News
SpaceX’s next West Coast Falcon 9 landing could be decided by baby seals
SpaceX and the Canadian Space Agency (CSA) have – at long last – officially announced a launch date for the Radarsat Constellation Mission (RCM), a ~$1B trio of Earth observation satellites.
Delayed from November, February, March, and May, RCM is now scheduled to launch on a flight-proven Falcon 9 booster from California’s Vandenberg Air Force Base (VAFB) no earlier than June 11th. The three flight-ready spacecraft were shipped from Canada in September 2018 and have now been awaiting launch in a Southern California storage facility for more than half a year. The blame for such an egregious delay can be largely placed on SpaceX, but CSA and launch customer Maxar Technologies are also partially responsible. On a lighter note, the location of RCM’s subsequent Falcon 9 landing might end up being decided by seal pupping – baby harbor seals, in other words.
Although RCM’s slip from 2018 to 2019 remains unexplained, the mission’s journey from mid-February to mid-June is a different story. Still, next to nothing is publicly known about the process SpaceX launch customers go through after contracts have been signed, particularly with respect to how Falcon boosters are assigned to missions. This is further stymied by the fact that – to date – the ~$1 billion RCM is probably the most valuable payload SpaceX has ever attempted to launch, making it a clear outlier. But, as they say, “damn the epistemological torpedoes!”
Rocket logistics hell
RCM’s logistical hell and ~6 months of delays began on December 5th, 2018 when Falcon 9 Block 5 booster B1050 – having just completed its inaugural launch debut – experienced a hydraulic pump failure. The first of its kind, B1050’s pump failure killed grid fin control authority and forced the booster to abort into the Atlantic Ocean, where it somehow pulled off a landing soft enough to leave the rocket almost entirely intact. Even more surprisingly, B1050 was safely towed back to port, lifted onto dry land, and shipped off to one of SpaceX’s many Florida hangars for inspection.
Despite its near-miraculous survival, B1050 was immediately removed from SpaceX’s fleet of flightworthy boosters. Set to become the least flight-proven flight-proven Block 5 booster yet after supporting a low-energy Cargo Dragon mission, SpaceX and CSA/Maxar had apparently reached an agreement to launch RCM on B1050.2. Despite the availability of other boosters at the time, all available cores had completed two launches (B1046, 47, and 48) or were assigned to a second launch in the near-term (B1049). This is the only rational explanation for the delays that followed.
B1049 completed its second launch in mid-January 2019 and has since floated around various SpaceX facilities while waiting for its third mission. Had CSA/Maxar been okay with a twice-flown Falcon 9, B1049 could have likely supported RCM’s launch as early as March or April. Instead, the customer – as was apparently their right – concluded that being a booster’s third launch would be an unacceptable risk, whereas launching on a once-flown booster was acceptable. The only possible solution to those demands was to manifest RCM on Falcon 9 B1051, assigned to Crew Dragon’s launch debut.
Quite possibly the worst booster one could pick for schedule preservation, Crew Dragon’s launch debut slipped – to the surprise of very few – from January to February and finally to March 3rd. B1051 launched, landed without issue, and returned to Port Canaveral a few days later, where it was transported to Pad 39A for refurbishment. The relatively gently-used booster required a bit less than 8 weeks of inspection and refurbishment before being packaged and shipped to California near the end of April (see above). By now, B1051 is likely safely inside SpaceX’s SLC-4E integration hangar, preparing for upper stage integration and a routine pre-launch static fire test.
In short, an untimely Falcon 9 anomaly and customer preferences conspired to delay the launch of Canada’s Radarsat Constellation Mission by nearly four months, from February 18th to June 11th. With any luck, the mission’s flow will be issue-free and suffer no additional delays.
FCC launch communications licenses currently show that SpaceX plans to return Falcon 9 B1051 to the launch site (RTLS) after launch, rather than landing aboard drone ship Just Read The Instructions (JRTI). With a total launch mass likely around 5000 kg (11,000 lb), Falcon 9 should easily be able to manage a RTLS recovery. However, SpaceX’s West Coast LZ-4 use permit prevents the company from landing rockets at the pad during harbor seal pupping season, typically March thru June. The sonic booms and noise generated during Falcon 9’s spectacular landings might end up stressing endangered harbor seals, potentially causing parents to abandon their seal pups in confusion. As such, JRTI may be forced to get some exercise after spending almost five months in port. Anything for the baby seals!
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
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.
News
Tesla’s Cybercab battery design could make robotaxis even cheaper
Tesla built the Cybercab’s battery pack with spare room for a future switch to LFP.
Tesla built the Cybercab’s battery pack with empty space inside it on purpose, and the reason points to a cheaper robotaxi down the road.
Robert Sumpf, Tesla’s director of mechanical design engineering for battery modules and packs, said the extra room beside and beneath the Cybercab’s modules was left there so the company can move to lithium iron phosphate cells later. “So, we protected this pack to go to an even lower energy dense chemistry as we scale and need to bring LFP into the platform,” Sumpf said in a Cybercab deep dive with Munro Live.
The Cybercab runs on Tesla’s own 4680 cells with a nickel chemistry today. LFP cells store less energy for their size, so a straight swap would cut range. The reserved space lets Tesla add more LFP cells to make up the difference. In return, Tesla would get cells that cost less, run cooler and survive more charge cycles. LFP became the most used EV battery chemistry in the world last year.
Not all of that room was planned for a chemistry change. Lars Moravy, Tesla’s Vice President of Vehicle Engineering, said part of it exists because “we didn’t need as many batteries as we thought we did.” Tesla told Sandy Munro in early 2025 that it was targeting a Cybercab pack under 50 kWh with close to 300 miles of range.
The pack also breaks from the structural design Tesla used in some Model Y and Cybertruck builds. Instead of potting hundreds of cells into one block, the Cybercab uses four separate, individually sealed modules, so a bad module can be replaced without scrapping the whole pack. Sumpf was blunt about the older approach, giving the Model Y structural battery “a grade D” because it was hard to build and nearly impossible to repair. He estimated a fully structural pack gains about 10% more cell volume, but said “the issue is the service cost.”
That cost matters more for a car that rarely sits parked. Cybercab chief engineer Eric Earley said replacing an entire pack “before half a million miles is a killer on cost,” which is why remanufacturing and serviceability were built into the design from the start.
The same Munro Live tour produced Moravy’s admission that the Cybercab line at Giga Texas is now outpacing Robotaxi deployments, along with a look at the robotaxi’s unorthodox paint process. Tesla is aiming to deliver the first Cybercabs to outside customers by the end of 2026, though Elon Musk has said the vast majority will stay owned by Tesla and run as a transport service.
Sumpf did not give a date for an LFP version, name a cell supplier or say how a chemistry change would affect range. For now, the 4680 cars keep piling up: Texas DMV records from Tuesday list 544 Cybercabs authorized for Tesla’s Robotaxi fleet, more than the 507 Model Ys on the same roster for the first time.
Tesla Semi catches fire in California: what we know
Tesla’s ‘Emergency Drive Away’ function gets its first use in the real world
