News
What’s causing SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy delays?
Although uncertainty in the schedule remains, SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy rocket appears to be nearly ready for its first engine ignition test (called a ‘static fire’) sometime within the next week or so.
An attempt at 1 PM EST today, January 16, was canceled for unspecified reasons, although Kennedy Space Center reportedly maintained the usual roadblock to prevent vehicles from driving past, implying that SpaceX still intends to conduct propellant loading tests with Falcon Heavy. It was noted earlier this morning by spaceflight journalist Chris Bergin that things were “a bit too quiet” if a test was indeed planned for today, and his intuition appears to have been correct. It still remains the case that Falcon Heavy is an experimental and untested rocket to an extent, and these delays are to be expected as SpaceX works out the inevitable kinks and bugs that arise during the extensive testing big launch vehicle has been and is still being put through.
KSC is in roadblock stance, so they will still do some testing it would seem, but we will have to wait for the Static Fire itself. https://t.co/DxzsRn85NR
— NSF – NASASpaceflight.com (@NASASpaceflight) January 16, 2018
Due to range requirements in support of an upcoming launch of the United Launch Alliance’s (ULA) Atlas 5 rocket, currently NET Thursday, SpaceX has postponed the static fire of Falcon Heavy without a replacement date. It is unlikely that another attempt will occur before the upcoming weekend, but SpaceX should have at least a solid week of uninterrupted range support once ULA’s launch occurs, hopefully without delay. Godspeed to ULA, in the meantime.
The crazy complexity of rocketry
Most recently, and perhaps somewhat related to Falcon Heavy’s static fire delays, SpaceX completed as many as two complete wet dress rehearsals (WDRs), which saw Falcon Heavy topped off with full tanks of its cryogenic (super cool) liquid oxygen (LOX) and rocket-grade jet fuel (RP-1). In essence, the rocket became equivalent to several hundred tons of carefully stabilized explosive. Nominally, these rehearsals appear entirely uneventful to an outside observer, with little more than ice formation and the occasional bursts of propellant tank vents to suggest that something important is occurring. However, anomalies like the failure of Falcon 9 during the Amos-6 static fire provide a staggering demonstration of just how explosive and sensitive a rocket’s fuel is, and Falcon Heavy has approximately three times the fuel capacity of Falcon 9. Empty, Falcon 9’s mass has been estimated to be around 30 metric tons, a minuscule amount of structure in the face of the more than 500 metric tons of propellant the vehicle carries at liftoff.
These propellant loading tests can also be challenging for reasons aside from their highly explosive nature. Due to basic realities of the physical nature of metal, the predominate ingredient for Falcon 9’s load-bearing structures, metallic structures shrink under extreme cold (and expand under heating). In the case of Falcon 9’s massive 45 meters (150 foot) tall first stage, the scale of this contraction can be on the order of several inches or more, particularly given SpaceX’s predilection towards cooling their propellant as much as possible to increase its energy density. For Falcon 9, these issues (thermodynamic loads) are less severe. However, add in three relatively different first stage boosters linked together with several extremely strong supports at both their tops and bottoms and that dynamic loading can become a fickle beast. The expansion or compression of materials due to temperature changes can create absolutely astounding amounts of pressure – if you’ve ever forgotten a glass bottled drink in the freezer and discovered it violently exploded at some future point, you’ll have experienced this yourself.
With several inches of freedom and the possibility that each Falcon Heavy booster might contract or expand slightly differently, these forces could understandably wreak havoc with the high precision necessary for the huge rocket to properly connect with the launch pad’s ground systems that transmit propellant, fluids, and telemetry back and forth. Information from two reliable Kennedy Space Center sources experienced with the reality of operating rockets, as well as NASASpaceflight.com, suggested that issues with dynamic loads (such as those created by thermal contraction/expansion) are a likely explanation for the delays, further evidenced by their observations that much of the pad crew’s attention appeared to be focused at the base of Transporter/Erector/Launcher (TEL). The TEL base hosts the clamps that hold the rocket down during static fires and launches, as well as the Tail Service Masts (TSMs) that connect with the Falcon 9/Heavy to transport propellant and data to the first stage(s). These connection points are both relatively tiny, mechanically sensitive, and absolutely critical for the successful operation of the rocket, and thus are a logical point of failure in the event of off-nominal or unpredicted levels of dynamic stresses.
-
- The white bars in this photo are half of Falcon Heavy’s seperation mechanism. A number of actuators take the place of the more common solid rocket motors used with vehicles like the Delta IV Heavy. (SpaceX)
-
- Falcon Heavy’s three boosters and 27 Merlin 1D engines on full display. (SpaceX)
-
- Falcon Heavy. Modeled and rendered by NASASpaceflight forum user WBY1984. (WBY1984)
Test, launch, land, repeat.
All things considered, these difficulties demonstrate that even after months (even years) of relentless modeling, testing, remodeling, and retesting, rockets (and especially huge rockets like Falcon Heavy) are immensely complex, and even tiny mistakes can lead the vehicle to stray from its expected behavior. Quite simply, the reality of engineering only truly comes into play once hardware is fully in the loop, and it’s in this state that SpaceX has demonstrated again and again a distinct and elegant ability to learn from their hardware, rather than attempt to salve uncertainty with a neurotic and counterproductive level of statistical analysis, modelling, and documentation. The agile launch company still dabbles in those aspects when beneficial or necessary, but testing comes first in its importance.
The conclusion here, then, is that Falcon Heavy’s delays betray this aspect of SpaceX – a launch company that loves its fans, but also understands the need for cautious testing when it comes to new and untried rocket hardware. Whether Falcon Heavy succeeds or fails, SpaceX will learn from the proceedings, and they will be better off for it (although maybe less so financially…).
Follow along live as launch photographer Tom Cross and I cover these exciting proceedings as close to live as possible.
Teslarati  –  Instagram – Twitter
Tom Cross – Instagram
Eric Ralph – Twitter
News
Tesla launches new Model Y interior option
Produced at Gigafactory Shanghai, the update applies to all five-seat Premium Model Y configurations and started being seen on customer deliveries this week. The move marks the first major interior refresh for the compact crossover since its global debut.
Tesla has rolled out a striking new interior choice for its best-selling Model Y in China, replacing the long-familiar white cabin with a fresh option: Zen Grey.
Produced at Gigafactory Shanghai, the update applies to all five-seat Premium Model Y configurations and started being seen on customer deliveries this week. The move marks the first major interior refresh for the compact crossover since its global debut.
The Zen Grey interior swaps the classic black-and-white contrast for a softer, more unified palette. Seats, door panels, and center console trim now feature a warm light-grey tone that covers far more surface area than before.
Previously, black accents on the console, door handles, and lower dashboard are now color-matched in the same pebbled vegan leather, creating a brighter, less clinical cabin.
Tesla describes the material as durable and easy to maintain while delivering a noticeably more premium feel. Early photos and videos from Chinese owners show the new shade reflecting natural light beautifully, giving the spacious Model Y an even airier, more inviting atmosphere without sacrificing the minimalist design customers expect:
🚨 First look at Tesla’s new Zen Grey interior, which differs slightly in tone and in placement compared to the now discontinued White Interior https://t.co/rRRuEOrbm4 pic.twitter.com/p7uyNfO3xY
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 13, 2026
The change is not an added-cost upgrade but a direct replacement for the discontinued white interior on Shanghai-built vehicles. Customers configuring a new Model Y in China, Hong Kong, or Macau now see Zen Grey as the default light-colored choice.
The update also flows to export markets supplied by Giga Shanghai, including Australia, New Zealand, South Korea, Japan, and the Philippines. Tesla has used its Chinese factory as an innovation hub before, and executives appear to be testing broader appeal with this subtler, warmer tone that avoids the high-maintenance reputation sometimes associated with bright white leather.
Beyond the interior, the refreshed Model Y from Shanghai includes minor exterior tweaks such as blacked-out badges on some trims and optional dark 20-inch wheels.
These changes arrive as Tesla faces stiff competition from domestic EV makers in its largest market. By refreshing the Model Y’s cabin without raising prices, the company is signaling continued commitment to value and constant improvement.
With over 1.2 million Model Y units already on Chinese roads, the Zen Grey launch gives existing owners a fresh talking point and new buyers another reason to choose Tesla. As deliveries ramp up this month, the updated interior is expected to become the dominant light-colored choice across the Asia-Pacific region.
Tesla has not yet confirmed whether the Zen Grey will reach Fremont, Austin, or Berlin-built Model Ys, but Shanghai’s track record suggests the option could spread quickly if customer feedback remains strong.
Elon Musk
Tesla launches 200mph Model S “Gold” Signature in invite-only purchase
Tesla’s final 350-unit Signature Edition closes the book on two cars that changed everything.
Tesla has announced a super limited Signature Edition run of 250 Model S Plaid and 100 Model X Plaid units as an invite only purchase in a bid to give its original flagship vehicles a proper send-off.
When the Model S first launched in 2012, the first 1,000 units sold were “Signature” editions that required a $40,000 deposit and cost nearly $100,000 each. Those early buyers were Tesla’s first real believers. This new Signature Edition deliberately echoes that moment, bookending a 14-year run with numbered collector hardware.
Both models are finished in an exclusive Garnet Red paint not available on any current Tesla production vehicle, with gold Tesla T badges up front, a gold Plaid badge and Signature badge at the rear, and a white Alcantara interior featuring gold Plaid seat badges, gold piping, Signature-marked door sills, and a numbered dash plate. The Model S adds carbon ceramic brakes with gold calipers. Every unit ships with Tesla’s Luxe Package, bundling Full Self-Driving (Supervised), four years of Premium Service, free lifetime Supercharging, and a Signature Edition key fob. Both are priced at $159,420, a roughly $35,000 premium over standard Plaid inventory.
The discontinuation is part of a broader strategic shift. At Tesla’s Q4 2025 earnings call, Musk described the decision as “slightly sad” but necessary, saying: “It’s time to basically bring the Model S and X programs to an end with an honorable discharge, because we’re really moving into a future that is based on autonomy.”
The Fremont factory floor that built these cars is being converted to manufacture Optimus humanoid robots, with a target of one million units annually.
Elon Musk
Tesla FSD in Europe vs. US: It’s not what you think
Tesla FSD is approved in the Netherlands, but the European version differs from what US drivers use.
On April 10, 2026, the Dutch vehicle authority RDW granted Tesla the first European type approval for Full Self-Driving Supervised, making the Netherlands the first country on the continent to authorize Tesla’s semi-autonomous system for customer use on public roads.
As Teslarati reported, the RDW approval followed 18 months of testing, more than 1.6 million kilometers driven on EU roads, 13,000 customer ride-alongs, and documentation covering over 400 compliance requirements. Tesla Europe had been running public demo drives through cities like Amsterdam and Eindhoven since early 2026, giving passengers their first experience of the system on European streets.
The European version of FSD is not the same software US drivers use. The RDW’s own statement is direct, noting that the software versions and functionalities in the US and Europe “are therefore not comparable one-to-one.” We’ve compile a table below that captures the most significant differences between US-based Tesla FSD vs. European Tesla FSD that’s based on what regulators and Tesla have publicly confirmed.
| Feature | FSD US | FSD Europe (Netherlands) |
| Regulatory framework | Self-certification, post-market oversight | Pre-market type approval required (UN R-171 + Article 39) |
| Hands requirement | Hands-off permitted on highway | Hands must be available to take over immediately |
| Auto turning from stop lights | Available — navigates intersections, turns, and traffic signals autonomously | Available in EU build — confirmed in Amsterdam demo footage handling unprotected turns and signalized intersections |
| Driving modes | Multiple profiles including a more aggressive “Mad Max” mode | EU build is more conservative by default and errs on the side of restraint when it cannot confirm the limit |
| Summon | Available — Smart Summon navigates parking lots to driver | Status unclear — not confirmed as part of the RDW-approved feature set; urban FSD approval targeted separately for 2027 |
| Driver monitoring | Camera-based eye tracking | Stricter continuous monitoring with more frequent intervention alerts |
| Software version | FSD v14.3 | EU-specific builds that must be separately validated by RDW |
| Geographic restriction | US, Canada, China, Mexico, Australia, NZ, South Korea | Netherlands only; EU-wide vote pending summer 2026 |
| Subscription price | $99/month | €99/month |
| Full urban FSD scope | Available | Partial — separate urban application planned for 2027 |
The approval comes as Tesla is under real pressure to grow FSD subscriptions globally. Musk’s 2025 CEO compensation package, approved by shareholders, includes a milestone requiring 10 million active FSD subscriptions as one condition for his stock awards to vest. Tesla hit one million subscriptions during its Q4 2025 earnings call, which is a meaningful start, but still a long way from the target. Opening Europe as a market for subscriptions, rather than just hardware sales, directly accelerates that number.
Tesla has said it anticipates EU-wide recognition of the Dutch approval during summer 2026, which would extend FSD access to Germany, France, and other major markets through a mutual recognition process without each country repeating the full 18-month review. That timeline is Tesla’s projection, not a confirmed regulatory outcome. As Musk acknowledged at Davos in January 2026, “We hope to get Supervised Full Self-Driving approval in Europe, hopefully next month.”
Tesla launches new Model Y interior option
Tesla launches 200mph Model S “Gold” Signature in invite-only purchase
