News
Elon Musk teases an update to SpaceX’s Mars architecture later this year
Elon Musk and SpaceX are aiming to provide a second update on the company’s Mars architecture plans in late September of this year, likely at the 2017 International Astronautical Congress (IAC) in Adelaide, Australia.
While 2017 has been extraordinarily busy and successful for SpaceX thus far, it has also been a somewhat quiet year for Mars and the technology being developed to colonize it affordably. There was a brief flurry of social media information focused on the testing of the ITS carbon composite test tank revealed at the 2016 IAC, with a few pictures and a video of its transport. This activity, as well as Elon Musk’s Ask Me Anything on /r/SpaceX, occurred a month or two after the 2016 IAC, in October and November.
https://www.instagram.com/p/BM4P6b_g2N9/?taken-by=spacex&hl=en
The only concrete information revealed about SpaceX’s Mars ambitions in 2017 have so far been distributed by Musk over Twitter and in an interview of SpaceX President and COO Gwynne Shotwell a few weeks ago. Musk offered tentative time frames for a possible update of the Mars architecture, stating that he believed it dealt with the far more crucial challenge of how to finance such a large endeavor’s significant R&D costs.
Maybe the upcoming IAC in Adelaide
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 11, 2017
During his 2016 reveal, Musk estimated that something like $10 billion would be required to complete development and initial construction of the Raptor engine and ITS test articles. While it is believed that SpaceX has at least several hundred million dollars of liquid capital available, growing several billion dollars of capital is a much greater challenge that will likely require a different methodology than those typically employed by Musk.
Shotewell also discussed SpaceX’s Mars ambitions off and on during an hour-long interview on The Space Show. Of general interest, she mentioned that the current team working on Mars-related research and development was “tiny”, but that it would become a drastically more resource-intensive priority as the company completes work on the fifth and somewhat final “Block” of Falcon 9 and finishes the work necessary to begin routinely conducting Commercial Crew missions. Shotwell gave a timeline of “soon” for the beginning of Block 4 flights and “end of year” for the introduction of Block 5, which is intended to significantly increase the reusability of Falcon 9 (titanium grid fins are a feature of this strategy). Barring delays or setbacks for SpaceX, this implies that SpaceX will begin aggressively pursuing the concrete development of their Mars architecture as soon as the latter months of 2018 or sometime in 2019.
SpaceX revealed this stunning photo of Raptor’s first (partial) hot-fire test the night before Musk’s talk at Guadalajara. (SpaceX)
More specifically, however, Shotwell said that the Raptor test article revealed at the Guadalajara IAC has since conducted “dozens” of tests and is now more seriously considering the engine’s potential utility aboard Falcon 9. The current subscale Raptor components are approximately half the size of the final, operational design, and the need to scale up by as little as a factor of 2 should make the realization of the final design considerably less difficult, and make the testing of the current Raptor far more demonstrative of the operational engine. The exploration of vacuum Raptor as the engine of an upgraded second stage for Falcon 9 would further allow for true on-orbit testing of Raptor, and increasing the performance of S2 would allow for greater flexibility in exploring second stage reuse. Musk and Shotwell have expressed interest in this, particularly given that the second stage is approximately 30% of the cost of every Falcon 9, thus capping any potential cost savings first stage (and fairing) reuse may bring. If SpaceX wishes to lower the cost of launches by a factor of 10 to 100 and bring to life any form of the Mars architecture revealed in Guadalajara, they will have to develop second stage reusability that it is both as rapid, functional, and complete as they soon hope to make first stage reuse.
A fully reusable Falcon 9 would offer the company more cost-effective ways to launch their own profit-driving internet constellation, and could also simply provide deeper profit margins for their main business of commercial launches. However, with Musk having already publicly acknowledged that reusability cost SpaceX approximately $1 billion to develop, SpaceX is certainly already considering the plausibly diminishing returns of diverting more funds and human resources into the continued development of Falcon 9. The most likely outcome is almost certainly some combination of the above goals, whereby SpaceX would delay their Mars exploration timeline by several years and concurrently pursue Falcon 9 second stage reuse and the initial test article development for their Mars architecture, as well as exploring the challenges and intricacies of human spaceflight and deep space exploration with Dragon v2.
-
- The carbon composite LOX tank test article before its first pressurization testing in northern Washington, mid-November 2016. (Reddit /u/ Death_Cog_Unit)
-
- SpaceX’s massive carbon fiber liquid oxygen tank seen testing in Northern Washington. BFR’s tankage will be 25% narrower, and thus easier to manufacture. (SpaceX)
-
- The test article before testing in early February 2017, during which it is believed to have lost structural integrity and failed. (Reddit /u/TeddyBear3238)
-
- The remains of the test article tank after suspected over-pressure testing. Divers were required to salvage the remains over the course of several days. (Reddit /u/ Death_Cog_Machine)
Of note, the only known major testing event in 2017 related to SpaceX’s Mars program was observed by a SpaceX fan in February of this year. After successful November 2016 tests of the carbon composite tank in northern Washington state, fans noted that the tank had made an outdoors appearance once more in early February 2017. SpaceX mentioned on Instagram that the following test, the one SpaceX was preparing for in February, was a full cryo test of the tank, meaning that it involved actual high-pressure, supercooled liquid oxygen. Another fan noted several days later that the barge SpaceX was testing the tank aboard returned to port empty, and later observed what looked like several large pieces of the tank test article that reportedly had to be recovered from the sound by divers. The logical conclusion is that the tank was destroyed during its second phase of testing, but the crucial and currently unknown fact of the matter is whether the failure was a result of intentionally destructive testing or defects in what was effectively an experimental engineering article. Further SpaceX talks later this year will likely reveal some level of detail as to what transpired in the testing of that prototype carbon composite tank.
Reasoned speculation aside, the latter months of 2017 have multiple talks, speeches, and hearings planned by SpaceX members like Elon Musk and Tim Hughes, and information on SpaceX’s Mars ambitions and other future prospects will almost certainly be offered. Hughes is to attend a hearing at 9am EST on July 13th for the U.S. Senate on commercial space and will be testifying on the subject as a representative and employee of SpaceX. Just under a week later, Elon Musk is scheduled to be the main keynote speaker at the 2017 ISS R&D Conference. His talk is set to begin at 12:30pm EST on July 19th. A handful of months after that, as mentioned above, Musk may also provide a detailed update on SpaceX’s Mars architecture at the 2017 International Astronautical Congress.
In other words, on top of an aggressive 12 possible launches between August and the end of December, SpaceX fans also can look forward to details, photos, and possibly even more about the company’s Mars efforts over the next several months.
News
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.2.2.5 might be the most confusing release ever
With each Full Self-Driving release, I am realistic. I know some things are going to get better, and I know some things will regress slightly. However, these instances of improvements are relatively mild, as are the regressions. Yet, this version has shown me that it contains extremes of both.
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.2.2.5 hit my car back on Valentine’s Day, February 14, and since I’ve had it, it has become, in my opinion, the most confusing release I’ve ever had.
With each Full Self-Driving release, I am realistic. I know some things are going to get better, and I know some things will regress slightly. However, these instances of improvements are relatively mild, as are the regressions. Yet, this version has shown me that it contains extremes of both.
It has been about three weeks of driving on v14.2.2.5; I’ve used it for nearly every mile traveled since it hit my car. I’ve taken short trips of 10 minutes or less, I’ve taken medium trips of an hour or less, and I’ve taken longer trips that are over 100 miles per leg and are over two hours of driving time one way.
These are my thoughts on it thus far:
Speed Profiles Are a Mixed Bag
Speed Profiles are something Tesla seems to tinker with quite frequently, and each version tends to show a drastic difference in how each one behaves compared to the previous version.
I do a vast majority of my FSD travel using Standard and Hurry modes, although in bad weather, I will scale it back to Chill, and when it’s a congested city on a weekend or during rush hour, I’ll throw it into Mad Max so it takes what it needs.
Early on, Speed Profiles really felt great. This is one of those really subjective parts of the FSD where someone might think one mode travels too quickly, whereas another person might see the identical performance as too slow or just right.
To me, I would like to see more consistency from release to release on them, but overall, things are pretty good. There are no real complaints on my end, as I had with previous releases.
In a past release, Mad Max traveled under the speed limit quite frequently, and I only had that experience because Hurry was acting the same way. I’ve had no instances of that with v14.2.2.5.
Strange Turn Signal Behavior
This is the first Full Self-Driving version where I’ve had so many weird things happen with the turn signals.
Two things come to mind: Using a turn signal on a sharp turn, and ignoring the navigation while putting the wrong turn signal on. I’ve encountered both things on v14.2.2.5.
On my way to the Supercharger, I take a road that has one semi-sharp right-hand turn with a driveway entrance right at the beginning of the turn.
Only recently, with the introduction of v14.2.2.5, have I had FSD put on the right turn signal when going around this turn. It’s obviously a minor issue, but it still happens, and it’s not standard practice:
How can we get Full Self-Driving to stop these turn signals?
There’s no need to use one here; the straight path is a driveway, not a public road. The right turn signal here is unnecessary pic.twitter.com/7uLDHnqCfv
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) February 28, 2026
When sharing this on X, I had Tesla fans (the ones who refuse to acknowledge that the company can make mistakes) tell me that it’s a “valid” behavior that would be taught to anyone who has been “professionally trained” to drive.
Apparently, if you complain about this turn signal, you are also claiming you know more than Tesla engineers…okay.
Nobody in their right mind has ever gone around a sharp turn when driving their car and put on a signal when continuing on the same road. You would put a left turn signal on to indicate you were turning into that driveway if that’s what your intention was.
Like I said, it’s a totally minor issue. However, it’s not really needed, and nor is it normal. If I were in the car with someone who was taking a simple turn on a road they were traveling, and they signaled because the turn was sharp, I’d be scratching my head.
I’ve also had three separate instances of the car completely ignoring the navigation and putting on a signal that is opposite to what the routing says. Really quite strange.
Parking Performance is Still Underwhelming
Parking has been a complaint of mine with FSD for a long time, so much so that it is pretty rare that I allow the vehicle to park itself. More often than not, it is because I want to pick a spot that is relatively isolated.
However, in the times I allow it to pull into a spot, it still does some pretty head-scratching things.
Recently, it tried to back into a spot that was ~60% covered in plowed snow. The snow was piled about six feet high in a Target parking lot.
A few days later, it tried backing into a spot where someone failed the universal litmus test of returning their shopping cart. Both choices were baffling and required me to manually move the car to a different portion of the lot.
I used Autopark on both occasions, and it did a great job of getting into the spot. I notice that the parking performance when I manually choose the spot is much better than when the car does the entire parking process, meaning choosing the spot and parking in it.
It’s Doing Things (For Me) It’s Never Done Before
Two things that FSD has never done before, at least for me, are slow down in School Zones and avoid deer. The first is something I usually take over manually, and the second I surprisingly have not had to deal with yet.
I had my Tesla slow down at a school zone yesterday for the first time, traveling at 20 MPH and not 15 MPH as the sign suggested, but at the speed of other cars in the School Zone. This was impressive and the first time I experienced it.
I would like to see this more consistently, and I think School Zones should be one of those areas where, no matter what, FSD will only travel the speed limit.
Last night, FSD v14.2.2.5 recognized a deer in a roadside field and slowed down for it:
🚨 Cruising home on a rainy, foggy evening and my Tesla on Full Self-Driving begins to slow down suddenly
FSD just wanted Mr. Deer to make it home to his deer family ❤️ pic.twitter.com/cAeqVDgXo5
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) March 4, 2026
Navigation Still SUCKS
Navigation will be a complaint until Tesla proves it can fix it. For now, it’s just terrible.
It still has not figured out how to leave my neighborhood. I give it the opportunity to prove me wrong each time I leave my house, and it just can’t do it.
It always tries to go out of the primary entrance/exit of the neighborhood when the route needs to take me left, even though that exit is a right turn only. I always leave a voice prompt for Tesla about it.
It still picks incredibly baffling routes for simple navigation. It’s the one thing I still really want Tesla to fix.
Investor's Corner
Tesla gets tip of the hat from major Wall Street firm on self-driving prowess
“Tesla is at the forefront of autonomous driving, supported by a camera-only approach that is technically harder but much cheaper than the multi-sensor systems widely used in the industry. This strategy should allow Tesla to scale more profitably compared to Robotaxi competitors, helped by a growing data engine from its existing fleet,” BoA wrote.
Tesla received a tip of the hat from major Wall Street firm Bank of America on Wednesday, as it reinitiated coverage on Tesla shares with a bullish stance that comes with a ‘Buy’ rating and a $460 price target.
In a new note that marks a sharp reversal from its neutral position earlier in 2025, the bank declared Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) technology the “leading consumer autonomy solution.”
Analysts highlighted Tesla’s camera-only architecture, known as Tesla Vision, as a strategic masterstroke. While technically more challenging than the multi-sensor setups favored by rivals, the vision-based approach is dramatically cheaper to produce and maintain.
This cost edge, combined with Tesla’s rapidly expanding real-world data engine, positions the company to scale robotaxis far more profitably than competitors, BofA argues in the new note:
“Tesla is at the forefront of autonomous driving, supported by a camera-only approach that is technically harder but much cheaper than the multi-sensor systems widely used in the industry. This strategy should allow Tesla to scale more profitably compared to Robotaxi competitors, helped by a growing data engine from its existing fleet.”
The bank now attributes roughly 52% of Tesla’s total valuation to its Robotaxi ambitions. It also flagged meaningful upside from the Optimus humanoid robot program and the fast-growing energy storage business, suggesting the auto segment’s recent headwinds, including expired incentives, are being eclipsed by these higher-margin opportunities.
Tesla’s own data underscores exactly why Wall Street is waking up to FSD’s potential. According to Tesla’s official safety reporting page, the FSD Supervised fleet has now surpassed 8.4 billion cumulative miles driven.
Tesla FSD (Supervised) fleet passes 8.4 billion cumulative miles
That total ballooned from just 6 million miles in 2021 to 80 million in 2022, 670 million in 2023, 2.25 billion in 2024, and a staggering 4.25 billion in 2025 alone. In the first 50 days of 2026, owners added another 1 billion miles — averaging more than 20 million miles per day.
This avalanche of real-world, camera-captured footage, much of it on complex city streets, gives Tesla an unmatched training dataset. Every mile feeds its neural networks, accelerating improvement cycles that lidar-dependent rivals simply cannot match at scale.
Tesla owners themselves will tell you the suite gets better with every release, bringing new features and improvements to its self-driving project.
The $460 target implies roughly 15 percent upside from recent trading levels around $400. While regulatory and safety hurdles remain, BofA’s endorsement signals growing institutional conviction that Tesla’s data advantage is not hype; it’s a tangible moat already delivering billions of miles of proof.
News
Tesla to discuss expansion of Samsung AI6 production plans: report
Tesla has reportedly requested an additional 24,000 wafers per month, which would bring total production capacity to around 40,000 wafers if finalized.
Tesla is reportedly discussing an expansion of its next-generation AI chip supply deal with Samsung Electronics.
As per a report from Korean industry outlet The Elec, Tesla purchasing executives are reportedly scheduled to meet Samsung officials this week to negotiate additional production volume for the company’s upcoming AI6 chip.
Industry sources cited in the report stated that Tesla is pushing to increase the production volume of its AI6 chip, which will be manufactured using Samsung’s 2-nanometer process.
Tesla previously signed a long-term foundry agreement with Samsung covering AI6 production through December 31, 2033. The deal was reportedly valued at about 22.8 trillion won (roughly $16–17 billion).
Under the existing agreement, Tesla secured approximately 16,000 wafers per month from the facility. The company has reportedly requested an additional 24,000 wafers per month, which would bring total production capacity to around 40,000 wafers if finalized.
Tesla purchasing executives are expected to discuss detailed supply terms during their visit to Samsung this week.
The AI6 chip is expected to support several Tesla technologies. Industry sources stated that the chip could be used for the company’s Full Self-Driving system, the Optimus humanoid robot, and Tesla’s internal AI data centers.
The report also indicated that AI6 clusters could replace the role previously planned for Tesla’s Dojo AI supercomputer. Instead of a single system, multiple AI6 chips would be combined into server-level clusters.
Tesla’s semiconductor collaboration with Samsung dates back several years. Samsung participated in the design of Tesla’s HW3 (AI3) chip and manufactured it using a 14-nanometer process. The HW4 chip currently used in Tesla vehicles was also produced by Samsung using a 5-nanometer node.
Tesla previously planned to split production of its AI5 chip between Samsung and TSMC. However, the company reportedly chose Samsung as the primary partner for the newer AI6 chip.
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.2.2.5 might be the most confusing release ever
Tesla gets tip of the hat from major Wall Street firm on self-driving prowess
