News
Self-driving Teslas and autonomous vehicles will end traffic as we know it
We are all fascinated with autonomous driving in terms of what it can do for us. Make the elderly mobile again without endangering the rest of us with their arguably reduced reaction times, less acute hearing and vision. We dream of the day when we can sleep through a long, boring trip. Doing valuable work in what would otherwise be dead time is a plus too. One thing we haven’t talked about too much is how autonomous cars can radically reduce the congestion of our roads.
Six Inches of Separation (With All Due Respect to Kevin Bacon)
One way we can reduce highway congestion is to reduce the following distances between cars. It takes a human about four seconds to react to a car stopping ahead of us. At 60 mph, that translates to 88 feet per second or a total traveled of 352 feet before you are really starting to stop the car. Using the 2 1/2 second rule would yield 220 feet. Now if you have a car which reacts in, oh say, 1,000 nanoseconds, or a millionth of a second, some have argued that a six inch separation would be more than enough time for the computer to stop the car in time to avoid a collision. So, a non-autonomous car would take up about 220 feet of roadway per car, autonomous cars would take up roughly 20 feet per car. 220 divided by 20 yields about 11 cars per 220 feet of roadway rather than one. You’ve magically increased the carrying capacity which decreases congestion.
Platooning
This increased use of autonomy will almost certainly create “platooning” on our roads where cars headed in the same direction are pulled up within inches of the car ahead creating a “car train” of 30, 50, or more cars all traveling at high speed to a destination ahead of them. With level 5 autonomy, some have suggested that 90 mph is reasonable while remaining very safe.
So let’s do a mind experiment here. You have a 220 foot stretch of roadway which can now safely carry 1 car traveling at 60 mph. Let’s put in a platoon of 11 cars traveling at 90 mph. That 220 foot stretch of roadway at 90 mph can carry 15 cars rather than 11 because 90 is 150% of 60. You have now increased the carrying capacity of the roadway by 1500%, or put another way, it would be like the New York State Thruway had 1/15 the cars on it that it does now. Rush hour would be like driving at three in the morning.
You may say that 220 feet is a preposterous amount of road and that people routinely travel only 10 to 20 feet behind the car in front of them. My response is look at the accident statistics. Yeah, you can travel that close. You just can’t travel that close safely.
Goose it Man!
One of the arguments against high speed travel in cars has been that as you increase speed, miles per kilowatt drop radically. Wind resistance is the big thief of range. When you read about people who manage to get ridiculous miles per charge out of their Teslas you can bet that last dollar that they are driving slowly!
Here’s where we can take a lesson from NASCAR and…wait for it, GEESE! Any fan of NASCAR knows that the drivers “draft” the car in front of them to save gas. The reason is very simple. The car in front is pushing the air out of the way, and the car behind benefits from traveling at the same speed in a partial vacuum, enabling the following driver to save fuel and possibly avoid a pit stop.
Why am I talking about geese? Ever wonder why geese travel in that cool V-formation? Similar reason. They avoid the turbulence from the goose ahead and conserve energy. Being cooperative sorts they trade places with the leader, who drops back and lets the next goose in line take over the toughest place, which is the lead. That way all the geese get to where they’re going quicker and with less fatigue. In our terms, with less battery energy expended.
I foresee platooning supplemented with leader “dropback” like the geese, let’s say, every five miles, to enable very fast driving times with lower fuel/kilowatt hour consumption. This will become part of the autonomous software suite.
So, all hail the goose, and I, for one, look forward to autonomous driving because of the effect platooning will have on our drives, and the automatic increase of the carrying capacity of our roads. Cool, very cool!
Allan Honeyman
(Submitted via email to the Teslarati Network. Do you a post you’d like to share? Email it to us at info@teslarati.com)
Tesla rolled out Full Self-Driving version 14.2 yesterday to members of the Early Access Program (EAP). Expectations were high, and Tesla surely delivered.
With the rollout of Tesla FSD v14.2, there were major benchmarks for improvement from the v14.1 suite, which spanned across seven improvements. Our final experience with v14.1 was with v14.1.7, and to be honest, things were good, but it felt like there were a handful of regressions from previous iterations.
While there were improvements in brake stabbing and hesitation, we did experience a few small interventions related to navigation and just overall performance. It was nothing major; there were no critical takeovers that required any major publicity, as they were more or less subjective things that I was not particularly comfortable with. Other drivers might have been more relaxed.
With v14.2 hitting our cars yesterday, there were a handful of things we truly noticed in terms of improvement, most notably the lack of brake stabbing and hesitation, a major complaint with v14.1.x.
However, in a 62-minute drive that was fully recorded, there were a lot of positives, and only one true complaint, which was something we haven’t had issues with in the past.
The Good
Lack of Brake Stabbing and Hesitation
Perhaps the most notable and publicized issue with v14.1.x was the presence of brake stabbing and hesitation. Arriving at intersections was particularly nerve-racking on the previous version simply because of this. At four-way stops, the car would not be assertive enough to take its turn, especially when other vehicles at the same intersection would inch forward or start to move.
This was a major problem.
However, there were no instances of this yesterday on our lengthy drive. It was much more assertive when arriving at these types of scenarios, but was also more patient when FSD knew it was not the car’s turn to proceed.
Can report on v14.2 today there were ZERO instances of break stabbing or hesitation at intersections today
It was a significant improvement from v14.1.x
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 21, 2025
This improvement was the most noticeable throughout the drive, along with fixes in overall smoothness.
Speed Profiles Seem to Be More Reasonable
There were a handful of FSD v14 users who felt as if the loss of a Max Speed setting was a negative. However, these complaints will, in our opinion, begin to subside, especially as things have seemed to be refined quite nicely with v14.2.
Freeway driving is where this is especially noticeable. If it’s traveling too slow, just switch to a faster profile. If it’s too fast, switch to a slower profile. However, the speeds seem to be much more defined with each Speed Profile, which is something that I really find to be a huge advantage. Previously, you could tell the difference in speeds, but not in driving styles. At times, Standard felt a lot like Hurry. Now, you can clearly tell the difference between the two.
It seems as if Tesla made a goal that drivers should be able to tell which Speed Profile is active if it was not shown on the screen. With v14.1.x, this was not necessarily something that could be done. With v14.2, if someone tested me on which Speed Profile was being used, I’m fairly certain I could pick each one.
Better Overall Operation
I felt, at times, especially with v14.1.7, there were some jerky movements. Nothing that was super alarming, but there were times when things just felt a little more finicky than others.
v14.2 feels much smoother overall, with really great decision-making, lane changes that feel second nature, and a great speed of travel. It was a very comfortable ride.
The Bad
Parking
It feels as if there was a slight regression in parking quality, as both times v14.2 pulled into parking spots, I would have felt compelled to adjust manually if I were staying at my destinations. For the sake of testing, at my first destination, I arrived, allowed the car to park, and then left. At the tail-end of testing, I walked inside the store that FSD v14.2 drove me to, so I had to adjust the parking manually.
This was pretty disappointing. Apart from parking at Superchargers, which is always flawless, parking performance is something that needs some attention. The release notes for v14.2. state that parking spot selection and parking quality will improve with future versions.
Any issues with parking on your end? 14.1.7 didn’t have this trouble with parking pic.twitter.com/JPLRO2obUj
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 21, 2025
However, this was truly my only complaint about v14.2.
You can check out our full 62-minute ride-along below:
Elon Musk
SpaceX issues statement on Starship V3 Booster 18 anomaly
The incident unfolded during gas-system pressure testing at the company’s Massey facility in Starbase, Texas.
SpaceX has issued an initial statement about Starship Booster 18’s anomaly early Friday. The incident unfolded during gas-system pressure testing at the company’s Massey facility in Starbase, Texas.
SpaceX’s initial comment
As per SpaceX in a post on its official account on social media platform X, Booster 18 was undergoing gas system pressure tests when the anomaly happened. Despite the nature of the incident, the company emphasized that no propellant was loaded, no engines were installed, and personnel were kept at a safe distance from the booster, resulting in zero injuries.
“Booster 18 suffered an anomaly during gas system pressure testing that we were conducting in advance of structural proof testing. No propellant was on the vehicle, and engines were not yet installed. The teams need time to investigate before we are confident of the cause. No one was injured as we maintain a safe distance for personnel during this type of testing. The site remains clear and we are working plans to safely reenter the site,” SpaceX wrote in its post on X.
Incident and aftermath
Livestream footage from LabPadre showed Booster 18’s lower half crumpling around the liquid oxygen tank area at approximately 4:04 a.m. CT. Subsequent images posted by on-site observers revealed extensive deformation across the booster’s lower structure. Needless to say, spaceflight observers have noted that Booster 18 would likely be a complete loss due to its anomaly.
Booster 18 had rolled out only a day earlier and was one of the first vehicles in the Starship V3 program. The V3 series incorporates structural reinforcements and reliability upgrades intended to prepare Starship for rapid-reuse testing and eventual tower-catch operations. Elon Musk has been optimistic about Starship V3, previously noting on X that the spacecraft might be able to complete initial missions to Mars.
Investor's Corner
Tesla analyst maintains $500 PT, says FSD drives better than humans now
The team also met with Tesla leaders for more than an hour to discuss autonomy, chip development, and upcoming deployment plans.
Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) received fresh support from Piper Sandler this week after analysts toured the Fremont Factory and tested the company’s latest Full Self-Driving software. The firm reaffirmed its $500 price target, stating that FSD V14 delivered a notably smooth robotaxi demonstration and may already perform at levels comparable to, if not better than, average human drivers.
The team also met with Tesla leaders for more than an hour to discuss autonomy, chip development, and upcoming deployment plans.
Analysts highlight autonomy progress
During more than 75 minutes of focused discussions, analysts reportedly focused on FSD v14’s updates. Piper Sandler’s team pointed to meaningful strides in perception, object handling, and overall ride smoothness during the robotaxi demo.
The visit also included discussions on updates to Tesla’s in-house chip initiatives, its Optimus program, and the growth of the company’s battery storage business. Analysts noted that Tesla continues refining cost structures and capital expenditure expectations, which are key elements in future margin recovery, as noted in a Yahoo Finance report.
Analyst Alexander Potter noted that “we think FSD is a truly impressive product that is (probably) already better at driving than the average American.” This conclusion was strengthened by what he described as a “flawless robotaxi ride to the hotel.”
Street targets diverge on TSLA
While Piper Sandler stands by its $500 target, it is not the highest estimate on the Street. Wedbush, for one, has a $600 per share price target for TSLA stock.
Other institutions have also weighed in on TSLA stock as of late. HSBC reiterated a Reduce rating with a $131 target, citing a gap between earnings fundamentals and the company’s market value. By contrast, TD Cowen maintained a Buy rating and a $509 target, pointing to strong autonomous driving demonstrations in Austin and the pace of software-driven improvements.
Stifel analysts also lifted their price target for Tesla to $508 per share over the company’s ongoing robotaxi and FSD programs.
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.2 – Full Review, the Good and the Bad
SpaceX issues statement on Starship V3 Booster 18 anomaly
