News
SpaceX tests ceramic Starship heat shield tiles on Starhopper’s final flight test
Although it flew under the radar in the heat of the moment, SpaceX’s final Starhopper test flight – completed on August 27th – happened to include an unusual bit of test hardware – eight (give or take) ceramic Starship heat shield tiles.
On the same day that Starhopper lifted off for the last time and completed a 150m (500 ft) hop test in South Texas, SpaceX Cargo Dragon capsule C108 wrapped up its third successful orbital mission, reentering Earth’s atmosphere with a complement of several ceramic Starship heat shield tiles. This marked the first known orbital test of Starship hardware on the same exact day that Starhopper was putting nearly identical tiles through an entirely different kind of flight test.
Tile #8
As pictured above, a group of seven hexagonal tiles appeared on Starhopper’s exterior around August 14th. Those tiles were black (somewhere between matte and glossy), featured indents likely related to manufacturing or mounting, and appeared to be attached to Starhopper by way of a white, marshmallow-esque adhesive. Altogether, each tile bears a striking resemblance to two-thirds of a hexagonal Oreo cookie, arranged in a grid and sort of squished onto Starhopper.
Aside from the seven tiles attached directly to the exterior Starhopper’s liquid methane tank, at least one additional tile was spotted on a small mount structure welded to the bottom of one of the vehicle’s tripod legs. Likely just five or so meters (~15 feet) away from Starhopper’s Raptor engine, that particular tile would have been subjected to intense heating and sound (i.e. thermal and acoustic shock) during the Starship testbed’s final ~60-second flight.
It is a busy morning at the Starship Hopper launch site!
⚙️/⬇️/? : https://t.co/zWfJdm095L pic.twitter.com/KL6azUo4Rd— ?Trevor Mahlmann (@TrevorMahlmann) August 26, 2019
In fact, the Raptor-facing tile may have been put through an even more stressful test than intended, owing to the apparent difficulties Raptor SN06 had during its minute-long performance. Whether the result of shoddy installation and plumbing or an issue with Raptor itself, the engine demonstrated some unusual behavior as it throttled down for Starhopper’s landing, turning its largely transparent exhaust plume into a massive flamethrower.
Raptor or adjacent plumbing also appeared to suffer some kind of leak just before landing, producing significant flames that clearly scorched Starhopper’s rear and destroyed a huge amount of cabling in the area, visible just below the hexagonal tile group. Likely related, several views of the test showed a COPV flying off – clearing having suffered an anomaly that broke it free from Starhopper – around the same time as the vehicle ended its hop with a hard landing.
Tiles on Starhopper?
This does raise the question: why were prototype Starship heat shield tiles attached to Starhopper, a distinctly suborbital prototype that never reached a speed of ~20 m/s (40 mph), let alone orbital velocity? Without actually performing a reentry, what value could be derived? Taken alongside the almost-simultaneous orbital reentry test of four separate Cargo Dragon-shaped tile prototypes, the likely explanation is actually pretty simple and serves as an excellent example of SpaceX’s agile approach to aerospace development.
The three separate tile locations (Starhopper’s tank and leg and Cargo Dragon’s heat shield) all delivered extremely unique test conditions to their respective ceramic tile prototypes. Attached directly to a cryogenic fuel tank, Starhopper’s seven-tile set was almost certainly meant to test methods of mounting a heat shield on a stainless steel tank. Those tiles went through several thermal cycles from propellant loading, spent weeks unprotected in hellish South Texas heat and humidity, and suffered through the shock of flight and a hard landing.
The lone Raptor-adjacent tile was subjected to heating from a live engine just a dozen or so feet away, along with all the brutal acoustic stresses associated with it, perhaps including an unintended fire during anomalous engine performance. Cargo Dragon C108’s four ceramic tiles were far closer to a full-fidelity test, although they were shaped for and attached to the spacecraft in a manner that minimized their one-to-one relevance to Starship’s likely shield design. Regardless of the level of the test’s fidelity, they still managed to survive a true-to-life orbital reentry with nothing more than some soot stains from Dragon’s normal PICA-X shield material.
In short, SpaceX (hopefully successfully) demonstrated a large number of Starship’s ceramic tile design requirements before an actual flight-capable Mk1 or Mk2 Starship is ready for comparable testing. Of course, the most important tests will involve a combination of all Starship-relevant conditions (Raptor engines, cryogenic tank-wall mounting, hexagonal tiles, weeks spent in space, orbital reentry, etc.) for a full-fidelity reentry campaign with an actual Starship prototype. SpaceX CEO Elon Musk says those tests could begin very soon – as early as October 2019 – and the suite of piecemeal Cargo Dragon and Starhopper tests that prototype tiles have already completed will undoubtedly grease the wheels towards that ambitious goal.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
Elon Musk
Tesla confirmed HW3 can’t do Unsupervised FSD but there’s more to the story
Tesla confirmed HW3 vehicles cannot run unsupervised FSD, replacing its free upgrade promise with a discounted trade-in.
Tesla has officially confirmed that early vehicles with its Autopilot Hardware 3 (HW3) will not be capable of unsupervised Full Self-Driving, while extending a path forward for legacy owners through a discounted trade-in program. The announcement came by way of Elon Musk in today’s Tesla Q1 2026 earnings call.
🚨 Our LIVE updates on the Tesla Earnings Call will take place here in a thread 🧵
Follow along below: pic.twitter.com/hzJeBitzJU
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 22, 2026
The history here matters. HW3 launched in April 2019, and Tesla sold Full Self-Driving packages to owners on the understanding that the hardware was sufficient for full autonomy. Some owners paid between $8,000 and $15,000 for FSD during that period. For years, as FSD’s AI models grew more demanding, HW3 vehicles fell progressively further behind, eventually landing on FSD v12.6 in January 2025 while AI4 vehicles moved to v13 and then v14. When Musk acknowledged in January 2025 that HW3 simply could not reach unsupervised operation, and alluded to a difficult hardware retrofit.
The near-term offering is more concrete. Tesla’s head of Autopilot Ashok Elluswamy confirmed on today’s call that a V14-lite will be coming to HW3 vehicles in late June, bringing all the V14 features currently running on AI4 hardware. That is a meaningful software update for owners who have been frozen at v12.6 for over a year, and it represents genuine effort to keep older hardware relevant. Unsupervised FSD for vehicles is now targeted for Q4 2026 at the earliest, with Musk describing it as a gradual, geography-limited rollout.
For HW3 owners, the over-the-air V14-lite update is welcomed, and the discounted trade-in path at least acknowledges an old obligation. What happens next with the trade-in pricing will define how this chapter ultimately gets written. If Tesla prices the hardware path fairly, acknowledges what early adopters are owed, and delivers V14-lite on the June timeline it committed to today, it has a real opportunity to convert one of the longest-running sore subjects among early adopters into a loyalty story.
Elon Musk
Tesla isn’t joking about building Optimus at an industrial scale: Here we go
Tesla’s Optimus factory in Texas targets 10 million robots yearly, with 5.2 million square feet under construction.
Tesla’s Q1 2026 Update Letter, released today, confirms that first generation Optimus production lines are now well underway at its Fremont, California factory, with a pilot line targeting one million robots per year to start. Of bigger note is a shared aerial image of a large piece of land adjacent to Gigafactory Texas, that Tesla has prominently labeled “Optimus factory site preparation.”
Permit documents show Tesla is seeking to add over 5.2 million square feet of new building space to the Giga Texas North Campus by the end of 2026, at an estimated construction investment of $5 billion to $10 billion. The longer term production target for that facility is 10 million Optimus units per year. Giga Texas already sits on 2,500 acres with over 10 million square feet of existing factory floor, and the North Campus expansion is being built to support multiple projects, including the dedicated Optimus factory, the Terafab chip fabrication facility (a joint Tesla/SpaceX/xAI venture), a Cybercab test track, road infrastructure, and supporting facilities.
Credit: TESLA
Texas makes strategic sense beyond the existing infrastructure. The state’s tax structure, lower labor costs relative to California, and the proximity to Tesla’s AI training cluster Cortex 1 and 2, both located at Giga Texas and now totaling over 230,000 H100 equivalent GPUs, means the Optimus software stack and the factory producing the hardware will share the same campus. Tesla’s Q1 report also confirmed completion of the AI5 chip tape out in April, the inference processor designed specifically to power Optimus units in the field.
As Teslarati reported, the Texas facility is intended to house Optimus V4 production at full scale. Musk told the World Economic Forum in January that Tesla plans to sell Optimus to the public by end of 2027 at a price between $20,000 and $30,000, stating, “I think everyone on earth is going to have one and want one.” He has previously pegged long term demand for general purpose humanoid robots at over 20 billion units globally, citing both consumer and industrial use cases.
Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) reported its earnings for the first quarter of 2026 on Wednesday afternoon. Here’s what the company reported compared to what Wall Street analysts expected.
The earnings results come after Tesla reported a miss on vehicle deliveries for the first quarter, delivering 358,023 vehicles and building 408,386 cars during the three-month span.
As Tesla transitions more toward AI and sees itself as less of a car company, expectations for deliveries will begin to become less of a central point in the consensus of how the quarter is perceived.
Nevertheless, Tesla is leaning on its strong foundation as a car company to carry forward its AI ambitions. The first quarter is a good ground layer for the rest of the year.
Tesla Q1 2026 Earnings Results
Tesla’s Earnings Results are as follows:
- Non-GAAP EPS – $0.41 Reported vs. $0.36 Expected
- Revenues – $22.387 billion vs. $22.35 billion Expected
- Free Cash Flow – $1.444 billion
- Profit – $4.72 billion
Tesla beat analyst expectations, so it will be interesting to see how the stock responds. IN the past, we’ve seen Tesla beat analyst expectations considerably, followed by a sharp drop in stock price.
On the same token, we’ve seen Tesla miss and the stock price go up the following trading session.
Tesla will hold its Q1 2026 Earnings Call in about 90 minutes at 5:30 p.m. on the East Coast. Remarks will be made by CEO Elon Musk and other executives, who will shed some light on the investor questions that we covered earlier this week.
You can stream it below. Additionally, we will be doing our Live Blog on X and Facebook.
Q1 2026 Earnings Call at 4:30pm CT https://t.co/pkYIaGJ32y
— Tesla (@Tesla) April 22, 2026
Tesla confirmed HW3 can’t do Unsupervised FSD but there’s more to the story
Tesla isn’t joking about building Optimus at an industrial scale: Here we go
