Connect with us

News

SpaceX Starship eyes Tuesday launch after FAA communication breakdown causes delays

Published

on

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.”

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

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.

Eric Ralph is Teslarati's senior spaceflight reporter and has been covering the industry in some capacity for almost half a decade, largely spurred in 2016 by a trip to Mexico to watch Elon Musk reveal SpaceX's plans for Mars in person. Aside from spreading interest and excitement about spaceflight far and wide, his primary goal is to cover humanity's ongoing efforts to expand beyond Earth to the Moon, Mars, and elsewhere.

Advertisement
Comments

News

Is the affordable Tesla Model Y’s features hiding in plain sight?

Variants of the Model Y that could bring down the vehicle’s price would likely be appreciated by consumers.

Published

on

Credit: Joey Klender/Teslarati

Just recently, rumors emerged in China suggesting that a more affordable Tesla Model Y variant internally dubbed the ”E80” would be produced in Giga Shanghai this May. A look at Tesla’s current affordable vehicles suggests that the features of the upcoming Model Y variant may be hiding in plain sight.

Model Y “E80” Rumors

Reports from Chinese publications suggested that the affordable Model Y “E80” will be a stripped down version of the new Model Y. Thus, the vehicle may be equipped with smaller wheels, single-layer windows on its sides, no rear display, half the number of speakers, single-color ambient interior lighting, fabric seats with no heating or ventilation functions, and a manual trunk.

These reductions, the rumors suggested, would allow Tesla China to offer the Model Y “E80” at an affordable price of 190,000–210,000 ($26,000–$28,800). Other rumors suggested that the vehicle will be priced even more aggressively, at around 150,000-170,000 yuan ($20,500-$23,300). 

Hiding in Plain Sight

What is quite interesting about the Model Y “E80” rumors is the fact that Tesla has actually released stripped-down versions of its vehicles to make them more affordable. Based on the features that were bundled in these vehicles, one could make an inference about the features that the Model Y “E80” will have, at least considering its rumored aggressive pricing.

In August last year, Tesla Mexico launched a variant of the Model 3 sedan that is quite unlike the vehicle’s base variant in the United States. The vehicle was priced at MXD 749,000 (USD 40,000), which was MXD 50,000 (USD 2,670) lower than the Model 3 RWD’s previous price in Mexico, which stood at MXD 799,000 (USD42,730).

Advertisement

With its more affordable price, Tesla Mexico’s base Model 3 featured textile seats instead of vegan leather, acoustic glass only on its front windows, and no secondary display for rear passengers. Its ambient lights were also limited to just white. Lastly, the vehicle did not have heated or cooled seats or a heated steering wheel. These reductions are very similar to the rumored feature set of the Model Y “E80” in China.

The Tesla Cybertruck Long Range Rear Wheel Drive is another base variant that could provide hints at the affordable Model Y’s features. Similar to Tesla Mexico’s base Model 3, the Cybertruck LR RWD features textile seats and no second-row display. Interestingly enough, the Cybertruck LR RWD is $10,000 cheaper than the Cybertruck. That’s similar to the rumored price difference between the new Model Y in China and the vehicle’s supposed affordable “E80” variant.

Still Compelling Enough?

Perhaps the biggest question at this point would be if the rumored Model Y “E80,” even with its stripped-out features, will be compelling enough for consumers. While such concerns are valid, one must not forget that the Model Y is still a premium vehicle.

Thus, variants of the Model Y that could bring down the vehicle’s price would likely be appreciated by consumers. The fact that the rumored “E80” will be produced in Giga Shanghai speaks volumes as well, especially since China is home to the most competitive EV market in the world. Giga Shanghai also exports vehicles to several territories worldwide.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Tesla Model Y has become the most common vehicle in Norway

The Tesla Model Y passed more than 70,000 registrations recently.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

The Tesla Model Y has become the most common car on Norwegian roads. This is a remarkable achievement for the all-electric crossover, which has also commanded the top spot in Norway’s vehicle sales rankings for several years running.

Model Y Domination

As per vehicle registration figures tracked by the Norwegian Road Traffic Information Council (OFV), there were 68,378 Model Ys with Norwegian license plates at the end of March/beginning of April 2025. In recent weeks, the Model Y passed more than 70,000 registrations, as per a report from Elbil24.

With the Model Y now becoming the most common car in Norway, the Toyota Rav4 now stands in second place, followed by the Nissan Leaf, the Volkswagen Golf, and the Toyota Yaris. The Model Y also topped the country’s vehicle registration rankings for the last three years, and it set a record for selling the most vehicles in a year in 2023, breaking the Volkswagen Beetle’s record that has stood since 1969.

Possibly More Momentum

It is undeniable that the Tesla Model Y has helped Norway push its electric vehicle transition. As of date, electric vehicles now account for 28% of the Norwegian car fleet, a notable portion of which is comprised of the all-electric crossover.

While the Model Y’s achievements in Norway have been impressive, the vehicle could expand its reach into the country even more this year. Tesla, after all, has been aggressively pushing the new Model Y to consumers, with the company offering a zero percent interest promotion for the vehicle. These efforts, as well as the new Model Y’s improved features, should make the vehicle even more compelling to Norwegian car buyers this year.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Tesla Board Chair slams Wall Street Journal over alleged CEO search report

Denholm’s comments were posted by Tesla on its official account on social media platform X.

Published

on

robyn-m-denholm-tesla
CeBIT Australia, CC BY 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

Tesla Board Chair Robyn Denholm has issued a stern correction to The Wall Street Journal after the publication posted a report alleging that the electric vehicle maker’s Board of Directors opened a search for a new CEO to replace Elon Musk.

Denholm’s comments were posted by Tesla on its official account on social media platform X. 

The WSJ’s Allegations

Citing people reportedly familiar with the discussions, the WSJ alleged that Tesla Board members reached out to several executive search firms to work on a formal process for finding Elon Musk’s successor. The publication also alleged that tensions had been mounting at Tesla due to the company’s dropping sales and profits, as well as the time Musk has been spending with DOGE.

The publication also alleged that Elon Musk had met with the Tesla Board about the matter, and that members told the CEO that he needed to spend more time on Tesla. Musk was reportedly instructed to state his intentions publicly as well. The CEO did not push back against the Board, the WSJ claimed. 

Elon Musk did announce that he is stepping back from his day-to-day role at the Department of Government Efficiency during the Tesla Q1 2025 earnings call. Musk’s announcement was embraced by Tesla investors and analysts, many of whom felt that the CEO’s renewed focus on the EV maker could push the company to greater heights. 

Advertisement

Tesla and Musk’s Response

In response to The Wall Street Journal’s report, Tesla’s official account on X shared a comment from its Board Chair. In her comment, Denham noted that the WSJ‘s report was “absolutely false.” She also highlighted that Tesla had communicated this fact to the publication before the report was published, but the Journal ran the story anyway.

“Earlier today, there was a media report erroneously claiming that the Tesla Board had contacted recruitment firms to initiate a CEO search at the company. This is absolutely false (and this was communicated to the media before the report was published). The CEO of Tesla is Elon Musk and the Board is highly confident in his ability to continue executing on the exciting growth plan ahead,” Denholm stated.

Elon Musk himself commented on the matter, stating that the publication showed an “extremely bad breach of ethics” since the report did not even include the Tesla Board of Directors’ denial of the allegations. “It is an EXTREMELY BAD BREACH OF ETHICS that the WSJ would publish a DELIBERATELY FALSE ARTICLE and fail to include an unequivocal denial beforehand by the Tesla board of directors!” Musk wrote in a post on X.

Continue Reading

Trending