News
SpaceX’s first fairing catch imminent with plans to 4X Mr Steven’s net
Following SpaceX CEO Elon Musk’s brief confirmation that the launch company would be quadrupling recovery vessel Mr Steven’s already-huge net, members of the /r/SpaceX subreddit created a rough visualization of what that expanded net might look like once completed.
Based on rough estimates done by the author, SpaceX’s official confirmation that fairings had landed within 50 meters of Mr Steven’s net indicates that the parasailing halves are able to somewhat reliably reach Mr Steven’s net with a margin of error of roughly 0.01% when they really need 0.005% to be caught in the vessel’s net every time. Based on specifications from the vessel’s shipyard, his current claws appear to be roughly 75% the length of the entire vessel, or something like 40m long by 30 to 40m wide.
-
- An artist rendering of a Falcon 9 fairing parasailing towards Mr Steven’s net. Original photos by Chuck Bennett (Instagram @chuckbennett) and SpaceX. (/Chuck Bennet/SpaceX/Eric Ralph)
-
- It’s difficult to imagine how Mr Steven’s already vast net could plausibly be expanded by a factor of two in each dimension. I certainly can’t wait to see how SpaceX engineers and technicians tackle the task. (Pauline Acalin)
-
- Created by Reddit /u/Pipinpadiloxacopolis, this visualization shows Mr Steven with net with 4X the area currently installed. (Teslarati/ /u/Pipinpadiloxacopolis)
Several days after the author’s speculation was published, Mr. Musk appeared to effectively corroborate it by stating on Twitter that Mr Steven’s net would have its area expanded fourfold in order to operationalize fairing recovery: to quadruple the area, both the length and the width of the net would need to be expanded by a factor of two (square) or perhaps 50% width-wise and 150% lengthwise (more rectangular). Mr Steven’s massive steel arms appear to be fairly permanent in their current forms, suggesting that changing the aspect ratio of the net would be far more effort than simply expanding his arms along their current paths. Either way, lengthwise growth of a factor of 2-2.5 would appear to functionally close the gap on that 0.005% margin of error (the current 0.01% – missing by 50 meters – divided by 2 equals 0.005%) required, albeit by modifying the recovery vessel instead of optimizing the fairings’ hardware and software.
TL;DR: @SpaceX's fairing recovery engineers/techs have achieved a margin of error of like 0.01% when they actually need ~0.005% to reliably catch fairings in Mr Steven's net. Success is imminent 😀 https://t.co/MfPdzdBkyO
— Eric Ralph (@13ericralph31) June 1, 2018
Put more simply, a net with four times the area would roughly halve the accuracy required from each fairing half for reliable recovery. Compared with the original (left) above, Reddit user Pipinpadiloxacopolis followed Musk’s rough estimation and did a rough Photoshop (right) of the fairing recovery vessel’s current arms, expanding it by 2X in each direction to arrive at a quadrupled area. Although I would argue that Mr Steven’s forward arms are unlikely to ever move beyond their current end-point around 10 meters behind the vessel’s crew cabin and cockpit, /u/Pipin’s estimate is probably a decent prediction for the upgraded vessel’s most likely appearance.
What’s less clear is whether the depth of the net will increase alongside the length and width, nor whether the already massive arms will have to rely on some sort of retraction/pivot mechanism to allow Mr Steven to safely maneuver within Port of Los Angeles waters. Regardless of the solution that SpaceX expertise arrives at, the already eclectic recovery vessel is all but guaranteed to look even more absurd and awesome than it already does. With any luck, the net expansion may allow SpaceX to finally achieve their first successful ‘catch’ of a Falcon fairing, ending the need for mass-storage of unreusable fairing halves grabbed off of the ocean surface.
-
- Mr Steven and drone ship Just Read The Instructions captured at their berths on June 5th. JRTI also appears to be preparing for a return to action with Iridium-7. (Pauline Acalin)
-
- Even SpaceXers deserve a break. (Pauline Acalin)
-
- Mr Steven slips between massive container ship canyons on the final leg of its return. (Chuck Bennett, Instagram @chuckbennett)
Stay tuned, as Teslarati photographer Pauline Acalin will be tracking modifications made to Mr Steven closely over the next several weeks. As of now, the vessel will return to the Pacific Ocean for another fairing catch attempt sometime in the second or third week of July. We’ll find out soon whether Musk’s mentioned upgrades can be realized before then.
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
