News
NASA & US Air Force consider SpaceX’s reusable rockets for future missions
Three of SpaceX’s largest and most important customers have in some way expressed significant interest in flying missions aboard recovered SpaceX Falcon 9 rockets. Even with respect to the three commercial reuses SpaceX has already accomplished this year, the combined interest of NASA, the US Air Force, and Iridium could well mark a major phase change in the space industry.
NASA
According to NASASpaceflight.com, NASA has been exploring reused Falcon 9 hardware for CRS-13, a cargo Dragon mission scheduled for no earlier than December 4th. If NASA finalizes approvals in time, CRS-13 could see SpaceX reuse both the Falcon 9 first stage and the Dragon spacecraft atop it, in many ways reminiscent of SpaceX’s ultimate goal of full reusability. Furthermore, for CRS-13, NASA is focused on launching aboard the same Falcon 9 that flew CRS-11 just four months ago, a pleasant synergy that would figuratively suggest the development of a fleet ownership-type attitude. NASA is by far SpaceX’s largest customer and has been an invaluable source of support and expertise for the company for nearly all of its 15 years of operations.
Falcon 9 1031 prepped and ready for its second flight and SpaceX’s third commercial reuse. (Tom Cross/Teslarati)
US Air Force
The week initially began with a Bloomberg interview of US Space Command head General Jay Ramond that can be best described as a resounding affirmation of the Air Force’s interest in reused SpaceX rockets. Never one for subtlety, Gen. Raymond was quoted saying that the USAF would be “absolutely foolish” and “dumb” to not consider flying on reused rockets. While reused hardware will need to be certified separately for Air Force missions, the Raymond suggested that the process of certifying the reusable Falcon 9 had already begun, although he was unable to provide a an estimate for when it might be completed. Ultimately, although the Air Force is laser-focused on reliability over all other traits, Raymond praised SpaceX for its role in introducing price-shrinking competition to the launch market and reiterated his “[complete] commitment to…reused rocket[s].”
Iridium Communications
Up next on the docket is Iridium, a satellite communications provider that contracted with SpaceX for the eight missions required to launch its next generation Iridium NEXT constellation. While CEO Matt Desch has openly expressed interest in reuse over the last year and a half, he remained skeptical and maintained that he was effectively waiting for a more amicable discount on reused vehicles before biting the bullet. SpaceX must have made an offer that couldn’t be refused, as Iridium Communications announced in a press release that the NEXT-4 and NEXT-5 missions will both fly atop reused Falcon 9 first stages, beginning with NEXT-4 on December 22nd.
Of crucial importance, Iridium also noted that the premiums paid to their launch insurers would not increase as a result of the adoption of reused hardware. While the change boosters means that the newly-completed Landing Zone at Vandenberg will have to wait until 2018 to host a Falcon 9 recovery, that is a small consolation to pay for yet another major customer warming up to SpaceX’s reusability program.
Falcon 9 1041 the night before its predawn liftoff for the Iridium NEXT-3 mission. (SpaceX)
Encore: Spacecom
Finally, in an unexpected and encouraging turn of events, Israeli communications satellite operator Spacecom announced on Wednesday that they had contracted with SpaceX for the 2019 and 2020 launches of the Amos-17 and Amos-8 communications satellites.
In early-September 2016, a Falcon 9 preparing to conduct a static fire suffered a catastrophic failure that destroyed vehicle, Spacecom’s Amos-6 payload, and extensively damaged Launch Complex 40. With SpaceX effectively at fault for the loss, they were contractually obligated to either return Spacecom’s $50m deposit or provide a second launch at no additional cost. Spacecom sided with the latter and further tripled down on SpaceX with a second launch order in 2020 and the decision to fly Amos-17 on a reused Falcon 9.
While one could dismiss the choice to exploit free reflight as a move begrudgingly forced by financial pragmatism, Spacecom’s Amos-8 launch order and decision to fly on reused hardware is undeniable evidence that the two companies have preserved their relationship in spite of the Amos-6 trials and tribulations.
Whoa. Spacecom not only going back to #SpaceX F9 for free re-flight of AMOS-6, but it looks like it will be on a flight-proven F9 to boot!
— Chris G (@ChrisG_SpX) October 18, 2017
All said and done, the fact that all four of these groundbreaking announcements occurred over the course of a handful of days is incredible. If the trope could ever be said to be applicable, it is hard to deny that SpaceX is likely on aerospace’s Cloud 9 this week.
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
