News
SpaceX, Boeing astronaut spacecraft working towards orbital meet-up in 2020
According to Boeing’s new Starliner testing plan, the spacecraft could potentially meet SpaceX’s own Crew Dragon astronaut spacecraft in orbit at the International Space Station (ISS) later this year.
Following Starliner’s near-catastrophic December 2019 orbital flight test (OFT), Boeing and NASA have finally announced that – at a minimum – a second uncrewed flight test will have to be completed before the company will be allowed to launch astronauts. According to the Washington Post, Starliner’s return to flight is expected to occur no earlier than October or November 2020, 10 or 11 months after it suffered several major software failures during its first spaceflight. While delays to that flight schedule are incredibly likely, it does mean that there’s a chance that SpaceX’s second crewed Crew Dragon launch could coincide with Starliner’s second orbital mission — a first for the two NASA Commercial Crew Program (CCP) providers.
Just one week before NASA and Boeing revealed plans to refly Starliner’s uncrewed flight test, NASA announced that SpaceX’s first operational Crew Dragon launch now has a full four astronauts assigned to it. Scheduled to launch no earlier than Q4 2020, the spacecraft will carry three NASA astronauts and one Japanese (JAXA) astronaut to the ISS, remaining in orbit for at least six months before returning its crew back to Earth. Now, there’s a chance that SpaceX’s first operational Crew Dragon will be joined in orbit by Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft sometime soon after arriving on station.
As previously discussed on Teslarati, Boeing’s Starliner OFT suffered several near-catastrophic close calls in the few days it spent in space, all of which appear to have egregiously shoddy and unqualified software to blame.
“Starliner launched atop a ULA Atlas V rocket on its orbital launch debut (OFT) on December 20th, 2019. Atlas V performed flawlessly but immediately after Starliner separated from the rocket, things went very wrong.
Bad software ultimately caused the spacecraft to perform thousands of uncommanded maneuvering thruster burns, depleting a majority of its propellant before Boeing was able to intervene. Starliner managed to place itself in low Earth orbit (LEO), but by then it had nowhere near enough propellant left to rendezvous and dock with the ISS – one of the most crucial purposes of the flight test. Unable to complete that part of the mission, Boeing instead did a few small tests over the course of 48 hours in orbit before commanding the spacecraft’s reentry and landing on December 22nd.
The Starliner spacecraft also reportedly almost suffered a second major software failure just hours before reentry. According to NASA and Boeing comments in a press conference held only after news of that second failure broke, a second Starliner software bug – caught only because the first failure forced Boeing to double-check its code – could have had far more catastrophic consequences. NASA stated that had the second bug not been caught, some of Starliner’s thruster valves would have been frozen, either entirely preventing or severely hampering the spacecraft’s detached trunk from properly maneuvering in orbit. Apparently, that service module (carrying fuel, abort engines, a solar array, and more) could have crashed into the crew module shortly after detaching.”
Teslarati.com — February 11th, 2020
The only sane response was obviously for NASA to require Boeing to successfully complete a second Orbital Flight Test (OFT), a necessary decision the space agency and card-holder was bizarrely hesitant to acknowledge. Now, almost four months after Starliner was nearly lost on its first orbital flight test, NASA and Boeing have finally stated the obvious and confirmed that a second OFT will be required before astronauts can fly on Starliner. Even then, if things go wrong during OFT2 or Boeing completes the mission but still fails to rectify all faults identified by a joint failure investigation, NASA may still delay the spacecraft’s astronaut launch debut.
SpaceX has undeniably had its own stumbles while developing Crew Dragon, most notably when the first successfully flight-proven spacecraft violently exploded moments before a static fire test in April 2019. SpaceX was able to rectify the responsible design flaws and successfully complete an identical static fire test less than seven months later, followed by a second successful launch less than three months after that. Based on WaPo’s indication that Starliner’s second OFT is scheduled for Q4 2020, Boeing is now anywhere from 12-18 months behind SpaceX with its efforts to launch NASA astronauts to and from the space station. SpaceX successfully completed Crew Dragon’s OFT equivalent in March 2019.
Regardless, if Crew Dragon performs flawlessly during its Demo-2 astronaut launch debut – scheduled no earlier than mid-to-late May – and Boeing’s Starliner OFT2 mission launches on time in Q4 2020, there is a great chance that both spacecraft will be simultaneously docked to the space station. Better circumstances would be unequivocally preferable but it will still mark an important symbolic milestone for NASA’s Commercial Crew Program (CCP) and assured access to the ISS.
Tesla’s long-standing saga regarding its door handles and a manual release has entered its latest chapter, and as a result, a big change is coming.
On Friday, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) denied Tesla’s petition that was seeking a defect investigation into roughly 180,000 Model 3 vehicles for an issue involving the emergency mechanical door release.
🚨 The NHTSA denied a petition from Tesla that would have thrown out concerns regarding its door handles.
NHTSA said Tesla’s petition did not present evidence of a safety-related defect warranting an investigation. The agency said a rulemaking process would be a better strategy. pic.twitter.com/j6PzUBM1mT
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 24, 2026
NHTSA said that Tesla’s petition did not present evidence of a safety-related defect in the door handles or their emergency releases. Instead, the agency determined that it would rather solve the issue of the lack of labeling or location of emergency mechanical door releases and the federal safety rules that govern them.
Essentially, the NHTSA wants to create and enforce rules that would require automakers to make emergency door latch releases more clearly labeled in a car. Despite a Tesla having manual door releases on all four passenger doors, many people do not know they exist or how they work.
Tesla addresses door handle complaints with simple engineering fix
In recent times, Tesla has faced some criticism involving its door handles, specifically because some occupants have reported that they are unable to exit their vehicles after losing power. The door handles on a Tesla are electronically operated, but in the event that the 12V battery dies, there is a manual release that can be used.
The NHTSA only identified a single complaint involving the mechanical door releases: a 2022 Model 3 owner said the release was concealed and unlabeled after the vehicle lost power after a front-end collision. It has also already started to create a separate rulemaking process to make emergency door-egress systems more obvious.
It should be noted that all Teslas have mechanical emergency door releases, but they are placed in various locations as the vehicles have aged and been redesigned from year to year. Refer to the safety manual for your vehicle if you have any confusion about where the emergency releases are and how they work.
News
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 faces wrath of the Texas skies
SpaceX pushed Starship Flight 13 to Friday, blaming weather instead of the previous engine issues.
SpaceX called off Thursday’s launch attempt of Starship Flight 13, pushing the mission to Friday because of weather tied to Tropical Storm Bertha. The company confirmed the delay on X, noting “Now targeting Friday, July 24 for Starship’s thirteenth flight test, due to weather. A key objective for the flight test is to get clear imagery from the ground of Starship’s heatshield as it flies at a higher dynamic pressure during ascent, which won’t be possible with today’s weather conditions.”
This is the second delay for Flight 13 in two weeks. SpaceX first tried to launch the mission on July 16, but the countdown ended in an automated abort at T-0 when four of Super Heavy Booster 20’s 33 Raptor engines failed to ignite. Musk said at the time that two Raptors would need to be removed and replaced, as Teslarati reported. The company spent the following week destacking Ship 40 and Booster 20, swapping engines, and running leak checks before restacking the vehicle on Pad 2 Wednesday night, according to Spaceflight Now’s live coverage.
Unlike the engine problem, Thursday’s delay has nothing to do with the hardware. SpaceX wants clean footage of Starship’s heat shield captured from the ground as the vehicle flies through max dynamic pressure, something the storm’s cloud cover over South Texas would not allow. The company said visibility should improve for Friday’s attempt, with the same 90 minute window opening at 5:45 p.m. CT.
Flight 13 will be the second outing for the V3 versions of Starship and Super Heavy, following their debut on Flight 12 in May. The mission carries 20 production Starlink V3 satellites, the first time SpaceX has flown operational satellites rather than mass simulators on Starship. Six of those satellites are fitted with cameras to inspect the heat shield from a different angle during ascent, giving engineers a second data source beyond the ground imagery the weather is currently blocking.
Booster 20 will attempt a boostback burn and a splashdown landing burn in the Gulf of America, while Ship 40 follows a suborbital trajectory toward a landing in the Indian Ocean. The flight plan largely mirrors Flight 12, though the booster will run a more aggressive ascent burn after max Q this time, and the ship’s heat shield includes load sensing tiles meant to measure stress at the higher dynamic pressure SpaceX is targeting.
If Friday’s attempt succeeds, Flight 13 could be the last suborbital test in the program. SpaceX is already looking to push for an orbital flight on Flight 14.
Tesla stock (NASDAQ: TSLA) endured one of its sharpest single-day declines in years on July 23, tumbling approximately 14.5 percent and closing near $320 after opening the session around $374. The drop erased more than $140 billion in market value amid heavy trading volume and left the shares at multi-week lows.
The sell-off followed the company’s second-quarter 2026 results, released the previous evening. Tesla reported record revenue of $28.2 billion, up 26 percent year over year, driven by a Q2-record 480,126 vehicle deliveries. Energy storage deployments also rose strongly.
Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue
Yet profitability disappointed sharply. Operating income fell 57 percent to $398 million, compressing the operating margin to just 1.4 percent. Non-GAAP earnings per share came in at $0.33, well below the roughly $0.53 analysts had expected. Free cash flow turned negative by $1.1 billion as capital expenditures surged 142 percent to $5.8 billion, largely tied to accelerated spending on artificial intelligence, robotics, and autonomous systems.
The losses on capex were expected, as Tesla said it would be spending heavily in 2026.
Investors also reacted to lingering uncertainty surrounding key product timelines. During the Earnings Call, management reiterated ambitions for Robotaxi deployment and the Optimus humanoid robot, but offered limited new concrete milestones, renewing questions about execution pace that have long accompanied Tesla’s ambitious roadmap.
The magnitude of the decline places it among Tesla’s more severe one-day percentage losses since its 2010 initial public offering. Historically, the two largest single-day drops (split-adjusted) remain September 8, 2020, when shares fell 21.1 percent amid broader market volatility and valuation concerns, and January 13, 2012, with a 19.3 percent plunge during the company’s early growth struggles.
Other notable declines include an 18.6 percent drop on March 16, 2020, at the onset of pandemic-related market turmoil. Thursday’s move ranks roughly ninth on the all-time list but stands out as the steepest in more than a year.
Despite the short-term pain, Tesla’s long-term trajectory has repeatedly recovered from such volatility. The latest results underscore both the strength of its core automotive and energy businesses and the near-term costs of heavy investment in next-generation technologies.
Tesla door handle saga gets its latest chapter and a big change is coming
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 faces wrath of the Texas skies
