News
SpaceX closes in on West Coast Starlink launches with lease for drone ship dock space
Amid a major hiring push and calls for monthly launches, SpaceX has taken its latest step towards launching Starlink satellites from the West Coast with a lease for rocket recovery ship dock space at the Port of Long Beach.
News of the port lease broke on April 26th with a tweet from the mayor of Long Beach, California after the Port of Long Beach (POLB) Commission voted to approve SpaceX’s 24-month sublease with an effective start date of May 1st, 2021. From 2014 to 2020, a massive floating rocket launch complex and associated service ships once used by SeaLaunch called POLB’s Pier 16 home while mothballed and the company left behind a decent amount of infrastructure when it vacated the facility last year.
That includes a ~5600 square meter (~65,000 sq ft) warehouse and office space formerly used to process SeaLaunch payloads and Ukrainian Zenit rockets, as well as a pier and dock space generally optimized for loading and unloading large rockets from rocket transport ships. In other words, Pier 16 is a perfect fit for SpaceX’s needs.
The news came as a surprise because SpaceX already has a lease for several berths and dock space at Port of San Pedro, which – along with Port of Long Beach – makes up the greater Port of Los Angeles. SpaceX has used those facilities for the better part of a decade – initially to support Dragon spacecraft recoveries but later as a hub for drone ship Just Read The Instructions (JRTI) and fairing recovery ship Mr. Steven (later Ms. Tree).
SpaceX has a bit of a sordid history with port leases over the last several years after twice entering and backing out of Port of Los Angeles (San Pedro) lease agreements to build a Starship factory directly on the water in 2018 and 2020. This time around, POLB commission documents indicate that this new lease is not the third in a line of ill-fated Starship factory plans – but instead a simple relocation of existing West Coast Falcon rocket recovery operations just two miles east of their current home.
It’s unclear why exactly SpaceX is leasing much larger berth and dock space at a port in competition with its current Port of Los Angeles landlord or if Pier 16 will be an addition to – or a replacement for – its current berths to the west. At approximately $100,000 per month, Pier 16 will be substantially more expensive, ruling out cost savings, which could mean that SpaceX has reason to believe that its West Coast rocket recovery operations are going to experience a substantial uptick in activity in the near future.
Indeed, in retrospect, SpaceX’s current Port of San Pedro berths and dock space have always been fairly limited, offering just enough space for a few small tents on concrete and a drone ship and two support vessels to park end to end. Assuming SpaceX moves all operations to Pier 16 and closes out its San Pedro lease, the new facilities should offer a bit more dock space along the pier itself, as well as far more room – and an existing warehouse with offices – to process recovered Falcon boosters and fairings.
Over half a decade of operations, SpaceX recovered Falcon boosters with drone ship JRTI just seven times (of eight attempts) on the West Coast, making it clear why the company simply chose to make do with close quarters and a barebones dockside setup. Now, however, SpaceX appears to be preparing its Vandenberg Air Force Base (VAFB) launch site and associated Port of LA recovery assets for a far more ambitious period of Falcon 9 launch activity.
Other observations support that conclusion. Over the last six or so months, SpaceX has been aggressively hiring to fully outfit its VAFB SLC-4 launch pad after supporting just two West Coast launches in the last ~28 months. Most notably, hiring ‘flyers’ distributed on social media by SpaceX employees touted a target of monthly launches from the company’s West Coast pad – an unprecedented cadence over the decade SpaceX has leased it.
First reported by Spaceflight Now, SpaceX President and COO Gwynne Shotwell recently revealed that the company intends to begin dedicated polar Starlink launches from Vandenberg as early as this summer – July 2021 if taken literally. Other “industry officials” reportedly corroborated those plans.
With its hiring campaign finally starting to slow down and a new Port of Long Beach lease set to open on May 1st, the only real ‘missing link’ for SpaceX’s plans to restart regular West Coast Falcon 9 launches is the fleet of ships the company will need to recover Falcon boosters and payload fairings. To maximize efficiency, dedicated polar Starlink launches will require Falcon 9 boosters to land far downrange and will be even more challenging than the rocket’s now-routine missions to low Earth orbit (LEO), which require almost every ounce of performance the rocket can give.
SpaceX transported its second drone ship – Just Read The Instructions (JRTI) – across the Panama Canal from Port of LA to Port Canaveral, Florida in 2019, where it still operates today. To achieve SpaceX’s planned cadence of up to 48 launches in 2021, the company will almost certainly need both drone ships on the East Coast. A third drone ship – named A Shortfall Of Gravitas (ASOG) – has been in the works for years, though SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has long described the vessel as an addition to the company’s Florida fleet that would enable Falcon Heavy to land all three first-stage boosters at sea for maximum payload capacity.
For now, we’ll just have to wait and see if SpaceX intends to send that third drone ship directly to California to support an imminent series of polar Starlink launches.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk demands Delaware Judge recuse herself after ‘support’ post celebrating $2B court loss
A banner on the post read “Katie McCormick supports this,” using LinkedIn’s heart-in-hand “support” icon, an endorsement stronger than a simple “like.” Musk’s lawyers argue the action creates “a perception of bias against Mr. Musk,” warranting immediate recusal to preserve judicial impartiality.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s legal team has filed a motion demanding that Delaware Chancellor Kathaleen McCormick disqualify herself from an ongoing high-stakes Tesla shareholder lawsuit.
The filing, submitted March 25, cites an apparent LinkedIn “support” reaction from McCormick’s account to a post celebrating a $2 billion jury verdict against Musk in a separate California securities-fraud case.
The move escalates long-simmering tensions between Musk, Tesla, and the Delaware judiciary, where McCormick previously presided over the landmark challenge to Musk’s record $56 billion 2018 compensation package.
Delaware Supreme Court reinstates Elon Musk’s 2018 Tesla CEO pay package
The LinkedIn post was written by Harry Plotkin, a Southern California jury consultant who assisted the plaintiffs who sued Musk over 2022 tweets about his Twitter acquisition. Plotkin praised the trial team for “standing up for the little guy against the richest man in the world.”
The New York Post initially reported the story.
A banner on the post read “Katie McCormick supports this,” using LinkedIn’s heart-in-hand “support” icon, an endorsement stronger than a simple “like.” Musk’s lawyers argue the action creates “a perception of bias against Mr. Musk,” warranting immediate recusal to preserve judicial impartiality.
This appears to be unequivocal proof she denied the pay package because of her own personal beliefs and not the law.
Corruption. https://t.co/8dvgcfYuvh
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) March 25, 2026
McCormick swiftly denied intentional endorsement. In a letter to attorneys, she stated she was unaware of the interaction until LinkedIn notified her. She wrote:
“I either did not click the ‘support’ icon at all, or I did so accidentally. I do not believe that I did it accidentally.”
The chancellor maintains the reaction was inadvertent, but critics, including Musk allies, call the explanation implausible given the platform’s deliberate interface.
McCormick’s central role in the Tesla pay-package litigation underscores the stakes. In Tornetta v. Musk, in January 2024, she ruled the 2018 performance-based stock-option grant, potentially worth $56 billion at the time and now valued far higher, was invalid.
The package consisted of 12 tranches of options, each vesting only after Tesla achieved ambitious market-cap and operational milestones. McCormick found Musk exercised “transaction-specific control” over Tesla as a controlling stockholder, the board lacked sufficient independence, and proxy disclosures to shareholders were materially deficient.
Applying the entire-fairness standard, she concluded defendants failed to prove the deal was fair in process or price and ordered full rescission, an “unfathomable” remedy she described as necessary to deter fiduciary breaches.
After the ruling, Tesla shareholders ratified the package a second time in June 2024. McCormick rejected that ratification in December 2024, holding that post-trial votes could not cure defects.
Tesla appealed. On December 19 of last year, the Delaware Supreme Court unanimously reversed the rescission remedy while largely leaving McCormick’s liability findings intact. The high court deemed total unwinding inequitable and impractical, restoring the package but awarding the plaintiff only nominal $1 damages plus reduced attorneys’ fees. Musk ultimately received the full award.
The current recusal motion arises in yet another Tesla derivative suit before McCormick. Legal observers say granting it could signal heightened scrutiny of judicial social-media activity; denial might reinforce perceptions of an insular Delaware bench.
Broader fallout includes accelerated corporate migration out of Delaware, Musk himself moved Tesla’s incorporation to Texas after the first ruling, and renewed debate over whether the state’s specialized courts remain the gold standard for corporate governance disputes.
A decision is expected soon; whichever way it lands, the episode highlights the fragile balance between judicial independence and public confidence in high-profile litigation.
News
Tesla Cybercab spotted next to Model Y shows size comparison
The Model Y is Tesla’s most-popular vehicle and has been atop the world’s best-selling rankings for the last three years. The Cybercab, while yet to be released, could potentially surpass the Model Y due to its planned accessible price, potential for passive income for owners, and focus on autonomy.
The Tesla Cybercab and Tesla Model Y are perhaps two of the company’s most-discussed vehicles, and although they are geared toward different things, a recent image of the two shows a side-by-side size comparison and how they stack up dimensionally.
The Model Y is Tesla’s most-popular vehicle and has been atop the world’s best-selling rankings for the last three years. The Cybercab, while yet to be released, could potentially surpass the Model Y due to its planned accessible price, potential for passive income for owners, and focus on autonomy.
Geared as a ride-sharing vehicle, it only has two seats. However, the car will be responsible for hauling two people around to various destinations completely autonomously. How they differ in terms of size is striking.
In a new aerial image shared by drone operator and Gigafactory Texas observer Joe Tegtmeyer, the two vehicles were seen side by side, offering perhaps the first clear look at how they differ in size.
Tesla Model Y vs. Tesla Cybercab:
✅ Overall Length:⁰Model Y: 188.7 inches (4,794 mm)⁰Cybercab: ~175 inches (≈4,445 mm)⁰→ Cybercab is about 13–14 inches shorter (roughly the length of a large suitcase).
✅ Overall Width (excluding mirrors):⁰Model Y: 75.6 inches (1,920 mm)… https://t.co/PsVwzhw1pe pic.twitter.com/58JQ5ssQIO
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) March 25, 2026
Dimensionally, the differences are striking. The Model Y stretches roughly 188 inches long, 75.6 inches wide, excluding its mirrors, and stands 64 inches tall on a 113.8-inch wheelbase. The Cybercab measures approximately 175 inches in length, about a foot shorter, and just 63 inches wide.
That narrower stance gives the Cybercab a dramatically more compact silhouette, making it easier to maneuver in tight urban environments and park in standard spaces that would feel cramped for the Model Y. Height is also lower on the Cybercab, contributing to its sleek, coupe-like profile versus the Model Y’s taller crossover shape.
Visually, the contrast is unmistakable. The Model Y presents as a family-friendly SUV with conventional doors, a prominent hood, and a spacious glass roof.
The Cybercab eliminates the steering wheel and pedals entirely, creating a clean, futuristic cabin that feels more lounge than cockpit.
Its doors open in a distinctive, wide-swinging motion, and the body features smoother, more aerodynamic lines optimized for autonomy. Parked beside a Model Y, the Cybercab appears almost toy-like in width and length, yet its low-slung stance and minimalist design emphasize agility over bulk.
🚨 We caught up with the Tesla Cybercab today in The Bay Area: pic.twitter.com/9awXiK26ue
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) March 24, 2026
Cargo capacity tells another part of the story. The Model Y offers generous real-world utility: 4.1 cubic feet in the front trunk and 30.2 cubic feet behind the rear seats, expanding to 72 cubic feet with the second row folded flat.
It comfortably swallows groceries, luggage, or sports equipment for five passengers. The Cybercab, designed for two riders, trades that volume for targeted efficiency.
It features a rear hatch with enough space for two carry-on suitcases and personal items, plenty for the typical robotaxi trip, while maintaining impressive legroom and headroom for its occupants.
In short, the Model Y prioritizes versatility and family hauling with its larger footprint and abundant storage. The Cybercab sacrifices size for simplicity, cost, and urban nimbleness.
At roughly 12 inches shorter and 12 inches narrower, it embodies Tesla’s vision for scalable, affordable autonomy: smaller on the outside, smarter inside, and ready to redefine how we move through cities.
The Cybercab and Model Y both will contribute to Tesla’s fully autonomous future. However, the size comparison gives a good look into how the vehicles are the same, and how they differ, and what riders should anticipate as the Cybercab enters production in the coming weeks.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk says Tesla is developing a new vehicle: ‘Way cooler than a minivan’
It sounds as if Tesla could be considering a new vehicle to fit the mold of what a larger family would need, and as fans have been demanding it for several years and the company is phasing out the Model X, its only family-geared vehicle, it sounds as if it could be the perfect time.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk said the company is developing a new vehicle, and it will be “way cooler than a minivan.”
It sounds as if Tesla could be considering a new vehicle to fit the mold of what a larger family would need, and as fans have been demanding it for several years and the company is phasing out the Model X, its only family-geared vehicle, it sounds as if it could be the perfect time.
There are a handful of things Musk could be talking about, and as many Tesla owners have wanted a vehicle along the lines of a minivan for hauling around their family, speculation has persisted about what the company would do in terms of developing something for that exact use case.
There were several options, and some of them seemed to be already available. Musk posted on X yesterday that the Cybertruck has three sets of isofix attachments and could fit three child seats or three adults, and it seemed to be a way to deflect plans for a new, larger vehicle as a Model Y L appeared to be present at Giga Texas.
There is also the Robovan, the large people mover that Tesla unveiled at the “We, Robot” back in 2024.
Something way cooler than a minivan is coming
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 25, 2026
However, it seems Tesla could be developing something like a CyberSUV, something that is going to be large enough to haul around a car full of kids, but could be developed with the company’s aesthetic of the company’s most recent releases: this would likely include a light bar and a more sleek, futuristic look.
We’ve mocked up some potential looks for Tesla’s speculative vehicle in the past:
Tesla has teased the potential of a CyberSUV in the past, showing off clay models that it developed back in September in a teaser video called “Sustainable Abundance.”
Fans and owners have been calling for this development for a very long time, and it seems like Tesla might be ready to finally answer the call on a large SUV. With the segment being dominated by combustion engine vehicles, Tesla could truly disrupt the large SUVs that have been mainstays.
The Chevrolet Tahoe and GMC Yukon would feel some additional pressure, and it would be possible for Tesla to infiltrate some of those sales and pull consumers to electric powertrains.
As the Model S and Model X sunset process is truly hitting full swing, it might be time to consider Tesla’s next option in terms of vehicle development.
Elon Musk demands Delaware Judge recuse herself after ‘support’ post celebrating $2B court loss
Tesla Cybercab spotted next to Model Y shows size comparison
Elon Musk says Tesla is developing a new vehicle: ‘Way cooler than a minivan’
Elon Musk’s Boring Co. Tunnel Vision Challenge ends with a surprise for Louisiana, Maryland and Dallas
What is Digital Optimus? The new Tesla and xAI project explained
