Connect with us

News

SpaceX launches Japanese lander, NASA cubesat to the Moon

Published

on

A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket has successfully launched a privately-developed Japanese Moon lander and a NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory cubesat on their way to lunar orbit.

Following five back-to-back delays that pushed the launch from November to mid-December, Falcon 9 lifted off with Japanese startup ispace’s first HAKUTO-R Moon lander on December 11th, kicking off a multi-month journey that will take the spacecraft more than 700,000 miles (1.1M km) away from Earth. It’s not the first time SpaceX has launched a mostly commercial Moon lander, and it won’t be the last. SpaceX’s first Moon lander launch happened in February 2019, when Falcon 9 launched Israeli company SpaceIL’s Beresheet Moon lander as a rideshare payload on Indonesia’s PSN-6 geostationary communications satellite. Beresheet failed just a minute or two before touchdown, but the attempt was still a historic step for commercial spaceflight.

Just shy of three years later, SpaceX has launched another private Moon lander. Unlike Beresheet, which made its way to the Moon from geostationary transfer orbit (GTO), HAKUTO-R was Falcon 9’s main payload, allowing the rocket to launch it directly into deep space. A Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) cubesat that missed a long-planned ride on NASA’s first Space Launch System (SLS) rocket also joined the Moon lander as a Falcon 9 rideshare payload.

Approximately four months from now, both spacecraft will reach the end of similar low-energy ballistic transfer trajectories, at which point they will have limited opportunities to enter lunar orbit and continue their missions. Reaching that checkpoint will require several successful orbital correction maneuvers and enough longevity to survive months in deep space, unprotected by Earth’s magnetic fields.

Advertisement

If they make it that far, HAKUTO-R will conduct several more burns to reach low lunar orbit (LLO), where ispace will verify the spacecraft’s health and eventually attempt a soft landing on the Moon. A privately-developed spacecraft has never landed on an extraterrestrial body, so the prestige at stake is about as high as it can get. If JPL’s Lunar Flashlight spacecraft [PDF] survives its journey, it will enter a near-rectilinear halo orbit around a point of gravitational equilibrium (Lagrange point) between the Earth and Moon. Once on station, it will spend most of its time 9000 kilometers (~5600 mi) away from the Moon but occasionally fly within 15 kilometers (~9 mi) of the surface. Under JPL’s nominal mission plan, Lunar Flashlight will complete at least ten week-long orbits and use an infrared laser instrument to search for water ice in permanently-shadowed Moon craters during each close approach.

(JPL)
Lunar Flashlight is about the size of a briefcase. HAKUTO-R is much larger. (ispace)

Without context, both missions seem to complement each other well, and it’s not hard to imagine an alternative scenario where a cubesat like Lunar Flashlight was intentionally included to prospect for ice that a lander could then target. But the JPL cubesat’s presence on ispace’s HAKUTO-R was purely by accident. Because of certain design decisions made by NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS) rocket and Orion spacecraft contractors, the giant rocket is intended to launch cubesat rideshare payloads to the Moon, but those satellites are barely accessible for the entire time the rocket is configured for its unprecedentedly slow launch campaigns.

As a result, even though SLS lifted off for the first time in November 2022, its cubesat payloads had to be ready for launch and installed on the rocket in October 2021. Out of 14 planned payloads, four – including Lunar Flashlight – weren’t ready in time, forcing them to find other ways to deep space. Ironically, that may have been an unexpected blessing, as the ten payloads that did make the deadline wound up sitting inside SLS for 13 months, much of which was spent at the launch pad. Half of those satellites appear to have partially or completely failed shortly after launch.

Because of the extremely circuitous path the NASA rocket ultimately took to reach launch readiness, JPL was able to find a new ride to the Moon and launch less than one month after SLS and its co-passengers. Unlike those copassengers, Lunar Flashlight likely spent just a few weeks installed on Falcon 9 before launching to the Moon. Additionally, the SLS launch trajectory took it more or less directly to the Moon, giving its rideshare payloads just a handful of days to troubleshoot any problems discovered. Thanks to the slower, more efficient transfer orbit SpaceX used to launch HAKUTO-R, JPL should still have opportunities to enter a nominal orbit even if Lunar Flashlight requires weeks of in-space troubleshooting – far more margin for error than most SLS copassengers received.

Lunar Flashlight weighs about 14 kilograms (~31 lb) at liftoff, features two sets of solar arrays, and packs a first-of-its-kind chemical propulsion system designed to deliver up to 290 m/s of delta-V – a ton of performance for such a small satellite. HAKUTO-R weighs closer to 1.1 tons (~2400 lb) and is a far more capable spacecraft, in theory – a necessity to land softly on the Moon. At ispace’s request, Falcon 9’s low-energy ballistic transfer orbit reduced the lander’s performance requirements, but it will need roughly 2000-2500 m/s of delta-V to enter lunar orbit and land on the lunar surface.

On December 12th, ispace confirmed that HAKUTO-R is in excellent shape around 24 hours after liftoff. ispace says the lander has secured stable communications, a stable orientation in space, and positive power generation from its solar arrays. An ispace infographic indicates that the spacecraft will enter lunar orbit around mid-April if all goes to plan. With HAKUTO-R in a stable state, the next most important near-term milestone will be the successful use of its propulsion and navigation systems. The startup hopes to demonstrate smooth deep space operations, including routine trajectory correction maneuvers, within one month of launch.

Advertisement

HAKUTO-R was SpaceX’s 56th successful launch of 2022 and the company’s second direct Moon launch this year after sending South Korea’s KPLO orbiter to the Moon in August.

(Richard Angle)
(Richard Angle)
Falcon 9 produced a beautiful artificial nebula as the plumes of its booster and upper stage interacted above Earth’s atmosphere. (Richard Angle)

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

Elon Musk

Elon Musk says your Tesla will start to learn your individual preferences

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Elon Musk said today on X that Teslas will start to learn your individual preferences. This is something that he seemed to hint toward earlier this month when he said parking was by far the biggest reason drivers intervene with Full Self-Driving.

Musk made the comment in response to notable Tesla influencer Whole Mars, who said that his vehicle will sometimes disobey the settings he has enabled for his car. He responded to the post, stating that “The car will start to remember your specific interventions and match each person’s individual preferences.”

This is something that could be perhaps one of the biggest ways Tesla could minimize or even work closer toward eliminating interventions altogether. While FSD does a lot of things really well, many people intervene a vast majority of the time not due to major or critical safety errors.

Instead, many take over because the car is doing something that they do not like as a preference; it might park in a parking spot that is not preferred by the driver, it might linger too long in the left lane on the highway (a personal favorite), or it could even take a route that the driver does not like.

These all lead to interventions, but they are not triggered by a major safety issue. Instead, it’s just preference.

READ OUR REVIEW OF TESLA’S LATEST FSD VERSION:

Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.3.5 Early Impressions: new features and early performance

If Teslas could start to learn the personal preferences of the person who owns them, interventions will truly begin to be less frequent. Some of this is already pretty evident, in my opinion. Teslas use a neural network to learn behaviors and accumulate data to improve performance.

For months now, we’ve tracked FSD’s performance at “Except Right Turn” stop signs, something that is very common in Pennsylvania, but many of our readers located in other parts of the U.S. have never heard of. FSD handles one Except Right Turn stop sign very well, one that I travel past frequently. Others that I do not navigate through as often do not have as confident a performance. It seems like the cars might already be doing this to an extent.

That example is also for something that is a street sign and not necessarily a driver preference; however, I still feel it is worth mentioning because it only handles that commonly passed Except Right Turn stop sign with true confidence. Others it still seems to struggle with.

This could be one of Tesla’s big moves toward full autonomy, and it could be a pathway to truly unsupervised driving. Every day, millions of cars on the road travel at a human driver’s personal preferences with no incident. Why can’t autonomous vehicles still cater to a passenger’s preferences while being autonomous? Tesla seems to have the idea that it would be possible.

Continue Reading

News

Ron DeSantis calls out media bias in Tesla crash coverage

Published

on

Credit: ABC News

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has sharply criticized legacy media outlets for what he describes as selective and biased reporting on vehicle accidents involving Tesla. In a recent X post, DeSantis questioned why headlines routinely spotlight the Tesla brand in crash stories, even when human error is the clear cause, while similar incidents with other automakers often receive generic treatment.

A prime example is the June 19, 2026, fatal crash in Katy, Texas. A Tesla Model 3 driven by Michael Butler struck a brick home at high speed, killing 76-year-old Martha Avila inside. Initial reports and headlines prominently featured “Tesla crash” and referenced the driver’s claim that an automated driving-assistance system was engaged.

Many outlets quickly speculated that Full Self-Driving or Autopilot were the cause of the crash, immediately blaming the suites for the accident shortly after it happened.

However, Tesla responded shortly after the accident with vehicle data that showed Butler manually overrode the system by pressing the accelerator to 100 percent, reaching 73 MPH in a residential area, more than double the speed limit. The accelerator remained floored after impact.

Tesla finally clarifies fatal Texas crash, confirms driver manually overrode acceleration

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) later confirmed these findings, and Butler now faces manslaughter charges. His phone searches also included queries like “Tesla FSD too timid,” suggesting he may have intervened aggressively. Despite this, many headlines continued to center Tesla’s technology rather than the driver’s actions.

DeSantis highlighted a Washington Post headline, which was labeled, “Newly released photo shows wreckage of Tesla crash that killed grandmother.”

The subheadline noted the driver overrode assistance and floored the accelerator, yet the brand name dominated the framing. He asked whether legacy outlets typically name the make of a car in routine crashes or reserve that treatment for Tesla to push a narrative.

This pattern appears widespread. Crashes involving Ford, Chevrolet, or Toyota vehicles frequently appear as “pickup truck slams into home” or “fatal car crash kills pedestrian” without brand specifics, especially absent new technology angles.

High-profile Ford F-150 or Chevy Silverado incidents tied to large sales volumes often escape brand-callout scrutiny. In contrast, Tesla stories consistently lead with the manufacturer, amplifying perceptions of risk despite data showing strong overall safety performance:

Tesla’s own 2025 Impact Report indicates vehicles using FSD logged 0.19 major incidents per million miles, roughly eight times fewer than the U.S. average. Models like the Model Y also rank among the safest in IIHS and NHTSA testing for occupant protection. Critics argue disproportionate coverage ignores these statistics and driver behavior factors, such as younger or more aggressive Tesla owners in some studies.

DeSantis frames this as part of a broader political agenda against innovative American companies like Tesla. By consistently naming Tesla while downplaying others, media outlets risk eroding public trust and shaping perceptions detached from the evidence of human error in most cases.

As autonomous technology evolves across the industry, consistent and factual reporting will be essential to separate real safety concerns from narrative-driven coverage.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla enters two new markets on two different continents in one week

Published

on

Tesla entered two new markets this week by advancing its presence in Latvia (Europe) and officially launching operations in Uruguay (South America), marking a rapid dual-continent expansion.

These moves underscore the company’s strategy to tap into emerging EV markets with supportive policies, renewable energy grids, and growing demand for sustainable transport.

Latvia: Strengthening the Baltic Footprint

In Latvia, Tesla has built on its earlier registration of Tesla Latvia SIA in late 2025 with recent steps toward full operations, including job postings for a service center and representation in Riga. This aligns with broader Baltic expansion following Lithuania’s model of pop-up stores and service centers.

EV penetration in Latvia stands at around 7 percent for BEVs in new passenger car registrations. 2025 data showed 1,602 BEVs out of about 22,500 total, or 7.1 percent, with combined plug-ins nearing 19 percent. Growth has been steady but below the European average, supported by government subsidies and infrastructure development. Tesla models like the Model 3 lead local EV registrations.

Vehicles for the Latvian market will likely be sourced from Gigafactory Berlin or Gigafactory Shanghai. Charging infrastructure is robust for the region as well, with over 400- 2,000 public points, with Tesla Superchargers in Riga, Jūrmala, and along Via Baltica routes offering up to 250 kW.

Uruguay: Third South American Country

Tesla teased its Uruguay arrival with “Estamos llegando,” or, “We are arriving,” on social media, followed by an official presentation scheduled for mid-July.

The company established Tesla Uruguay SAS, homologated Model 3 and Model Y (three versions each), and appointed local leadership. This makes Uruguay Tesla’s third official South American market after Chile and Colombia.

Uruguay boasts one of Latin America’s highest EV penetrations, with battery-electric vehicles exceeding 20 percent market share recently, driven by tax incentives, high fuel prices, and a nearly 95-100 percent renewable electricity grid. Hundreds of Teslas already operate via grey imports, but official sales bring warranties, service, and support.

Vehicles will be imported from Gigafactory Shanghai, enabling competitive pricing for Model 3 and Model Y. Charging plans include Supercharger development alongside existing infrastructure, leveraging the country’s green energy advantage for affordable operation.

Tesla Superchargers follow Model 3 and Model Y to South American country

Tesla’s Dual Continent Expansion

Tesla’s simultaneous push into Latvia and Uruguay demonstrates efficient scaling: prioritizing service and infrastructure first, then direct sales in high-potential niches. In Europe, it fills Baltic gaps; in Latin America, it counters Chinese dominance while leveraging renewables.

This dual move signals Tesla’s ambition to accelerate global EV adoption amid varying regional paces. By addressing local needs, like subsidies in Latvia or incentives and green grids in Uruguay, Tesla not only boosts volumes but advances its mission of sustainable energy.

For investors and consumers, it highlights resilience and opportunity in diverse markets, potentially paving the way for further growth in underserved regions. With strong fundamentals in both, these entries could yield long-term gains as EV transitions mature worldwide.

Continue Reading