News
SpaceX to receive $15m from Florida to build Falcon refurbishment facility
The state of Florida’s Space Florida initiative is likely to award SpaceX nearly $15 million in support of the company’s recently-publicized plan to build a new Falcon rocket refurbishment facility and launch control center on Kennedy Space Center property.
All things considered, such an investment would be an extremely savvy move for the state, potentially speeding up an expansion that will pave the way – quite literally in terms of infrastructure — for SpaceX to support a dramatically larger launch cadence in Florida. Writing in an environmental assessment (EA) for the Richards Road project discovered in early June, the company provided a rough estimate for what that growth could look like:
“SpaceX estimates a possible 150 construction jobs associated with the initial development of the Proposed Action, and approximately 70 new SpaceX employees to support additional operations on KSC. SpaceX plans to launch more than 4,000 satellites with the intention that most of these satellites will be launched from LC-39A and LC-40.” (p. 39)
-
- Satellite imagery from Google Maps shows the currently-abandoned site of SpaceX’s prospective Florida expansion. (Google Maps)
-
- SpaceX’s Launch Complex 39A pictured in April 2018. (Tom Cross)
-
- TomCross photographing Falcon 9 with the Zuma payload at SLC-40.
In the case of “most” of “more than 4,000 satellites” being launched from Florida, SpaceX is undoubtedly referring to the first phase of their Starlink internet constellation, a program that is also rapidly growing an R&D team to complete the system’s production-ready design and build a state-of-the-art factory for the vast majority of the network’s major components. For context, 70-90 additional new employees would grow SpaceX’s Florida presence by as much as 20-30% from 2018 levels.
Teslarati reached out to SpaceX for further clarification on the Starlink-related comments in the EA, but the company could not be reached for comment on the matter. However, SpaceX was later able to provide a statement on their prospective Richards Road expansion, reprinted below.
“As SpaceX’s launch cadence and manifest for missions from Florida continues to grow, we are seeking to expand our capabilities and streamline operations to launch, land and re-fly our Falcon family of rockets.”
It’s worth noting that SpaceX President and COO Gwynne Shotwell told CNBC reporters in May 2018 that the company expected 2019 to look more like 2017 (18 launches), suggesting that next year will likely be 30-50% slower than its busy 2018 launch schedule. Although the COO did state that “2019 [will] probably be closer to 2017 due to lower demand”, she didn’t explicitly include non-commercial launches in her figuring.
-
- While SpaceX’s 2018 manifest is likely to support more annual launches than the company has yet to achieve, the trend slopes a bit down in the 12-24 months that follow. The SES-12 satellite is shown here and was launched in June 2018. (SES)
-
- Iridium NEXT satellites being attached to the payload dispenser at SpaceX’s VAFB facilities. Iridium’s contract for eight launches should be completed by Q4 2018. (Iridium)
Combined with SpaceX’s official statement that its Florida manifest “continues to grow”, an observation that at face-value plainly contradicts the Chief Operating Officer’s on-record estimations, it seems almost impossible that that manifest growth is not largely a consequence of internal plans to dedicate a number of launches to Starlink satellites. As of June 2018, crowdsourced SpaceX launch manifests show a total of 20 possible launches in 2019 and 12 in 2020 – while plausible that a number of additional missions will be contracted or publicly announced as time marches on, it’s somewhat less plausible that those missions will push SpaceX’s commercial launch demand up to or above 2018 levels (24-28 launches).
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/875849793204928512
Starlink launches thus make sense as a gap-filler for the one or two demand-sapped years likely to follow 2018, too near for SpaceX’s reusability-associated launch price drops to make a difference and too early for the company’s full-reusable BFR to come online. Rather conveniently, the production of roughly 12 new Block 5 Falcon 9s and Heavies per year would almost certainly keep all of SpaceX’s rocket manufacturing facilities busy, while also leaving an unfathomably vast fleet of stagnant Block 5 boosters (and hopefully payload fairings) available for any internal missions required by the Starlink program. If Patricia Cooper’s late-2017 statements are still roughly true today, SpaceX plans to begin the first dedicated launches of operational Starlink satellites in 2019, perfectly coinciding with their publicly anticipated lull in commercial launch demand.
Although it does depend on an extraordinarily rapid and successful ramp of the Starlink program, the paradoxical opportunity presented to SpaceX by launch demand lulls in 2019 and 2020 is hard to deny. Around the same time, one would expect the market for launches to begin to seriously respond to the arrival of a new, more affordable paradigm of orbital access, potentially culminating in an unprecedented demand for commercial launches as the price of entry begins to drop appreciably.
Tesla Cybercab stands to gain from new rules that the Trump Administration is aiming to enforce on autonomous vehicles. On Thursday, NHTSA, under the Trump Administration’s U.S. Department of Transportation, commenced rulemaking on the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS).
This effort aims to eliminate the mandate for manual brake pedals in vehicles that are designed to be driven exclusively by automated driving systems. This would impact the Tesla Cybercab, which the company has stated would operate without a steering wheel or pedals.
Tesla Cybercab launch is imminent after latest sighting at Giga Texas
The Trump Administration is looking to revise FMVSS No. 135, which requires standard braking systems on light-duty vehicles.
Currently, the regulation requires light-duty cars to use traditional manual braking systems that allow operators to slow the vehicle. With the advent of self-driving in the U.S., these regulations need updating, and these are the changes that could come to FMVSS No. 135:
- Removes requirements for hand- or foot-operated brake controls for vehicles designed never to be operated by a human. Existing rules still apply to AVs that retain manual controls.
- All subject vehicles must still meet the same stopping distance performance criteria via alternative testing procedures.
- While this update ensures AVs can physically stop when commanded, NHTSA is separately developing safety performance requirements for AVs in real-world driving scenarios.
- NHTSA will continue to use its broad defect enforcement authority to investigate unsafe ADS behavior and oversee recalls.
As autonomy becomes a greater part of passenger travel, these types of rule adjustments will be more than reasonable. It will give manufacturers the ability to self-certify their vehicles and avoid any red tape that could ultimately delay the deployment of these vehicles.
Administrators are also incredibly excited about the opportunity to play a role in the advancement of self-driving vehicles.
“We are at the cusp of the greatest technological revolution in vehicle technology since the innovation of the Model T,” NHTSA Administrator Jonathan Morrison said. “If we want America to lead the way, we have to reimagine our regulatory framework. That’s why under Secretary Sean Duffy’s AV Framework, NHTSA is tearing down pointless barriers to innovative designs while strengthening the fundamental safety requirements that matter and holding AV developers accountable for safe performance.”
The Cybercab entered mass production at Gigafactory Texas in April. Tesla ultimately plans to push the vehicle into its Robotaxi fleet, potentially when frameworks like these are established.
Tesla plans to boost production at its Gigafactory Berlin plant in Germany following a sharp rebound in sales and demand in Europe after a softer 2025.
The plans put Tesla in a better position to compete with strengthening companies in Europe and potentially other markets; demand indicators show Tesla is much better off than in 2025.
Last year was a tough year for Tesla in terms of overall demand in Europe. The company produced over 200,000 vehicles at the German plant last year, a soft figure compared to the 375,000 vehicles Tesla lists as its current capacity at the factory.
🚨 Tesla said this morning it will ramp up production at Gigafactory Berlin to a volume of 7,500 vehicles per week.
This is a 20 percent boost in production. Tesla will hire 1,000 new employees to help with the increase.$TSLA pic.twitter.com/kravKfRO5n
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 25, 2026
Tesla’s overall European sales dropped significantly last year due to a variety of factors. However, sales are rebounding, and demand is strong once again, and only getting stronger. Tesla is now planning to bump production of Model Y vehicles at Giga Berlin upward by about 20 percent. It will also bring 1,000 new jobs to the plant.
Tesla confirmed the details of its planned production expansion in Germany this morning. It is a strategy to keep up with strengthening demand.
In Q1, Tesla saw a record 61,000 vehicles produced at Giga Berlin. European registrations rebounded sharply, with Model Y seeing 117 percent increases in March 2026 compared to last year. Germany alone saw stark increases, with a quadrupling in registrations to 9,252 units.
This trend continued in other key European markets, including France, Denmark and Sweden. Tesla registrations were up over 46 percent in some of these markets, and Model Y continued its trend as a top BEV in the market.
Demand has been recovering strongly in 2026, giving Tesla a reason to expand production efforts at the factory. These increases signal management’s confidence in sustained or growing European pull for Berlin-built vehicles.
Tesla is being sued by the family of the woman who was killed in a Texas crash involving a Model 3. The driver, who is also being sued, claimed the vehicle was operating on Autopilot mode, but Tesla executives have come out challenging that claim, stating that the driver of the vehicle overrode the system.
The lawsuit was filed by 76-year-old Martha Avila’s daughter and her husband, who allege a “design defect” involving a Tesla and a failure to warn. The suit alleges negligence against Tesla and the driver, Michael Butler.
Butler “stated he was operating with an automated driving assistance system engaged at the time of the crash,” the Harris County Sheriff’s Office said in a statement. He showed no signs of intoxication and was cooperative, the Sheriff’s Office said, according to NBC News.
Just after reports of the crash and numerous headlines that immediately blamed Tesla’s Autopilot suite, both Tesla CEO Elon Musk and Head of AI Ashok Elluswamy challenged that. Musk said the crash made “no sense” given that Tesla Autopilot and Full Self-Driving do not travel at the speeds the door cameras captured the car traveling at, which Tesla says was 73 MPH.
Tesla finally clarifies fatal Texas crash, confirms driver manually overrode acceleration
Elluswamy also revealed that Tesla data showed Butler overrode the system by pressing the accelerator to 100%, and that the pedal was compressed fully even after the car had crashed. Tesla has not released this data to the public, likely because it is communicating with agencies like the NHTSA on an investigation.
The suit uses a Washington Post analysis of government data that “identified at least 17 fatal incidents linked to Tesla Autopilot.”
This is far from the first time an accident has been blamed on Autopilot. A fatal crash in Texas was blamed on Autopilot several years ago, but when Tesla released data to the NTSB, which was investigating the crash, Autopilot was not available where the crash occurred, and Autosteer was never enabled, meaning the car was manually controlled at the time of the accident.
“Application of the accelerator pedal was found to be as high as 98.8 percent,” the NTSB said in their findings. The highest recorded speed in the five seconds leading up to the impact was 67 miles per hour. The area where the crash occurred is residential, and Texas State laws… pic.twitter.com/XGD97NHVZ2
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) March 18, 2026
More information on the accident will be released as Tesla works with agencies to find the cause of the crash. From personal experience, it is hard to imagine Tesla Autopilot or FSD operating in this manner. It drives sometimes too cautiously in residential areas in parking lots, at least in my experience. Speeding happens, but at this rate in this type of area, it is hard to believe.
We look forward to more details being released with time.
Tesla Cybercab stands to gain from new Trump autonomy rules
Tesla plans production boost at Giga Berlin following rebound in Europe
