News
SpaceX prepares for space station supply mission as secret Zuma launch postponed
Zuma patiently awaits a new launch date
Just shy of two weeks ago, SpaceX announced the discovery of unspecified problems with a Falcon 9 payload fairing during routine quality assurance (QA) testing at the company’s Hawthorne, CA factory. The launch of Zuma, a deeply mysterious satellite with no clear manufacturer or customer, was subsequently delayed indefinitely, pending the results of an internal investigation into the aforementioned fairing defects.
Several days after SpaceX’s Zuma announcement, the Falcon 9 booster, second stage, and payload (often referred to as the “stack”) were rolled back into the pad facilities at LC-39A, verifying that a delay of at least several days would follow. This delay was both confirmed and denied in a confusing manner, with the Cape’s 45th Space Wing appearing to suggest that Zuma would not be impacted by a preplanned range closure in late November, although journalist Irene Klotz reported that Zuma was delayed until December, when maintenance was scheduled to end.
SpaceX’s mysterious Zuma payload and Falcon 9 1043 seen before stormy Florida skies. (Tom Cross/Teslarati)
All things considered, the month of November has been an unusually chaotic period for SpaceX and the Space Coast, and the chaos has almost certainly been exacerbated by the intense secrecy surrounding Zuma. As the sum total of publicly available information, these details indicate that SpaceX employees discovered a systemic defect or defects in recently-manufactured fairings, serious enough to indefinitely ground the company’s commercial launches. However, SpaceX recently opened press registration for the Iridium-4 mission, still apparently scheduled for launch on December 22 and further corroborated by the CEO of Iridium Communications, hinting that that mission’s fairing either predates the scope of the fairing investigation, or that the investigation and fairing groundings have arisen out of an abundance of caution above all else.
A Dragon stretches its wings
More importantly and perhaps more logically, SpaceX’s next Cargo Dragon mission to the International Space Station – CRS-13 – has not been directly impacted by fairing problems; Dragon missions do not require fairings. The CRS-13 mission, currently aiming for a static fire on November 29 and launch on December 4, will be exceptional for a number of equally thrilling reasons. In no particular order: CRS-13 will mark the first NASA-approved reuse of a Falcon 9’s first stage, in this case with the added aesthetic bonus that the Dragon will reach orbit aboard the same booster that launched CRS-11’s Dragon almost exactly six months prior, June 3 2017. Equally exciting, CRS-12 marked the final new Cargo Dragon launch, and CRS-13’s Dragon is a refurbished spacecraft, having previously flown the CRS-6 mission in late 2015.
-
- The CRS-6 Cargo Dragon being mated to its Falcon 9 launch vehicle in 2015. (SpaceX)
-
- This exact Dragon has been recovered from orbit, refurbished, and is now prepped and ready for another orbital mission on December 4th. (SpaceX)
Rather poetically, CRS-11 marked the first commercial reuse of an orbital spacecraft, and the booster that launched that mission, Falcon 9 1035, will now fly once more to lift the second-ever reused Dragon into orbit. If all goes as planned, SpaceX’s CRS-13 mission will arguably be the most-reused orbital-class mission in the history of spaceflight, with only the second stage and Dragon’s trunk being both new and expendable. Both the booster and Dragon likely required a fair amount of refurbishment, but if Elon Musk’s June 2017 statements remain accurate, SpaceX has probably progressed far along the reusability learning curve. Quoting Elon Musk and myself at the ISS R&D Conference in July 2017:
Musk said he expects the next Dragon reuse and all future reuses to save the SpaceX nearly 50% of the cost of manufacturing an entirely new spacecraft. Musk admitted that the first refurbishment of Dragon likely ended up costing as much or more than a new vehicle, but this is to be expected for the first attempt to reuse any sort of space hardware that must survive some form of reentry heating and saltwater immersion.
Indeed, CRS-13 will in fact be “the next Dragon reuse” after CRS-11’s success. If the spacecraft’s refurbishment does manage save SpaceX anywhere near 50% of the cost of manufacture, the mission will be an extraordinary accomplishment, above and beyond the already intense difficulty of refurbishing and reflying a several-ton (~4000kg empty) orbital spacecraft.
LC-40 pad repairs near completion
Even after the reuse of both the Dragon and Falcon 9 booster, CRS-13 will lay host to yet another milestone for SpaceX as the first mission to launch from the newly repaired Launch Complex-40 (LC-40), after the pad suffered widespread damage from a Falcon 9 failure during preparations for the launch of Amos-6. Little is known on the specifics of the damage suffered, but repairs have taken no less than 14 months and at a minimum required the fabrication, assembly, and qualification of entirely new Ground Support Equipment (GSE).
-
- Based on photos posted to social media, LC-40’s new TEL will be considerably different than the 39A’s white monolith, likely closer in form to the original it is to replace (seen here). (SpaceX)
-
- The TEL seen at LC-39A in early 2017. (SpaceX)
-
- LC-39A’s TEL and Falcon 9 seen before the launch of SES-11 in October 2017. (Tom Cross/Teslarati)
Under the umbrella of GSE are thousands of feet of precisely machined and welded piping and pumps, a new launch mount and transporter-erector-launcher (TEL) to carry Falcon 9 out of the integration facilities, the repair or complete removal and replacement of a huge volume of scalded concrete, and the repair or replacement of likely dozens or hundreds of other miscellaneous components destroyed in the intense fire that followed the Amos-6 incident. Nevertheless, as spotted on a social media platform by the author, the aforementioned TEL and launch mount were shown going vertical just a handful of days ago, further evidence that LC-40 is once again rapidly marching towards operational status.
The long-awaited reactivation and return to operations at LC-40 is itself arguably the most critical path ahead of Falcon Heavy’s inaugural launch, and modifications to the pad and TEL have restarted in light of Zuma’s indefinite delays, with SpaceX’s ever-productive and heroic ground crew taking advantage of extra down-time between launches. With Zuma now ~11 days past its scheduled launch date, the mission’s delay will likely result in additional delays to Falcon Heavy’s inaugural launch, which was reported to be aiming for ~December 29. This deep of a delay might also necessitate the transfer of Zuma’s launch from LC-39A to LC-40, depending on the customer’s flexibility and SpaceX’s own needs. Time will tell, and in the meantime, the mystery of Zuma and wondrous accomplishments of CRS-13 ought to sate the launch withdrawals of SpaceX fans for the time being.
Elon Musk
Tesla Semi’s official battery capacity leaked by California regulators
A California regulatory filing just confirmed the exact battery size inside each Tesla Semi variant.
A regulatory filing published by the California Air Resources Board in April 2026 has put official numbers on what Tesla Semi owners and fleet buyers have long wanted confirmed: the exact battery capacities of both the Long Range and Standard Range Semi truck variants. CARB is California’s independent air quality regulator, and it certifies zero-emission powertrains before they can be sold or operated in the state. When a manufacturer submits a vehicle for certification, the resulting executive order becomes a public document, making it one of the most reliable sources for confirmed production specs on any EV.
The document lists two certified powertrain configurations. The Long Range Semi carries a usable battery capacity of 822 kWh, while the Standard Range version comes in at 548 kWh. Both use lithium-ion NCMA chemistry and share the same peak and steady-state motor output ratings of 800 kW and 525 kW respectively. Cross-referencing Tesla’s published efficiency figure of approximately 1.7 kWh per mile under full load, the 822 kWh pack supports roughly 480 miles of real-world range, which aligns closely with Tesla’s advertised 500-mile figure for the Long Range trim. The 548 kWh Standard Range pack works out to approximately 320 miles, again consistent with Tesla’s stated 325-mile target.
Here is a direct comparison of the two versions based on the CARB filing and published specs:
| Tesla Semi Spec | Long Range | Standard Range |
| Battery Capacity | 822 kWh | 548 kWh |
| Battery Chemistry | NCMA Li-Ion | NCMA Li-Ion |
| Peak Motor Power | 800 kW | 525 kW |
| Estimated Range | ~500 miles | ~325 miles |
| Efficiency | ~1.7 kWh/mile | ~1.7 kWh/mile |
| Est. Price | ~$290,000 | ~$260,000 |
| GVW Rating | 82,000 lbs | 82,000 lbs |
The timing of this certification is not incidental. On April 29, 2026, Semi Programme Director Dan Priestley confirmed on X that high-volume production is now ramping at Tesla’s dedicated 1.7-million-square-foot facility in Sparks, Nevada. A key advantage of the Nevada location is vertical integration: the 4680 battery cells powering the Semi are manufactured in the same complex, eliminating the supply chain bottleneck that had delayed the program for years.
Tesla’s long-term goal is to reach a production capacity of 50,000 trucks annually at the Nevada factory, which would represent roughly 20 percent of the entire North American Class 8 market. With CARB certification now in hand and the production line running, the regulatory and manufacturing groundwork for that target is in place.
Tesla became the first company to pass the United States government’s new Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) testing with the Model Y, completing each of the new tests with a passing performance.
In a landmark announcement on May 7, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) declared the 2026 Tesla Model Y the first vehicle to pass its newly ADAS benchmark under the New Car Assessment Program (NCAP).
Model Y vehicles manufactured on or after November 12, 2025, met rigorous pass/fail criteria for four newly added tests—pedestrian automatic emergency braking, lane keeping assistance, blind spot warning, and blind spot intervention—while also satisfying the program’s original four ADAS requirements: forward collision warning, crash imminent braking, dynamic brake support, and lane departure warning.
The NHTSA has just officially announced that the 2026 @Tesla Model Y is the first vehicle model to pass the agency’s new advanced driver assistance system tests.
2026 Tesla Model Y vehicles, manufactured on or after Nov. 12, 2025, successfully met the new criteria for four… pic.twitter.com/as8x1OsSL5
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) May 7, 2026
NHTSA administration Jonathan Morrison hailed the achievement as a milestone:
“Today’s announcement marks a significant step forward in our efforts to provide consumers with the most comprehensive safety ratings ever. By successfully passing these new tests, the 2026 Tesla Model Y demonstrates the lifesaving potential of driver assistance technologies and sets a high bar for the industry. We hope to see many more manufacturers develop vehicles that can meet these requirements.”
The updates to NCAP, finalized in late 2024 and effective for 2026 models, reflect growing recognition that ADAS features are no longer optional luxuries but essential tools for preventing crashes.
Pedestrian automatic emergency braking, for instance, targets one of the fastest-rising causes of roadway fatalities, while blind spot intervention and lane keeping assistance address common sources of side-swipes and run-off-road incidents. By incorporating objective, performance-based evaluations rather than mere presence of the technology, NHTSA aims to give buyers clearer data on real-world effectiveness.
This milestone arrives at a pivotal moment when vehicle autonomy is transitioning from science fiction to everyday reality.
Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) software and the impending rollout of robotaxis underscore a broader industry shift toward higher levels of automation. Yet regulators and consumers remain cautious: safety data must keep pace with technological ambition.
The Model Y’s perfect score on these ADAS benchmarks validates that current driver-assist systems—when engineered rigorously—can dramatically reduce human error, which still accounts for the vast majority of crashes.
For Tesla, the result reinforces its long-standing claim of building the safest vehicles on the road. More importantly, it signals to the entire auto sector that meeting elevated federal standards is achievable and expected.
As autonomy edges closer to Level 3 and beyond, where drivers may disengage more fully, such independent verification becomes critical. It builds public trust, informs purchasing decisions, and accelerates the development of systems that could one day eliminate tens of thousands of annual traffic deaths.
In an era when software-defined vehicles promise transformative mobility, the 2026 Model Y’s NHTSA triumph is more than a manufacturer accolade—it is a regulatory green light that autonomy’s future must be built on proven, testable safety foundations. The bar has been raised. The industry, and the roads we share, will be safer for it.
Tesla is going to fix the nearly 219,000 vehicles that it recalled due to an issue with the rearview camera with a simple software update, giving owners no need to travel to a service center to resolve the problem.
Tesla is formally recalling 218,868 U.S. vehicles after regulators discovered a software glitch that can delay the rearview camera image by up to 11 seconds when drivers shift into reverse.
The affected models include certain 2024-2025 Model 3 and Model Y, as well as 2023-2025 Model S and Model X vehicles running software version 2026.8.6 and equipped with Hardware 3 computers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) determined the lag violates Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 111 on rear visibility and could increase crash risk.
Yet this is no ordinary recall. Owners do not need to schedule a service-center visit, hand over keys, or wait for parts.
Tesla fans call for recall terminology update, but the NHTSA isn’t convinced it’s needed
Tesla identified the issue on April 10, halted further deployment of the faulty firmware the same day, and began pushing a corrective over-the-air (OTA) software update on April 11.
By the time the NHTSA posted the recall notice on May 6, more than 99.92 percent of the affected fleet had already received the fix. Tesla reports no crashes, injuries, or fatalities linked to the glitch.
The episode underscores a deeper problem with regulatory language. For decades, “recall” meant hauling a vehicle to a dealership for hardware repairs or replacements. That definition no longer fits software-defined cars. When a fix arrives wirelessly in minutes — identical to an iPhone update — the term evokes unnecessary alarm and misleads the public about the actual risk and remedy.
Elon Musk has repeatedly called for exactly this change. After earlier NHTSA actions, he stated plainly: “The terminology is outdated & inaccurate. This is a tiny over-the-air software update.” On another occasion, he added that labeling OTA fixes as recalls is “anachronistic and just flat wrong.”
The terminology is outdated & inaccurate. This is a tiny over-the-air software update. To the best of our knowledge, there have been no injuries.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 22, 2022
Musk’s point is simple: regulators must evolve their vocabulary to match the technology. Traditional recalls involve physical intervention and downtime; OTA updates do not. Retaining the old label distorts consumer perception, inflates perceived defect rates, and slows the industry’s shift to faster, safer software iteration.
Tesla’s rapid, remote remedy demonstrates the safety advantage of over-the-air capability. Problems that once required weeks of dealer appointments are now resolved in hours, often before most owners notice. As more automakers adopt software-first designs, the entire regulatory framework needs to catch up.
Updating “recall” terminology would align language with reality, reduce public confusion, and recognize that modern vehicles are no longer static hardware — they are continuously improving computers on wheels.
For the 219,000 Tesla owners involved, the process is already complete. The camera works, the car is safe, and no one left their driveway. That is the new standard — and the vocabulary should reflect it.
Tesla Semi’s official battery capacity leaked by California regulators
Tesla crushes NHTSA’s brand-new ADAS safety tests – first vehicle to ever pass
