News
SpaceX on track to launch four rockets next month despite Falcon Heavy delays
Despite the intense focus on SpaceX’s first Falcon Heavy launch attempt and the testing preceding it, SpaceX is still a functioning business, and that business lies in launching payloads into Earth orbit. While it appears that January is unlikely to see any additional SpaceX launches, particularly Falcon Heavy, the launch company’s February manifest appears to be rapidly firming up.
Perhaps most significantly, two geostationary communications satellites completed their long journeys to Cape Canaveral, Florida within the last week or so, and a third payload on the West Coast is presumed to be at Vandenberg Air Force Base, all preparing for February launches. Meanwhile, although it is unclear how close Falcon Heavy is to launching, a date in mid to late February appears realistic at this point. As such, SpaceX has at least three and maybe four missions concretely planned for February – concrete in the sense that three of them were given specific launch dates within the last week.
Falcon Heavy is now targeting Friday, January 19 for its first static fire test. (Tom Cross/Teslarati)
A return to stride
Following a halcyon year of 18 launches, SpaceX appears to be ready to tackle its manifest headfirst after a relatively relaxed start to 2018. January saw a single SpaceX launch, Zuma, as well as the ongoing series of tests of the first completed Falcon Heavy launch vehicle, although the big rocket’s launch date has likely already slipped into February at the earliest. Still, SpaceX’s Falcon 9 workhorse rocket is rearing for additional launches, and options abound.
GovSat-1 (SES-16) – NET late January 2018
First on the docket is the launch of GovSat-1/SES-16, a public-private partnership between Luxembourg’s government and the renowned Lux.-based satellite manufacturer and operator, SES. Similar to Hispasat, GovSat-1 is a geostationary communications satellite weighing around 4000 kg that will be placed in a geostationary transfer orbit by Falcon 9. If it flies before Falcon Heavy, something I’d place at around 99% likely, the launch of PAZ will mark SpaceX’s first reused flight of 2018, with many, many more to come. This particular launch will use Core 1032 from the secretive NROL-76 mission back in May 2017. 1032 is an older booster, and thus a recovery attempt is unlikely – Block 3 Falcon 9s were never designed to be reused more than once or twice, especially not after toasty high-energy recoveries necessitated by geostationary launches.
-
- After launching NROL-76 in May 2017, B1032 returned to Landing Zone-1 for a successful landing. (SpaceX)
-
- SES and GovSats’ first partnered satellite, GovSat-1/SES-16. (SES)
PAZ – Starlink prototype co-passengers – NET February 10 2018, 6:52am PST
Up next, PAZ is a commercial imaging satellite designed to return high-resolution photos of Earth from a relatively low polar orbit of approximately 500 km. It’s believed that this mission will be launched aboard a flight-proven Falcon 9 booster, Core 1038, previously tasked with the launch of the small Formosat-5 imaging satellite in August 2017. The mission will be the second 2018 launch of a flight proven booster for SpaceX, following on the heels of GovSat-1. Perhaps more important than reuse (but secondary to the customer’s payload insertion), however, is the probable presence of two of SpaceX’s first prototype broadband satellites, a constellation now known to be called Starlink.
This will be a major achievement for SpaceX’s satellite constellation efforts, as the several hundred employees SpaceX has stationed in Washington State and outside of Hawthorne, CA will finally be able to operationally test the fruit of many months of hard but silent work. Given the presence of two satellites, it’s assumed that these test satellites, Microsat 2A and 2B, have been designed to test all of the main components SpaceX has been developing, particularly the optical (LASER) on orbit communications system. By allowing each satellite to communicate at incredibly high bandwidths with each other, SpaceX’s ultimate goal is to create a mesh network of connectivity covering the entire Earth.
As such, fingers crossed that SpaceX begins to discuss Starlink in more detail as 2018 progresses and PAZ and its Microsat co-passengers reach orbit in February. Sadly, although the combined payload is small and the planned orbit low, the twice-flight-proven booster may meet its ultimate fate in the Pacific Ocean – a recovery attempt is no longer guaranteed for older, reused Falcon 9s. However, while not officially confirmed, this launch could see the debut of SpaceX’s Western landing pad, currently known as SLC-4 West (SLC-4W). Rather than attempting recovery aboard the drone ship Just Read The Instructions, Falcon 9 1038 would instead flip around and return to a landing area less than a kilometer away from its VAFB launch pad. Expect official confirmation as the launch date approaches.
-
- The Spanish company Hisdesat’s PAZ imaging satellite. (Hisdesat)
-
- Falcon 9 1038 aboard Just Read The Instructions after the launch of Formosat-5. (SpaceX)
Hispasat 30W-6 (1F) – No Earlier Than (NET) mid-February 2018
Finally, Hispasat is a relatively hefty 6000 kg commercial communications satellite slated for launch aboard what is believed to be a new Falcon 9 rocket. With SpaceX aiming to place the satellite into a geostationary transfer orbit, this will almost certainly preclude any attempts at recovering the first stage – the booster will need to expend most of its fuel to accomplish the job, leaving no reserve to conduct landing burns at sea. Hispasat’s Falcon 9 will thus likely be the first new booster to be expended intentionally by SpaceX in 2018.
Spain's @Hispasat: 30W-6 telecom sat arrives at Cape Canaveral from builder @sslmda to prepare for Feb launch on @SpaceX Falcon 9. Sat carries Ku-, C- & Ka-band payload for Americas/trans-Atlantic. pic.twitter.com/Zfhi1cE5vx
— Peter B. de Selding (@pbdes) January 16, 2018
Another busy year?
If February is to be representative of SpaceX’s 2018 launch cadence, the year is going to be a crazy one for the rocket company. As of IAC 2017, Elon Musk showed an estimated 30 launches as the company’s goal this year, compared to 20 in 2017 (SpaceX was only two launches short of that). While Falcon Heavy may be understandably stealing the buzz and then some from those interested in spaceflight and technology, it is an absolute necessity that SpaceX remains a viable and reliable launch company if they hope to pursue more aspirational technologies like Falcon Heavy, BFR, and more. Here’s to hoping that SpaceX manages to make 2018 equally or even more successful than 2017.
Follow along live as launch photographer Tom Cross and I cover these exciting proceedings as close to live as possible.
Teslarati – Instagram – Twitter
Tom Cross – Instagram
Eric Ralph – Twitter
Tesla has launched a direct campaign targeting its customers in New Jersey, sending emails that warn of pending legislation that could effectively block true driverless technology in the state.
The email focuses on Senate Bill S.1677 and Assembly Bill A.3968, measures intended to create a three-year autonomous vehicle pilot program but laden with requirements that Tesla argues make unsupervised Robotaxis impossible.
Tesla is sending out this email to New Jersey Tesla owners, warning them that NJ could block autonomous vehicles, and to take action.
“Proposed legislation moving through Trenton right now would impose restrictions so severe that true driverless deployment would remain illegal.… pic.twitter.com/2bmY646AUL
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) June 16, 2026
According to the email, the bills impose “restrictions so severe that true driverless deployment would remain illegal.” Specific hurdles include mandates for human safety drivers during operations, multimillion-dollar insurance minimums, reportedly $5 million, and thresholds like 100,000 miles of demonstrated safe autonomous driving before any driverless approval.
Tesla contends these are arbitrary barriers that ignore real-world performance data and favor entrenched competitors over innovative technologies like its Full Self-Driving (FSD) system.
The push comes as Tesla has started expanding Robotaxi operations in states like Texas, where unsupervised vehicles are already providing rides in several cities. New Jersey, by contrast, risks falling behind. The company highlights in the email communication that more than 94 percent of serious crashes result from human error, meaning impairment, distraction, or fatigue. These are all problems that Robotaxis eliminate entirely.
In 2025, New Jersey recorded 582 traffic deaths, underscoring the human cost of delayed adoption.
Tesla’s outreach stresses the transformative potential of robotaxis. For families, they could offer safer school runs without drowsy or distracted drivers. For seniors and people with disabilities, robotaxis promise independence and reliable mobility.
In areas with limited public transit, they could deliver affordable, on-demand transportation, reducing congestion, emissions, and overall transportation costs. Economically, the company warns that restrictive rules could cost New Jersey jobs, innovation investment, and billions in potential growth as autonomous ride-hailing scales elsewhere.
Supporters of the legislation, including Sen. Andrew Zwicker, describe the pilot as a cautious framework with strong safety oversight, including incident reporting, expert task forces, and restrictions in sensitive zones like school areas. They view it as balancing innovation with public protection.
Tesla and pro-AV advocates counter that the bill lacks technology neutrality, creates insurmountable entry barriers for commercial deployment, and prioritizes process over outcomes — effectively functioning as a de facto ban on services like Robotaxi.
This latest clash echoes Tesla’s past battles in New Jersey over direct vehicle sales. The email directs owners to Tesla’s advocacy platform, where they can send customized messages to legislators calling for amendments: outcome-based safety standards, open competition, and clear pathways for fully driverless commercial operations.
As hearings approach, Tesla’s campaign frames the issue as a choice between protecting the status quo and embracing life-saving progress. With robotaxi technology already proving itself in permissive states, New Jersey owners are being asked to ensure their state doesn’t lock out the future of transportation.
Turn-by-turn navigation is not new technology.
For over two decades, drivers have relied on Garmin, TomTom, and later smartphone apps like Google Maps and Waze to receive precise, reliable directions. These systems have guided millions safely through unfamiliar cities, highways, and backroads with remarkable effectiveness. They handle real-time traffic, construction detours, and complex intersections with minimal fuss.
Yet Tesla, the company that promised revolutionary Full Self-Driving (FSD), continues to struggle with this foundational capability. As FSD (Supervised) v14.3.4 has started rolling out to cars this week, navigation remains its glaring Achilles’ heel, undermining the entire autonomous vision.
Tesla Summon got insanely good in FSD v14.3.2 — Navigation? Not so much
Tesla’s FSD excels in many driving behaviors—smooth acceleration, confident lane changes in ideal conditions, and responsive handling of visible obstacles. However, when it comes to following a route accurately, the system falters repeatedly.
Owners report wrong turns, missed exits, inefficient routing through local roads instead of highways, phantom speed limit errors, and even directing vehicles to building rear entrances. Interventions for navigation issues often outnumber those for core driving maneuvers. Tesla has begun surveying owners specifically about these errors, acknowledging the problem after years of complaints.
Navigation is perhaps my biggest complaint when it comes to FSD, because sometimes, we do know better. Some of us have been living in our areas for our entire lives, but even those who have not have years or even decades of experience driving on local roads. We might know a little better about routing.
But the navigation mistakes are more than just FSD potentially taking a slightly different route that may or may not save you a few minutes. Sometimes, they’re genuinely mind-boggling.
This isn’t just annoying; it cascades into broader failures. A flawed route plan confuses the AI’s decision-making, leading to hesitant behavior, unnecessary disengagements, or dangerous maneuvers like attempting impossible U-turns or ignoring clear ramps. In a system meant to operate with minimal supervision, unreliable navigation erodes trust.
More often than not, false or plain incorrect navigation is what causes me to interrupt FSD operation. Unfortunately, I believe the latest FSD version is the worst example of it, and it leads me to believe that Tesla might be making some changes; they’ve just made them in the wrong direction.
It makes you wonder: Why is a company that has done so much with the progress of FSD and autonomy struggling so much with navigation, something that is not new and has been around a long time?
Multiple Data Sources
First, Tesla’s navigation relies on a fragile patchwork of multiple data sources—Google Maps, TomTom, OpenStreetMap, Valhalla, and its own fleet-derived data—stitched together rather than a single authoritative map. When these conflict on lane geometry, road status, or turn details, the system hesitates or chooses incorrectly.
Traditional GPS providers maintain centralized, regularly validated databases with professional curation and rapid updates. Tesla’s hybrid approach, while innovative in crowdsourcing, introduces inconsistencies that a purely vision-based or end-to-end AI approach may not easily reconcile in real time.
Persistent Learning
FSD seems to struggle with persistent learning from driver interventions.
Unlike consumer apps that quickly adapt to repeated corrections or user preferences (e.g., avoiding certain routes or remembering habitual detours), Tesla’s FSD often fails to internalize fixes on the same trip or across similar scenarios. Owners note making the same manual override multiple times without the routing engine updating its behavior meaningfully.
This stems from the neural architecture prioritizing real-time perception and control over long-term route memory and personalization, making navigation feel rigid and “opinionated” compared to the adaptive logic in Waze or Google Maps.
I noticed that when I asked Grok to try and get me home a certain way (a way that FSD routinely took in the past because it was the most efficient), it had to place a waypoint between my location at the time and my house. When I went to edit the waypoint out, as Grok had placed it for a way to get FSD to get off the highway at the right exit, it was stumped again, rerouted, and took a longer way home.
The next thing I’ve noticed, and this might be controversial, is that Nav has gotten even worse.
I think that might actually be a good thing; Tesla seems to be adjusting it. They just need to adjust it the opposite way.
The car is taking extremely strange routes to very… https://t.co/UHg3tVfNA2
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 16, 2026
Reasoning, Scaling, and Intuition
Third, scaling navigation for unsupervised or robotaxi ambitions requires not just accuracy but adaptability and user-like reasoning. Current FSD often defaults to single routes that ignore driver preferences or real-world nuances like time-of-day traffic patterns. It fails to match the intuitive, context-aware planning that traditional systems have refined over the years.
Resolving navigation is critical for several reasons. Practically, it is the backbone of any autonomous journey: without trustworthy routing, the car cannot reliably reach destinations, rendering FSD useless for robotaxis or hands-free commutes. Safety depends on it—mismatched plans create hesitation in merges or intersections, increasing accident risk.
Economically, Tesla’s valuation and future hinge on FSD delivering unsupervised driving; persistent navigation flaws delay regulatory approval and erode consumer confidence. For owners who paid premiums for FSD, these issues represent unfulfilled promises. While it is unlikely Tesla will lose too many customers due to bad navigation, some will be frustrated with the constant need for human input.
Tesla has achieved miracles in electric vehicles and battery tech. Mastering turn-by-turn—technology Garmin nailed in the early 2000s—should not be this hard. By investing in tighter data integration, faster learning loops from interventions, and more intuitive routing algorithms, Tesla could close this gap.
Until then, FSD’s navigation struggles highlight a humbling truth: even the most ambitious innovator must sometimes master the basics before conquering the future.
A Tesla Cybertruck driver in the United Kingdom had their all-electric pickup seized by local police in the Greater Manchester area after the department cited “legitimate concerns.”
Last Thursday, police saw the pickup on the roads and decided to pull the driver over. Greater Manchester Police said:
“Whilst this may seem trivial to some, legitimate concerns exist around the safety of other road users or pedestrians if they were involved in a collision with the Cybertruck.”
🚨 A Tesla Cybertruck, which is illegal to drive in the UK due to safety concerns, has been seized by police in Greater Manchester
“Whilst this may seem trivial to some, legitimate concerns exist around the safety of other road users or pedestrians if they were involved in a… pic.twitter.com/cqhdPok3DM
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 16, 2026
The Cybertruck in question was, according to the BBC, registered and insured abroad and was confiscated. The driver, who is a UK resident, was reported.
The Greater Manchester Police Department then added:
“The Tesla Cybertruck is not road-legal in the UK and does not hold a certificate of conformity.”
The Cybertruck cannot be legally driven in the UK because it has no UK Type Approval for operation in the country. This is due to some safety concerns, which are related to its angular shape and design. The stainless steel exoskeleton has sharp edges and projections that violate UK/EU rules on pedestrian protection.
Tesla has considered creating what it referred to as an “international version” that would be approved for operation in Europe. However, there has been no real movement on that front by the company, as it has been focused on the Robotaxi rollout primarily.
Tesla urges New Jersey owners to oppose new bill that could block Robotaxi
Tesla’s Navigation Nightmare: Why the easiest part of FSD might be the hardest
