News
Tesla Roadster’s ‘SpaceX package’ with rocket thrusters could actually work
This weekend proved to be a fruitful one for Elon Musk’s Twitter followers and fans of the next-generation Tesla Roadster, as the billionaire entrepreneur discussed, in honest-to-goodness seriousness, how the electric car maker would utilize SpaceX technology to make the upcoming all-electric supercar an absolute monster on wheels. Needless to say, there was quite a lot to take in.
Musk started off his Twitter discussion on the next-generation Roadster by stating that the car will feature ~10 rocket thrusters that are “arranged seamlessly around (the) car.” Musk further noted that the thrusters would “dramatically” improve acceleration, braking, and cornering, to the point that the Roadster would be able to fly — a reaffirmation of his previous statement referring to the vehicle having the capability to fly “short hops.”
Musk noted that Tesla would be using SpaceX’s Composite Overwrapped Pressure Vessel (COPV), a container consisting of a thin, non-structural liner wrapped with a structural fiber composite. COPVs are designed to hold a fluid under pressure, and are used by SpaceX’s first-stage rocket boosters during re-entry and landing. Musk further explained the use of SpaceX’s technology in later tweets.
SpaceX option package for new Tesla Roadster will include ~10 small rocket thrusters arranged seamlessly around car. These rocket engines dramatically improve acceleration, top speed, braking & cornering. Maybe they will even allow a Tesla to fly …
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 9, 2018
While the idea of using rocket propulsion to enhance the performance of an all-electric supercar might seem to be well into the realms of science fiction, using COPVs for the next-gen Roadster is actually pretty feasible, at least from a technical standpoint. SpaceX’s COPVs have operating pressures of around 350 bars (5,000 psi) and too powerful for a land vehicle. If Tesla installs a similar version of SpaceX’s upper stage thrusters that are used in guiding rockets, rear-mounted devices could store just enough compressed air to provide Tesla’s next-gen Roadster an additional boost in acceleration for a short duration.
Note, gas contained would be ultra high pressure air in a SpaceX rocket COPV bottle. The air exiting the thrusters would immediately be replenished whenever vehicle pack power draw allowed operation of the air pump, which is most of the time.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 10, 2018
Rocket thrusters placed in front of the vehicle that provides thrust opposite of the Roadster’s direction of travel, at least in concept, could help the electric car’s braking capability, while thrusters placed along each side of the vehicle can help in cornering by providing lateral force. In order to accomplish this, however, Tesla would have to carefully balance the weight of components from the upgraded SpaceX package – Musk noted that the vehicle would sacrifice its rear seats from the standard 2+ 2 configuration to accommodate the additional hardware – with output from the rocket thrusters to maximize the vehicle’s performance. Onboard electric air pumps would repressurize the space-grade containers when they were depleted, making for repeat fun, at least in a theoretical sense. Musk also stated that SpaceX COPVs that will be used for the next-generation Roadster will be durable, and be “literally bulletproof.”
Exactly. Total energy stored even in ultra compressed air is low vs battery, but power output is insane. The composite overwrapped pressure vessel (COPV) is most advanced ever made. It’s what SpaceX is qualifying for NASA crewed missions. Extremely robust — literally bulletproof.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 10, 2018
Overall, Musk reiterated that the next-generation Tesla Roadster is designed to be the best car in the industry when it gets released. During his tweetstorm, Musk mentioned that with the all-electric supercar, Tesla is attempting to beat ICE vehicles on “every performance metric;” thus transferring the “halo crown effect” gas cars have as the top speed standards in the automotive market.
New details about Tesla’s next-generation Roadster have been released by Elon Musk lately. The SpaceX option for the vehicle was announced during the 2018 Annual Shareholder Meeting, and not long after that, Musk also revealed that the vehicle would feature an “Augmented Mode” designed to “enhance human driving ability,” thereby providing assistance to drivers who would be operating the insanely powerful supercar.
During the unveiling of the next-generation Tesla Roadster, Elon Musk noted that the purpose of the all-electric supercar is to give a “hardcore smackdown” to gasoline-powered cars. The specs of the vehicle that were unveiled then, which are representative of the all-electric supercar’s base trim, are already record-breaking, including a 0-60 mph time of 1.9 seconds, a quarter-mile time of 8.9 seconds, a top speed of over 250 mph, 620 miles of range thanks to a 200 kWh battery, and 10,000 Nm of torque. With the Roadster’s SpaceX option, the all-electric supercar could very well establish a new class of vehicles that lie beyond the hypercar echelon.
Turn-by-turn navigation is not new technology.
For over two decades, drivers have relied on Garmin, TomTom, and later smartphone apps like Google Maps and Waze to receive precise, reliable directions. These systems have guided millions safely through unfamiliar cities, highways, and backroads with remarkable effectiveness. They handle real-time traffic, construction detours, and complex intersections with minimal fuss.
Yet Tesla, the company that promised revolutionary Full Self-Driving (FSD), continues to struggle with this foundational capability. As FSD (Supervised) v14.3.4 has started rolling out to cars this week, navigation remains its glaring Achilles’ heel, undermining the entire autonomous vision.
Tesla Summon got insanely good in FSD v14.3.2 — Navigation? Not so much
Tesla’s FSD excels in many driving behaviors—smooth acceleration, confident lane changes in ideal conditions, and responsive handling of visible obstacles. However, when it comes to following a route accurately, the system falters repeatedly.
Owners report wrong turns, missed exits, inefficient routing through local roads instead of highways, phantom speed limit errors, and even directing vehicles to building rear entrances. Interventions for navigation issues often outnumber those for core driving maneuvers. Tesla has begun surveying owners specifically about these errors, acknowledging the problem after years of complaints.
Navigation is perhaps my biggest complaint when it comes to FSD, because sometimes, we do know better. Some of us have been living in our areas for our entire lives, but even those who have not have years or even decades of experience driving on local roads. We might know a little better about routing.
But the navigation mistakes are more than just FSD potentially taking a slightly different route that may or may not save you a few minutes. Sometimes, they’re genuinely mind-boggling.
This isn’t just annoying; it cascades into broader failures. A flawed route plan confuses the AI’s decision-making, leading to hesitant behavior, unnecessary disengagements, or dangerous maneuvers like attempting impossible U-turns or ignoring clear ramps. In a system meant to operate with minimal supervision, unreliable navigation erodes trust.
More often than not, false or plain incorrect navigation is what causes me to interrupt FSD operation. Unfortunately, I believe the latest FSD version is the worst example of it, and it leads me to believe that Tesla might be making some changes; they’ve just made them in the wrong direction.
It makes you wonder: Why is a company that has done so much with the progress of FSD and autonomy struggling so much with navigation, something that is not new and has been around a long time?
Multiple Data Sources
First, Tesla’s navigation relies on a fragile patchwork of multiple data sources—Google Maps, TomTom, OpenStreetMap, Valhalla, and its own fleet-derived data—stitched together rather than a single authoritative map. When these conflict on lane geometry, road status, or turn details, the system hesitates or chooses incorrectly.
Traditional GPS providers maintain centralized, regularly validated databases with professional curation and rapid updates. Tesla’s hybrid approach, while innovative in crowdsourcing, introduces inconsistencies that a purely vision-based or end-to-end AI approach may not easily reconcile in real time.
Persistent Learning
FSD seems to struggle with persistent learning from driver interventions.
Unlike consumer apps that quickly adapt to repeated corrections or user preferences (e.g., avoiding certain routes or remembering habitual detours), Tesla’s FSD often fails to internalize fixes on the same trip or across similar scenarios. Owners note making the same manual override multiple times without the routing engine updating its behavior meaningfully.
This stems from the neural architecture prioritizing real-time perception and control over long-term route memory and personalization, making navigation feel rigid and “opinionated” compared to the adaptive logic in Waze or Google Maps.
I noticed that when I asked Grok to try and get me home a certain way (a way that FSD routinely took in the past because it was the most efficient), it had to place a waypoint between my location at the time and my house. When I went to edit the waypoint out, as Grok had placed it for a way to get FSD to get off the highway at the right exit, it was stumped again, rerouted, and took a longer way home.
The next thing I’ve noticed, and this might be controversial, is that Nav has gotten even worse.
I think that might actually be a good thing; Tesla seems to be adjusting it. They just need to adjust it the opposite way.
The car is taking extremely strange routes to very… https://t.co/UHg3tVfNA2
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 16, 2026
Reasoning, Scaling, and Intuition
Third, scaling navigation for unsupervised or robotaxi ambitions requires not just accuracy but adaptability and user-like reasoning. Current FSD often defaults to single routes that ignore driver preferences or real-world nuances like time-of-day traffic patterns. It fails to match the intuitive, context-aware planning that traditional systems have refined over the years.
Resolving navigation is critical for several reasons. Practically, it is the backbone of any autonomous journey: without trustworthy routing, the car cannot reliably reach destinations, rendering FSD useless for robotaxis or hands-free commutes. Safety depends on it—mismatched plans create hesitation in merges or intersections, increasing accident risk.
Economically, Tesla’s valuation and future hinge on FSD delivering unsupervised driving; persistent navigation flaws delay regulatory approval and erode consumer confidence. For owners who paid premiums for FSD, these issues represent unfulfilled promises. While it is unlikely Tesla will lose too many customers due to bad navigation, some will be frustrated with the constant need for human input.
Tesla has achieved miracles in electric vehicles and battery tech. Mastering turn-by-turn—technology Garmin nailed in the early 2000s—should not be this hard. By investing in tighter data integration, faster learning loops from interventions, and more intuitive routing algorithms, Tesla could close this gap.
Until then, FSD’s navigation struggles highlight a humbling truth: even the most ambitious innovator must sometimes master the basics before conquering the future.
A Tesla Cybertruck driver in the United Kingdom had their all-electric pickup seized by local police in the Greater Manchester area after the department cited “legitimate concerns.”
Last Thursday, police saw the pickup on the roads and decided to pull the driver over. Greater Manchester Police said:
“Whilst this may seem trivial to some, legitimate concerns exist around the safety of other road users or pedestrians if they were involved in a collision with the Cybertruck.”
🚨 A Tesla Cybertruck, which is illegal to drive in the UK due to safety concerns, has been seized by police in Greater Manchester
“Whilst this may seem trivial to some, legitimate concerns exist around the safety of other road users or pedestrians if they were involved in a… pic.twitter.com/cqhdPok3DM
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 16, 2026
The Cybertruck in question was, according to the BBC, registered and insured abroad and was confiscated. The driver, who is a UK resident, was reported.
The Greater Manchester Police Department then added:
“The Tesla Cybertruck is not road-legal in the UK and does not hold a certificate of conformity.”
The Cybertruck cannot be legally driven in the UK because it has no UK Type Approval for operation in the country. This is due to some safety concerns, which are related to its angular shape and design. The stainless steel exoskeleton has sharp edges and projections that violate UK/EU rules on pedestrian protection.
Tesla has considered creating what it referred to as an “international version” that would be approved for operation in Europe. However, there has been no real movement on that front by the company, as it has been focused on the Robotaxi rollout primarily.
A new report claims that Apple is in the process of developing what would be the missing link for Tesla to get CarPlay.
Apple and Tesla have been reportedly working together for some time to give Tesla owners the opportunity to utilize CarPlay within their vehicles. While many owners are more than happy with Tesla’s in-house UI, which is seamless, effective, and smooth, some still want CarPlay, which does have its advantages.
A report from 9to5Mac now states that a new CarPlay technology that was highlighted during the Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC) would potentially be the bridge between Tesla and Apple. With the addition of a feature known as “Route Sharing,” which gives a navigation app the ability to share routing data with the vehicle, Tesla would be able to launch CarPlay in its vehicles, the report states.
CarPlay has not been a priority for Tesla because it has done extremely well with its in-house UI, but some drivers are just used to it. Additionally, it could improve Tesla’s subpar Navigation or offer improved app capabilities, especially with iMessage.
Route Sharing is an intended addition to CarPlay’s iteration in iOS 26.4, which was released in March:
The addition of CarPlay would undoubtedly be welcome, but at the same time, it seems like Tesla realizes it is not of the utmost priority. There are so many things that Tesla is working on currently within its own vehicles, especially attempting to solve self-driving.
Back in February, Bloomberg had reported that Tesla was still working on bringing CarPlay to its vehicles, but it had not due to app compatibility issues and incredibly low adoption rates of iOS 26.
This bottleneck could buy Tesla the proper amount of time to develop CarPlay for its vehicles. It would be a welcome addition, and could be brought on with either the Summer or Fall 2026 Software Updates.
Tesla’s Navigation Nightmare: Why the easiest part of FSD might be the hardest
Tesla Cybertruck driver gets pickup seized for ‘legitimate concerns’ in UK
