News
SpaceX set for back-to-back weekend launches: Crew Dragon abort test, 60 more Starlink satellites
Two SpaceX Falcon 9 rockets are currently on track to launch back-to-back missions just a handful of days from now, potentially supporting Crew Dragon’s second flight test ever and yet another Starlink satellite launch a little over two days from now.
Known as Crew Dragon’s In-Flight Abort (IFA) test, the first mission is scheduled to lift off from Kennedy Space Center Launch Complex 39A (KSC LC-39A) no earlier than (NET) 8 am EST (13:00 UTC), January 18th and will almost certainly produce some spectacular fireworks (even more so than usual). During the test, SpaceX’s newest flightworthy Crew Dragon spacecraft will attempt to escape from a supersonic Falcon 9 rocket, exceptionally challenging conditions that will almost certainly result in the immediate (intentional) destruction of Falcon 9’s upper stage and booster.
A few miles to the north, SpaceX is preparing an entirely different Falcon 9 rocket for the third launch of 60 upgraded Starlink v1.0 satellites in barely two months, scheduled to lift off NET 12:20 pm EST (17:20 UTC), January 20th from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS) Launch Complex 40 (LC-40). While the duo of launches will break no records for SpaceX, they will certainly set the tone the company is aiming to keep throughout the rest of 2020.
On January 11th, SpaceX successfully fired up Falcon 9 B1046 at Pad 39A, performing the booster’s fifth routine static fire test (if not more) in approximately two years. The first Block 5 booster built and flown by SpaceX, B1046 has performed three orbital-class launches since it debuted in May 2018 and even became the first Falcon 9 booster to launch three times in December 2018.
Since that milestone, B1046 spent several months at SpaceX’s Hawthorne, CA factory undergoing inspections and refurbishment. At some point, SpaceX assigned the thrice-flown booster to support Crew Dragon’s In-Flight Abort (IFA) test – effectively a death sentence – and shipped the booster to Florida, where it publicly appeared for the first time in months on October 3rd, 2019. Given that four more Falcon 9 boosters have now successfully performed three (or even four) orbital-class launches each, B1046’s now-imminent demise is certainly disappointing but remains extremely pragmatic.
Sure, B1046 could have theoretically flown several more orbital-class launches before it might have otherwise been quietly retired, but it is still the first Falcon 9 Block 5 booster qualified for flight. Although SpaceX and CEO Elon Musk were explicit that Block 5 would be the last major design iteration for the Falcon family of launch vehicles, that definitely doesn’t rule out tweaks – minor to major – that have likely been implemented since the rocket’s flight debut. In the 20 months since that debut, Falcon 9 and Heavy Block 5 boosters have performed more than two dozen launches and landings and checked off several reusability milestones.
In simple terms, those dozens of flights and reuses all translate to lots and lots (and lots) of high-fidelity data. That data – and often the hardware it’s connected to – can be used to extensively cross-check and improve the Falcon 9 and Heavy engineering models SpaceX created while designing, producing, and ground testing the Block 5 upgrade prior to its flight debut. It can also be used to upgrade to the rocket where needed, especially useful when it comes to reusability.
Although Falcon Block 5 boosters already appear to be exceptionally reliable and reusable, having checked off multiple third-flight and fourth-flight milestones in the last year, there is always room for improvement – especially if Musk is still serious about his long-held goal of launching the same Falcon 9 booster twice in ~24 hours. Along those lines, it’s safe to assume that at least some of the boosters that come off the assembly line after B1046 feature design tweaks meant to optimize for reliability and reusability, among other things.
For the most part, it seems that SpaceX is no longer aggressively pursuing ~24-hour booster turnaround, although they very likely intend to continue cutting the work hours required for (and thus the cost of) each reuse. B1046’s demise may shrink SpaceX’s reusable rocket fleet by one but the company will continue to debut the occasional new booster throughout 2020, ultimately ensuring that the fleet grows over time. Ultimately, if SpaceX only needs to spend a week or two inspecting and refurbishing each Block 5 booster and has a fleet of 10-20 or more, 24-hour turnaround may not even be necessary to achieve the desired results it was meant to represent.
Finally, SpaceX aims to launch its fourth batch of 60 Starlink satellites overall as few as ~52 hours after Falcon 9’s Crew Dragon In-Flight Abort mission and nextspaceflight.com reports that Falcon 9 B1051 will support the Starlink V1 L3 mission – the booster’s third orbital-class launch in ~10 months. Thankfully, B1051 – formerly tasked with supporting Crew Dragon’s Demo-1 orbital launch debut in March 2019 and Canada’s Radarsat Constellation Mission (RCM) in June 2019 – will almost certainly be attempting its second drone ship landing and third recovery overall.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
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
