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 begins factoring international designs in Full Self-Driving visualization
Tesla has begun incorporating region-specific vehicle designs into its Full Self-Driving (FSD) visualization system, marking a quiet but meaningful step toward global readiness. In software update 2026.14, released as part of the Spring Update, European Tesla owners are now seeing flat-fronted, cab-over European-style semi-trucks rendered accurately on their center displays.
Tesla has begun factoring international designs into its Full Self-Driving (Supervised) visualizations, marking a tremendous step in how the company plans to roll out its driver assistance tech in areas outside North America.
Tesla has begun incorporating region-specific vehicle designs into its Full Self-Driving (FSD) visualization system, marking a quiet but meaningful step toward global readiness. In software update 2026.14, released as part of the Spring Update, European Tesla owners are now seeing flat-fronted, cab-over European-style semi-trucks rendered accurately on their center displays.
The change, first spotted by Not a Tesla App, adds a second 3D model alongside the traditional North American long-nose semi-trucks that have been standard until now. Vehicles can detect and display both styles depending on what’s in front of them, and the feature requires no FSD subscription—every Tesla owner in Europe sees it immediately.
The European semi-truck visualization was actually added to the vehicle software back in October alongside roughly fifteen new visual assets.
Tesla held it in reserve, activating it only once fleet data confirmed the AI could recognize these trucks with high confidence. This mirrors recent rollouts for horses and golf carts, where Tesla similarly waited for reliable detection before enabling the graphics. The result is a more realistic on-screen representation tailored to local roads, where cab-over designs dominate heavy transport.
The significance of this update extends far beyond a simple graphics tweak, which is really what people need to be paying attention to. These small, incremental steps forward continue to show Tesla’s intent for global expansion.
For the first time, Tesla is explicitly factoring international vehicle designs into its visualization engine, signaling a deliberate push to make FSD feel native in international markets.
In Europe, where cab-over semis are commonplace, seeing an accurate rendering builds immediate driver trust—the critical bridge between the car’s AI perception and the human behind the wheel. Accurate visualizations reinforce that the system truly understands its surroundings, reducing range anxiety and skepticism that have slowed autonomous adoption abroad.
Regulators in the EU have repeatedly emphasized human-AI transparency; by customizing visuals to match local reality, Tesla strengthens its case for broader FSD approvals and smoother regulatory reviews.
This move also highlights Tesla’s data-driven engineering philosophy. Rather than rushing generic models worldwide, the company is leveraging its global fleet to learn regional nuances before flipping the switch.
It accelerates FSD’s international expansion while improving safety—misidentified vehicles could erode confidence or, in edge cases, affect decision-making. For a company aiming to deploy robotaxis and unsupervised FSD globally, tailoring visualizations to European, Asian, or other markets is no longer optional; it’s foundational.
Early European owners report the change feels more intuitive, making the car’s “mind” easier to read in daily traffic.
As Tesla continues enabling the remaining visual assets added last year, the pattern is clear: localization is now baked into the FSD roadmap. What began as a small graphics update in Europe could soon appear in other regions, turning the visualization display into a truly worldwide language of autonomy.
With this step, Tesla isn’t just showing trucks differently—it’s proving it’s serious about making FSD work everywhere, one culturally accurate pixel at a time.
Tesla has quietly rolled out one of its most practical software updates yet — and it could add real dollars to every used Model 3, Y, S, and X on the road.
Starting with the latest Tesla app version, owners now receive an official “Certification of Repaired HV Battery” whenever Tesla performs a major high-voltage battery repair or full replacement. The digital certificate appears directly in the vehicle’s Service History tab inside the Tesla app.
It’s permanent, verifiable, and downloadable as a PDF, so sellers can hand it over to buyers in seconds.
For years, the used EV market has suffered from one glaring problem: nobody could prove what happened to the battery.
Service invoices often vanish when a car changes hands. Third-party battery-health scans are expensive and inconsistent. Buyers, staring at a car with 80,000 miles and an 8-year warranty ticking down, would negotiate hard — or walk away entirely — because the battery is the single most expensive part of any Tesla.
That uncertainty routinely shaved thousands off resale values and slowed the entire secondhand market.
Now Tesla has eliminated the guesswork. The new certificate, which was spotted by Tesla App Updates, logs exactly what work was done, when, and by whom. It lives inside the car’s digital profile forever, exactly where any future owner will look. No more digging through old emails or hoping the previous owner kept paperwork.
— Tesla App Updates (iOS) (@Tesla_App_iOS) May 5, 2026
The outlet describes why the update is so important:
-
Official Digital Certificates: The string “Certification of Repaired HV Battery” confirms that if your vehicle undergoes a major battery repair or replacement, Tesla will now issue an official, verifiable digital certificate documenting the work.
-
Service History Integration: Strings such as viewRepairedBatteryCert and repairedBatteryCertId indicate that this document won’t be lost in an old email thread. It will be permanently anchored to your vehicle’s profile inside the app’s Service History tab.
-
Easy Exporting: The service_history_repaired_battery_cert_download_fail error state indicates you will be able to download this certificate directly to your phone as a file (likely a PDF) to share with others.
Sellers who have already replaced packs under warranty are especially excited; they can now prove the vehicle received a fresh Tesla battery without any gray-area questions.
The timing couldn’t be better. As more Teslas roll off 8-year/100,000- or 120,000-mile battery warranties, the used market is exploding. Lenders, insurers, and even auction houses have quietly asked for better battery documentation for years. Tesla’s certificate hands it to them on a silver platter.
For current owners, the feature adds peace of mind and protects long-term value. For buyers, it removes the single biggest risk in any used EV purchase. And for Tesla itself, it quietly strengthens the entire ownership ecosystem — making vehicles more liquid, more desirable, and more valuable over time.
In an industry obsessed with range numbers and 0-60 times, Tesla just proved that sometimes the biggest innovation is a simple line in the Service History tab. One small certificate, one giant step for used-EV confidence.
In the global race toward electrification, Norway stands unchallenged as the world’s most mature EV market.
In the first quarter of this year, EVs captured a staggering 97.9 percent market share, with plugin EVs reaching 98.6 percent. Out of 27,175 new vehicles registered, non-BEV powertrains have been reduced to statistical noise—petrol and hybrids combined accounted for fewer than 80 units.
At the heart of this transformation is Tesla.
The Model Y dominated overall vehicle sales with 5,406 units, outselling the next five best-selling non-Tesla models combined. The refreshed Model 3 followed in second place with 2,010 units, giving Tesla a commanding one-two finish. Toyota’s bZ4X placed third with 1,400 units, while Volvo’s EX40 and others trailed further back.
The @Tesla Model Y was the #1 best-selling vehicle overall in Norway in Q1 2026 by a wide margin, with BEVs in general taking a 97.9% market share. Model 3 ranked #2.
Model Y (5,406 units) sold more units than the next five best-selling non-Tesla vehicles on the list. pic.twitter.com/LE2SD5UQjs
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) May 5, 2026
This dominance is no fluke. Norway has spent decades building the infrastructure and policy framework that makes EVs the rational choice. Generous tax incentives, exemption from VAT, reduced tolls, free ferries for EVs, and a dense charging network have turned the country into a living laboratory for mass adoption. High fuel prices—often exceeding $8 per gallon—further tilt the economics decisively toward electricity.
The result is a market where choosing anything but an EV feels increasingly anachronistic. Diesel and petrol cars have all but vanished from new registrations. Even plug-in hybrids, once a transitional favorite, have collapsed to 0.7 percent share.
Chinese brands like XPeng, BYD, and Zeekr are making inroads, while legacy European and Japanese automakers scramble to field competitive BEVs. Yet Tesla’s combination of range, performance, software, Supercharger network, and brand cachet continues to set the benchmark.
Norway’s Q1 figures come after a volatile start to 2026 caused by VAT changes that pulled forward sales into late 2025. The market rebounded strongly in March, underscoring underlying demand. Tesla’s Q1 performance in the country also jumped significantly year-over-year, reinforcing its position even as competition intensifies.
What happens in Norway rarely stays there. The country has long served as a bellwether for EV trends across Europe and beyond.
Its near-total transition demonstrates that when incentives align with infrastructure and consumer economics, adoption accelerates dramatically. For automakers, Norway signals a future where success hinges not on legacy powertrains but on delivering compelling electric vehicles at scale.
As other nations ramp up their own EV ambitions, Tesla’s continued reign in the world’s heaviest EV market sends a clear message: in a fully mature electric future, the company that started the revolution remains the one to beat. With the Model Y still the best-selling vehicle overall—quarter after quarter—Norway’s roads are a rolling testament to Tesla’s enduring leadership.
Tesla begins factoring international designs in Full Self-Driving visualization
Tesla adds new in-app feature to solve the used EV market’s biggest headache
