News
SpaceX Starship eyes Tuesday launch after FAA communication breakdown causes delays
Two new sourced reports suggest that SpaceX’s fast-moving approach to Starship development and a shocking level of naivety and ineptitude on behalf of the FAA’s regulatory responsibilities combined to delay the latest Starship test flight.
As previously discussed on Teslarati, SpaceX was clearly and publicly targeting a Starship launch as early as 12pm to 5pm on Monday, March 29th after unknown issues delayed a Friday attempt. Those plans were writ large on SpaceX’s own website and via CEO Elon Musk’s tweets a full three days before launch and confirmed by road closures, notices to mariners, and the FAA’s own flight restrictions and advisories 24-48 hours prior. Around 11am CDT Monday, Musk revealed that SpaceX had been forced to call off the day’s launch attempt because an FAA-required inspector was “unable to reach” Boca Chica in time.
Now, per reports separately corroborated by The Verge reporter Joey Roulette and Washington Post reporter Christian Davenport, a clearer picture of what exactly transpired is available.
Roulette first broke the news, offering a better look at a portion of the debacle. Per “a source,” SpaceX had apparently told the FAA inspector – who had been waiting all week for Starship SN11’s launch debut – that plans for a Monday recycle had been canceled. The inspector then flew home to Florida. However, as things often do and have, the situation rapidly changed and SpaceX suddenly found itself in a position to launch on Monday.
According to the apparent FAA-side source, SpaceX dropped that change of plans on the agency’s lap late on Sunday, leading the inspector to “[scramble]” onto a Monday flight that was somehow too late to arrive before the 5pm CDT end of Starship’s test window. In a statement, the FAA chided SpaceX, stating that the company “must provide adequate notice of its launch schedule to allow for a safety inspector to travel to Boca Chica.”
Under that description of events, it would be hard not to find SpaceX clearly in the wrong. Mere hours of notice – and only offered late on Sunday evening – would make it difficult for anyone to abruptly arrange a 1300-mile, multi-stop flight. At the same time, though, someone capable of singlehandedly scrubbing an entire rocket launch attempt on a whim (or an accident) is obviously not just “anyone” and a functional regulatory apparatus probably wouldn’t leave the entirety of that substantial responsibility up to a single employee.
As it so happened, Roulette’s source only offer part of the picture. According to Christian Davenport and his sources, SpaceX (or someone) did tell the FAA inspector that it was safe to head home on Friday because the company was struggling to secure road closures from Cameron County for a Monday launch attempt. Apparently, the issue was so extreme that SpaceX wasn’t sure if a launch on any day of the next week would be possible.
However, sometime early on Sunday morning, SpaceX secured a road closure for a Monday Starship launch attempt. According to Davenport, SpaceX emailed the FAA inspector but he “didn’t see the email,” which presumably served as a notice of plans for a Starship launch attempt. Logically, SpaceX then began attempting to call the FAA (inspector?) but didn’t get an answer or call back until “late Sunday night.”
Via Cameron County’s explicitly public road closure announcement website, Monday’s road closure was granted no later than 11am CDT. Assuming SpaceX emailed the FAA inspector around then, that email effectively served as a notice of launch plans more than 24 hours before the window was scheduled to open. If SpaceX didn’t somehow forget to email until hours later, Davenport’s description implies that it took SpaceX hours of constant phone calls before the FAA finally responded.
If that series of events is accurate, as it seems to be, it’s a searing indictment of systematic ineptitude and laziness on behalf of the FAA. Having changed SpaceX’s Starship launch license to necessitate the presence of an FAA inspector mere weeks ago, thus giving a single person the power to scrub an entire launch attempt, the regulatory agency appears to have entrusted the entirety of that responsibility to a single “inspector.” Knowing full well that SpaceX works continuously with multiple shifts after almost two years of managing Starhopper and Starship tests, hops, and launches, the FAA then failed to ensure that some kind of communications infrastructure was in place to keep SpaceX appraised about the availability of a single inspector it now fully hinged on for all future Starship launches.
If, as the phrasing in both reports suggests, the FAA allotted a single government inspector to preside over all future Starship launches, that alone would bely a ridiculous level of ineptitude and naivete (or ignorance). To then trust that single person with nearly all of the responsibility of maintaining contact with SpaceX, day and night, would be akin to the FAA consciously guaranteeing that a disruptive breakdown in communications like this one would happen.
All told, SpaceX likely also needs to do some recalibration to better mesh and coexist with the FAA’s glacial reaction time and pace of work. However, the FAA is not going to be winning any favors if it continues to manage SpaceX’s Starship licensing in a manner as inept and cavalier as it has been. Far more importantly, if the FAA – one of the largest, best-funded regulatory bodies responsible for ensuring the safety of some of the most complex systems and vehicles on Earth – is unable to perform tasks as rudimentary as scheduling and contingency planning, it’s difficult to imagine how that same office could be trusted to regulate – and make safer – systems as extraordinarily complex as launch vehicles.
With any luck, the FAA will prove that the last four months have been minor bumps in the road to reliably and professionally licensing and regulating SpaceX’s Starship launch vehicle. However, after two separate demonstrations of systematic mismanagement over a mere four Starship launch attempts, it’s becoming harder and harder to soundly argue that the FAA still deserves the benefit of the doubt.
Assuming the FAA inspector is on schedule, Starship SN11’s next launch attempt is now scheduled between 7am and 3pm CDT (UTC-5) on Tuesday, March 30th.
News
Tesla Cybercab spotted testing on public roads for the first time
The car was spotted just minutes from Tesla’s Engineering Headquarters in Los Altos, California. There are a few interesting tidbits we can gather from the photo and the information shared with it.
The Tesla Cybercab has been spotted testing on public roads for the first time, marking a substantial step forward in the vehicle’s development.
The car was spotted just minutes from Tesla’s Engineering Headquarters in Los Altos, California. There are a few interesting tidbits we can gather from the photo and the information shared with it:
BREAKING: Tesla’s Cybercab spotted testing on public roads for the first time!
This was in Los Altos, California, about 10 minutes from Tesla’s Engineering HQ. As would be expected at this stage, a person was in the driver seat.
The future is autonomous 🤖 pic.twitter.com/cvd6UrnKZo
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) October 29, 2025
The vehicle had a driver and side view mirrors equipped on it, which seems to be pretty expected, especially at this stage.
Tesla might have been using its Full Self-Driving software with the vehicle as it enters this new stage of testing on public roads. This seems most likely, especially as the car, which has long been developed to be void of a steering wheel and pedals, will totally rely on autonomous tech to transport one or two passengers to their destination.
Additionally, side view mirrors are required by law at delivery, and Tesla was likely looking to keep things as safe and elementary as possible, especially with this early stage of testing.
As this is the first time the vehicle has been spotted on public roads and the first time it was likely testing on them, Tesla was being cautious.
There have been a lot of developments with Cybercab over the past few weeks, as the car has been spotted testing on the Fremont Factory’s test track, units have been seen outside of Gigafactory Texas’s crash testing facility, and there has been some additional speculation about what the vehicle’s standard equipment will be.
There have also been quite a few job postings by Tesla for manufacturing and production roles related to Cybercab over the past few weeks.
Yesterday, Tesla’s Board Chair, Robyn Denholm, revealed that the company could end up building Cybercab with a steering wheel and pedals, contrary to what Tesla and CEO Elon Musk have wanted to do.
The vehicle has yet to reach that stage of regulatory testing, but Tesla wants to start volume production in Q2. If it wants to release the vehicle without any manual controls, that means that Full Self-Driving will need to be completed within the next eight months.
News
Tesla hints it could see ‘a few more vehicles’ released soon
Denholm said on CNBC yesterday that “we do have a few other vehicles coming out.”
Tesla Board Chair Robyn Denholm hinted the company could see “a few more vehicles” coming out and being released soon, although there is no indication of what could be on the way based on her comments.
However, Tesla has hinted toward several potential releases in the coming years, as other executives, including Chief Designer Franz von Holzhausen, have talked briefly about what could be on the way.
Denholm said on CNBC yesterday that “we do have a few other vehicles coming out.”
BREAKING: $TSLA BOARD CHAIR ROBYN SAYS — “WE HAVE NEW VEHICLES COMING OUT” 👀
It’s happening ! pic.twitter.com/f8UuZWGLuP
— TheSonOfWalkley (@TheSonOfWalkley) October 27, 2025
It was a vague and almost cryptic sentence, as, in all honesty, it was not completely clear whether she was talking about recent releases that are just making their way to market, like the Model 3 and Model Y “Standard,” or new vehicles altogether.
Nevertheless, it’s worth dissecting.
Tesla “Standard” Models
On October 7, Tesla launched the Standard Model 3 and Model Y, stripped-down versions of their now “Premium” siblings. The Standard trims lack premium features like leather seats, a rear touchscreen, and a glass roof, among other features.
These cars are just starting to be delivered for the first time, so it is possible that Denholm was referring to these cars.
Potential Model 2 Hint?
There has always been a looming vehicle model that many Tesla fans and owners have been intrigued by: the Model 2.
This car was hinted at being the $25,000 model that Tesla was rumored to be developing, and many thought that was the vehicle that would be released earlier this month, not the Standard Model 3 and Model Y.
Instead, the Model 2 could be something that would enable Tesla to reach an entirely new consumer base, including those who are not able to swing the payment for the company’s more premium offerings.
It seems Tesla will have to launch some sort of extremely affordable model in the future, and with the Cybercab being slotted at that rough price point, it would not be out of the question for it to be in the realm of possibility for future releases.
It’s worth noting, however, that it is probably unlikely this will happen. Tesla is so deadset focused on autonomy, it seems Cybercab would take extreme precedence over the unconfirmed “Model 2.”
Cybertruck-inspired SUV
Tesla fans have been begging the company to develop a full-size SUV that would compete with the Ford Expedition or Chevrolet Tahoe, but the company has not given any indication that this would be something it would build.
Nevertheless, there was a very subtle hint in a recent promotional clip that showed a Cyber SUV mock-up placed strategically next to a clay model of a Model 3:
The Model X is simply not what people want when it comes to an SUV, as it does not have the seating capacity and cargo space that many need with a full-sized SUV.
This issue, in particular, has been one that has been extremely relevant to the company’s future lineup as consumers have shown they would be interested in a Tesla vehicle that fit this description.
Additionally, von Holzhausen said in September that a Cyber SUV or a smaller electric pickup with a more traditional design is “definitely things we’ve considered…We’re working on so many innovative and fun things.”
Tesla gives big hint that it will build Cyber SUV, smaller Cybertruck
Investor's Corner
Tesla enters new stability phase, firm upgrades and adjusts outlook
Dmitriy Pozdnyakov of Freedom Capital upgraded his outlook on Tesla shares from “Sell” to “Hold” on Wednesday, and increased the price target from $338 to $406.
Tesla is entering a new phase of stability in terms of vehicle deliveries, one firm wrote in a new note during the final week of October, backing its position with an upgrade and price target increase on the stock.
Dmitriy Pozdnyakov of Freedom Capital upgraded his outlook on Tesla shares from “Sell” to “Hold” on Wednesday, and increased the price target from $338 to $406.
While most firms are interested in highlighting Tesla’s future growth, which will be catalyzed mostly by the advent of self-driving vehicles, autonomy, and the company’s all-in mentality on AI and robotics, Pozdnyakov is solely focusing on vehicle deliveries.
The analyst wrote in a note to investors that he believes Tesla’s updated vehicle lineup, which includes its new affordable “Standard” trims of the Model 3 and Model Y, is going to stabilize the company’s delivery volumes and return the company to annual growth.
Tesla launches two new affordable models with ‘Standard’ Model 3, Y offerings
Tesla launched the new affordable Model 3 and Model Y “Standard” trims on October 7, which introduced two stripped-down, less premium versions of the all-electric sedan and crossover.
They are both priced at under $40,000, with the Model 3 at $37,990 and the Model Y at $39,990, and while these prices may not necessarily be what consumers were expecting, they are well under what Kelley Blue Book said was the average new car transaction price for September, which swelled above $50,000.
Despite the rollout of these two new models, it is interesting to hear that a Wall Street firm would think that Tesla is going to return to more stable delivery figures and potentially enter a new growth phase.
Many Wall Street firms have been more focused on AI, Robotics, and Tesla’s self-driving project, which are the more prevalent things that will drive investor growth over the next few years.
Wedbush’s Dan Ives, for example, tends to focus on the company’s prowess in AI and self-driving. However, he did touch on vehicle deliveries in the coming years in a recent note.
Ives said in a note on October 2:
“While EV demand is expected to fall with the EV tax credit expiration, this was a great bounce-back quarter for TSLA to lay the groundwork for deliveries moving forward, but there is still work to do to gain further ground from a delivery perspective.”
Tesla has some things to figure out before it can truly consider guaranteed stability from a delivery standpoint. Initially, the next two quarters will be a crucial way to determine demand without the $7,500 EV tax credit. It will also begin to figure out if its new affordable models are attractive enough at their current price point to win over consumers.
Tesla Cybercab spotted testing on public roads for the first time
Tesla hints it could see ‘a few more vehicles’ released soon
Tesla enters new stability phase, firm upgrades and adjusts outlook
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoSpaceX posts Starship booster feat that’s so nutty, it doesn’t even look real
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoTesla Full Self-Driving gets an offer to be insured for ‘almost free’
-
News2 weeks agoElon Musk confirms Tesla FSD V14.2 will see widespread rollout
-
News2 weeks agoTesla is adding an interesting feature to its centerscreen in a coming update
-
News2 weeks agoTesla launches new interior option for Model Y
-
News2 weeks agoTesla widens rollout of new Full Self-Driving suite to more owners
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoTesla CEO Elon Musk’s $1 trillion pay package hits first adversity from proxy firm
-
News2 weeks agoTesla might be doing away with a long-included feature with its vehicles