News
Elon Musk’s Reddit AMA: Mars mission, upgrades to Falcon 9 and more
Yesterday, Elon Musk oh-so-kindly reached out on reddit to curious minds in an “Ask Me Anything” (AMA) session as a follow up to his September 27, 2016 talk at the 67th International Astronautical Congress in Guadalajara, Mexico.
Thousands of questions were put forth by AMA contributors, and he provided 15 answers in true, Elon fashion. By that I mean taking fairly complicated questions and answering them in ways that make the original questions more understandable for the layperson (layperson = me). Also, one word responses to two-paragraph long questions.
This will be under /r/spacex, not the general AMA. Meant to be supplemental to the IAC talk.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) October 23, 2016
General Outline of AMA Topics
Elon couldn’t put every inquiry to rest, but he did provide some interesting things to chew over. The audience, of course, actively participated every step of the way. Among the topics, there was…
- Discussion on the types of power to be used for energy in the initial base of operations on Mars: Bets were on solar, doubts were on nuclear, and Elon seemed to play the methane card by referencing the Sabatier Reaction;
- A clarification on upgrades to the Falcon 9, including a new naming scheme that doesn’t exactly coincide with the current semi-scheme;
- A broad outline of steps planned for setting up the initial Martian base, Elon referring to it as “Mars Base Alpha”;
- Discussion on the technical clarifications, details, and priorities for actualizing the missions, including perhaps even changing the name of the rocket…again.
Oh and sadly, no details on any fantastic spray parks or coffee bars in the crew cabin. We’ll have to wait a “year or two” before knowing what’s actually going to go inside the thing. He did mention geodesic domes and underground tunnels for “city” considerations, though!
Top Takeaways (IMO)
While Elon’s remarks definitely set some mental wheels in motion, these were my top takeaways:
- Elon believes that the final Falcon 9 booster will be able to be reused indefinitely, production on that version to start in about three months;
- Early Mars missions will be cargo-centric, twelve-passenger crews assumed;
- The transport system booster should be able to withstand 30 to 50 g’s without breaking up (20 being the usual expected amount);
- SpaceX will release mockups of the Mars spacecraft interior “in a year or two”;
- The transport system booster will have an easier time landing than Falcon 9 due to mass ratio and density differences.
[Author’s note: It is going to be insane to watch those boosters land. Can you imagine the Saturn V landing itself? Wowza.]
Of course, my favorite part of reddit (no, really) is the humor. Here are a couple of funnies from this thread:
Final Words
Just a note of sympathy to anyone who’s ever felt a little overwhelmed by the technical knowledge discussions on the SpaceX subreddit (ahem, moi): I view it as akin to thinking you are a pretty knowledgeable cook and then watch an episode of Julia Child’s “The French Chef”. Just because you don’t know 182 ways to cook an egg doesn’t mean you’re not informed about cooking eggs nor are you disqualified from enjoying them. Some people just really really like knowing everything about eggs and can really get you thinking about eggs as multiple organ systems-turned gourmet meals instead of just the side that comes with your toast and home fries.
Onwards!
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
