News
SpaceX making good progress towards Super Heavy static fire campaign
SpaceX appears to be making great progress towards the start of its first full Super Heavy static fire campaign, building upon extensive Starship testing and a single booster static fire completed in July 2021.
On May 14th, upgraded Super Heavy booster B7 was moved back to SpaceX’s South Texas Starbase Starship factory after completing a successful round of tests and smoothing out an otherwise rocky start to its life. It was not the booster’s first time on that journey: after first leaving the Starbase ‘nest’ on March 31st, Booster 7 suffered significant internal damage during a structural stress test on April 14th and was forced to return to the factory for repairs. Impressively, despite the cramped environment and extremely limited access to the interior of the Super Heavy’s primary and secondary propellant tanks, SpaceX engineers and technicians somehow completed those repairs and Booster 7 sailed through a new round of ‘cryoproof’ testing on May 9th and 11th.
In the ~20 days since its second return, SpaceX teams have been hard at work preparing Super Heavy B7 for its next major challenges – the results of which could determine whether the massive rocket helps launch a Starship into space later this year.
That goal, same as it has been for half a year, is to qualify the first Super Heavy booster for flight. To do so, SpaceX must – at long last – static fire a Super Heavy with all necessary Raptor engines installed. For Booster 7 and its near-term successors, that means 33 new “Raptor 2” engines capable of generating a total of ~7600 metric tons (~16.7M lbf) of thrust.
That’s exactly what SpaceX workers have been focused on doing since Booster 7’s second return to a Starbase assembly bay. Bit by bit, they have spent every day since installing Raptor 2 engines one at a time. Unfortunately, due to the Super Heavy’s relocation inside a brand new assembly building known as the Megabay, High Bay 2, or Wide Bay, the half-dozen or so unaffiliated photographers who have come to regularly photograph Starbase have yet to find an angle that shows the state of that engine installation progress.
Two weeks later, it’s clear that SpaceX is taking its time, which likely also implies that the company is simultaneously encasing Booster 7’s Raptors and engine section in shrouds that will protect them during static fire testing; as well as during launch, reentry, and landing if B7 makes it that far. That’s not guaranteed, however, and it could also simply be that installing 33 engines on the first attempt at installing any Raptor 2s on any rocket has proven much harder than expected.
On June 1st, CEO Elon Musk appeared to confirm that engines are still being installed on Super Heavy B7, but he also verified that “all Raptor 2 engines needed for [the] first orbital flight are complete.” That could include Starship S24, which needs three sea-level Raptor 2s and three vacuum-optimized Raptor 2s, but it’s still great news even if he only means it for Booster 7. SpaceX has been spotted delivering at least a handful of new Raptor 2 engines a week for the last month or two, which means that all 33 engines may already be onsite at Starbase. If some are still undergoing proof testing at SpaceX’s McGregor, Texas facilities, it could be a few more weeks before all necessary engines are onsite, but that milestone is likely close at hand if it hasn’t already been reached.
For Super Heavy Booster 4, which was inexplicably never static-fired, installation of all 29 of its Raptor 1 engines took just a few days, but the installation of a heat shield around those engines took at least a few weeks. On June 1st, SpaceX also began installing grid fins on Super Heavy B7, further indicating the company’s growing confidence in the booster.
Outside of booster outfitting, SpaceX has also been aggressively refilling the Starbase orbital launch site’s (OLS) massive tank farm, which is capable of storing, subcooling, and distributing thousands of tons of liquid oxygen (LOx), liquid methane (LCH4), liquid nitrogen (LN2), and a variety of gases. For a full wet dress rehearsal (WDR), which has also never been done with Super Heavy, SpaceX would need to fill the booster with around 3400 tons (7.5M lb) of propellant. Out of an abundance of caution, Super Heavy B7 will likely have far less propellant aboard during almost all of its static fire tests, but a full static fire with a full load of propellant – simulating most prelaunch conditions – will likely be one of the last main goals of any static fire campaign. At full thrust, 33 Raptor 2 engines will likely burn around 25 tons (~55,000 lb) of propellant per second, so a huge amount of propellant will be needed regardless.
In the same series of June 1st tweets, Musk also confirmed that SpaceX intends to proceed cautiously into its first true Super Heavy static fire campaign, testing engines “just one at a time at first.” Musk probably isn’t being literal, as a campaign in which Booster 7 tested every one of its 33 Raptors individually could easily take weeks, so it’s likely safe to interpret his words to mean that SpaceX is not going to leap straight from the first limited test of one or a few engines to all 13 center engines, all 20 outer ‘boost’ engines, or all 33 engines at once.
Almost three weeks into the process of engine and heat shield installation, Booster 7 could potentially be ready to return to the orbital launch site any day now, though there’s probably an equal chance that it’s still a few weeks away. Nonetheless, SpaceX is on the cusp of kicking off one of the most exciting and important test campaigns in the history of Starship.
News
Tesla expands Robotaxi geofence, but not the garage
This has broadened its geofence to nearly three times the size of Waymo’s current service area, which is great from a comparative standpoint. However, there seems to be something that also needs to be expanded as the geofence gets larger: the size of the Robotaxi fleet.
Tesla has expanded its Robotaxi geofence four times, once as recently as this week.
However, the company has seemingly kept its fleet size relatively small compared to the size of the service area, making some people — even pro-Tesla influencers — ask for more transparency and an expansion of the number of vehicles it has operating.
Over the past four months, Tesla has done an excellent job of maintaining growth with its service area in Austin as it continues to roll out the early stages of what is the Robotaxi platform.
The most recent expansion brought its size from 170 square miles (440.298 sq. km) to 243 square miles (629.367 sq. km).
Tesla sends clear message to Waymo with latest Austin Robotaxi move
This has broadened its geofence to nearly three times the size of Waymo’s current service area, which is great from a comparative standpoint. However, there seems to be something that also needs to be expanded as the geofence gets larger: the size of the Robotaxi fleet.
Tesla has never revealed exactly how many Model Y vehicles it is using in Austin for its partially driverless ride-hailing service (We say partial because the Safety Monitor moves to the driver’s seat for freeway routes).
When it first launched Robotaxi, Tesla said it would be a small fleet size, between 10 and 20 vehicles. In late August, after its second expansion of the service area, it then said it “also increased the number of cars available by 50 percent.”
The problem is, nobody knows how many cars were in the fleet to begin with, so there’s no real concrete figure on how many Robotaxis were available.
This has caused some frustration for users, who have talked about the inability to get rides smoothly. As the geofence has gotten larger, there has only been one mentioned increase in the fleet.
Trying to book a RoboTaxi in the new geofence and can’t get paired with a car.
Really think Tesla needs to add more cars to the fleet in Austin. Has become tougher and tougher to use the service reliably @elonmusk pic.twitter.com/KHqea3oUxU
— Farzad (@farzyness) October 29, 2025
Tesla did not reveal any new figures or expansion plans in terms of fleet size in the recent Q3 Earnings Call, but there is still a true frustration among many because the company will not reveal an exact figure.
News
Tesla recalls 6,197 Cybertrucks for light bar adhesive issue
On October 20, Tesla issued a voluntary recall of the impacted vehicles and has identified 619 warranty claims and just a single field report that is related to the issue.
Tesla has recalled 6,197 Cybertrucks for a light bar adhesive issue that was utilized by Service to install the aftermarket part.
According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), impacted vehicles may have had the light bar “inadvertently attached to the windshield using the incorrect surface primer.”
Tesla identified an issue with the light bar’s adhesion to glass back in February and worked for months to find a solution. In October, the company performed chemical testing as a part of an engineering study and determined the root cause as the BetaPrime primer it utilized, figuring out that it was not the right surface priming material to use for this specific application.
On October 20, Tesla issued a voluntary recall of the impacted vehicles and has identified 619 warranty claims and just a single field report that is related to the issue.
The component is manufactured by a Romanian company called Hella Romania S.R.L., but the issue is not the primer’s quality. Instead, it is simply the fact that it is not the correct adhesive for this specific type of application.
Tesla says there are no reports of injuries or deaths due to this issue, and it will be resolved. In the 473 report that the NHTSA released this morning, Tesla said:
“At no charge to customers, Tesla will inspect the service-installed optional off-road light bar accessory for delamination or damage and if either is present, replace the light bar with a new light bar adhered with tape and a positive mechanical attachment. If no delamination or damage is present, Tesla will retrofit the service-installed optional off-road light bar accessory with a positive mechanical attachment.”
This is the third recall applied to Cybertrucks this year, as one on March 18 highlighted the potential for exterior trim panels to detach while driving, and another earlier this month when the NHTSA said its front parking lights were too bright.
Tesla resolved the first with a free assembly replacement, while the headlight issue was fixed with an Over-the-Air software update earlier this week. Owners said there was a noticeable difference in the brightness of the lights now compared to previously.
Investor's Corner
Tesla investor Calpers opposes Elon Musk’s 2025 performance award
Musk’s 2025 pay plan will be decided at Tesla’s 2025 Annual Shareholder Meeting, which will be held on November 6 in Giga Texas.
One of the United States’ largest pension funds, the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (Calpers), has stated that it will be voting against Elon Musk’s 2025 Tesla CEO performance award.
Musk’s 2025 pay plan will be decided at Tesla’s 2025 Annual Shareholder Meeting, which will be held on November 6 in Giga Texas. Company executives have stated that the upcoming vote will decide Tesla’s fate in the years to come.
Why Calpers opposes Musk’s 2025 performance award
In a statement shared with Bloomberg News, a Calpers spokesperson criticized the scale of Musk’s proposed deal. Calpers currently holds about 5 million Tesla shares, giving its stance meaningful influence among institutional investors.
“The CEO pay package proposed by Tesla is larger than pay packages for CEOs in comparable companies by many orders of magnitude. It would also further concentrate power in a single shareholder,” the spokesperson stated.
This is not the first time Calpers has opposed a major Musk pay deal. The fund previously voted against a $56 billion package proposed for Musk and criticized the CEO’s 2018 performance-based plan, which was perceived as unrealistic due to its ambitious nature at the time. Musk’s 2018 pay plan was later struck down by a Delaware court, though Tesla is currently appealing the decision.
Musk’s 2025 CEO Performance Award
While Elon Musk’s 2025 performance award will result in him becoming a trillionaire, he would not be able to receive any compensation from Tesla unless aggressive operational and financial targets are met. For Musk to receive his full compensation, for example, he would have to grow Tesla’s market cap from today’s $1.1 trillion to $8.5 trillion, effectively making it the world’s most valuable company by a mile.
Musk has also maintained that his 2025 performance award is not about compensation. It’s about his controlling stake at Tesla. “If I can just get kicked out in the future by activist shareholder advisory firms who don’t even own Tesla shares themselves, I’m not comfortable with that future,” Musk wrote in a post on X.
Tesla expands Robotaxi geofence, but not the garage
Tesla recalls 6,197 Cybertrucks for light bar adhesive issue
Tesla investor Calpers opposes Elon Musk’s 2025 performance award
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoSpaceX posts Starship booster feat that’s so nutty, it doesn’t even look real
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoTesla Full Self-Driving gets an offer to be insured for ‘almost free’
-
News2 weeks agoElon Musk confirms Tesla FSD V14.2 will see widespread rollout
-
News2 weeks agoTesla is adding an interesting feature to its centerscreen in a coming update
-
News2 weeks agoTesla widens rollout of new Full Self-Driving suite to more owners
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoTesla CEO Elon Musk’s $1 trillion pay package hits first adversity from proxy firm
-
News2 weeks agoTesla might be doing away with a long-included feature with its vehicles
-
News1 week agoTesla updates fans on its plans for the Roadster