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.
Tesla just raised Model Y prices for the first time in two years, with the largest increase being $1,000.
The move signals shifting dynamics in the competitive electric vehicle market as the company continues to work on balancing demand, profitability, and accessibility.
The new pricing affects premium trims while leaving entry-level options unchanged. The Model Y Premium Rear-Wheel Drive (RWD) now starts at $45,990, a $1,000 increase.
The Model Y Premium All-Wheel Drive (AWD)—previously referred to in the post as simply “Model Y AWD”—rises to $49,990, also up $1,000. The top-tier Model Y Performance sees a more modest $500 bump, bringing its starting price to $57,990.
Tesla Model Y prices just went up:
New prices:
🚗 Model Y Premium RWD: $45,990 – up $1,000
🚗 Model Y AWD: $49,990 – up $1,000
🚗 Model Y Performance: $57,990 – up $500 https://t.co/e4GhQ0tj4H pic.twitter.com/TCWqr3oqiV— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) May 16, 2026
Base models remain untouched to preserve affordability. The entry-level Model Y RWD holds steady at $39,990, and the base Model Y AWD stays at $41,990. This selective approach keeps the crossover accessible for budget-conscious buyers while extracting more revenue from higher-margin configurations.
After years of aggressive price cuts to stimulate volume amid slowing EV adoption and rising competition from rivals like BYD, Ford, and GM, Tesla appears confident in underlying demand. Recent lineup refreshes for the 2026 Model Y, including refreshed styling and efficiency gains, have helped maintain its status as America’s best-selling EV.
By protecting base prices, Tesla avoids alienating price-sensitive customers while improving margins on the more popular variants.
Tesla Model Y ownership review after six months: What I love and what I don’t
For consumers, the changes are relatively modest—under 3% on affected trims—and still position the Model Y competitively against gas-powered SUVs in the same class. Federal tax credits and potential state incentives may further offset costs for eligible buyers.
This marks a subtle but notable shift from the deep discounting era that defined much of 2024 and 2025. As the EV market matures into 2026, Tesla’s pricing strategy will be closely watched for clues about production ramps, new variants like the rumored longer-wheelbase Model Y, and broader profitability goals.
In short, today’s adjustment reflects a company that remains dominant yet pragmatic—willing to test higher pricing where demand supports it. It is unlikely to deter consumers from choosing other options.
Elon Musk cannot be fired from SpaceX, and there’s a reason for that.
In a blunt post on X on Friday, Elon Musk confirmed plans to structurally shield his leadership at SpaceX, ensuring he cannot be fired while tying a potential trillion-dollar compensation package to the company’s long-term goal of establishing a self-sustaining colony on Mars.
Yes, I need to make sure SpaceX stays focused on making life multiplanetary and extending consciousness to the stars, not pandering to someone’s bullshit quarterly earnings bonus!
Obviously, IF SpaceX succeeds in this absurdly difficult goal, it will be worth many orders of…
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) May 15, 2026
The revelation stems from a Financial Times report detailing SpaceX’s intention to restructure its governance and compensation framework. The moves are designed to protect Musk’s control and align his incentives with the company’s founding mission rather than short-term financial pressures. Musk’s reply left no ambiguity:
“Yes, I need to make sure SpaceX stays focused on making life multiplanetary and extending consciousness to the stars, not pandering to someone’s bullshit quarterly earnings bonus!”
He added that success in this “absurdly difficult goal” would generate value “many orders of magnitude more than the economy of Earth,” though he cautioned that the journey will not be smooth. “Don’t expect entirely smooth sailing along the way,” Musk wrote.
The strategy reflects Musk’s deep concerns about how public-market expectations could derail SpaceX’s core objective. Founded in 2002, SpaceX has repeatedly stated its purpose is to reduce the cost of space travel and ultimately make humanity a multiplanetary species.
Unlike Tesla, which went public in 2010 and has faced repeated battles over Musk’s compensation and board influence, SpaceX remains privately held. Musk has long resisted taking the rocket company public precisely to avoid the quarterly earnings treadmill that forces most CEOs to prioritize short-term stock performance over ambitious, high-risk projects.
By embedding protections against his removal and linking any outsized pay package to verifiable milestones—such as a functioning Mars colony—SpaceX aims to insulate its leadership from activist investors or board members who might demand faster profits or safer bets.
Musk has referenced past experiences, including his ouster from OpenAI and shareholder lawsuits at Tesla, as cautionary tales. In those cases, he argued, external pressures risked diluting the original vision.
Critics may view the arrangement as excessive, especially given Musk’s already substantial voting power and wealth. Supporters, however, argue it is a necessary safeguard for a company pursuing goals measured in decades rather than quarters. Achieving a Mars colony would require sustained investment in Starship development, orbital refueling, life-support systems, and in-situ resource utilization—technologies that may deliver no immediate financial return.
Musk’s post underscores a broader philosophical point: true breakthrough innovation often demands tolerance for volatility and a willingness to ignore conventional business wisdom. As SpaceX prepares for increasingly ambitious Starship test flights and eventual crewed missions, the new governance structure signals that the company’s North Star remains unchanged—humanity’s expansion beyond Earth.
Whether the trillion-dollar package materializes depends on execution, but Musk’s message is clear: SpaceX exists to reach the stars, not to chase the next earnings beat. For investors or employees who share that vision, the protections are not a perk—they are a prerequisite for success.
News
Tesla discloses two Robotaxi crashes to NHTSA
Newly unredacted data filed with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reveals the two incidents.
Tesla has disclosed information on two low-speed crashes that occurred in Austin with its Robotaxi platform. These incidents occurred with teleoperators steering the vehicle, and there were no passengers in the car at the time they happened.
Newly unredacted data filed with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reveals the two incidents.
The first crash took place in July 2025, shortly after Tesla launched its nascent Robotaxi network in Austin. The ADS reportedly struggled to move forward while stopped on a street. A teleoperator assumed control, gradually accelerating and turning left toward the roadside. The vehicle then mounted the curb and struck a metal fence.
In the second incident, in January 2026, the ADS was traveling straight when the safety monitor requested navigation support. The teleoperator took over from a stop, continued forward, and collided with a temporary construction barricade at approximately 9 mph, scraping the front-left fender and tire.
Tesla Robotaxi service in Austin achieves monumental new accomplishment
Tesla has previously told lawmakers that teleoperators are authorized to pilot vehicles remotely—but only at speeds below 10 mph, as the only maneuvers they were approved to perform were repositioning in awkward areas.
“This capability enables Tesla to promptly move a vehicle that may be in a compromising position, thereby mitigating the need to wait for a first responder or Tesla field representative to manually recover the vehicle,” the company stated in filings earlier this year.
Before this week, Tesla redacted the NHTSA reports, but they decided to reveal all 17 Robotaxi incidents recorded since the launch in Austin last Summer. Most of the other crashes involved the Tesla being struck by other road users and were not caused by the self-driving suite itself.
There were other incidents, including two additional self-caused accidents involving the ADS clipping side mirrors on parked cars. In September 2025, one Robotaxi struck a dog that darted into the roadway (the dog escaped unharmed), while another made an unprotected left turn into a parking lot and hit a metal chain.
Although Waymo and Zoox have reported more total crashes, Tesla operates at a far smaller scale. The cautious pace reflects the company’s broader safety concerns; it has been very slow with the Robotaxi rollout to ensure the suite is ready for operation.
Last month, CEO Elon Musk acknowledged that “making sure things are completely safe” remains the primary bottleneck to expanding the network, describing the company’s approach as “very cautious.”
The unredacted filings arrive amid heightened regulatory scrutiny of autonomous vehicles. NHTSA recently closed a separate probe into Tesla’s Full Self-Driving software repeatedly striking parking-lot obstacles such as bollards and chains—a problem that also prompted a recall at Waymo last year.
Tesla Robotaxi has been a widely successful program in its early days of operation, and the transparency Tesla brings here is greatly appreciated. Incidents will happen, of course, but the honesty gives customers and regulators a sense of where Tesla is in terms of developing its self-driving and fully autonomous ride-hailing suite.
Tesla Model Y prices just went up for the first time in two years
Elon Musk explains why he cannot be fired from SpaceX
