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
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
NHTSA escalated its Cybercab audit into a sworn Special Order with a September 30 deadline.
Federal regulators have moved from asking Tesla questions about its Cybercab to demanding sworn answers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a Special Order that requires a Tesla officer to sign an affidavit attesting to the completeness of the company’s responses, with a deadline of September 30.
The order builds on Audit Query AQ26002, which NHTSA opened on September 3, the same day Tesla began commercial Cybercab service in Austin. Teslarati covered that initial inquiry when it surfaced, noting the agency wanted to understand how Tesla certified a vehicle with no permanently attached steering wheel, pedals, or mirrors as compliant with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. A Special Order is a different tool and converts a fact finding review into a legally enforceable demand, the same mechanism NHTSA used against Tesla in 2023 during its Autopilot investigation.
Several of the 21 requests target a specific gap in Cybercab’s design. One asks whether Tesla used temporarily attached human controls at any point to help certify the vehicle, and if so, which standards depended on that equipment being present. Another quotes an existing rule directly: “The service brakes shall be activated by means of a foot control.” Cybercab has no foot pedal. NHTSA wants a detailed explanation of how the vehicle satisfies that requirement, and how it complies without the kind of exemption granted to Zoox in July under Part 555, the regulatory pathway built for steering wheel free vehicles.
The order does not claim Cybercab is unsafe or that Tesla broke a rule. It requires Tesla to explain, under oath, the reasoning behind decisions the company already made when it self-certified the vehicle. That distinction matters, but so does the exposure. Motor1’s reporting, summarized here, put potential civil penalty exposure as high as $139 million if NHTSA later finds the certification was flawed, on top of whatever criminal risk comes with a false sworn statement.
Tesla has not said publicly how it plans to respond. Cybercab is still carrying passengers in Austin through the Robotaxi app while the September 30 deadline approaches, and the company has continued expanding the vehicle’s footprint even as the regulatory question remains open. The Special Order does not pause any of that and just sets a date by which Tesla has to put its certification logic on the record, with a company officer’s name attached to it.
In a new interview on Wednesday, Tesla uber bull Ron Baron said that anyone looking to buy the company’s stock should do so as soon as they can.
Baron, founder and CEO of Baron Capital and one of Tesla’s most persistent institutional bulls, used a CNBC Squawk Box appearance on Wednesday to deliver a familiar message with fresh urgency: In his opinion, Tesla stock is a buy:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.”
The Baron Capital frontman’s case is built around Full Self-Driving. Tesla reported 1.48 million active FSD subscriptions in the second quarter, up 56 percent year over year, and company officials have said roughly 55 percent of new North American deliveries left with a subscription enabled.
Baron framed that attach rate as proof the product is moving from enthusiast extra to default expectation, and as a reason software, not just vehicle volume, should drive the next phase of value.
His conviction on Tesla shares is not theoretical, as Baron Capital made its first Tesla investment in 2014, after years of meetings that began around the 2010 IPO roadshow. The firm later built a large SpaceX position starting in 2017.
Ron Baron today in new interview on Tesla:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.” pic.twitter.com/Rv5PB0bVZ2
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) September 16, 2026
Baron said those Musk-led bets have generated about $30 billion of the $71 billion in profits Baron Capital has produced for clients. He put the firm’s current exposure at roughly $25 billion in SpaceX and $5 billion in Tesla. Personally, he described SpaceX as his largest holding, at about $5 billion, with about $1.5 billion in Tesla and additional Tesla exposure through the firm’s funds.
That concentration is also a statement of loyalty. Asked about talk of a SpaceX-Tesla combination, Baron said he had already walked Elon Musk through arguments for and against a deal, then declined to repeat them on air. His public position was simpler: “Whatever you decide is better is what I’m going to support,” he said to Musk.
Baron also said that he picked up the farewell edition of the Model S after Tesla decided to sunset the vehicle earlier this year, calling it his favorite car he’s ever driven.
Elon Musk
SpaceX’s next Starship launch is about to attempt its biggest leap yet
SpaceX targets September 22 for Starship Flight 14, its first attempt to reach real orbit.
SpaceX has set September 22 as the target date for Starship’s 14th test flight, and this one carries a different goal than any of the 13 that came before it. Every previous Starship mission has intentionally flown a suborbital arc, reentering the atmosphere within the same hour it launched. Flight 14 is designed to send the craft into a genuine orbit around Earth for the first time.
The launch window opens at 7:15 a.m. Central time at Starbase in South Texas and runs for 75 minutes, pending regulatory approval, according to SpaceX’s mission description published Tuesday. If the flight goes as planned, Starship will circle the planet roughly six times at an altitude near 275 kilometers over about ten hours before a deorbit burn sends it toward a splashdown in the Pacific Ocean west of Chile, a departure from the Indian Ocean recoveries used on the last several flights.
The mission also marks the first attempt to put a working batch of Starlink V3 satellites into actual service. Flight 13 carried 20 of the new satellites in July, but because that mission never left a suborbital trajectory, the payload reentered along with the ship instead of separating into orbit.
SpaceX tells the FCC that Starship Flight 14 is going to orbit
Each V3 satellite is rated for roughly one terabit per second of downlink capacity, so a successful deployment on Flight 14 would be SpaceX’s largest single jump in network bandwidth since Starlink began flying on Falcon 9.
Flight 13 still did the heavier lifting on the technical side. That July mission flew a deliberately more stressful reentry profile to test Starship’s heat shield, and the ship survived its softest splashdown yet, intact enough for drone inspections shortly after landing. Elon Musk said the flight delivered “all the heat shield data we needed and then some,” a result Teslarati covered in detail when he later said SpaceX had solved the vehicle’s biggest reusability challenge. Flight 14 is where SpaceX starts spending that confidence on an actual orbital insertion rather than another controlled fall back to Earth.
One thing Flight 14 will not attempt is a tower catch of the ship. Musk floated the idea right after Flight 13, but walked the timeline back in August, saying a catch attempt was more likely “in a few months.” The Super Heavy booster will still aim for its own recovery, targeting an offshore landing point in the Gulf of America, the same approach used on recent flights.
September 22 is SpaceX’s own target, not a locked date. Starship’s schedule has slipped before over hardware readiness and FAA sign off, and the company has said as much in its own mission notes. But the plan itself represents the clearest marker yet that Starship is moving from a suborbital test program into something meant to carry paying payloads and, eventually, people.
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
Tesla uber bull Ron Baron says ‘the time to buy the stock is now’
