News
DeepSpace: SpaceX takes huge step towards Mars with flawless Crew Dragon performance
This is a free preview of DeepSpace, Teslarati’s new member-only weekly newsletter. Each week, I’ll be taking a deep-dive into the most exciting developments in commercial space, from satellites and rockets to everything in between.
If you’d like to receive DeepSpace and all of our newsletters and membership benefits, you can become a member for as little as $3/month here.
While the mission is not done just yet, SpaceX is days away from (hopefully) wrapping up an extraordinarily smooth debut of its newest spacecraft, a human-rated vehicle known as Crew Dragon. Assuming no anomalous behavior during reentry, descent, and landing this Friday, SpaceX will likely be less than six months away from launching its first astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS), the most important step yet towards offering reliable and routine transport to Earth orbit and ultimately between Earth and Mars.
Founded by Elon Musk to kickstart a stagnant space industry and drive humanity to become an interplanetary species, SpaceX is in the process of building the first full-scale prototype(s) of the launch vehicle (Super Heavy) and spacecraft (Starship) it believes will deliver on those promises. Along with countless programmatic and technical lessons learned, every conceivable aspect of Crew Dragon’s development will feed directly into SpaceX’s development of Starship, meant to one day safely transport and land as many as 100 passengers on the surface of Mars.
A spacefaring civilization, one step at a time
In the process of building Crew Dragon, SpaceX has been forced to become rising experts in fields like human-rated environmental control and life support systems (ECLSS), as well as ensuring an even more extreme level of redundancy and reliability compared with SpaceX’s already high standards for their uncrewed Falcon rockets and Cargo Dragon spacecraft.
- More so than any particular piece of technology present on Crew Dragon, the process of both cooperating and grappling with NASA to build the spacecraft to high standards and ‘certify’ it has hopefully had an extremely positive impact on SpaceX’s own engineers and company-wide standards, albeit potentially at the cost of some of the willingness to take risks and move quickly.
“I’m personally convinced that this has made, certainly, SpaceX better, to have NASA guide us, and to look at requirements, and to try to question requirements, and what’s the true reason behind those requirements, and then basically comply with the overall safety culture that NASA taught us, I would say, to some extent. And so I feel like it certainly made a better SpaceX and made better engineers out of the SpaceX engineers. And I really appreciate that very much.”
-Hans Koenigsman, Vice President of Mission Assurance, SpaceX
Feet in Earth orbit, head in the Martian clouds
- Regardless, the end result will ultimately be a reliable spacecraft capable of transporting an average of 4-7 astronauts to and from the ISS, whether that end result is the result of near-perfect execution the first time around or discovering and fixing problems during flight tests.
- Compared to NASA, SpaceX prefers a radically agile approach to development, meaning that the company will rapidly build, test, and fly iterations of the same hardware of software, beginning with the minimum viable product and ending (although improvement never really ends) with an advanced solution optimized by extensive lessons learned.
- Through the process of building Crew Dragon, SpaceX has hopefully absorbed most of the valuable lessons and practices NASA can often be rich with while rejecting the unhealthy and unsuccessful tendencies that contribute to NASA’s distinctly unimpressive modern efforts to build human-rated rockets (SLS) and spacecraft (Orion, Space Shuttle).
- With that knowledge and technical experience, SpaceX may already have an extremely strong foundation upon which it can build its next-gen spacecraft, Starship. In theory, Crew Dragon’s life support system – meant to support up to 7 astronauts with extreme reliability and safety – should be able to scale up to ECLSS fit for dozens or hundreds of passengers.
- In a worst-case scenario relative to mass efficiency, SpaceX could quite literally package Crew Dragon’s ECLSS system into a module and duplicate it as many times as needed for a given Starship crew. Identical modules could then be transported in a cargo bay for any structures built on the surface of Mars or the Moon.
- Understandably, Crew Dragon does not need a significant number of systems critical for longer stays in space, as it is only designed to support humans for approximately one week in free-flight. SpaceX will still need to develop extremely efficient recycling systems, used to recycle water, oxygen, and other consumables to extend the amount of time the ISS (or Starship/Mars colonies) can operate without external supply deliveries.
- In essence, recycling technology is roughly (or sometimes exactly) equivalent to something known as in-situ resource utilization (ISRU), basically prioritizing local resources over shipped goods. A small subset of SpaceX’s future projects team has been working on ISRU – particularly Sabatier reactors for Starship refueling on Mars – for several years.
- In late 2017, Elon Musk stated that the design and development of SpaceX’s own ISRU hardware were “pretty far along.”
Mission Updates:
- SpaceX’s Crew Dragon spacecraft will attempt its first orbital-velocity reentry and Atlantic Ocean splashdown on the morning of Friday, March 8th.
- The second launch of Falcon Heavy could occur as early as late March
- Aside from DM-1 and Falcon Heavy Flight 2, it’s unclear what SpaceX mission will happen next. DM-1 may be the only SpaceX launch in March, while several missions are tentatively scheduled for April and May.
Photos of the week:
B1051 returned to Port Canaveral three days after successfully sending Crew Dragon on its first orbital mission. Thanks to the relatively low-energy trajectory and gentle reentry, SpaceX should be able to refurbish the booster extremely quickly.(c. Tom Cross, Pauline Acalin)
News
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 faces wrath of the Texas skies
SpaceX pushed Starship Flight 13 to Friday, blaming weather instead of the previous engine issues.
SpaceX called off Thursday’s launch attempt of Starship Flight 13, pushing the mission to Friday because of weather tied to Tropical Storm Bertha. The company confirmed the delay on X, noting “Now targeting Friday, July 24 for Starship’s thirteenth flight test, due to weather. A key objective for the flight test is to get clear imagery from the ground of Starship’s heatshield as it flies at a higher dynamic pressure during ascent, which won’t be possible with today’s weather conditions.”
This is the second delay for Flight 13 in two weeks. SpaceX first tried to launch the mission on July 16, but the countdown ended in an automated abort at T-0 when four of Super Heavy Booster 20’s 33 Raptor engines failed to ignite. Musk said at the time that two Raptors would need to be removed and replaced, as Teslarati reported. The company spent the following week destacking Ship 40 and Booster 20, swapping engines, and running leak checks before restacking the vehicle on Pad 2 Wednesday night, according to Spaceflight Now’s live coverage.
Unlike the engine problem, Thursday’s delay has nothing to do with the hardware. SpaceX wants clean footage of Starship’s heat shield captured from the ground as the vehicle flies through max dynamic pressure, something the storm’s cloud cover over South Texas would not allow. The company said visibility should improve for Friday’s attempt, with the same 90 minute window opening at 5:45 p.m. CT.
Flight 13 will be the second outing for the V3 versions of Starship and Super Heavy, following their debut on Flight 12 in May. The mission carries 20 production Starlink V3 satellites, the first time SpaceX has flown operational satellites rather than mass simulators on Starship. Six of those satellites are fitted with cameras to inspect the heat shield from a different angle during ascent, giving engineers a second data source beyond the ground imagery the weather is currently blocking.
Booster 20 will attempt a boostback burn and a splashdown landing burn in the Gulf of America, while Ship 40 follows a suborbital trajectory toward a landing in the Indian Ocean. The flight plan largely mirrors Flight 12, though the booster will run a more aggressive ascent burn after max Q this time, and the ship’s heat shield includes load sensing tiles meant to measure stress at the higher dynamic pressure SpaceX is targeting.
If Friday’s attempt succeeds, Flight 13 could be the last suborbital test in the program. SpaceX is already looking to push for an orbital flight on Flight 14.
Tesla stock (NASDAQ: TSLA) endured one of its sharpest single-day declines in years on July 23, tumbling approximately 14.5 percent and closing near $320 after opening the session around $374. The drop erased more than $140 billion in market value amid heavy trading volume and left the shares at multi-week lows.
The sell-off followed the company’s second-quarter 2026 results, released the previous evening. Tesla reported record revenue of $28.2 billion, up 26 percent year over year, driven by a Q2-record 480,126 vehicle deliveries. Energy storage deployments also rose strongly.
Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue
Yet profitability disappointed sharply. Operating income fell 57 percent to $398 million, compressing the operating margin to just 1.4 percent. Non-GAAP earnings per share came in at $0.33, well below the roughly $0.53 analysts had expected. Free cash flow turned negative by $1.1 billion as capital expenditures surged 142 percent to $5.8 billion, largely tied to accelerated spending on artificial intelligence, robotics, and autonomous systems.
The losses on capex were expected, as Tesla said it would be spending heavily in 2026.
Investors also reacted to lingering uncertainty surrounding key product timelines. During the Earnings Call, management reiterated ambitions for Robotaxi deployment and the Optimus humanoid robot, but offered limited new concrete milestones, renewing questions about execution pace that have long accompanied Tesla’s ambitious roadmap.
The magnitude of the decline places it among Tesla’s more severe one-day percentage losses since its 2010 initial public offering. Historically, the two largest single-day drops (split-adjusted) remain September 8, 2020, when shares fell 21.1 percent amid broader market volatility and valuation concerns, and January 13, 2012, with a 19.3 percent plunge during the company’s early growth struggles.
Other notable declines include an 18.6 percent drop on March 16, 2020, at the onset of pandemic-related market turmoil. Thursday’s move ranks roughly ninth on the all-time list but stands out as the steepest in more than a year.
Despite the short-term pain, Tesla’s long-term trajectory has repeatedly recovered from such volatility. The latest results underscore both the strength of its core automotive and energy businesses and the near-term costs of heavy investment in next-generation technologies.
Elon Musk clapped back at France’s decision to withhold the approval for Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) Supervised system, projecting a clear and blunt message to French Transport Minister Phillippe Tabarot, after he publicly rejected the technology in its current form.
Tabarot outlines several concerns with Tesla Full Self-Driving in a detailed video statement, where he said, “The safety trade-offs are not yet sufficient to authorize it as it currently stands,” he said. He emphasized that FSD is not a true self-driving system and that the driver remains fully responsible.
Key issues Tabarot also brought up included allowing speeding when surrounding traffic exceeds limits and what he believes are insufficient guarantees of driver attention during complex urban maneuvers such as lane changes, intersections, and roundabouts.
Delaying the approval of FSD in France will cost lives
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 22, 2026
While acknowledging technological progress and France’s support for autonomous innovation, Tabarot stressed that deployment must prioritize road safety. He noted ongoing technical discussions with Tesla, the Netherlands, and other European partners, with further ecosystem meetings planned for the fall.
Musk’s rebuke highlights the human cost of regulatory caution. Tesla’s latest safety reports provide compelling data supporting accelerated adoption. In the most recent 12-month period, vehicles using FSD (Supervised) recorded one major collision per approximately 5.1 million miles driven, dramatically better than the U.S. national average of one crash per 698,000 miles.
Even Tesla vehicles driven manually with active safety features outperform the average by a wide margin. These figures come from billions of real-world miles of telemetry, showing FSD vehicles involved in far fewer incidents than both manual Teslas and the broader U.S. fleet.
Critics argue Tesla’s comparisons require careful scrutiny regarding reporting thresholds and fleet demographics, yet the data consistently positions FSD as a potential lifesaver. With road fatalities remaining a leading cause of death worldwide, Musk contends that proven safer technology should not face prolonged bureaucratic hurdles.
France’s measured approach reflects the broader European regulatory caution, which many, especially Musk, have been critical of in the past. However, as autonomous systems from Tesla and competitors like Waymo demonstrate superior safety in independent studies, pressure is mounting for harmonized approvals.
Musk’s warning carries the belief that every month of delay may equate to avoidable tragedies on European roads.
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 faces wrath of the Texas skies
Tesla stock tumbles after earnings, one of its sharpest single-day declines
