News
SpaceX Starlink launch to smash California pad turnaround record
Update: SpaceX’s Thursday Starlink 3-2 launch was automatically aborted less than a minute before liftoff by Falcon 9’s onboard computers. The company will try again tomorrow, Friday, July 22nd, at 10:39 pm PDT (17:39 UTC).
SpaceX says it’s on track to launch another batch of polar Starlink satellites from the West Coast as early as 10:39 am PDT (17:39 UTC), Thursday, July 21st.
On top of featuring one of the fastest Falcon 9 booster turnarounds ever, SpaceX’s Starlink 3-2 launch will more than halve the fastest turnaround of its Vandenberg Space Force Base (VSFB) SLC-4E pad, potentially rendering it capable of launching dozens of times per year.
Barring delays, Starlink 3-2 is scheduled to launch from SLC-4E just 10 days and 14 hours after the same pad supported Starlink 3-1. The current record – 22 days and 11 hours – was set between the launches of Germany’s SARah-1 radar satellite and Starlink 3-1, meaning that SLC-4E is on track to break its turnaround record twice in a row.
For most of the time since SpaceX began using SLC-4E for Falcon 9 launches in 2013, the pad has rarely supported more than one launch every few months. Between 2013 and 2020, the pad supported a total of 16 successful Falcon 9 launches. 15 occurred between January 2016 and November 2020, averaging one launch every four months and never flying twice in less than 36 days. Between January 2019 and September 2021, the pad only supported three launches and even went 17 months without a single use.
-->
In late 2021, something changed. On top of the introduction of dedicated West Coast Starlink launches, apparent upgrades to the pad’s turnaround capabilities have allowed it to support more launches than usual. In the ten months since SLC-4E exited its hibernation period, it’s supported nine Falcon 9 launches – five for Starlink and four for customers. Prior to 2021, SLC-4E never supported more than six launches in a ten-month period, meaning that the pad is already operating at a 50% higher capacity.
SpaceX, however, apparently wasn’t satisfied and is on track to substantially expand SLC-4’s operational constraints yet again, more than halving its minimum demonstrated turnaround time. By definition, that also doubles the pad’s operational ceiling, meaning that it could theoretically support about 34 launches per year with no downtime. SpaceX appears to have achieved that expansion by applying the same upgrades it already made to its two East Coast launch pads, LC-39A and LC-40, which both set respective turnaround records of approximately nine days and eight days earlier this year. SLC-4E will comfortably bookend the two with its imminent 10.7-day turnaround.
Of course, no launch pad routinely operates at its demonstrated minimum, but a leap forward like SLC-4E’s (22.5 to 10.7 days) all but guarantees that the pad will be able to launch far more frequently as long as rockets and payloads are available. Over the last seven months, LC-39A has averaged one launch every 19 days – more than twice its 9.1-day turnaround record. LC-40, which generally deals with simpler missions and only one of three Falcon rocket variants, has managed one launch every 13 days over the same period – closer to its 8.2-day record but still a ways off.
Even if SLC-4E’s average cadence settles somewhere between SpaceX’s other two pads going forward, it will still likely double its contribution the company’s annual launch cadence and help expedite the deployment of its Starlink internet constellation. If all three pads manage an average of about one launch every two weeks, a target that’s well within reach, SpaceX will have the capacity to launch 72 Falcon rockets per year – more than any other family of rockets in history.
Pad aside, Starlink 3-2 will be Falcon 9 booster B1071’s fourth launch overall and second launch in 33 days – SoaceX’s fifth fastest Falcon booster reuse since the practice began in March 2017. Tune in below around 10:30 am PDT (17:30 UTC) to watch Falcon 9’s 32nd launch of 2022.
Tesla recently released Full Self-Driving (FSD) v14.2.1, its latest version, but the tinkering with Speed Profiles has perhaps gone too far.
We try to keep it as real as possible with Full Self-Driving operation, and we are well aware that with the new versions, some things get better, but others get worse. It is all part of the process with FSD, and refinements are usually available within a week or so.
However, the latest v14.2.1 update has brought out some major complaints with Speed Profiles, at least on my end. It seems the adjustments have gone a tad too far, and there is a sizeable gap between Profiles that are next to one another.
Tesla FSD v14.2.1 first impressions:
✅ Smooth, stress-free highway operation
✅ Speed Profiles are refined — Hurry seems to be limited to 10 MPH over on highways. Switching from Mad Max to Hurry results in an abrupt braking pattern. Nothing of concern but do feel as if Speed…— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 29, 2025
The gap is so large that changing between them presents a bit of an unwelcome and drastic reduction in speed, which is perhaps a tad too fast for my liking. Additionally, Speed Profiles seem to have a set Speed Limit offset, which makes it less functional in live traffic situations.
Before I go any further, I’d like to remind everyone reading this that what I am about to write is purely my opinion; it is not right or wrong, or how everyone might feel. I am well aware that driving behaviors are widely subjective; what is acceptable to one might be unacceptable to another.
Speed Profiles are ‘Set’ to a Speed
From what I’ve experienced on v14.2.1, Tesla has chosen to go with somewhat of a preset max speed for each Speed Profile. With ‘Hurry,’ it appears to be 10 MPH over the speed limit, and it will not go even a single MPH faster than that. In a 55 MPH zone, it will only travel 65 MPH. Meanwhile, ‘Standard’ seems to be fixed at between 4-5 MPH over.
This is sort of a tough thing to have fixed, in my opinion. The speed at which the car travels should not be fixed; it should be more dependent on how traffic around it is traveling.
It almost seems as if the Speed Profile chosen should be more of a Behavior Profile. Standard should perform passes only to traffic that is slower than the traffic. If traffic is traveling at 75 MPH in a 65 MPH zone, the car should travel at 75 MPH. It should pass traffic that travels slower than this.
Hurry should be more willing to overtake cars, travel more than 10 MPH over the limit, and act as if someone is in a hurry to get somewhere, hence the name. Setting strict limits on how fast it will travel seems to be a real damper on its capabilities. It did much better in previous versions.
Some Speed Profiles are Too Distant from Others
This is specifically about Hurry and Mad Max, which are neighbors in the Speed Profiles menu. Hurry will only go 10 MPH over the limit, but Mad Max will travel similarly to traffic around it. I’ve seen some people say Mad Max is too slow, but I have not had that opinion when using it.
In a 55 MPH zone during Black Friday and Small Business Saturday, it is not unusual for traffic around me to travel in the low to mid-80s. Mad Max was very suitable for some traffic situations yesterday, especially as cars were traveling very fast. However, sometimes it required me to “gear down” into Hurry, especially as, at times, it would try to pass slower traffic in the right lane, a move I’m not super fond of.
We had some readers also mention this to us:
The abrupt speed reduction when switching to a slower speed profile is definitely an issue that should be improved upon.
— David Klem (@daklem) November 29, 2025
After switching from Mad Max to Hurry, there is a very abrupt drop in speed. It is not violent by any means, but it does shift your body forward, and it seems as if it is a tad drastic and could be refined further.
News
Tesla’s most affordable car is coming to the Netherlands
The trim is expected to launch at €36,990, making it the most affordable Model 3 the Dutch market has seen in years.
Tesla is preparing to introduce the Model 3 Standard to the Netherlands this December, as per information obtained by AutoWeek. The trim is expected to launch at €36,990, making it the most affordable Model 3 the Dutch market has seen in years.
While Tesla has not formally confirmed the vehicle’s arrival, pricing reportedly comes from a reliable source, the publication noted.
Model 3 Standard lands in NL
The U.S. version of the Model 3 Standard provides a clear preview of what Dutch buyers can expect, such as a no-frills configuration that maintains the recognizable Model 3 look without stripping the car down to a bare interior. The panoramic glass roof is still there, the exterior design is unchanged, and Tesla’s central touchscreen-driven cabin layout stays intact.
Cost reductions come from targeted equipment cuts. The American variant uses fewer speakers, lacks ventilated front seats and heated rear seats, and swaps premium materials for cloth and textile-heavy surfaces. Performance is modest compared with the Premium models, with a 0–100 km/h sprint of about six seconds and an estimated WLTP range near 550 kilometers.
Despite the smaller battery and simpler suspension, the Standard maintains the long-distance capability drivers have come to expect in a Tesla.
-->Pricing strategy aligns with Dutch EV demand and taxation shifts
At €36,990, the Model 3 Standard fits neatly into Tesla’s ongoing lineup reshuffle. The current Model 3 RWD has crept toward €42,000, creating space for a more competitive entry-level option, and positioning the new Model 3 Standard comfortably below the €39,990 Model Y Standard.
The timing aligns with rising Dutch demand for affordable EVs as subsidies like SEPP fade and tax advantages for electric cars continue to wind down, EVUpdate noted. Buyers seeking a no-frills EV with solid range are then likely to see the new trim as a compelling alternative.
With the U.S. variant long established and the Model Y Standard already available in the Netherlands, the appearance of an entry-level Model 3 in the Dutch configurator seems like a logical next step.
News
Tesla Model Y is still China’s best-selling premium EV through October
The premium-priced SUV outpaced rivals despite a competitive field, while the Model 3 also secured an impressive position.
The Tesla Model Y led China’s top-selling pure electric vehicles in the 200,000–300,000 RMB segment through October 2025, as per Yiche data compiled from China Passenger Car Association (CPCA) figures.
The premium-priced SUV outpaced rivals despite a competitive field, while the Model 3 also secured an impressive position.
The Model Y is still unrivaled
The Model Y’s dominance shines in Yiche’s October report, topping the chart for vehicles priced between 200,000 and 300,000 RMB. With 312,331 units retailed from January through October, the all-electric crossover was China’s best-selling EV in the 200,000–300,000 RMB segment.
The Xiaomi SU7 is a strong challenger at No. 2 with 234,521 units, followed by the Tesla Model 3, which achieved 146,379 retail sales through October. The Model Y’s potentially biggest rival, the Xiaomi YU7, is currently at No. 4 with 80,855 retail units sold.
Efficiency kings
The Model 3 and Model Y recently claimed the top two spots in Autohome’s latest real-world energy-consumption test, outperforming a broad field of Chinese-market EVs under identical 120 km/h cruising conditions with 375 kg payload and fixed 24 °C cabin temperature. The Model 3 achieved 20.8 kWh/100 km while the Model Y recorded 21.8 kWh/100 km, reaffirming Tesla’s efficiency lead.
The results drew immediate attention from Xiaomi CEO Lei Jun, who publicly recognized Tesla’s advantage while pledging continued refinement for his brand’s lineup.
-->“The Xiaomi SU7’s energy consumption performance is also very good; you can take a closer look. The fact that its test results are weaker than Tesla’s is partly due to objective reasons: the Xiaomi SU7 is a C-segment car, larger and with higher specifications, making it heavier and naturally increasing energy consumption. Of course, we will continue to learn from Tesla and further optimize its energy consumption performance!” Lei Jun wrote in a post on Weibo.
Tesla tinkering with Speed Profiles on FSD v14.2.1 has gone too far
Tesla’s most affordable car is coming to the Netherlands
