News
NHTSA says your Tesla can’t be this quiet starting Sept., 2019
We at Teslarati are all in favor of making vehicles as safe as possible. Indeed, in our research and analysis of Teslas, we were proud early on in 2013 when the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) awarded the Tesla Model S a 5-star safety rating, not just overall, but in every subcategory without exception. It was so safe, in fact, that the all-electric sedan broke the testing equipment at an independent commercial facility. Fast-forward to 2015. The Model X was the first SUV to be five-star in every category, according to Tesla CEO Elon Musk. It even won the prestigious Golden Steering Wheel (Das Goldene Lenkrad) award for best SUV this year.
Safety is important and should be primary to any driving situation. It should prevail over luxury features, style, and even comfort. However, a new NHTSA regulation that purports to target safety in its language is little more than a superficial gesture within a larger framework of driver, passenger, and pedestrian concerns.
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 141, which will begin on September 1, 2019, requires all newly manufactured hybrid and electric light-duty vehicles to make an audible noise at speeds below 19 mph. The sound requirement has been designed to help pedestrians who are blind, have low vision, cyclists, and other pedestrians to detect the presence, direction, and location of hybrids and EVs traveling at low speeds. At higher speeds, the sound alert will not be required because other factors, such as tire and wind noise, seem to provide adequate audible warning to pedestrians and will not be the subject of this regulation.
“We all depend on our senses to alert us to possible danger,” said U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx. “With more, quieter hybrid and electrical cars on the road, the ability for all pedestrians to hear as well as see the cars becomes an important factor of reducing the risk of possible crashes and improving safety.”
Creating a social environment in which all individuals — especially those with disabilities, underrepresented groups, children, and the elderly — are physically and psychologically welcomed and safe is absolutely paramount to a healthy community. Manufacturers and drivers of hybrids and EVs do have a responsibility to contribute to such an environment.
Yet, clearly, we have a generation who has been accustomed to the sounds and smells of internal combustion engines. Wouldn’t driver and pedestrian education be a more efficacious way to ensure that hybrids and EVs do not pose a safety threat? Daniel Kahneman’s (2013) work, Thinking Fast and Slow, suggests that innovative products require a higher degree of learning than existing products. Education to help EV drivers and individuals who do not have personal access to hybrids and EVS, thus, who have not built in conscious mechanisms toward the awareness of hybrids and EVs in traffic, would have longer lasting and more permanent results.
Making the case for educating pedestrians
As the general population increases its awareness of the risks of pollution to both health and the environment, the internal combustion engine has become less desirable. As a result, battery-powered, fuel-cell electric, and hybrid vehicles are technologically viable alternatives to the internal combustion engine. And they’re beginning to take on a significant segment of the U.S. vehicle market.
Essentially, an internal combustion engine works like a cannon. The sound that results is formidable and part of our collective U.S. psyche. It is ingrained in our psychological expectations of what an engine should be. Electric motors, however, make very little noise compared with an internal combustion engine. Research on the safety implications of quiet electric vehicles has mostly focused on pedestrians’ acoustic perception of EVs and suggests that EVs compromise traffic safety. However, Cocran & Krems‘ 2013 research determined that, based on gained individual experience, drivers adjust their evaluation of noise-related hazards. Some statistical observation studies in literature indicate that hybrid or EV drivers intend to be more careful, less risk takers in traffic (Horswill and Coster 2002). Thus, it makes sense to increase the awareness factors for everyone — EV drivers and pedestrians — to create more robust safe traffic situations when EVs are added to the vehicle mix.
Adding to the sound mix
Principles to increase awareness of hybrids and EVs have generally focused on alerts, or sounds that indicate the presence of an EV. Other principles, such as orientation mechanisms, which make it possible to determine where the vehicle is located, roughly how fast it is going, and whether it is moving toward or away from the listener, extend beyond mere white or overt noises.
Education transcends any of these physical additions to a hybrid or EV. Hybrid and EV drivers as well as pedestrians should be exposed to new conceptual thinking about the place of EVs in traffic situations. Alongside the new federal safety standard that requires low speed noise, hybrid and EV automakers can build in specific educational materials to prepare their consumer base for new driving situations, which will continue to add safety awareness. With access to multiple new technologies, drivers could have multimodal educational opportunities.
- Audio systems could provide periodic, random reminders to increase driver awareness of pedestrians and cyclists in slow speed situations.
- Automakers could require that drivers work through a series of interactive online tutorials that accentuate driver understanding of slow speed safety adaptations with hybrids and EVs.
- Traditional print manuals should include dedicated sections that address slow speed driver safety decision making.
- Before-driving checklists should include explicit instruction in slow speed situations and the possibility of pedestrian interactions.
Consumer safety groups can also assume responsibility for educating their constituents about new needs for pedestrian and cyclist awareness.
- Cyclist advocacy organizations can provide seminars to their members during events to increase strategies for hybrid and EV slow speed situations.
- Existing support groups for persons with visual impairment can add workshops about hybrid and EVs to empower them to anticipate potential slow speed traffic situations.
- Minimal training standards for service animals could include special animal recognition of hybrid and EVs.
- Traditional and highly respected elderly advocacy organizations like AARP could provide print and online materials to help a generation who grew up with internal combustion engines to accommodate strategies to recognize hybrids and EVs in traffic.
Yes, adoption and diffusion of new innovations can be a long-term, complicated process. Airbags, child safety features, exhaust gas hazard, seat belts, and driver assist technologies currently provide hybrid and EV drivers with a toolkit of pedestrian safety measures. But we want more than to prevent what NHTSA says is about 2,400 pedestrian injuries each year that occur during low speed hybrid or EV/ pedestrian interactions. We want to create a cultural climate in which a social vehicular knowledge base extends well beyond the internal combustion engine.
News
SpaceX tells the FCC that Starship Flight 14 is going to orbit
SpaceX filed with the FCC for Starship Flight 14, its first true orbital launch attempt.
SpaceX has asked the Federal Communications Commission for permission to fly Starlink terminals during Starship’s fourteenth flight test, and the filing lays out a genuine trip to orbit, something the program has never attempted.
Every Starship flight so far, including Flight 13’s successful splashdown in the Indian Ocean on July 24, has flown a suborbital arc that ends with the ship reentering the atmosphere within the same hour it launches. The FCC paperwork describes a mission profile built around an actual orbital insertion instead.
The payload is the other half of the story. Flight 13 carried 20 production Starlink V3 satellites, but because that mission never reached orbit, the satellites reentered along with the ship rather than joining the constellation, something Teslarati covered in detail after SpaceX released footage shot from one of those satellites as it drifted away from Starship in space. Flight 14 is designed to close that gap. If the orbital insertion holds, the roughly 20 V3 satellites onboard would separate into an operational orbit and could eventually go into service, each one rated for about 1 terabit per second of downlink capacity by SpaceX’s own account.
SpaceX announces new Starbase for ‘thousands of Starship launches annually’
Elon Musk first flagged the orbital attempt during SpaceX’s August 4 earnings call, the company’s first as a public entity following its June IPO under the ticker SPCX. He also floated catching the ship with the Starbase tower on the same flight, an idea he walked back on August 20, saying the catch attempt would more likely come “in a few months,” as Teslarati reported at the time. Flight 14 will instead target a splashdown for the ship in the Indian Ocean, the same recovery method used since Flight 12.
Hardware has been catching up to the ambition. Booster 21 completed a full 33-engine static fire on August 28, and Ship 41 finished its own six-engine test the week before. An airspace briefing circulated to pilots on August 20 listed September 15 as the target date, later than the end of August window Musk mentioned on the earnings call, though SpaceX has not confirmed a launch date publicly and Starship schedules routinely slip while hardware and FAA paperwork line up.
The FCC filing itself does not guarantee a launch date. It covers communications authority, and not flight readiness, considering SpaceX still needs Ship 41 fully stacked and cleared by the FAA before Flight 14 can fly. But the filing is a real marker of intent and it puts a specific regulatory process behind what had so far only been Musk’s word on the earnings call.
Tesla is set to launch Cybercab on Thursday at an event in Austin, Texas, which will officially bring the company’s first steering wheel-less and pedal-less vehicle to a limited number of consumers for the first time.
The event, which is invite-only, is still thin on details: we’ll be there, and it seems the event will be held at Gigafactory Texas, but the launch of this vehicle truly relies on it being operational outside of the factory and on public roads.
🚨 Close-Up look at Tesla Cybercab without steering wheel: pic.twitter.com/9TXCDeDCz7
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 3, 2026
Nevertheless, there are some big things to expect, and other things to temper expectations on. For what it’s worth, we believe this event could be perhaps the biggest indication that Tesla is ready to truly enter a new phase and chapter in its historic story.
Tesla Cybercab’s First Foray into the Public with Real-World Riders
Cybercab will likely hit the streets of Austin and the surrounding areas, likely in the established geofence that Tesla has expanded on for the past 14 months. Just yesterday, Tesla expanded it once again by 9 percent.
Tesla will put, for the first time, a vehicle without any manual controls on public roads, likely without any help from teleoperators. This is a truly groundbreaking development if it comes through in this fashion: it would be groundbreaking for Tesla to roll out a truly driverless ride-hailing vehicle.
Cybercab Has Already Been Unveiled
This is not an unveiling event. Cybercab has been released for nearly two years, as Tesla first showed it to the public on October 10, 2024.
FIRST LOOK: Tesla ‘Cybercab’ Robotaxi makes its global debut
While there is some small speculation that Tesla could release the Roadster at the event as a surprise, it seems more likely the focus will be on the Cybercab and the huge accomplishment that will come with releasing a vehicle with no manual controls.
There Will Be a Lot of Hype
What’s important to remember about the Cybercab event is that Tesla will continue to prioritize safety and the rollout will likely be slow, just as it has been with Robotaxi.
One of the biggest complaints about Robotaxi is vehicle population, and the fact that the wait for a ride, at least in some instances, has been longer than most want to admit.
It will take time for this project to truly scale. It will take time for Tesla to roll this out in a large fashion. The important thing to note is that they are doing it, and they’re doing it with a vehicle that is completely engineered and built internally. That’s something no other ride-hailing service can say.
Elon Musk recently restated a fact that still defines SpaceX’s origin story: if Falcon 1’s fourth launch had failed, the company would not exist. The comment answered a reminder that after three consecutive losses, SpaceX had money for only one more attempt.
On X, Peter Diamandis said that the present-day acknowledgement of SpaceX’s success does not discount the rough start the company had. “Almost nobody remembers that Elon’s first rocket failed three times, and there was money for exactly only one more attempt.”
Musk said, “If the 4th launch had failed, SpaceX would not exist.”
If the 4th launch had failed, SpaceX would not exist
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 30, 2026
In late 2008, the firm was nearly out of cash. Another failure would have ended payroll, closed the Hawthorne factory, and left the Falcon 9 and Dragon programs as unfinished drawings.
The first flight lifted off from Omelek Island on 24 March 2006. Thirty-three seconds later, a corroded aluminum fitting on a fuel line leaked. Kerosene ignited around the Merlin engine, control was lost, and the vehicle came apart. The small DARPA payload, FalconSAT-2, survived the short flight only to land on a storage shed near the pad. Investigators later traced the fitting to a materials mix-up that should never have reached the rocket.
Flight 2, on 21 March 2007, looked far better at first. The first stage burned cleanly and handed off to the Kestrel-powered upper stage. The vehicle crossed 100 kilometers and reached a peak of about 289 kilometers. Then propellant slosh in the second-stage tank started a circular coning motion that grew until the engine shut down. Telemetry faded as the stage tumbled, and SpaceX had reached space but not orbit. Over the next year, the team redesigned everything from the ground up, including tanks, baffles, and the new regeneratively cooled Merlin 1C.
That engine flew on Flight 3 on 2 August 2008. The first stage performed almost perfectly and reached 217 kilometers. After main-engine cutoff, leftover fuel in the cooling channels produced a faint residual thrust, roughly 10 pounds per square inch of chamber pressure. On a Texas test stand, the effect was invisible beneath ambient air pressure. In vacuum it was enough to push the spent first stage back into the second stage after separation. The stages collided, the upper stage spun, and the mission was lost. Musk later said a slightly longer delay before staging would have saved the flight.
Six weeks later, the team assembled Flight 4 from remaining parts and flew it on 28 September 2008 at 23:15 UTC. The payload was Ratsat, a 165-kilogram aluminum mass simulator built in-house. Staging was delayed so residual thrust could decay. The Kestrel ignited, the fairing split away, and nine and a half minutes after liftoff the vehicle was in orbit. After a coast, the second stage restarted, settling into a 621-by-643-kilometer path at 9.35 degrees inclination. Falcon 1 became the first privately developed liquid-fueled rocket to reach Earth orbit. Musk called the insertion “middle of the bull’s-eye.”
SpaceX restores a Falcon 1 rocket for 10th anniversary of first launch success
That success unlocked NASA’s Commercial Resupply Services award later that year. Without it, there would have been no Falcon 9, no reusable first stages, and no Dragon cargo or crew flights to the International Space Station. Launch prices would have remained far higher. Starlink’s constellation would not exist; broadband from low Earth orbit would still be a paper concept.
Ride-share markets, high launch cadence, and the current pace of lunar and Mars hardware would be years behind. Communications, Earth observation, and the cost of putting anything into space would look more like the 2000s than the 2020s.
One extra second of residual thrust in August 2008 would have written a different decade.
SpaceX tells the FCC that Starship Flight 14 is going to orbit
Tesla Cybercab Event: what to expect from Austin
