News
SpaceX aces 12th launch of 2022, delivering dozens of satellites to orbit
SpaceX has aced its 12th launch of 2022 just a day over three months into the year, demonstrating a major leap in sustained launch cadence as the company strives to achieve ambitious goals set by CEO Elon Musk.
That 12th launch was Transporter-4, a dedicated rideshare mission managed by SpaceX itself. Falcon 9 lifted off on time on April 1st with fewer satellites than it had ever launched before on a Transporter mission – ‘just’ 40 payloads for about a dozen customers. The rocket performed as expected, reaching a parking orbit about nine minutes after liftoff. Booster B1061 – flying for the eighth time – safely landed on drone ship Just Read The Instructions (JRTI) about a minute prior, ensuring that it will be able to fly again. Over the course of more than 90 minutes, Falcon 9’s upper stage performed four separate burns to deploy all 40 payloads into several different orbits before finally deorbiting itself.
All told, Transporter-4 was SpaceX’s 121st consecutively successful launch, 37th consecutively successful landing, 112th landing overall, 89th reuse of a Falcon booster, and the 34th launch with a reused Falcon fairing. Falcon 9 is and continues to be the most reliable operational launch vehicle in the world. Just as importantly, it’s also the most prolific launch vehicle operational today.
In 2021, SpaceX successfully launched Falcon 9 31 times, falling a bit short of internal goals. Just before the year was over, though, SpaceX abruptly demonstrated the ability to complete five orbital launches in less than three weeks and six launches in less than four weeks – blowing its previous records out of the water and establishing the potential for huge increases in annual cadence. In 2022, SpaceX has thus far managed to sustain a similar cadence for a full quarter of the year.
Following Transporter-4, SpaceX has launched 12 Falcon 9 rockets in 90 days. If sustained for three more quarters, the company could launch 48 times this year – a 55% increase in annual launch cadence compared to a record 31 launches completed in 2021. A few weeks ago, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk established 52 launches – one per week – as the company’s overarching goal for 2022. More recently, Musk – in classic fashion – raised his already significant ambitions and boosted that goal to 60 launches, including at least a thousand more Starlink satellites.
52 launches may still be achievable with a few five or six-launch months. 60 launches, however, would require an average of 5.3 launches per month for the rest of 2022 – maybe not impossible but a huge challenge even before considering the fact that one of SpaceX’s three Falcon pads could be bogged down with as many as five Falcon Heavy and seven Dragon launches in the next nine months. Falcon Heavy, Falcon 9 Dragon, and Falcon 9 Fairing launches all require significant modifications to pad hardware, modifications that likely take at least a week or two to complete. Continuously swapping between setups to squeeze in the odd Starlink or satellite launch isn’t out of the question, but the added schedule risk would increase the odds of delays for several of SpaceX’s most delay-averse missions, including Crew Dragon, Cargo Dragon, and interplanetary spacecraft launches for NASA and two or three ‘national security’ missions for the US military.
Even if SpaceX falls short of Musk’s ambitious 60-launch target, it will take a minor disaster for 2022 to not be the company’s most spectacular year yet. This month alone, SpaceX is scheduled to launch the first all-private astronaut mission to the International Space Station no earlier than (NET) April 6th, followed by launches of Starlink 4-14 NET April 14th, NROL-85 NET April 15th, and a group of four NASA and ESA astronauts NET April 20th.
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
