News
Tesla designs safer airbag deployment system through seat sensors in new patent
Tesla’s electric cars are among the safest on the road, so much so that the Model 3, Model S, and Model X are among the NHTSA’s top vehicles with the lowest probability of injury in the event of an accident. Thanks to Tesla’s use of ultra-high-strength steel and aluminum, as well as the vehicles’ extra large crumple zones due to their all-electric design, the company’s electric cars are capable of protecting their occupants when untoward events happen on the road.
If a recently published patent application is any indication, though, it appears that Tesla is exploring more ways to make its vehicles even safer. Tesla’s recent patent, titled “Sensors for Vehicle Occupant Classification Systems and Methods,” taps into the company’s prowess in tech by using a system that alows cars to detect and/or classify their occupants based on readings from a series of sensors in the seats. With such a system in place, safety features could activate in a way that is optimized for passengers.
-
- Diagrams depicting Tesla’s “Sensors for Vehicle Occupant Classification Systems and Methods” patent. (Credit: US Patent Office)
-
- Diagrams depicting Tesla’s “Sensors for Vehicle Occupant Classification Systems and Methods” patent. (Credit: US Patent Office)
-
- Diagrams depicting Tesla’s “Sensors for Vehicle Occupant Classification Systems and Methods” patent. (Credit: US Patent Office)
Diagrams depicting Tesla’s “Sensors for Vehicle Occupant Classification Systems and Methods” patent. (Credit: US Patent Office)
Tesla notes that cars on the road today are becoming safer overall, thanks to systems that monitor operations while the vehicle is in motion and features that provide coordinated alerts and assistance as needed. While such processes make vehicles safe, though, Tesla states that there is still a large area for improvement. One such area, according to the electric car maker, is in the way airbags deploy in the event of an accident.
“Difficulties remain in reliably detecting the presence of vehicle occupants and accurately classifying them as children, relatively small adults, and/or according to other classifications, and particularly in differentiating between classifications. Accurate classification can be critical when the vehicle is attempting to assist or enact safety measures to protect the occupant.
“In particular, airbag deployment can be adjusted to reduce risk of injury caused by the airbag while maintaining safety of the occupant during a collision. However, while reduced-force airbag deployment is recommended for relatively small adult females, it is not recommended for young children, even though the young children can reach heights and weights approaching those of the relatively small adult females. Thus, there is a need for an improved methodology to provide reliable and accurate vehicle occupant classification, particularly in the context of controlling an occupant restraint system that can apply force to an operator of the vehicle.”
Tesla’s patent application explores the use of sensors placed on the vehicle’s seats that enable the cars to classify their occupants. By classifying the size, weight, and body type (among others) of a passenger, the car would be able to deploy airbags in the safest way possible during an accident. Tesla describes this system as follows.
“In accordance with various embodiments of the present disclosure, occupant detection and classification may be provided by an occupant weight sensor, an occupant presence sensor, and a logic device configured to convert sensor signals provided by the occupant weight sensor and the occupant presence sensor into an estimated occupant weight and an occupant presence response, which may be used together to reliably detect and classify the occupant with increased sensitivity, accuracy, and granularity compared to conventional detection systems.
“In particular, embodiments of the present occupant classification system may be employed to detect and differentiate a child from a relatively small woman or man and disable, partially enable, or fully enable an airbag as appropriate. Such occupant classification systems may be implemented with various types of user feedback mechanisms, including reporting detections and classifications both locally and remotely, such as to a smartphone, for example, and reporting potentially unsafe conditions and/or undesired operation of the vehicle, as described herein.”
With this system in place, Tesla’s electric cars would be even safer than they already are. If any, this would widen the gap further between Tesla’s vehicles and conventional cars, many of which are bogged down in frontal collisions due to the presence of a large, heavy engine under the hood. That said, this recent patent application all but emphasizes Tesla’s proactive nature and the company’s tendency to always make efforts to improve.
This particular nature was emphasized by Elon Musk on Twitter last October, when he explained that there is “no such thing” as a “full refresh” or even a model year at Tesla. In his tweet, Musk stated that all the company’s vehicles are partially upgraded every month “as soon as a subsystem is ready for production,” thereby ensuring buyers that they are getting the best vehicles available at their time of purchase. This, coupled with Tesla’s trademark over-the-air updates — which give new features from driver assist functions such as Navigate on Autopilot, to fun, quirky things like the Romance Mode Easter Egg — truly make the company’s electric cars unique on the road.
The full text of Tesla’s recent patent application could be accessed here.
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
