News
SpaceX’s backup Dragon launch pad on track for 2023 debut
SpaceX has begun building a backup launch pad for its Cargo and Crew Dragon spacecraft and says the facility could be ready for use as early as fall 2023.
Reuters first revealed those plans in June 2022. They arose because NASA reportedly told SpaceX it was worried that the company’s first Florida Starship launch site – colocated at the only pad currently able to launch SpaceX Dragon spacecraft – could add too much risk. In September 2022, NASA and SpaceX acknowledged plans to modify LC-40 for Dragon launches and indicated that both parties had decided to proceed.
Four months later, SpaceX and NASA have provided another press conference update. Officials confirmed that construction is already partially underway and reported that LC-40 could be ready to support its first Dragon launch less than a year from now.
The update that's rolling out to the fleet makes full use of the front and rear steering travel to minimize turning circle. In this case a reduction of 1.6 feet just over the air— Wes (@wmorrill3) April 16, 2024
Because Boeing’s comparable Starliner capsule is years behind schedule and still unqualified to launch humans, NASA has relied almost exclusively on SpaceX’s Crew Dragon to launch its astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS) since 2020. Starliner should be ready to supplement Crew Dragon’s operational astronaut launches by the end of 2023 or early 2024, alleviating some of that pressure.
NASA, however, chose to develop two spacecraft to guarantee that one spacecraft would likely be available if the other was grounded for any reason. Adding the possibility that a giant, new, experimental rocket (Starship) could potentially halt all SpaceX Dragon launches in one fell swoop was apparently one bridge too many for the agency.

SpaceX’s answer to the problem was about as simple, elegant, and cheap as possible. The company has two operational Falcon launch pads in Florida, and it proposed to modify the second pad. SpaceX’s Cape Canaveral Space Force Station (CCSFS) LC-40 pad is located on a secure military base and has an even longer history of successful Falcon 9 launches than Pad 39A. It also appears that its layout will allow SpaceX to add a Dragon access tower without requiring major redesigns or months of downtime.
LC-40 is SpaceX’s most productive launch pad by far, and the company intends to launch up to 100 times in 2023. It’s thus crucial that the pad remains as active as possible as it’s modified – a major challenge. A combination of luck and the fact that the launch pad is already operational is the only reason that’s possible.
Modifying SpaceX’s busiest pad
In theory, SpaceX needs to do relatively little to enable Dragon launches out of LC-40. Dragon spacecraft are processed for flight at a separate facility and only head to the pad once they’re ready to be attached to a Falcon 9 rocket. The biggest modification LC-40 needs is a launch tower, but SpaceX ironically has experience building giant towers in sections – and offsite – through Starship.
LC-40’s Dragon access tower requires far less complex plumbing and should be smaller and easier to prefabricate and assemble. Regulatory documents indicate that the new tower will stand 81 meters (265 feet) tall – almost a third shorter than the 110-meter-tall tower SpaceX modified at Pad 39A for the same purpose. LC-40 will also need a swinging access arm to connect the tower to Dragon’s hatch. That arm can also be constructed offsite, further reducing the amount of downtime required.

The most disruptive modifications may involve LC-40’s transporter/erector (T/E) device, which rolls Falcon 9 out to the pad, raises it vertical, holds it down with giant clamps; and hosts a maze of plumbing that fuels, pressurizes, and powers the rocket. The top of LC-40’s T/E is fitted with a brace designed to support Falcon payload fairings. In comparison, 39A’s T/E was designed with swappable ‘heads’ that allow SpaceX to switch between Dragon and fairing configurations in a matter of days. The top of LC-40’s T/E also appears to be somewhat removable, but SpaceX may still have to halt launches for a few weeks to get the T/E up to spec and modified for Dragon.
SpaceX says that LC-40 will be ready to support its first Dragon launch as early as fall (Q4) 2023. Its first Dragon mission will carry cargo to the ISS, meaning that the tower, arm, and pad will not need to be immediately human-rated. In theory, SpaceX could even launch Cargo Dragon 2 from LC-40 without a tower or arm, as the only purpose of the tower during uncrewed missions is to load volatile cargo at the last possible second. SpaceX could even revert to a practice that dates back to its original Dragon 1 spacecraft and devise a method to late-load cargo while Falcon 9 and Dragon are still horizontal.

The tower and access arm are only essential for Crew Dragon launches, during which astronauts must board the spacecraft a few hours before liftoff. More importantly, the same arm and tower would be used to escape Dragon and Falcon 9 in case of a minor emergency. NASA requires an escape (egress) system to human-rate a launch pad and rocket. SpaceX met that requirement at Pad 39A with a “slidewire basket” system that carries astronauts to a concrete bunker several hundred feet away from the rocket. Before LC-40 can be human-rated, SpaceX will likely need to build the same basket-and-bunker system or come up with a viable alternative.
Once complete, SpaceX will have two pads capable of supporting all Crew and Cargo Dragon launches. With that redundancy in place, NASA should be far more open to regular launches of SpaceX’s next-generation Starship rocket out of Pad 39A. Access to multiple pads will likely be essential for Starship to complete NASA’s Human Landing System (HLS) contracts, which will culminate in the giant rocket sending humans back to the Moon for the first (and second) time in half a century in the mid-to-late-2020s.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk says your Tesla will start to learn your individual preferences
Elon Musk said today on X that Teslas will start to learn your individual preferences. This is something that he seemed to hint toward earlier this month when he said parking was by far the biggest reason drivers intervene with Full Self-Driving.
Musk made the comment in response to notable Tesla influencer Whole Mars, who said that his vehicle will sometimes disobey the settings he has enabled for his car. He responded to the post, stating that “The car will start to remember your specific interventions and match each person’s individual preferences.”
The car will start to remember your specific interventions and match each person’s individual preferences
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 18, 2026
This is something that could be perhaps one of the biggest ways Tesla could minimize or even work closer toward eliminating interventions altogether. While FSD does a lot of things really well, many people intervene a vast majority of the time not due to major or critical safety errors.
Instead, many take over because the car is doing something that they do not like as a preference; it might park in a parking spot that is not preferred by the driver, it might linger too long in the left lane on the highway (a personal favorite), or it could even take a route that the driver does not like.
These all lead to interventions, but they are not triggered by a major safety issue. Instead, it’s just preference.
READ OUR REVIEW OF TESLA’S LATEST FSD VERSION:
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.3.5 Early Impressions: new features and early performance
If Teslas could start to learn the personal preferences of the person who owns them, interventions will truly begin to be less frequent. Some of this is already pretty evident, in my opinion. Teslas use a neural network to learn behaviors and accumulate data to improve performance.
For months now, we’ve tracked FSD’s performance at “Except Right Turn” stop signs, something that is very common in Pennsylvania, but many of our readers located in other parts of the U.S. have never heard of. FSD handles one Except Right Turn stop sign very well, one that I travel past frequently. Others that I do not navigate through as often do not have as confident a performance. It seems like the cars might already be doing this to an extent.
🚨 Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.3 proceeds through an Except Right Turn Stop Sign pic.twitter.com/YemRSlens7
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 8, 2026
That example is also for something that is a street sign and not necessarily a driver preference; however, I still feel it is worth mentioning because it only handles that commonly passed Except Right Turn stop sign with true confidence. Others it still seems to struggle with.
This could be one of Tesla’s big moves toward full autonomy, and it could be a pathway to truly unsupervised driving. Every day, millions of cars on the road travel at a human driver’s personal preferences with no incident. Why can’t autonomous vehicles still cater to a passenger’s preferences while being autonomous? Tesla seems to have the idea that it would be possible.
News
Ron DeSantis calls out media bias in Tesla crash coverage
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has sharply criticized legacy media outlets for what he describes as selective and biased reporting on vehicle accidents involving Tesla. In a recent X post, DeSantis questioned why headlines routinely spotlight the Tesla brand in crash stories, even when human error is the clear cause, while similar incidents with other automakers often receive generic treatment.
A prime example is the June 19, 2026, fatal crash in Katy, Texas. A Tesla Model 3 driven by Michael Butler struck a brick home at high speed, killing 76-year-old Martha Avila inside. Initial reports and headlines prominently featured “Tesla crash” and referenced the driver’s claim that an automated driving-assistance system was engaged.
Many outlets quickly speculated that Full Self-Driving or Autopilot were the cause of the crash, immediately blaming the suites for the accident shortly after it happened.
However, Tesla responded shortly after the accident with vehicle data that showed Butler manually overrode the system by pressing the accelerator to 100 percent, reaching 73 MPH in a residential area, more than double the speed limit. The accelerator remained floored after impact.
Tesla finally clarifies fatal Texas crash, confirms driver manually overrode acceleration
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) later confirmed these findings, and Butler now faces manslaughter charges. His phone searches also included queries like “Tesla FSD too timid,” suggesting he may have intervened aggressively. Despite this, many headlines continued to center Tesla’s technology rather than the driver’s actions.
DeSantis highlighted a Washington Post headline, which was labeled, “Newly released photo shows wreckage of Tesla crash that killed grandmother.”
Do legacy media outlets typically use headlines involving the make of a car in a crash or is that only for Tesla?
It would be one thing if the self-driving malfunctioned but the crash was purely human-induced.
Seems like these outlets want to associate Tesla with crashes as… pic.twitter.com/EmfyeYiuv6
— Ron DeSantis (@RonDeSantis) July 17, 2026
The subheadline noted the driver overrode assistance and floored the accelerator, yet the brand name dominated the framing. He asked whether legacy outlets typically name the make of a car in routine crashes or reserve that treatment for Tesla to push a narrative.
This pattern appears widespread. Crashes involving Ford, Chevrolet, or Toyota vehicles frequently appear as “pickup truck slams into home” or “fatal car crash kills pedestrian” without brand specifics, especially absent new technology angles.
High-profile Ford F-150 or Chevy Silverado incidents tied to large sales volumes often escape brand-callout scrutiny. In contrast, Tesla stories consistently lead with the manufacturer, amplifying perceptions of risk despite data showing strong overall safety performance:
🚨 Why do Tesla Owners get so defensive over the narrative of crashes involving Teslas? https://t.co/aX7ogtjTCR pic.twitter.com/KO4QWaLOKl
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 24, 2026
Tesla’s own 2025 Impact Report indicates vehicles using FSD logged 0.19 major incidents per million miles, roughly eight times fewer than the U.S. average. Models like the Model Y also rank among the safest in IIHS and NHTSA testing for occupant protection. Critics argue disproportionate coverage ignores these statistics and driver behavior factors, such as younger or more aggressive Tesla owners in some studies.
DeSantis frames this as part of a broader political agenda against innovative American companies like Tesla. By consistently naming Tesla while downplaying others, media outlets risk eroding public trust and shaping perceptions detached from the evidence of human error in most cases.
As autonomous technology evolves across the industry, consistent and factual reporting will be essential to separate real safety concerns from narrative-driven coverage.
News
Tesla enters two new markets on two different continents in one week
Tesla entered two new markets this week by advancing its presence in Latvia (Europe) and officially launching operations in Uruguay (South America), marking a rapid dual-continent expansion.
These moves underscore the company’s strategy to tap into emerging EV markets with supportive policies, renewable energy grids, and growing demand for sustainable transport.
Latvia: Strengthening the Baltic Footprint
In Latvia, Tesla has built on its earlier registration of Tesla Latvia SIA in late 2025 with recent steps toward full operations, including job postings for a service center and representation in Riga. This aligns with broader Baltic expansion following Lithuania’s model of pop-up stores and service centers.
Coming to Latvia https://t.co/XNkQQJ2O6a pic.twitter.com/yS9kpcNky1
— Tesla Europe, Middle East & Africa (@teslaeurope) July 17, 2026
EV penetration in Latvia stands at around 7 percent for BEVs in new passenger car registrations. 2025 data showed 1,602 BEVs out of about 22,500 total, or 7.1 percent, with combined plug-ins nearing 19 percent. Growth has been steady but below the European average, supported by government subsidies and infrastructure development. Tesla models like the Model 3 lead local EV registrations.
Vehicles for the Latvian market will likely be sourced from Gigafactory Berlin or Gigafactory Shanghai. Charging infrastructure is robust for the region as well, with over 400- 2,000 public points, with Tesla Superchargers in Riga, Jūrmala, and along Via Baltica routes offering up to 250 kW.
Uruguay: Third South American Country
Tesla teased its Uruguay arrival with “Estamos llegando,” or, “We are arriving,” on social media, followed by an official presentation scheduled for mid-July.
Hola Uruguay 🇺🇾
Nuestros Model 3 y Model Y están cada vez mas cerca! pic.twitter.com/FR41fsA7um
— Tesla Latinoamérica (@Tesla_LatAm) June 30, 2026
The company established Tesla Uruguay SAS, homologated Model 3 and Model Y (three versions each), and appointed local leadership. This makes Uruguay Tesla’s third official South American market after Chile and Colombia.
Uruguay boasts one of Latin America’s highest EV penetrations, with battery-electric vehicles exceeding 20 percent market share recently, driven by tax incentives, high fuel prices, and a nearly 95-100 percent renewable electricity grid. Hundreds of Teslas already operate via grey imports, but official sales bring warranties, service, and support.
Vehicles will be imported from Gigafactory Shanghai, enabling competitive pricing for Model 3 and Model Y. Charging plans include Supercharger development alongside existing infrastructure, leveraging the country’s green energy advantage for affordable operation.
Tesla Superchargers follow Model 3 and Model Y to South American country
Tesla’s Dual Continent Expansion
Tesla’s simultaneous push into Latvia and Uruguay demonstrates efficient scaling: prioritizing service and infrastructure first, then direct sales in high-potential niches. In Europe, it fills Baltic gaps; in Latin America, it counters Chinese dominance while leveraging renewables.
This dual move signals Tesla’s ambition to accelerate global EV adoption amid varying regional paces. By addressing local needs, like subsidies in Latvia or incentives and green grids in Uruguay, Tesla not only boosts volumes but advances its mission of sustainable energy.
For investors and consumers, it highlights resilience and opportunity in diverse markets, potentially paving the way for further growth in underserved regions. With strong fundamentals in both, these entries could yield long-term gains as EV transitions mature worldwide.