News
NASA to retry Artemis I Moon rocket launch on Saturday
NASA says it has alleviated issues that arose during its first Space Launch System (SLS) Moon rocket launch attempt and will try again as early as Saturday, September 3rd.
Measuring around 98 meters (~322 feet) tall and capable of launching up to 95 tons (~210,000 lb) to low Earth orbit, the SLS rocket’s first launch – Artemis I – will attempt to send NASA Orion spacecraft on its way to lunar orbit. If all goes to plan, a partial prototype of the deep space crew transport vehicle will enter orbit spend several weeks around the Moon, where it will attempt to prove that Orion is safe and ready to launch NASA astronauts.
Approximately six years behind schedule and tens of billions of dollars over budget, the combined Orion spacecraft and SLS rocket were originally expected to debut in 2016 when Congress legally required NASA to develop the combined system in 2011. It would be difficult for the stakes to be much higher.
Now, after an unsuccessful August 29th launch attempt that turned into a wet dress rehearsal test as a result of poor planning, NASA is ready to try again.
SLS is scheduled to lift off from NASA’s Kennedy Space Center (KSC) LC-39B pad no earlier than (NET) 2:17 pm EDT (18:17 UTC) on Saturday, September 3rd. Like the first, the window lasts for two hours, providing some flexibility for NASA to troubleshoot any other minor problems that might crop up during the second launch attempt.
During the first SLS launch attempt, several problems arose, including a possible crack in Core Stage foam insulation, a misbehaving vent valve, a hydrogen fuel leak, and weather concerns that delayed the start of propellant loading by more than an hour. The most important problem, causing NASA to abort its first attempt at T-40 minutes to liftoff, involved Core Stage engine chill systems.
At the time, available data suggested that one of the Core Stage’s four modified and flight-proven Space Shuttle Main Engines (known as RS-25) was unable to chill down to the temperatures required for safe ignition. In a September 1st press conference, after more analysis, NASA now says that the rocket was, in fact, correctly trickling liquid hydrogen fuel through all four engines and that all engines were likely ready to go. The agency and its contractors say they are confident that the true cause of the unfavorable readings was a faulty temperature sensor.
In an earlier press conference, senior officials noted that the Boeing-built SLS Core Stage is designed in a way that makes those faulty temperature sensors virtually inaccessible without major work – and certainly not while the rocket is still at the launch pad. A rollback to NASA’s Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) could easily delay the next SLS launch attempt by 4-6 weeks, if not longer.
Perhaps as a result of the looming consequences of another rollback, instead of sending the rocket back to fix the newly discovered sensor issue, NASA officials now say they never actually needed the broken sensor and can get by without it working properly. That doesn’t entirely explain why NASA fully aborted an SLS launch attempt as a direct result of not liking the data produced by said sensor a few days prior. Nonetheless, the officials say that by analyzing several other unspecified telemetry readings within the RS-25s and SLS plumbing, they can effectively infer that the engines have been chilled to the right temperature.
In theory, if no other issues arise in the remaining 40 minutes leading up to launch, that should allow NASA to confidently launch SLS without having to replace components deep within the rocket.
NASA will begin live coverage of its next SLS launch attempt on NASA TV at 5:45 am EDT (09:45 UTC), followed by a separate hosted broadcast (the agency’s first attempt at a 4K launch webcast) beginning at 12:15 pm EDT (16:15 UTC).
Tesla just gave what is perhaps its biggest signal yet that the launch of the Cybercab, its autonomous ride-hailing-geared car, is imminent.
The Cybercab has been spotted outside of Gigafactory Texas in massive numbers over the past few days, with hundreds of units being stored on property just days after the vehicle received a Certificate of Conformity from the EPA.
Today, things were a bit different.
Cybercabs spotted on Giga Texas property today had an addition: a Cybercab decal on the side, reminiscent of the “Robotaxi” ones that were placed on Model Ys just as the company launched its ride-sharing platform about a year ago.
Giga Texas drone operator Joe Tegtmeyer noticed the change today:
Tesla Cybercabs are now getting “Cybercab” logos on the side of them!
Tesla did the same with Model Ys that were given “Robotaxi” logos: https://t.co/DanANtw1m7 pic.twitter.com/FqOhH0S9Ks
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 19, 2026
Tesla could be signaling that the Cybercab is preparing to enter the Robotaxi fleet in the coming weeks or months with this move. It seems more symbolic than anything; Tesla is ready to throw Cybercabs in the ride-hailing platform just as it did with Model Ys last year.
The addition of the Certificate of Conformity awarded to the Cybercab is another major factor working to Tesla’s advantage. The company now has permission from the EPA to allow the vehicle to operate on public roads and enter the chain of commerce. It’s officially street legal.
Tesla Cybercab specs revealed: range, curb weight, range ratings, and more
The big question that remains is whether Tesla will be able to operate the car without a safety monitor, especially considering it plans to put the car out there without a steering wheel or pedals. With the Cybercab only having a seating capacity of two, it is hard to believe Tesla will even consider putting a Safety Monitor in the car.
It did recently self-certify as Level 4 and has the ability to operate driverless vehicles in the State of Texas under a law that took effect on May 28. You can read more about that here:
Tesla’s Robotaxi dreams just took a massive step toward reality
We’d imagine Cybercabs will be on the roads as soon as July, but August will likely be a better estimate of when the car will be entered into the Cybercab fleet. It all depends at where Tesla is, as they’ve truly prioritized safety with the rollout of the Robotaxi platform.
Elon Musk has publicly questioned Moody’s credit assessments following the rating agency’s decision to assign SpaceX a Baa1 investment-grade rating, two notches above Tesla’s Baa3. The comments came amid discussions comparing the two companies’ financial profiles.
SpaceX earned its first-time Baa1 rating with a stable outlook from Moody’s. The agency highlighted the company’s leadership in orbital launches, the growing recurring revenue from its Starlink satellite network, strong vertical integration, U.S. government contracts, and emerging opportunities in AI infrastructure.
These factors were cited as supporting robust cash flows, margin expansion, and financial flexibility.
Musk responded directly: “Tesla’s credit rating is ridiculously low tbh,” and added, “Yeah, makes no sense. Tesla has over $40B in cash, no debt, and is consistently profitable!” His remarks underscored Tesla’s balance sheet strength and profitability at a time when many traditional automakers continue to report losses in the shift to electric vehicles.
Yeah, makes no sense.
Tesla has over $40B in cash, no debt and is consistently profitable!
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 19, 2026
Tesla maintains a leading position in the global EV market, with diversification into energy and storage, battery technology, and robotics through projects like Optimus. Recent financial updates show the company generated positive free cash flow of $1.4 billion in Q1 2026, supported by operating cash flow of $3.9 billion. Cash and short-term investments stood at approximately $44.7 billion.
Moody’s has affirmed Tesla’s Baa3 issuer rating with a stable outlook in periodic reviews, acknowledging the company’s EV leadership, technology strengths, including AI for autonomous vehicles, solid profitability, and strong liquidity.
Tesla (TSLA) scores Baa3 Moody’s rating for ‘stable’ outlook
However, the agency has also noted challenges in the automotive segment and expectations for margin pressures.
Musk’s critique highlights a common debate about how traditional rating methodologies apply to high-growth, capital-intensive technology companies. SpaceX benefits from long-term government-backed contracts and diversified, recurring revenue streams, while Tesla’s valuation reflects heavy investment in future technologies such as autonomy and robotics.
Both ratings remain investment-grade, yet the one-notch difference has fueled online discussion about potential inconsistencies in evaluating innovative firms.
The exchange comes as SpaceX explores financing options following its recent valuation milestones, while Tesla continues executing on its multi-year roadmap. Musk’s pointed response serves as a reminder that credit ratings, though influential for borrowing costs, represent one lens through which markets assess corporate strength—and that company leaders often view their financial positions through the lens of long-term innovation and cash generation rather than short-term risk metrics alone.
A new report from Reuters claims that a transport authority in Sweden is pushing back against the approval of Tesla’s Full Self-Driving suite because it will travel over speed limits.
The report says the Swedish Transport Administration (TRV) recommends the European Union votes against FSD’s approval. TRV believes it should not be approved until Tesla disables FSD’s ability to speed.
TRV sent a letter to the European Union’s Technical Committee on Motor Vehicles (TCMV), which is set to meet on June 30 to discuss the potential approval of the Tesla FSD suite in the country. Tesla, which has received various approvals in Europe over the past two months, has not provided a comment.
Teslas operating on FSD do travel over the speed limit, depending on the Speed Profile that is chosen. Drivers have the ability to disengage FSD at any point; Tesla specifically states that those supervising the suite are responsible for its actions.
Let’s cut to the chase: humans operating any vehicle speed almost daily in the United States. Realistically, speed limits in the U.S. are more frequently treated as speed minimums. However, other countries are different, and driving behaviors are less aggressive.
TRV believes that “allowing automated systems to systematically exceed legal speed limits…risks undermining both the legal framework and the expected safety benefits of vehicle automation,” the report stated. It’s surprising that Tesla has not received this claim from other countries previously.
This could be a good argument to bring Max Speed back, the setting that previously allowed the driver to choose the absolute fastest the car would travel.
This would still put the responsibility of supervision in the hands of the driver. It would allow the driver to choose whether the car would travel over the speed limit or not, acknowledging that they set the speed, and if they get pulled over, there would be no ability to argue it.
However, it does not seem as if this is something Tesla will do, especially considering many U.S. drivers have requested the feature in an effort to eliminate speeding or at least tone it down. The company has not shown any interest in bringing it back.
Tesla has approvals for FSD in Europe in Estonia, Lithuania, Denmark, the Netherlands, and Belgium.
Tesla Cybercab launch is imminent after latest sighting at Giga Texas
Elon Musk says this part of Tesla ‘makes no sense’
