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.
Tesla rolled out Full Self-Driving version 14.2 yesterday to members of the Early Access Program (EAP). Expectations were high, and Tesla surely delivered.
With the rollout of Tesla FSD v14.2, there were major benchmarks for improvement from the v14.1 suite, which spanned across seven improvements. Our final experience with v14.1 was with v14.1.7, and to be honest, things were good, but it felt like there were a handful of regressions from previous iterations.
While there were improvements in brake stabbing and hesitation, we did experience a few small interventions related to navigation and just overall performance. It was nothing major; there were no critical takeovers that required any major publicity, as they were more or less subjective things that I was not particularly comfortable with. Other drivers might have been more relaxed.
With v14.2 hitting our cars yesterday, there were a handful of things we truly noticed in terms of improvement, most notably the lack of brake stabbing and hesitation, a major complaint with v14.1.x.
However, in a 62-minute drive that was fully recorded, there were a lot of positives, and only one true complaint, which was something we haven’t had issues with in the past.
The Good
Lack of Brake Stabbing and Hesitation
Perhaps the most notable and publicized issue with v14.1.x was the presence of brake stabbing and hesitation. Arriving at intersections was particularly nerve-racking on the previous version simply because of this. At four-way stops, the car would not be assertive enough to take its turn, especially when other vehicles at the same intersection would inch forward or start to move.
This was a major problem.
However, there were no instances of this yesterday on our lengthy drive. It was much more assertive when arriving at these types of scenarios, but was also more patient when FSD knew it was not the car’s turn to proceed.
Can report on v14.2 today there were ZERO instances of break stabbing or hesitation at intersections today
It was a significant improvement from v14.1.x
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 21, 2025
This improvement was the most noticeable throughout the drive, along with fixes in overall smoothness.
Speed Profiles Seem to Be More Reasonable
There were a handful of FSD v14 users who felt as if the loss of a Max Speed setting was a negative. However, these complaints will, in our opinion, begin to subside, especially as things have seemed to be refined quite nicely with v14.2.
Freeway driving is where this is especially noticeable. If it’s traveling too slow, just switch to a faster profile. If it’s too fast, switch to a slower profile. However, the speeds seem to be much more defined with each Speed Profile, which is something that I really find to be a huge advantage. Previously, you could tell the difference in speeds, but not in driving styles. At times, Standard felt a lot like Hurry. Now, you can clearly tell the difference between the two.
It seems as if Tesla made a goal that drivers should be able to tell which Speed Profile is active if it was not shown on the screen. With v14.1.x, this was not necessarily something that could be done. With v14.2, if someone tested me on which Speed Profile was being used, I’m fairly certain I could pick each one.
Better Overall Operation
I felt, at times, especially with v14.1.7, there were some jerky movements. Nothing that was super alarming, but there were times when things just felt a little more finicky than others.
v14.2 feels much smoother overall, with really great decision-making, lane changes that feel second nature, and a great speed of travel. It was a very comfortable ride.
The Bad
Parking
It feels as if there was a slight regression in parking quality, as both times v14.2 pulled into parking spots, I would have felt compelled to adjust manually if I were staying at my destinations. For the sake of testing, at my first destination, I arrived, allowed the car to park, and then left. At the tail-end of testing, I walked inside the store that FSD v14.2 drove me to, so I had to adjust the parking manually.
This was pretty disappointing. Apart from parking at Superchargers, which is always flawless, parking performance is something that needs some attention. The release notes for v14.2. state that parking spot selection and parking quality will improve with future versions.
Any issues with parking on your end? 14.1.7 didn’t have this trouble with parking pic.twitter.com/JPLRO2obUj
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 21, 2025
However, this was truly my only complaint about v14.2.
You can check out our full 62-minute ride-along below:
Elon Musk
SpaceX issues statement on Starship V3 Booster 18 anomaly
The incident unfolded during gas-system pressure testing at the company’s Massey facility in Starbase, Texas.
SpaceX has issued an initial statement about Starship Booster 18’s anomaly early Friday. The incident unfolded during gas-system pressure testing at the company’s Massey facility in Starbase, Texas.
SpaceX’s initial comment
As per SpaceX in a post on its official account on social media platform X, Booster 18 was undergoing gas system pressure tests when the anomaly happened. Despite the nature of the incident, the company emphasized that no propellant was loaded, no engines were installed, and personnel were kept at a safe distance from the booster, resulting in zero injuries.
“Booster 18 suffered an anomaly during gas system pressure testing that we were conducting in advance of structural proof testing. No propellant was on the vehicle, and engines were not yet installed. The teams need time to investigate before we are confident of the cause. No one was injured as we maintain a safe distance for personnel during this type of testing. The site remains clear and we are working plans to safely reenter the site,” SpaceX wrote in its post on X.
Incident and aftermath
Livestream footage from LabPadre showed Booster 18’s lower half crumpling around the liquid oxygen tank area at approximately 4:04 a.m. CT. Subsequent images posted by on-site observers revealed extensive deformation across the booster’s lower structure. Needless to say, spaceflight observers have noted that Booster 18 would likely be a complete loss due to its anomaly.
Booster 18 had rolled out only a day earlier and was one of the first vehicles in the Starship V3 program. The V3 series incorporates structural reinforcements and reliability upgrades intended to prepare Starship for rapid-reuse testing and eventual tower-catch operations. Elon Musk has been optimistic about Starship V3, previously noting on X that the spacecraft might be able to complete initial missions to Mars.
Investor's Corner
Tesla analyst maintains $500 PT, says FSD drives better than humans now
The team also met with Tesla leaders for more than an hour to discuss autonomy, chip development, and upcoming deployment plans.
Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) received fresh support from Piper Sandler this week after analysts toured the Fremont Factory and tested the company’s latest Full Self-Driving software. The firm reaffirmed its $500 price target, stating that FSD V14 delivered a notably smooth robotaxi demonstration and may already perform at levels comparable to, if not better than, average human drivers.
The team also met with Tesla leaders for more than an hour to discuss autonomy, chip development, and upcoming deployment plans.
Analysts highlight autonomy progress
During more than 75 minutes of focused discussions, analysts reportedly focused on FSD v14’s updates. Piper Sandler’s team pointed to meaningful strides in perception, object handling, and overall ride smoothness during the robotaxi demo.
The visit also included discussions on updates to Tesla’s in-house chip initiatives, its Optimus program, and the growth of the company’s battery storage business. Analysts noted that Tesla continues refining cost structures and capital expenditure expectations, which are key elements in future margin recovery, as noted in a Yahoo Finance report.
Analyst Alexander Potter noted that “we think FSD is a truly impressive product that is (probably) already better at driving than the average American.” This conclusion was strengthened by what he described as a “flawless robotaxi ride to the hotel.”
Street targets diverge on TSLA
While Piper Sandler stands by its $500 target, it is not the highest estimate on the Street. Wedbush, for one, has a $600 per share price target for TSLA stock.
Other institutions have also weighed in on TSLA stock as of late. HSBC reiterated a Reduce rating with a $131 target, citing a gap between earnings fundamentals and the company’s market value. By contrast, TD Cowen maintained a Buy rating and a $509 target, pointing to strong autonomous driving demonstrations in Austin and the pace of software-driven improvements.
Stifel analysts also lifted their price target for Tesla to $508 per share over the company’s ongoing robotaxi and FSD programs.
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.2 – Full Review, the Good and the Bad
SpaceX issues statement on Starship V3 Booster 18 anomaly
