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.
News
Tesla Cybercab gets crazy change as mass production begins
Tesla has officially kicked off mass production of its groundbreaking Cybercab robotaxi at Giga Texas, and the first units rolling off the line feature a striking transformation that’s turning heads across the EV community.
Tesla Cybercab has evidently received a pretty crazy change from an aesthetic standpoint, as the company has made the decision to offer an additional finish on the vehicle as mass production is starting.
Tesla has officially kicked off mass production of its groundbreaking Cybercab robotaxi at Giga Texas, and the first units rolling off the line feature a striking transformation that’s turning heads across the EV community.
VIN Zero—the very first production Cybercab—showcases a vibrant champagne gold exterior with a high-gloss finish, a dramatic departure from the flat, matte-wrapped prototypes that debuted at the 2024 “We, Robot” event.
Presenting VIN Zero — the very first production Cybercab built at Giga Texas. pic.twitter.com/8bXo4CJAlr
— TechOperator (@TechOperator) April 23, 2026
This glossy sheen is a pretty big pivot from what was initially shown by Tesla. The company has maintained a pretty flat tone in terms of anything related to custom colors or finishes.
A specialized clear coat or process delivers the deep, reflective gloss without conventional painting. The result is a premium, mirror-like shine, and it looks pretty good, and gives the compact two-seater a more luxurious and futuristic presence than the subdued matte prototypes.
Photos shared by Tesla community members reveal VIN Zero in a showroom-like setting at Giga Texas, highlighting refined panel gaps, large aero wheel covers, and the signature no-steering-wheel, no-pedals interior optimized for full autonomy.
The open frunk in some images offers a glimpse of practical storage, while the overall build quality appears more polished than that of test mules.
This glossy evolution aligns with Tesla’s broader production ramp. After the first unit in February 2026, the company has shifted to volume manufacturing, with dozens of units already spotted in outbound lots. CEO Elon Musk and the team aim for hundreds per week, paving the way for unsupervised FSD robotaxi networks that could slash ride costs to pennies per mile.
The Cybercab holds Tesla’s grand ambitions of operating a full-service ride-hailing service without any drivers in its grasp. Tesla has yet to solve autonomy, but is well on its way, and although its timelines are usually a bit off, improvements often come through the Over-the-Air updates to the Full Self-Driving suite.
Tesla has confirmed today that its steering wheel-less and pedal-less Cybercab, the vehicle geared toward launching the company’s autonomous ride-hailing hopes, has officially entered production at its Giga Texas production facility outside of Austin.
The Cybercab is a sleek two-door, two-passenger coupe engineered from the ground up as an electric self-driving vehicle. It features no steering wheel or pedals, relying instead on Tesla’s advanced vision-only Full Self-Driving system powered by multiple cameras and artificial intelligence.
Purpose-built for autonomy
Cybercab in production now at Giga Texas pic.twitter.com/Y9qG3KyWBa
— Tesla (@Tesla) April 23, 2026
The minimalist cabin centers on a large display screen that serves as the primary interface for passengers, creating an open, futuristic space optimized for comfort during unsupervised rides. A compact 35-kilowatt-hour battery pack delivers exceptional efficiency at 5.5 miles per kilowatt-hour, providing an estimated 200-mile range.
Additional innovations include inductive charging compatibility and a lightweight design that enhances aerodynamics and performance.
Production at Giga Texas builds on earlier prototypes and initial units completed earlier in 2026. The facility, already a hub for Model Y and Cybertruck assembly, now ramps up dedicated lines for the Cybercab.
This shift to volume manufacturing reflects Tesla’s strategy to scale affordable autonomous vehicles rapidly.
By focusing on a dedicated platform rather than adapting existing models, the company aims to keep costs low while prioritizing safety and reliability through continuous AI improvements.
The Cybercab’s debut in production carries broad implications for urban mobility. As the cornerstone of Tesla’s Robotaxi network, it promises on-demand, driverless rides that could slash transportation expenses, reduce traffic accidents caused by human error, and lower emissions through its all-electric powertrain.
Accessibility features, such as space for service animals or assistive devices, further broaden its appeal. Regulators and cities worldwide will soon evaluate its deployment, but the vehicle’s design already addresses key hurdles in scaling unsupervised autonomy.
Challenges persist, including full regulatory clearance and building charging infrastructure. Yet this production launch signals momentum. With Cybercabs poised to roll out in increasing numbers, Tesla edges closer to a future where personal ownership meets shared fleets of intelligent vehicles.
The start of Cybercab production is more than just a new vehicle entering mass manufacturing for Tesla, as it’s a signal autonomy is near. Being developed without manual controls is such a massive sign by Tesla that it trusts its progress on Full Self-Driving.
While the development of that suite continues, Tesla is making a clear cut statement that it is prepared to get its fully autonomous vehicle out in public roads as it prepares to revolutionize passenger travel once and for all.
News
Tesla Summon got insanely good in FSD v14.3.2 — Navigation? Not so much
There were two new lines of improvements in the release notes: one addressing Actually Smart Summon (ASS), and another that now allows drivers to choose a reason for an intervention via a small menu during disengagement.
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.3.2 began rolling out to some owners earlier this week, and there are some notable improvements that came with this update.
There were two new lines of improvements in the release notes: one addressing Actually Smart Summon (ASS), and another that now allows drivers to choose a reason for an intervention via a small menu during disengagement.
Overall operation saw a handful of slight improvements, especially with parking performance, which has been the most notable difference with the arrival of FSD v14.3. However, there are still some very notable shortcomings, most notably with region-specific signage and navigation.
Tesla Assisted Smart Summon (ASS) improvements
There are noticeable improvements to ASS operation, which has definitely been inconsistent in terms of performance. Tesla wrote in the release notes for v14.3.2:
“Unified the model between Actually Smart Summon, FSD, and Robotaxi for more capable and reliable behavior.”
As recently as this month, I used Summon with no success. It had pulled around the parking lot I was in incorrectly, leaving the range at which Summon can be operated and losing a signal while moving in the middle of the lot.
This caused me to sprint across the lot to retrieve the vehicle:
It was pouring when I left the gym so I tried to Summon my Model Y
It turned the opposite way and drove out of range, stopping here and forcing me to walk even further across the lot in the rain for it 🤣
One day pic.twitter.com/iD10c8sriB
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 5, 2026
Unfortunately, Summon was not dependable or accurate enough to use regularly. It appears Tesla might have bridged the gap needed to make it an effective feature, as two tests in parking lots proved that Summon was more responsive and faster to navigate to the location chosen.
It also did so without hesitation, confidently, and at a comfortable speed. I was able to test it twice at different distances:
🚨 Tesla FSD v14.3.2 ASS testing part 1
This was a significant improvement than recent tries using ASS. The parking lot was pretty empty but getting it to come to my location in one singular motion and maneuver was encouraging. https://t.co/vF7TS48GGV pic.twitter.com/sYt8tyHgNn
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 23, 2026
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.3.2 ASS testing part 2 https://t.co/lxfWfnLUxf pic.twitter.com/2R0r3ohI3M
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 23, 2026
I plan to test this more thoroughly and regularly through the next few weeks, and I avoided using it in a congested parking lot initially because I have not had overwhelming success with Summon in the past. I wanted to set a low baseline for it to see if it could simply pull up to the place I pinned in the Tesla app.
It was two for two, which is a big improvement because I don’t think I ever had successful Summon attempts back-to-back. It just seems more confident than ever before.
New Disengagement Categories
This is a really good idea from Tesla, but there are some issues with it. The categories you can select are Critical, Comfort, Preference, and Other.
I think the reasons why people choose to take over would be a better way to prompt drivers, like, “Traveling Too Fast,” “Incorrect Maneuver,” “Navigation Error,” would be more beneficial.
I say this because it seems that how we each categorize things might be different. For example, I shared a video of an intervention because the car had navigated to an exit to a parking lot and put its left blinker on, despite left turns not being allowed there.
I disengaged and chose Critical as the reason; it’s not a comfort issue, it’s not a preference, it’s quite literally an illegal turn, and it’s also dangerous because it cuts across several lanes of traffic and is 180 degrees.
I chose to label this Navigation error as “Critical” while testing FSD v14.3.2
Here’s why:
✅ This intervention wasn’t “preference,” as the maneuver FSD routed was illegal
✅ If a police officer saw this maneuver, it would result in a ticket https://t.co/znhHb4haAo pic.twitter.com/bZOiLwWmQa— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 23, 2026
Some said I should not have labeled this as Critical, but that’s the description I best characterized the disengagement as.
Categorizing interventions is a good thing, but it’s kind of hard to determine how to label them correctly.
Inconsistency with Regional Traffic Patterns
Tesla Full Self-Driving is pretty inconsistent with how it handles regional or local traffic patterns and road rules. The most frequent example I like to use is that of the “Except Right Turn” stop sign, which has become a notorious sighting on our social media platforms.
In the initial rollout of v14.3, my Model Y successfully navigated through one of these stop signs with no issues. However, testing at two of these stop signs yesterday proved it is still not sure how to read signs and navigate through them properly.
🚨 Tesla FSD v14.3.2 attempts the “Except Right Turn” stop sign: https://t.co/W5MjAybaNK pic.twitter.com/P6oeUsk4PN
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 23, 2026
Off camera, I approached another one of these signs and felt the car coming to a stop, so I nudged it forward with the accelerator pedal pressed.
This helped the car go through the sign without stopping, but I could feel the bucking of the vehicle as the car really wanted to stop.
Musk said on the earnings call earlier this week that unsupervised FSD would probably be available in some regions before others, including a state-to-state basis in the U.S.
“It’s difficult to release this like to everyone everywhere all at once because we do want to make sure that they’re not unique situations in a city that particularly complex intersection or — actually, they tend to be places where people get into accidents a lot because they’re just — perhaps there’s — and like I said, an unsafe intersection or bad road markings or a lot of weather challenges. So I think we would release unsupervised gradually to the customer fleet as we feel like a particular geography is confirmed to be safe.”
This could be one of those examples that Tesla just has to figure out.
Highway Operation
Full Self-Driving is already pretty good at routine roadway navigation, so I don’t have too much to report here.
However, I was happy with FSD’s decision-making at several points, including its choice not to pass a slightly slower car and remain in the right lane as we approached the off-ramp:
🚨 Tesla FSD v14.3.2 highway operation: generally happy with the performance here, especially behavior near the exit
Love that the car got over in the right lane after its final pass, and stayed there as the off ramp was approaching https://t.co/qVRVhg6XGR pic.twitter.com/1ELwHf2XKS
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 23, 2026
Better Maneuvering at Stop Signs
Many FSD users report some strange operations at stop signs, especially four-way intersections where there is a stop sign and a line on the road, and they’re not even with one another.
I experienced this quite frequently and found that FSD would actually double stop: once at the stop sign and again at the line.
This created some interesting scenarios for me and I had many cars honk at me when the second stop would happen. Other vehicles that had waved me on to proceed through the intersection would become frustrated at the second stop.
FSD seems to have worked through this particular maneuver:
🚨 Tesla FSD v14.3.2 with a singular stop at the correct spot
No double stopping anymore in my experience https://t.co/Wd0TaNjc1R pic.twitter.com/CdQPvJHaAM
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 23, 2026
FSD should know to go to the more appropriate location (whichever provides better visibility), and proceed when it is the car’s turn to move. The double stop really ruined the flow of traffic at times and generally caused some frustration from other drivers.
Tesla Cybercab gets crazy change as mass production begins
Tesla confirms Cybercab with no steering wheel enters production
