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.
-->
Elon Musk
Elon Musk gives nod to SpaceX’s massive, previously impossible feat
It was the booster’s 30th flight, a scenario that seemed impossible before SpaceX became a dominant force in spaceflight.
Elon Musk gave a nod to one of SpaceX’s most underrated feats today. Following the successful launch of the Transporter-15 mission, SpaceX seamlessly landed another Falcon 9 booster on a droneship in the middle of the ocean.
It was the booster’s 30th flight, a scenario that seemed impossible before SpaceX became a dominant force in spaceflight.
Elon Musk celebrates a veteran Falcon 9 booster’s feat
SpaceX completed another major milestone for its Smallsat Rideshare program on Friday, successfully launching and deploying 140 spacecraft aboard a Falcon 9 from Vandenberg Space Force Base. The mission, known as Transporter-15, lifted off two days later than planned after a scrub attributed to a ground systems issue, according to SpaceFlight Now. SpaceX confirmed that all payloads designed to separate from the rocket were deployed as planned.
The Falcon 9 used for this flight was booster B1071, one of SpaceX’s most heavily flown rockets. With its 30th mission completed, it becomes the second booster in SpaceX’s fleet to reach that milestone. B1071’s manifest includes five National Reconnaissance Office missions, NASA’s SWOT satellite, and several previous rideshare deployments, among others. Elon Musk celebrated the milestone on X, writing “30 flights of the same rocket!” in his post.
Skeptics once dismissed reusability as unfeasible
While rocket landings are routine for SpaceX today, that was not always the case. Industry veterans previously questioned whether reusable rockets could ever achieve meaningful cost savings or operational reliability, often citing the Space Shuttle’s partial reusability as evidence of failure.
-->In 2016, Orbital ATK’s Ben Goldberg argued during a panel that even if rockets could be reusable, they do not make a lot of sense. He took issue with Elon Musk’s claims at the time, Ars Technica reported, particularly when the SpaceX founder stated that fuel costs account for just a fraction of launch costs.
Goldberg noted that at most, studies showed only a 30% cost reduction for low-Earth orbit missions by using a reusable rocket. “You’re not going to get 100-fold. These numbers aren’t going to change by an order of magnitude. They’re just not. That’s the state of where we are today,” he said.
Former NASA official Dan Dumbacher, who oversaw the Space Launch System, expressed similar doubts in 2014, implying that if NASA couldn’t make full reusability viable, private firms like SpaceX faced steep odds.
News
Tesla AI and Autopilot VP hints that Robovan will have RV conversions
Tesla’s vice president of AI and Autopilot software, Ashok Elluswamy, hinted at the linitiative in a reply to Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan.
It appears that Tesla is indeed considering an RV in its future pipeline, though the vehicle that would be converted for the purpose would be quite interesting. This is, at least, as per recent comments by a Tesla executive on social media platform X.
Robovan as an RV
Tesla’s vice president of AI and Autopilot software, Ashok Elluswamy, hinted at the linitiative in a reply to Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan, who called for a startup to build RVs with Full Self-Driving capabilities. In his reply, Elluswamy simply stated “On it,” while including a photo of Tesla’s autonomous 20-seat people mover.
Tesla unveiled the Robovan in October 2024 at the “We, Robot” event. The vehicle lacks a steering wheel and features a low floor for spacious interiors. The vehicle, while eclipsed by the Cybercab in news headlines, still captured the imagination of many, as hinted at by X users posting AI-generated images of Robovan RV conversions with beds, kitchens and panoramic windows on social media platforms. One such render by Tesla enthusiast Mark Anthony reached over 300,000 views on X.
Elon Musk on the Robovan
Elon Musk addressed the Robovan’s low profile in October 2024, stating the van uses automatic load-leveling suspension that raises or lowers based on road conditions. The system maintains the futuristic look while handling uneven pavement, Musk wrote on X. The CEO also stated that the Robovan is designed to be very airy inside, which would be great for an RV.
“The view from the inside is one of extreme openness, with visibility in all directions, although it may appear otherwise from the outside. The unusually low ground clearance is achieved by having an automatic load-leveling suspension that raises or lowers, based on smooth or bumpy road conditions,” Musk stated.
-->Elluswamy’s response on X suggests that Tesla is considering a Robovan RV conversion, though it would be interesting to see how the company will make the vehicle capable of reaching campsites. The Robovan has a very low ground clearance, after all, and campsites tend to be in unpaved areas.
Tesla recently released Full Self-Driving (FSD) v14.2.1, its latest version, but the tinkering with Speed Profiles has perhaps gone too far.
We try to keep it as real as possible with Full Self-Driving operation, and we are well aware that with the new versions, some things get better, but others get worse. It is all part of the process with FSD, and refinements are usually available within a week or so.
However, the latest v14.2.1 update has brought out some major complaints with Speed Profiles, at least on my end. It seems the adjustments have gone a tad too far, and there is a sizeable gap between Profiles that are next to one another.
Tesla FSD v14.2.1 first impressions:
✅ Smooth, stress-free highway operation
✅ Speed Profiles are refined — Hurry seems to be limited to 10 MPH over on highways. Switching from Mad Max to Hurry results in an abrupt braking pattern. Nothing of concern but do feel as if Speed…— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 29, 2025
The gap is so large that changing between them presents a bit of an unwelcome and drastic reduction in speed, which is perhaps a tad too fast for my liking. Additionally, Speed Profiles seem to have a set Speed Limit offset, which makes it less functional in live traffic situations.
Before I go any further, I’d like to remind everyone reading this that what I am about to write is purely my opinion; it is not right or wrong, or how everyone might feel. I am well aware that driving behaviors are widely subjective; what is acceptable to one might be unacceptable to another.
Speed Profiles are ‘Set’ to a Speed
From what I’ve experienced on v14.2.1, Tesla has chosen to go with somewhat of a preset max speed for each Speed Profile. With ‘Hurry,’ it appears to be 10 MPH over the speed limit, and it will not go even a single MPH faster than that. In a 55 MPH zone, it will only travel 65 MPH. Meanwhile, ‘Standard’ seems to be fixed at between 4-5 MPH over.
This is sort of a tough thing to have fixed, in my opinion. The speed at which the car travels should not be fixed; it should be more dependent on how traffic around it is traveling.
It almost seems as if the Speed Profile chosen should be more of a Behavior Profile. Standard should perform passes only to traffic that is slower than the traffic. If traffic is traveling at 75 MPH in a 65 MPH zone, the car should travel at 75 MPH. It should pass traffic that travels slower than this.
Hurry should be more willing to overtake cars, travel more than 10 MPH over the limit, and act as if someone is in a hurry to get somewhere, hence the name. Setting strict limits on how fast it will travel seems to be a real damper on its capabilities. It did much better in previous versions.
Some Speed Profiles are Too Distant from Others
This is specifically about Hurry and Mad Max, which are neighbors in the Speed Profiles menu. Hurry will only go 10 MPH over the limit, but Mad Max will travel similarly to traffic around it. I’ve seen some people say Mad Max is too slow, but I have not had that opinion when using it.
In a 55 MPH zone during Black Friday and Small Business Saturday, it is not unusual for traffic around me to travel in the low to mid-80s. Mad Max was very suitable for some traffic situations yesterday, especially as cars were traveling very fast. However, sometimes it required me to “gear down” into Hurry, especially as, at times, it would try to pass slower traffic in the right lane, a move I’m not super fond of.
We had some readers also mention this to us:
The abrupt speed reduction when switching to a slower speed profile is definitely an issue that should be improved upon.
— David Klem (@daklem) November 29, 2025
After switching from Mad Max to Hurry, there is a very abrupt drop in speed. It is not violent by any means, but it does shift your body forward, and it seems as if it is a tad drastic and could be refined further.
Elon Musk gives nod to SpaceX’s massive, previously impossible feat
Tesla AI and Autopilot VP hints that Robovan will have RV conversions
