News
SpaceX rolls largest rocket booster ever built to the launch pad
Six weeks after assembly began, SpaceX has completed Starship’s first true Super Heavy booster prototype, rolled it out of its ‘high bay’ nest, and installed the building-sized rocket at the launch pad.
Standing some 65 meters (~215 ft) tall, Super Heavy Booster 3 (B3) is the same height as an entire two-stage Falcon rocket and Dragon spacecraft and is expected to singlehandedly weigh six times more than a fully-fueled Falcon 9 when loaded with liquid oxygen and methane propellant. Once Super Heavies are eventually outfitted with a full 32 Raptors, more engines than any other rocket in history, the booster will also produce more than twice the thrust of NASA’s Saturn V Moon rocket – still the most powerful vehicle ever successfully flown.
Assembled out of 36 steel rings, three tank domes, and dozens of other major components, Super Heavy B3 borrows heavily from the Starship production apparatus SpaceX has built and refined over the last ~18 months. Boosters use the same welding and integration jigs, facilities, and strategies and are built out of the same steel rings, stringers, stiffeners, and dome ‘gores.’
In some ways, Super Heavy boosters are actually a good deal simpler than Starships, which require a custom nose cone, secondary ‘header’ tanks, extra plumbing, actuating flaps, a heat shield with thousands of tiles, and more. Boosters, by comparison, require no heat shield and only need two main tanks made out of identical steel rings. However, all three Super Heavy domes (forward, common, and thrust) are mostly custom or require major modifications on top of parts shared with Starship domes.
Speaking on June 30th, Elon Musk revealed that Booster 3 was “very hard to build” and would be exclusively used for ground tests, reiterating that Super Heavy B4 is currently the first booster scheduled to fly. Curiously, the SpaceX CEO also said that “much of [Super Heavy’s] design” would be changed between Booster 3 and Booster 4, raising questions about what the company hopes to gain from Booster 3 “ground tests.”
Regardless, those tests are now on track to begin as early as Monday, July 6th after SpaceX transported Super Heavy Booster 3 from the factory to the launch pad and rapidly installed the rocket on a test platform on July 1st. Following in the footsteps of Starship, Super Heavy’s first hurdle will likely be an ambient proof test, in which nitrogen gas is used to check for leaks and verify general structural integrity under pressure.
Once complete, Booster 3 will be put through a cryogenic proof test, effectively replacing gaseous nitrogen with its supercooled liquid equivalent to simulate the immense thermal and mechanical stress incurred by similarly cold liquid oxygen and methane propellant. How exactly that test will be done is unclear given that Super Heavy can feasibly hold more than 3100 tons of liquid nitrogen and nowhere near that much storage capacity has been installed. The most important goal of cryo proof testing is to demonstrate that Super Heavy is structurally sound with its tanks pressurized to nominal flight pressures – likely at least 7-8 bar (~100-120 psi).
If successful, there are two possible routes SpaceX could go: more cryogenic proof testing at higher (and thus potentially destructive) pressures or static fire testing with one or several Raptor engines installed. Given Musk’s statement that the first flightworthy Super Heavy booster would implement major design changes, it’s unclear if Booster 3 is of a high enough fidelity to warrant static fire testing or if SpaceX has effectively turned the Super Heavy prototype into a massive ‘test tank’ instead.
News
Tesla’s Apple CarPlay ambitions are not dead, they’re still in the works
For what it’s worth, as a Tesla owner, I don’t particularly see the need for CarPlay, as I have found the in-car system that the company has developed to be superior. However, many people are in love with CarPlay simply because, when it’s in a car that is capable, it is really great.
Tesla’s Apple CarPlay ambitions appeared to be dead in the water after a large amount of speculation late last year that the company would add the user interface seemed to cool down after several weeks of reports.
However, it appears that CarPlay might make its way to Tesla vehicles after all, as a recent report seems to indicate that it is still being worked on by software teams for the company.
The real question is whether it is truly needed or if it is just a want by so many owners that Tesla is listening and deciding to proceed with its development.
Back in November, Bloomberg reported that Tesla was in the process of testing Apple CarPlay within its vehicles, which was a major development considering the company had resisted adopting UIs outside of its own for many years.
Nearly one-third of car buyers considered the lack of CarPlay as a deal-breaker when buying their cars, a study from McKinsey & Co. outlined. This could be a driving decision in Tesla’s inability to abandon the development of CarPlay in its vehicles, especially as it lost a major advantage that appealed to consumers last year: the $7,500 EV tax credit.
Tesla owners propose interesting theory about Apple CarPlay and EV tax credit
Although we saw little to no movement on it since the November speculation, Tesla is now reportedly in the process of still developing the user interface. Mark Gurman, a Bloomberg writer with a weekly newsletter, stated that CarPlay is “still in the works” at Tesla and that more concrete information will be available “soon” regarding its development.
While Tesla already has a very capable and widely accepted user interface, CarPlay would still be an advantage, considering many people have used it in their vehicles for years. Just like smartphones, many people get comfortable with an operating system or style and are resistant to using a new one. This could be a big reason for Tesla attempting to get it in their own cars.
Tesla gets updated “Apple CarPlay” hack that can work on new models
For what it’s worth, as a Tesla owner, I don’t particularly see the need for CarPlay, as I have found the in-car system that the company has developed to be superior. However, many people are in love with CarPlay simply because, when it’s in a car that is capable, it is really great.
It holds one distinct advantage over Tesla’s UI in my opinion, and that’s the ability to read and respond to text messages, which is something that is available within a Tesla, but is not as user-friendly.
With that being said, I would still give CarPlay a shot in my Tesla. I didn’t particularly enjoy it in my Bronco Sport, but that was because Ford’s software was a bit laggy with it. If it were as smooth as Tesla’s UI, which I think it would be, it could be a really great addition to the vehicle.
With the launch of a new trim level for the Model Y last night, something almost went unnoticed — the loss of a moniker that Tesla just recently added to a couple of its variants of the all-electric crossover.
Tesla launched the Model Y All-Wheel-Drive last night, competitively priced at $41,990, but void of the luxurious features that are available within the Premium trims.
Upon examination of the car, one thing was missing, and it was noticeable: Tesla dropped the use of the “Standard” moniker to identify its entry-level offerings of the Model Y.
The Standard Model Y vehicles were introduced late last year, primarily to lower the entry price after the U.S. EV tax credit changes were made. Tesla stripped some features like the panoramic glass roof, premium audio, ambient lighting, acoustic-lined glass, and some of the storage.
Last night, it simply switched the configurations away from “Standard” and simply as the Model Y Rear-Wheel-Drive and Model Y All-Wheel-Drive.
There are three plausible reasons for this move, and while it is minor, there must be an answer for why Tesla chose to abandon the name, yet keep the “Premium” in its upper-level offerings.
“Standard” carried a negative connotation in marketing
Words like “Standard” can subtly imply “basic,” “bare-bones,” or “cheap” to consumers, especially when directly contrasted with “Premium” on the configurator or website. Dropping it avoids making the entry-level Model Y feel inferior or low-end, even though it’s designed for affordability.
Tesla likely wanted the base trim to sound neutral and spec-focused (e.g., just “RWD” highlights drivetrain rather than feature level), while “Premium” continues to signal desirable upgrades, encouraging upsells to higher-margin variants.
Simplifying the overall naming structure for less confusion
The initial “Standard vs. Premium” split (plus Performance) created a somewhat clunky hierarchy, especially as Tesla added more variants like Standard Long Range in some markets or the new AWD base.
Removing “Standard” streamlines things to a more straightforward progression (RWD → AWD → Premium RWD/AWD → Performance), making the lineup easier to understand at a glance. This aligns with Tesla’s history of iterative naming tweaks to reduce buyer hesitation.
Elevating brand perception and protecting perceived value
Keeping “Premium” reinforces that the bulk of the Model Y lineup (especially the popular Long Range models) remains a premium product with desirable features like better noise insulation, upgraded interiors, and tech.
Eliminating “Standard” prevents any dilution of the Tesla brand’s upscale image—particularly important in a competitive EV market—while the entry-level variants can quietly exist as accessible “RWD/AWD” options without drawing attention to them being decontented versions.
You can check out the differences between the “Standard” and “Premium” Model Y vehicles below:
@teslarati There are some BIG differences between the Tesla Model Y Standard and Tesla Model Y Premium #tesla #teslamodely ♬ Sia – Xeptemper
Elon Musk
Tesla bull sees odds rising of Tesla merger after Musk confirms SpaceX-xAI deal
Dan Ives of Wedbush Securities wrote on Tuesday that there is a growing chance Tesla could be merged in some form with SpaceX and xAI over the next 12 to 18 months.
A prominent Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) bull has stated that the odds are rising that Tesla could eventually merge with SpaceX and xAI, following Elon Musk’s confirmation that the private space company has combined with his artificial intelligence startup.
Dan Ives of Wedbush Securities wrote on Tuesday that there is a growing chance Tesla could be merged in some form with SpaceX and xAI over the next 12 to 18 months.
“In our view there is a growing chance that Tesla will eventually be merged in some form into SpaceX/xAI over time. The view is this growing AI ecosystem will focus on Space and Earth together…..and Musk will look to combine forces,” Ives wrote in a post on X.
Ives’ comments followed confirmation from Elon Musk late Monday that SpaceX has merged with xAI. Musk stated that the merger creates a vertically integrated platform that combines AI, rockets, satellite internet, communications, and real-time data.
In a post on SpaceX’s official website, Elon Musk added that the combined company is aimed at enabling space-based AI compute, stating that within two to three years, space could become the lowest-cost environment for generating AI processing power. The transaction reportedly values the combined SpaceX-xAI entity at roughly $1.25 trillion.
Tesla, for its part, has already increased its exposure to xAI, announcing a $2 billion investment in the startup last week in its Q4 and FY 2025 update letter.
While merger speculation has intensified, notable complications could emerge if SpaceX/xAI does merge with Tesla, as noted in a report from Investors Business Daily.
SpaceX holds major U.S. government contracts, including with the Department of Defense and NASA, and xAI’s Grok is being used by the U.S. Department of War. Tesla, for its part, maintains extensive operations in China through Gigafactory Shanghai and its Megapack facility.
Tesla’s Apple CarPlay ambitions are not dead, they’re still in the works
Tesla brings closure to Model Y moniker with launch of new trim level
