News
SpaceX’s response to Crew Dragon explosion unfairly maligned by head of NASA
In a bizarre turn of events, NASA administrator Jim Bridenstine has offered harsh criticism of SpaceX’s response to Crew Dragon’s April 20th explosion, suffered just prior to a static fire test of its eight Super Draco abort engines.
The problem? The NASA administrator’s criticism explicitly contradicts multiple comments made by other NASA officials, the director of the entire Commercial Crew Program, and SpaceX itself. Lest all three of the above sources were either blatant lies or deeply incorrect, it appears that Bridenstine is – intentionally or accidentally – falsely maligning SpaceX and keeping the criticism entirely focused on just one of the two Commercial Crew partners. The reality is that his initial comments were misinterpreted, but an accurate interpretation is just as unflattering.
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.Ultimately, Bridenstine responded to a tweet by Ars Technica’s Eric Berger to correct the record, noting that the criticism was directed at his belief that SpaceX’s “communication with the public was not [good]”, while the company’s post-failure communication with NASA was actually just fine. In fact, according to Commercial Crew Program (CCP) Manager Kathy Lueders, NASA team members were quite literally in the control room during the pre-static fire explosion and the failure investigation began almost instantly.
A blog post and official update published by NASA on May 28th further confirms Lueders’ praise for the immediate SpaceX/NASA response that followed the failure.
“Following the test [failure], NASA and SpaceX immediately executed mishap plans established by the agency and company. SpaceX fully cleared the test site and followed all safety protocols. Early efforts focused on making the site safe, collecting data and developing a timeline of the anomaly, which did not result in any injuries. NASA assisted with the site inspection including the operation of drones and onsite vehicles.”
— NASA, May 28th, 2019
Why, then, are Bridenstine’s comments so bizarre and unfair?
A trip down memory lane
Back in mid-2018, Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft suffered a major setback (albeit not as catastrophic as Crew Dragon’s) when a static fire test ended with a valve failing to close, leaking incredibly toxic hydrazine fuel all over the test stand and throughout the service module that was test-fired. The failure reportedly delayed Boeing’s Starliner program months as a newer service module had to replace the contaminated article that was meant to support a critical 2019 pad-abort test preceding Starliner’s first crew launch.
According to anonymous sources that have spoken with reporters like Eric Berger and NASASpaceflight.com, the anomalous test occurred in late-June 2018, followed by no less than 20-30 days of complete silence from both Boeing and NASA. If Boeing told NASA, NASA certainly didn’t breathe a word of that knowledge to – in Bridenstine’s words – “the public (taxpayers)”. Prior to Mr. Berger breaking the news, Boeing ignored at least one private request for comment for several days before the author gave up and published the article, choosing to trust his source.
After the article was published, Boeing finally provided an official comment vaguely acknowledging the issue.
“We have been conducting a thorough investigation with assistance from our NASA and industry partners. We are confident we found the cause and are moving forward with corrective action. Flight safety and risk mitigation are why we conduct such rigorous testing, and anomalies are a natural part of any test program.”
— Boeing, July 21st, 2018 (T+~30 days)
SpaceX, for reference, offered an official media statement hours after Crew Dragon capsule C201 suffered a major failure during testing, acknowledging that an “anomaly” had occurred and that SpaceX and NASA were already working closely to investigate the accident. Less than two weeks after that, Vice President of Mission Assurance Hans Koenigsmann spent several minutes discussing Crew Dragon’s failure at a press conference, despite the fact that it was off topic in an event meant for a completely different mission (Cargo Dragon CRS-17).
“Earlier today, SpaceX conducted a series of engine tests on a Crew Dragon test vehicle on our test stand at Landing Zone 1 in Cape Canaveral, Florida. The initial tests completed successfully but the final test resulted in an anomaly on the test stand. Ensuring that our systems meet rigorous safety standards and detecting anomalies like this prior to flight are the main reasons why we test. Our teams are investigating and working closely with our NASA partners.”
— SpaceX, April 20th, 2019 (T+several hours)
Within ~40 days, NASA published an official update acknowledging Crew Dragon’s accident and the ongoing mishap investigation. Meanwhile, a full year after Starliner’s own major accident, NASA communications have effectively never once acknowledged it, while Boeing has been almost equally resistant to discussing or even acknowledging the problem and the delays it caused. On May 24th, NASA and Boeing announced that Starliner’s service module had passed important propulsion tests (essentially a repeat of the partially failed test in June 2018) – the anomaly that incurred months of delays and required a retest with a new service section was not mentioned once.
On April 3rd, NASA published a Commercial Crew schedule update that showed Boeing’s orbital Starliner launch debut (Orbital Flight Test, OFT) launching no earlier than August 2019, a delay of 4-5 months. In the article, NASA’s explanation (likely supplied in part by Boeing) bizarrely pointed the finger at ULA and the technicalities of Atlas V launch scheduling.
In other words, NASA somehow managed to completely leave out the fact that Starliner suffered a major failure almost a year prior that likely forced the OFT service section to be redirected to a pad abort test.
Following SpaceX’s anomaly, the company (and NASA, via Kathy Lueders) have been open about the fact that it means the Crew Dragon meant for DM-2 – the first crewed test launch – would have to be redirected to Dragon’s in-flight abort (IFA) test, while the vehicle originally meant to fly the first certified astronaut launch (USCV-1) would be reassigned to DM-2. Thankfully, this practice can be a boon for minimizing delays caused by failures. Oddly, Boeing has not once acknowledged that it was likely forced to do the same thing with Starliner, albeit with the expendable service section instead of the spacecraft’s capsule section.
Again, although the slides of additional CCP presentations from advisory committee meetings have briefly acknowledged Starliner’s failure with vague mentions like “valve design corrective action granted” (Dec. 2018) and “Service Module Hot Fire testing resuming after new valves installed” (May 2019), NASA has yet to acknowledge the Service Module failure and its multi-month schedule impact.
So, if SpaceX’s moderately quiet but otherwise excellent communication of Crew Dragon’s explosion was unsatisfactory and worthy of pointed criticism straight from the head of NASA, the fact that Boeing and NASA have scarcely acknowledged a Starliner anomaly that caused months of delays must be downright infuriating, insulting, and utterly unacceptable. And yet… not one mention during Bridenstine’s bizarre criticism of SpaceX’s supposed communication issues.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
News
Tesla hints at Starlink integration with recent patent
“By employing polymer blends, some examples enable RF transmission from all the modules to satellites and other communication devices both inside and outside the vehicle.”
Tesla hinted at a potential Starlink internet terminal integration within its vehicles in a recent patent, which describes a vehicle roof assembly with integrated radio frequency (RF) transparency.
The patent, which is Pub. No U.S. 2025/0368267 describes a new vehicle roof that is made of RF-transparent polymer materials, allowing and “facilitating clear communication with external devices and satellites.”
Tesla believes that a new vehicle roof design, comprised of different materials than the standard metallic or glass elements used in cars today, would allow the company to integrate modern vehicular technologies, “particularly those requiring radio frequency transmission and reception.
Tesla has recently filed a US patent application on integrating RF transparent materials into the roof structure.
“facilitating clear communication with external devices and satellites”
Tesla fleet is getting @Starlink connectivity integration soon. LFG @Tesla @elonmusk… pic.twitter.com/bLa8YtPLd1
— Chansoo Byeon (@Chansoo) December 9, 2025
Instead of glass or metallic materials, Tesla says vehicles may benefit from high-strength polymer blends, such as Polycarbonate, Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene, or Acrylonitrile Styrene Acrylate.
These materials still provide ideal strength metrics for crashworthiness, stiffness for noise, vibration, and harshness control, and are compliant with head impact regulations.
They would also enable better performance with modern technologies, like internet terminals, which need an uninterrupted signal to satellites for maximum reception. Tesla writes in the patent:
“By employing polymer blends, some examples enable RF transmission from all the modules to satellites and other communication devices both inside and outside the vehicle.”
One of the challenges Tesla seems to be aware of with this type of roof design is the fact that it will still have to enable safety and keep that at the forefront of the design. As you can see in the illustration above, Tesla plans to use four layers to increase safety and rigidity, while also combating noise and vibration.
It notes in the patent that disclosed examples still meet the safety requirements outlined in the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS).
Starlink integrated directly into Tesla vehicles would be a considerable advantage for owners. It would come with a handful of distinct advantages.
Initially, the inclusion of Starlink would completely eliminate cellular dead zones, something that is an issue, especially in rural areas. Starlink would provide connectivity in these remote regions and would ensure uninterrupted service during road trips and off-grid adventures.
It could also be a critical addition for Robotaxi, as it is crucial to have solid and reliable connectivity for remote monitoring and fleet management.
Starlink’s growing constellation, thanks to SpaceX’s routine and frequent launch schedule, will provide secure, stable, and reliable internet connectivity for Tesla vehicles.
Although many owners have already mounted Starlink Mini dishes under their glass roofs for a similar experience, it may be integrated directly into Teslas in the coming years, either as an upgrade or a standard feature.
News
Tesla supplements Holiday Update by sneaking in new Full Self-Driving version
It seems Tesla was waiting for the Hardware 4 rollout, as it wanted to also deploy a new Full Self-Driving version to those owners, as it appeared in the release notes for the Holiday Update last night.
Tesla has surprised some owners by sneaking in a new Full Self-Driving version with the wide release of the Holiday Update, which started rolling out to Hardware 4 owners on Friday night.
Tesla has issued a controlled and very slow release pattern with the Holiday Update, which rolls out with Software Version 2025.44.25.5.
For the past two weeks, as it has rolled out to Hardware 3 and older Tesla owners, the company has kept its deployment of the new Software Version relatively controlled.
It seems Tesla was waiting for the Hardware 4 rollout, as it wanted to also deploy a new Full Self-Driving version to those owners, as it appeared in the release notes for the Holiday Update last night.
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.2.1.25 made its first appearance last night to Hardware 4 owners who are members of the Early Access Program (EAP). It appears to be a slight refinement from FSD v14.2.1, which has been out for a couple of weeks.
Tesla v2025.44.25.5 Holiday update incoming
Also Full Self-Driving v14.2.1.25!!! pic.twitter.com/74D7S0UGXz
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) December 13, 2025
Many owners welcome the new FSD version, us included, because we’ve been less than impressed with v14.2.1. We have experienced some minor regressions with v14.2.1, especially with Speed Limit recognition, Speed Profile tinkering, and parking performance.
As it stands, Full Self-Driving is still particularly impressive, but Tesla is evidently having an issue with some of the adjustments, as it is still refining some of the performance aspects of the suite. This is expected and normal with some updates, as not all of them are an improvement in all areas; we routinely see some things backtrack every once in a while.
This new FSD version is likely to take care of those things, but it also includes all of the awesome Holiday Update features, which include:
- Grok with Navigation Commands (Beta) – Grok will now add and edit destinations.
- Tesla Photobooth – Take pictures inside your car using the cabin-facing camera
- Dog Mode Live Activity – Check on your four-legged friend on your phone through periodic snapshots taken of the cabin
- Dashcam Viewer Update – Includes new metrics, like steering wheel angle, speed, and more
- Santa Mode – New graphics, trees, and a lock chime
- Light Show Update – Addition of Jingle Rush light show
- Custom Wraps and License Plates – Colorizer now allows you to customize your vehicle even further, with custom patterns, license plates, and tint
- Navigation Improvements – Easier layout and setup
- Supercharger Site Map – Starting at 18 pilot locations, a 3D view of the Supercharger you’re visiting will be available
- Automatic Carpool Lane Routing – Navigation will utilize carpool lanes if enabled
- Phone Left Behind Chime – Your car will now tell you if you left a phone inside
- Charge Limit Per Location – Set a charge limit for each location
- ISS Docking Simulator – New game
- Additional Improvements – Turn off wireless charging pad, Spotify improvements, Rainbow Rave Cave, Lock Sound TRON addition
Tesla also added two other things that were undocumented, like Charging Passport and information on USB drive storage to help with Dashcam.
Tesla is updating Cybertruck owners on its timeline of a massive feature that has yet to ship: Powershare with Powerwall.
Powershare is a bidirectional charging feature exclusive to Cybertruck, which allows the vehicle’s battery to act as a portable power source for homes, appliances, tools, other EVs, and more. It was announced in late 2023 as part of Tesla’s push into vehicle-to-everything energy sharing, and acting as a giant portable charger is the main advantage, as it can provide backup power during outages.
Cybertruck’s Powershare system supports both vehicle-to-load (V2L) and vehicle-to-home (V2H), making it flexible and well-rounded for a variety of applications.
However, even though the feature was promised with Cybertruck, it has yet to be shipped to vehicles. Tesla communicated with owners through email recently regarding Powershare with Powerwall, which essentially has the pickup act as an extended battery.
Powerwall discharge would be prioritized before tapping into the truck’s larger pack.
However, Tesla is still working on getting the feature out to owners, an email said:
“We’re writing to let you know that the Powershare with Powerwall feature is still in development and is now scheduled for release in mid-2026.
This new release date gives us additional time to design and test this feature, ensuring its ability to communicate and optimize energy sharing between your vehicle and many configurations and generations of Powerwall. We are also using this time to develop additional Powershare features that will help us continue to accelerate the world’s transition to sustainable energy.”
Owners have expressed some real disappointment in Tesla’s continuous delays in releasing the feature, as it was expected to be released by late 2024, but now has been pushed back several times to mid-2026, according to the email.
Foundation Series Cybertruck buyers paid extra, expecting the feature to be rolled out with their vehicle upon pickup.
Cybertruck’s Lead Engineer, Wes Morrill, even commented on the holdup:
As a Cybertruck owner who also has Powerwall, I empathize with the disappointed comments.
To their credit, the team has delivered powershare functionality to Cybertruck customers who otherwise have no backup with development of the powershare gateway. As well as those with solar…
— Wes (@wmorrill3) December 12, 2025
He said that “it turned out to be much harder than anticipated to make powershare work seamlessly with existing Powerwalls through existing wall connectors. Two grid-forming devices need to negotiate who will form and who will follow, depending on the state of charge of each, and they need to do this without a network and through multiple generations of hardware, and test and validate this process through rigorous certifications to ensure grid safety.”
It’s nice to see the transparency, but it is justified for some Cybertruck owners to feel like they’ve been bait-and-switched.
Tesla hints at Starlink integration with recent patent
Tesla supplements Holiday Update by sneaking in new Full Self-Driving version
