From Tesla websiteThere is no 'unintended acceleration' in Tesla vehicles.

This petition is completely false and was brought by a Tesla short-seller. We investigate every single incident where the driver alleges to us that their vehicle accelerated contrary to their input, and in every case where we had the vehicle's data, we confirmed that the car operated as designed. In other words, the car accelerates if, and only if, the driver told it to do so, and it slows or stops when the driver applies the brake.

While accidents caused by a mistaken press of the accelerator pedal have been alleged for nearly every make/model of vehicle on the road, the accelerator pedals in Model S, X and 3 vehicles have two independent position sensors, and if there is any error, the system defaults to cut off motor torque. Likewise, applying the brake pedal simultaneously with the accelerator pedal will override the accelerator pedal input and cut off motor torque, and regardless of the torque, sustained braking will stop the car. Unique to Tesla, we also use the Autopilot sensor suite to help distinguish potential pedal misapplications and cut torque to mitigate or prevent accidents when we’re confident the driver’s input was unintentional. Each system is independent and records data, so we can examine exactly what happened.

We are transparent with NHTSA, and routinely review customer complaints of unintended acceleration with them. Over the past several years, we discussed with NHTSA the majority of the complaints alleged in the petition. In every case we reviewed with them, the data proved the vehicle functioned properly.

By landing the booster SpaceX recovers 9 of the 10 Merlin engines. When they launch the Falcon Heavy, they will be recovering 27 of 28 engines per flight. This is leading up to the BFR which will recover all 38 of the larger Raptor engines. In fact it will be 100% reusable. This is where the big payoff will be evident.

If NASA put the $4B/yr they currently spend on the SLS into a fixed contract to SpaceX to develop the BFR they could have a base on the moon within 10 years. It may be wishful thinking that the US would abandon SLS after all the money that has been sunk into it but eventually someone will notice that a lot of money is being spent on a system that can only launch every two years.

Spacenews reports that SpaceX has been working with NASA to identify potential landing sites on Mars for both its Red Dragon spacecraft starting in 2020 and future human missions. SpaceX, working with scientists at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory and elsewhere, had identified several potential landing sites, including one that looks particularly promising - Arcadia Planitia.

Those landing sites are of particular interest, he said, for SpaceX’s long-term vision of establishing a human settlement on Mars, but he said the company wouldn’t rule our sending Red Dragon spacecraft elsewhere on the planet to serve other customers. “We’re quite open to making use of this platform to take various payloads to other locations as well,” he said. “We’re really looking to turn this into a steady cadence, where we’re sending Dragons to Mars on basically every opportunity.”

The Red Dragon spacecraft, he said, could carry about one ton of useful payload to Mars, with options for those payloads to remain in the capsule after landing or be deployed on the surface. “SpaceX is a transportation company,” he said. “We transport cargo to the space station, we deliver payloads to orbit, so we’re very happy to deliver payloads to Mars.”

Fans of the book/movie "The Martian" would be happy if SpaceX does select Arcadia Planitia for their first landing site as that was the landing site of the Ares 3.

I agree. The money would be better spent in SpaceX's ITS interplanetary Booster/spaceship program which would only cost $10 Billion to develop and $62m per launch. The ITS Spaceship could land 100 tons on the moon and return. ITS could also land 100 tons on Mars and return if refueled in situ.. SpaceX does not want to be seen as a competitor to SLS but ITS economics make it hard to ignore.

The tunnel crack problem was discovered in Jan 2015 so they have had awhile to work on it. This was first revealed on 1 Sept 2016 in the Commercial Crew program update.

'NASA Program officials anticipate SpaceX will encounter additional delays on the path to certification. For example, in January 2015, the tunnel that provides a passageway for astronauts and cargo between the Dragon and the ISS was reported to have cracked during the heat treatment phase of the manufacturing process. As a result, SpaceX delayed qualification testing by approximately one year to better align the tests as SpaceX moves toward certification. SpaceX has also experienced ongoing issues with stress fractures in turbopumps that must be resolved prior to flight.23 Additionally, SpaceX has not yet completed parachute system level testing which may reveal issues that would require redesign that could further delay the test flights. Accordingly, we anticipate additional schedule slippage and do not expect certified flights by SpaceX earlier than late 2018.'

It is proven technology as it already delivers supplies to ISS and returns safely. They have tested the abort system on the ground along with the other systems. I do not see why they will not be ready for flights in 2018. Boeing on the other hand is still way behind

SpaceX reusing a booster is a significant milestone but it will really start paying off with Falcon Heavy when they can reuse three boosters from each launch.

Why does this one death cause everyone to panic?

Musk continues: 'Crush core is aluminum honeycomb for energy absorption in the telescoping actuator. Easy to replace (if Falcon makes it back to port).'

Elon Musk just tweeted: 'Rocket landing speed was close to design max & used up contingency crush core, hence back & forth motion. Prob ok, but some risk of tipping.'

The Falcon Heavy is scheduled to do a demo launch in November. I would not be surprised if they put a Dragon 2 capsule on it to do the unmanned flight test at the same time. If they do, it would be cool if they launched the Dragon around the moon. SpaceX has a history of doing experimental landings during real launches. Launching a Dragon atop of FH would be more efficient than just having a dummy payload and going around the Moon would certainly make the launch worthwhile.

The atmosphere on Mars is roughly 100 times thinner than on Earth so you can use a parachute to slow you down but only to a limited extent. The largest supersonic parachute ever used was foe the Curiosity rover mission. Good video here. Not practical for a manned mission due to the snap of the parachute opening at that speed(9 Gs) would break necks. It only slowed the rover to 320 kph and needed a rocket to land.