News
NASA Mars rover promises blazing entrance after China, UAE make it to Mars orbit
The month of the robotic invasion of Mars is upon us. Seven months ago, the United States, China, and the United Arab Emirates launched missions on a 300 million mile (480 million kilometer) journey to Mars.
Last week, two of the three missions quietly arrived and inserted themselves into Mars orbit. The final spacecraft to arrive, NASA’s Mars 2020 Perseverance mission, however, will not go gently into the Martian atmosphere. On Thursday, February 18, NASA’s latest Mars mission destined to uncover evidence of ancient microbial life on the distant planet is set to touchdown following a spectacular display of extremely complex engineering.
Getting to Mars
Launching to the Red Planet is a strategic maneuver that can only be completed once every two years. This is due to the varying speeds and the elliptical shape of the planets’ orbits around the sun. The point at which Earth and Mars are aligned close enough to minimize travel time, called an opposition, occurs only once every two years.
The update that's rolling out to the fleet makes full use of the front and rear steering travel to minimize turning circle. In this case a reduction of 1.6 feet just over the air— Wes (@wmorrill3) April 16, 2024
The most recent opposition occurred in July 2020. Four international Mars missions were intended to leave Earth that summer, however, due to required further certification of parachutes the European Space Agency’s ExoMars Rosalind Franklin rover would have to wait for its launch opportunity during the next planetary opposition to occur in 2022. That left three robotic invaders from the United States, the United Arab Emirates, and China to escape Earth’s orbit and become interplanetary superstars.
Hope arrives to Mars
The United Arab Emirates Space Agency’s first-ever interplanetary mission, a spacecraft named Al-Amal, or the Hope Probe, was developed in collaboration between the Mohammed bin Rashid Space Center, Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics at the University of Colorado Boulder, Arizona State University, and the Space Sciences Lab at the University of California, Berkeley. It was launched on July 19, 2020, from Tanegashima Space Centre in Japan aboard an H2A202 rocket. On Tuesday, February 9, the Hope Probe was the first of the three missions to complete the journey to Mars and successfully insert itself into orbit.
The Hope Probe arrived to near-Mars orbit traveling approximately 75,000 mph (121,000 kph), far too fast to successfully achieve a safe Martian orbital insertion maneuver. In order to slow down to the approximate 11,000mph (18,000 kph) needed to be captured by Mars orbit, the spacecraft had to autonomously fire its main thrusters and perform a Mars Orbit Insertion burn lasting an agonizing 27 minutes. To compensate in the instance of a thruster failure, there was a backup safety protocol that would’ve doubled the length of the burn. After 27 grueling minutes, the Mohammad Bin Rashid Space Center located in Dubai reported that the maneuver was completed successfully and the Hope Probe had arrived at its final destination.
Unlike the American and Chinese missions to Mars which will land rovers on the surface, the United Arab Emirates’ Hope Probe will remain in Mars orbit for the duration of its mission – approximately two Martian years. The spacecraft is equipped with a suite of three instruments, two spectrometers – one infrared and one ultraviolet – to study the Martian atmosphere, and one imager to capture high-resolution images to study the surface from afar.
China’s Tianwen-1 Rover will hang out in orbit before landing in May
The same type of Mars Orbit Insertion maneuver was completed by China’s first interplanetary mission, the Tianwen-1 spacecraft. Launched from China on July 23, 2020, Tianwen-1 arrived at Mars orbit just one day after the Hope Probe on Wednesday, February 10.
The Tianwen-1 spacecraft had to autonomously complete an excruciating 11-minute “braking” burn to slow down which took it behind the planet as it was captured by Mars gravity and entered into orbit.
Like NASA’s Perseverance, the Tianwen-1 mission features a rover that will eventually land on the surface of Mars. The process to get the rover to the surface, however, varies from that of NASA’s Mars 2020 Perseverance mission.
The Tianwen-1 spacecraft is made of two components, an orbiter and a rover. Currently, it is planned that the orbiter will spend some time in Mars orbit for a period of comprehensive observation before attempting a landing of the rover in May. Ideally, the spacecraft will then touch down in a region known as Utopia Planitia.
The update that's rolling out to the fleet makes full use of the front and rear steering travel to minimize turning circle. In this case a reduction of 1.6 feet just over the air— Wes (@wmorrill3) April 16, 2024
Once the rover safely makes it to the surface it will initiate the investigation period of the mission. The rover carries a suite of scientific instruments that will be used to investigate the composition of the Martian surface searching for the potential distribution of water and ice. Similar to China’s Yutu 2 rover which is exploring the Moon, the Tianwen-1 rover also carries a panoramic camera to image the planet.
Perseverance and Ingenuity like no other
The last of the three Mars missions – NASA’s Mars 2020 Perseverance mission launched on July 30, 2020, from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station aboard a United Launch Alliance Atlas 5 rocket. As far as Mars arrivals go, the best has certainly been saved for last. Following the success of the other two missions from China and the United Arab Emirates, the stage is set for Perseverance to make its dramatic entrance.
NASA’s Mars 2020 Perseverance mission is by far the most ambitious mission to launch to Mars during the 2020 planetary transfer window. NASA is not attempting to land one, but two spacecraft on the surface of Mars. The $2.4 billion Mars 2020 mission is comprised of the Perseverance rover – powered by the heat produced by radioactive decay of Plutonium – and a first of its kind rotary helicopter called Ingenuity. It is scheduled to arrive in dramatic fashion on Thursday, February 18.
Rather than conducting a braking maneuver to slow down and enter Mars orbit, the Perseverance spacecraft will autonomously conduct the entry, descent, and landing (EDL) procedure – essentially going from traveling several thousand miles an hour to descending slowly under a parachute canopy to softly land in mere minutes.
The spacecraft – housed in a protective aeroshell with its robust heat shield facing the planet’s surface – will burst into Mars’ atmosphere traveling nearly 12,500 mph (20,000 kph). Once through, Pesevereance will ditch its heat shield and autonomously begin scanning the Martain terrain to determine its relative location and make adjustments to find an optimal landing spot. Then, a powered descent module will deploy transporting the rover the rest of the way down slowing to less than 2mph (3kph). Finally, the descent module will hover and deploy a complex harness system lowering Perseverance – and its stowaway, the Ingenuity helicopter – to the Martian surface for touchdown.
After seven months of interplanetary travel, it all comes down to the final seven minutes – the length of time the EDL process is expected to take. All spacecraft controllers back on Earth can do is watch and wait for that final telemetry reading indicating that Perseverance has successfully touched down. That is why this process has earned the nickname “seven minutes of terror.”
Beginning around 11:15 am PST (19:15 UTC) on Thursday, February 18th, NASA will provide live coverage of Perseverance’s landing attempt. The agency will carry the coverage on NASA TV and its website, as well as a number of other platforms including YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitch, Daily Motion, Theta.TV, and NASA App.
Stay ahead of the curve and be the first to learn about new industry trends each week!
Follow along as our team gives you their take on the biggest stories of the week.
Tesla has launched a direct campaign targeting its customers in New Jersey, sending emails that warn of pending legislation that could effectively block true driverless technology in the state.
The email focuses on Senate Bill S.1677 and Assembly Bill A.3968, measures intended to create a three-year autonomous vehicle pilot program but laden with requirements that Tesla argues make unsupervised Robotaxis impossible.
Tesla is sending out this email to New Jersey Tesla owners, warning them that NJ could block autonomous vehicles, and to take action.
“Proposed legislation moving through Trenton right now would impose restrictions so severe that true driverless deployment would remain illegal.… pic.twitter.com/2bmY646AUL
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) June 16, 2026
According to the email, the bills impose “restrictions so severe that true driverless deployment would remain illegal.” Specific hurdles include mandates for human safety drivers during operations, multimillion-dollar insurance minimums, reportedly $5 million, and thresholds like 100,000 miles of demonstrated safe autonomous driving before any driverless approval.
Tesla contends these are arbitrary barriers that ignore real-world performance data and favor entrenched competitors over innovative technologies like its Full Self-Driving (FSD) system.
The push comes as Tesla has started expanding Robotaxi operations in states like Texas, where unsupervised vehicles are already providing rides in several cities. New Jersey, by contrast, risks falling behind. The company highlights in the email communication that more than 94 percent of serious crashes result from human error, meaning impairment, distraction, or fatigue. These are all problems that Robotaxis eliminate entirely.
In 2025, New Jersey recorded 582 traffic deaths, underscoring the human cost of delayed adoption.
Tesla’s outreach stresses the transformative potential of robotaxis. For families, they could offer safer school runs without drowsy or distracted drivers. For seniors and people with disabilities, robotaxis promise independence and reliable mobility.
In areas with limited public transit, they could deliver affordable, on-demand transportation, reducing congestion, emissions, and overall transportation costs. Economically, the company warns that restrictive rules could cost New Jersey jobs, innovation investment, and billions in potential growth as autonomous ride-hailing scales elsewhere.
Supporters of the legislation, including Sen. Andrew Zwicker, describe the pilot as a cautious framework with strong safety oversight, including incident reporting, expert task forces, and restrictions in sensitive zones like school areas. They view it as balancing innovation with public protection.
Tesla and pro-AV advocates counter that the bill lacks technology neutrality, creates insurmountable entry barriers for commercial deployment, and prioritizes process over outcomes — effectively functioning as a de facto ban on services like Robotaxi.
This latest clash echoes Tesla’s past battles in New Jersey over direct vehicle sales. The email directs owners to Tesla’s advocacy platform, where they can send customized messages to legislators calling for amendments: outcome-based safety standards, open competition, and clear pathways for fully driverless commercial operations.
As hearings approach, Tesla’s campaign frames the issue as a choice between protecting the status quo and embracing life-saving progress. With robotaxi technology already proving itself in permissive states, New Jersey owners are being asked to ensure their state doesn’t lock out the future of transportation.
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.
Tesla urges New Jersey owners to oppose new bill that could block Robotaxi
Tesla’s Navigation Nightmare: Why the easiest part of FSD might be the hardest
