News
SpaceX Cargo Dragon spacecraft arrives at space station on second to last mission
SpaceX’s Cargo Dragon has successfully rendezvoused with the International Space Station (ISS) as part of NASA’s CRS-19 resupply mission, marking what is almost certainly the spacecraft’s second to last orbital launch.
On December 5th, new Falcon 9 booster B1059 lifted off from SpaceX’s LC-40 Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS) launch pad with a fresh upper stage and twice flown Cargo Dragon capsule C106 atop it. A little over nine minutes after launch, B1059 prepared to be robotically secured on drone ship Of Course I Still Love You (OCISLY) while Cargo Dragon – now in orbit – separated from Falcon 9’s upper stage and headed on its merry way.
Cargo Dragon’s 20th orbital mission and 19th trip to the ISS, CRS-19’s twice-flown spacecraft commanded the deployment of its two solar arrays, primed its Draco maneuvering thrusters, and opened up its Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC) bay. Using star trackers, inertial measurement devices, and lasers, Dragon then proceeded to precisely deliver itself to the ‘door’ of the space station before gradually approaching.
Astronauts aboard the ISS then manually guided Canadarm2 – a massive robotic arm externally attached to the space station – towards Cargo Dragon as it used its thrusters to essentially hover in place, ultimately grabbing the spacecraft with a sort of mechanical hand. At that point, Dragon effectively became a part of the ISS and astronauts monitored the subsequent (and mostly automated) process of using Canadarm2 to fully berth spacecraft with the station.
After berthing, astronauts are able to equalize the pressure between the ISS and visiting spacecraft and open the hatch, gaining access to whatever cargo it was loaded with prior to launch. Alternatively, visiting vehicles can also dock with the International Space Station, a process controlled entirely by the arriving spacecraft, a bit like berthing but with almost all of the risk on its shoulders. All Russian spacecraft currently use this method, as do Boeing’s Starliner and SpaceX’s Crew Dragon.
As it turns out, CRS-19 – partially hinted at in the name – is the second to last launch of SpaceX’s Dragon 1 (Cargo Dragon), which become the first commercial spacecraft capable of reentering Earth’s atmosphere in 2010 and rendezvousing with a space station in 2012. Five months later, SpaceX launched CRS-1 – its first operational resupply mission – and the rest is (more or less) history.
In the seven years since CRS-1, Cargo Dragon – including CRS-19 – has now flown 18 successful space station resupply missions and delivered more than 90,000 lb (50,000 kg) to its ever-changing crew of astronauts. Cargo Dragon has undergone at least two significant upgrades and suffered its fair share of mishaps, but has still successfully completed its mission every time it reached orbit.
NASA’s CRS1 SpaceX contract ultimately called for a total of 20 Cargo Dragon missions to the ISS, although more could technically be added retroactively if both entities were to decide they were needed. Currently, the plan is for CRS-20 – Cargo Dragon’s next launch – to be the spacecraft’s last orbital mission and is scheduled no earlier than March 2020.
After CRS-20, SpaceX – via its subsequent CRS2 NASA contract – means to introduce a version of Crew Dragon (Dragon 2) modified for cargo-only missions, optimally taking flight-proven Crew capsules and reusing them as Cargo Dragon 2s.
SpaceX recently revealed that the first Cargo Dragon 2 spacecraft will unexpectedly not feature Crew Dragon’s complex SuperDraco abort system, a feature that has recently created several roadblocks. However, this dramatically simplifies Dragon 2 and means that SpaceX is still quite confident that the upgraded cargo spacecraft will be ready for its launch debut next year.
Known as CRS-21, that mission will see SpaceX’s CRS launches move from LC-40 to Kennedy Space Center’s LC-39A pad in order to enable extremely late and convenient cargo-loading via Pad 39A’s Crew Access Arm (CAA), to be primarily used by astronauts boarding Crew Dragon. Similarly, Cargo Dragon 2 will dock with the ISS instead of using Dragon’s current berthing route, nominally requiring less hands-on astronaut time for each resupply mission.
Cargo Dragon will be missed but will forever remain a major piece of commercial spaceflight history. Dragon 2 will likely toe the line for the first half of the next decade, but SpaceX ultimately wants to get its generation Starship launch vehicle online as soon as possible – a feat that will make all Falcon and Dragon vehicles redundant if things go as planned.
Check out Teslarati’s newsletters for prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket launch and recovery processes.
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
