News
SpaceX acquires new photos of Starship landing sites with Mars-orbiting NASA satellite
SpaceX has reaffirmed its prioritization of the Arcadia Planitia – a low Martian plain – and adjacent areas as some of the most promising locations for early Starship landings, tasking a NASA satellite to gather updated photos of six potential landing sites.
First discovered and analyzed by author Robert Zimmerman on August 28th, SpaceX requested the landing site prospecting images from the University of Arizona, tasked with operating NASA’s JPL-built HiRISE spacecraft. Back before Red Dragon’s 2017 cancellation, SpaceX began the process of landing site analysis, a canvassing that ultimately settled on four possible locations, of which the Arcadia Planitia was viewed as most promising.
After at least 2.5 years of research, SpaceX thus appears to be confidently settling on one particular region of Mars for its first Starship landing(s) on the Red Planet. Located in Mars’ mid-northern latitudes, Arcadia Planitia – like its Latin namesake suggests – is a region of plains, specifically low plains per International Astronomical Union (IAU) standards. It has been described by NASA as “one of the few regions [of Mars] where abundant shallow ice is present at relatively low latitude”, desirable for an array of reasons.
Arcadia Planitia takes up much of the left-hand side of this spectacular 2017 panorama, stitched together from Mars Express images by Justin Cowart. On the scale of Martian spectacle, one could be forgiven for perceiving Arcadia as boring. In fact, that’s one of the main reasons SpaceX is interested in it – just as Arcadia looks rather featureless from orbit, it is relatively bereft of the boulder fields common in many other regions of Mars, translating into much less obstacle avoidance during landing.
Additionally, Arcadia Planitia is indeed a region of low plains – one of the lowest regions (relative to the mean surface level) on Mars. This translates into much higher atmospheric pressure (i.e. a thicker atmosphere), insulating the region from some of the extremes of Martian weather, as does its relative adjacency to the planet’s equator. Simultaneously, this wealth of atmosphere enables more efficient spacecraft landings. Per a September 2018 update, Starship is set to rely heavily on a series of atmospheric maneuvers to slow down, a strategy that significantly cuts the amount of propellant the spacecraft must use to land softly on Mars (and Earth!).
To tally: Arcadia Planitia offers (somewhat) warmer summers and winters due to its latitude, augmented by a low relative altitude that insulates the region from weather extremes and enables more efficient propulsive spacecraft landings.
However, perhaps more important than any of the above features is the fact that Arcadia Planitia is host to a vast wealth of water ice resources, ranging from frozen aquifers to glaciers in the adjacent Erebus Montes mountains. Of central importance to SpaceX’s strategy of affordably colonizing and exploring Mars is the decision to produce return propellant – needed for Starships to return to Earth – on Mars, known as in-situ resource utilization (ISRU). Starship’s use of methane and oxygen is almost entirely a result of this – methane is far easier to work with than hydrogen and can also be easily produced from water, as can oxygen.
The cleaner and more accessible the Martian water ice is, the easier it will be for SpaceX robots or astronauts to set up a propellant plant on Mars. Additionally, clean water is extremely expensive to transport in space, and a near-infinite supply of ice-derived water would be extremely useful for all sorts of human outpost needs.
SpaceX CEO Elon Musk believes that the company could be ready for Starship’s first uncrewed Mars launch as early as 2020 or 2022 Hohmann transfer opportunities, windows that permit a uniquely efficient journey from Earth to Mars.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
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
