News
Rocket Lab set for Electron’s 9th launch as work continues on reusability, new US launch pad
Over the last several weeks, US spaceflight company Rocket Lab has posted major updates about its ongoing work on LC-2 – the company’s second orbital launch complex – and offered a number of glimpses behind the scenes of preparations for Electron’s 9th orbital launch attempt.
That attempt will be streamed by Rocket Lab and could occur as early as October 17th, delayed from the 15th due to unfavorable weather conditions.
Prior to announcing booster recovery efforts – much like SpaceX and the Falcon 9 – the company broke ground on their first US-based launch facility, to be located at the Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport in Wallops Island, Virginia. Launch Complex 2 (LC-2) will join the company’s lone orbital Launch Complex 1 (LC-1) – New Zealand’s first and only orbital launch site – and is meant to enable Rocket Lab to eventually reach a biweekly-to-weekly launch cadence with Electron.
In a statement posted to the company’s social media accounts, Rocket Lab proudly announced that it is working alongside Virginia Space teams to construct LC-2 and its associated Integration and Control Facilities. The future pad recently reached a major milestone as workers installed LC-2’s 66-ton Electron launch platform, to be followed soon after by the installation of the mount’s 44 foot tall (13.4m) strongback, itself weighing 7.6 tons. This marks the beginning of the end of construction efforts at the complex and Rocket Lab is still working towards completion sometime in December 2019. Inaugural pad testing and shakedown operations are expected to begin immediately after, followed by LC-2’s first Electron launch sometime in early 2020.
The US launch facilities will closely resemble Rocket Lab’s New Zealand pad both in appearance and operation: Electron will be rolled horizontally to the launch mount to be lifted vertical after installation on the strongback. A high-pressure water deluge system will protect the mount from Electron and deaden some of the acoustic energy created by the booster.
Mahia Peninsula, New Zealand 2017 (Rocket Lab)
Although Rocket Lab is an American company headquartered in Huntington, CA, it has never launched from the United States. The addition of a second launch complex is expected to drastically increase Electron’s launch cadence, while also lowering the burden placed on companies who would otherwise have to transport spacecraft internationally. In a statement, David Pierce – director of NASA Goddard Space Flight Center’s Wallop Flight Facility – said that “the company’s Electron rocket helps fill a key national need for providing more – and more frequent – launch opportunities for small satellites, and NASA’s Launch Range at GSFC/Wallops, which has enabled commercial space operations for decades, is poised and ready to support these missions.”
Rocket Lab previously worked with NASA to support the Educational Launch of Nanosatellites (ELaNa)-19 mission in December of 2018. So far, Rocket Lab has supported many small companies by launching a total of 39 satellites to orbit. A launch facility located in the US will allow the company to expand its customer base and open up opportunities for more US government launch contracts.
The new US-based launch facility will allow Rocket Lab to expand its employee roster by hiring up to 30 new team members in positions supportive of launch operations including engineering, launch safety, and administration. Launch Complex 2 has been certified to fly Electron up to 12 times a year – specifically supporting government contracts – while Launch Complex 1 in New Zealand has been certified for up to 120 launches per year.
Electron’s 9th launch – nicknamed “As the Crow Flies” – is scheduled for liftoff no earlier than (NET) October 15th and will be a dedicated commercial mission for startup Astro Digital. It will serve as an orbital launch attempt for Astro’s “Corvus” satellite bus and will test the world’s most powerful small electric propulsion system. In a recent blog post, Rocket Lab Senior Vice President of Global Launch Services Lars Hoffman stated that “the mission is a perfect example of the tailored, responsive and precise launch service sought by an increasing number of small satellite operators.”
On October 4th, the 9th flight-qualified Electron rocket completed a routine wet dress rehearsal (WDR) – loading the vehicle with propellant and counting down to launch (sans ignition) – at LC-1. A few days later, Astro Digital’s spacecraft was integrated with a Curie-powered kick stage and encapsulated inside Electron’s carbon fiber payload fairing.
As of now, everything is smoothly on track for Electron’s ninth launch. Of note, the Flight 9 Electron booster is outfitted with a new telemetry system designed to gather a huge amount of data about the reentry environment the booster experiences, data that will be used to reinforce the booster and prepare for its first recovery attempts.
Due to the volume of data that will be produced, Electron will quite literally eject small data capsules that will then be recovered by boat in the Pacific Ocean. If all goes well and the data returned looks promising, Rocket Lab could attempt its first Electron recoveries – nominally grabbing the parasailing booster mid-air with a helicopter – at some point in early 2020.
Check out Teslarati’s newsletters for prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket launch and recovery processes.
Tesla rolled out Full Self-Driving version 14.2 yesterday to members of the Early Access Program (EAP). Expectations were high, and Tesla surely delivered.
With the rollout of Tesla FSD v14.2, there were major benchmarks for improvement from the v14.1 suite, which spanned across seven improvements. Our final experience with v14.1 was with v14.1.7, and to be honest, things were good, but it felt like there were a handful of regressions from previous iterations.
While there were improvements in brake stabbing and hesitation, we did experience a few small interventions related to navigation and just overall performance. It was nothing major; there were no critical takeovers that required any major publicity, as they were more or less subjective things that I was not particularly comfortable with. Other drivers might have been more relaxed.
With v14.2 hitting our cars yesterday, there were a handful of things we truly noticed in terms of improvement, most notably the lack of brake stabbing and hesitation, a major complaint with v14.1.x.
However, in a 62-minute drive that was fully recorded, there were a lot of positives, and only one true complaint, which was something we haven’t had issues with in the past.
The Good
Lack of Brake Stabbing and Hesitation
Perhaps the most notable and publicized issue with v14.1.x was the presence of brake stabbing and hesitation. Arriving at intersections was particularly nerve-racking on the previous version simply because of this. At four-way stops, the car would not be assertive enough to take its turn, especially when other vehicles at the same intersection would inch forward or start to move.
This was a major problem.
However, there were no instances of this yesterday on our lengthy drive. It was much more assertive when arriving at these types of scenarios, but was also more patient when FSD knew it was not the car’s turn to proceed.
Can report on v14.2 today there were ZERO instances of break stabbing or hesitation at intersections today
It was a significant improvement from v14.1.x
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 21, 2025
This improvement was the most noticeable throughout the drive, along with fixes in overall smoothness.
Speed Profiles Seem to Be More Reasonable
There were a handful of FSD v14 users who felt as if the loss of a Max Speed setting was a negative. However, these complaints will, in our opinion, begin to subside, especially as things have seemed to be refined quite nicely with v14.2.
Freeway driving is where this is especially noticeable. If it’s traveling too slow, just switch to a faster profile. If it’s too fast, switch to a slower profile. However, the speeds seem to be much more defined with each Speed Profile, which is something that I really find to be a huge advantage. Previously, you could tell the difference in speeds, but not in driving styles. At times, Standard felt a lot like Hurry. Now, you can clearly tell the difference between the two.
It seems as if Tesla made a goal that drivers should be able to tell which Speed Profile is active if it was not shown on the screen. With v14.1.x, this was not necessarily something that could be done. With v14.2, if someone tested me on which Speed Profile was being used, I’m fairly certain I could pick each one.
Better Overall Operation
I felt, at times, especially with v14.1.7, there were some jerky movements. Nothing that was super alarming, but there were times when things just felt a little more finicky than others.
v14.2 feels much smoother overall, with really great decision-making, lane changes that feel second nature, and a great speed of travel. It was a very comfortable ride.
The Bad
Parking
It feels as if there was a slight regression in parking quality, as both times v14.2 pulled into parking spots, I would have felt compelled to adjust manually if I were staying at my destinations. For the sake of testing, at my first destination, I arrived, allowed the car to park, and then left. At the tail-end of testing, I walked inside the store that FSD v14.2 drove me to, so I had to adjust the parking manually.
This was pretty disappointing. Apart from parking at Superchargers, which is always flawless, parking performance is something that needs some attention. The release notes for v14.2. state that parking spot selection and parking quality will improve with future versions.
Any issues with parking on your end? 14.1.7 didn’t have this trouble with parking pic.twitter.com/JPLRO2obUj
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 21, 2025
However, this was truly my only complaint about v14.2.
You can check out our full 62-minute ride-along below:
Elon Musk
SpaceX issues statement on Starship V3 Booster 18 anomaly
The incident unfolded during gas-system pressure testing at the company’s Massey facility in Starbase, Texas.
SpaceX has issued an initial statement about Starship Booster 18’s anomaly early Friday. The incident unfolded during gas-system pressure testing at the company’s Massey facility in Starbase, Texas.
SpaceX’s initial comment
As per SpaceX in a post on its official account on social media platform X, Booster 18 was undergoing gas system pressure tests when the anomaly happened. Despite the nature of the incident, the company emphasized that no propellant was loaded, no engines were installed, and personnel were kept at a safe distance from the booster, resulting in zero injuries.
“Booster 18 suffered an anomaly during gas system pressure testing that we were conducting in advance of structural proof testing. No propellant was on the vehicle, and engines were not yet installed. The teams need time to investigate before we are confident of the cause. No one was injured as we maintain a safe distance for personnel during this type of testing. The site remains clear and we are working plans to safely reenter the site,” SpaceX wrote in its post on X.
Incident and aftermath
Livestream footage from LabPadre showed Booster 18’s lower half crumpling around the liquid oxygen tank area at approximately 4:04 a.m. CT. Subsequent images posted by on-site observers revealed extensive deformation across the booster’s lower structure. Needless to say, spaceflight observers have noted that Booster 18 would likely be a complete loss due to its anomaly.
Booster 18 had rolled out only a day earlier and was one of the first vehicles in the Starship V3 program. The V3 series incorporates structural reinforcements and reliability upgrades intended to prepare Starship for rapid-reuse testing and eventual tower-catch operations. Elon Musk has been optimistic about Starship V3, previously noting on X that the spacecraft might be able to complete initial missions to Mars.
Investor's Corner
Tesla analyst maintains $500 PT, says FSD drives better than humans now
The team also met with Tesla leaders for more than an hour to discuss autonomy, chip development, and upcoming deployment plans.
Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) received fresh support from Piper Sandler this week after analysts toured the Fremont Factory and tested the company’s latest Full Self-Driving software. The firm reaffirmed its $500 price target, stating that FSD V14 delivered a notably smooth robotaxi demonstration and may already perform at levels comparable to, if not better than, average human drivers.
The team also met with Tesla leaders for more than an hour to discuss autonomy, chip development, and upcoming deployment plans.
Analysts highlight autonomy progress
During more than 75 minutes of focused discussions, analysts reportedly focused on FSD v14’s updates. Piper Sandler’s team pointed to meaningful strides in perception, object handling, and overall ride smoothness during the robotaxi demo.
The visit also included discussions on updates to Tesla’s in-house chip initiatives, its Optimus program, and the growth of the company’s battery storage business. Analysts noted that Tesla continues refining cost structures and capital expenditure expectations, which are key elements in future margin recovery, as noted in a Yahoo Finance report.
Analyst Alexander Potter noted that “we think FSD is a truly impressive product that is (probably) already better at driving than the average American.” This conclusion was strengthened by what he described as a “flawless robotaxi ride to the hotel.”
Street targets diverge on TSLA
While Piper Sandler stands by its $500 target, it is not the highest estimate on the Street. Wedbush, for one, has a $600 per share price target for TSLA stock.
Other institutions have also weighed in on TSLA stock as of late. HSBC reiterated a Reduce rating with a $131 target, citing a gap between earnings fundamentals and the company’s market value. By contrast, TD Cowen maintained a Buy rating and a $509 target, pointing to strong autonomous driving demonstrations in Austin and the pace of software-driven improvements.
Stifel analysts also lifted their price target for Tesla to $508 per share over the company’s ongoing robotaxi and FSD programs.
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.2 – Full Review, the Good and the Bad
SpaceX issues statement on Starship V3 Booster 18 anomaly
