News
SpaceX’s third Falcon 9 launch in 31 hours aborted by “tiny helium leak”
SpaceX’s third Falcon 9 launch in a little over 31 hours was called off seconds before liftoff after the rocket’s onboard computer detected what Elon Musk says was a “tiny helium leak.”
SpaceX takes “no risks with customer satellites,” per the CEO, so the company has stood down from its October 6th launch attempt to inspect the rocket, analyze data gathered from tonight’s attempt, and ensure everything is in order. Barring surprises, SpaceX will attempt to launch Intelsat’s Galaxy-33 and Galaxy-34 geostationary communications satellites at the next earliest opportunity, a 69-minute window that opens at 7:06 pm EDT (23:06 UTC) on Friday, October 7th.
The abort ends an opportunity SpaceX had to launch three Falcon rockets faster than ever before, but the company was still able to crush a different (internal) record with two Falcon 9 launches in seven hours on October 5th. Thanks to its relentless pursuit of ever-higher launch cadences, SpaceX will likely have many opportunities to break its record of three launches in ~36 hours over the next several months.
Intelsat’s Galaxy-33/Galaxy-34 (G33/G34) mission would have been SpaceX’s third Falcon 9 launch in 31 hours and 20 minutes following the successful October 5th launches of Crew-5 (carrying four astronauts) at 12:00 pm EDT and Starlink 4-29 (deploying 52 Starlink satellites) at 7:10 pm EDT. The hat-trick record for a non-SpaceX vehicle appears to have been previously held by the Soviet R-7 rocket family, which completed three launches in 40 hours in March 1978.
SpaceX broke that record in June 2022 when it launched Starlink 4-19, SARah-1, and Globalstar FM15 a little over 36 hours apart. It will now have to wait for another opportunity to break its own record, though it likely won’t be too long as the company continues to target 60 launches in 2022 and “up to” 100 launches in 2023.
According to a SpaceX launch controller, Falcon 9’s first ill-fated Galaxy-33/Galaxy-34 launch attempt was aborted automatically when the rocket’s flight computer “identified higher than expected cryo helium decay.” SpaceX’s Falcon rockets burn a combination of cryogenic liquid oxygen and chilled rocket-grade kerosene (RP-1), but they carry composite overwrapped pressure vessels (COPVs) filled with high-pressure helium gas to keep their propellant tanks pressurized as they’re drained. If SpaceX’s much larger Starship rocket shares some similarities, the company may also use a system of “helium injection” [PDF] inside Falcon 9 to keep its cryogenic oxygen and chilled kerosene as cold as possible. Musk later simplified the cause of the abort to a “tiny helium leak,” but the location of the leak (inside or outside of the rocket) was not specified.
Two hours before that, the Crew Dragon spacecraft SpaceX launched the day prior successfully docked with the International Space Station (ISS), delivering its ‘payload’ of four professional astronauts to the orbital outpost. One of those passengers is Russian cosmonaut Anna Kikina, marking the first time an American spacecraft has ferried a Russian to the ISS in almost 20 years. That milestone has unfortunately been muddied and overshadowed by the country’s illegal, genocidal, and increasingly suicidal invasion of Ukraine.
Crew-5 is the seventh Crew Dragon to successfully transport astronauts to the ISS and SpaceX’s eighth crewed launch overall since May 2020. Flying for the second time, Crew Dragon capsule C210 docked on its first try after a smooth 29-hour rendezvous. About a week from now, another crew of four astronauts will board a different Crew Dragon spacecraft and return to Earth, handing off the ISS to Crew-5 and ending SpaceX and NASA’s Crew-4 mission.
SpaceX is scheduled to launch at least one more batch of astronauts for NASA in March or April 2023, meaning that the company is expected to singlehandedly ensure NASA access to the ISS for almost three full years. At the start of the Commercial Crew Program and for most of its development, NASA intended for partners SpaceX and Boeing to alternate, but Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft is years behind schedule.
Elon Musk
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Four Raptor engines failed to ignite at T-zero, forcing SpaceX to scrub Starship Flight 13 Thursday.
SpaceX scrubbed the Starship Flight 13 launch attempt Thursday evening at the last possible moment, after four of the Super Heavy booster’s 33 Raptor 3 engines failed to ignite during the startup sequence. The 90-minute window had opened at 6:45 p.m. EDT from Starbase in Boca Chica, Texas, and the countdown had proceeded without issue all day, with more than 11.5 million pounds of liquid methane and liquid oxygen being fully loaded into the rocket before the automated abort triggered. SpaceX’s launch directors posted on X, “Standing down from today’s flight test attempt,” and shut down the livestream shortly after.
Musk confirmed the root cause within hours. “Some of the engines didn’t start, triggering an automatic launch abort,” he wrote on X. “To be confident of a good flight, 2 Raptors will be removed and replaced. Most probable launch timing is early next week.” SpaceX engineers began draining propellant tanks immediately and Booster 20 was rolled back to its hangar for inspection.
The timing adds a layer of significance that did not exist during any of the previous 12 Starship flights. This is the first time SpaceX has attempted to launch Starship since the company made its stock market debut in June, listing under ticker SPCX at $135 per share. Public investors are now watching every Starship outcome in real time, and a last-second abort carries more visibility than it would have six months ago.
Flight 13 was designed to be one of the most consequential tests in the program’s history. It was set to carry 20 Starlink V3 satellites, the first operational payload Starship has ever attempted to deploy. Six of those satellites carried external cameras to photograph Starship’s heat shield from the outside during flight, which would act as a self-inspection approach SpaceX has never attempted before. The mission also needed to complete a Raptor engine relight in space, a step SpaceX skipped on Flight 12 in May after losing an engine during ascent. That Flight 12 booster also flipped 90 degrees off course during its boostback burn when five engines failed to reignite.
SpaceX has not announced an official next launch date. Musk’s “early next week” window points to July 21 or 22 at the earliest, pending the engine swap and a return to the pad.
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.
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
