News
SpaceX beats Falcon 9 recovery records after company’s heaviest launch ever
Completed on May 30th, SpaceX’s latest Falcon 9 booster recovery smashed several internal speed records, unofficially cataloged over the years by watchful fans.
In short, as the company’s experienced recovery technicians continue to gain experience and grow familiar with Falcon 9 Block 5, the length of booster recoveries have consistently decreased in the 12 months since Block 5’s launch debut. Already, the efficiency of recovery processing has gotten to the point that – once SpaceX optimizes Block 5’s design for refurbishment-free reuse – there should be no logistical reason the company can’t fly the same booster twice in ~24-48 hours.
The road to rapid reusability
Rarely will it make headlines, but the fact remains that SpaceX’s ultimate goal is not just to reuse Falcon 9 (and other) boosters, but to do so with a level of routine efficiency approaching that of modern passenger aircraft. It’s reasonable to assume that chemical rockets might never reach those capabilities, but they may certainly be able to improve enough to radically change the relationship between humans and spaceflight.
Along that line of thinking, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk decided years ago that an excellent representative goal for Falcon 9 would be to launch the same booster twice in 24 hours. In the last year or so, that largely arbitrary target has changed a bit and is now believed to be a bit wider, aiming for booster reuse within a few days of recovery. This is a pragmatic adjustment more than a technical criticism of Falcon 9.
In general, Falcon 9 simply doesn’t have the performance necessary for routine reusability timelines measured in hours. The majority of SpaceX launches need enough of Falcon 9’s performance to necessitate recovery aboard one of SpaceX’s two drone ships, typically stationed at least a 200-300 km (100-200 mi) offshore. That fact alone almost single-handedly kills any chance of sub-24-hour booster reuse, given that the process of towing the booster-carrying drone ship back to port happens at a max speed of ~10 mph (15 km/h). Just gaining permission to enter the port itself often involves waits of 6+ hours a few miles offshore.
Low orbit, low mass Falcon 9 missions are much more promising for extremely rapid reusability, given that both of SpaceX’s West and East coast landing zones are located just a few miles (or less than 1500 feet, in the case of LZ-4) from their corresponding launch pads and processing facilities. However, these missions are quite rare, while SpaceX’s own low Earth orbit (LEO) Starlink launches will likely involve payloads so heavy that long-distance drone ship recoveries will be necessary.


Finally, there are Falcon Heavy launches, most of which will allow for both side boosters to return to the Florida coast for landings at LZ-1/LZ-2. However, these pose their own barriers to rapid reuse, mainly due to the fact that side boosters – while technically just Falcon 9 boosters – would need major changes to support a single-stack Falcon 9 launch. Falcon Heavy launches simply aren’t going to happen back-to-back over a period of 24-48 hours, so that option is also out of the question.
This means that SpaceX’s only real option for practical rapid reuse is to instead focus on something closer to a weekly launch capability for Block 5 boosters, meaning that the same booster would be able to launch, land, return to shore, and prepare for the next launch in the same week. Even then, launch site readiness may still stand in the way of truly radical improvements in booster reuse and launch frequency. After each launch, SpaceX’s pads and transporter/erectors take a significant beating, requiring routine repairs and maintenance before returning to flight-readiness. Barring major improvements, SpaceX has demonstrated minimum launch-to-launch times of roughly 10 days, and cutting that figure by 50-90% will be a major challenge for a rocket as powerful as Falcon 9.
B1049 takes a step forward
Despite the many logistical reasons that Falcon 9 will likely never lend itself to routine ~24-hour reusability, having that latent capability would still mean that the hardware is advanced enough to offer that efficiency. Even if SpaceX can’t literally fly each booster at its operational capacity, nearly refurbishment-free reflights will still translate into dramatically lower launch costs. Modern civilian aircraft need not fly every second of every day to still be affordable to operate (excluding amortization costs).
Ultimately, SpaceX has been taking small steps in that direction ever since the company began recovering (and reusing) Falcon 9 boosters. Falcon 9 B1049’s third recovery has been one of the best (and most record-breaking) steps yet, but those records were only just broken The most significant statistic to come out of the post-Starlink v0.9 recovery is that B1049.3 took less than 30 hours to go from docking in port to being horizontal on a SpaceX booster transporter. The previous record-holder was Falcon 9 B1046.2, requiring approximately 40 hours for the same feat. B1049.3 also holds the record for fastest recovery overall – just 48 hours from docking to being transported to a SpaceX hangar – but only beat B1051 by about half an hour. In general, Falcon 9 Block 5 has been privy to consistently quick recovery operations and B1049 is just the latest in a long line of reusable SpaceX rockets.



Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
News
Elon Musk confirms Tesla Semi will enter high-volume production this year
Musk shared his update in a post on social media platform X.
Elon Musk has confirmed that Tesla will begin high-volume production of the Class 8 all-electric Semi this year.
He shared his update in a post on social media platform X.
Musk confirms Tesla Semi production ramp
Tesla CEO Elon Musk reaffirmed on X that the Semi is finally moving into volume production, posting on Sunday that “Tesla Semi starts high volume production this year.”
The update comes as Tesla refreshed its Semi lineup on its official website, an apparent hint that the program is transitioning from limited pilots into wider commercial deployment. As per Tesla’s official website, two variants of the Semi will be offered to consumers: Standard and Long Range.
The Standard trim offers up to 325 miles of range with an energy consumption rating of 1.7 kWh per mile and a gross combination weight rating of 82,000 pounds. The Long Range version pushes driving range to 500 miles, with Tesla noting a higher curb weight of about 23,000 pounds, likely due to a larger battery pack.
Both trims support fast charging, with Tesla stating that the Semi can recover up to 60% of its range in 30 minutes using compatible charging infrastructure.
Broader Tesla Semi rollout
Tesla has already delivered production Semi units to select partners, including snack and beverage giant PepsiCo as well as logistics behemoth DHL, which confirmed that its truck operates daily in California, traveling roughly 100 miles per day and requiring charging just about once a week.
The company has also partnered with Uber Freight, as noted in a Benzinga report, with Tesla executives previously describing the agreement as a way for fleet operators to experience the Semi’s lower operating and maintenance costs firsthand.
With Musk now publicly committing to high-volume production, the Semi appears poised to move beyond pilot programs and into scaled commercial use, an important step in Tesla’s wider push to electrify heavy-duty and long-range trucking.
News
Tesla tops France reliability rankings, beating Toyota for the first time
The milestone was celebrated by CEO Elon Musk on social media platform X.
Tesla has overtaken Toyota to become France’s most reliable car brand in 2025, as per a new nationwide reliability ranking published by Auto Plus magazine.
The milestone was celebrated by CEO Elon Musk on social media platform X.
Tesla tops reliability ranking in France
Tesla ranked first overall in Auto Plus’ 2025 reliability study, surpassing long-time benchmark Toyota across all powertrain types, including gasoline, hybrid, and electric vehicles.
The ranking, published on February 6, 2026, evaluated early problems reported in 2025 on vehicles registered in France since January 1, 2018, with fewer than 150,000 kilometers on the odometer, as noted by a Numerama report. This marked Tesla’s first appearance in the magazine’s reliability rankings, which was enabled by the company’s growing vehicle population in the French market.
According to the publication, Tesla vehicles showed no recurring major defects beyond isolated suspension arm issues, which are covered under the company’s four-year or 80,000-kilometer warranty. Other reported issues were described as minor, including occasional screen glitches and door handle concerns.
Why this ranking differs from earlier criticism
Tesla’s top placement contrasts sharply with past assessments from the German Automobile Club (ADAC), which previously ranked the Model 3 and Model Y low in its technical inspection reports. Auto Plus noted that those inspections were focused heavily on factors such as brake disc wear, which are not necessarily the best benchmarks for overall vehicle reliability.
By focusing instead on real-world reliability data and early ownership issues, Auto Plus’ methodology offered a broader picture of how vehicles perform over time rather than how individual components age under inspection standards. The publication emphasized that electric vehicles, with far fewer moving parts than combustion-engine cars, are not inherently less reliable.
While the ranking supports the case that electric vehicles can match or exceed the reliability of traditional brands, the magazine acknowledged limitations in its analysis. Still, Tesla’s debut at the top of the list underscores how perceptions of EV durability are shifting as more long-term data becomes available in major automotive markets like France.
News
Tesla’s Sweden standoff draws UAW support as unions widen pressure campaign
In a post shared on social media, the United Auto Workers stated that it stands with IF Metall workers who are striking against Tesla Sweden.
The United Auto Workers (UAW) has publicly expressed solidarity with Swedish union IF Metall as its strike against Tesla continues, adding international attention to the extended labor dispute in the European country.
UAW supports IF Metall’s strike
In a post shared on social media, the United Auto Workers stated that it stands with IF Metall workers who are striking against Tesla Sweden. UAW Region 8 Director Tim Smith stated that the union fully supports IF Metall’s efforts to secure a collective bargaining agreement with the automaker.
“UAW stands with IF Metall workers on strike against Tesla, fighting for a collective bargaining agreement. UAW Region 8 Director Tim Smith pledged the UAW’s full support and solidarity,” the UAW International Union stated in its post.
IF Metall launched its strike against Tesla Sweden in late 2023 over the electric car maker’s refusal to sign a collective agreement. The action has since been supported by other unions through sympathy strikes affecting ports, logistics, and service operations.
Tesla Sweden has maintained that it complies with Swedish labor laws and offers competitive pay and benefits, though the company has not publicly commented on the UAW’s latest show of support.
Tesla owners get union attention
Pro-union groups in Sweden have recently expanded their outreach beyond Tesla’s facilities and workforce. Activists have begun distributing informational leaflets against the EV maker directly on Tesla vehicles parked across Stockholm, as per a report from Swedish outlet Dagens Arbete.
The yellow slips, designed to resemble parking notices, urge regular Tesla owners to pressure the company into signing a collective agreement. Organizers involved in the effort have argued that the leaflets are intended to simply inform consumers rather than single out individual owners. When owners are present, however, activists stated that they explain the dispute verbally.
Tesla has not issued a public response regarding the leaflet distribution campaign as of writing.