News
SpaceX prepares for space station supply mission as secret Zuma launch postponed
Zuma patiently awaits a new launch date
Just shy of two weeks ago, SpaceX announced the discovery of unspecified problems with a Falcon 9 payload fairing during routine quality assurance (QA) testing at the company’s Hawthorne, CA factory. The launch of Zuma, a deeply mysterious satellite with no clear manufacturer or customer, was subsequently delayed indefinitely, pending the results of an internal investigation into the aforementioned fairing defects.
Several days after SpaceX’s Zuma announcement, the Falcon 9 booster, second stage, and payload (often referred to as the “stack”) were rolled back into the pad facilities at LC-39A, verifying that a delay of at least several days would follow. This delay was both confirmed and denied in a confusing manner, with the Cape’s 45th Space Wing appearing to suggest that Zuma would not be impacted by a preplanned range closure in late November, although journalist Irene Klotz reported that Zuma was delayed until December, when maintenance was scheduled to end.
SpaceX’s mysterious Zuma payload and Falcon 9 1043 seen before stormy Florida skies. (Tom Cross/Teslarati)
All things considered, the month of November has been an unusually chaotic period for SpaceX and the Space Coast, and the chaos has almost certainly been exacerbated by the intense secrecy surrounding Zuma. As the sum total of publicly available information, these details indicate that SpaceX employees discovered a systemic defect or defects in recently-manufactured fairings, serious enough to indefinitely ground the company’s commercial launches. However, SpaceX recently opened press registration for the Iridium-4 mission, still apparently scheduled for launch on December 22 and further corroborated by the CEO of Iridium Communications, hinting that that mission’s fairing either predates the scope of the fairing investigation, or that the investigation and fairing groundings have arisen out of an abundance of caution above all else.
A Dragon stretches its wings
More importantly and perhaps more logically, SpaceX’s next Cargo Dragon mission to the International Space Station – CRS-13 – has not been directly impacted by fairing problems; Dragon missions do not require fairings. The CRS-13 mission, currently aiming for a static fire on November 29 and launch on December 4, will be exceptional for a number of equally thrilling reasons. In no particular order: CRS-13 will mark the first NASA-approved reuse of a Falcon 9’s first stage, in this case with the added aesthetic bonus that the Dragon will reach orbit aboard the same booster that launched CRS-11’s Dragon almost exactly six months prior, June 3 2017. Equally exciting, CRS-12 marked the final new Cargo Dragon launch, and CRS-13’s Dragon is a refurbished spacecraft, having previously flown the CRS-6 mission in late 2015.
-
- The CRS-6 Cargo Dragon being mated to its Falcon 9 launch vehicle in 2015. (SpaceX)
-
- This exact Dragon has been recovered from orbit, refurbished, and is now prepped and ready for another orbital mission on December 4th. (SpaceX)
Rather poetically, CRS-11 marked the first commercial reuse of an orbital spacecraft, and the booster that launched that mission, Falcon 9 1035, will now fly once more to lift the second-ever reused Dragon into orbit. If all goes as planned, SpaceX’s CRS-13 mission will arguably be the most-reused orbital-class mission in the history of spaceflight, with only the second stage and Dragon’s trunk being both new and expendable. Both the booster and Dragon likely required a fair amount of refurbishment, but if Elon Musk’s June 2017 statements remain accurate, SpaceX has probably progressed far along the reusability learning curve. Quoting Elon Musk and myself at the ISS R&D Conference in July 2017:
Musk said he expects the next Dragon reuse and all future reuses to save the SpaceX nearly 50% of the cost of manufacturing an entirely new spacecraft. Musk admitted that the first refurbishment of Dragon likely ended up costing as much or more than a new vehicle, but this is to be expected for the first attempt to reuse any sort of space hardware that must survive some form of reentry heating and saltwater immersion.
Indeed, CRS-13 will in fact be “the next Dragon reuse” after CRS-11’s success. If the spacecraft’s refurbishment does manage save SpaceX anywhere near 50% of the cost of manufacture, the mission will be an extraordinary accomplishment, above and beyond the already intense difficulty of refurbishing and reflying a several-ton (~4000kg empty) orbital spacecraft.
LC-40 pad repairs near completion
Even after the reuse of both the Dragon and Falcon 9 booster, CRS-13 will lay host to yet another milestone for SpaceX as the first mission to launch from the newly repaired Launch Complex-40 (LC-40), after the pad suffered widespread damage from a Falcon 9 failure during preparations for the launch of Amos-6. Little is known on the specifics of the damage suffered, but repairs have taken no less than 14 months and at a minimum required the fabrication, assembly, and qualification of entirely new Ground Support Equipment (GSE).
-
- Based on photos posted to social media, LC-40’s new TEL will be considerably different than the 39A’s white monolith, likely closer in form to the original it is to replace (seen here). (SpaceX)
-
- The TEL seen at LC-39A in early 2017. (SpaceX)
-
- LC-39A’s TEL and Falcon 9 seen before the launch of SES-11 in October 2017. (Tom Cross/Teslarati)
Under the umbrella of GSE are thousands of feet of precisely machined and welded piping and pumps, a new launch mount and transporter-erector-launcher (TEL) to carry Falcon 9 out of the integration facilities, the repair or complete removal and replacement of a huge volume of scalded concrete, and the repair or replacement of likely dozens or hundreds of other miscellaneous components destroyed in the intense fire that followed the Amos-6 incident. Nevertheless, as spotted on a social media platform by the author, the aforementioned TEL and launch mount were shown going vertical just a handful of days ago, further evidence that LC-40 is once again rapidly marching towards operational status.
The long-awaited reactivation and return to operations at LC-40 is itself arguably the most critical path ahead of Falcon Heavy’s inaugural launch, and modifications to the pad and TEL have restarted in light of Zuma’s indefinite delays, with SpaceX’s ever-productive and heroic ground crew taking advantage of extra down-time between launches. With Zuma now ~11 days past its scheduled launch date, the mission’s delay will likely result in additional delays to Falcon Heavy’s inaugural launch, which was reported to be aiming for ~December 29. This deep of a delay might also necessitate the transfer of Zuma’s launch from LC-39A to LC-40, depending on the customer’s flexibility and SpaceX’s own needs. Time will tell, and in the meantime, the mystery of Zuma and wondrous accomplishments of CRS-13 ought to sate the launch withdrawals of SpaceX fans for the time being.
Elon Musk has publicly questioned Moody’s credit assessments following the rating agency’s decision to assign SpaceX a Baa1 investment-grade rating, two notches above Tesla’s Baa3. The comments came amid discussions comparing the two companies’ financial profiles.
SpaceX earned its first-time Baa1 rating with a stable outlook from Moody’s. The agency highlighted the company’s leadership in orbital launches, the growing recurring revenue from its Starlink satellite network, strong vertical integration, U.S. government contracts, and emerging opportunities in AI infrastructure.
These factors were cited as supporting robust cash flows, margin expansion, and financial flexibility.
Musk responded directly: “Tesla’s credit rating is ridiculously low tbh,” and added, “Yeah, makes no sense. Tesla has over $40B in cash, no debt, and is consistently profitable!” His remarks underscored Tesla’s balance sheet strength and profitability at a time when many traditional automakers continue to report losses in the shift to electric vehicles.
Yeah, makes no sense.
Tesla has over $40B in cash, no debt and is consistently profitable!
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 19, 2026
Tesla maintains a leading position in the global EV market, with diversification into energy and storage, battery technology, and robotics through projects like Optimus. Recent financial updates show the company generated positive free cash flow of $1.4 billion in Q1 2026, supported by operating cash flow of $3.9 billion. Cash and short-term investments stood at approximately $44.7 billion.
Moody’s has affirmed Tesla’s Baa3 issuer rating with a stable outlook in periodic reviews, acknowledging the company’s EV leadership, technology strengths, including AI for autonomous vehicles, solid profitability, and strong liquidity.
Tesla (TSLA) scores Baa3 Moody’s rating for ‘stable’ outlook
However, the agency has also noted challenges in the automotive segment and expectations for margin pressures.
Musk’s critique highlights a common debate about how traditional rating methodologies apply to high-growth, capital-intensive technology companies. SpaceX benefits from long-term government-backed contracts and diversified, recurring revenue streams, while Tesla’s valuation reflects heavy investment in future technologies such as autonomy and robotics.
Both ratings remain investment-grade, yet the one-notch difference has fueled online discussion about potential inconsistencies in evaluating innovative firms.
The exchange comes as SpaceX explores financing options following its recent valuation milestones, while Tesla continues executing on its multi-year roadmap. Musk’s pointed response serves as a reminder that credit ratings, though influential for borrowing costs, represent one lens through which markets assess corporate strength—and that company leaders often view their financial positions through the lens of long-term innovation and cash generation rather than short-term risk metrics alone.
A new report from Reuters claims that a transport authority in Sweden is pushing back against the approval of Tesla’s Full Self-Driving suite because it will travel over speed limits.
The report says the Swedish Transport Administration (TRV) recommends the European Union votes against FSD’s approval. TRV believes it should not be approved until Tesla disables FSD’s ability to speed.
TRV sent a letter to the European Union’s Technical Committee on Motor Vehicles (TCMV), which is set to meet on June 30 to discuss the potential approval of the Tesla FSD suite in the country. Tesla, which has received various approvals in Europe over the past two months, has not provided a comment.
Teslas operating on FSD do travel over the speed limit, depending on the Speed Profile that is chosen. Drivers have the ability to disengage FSD at any point; Tesla specifically states that those supervising the suite are responsible for its actions.
Let’s cut to the chase: humans operating any vehicle speed almost daily in the United States. Realistically, speed limits in the U.S. are more frequently treated as speed minimums. However, other countries are different, and driving behaviors are less aggressive.
TRV believes that “allowing automated systems to systematically exceed legal speed limits…risks undermining both the legal framework and the expected safety benefits of vehicle automation,” the report stated. It’s surprising that Tesla has not received this claim from other countries previously.
This could be a good argument to bring Max Speed back, the setting that previously allowed the driver to choose the absolute fastest the car would travel.
This would still put the responsibility of supervision in the hands of the driver. It would allow the driver to choose whether the car would travel over the speed limit or not, acknowledging that they set the speed, and if they get pulled over, there would be no ability to argue it.
However, it does not seem as if this is something Tesla will do, especially considering many U.S. drivers have requested the feature in an effort to eliminate speeding or at least tone it down. The company has not shown any interest in bringing it back.
Tesla has approvals for FSD in Europe in Estonia, Lithuania, Denmark, the Netherlands, and Belgium.
Tesla is going to let you guide Full Self-Driving with Grok in 3 months, CEO Elon Musk confirmed on X.
The response from Musk, which revealed Tesla plans to allow drivers to effectively control the car and its navigation more explicitly using Grok, puts the feature for about September.
A Tesla owner said that Full Self-Driving is great, but owners should be able to “converse with Grok like we can with an Uber driver.” She then used examples like, “Grok, turn right here,” and “Drop us off right here, we’ll walk due to traffic,” and finally,” Drop at entrance first, then park far away.”
Coincidentally, the final piece of dialogue would also mean features like Banish are potentially on the way soon.
This functionality will be there in about 3 months or so
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 18, 2026
Banish is also referred to as “Reverse Summon,” and would enable the car to self-park while dropping occupants off at their destination.
This would be a great way to improve the overall experience while supervising FSD. Navigation is already a major painpoint that many owners complain about. Manual overrides when a maneuver is requested or canceled (like using the turn signal stalk to override a navigation route), do not always work.
The feature could be especially useful in street parking scenarios in a city, where spots are sometimes tough to come by. Many of us who grab dinner in a more populated area will park a street or two over from wherever we’re going, because sometimes you know that’s the best you will get. If a driver using FSD could say, “Hey Grok, turn right here on Queen St. and park in that open spot on the right,” it could save a lot of confusion FSD might have on its own.
Musk teased that a similar feature was “coming” back in February:
Tesla Full Self-Driving set to get an awesome new feature, Elon Musk says
It is certainly surprising that Tesla is doing it at this point. The company’s more recent moves have been more evident of taking control and inputs away from humans and putting them in the AI’s hands more frequently. The biggest example of this was taking away Max Speed in AI4 cars, giving us Speed Profiles, and not having any input on the fastest speed the car will travel.
Of course, giving navigation preferences to Grok is availble already in Teslas, but not at the drop of a hat. Instead, you can suggest a certain route at the beginning of your drive.
Here’s an example of that from December:
🚨🏈 I am taking my parents and Fiancee to the @Ravens game next weekend and asked @Grok to help me route my @Tesla through a specific neighborhood to reach the correct Lot we will park in.
This is a great example of the new @grok nav integration with the Tesla Holiday Update: pic.twitter.com/rPp4I7q8Yv
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) December 13, 2025
Finally, the original post that Musk responded to mentioned a parking preference after dropping off the occupants, which describes the Banish feature that Tesla has teased for years.
We’re not sure if Musk was responding more to the ability to guide the car with Grok, or whether he also was including Banish in the three-month prediction timeframe.
Elon Musk challenges Tesla credit rating from Moody’s after SpaceX gets a higher one
Tesla faces Full Self-Driving pushback in EU over ‘speeding’
