Connect with us

News

SpaceX to attempt back-to-back Falcon Heavy launches with booster reuse in 2019

The second (and third) flight of Falcon Heavy is even closer to reality as a new side booster heads to Florida after finishing static fire tests in Texas. (Reddit /u/e32revelry)

Published

on

SpaceNews reports that SpaceX is planning an impressive duo of Falcon Heavy launches in the first half of 2019, the heavy lift rocket’s second and third missions. According to Nicky Fox, NASA’s heliophysics division director, SpaceX intends to recover and reuse all three Falcon Heavy first stage boosters for both launches and apparently believes that it can recover and prepare them for a second launch in as few as 60 days.

Following a highly successful February 2018 launch debut, SpaceX has targeted the launches of commercial satellite Arabsat 6A and the USAF’s Space Test Program 2 (STP-2) in the second half of 2018, a schedule that rapidly realigned to H1 2019. If the unofficial plan described above turns out to be true, the USAF will apparently become the first commercial customer to launch on a flight-proven Falcon Heavy.

Advertisement

A Reddit user was lucky enough to spot one of SpaceX’s next-gen Falcon Heavy side boosters – coincidentally just one day after Dr. Fox’s comments – on its way East through rainy Louisiana, undeniable evidence that the heavy lift rocket’s second (and third) launches have a real chance of happening in early 2019. According to Dr. Fox, SpaceX is seriously targeting a very rapid turnaround of Falcon Heavy’s next three first stage boosters, stating (admittedly without official confirmation) that SpaceX would be reusing the boosters from Arabsat 6A’s March 2019 launch on the planned April 2019 launch of STP-2.

“[Falcon Heavy] will launch [STP-2 in April] after the successful launch of Arabsat, which is currently manifested for March. [SpaceX] will recover and reuse the boosters, so we’re kind of watching what happens with that first launch.” – Dr. Nicky Fox via SpaceNews

Whether or not this officially unconfirmed information is correct, it certainly sounds like just the thing that CEO Elon Musk might challenge SpaceX to pull off, not to mention the fact that this would place the US Air Force in a situation requiring it to become the first commercial customer to launch on a flight-proven Falcon Heavy. This would be a truly dramatic change in attitude compared to comments made in just the last week, brought up in the context of SpaceX’s planned December 18 (now Dec 22) launch of the USAF’s first next-gen GPS satellite, GPS III SV01. In official comments provided to the media, the Air Force was extremely “uncertain”  about allowing SpaceX to even attempt to recover its Falcon 9 booster, let alone allowing the company to fly Air Force payloads on flight-proven rockets.

 

Admittedly, the intentions behind STP-2 differ drastically from GPS III SV01. As the name suggests, the missions falls under a program explicitly designed to test and prove out new launch vehicles in the context of fast-tracking their certification for higher-value Air Force spacecraft. Falcon 9 could almost certainly launch STP-2 in a reusable configuration, but the USAF chose Falcon Heavy – and included literal dead weight – because the military branch is very interested in the rocket’s potential utility for more serious National Security Space missions.

Advertisement
One of two Block 5 Falcon Heavy side boosters was spotted vertical at SpaceX’s McGregor facilities during static fire testing. This booster is now in Florida. (Teslarati/Aero Photo)

SpaceX’s first Falcon Heavy launch famously featured flight-proven side boosters that performed jaw-dropping simultaneous landings at LZ-1 and LZ-2. Chances are good that Falcon Heavy Flight 2 and 3 will both feature additional attempts at simultaneous LZ booster landings. If SpaceX can find a way to launch Falcon Heavy twice in barely two months while still reusing all three first stage boosters, it’s hard to imagine a better way to demonstrate the economic and technological viability of both Falcon Heavy and Block 5’s reusability upgrades.


For prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket recovery fleet check out our brand new LaunchPad and LandingZone newsletters!

Eric Ralph is Teslarati's senior spaceflight reporter and has been covering the industry in some capacity for almost half a decade, largely spurred in 2016 by a trip to Mexico to watch Elon Musk reveal SpaceX's plans for Mars in person. Aside from spreading interest and excitement about spaceflight far and wide, his primary goal is to cover humanity's ongoing efforts to expand beyond Earth to the Moon, Mars, and elsewhere.

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

Tesla Semi’s official battery capacity leaked by California regulators

A California regulatory filing just confirmed the exact battery size inside each Tesla Semi variant.

Published

on

By

A regulatory filing published by the California Air Resources Board in April 2026 has put official numbers on what Tesla Semi owners and fleet buyers have long wanted confirmed: the exact battery capacities of both the Long Range and Standard Range Semi truck variants. CARB is California’s independent air quality regulator, and it certifies zero-emission powertrains before they can be sold or operated in the state. When a manufacturer submits a vehicle for certification, the resulting executive order becomes a public document, making it one of the most reliable sources for confirmed production specs on any EV.

The document lists two certified powertrain configurations. The Long Range Semi carries a usable battery capacity of 822 kWh, while the Standard Range version comes in at 548 kWh. Both use lithium-ion NCMA chemistry and share the same peak and steady-state motor output ratings of 800 kW and 525 kW respectively. Cross-referencing Tesla’s published efficiency figure of approximately 1.7 kWh per mile under full load, the 822 kWh pack supports roughly 480 miles of real-world range, which aligns closely with Tesla’s advertised 500-mile figure for the Long Range trim. The 548 kWh Standard Range pack works out to approximately 320 miles, again consistent with Tesla’s stated 325-mile target.

Here is a direct comparison of the two versions based on the CARB filing and published specs:

Tesla Semi Spec Long Range Standard Range
Battery Capacity 822 kWh 548 kWh
Battery Chemistry NCMA Li-Ion NCMA Li-Ion
Peak Motor Power 800 kW 525 kW
Estimated Range ~500 miles ~325 miles
Efficiency ~1.7 kWh/mile ~1.7 kWh/mile
Est. Price ~$290,000 ~$260,000
GVW Rating 82,000 lbs 82,000 lbs

The timing of this certification is not incidental. On April 29, 2026, Semi Programme Director Dan Priestley confirmed on X that high-volume production is now ramping at Tesla’s dedicated 1.7-million-square-foot facility in Sparks, Nevada. A key advantage of the Nevada location is vertical integration: the 4680 battery cells powering the Semi are manufactured in the same complex, eliminating the supply chain bottleneck that had delayed the program for years.

Advertisement

Tesla’s long-term goal is to reach a production capacity of 50,000 trucks annually at the Nevada factory, which would represent roughly 20 percent of the entire North American Class 8 market. With CARB certification now in hand and the production line running, the regulatory and manufacturing groundwork for that target is in place.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla crushes NHTSA’s brand-new ADAS safety tests – first vehicle to ever pass

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla became the first company to pass the United States government’s new Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) testing with the Model Y, completing each of the new tests with a passing performance.

In a landmark announcement on May 7, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) declared the 2026 Tesla Model Y the first vehicle to pass its newly ADAS benchmark under the New Car Assessment Program (NCAP).

Model Y vehicles manufactured on or after November 12, 2025, met rigorous pass/fail criteria for four newly added tests—pedestrian automatic emergency braking, lane keeping assistance, blind spot warning, and blind spot intervention—while also satisfying the program’s original four ADAS requirements: forward collision warning, crash imminent braking, dynamic brake support, and lane departure warning.

NHTSA administration Jonathan Morrison hailed the achievement as a milestone:

“Today’s announcement marks a significant step forward in our efforts to provide consumers with the most comprehensive safety ratings ever. By successfully passing these new tests, the 2026 Tesla Model Y demonstrates the lifesaving potential of driver assistance technologies and sets a high bar for the industry. We hope to see many more manufacturers develop vehicles that can meet these requirements.”

Advertisement

The updates to NCAP, finalized in late 2024 and effective for 2026 models, reflect growing recognition that ADAS features are no longer optional luxuries but essential tools for preventing crashes.

Pedestrian automatic emergency braking, for instance, targets one of the fastest-rising causes of roadway fatalities, while blind spot intervention and lane keeping assistance address common sources of side-swipes and run-off-road incidents. By incorporating objective, performance-based evaluations rather than mere presence of the technology, NHTSA aims to give buyers clearer data on real-world effectiveness.

This milestone arrives at a pivotal moment when vehicle autonomy is transitioning from science fiction to everyday reality.

Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) software and the impending rollout of robotaxis underscore a broader industry shift toward higher levels of automation. Yet regulators and consumers remain cautious: safety data must keep pace with technological ambition.

Advertisement

The Model Y’s perfect score on these ADAS benchmarks validates that current driver-assist systems—when engineered rigorously—can dramatically reduce human error, which still accounts for the vast majority of crashes.

For Tesla, the result reinforces its long-standing claim of building the safest vehicles on the road. More importantly, it signals to the entire auto sector that meeting elevated federal standards is achievable and expected.

As autonomy edges closer to Level 3 and beyond, where drivers may disengage more fully, such independent verification becomes critical. It builds public trust, informs purchasing decisions, and accelerates the development of systems that could one day eliminate tens of thousands of annual traffic deaths.

In an era when software-defined vehicles promise transformative mobility, the 2026 Model Y’s NHTSA triumph is more than a manufacturer accolade—it is a regulatory green light that autonomy’s future must be built on proven, testable safety foundations. The bar has been raised. The industry, and the roads we share, will be safer for it.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Tesla to fix 219k vehicles in recall with simple software update

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla is going to fix the nearly 219,000 vehicles that it recalled due to an issue with the rearview camera with a simple software update, giving owners no need to travel to a service center to resolve the problem.

Tesla is formally recalling 218,868 U.S. vehicles after regulators discovered a software glitch that can delay the rearview camera image by up to 11 seconds when drivers shift into reverse.

The affected models include certain 2024-2025 Model 3 and Model Y, as well as 2023-2025 Model S and Model X vehicles running software version 2026.8.6 and equipped with Hardware 3 computers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) determined the lag violates Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 111 on rear visibility and could increase crash risk.

Yet this is no ordinary recall. Owners do not need to schedule a service-center visit, hand over keys, or wait for parts.

Advertisement

Tesla fans call for recall terminology update, but the NHTSA isn’t convinced it’s needed

Tesla identified the issue on April 10, halted further deployment of the faulty firmware the same day, and began pushing a corrective over-the-air (OTA) software update on April 11.

By the time the NHTSA posted the recall notice on May 6, more than 99.92 percent of the affected fleet had already received the fix. Tesla reports no crashes, injuries, or fatalities linked to the glitch.

The episode underscores a deeper problem with regulatory language. For decades, “recall” meant hauling a vehicle to a dealership for hardware repairs or replacements. That definition no longer fits software-defined cars. When a fix arrives wirelessly in minutes — identical to an iPhone update — the term evokes unnecessary alarm and misleads the public about the actual risk and remedy.

Advertisement

Elon Musk has repeatedly called for exactly this change. After earlier NHTSA actions, he stated plainly: “The terminology is outdated & inaccurate. This is a tiny over-the-air software update.” On another occasion, he added that labeling OTA fixes as recalls is “anachronistic and just flat wrong.”

Musk’s point is simple: regulators must evolve their vocabulary to match the technology. Traditional recalls involve physical intervention and downtime; OTA updates do not. Retaining the old label distorts consumer perception, inflates perceived defect rates, and slows the industry’s shift to faster, safer software iteration.

Advertisement

Tesla’s rapid, remote remedy demonstrates the safety advantage of over-the-air capability. Problems that once required weeks of dealer appointments are now resolved in hours, often before most owners notice. As more automakers adopt software-first designs, the entire regulatory framework needs to catch up.

Updating “recall” terminology would align language with reality, reduce public confusion, and recognize that modern vehicles are no longer static hardware — they are continuously improving computers on wheels.

For the 219,000 Tesla owners involved, the process is already complete. The camera works, the car is safe, and no one left their driveway. That is the new standard — and the vocabulary should reflect it.

Advertisement
Continue Reading