News
The Boring Co.’s projects are making transit departments rethink above-ground travel
The Boring Company’s underground tunneling projects are widely-appealing to Transit Departments and Authorities across the United States. Because of the sustainable tone of Elon Musk’s Boring Company, along with the efficiency of an Express-based system, agencies responsible for solving the issue of public passenger transportation are considering underground options more often than ever before. Above-ground public travel options, like Monorails or buses, are being ditched for underground options, and subways are outdated and not widely considered by these agencies.
Elon Musk’s underground tunneling venture has made it from California to Las Vegas, and now, back to California again, as the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) is considering a new underground tunneling project from the Boring Company. Later today, on February 3rd, the entity will consider the Boring Company’s submission for an underground tunnel that would take travelers from several different locations to the Ontario International Airport, located in Southern California. While the Boring Company has already received the equivalent of preliminary approval from the Transportation Authority, more questions are being asked to secure the tunnel’s place in the densely-populated and traffic-heavy area of Southern California.
In September 2020, the SBCTA Board of Directors approved the release of a Request for Qualifications, seeking qualified entities to submit a Statement of Qualifications for a potential tunneling project in San Bernardino County. According to documents released by the SBCTA, the tunnel will run from the Rancho Cucamonga Metrolink Station to the Ontario International Airport, procuring a design-build and transitional operate-maintain methodology that will have the two transit systems running concurrently to complement one another.
The 31-minute ride from the Rancho Cucamonga Metrolink Station to the Ontario International Airport could be expedited thanks to a new Boring Company tunnel proposal. (Google Maps)
The only thing is, not many companies with expertise in tunneling stepped forward. And by not many, only one did: The Boring Company.
The SBCTA wrote:
“In response to the RFQ, one Statement of Qualifications (SOQ), from The Boring Company, was received on November 30, 2020. A review panel was assembled involving a technical review team and an executive oversight team consisting of representatives from the City of Rancho Cucamonga, the City of Ontario, the OIAA, Omnitrans, and SBCTA. The SOQ was deemed responsive and passed all the minimum requirements of the RFQ.”
After an initial assessment from SBCTA Board Members, the Boring Company met the minimum requirements to qualify for further scrutiny. The Boring Company’s Statement of Qualifications only received a score of 58/100. Still, more information regarding financing, timing, ridership, and how the system will operate in conjunction with the Rancho Cucamonga Metrolink Station will likely increase that score. These issues are set to be brought up during the Board of Directors meeting later today.
Ditching Above-Ground Systems for Underground Tunnels
Above-ground systems of transportation have been around for ages. Monorails, trains, and other large-scale passenger transportation systems have been aligned with cost-effective and efficient travel for decades, but a new era has come in thanks to Elon Musk. While many argue that the Boring Company’s system is a simple revision of a subway, it is far from identical. The Boring Company loops use Tesla’s all-electric vehicles for passenger transport, eliminating jam-packed, unsanitary, and oftentimes, uncomfortable situations where underground travel is offered.
Sitting in an automotive seat, likely joined by colleagues, or in some cases, complete strangers, is much more comfortable in a smaller setting, especially as the COVID-19 pandemic rolls on. Additionally, the express-system eliminates the need for unneeded stops, decreasing total travel time.
While the San Bernardino project seems to indicate that the Boring Company will work with an already-operational monorail system, other projects have completely abandoned the idea of using an above-ground Monorail system. One of the most notable is the Boring Company’s Vegas Loop. After the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority (LVCVA) purchased the bankrupt Vegas Monorail system in 2020, it opened the door for the Boring Company to expand its possible tunneling to property exclusive to the Monorail.
The Boring Company has several other large-scale projects in the proposal stage, including one in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, and Chicago, Illinois. These projects are in the early stages and will be subjected to the speed at which local authorities move. Some agencies are quicker to get the ball rolling on public transit projects than others. For example, a tunnel between Baltimore and Washington D.C. would eliminate the need to travel on the Maryland Transit Authority’s Lightrail system, a cost-effective, but not time-effective, way to travel from suburbs of Baltimore County to the Nation’s Capitol. This project has been in a stalemate for several years but would expedite the travel time from Baltimore’s Camden Yards, home of the Orioles, to Washington. The Boring Company’s website indicates that an environmental review is pending.
Underground tunnels may be the way of the future, much like electric cars. At the forefront, a South African-born entrepreneur named Elon Musk is leading the charge, changing how human beings will travel from one point to another.
The San Bernardino County Transportation Authority’s Agenda is available below, with The Boring Company’s consideration beginning on page 13.
Tbc San Bernardino Tunnel by Joey Klender on Scribd
News
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 faces wrath of the Texas skies
SpaceX pushed Starship Flight 13 to Friday, blaming weather instead of the previous engine issues.
SpaceX called off Thursday’s launch attempt of Starship Flight 13, pushing the mission to Friday because of weather tied to Tropical Storm Bertha. The company confirmed the delay on X, noting “Now targeting Friday, July 24 for Starship’s thirteenth flight test, due to weather. A key objective for the flight test is to get clear imagery from the ground of Starship’s heatshield as it flies at a higher dynamic pressure during ascent, which won’t be possible with today’s weather conditions.”
This is the second delay for Flight 13 in two weeks. SpaceX first tried to launch the mission on July 16, but the countdown ended in an automated abort at T-0 when four of Super Heavy Booster 20’s 33 Raptor engines failed to ignite. Musk said at the time that two Raptors would need to be removed and replaced, as Teslarati reported. The company spent the following week destacking Ship 40 and Booster 20, swapping engines, and running leak checks before restacking the vehicle on Pad 2 Wednesday night, according to Spaceflight Now’s live coverage.
Unlike the engine problem, Thursday’s delay has nothing to do with the hardware. SpaceX wants clean footage of Starship’s heat shield captured from the ground as the vehicle flies through max dynamic pressure, something the storm’s cloud cover over South Texas would not allow. The company said visibility should improve for Friday’s attempt, with the same 90 minute window opening at 5:45 p.m. CT.
Flight 13 will be the second outing for the V3 versions of Starship and Super Heavy, following their debut on Flight 12 in May. The mission carries 20 production Starlink V3 satellites, the first time SpaceX has flown operational satellites rather than mass simulators on Starship. Six of those satellites are fitted with cameras to inspect the heat shield from a different angle during ascent, giving engineers a second data source beyond the ground imagery the weather is currently blocking.
Booster 20 will attempt a boostback burn and a splashdown landing burn in the Gulf of America, while Ship 40 follows a suborbital trajectory toward a landing in the Indian Ocean. The flight plan largely mirrors Flight 12, though the booster will run a more aggressive ascent burn after max Q this time, and the ship’s heat shield includes load sensing tiles meant to measure stress at the higher dynamic pressure SpaceX is targeting.
If Friday’s attempt succeeds, Flight 13 could be the last suborbital test in the program. SpaceX is already looking to push for an orbital flight on Flight 14.
Tesla stock (NASDAQ: TSLA) endured one of its sharpest single-day declines in years on July 23, tumbling approximately 14.5 percent and closing near $320 after opening the session around $374. The drop erased more than $140 billion in market value amid heavy trading volume and left the shares at multi-week lows.
The sell-off followed the company’s second-quarter 2026 results, released the previous evening. Tesla reported record revenue of $28.2 billion, up 26 percent year over year, driven by a Q2-record 480,126 vehicle deliveries. Energy storage deployments also rose strongly.
Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue
Yet profitability disappointed sharply. Operating income fell 57 percent to $398 million, compressing the operating margin to just 1.4 percent. Non-GAAP earnings per share came in at $0.33, well below the roughly $0.53 analysts had expected. Free cash flow turned negative by $1.1 billion as capital expenditures surged 142 percent to $5.8 billion, largely tied to accelerated spending on artificial intelligence, robotics, and autonomous systems.
The losses on capex were expected, as Tesla said it would be spending heavily in 2026.
Investors also reacted to lingering uncertainty surrounding key product timelines. During the Earnings Call, management reiterated ambitions for Robotaxi deployment and the Optimus humanoid robot, but offered limited new concrete milestones, renewing questions about execution pace that have long accompanied Tesla’s ambitious roadmap.
The magnitude of the decline places it among Tesla’s more severe one-day percentage losses since its 2010 initial public offering. Historically, the two largest single-day drops (split-adjusted) remain September 8, 2020, when shares fell 21.1 percent amid broader market volatility and valuation concerns, and January 13, 2012, with a 19.3 percent plunge during the company’s early growth struggles.
Other notable declines include an 18.6 percent drop on March 16, 2020, at the onset of pandemic-related market turmoil. Thursday’s move ranks roughly ninth on the all-time list but stands out as the steepest in more than a year.
Despite the short-term pain, Tesla’s long-term trajectory has repeatedly recovered from such volatility. The latest results underscore both the strength of its core automotive and energy businesses and the near-term costs of heavy investment in next-generation technologies.
Elon Musk clapped back at France’s decision to withhold the approval for Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) Supervised system, projecting a clear and blunt message to French Transport Minister Phillippe Tabarot, after he publicly rejected the technology in its current form.
Tabarot outlines several concerns with Tesla Full Self-Driving in a detailed video statement, where he said, “The safety trade-offs are not yet sufficient to authorize it as it currently stands,” he said. He emphasized that FSD is not a true self-driving system and that the driver remains fully responsible.
Key issues Tabarot also brought up included allowing speeding when surrounding traffic exceeds limits and what he believes are insufficient guarantees of driver attention during complex urban maneuvers such as lane changes, intersections, and roundabouts.
Delaying the approval of FSD in France will cost lives
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 22, 2026
While acknowledging technological progress and France’s support for autonomous innovation, Tabarot stressed that deployment must prioritize road safety. He noted ongoing technical discussions with Tesla, the Netherlands, and other European partners, with further ecosystem meetings planned for the fall.
Musk’s rebuke highlights the human cost of regulatory caution. Tesla’s latest safety reports provide compelling data supporting accelerated adoption. In the most recent 12-month period, vehicles using FSD (Supervised) recorded one major collision per approximately 5.1 million miles driven, dramatically better than the U.S. national average of one crash per 698,000 miles.
Even Tesla vehicles driven manually with active safety features outperform the average by a wide margin. These figures come from billions of real-world miles of telemetry, showing FSD vehicles involved in far fewer incidents than both manual Teslas and the broader U.S. fleet.
Critics argue Tesla’s comparisons require careful scrutiny regarding reporting thresholds and fleet demographics, yet the data consistently positions FSD as a potential lifesaver. With road fatalities remaining a leading cause of death worldwide, Musk contends that proven safer technology should not face prolonged bureaucratic hurdles.
France’s measured approach reflects the broader European regulatory caution, which many, especially Musk, have been critical of in the past. However, as autonomous systems from Tesla and competitors like Waymo demonstrate superior safety in independent studies, pressure is mounting for harmonized approvals.
Musk’s warning carries the belief that every month of delay may equate to avoidable tragedies on European roads.
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 faces wrath of the Texas skies
Tesla stock tumbles after earnings, one of its sharpest single-day declines
