News
SpaceX’s first crewed NASA launches remain on schedule for 2018
Plenty of work lies ahead of both companies, but progress abounds
Amidst a seemingly relaxed July for SpaceX, the company has been working intently with NASA to prepare for its first Commercial Crew mission in as few as seven months. NASA’s combination of strict technical requirements and partial flexibility with the famously fast-moving aerospace company have resulted in a collaborative environment that Elon Musk recently deemed beneficial to the company.
As NASA works with the company to ensure that Dragon 2 is as safe as realistically possible, SpaceX has begun several rounds of advanced testing and training. NASA astronauts are in the process of learning how to operate Dragon 2, and a near-production version of the vehicle’s control software and hardware has been integrated to allow for accurate simulations as practice. Meanwhile, Department of Defense personnel that will be tasked with recovering Dragons and crew from the ocean have begun developing those procedures with a mockup capsule.
-
- DoD personnel began initial recovery procedure development in July. (SpaceX)
-
- NASA astronauts utilizing the Dragon 2 simulator as they practice for the first crewed launch in June 2018. (SpaceX)
-
- A look inside Crew Dragon’s bare crew compartment. (SpaceX)
At SpaceX’s Hawthorne manufacturing facilities, four separate Crew Dragons are in different states of assembly. While one of those vehicles is intended solely for qualification testing, the three remaining Dragons will respectively launch into low Earth orbit throughout the course of 2018, assuming schedules remain firm. Structural testing and verification of the qualification Dragon was completed as of July 24th, and the first flightworthy Dragon has undergone testing of its pressure vessel to ensure that there are no leaks.
Looking forward to launching @NASA astronauts to the International Space Station next year!https://t.co/qoLtTEP4L8
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 3, 2017
Deemed Demo-1 in relation to the first flight of Dragon being Demonstration Flight 1, SpaceX workers are almost ready to integrate the service section and pressure vessel compartments. The pressure vessel is better known as the crew compartment, while the service section is where all the necessary flight and life support systems are contained. Dragon’s “claw” – used to grab hold of the ISS upon docking – and engines have also passed qualification tests.
Different parts of the Demo-1 Dragon in Hawthorne. The crew compartment or pressure vessel can be seen on the left, while the heat shield is front and center. A second and possibly third Crew Dragon pressure vessel can be seen in the background. (SpaceX)
Possibly the most exciting of all, SpaceX has conducted the first pressurized tests of its in-house space suits with NASA crew members. While non-insiders have yet to catch a glimpse of the company’s suits, those lucky enough to have stolen a glance have indicated that they look awesome. As the company progresses to actual vacuum testing of the suits, fans can likely look forward to a reveal. While we don’t yet have a view of SpaceX suits, the July 24th Commercial Crew update did provide the first public photos of SpaceX’s crew access arm, set to be installed at the LC-39A launch pad later this year.
-
- NASA astronauts check out SpaceX’s recently-completed crew access arm. (SpaceX)
-
- Whether or not you can parse NASA’s infamous acronym and jargon-heavy language, it’s clear that SpaceX has a considerable amount of work ahead to make their February 2018 deadline. (NASA)
-
- For those with extreme willpower, a close study of this graphic provides a good idea of where both SpaceX and Boeing are as they head to first CCP launches. (NASA)
Aside from an array of milestones ahead for the company, the only major tasks yet to be finished are design finalization for Crew Dragon’s seat mechanisms and control displays. SpaceX’s Demonstration 1 and 2 launch dates of February and June 2018 respectively remain steady as of this late-July update. Delays are always possible and even likely, but chances are good that SpaceX will be ready to conduct the first launch of crew to the ISS before the end of next year.
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
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
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
