Connect with us

News

SpaceX Crew Dragon spacecraft shown off in photo ahead of next launch

SpaceX Crew Dragon capsule C205 is in the late stages of processing ahead of its first flight and the spacecraft's second Falcon 9 launch overall. (SpaceX)

Published

on

NASA has published a new SpaceX photo of the next Crew Dragon spacecraft scheduled for launch and confirmed that the mission is now scheduled to lift off on a Falcon 9 rocket no earlier than (NET) January 18th.

Known as an In-Flight Abort (IFA) test, the exceptionally challenging mission will represent a major milestone for Crew Dragon regardless of the results. Meant to simulate an abort at the (near) worst possible time during launch, Crew Dragon will ignite its SuperDraco abort thrusters around 60-90 seconds after liftoff, subjecting the spacecraft to even more extreme stresses around the same time both it and Falcon 9 are passing through Max Q – “the moment of peak mechanical stress”. If the test is unsuccessful, SpaceX Demo-2 – Crew Dragon’s first NASA astronaut launch – would almost certainly be delayed several months.

If successful, however, it could pave the way for Crew Dragon’s first astronaut perhaps just a month or two later, although Q2 2020 is much more likely. Simultaneously, while difficult to rationally explain, Boeing appears confident that its Starliner spacecraft – having lost control and failed to reach the International Space Station (ISS) barely more than a week ago and suffered a parachute deployment failure on a pad abort test one month prior – is still on track for its first astronaut launch (“Crewed Flight Test”, CFT) just a handful of months from now. In line with the special treatment NASA seems fated to bestow upon Boeing, it appears that Crew Dragon and Starliner’s unofficial race to become the first commercial spacecraft to launch astronauts is as close as it’s ever been.

Regardless, January 18th represents a delay of one week since SpaceX and NASA’s last launch date announcement – NET January 11th, 2020 as of December 18th, 2019. January 11th was itself a week delay from January 4th, the first specific In-Flight Abort launch target released on December 6th, 2019. The date of Crew Dragon’s IFA test has thus technically slipped 14 days in the last 31 days, although it has also technically slipped 7 days in the last 19.

Advertisement

In other words, as previously discussed on Teslarati, those two weeks of delays mean that Falcon 9 and Crew Dragon will almost certainly launch sometime in January 2020 – a significant improvement in schedule assurance compared to Crew Dragon’s Demo-1 launch debut, which suffered some three months of delays despite its hardware being ready for flight throughout.

SpaceX completed a successful static fire of the first Falcon 9 rated for human flight on January 24th. (SpaceX)
It took almost six weeks for Crew Dragon to go from static fire to liftoff on its Demo-1 launch debut on March 2nd, 2019. (NASA)

With any luck, thrice-flown Falcon 9 booster B1046 – all but guaranteed to be destroyed by Dragon’s abort test – could launch new Crew Dragon capsule C205 and an expendable trunk section perhaps just a single week after performing a routine static fire and wet dress rehearsal at Pad 39A. That would represent an almost sixfold improvement relative to the timing of the spacecraft’s first Falcon 9 launch, which took some six weeks to go from static fire to liftoff.

NASA says that the delay from January 11th to January 18th “allows additional time for spacecraft processing”, although the reality is almost certainly a pretty even split between SpaceX processing and NASA’s plodding review process (i.e. paperwork). Regardless, now standing just 11 days from the latest launch date, Crew Dragon’s second Falcon 9 launch is rapidly converging on a liftoff sometime in the last two weeks of January 2020.

Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.

Advertisement

Eric Ralph is Teslarati's senior spaceflight reporter and has been covering the industry in some capacity for almost half a decade, largely spurred in 2016 by a trip to Mexico to watch Elon Musk reveal SpaceX's plans for Mars in person. Aside from spreading interest and excitement about spaceflight far and wide, his primary goal is to cover humanity's ongoing efforts to expand beyond Earth to the Moon, Mars, and elsewhere.

Advertisement
Comments

Lifestyle

NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story

The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.

Published

on

By

The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.

Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot

Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.

The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Lucid CEO dispels any rumors of bankruptcy: ‘So far from the facts’

Published

on

Credit: Lucid

Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.

The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.

The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.

Lucid denies rumors of bankruptcy after over 40% stock drop

Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”

Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”

Napoli said:

“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.

As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.

We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.

My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.

I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”

It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.

Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.

Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla responds to strange Supercharging pricing error with classy move

Published

on

(Credit: Tesla)

Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.

The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.

One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.

These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.

To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.

At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.

Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line

By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.

The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.

Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.

It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.

The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.

In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.

Continue Reading