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.
Turn-by-turn navigation is not new technology.
For over two decades, drivers have relied on Garmin, TomTom, and later smartphone apps like Google Maps and Waze to receive precise, reliable directions. These systems have guided millions safely through unfamiliar cities, highways, and backroads with remarkable effectiveness. They handle real-time traffic, construction detours, and complex intersections with minimal fuss.
Yet Tesla, the company that promised revolutionary Full Self-Driving (FSD), continues to struggle with this foundational capability. As FSD (Supervised) v14.3.4 has started rolling out to cars this week, navigation remains its glaring Achilles’ heel, undermining the entire autonomous vision.
Tesla Summon got insanely good in FSD v14.3.2 — Navigation? Not so much
Tesla’s FSD excels in many driving behaviors—smooth acceleration, confident lane changes in ideal conditions, and responsive handling of visible obstacles. However, when it comes to following a route accurately, the system falters repeatedly.
Owners report wrong turns, missed exits, inefficient routing through local roads instead of highways, phantom speed limit errors, and even directing vehicles to building rear entrances. Interventions for navigation issues often outnumber those for core driving maneuvers. Tesla has begun surveying owners specifically about these errors, acknowledging the problem after years of complaints.
Navigation is perhaps my biggest complaint when it comes to FSD, because sometimes, we do know better. Some of us have been living in our areas for our entire lives, but even those who have not have years or even decades of experience driving on local roads. We might know a little better about routing.
But the navigation mistakes are more than just FSD potentially taking a slightly different route that may or may not save you a few minutes. Sometimes, they’re genuinely mind-boggling.
This isn’t just annoying; it cascades into broader failures. A flawed route plan confuses the AI’s decision-making, leading to hesitant behavior, unnecessary disengagements, or dangerous maneuvers like attempting impossible U-turns or ignoring clear ramps. In a system meant to operate with minimal supervision, unreliable navigation erodes trust.
More often than not, false or plain incorrect navigation is what causes me to interrupt FSD operation. Unfortunately, I believe the latest FSD version is the worst example of it, and it leads me to believe that Tesla might be making some changes; they’ve just made them in the wrong direction.
It makes you wonder: Why is a company that has done so much with the progress of FSD and autonomy struggling so much with navigation, something that is not new and has been around a long time?
Multiple Data Sources
First, Tesla’s navigation relies on a fragile patchwork of multiple data sources—Google Maps, TomTom, OpenStreetMap, Valhalla, and its own fleet-derived data—stitched together rather than a single authoritative map. When these conflict on lane geometry, road status, or turn details, the system hesitates or chooses incorrectly.
Traditional GPS providers maintain centralized, regularly validated databases with professional curation and rapid updates. Tesla’s hybrid approach, while innovative in crowdsourcing, introduces inconsistencies that a purely vision-based or end-to-end AI approach may not easily reconcile in real time.
Persistent Learning
FSD seems to struggle with persistent learning from driver interventions.
Unlike consumer apps that quickly adapt to repeated corrections or user preferences (e.g., avoiding certain routes or remembering habitual detours), Tesla’s FSD often fails to internalize fixes on the same trip or across similar scenarios. Owners note making the same manual override multiple times without the routing engine updating its behavior meaningfully.
This stems from the neural architecture prioritizing real-time perception and control over long-term route memory and personalization, making navigation feel rigid and “opinionated” compared to the adaptive logic in Waze or Google Maps.
I noticed that when I asked Grok to try and get me home a certain way (a way that FSD routinely took in the past because it was the most efficient), it had to place a waypoint between my location at the time and my house. When I went to edit the waypoint out, as Grok had placed it for a way to get FSD to get off the highway at the right exit, it was stumped again, rerouted, and took a longer way home.
The next thing I’ve noticed, and this might be controversial, is that Nav has gotten even worse.
I think that might actually be a good thing; Tesla seems to be adjusting it. They just need to adjust it the opposite way.
The car is taking extremely strange routes to very… https://t.co/UHg3tVfNA2
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 16, 2026
Reasoning, Scaling, and Intuition
Third, scaling navigation for unsupervised or robotaxi ambitions requires not just accuracy but adaptability and user-like reasoning. Current FSD often defaults to single routes that ignore driver preferences or real-world nuances like time-of-day traffic patterns. It fails to match the intuitive, context-aware planning that traditional systems have refined over the years.
Resolving navigation is critical for several reasons. Practically, it is the backbone of any autonomous journey: without trustworthy routing, the car cannot reliably reach destinations, rendering FSD useless for robotaxis or hands-free commutes. Safety depends on it—mismatched plans create hesitation in merges or intersections, increasing accident risk.
Economically, Tesla’s valuation and future hinge on FSD delivering unsupervised driving; persistent navigation flaws delay regulatory approval and erode consumer confidence. For owners who paid premiums for FSD, these issues represent unfulfilled promises. While it is unlikely Tesla will lose too many customers due to bad navigation, some will be frustrated with the constant need for human input.
Tesla has achieved miracles in electric vehicles and battery tech. Mastering turn-by-turn—technology Garmin nailed in the early 2000s—should not be this hard. By investing in tighter data integration, faster learning loops from interventions, and more intuitive routing algorithms, Tesla could close this gap.
Until then, FSD’s navigation struggles highlight a humbling truth: even the most ambitious innovator must sometimes master the basics before conquering the future.
A Tesla Cybertruck driver in the United Kingdom had their all-electric pickup seized by local police in the Greater Manchester area after the department cited “legitimate concerns.”
Last Thursday, police saw the pickup on the roads and decided to pull the driver over. Greater Manchester Police said:
“Whilst this may seem trivial to some, legitimate concerns exist around the safety of other road users or pedestrians if they were involved in a collision with the Cybertruck.”
🚨 A Tesla Cybertruck, which is illegal to drive in the UK due to safety concerns, has been seized by police in Greater Manchester
“Whilst this may seem trivial to some, legitimate concerns exist around the safety of other road users or pedestrians if they were involved in a… pic.twitter.com/cqhdPok3DM
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 16, 2026
The Cybertruck in question was, according to the BBC, registered and insured abroad and was confiscated. The driver, who is a UK resident, was reported.
The Greater Manchester Police Department then added:
“The Tesla Cybertruck is not road-legal in the UK and does not hold a certificate of conformity.”
The Cybertruck cannot be legally driven in the UK because it has no UK Type Approval for operation in the country. This is due to some safety concerns, which are related to its angular shape and design. The stainless steel exoskeleton has sharp edges and projections that violate UK/EU rules on pedestrian protection.
Tesla has considered creating what it referred to as an “international version” that would be approved for operation in Europe. However, there has been no real movement on that front by the company, as it has been focused on the Robotaxi rollout primarily.
A new report claims that Apple is in the process of developing what would be the missing link for Tesla to get CarPlay.
Apple and Tesla have been reportedly working together for some time to give Tesla owners the opportunity to utilize CarPlay within their vehicles. While many owners are more than happy with Tesla’s in-house UI, which is seamless, effective, and smooth, some still want CarPlay, which does have its advantages.
A report from 9to5Mac now states that a new CarPlay technology that was highlighted during the Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC) would potentially be the bridge between Tesla and Apple. With the addition of a feature known as “Route Sharing,” which gives a navigation app the ability to share routing data with the vehicle, Tesla would be able to launch CarPlay in its vehicles, the report states.
CarPlay has not been a priority for Tesla because it has done extremely well with its in-house UI, but some drivers are just used to it. Additionally, it could improve Tesla’s subpar Navigation or offer improved app capabilities, especially with iMessage.
Route Sharing is an intended addition to CarPlay’s iteration in iOS 26.4, which was released in March:
The addition of CarPlay would undoubtedly be welcome, but at the same time, it seems like Tesla realizes it is not of the utmost priority. There are so many things that Tesla is working on currently within its own vehicles, especially attempting to solve self-driving.
Back in February, Bloomberg had reported that Tesla was still working on bringing CarPlay to its vehicles, but it had not due to app compatibility issues and incredibly low adoption rates of iOS 26.
This bottleneck could buy Tesla the proper amount of time to develop CarPlay for its vehicles. It would be a welcome addition, and could be brought on with either the Summer or Fall 2026 Software Updates.
Tesla’s Navigation Nightmare: Why the easiest part of FSD might be the hardest
Tesla Cybertruck driver gets pickup seized for ‘legitimate concerns’ in UK
