrote a story on how Tesla is launching a new Supercharging Queue system to mitigate problems between drivers when there is a wait to charge.
Rather than potentially having people end up in a physical conflict, Tesla’s approach is to determine who is next to charge based on geographic data.
Tesla launches solution to end Supercharger fights once and for all
But some companies, notably Tesla’s biggest rival in China, BYD, are taking a different approach, focusing on charging speeds rather than how they will manage delays.
BYD’s approach, especially with its tests of ultra-fast “Flash Charging” technology, is to eliminate the length of a charging session. At the heart of this strategy is BYD’s second-generation Blade Battery paired with 1,500-kW Flash Chargers.
Real-world FLASH Charging in action.
⚡ 10% → 70% in 5 minutes
⚡ 10% → 97% in 9 minutesIntroducing BYD’s 2nd Generation Blade Battery + FLASH Charging Technology.
20,000 stations will bring faster, safer, and smarter EV charging across China by the end of 2026. pic.twitter.com/uzQC8q1xGf
— BYD (@BYDCompany) March 9, 2026
Unveiled earlier this year, the system charges compatible vehicles from 10 percent to 70 percent state of charge in just five minutes and from 10 percent to 97 percent in nine minutes.
Real-world demonstrations on models like the Yangwang U7 and Denza Z9 GT have shown the tech delivering roughly 250 miles (400 kilometers) of range in just five minutes. This would essentially match or beat the time it takes to fill a gas tank.
Sometimes, gas pumps get congested, and there are lines. You rarely see conflicts at pumps because filling up a tank rarely takes more than five minutes.
Tesla’s fastest Supercharger build currently is the v4, which can deliver up to 325 kW for Cybertruck and 250 kW for other models, but there are “true” sites that are capable of up to 500 kW. This enables speeds of up to 1,000 miles per hour, or 1,400 miles for 350 kW-capable vehicles.
The breakthrough stems from BYD’s vertically integrated ecosystem: a new 1,000-volt architecture, 10C charging rates, and proprietary silicon-carbide chips that minimize internal resistance while protecting battery health.
The company plans to install 20,000 Flash Charging stations across China by the end of 2026, with thousands already operational and global expansion eyed for Europe and beyond later this year.
Early rollout targets popular models, including upgrades to high-volume sellers like the Seal and Sealion series, bringing five-minute charging to mainstream prices around 100,000 yuan (about $14,000).
This approach contrasts sharply with Tesla’s software solution. Tesla’s Virtual Queue uses geofencing and the app to assign turns at crowded sites, addressing driver disputes and idle time. It’s a clever fix for today’s network realities.
Yet, BYD’s philosophy is simpler: make charging so fast that waits barely exist. A five-minute stop becomes as convenient as a gas-station visit, reducing station dwell time, easing grid strain, and lowering range anxiety for long trips.
For consumers, the difference is potentially tangible. They’ll spend more time driving and less time parked. It is just another way Tesla and BYD are pushing one another to improve the overall experience of EV ownership.
News
Tesla wins big as NHTSA drops three-year, 120k unit probe against Model Y
In all, 120,089 Model Ys were impacted, but in two cases, drivers reported the complete detachment of the steering wheel from the steering column while the vehicle was in motion. NHTSA’s initial review revealed that the vehicles had been delivered without the critical retaining bolt that secures the steering wheel to the splined steering column.
A probe into over 120,000 2023 Tesla Model Y units has been closed by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). The probe ends without the agency requiring any action from Tesla.
The probe, designated PE23-003, opened in March 2023 and stemmed from just two consumer complaints involving low-mileage Model Y SUVs.
In all, 120,089 Model Ys were impacted, but in two cases, drivers reported the complete detachment of the steering wheel from the steering column while the vehicle was in motion. NHTSA’s initial review revealed that the vehicles had been delivered without the critical retaining bolt that secures the steering wheel to the splined steering column.
NHTSA has ended a probe into over 120,000 Tesla Model Y vehicles after claims that the steering wheel could detach from the steering column due to a missing retaining bolt
There is no action needed by Tesla pic.twitter.com/YpAO3bKugA
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 28, 2026
Factory records showed each car had undergone an “end-of-line” repair at Tesla’s facility, during which the steering wheel was removed and reinstalled. The bolt was apparently omitted after the repair, leaving only a friction fit between the wheel and column to hold it in place temporarily.
According to NHTSA documents, this friction fit maintained the connection during initial low-mileage driving until forces during normal operation caused the wheel to detach. Both vehicles that were impacted were repaired under warranty with no injuries reported, and no additional incidents surfaced during the agency’s three-year review.
After analyzing manufacturing processes, complaint data, and field reports, NHTSA concluded the issue was isolated to those two post-repair vehicles rather than indicative of a systemic defect in Tesla’s production or quality control.
The closure means the agency has determined no recall or further enforcement is warranted for this specific missing-bolt condition.
This outcome marks the second NHTSA investigation into Tesla closed without action this month, as a recent probe into the company’s “Actually Smart Summon” feature was also resolved in April.
The two resolutions provide some relief for Tesla amid the continuous and somewhat unfair regulatory scrutiny of its vehicles, including open inquiries into driver assistance systems.
Importantly, the closed probe does not involve or affect Tesla’s separate May 2023 voluntary recall of certain 2022-2023 Model Y vehicles. That recall addressed a different issue—steering-wheel fasteners that were installed but not torqued to specification—prompted by a service technician’s observation of a loose wheel during unrelated repairs.
Tesla identified a small number of related warranty claims and proactively addressed the matter without NHTSA mandate.
The Model Y remains one of the world’s best-selling vehicles, and Tesla continues to refine its lineup, including the recent “Juniper” refresh. While federal oversight of the electric vehicle pioneer remains intense, this decision underscores that isolated manufacturing anomalies do not always translate into broader safety defects requiring recalls.
SpaceX Board has set a Mars bonus for Elon Musk
Tesla’s biggest rivals fights charging wait times with a modern approach
