News
SpaceX begins installing new ‘Raptor 2’ engines on Super Heavy booster
SpaceX has begun installing new ‘Raptor 2’ engines on Super Heavy Booster 7 after the prototype completed a range of tests and returned to the company’s South Texas ‘Starbase’ rocket factory.
Earlier this month, SpaceX transported Booster 7 (B7) in the opposite direction, returning the 67-meter (~220 ft) tall rocket to Starbase’s orbital launch site (OLS) for the second time after it was forced to head back to the factory for repairs. Repairs completed, SpaceX dove headfirst into the process of verifying that the booster had been returned to full health and immediately filled its tanks to the brim with at least 3000 tons (>6.5M lb) of liquid nitrogen and oxygen – better known as a cryogenic proof test.
Less than 48 hours after completing its first post-repair test, Booster 7 sailed through another full cryoproof test without losing a beat. On May 13th, two days later, SpaceX attached a crane to Super Heavy B7 and removed it from the orbital launch mount before rolling the rocket back to Starbase’s build site on May 14th. Without official confirmation, which is increasingly rare, it was impossible to determine the results of the testing with certainty, but the speed of the process and Booster 7’s rapid launch mount removal made the two most extreme outcomes the most likely.
A quick return to the build site could have been explained by a significant vehicle failure or a major issue with SpaceX’s repair job – no point in continuing to test a vehicle that can’t be fully tested. On the exact opposite hand, a near-perfect test campaign in which all objectives were more or less achieved without major hiccups could also explain the quick return. In general, the evidence was in favor of the more optimistic explanation. Had a major issue been uncovered during the first post-repair cryoproof, it’s difficult to imagine that SpaceX would have completed the exact same test – in full less than 48 hours later.
However, SpaceX moved an in-situ Raptor engine installation stand towards Booster 7 and the orbital launch mount shortly before testing restarted, hinting – for the moment – that the company wanted to begin installing Raptor engines immediately after cryoproof testing. But mid-way through testing, the stand was moved back to its storage area and Super Heavy was instead removed from the mount and returned to the factory, adding a little uncertainty.
Concerns were immediately assuaged on May 17th when SpaceX was spotted moving Raptor engines from a production tent to the ‘megabay’ assembly building containing Booster 7. While the location of the new bay makes it difficult to peek inside from public viewpoints, preventing direct confirmation, it’s very likely SpaceX has begun installing new Raptor 2 engines on Super Heavy B7.
Additionally, confirming some of the more optimistic speculation about SpaceX’s decision to move Booster 7 back to build site, two of the three Raptor engines spotted on May 17th were also labeled “E26” and “E28.” Unless SpaceX’s engine numbering conventions have changed, the labels identify the engines as three of 20 ‘Raptor Boost’ engines that will ultimately populate the outer ring of Super Heavy B7’s aft end. More importantly, the installation of any Raptor Boost 2 (RB2) engines likely indicates that SpaceX has decided to install a full set of 33 Raptors on the booster before kicking off static fire testing.
To limit risk, SpaceX could have begun test-firing Booster 7 with just 1-3 Raptor engines installed and gradually added more as confidence grew. Instead, SpaceX appears to have accepted the added risk of losing 33 brand-new Raptor 2 engines in one fell swoop in return for the possibility of a much faster test campaign. If there are no major surprises during static fire testing, in other words, Booster 7 could be ready for flight far more quickly if the process begins with all 33 engines already installed. Installing Booster 7’s Raptors, heat shield, and aerocovers will be easier back at the build site.
Doing it all at once should also help prevent Booster 7 from suffering Booster 4’s fate and wallowing, unfinished, for months without completing a single useful test. If the gamble works, the first stage of a two-stage Starship could be ready for an orbital launch attempt in just a few months. If the gamble fails and Booster 7 is damaged, destroyed, or otherwise unable to pass the necessary tests, SpaceX will simply move on to Booster 8 sooner than later, having wasted less time on a more cautious Booster 7 test campaign.
It’s unclear how long it will take SpaceX to install all 33 Raptors, construct a heat shield around those engines, and finish buttoning up the rest of Booster 7. In an adjacent assembly bay, SpaceX appears to have nearly finished assembling a similarly upgraded Starship – Ship 24 – that’s first in line to ride Booster 7 into space. The company has also tentatively requested road closures for three 12-hour test windows on May 23rd, 24th, and 25th that either vehicle could use.
News
SpaceX’s Starfall just went from secret to storefront
SpaceX now pitches Starfall missions with 1,000 kg payloads, weeks of microgravity, and Starlink connectivity.
SpaceX has put up a dedicated commercial page for Starfall, its disk shaped reentry capsule, laying out for the first time what customers actually get when they book a flight. The page, live at spacex.com/starfall, pitches “affordable, routine access to microgravity” and invites companies to get in touch about flying manufacturing, research or testing payloads.
The specs are short and specific. Each Starfall mission carries up to 1,000 kg of payload, supplies 1 kW of power and connects through an Ethernet interface. Mission length is tailored to the customer, and the payload stays online the entire time through Starlink, which means researchers can pull data from an experiment while it is still in orbit instead of waiting for splashdown.
SpaceX is launching a secret spacecraft that could change how things are made in space
SpaceX is aiming the service at three markets. Biomedical customers are told they can grow stem cell organoids, replacement tissue and layered biomaterials. Pharmaceutical companies are pitched on protein and small molecule drug crystals, which form smaller and more uniform shapes without gravity driven convection. Materials science rounds out the list, with semiconductors and other next generation materials grown in vacuum and microgravity.
The page also makes clear which rocket SpaceX is counting on. “By launching on Starship, Starfall brings a reliable and scalable cadence previously unavailable to the market,” the company wrote, contrasting weeks of continuous microgravity with the seconds offered by drop towers and parabolic flights. No price or first operational flight date is listed.
The commercial push is a sharp turn from how Starfall started. SpaceX said almost nothing about the capsule ahead of its first flight in June, and nearly everything known came from FAA and FCC filings describing a disk about 10.2 feet wide and 2.5 feet tall that can return 2,200 pounds of cargo. By its second flight on the Bandwagon-5 rideshare in October, Starfall was listed by name on the mission page, though SpaceX still did not say what it carried.
Customers appear to be lining up. SpaceX said in its third quarter results that it signed three commercial Starfall missions during the quarter. On the earnings call, President Gwynne Shotwell described the capsule as providing “routine relatively low cost access to microgravity environments for scientific research, including improving our understanding of diseases like cancer and diabetes,” and said the three new missions would fly on Starship.
The branding effort extends past the website. SpaceX added a Starfall T-shirt to its online store on Monday as part of a batch of new merchandise, giving the program a place next to Starship, Starlink and Starshield in the company’s lineup.
The move also puts SpaceX in more direct competition with companies it launches. Varda Space Industries, which has built much of the in-space manufacturing market so far, flew its W-Series 7 capsule on the same Bandwagon-5 mission as Starfall in October. Varda’s capsules are roughly three times smaller than Starfall, and SpaceX controls the ride to orbit for both.
Starfall’s near term cadence depends on Starship. SpaceX is preparing for Flight 15 after completing static fires of Ship 42 and its Super Heavy booster in late October, and is aiming to catch both stages with the launch tower on that flight.
Elon Musk said weeks ago during SpaceX’s third-quarter earnings call that the company’s Grok Bot, its autonomous AI Agent platform, was showing “the fastest growth of a product” that he’d ever seen in his life.
Now, SpaceXSI is scaling back Grok Bot users’ weekly limits, much to the surprise of those who have relied on it to take away monotonous tasks in their lives.
Elon Musk’s terse November 1 reply on X captured a sharp tension in the early days of agentic AI. Responding to a user who asked for a Grok Bot usage reset after hitting 100 percent with four days still left on the weekly cycle, Musk wrote: “The cost of serving Grok Bot was unsustainably high relative to revenue.”
@DogecoinNorway The cost of serving Grok Bot was unsustainably high relative to revenue
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 1, 2026
The post arrived amid a wave of similar complaints from paying subscribers whose meters had jumped unexpectedly toward or to the limit, sometimes overnight and with little corresponding activity. It also stood in clear contrast to statements Musk had made only days and weeks earlier.
On the SpaceX third-quarter earnings call in mid-to-late October, Musk had described Grok Bot in almost the opposite terms. He called it “the fastest growth of a product that I’ve ever seen in my life” and said he had “never seen anything grow this fast.”
Company figures put paid weekly users at roughly 800,000 earlier in the month, more than doubling over the prior period. Daily active users had climbed from under 100,000 in early September to over 600,000 by late October.
Musk emphasized that the product has no free tier and that users appear to be getting real value beyond what they pay. In other remarks, he noted that usage per user was rising rather than declining, the opposite of the usual decay pattern for new software.
Grok Bot, launched around August, functions as an always-available agent with its own persistent cloud computer; it can schedule, research, shop, browse, and execute multi-step workflows even after the user steps away. Access is bundled into X subscription tiers (roughly $30, $100, and $200 per month) and certain Cursor plans, drawing from shared weekly usage pools whose exact sizes have not been publicly detailed.
The economics of that model are what Musk’s November 1 post put in the spotlight. Agentic systems burn far more compute than ordinary chatbot exchanges. Each task can trigger repeated model calls, tool use, web actions, and sustained background work.
When growth is as rapid as Musk celebrated, the absolute compute bill scales quickly even if average revenue per user stays fixed under flat monthly subscriptions. Industry observers noted the opportunity cost as well: the same GPUs can be rented to other AI labs at higher rates.
A simple back-of-the-envelope comparison circulating after the post illustrated the gap: if every reported daily user paid the top tier, annualized subscription revenue would still be modest relative to the scale of compute infrastructure SpaceX is building and leasing to companies like Anthropic.
Some users also reported possible dashboard anomalies around the same period, though Musk’s framing treated the underlying cost-revenue imbalance as the core issue rather than a pure metering glitch.
The juxtaposition is the core of this exchange. Within roughly two weeks of publicly framing Grok Bot as an unprecedented success with strong unit economics and no free tier, Musk acknowledged that serving the same product had become unsustainable relative to the revenue it generates.
For the broader industry, the episode underscores a structural challenge of the agent era: demand is real and growing faster than many expected, yet the cost of fulfilling that demand through always-on, multi-step agents can outrun subscription pricing before companies can adjust limits, introduce metered billing, or raise prices.
Musk’s reply did not promise an immediate reset or higher allowances; it simply stated the constraint. In doing so, it supplied a rare, explicit public data point on the unit economics of a high-profile AI agent just as adoption numbers were still being celebrated as the fastest in Musk’s experience.
The tension between rapid, paid growth and the compute required to deliver it is now on the record.
News
Tesla owners who tap Emergency Drive Away for fun are in for a surprise
Tapping Activate on Tesla’s Emergency Drive Away reportedly triggers a $539 service bill without moving.
Tesla owners who press Activate on Emergency Drive Away may be on the hook for a service bill even if their car never leaves the Supercharger stall.
Yaro, who posts about Tesla service cases on X as @Tutrifour, said a customer called after tapping Activate while still plugged into a Supercharger. The owner was about to pull away, remembered the cable was still connected and stopped. The car never moved, but the touchscreen showed a red alert reading “Emergency Drive Away has been activated” with “Service is required” underneath. A Service Mode screenshot showed the active alert BMS_a228_EmergencyDriveAwayServiceRequired, which Yaro said only Tesla Service can clear.
Here is a lesson to Tesla owners. Don’t press Activate on the new Emergency Drive Away feature on your Tesla because service charges $539 to inspect the charge port and to clear the alert. Yes, even if you didn’t move the car an inch. https://t.co/NZJENw4SQv
— Yaro (@Tutrifour) October 30, 2026
The cost of clearing it was the bigger surprise. “Don’t press Activate on the new Emergency Drive Away feature on your Tesla because service charges $539 to inspect the charge port and to clear the alert. Yes, even if you didn’t move the car an inch,” Yaro wrote. The $539 figure comes from that single case, and Tesla has not published a set price for the inspection or commented on the post. Yaro also noted that the car would still charge with the alert on screen.
Tesla launched Emergency Drive Away on October 1 with software update 2026.38.3, letting drivers pull away from a U.S. Supercharger with the cable still attached, as Teslarati reported. To use it, a driver shifts into Drive while connected, holds the brake and taps Activate. The prompt warns that driving with the cable connected will damage the vehicle and the Supercharger, and that short camera recordings will be shared with Tesla.
Tesla Charging has been clear about what follows a real activation. Repairs to a Supercharger stall can run up to $25,000 depending on the site, a service visit for the car’s charge port is mandatory, and deliberate misuse “will invoke additional penalties.” What the company had not spelled out is that the service requirement is triggered the moment Activate is pressed, not the moment the cable breaks away.
From an engineering standpoint, that is the cautious choice. Once Activate is pressed, the car cannot be sure the charge port latch was not stressed, so flagging it for inspection removes the guesswork. It also means the button carries a price on its own, which is a stronger deterrent against casual use than any warning screen.
Customer called because they have an active alert after tapping ACTIVATE on the new Emergency Drive Away feature. They didn’t actually drive away but were about to until they “remembered” they had the charge cable connected.
This alert can only be cleared by Tesla Service. https://t.co/SkHyJJPFwU
— Yaro (@Tutrifour) October 28, 2026
The report follows the feature’s first known real world use, when a driver in Austin during F1 weekend appeared to trigger it by accident and dragged the Supercharger cable along with the car. The Reddit user who filmed it said the driver seemed to have only half read the prompts.
For owners, the takeaway is to treat the red prompt as a stop sign. If it appears after shifting out of Park by mistake, shift back and unplug the normal way from the touchscreen, the Tesla app or the button on the charge handle. Activate is meant for moments when staying at the stall is the bigger risk, and Tesla is now pricing it that way.
SpaceX’s Starfall just went from secret to storefront
Grok Bot users hit with weekly limits early, Elon Musk explains what happened
