News
Best places to watch SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy launch
Just a day away from SpaceX’s first inaugural Falcon Heavy launch attempt on February 6 at 1:30 pm EST, hype for the triple-rocket is reaching a boiling point, and for good reason. Already, there are hints and reports that the launch is likely to draw crowds not seen in several years, likely well over 100,000 people. This means that those still interested in viewing the historic launch but not yet committed may have trouble gaining access to the most popular viewing locations in Florida, but there are still a number of ways to join in on the spectacle.
SpaceX’s massive Falcon Heavy seen at Pad 39A ahead of its first successful static fire test. (Tom Cross)
Launch photographers and committed spaceflight fans are by far the best resources in this regard, and many have decades of experience viewing all kinds of rocket launches from Cape Canaveral, Florida. Prominent photographer Ben Cooper has created a brief launch viewing guide specific to Falcon Heavy, the size of which means that certain viewing sites are either closed or already sold out. Quoted below, he provides a solid summary of the options still available to fans and travelers alike:
Falcon Heavy / [No Earlier Than] Feb 6 @ 1:30pm (Pad 39A):
1) If you are heading to PLAYALINDA BEACH (3.6 miles at first parking lot, closest possible spot to watch this launch): They plan to remain open, but the park reserves the right to change that, alter traffic patterns, and close beaches/areas when parking lots are filled. The beach opens at 6:00am. GET THERE EARLY AND HAVE A BACKUP PLAN. THEY MAY CLOSE UPON REACHING PARKING CAPACITY. Plan for the possibility of having to walk between one and three miles from where you park if you wish to get closer.
2) The Kennedy Space Center Visitor Center (KSCVC) is also selling tickets: Saturn V Center (3.9 miles) tickets are SOLD OUT. Tickets to go to the Visitor Complex itself were still available as of Feb. 1 (7.4 miles; you will see the launch and landing only in the sky; the pads are behind the trees). (They are also selling $35 tickets to watch from a location in Titusville which you otherwise go to for free.)
3) Next best for launch only: Titusville riverfront areas (any), but especially on top of the Max Brewer Bridge (11.7 miles, Rt. 406/Garden Street).
4) Next best for launch + landings both: Port Canaveral (Rt. 401, 6.9 from landings, 13 from launch) or Jetty Park (6.0 from landings but no view of launch pad). If 401 is filled or no more parking is allowed, fall back to Rt 528/Beeline behind it.
If you’re looking for a far more populated map including public transport, airports, rest stops, nearby amenities, and more, LaunchRats.com has you covered. They also feature a Falcon Heavy viewing guide, but Ben’s above guide is nearly identical. For a full rundown of the above resources and much, much more, Tim “Everyday Astronaut” Dodd has crafted an extremely well-made video walking viewers through all they need to know ahead of attempting to watch rocket launches in Florida, and I highly recommend it if you have ten or so minutes to spare.
As he rightly points out, Falcon Heavy viewing guides effectively work for all launches Florida, albeit minus any rocket landing attempts in the case of NASA or ULA missions. In the case of Falcon Heavy, not one but two of its three first stages will be attempting landings at Landing Zone 1, guaranteed to produce a visual spectacle from several of the aforementioned viewing locations, as well as a symphony of sonic booms (probably six or more) throughout the East coast of Florida. Buckle up, it’s bound to be a moment to remember, one way or another. For those that can’t attend the launch in person, SpaceX will undoubtedly provide their own exceptional live coverage.
Follow along live as launch photographer Tom Cross covers this incredible moment in person, documenting all of the best parts on Teslarati’s Instagram stories. Up next is the release of be a Falcon Heavy launch animation straight from SpaceX.
Teslarati – Instagram – Twitter
Tom Cross – Instagram
Eric Ralph – Twitter
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
