News
SpaceX ready for back to back astronaut, Starlink launches
Two SpaceX Falcon 9 rockets remain on track to attempt back-to-back astronaut and Starlink satellite launches later this week.
Both SpaceX East Coast drone ships Just Read The Instructions (JRTI) and A Shortfall of Gravitas (ASOG) and two new support and fairing recovery ships (Bob and Doug) are all headed northeast into the Atlantic Ocean, where they’ll soon reach landing zones stationed just ~50 km (~30 mi) apart. As early as 9:03pm EST Wednesday, November 10th (02:03 UTC 11 Nov), the first of those Falcon 9s is scheduled to lift off on its second mission for NASA, sending a new Crew Dragon and four international astronauts on their way to the International Space Station (ISS).
If all goes to plan, less than a day and a half later, a second Falcon 9 rocket will lift off from SpaceX’s other East Coast launch site as part of “Starlink 4-1” – the company’s first dedicated Florida Starlink launch in almost six months.
Starlink 4-1 is scheduled to launch NET 7:40am EST (12:40 UTC) on Friday, November 12th with Falcon 9 booster B1062, a new expendable upper stage, a (likely) reused fairing, and 53 Starlink V1.5 satellites – likely the first of their kind to launch from the East Coast. While the mission profile will be almost identical to all 29 of SpaceX’s dedicated East Coast Starlink launches, it will be targeting a slightly lower and different orbit to kick off the second of five constellation ‘shells’.
Unlike the ~1700 Starlink V1.0 satellites SpaceX launched over the last two years, the Starlink V1.5 satellites the company recently began launching feature a partially upgraded design but are mainly distinguished by the addition of several ‘space lasers’. More officially known as optical interlinks, those lasers will allow Starlink satellites to connect to each other and route communications entirely in orbit, exploiting the vacuum of space to create what amount to wireless fiber-optic links with bandwidth on the order of tens or hundreds of gigabits per second (Gbps). As a result, there’s a good chance that SpaceX will eventually replace the first-generation Starlink V1.0 constellation as soon as possible, leaving an upgraded and laser-linked copycat in their place.
If SpaceX interlinks most or all of its constellation with lasers, it could drastically simplify Starlink ground station operations and cut down on the bureaucratic work required to license and build those stations in virtually every country Starlink wants to operate in. It would also make it far easier for SpaceX to serve unprecedentedly high-quality internet to aircraft and ships – a captive market practically begging for disruption.
In a prelaunch briefing late on November 9th, SpaceX vice president Bill Gerstenmaier revealed that drone ship Just Read The Instructions (JRTI) – originally meant to support Crew-3’s booster landing – had gotten “beat up” by the Atlantic, forcing it to swap places with A Shortfall of Gravitas (ASOG). It’s unclear if the damage JRTI may or may not have received is enough to require a return to port, which could trigger a week or more of Starlink 4-1 launch delays. For now, though, there are no signs of a delay.
Crew-3
Prior to Starlink 4-1, SpaceX is set for its fifth astronaut launch since May 2020 and third operational NASA ‘crew rotation’ mission on Wednesday, November 10th. Crew-3 will also host the 15th through 18th astronauts launched by SpaceX, nominally sending Raja Chari, Thomas Marshburn, Kayla Barron (NASA), and Matthias Maurer (ESA) on their way to an ISS docking on November 11th.
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
