News
SpaceX could begin testing its Mars rocket in Texas by late 2018, early 2019
On the heels of a successful wet dress rehearsal for Falcon Heavy, SpaceX’s President and COO Gwynne Shotwell spoke briefly about SpaceX for an aerospace conference located at Texas’ Academy of Medicine, Engineering & Science. Ars Technica’s senior spaceflight editor Eric Berger was in attendance and provided a rough outline of live tweets during the first group of presentations.
While the phrasing cannot provide absolute confirmation, Berger summarized a statement by Shotwell suggesting that SpaceX’s Boca Chica, Texas launch site, currently in the early stages of construction, could be ready to host “vehicle tests” as soon as late 2018, early 2019. At this point in time, based on comments from Shotwell and CEO Elon Musk, it can be reasonably assumed that SpaceX’s Texas launch facilities will be dedicated mainly to the company’s interplanetary colonization efforts, and will probably be tailored to support the testing and eventual launches of BFR/BFS.
Some news from Shotwell: Brownsville launch site ready for vehicle tests in late 2018, early 2019. Move to launch site after that.
— Eric Berger (@SciGuySpace) January 11, 2018
After nine months of earnest construction and rehabilitation, SpaceX’s LC-40 pad was recently reactivated and has since supported two launches without any major hitches. At the same time, LC-39A in flux in order to support launches of SpaceX’s new Falcon Heavy rocket, the size of which required some concomitant upgrades to multiple ground systems. With both of those major tasks now effectively complete, SpaceX’s pad construction team is free to either refocus their efforts towards Boca Chica. Over the past several months, Boca Chica has seen a gradual but consistent level of development, mainly by way of unaffiliated SpaceX contractors. These changes have been dutifully tracked over the last several years on NASASpaceflight.com forums by a handful of friendly local residents interested in the changes coming to Boca Chica and Brownsville, Texas, a nearby town.
SpaceX’s Boca Chica facilities and STARGATE dishes (center-left) seen at sunset from the top of the giant crane garage. (anonymous Instagram user)
Most significantly, the last several months have seen three major developments. First and most prominently, a permanent facility called STARGATE externally appears complete and its two large radio communication dishes have been installed nearby. The STARGATE facility is a public-private partnership between the University of Texas at Brownsville (now part of University of Texas Rio Grande Valley) and SpaceX, with the academic components focusing on research that SpaceX undoubtedly has interest in: improved orbital spacecraft tracking and communications. Operationally, SpaceX will use the facilities to communicate with and operate its Crew Dragon spacecraft during launches, set to begin with an uncrewed demonstration mission as early as August 2018.
Second, an absolutely massive trolley crane appeared on SpaceX’s land and was eventually housed in an apparently purpose-built shed. The crane dwarfs anything currently used at SpaceX’s launch facilities and is almost certainly a custom-ordered piece of equipment, and thus would be both expensive and explicitly purposeful. What that purpose might be is currently unknown, but it is entirely plausible that the crane is intended to support initial testing (or even limited manufacturing) of SpaceX’s first BFS prototype rockets. This speculation has now been strengthened by Shotwell’s January 11 2018 comment on potential “vehicle tests” occurring at the site within a year or so, and also meshes with a presentation she gave in October 2017 at MIT. It also fits with Elon Musk’s 2017 IAC comments that BFR construction tooling and facilities were respectively already ordered and under construction.
The boom of the giant crane seen in late 2017, parked at SpaceX’s Boca Chica facilities. (Reddit /u/ ticklestuff)
Third and last, the aforementioned SpaceX-following locals observed the early stages of a solar power install beginning on some of SpaceX’s Boca Chica land in late 2017, and also noted that at least some of its contractors were part of Tesla Solar. Plans and permits for solar power were acknowledged as far back as 2014, although at that point the contractor was Solar City (now a part of Tesla). A handful of months later, NASASpaceflight user and all-around awesome guy Nomadd has installed a webcam on a tall pole with a wonderful view of both the solar installation (now nearly completed) and STARGATE. The acre of solar panels can be expected to produce as much as half a megawatt (MW) at peak sun, likely more than enough to offset a considerable amount of the facilities’ electricity usage even after it begins to be see serious use.
-
- A Tesla Energy/Solar City contractor’s vehicle spotted at the Boca Chica solar installation. (NSF /u/ bocachicagal)
-
- As of last week, the solar installation appears to be nearly complete. (NSF /u/ Nomadd)
Originally announced as an additional Falcon launch facility in 2014, Boca Chica has remained relatively dormant over the last three years, and it is truly exciting to see activity ramping up. There are admittedly significant barriers that will prevent SpaceX from effortlessly repurposing its Boca Chica pad for BFR, a much larger rocket. If SpaceX intends to do that, they will almost certainly need to pass a significantly updated FAA environmental impact review and account for any remediations that might be required. Still, that is a small ask for for Brownsville’s local government and Texas as a whole, both of which have clearly enjoyed and begun to benefit from SpaceX’s presence in the otherwise unknown area. SpaceX is unlikely to give up on Boca Chica in the near term, so long as Ms. Shotwell maintains her belief that it is effectively the perfect location for BFR launches.
Overall, Shotwell’s comments over the last several months and today in particular are increasingly encouraging, and things are likely to only speed up as 2018 progresses, allowing SpaceX to focus more and more of its expertise on BFR, BFS, and its South Texas testing and launch facilities.
Full disclosure: As Shotwell did not specify which vehicle or vehicles could be expected to begin testing in 2018/2019, it is possible that Falcon 9, not BFR, was the statement’s target. This article should be taken with a grain of salt, as it is educated speculation based upon public information from SpaceX executives and Texas contractors. Teslarati reached out to SpaceX for additional information, but the company was unable to comment further on Shotwell’s presentation at the moment.
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
