News
ICBM rocket shopping: Elon Musk did it in Russia, so why not do it in the United States?
The ultimate goal of launching rockets is to get us exploring and building in space, not picking winners and losers. Simply put, if you can’t compete with the mousetraps on the market, you haven’t actually built a better mousetrap. Repurposed ICBM motors for rocket engines are not the problem.
Gemini 10 launches on a modified Titan ICBM motor. Credit: NASA on The Commons.
A Disagreement Among Star Travelers
There’s a debate going on among the government “powers that be” and commercial space companies over the use of excess intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) motors to launch rockets. Currently, these motors are banned from being used for commercial purposes, although military and civil launches are okay.
One side argues that the ban should be lifted because
- the missile parts provide a reliable, cost-effective means for space access; and
- it benefits taxpayers through recouped monies from private sales.
The other side wants the ban maintained because
- flooding the market with cheaper, “off-the-shelf” rocket parts could hinder the innovation and development of new rocket technologies by lowering demand for them; and
- larger companies will take away their market share through easy access to cheaper motors.
This same debate created the ban in the 1990s, and it should be mentioned that the main proponent of lifting the ban was a big part of passing it in the first place. It is also only fair to mention that this main proponent is a very large, established rocket company while the opponents are mostly smaller competitors.
Putting It All Into Perspective
First, it’s important to consider a reality-based context before taking a position on this. Absent another world war, globalization is here to stay, meaning that if a company in the United States cannot offer launch services at a 
competitive price point, their potential customers will go elsewhere. Since these customers are not exclusively American companies, U.S. lawmakers cannot simply make the problem go away through legislation by restricting the nationality of launch providers.
Second, it’s important to frame this issue using marketplace case studies relevant to the situation found here. Old technology is constantly giving way to updated and new technology, demonstrating that innovation is driven by a variety of factors, not just the pure need for a technology to exist.
Finally, it’s important to fully understand the motives of all parties involved. The commercial space industry is, by definition, business-oriented. At a fundamental level, all parties involved are concerned primarily with their own best interest, i.e., their ability to make a profit.
Space Access Should Be More Affordable
In my opinion, the ban should be lifted, as my position on issues like this will always tend towards expanding access rather than restricting it. Achieving democratized space travel will require affordable accessibility to space, and one of the best ways to drive costs down is to not spend valuable resources “reinventing the wheel” if existing resources work well for current needs. This isn’t to say that innovation isn’t necessary, but rather that different 
missions have different needs, and the existence of one option doesn’t preclude the need for other options.
The car industry is a good case study to compare to. The fact that older cars
exist does not prevent newer, generally improved cars from being developed and sold each year. Gasoline is a proven standard to fuel vehicles, but the demand for electric vehicles is getting louder. It’s the demand for better technology that moves this process of innovation forward.
The companies involved in this debate are profit-driven. What would motivate a company to keep inexpensive, proven technology out of a market they were competing in? In my opinion, the question itself contains the answer. Competition is a proven way to drive development, and the argument that a market flooded with competition would hurt competition has somewhat circular logic.
I do think it is fair to be concerned that the nature of competing against government for a product undermines the concept of a fair market; however, the global nature of launch services and the expanding need for more innovative solutions, i.e., more powerful rocket engines for the upcoming long-distance space missions, mitigate this concern.
In the current environment, American launch providers are losing business to non-American launch providers, most of which are either heavily subsidized by their governments or are the governments themselves. In order for American launch providers to afford the costs of innovation and development, they need to be able to fairly compete in the global market for a customer base. It is also important to note that the rocket motor is only one part of the process of providing launch services. In that light, opening the ICBM market to American launch providers doesn’t make the American government the competitor as much as it is a retailer selling certain parts which make up a whole rocket product.
Elon Musk, Russians, and ICBM Engines (Oh, my!)
To frame this debate in another light, recall that Elon Musk’s initial space dreams involved purchasing ICBM motors from Russia to send dehydrated plant seeds to Mars. He wanted to accomplish something inspirational without diving head first into the business of building rockets. Fortunately for us, SpaceX was born through that process; however, 
imagine a future, space-inspired millionaire looking to make a similar contribution except the purpose would ultimately be commercial. Why deny the option of a rocket built with “off-the-shelf” parts? There aren’t many Elon Musk types out there willing to invest most of their own personal fortune for a ten percent chance of success at building a rocket engine from scratch, but every time technology is sent into space, it moves us forward.
Elon Musk’s ICBM story isn’t the only thing worth noting in this debate. Unfortunately for supporters of the ban, SpaceX essentially renders their argument moot because SpaceX’s innovation and resulting lower launch price tag are what’s making Russian space authorities somewhat cranky about the business they’re usurping from them. Clearly, innovation is still possible even with other ICBM-based rockets on the market.
In Summary
The ultimate goal of launching rockets is to get us exploring and building in space, and this is hindered when the regulatory environment has the effect of hand picking winners and losers. Restricting ICBM motors from being on the commercial market does exactly that. This doesn’t advance the long term goals of space exploration. It only interferes with getting technology into orbit and beyond by restricting the capital available to develop better technology.
The argument that innovation is hurt by a market full of ICBM motors is one based on a desire to control market forces in an unfair way. Simply put, if you can’t compete with the mousetraps on the market, you haven’t actually built a better mousetrap, and there’s nothing to prevent you from selling existing mousetraps in service packages while you develop better ones.
Granted, as Elon Musk has reminded us in several interviews, rockets are hard, making the business of rockets even harder. Imagine, however, if the government banned access to all major highways, an existing tax-funded resource, because there was a need for a surface material that was resistant to pot holes and existing asphalt mixes hindered its development. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see what a bad idea that would be and what type of impact it would have on those needing the highways to conduct their business, especially while other countries still had their road systems up and running.
Autobahn, anyone?
Tesla is now starting to ship a “Halloween Mode” that is filled with some creepy and fun features; the company says, “This spooky update turns your Tesla into a haunted house on wheels.”
The update is just the latest in a series of updates that Tesla typically ships out in a seasonal fashion. The Spring and Summer Updates provided some fun novelty items while also packing some cool features that are actually useful for the ownership experience.
This one seems to be more fun-forward, and there are not any updates to the Full Self-Driving suite or overall operation of the vehicle. Instead, these novelty features are geared toward getting you in the mood for the Fall and Halloween.
Halloween Mode now rolling out 🎃
This spooky update turns your Tesla into a haunted house on wheels
– Ghost costume on your car’s avatar
– Enable Trick or Treat to play spooky sounds & flicker the lights when visitors approach
– New haunting light show, wraps & lock sound
– A rather chilling Photobooth
– Frighten people remotely by speaking through the app…your car will say it in a voice of its own
Side effects may include neighborhood notoriety
— Tesla (@Tesla) October 6, 2026
New Ghost Costume on Car Avatar
Driver Visualization will now show your vehicle as a ghost, as an all-white sheet is draped over the vehicle. Pedestrians are turned into mummies or skeletons, and other vehicles are all a spooky green:
Credit: Tesla
Additionally, the Park Scene with your Tesla now displays that ghost costume draped over your vehicle in the foreground of a scary backdrop with Jack-o-Lanterns and a haunted house:
Credit: Tesla
Trick or Treat Mode
Trick or Treat Mode will enable the vehicle to play spooky sounds and flicker the lights as visitors approach. This might be a nice touch for when you’re handing out candy to kids on Halloween Night.
Other Features
Tesla is also adding a new Light Show, new Wrap Options, and a new Lock Sound with this update.
Credit: Tesla
Additionally, Photobooth has a new Halloween option:
Credit: Tesla
You will also be able to speak remotely through the app and transmit your voice to people outside, which is not a new feature, but the car will say it in a voice of its own, which is a new feature with that bullhorn-like feature.
Investor's Corner
SpaceX reveals how its 1 Million AI satellite network will work and prevent space collisions
SpaceX reveals plans for one million Starmind AI satellites and calls out operators hiding maneuvers.
SpaceX has put the largest satellite count it has ever published into writing, and it says that plan only works if every other operator in orbit starts sharing what it knows.
In a new Space Safety page highlighted Tuesday morning by Sawyer Merritt on X, SpaceX said it “plans to operate up to 100,000 Starlink satellites and up to 1 million Starmind AI satellites to meet the growing demand for broadband and supercompute.” Starlink has a little over 11,000 satellites in orbit today, so the target alone implies roughly a ninefold expansion of the broadband network.
Starmind is SpaceX’s orbital AI compute constellation. Elon Musk confirmed the Starmind name in June after an xAI trademark filing surfaced, and in August SpaceX said it was working with Nvidia on the compute payload. The FCC accepted the filing for up to one million satellites back in February.
FCC accepts SpaceX filing for 1 million orbital data center plan
SpaceX also released a new render of what a full Starmind constellation could look like. Alongside it, SpaceX VP Michael Nicolls explained why the satellites will not operate on their own. “We need to operate clusters of satellites in tight formation to get enough coherent compute to run AI models efficiently,” Nicolls said. “A cluster will be 10-ish satellites connected with 10 terabits or so of bandwidth between them, and interconnected to the broader constellation.”
That is the most specific detail SpaceX has given on how Starmind will be built. Instead of a million independent servers, the network would work as tightly packed groups of about 10 satellites acting as one compute unit, with Starlink’s laser links carrying results back to Earth.
There is a bright and exciting future for humanity ahead – and space is fundamental to that future.
To achieve this, space safety must be done right. We encourage every operator to not only share ephemeris data proactively the same way Starlink already does, but to also adopt the high standards of space safety that SpaceX and Starlink use every day → https://t.co/QizAkQZvEm
— Starlink (@Starlink) October 6, 2026
Packing satellites that close together, at that scale, makes collision avoidance the central problem, and most of the Space Safety page is aimed at other operators. SpaceX said Starlink encountered collision risks with about 650 unique maneuvering third party satellites in 2026, and only about half of them shared data. Over six months, Starlink recorded roughly 164,000 more collision risks where the closest approach came within four hours of an unannounced maneuver.
Some operators keep maneuver plans private over proprietary concerns, while others cannot get government permission to share them. SpaceX called those policies “counterproductive,” saying they “largely only serve to create preventable collision risk between satellites.” Starlink is also offering a free ephemeris sharing and screening platform that returns risk results within a minute, backed by its Stargaze network of 30,000 optical sensors.
The push comes as the Starmind application draws opposition from astronomers and environmental groups. In a September filing with the FCC, SpaceX said each Starmind satellite could weigh up to 4,000 kg, nearly seven times the mass of a Starlink V2 Mini. Musk has brushed off crowding concerns before, telling viewers in June that “space is enormous” and that SpaceX already knows how to run very large constellations safely.
SpaceX’s Starmind page says its Gigasat factory in Bastrop, Texas, is designed to produce AI satellites at scale, with deployment of thousands of units starting as soon as late 2027.
Tesla Full Self-Driving is really good. I have used it for over 76 percent of my driving since FSD v14 launched around this time last year, equating to about 76 percent of my miles using the suite. It’s truly the only way I prefer to travel, but admittedly I save some of the more fun drives for myself.
Even with all of the great things it has done for me, including saving me from being involved in an accident, there are still a handful of things that it needs to improve on. These issues recur from update to update, and while there have been some improvements, they still give me reasons to either soft or hard intervene.
A soft intervention means an adjustment that is needed without disengaging the suite, like manually using a turn signal to change lanes while the car still operates on FSD. What I’d consider to be a “hard intervention” is anything that requires me to disengage the suite altogether, like missing a turn or performing a maneuver I’m uncomfortable with. Of course, some hard interventions will be subjective.
Here are the five things I’d like to see Tesla really focus on through the final versions of v14 and hope to see completely improved with v15.
Speed Limit Recognition and Adjustment
There are entirely too many instances of FSD traveling at a speed that is just totally outrageous. While some of these events can occur on Hurry Mode, I’ve even had issues with it on Standard from time to time, and despite wanting more aggressive maneuvers or a slight bit of urgency, I don’t want to worry about getting a ticket while doing it.
The two areas I notice it the most are in school zones and on local roads. When a Speed Limit changes from 45 to 35, FSD does not always slow down in a way that would appease local law enforcement. On Hurry, 52-55 is pretty standard for a rate of travel in a 45 MPH zone. When it changes to 35, FSD shows zero urgency to slow down to an appropriate speed.
School Zones have been a true pain point, and as recently as last week, I had an issue with it:
Threw FSD into Sloth to see how it handled this school zone. You can see well before I enter it, the car is traveling 34 MPH, one MPH under the limit.
Still not slowing down nearly enough.
@Tesla_AI, not 25, not 30…15 MPH in School Zones https://t.co/YQuQ8ydhKh
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) September 29, 2026
Realistically, most Speed Limit issues are a soft intervention, as I simply scroll into a slower Speed Profile to get the car to slow down. School Zones are a hard intervention, as they require me to completely take over and travel at the posted 15 MPH limit. Even on Sloth, it simply does not get down to a low enough speed.
Parking
Parking is one thing that has really improved over time, but there are still some pretty considerable hoops Tesla needs to jump through to get it to a point where it can be unsupervised.
Parking preferences seem to be where a lot of these issues will be resolved, as most of my complaints come from the fact that the place FSD chooses to park are usually not where I would personally choose to park. This morning, for example, when I arrived at the gym, FSD chose to park next to a vehicle that was parked with its two tires in the spot that FSD picked.
This is a big reason Parking Preferences with Supervised FSD will be so valuable.
If possible, parking a little further away and being distant from people like this is worth it. https://t.co/3Ac71KQiQ3
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 7, 2026
There were three spots in between that car and the nearest car, so FSD could have chosen the spot that would have given a one-spot buffer between the two vehicles. In a parking lot full of empty spots, don’t be that guy who parks next to a car.
Generally, parking performance is vastly improved from where it was a year ago; I rarely am adjusting how it pulls or backs into a spot on v14.3.10, but in earlier versions, I definitely had my problems. It’s gotten really good since, and this version has been the best in terms of parking performance. It’s more about the places FSD choose to park, and not necessarily the parking itself.
There are also no options or map data to allow you to choose a charger at a place like a grocery store if it offers charging. These are things that are a bit more complex, but they will be needed for unsupervised FSD operation.
Navigation
Navigation was always going to be on this list, simply because it is one of the most inconsistent and mind-boggling things about FSD. Even after a year of intervening, sending voice notes, and overriding decisions, FSD still tries to take me out of my neighborhood the wrong way. You cannot turn left out of my neighborhood’s main entrance and exit, only right. Navigation still prompts a left turn out of my neighborhood’s main entrance and exit, instead of going around the neighborhood and exiting where a left turn is legal.
Tesla rolled out Preferred Routes with the Summer Update, and this has resolved some of the issues. I also found my own personal workaround:
🚨See if this cool Tesla Navigation Hack works for you!
I have used it to get out of my neighborhood legally with FSD, thus enabling completely hands-free drives! https://t.co/DlDsCQjxRI
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
Some of the more mind-boggling things that FSD used to do with Navigation have been remedied, but it is still a frequent complaint for me and many other owners. I’d just like to see it adopt those preferred routes more frequently and maybe learn them a little faster.
Certain Highway Behaviors
Highway travel is the most consistent and perhaps FSD’s best use case. There is nothing better than having FSD handle busy highway traffic or just long, monotonous, and boring drives. I love to use it for my trips to the Flight 93 Memorial where I volunteer. When I drove manually, I chose to get a hotel and stay overnight because it’s about a 2.5 hour drive. FSD lets me make the drive, put in a volunteering shift, and drive home, without much fatigue. I have found that this is where FSD is most valuable for me, personally.
However, there are a few things FSD does on the highway that are just weird.
One thing I’ve had issues with as of late is that there will be times when I’m about a mile from my exit, the car is in the left lane and is traveling faster than the traffic in the cruising late. Instead of completing a pass and then getting over with no traffic ahead, the car will sometimes drastically and suddenly slow down, switch to the slow lane, and get behind a vehicle — all with a mile until the exit. On average, I’ll have around one minute from the time I get to my exit if it’s a mile away, because in most cases, I’m traveling somewhere around 60 MPH on the highway.
There is no reason to not complete that last pass, then get into the right lane, and have an unobstructed path to the exit. This is one of the more strange behaviors I’ve seen it do, and it really does feel like a bug. Here’s an example of it from FSD v14.3.7:
🚨 Tesla FSD v14.3.7 did nearly the exact opposite — nearly 2.5 miles before the exit it got over into the slow lane and got behind much slower traffic.
Now, v14.3.8, anecdotally, waited til the last minute to get off the highway https://t.co/Lc9vAKDyQC
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 29, 2026
I ended up overriding the turn signal and using the accelerator to nudge the car to do what I wanted it to do. There was no reason to get in the left lane and add to the congestion in that lane.
Another thing that FSD does frequently is camps in the left lane, especially on Hurry. Cruising in the passing lane is illegal in Pennsylvania, and I know it is not a crime to do that everywhere. However, it is here, and I really wish the car was a little quicker to get over in the left lane when it’s cruising.
Here’s a pretty drastic example I had just a couple weeks back:
Recognizing Drastic Changes in Road Condition
I think anyone who has ever used FSD knows that potholes are a huge issue, but so are large bumps or sudden changes in road condition. At the intersection of Kreutz Creek Rd. and Rt. 462 in Hellam, PA the roads are nearly set up as a ramp, and going over it at a speed of over 35 MPH can send your head into the glass roof, your butt off your seat, and a brace for the sudden thud that is inevitably coming when you finally touch back down again.
You can see here I tried to change Speed Profiles quickly, but I did it a tad too late:
This is that big bounce that I mentioned in the quoted post.
It’s just a tad too drastic to take at the speed FSD wants to go over it. You can see me quickly swipe down into Sloth, but I intervened. https://t.co/81Oc82ZJcZ
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 2, 2026
There are other roads in my area that should not be taken at even the posted Speed Limit because of the damage it could do to your car. Here’s another, where I disengaged FSD altogether:
🚨 I’ve talked in the past about my struggles with FSD when large bumps or sudden changes in sloping are approaching.
Today I tried switching down into Sloth from Standard but I did it a tad too late and I had to take over. You can see this isn’t a bump you take at 35 MPH https://t.co/f4tK13hsz1
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) September 6, 2026
The recognition of these bumps is so crucial for two main reasons: they can cause injury, and they can cause damage to the car. These are reasons why the suite is supervised and drivers should remain attentive. I could not imagine going over that bump at an excessive speed if I had back issues, or if I were older.
Potholes are rarely recognized and usually require a lead car to avoid them. I had FSD use a lead car to avoid a pretty sizeable manhole cover a few weeks back:
🚨 Interesting observation on FSD v14.3.8 – Make note of the van in front of me as it swerves out of the way of a sewer cover
FSD followed this behavior, but interestingly did not swerve for the next sewer cover
What do we make of this? https://t.co/RO19941AIP
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) September 2, 2026
Tesla says that there are improvements coming for potholes, so hopefully that means these bumps will also be recognized consistently.
Tesla ships ‘spooky’ Halloween Mode with creepy and fun features
SpaceX reveals how its 1 Million AI satellite network will work and prevent space collisions
