News
SpaceX Starlink launch to smash California pad turnaround record
Update: SpaceX’s Thursday Starlink 3-2 launch was automatically aborted less than a minute before liftoff by Falcon 9’s onboard computers. The company will try again tomorrow, Friday, July 22nd, at 10:39 pm PDT (17:39 UTC).
SpaceX says it’s on track to launch another batch of polar Starlink satellites from the West Coast as early as 10:39 am PDT (17:39 UTC), Thursday, July 21st.
On top of featuring one of the fastest Falcon 9 booster turnarounds ever, SpaceX’s Starlink 3-2 launch will more than halve the fastest turnaround of its Vandenberg Space Force Base (VSFB) SLC-4E pad, potentially rendering it capable of launching dozens of times per year.
Barring delays, Starlink 3-2 is scheduled to launch from SLC-4E just 10 days and 14 hours after the same pad supported Starlink 3-1. The current record – 22 days and 11 hours – was set between the launches of Germany’s SARah-1 radar satellite and Starlink 3-1, meaning that SLC-4E is on track to break its turnaround record twice in a row.
For most of the time since SpaceX began using SLC-4E for Falcon 9 launches in 2013, the pad has rarely supported more than one launch every few months. Between 2013 and 2020, the pad supported a total of 16 successful Falcon 9 launches. 15 occurred between January 2016 and November 2020, averaging one launch every four months and never flying twice in less than 36 days. Between January 2019 and September 2021, the pad only supported three launches and even went 17 months without a single use.
In late 2021, something changed. On top of the introduction of dedicated West Coast Starlink launches, apparent upgrades to the pad’s turnaround capabilities have allowed it to support more launches than usual. In the ten months since SLC-4E exited its hibernation period, it’s supported nine Falcon 9 launches – five for Starlink and four for customers. Prior to 2021, SLC-4E never supported more than six launches in a ten-month period, meaning that the pad is already operating at a 50% higher capacity.
SpaceX, however, apparently wasn’t satisfied and is on track to substantially expand SLC-4’s operational constraints yet again, more than halving its minimum demonstrated turnaround time. By definition, that also doubles the pad’s operational ceiling, meaning that it could theoretically support about 34 launches per year with no downtime. SpaceX appears to have achieved that expansion by applying the same upgrades it already made to its two East Coast launch pads, LC-39A and LC-40, which both set respective turnaround records of approximately nine days and eight days earlier this year. SLC-4E will comfortably bookend the two with its imminent 10.7-day turnaround.
Of course, no launch pad routinely operates at its demonstrated minimum, but a leap forward like SLC-4E’s (22.5 to 10.7 days) all but guarantees that the pad will be able to launch far more frequently as long as rockets and payloads are available. Over the last seven months, LC-39A has averaged one launch every 19 days – more than twice its 9.1-day turnaround record. LC-40, which generally deals with simpler missions and only one of three Falcon rocket variants, has managed one launch every 13 days over the same period – closer to its 8.2-day record but still a ways off.
Even if SLC-4E’s average cadence settles somewhere between SpaceX’s other two pads going forward, it will still likely double its contribution the company’s annual launch cadence and help expedite the deployment of its Starlink internet constellation. If all three pads manage an average of about one launch every two weeks, a target that’s well within reach, SpaceX will have the capacity to launch 72 Falcon rockets per year – more than any other family of rockets in history.
Pad aside, Starlink 3-2 will be Falcon 9 booster B1071’s fourth launch overall and second launch in 33 days – SoaceX’s fifth fastest Falcon booster reuse since the practice began in March 2017. Tune in below around 10:30 am PDT (17:30 UTC) to watch Falcon 9’s 32nd launch of 2022.
News
Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile are trying to shut Starlink out before FCC vote
AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile want 290 MHz cut from an FCC satellite plan before Thursday.
AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile are asking the Federal Communications Commission to pull nearly 300 MHz of spectrum out of a proposal that would let satellite companies like SpaceX offer cell service directly to ordinary phones. The request lands one day before the agency votes on it.
The FCC will vote Thursday, October 29, on a notice of proposed rulemaking that would make an additional 482 MHz available for direct to device service, expanding the number of eligible bands from five to 13, according to the FCC fact sheet. It would also scrap the rule requiring a satellite operator to lease spectrum from carriers, replacing it with a certification that the operator has coexistence agreements in place or holds the terrestrial license itself.
That second path matters for SpaceX. As Teslarati reported earlier this month, SpaceX agreed to buy Grain Management’s nationwide 800 MHz portfolio to turn Starlink Mobile into a full US carrier, adding to the spectrum it already bought from EchoStar.
The carriers want two bands removed, 2.5 GHz and 3.45 GHz, which make up 290 MHz of the 482 MHz on the table. Through industry group CTIA, they argued that about 300 million users depend on those bands and that satellite operations in them are not technically feasible. T-Mobile, which calls 2.5 GHz the foundation of its Ultra Capacity 5G network, said in its own filing that satellite interference could wipe out up to 96% of a cell site’s uplink coverage area and cut uplink speeds by 88% to 99%.
Executives from all three carriers met with FCC staff on October 20, and T-Mobile CEO Srini Gopalan met separately with FCC Chairman Brendan Carr. T-Mobile’s role stands out because it is still SpaceX’s US launch partner for Starlink Mobile. The three carriers have also teamed up on their own satellite joint venture to pool spectrum, a move widely seen as a response to Starlink.
SpaceX is asking for the opposite. In an October 23 filing after meetings with FCC staff and commissioners’ offices, the company asked regulators to add the 902 to 928 MHz band to the proposal. “Doing so now saves time later,” SpaceX wrote. The company also asked the FCC to modernize interference rules and align satellite deployment requirements with those for terrestrial cell networks, saying the goal is to let satellite and ground networks work together so Americans stay connected wherever they are.
The carriers have not been shy about how they view SpaceX as a competitor. On Verizon’s third quarter earnings call Monday, its chief executive said Starlink Mobile “just can’t compete with a terrestrial network” and estimated SpaceX would need four to six years and $300 billion to $500 billion to build a full US carrier network.
Thursday’s vote will not settle which bands survive. Adopting the notice opens a public comment period, with final rules to come later in the proceeding. The FCC already considered and rejected 2.5 GHz for satellite coverage once, in 2024. SpaceX also is not the only satellite player watching: the FCC approved Amazon’s $11.6 billion acquisition of Globalstar on October 27, giving its planned direct to device fleet its own mobile satellite spectrum.
A Tesla Semi caught fire in Hayward, California, which caused both directions of traffic to shut down for hours before being completely reopened early on Wednesday, the California Highway Patrol said.
The fire occurred just after 5:30 local time in Hayward on Tuesday, as the Semi caught fire in the southbound lanes of I-880 before CHP officials made the decision to shut down both lanes of traffic due to potential risks from hazardous chemical smoke.
There were no injuries reported.
🚨 A Tesla Semi reportedly caught fire, with California Highway Patrol confirming. The Semi was on I-880 SB
An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 28, 2026
The cause of the fire is currently unknown, as neither Tesla nor the CHP have not determined a cause.
However, some images taken before the Semi was completely destroyed by the fire seem to indicate this might have been an older unit, as it appears to be one of the designs that Tesla shipped as part of its pilot program, before revising it and starting mass production just a month ago.
@Tslachan From on of the videos looks like it’s an old Semi (not the refresh version that recently started production) https://t.co/KzwmR2kXow
— Area Under The Curve 🎗️ (@AreaUnderCurve) October 28, 2026
At the time of publication, CHP had not returned our request for a comment for additional details, including the Semi involved and any potential collaboration on an investigation between the CHP and Tesla. We will update this story when we hear back from them.
The southbound lanes were reopened at 3:30 a.m. on Wednesday, with the northbound lanes opening last night a few hours after the fire began. The CHP did state that the lithium batteries were “incredibly difficult to extinguish,” according to NBC Bay Area.
The truck’s driver said that the Semi caught fire, but he did not have an explanation.
An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 semi-truck and large commercial vehicle fires occur on U.S. roadways every year.
Tesla’s launch of the “Emergency Drive Away” function a few months back offered owners a safe option to evacuate an area if they were in reasonable danger. The function finally got its first use in the real world, but it appears it was by mistake.
A video shared by u/Joshalander in the r/TeslaLounge subreddit recorded the instance from his vehicle and said the incident took place in Austin this past weekend during the city’s F1 Race.
“Was charging around 6 AM this past Sunday in Austin before heading to the F1 race and heard a pop. Looked over and saw the new emergency drive-away feature in action. Genuinely felt bad for the dude when he got out and realized what happened, since he looked exhausted and only seemed to half-read the prompts.”
🚨 Here’s the first look at Tesla’s Emergency Drive Away function in action:
Apparently this driver accidentally enabled it and drove forward; you can see the Supercharger pull with the car.
Tesla said previously this would cost up to $25k if not used properly. https://t.co/B4qQRrsO6B
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 28, 2026
Emergency Drive Away unlatches the Supercharger connector from the vehicle, but still causes damage to both the car and the Supercharger. Tesla has said that it will cost up to $25,000 in repairs to have everything fixed back to normal.
Additionally, the company said that if it were not used in an emergency situation, the driver of the vehicle who activated the Emergency Drive Away feature would be responsible for all repair costs.
Tesla constitutes the following situations as reasonable justifications for activating the feature:
- You face an immediate threat to your life or personal safety.
- You must leave the area immediately.
- Exiting the vehicle is unsafe.
- Unplugging the charge connector would unreasonably delay your departure or expose you to a risk to your personal safety.
After using the feature, Tesla requires the driver to schedule Service so the car can be inspected.
Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile are trying to shut Starlink out before FCC vote
Tesla Semi catches fire in California: what we know
