News
SpaceX seeks approval for Starlink internet tests on high-performance govt. planes
According to updated regulatory documents and recent Aviation Week interviews with the US Air Force Research Laboratory, it can be all but guaranteed that the USAF has begun working with SpaceX to test the feasibility of using the company’s planned Starlink satellite internet constellation for military communications purposes.
In early August, SpaceX updated regulatory documents required by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for the company to be permitted to experimental test its two prototype Starlink internet satellites, named Tintin A and B. Launched roughly six months ago as a copassenger on one of SpaceX’s own Falcon 9 rockets, the satellite duo has been quietly performing a broad range of tests on orbit, particularly focused on general satellite operations, orbital maneuvering with SpaceX’s own custom-built electric propulsion, and – most importantly – the experimental satellites’ cutting-edge communications capabilities.
The orbit histories of @SpaceX's Tintin A/B Starlink prototype satellites, launched in February! Some thoroughly intriguing differences in behavior over the six months they've spent on-orbit. Data and visualizations generated by the lovely https://t.co/xKOdbP89tz. pic.twitter.com/a8CfQaZJep
— Eric Ralph (@13ericralph31) August 9, 2018
Per a public summary of the application update, SpaceX is awaiting FCC permission to begin a new series of tests of its prototype satellite internet network, this time highlighting an intriguing interest in applying Starlink connectivity to moving aircraft in order to provide them an exceptionally flexible and powerful suite of communications capabilities.
“SpaceX seeks to modify its experimental authorization to allow testing of two different antennas, both of which will operate on the ground and one of which will also operate from a moving aircraft.”
In those same documents, the company states that it is “working with a manufacturer of conformal antennas for tactical aircraft” to design and build “a custom installation kit consisting of mechanical plates for the low-profile antennas and fairings reducing wind drag”, seemingly indicating that SpaceX itself intends to supply the phased array antennae itself. Normally, this sort of testing would be fairly mundane and expected for any global satellite network, as one of the largest markets for satellite internet connectivity happens to be commercial aviation, particularly airlines and passenger entertainment.
-
- SpaceX’s first Starlink prototypes launched in late February aboard a flight-proven Falcon 9 booster. (Pauline Acalin)
-
- (SpaceX)
-
- One of the first two prototype Starlink satellites separates from Falcon 9’s upper stage in February 2018. (SpaceX)
However, the plot thickens beyond that extent thanks to a few select phrases. Most tellingly, the company writes that it “will perform a series of tests with the integrated airborne prototype terminal … varying motion for representative roll and pitch rates of a high-performance aircraft“, later also describing the program the update as a request for permission for “additional test activities undertaken with the federal government.”
It just so happens that the US Air Force’s Research Laboratory (AFRL) spoke with Aviation Week earlier this year (just weeks after SpaceX’s first prototype satellites had launched, in fact) about a nascent program exploring the potential utility of a spate of commercial Low Earth Orbit satellite internet constellations proposed for launch in recent years.
“To explore the art of the possible, AFRL is planning to contract with at least one commercial internet provider for a set of antennas that can be mounted onto Air Force test aircraft, Beal says. The team will then fly the aircraft … directly under the associated satellites and establish a communications path.” – Lara Seligman/AviationWeek
As of publishing then (March 2018) and now, SpaceX is the only company in the world to have launched a pair of functional demonstration satellites as a part of its proposed megaconstellation, meaning that it’s the only company that has a (technically) operational network with which they can test inter-satellite connectivity, connection hand-offs between different satellites, and multi-satellite operations.
While it’s currently unclear how that series of tests transpired and if they were or are officially connected to the AFRL’s own program, the briefest thought of the USAF (and thus the Department of Defence) as a prospective anchor customer for SpaceX’s Starlink constellation is extraordinarily exciting, especially given the apparent difficulties and costs associated with actually deploying even the first wave (~900 satellites) of such a massive constellation (~4500 satellites total).
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
