News
High winds scrub SpaceX Starship SN9’s Monday launch attempt
Update (2:30 pm CST): SpaceX appears to have called off Monday’s Starship SN9 launch attempt due (primarily) to high winds along the flight corridor. Additional opportunities are available from 8 am to 6 pm CST (UTC-6) on Tuesday (Jan 26) and Wednesday (Jan 27).
Technically, lacking any official confirmation, there’s still a chance of a launch attempt or additional ground testing happening today but either possibility is extremely unlikely at this point.
Update: SpaceX has completed what is known as a Flight Readiness Review (FRR) and determined that Starship prototype SN9 is ready to attempt its first high-altitude launch as early as today.
All necessary aviation and maritime notices and restrictions are in place and the company has begun the process of closing a public highway and clearing the launch site of employees. Today’s (Jan 25) launch window lasts from noon to 6 pm CST (UTC-6) and Starship SN9 could likely be made ready to launch anytime after 2pm be ready to fly as early as 4 pm CST according to a loudspeaker announcement at the launch pad. Stay tuned for updates and, hopefully, an official SpaceX webcast.
All signs point to SpaceX’s second high-altitude Starship prototype preparing for a 12.5-kilometer (~40,000 ft) as early as Monday, January 25th in a bid to rectify a last-second bug that caused its predecessor to explode last month.
Known as Starship serial number 8 (SN8), the SpaceX-built prototype was the first to have its basic airframe (tank and nose sections) fully integrated, as well as the first Starship to attempt to break the 150m (~500 ft) ceiling set by Starhopper, SN5, and SN6. Break the ceiling SN8 most certainly did, performing a spectacularly successful 12.5 km launch that aced almost every single goal SpaceX had hoped to complete. Keyword almost.
After an impressive 280 seconds of uninterrupted operation of its Raptors, Starship SN8 shut down the last of those three engines, flipped onto its belly, and successful freefell ~12 kilometers back to Earth. The rocket then carried that success even further, reigniting two Raptors, performing a dramatic 120-degree flip, orienting itself vertically, and beginning to slow down for a soft landing.
Only then did Starship SN8’s performance deviate from virtual perfection. At T+6:38, a few seconds after beginning its crucial landing burn, one of Starship’s active Raptors shut down and the other effectively stopped generating thrust. The reason, CEO Elon Musk would later explain, was low head pressure in a smaller tank (‘header tank’) dedicated to supplying fuel during Starship’s wild flip and landing maneuver. It was never confirmed if the Raptor engine shutdown observed milliseconds prior to the other engine losing thrust was intentional.
Cause aside, the end result was unsurprising: without enough thrust to slow down, Starship SN8 accurately impacted the concrete landing zone but did so at high speed – likely around 50-60 m/s (100-150 mph). Given that Starhopper and Starships SN5 and SN6 had already successfully proven Starship’s ability to gently land from 150 meters on a single Raptor engine and that, prior to SN8, Starship’s bizarre belly-flop descent and 90-degree flip had been almost entirely theoretical, SpaceX deemed the launch a spectacular success.
Nothing better exemplifies that than the fact that a little over a month later, SpaceX quite literally began scrapping the most complex, completed section of a future Starship prototype (SN12) before it ever reached the assembly phase. Instead, SpaceX appears to be more focused than ever on a mysterious series of “major” upgrades Musk has said will debut on Starship SN15. Nearly all SN15 subsections have been completed and are simply waiting to be joined together, while parts of SN16 and SN17 are also starting to pile up in staging areas.
Starship SN10 is practically ready to move to the launch pad to prepare for flight as soon as SpaceX chooses to do so and Starship SN11 is likely no more than a week or two of work away from reaching same level of readiness.
Ultimately, despite a long and delay-ridden test campaign, Starship SN9 finally completed what looked like a full-duration static fire of all three of its Raptor engines – the rocket’s sixth static fire overall. On Saturday, January 23rd, SpaceXers installed SN9’s flight termination system (FTS) – a system of explosives designed to destroy Starship if it flies too far off course. For Starship, FTS installation all but guarantees that a launch attempt is a matter of days away. Fresh county roadblocks, Temporary Flight Restrictions (TFRs) granted by the FAA, and Coast Guard a safety notice further imply that SN9 will attempt to launch as early as Monday morning, January 25th, with backup opportunities on Tuesday and Wednesday.
With any luck, like SN8’s high-altitude debut, SpaceX hopefully livestream Starship SN9’s own attempt at the same feat. Stay tuned for more details as they come.
Tesla Cybercab stands to gain from new rules that the Trump Administration is aiming to enforce on autonomous vehicles. On Thursday, NHTSA, under the Trump Administration’s U.S. Department of Transportation, commenced rulemaking on the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS).
This effort aims to eliminate the mandate for manual brake pedals in vehicles that are designed to be driven exclusively by automated driving systems. This would impact the Tesla Cybercab, which the company has stated would operate without a steering wheel or pedals.
Tesla Cybercab launch is imminent after latest sighting at Giga Texas
The Trump Administration is looking to revise FMVSS No. 135, which requires standard braking systems on light-duty vehicles.
Currently, the regulation requires light-duty cars to use traditional manual braking systems that allow operators to slow the vehicle. With the advent of self-driving in the U.S., these regulations need updating, and these are the changes that could come to FMVSS No. 135:
- Removes requirements for hand- or foot-operated brake controls for vehicles designed never to be operated by a human. Existing rules still apply to AVs that retain manual controls.
- All subject vehicles must still meet the same stopping distance performance criteria via alternative testing procedures.
- While this update ensures AVs can physically stop when commanded, NHTSA is separately developing safety performance requirements for AVs in real-world driving scenarios.
- NHTSA will continue to use its broad defect enforcement authority to investigate unsafe ADS behavior and oversee recalls.
As autonomy becomes a greater part of passenger travel, these types of rule adjustments will be more than reasonable. It will give manufacturers the ability to self-certify their vehicles and avoid any red tape that could ultimately delay the deployment of these vehicles.
Administrators are also incredibly excited about the opportunity to play a role in the advancement of self-driving vehicles.
“We are at the cusp of the greatest technological revolution in vehicle technology since the innovation of the Model T,” NHTSA Administrator Jonathan Morrison said. “If we want America to lead the way, we have to reimagine our regulatory framework. That’s why under Secretary Sean Duffy’s AV Framework, NHTSA is tearing down pointless barriers to innovative designs while strengthening the fundamental safety requirements that matter and holding AV developers accountable for safe performance.”
The Cybercab entered mass production at Gigafactory Texas in April. Tesla ultimately plans to push the vehicle into its Robotaxi fleet, potentially when frameworks like these are established.
Tesla plans to boost production at its Gigafactory Berlin plant in Germany following a sharp rebound in sales and demand in Europe after a softer 2025.
The plans put Tesla in a better position to compete with strengthening companies in Europe and potentially other markets; demand indicators show Tesla is much better off than in 2025.
Last year was a tough year for Tesla in terms of overall demand in Europe. The company produced over 200,000 vehicles at the German plant last year, a soft figure compared to the 375,000 vehicles Tesla lists as its current capacity at the factory.
🚨 Tesla said this morning it will ramp up production at Gigafactory Berlin to a volume of 7,500 vehicles per week.
This is a 20 percent boost in production. Tesla will hire 1,000 new employees to help with the increase.$TSLA pic.twitter.com/kravKfRO5n
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 25, 2026
Tesla’s overall European sales dropped significantly last year due to a variety of factors. However, sales are rebounding, and demand is strong once again, and only getting stronger. Tesla is now planning to bump production of Model Y vehicles at Giga Berlin upward by about 20 percent. It will also bring 1,000 new jobs to the plant.
Tesla confirmed the details of its planned production expansion in Germany this morning. It is a strategy to keep up with strengthening demand.
In Q1, Tesla saw a record 61,000 vehicles produced at Giga Berlin. European registrations rebounded sharply, with Model Y seeing 117 percent increases in March 2026 compared to last year. Germany alone saw stark increases, with a quadrupling in registrations to 9,252 units.
This trend continued in other key European markets, including France, Denmark and Sweden. Tesla registrations were up over 46 percent in some of these markets, and Model Y continued its trend as a top BEV in the market.
Demand has been recovering strongly in 2026, giving Tesla a reason to expand production efforts at the factory. These increases signal management’s confidence in sustained or growing European pull for Berlin-built vehicles.
Tesla is being sued by the family of the woman who was killed in a Texas crash involving a Model 3. The driver, who is also being sued, claimed the vehicle was operating on Autopilot mode, but Tesla executives have come out challenging that claim, stating that the driver of the vehicle overrode the system.
The lawsuit was filed by 76-year-old Martha Avila’s daughter and her husband, who allege a “design defect” involving a Tesla and a failure to warn. The suit alleges negligence against Tesla and the driver, Michael Butler.
Butler “stated he was operating with an automated driving assistance system engaged at the time of the crash,” the Harris County Sheriff’s Office said in a statement. He showed no signs of intoxication and was cooperative, the Sheriff’s Office said, according to NBC News.
Just after reports of the crash and numerous headlines that immediately blamed Tesla’s Autopilot suite, both Tesla CEO Elon Musk and Head of AI Ashok Elluswamy challenged that. Musk said the crash made “no sense” given that Tesla Autopilot and Full Self-Driving do not travel at the speeds the door cameras captured the car traveling at, which Tesla says was 73 MPH.
Tesla finally clarifies fatal Texas crash, confirms driver manually overrode acceleration
Elluswamy also revealed that Tesla data showed Butler overrode the system by pressing the accelerator to 100%, and that the pedal was compressed fully even after the car had crashed. Tesla has not released this data to the public, likely because it is communicating with agencies like the NHTSA on an investigation.
The suit uses a Washington Post analysis of government data that “identified at least 17 fatal incidents linked to Tesla Autopilot.”
This is far from the first time an accident has been blamed on Autopilot. A fatal crash in Texas was blamed on Autopilot several years ago, but when Tesla released data to the NTSB, which was investigating the crash, Autopilot was not available where the crash occurred, and Autosteer was never enabled, meaning the car was manually controlled at the time of the accident.
“Application of the accelerator pedal was found to be as high as 98.8 percent,” the NTSB said in their findings. The highest recorded speed in the five seconds leading up to the impact was 67 miles per hour. The area where the crash occurred is residential, and Texas State laws… pic.twitter.com/XGD97NHVZ2
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) March 18, 2026
More information on the accident will be released as Tesla works with agencies to find the cause of the crash. From personal experience, it is hard to imagine Tesla Autopilot or FSD operating in this manner. It drives sometimes too cautiously in residential areas in parking lots, at least in my experience. Speeding happens, but at this rate in this type of area, it is hard to believe.
We look forward to more details being released with time.
Tesla Cybercab stands to gain from new Trump autonomy rules
Tesla plans production boost at Giga Berlin following rebound in Europe
