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.
Tesla executive Sendil Palani confirmed in a post on social media platform X that Full Self-Driving, despite being the most robust driver assistance program in the United States, still isn’t garnering any interest from lagging competitors.
Tesla has said on several occasions in the past that it has had discussions with a competing carmaker to license its Full Self-Driving suite. While it never confirmed which company it was, many pointed toward Ford as the one Tesla was holding dialogue with.
At the time, Ford CEO Jim Farley and Tesla CEO Elon Musk had a very cordial relationship.
Despite Tesla’s confirmation, which occurred during both the Q2 2023 and Q1 2024 Earnings Calls, no deal was ever reached. Whichever “major OEM” Tesla had talked to did not see the benefit. Even now, Tesla has not found that dance partner, despite leading every company in the U.S. in self-driving efforts by a considerable margin.
Elon Musk says Tesla Robotaxi launch will force companies to license Full Self-Driving
Palani seemed to confirm that Tesla still has not found any company that is remotely interested in licensing FSD, as he said on X that “despite our best efforts to share the technology,” the company has found that it “has not been proven to be easy.”
Licensing FSD has not proven to be easy, despite our best efforts to share the technology. https://t.co/VGYBU7Aduw
— Sendil Palani (@sendilpalani) February 3, 2026
The question came just after one Tesla fan on X asked whether Tesla would continue manufacturing vehicles.
Because Tesla continues to expand its lineup of Model Y, it has plans to build the Cybercab, and there is still an immediate need for passenger vehicles, there is no question that the company plans to continue scaling its production.
However, Palani’s response is interesting, especially considering that it was in response to the question of whether Tesla would keep building cars.
Perhaps if Tesla could license Full Self-Driving to enough companies for the right price, it could simply sell the suite to car companies that are building vehicles, eliminating the need for Tesla to build its own.
While it seems like a reach because of Tesla’s considerable fan base, which is one of the most loyal in the automotive industry, the company could eventually bail on manufacturing and gain an incredible valuation by simply unlocking self-driving for other manufacturers.
The big question regarding why Tesla can’t find another company to license FSD is simply, “Why?”
Do they think they can solve it themselves? Do they not find FSD as valuable or effective? Many of these same companies didn’t bat an eye when Tesla started developing EVs, only to find themselves years behind. This could be a continuing trend.
Tesla executive Lars Moravy appeared today in front of the U.S. Senate Commerce Committee to highlight the importance of modernizing autonomy standards by establishing a federal framework that would reward innovation and keep the country on pace with foreign rivals.
Moravy, who is Tesla’s Vice President of Vehicle Engineering, strongly advocated for Congress to enact a national framework for autonomous vehicle development and deployment, replacing the current patchwork of state-by-state rules.
These rules have slowed progress and kept companies fighting tooth-and-nail with local legislators to operate self-driving projects in controlled areas.
Tesla already has a complete Robotaxi model, and it doesn’t depend on passenger count
Moravy said the new federal framework was essential for the U.S. to “maintain its position in global technological development and grow its advanced manufacturing capabilities.
He also said in a warning to the committee that outdated regulations and approval processes would “inhibit the industry’s ability to innovate,” which could potentially lead to falling behind China.
Being part of the company leading the charge in terms of autonomous vehicle development in the U.S., Moravy highlighted Tesla’s prowess through the development of the Full Self-Driving platform. Tesla vehicles with FSD engaged average 5.1 million miles before a major collision, which outpaces that of the human driver average of roughly 699,000 miles.
Moravy also highlighted the widely cited NHTSA statistic that states that roughly 94 percent of crashes stem from human error, positioning autonomous vehicles as a path to dramatically reduce fatalities and injuries.
🚨 Tesla VP of Vehicle Engineering, Lars Moravy, appeared today before the U.S. Senate Commerce Committee to discuss the importance of outlining an efficient framework for autonomous vehicles:
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) February 4, 2026
Skeptics sometimes point to cybersecurity concerns within self-driving vehicles, which was something that was highlighted during the Senate Commerce Committee hearing, but Moravy said, “No one has ever been able to take over control of our vehicles.”
This level of security is thanks to a core-embedded central layer, which is inaccessible from external connections. Additionally, Tesla utilizes a dual cryptographic signature from two separate individuals, keeping security high.
Moravy also dove into Tesla’s commitment to inclusive mobility by stating, “We are committed with our future products and Robotaxis to provide accessible transportation to everyone.” This has been a major point of optimism for AVs because it could help the disabled, physically incapable, the elderly, and the blind have consistent transportation.
Overall, Moravy’s testimony blended urgency about geopolitical competition, especially China, with concrete safety statistics and a vision of the advantages autonomy could bring for everyone, not only in the U.S., but around the world, as well.
Tesla launched a new configuration of the Model Y this week, bringing more complexity to its lineup of the vehicle and adding a new, lower entry point for those who require an All-Wheel-Drive car.
However, the broadening of the Model Y lineup in the United States could signal a somewhat uncomfortable reality for Tesla fans and car buyers, who have been vocal about their desire for a larger, full-size SUV.
Tesla has essentially moved in the opposite direction through its closure of the Model X and its continuing expansion of a vehicle that fits the bill for many, but not all.
Tesla brings closure to Model Y moniker with launch of new trim level
While CEO Elon Musk has said that there is the potential for the Model Y L, a longer wheelbase configuration of the vehicle, to enter the U.S. market late this year, it is not a guarantee.
Instead, Tesla has prioritized the need to develop vehicles and trim levels that cater to the future rollout of the Robotaxi ride-hailing service and a fully autonomous future.
But the company could be missing out on a massive opportunity, as SUVs are a widely popular body style in the U.S., especially for families, as the tighter confines of compact SUVs do not support the needs of a large family.
Although there are other companies out there that manufacture this body style, many are interested in sticking with Tesla because of the excellent self-driving platform, expansive charging infrastructure, and software performance the vehicles offer.
Additionally, the lack of variety from an aesthetic and feature standpoint has caused a bit of monotony throughout the Model Y lineup. Although Premium options are available, those three configurations only differ in terms of range and performance, at least for the most part, and the differences are not substantial.
Minor Expansions of the Model Y Fail to Address Family Needs for Space
Offering similar trim levels with slight differences to cater to each consumer’s needs is important. However, these vehicles keep a constant: cargo space and seating capacity.
Larger families need something that would compete with vehicles like the Chevrolet Tahoe, Ford Expedition, or Cadillac Escalade, and while the Model X was its largest offering, that is going away.
Tesla could fix this issue partially with the rollout of the Model Y L in the U.S., but only if it plans to continue offering various Model Y vehicles and expanding on its offerings with that car specifically. There have been hints toward a Cyber-inspired SUV in the past, but those hints do not seem to be a drastic focus of the company, given its autonomy mission.
Model Y Expansion Doesn’t Boost Performance, Value, or Space
You can throw all the different badges, powertrains, and range ratings on the same vehicle, it does not mean it’s going to sell better. The Model Y was already the best-selling vehicle in the world on several occasions. Adding more configurations seems to be milking it.
The true need of people, especially now that the Model X is going away, is going to be space. What vehicle fits the bill of a growing family, or one that has already outgrown the Model Y?
Not Expanding the Lineup with a New Vehicle Could Be a Missed Opportunity
The U.S. is the world’s largest market for three-row SUVs, yet Tesla’s focus on tweaking the existing Model Y ignores this. This could potentially result in the Osborne Effect, as sales of current models without capturing new customers who need more seating and versatility.
Expansions of the current Model Y offerings risk adding production complexity without addressing core demands, and given that the Model Y L is already being produced in China, it seems like it would be a reasonable decision to build a similar line in Texas.
Listening to consumers means introducing either the Model Y L here, or bringing a new, modern design to the lineup in the form of a full-size SUV.
Tesla confirms Full Self-Driving still isn’t garnering interest from lagging competitors
Tesla exec pleads for federal framework of autonomy to U.S. Senate Committee
