News
SpaceX set to launch reused Dragon on a new Falcon 9 as NASA requests delay
An electrical fault aboard the International Space Station (ISS) has forced NASA to delay SpaceX’s CRS-17 Cargo Dragon launch from May 1st to May 3rd, giving the station’s crew more time to fix the issues at hand.
A new Falcon 9 Block 5 booster is tasked with launching the spacecraft and completed a static fire test at SpaceX’s LC-40 pad on April 27th. The Cargo Dragon capsule, however, completed its first orbital resupply mission (CRS-12) in September 2017 and has since been refurbished for a second launch. After CRS-17, three launches remain on SpaceX’s CRS1 NASA contract between now and early 2020, after which Dragon 2 (i.e. Crew Dragon) is expected to take over. However, a recent failure during a Crew Dragon test have thrown those plans into question.
Cargo Dragon’s 17th mission
Known as C113, the CRS-12 capsule is the last Dragon 1 manufactured by SpaceX, leaving a fleet of five flight-proven spacecraft for SpaceX to complete the eight remaining ISS resupply missions under its Commercial Resupply Services 1 (CRS1) contract. CRS-17 is the latest installment in SpaceX’s ISS resupply saga and is manifested with ~2500 kg (5500 lb) of cargo.
Along for the ride are NASA’s Orbiting Carbon Observatory-3 (OCO-3) and the multi-experiment STP-H6 investigation, two large pieces of hardware that will be delivered to the ISS in Dragon’s unpressurized trunk. After being berthed to the ISS, astronauts will unpack dozens of packages stored inside Cargo Dragon’s cabin. Sometime later, the station’s Canadarm2 will be used to grab OCO-3 and STP-H6 and install each on the outside of the space station, where they will hopefully live long and scientifically fruitful lives.
SpaceX and NASA have assigned a new Falcon 9 Block 5 booster – likely B1056 – to launch CRS-17. To preserve the scene of Crew Dragon C201’s April 20th explosion, the booster will attempt to land around 20 miles (32 km) offshore aboard drone ship Of Course I Still Love You (OCISLY). Originally scheduled for April 25th, CRS-17 was delayed to the 26th, 30th, 1st, and now May 3rd, most of which were requested by NASA for ISS scheduling purposes.
The latest delay – from May 1st to no earlier than (NET) May 3rd – was triggered by an unexpected electrical fault aboard the ISS, cutting the redundancy of its Canadarm2 (SSRMS) control systems from two strings to one. In other words, Canadarm2 – used to ‘grapple’ and berth spacecraft like Cargo Dragon and Cygnus to the station – is now just one electrical fault away from being rendered inoperable. CRS-17 will stay grounded until two-string (i.e. single fault) redundancy is returned to Canadarm2 and additional impacted systems.
In the event that ISS astronauts and NASA ground control are able to repair the electrical systems in a timely fashion, CRS-17 is scheduled to launch at 3:11 am EDT (07:11 UTC) on May 3rd.
In the shadow of Crew Dragon
A recent catastrophic failure of Crew Dragon (i.e. Dragon 2) raises serious questions about SpaceX’s follow-up CRS2 contract, but the nominal plan involves retiring Dragon 1 after CRS-20 and flying all future cargo missions with flight-proven Crew Dragon spacecraft. In the likely event that Crew Dragon C201’s failure delays SpaceX’s CRS2 schedule by several months, there are contingency plans to continue flying refurbished Dragon 1 spacecraft.
However, each Dragon 1 was designed for a maximum of three orbital missions, meaning that SpaceX’s current capsule fleet can support no more than six additional resupply missions before they reach the end of their usable lifespans. SpaceX thus has two potential buffer missions – CRS-21 and CRS-22 – that could theoretically account for up to a year of Dragon 2 delays. Beyond that, additional Dragon 2 delays could create a gap where NASA would have to supply the ISS without SpaceX’s services.
In a best-case scenario, SpaceX and NASA will quickly uncover an unequivocal culprit of C201’s catastrophic explosion, fix the technical and organizational failures that allowed it to happen, and be back on their feet in no time. In reality, it’s likely that the failure will delay future Crew Dragon (and thus Dragon 2) launches by a minimum of 6-12 months. SpaceX will likely need to change up the launch order of its capsules, reassigning DM-2’s Crew Dragon to the in-flight abort (IFA) test and the US Crew Vehicle 1 (USCV-1) Crew Dragon to SpaceX’s first crewed demonstration mission (DM-2). After such a serious and potentially fatal failure, it’s even possible that NASA will require an additional uncrewed orbital launch before permitting SpaceX to fly astronauts on Crew Dragon.
Given that SpaceX’s nominal CRS2 plan involved lightly modifying and reusing Dragon 2s after crewed missions, the future (and schedule) of the company’s Cargo and Crew contracts are intimately intertwined. With any luck, SpaceX and NASA will be able to solve the technical, organizational, and logistical problems now facing them and ensure a stable future for Dragon 2. In the meantime, Cargo Dragon’s CRS-17 mission offers SpaceX a chance to partially verify that Cargo Dragon C201’s issues are are relegated to Dragon 2 and Dragon 2 alone.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
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.
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.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
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’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.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
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.
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.
Correct pricing will be going live at midnight tonight. All fees since July 2nd 2026 will be waived.
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) July 13, 2026
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.
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
Elon Musk’s Texas ranch to showcase the lifelong work that changed the world
