News
SpaceX Starship eyes Tuesday launch after FAA communication breakdown causes delays
Two new sourced reports suggest that SpaceX’s fast-moving approach to Starship development and a shocking level of naivety and ineptitude on behalf of the FAA’s regulatory responsibilities combined to delay the latest Starship test flight.
As previously discussed on Teslarati, SpaceX was clearly and publicly targeting a Starship launch as early as 12pm to 5pm on Monday, March 29th after unknown issues delayed a Friday attempt. Those plans were writ large on SpaceX’s own website and via CEO Elon Musk’s tweets a full three days before launch and confirmed by road closures, notices to mariners, and the FAA’s own flight restrictions and advisories 24-48 hours prior. Around 11am CDT Monday, Musk revealed that SpaceX had been forced to call off the day’s launch attempt because an FAA-required inspector was “unable to reach” Boca Chica in time.
Now, per reports separately corroborated by The Verge reporter Joey Roulette and Washington Post reporter Christian Davenport, a clearer picture of what exactly transpired is available.
Roulette first broke the news, offering a better look at a portion of the debacle. Per “a source,” SpaceX had apparently told the FAA inspector – who had been waiting all week for Starship SN11’s launch debut – that plans for a Monday recycle had been canceled. The inspector then flew home to Florida. However, as things often do and have, the situation rapidly changed and SpaceX suddenly found itself in a position to launch on Monday.
According to the apparent FAA-side source, SpaceX dropped that change of plans on the agency’s lap late on Sunday, leading the inspector to “[scramble]” onto a Monday flight that was somehow too late to arrive before the 5pm CDT end of Starship’s test window. In a statement, the FAA chided SpaceX, stating that the company “must provide adequate notice of its launch schedule to allow for a safety inspector to travel to Boca Chica.”
Under that description of events, it would be hard not to find SpaceX clearly in the wrong. Mere hours of notice – and only offered late on Sunday evening – would make it difficult for anyone to abruptly arrange a 1300-mile, multi-stop flight. At the same time, though, someone capable of singlehandedly scrubbing an entire rocket launch attempt on a whim (or an accident) is obviously not just “anyone” and a functional regulatory apparatus probably wouldn’t leave the entirety of that substantial responsibility up to a single employee.
As it so happened, Roulette’s source only offer part of the picture. According to Christian Davenport and his sources, SpaceX (or someone) did tell the FAA inspector that it was safe to head home on Friday because the company was struggling to secure road closures from Cameron County for a Monday launch attempt. Apparently, the issue was so extreme that SpaceX wasn’t sure if a launch on any day of the next week would be possible.
However, sometime early on Sunday morning, SpaceX secured a road closure for a Monday Starship launch attempt. According to Davenport, SpaceX emailed the FAA inspector but he “didn’t see the email,” which presumably served as a notice of plans for a Starship launch attempt. Logically, SpaceX then began attempting to call the FAA (inspector?) but didn’t get an answer or call back until “late Sunday night.”
Via Cameron County’s explicitly public road closure announcement website, Monday’s road closure was granted no later than 11am CDT. Assuming SpaceX emailed the FAA inspector around then, that email effectively served as a notice of launch plans more than 24 hours before the window was scheduled to open. If SpaceX didn’t somehow forget to email until hours later, Davenport’s description implies that it took SpaceX hours of constant phone calls before the FAA finally responded.
If that series of events is accurate, as it seems to be, it’s a searing indictment of systematic ineptitude and laziness on behalf of the FAA. Having changed SpaceX’s Starship launch license to necessitate the presence of an FAA inspector mere weeks ago, thus giving a single person the power to scrub an entire launch attempt, the regulatory agency appears to have entrusted the entirety of that responsibility to a single “inspector.” Knowing full well that SpaceX works continuously with multiple shifts after almost two years of managing Starhopper and Starship tests, hops, and launches, the FAA then failed to ensure that some kind of communications infrastructure was in place to keep SpaceX appraised about the availability of a single inspector it now fully hinged on for all future Starship launches.
If, as the phrasing in both reports suggests, the FAA allotted a single government inspector to preside over all future Starship launches, that alone would bely a ridiculous level of ineptitude and naivete (or ignorance). To then trust that single person with nearly all of the responsibility of maintaining contact with SpaceX, day and night, would be akin to the FAA consciously guaranteeing that a disruptive breakdown in communications like this one would happen.
All told, SpaceX likely also needs to do some recalibration to better mesh and coexist with the FAA’s glacial reaction time and pace of work. However, the FAA is not going to be winning any favors if it continues to manage SpaceX’s Starship licensing in a manner as inept and cavalier as it has been. Far more importantly, if the FAA – one of the largest, best-funded regulatory bodies responsible for ensuring the safety of some of the most complex systems and vehicles on Earth – is unable to perform tasks as rudimentary as scheduling and contingency planning, it’s difficult to imagine how that same office could be trusted to regulate – and make safer – systems as extraordinarily complex as launch vehicles.
With any luck, the FAA will prove that the last four months have been minor bumps in the road to reliably and professionally licensing and regulating SpaceX’s Starship launch vehicle. However, after two separate demonstrations of systematic mismanagement over a mere four Starship launch attempts, it’s becoming harder and harder to soundly argue that the FAA still deserves the benefit of the doubt.
Assuming the FAA inspector is on schedule, Starship SN11’s next launch attempt is now scheduled between 7am and 3pm CDT (UTC-5) on Tuesday, March 30th.
News
Tesla ships out update that brings massive change to two big features
“This change only updates the name of certain features and text in your vehicle,” the company wrote in Release Notes for the update, “and does not change the way your features behave.”
Tesla has shipped out an update for its vehicles that was caused specifically by a California lawsuit that threatened the company’s ability to sell cars because of how it named its driver assistance suite.
Tesla shipped out Software Update 2026.2.9 starting last week; we received it already, and it only brings a few minor changes, mostly related to how things are referenced.
“This change only updates the name of certain features and text in your vehicle,” the company wrote in Release Notes for the update, “and does not change the way your features behave.”
The following changes came to Tesla vehicles in the update:
- Navigate on Autopilot has now been renamed to Navigate on Autosteer
- FSD Computer has been renamed to AI Computer
Tesla faced a 30-day sales suspension in California after the state’s Department of Motor Vehicles stated the company had to come into compliance regarding the marketing of its automated driving features.
The agency confirmed on February 18 that it had taken a “corrective action” to resolve the issue. That corrective action was renaming certain parts of its ADAS.
Tesla discontinued its standalone Autopilot offering in January and ramped up the marketing of Full Self-Driving Supervised. Tesla had said on X that the issue with naming “was a ‘consumer protection’ order about the use of the term ‘Autopilot’ in a case where not one single customer came forward to say there’s a problem.”
This was a “consumer protection” order about the use of the term “Autopilot” in a case where not one single customer came forward to say there’s a problem.
Sales in California will continue uninterrupted.
— Tesla North America (@tesla_na) December 17, 2025
It is now compliant with the wishes of the California DMV, and we’re all dealing with it now.
This was the first primary dispute over the terminology of Full Self-Driving, but it has undergone some scrutiny at the federal level, as some government officials have claimed the suite has “deceptive” names. Previous Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg was one of those federal-level employees who had an issue with the names “Autopilot” and “Full Self-Driving.”
Tesla sued the California DMV over the ruling last week.
News
Tesla workers push back against Giga Berlin unionization
“IG Metall did not succeed in Giga Berlin‘s works council election earlier today. The union share was reduced from nearly 40% in 2024 to 31% in 2026! This is a clear message by the Giga Berlin team towards an independent co-determination! The list called Giga United, led by the current chairwoman, Michaela Schmitz, received the most votes with more than 40%! Good news for Giga Berlin!”
Tesla workers pushed back against unionization efforts at Gigafactory Berlin, and over the past few years, there has been a dramatic decrease in interest to unionize at the German plant.
Gigafactory Berlin Plant Manager André Thierig announced on Wednesday that IG Metall, the European union group, saw its share reduce from 40 to 31 percent in 2026 as employees eligible to vote on the issue. Instead, the Giga Berlin team, known as Giga United, received the most votes with more than 40 percent.
BREAKING! 🚨
IG Metall did not succeed in Giga Berlin‘s works council election earlier today. The union share was reduced from nearly 40% in 2024 to 31% in 2026!
This is a clear message by theGiga Berlin team towards an independent co-determination!
The list called Giga…
— André Thierig (@AndrThie) March 4, 2026
Thierig gave specific details in a post on X:
“IG Metall did not succeed in Giga Berlin‘s works council election earlier today. The union share was reduced from nearly 40% in 2024 to 31% in 2026! This is a clear message by the Giga Berlin team towards an independent co-determination! The list called Giga United, led by the current chairwoman, Michaela Schmitz, received the most votes with more than 40%! Good news for Giga Berlin!”
There were over 10,700 total employees who were eligible to vote, with 87 percent of them turning out to cast what they wanted. There were three key outcomes: Giga United, IG Metall, and other notable groups, with the most popular being the Polish Initiative.
The 37-seat council remains dominated by non-unionized representatives, preserving Giga Berlin as Germany’s only major auto plant without a collective bargaining agreement.
Thierig and Tesla framed the outcome as employee support for an “independent, flexible, and unbureaucratic” future, enabling acceleration on projects like potential expansions or new models. IG Metall expressed disappointment, accusing management of intimidation tactics and an “unfair” campaign.
The first election of this nature happened back in 2022. In 2024, IG Metall emerged as the largest single faction with 39.4 percent, but non-union lists coalesced for a majority.
But this year was different. There was some extra tension at Giga Berlin this year, as just two weeks ago, an IG Metall rep was accused by Tesla of secretly recording a council meeting. The group countersued for defamation.
Tesla Giga Berlin plant manager faces defamation probe after IG Metall union complaint
This result from the 2026 vote reinforced Tesla’s model of direct employee-management alignment over traditional German union structures, amid ongoing debates about working conditions. IG Metall views it as a setback but continues advocacy. Tesla sees it as validation of its approach in a competitive EV market.
This outcome may influence future labor dynamics at Giga Berlin, including any revival of expansion plans or product lines, which Musk has talked about recently.
News
SpaceX President Gwynne Shotwell details xAI power pledge at White House event
The commitment was announced during an event with United States President Donald Trump.
SpaceX President Gwynne Shotwell stated that xAI will develop 1.2 gigawatts of power at its Memphis-area AI supercomputer site as part of the White House’s new “Ratepayer Protection Pledge.”
The commitment was announced during an event with United States President Donald Trump.
During the White House event, Shotwell stated that xAI’s AI data center near Memphis would include a major energy installation designed to support the facility’s power needs.
“As you know, xAI builds huge supercomputers and data centers and we build them fast. Currently, we’re building one on the Tennessee-Mississippi state line. As part of today’s commitment, we will take extensive additional steps to continue to reduce the costs of electricity for our neighbors…
“xAI will therefore commit to develop 1.2 GW of power as our supercomputer’s primary power source. That will be for every additional data center as well. We will expand what is already the largest global Megapack power installation in the world,” Shotwell said.
She added that the system would provide significant backup power capacity.
“The installation will provide enough backup power to power the city of Memphis, and more than sufficient energy to power the town of Southaven, Mississippi where the data center resides. We will build new substations and invest in electrical infrastructure to provide stability to the area’s grid.”
Shotwell also noted that xAI will be supporting the area’s water supply as well.
“We haven’t talked about it yet, but this is actually quite important. We will build state-of-the-art water recycling plants that will protect approximately 4.7 billion gallons of water from the Memphis aquifer each year. And we will employ thousands of American workers from around the city of Memphis on both sides of the TN-MS border,” she noted.
The Ratepayer Protection Pledge was introduced as part of the federal government’s effort to address concerns about rising electricity costs tied to large AI data centers, as noted in an Insider report. Under the agreement, companies developing major AI infrastructure projects committed to covering their own power generation needs and avoiding additional costs for local ratepayers.
Tesla ships out update that brings massive change to two big features
Tesla workers push back against Giga Berlin unionization
