News
Firefly launches world’s largest carbon fiber rocket into orbit on second try
Firefly Aerospace’s Alpha rocket has successfully reached orbit on its second try, cementing the company as the victor of a mostly unintentional race between three American NewSpace startups.
After weeks of delays and three aborted launch attempts on September 11th, 12th, and 30th, the second carbon-fiber Alpha rocket lifted off from its Vandenberg Space Force Base (VSFB) SLC-2W launch pad at 12:01 am PDT (07:01 UTC) on October 1st. According to Firefly, the resulting mission was a “100%…success”, indicating that it achieved all of the company’s objectives – an outcome far from guaranteed on the second flight of any orbital rocket.
In a familiar display, Alpha’s suborbital booster lifted the upper stage, fairing, and payload most of the way out of the Earth’s atmosphere within a few minutes. After a mechanical system pushed the two stages apart, the upper stage successfully ignited its lone Lightning engine, ejected the two-piece fairing (nose cone) protecting its payloads, and continued uphill for another five minutes before reaching a stable parking orbit around 250 kilometers (~160 mi) above Earth’s surface.
After successfully reaching orbit, Alpha’s upper stage even made it through a more than 90-minute coast phase and reignited for a brief second burn. Finally, Alpha managed to deploy all seven of the satellites it lifted off with. As a test flight, there was no guarantee that those payloads would end up anywhere other than the Pacific Ocean, so the successful deployment was likely a very pleasant surprise for all satellite operators involved in the mission.
Nicknamed “Into The Black” by Firefly, it was the company’s second Alpha flight and followed an unsuccessful attempt on September 3rd, 2021. During the rocket’s first launch, a loose cable caused one of its booster’s four main Reaver engines to fail almost immediately after liftoff, dooming the attempt. However, the rest of the booster fought for more than two minutes to keep the mission on track before a termination system destroyed the rocket, demonstrating otherwise excellent performance and gathering invaluable data and experience.
Firefly wasted no time putting that experience to good use. Compared to the first vehicle, the booster and upper stage for Alpha’s second flight sailed through preflight testing and completed their respective proof tests (a combined wet dress rehearsal and static fire) on their first tries. That smooth processing bodes well for the timing of Firefly’s third Alpha launch, although the company’s official accounts have strangely been almost silent after Flight 2’s success.
Soon after launch, third-party data showed that Alpha deployed its seven payloads into a 210 x 270 kilometer (130 x 170 mi) orbit. Firefly’s official launch page had stated that the target orbit was 300 kilometers (~185 mi) and called the second ignition of the upper stage a “circularization burn.” Given that the final orbit is far from circular and has an apogee a full 10% below that stated target, it wasn’t clear the rocket had performed exactly as expected. The orbit’s very low perigee means that the customer satellites Alpha deployed could reenter Earth’s atmosphere and burn up after a matter of weeks in space, rather than months or years.
But according to Bill Weber, who became CEO of Firefly less than a month before the launch, Alpha “deployed [Firefly’s] customer payloads at exactly the spot [the company] intended,” strongly implying that the strange final orbit was intentional.
Additionally, official footage Firefly released after the launch suggests that Alpha’s upper stage Lightning engine nozzle narrowly missed the booster’s interstage during stage separation. Had the drifting booster hit that nozzle, it would have likely caused the upper stage to begin tumbling and potentially ended the mission well before orbit. Thankfully, it didn’t, and it should be relatively easy to fix whatever caused the Alpha booster to begin slipping sideways so quickly after separation.
Alpha is the largest all-carbon-fiber rocket ever built. It stands 29.5 meters (~95 ft) tall, 1.8 meters (6 ft) wide, weighs 54 tons (~120,000 lb) fully fueled, and can produce up 81 tons of thrust (~180,000 lbf). Alpha can launch up to 1.17 tons ~(2600 lb) of useful cargo to low Earth orbit (LEO), making it the first successful entrant in a new and rapidly growing field of privately-developed rockets designed to launch 1-2 tons to orbit.
Coincidentally, Firefly found itself neck and neck with two other prospective US providers, Relativity Space and ABL Space. For several months, all three companies were aiming to successfully launch their one-ton-class rockets to orbit sometime in the late summer or early fall. But despite delays, Firefly – already more than a year ahead after its first launch attempt in 2021 – still beat Relativity and ABL Space to flight and did so successfully, securing itself a small but significant milestone in the history of private spaceflight.
The timeline for Relativity’s first 3D-printed Terran-1 rocket launch is no longer clear after a hurricane disrupted its preflight test campaign. ABL Space, meanwhile, has been forced to sit with its first RS1 rocket ready to launch for weeks while waiting on the FAA to complete paperwork and grant it a launch license. Had the FAA moved faster, it’s entirely possible that ABL Space could have launched before Firefly’s Alpha Flight 2, although the odds of success are much lower for RS1 during its debut. Pending that regulatory approval, ABL Space intends to launch RS1 out of Kodiak, Alaska as early as mid-October.
Firefly has yet to offer a substantial statement after the successful launch, which means that the company has provided no information about its next steps or next launch. Per prior statements, the company is working to upgrade its Texas factory to enable up to six Alpha launches in 2023.
News
Tesla’s Apple CarPlay ambitions are not dead, they’re still in the works
For what it’s worth, as a Tesla owner, I don’t particularly see the need for CarPlay, as I have found the in-car system that the company has developed to be superior. However, many people are in love with CarPlay simply because, when it’s in a car that is capable, it is really great.
Tesla’s Apple CarPlay ambitions appeared to be dead in the water after a large amount of speculation late last year that the company would add the user interface seemed to cool down after several weeks of reports.
However, it appears that CarPlay might make its way to Tesla vehicles after all, as a recent report seems to indicate that it is still being worked on by software teams for the company.
The real question is whether it is truly needed or if it is just a want by so many owners that Tesla is listening and deciding to proceed with its development.
Back in November, Bloomberg reported that Tesla was in the process of testing Apple CarPlay within its vehicles, which was a major development considering the company had resisted adopting UIs outside of its own for many years.
Nearly one-third of car buyers considered the lack of CarPlay as a deal-breaker when buying their cars, a study from McKinsey & Co. outlined. This could be a driving decision in Tesla’s inability to abandon the development of CarPlay in its vehicles, especially as it lost a major advantage that appealed to consumers last year: the $7,500 EV tax credit.
Tesla owners propose interesting theory about Apple CarPlay and EV tax credit
Although we saw little to no movement on it since the November speculation, Tesla is now reportedly in the process of still developing the user interface. Mark Gurman, a Bloomberg writer with a weekly newsletter, stated that CarPlay is “still in the works” at Tesla and that more concrete information will be available “soon” regarding its development.
While Tesla already has a very capable and widely accepted user interface, CarPlay would still be an advantage, considering many people have used it in their vehicles for years. Just like smartphones, many people get comfortable with an operating system or style and are resistant to using a new one. This could be a big reason for Tesla attempting to get it in their own cars.
Tesla gets updated “Apple CarPlay” hack that can work on new models
For what it’s worth, as a Tesla owner, I don’t particularly see the need for CarPlay, as I have found the in-car system that the company has developed to be superior. However, many people are in love with CarPlay simply because, when it’s in a car that is capable, it is really great.
It holds one distinct advantage over Tesla’s UI in my opinion, and that’s the ability to read and respond to text messages, which is something that is available within a Tesla, but is not as user-friendly.
With that being said, I would still give CarPlay a shot in my Tesla. I didn’t particularly enjoy it in my Bronco Sport, but that was because Ford’s software was a bit laggy with it. If it were as smooth as Tesla’s UI, which I think it would be, it could be a really great addition to the vehicle.
With the launch of a new trim level for the Model Y last night, something almost went unnoticed — the loss of a moniker that Tesla just recently added to a couple of its variants of the all-electric crossover.
Tesla launched the Model Y All-Wheel-Drive last night, competitively priced at $41,990, but void of the luxurious features that are available within the Premium trims.
Upon examination of the car, one thing was missing, and it was noticeable: Tesla dropped the use of the “Standard” moniker to identify its entry-level offerings of the Model Y.
The Standard Model Y vehicles were introduced late last year, primarily to lower the entry price after the U.S. EV tax credit changes were made. Tesla stripped some features like the panoramic glass roof, premium audio, ambient lighting, acoustic-lined glass, and some of the storage.
Last night, it simply switched the configurations away from “Standard” and simply as the Model Y Rear-Wheel-Drive and Model Y All-Wheel-Drive.
There are three plausible reasons for this move, and while it is minor, there must be an answer for why Tesla chose to abandon the name, yet keep the “Premium” in its upper-level offerings.
“Standard” carried a negative connotation in marketing
Words like “Standard” can subtly imply “basic,” “bare-bones,” or “cheap” to consumers, especially when directly contrasted with “Premium” on the configurator or website. Dropping it avoids making the entry-level Model Y feel inferior or low-end, even though it’s designed for affordability.
Tesla likely wanted the base trim to sound neutral and spec-focused (e.g., just “RWD” highlights drivetrain rather than feature level), while “Premium” continues to signal desirable upgrades, encouraging upsells to higher-margin variants.
Simplifying the overall naming structure for less confusion
The initial “Standard vs. Premium” split (plus Performance) created a somewhat clunky hierarchy, especially as Tesla added more variants like Standard Long Range in some markets or the new AWD base.
Removing “Standard” streamlines things to a more straightforward progression (RWD → AWD → Premium RWD/AWD → Performance), making the lineup easier to understand at a glance. This aligns with Tesla’s history of iterative naming tweaks to reduce buyer hesitation.
Elevating brand perception and protecting perceived value
Keeping “Premium” reinforces that the bulk of the Model Y lineup (especially the popular Long Range models) remains a premium product with desirable features like better noise insulation, upgraded interiors, and tech.
Eliminating “Standard” prevents any dilution of the Tesla brand’s upscale image—particularly important in a competitive EV market—while the entry-level variants can quietly exist as accessible “RWD/AWD” options without drawing attention to them being decontented versions.
You can check out the differences between the “Standard” and “Premium” Model Y vehicles below:
@teslarati There are some BIG differences between the Tesla Model Y Standard and Tesla Model Y Premium #tesla #teslamodely ♬ Sia – Xeptemper
Elon Musk
Tesla bull sees odds rising of Tesla merger after Musk confirms SpaceX-xAI deal
Dan Ives of Wedbush Securities wrote on Tuesday that there is a growing chance Tesla could be merged in some form with SpaceX and xAI over the next 12 to 18 months.
A prominent Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) bull has stated that the odds are rising that Tesla could eventually merge with SpaceX and xAI, following Elon Musk’s confirmation that the private space company has combined with his artificial intelligence startup.
Dan Ives of Wedbush Securities wrote on Tuesday that there is a growing chance Tesla could be merged in some form with SpaceX and xAI over the next 12 to 18 months.
“In our view there is a growing chance that Tesla will eventually be merged in some form into SpaceX/xAI over time. The view is this growing AI ecosystem will focus on Space and Earth together…..and Musk will look to combine forces,” Ives wrote in a post on X.
Ives’ comments followed confirmation from Elon Musk late Monday that SpaceX has merged with xAI. Musk stated that the merger creates a vertically integrated platform that combines AI, rockets, satellite internet, communications, and real-time data.
In a post on SpaceX’s official website, Elon Musk added that the combined company is aimed at enabling space-based AI compute, stating that within two to three years, space could become the lowest-cost environment for generating AI processing power. The transaction reportedly values the combined SpaceX-xAI entity at roughly $1.25 trillion.
Tesla, for its part, has already increased its exposure to xAI, announcing a $2 billion investment in the startup last week in its Q4 and FY 2025 update letter.
While merger speculation has intensified, notable complications could emerge if SpaceX/xAI does merge with Tesla, as noted in a report from Investors Business Daily.
SpaceX holds major U.S. government contracts, including with the Department of Defense and NASA, and xAI’s Grok is being used by the U.S. Department of War. Tesla, for its part, maintains extensive operations in China through Gigafactory Shanghai and its Megapack facility.
Tesla’s Apple CarPlay ambitions are not dead, they’re still in the works
Tesla brings closure to Model Y moniker with launch of new trim level
