News
SpaceX preparing for third Starship ‘full stack’
SpaceX appears to be preparing Starship 20 and Super Heavy Booster 4 for their third ‘full stack’ demonstration after two seemingly successful tests in August 2021 and February 2022.
The first, completed in early August 2021, was mostly for show and saw SpaceX stack the unfinished prototypes with a giant crane – fighting the coastal winds throughout. After just a few hours stacked, Ship 20 was removed and returned to Starbase, where workers spent several more weeks (mostly) finishing the prototype. Booster 4 followed suit several weeks later and ultimately took another three months of work to reach some level of test readiness.
After Ship 20 and Booster 4 completed a series of tests in the last few months of 2021 and early 2022, the two were re-stacked in mid-February – once again for show. This time, the stacked Starship served as a backdrop for SpaceX CEO Elon Musk’s first official Starship presentation in more than two years. However, despite the fact that neither prototype was actually tested during the second stack, SpaceX did use the opportunity to partially debut Starbase’s ‘orbital launch integration tower’ and used that towers trio of giant arms to lift, stack, and stabilize Starship S20 on top of Super Heavy B4.
Ship 20 was ‘destacked’ with the tower’s arms just a few days after Musk’s event – an undeniably rapid and impressive achievement for the first real use of the ‘chopstick’ arms but still far from demonstrating that Ship 20, Booster 4, or the orbital launch site (OLS) are ready for orbital test flights. Since then, however, Starbase’s launch facilities have admittedly been almost as busy as they’ve ever been with Starship and Super Heavy cryoproof tests.
Ship 20 completed its first basic OLS cryogenic proof test or ‘cryoproof’ just two days after it was destacked. Additional Starship S20 cryoproofs followed on February 17th (the day after), February 22nd, and March 3rd. Super Heavy B4 completed its own cryoproofs on February 18th and March 1st, the latter of which may have actually been the fullest a Starship booster has ever been filled. All told, SpaceX completed no less than six major B4/S20 cryoproof tests in 15 days.
Crucially, all six cryoproofs were performed with Starbase’s nascent orbital tank farm, thoroughly testing its storage and distribution capabilities. Additionally, because SpaceX began liquid methane deliveries on February 13th, some of those tests – particularly with Ship 20 – may have even been proper wet dress rehearsals, meaning that SpaceX may have filled the rocket(s) with liquid methane (LCH4) and liquid oxygen (LOx) propellant to replicate preparations for a real launch.
At a minimum, Super Heavy Booster 4’s oxidizer tank was fully filled with liquid oxygen – and possibly pressurized with hot gaseous oxygen – during its March 1st cryoproof, while its fuel tank was filled about two-thirds of the way either with liquid nitrogen (LN2) or methane. Prior to its February and March tests, Booster 4 had already completed three cryoproofs – some also using LOx – in December 2021. Ship 20 had completed a cryoproof and four static fire tests.
All told, short of finally performing a full Super Heavy wet dress rehearsal and static fire at the orbital launch site, it’s not all that clear what more SpaceX can derive from additional individual cryoproof testing of Ship 20 or Booster 4. Several things do still need to be demonstrated, however. First, the OLS launch tower has yet to use its arms to remotely install a Super Heavy on the orbital launch mount. More importantly, SpaceX has yet to use the launch tower and its swinging ship umbilical arm to cryoproof or fuel a Starship while stacked on top of a Super Heavy. Finally, SpaceX has also yet to simultaneously perform a cryoproof or wet dress rehearsal test of a stacked Starship and Super Heavy, which will be necessary for orbital test flights.
One or several of those to-be-completed tests may be why SpaceX appears to have begun preparing to install Ship 20 on top of Booster 4 for the third time. On March 14th, Starship S20 was moved towards the launch tower and on March 15th, the ship was slotted between its ‘chopstick’ arms. Based on stack #2, the ship could be lifted at any point – day or night – and installed on top of Super Heavy in a matter of hours.
Elon Musk
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Four Raptor engines failed to ignite at T-zero, forcing SpaceX to scrub Starship Flight 13 Thursday.
SpaceX scrubbed the Starship Flight 13 launch attempt Thursday evening at the last possible moment, after four of the Super Heavy booster’s 33 Raptor 3 engines failed to ignite during the startup sequence. The 90-minute window had opened at 6:45 p.m. EDT from Starbase in Boca Chica, Texas, and the countdown had proceeded without issue all day, with more than 11.5 million pounds of liquid methane and liquid oxygen being fully loaded into the rocket before the automated abort triggered. SpaceX’s launch directors posted on X, “Standing down from today’s flight test attempt,” and shut down the livestream shortly after.
Musk confirmed the root cause within hours. “Some of the engines didn’t start, triggering an automatic launch abort,” he wrote on X. “To be confident of a good flight, 2 Raptors will be removed and replaced. Most probable launch timing is early next week.” SpaceX engineers began draining propellant tanks immediately and Booster 20 was rolled back to its hangar for inspection.
The timing adds a layer of significance that did not exist during any of the previous 12 Starship flights. This is the first time SpaceX has attempted to launch Starship since the company made its stock market debut in June, listing under ticker SPCX at $135 per share. Public investors are now watching every Starship outcome in real time, and a last-second abort carries more visibility than it would have six months ago.
Flight 13 was designed to be one of the most consequential tests in the program’s history. It was set to carry 20 Starlink V3 satellites, the first operational payload Starship has ever attempted to deploy. Six of those satellites carried external cameras to photograph Starship’s heat shield from the outside during flight, which would act as a self-inspection approach SpaceX has never attempted before. The mission also needed to complete a Raptor engine relight in space, a step SpaceX skipped on Flight 12 in May after losing an engine during ascent. That Flight 12 booster also flipped 90 degrees off course during its boostback burn when five engines failed to reignite.
SpaceX has not announced an official next launch date. Musk’s “early next week” window points to July 21 or 22 at the earliest, pending the engine swap and a return to the pad.
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
