News
SpaceX, NASA batten down the hatches as another storm approaches Florida
SpaceX, NASA, and the rest of the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) and Cape Canaveral Space Force Station (CCSFS) are doing what they can to prepare for Tropical Storm Nicole’s imminent arrival.
The somewhat unexpected storm grew quickly in recent days and has become a system that could at least partially threaten the Space Coast and its tenants. After the likelihood of favorable weather conditions dropped to just 20% on November 7th, SpaceX announced later the same day that it would delay its next Falcon 9 launch from November 8th to no earlier than (NET) November 12th. Increasingly tight scheduling of one of SpaceX’s two Florida pads will likely trigger delays for at least two or three more November launches, magnifying the storm’s immediate impact.
In comparison, the situation facing NASA could become more serious. On November 4th, for the fourth time since April 2022, NASA rolled its first Space Launch System (SLS) rocket to KSC’s LC-39B pad for a third launch attempt. Due to a combination of the storm’s quick growth and the nature of the SLS rocket, the design of which was dictated more by political expediency than rational engineering, the agency was reluctant to roll the rocket back to shelter. By the time it was clear that Nicole would impact Cape Canaveral, it was too late for NASA to complete the multi-day rollback process.
In late September, Hurricane Ian created a similar situation. The threat of the tail-end of the storm bringing winds higher than the SLS rocket is rated to survive forced NASA to abandon a third launch attempt and instead roll SLS back to the Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB), which is rated to survive even a Category 5 hurricane. According to NASA, SLS is designed to withstand wind gusts as high as 137 km/h (85 mph). Even then, some senior officials were brazenly reluctant to stand down. Every round trip to and from the VAB guarantees weeks of delays before the next possible launch attempt. Additionally, while NASA has refused to offer more context, each crawler ride seemingly takes a toll on the SLS rocket, meaning that the vehicle can only handle a limited number of rollbacks before unspecified issues begin to arise.
As a result, even though high winds could apparently damage the first SLS rocket and orbit-capable Orion spacecraft, which represent 10-15 years of work and would cost a minimum of $4.1 billion to replace, NASA was nearly willing to play chicken with a hurricane. Ultimately, someone in the agency saw reason and took the threat seriously enough to return the rocket to the safety of the VAB. But just six weeks later, with no evidence that NASA seriously considered a rollback before it was too late, SLS is stuck at Pad 39B while an increasingly threatening tropical storm – verging on a Category 1 hurricane – approaches the Space Coast.
-->Because the rollback process (which takes about a day) requires days of preparation, NASA would have had to decide to return SLS to the VAB days in advance. Instead, even though NASA was already aware that a storm system was developing, the agency decided to roll the rocket out of the VAB to LC-39B late on November 3rd. Had NASA merely delayed rollout by a few days to allow forecasts of the storm system to become more confident, it’s unlikely that it would have moved forward with its rollout plans as the storm’s predicted impact worsened.
When Hurricane Ian threatened KSC, NASA decided to roll SLS back to the VAB after the odds of sustained hurricane-force winds grew to 6%. That makes NASA’s decision to roll SLS to the pad when it had a forecast showing a 4% chance of similar winds even stranger.
SLS will be forced to weather the storm while sitting unprotected at the launch pad. As of November 7th, NOAA models predicted a 7% chance of hurricane-force winds at Kennedy Space Center. The odds increased to 15% 12 hours later – briefly equivalent to Russian roulette. The latest forecast has dropped to a 10% chance of sustained wind speeds of 120 km/h (75 mph) or higher. It’s unclear what the SLS rocket’s tolerance for sustained winds is, but it’s likely lower than its tolerance for gusts of up to 85 mph.
With any luck, Nicole will fall on the right side of NASA’s gamble. In the meantime, to “provide sufficient logistical time to get back into launch status following the storm,” NASA has delayed its third SLS launch attempt from November 14th to November 16th. The bulk of Nicole’s impact will begin to be felt at KSC as early as November 9th and should last for several days.
-->
Tesla recently released Full Self-Driving (FSD) v14.2.1, its latest version, but the tinkering with Speed Profiles has perhaps gone too far.
We try to keep it as real as possible with Full Self-Driving operation, and we are well aware that with the new versions, some things get better, but others get worse. It is all part of the process with FSD, and refinements are usually available within a week or so.
However, the latest v14.2.1 update has brought out some major complaints with Speed Profiles, at least on my end. It seems the adjustments have gone a tad too far, and there is a sizeable gap between Profiles that are next to one another.
Tesla FSD v14.2.1 first impressions:
✅ Smooth, stress-free highway operation
✅ Speed Profiles are refined — Hurry seems to be limited to 10 MPH over on highways. Switching from Mad Max to Hurry results in an abrupt braking pattern. Nothing of concern but do feel as if Speed…— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 29, 2025
The gap is so large that changing between them presents a bit of an unwelcome and drastic reduction in speed, which is perhaps a tad too fast for my liking. Additionally, Speed Profiles seem to have a set Speed Limit offset, which makes it less functional in live traffic situations.
Before I go any further, I’d like to remind everyone reading this that what I am about to write is purely my opinion; it is not right or wrong, or how everyone might feel. I am well aware that driving behaviors are widely subjective; what is acceptable to one might be unacceptable to another.
Speed Profiles are ‘Set’ to a Speed
From what I’ve experienced on v14.2.1, Tesla has chosen to go with somewhat of a preset max speed for each Speed Profile. With ‘Hurry,’ it appears to be 10 MPH over the speed limit, and it will not go even a single MPH faster than that. In a 55 MPH zone, it will only travel 65 MPH. Meanwhile, ‘Standard’ seems to be fixed at between 4-5 MPH over.
This is sort of a tough thing to have fixed, in my opinion. The speed at which the car travels should not be fixed; it should be more dependent on how traffic around it is traveling.
It almost seems as if the Speed Profile chosen should be more of a Behavior Profile. Standard should perform passes only to traffic that is slower than the traffic. If traffic is traveling at 75 MPH in a 65 MPH zone, the car should travel at 75 MPH. It should pass traffic that travels slower than this.
Hurry should be more willing to overtake cars, travel more than 10 MPH over the limit, and act as if someone is in a hurry to get somewhere, hence the name. Setting strict limits on how fast it will travel seems to be a real damper on its capabilities. It did much better in previous versions.
Some Speed Profiles are Too Distant from Others
This is specifically about Hurry and Mad Max, which are neighbors in the Speed Profiles menu. Hurry will only go 10 MPH over the limit, but Mad Max will travel similarly to traffic around it. I’ve seen some people say Mad Max is too slow, but I have not had that opinion when using it.
In a 55 MPH zone during Black Friday and Small Business Saturday, it is not unusual for traffic around me to travel in the low to mid-80s. Mad Max was very suitable for some traffic situations yesterday, especially as cars were traveling very fast. However, sometimes it required me to “gear down” into Hurry, especially as, at times, it would try to pass slower traffic in the right lane, a move I’m not super fond of.
We had some readers also mention this to us:
The abrupt speed reduction when switching to a slower speed profile is definitely an issue that should be improved upon.
— David Klem (@daklem) November 29, 2025
After switching from Mad Max to Hurry, there is a very abrupt drop in speed. It is not violent by any means, but it does shift your body forward, and it seems as if it is a tad drastic and could be refined further.
News
Tesla’s most affordable car is coming to the Netherlands
The trim is expected to launch at €36,990, making it the most affordable Model 3 the Dutch market has seen in years.
Tesla is preparing to introduce the Model 3 Standard to the Netherlands this December, as per information obtained by AutoWeek. The trim is expected to launch at €36,990, making it the most affordable Model 3 the Dutch market has seen in years.
While Tesla has not formally confirmed the vehicle’s arrival, pricing reportedly comes from a reliable source, the publication noted.
Model 3 Standard lands in NL
The U.S. version of the Model 3 Standard provides a clear preview of what Dutch buyers can expect, such as a no-frills configuration that maintains the recognizable Model 3 look without stripping the car down to a bare interior. The panoramic glass roof is still there, the exterior design is unchanged, and Tesla’s central touchscreen-driven cabin layout stays intact.
Cost reductions come from targeted equipment cuts. The American variant uses fewer speakers, lacks ventilated front seats and heated rear seats, and swaps premium materials for cloth and textile-heavy surfaces. Performance is modest compared with the Premium models, with a 0–100 km/h sprint of about six seconds and an estimated WLTP range near 550 kilometers.
Despite the smaller battery and simpler suspension, the Standard maintains the long-distance capability drivers have come to expect in a Tesla.
-->Pricing strategy aligns with Dutch EV demand and taxation shifts
At €36,990, the Model 3 Standard fits neatly into Tesla’s ongoing lineup reshuffle. The current Model 3 RWD has crept toward €42,000, creating space for a more competitive entry-level option, and positioning the new Model 3 Standard comfortably below the €39,990 Model Y Standard.
The timing aligns with rising Dutch demand for affordable EVs as subsidies like SEPP fade and tax advantages for electric cars continue to wind down, EVUpdate noted. Buyers seeking a no-frills EV with solid range are then likely to see the new trim as a compelling alternative.
With the U.S. variant long established and the Model Y Standard already available in the Netherlands, the appearance of an entry-level Model 3 in the Dutch configurator seems like a logical next step.
News
Tesla Model Y is still China’s best-selling premium EV through October
The premium-priced SUV outpaced rivals despite a competitive field, while the Model 3 also secured an impressive position.
The Tesla Model Y led China’s top-selling pure electric vehicles in the 200,000–300,000 RMB segment through October 2025, as per Yiche data compiled from China Passenger Car Association (CPCA) figures.
The premium-priced SUV outpaced rivals despite a competitive field, while the Model 3 also secured an impressive position.
The Model Y is still unrivaled
The Model Y’s dominance shines in Yiche’s October report, topping the chart for vehicles priced between 200,000 and 300,000 RMB. With 312,331 units retailed from January through October, the all-electric crossover was China’s best-selling EV in the 200,000–300,000 RMB segment.
The Xiaomi SU7 is a strong challenger at No. 2 with 234,521 units, followed by the Tesla Model 3, which achieved 146,379 retail sales through October. The Model Y’s potentially biggest rival, the Xiaomi YU7, is currently at No. 4 with 80,855 retail units sold.
Efficiency kings
The Model 3 and Model Y recently claimed the top two spots in Autohome’s latest real-world energy-consumption test, outperforming a broad field of Chinese-market EVs under identical 120 km/h cruising conditions with 375 kg payload and fixed 24 °C cabin temperature. The Model 3 achieved 20.8 kWh/100 km while the Model Y recorded 21.8 kWh/100 km, reaffirming Tesla’s efficiency lead.
The results drew immediate attention from Xiaomi CEO Lei Jun, who publicly recognized Tesla’s advantage while pledging continued refinement for his brand’s lineup.
-->“The Xiaomi SU7’s energy consumption performance is also very good; you can take a closer look. The fact that its test results are weaker than Tesla’s is partly due to objective reasons: the Xiaomi SU7 is a C-segment car, larger and with higher specifications, making it heavier and naturally increasing energy consumption. Of course, we will continue to learn from Tesla and further optimize its energy consumption performance!” Lei Jun wrote in a post on Weibo.
Tesla tinkering with Speed Profiles on FSD v14.2.1 has gone too far
Tesla’s most affordable car is coming to the Netherlands
