News
(Update: scrubbed) SpaceX’s next Starlink launch to break rocket fairing reuse record
Update: SpaceX says that today’s Starlink-12 launch attempt was scrubbed due to a mysterious “recovery issue.” Liftoff from Kennedy Space Center Pad 39A is now scheduled no earlier than (NET) 1:57 pm EDT (17:57 UTC) on Friday, September 18th.
Prior to the announcement, fairing recovery ship GO Ms. Tree was spotted diverting to a North Carolina port for unknown reasons, leaving twin ship Ms. Chief to recover both fairing halves. Based on bouy data, conditions at the Atlantic Ocean fairing and booster recovery zones appeared to be moderately challenging but far from unreasonable and SpaceX has been happy to point to recovery weather for past launch delays.
SpaceX has revealed that its next Starlink launch will mark a new first for Falcon 9 payload fairing reuse, reaching a milestone that took booster reuse 18 months in less than a year.
Scheduled to lift off no earlier than (NET) 2:19 pm EDT (18:19 UTC) on Thursday, September 17th, the Starlink-12 (v1.0 L12) mission will be SpaceX’s 11th in 2020 alone and 13th overall. If things go according to plan, it could leave SpaceX’s nascent constellation just two or so months away from the beginning of the first public beta tests of Starlink internet service.
Meanwhile, Falcon 9 booster B1058 will be attempting its third launch less than four months after its flight debut, an unprecedented cadence of reuse for SpaceX. Aside from likely ensuring that B1058 becomes the proud holder of SpaceX’s first and second place records for booster turnaround (time between launches), the mission also continues an unexpected trend: the near-extinction of Falcon 9 static fire tests.
SpaceX’s first successful Falcon booster landing happened in December 2015, just a few months shy of five years ago. In March 2017, two years later, SpaceX reused a Falcon 9 booster on an orbital-class launch for the first time in history. Some 21 months after that historic milestone, SpaceX launched the same Falcon 9 booster for the third time, kicking off a relentless series of reusability firsts that continue to be made to this day.
Now, SpaceX says it’s about to launch the same Falcon 9 payload fairing half for the third time in a significant and unexpected first for fairing reuse. Constructed primarily out of a carbon fiber-aluminum honeycomb composite material, Falcon fairings are dramatically more fragile – and reaches much higher altitudes and velocities – than the boosters SpaceX has cut its teeth on recovering and reusing.
Compared to booster reuse, it’s quite the achievement. SpaceX first managed to launch the same Falcon 9 booster three times in December 2018, ~33 months after the first booster reuse. Measured from SpaceX’s first fairing reuse, completed in November 2019 as part of the first Starlink v1.0 launch (Starlink-1), the company will have managed to cross the three-flight fairing reuse barrier less than 11 months later – a full three times faster than SpaceX’s booster reuse program took to achieve the same milestone.
Additionally, prior to SpaceX’s September 16th reveal, it was purely up to speculation whether the company would be able to reuse Falcon fairing halves more than once, particularly when a given fairing half is only fished out of the ocean. If successful, Starlink-12 will prove that Falcon fairing halves can be reused at least three times regardless of whether SpaceX was/is able to catch said halve in a recovery ship’s net.
No more static fires?
Meanwhile, SpaceX appears to be turning a major corner on Falcon 9 launch operations. Of all 93 Falcon 9 launches since the rocket’s June 2010 debut, every single one has been preceded by a combined wet dress rehearsal (WDR) and static fire test a few days or weeks prior to liftoff. Effectively simulating a launch 1:1 up to the exact moment before liftoff, SpaceX has used static fires to verify vehicle health and firewall minor quality assurance lapses for as long as it’s been launching rockets.
In a major operational change that has almost flown under the radar, SpaceX appears to have killed the practice of universal prelaunch static fires beginning with Starlink-8 in June 2020. Including Starlink-8, of the seven launches SpaceX has completed in the last three months, just three (GPS III SV03, Starlink-9, and Starlink-10) included Falcon 9 static fire tests prior to liftoff. A step further, two of the four static fire-free launches were for major commercial missions – not retiring risk on SpaceX’s own Starlink launches, in other words.
As of today, Falcon 9 has completed 65 successful launches since the last catastrophic vehicle failure (Amos-6, September 2016) and 74 consecutively-successful launches if Amos-6 (which never lifted off) is excluded. As of 2020, it’s the most reliable US launch vehicle currently in operation, surpassing ULA’s Atlas V several months ago. In fewer words, it’s not actually surprising (in retrospect) that SpaceX has begun to relax its position on static fires – especially considering that there isn’t another launch provider on Earth that static fires rockets before every launch.
More likely than not, SpaceX will continue to static fire Falcon 9 and Heavy boosters at the launch pad before their flight debuts and upon customer request. If launch or post-flight inspection data offer reason(s) for concern, SpaceX may still choose to static fire boosters out of caution. Additionally, SpaceX shows no signs of ending the practice of performing full booster static fires in McGregor, Texas as part of acceptance testing, still leaving it a step beyond traditional rocket manufacturers, which only static fire individual engines.
Regardless, SpaceX’s 13th Starlink launch will be streamed live as usual, with coverage beginning around 15 minutes prior to liftoff.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
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.
A new report claims that Apple is in the process of developing what would be the missing link for Tesla to get CarPlay.
Apple and Tesla have been reportedly working together for some time to give Tesla owners the opportunity to utilize CarPlay within their vehicles. While many owners are more than happy with Tesla’s in-house UI, which is seamless, effective, and smooth, some still want CarPlay, which does have its advantages.
A report from 9to5Mac now states that a new CarPlay technology that was highlighted during the Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC) would potentially be the bridge between Tesla and Apple. With the addition of a feature known as “Route Sharing,” which gives a navigation app the ability to share routing data with the vehicle, Tesla would be able to launch CarPlay in its vehicles, the report states.
CarPlay has not been a priority for Tesla because it has done extremely well with its in-house UI, but some drivers are just used to it. Additionally, it could improve Tesla’s subpar Navigation or offer improved app capabilities, especially with iMessage.
Route Sharing is an intended addition to CarPlay’s iteration in iOS 26.4, which was released in March:
The addition of CarPlay would undoubtedly be welcome, but at the same time, it seems like Tesla realizes it is not of the utmost priority. There are so many things that Tesla is working on currently within its own vehicles, especially attempting to solve self-driving.
Back in February, Bloomberg had reported that Tesla was still working on bringing CarPlay to its vehicles, but it had not due to app compatibility issues and incredibly low adoption rates of iOS 26.
This bottleneck could buy Tesla the proper amount of time to develop CarPlay for its vehicles. It would be a welcome addition, and could be brought on with either the Summer or Fall 2026 Software Updates.
Tesla’s Navigation Nightmare: Why the easiest part of FSD might be the hardest
Tesla Cybertruck driver gets pickup seized for ‘legitimate concerns’ in UK
