News
India could become the fourth country ever to soft-land a spacecraft on the Moon next week
The Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) is perhaps just a few weeks (maybe days) away from attempting to place the country in the history books, hopefully setting India up to become the fourth nation on Earth – after the Soviet Union, United States, and China – to successfully soft-land on the Moon.
Known as Chandrayaan-2, the mission seeks to simultaneously launch a lunar orbiter, lander, and rover, altogether weighing nearly 3900 kg (8600 lb) at liftoff. If successful, the trio of spacecraft will remain integrated for about two months as the orbiter slowly raises its Earth orbit to eventually intercept and begin orbiting the Moon. Although originally expected to launch on Sunday, July 14th (July 15th local time), a bug with the Indian-built launch vehicle’s upper stage has pushed Chandrayaan-2 outside its original launch window, which ended today (July 16th). Depending on the complexity of the mission profile ISRO is using, the delay should be no more than a few days to a few weeks before the next launch window opens.
Editor’s note: Following ISRO’s July 15th scrub, the Chandrayaan-2 Moon lander mission has been rescheduled for launch no earlier than (NET) 2:43 pm local time, July 22nd (2:13 am PDT/9:13 UTC, July 23rd).
Fourth to the Moon (in one piece)
- All the way back in 1966, the Soviet Union (USSR) became the first to successfully soft-land an uncrewed spacecraft on the Moon with a mission known as Luna-9. Some four months after the momentous achievement, the United States became the second, safely landing Surveyor-1 on the Moon in June 1966.
- At the height of the space race, huge amounts of money was being funneled into these milestones, permitting the companies, institutions, and space agencies building, launching, and operating the individual missions to almost throw hardware at the metaphorical wall until something stuck. With the Soviet space program, this involved 17 failures, two successes, and one partial success in the first 7 years of the Luna initiative, culminating in Luna 9’s successful landing in February 1966.
- The US had three major separate programs known as Ranger, Lunar Orbiter, and Surveyor, the former of which was meant to simply fly past or impact the Moon to acquire detailed photos of its surface. Ranger suffered five consecutive failures and one partial failure before three full successes, while Orbiter was a complete success (5/5) and Surveyor failed only 2 of 7 attempts.
- Ultimately, this little snippet of history is simply meant to emphasize the utterly different approaches of those pathfinder programs relative to modern exploration efforts. In the case of ISRO’s Chandrayaan-2, failure would likely mean several years of delays before the next possible attempt – there is no concurrent (verging on mass-) production of multiple spacecraft like there was with Surveyor and Luna.
- Just shy of 50 years after the back-to-back first and second soft landings of Luna-9 and Surveyor-1, China became the third nation on Earth to successfully soft-land on the Moon with its 2013 Chang’e-3 mission, featuring a lander and rover. This was followed by Chang’e-4 in 2018, which continues to successfully operate 8 months after achieving the first successful soft-landing on the far side of the Moon.
- Finally, just several months ago, private company SpaceIL – supported by Israeli aerospace company IAI – attempted (albeit unsuccessfully) to make Israel the fourth country to land on the Moon.
Indian spacecraft, Indian rocket
- This finally brings us to Chandrayaan-2, what can only be described as a continuation of a recent resurgence in interest and serious robotic exploration of the Moon. Once it launches, the mission will take roughly 56 days to get into position for an attempted soft-landing. Prior to landing, the orbiter – in a circular, 100-km (62 mi) lunar orbit – will actively scout the intended landing site with a high-resolution ~0.3m/pixel camera to help the lander avoid any dangerous terrain.
- Once complete, the lander – carrying a tiny, ~27 kg (60 lb) rover – will begin its deorbit and landing maneuvers, hopefully culminating in a successful, gentle landing near the Moon’s South pole.
- Sadly, the Vikram lander and Pragyaan rover have an expected life of just one lunar day after landing, translating to ~14 Earth days or ~340 hours. This is a strong indicator that the Chandrayaan-2 landing component was not designed to survive the ultra-cold and harsh lunar night, also ~14 Earth days long.
- This isn’t much of a surprise, as surviving the lunar night is a whole different challenge that is rarely worth the hardware, effort, and funding required until the first prerequisite – a soft landing on the Moon – has been successfully demonstrated.
- A follow-up mission known as Chandrayaan-2 has already been proposed and would likely permit far lengthier exploration of the lunar south pole if India and launch partner Japan choose to move forward with it.
- Chandrayaan-2 will be launched on an Indian-built Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV) Mk III-D2 rocket, the most powerful rocket in India’s arsenal. Although GSLV Mk III weighs significantly more than SpaceX’s
- Falcon 9 when fully fueled (640 metric tons to F9’s 550), the rocket is almost a third less capable to Low Earth Orbit (LEO) – 8000 kg to F9’s ~23,000 kg.
- However, thanks to the development of an efficient liquid hydrogen/oxygen (hydrolox) upper stage and engine, the rocket comes into its own when dealing with its namesake – geostationary (i.e. high-altitude) satellite launches. To GTO, GSLV Mk III is reportedly capable of launching at least 4000 kg, almost half of Falcon 9’s expendable performance and almost 75% as much as Falcon 9 with booster landing.
- Even more impressive is the cost: ISRO purchased a block of 10 GSLV Mk III rockets in 2018 for roughly $630M, translating to ~$63M per rocket, nearly equivalent to Falcon 9’s own list price of $62M. This places GSLV Mk III around the same level as Russia’s Proton-M rocket in terms of a cost-to-performance ratio, still second to Falcon 9 in most cases. GSLV Mk III has only launched three times (all successful) since its 2014 debut and Chandrayaan-2 will be its fourth launch.
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
